Datasets:

kilian-group
/

arxiv-classifier

Dataset card Data Studio Files Files and versions Community

Subset (4)

default · ~99.6k rows (showing the first 120k)

Split (2)

train · ~72.4k rows (showing the first 93.1k)

paper_id stringlengths 9 16	version stringclasses 26 values	yymm stringclasses 311 values	created timestamp[s]	title stringlengths 6 335	secondary_subfield sequencelengths 1 8	abstract stringlengths 25 3.93k	primary_subfield stringclasses 124 values	field stringclasses 20 values	fulltext stringlengths 0 2.84M
1806.06307	1	1806	2018-06-16T22:23:18	The inner kernel theorem for a certain Segal algebra	[ "math.FA" ]	The Segal algebra ${\textbf{S}}_{0}(G)$ is well defined for arbitrary locally compact Abelian Hausdorff (LCA) groups $G$. Despite the fact that it is a Banach space it is possible to derive a kernel theorem similar to the Schwartz kernel theorem, of course without making use of the Schwartz kernel theorem. First we characterize the bounded linear operators from ${\textbf{S}}_{0}(G_1)$ to ${\textbf{S}}_{0}'(G_2)$ by distributions in ${\textbf{S}}_{0}'(G_1 \times G_2)$. We call this the "outer kernel theorem". The "inner kernel theorem" is concerned with the characterization of those linear operators which have kernels in the subspace ${\textbf{S}}_{0}(G_1 \times G_2)$, the main subject of this manuscript. We provide a description of such operators as regularizing operators in our context, mapping ${\textbf{S}}_{0}'(G_1)$ into test functions in ${\textbf{S}}_{0}(G_2)$, in a $w^{*}$-to norm continuous manner. The presentation provides a detailed functional analytic treatment of the situation and applies to the case of general LCA groups, without recurrence to the use of so-called Wilson bases, which have been used for the case of elementary LCA groups. The approach is then used in order to describe natural laws of composition which imitate the composition of linear mappings via matrix multiplications, now in a continuous setting. We use here that in a suitable (weak) form these operators approximate general operators. We also provide an explanation and mathematical justification used by engineers explaining in which sense pure frequencies "integrate" to a Dirac delta distribution.	math.FA	math	The inner kernel theorem for a certain Segal algebra Hans G. Feichtinger and Mads S. Jakobsen June 19, 2018 Abstract 0(G2) by distributions in S′ The Segal algebra S0(G) is well defined for arbitrary locally compact Abelian Hausdorff (LCA) groups G. Despite the fact that it is a Banach space it is possible to derive a kernel theorem similar to the Schwartz kernel theorem, of course without making use of the Schwartz kernel theorem. First we characterize the bounded linear operators from S0(G1) to S′ 0(G1 × G2). We call this the "outer kernel theorem". The "inner kernel theorem" is concerned with the characterization of those linear operators which have kernels in the subspace S0(G1 × G2), the main subject of this manuscript. We provide a description of such operators as regularizing operators in our context, mapping S′ 0(G1) into test functions in S0(G2), in a w∗-to norm continuous manner. The presentation provides a detailed functional analytic treatment of the situation and applies to the case of general LCA groups, without recurrence to the use of so-called Wilson bases, which have been used for the case of elementary LCA groups. The approach is then used in order to describe natural laws of composition which imitate the composition of linear mappings via matrix multiplications, now in a continuous setting. We use here that in a suitable (weak) form these operators approximate general operators. We also provide an explanation and mathematical justification used by engineers explaining in which sense pure frequencies "integrate" to a Dirac delta distribution. 8 1 0 2 n u J 6 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 Introduction 1 v 7 0 3 6 0 . 6 0 8 1 : v i X r a The focus of this paper is on the kernel theorem associated with the Segal algebra S0(G) introduced by the first named author in [10]. Given a locally compact Abelian Hausdorff (LCA) group G we write bG for its dual group, and for each ω ∈ bG we denote by Eωf (t) = ω(t)f (t), t ∈ G the modulation (frequency-shift) operator. We define the set of test functions using convolution "∗" and the usual norm in L1: S0(G) =nf ∈ L1(G) : Z bG kEωf ∗ f k1 dω < ∞ o. Any non-zero function g ∈ S0(G) (also called window or Gabor atom) defines a norm on S0(G) via kf kS0,g = kf kS0(G),g :=Z bG kEωf ∗ gk1 dω, that turns S0 into a Banach space. These norms are pairwise equivalent and we therefore allow ourselves to simply write k · kS0 without specifying the function g. The space S0(G) is a Fourier invariant Banach algebra under convolution and pointwise multiplication. We call continuous linear functionals on this space distributions. They form altogether the dual space S′ 0(G), which is a Banach space itself. The action σ ∈ S′ 0(G) on a (test) function f ∈ S0(G) is described by the bilinear form ( · , · )S0,S′ 0(G) : S0(G) × S′ 0(G) → C, (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = σ(f ). (3) Throughout the paper Bil(X × Y, Z) is the space of bilinear and norm continuous operators from the normed space X × Y into the normed space Z and, similarly, Lin(X, Y ) is the space of linear and norm continuous operators from X into Y , each of them endowed with their natural norm. 1 (1) (2) Using these spaces we can formulate the following result. Theorem 1.1 (Outer kernel theorem for S0). For LCA groups G1 and G2 the four Banach spaces 0(G1 × G2), Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C), Lin(S0(G1), S′ S′ 0(G2)) and Lin(S0(G2), S′ 0(G1)) are naturally isomorphic. In particular, given any σ ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2), A ∈ Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C), T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) or S ∈ Lin(S0(G2), S′ 0(G1)) the others are uniquely determined by the following identity, valid for f (1) ∈ S0(G1), f (2) ∈ S0(G2): (f (1) ⊗ f (2), σ)S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) = A(f (1), f (2)) = (f (2), T f (1))S0,S′ 0(G2) = (f (1), Sf (2))S0,S′ 0(G1). The unique distribution σ ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) associated with A, T or S is called the kernel of A, T or S, respectively and we write κ(A) = κ(T ) = κ(S) = σ. The outer kernel theorem for S0 was first announced in [9]. Its proof can be found in [15, 16, 21], for example. This paper will consider the following questions: Is there an analogue of Theorem 1.1 concerning operators that can be naturally identified with the functions in S0(G1 × G2) (rather than its dual space S′ 0(G1 × G2))? This question has been considered and answered before in [6] and [16], however not in this generality (cf. the comment following Theorem 1.3 below). As is well known (and as we will explain in detail in Section 2) there is a natural isomorphic copy of the Banach space of functions S0(G) inside its dual space S′ 0(G). We are therefore also interested in the following question: Can we characterize those operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ kernel σ ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) which is induced by a function in S0(G1 × G2)? 0(G2)) ∼= Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C) that have a The main result of this paper, Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 3.2, answer these two questions. For their formulation we need two auxiliary spaces: Definition 1.2. For LCA groups G1 and G2 we define the following two sets of operators: A(G1, G2) = {A ∈ Bil(S′ B(G1, G2) = {T ∈ Lin(S′ 0(G2), C) : A is weak∗ continuous in each coordinate }, 0(G1) × S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)) : T maps bounded weak∗convergent nets in S′ 0(G1) into norm convergent nets in S0(G2) }. In Section 4 we prove that the spaces A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2) are complete with respect to their natural subspace topologies. Furthermore, we shall show that all elements in B(G1, G2) are nuclear (and thus, in particular, also compact) operators from S′ 0(G1) into S0(G2) and that they are consequently trace class operators for the case G1 = G2 (see Section 3.4). We are now ready to formulate our first main result: Theorem 1.3 (Inner kernel theorem for S0). For LCA groups G1 and G2 the four Banach spaces S0(G1 × G2), A(G1, G2), B(G1, G2) and B(G2, G1) are naturally isomorphic. In particular, if any K ∈ S0(G1 × G2), A ∈ A(G1, G2), T ∈ B(G1, G2) or S ∈ B(G2, G1) is given, then the others are uniquely determined such that, for all σ(i) ∈ S′ 0(Gi), i = 1, 2, (K, σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) = A(σ(1), σ(2)) = (T σ(1), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) = (Sσ(2), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1). (4) 2 If the groups G1 and G2 are elementary, i.e., isomorphic to Rn × Zm × Tl × F , where F is some finite Abelian group and l, n, m ∈ N0, then a proof of Theorem 1.3 can be found in [16]. However, the methods used there do not extend to general locally compact Abelian groups. The lack of a proof of the inner kernel theorem for S0(G) on general locally compact Abelian groups also serves as a motivation for this paper. We devote the entirety of Section 4 to the proof of Theorem 1.3. Similar to the outer kernel theorem, given any A ∈ A(G1, G2), T ∈ B(G1, G2) or S ∈ B(G2, G1), the function K ∈ S0(G1 × G2) satisfying (4) is called the kernel of A, T or S and we denote this function by κ(A), κ(T ) or κ(S). A combination of the inner and outer kernel theorem together with the continuous embedding of S0 0 (see Lemma 2.4) allows us to make the following diagram for any two LCA groups G1 and G2. into S′ Here HS(G1, G2) are the Hilbert-Schmidt operators from L2(G1) into L2(G2). Inner Kernel Theorem A(G1, G2) ∼= S0(G1 × G2) ∼= B(G1, G2) ⊆ Lin(S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)) ⊆ Lin(L2(G1), S0(G2)) ⊆ Lin(S0(G1), S0(G2)) ⊆ ⊆ ⊆ Lin(S′ 0(G1), L2(G2)) ⊆ Lin(L2(G1), L2(G2)) ⊆ Lin(S0(G1), L2(G2)) ⊆ ⊆ L2(G1 × G2) ∼= HS(G1, G2) ⊆ ⊆ Hilbert-Schmidt Operators Lin(S′ 0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) ⊆ Lin(L2(G1), S′ 0(G2)) ⊆ Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C) ∼= S′ 0(G1 × G2) Outer Kernel Theorem ∼= Furthermore, we have the following (strict) inclusions for Banach spaces of operators: B(G1, G2) ⊆ HS(G1, G2) ⊆ Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)). (5) They even form a Banach Gelfand triple and have been investigated in [2],[6] and [16]. Both the inner and outer kernel theorem for S0 are analogous to the situation for nuclear spaces, cf. Chapter 50 and 51 in Trèves book [28]. Further references to the theory of nuclear spaces and their kernel theorems are Delcroix [8] and Hörmander [19]. Speaking about nuclear spaces, let us remark here that S0 contains the Schwartz(-Bruhat) space as a dense subspace ([10, Theorem 9]) and that S′ 0 is a subspace of the tempered distributions. For more on the Schwartz-Bruhat functions we refer to the original literature [4, 24]. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 recollects necessary facts about the function space S0(G) and its continuous dual space S′ 0(G). Section 3 is comprised of several smaller pieces. The first of which, Section 3.1, states when the continuity of the operators in the spaces A and B can be described with the notion of sequences rather than that of nets. Section 3.2 contains the second main result of this paper, Theorem 3.2. This result gives a more quantitative description of the operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) that have a kernel in S0 and establishes a more natural norm on those operators (rather than the subspace topologies as mentioned following Definition 1.2). Section 3.3 shows similarities between the matrix rep- resentation of operators between finite dimensional spaces and the space B(G1, G2). Examples of operator with kernel in S0 and results concerning series representations, nuclearity and trace-class properties of the operators in B are shown in Section 3.4. In Section 3.5 we define and show examples of what we call regularizing approximations of the identity. Finally, Section 3.6 contains some comments on extensions of the theory and references to related work. As mentioned earlier, Section 4 is solely concerned with the proof of the Theorem 1.3. 3 2 Preliminaries 2.1 Harmonic analysis on LCA groups Throughout the paper we will be working with locally compact Abelian Hausdorff groups G. As any locally compact group, they carry an (up to scaling) unique translation invariant measure, the Haar measure. The dual group bG of an LCA group G is the multiplicative group of all continuous group homomorphisms from G into the torus {z ∈ C : z = 1}. Under the topology of uniform convergence on compact sets the dual group becomes a LCA group itself. As such it also carries a Haar measure. Without loss of generality we always assume that these measures are normalized such that f (x) =Z bG f (ω) ω(x) dµ bG(ω) for almost every x ∈ G for all f ∈ L1(G) with f ∈ L1(bG), where f is the Fourier transform of f , f (ω) = RG f (x) ω(x) dµG(x), ω ∈ bG. Typically we will perform integration in the time-frequency plane (phase space) G × bG so that we encounter integrals of the formRG× bG f (ν) dµG× bG(ν) for suitable complex valued functions f on G × bG. From now on we shall simplify the notation and write RG . . . dx, R bG . . . dω, and RG× bG . . . dν, rather than, e.g.,RG× bG . . . dµG× bG(ν). For more on integration on locally compact groups and abstract harmonic analysis we refer to, e.g., [17, 23] and [25]. 2.2 The space S0 In this section we summarize results on the space S0 and its dual space S′ 0. Since we often will deal with 0(G1) and S′ functions in the spaces S0(G1) and S0(G2) and also with distributions in S′ 0(G2) for typically different locally compact Abelian groups Gi, i = 1, 2, we define once and for all that f (i) and σ(i) denote a function and a distribution in S0(Gi) and S′ 0(Gi), respectively. Different functions in S0(Gi) will be denoted either by different letters, e.g., f (i), g(i) and h(i), or with an index, f (i) j . For functions in S0(G1) and S0(G2) the tensor product (cid:0)f (1) ⊗ f (2)(cid:1)(x(1), x(2)) = f (1)(x(1)) · f (2)(x(2)), is a bilinear and bounded operator into S0(G1 × G2). In fact, (x(1), x(2)) ∈ G1 × G2, kf (1) ⊗ f (2)kS0(G1×G2),g(1)⊗g(2) = kf (1)kS0(G1),g(1) · kf (2)kS0(G2),g(2). Any f ∈ S0(G1 × G2) can be written as a sum of tensor products of appropriately chosen functions. Lemma 2.1. Given LCA groups G1 and G2 one has S0(G1 × G2) = S0(G1) ⊗S0(G2). That is, any f ∈ S0(G1 × G2) can be written (in a non-unique way) as f =Xj∈N f (1) j ⊗ f (2) j such that Xj∈N kf (1) j kS0 kf (2) j kS0 < ∞, (6) where the sum is absolutely norm convergent in S0(G1 ×G2). Moreover, the S0(G1×G2)-norm is equivalent to the projective tensor product norm kf k = inf(cid:8)Xj∈N kf (1) j kS0 kf (2) j kS0(cid:9), (7) where the infimum is taken over all possible representations of f as in (6). These statements were originally proven in [10, Theorem 7] and can also be found in [21, Theorem 7.4]. Recall that the translation operator Tx and the modulation operator Eω, given by Txf (t) = f (t − x), Eωf (t) = ω(t)f (t), 4 t, x ∈ G, ω ∈ bG act as linear and isometric operators on S0(G), and so do time-frequency shifts, given by Besides the definition of S0 in the introduction, there is also an atomic characterization: π(ν) = π(x, ω) = EωTx for ν = (x, ω) ∈ G × bG. Lemma 2.2. Fix a non-zero function g ∈ S0(G). For any f ∈ S0(G) there exists a sequence c ∈ ℓ1(N) and elements νj ∈ G × bG, j ∈ N such that f = Pj∈N cj π(νj)g. Furthermore kf k = inf kck1, where the infimum is taken over all possible representations of f as above, defines an equivalent norm on S0(G). This result goes back to [11] and can also be found in [21, Theorem 7.2]. For each non-zero g ∈ S0(G) the dual space S′ 0(G) is a Banach space with respect to the usual operator topology induced by the family of equivalent norms kσkS′ 0(G),g = sup f ∈S0(G)\{0} (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) kf kS0(G),g , σ ∈ S′ 0(G). (8) Lemma 2.3 (see [21, Proposition 6.11]). For any g ∈ S0(G)\{0} k · kM∞ g : S′ 0(G) → R+ 0 , kσkM∞ g = sup ν∈G× bG (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) is a norm on S′ 0(G) which is equivalent to the norm in (8). In many situations the norm convergence in S′ 0 is too strong and therefore we also have to make use of the weak∗-topology. Recall that σ0 = w∗ − limα σα for a given net (σα) in S′ 0(G) if lim α (f, σα − σ0)S0,S′ 0(G) = 0, for anyf ∈ S0(G). As for every Banach space (see [22, p. 98]), also for S0(G) the Hahn-Banach Theorem provides a isometric embedding into its double dual S′′ 0(G) via the canonical embedding ι : S0(G) → S′′ 0(G), ι(f ) = σ 7→ (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G), f ∈ S0(G), σ ∈ S′ 0(G). Moreover, ι(S0(G)) ⊆ S′′ That is, a linear and bounded functional ϕ : S′ into norm convergent nets in C if and only if ϕ is of the form ϕ(σ) = (f, σ)S0,S′ (see [22, Proposition 2.6.4]). Henceforth we view, if necessary, S0(G) as a closed subspace of S′′ fact is essential for our proof of Theorem 1.3 in Section 4. 0(G) is exactly the set of all bounded weak∗ continuous functionals on S′ 0(G) → C sends bounded weak∗ convergent nets in S′ 0(G). 0(G) 0(G) for some f ∈ S0(G) 0(G). This Similar as for functions, we can define the tensor product σ(1) ⊗ σ(2) of two distributions σ(1) ∈ S′ 0(G1) and σ(2) ∈ S′ 0(G2). It is the unique element in S′ 0(G1 × G2) with the property that (f (1) ⊗ f (2), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) = (f (1), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1) (f (2), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2), for all f (i) ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2. One can show that kσ(1) ⊗ σ(2)kM∞ g(1)⊗g(2) = kσ(1)kM∞ g(1) kσ(2)kM∞ g(2) . For a proof of this we refer to [21, Corollary 9.2]. (9) (10) As mentioned in the introduction, the space S0(G) is embedded into its dual space S′ 0(G) in a very natural, but non-isometric way. In order to properly formulate this result we define the modulation space (for the parameter 1) as the subspace of S′ 0(G) given by M1(G) =nσ ∈ S′ 0(G) : ZG× bG (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) dν < ∞o, (11) 5 where g is some non-zero function in S0(G). In Section 3.6 we give references to literature on the modulation spaces. The norm k · kM1,g : M1(G) → R+ 0 , kσkM1,g =ZG× bG (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) dν (12) turns M1(G) into a Banach space. Each function g ∈ S0(G)\{0} induces an equivalent norm on M1(G). ≤ c kσkM1 for all σ ∈ M1(G). That is, One can show that there exists a constant c > 0 such that kσkS′ M1(G) is continuously embedded into S′ 0 0(G). Lemma 2.4. The Banach spaces S0(G) and M1(G) are naturally isomorphic. In particular we have: (i) Via the Haar measure on G every h ∈ S0(G) induces a (unique) functional σ = σh ∈ S′ 0(G): (f, σh)S0,S′ 0(G) =ZG f (t) h(t) dt for all f ∈ S0(G). (13) This embedding of S0(G) into S′ 0(G) is linear, continuous and injective. (ii) If σ is a distribution in S′ 0(G), then there exists a function h ∈ S0(G) such that (13) holds if and only if σ ∈ M1(G). The function h ∈ S0(G) is characterized by the fact that for some g ∈ S0(G)\{0} (and then for every such g) one has: (h, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = kgk−2 2 ZG× bG(cid:0)π(ν)g, σ(cid:1)(cid:0)π(ν)g, σ(cid:1) dν for all σ ∈ S′ 0(G). (14) One can verify that the embeddings in Lemma 2.4(i) and (ii) are inverses of one another (independently of the choice of the function g in (ii)). The details can be found in [21, Theorem 6.12]. If h is any function in Lp(G), p ∈ [1, ∞], then h also induces a functional in S′ 0(G) as in (13). By the natural isomorphism between S0(G) and M1(G) the function space S0(G) is continuously 0(G) we allow ourselves, 0(G), by which we mean the action that the function h has on f as 0(G) = (h, f )S0,S′ embedded into its dual space S′ for all f, h ∈ S0(G), to write (f, h)S0,S′ in Lemma 2.4(i). Note that (f, h)S0,S′ 0(G). Due to this relation between S0(G) and S′ 0(G). The function space S0 is weak∗ dense in S′ 0. 0(G) there exists a net (σα) in M1(G) ∼= S0(G) Lemma 2.5 (see [21, Proposition 6.15]). For any σ ∈ S′ such that lim 0 = 0 for all f ∈ S0(G) and kσαkS′ The translation and modulation operator can be uniquely extended from operators on S0(G) to weak∗- 0(G). We will denote these extensions by the same symbol. Specifically, α (cid:12)(cid:12)(f, σ − σα)S0,S′ 0(G) and ν = (x, ω) ∈ G × bG, they are characterized by the following identities: weak∗ continuous operators on S′ for f ∈ S0(G), σ ∈ S′ 0 ≤ kσkS′ 0. (f, Txσ)S0,S′ (f, Eωσ)S0,S′ (f, π(x, ω) σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (T−xf, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (Eωf, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = ω(x) (π(−x, ω)f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G), 0(G), 0(G). In addition, for g, h ∈ S0(G), we define (f, h · σ)S0,S′ (f, g ∗ σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (f · h, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (f ∗ gX, σ)S0,S′ 0(G), 0(G), gX(t) = g(−t), t ∈ G. These formulas remain valid for h being a pointwise multiplier of S0(G) or g having a Fourier transform with this property (defining a bounded convolution operator on S0(G)). 6 The complex conjugation of a distribution is defined by the relation (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (f , σ)S0,S′ 0(G), The reader may verify that these definitions are compatible with the embedding of S0(G) into S′ described in Lemma 2.4 and are in fact uniquely determined based on this consistency consideration. 0(G) as The extension of the translation operator to S′ 0(G) is not the same as its Banach space adjoint, which, by definition, is the operator given by (Tx)× : S′ 0(G) → S′ 0(G), (f, (Tx)×σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = (Txf, σ)S0,S′ 0(G). However, it so happens that the Banach space adjoint of the modulation operator Eω : S0(G) → S0(G) is the same as its unique extension to an operator on S′ Throughout the paper h·, ·i is the L2-inner product (with the anti-linearity in the second entry), which is well-defined for functions in S0(G) as S0(G) ⊆ L2(G). In fact, S0(G) is continuously embedded into all the Lp(G) spaces: for all p ∈ [1, ∞] and f ∈ S0(G), 0(G). kf kp ≤ kgk−1 q kf kS0(G),g, where p−1 + q−1 = 1 for p ∈ (1, ∞) and the usual convention if p = 1 or p = ∞ (this follows from [21, Lemma 4.19]). Furthermore S0(G) is continuously embedded into C0(G) and hence S′ 0(G) contains the Dirac delta distribution δx : f 7→ f (x), x ∈ G, f ∈ S0(G). We will make frequent use of the following equality. Lemma 2.6 (see [21, Lemma 6.10(iv)]). If g ∈ S0(G)\{0}, then for any f ∈ S0(G) and σ ∈ S′ 0(G) (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = kgk−2 2 ZG× bG hf, π(ν)gi (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) dν. (15) Lastly, we define the short-time Fourier transform with respect to a function g ∈ S0(G) to be the operator Vg : S′ 0(G) → Cb(G × bG), Vgσ(ν) =(cid:0)π(ν)g, σ(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G) for all σ ∈ S′ 0(G), ν ∈ G × bG. The operator maps L2(G) into L2(G × bG) and it maps S0(G) into S0(G × bG) (see [16, Section 6] or [21, Theorem 5.3(ii)]. Note that if f ∈ L2(G), then Vgf (ν) = hf, π(ν)gi, ν ∈ G × bG. Using the short-time Fourier transform we can reformulate (15) as kgk2 2 (f, σ)S0,S′ 0(G) =RG× bG Vgf (ν)Vgσ(ν) dν. 3 Operators that have a kernel in S0 3.1 Nets versus sequences The spaces of operators that are identified with S0(G1 × G2) by Theorem 1.3 are uniquely extended to S′ 0 using weak∗ continuity in S′ 0 is non-metrizable (unless S0 is finite dimensional, [22, Proposition 2.6.12]) and it is therefore properly described using nets. However, in some cases, e.g., if G = Rd, we may use the notion of sequences to describe the spaces A and B. 0. The weak∗ topology on S′ Lemma 3.1. If G1 and G2 are σ-compact and metrizable, then the Banach spaces A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2) can be described by the behavior of convergent sequences. Specifically, A(G1, G2) = {A ∈ Bil(S′ B(G1, G2) = {T ∈ Lin(S′ convergent sequences in S0(G2)}. 0(G1) × S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)) : T maps weak∗-convergent sequences in S′ 0(G2), C) : A is sequentially weak∗ continuous in each coordinate}. 0(G1) into norm 7 σ-compact and metrizable [3, Section 3]. It is a fact that S0 can be described as a coorbit space associated Proof. If a locally compact Abelian group G is σ-compact and metrizable then also its dual group bG is to the Heisenberg representation of G × bG [15]. Coorbit theory [14, Theorem 6.1], together with the fact that the time-frequency plane G × bG is σ-compact, implies the separability of S0(G). Thus, by the assumption in the lemma, the spaces S0(Gi), i = 1, 2 are separable. The Banach-Alaoglu theorem implies that the weak∗ topology on S′ 0 on any bounded set is metrizable. Hence the notions of continuity by bounded convergent nets and convergent sequences coincide. Note that the commonly used locally compact Abelian groups R, Z, T, Z/N Z N = 1, 2, . . . and the p-adic numbers are σ-compact and metrizable. The additive group R under the discrete topology is an example of a non-σ-compact (albeit metrizable) locally compact Abelian group. 3.2 Identifying operators that have a kernel in S0 0(G1 × G2). In this section we answer the second question posed in the introduction, which we expand on here. If T is an operator in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)), then the outer kernel theorem implies that T has a kernel κ(T ) in S′ It may happen that this kernel is induced by a function in S0(G1 × G2). By the inner kernel theorem we know that these operators are exactly the ones that belong to B(G1, G2) ⊆ Lin(S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)). However, it is not immediately clear how (a) we verify that the domain of the operator T can be extended from S0(G1) to S′ 0(G1), (b) that its co-domain actually is S0(G2) rather than S′ 0(G2) and (c) how we can verify its continuity properties as described in Definition 1.2. Of course we have similar issues for operators A ∈ Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C) whose kernel might be induced by a function in S0(G1 × G2). The following theorem characterizes in a quantitative way the operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) and Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C) that have a kernel in S0(G1 × G2) and it describes how their domain extends from S0 to S′ 0. Theorem 3.2. For i = 1, 2 fix a function g(i) ∈ S0(Gi)\{0} such that kg(i)k2 = 1. (i) If A is an operator in Bil(S0(G1) × S0(G2), C), then its kernel κ(A) ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) is induced by a function in S0(G1 × G2), i.e. A ∈ A(G1, G2), if and only if Z (cid:12)(cid:12)A(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1), π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)) < ∞. G1× bG1×G2× bG2 In that case the operator A : S′ 0(G1) × S′ 0(G2) → C satisfies A(σ(1), σ(2)) = Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 Vg(1)σ(1)(ν(1)) · Vg(2)σ(2)(ν(2)) · A(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1), π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1) d(ν(1), ν(2)). (16) (17) (ii) If T is an operator in Lin(cid:0)S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)(cid:1), then its kernel κ(T ) ∈ S′ function in S0(G1 × G2), i.e. T ∈ B(G1, G2), if and only if 0(G1 × G2) is induced by a Z (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2), T ◦ π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)) < ∞. G1× bG1×G2× bG2 (18) In that case the operators T : S′ 0(G1) → S0(G2) satisfies (T σ(1), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) = Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 Vg(1)σ(1)(ν(1)) · Vg(2)σ(2)(ν(2)) ·(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2), T π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0 d(ν(1), ν(2)). (19) 8 Remark 1. The formula in (17) extends the domain of A from S0(G1) × S0(G2) to S′ (19) extends the domain of T from S0(G1) to S′ Remark 2. The condition in Theorem 3.2 that kg(i)k2 = 1 is only necessary to make the equalities in (17) and (19) more pleasant. Otherwise the integrals need to be normalized by kg(1) ⊗ g(2)k−2 2 , see the details in the proof. 0(G1) × S′ 0(G2), and 0(G1). Proof of Theorem 3.2. We will only prove (i) as the proof of (ii) is similar. By Theorem 1.1 and by assumption we know that A has a kernel κ(A) ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) so that G1× bG1×G2× bG2 Z Z Z (cid:12)(cid:12)A(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1), π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1) ⊗ π(ν(2))g(2), κ(A)(cid:1)S0,S′ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)Eω(1),ω(2)Tx(1),x(2)(g(1) ⊗ g(2)), κ(A)(cid:1)S0,S′ = = G1× bG1×G2× bG2 G1× bG1×G2× bG2 0(G1×G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)). 0(G1×G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(x(1), ω(1), x(2), ω(2)). By Lemma 2.4 the last integral is finite if and only if the distribution κ(A) ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) is induced by a (unique) function in S0(G1 × G2), which we shall also call κ(A). By Theorem 1.3 this kernel is identifiable with an operator A ∈ A ⊆ Bil(S′ 0(G1) × S′ 0(G2), C) which satisfies A(σ(1), σ(2)) = (κ(A), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2). By use of Lemma 2.6 (with g = g(1) ⊗ g(2), f = κ(A), σ = σ(1) ⊗ σ(2)) we can establish the desired equality. (κ(A), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) Z = kg(1) ⊗ g(2)k−2 2 (κ(A), π(ν(1))g(1) ⊗ π(ν(2))g(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) G1× bG1×G2× bG2 · (π(ν(1))g(1) ⊗ π(ν(2))g(2), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) d(ν(1), ν(2)) = Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 A(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1), π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1) · (π(ν(1))g(1), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1) (π(ν(2))g(2), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) d(ν(1), ν(2)). In the introduction we stated that the spaces A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2) are Banach spaces with respect to their subspace topologies which they naturally inherit from Bil(S′ respectively. It is clear that the induced norms fail to capture the continuity requirements for operators in A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2) as described in Definition 1.2. Hence the induced norm on A(G1, G2) can not distinguish between operators in Bil(S′ 0(G2)) that belong to A(G1, G2) and those that do not. Similarly the norm on Lin(S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)) can not detect if an operator actually belongs to B(G1, G2) or not. The results from Theorem 3.2 show how we can define a norm on the spaces A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2) that exactly captures operators with a kernel in S0(G1 × G2). Corollary 3.3. For i = 1, 2 fix a function g(i) ∈ S0(Gi)\{0}. 0(G2), C) and Lin(S′ 0(G1) × S′ 0(G1)×S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)), (i) k · kA : A(G1, G2) → R+ 0 , kAkA = Z (cid:12)(cid:12)A(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1), π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)), A ∈ A(G1, G2), G1× bG1×G2× bG2 defines a norm on A(G1, G2). This norm is equivalent to the subspace norm on A(G1, G2) induced by the space Bil(S′ 0(G1) × S′ 0(G2), C). 9 (ii) k · kB : B(G1, G2) → R+ 0 , kT kB = Z (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2), T π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(ν(1), ν(2)), T ∈ B(G1, G2), G1× bG1×G2× bG2 defines a norm on B(G1, G2). This norm is equivalent to the subspace norm on B(G1, G2) induced by the space Lin(S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)). Remark 3. Theorem 3.2 implies that the integrals used to define the norms in Corollary 3.3(i) and (ii) are finite exactly when A and T belong to A(G1, G2) and B(G1, G2), respectively. We can use (19) and Lemma 2.6 with respect to the time-frequency plane G2 × bG2 to show that an operator in B(G1, G2) is uniquely determined by its action on all time-frequency shifts of a given function in S0(G1). Corollary 3.4. Fix g ∈ S0(G1)\{0}. An operator in B(G1, G2) is uniquely determined by its action on the set {π(ν)g : ν ∈ G1 × bG1}. Specifically, for all T ∈ B(G1, G2) and σ(i) ∈ S′ Vgσ(1)(ν) · (cid:0)T π(ν)g, σ(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 2 ZG1× bG1 (T σ(1), σ(2)) = kgk−2 0(G2) dν. 0(Gi), i = 1, 2, We refer to Corollary 3.4 by saying that the following identity holds true in the weak sense: T σ = kgk−2 2 ZG1× bG1 Vgσ(ν) · T π(ν)g dν for all σ ∈ S′ 0(G1). (20) 3.2.1 A note on operator with kernel in S′ 0 The results of Theorem 3.2 and Corollaries 3.3 and 3.4 are not restricted to the operators in A(G1, G2) ∼= B(G1, G2), but can be formulated in a very similar form for the much larger spaces of operators that have a kernel in S′ 0(G1 × G2) (by use of the outer rather than the inner kernel theorem and Lemma 2.6). For operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) they take the following form. Proposition 3.5. Given f (i), g(i) ∈ S0(Gi), g(i) 6= 0 for i = 1, 2 one has for any operator T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)): kg(1) ⊗ g(2)k2 2 · (f (2), T f (1))S0,S′ 0(G2) (i) (ii) T f (1) = kg(1)k−2 = Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 Vg(1)f (1)(ν(1)) · Vg(2)f (2)(ν(2)) ·(cid:16)π(ν(2))g(2), T ◦ π(ν(1))g(cid:17)S0,S′ 2 ZG1× bG1 Vg(1)f (1)(ν(1)) · T(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(cid:1) dν(1), d(ν(1), ν(2)), 0(G2) (iii) and k · kB′ : Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) → R+ 0 , kT kB′ = sup ν(1)∈G1× bG1 ν(2)∈G2× bG2 (π(ν(2))g(2), T π(ν(1))g(1))S0,S′ 0(G2) defines a norm on Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) which is equivalent to the usual operator norm. This result has the following consequence: 10 Corollary 3.6. For i = 1, 2 take g(i) ∈ S0(Gi)\{0}. Every continuous and bounded function F ∈ Cb(G1 × bG1 × G2 × bG2) defines a linear and bounded operator T : S0(G1) → S′ 0(G2) via (f (2), T f (1))S0,S′ 0(G2) = Vg(1)f (1)(ν(1)) · Vg(2)f (2)(ν(2)) · F (ν(1), ν(2)) d(ν(1), ν(2)). (21) Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 Conversely, for every linear and bounded operator T : S0(G1) → S′ 0(G2) there exists a (non-unique) function F ∈ Cb(G1 × bG1 × G2 × bG2) (which also depends on g(i)) such that (21) holds. Moreover, the function F can be taken to be in L1(G1 × bG1 × G2 × bG2) if and only if T has a kernel in S0(G1 × G2). 0(G2)) where the operators are represented by bounded and continuous functions (rather than abstract functionals as in the outer kernel theorem). This shows that it is possible to have a calculus for operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 3.2.2 A note on Gabor frames Recall that a function g ∈ S0(G) generates a Gabor frame for L2(G) with respect to a closed subgroup Λ in G × bG (typically Λ is a discrete and co-compact subgroup, a lattice, in the time-frequency plane) if there exist constants A, B > 0 such that A kf k2 dλ ≤ B kf k2 2 ∀ f ∈ L2(G). 2 ≤ZΛ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:10)f, π(λ)g(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:12)2 =ZΛ (22) (23) In the positive case there exists a (not necessarily unique) function h ∈ S0(G) such that (f, σ)S0,S′ 0 hf, π(λ)gi (π(λ)h, σ) dλ ∀f ∈ S0(G), σ ∈ S′ 0(G). We will not go into details of how pairs of function g and h can be found or be characterized so that (23) holds. For general Gabor and time-frequency analysis we refer to [5, 18] and [20]. We have already encountered a Gabor frame for L2(G) with respect to the subgroup G×bG: Lemma 2.6 shows that any non-zero function g ∈ S0(G) generates a Gabor frame for L2(G) with respect to Λ = G ×bG (in (15) take σ to be induced by f ; since (15) holds for all f ∈ S0(G), which is dense in L2(G), it follows that (22) is satisfied and that A = B = kgk2 2). In this case, if g is any other function in S0(G) such that hg, gi 6= 0, then the pair (g, h), where h = (hg, gi)−1g satisfies (23). Using (23) rather than (15) for the proofs of Section 3.2 leads to the following results for the operators in B(G1, G2) (we leave the formulation of the corresponding results for A(G1, G2) to the reader). Theorem 3.7. For i = 1, 2 let g(i) and h(i) be functions in S0(Gi) such that they generate Gabor frames for L2(Gi) with respect to a closed subgroup Λi in Gi × bGi and such that (23) holds. k · kB,g(1),g(2) : B(G1, G2) → R+ 0 , (i) kT k =ZΛ1×Λ2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(λ(2))g(2), T π(λ(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) d(λ(1), λ(2)), T ∈ B(G1, G2), defines a norm on B(G1, G2). This norm is equivalent to the subspace norm on B(G1, G2) induced by the space Lin(S′ only if T ∈ B(G1, G2). 0(G2)(cid:1) the norm is finite if and 0(G1), S0(G2)). For an operator T ∈ Lin(cid:0)S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)(cid:1) with kernel κ(T ) ∈ S0(G1 × G2), then (ii) Given T ∈ Lin(cid:0)S0(G1), S′ (T σ(1), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) =ZΛ1×Λ2 Vg(1)σ(1)(λ(1)) · Vg(2)σ(2)(λ(2)) ·(cid:0)π(λ(2))h(2), T π(λ(1))h(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2) d(λ(1), λ(2)). 11 (iii) Any T ∈ B(G1, G2) satisfies (T σ(1), σ(2)) =ZΛ1 Vg(1)σ(1)(λ(1)) · (T π(λ(1))h(1), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) dλ(1). We can be much more concrete if G = Rn. In this case it is known that for any n ∈ N the Gaussian function g(n)(x) = e−πx·x, x ∈ Rn generates a Gabor frame for L2(Rn) with respect to the lattice Λ = aZ2n ⊂ R2n whenever 0 < a < 1. Hence in this case the integrals in Theorem 3.7 become a sum over lattice points. In particular, any linear and bounded operator T from S0(Rn) into S′ 0(Rm) has a kernel in S0(Rn+m) if and only if Xλ(n)∈aZ2n λ(m)∈aZ2m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(λ(m))g(m), T π(λ(n))g(n)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(Rm)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞. 3.3 Analogies with linear algebra If A is an n2 × n1 matrix, then it defines an operator bA from Cn1 into Cn2, bA : Cn1 → Cn2, bA(v(1)) = A · v(1), v(1) ∈ Cn1. Conversely, if a linear operator bA from Cn1 into Cn2 is given and we use the standard basis for these spaces, then the matrix representation of bA is and then bA(v(1)) = A · v(1). If a matrix A is as above and if we let a matrix B ∈ Cn3×n2 define an operator bB from Cn2 into Cn3, then their composition, bB ◦ bA, is represented by the product of the two matrices. i = 1, . . . , n2, j = 1, . . . , n2 A(i, j) = (A(ej))⊤ · ei, That is, (24) bB ◦ bA : Cn1 → Cn3, bB ◦ bA(v(1)) = B · A · v(1), v(1) ∈ Cn1, (25) according to usual matrix multiplication: (B · A)(i, j) = B(i, k) · A(k, j), i = 1, . . . , n3, j = 1, . . . , n1. n2Xk=1 The next two results show that the inner kernel theorem allows us to extend both (24) and (25) from matrices to operators in B(G1, G2). In particular, the role of the unit vectors in Cn are replaced by the Dirac delta distribution, δx : S0(G) → C, δx : f 7→ f (x), f ∈ S0(G), x ∈ G. If Gi = Z/niZ, i = 1, 2, then the results reduce to the matrix case. Lemma 3.8. Given T ∈ B(G1, G2) and A ∈ A(G1, G2) its kernel satisfies for x(i) ∈ Gi, i = 1, 2: κ(T )(x(1), x(2)) = (T δx(1), δx(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) and κ(A)(x(1), x(2)) = A(δx(1), δx(2)), Proof. It is easy to verify the equality δx(1),x(2) = δx(1) ⊗ δx(2), since on has obviously (cid:0)f (1) ⊗ f (2), δx(1) ⊗ δx(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) = f (1)(x(1)) · f (2)(x(2)) = (f (1) ⊗ f (2))(x(1), x(2)). The desired result now follows from the inner kernel theorem: κ(T )(x(1), x(2)) =(cid:0)κ(T ), δx(1),x(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ =(cid:0)κ(T ), δx(1) ⊗ δx(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) =(cid:0)T δx(1), δx(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) 0(G2). The equality for the kernel of A follows in the same fashion. The role of the "delta-basis" in Lemma 3.8 can also be taken by a continuous Gabor frame (cf. Section 3.2.2). 12 Corollary 3.9. For i = 1, 2 let g(i) ∈ S0(Gi)\{0} and x(i) ∈ Gi. (i) For T ∈ B(G1, G2) one has κ(T )(x(1), x(2)) = kg(1)k−2 2 ZG1× bG1(cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)(x(1)) ·(cid:0)T ◦ π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)(x(2)) dν(1). (ii) For A ∈ A(G1, G2) one has κ(A)(x(1), x(2)) = kg(1) ⊗ g(2)k−2 2 Z G1× bG1G2× bG2 (cid:0)π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)(x(1))(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2)(cid:1)(x(2)) · A(cid:0)π(ν(1)g(1), π(ν(2)g(2)(cid:1) d(ν(1), ν(2)). Proof. Combine equality (19) of Theorem 3.2, Corollary 3.4 with Lemma 3.8. The composition rule of operators represented by matrices has the following analogous continuous formulation for operators with kernel in S0. Lemma 3.10. If T1 ∈ B(G1, G2) and T2 ∈ B(G2, G3), then T2 ◦ T1 ∈ B(G1, G3) and κ(T2 ◦ T1)(x(1), x(3)) =ZG2 κ(T1)(x(1), x(2)) · κ(T2)(x(2), x(3)) dx(2), x(i) ∈ Gi, i = 1, 3. Moreover, using the norm on B as defined in Corollary 3.3, there exists a constant c > 0 such that kT2 ◦ T1kB ≤ c kT2kB kT1kB. Corollary 3.11. The Banach space (B(G, G), k · kB) forms a Banach algebra under composition. Proof of Lemma 3.10. Let us first show that the integral is well-defined. By Lemma 2.1 we can write κ(T1) =Xj∈N f (1) j ⊗ f (2) j and κ(T2) =Xj∈N h(2) j ⊗ h(3) j for suitable f (i) j ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2 and h(i) j ∈ S0(Gi), i = 2, 3 and where j ∈ N. Furthermore, Xj∈N kf (1) j kS0 kf (2) j kS0 < ∞ and Xj∈N kh(1) j kS0 kh(2) j kS0 < ∞. Because S0(G) is continuously embedded into L2(G) and into L∞(G) the following estimate applies: for all x(i) ∈ Gi, i = 1, 2, 3 f (1) j k (x(2)) · h(3) k (x(3)) dx(2) (x(2)) · h(2) j (x(1)) · f (2) ZG2(cid:12)(cid:12)κ(T1)(x(1), x(2)) · κ(T2)(x(2), x(3))(cid:12)(cid:12) dx(2) ≤ZG2 Xj,k∈N ≤ Xj,k∈N ≤ Xj,k∈N ≤ c Xj,k∈N k k∞ ZG2 k k∞ kf (2) j k2 kh(2) j k∞ kh(3) j kS0 kh(3) k kS0 kf (2) j kS0 kh(2) kf (1) j k∞ kh(3) (x(2)) · h(2) kf (1) kf (1) f (2) j k k2 k kS0 < ∞, k (x(2)) dx(2) 13 for some c > 0. This shows that the integral and thus the function κ(T2 ◦ T1) : G1 ×G3 → C is well-defined. Note that κ(T2 ◦ T1)(x(1), x(3)) =ZG2 κ(T1)(x(1), x(2)) κ(T2)(x(2), x(3)) dx(2) =ZG2 Xj,k∈N = Xj,k∈N (f (2) j f (1) j (x(1)) f (2) j (x(2)) h(2) k (x(2)) h(3) k (x(3)) dx(2) , h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:0)f (1) j ⊗ h(3) k (cid:1)(x(1), x(3)). Hence κ(T1 ◦ T2) =Pj,k∈N(f (2) j , h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G2) f (1) j ⊗ h(3) k . The above calculation shows that Xj,k∈N k(f (2) j , h(2) k ) f (1) j kS0 kh(3) k kS0 ≤ ∞. Hence κ(T2 ◦ T1) ∈ S0(G1) ⊗S0(G3). By Lemma 2.1 this implies that κ(T2 ◦ T1) ∈ S0(G1 × G3) as well as the moreover-part of the lemma. Let us show that the function which we defined as κ(T2 ◦ T1) indeed is the kernel of the operator T2 ◦ T1: if σ(i) ∈ S′ 0(Gi), i = 1, 3, then (T2 ◦ T1σ(1), σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G3) = (κ(T2), T1σ(1) ⊗ σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G2×G3) (h(2) k ⊗ h(3) k , T1σ(1) ⊗ σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G2×G3) (T1σ(1), h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G2) (h(3) k , σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G3) (κ(T1), σ(1) ⊗ h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) (h(3) k , σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G3) (f (1) j ⊗ f (2) j , σ(1) ⊗ h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) (h(3) k , σ(3))S0,S′ 0(G3) (f (2) j , h(2) k )S0,S′ 0(G2) f (1) j ⊗ h(3) k , σ(1) ⊗ σ(2)(cid:17)S0,S′ . 0(G1×G3) =Xk∈N =Xk∈N =Xk∈N = Xj,k∈N =(cid:16) Xj,k∈N 3.4 Some examples, nuclearity and trace-class results Example 3.12. The prototypical example of an element in S0(G1 × G2) is the tensor-product function f = f (1) ⊗ f (2), f (i) ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2. It is not difficult to show that the unique corresponding operators A, T and S according to Theorem 1.3 are the following ones: A : S′ T : S′ S : S′ 0(G1) × S′ 0(G1) → S0(G2), T (σ(1)) = (f (1), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G2) → S0(G1), S(σ(2)) = (f (2), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) → C, A(σ(1), σ(2)) = (f (1), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1) · f (2), 0(G2) · f (1), 0(G1) (f (2), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2), where σ(i) ∈ S′ 0(Gi), i = 1, 2. Observe that the range of the operators T and S in Example 3.12 is one-dimensional. Naturally, not all rank-one operators have a kernel in S0. For example, let f (1) be a function in S0(G1) and let f (2) be a function in L2(G2) which is not also in S0(G2), then T (σ(1)) = (f (1), σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1) · f (2) is a bounded rank-one operator from S′ Indeed, if we restrict T to an operator from S0(G1) into L2(G2) ⊆ S′ 0(G1) into L2(G2) which does not have a kernel in S0(G1 × G2). 0(G2), then (by the outer kernel 14 theorem) its kernel in S′ show that the operator 0(G1 × G2) is the functional induced by the function f 1 ⊗ f 2. Similarly, one can S(h(2)) = hf (2), h(2)iL2(G2) · f (1), h(2) ∈ L2(G2), is a linear and bounded rank-one operator from L2(G2) into S0(G1) with kernel f 2 ⊗ f 1. Remark 4. By Lemma 2.1 every f ∈ S0(G1 × G2) has a representation f =Xj∈N f (1) j ⊗ f (2) j such that Xj∈N kf (1) j kS0 kf (2) j kS0 < ∞. The inner kernel theorem implies that the corresponding operator T ∈ B(G1, G2) satisfies T σ(1) =Xj∈N (f (1) j , σ(1))S0,S′ 0(G1) · f (2) j for all σ(1) ∈ S′ 0(G1), where the sum is absolutely convergent in the operator norm of Lin(S′ 0(G1), S0(G2)). This immediately leads to the following. Corollary 3.13. Finite-rank operators in B(G1, G2) are norm dense in B(G1, G2), because any T ∈ B(G1, G2) can be written as absolutely convergent series of rank one operators (Tn)n∈N in B(G1, G2), i.e. (cid:13)(cid:13)T −Xn∈N Tn(cid:13)(cid:13)op,S′ 0→S0 = 0 and Xn∈N kTnkop,S′ 0→S0 < ∞. Because S0 is dense in L2 it follows that the finite-rank operators of B(G1, G2) are dense in the space of Hilbert-Schmidt operators from L2(G1) into L2(G2). Corollary 3.14. All operators in B(G1, G2) are nuclear operators from the Banach space S′ Banach space S0(G2). 0(G1) into the Proof. By [27, Chapter III, §7] all nuclear operators from the Banach space S′ S0(G2) are of the form 0(G1) into the Banach space T : S′ 0(G1) → S0(G2), T σ =Xj∈N ψ(1) j (σ(1)) · f (2) j , where (ψ(1) j ) is a sequence in S′′ 0(G1) and (f (2) j ) is a sequence in S0(G2) such that Xj∈N kψ(1) j kS′′ 0 kf (2) j kS0 < ∞. Remark 4 combined with the fact that S0(G1) is continuously embedded into S′′ embedding implies that all operators in B(G1, G2) are nuclear. 0(G1) via the natural By the embedding of S0 into S′ are also nuclear operators from S0(G1) into S0(G2); from S0(G1) into S′ 0 as described in Lemma 2.4 it follows that all the operators in B(G1, G2) 0(G2). 0(G2); and from S′ 0(G1) into S′ Corollary 3.15. An operator T in B(G, G) with kernel κ(T ) ∈ S0(G × G) is a trace-class operator on both S0(G) and S′ 0(G). Its trace satisfies tr(T ) =RG κ(T )(x, x) dx. Proof. Following [26] we say that an operator T on a Banach space B is of trace class if it has the form T : B → B, T x =Xj∈N (x, σj)B,B′ · bj for all x ∈ B, for some suitable sequences (σj) in B′ and (bj) in B such that Pj kσjkB′ kbjkB < ∞. The trace of T is tr(T ) = Pj∈N(bj, σj)B,B′. Remark 4 shows that for B = S0(G) or B = S′ have the desired form. Here we also use that S0 is continuously embedded into S′ 0(G) the operators in B(G, G) 0 via Lemma 2.4 0 and S′′ 15 and the canonical embedding ι : S0 → S′′ will first prove that the integral is well-defined. The inner kernel theorem states that κ(T ) is a function in S0(G × G). Observe that the diagonal {(x, y) ∈ G × G : x = y} is a closed subgroup of G × G. It is a fact (see [10, Theorem 7] or [21, Theorem 5.7]) that the restriction of an S0 function to a closed subgroup again belongs to S0 of that subgroup. In our case this means that x 7→ κ(T )(x, x) is a function in S0(G) 0, respectively. Before we show that tr(T ) =RG κ(T )(x, x) dx we and, in particular, that it is integrable. Now, since κ(T ) =Pj∈N f (1) j ⊗ f (2) j , j tr(T ) =Xj∈N =ZGXj∈N 0(G) =Xj∈NZG (x) dx =ZG (f (1) , f (2) j )S0,S′ f (1) j (x) f (2) j (x) dx f (1) j (x) f (2) j κ(T )(x, x) dx. 0, w∗)′ ∼= S0 it is reasonable to extend the Remark 5. Since S0 is continuously embedded into S′ definition of trace-class operator from [26] used in the proof of Corollary 3.15 as follows: We say a (linear and continuous) operator from S′ 0(G) with the weak∗ topology into S0(G) with its norm topology is of trace-class if 0 and (S′ T : S′ 0(G) → S0(G), T σ =Xj∈N (f (1) j , σ)S0,S′ 0 · f (2) j for all σ ∈ S′ 0(G), for some suitable sequences (f (i) operator is then tr(T ) = Pj∈N(f (1) j coincides exactly with the trace-class operators defined in this way. j ) in S0(G) and such that Pj kf (1) j k < ∞. The trace of such an In that case, it is clear from Remark 4 that B(G, G) j k kf (2) , f (2) . )S0,S′ 0 j Let us consider another important example of elements in B(G, G). Example 3.16 (Product-convolution operators). For any two functions h1 and h2 in S0(G) the product- convolution operator P Ch1,h2 : S′ 0(G) → M1(G) ∼= S0(G), P Ch1,h2(σ) = (σ · h1) ∗ h2, and the convolution-product operator CPh1,h2 : S′ 0(G) → M1(G) ∼= S0(G), CPh1,h2(σ) = (σ ∗ h1) · h2, are linear and bounded operators, which send norm bounded weak∗ convergent nets in S′ 0(G) into norm convergent nets in M1(G) ∼= S0(G). That is, both operators belong to B(G, G). One can show that κ(P Ch1,h2) = τ1(h1 ⊗ h2) and κ(CPh1,h2) = τ2(h1 ⊗ h2), where τ1 : S0(G × G) → S0(G × G), τ1(f )(s, t) = f (s, t − s), τ2 : S0(G × G) → S0(G × G), τ2(f )(s, t) = f (t − s, t). Product-convolution operators can be used to prove Lemma 2.5 (see [21, Proposition 6.15] for the details). The kernel theorems translate Lemma 2.5 into a statement for operators: Lemma 3.17. For any operator T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ bounded in Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) such that, for all f (i) ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2, 0(G2)) there exists a net of operators (Tα) in B(G1, G2), lim α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T − Tα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) = 0, kTαkop,S0→S′ 0 ≤ kT kop,S0→S′ 0. Similar to Lemma 3.17, the inner kernel theorem can be used to translate Lemma 2.2 from a statement of S0 to a statement of B(G1, G2). 16 Proposition 3.18. Let T0 be a non-trivial operator in B(G1, G2). The operators T in B(G1, G2) are exactly those of the form T =Xj∈N cj π(ν(2) j ) ◦ T0 ◦ π(ν(1) j ), where c ∈ ℓ1(N) and (ν(i) furthermore kT k = inf kck1, where the infimum is taken over all possible representations of T as above, defines an equivalent norm on B(G1, G2). j ) are sequences in Gi × bGi, i = 1, 2. The sum converges in B(G1, G2) and A similar statement is true for the space A(G1, G2). In that case, if A0 is a non-trivial element in A(G1, G2), then all operators in A(G1, G2) are exactly those of the form A(σ(1), σ(2)) =Xj∈N with c and ν(i) j in Proposition 3.18. cj A0(cid:0)π(ν(1) j )σ(1), π(ν(2) j )σ(2)(cid:1) Proof of Proposition 3.18. By Lemma 2.2 we know that for any T ∈ B(G1, G2) there exists a sequence c ∈ ℓ1(N) and a sequence (x(1) j , x(2) j , ω(1) , ω(2) j j ) in G1 × G2 × bG1 × bG2 such that cjEω(1) j ,ω(2) j Tx(1) j ,x(2) j κ(T0). κ(T ) =Xj∈N Hence (T σ(1), σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G2) = (κ(T ), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2) =Xj∈N =Xj∈N =Xj∈N =Xj∈N j j j j ,ω(2) Tx(1) cj(cid:0)Eω(1) cj(cid:0)κ(T0), [T−x(1) cj(cid:0)T0 ◦ T−x(1) } ω(1) j (x(1) ∈ℓ1(N) {z j ) cj j ,x(2) j κ(T0), σ(1) ⊗ σ(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ Eω(1) j σ(1)] ⊗ [T−x(2) j Eω(2) j 0(G1×G2) σ(2)](cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G1,G2) Eω(1) j σ(1), T−x(2) j Eω(2) j σ(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2) j (cid:0) Eω(2) {z =:π(ν(2) ) j } Tx(2) j ◦T0 ◦ Eω(1) j T−x(1) j =:π(ν(1) ) {z j } σ(1), σ(2)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2). If we take T0 to be a rank-one operator in B(G1, G2) as in Example 3.12 with κ(T0) = f (1) ⊗ f (2), then Proposition 3.18 states that any operator T ∈ B(G1, G2) has the form T σ(1) =Xj∈N cj(cid:0)π(ν(1) j )f (1), σ(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G1) π(ν(2) j )f (2) for all σ(1) ∈ S′ 0(G1), for some suitable sequence c ∈ ℓ1(N) and sequences (νi j) in Gi × bGi, i = 1, 2. 3.5 Regularizing approximations of the identity Since S0 is weak∗ dense in S′ operator T in Lin(S0(G1), S′ in the weak∗sense towards κ(T ). The associated operators Tα ∈ B(G1, G2) satisfy 0 it is possible to approximate the kernel κ(T ) ∈ S′ 0(G1 × G2) of a general 0(G2)) by a net (or sequence) of functions κα in S0(G1 × G2) that converges lim α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T − Tα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) = 0 for all f (i) ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2. 17 (26) We saw this already in Lemma 3.17. In this section we propose a construction of a net of operators (Tα) in B(G1, G2) such that (26) holds, that is not based on the modification of the kernel per se (which is the idea behind Lemma 3.17), but rather by a composition of the given operator T with certain operators: we introduce the idea of a regularizing approximations of the identity. Definition 3.19. A regularizing approximation of the identity of S0(G) is a net of operators (Tα) in B(G, G) resp. κ(Tα) ∈ S0(G × G) for each α and which satisfies the following conditions: (i) limα kTαf − f kS0 = 0 for all f ∈ S0(G), (ii) supα kTαkop,S0→S0 < ∞, (iii) supα kTαkop,S′ 0→S′ 0 < ∞, (iv) limα (f, Tασ − σ)S0,S′ 0(G) = 0 for all f ∈ S0(G), σ ∈ S′ 0(G). Remark 6. Statement (i) and (ii) for the adjoint operators (T × α ) implies (iv) and (iii), respectively. Hence we need only conditions (i) and (ii) for self-adjoint operators. Moreover, (i) implies (ii) for the case of a sequence of operators, due to the Banach-Steinhaus principle. We list three examples of such families of operators at the end of this section. It is straightforward to show that the properties of a regularizing approximation of the identity implies convergence of L2. Lemma 3.20. If (Tα) is a regularizing approximation of the identity for S0(G), then sup α kTαkop,L2→L2 < ∞ and lim α kTαf − f k2 = 0 for all f ∈ L2(G). Moreover, the net (κ(Tα)) in S0(G × G) ⊆ S′ in the weak∗sense. 0(G × G) converges towards the kernel of the identity operator Proof. The first statement follows by interpolation theory for operators and assumptions (ii) and (iii) in Definition 3.19. Now, since S0 is continuously embedded and dense in L2, Definition 3.19(i) implies that kTαf − f k2 → 0 for all f ∈ L2(G). lim α The moreover part follows from the fact that Definition 3.19(iv) implies (26) Regularizing approximations of the identity allow us to construct a concrete family of operators that 0(G1×G2) have kernels in S0(G1×G2), which approximate any given operator with an (abstract) kernel in S′ in the weak∗ sense. Proposition 3.21. For i = 1, 2 let (T (i) any operator T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ α ) be a regularizing approximation of the identity for S0(Gi). For 0(G2)) the collection of operators (Tα), Tα := T (2) α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α is such that (i) Tα ∈ B(G1, G2) for each α, i.e., κ(Tα) ∈ S0(G1 × G2), (ii) limα(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T − Tα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) = 0 for all f (i) ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 2, (iii) κ(Tα) converges to κ(T ) in the weak∗ sense. (iv) supα kTαkop,S0→S′ 0 < ∞. (v) For T ∈ Lin(L2(G1), L2(G2)) one has limα k(T − Tα)f kL2(G2) = 0 for all f ∈ L2(G1). (vi) For T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S0(G2)) one has limα k(T − Tα)f kS0(G2) = 0 for all f ∈ S0(G1). 18 Proof. (i). For any α and i = 1, 2 the operator T (i) convergent nets in S′ that then Tα = T (2) nets in S0(G2). Hence Tα ∈ B(G1, G2). (ii). This is a simple estimate: α ◦ T ◦ T (1) 0(Gi) into norm convergent nets in S0(Gi). Since T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ α belongs to B(Gi, Gi) and thus maps bounded weak∗ 0(G2)) it is clear 0(G1) into norm convergent α also maps bounded weak∗ convergent nets in S′ lim + lim ≤ lim ≤ lim α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T − T (2) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T − T (2) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (T (2) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (2), (IdS′ ≤ kf (2)kS0(cid:16) sup 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) α )f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) α ◦ T )f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ α )f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) α )(T f (1))(cid:1)S0,S′ } {z 0(cid:17) kT kop,S0→S′ α ◦ T − T (2) − T (2) kf (2)kS0kT (2) 0 kT kop,S0→S′ =0 (by Definition 3.19(iv)) α kop,S′ α kop,S′ + lim α 0 lim α kT (2) 0→S′ 0→S′ α 0 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 k(IdS0 − T (1) α )f (1)kS0 kTαf (1) − f (1)kS0 = 0. (iii). This is implied by (ii). (iv). By definition the operators T (1) and S′ 0. Thus α and T (2) α have uniformly bounded operator norms as operators on S0 sup α ≤(cid:16) sup α kTαkop,S0→S′ 0 = sup α kT (2) α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α kop,S0→S′ 0 kT (2) α kop,S′ 0→S′ 0(cid:17) kT kop,S0→S′ 0(cid:16) sup α kT (1) α kop,S0→S0(cid:17) < ∞ (vi). In case T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S0(G2)) we make the following estimate: for all f ∈ S0(G1) lim α ≤ lim α ≤(cid:0) sup k(T − T (2) α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α )f kS0 k(T − T (2) α ◦ T )f kS0 k(T (2) α ◦ T − T (2) α ◦ T ◦ T (1) α )f kS0 + lim α =0 {z α kop,S0→S0(cid:1) kT kop,S0→S0 lim } α kT (2) kf − T (1) α f kS0 = 0 α The proof for (v) is similar. Proposition 3.22. Consider an operator S ∈ Lin(L2(G1), L2(G2)) and T ∈ Lin(L2(G2), L2(G3)). Let (Sα) and (Tα) be the nets of operators in B(G1, G2) and B(G2, G3) associated to S and T as in Proposition 3.21, respectively. In that case the kernel of the operator T ◦ S ∈ Lin(L2(G1), L2(G3)) is the weak∗ limit of the kernels of the net of operators (Tα ◦ Sα), κ(Tα ◦ Sα) w∗ −→ κ(T ◦ S), i.e., lim α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (3), (T ◦ S − Tα ◦ Sα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G3)(cid:12)(cid:12) = 0 for all f i ∈ S0(Gi), i = 1, 3. Remark 7. The usefulness here is that the composition of the operators S and T can we approximated in the weak∗ sense by a composition of operators Sα and Tα that have kernels in S0. Observe that the composition Tα ◦ Sα is well understood, cf. the "continuous matrix-matrix product" in Section 3.3. Proof of Proposition 3.22. By the estimates of Proposition 3.21 and the embedding of L2 into S′ 0 one has: lim ≤ lim 0(G3)(cid:12)(cid:12) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (3), (T ◦ S − Tα ◦ Sα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G3)(cid:12)(cid:12) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (3), (T ◦ S − Tα ◦ S)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G3)(cid:12)(cid:12) α (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)f (3), (Tα ◦ S − Tα ◦ Sα)f (1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(cid:1) lim + kf (3)kS0(cid:0) sup ≤ kf (3)kS0k(T − Tα)Sf (1)k2 kTαkop,S′ + lim 0→S′ α α kSf (1) − Sαf (1)k2 = 0. 19 Let us apply Proposition 3.22 to a concrete example: Example 3.23. The Fourier transform F is an operator from L2(G) onto L2(bG). Furthermore its inverse F −1 is an operator from L2(bG) onto L2(G). It is clear that F −1 ◦ F = IdL2(G). It is not difficult to verify 0 (guaranteed by the outer kernel theorem) are as follows: that their kernels in S′ • κ(F ) ∈ S′ so that (h, F f )S0,S′ • κ(F −1) ∈ S′ so that (f, F −1h)S0,S′ 0( bG) =ZG× bG 0(G) =Z bG×G 0(G × bG) is induced by the function G × bG → C, (x, ω) 7→ ω(x), 0(bG × G) is induced by the function bG × G → C, (ω, x) 7→ ω(x), 0(G × G) is the functional defined by f1 ⊗ f2 7→ZG f (x)h(ω) ω(x) d(x, ω) for all f ∈ S0(G), h ∈ S0(bG). h(ω)f (x) ω(x) d(x, ω) for all f ∈ S0(G), h ∈ S0(bG). f1(x)f2(x) dx, • κ(IdL2(G)) ∈ S′ for all f1, f2 ∈ S0(G). This is typically expressed as κ(IdL2(G)) = δ(y − x). Again the analogy to matrix analysis is helpful and gives these symbols a meaning. • While we describe the distributional kernel for the identity operator as a distribution of two variables, in the spirit of a Kronecker delta (describing the unit matrix), simply given as δKron(F ) =ZG F (x, x) dx, F ∈ S0(G × G) it has become a common understanding to describe the kernel as a continuous collection of Dirac delta distributions δy, or with the usual notation δ(y) this becomes just δ(y − x). Let now (Fα), (F −1 Proposition 3.22. In that case α ) be two nets of operators in B(G, bG) and B(bG, G) associated to F and F −1 as in κ(Fα) w∗ κ(F −1 −→ κ(F ), κ(F −1 α ) w∗ −→ κ(F −1), α ◦ Fα) w∗ −→ κ(F −1 ◦ F ) = κ(IdL2(G)). At the same time Lemma 3.10 tells us that κ(F −1 α ◦ Fα) is the function in S0(G × G) given by κ(F −1 α ◦ Fα)(x, y) =Z bG κ(Fα)(x, ω) · κ(F −1 α )(ω, y) dω. If "we take the limit" of the above integral, then we are lead to the following "identity", which is often found in physics and engineering: Z bG ⇔ Z bG κ(F )(x, ω) · κ(F −1)(ω, y) dω = κ(IdL2(G)) ω(y − x) dω = δ(y − x). Expressed in the familiar setting G = bG = R: ZR We now consider examples of regularizing approximations of the identity. e2πiω(y−x) dω = δ(y − x), x, y ∈ R. Example 3.24. (Partial sums of Gabor frame operators) Let g ∈ S0(R) and a, b > 0 be such that {π(λ)g}λ∈aZ×bZ is a Parseval Gabor frame for L2(R), i.e., kf k2 2 = Xλ∈aZ×bZ hf, π(λ)gi2 for all f ∈ L2(R). 20 In that case the associated Gabor frame operator Sg : S0(R) → S0(R), Sgf = Xλ∈aZ×bZ hf, π(λ)giπ(λ)g, f ∈ S0(R) is the identity on S0(R). Let (ΛN ), N ∈ N be a family of finite subsets of aZ × bZ so that for every point λ ∈ aZ × bZ there exists an N0 ∈ N such that N > N0 implies that λ ∈ ΛN . For every N ∈ N we define the operator Sg,N : S0(R) → S0(R), Sg,N f = Xλ∈ΛN hf, π(λ)giπ(λ)g. It extends to an operator on S′ 0(R) in the following way: Sg,N : S′ 0(R) → S′ 0(R), (f, Sg,N σ)S0,S′ 0(R) =(cid:0)f, Xλ∈λN (π(α)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(R) π(λ)g(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(R). The collection of operators (Sg,N )N ∈N is a regularizing approximation of the identity: It is straight forward to write an explicit formula for the kernel of the operator Sg,N , namely κ(Sg,N )(t1, t2) = Xλ∈ΛN π(λ)g(t1) π(λ)g(t2), t1, t2 ∈ R, such that (f2, Sg,N f1)S0,S′ 0(R) = (f1 ⊗ f2, κ(Sg,N ))S0,S′ (ii) and (iii) we need the following two inequalities: constant c > 0 such that 0(R2). Hence κ(Sg,N ) ∈ S0(R2). Concerning condition 0(R) there exists a for any f ∈ S0(R) and σ ∈ S′ Xλ∈aZ×bZ hf, π(λ)gi ≤ c kf kS0 kgkS0 and sup λ∈aZ×bZ (π(λ)g, σ) ≤ c kgkS0 kσkS′ 0 . (27) We can then make the following estimates: kSg,N kop,S0→S0 = sup kSg,N f kS0 f ∈S0(R) kf kS0 =1 ≤ sup f ∈S0(R) kf kS0 =1(cid:13)(cid:13) Xλ∈ΛN Xλ∈aZ×bZ f ∈S0(R) kf kS0 =1 ≤ sup hf, π(λ)giπ(λ)g(cid:13)(cid:13)S0 Xλ∈ΛN ≤ sup f ∈S0(R) kf kS0 =1 hf, π(λ)gi kgkS0 hf, π(λ)gi kgkS0 (27) ≤ c sup f ∈S0(R) kf kS0 =1 kf kS0 kgk2 S0 = c kgk2 S0. Hence supN kSg,N kop,S0→S0 < ∞. Similarly, also using (27), we can show that Finally, because Sg is the identity on S0(R) we find that kSg,N kop,S′ 0→S′ 0 ≤ c kgk2 S0. lim N→∞ kSg,N f − f kS0 ≤ kgkS0 lim N→∞ Xλ∈aZ×bZ\ΛN hf, π(λ)gi = 0 where the last equality follows from the fact that for any two functions f, g ∈ S0(R) the sequence {hf, π(λ)gi}λ∈aZ×bZ is absolutely summable. In a similar way one can show that (Sg,N ) satisfies condi- tion (iv) in Definition 3.19. Example 3.25. (Product-convolution operators) In sequel A(G) is the Fourier algebra A(G) = {f ∈ C0(G) : ∃h ∈ L1(bG) s.t. f = F bGh}, here F bG is the Fourier transform from L1(bG) into C0(G). The norm in the Fourier algebra is defined by kf kA = khk1, where h is as before. We now construct regularizing 21 approximations of the identity with the help of product-convolution operators. As described in, e.g., [21, Proposition 4.18], it is possible to find nets of functions (hα) ∈ S0(G) and (gα) ∈ S0(G) such that lim α kf ∗ hα − f kS0 = 0 and lim α kf · gα − f k1 = 0 ∀ f ∈ S0(G), where khαk1 ≤ 1 and kgαkA(G) ≤ 1 for all α. The net of operators Tα : S′ 0(G) → S0(G), Tασ = (σ · gα) ∗ hα, σ ∈ S′ 0(G) is a regularizing approximation of the identity. Example 3.26. (Localization operators) Let (Hn) be a sequence of uniformly bounded functions in Cc(R2) that converges uniformly over compact sets to the constant function 1 and take g to be a non-zero function in S0(R) with kgk2 = 1. Then the operators Tn : S′ 0(R) → S0(R), Tnσ =ZR2 Hn(ν) (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(R) π(ν)g dν form a regularizing approximation of the identity. Similar statements can be obtained for Gabor multipliers with respect to tight Gabor families. 3.6 Kernel theorems for modulation spaces The inner and outer kernel theorem characterize the operators that are linear and bounded from S′ 0(G1) into S0(G2) and from S0(G1) into S′ 0(G2), respectively (with some added assumptions in the former case). In between S0(G) and S′ 0(G) there is a well-studied family of spaces called the (unweighted) modulation spaces. We refer to [12, 13] and the relevant chapters in [18] for more on those spaces. For our purpose here we only need to recall the following. 0(G), or more precise, in between the embedding of S0(G) into S′ 0(G) and S′ Definition 3.27. Given p ∈ [1, ∞] and 0 6= g ∈ S0(G). the modulation space Mp(G) can be defined by Mp(G) =nσ ∈ S′ 0(G) : (cid:18)ZG× bG(cid:12)(cid:12) (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ 0(cid:12)(cid:12)p dν(cid:19)1/p < ∞o, (28) equipped with the norm kσkMp =(cid:0)RG× bG(cid:12)(cid:12) (π(ν)g, σ)S0,S′ in the obvious way. 0(cid:12)(cid:12)p dν(cid:1)1/p. In case p = ∞ the definition is modified One can show that different g induce equivalent norms. As already mentioned in Section 2 we have M1(G) ∼= S0(G) and M∞(G) = S′ 0(G). For p ∈ (1, ∞), the modulation space Mp(G) is reflexive and (Mp(G))′ ∼= Mp′(G), where 1/p + 1/p′ = 1. For any fixed function g ∈ S0(G)\{0}, the action of a distribution σ ∈ Mp′(G) on a distribution f ∈ Mp(G) is given by (f, σ)Mp,Mp′ (G) = kgk−2 2 ZG× bG(cid:0)π(ν)g, f(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G)(cid:0)π(ν)g, σ(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G) dν. (29) In light of the inner and outer kernel theorems we may therefore ask: can we characterize the bounded It is straight forward to generalize 0(G2)) to be operators from linear operators from Mp(G) into Mq(G) for some p, q ∈ [1, ∞]. Theorem 3.2 to the following sufficient condition for operators in Lin(S0(G1), S′ Mp′(G1) into Mq(G2). Proposition 3.28. Fix any function g(i) ∈ S0(Gi)\{0}, i = 1, 2 and let p, q ∈ [1, ∞]. If an operator T ∈ Lin(S0(G1), S′ 0(G2)) satisfies the condition ZG2× bG2(cid:16)ZG1× bG1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2), T π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2)(cid:12)(cid:12)p dν(1)(cid:17)q/p dν(2) < ∞ 22 then T is bounded from Mp′(G1) into Mq(G2). Hence, for σ(1) ∈ Mp′(G) and σ(2) ∈ Mq′(G), kg(1) ⊗ g(2)k2 = Z G1× bG1×G2× bG2 2 (cid:0)σ(2), T σ(1)(cid:1)Mq′ ,Mq Vg(1)σ(1)(ν(1)) · Vg(2)σ(2)(ν(2)) ·(cid:0)π(ν(2))g(2), T π(ν(1))g(1)(cid:1)S0,S′ 0(G2) d(ν(1), ν(2)). In general, the assumption in Proposition 3.28 is only sufficient for T to be a bounded operator from Mp′(G1) to Mq(G2). For example, if p = q = 2, then the identity operator is bounded on L2(G), but its kernel is not in L2(G × G). In [1] and [7] it has been shown recently that for certain choices of p and q the condition in Proposition 3.28 is necessary for boundedness from Mp′(G1) into Mq(G2). Specifically in the cases where (1) p = ∞ and q ∈ [1, ∞] ; (2) p ∈ [1, ∞] and q = ∞. Such results confirm the usefulness of coorbit spaces, here specifically of modulation spaces. 4 Proof of the inner kernel theorem For the proof of Theorem 1.3 it is useful to introduce the space B(G1, G2): Definition 4.1. Let G1 and G2 be locally compact abelian Hausdorff groups. We then define B(G1, G2) = {T ∈ Lin(S′ into a norm convergent net in ι(S0(G2)) ⊆ S′′ 0(G2)}. 0(G1), ι(S0(G2))) : T maps every bounded weak∗convergent net in S′ 0(G1) The identification of S0(G) with ι(S0(G)) implies that B(G1, G2) ∼= B(G1, G2). Proof of Theorem 1.3. We will show that the three Banach spaces S0(G1 × G2), A and B(G1, G2) are isomorphic. Since the roles of G1 and G2 can be interchanged (because S0(G1 × G2) ∼= S0(G2 × G1)), it then automatically follows that also B(G2, G1) is isomorphic to these spaces. In order to prove the desired identifications, we consider the following two operators. c : S0(G1 × G2) → A, c(K) =h(σ(1), σ(2)) 7→ (K, σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ d : A → B(G1, G2), d(A) =hσ(1) 7→(cid:2)σ(2) 7→ A(σ(1), σ(2)) (cid:3) i, 0(G1×G2)i, where K ∈ S0(G1 × G2), A ∈ A and σ(i) ∈ S′ that both these operators are well-defied, linear and bounded. 0(Gi), i = 1, 2. In Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4 we will show Furthermore, let S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2) be the tensor product of S′ 0(G1) and S′ 0(G2), that is, 0(G1) ⊗ S′ S′ 0(G2) = {σ ∈ S′ j=1 σ(1) j ⊗ σ(2) j , N ∈ N }. 0(G1 × G2) : σ =PN Then, for a given T ∈ B(G1, G2), we define the operator e(T ) : S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2) → C, e(T )(cid:16) NXj=1 σ(1) j ⊗ σ(2) j (cid:17) = NXj=1 T (σ(1) j )(σ(2) j ). So far it is not clear whether the value of e(T )(σ), σ ∈ S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2) depends on the particular representation PN j=1 σ(1) j ⊗ σ(2) j of σ. We will show in a moment that this is not the case. In Lemma 4.5 we show that e(T ) is continuous with respect to the weak∗ topology induced by functions 0(G1 × G2) (the distributions induced by 0(G2)), there is a 0(G2) is weak∗ dense in S′ 0(G1 × G2) and they are a subspace of S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ in S0(G1 × G2). Because S′ S0(G1) ⊗ S0(G2) are weak∗ dense in S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 23 unique weak∗ continuous extension of e(T ), which we also call e(T ), to a functional from S′ C. We can therefore define the operator 0(G1 × G2) to e : B → ι(S0(G1 × G2)) ⊆ S′′ 0(G1 × G2), which, to every T ∈ B, assigns the operator e(T ) from above. Since ι(S0(G1 × G2)) ∼= S0(G1 × G2) we can consider e as an operator from B into S0(G1 × G2). Now, given K ∈ S0(G1 × G2), A ∈ A and T ∈ B(G1, G2) one can, simply by the definitions of the three operators c, d and e, show that e ◦ d ◦ c(K) = K, c ◦ e ◦ d(A) = A, d ◦ c ◦ e(T ) = T. This implies that c, d and e are injective, surjective, and hence invertible. We conclude that e is the (unique) inverse operator of d ◦ c, thus e(T )(σ) for σ ∈ S′ 0(G2) can not depend on a particular representation of σ as discussed earlier in the proof. Because S0(G1 × G2) is a Banach space, it follows that also the normed vector spaces A and B(G1, G2) are Banach spaces. To complete the proof it remains only to prove Lemma 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5. 0(G1) ⊗ S′ In order to verify weak∗ continuity of functionals the following result is essential to us. Lemma 4.2 ([22, Corollary 2.7.9]). Let X be a Banach space and X ′ its continuous dual space. For a functional ϕ : X ′ → C the following statements are equivalent: (i) ϕ is weak∗ continuous, i.e., if (x′ α) is a weak∗ convergent net in X ′ with limit x′ 0, then for all ǫ > 0 there exists a α0 such that for all α > α0 one has ϕ(x′ α − x′ 0) < ǫ. (ii) ϕ is continuous with respect to the bounded weak∗ topology, i.e., if (x′ α) is a (in X ′ norm) bounded 0, then for all ǫ > 0 there exists a α0 such that one has weak∗ convergent net in X ′ with limit x′ ϕ(x′ 0) < ǫ for all α > α0. α − x′ Lemma 4.3. The follwoing operator is well-defined, linear and bounded: c : S0(G1 × G2) → A, c(K) =(cid:2)(σ(1), σ(2)) 7→ (K, σ(1) ⊗ σ(2))S0,S′ 0(G1×G2)(cid:3) . Proof. Let a function K ∈ S0(G1 × G2) be given. Then for some constant a > 0 c(K)(σ(1), σ(2)) = (K, σ(1) ⊗ σ(2)) ≤ kKkS0kσ(1) ⊗ σ(2)kS′ 0 (10) ≤ a kKkS0 kσ(1)kS′ 0 kσ(2)kS′ 0, Hence c(K)(σ(1), σ(2)) is well-defined. The bilinearity of c(K) is clear. Also, c(K)(σ(1), σ(2)) ≤ a kKkS0. sup (Gi)=1, i=1,2 kσ(i)kS′ 0 (30) (31) This shows that c(K) is an element in Bil(S′ 0(G2), C). Let us show that c(K) ∈ A, i.e., c(K) is weak∗ continuous in each variable. In order to show this, let us first consider a function K ∈ S0(G1) ⊗ S0(G2) ⊆ S0(G1 × G2), that is, a function of the form 0(G1) × S′ K = NXj=1 j ⊗ f (2) f (1) j , (f (i) j )N j=1 in S0(Gi), i = 1, 2, N ∈ N. If (σ(1) α ) is a bounded weak∗ convergent net in S′ α − σ(1) c(K)(σ(1) 0(G1) with limit σ(1) (K, σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) = lim α 0 , and σ(2) ∈ S′ α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) lim α 0(G2), then = lim α NXj=1 (f (1) j , σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 ) (f (2) j , σ(2)) ≤ a max j kf (2) j kS0 kσ(2)kS′ 0 , σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 ) = 0. (f (1) j lim α NXj=1 24 By Lemma 4.2 the operator c(K) is weak∗ continuous in the first coordinate. The continuity in the second coordinate is proven in the same fashion. Let now K be any function in S0(G1 × G2). Then, given any ǫ > 0, we can find function K ∈ S0(G1) ⊗ S0(G2) such that kK − KkS0 < ǫ 4 sup α,{0} kσ(1) (·) kS′ 0 kσ(2)kS′ 0. With this K fixed, there is, as we just showed, an index α0 such that for all α > α0 c( K)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) < ǫ/2. Hence, for α > α0 we have that c(K)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) α − σ(1) = c(K − K + K)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) + c( K)(σ(1) ≤ c(K − K)(σ(1) kσ(1) < 2 kK − KkS0 sup (·) kS′ 0 + ǫ/2 0 kσ(2)kS′ 0 , σ(2)) α,{0} α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) < ǫ/2 + ǫ/2 = ǫ. We have thus shown that c(K) is weak∗ continuous in the first coordinate for any K ∈ S0(G1 × G2). The continuity in the second coordinate is proven in the same way. Consequently c is a mapping from S0(G1 × G2) into A. The linearity of c is clear. Finally, the boundedness of c follows from the inequalities concerning c(K) above, namely, sup K∈S0(G1×G2) kKkS0 =1 kc(K)kBil(S′ 0×S′ 0,C) ≤ a, where a is the same constant as in (30) and (31). Hence the operator c is well-defined, linear and bounded. Lemma 4.4. The operator d : A → B(G1, G2), d(A) =(cid:2)σ(1) 7→(cid:2)σ(2) 7→ A(σ(1), σ(2)) (cid:3) (cid:3) , σ(i) ∈ S′ 0(Gi), i = 1, 2, is well-defined, linear and bounded. Proof. Let A be an operator in A. Let us show that d(A) is an operator in B(G1, G2). That is, we need to show that d(A) ∈ Lin(S0(G1), ι(S′ 0(G1) into norm convergent nets in S′′ 0(G2) we have the estimate 0(G2))) and that d(A) maps bounded weak∗ convergent nets in S′ 0(G1) and σ(2) ∈ S′ 0(G2). Since A ∈ A it is clear that for all σ(1) ∈ S′ d(A)(σ(1))(σ(2)) = A(σ(1), σ(2)) ≤ kAkopkσ(1)kS′ 0 kσ(2)kS′ 0 < ∞. (32) Hence the functional d(A)(σ1) : S′ 0(G2) → C, d(A)(σ(1))(σ(2)) = A(σ(1), σ(2)) is well-defined. The bilineairty of A implies that d(A)(σ(1)) is linear. In order to show that the functional is also bounded we use the estimate from (32). This yields d(A)(σ(1))(σ(2)) (32) ≤ sup σ(2)∈S′ 0(G2) kσ(2)k=1 sup σ(2)∈S′ 0(G2) kσ(2)k=1 kAkop kσ(1)kS′ 0 kσ(2)kS′ 0 = kAkop kσ(1)kS′ 0 < ∞. (33) 25 Hence d(A)(σ(1)) is also bounded. The weak∗continuity of this functional is also easy to show: if (σ(2) weak∗ convergent net in S′ coordinate, α ) is a 0(G2), then, since A is weak∗ continuous in the second 0(G2) with limit σ(2) 0 ∈ S′ lim α d(A)(σ(1))(σ(2) α − σ(2) 0 ) = lim α A(σ1, σ(2) α − σ(2) 0 ) = 0. Thus d(A)(σ(1)) ∈ ι(S0(G2)). Let us verify that d(A) is a bounded operator from S′ S′′ 0(G2). 0(G1) into ι(S0(G2)) ⊆ kd(A)(σ(1))kS′′ 0 (33) ≤ sup kσ(1)kS′ 0 (G1 ≤1 sup kσ(1)kS′ 0 (G1)≤1 kAkop kσ(1)kS′ 0 = kAkop. (34) We have thus shown that d(A) ∈ Lin(S′ convergent nets in S′ convergent net (σ(1) α ) in S′ 0(G1) with limit σ(1) 0 one has: 0(G1) into norm convergent nets in ι(S0(G2)) ⊆ S′′ 0(G1), ι(S0(G2))). It is left to show that d(A) maps bounded weak∗ 0(G2). Given a bounded weak∗ kd(A)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 )kS′′ 0 lim α = lim α = lim α sup kσ(2)kS′ 0 (G2)≤1 sup kσ(2)kS′ 0 (G2)≤1 d(A)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 )(σ(2)) A(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)). We need to show that the limit is equal to zero. Note that A is weak∗ continuous in the first and second entry. By the Banach-Alaoglu Theorem ([22, Theorem 2.6.18]) the unit ball of S′ 0(G2) is compact in the weak∗ topology. Continuous mappings on compact sets are uniform continuous, therefore we conclude that lim α kd(A)(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 )kS′′ 0 = lim α sup kσ(2)kS′ 0(G2)≤1 A(σ(1) α − σ(1) 0 , σ(2)) = 0. Hence d(A)(σ(1) well-defined operator, clearly linear. It is also bounded: 0(G2)-norm convergent net with limit d(A)(σ(1) α ) is a S′′ 0 ). Thus d(A) ∈ B and hence d is a kdkop = sup kAk=1 kd(A)kop,S′ 0→S′′ 0 = sup kAk=1 k d(A)kop,S′ 0→S′′ 0 (34) ≤ 1. Lemma 4.5. For every T ∈ B(G1, G2), the operator given by e(T ) : S′ 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2) → C, e(T )(cid:16) NXj=1 σ(1) j ⊗ σ(2) j (cid:17) = NXj=1 T (σ(1) j )(σ(2) j ). is linear and continuous with respect to the weak∗ topology induced by the functions in S0(G1 × G2). Proof. Let us first show that e(T ) is a well-defined and linear operator on S′ find that for all finite sequences (σ(i) 0(Gi), i = 1, 2, N ∈ N, j=1 in S′ j )N 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2). Indeed, we NXj=1 T (σ(1) j )(σ(2) j )(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ kT kop,S′ 0→S′′ 0 NXj=1 kσ(1) j kS′ 0 kσ(2) j kS′ 0 < ∞. For e(T ) to be well-defined we should verify that the value of e(T )(σ), σ ∈ S′ j=1 σ(1) j ⊗ σ(2) j 0(G2) is independent . This issue is resolved in the proof of Theorem 1.3. The 0(G1) ⊗ S′ NPj=1 j ⊗ σ(2) σ(1) (cid:12)(cid:12)e(T )( j )(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12) of its particular representation PN linearity of the operator e(T ) follows immediately from its definition. Let us now show that e(T ) is weak∗ continuous. Let us start with bounded net of elementary tensors, α ⊗ σ(2) α ) is weak∗ convergent towards σ(1) 0 ⊗ σ(2) 0 . Then (σ(1) e(T )(σ(1) α ⊗ σ(2) α ) = e(T )(σ(1) 0 ⊗ σ(2) 0 ). lim α (35) 26 2 kS′ 0 ⊗ σ(2) 0(G2) as 0 = σ(1) = 2. Assume now that (σ(1) Since e(T ) is linear, it is enough to verify its weak∗ continuity at 0. We may write the zero element 0(G1) ⊗ S′ 0(G2) with 0 ). Furthermore, we may assume without loss 0 = 1 for all α (in order to achieve this normalization α = 0, then use that σ(1) ⊗ 0 = 0 ⊗ σ(2) = 0 in S′ kσ(0) of generality that supα kσ(1) use that σ(1) ⊗ σ(2) = ασ(1) ⊗ α−1σ(2) for all α ∈ C\{0}. If σ(2) and then normalize appropriately). is some non-zero element in S′ 0(G1) < ∞ and kσ(2) 0 = 0 and σ(2) −→ 0 = (0 ⊗ σ(2) 0 , where σ(1) α ⊗ σ(2) α ) w∗ α kS′ α kS′ 0 0 Now, assume for a moment that (σ(1) α ) w∗ X−→ 0 and that (σ(2) α ) w∗ X−→ σ(2) exist a function h(i) ∈ S0(Gi) and an ǫ(i) > 0 such that, for all index α(i) (h(i), σ(i) 0(Gi) ≥ ǫ(i). This allows us, for sufficiently large α to achieve the inequality α(i) − σ(i) 0 )S0,S′ 0 . Then, for i = 1, 2 there 0 and 0 we have that α(i) > α(i) ǫ(1)ǫ(2) ≤ (h(1), σ(1) α )S0,S′ 0(G1)(h(2), σ(2) α − σ(2) 0 )S0,S′ 0(G2). (36) On the other hand, because by assumption (σ(1) high values of α, α ⊗σ(2) α ) w∗ −→ (0⊗σ(2) 0 ) = 0 we can ensure that, for sufficiently (h(1), σ(1) α )S0,S′ 0(G1) (h(2), σ(2) α − σ(2) 0 )S0,S′ 0(G2) < ǫ(1)ǫ(2). This is a contradiction to (36) and therefore the assumption that (σ(1) wrong. We must therefore be in either of the following three situations: α ) w∗ X−→ 0 and that (σ(2) α ) w∗ X−→ σ(2) 0 is (i) (σ(1) α ) w∗ −→ 0 and (σ(2) α ) w∗ X−→ σ(2) 0 (ii) (σ(1) α ) w∗ −→ 0 and (σ(2) α ) w∗ −→ σ(2) 0 (iii) (σ(1) α ) w∗ X−→ 0 and (σ(2) α ) w∗ −→ σ(2) 0 Assume for a moment that (σ(2) α ) w∗ −→ σ(0) 2 . It follows from [22, Theorem 2.6.14] that this implies that However, with our choice of normalization we find that kσ(2) 0 kS′ 0 ≤ lim inf α 2 = kσ(2) 0 kS′ 0 ≤ lim inf α kσ(2) α kS′ 0. kσ(2) α kS′ 0 = 1, which, clearly, can not be the case. We must therefore be in situation (i). We thus have that (σ(1) σ(1) 0 = 0. Note that T maps bounded weak∗ convergent nets in S′ 0(G2). Thus limα kT σ(1) S′′ α ) w∗ −→ 0(G1) into norm convergent nets in 0 = 0. We therefore find that α kS′′ e(T )(σ(1) α ⊗ σ(2) α ) − e(T )(σ(1) 0 ⊗ σ(2) 0 ) lim α = lim α ≤ lim α ≤(cid:0) sup α T (σ(1) α )(σ(2) kT (σ(1) α )kS′′ α ) − T (0)(σ(2) 0 kσ(2) α kS′ 0 0 ) = lim α T (σ(1) α )(σ(2) α ) kσ(2) α kS′ kT (σ(1) α )kS′′ 0 = 0. 0(cid:1) lim α We have thus verified the continuity of e(T ) for elementary tensors with respect to the weak∗ topology induced by functions in S0(G1 × G2). This continuity is preserved by finite linear combinations and as a consequence e(T ) is continuous from S′ 0(G2) into C. 0(G1) ⊗ S′ Acknowledgments The work of M.S.J. was carried out during the tenure of the ERCIM 'Alain Bensoussan' Fellowship Pro- gramme at NTNU. 27 References [1] P. Balazs and K. Gröchenig. A guide to localized frames and applications to Galerkin-like repre- sentations of operators. In Isaac Pesenson, Hrushikesh Mhaskar, Azita Mayeli, Quoc T. Le Gia, and Ding-Xuan Zhou, editors, Novel methods in harmonic analysis with applications to numerical analysis and data processing, Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis series (ANHA). Birkhäuser/Springer, 2017. [2] S. Bannert. Banach-Gelfand Triples and Applications in Time-Frequency Analysis. Master's thesis, University of Vienna, 2010. [3] M. Bownik and K. Ross. The structure of translation-invariant spaces on locally compact abelian groups. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 21(4):849–884, 2015. [4] F. Bruhat. Distributions sur un groupe localement compact et applications à l etude des représenta- tions des groupes p-adiques. Bull. Soc. Math. France, 89:43–75, 1961. [5] O. Christensen. An Introduction to Frames and Riesz Bases. Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis. Birkhäuser Basel, Second edition, 2016. [6] E. Cordero, H. G. Feichtinger, and F. Luef. Banach Gelfand triples for Gabor analysis. In Pseudo- differential Operators, volume 1949 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, pages 1–33. Springer, Berlin, 2008. [7] E. Cordero and F. Nicola. Kernel theorems for modulation spaces. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., pages 1–14, 2017. [8] A. Delcroix. Kernel theorems in spaces of generalized functions. In Linear and non-linear theory of generalized functions and its applications, volume 88 of Banach Center Publ., pages 77–89. Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2010. [9] H. G. Feichtinger. Un espace de Banach de distributions tempérées sur les groupes localement com- pacts abéliens. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S'er. A-B, 290(17):791–794, 1980. [10] H. G. Feichtinger. On a new Segal algebra. Monatsh. Math., 92:269–289, 1981. [11] H. G. Feichtinger. Minimal Banach spaces and atomic representations. Publ. Math. Debrecen, 34(3- 4):231–240, 1987. [12] H. G. Feichtinger. Modulation spaces of locally compact Abelian groups. In R. Radha, M. Krishna, and S. Thangavelu, editors, Proc. Internat. Conf. on Wavelets and Applications, pages 1–56, Chennai, January 2002, 2003. New Delhi Allied Publishers. [13] H. G. Feichtinger. Modulation Spaces: Looking Back and Ahead. Sampl. Theory Signal Image Process., 5(2):109–140, 2006. [14] H. G. Feichtinger and K. Gröchenig. Banach spaces related to integrable group representations and their atomic decompositions, I. J. Funct. Anal., 86(2):307–340, 1989. [15] H. G. Feichtinger and K. Gröchenig. Gabor wavelets and the Heisenberg group: Gabor expansions and short time Fourier transform from the group theoretical point of view. In C. K. Chui, editor, Wavelets :a tutorial in theory and applications, volume 2 of Wavelet Anal. Appl., pages 359–397. Academic Press, Boston, 1992. [16] H. G. Feichtinger and W. Kozek. Quantization of TF lattice-invariant operators on elementary LCA groups. In H. G. Feichtinger and T. Strohmer, editors, Gabor analysis and algorithms, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., pages 233–266. Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 1998. 28 [17] G. Folland. A Course in Abstract Harmonic Analysis. Textbooks in Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Second edition, 2016. [18] K. Gröchenig. Foundations of Time-Frequency Analysis. Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal. Birkhäuser, Boston, MA, 2001. [19] L. Hörmander. The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators I: Distribution Theory and Fourier Analysis. Classics in Mathematics. Springer, Reprint of the 2nd Edition 1990 edition, 2003. [20] M. S. Jakobsen and J. Lemvig. Density and duality theorems for regular Gabor frames. J. Funct. Anal., 270(1):229 – 263, 2016. [21] M. S. Jakobsen. On a (no longer) New Segal Algebra: A Review of the Feichtinger Algebra. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., preprint, 2018. [22] R. Megginson. An Introduction to Banach Space Theory, volume 183 of Graduate Texts in Mathe- matics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998. [23] L. Nachbin. The Haar Integral. Princeton, N.J.-Toronto-New York-London: D. Van Nostrand Com- pany, 1965. [24] M. S. Osborne. On the Schwartz-Bruhat space and the Paley-Wiener theorem for locally compact Abelian groups. J. Funct. Anal., 19:40–49, 1975. [25] H. Reiter and J. D. Stegeman. Classical Harmonic Analysis and Locally Compact Groups. 2nd ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2000. [26] A. Ruston. On the Fredholm theory of integral equations for operators belonging to the trace class of a general Banach space. Proc. London Math. Soc. (2), 53:109–124, 1951. [27] H. Schaefer and M. Wolff. Topological Vector Spaces, volume 3 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, Second edition, 1999. [28] F. Treves. Topological Vector Spaces, Distributions and Kernels. Number 25 in Pure Appl. Math. Academic Press, New York, 1967. 29
1502.07064	1	1502	2015-02-25T06:38:09	The strong "zero-two" law for positive contractions of Banach-Kantorovich L_p-lattices	[ "math.FA" ]	In the present paper we study majorizable operators acting on Banach-Kantorovich $L_p$-lattices, constructed by a measure $m$ with values in the ring of all measurable functions. Then using methods of measurable bundles of Banach-Kantorovich lattices, we prove the strong "zero-two" law for positive contractions of the Banach-Kantorovich $L_p$-lattices.	math.FA	math	THE STRONG "ZERO-TWO" LAW FOR POSITIVE CONTRACTIONS OF BANACH-KANTOROVICH Lp-LATTICES INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV Abstract. In the present paper we study majorizable operators acting on Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices, constructed by a measure m with values in the ring of all measurable functions. Then using methods of measurable bundles of Banach-Kantorovich lattices, we prove the strong "zero-two" law for positive contractions of the Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices. Mathematics Subject Classification: 37A30, 47A35, 46B42, 46E30, 46G10. Key words and phrases: Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattice, strong "zero-two" law, positive con- traction. 5 1 0 2 b e F 5 2 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 4 6 0 7 0 . 2 0 5 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction Starting from von Neumman's [20] pioneering work, the development of the theory of Banach bundles had been stimulated by many works (see for example [13, 14]). There are many papers were devoted to the applications of this theory to several branches of analysis [1, 16, 17, 23]. Moreover, this theory is well-connected with the theory of vector-valued Banach spaces [12, 13], which has several applications (see for example, [18]). In the present paper, we concentrate ourselves to the theory of Banach bundles of L0-valued Banach spaces (see for more details [6, 13]). Note that such spaces are called Banach -- Kantorovich spaces. In [13, 14, 17]) the theory of Banach -- Kantorovich spaces were developed. It is known [13] that the theory of measurable bundles of Banach lattices is sufficiently well explored. Therefore, it is natural to employ methods of measurable bundles of such spaces to investigate functional properties of Banach -- Kantorovich spaces. It is an effective tool which gives a good opportunity to obtain various properties of these spaces [4, 5]. For example, in [7, 6] Banach-Kantorovich lattice Lp(∇, µ) is represented as a measurable bundle of classical Lp -lattices. Naturally, these functional Banach -- Kantorovich spaces have many similar properties like the classical ones, constructed by the real In [2, 10] this allowed to establish several weighted ergodic theorems for valued measures. positive contractions of Lp(∇, µ)-spaces. In [5] the convergence theorems of martingales on such lattices has been proved. Some other applications of the measurable bundles of Banach- Kantorovich spaces can be found in [1, 11]. In [19] Ornstein and Sucheston proved that, for any positive contraction T on an L1-space, one has either kT n − T n+1k1 = 2 for all n or lim kT n − T n+1k1 = 0. An extension of this result n→∞ to positive operators on L∞-spaces was given by Foguel [3]. In [24] Zahoropol generalized these results, called "zero-two" laws, and his result can be formulated as follows: Theorem 1.1. Let T be a positive contraction of Lp, p > 1, p 6= 2. If the following relation holds (cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 − T m(cid:13)(cid:13) < 2 for some m ∈ N ∪ {0}, then kT n+1 − T nk = 0. lim n→∞ 1 2 INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV In [15] this theorem was established for Kothe spaces. In particularly, from that result it follows the statement of the theorem for a case p = 2. Furthermore, the strong "zero-two" law for positive contractions of Lp-spaces, 1 ≤ p < +∞ was proved in [22]. This result is formulated as follows: Theorem 1.2. Let 1 ≤ p < +∞ and T be a positive contraction of Lp. If (cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 − T m(cid:13)(cid:13) < 2 for some m ∈ N ∪ {0}, then lim n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)T n+1 − T n(cid:13)(cid:13) = 0. In [9] we have generalized Theorem 1.1 for the positive contractions of the Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices. Namely, the following result was proved. Theorem 1.3. Let T : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m), p > 1, p 6= 2 be a positive linear contraction such that T 1 ≤ 1. If one had (cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 − T m(cid:13)(cid:13) < 2 · 1 for some m ∈ N ∪ {0}. Then kT n+1 − T nk = 0. (o) − lim n→∞ The main aim of this paper is to prove the strong "zero-two" law for the positive contrac- tions of the Banach-Kantorovich lattices Lp(∇, m). To establish the main aim, we first study majorizable operators acting on Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices (see Section 3). Then using methods of measurable bundles of Banach-Kantorovich lattices, in section 4 we prove the main result of the present paper. 2. Preliminaries Let (Ω, Σ, µ) be a complete measure space with a finite measure µ. By L(Ω) (resp. L∞(Ω) ) we denote the set of all (resp. essentially bounded) measurable real functions defined on Ω a.e. By the standard way, we introduce an equivalence relation on L(Ω) by putting f ∼ g whenever f = g a.e. The set L0(Ω) of all cosets f ∼ = {g ∈ L(Ω) : f ∼ g}, endowed with the natural algebraic operations, is an algebra with unit 1(ω) = 1 over the field of reals R. Moreover, with respect to the partial order f ∼ ≤ g∼ ⇔ f ≤ g a.e., the algebra L0(Ω) is a Dedekind complete Riesz space with weak unit 1, and the set B(Ω) := B(Ω, Σ, µ) of all idempotents in L0(Ω) is a complete Boolean algebra. Furthermore, L∞(Ω) = {f ∼ : f ∈ L∞(Ω)} is an order ideal in L0(Ω) generated by 1. In what follows, we will write f ∈ L0(Ω) instead of f ∼ ∈ L0(Ω) by assuming that the coset of f is considered. Let E be a linear space over the real field R. By k · k we denote a L0(Ω)-valued norm on E. Then the pair (E, k · k) is called a lattice-normed space (LNS) over L0(Ω). An LNS E is said to be d-decomposable if for every x ∈ E and the decomposition kxk = f + g with f and g disjoint positive elements in L0(Ω) there exist y, z ∈ E such that x = y + z with kyk = f , kzk = g. Suppose that (E, k · k) is an LNS over L0(Ω). A net {xα} of elements of E is said to be (bo)-converging to x ∈ E (in this case we write x = (bo)-lim xα), if the net {kxα − xk} (o)- converges to zero (here (o)-convergence means the order convergence) in L0(Ω) (written as (o)-lim kxα − xk = 0). A net {xα}α∈A is called (bo)-fundamental if (xα − xβ)(α,β)∈A×A (bo)- converges to zero. An LNS in which every (bo)-fundamental net (bo)-converges is called (bo)-complete. A Banach-Kantorovich space (BKS) over L0(Ω) is a (bo)-complete d-decomposable LNS over L0(Ω). It is well known [16],[17] that every BKS E over L0(Ω) admits an L0(Ω)-module struc- ture such that kf xk = f · kxk for every x ∈ E, f ∈ L0(Ω), where f is the modulus of a THE STRONG "ZERO-TWO" LAW 3 function f ∈ L0(Ω). A BKS (U , k · k) is called a Banach-Kantorovich lattice if U is a vector lattice and the norm k · k is monotone, i.e. u1 ≤ u2 implies ku1k ≤ ku2k. It is known [16] that the cone U+ of positive elements is (bo)-closed. Let ∇ be an arbitrary complete Boolean algebra and let X(∇) be the Stone space of ∇. Assume that L0(∇) := C∞(X(∇)) be the algebra of all continuous functions x : X(∇) → [−∞, +∞] that take the values ±∞ only on nowhere dense subsets of X(∇). Finally, by C(X(∇)) we denote the subalgebra of all continuous real functions on X(∇). Given a complete Boolean algebra ∇, let us consider a mapping m : ∇ → L0(Ω). Such a mapping is called a L0(Ω)-valued measure if one has (i) m(e) ≥ 0 for all e ∈ ∇ and m(e) = 0 ⇔ e = 0; (ii) m(e ∨ g) = m(e) + m(g) if e ∧ g = 0, e, g ∈ ∇; (iii) m(eα) ↓ 0 for any net eα ↓ 0. Following the well-known scheme of the construction of Lp-spaces, a space Lp(∇, m) can be defined by Lp(∇, m) =(cid:26)f ∈ L0(∇) : f p :=Z f pdm − exist (cid:27) , p ≥ 1 where m is a L0(Ω)-valued measure on ∇. A L0(Ω)-valued measure m is said to be disjunctive decomposable (d-decomposable), if for ai ∈ L0(B) there exit a1 ∧ a2 = 0, every e ∈ ∇ and the decomposition m(e) = a1 + a2, e1, e2 ∈ ∇ such that e = e1 ∨ e2 and m(ei) = ai, i = 1, 2. Theorem 2.1. [6] The following statements hold: (i) The pair (Lp(∇, m), ·p) is (bo) -- complete lattice. Moreover, it is an ideal linear subspace of L0(∇), i.e. from x ≤ y, y ∈ Lp(∇, m), x ∈ L0(∇) it follows that x ∈ Lp(∇, m) and xp ≤ yp; (ii) If 0 ≤ xα ∈ Lp(∇, m) and xα ↓ 0, then xαp ↓ 0; (iii) If the measure m is d-decomposable, then α)xp = αxp for all α ∈ L0(Ω), x ∈ Lp(∇, m); (iv) If the measure m is d-decomposable, then (Lp(∇, m), · p) is a Banach -- Kantorovich space; (v) One has L∞(∇, m) := C(X(∇)) ⊂ Lp(∇, m) ⊂ Lq(∇, m), 1 ≤ q ≤ p. Moreover, L∞(∇, m) is (bo) -- dense in (L1(∇, m), k · k1). Now we mention necessary facts from the theory of measurable bundles of Boolean algebras and Banach spaces (see [13] for more details). Let (Ω, Σ, µ) be the same as above and X be a mapping assigning an Lp-space constructed by a real-valued measure mω, i.e. Lp(∇ω, mω) to each point ω ∈ Ω and let L =(cid:26) nXi=1 αiei : αi ∈ R, ei(ω) ∈ ∇ω, i = 1, n, n ∈ N(cid:27) 4 INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV be a set of sections. In [6] it has been established that the pair (X, L) is a measurable bundle of Banach lattices and L0(Ω, X) is modulo ordered isomorphic to Lp(∇, µ). Let ρ be a lifting in L∞(Ω) (see [13]). As before, let ∇ be an arbitrary complete Boolean subalgebra of ∇(Ω) and m be an L0(Ω)-valued measure on ∇. By L∞(∇, m) we denote the set of all essentially bounded functions w.r.t. m taken from L0(∇). A mapping ℓ : L∞(∇, m)(⊂ L∞(Ω, X)) → L∞(Ω, X) is called a vector-valued lifting [13] associated with the lifting ρ if it satisfies the following conditions: (1) ℓ(u) ∈ u for all u such that dom(u) = Ω; (2) kℓ(u)kLp(∇ω ,mω) = ρ(up)(ω); (3) ℓ(u + v) = ℓ(u) + ℓ(v) for every u, v ∈ L∞(∇, m); (4) ℓ(h · u) = ρ(h)ℓ(u) for every u ∈ L∞(∇, m), h ∈ L∞(Ω); (5) ℓ(u) ≥ 0 whenever u ≥ 0; (6) the set {ℓ(u)(ω) : u ∈ L∞(∇, m)} is dense in X(ω) for all ω ∈ Ω; (7) ℓ(u ∨ v) = ℓ(u) ∨ ℓ(v) for every u, v ∈ L∞(∇, m). In [6] the existence of the vector-valued lifting was proved. Let Lp(∇, m) (p ≥ 1) be a Banach-Kantorovich lattice. A linear mapping T : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) is called positive if T f ≥ 0 whenever f ≥ 0. We say that T is a L0(Ω)-bounded mapping if there exists a function k ∈ L0(Ω) such that T f p ≤ k f p for all f ∈ Lp(∇, µ). For such a mapping we can define an element of L0(Ω) as follows kT k = sup f p≤1 T f p, which is called an L0(Ω)-valued norm of T . A mapping T is said to be a contraction if one has kT k ≤ 1. Some examples of contractions can be found in [10]. In the sequel we will need the following bundle representation of L0(Ω)-linear L0(Ω)-bounded operators acting in Banach-Kantorovich lattices. Theorem 2.2. [9] Let Lp(∇, m) (p ≥ 1) be a Banach-Kantorovich lattice, and Lp(∇ω, mω) be the corresponding Lp-spaces constructed by real valued measures. Let T : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) be a positive linear contraction such that T 1 ≤ 1. Then for every ω ∈ Ω there exists a positive contraction Tω : Lp(∇ω, µω) → Lp(∇ω, mω) such that Tωf (ω) = (T f )(ω) a.e. for every f ∈ Lp(∇, m). 3. Majorizable operators in Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices In this section, we are going to study majorizable operators in Banach-Kantorovich Lp- lattices. Theorem 3.1. Let T : L1(∇, m) → L1(∇, m) be an L0(Ω)- bounded linear operator in Banach- Kantorovich lattice L1(∇, m). Then there exists a unique T - L0(Ω)- bounded linear operator in L1(∇, m) such that (a) kT k = kT k; (b) one has T f ≤ T f, for all f ∈ L1(∇, m); (c) for each f ∈ L1(∇, m) with f ≥ 0 one has T f = sup{T g : g ∈ L1(∇, m), g ≤ f }; (d) kT k∞ = kT k∞. THE STRONG "ZERO-TWO" LAW 5 Proof. Let P denote the family of all finite measurable partitions π = {B1, B2, . . . , Bm} of Ω. We partially order P in the usual way, i.e. for π = {B1, B2, . . . , Bm} and π′ = {B′ k} we write π ≤ π i}. ′ is a refinement of π, i.e. each set Bi is a union of sets {B′ ′ if π 1, B′ 2, . . . , B′ Given π ∈ P, and for every f ∈ L1(∇, m), f ≥ 0 we define Tπ f = mXi=1 T (χBi f ). Clearly π ≤ π′ implies Tπ f ≤ Tπ′ f . From f 1 = χBi f 1 we obtain Tπ f 1 ≤ kT k f1. Since {Tπ f : π ∈ P} is increasing on P and is norm bounded, therefore one can define mPi=1 We clearly have (3.1) T f := lim π∈P Tπ f , f ≥ 0. T f1 ≤ kT k f 1, f ≥ 0 and T is linear on positive functions. Therefore T can be extended by the linearity to whole L1(∇, m). This extension is again denoted by T . For f ≥ 0 and g ≤ f we obtain T f ≥ T g by means of the approximation argument with simple functions. This yields (b). (c). From (b) we have T g ≥ T g, i.e. T has a positive majorant. Then by [21, Theorem VIII 1.1] T is regular. Hence, using [21, formula (10),p.231] one finds T f = sup{T g : g ∈ L1(∇, m), g ≤ f }. (a). Again from (b) we get kT k ≤ kT k and by (3.1) one finds kT k ≤ kT k. Hence, kT k = kT k. (d). Let f ∈ L∞( ∇, µ). kT k∞k f k∞ which means kT k∞ ≤ kT k∞. It is then clear that from T f ≤ T f one gets kT k∞k f k∞ ≤ Using (c) we obtain T f = sup g≤ f T g ≤ sup g≤ f kT k∞kgk∞1 ≤ kT k∞k f k∞1. Hence, kT k∞ ≤ kT k∞ and kT k∞ = kT k∞. (cid:3) Definition 3.2. A linear operator A : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) is called majorizable if there exists an L0(Ω)- bounded positive linear operator S : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) such that for all f ∈ Lp(∇, m). The operator S is called majorant. A f ≤ S( f ) Theorem 3.3. Let T : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) be a majorizable operator with a majorant S on Banach-Kantorovich lattice Lp(∇, m). Then there exists a unique T - L0(Ω)- bounded linear operator on Lp(∇, m) such that (a) kT k ≤ kSk; (b) one has T f ≤ T f, for all f ∈ Lp(∇, m); (c) for each f ∈ Lp(∇, m), f ≥ 0 one has T f = sup{T g : g ∈ Lp(∇, m), g ≤ f }; 6 INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV Proof. The proof of the existence of T and (b), (c) are similar to the proof of Theorem 3.1. Now we prove (a). From T f = sup{T g : g ∈ Lp(∇, m), g ≤ f } ≤ sup{Sg : g ∈ Lp(∇, m), g ≤ f } = S f we get hence T fp ≤ S f p ≤ kSkk f p kT k ≤ kSk. This completes the proof. (cid:3) Theorem 3.4. If A : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) is a majorizable operator, and its majorant S is a contraction with S1 ≤ 1, then for every ω ∈ Ω there exists a majorizable operator Aω : Lp(∇ω, mω) → Lp(∇ω, mω) such that for all f ∈ Lp(∇, m). Aωf (ω) = (A f )(ω) a.e. Proof. Since S is a contraction and S1 ≤ 1, we obtain that A(L∞(∇, m)) ⊂ L∞(∇, m). Now we define a linear operator ϕω from {ℓ( f )(ω) : f ∈ L∞(∇, m)} into Lp(∇ω, mω) by where ℓ is the vector lifting of L∞(∇, m) associated with the lifting ρ. ϕω(ℓ( f )(ω)) = ℓ(A f )(ω) From the majorizability of A one gets ϕ(ω)(ℓ( f)(ω)) = ℓ(A f )(ω) = ℓ(A f )(ω) ≤ ℓ(S f )(ω) = S′ ω(ℓ( f )(ω)) = S′ ω(ℓ( f )(ω)) for any positive f ∈ L∞(∇, m), where S′ This means that ϕ(ω) is a majorizable operator on {ℓ( f )(ω) : f ∈ L∞(∇, m)}. ω is a positive contraction on {ℓ( f )(ω) : f ∈ L∞(∇, m)}. From S f p ≤ f p we obtain kℓ(A f )(ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) = ρ(A f p)(ω) ≤ ρ(S f p)(ω) ≤ ρ( f p)(ω) = kℓ( f )(ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) which implies that ϕω and S′ ω is positive (see Theorem 2.2). Due to the density of {ℓ( f )(ω) : f ∈ L∞(∇, m)} in Lp(∇ω, mω), we can extend ϕω and S′ ω, respectively, to Lp(∇ω, mω). We respectively denote the extensions by Aω and Sω. One can see that Aω is bounded, and Sω is positive bounded. ω are well defined and bounded. Moreover, S′ From for any f ∈ L∞(∇, m) one finds ϕ(ω)(ℓ( f)(ω)) ≤ S′ ω(ℓ( f )(ω)) Aω(f (ω)) ≤ Sω(f (ω)) i.e. Aω is majorizable. Repeating the argument of the proof of [9, Theorem 2.1], we can prove that Aωf (ω) = (A f )(ω) for almost all ω ∈ Ω and for all f ∈ Lp(∇, m). This completes the proof. (cid:3) THE STRONG "ZERO-TWO" LAW 7 Theorem 3.5. If A : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) is a majorizable operator, and its majorant S is a contraction with S1 ≤ 1, then kAωkp,ω = kAωkp,ω for almost all ω ∈ Ω, where k · kp,ω is the norm of an operator from Lp(∇ω, mω) to Lp(∇ω, mω). Proof. Due to −A ≤ A ≤ A we have −Aω ≤ Aω ≤ Aω which yields Aω ≤ Aω for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Hence, kAωkp,ω ≥ kAωkp,ω for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Let {πn} be an increasing sequence in P such that A f = (bo) − lim n→∞ Aπn f , for 0 ≤ f ∈ Lp(∇, m). One can see that (3.2) (Aπn f )(ω) = for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Now using mXi=1 A(χBi f )(ω) = mXi=1 Aω(χBi(ω)f )(ω) = Aω,πnf (ω) A f = (bo) − lim n→∞ Aπn f in Lp(∇, m), with (3.2) we obtain Aπn Hence, f p (o) → (cid:12)(cid:12)A f(cid:12)(cid:12)p or Aπn f p(ω) → (cid:12)(cid:12)A f(cid:12)(cid:12)p(ω) for almost all ω ∈ Ω. for almost all ω ∈ Ω. On the other hand, one has for almost all ω ∈ Ω. This means that kAπn,ωf (ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) →(cid:13)(cid:13)Aωf (ω)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(∇ω ,mω) kAπn,ωf (ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)Aωf (ω)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(∇ω ,mω) (cid:13)(cid:13)Aωf (ω)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(∇ω ,mω) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)Aωf (ω)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(∇ω ,mω) lim n→∞ or for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Hence (cid:13)(cid:13)Aω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)Aω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω (cid:13)(cid:13)Aω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω =(cid:13)(cid:13)Aω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω for almost all ω ∈ Ω. This completes the proof. (cid:3) 4. The strong "zero-two" law In this section we are going to prove an analog of the strong "zero-two" law for positive contractions in the Banach-Kantorovich Lp-lattices. Before the formulation of the main result, we need some auxiliary results. Proposition 4.1. Let T, S : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) be two positive linear contractions such that T 1 ≤ 1, S1 ≤ 1. Then here · means the modulus of an operator. (cid:13)(cid:13)Tω − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω ≥(cid:13)(cid:13)T − S(cid:13)(cid:13)(ω), a.e. 8 INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV Proof. Due to (T − S)( f ) ≤ T ( f ) for any positive f ∈ Lp(∇, m) one gets (T − S)( f ) ≤ T ( f ) for any f ∈ Lp(∇, m). Hence T − S is majorizable. Since T is a contraction and T 1 ≤ 1 by Theorem 3.5, we obtain(cid:13)(cid:13)T − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω =(cid:13)(cid:13)Tω − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω for almost all ω ∈ Ω. By [8, Proposition 2] for any ε > 0 there exists f ∈ Lp(∇, m) with f p = 1 such that Then (cid:13)(cid:13)T − S(cid:13)(cid:13) − ε1 ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)T − S f(cid:12)(cid:12)p . (cid:13)(cid:13)T − S(cid:13)(cid:13)(ω) − ε1 ≤ (cid:12)(cid:12)T − S f(cid:12)(cid:12)p(ω) = k(T − S f )(ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) = kT − Sωf (ω)kLp(∇ω ,mω) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)T − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω = (cid:13)(cid:13)Tω − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω for almost all ω ∈ Ω. The arbitrariness of ε > 0 implies the statement. (cid:3) Corollary 4.2. Let T, S : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) be two positive linear contractions such that T 1 ≤ 1, S1 ≤ 1. Then (cid:13)(cid:13)Tω − Sω(cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω =(cid:13)(cid:13)T − S(cid:13)(cid:13)(ω), a.e. The proof follows from [9, Proposition 3.2] and Proposition 4.1. The next theorem is our main result of the present paper. Theorem 4.3. Let T : Lp(∇, m) → Lp(∇, m) be a positive linear contraction such that T 1 ≤ 1. If one has (cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 − T m(cid:13)(cid:13) < 2 · 1 for some m ∈ N ∪ {0}. Then n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)T n+1 − T n(cid:13)(cid:13) = 0. ω (cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω =(cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 − T m(cid:13)(cid:13)(ω), a.e. Proof. From Corollary 4.2 it follows that (cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 ω − T m (o) − lim on Ω. Therefore, due to(cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1−T m(cid:13)(cid:13) < 2·1 for some m ∈ N∪{0} we find(cid:13)(cid:13)T m+1 < 2 for almost all ω ∈ Ω. According to Theorem 2.2 we conclude that Tω is a positive contraction on Lp(∇ω, mω). Hence, the contraction Tω satisfies the conditions of Theorem 1.2 for almost all ω ∈ Ω, which yields that ω (cid:13)(cid:13)p,ω ω −T m (cid:3) for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Then again using Corollary 4.2 we obtain lim lim ω − T n ω (cid:13)(cid:13) = 0 n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)T n+1 n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)T n+1 − T n(cid:13)(cid:13)(ω) = 0 n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)T n+1 − T n(cid:13)(cid:13) = 0. for almost all ω ∈ Ω. Therefore, This completes the proof. (o) − lim THE STRONG "ZERO-TWO" LAW 9 Acknowledgement The first author acknowledges the MOE Grant FRGS13-071-0312. The second named author thanks the MOE grant FRGS14-135-0376, and the Junior Associate scheme of the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy. References [1] Albeverio S., Ayupov Sh.A., Kudaybergenov K.K., Non commutative Arens algebras and their deriva- tions, J. Funct. Anal.253 (2007), 287 -- 302. [2] Chilin V.I., Ganiev I.G. An individual ergodic theorem for contractions in the Banach-Kantorovich lattice Lp(∇, µ). Russian Math. (Iz. VUZ) 44 (2000), 77 -- 79. [3] Foguel S.R. On the "zero-two" law. Israel J. Math. 10(1971), 275-280. [4] Ganiev I.G. Measurable bundles of Banach lattices. Uzbek Math. Zh. (1998), N.5, 14 -- 21 (Russian). [5] Ganiev I.G. The martingales convergence in the Banach-Kantorovich's lattices Lp(b∇,bµ), Uzb. Math. [6] Ganiev I.G. Measurable bundles of lattices and their applications. In book : Studies on Functional Jour. 2000, N.1, 18 -- 26. Analysis and its Applications, pp. 9 -- 49. Nauka, Moscow (2006) (Russian). [7] Ganiev, I. G., Chilin, V.I. Measurable bundles of noncommutative Lp-spaces associated with a center- valued trace. Siberian Adv. Math. 12 (2002), no. 4, 19 -- 33. [8] Ganiev I.G., Kudaybergenov K.K). The Banach-Steinhaus Uniform Boundedness Principle for Operators in Banach-Kantorovich Spaces over L0, Siberian Adv. Math. 16(2006), 42 -- 53. [9] Ganiev I.G., Mukhamedov F. On the "Zero-Two" law for positive contractions in the Banach-Kantorovich lattice Lp(∇, µ), Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae 47 (2006), 427 -- 436 [10] Ganiev I.G., Mukhamedov F. On weighted ergodic theorems for Banach-Kantorovich lattice Lp(∇, µ), Lobachevskii Jour. Math. 34 (2013), 1 -- 10. [11] Ganiev I., Mukhamedov F., Measurable bundles of C ∗-dynamical systems and its applications, Positivity 18(2014), 687 -- 702. [12] Gierz, G. Bundles of Topological Vector Spaces and their Duality, Springer, Berlin, 1982. [13] Gutman A.E. Banach bundles in the theory of lattice-normed spaces, III. Siberien Adv. Math. 3(1993), n.4, 8 -- 40 [14] Gutman A.E. Banach fiberings in the theory of lattice-normed spaces. Order-compatible linear operators, Trudy Inst. Mat. 29(1995), 63-211. (Russian) [15] Katznelson Y., Tzafriri L. On power bounded operators, J. Funct. Anal. 68(1986), 313-328. [16] Kusraev A.G. Vector duality and its applications, Novosibirsk, Nauka, 1985 (Russian). [17] Kusraev A.G. Dominanted operators, Mathematics and its Applications, V. 519. Kluwer Academic Pub- lishers, Dordrecht, 2000. [18] Lee Y., Lin Y., Wahba G., Multicategory support vector machines: theory and application to the J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 99 (465) (2004) 67-81. [19] Ornstein D., Sucheston L. An operator theorem on L1 convergence to zero with applications to Markov kernels. Ann. Math. Statis. 41(1970), 1631-1639. [20] von Neumann, J. On rings of operators III, Ann. Math. 41 (1940), 94 -- 161. [21] Vulih B.Z. Introduction to theory of partially ordered spaces. Moscow, 1961 (Russian). English trans. Noordhoff, Groningen, 1967. [22] Wittman R. Ein starkes Null-Zwei Gesetz in Lp, Math. Z. 197(1988) 223 -- 229. [23] Woyczynski W.A. Geometry and martingales in Banach spaces. Lect. Notes Math. 472(1975) 235 -- 283. [24] Zaharopol R. The modulus of a regular liniear operators and the "zero-two" law in Lp-spaces (1 < p < ∞, p 6= 2). J. Funct. Anal. 68(1986), 300-312. 10 INOMJON GANIEV, FARRUKH MUKHAMEDOV, AND DILMURAD BEKBAEV Inomjon Ganiev, Department of Science in Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Interna- tional Islamic University Malaysia, P.O. Box 10, 50728, Kuala-Lumpur, Malaysia E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected] Farrukh Mukhamedov, Department of Computational & Theoretical Sciences, Faculty of Science, International Islamic University Malaysia, P.O. Box, 141, 25710, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia E-mail address: farrukh [email protected], [email protected] Dilmurad Bekbaev, Department of Computational & Theoretical Sciences, Faculty of Sci- ence, International Islamic University Malaysia, P.O. Box, 141, 25710, Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia
1710.04893	1	1710	2017-10-13T12:48:50	Some generalizations of the Aluthge transform of operators	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $A = U \|A\|$ be the polar decomposition of $A$. The Aluthge transform of the operator $A$, denoted by $\tilde{A}$, is defined as $\tilde{A} =\|A\|^{\frac{1}{2}} U \|A\|^{\frac{1}{2}}$. In this paper, first we generalize the definition of Aluthge transform for non-negative continuous functions $f, g$ such that $f(x)g(x)=x\,\,(x\geq0)$. Then, by using of this definition, we get some numerical radius inequalities. Among other inequalities, it is shown that if $A$ is bounded linear operator on a complex Hilbert space ${\mathscr H}$, then \begin{equation} h\left( w(A)\right) \leq \frac{1}{4}\left\Vert h\left( g^{2}\left( \left\vert A\right\vert \right) \right) +h\left( f^{2}\left( \left\vert A\right\vert \right) \right) \right\Vert +\frac{1}{2}h\left( w\left( \tilde{A}_{f,g}\right) \right) , \end{equation} where $f, g$ are non-negative continuous functions such that $f(x)g(x)=x\,\,(x\geq 0)$, $h$ is a non-negative non-decreasing convex function on $[0,\infty )$ and $\tilde{A}_{f,g} =f(\|A\|) U g(\|A\|)$.	math.FA	math	SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES MOJTABA BAKHERAD1 AND KHALID SHEBRAWI2 Abstract. Let A = U A be the polar decomposition of A. The Aluthge transform of the operator A, denoted by A, is defined as A = A generalize the definition of Aluthge transform for non-negative continuous functions 2 . In this paper, first we 2 U A 1 1 f, g such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). Then, by using of this definition, we get some numerical radius inequalities. Among other inequalities, it is shown that if A is bounded linear operator on a complex Hilbert space H , then h (w(A)) ≤ 1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)h(cid:0)g2 (A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2 (A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 2 h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) , where f, g are non-negative continuous functions such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0), h is a non-negative non-decreasing convex function on [0, ∞) and Af,g = f (A)U g(A). 1. Introduction Let B(H ) denote the C ∗-algebra of all bounded linear operators on a complex Hilbert space H with an inner product h·, ·i and the corresponding norm k · k. In the case when dimH = n, we identify B(H ) with the matrix algebra Mn of all n × n matrices with entries in the complex field. For an operator A ∈ B(H ), let A = UA (U is a partial isometry with kerU = rngA⊥) be the polar decomposition of A. The Aluthge transform of the operator A, denoted by A, is defined as A = A 2 . In [12], Okubo introduced a more general notion called t-Aluthge transform which has later been studied also in detail. This is defined for any 0 < t ≤ 1 by At = AtUA1−t. Clearly, for t = 1 2 we obtain the usual Aluthge transform. As for the case t = 1, the operator A1 = AU is called the Duggal transform of A ∈ B(H ). For A ∈ B(H ), we generalize the Aluthge transform of the operator A to the form 2 UA 1 1 Af,g = f (A)U g(A), 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47A12, Secondary 47A63, 47A30 . Key words and phrases. Aluthge transform, Numerical radius, Operator matrices, Polar decomposition. 1 2 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI in which f, g are non-negative continuous functions such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). The numerical radius of A ∈ B(H ) is defined by w(A) := sup{hAx, xi : x ∈ H , kxk = 1}. It is well known that w( · ) defines a norm on B(H ), which is equivalent to the usual operator norm k · k. In fact, for any A ∈ B(H ), 1 2kAk ≤ w(A) ≤ kAk; see [6]. Let r(·) denote to the spectral radius. It is well known that for every operator A ∈ B(H ), we have r(A) ≤ w(A). An important inequality for ω(A) is the power inequality stating that ω(An) ≤ ω(A)n (n = 1, 2, · · · ). The quantity w(A) is useful in studying perturbation, convergence and approximation problems as well as integrative method, etc. For more information see [3, 7, 8, 9] and references therein. Let A, B, C, D ∈ B(H ). The operator matrices " A 0 the diagonal and off-diagonal parts of the operator matrix " A B C 0 # are called C D #, respectively. 0 D # and " 0 B In [11], It has been shown that if A is an operator in B(H ), then Several refinements and generalizations of inequality (1.1) have been given; see [1, 4, 14, 15]. Yamazaki [15] showed that for A ∈ B(H ) and t ∈ [0, 1] we have w(A) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)kAk + kA2k 1 2(cid:17) . w(A) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)kAk + w( At)(cid:17) . (1.1) (1.2) Davidson and Power [5] proved that if A and B are positive operators in B(H ), then kA + Bk ≤ max{kAk, kBk} + kABk 1 2 . (1.3) Inequality (1.3) has been generalized in [2, 13]. In [13], the author extended this inequality to the form kA + B∗k ≤ max{kAk, kBk} + in which A, B ∈ B(H ) and t ∈ [0, 1]. 1 2(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)AtB∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) +(cid:13)(cid:13)A∗1−tBt(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) , (1.4) In this paper, by applying the generalized Aluthge transform of operators, we es- tablish some inequalities involving the numerical radius. In particular, we extend inequality (1.2) and (1.4) for two non-negative continuous functions. We also show some upper bounds for the numerical radius of 2 × 2 operators matrices. SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 3 To prove our numerical radius inequalities, we need several known lemmas. 2. main results Lemma 2.1. [1, Theorem 2.2] Let X, Y, S, T ∈ B(H ). Then r(XY + ST ) ≤ 1 2 (w(Y X) + w(T S)) + 1 2q(w(Y X) − w(T S))2 + 4kY SkkT Xk. Lemma 2.2. [15, 11] Let A ∈ B(H ). Then (a) w(A) = max θ∈R (cid:13)(cid:13)Re(cid:0)eiθA(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) . 0 0 #! = 1 2 kAk. (b) w " 0 A Polarization identity: For all x, y ∈ H , we have hx, yi = 1 4 3 Xk=0(cid:13)(cid:13)x + iky(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ik. Now, we are ready to present our first result. The following theorem shows a general- ization of inequality (1.2). Theorem 2.3. Let A ∈ B(H ) and f, g be two non-negative continuous functions on [0, ∞) such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). Then, for all non-negative non-decreasing convex function h on [0, ∞), we have h (w(A)) ≤ 1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)h(cid:0)g2 (A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2 (A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 2 h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) . 4 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI Proof. Let x be any unit vector. Then Re(cid:10)eiθAx, x(cid:11) = Re(cid:10)eiθU A x, x(cid:11) 1 1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)eiθf (A) − g (A) U ∗(cid:1) x(cid:13)(cid:13) (by polarization identity) 2 2 1 = 2 2 ≤ ≤ 1 1 − = Re(cid:10)eiθU g (A) f (A) x, x(cid:11) = Re(cid:10)eiθf (A) x, g (A) U ∗x(cid:11) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)eiθf (A) + g (A) U ∗(cid:1) x(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)eiθf (A) + g (A) U ∗(cid:1) x(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)eiθf (A) + g (A) U ∗(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)eiθf (A) + g (A) U ∗(cid:1)(cid:0)e−iθf (A) + U g (A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) g2 (A) + f 2 (A) + eiθ Af,g + e−iθ(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)∗(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) eiθ Af,g + e−iθ(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)∗(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 (A) + f 2 (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Re(cid:16)eiθ Af,g(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 (A) + f 2 (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) + w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17) . 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 (A) + f 2 (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 = = ≤ = ≤ Now, taking the supremum over all unit vector x ∈ H and applying Lemma 2.2 in the above inequality produces w (A) ≤ 1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 (A) + f 2 (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 2 w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17) . SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 5 Therefore, + 2 2 1 2 1 2 g2 (A) + f 2 (A) g2 (A) + f 2 (A) h (w (A)) ≤ h(cid:18)1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 (A) + f 2 (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = h(cid:18)1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) h(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:19) + h(cid:18) g2 (A) + f 2 (A) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)h(cid:0)g2 (A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2 (A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) + w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:19) w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:19) h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 1 ≤ ≤ = + 2 (by the convexity of h) (by the convexity of h). (by the functional calculus) Theorem 2.3 includes some special cases as follows. Corollary 2.4. Let A ∈ B(H ). Then, for all non-negative non-decreasing convex function h on [0, ∞) and all t ∈ [0, 1], we have (cid:3) h (w(A)) ≤ (2.1) Corollary 2.5. Let A ∈ B(H ). Then, for all t ∈ [0, 1] and r ≥ 1, we have wr(A) ≤ In particular, 1 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) h(cid:0)A2t(cid:1) + h(cid:16)A2(1−t)(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) k A2tr + A2(1−t)r k + 1 4 + 1 2 h(cid:16)w(cid:16) At(cid:17)(cid:17) . wr(cid:16) At(cid:17) . 1 2 wr(A) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)kAkr + wr(cid:16) A(cid:17)(cid:17) . Proof. The first inequality follows from inequality (2.1) for the function h (x) = xr (r ≥ 1). For the particular case, it is enough to put t = 1 2 . (cid:3) Theorem 2.3 gives the next result for the off-diagonal operator matrix " 0 A B 0 #. Theorem 2.6. Let A, B ∈ B(H ), f, g be two non-negative continuous functions on [0, ∞) such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0) and r ≥ 1. Then wr " 0 A B 0 #! ≤ 1 4 + 1 max(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (A) + f 2r (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (B) + f 2r (B)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) 4(cid:0)kf (B)g(A∗)kr + kf (A)g(B∗)kr(cid:1). 6 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI Proof. Let A = UA and B = V B be the polar decompositions of A and B, re- spectively and let T = " 0 A B 0 #. A # that T =" 0 U 0 #" B V 0 0 It follows from the polar the composition of Tf,g = f (T )" 0 U V 0 = " f (B) = " 0 f (A)V g(B) 0 # g(T ) f (A) #" 0 U V 0 0 0 #" g(B) # . 0 f (B)U g(A) 0 g(A) # Using A∗2 = AA∗ = UA2U ∗ and B∗2 = BB∗ = V B2V ∗ we have g(A) = U ∗g(A∗)U and g(B) = V ∗g(B∗)V for every non-negative continuous function g on [0, ∞). Therefore, w(cid:16) Tf,g(cid:17) = w " 0 f (A)V g(B) 0 0 ≤ w " 0 f (B)U g(A) = w " 0 f (B)U g(A) = w " 0 f (B)U g(A) 0 0 0 0 f (B)U g(A) 0 0 0 #! #! + w " f (A)V g(B) 0 #! # U! #! + w U ∗" 0 f (A)V g(B) #! #! + w " 0 f (A)V g(B) 0 0 0 0 = = ≤ 1 2 1 2 1 2 kf (B)U g(A)k + 1 2 kf (A)V g(B)k (by Lemma 2.1(b)) kf (B)U U ∗g(A∗)Uk + 1 2 kf (A)V V ∗g(B∗)V k kf (B)g(A∗)k + 1 2 kf (A)g(B∗)k, (2.2) SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 7 where U =" 0 I I 0 # is unitary. Applying Theorem 2.3 and inequality (2.2), we have wr (T ) ≤ ≤ ≤ 1 1 1 1 4 2(cid:16)wr(cid:16) Tf,g(cid:17)(cid:17) 4(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (T ) + f 2r (T )(cid:13)(cid:13) + max(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (A) + f 2r (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (B) + f 2r (B)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) 2(cid:20) 1 max(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (A) + f 2r (A)(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)g2r (B) + f 2r (B)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) (kf (B)g(A∗)k + kf (A)g(B∗)k)(cid:21)r kf (B)g(A∗)kr + kf (A)g(B∗)kr 1 4 2 + + 1 4 1 4 (by the convexity h(x) = xr). Corollary 2.7. Let A, B ∈ B(H ). Then, for all t ∈ [0, 1] and r ≥ 1, we have (cid:3) (cid:3) Proof. Applying the power inequality of the numerical radius, we have w r 2 (AB) ≤ 1 4 + 1 A2tr + A2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) max(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)At B∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) w r 2 (AB) ≤ max(cid:0)w r r 2 (AB) , w B2tr + B2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) r r(cid:17) . +(cid:13)(cid:13)Bt A∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (BA)(cid:1) r r = w = w 0 BA #! 2 " AB 0 2  B 0 #2 " 0 A   B 0 #! ≤ wr " 0 A A2tr + A2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) max(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)At B∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 4 ≤ + 1 r ,(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) B2tr + B2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17) r(cid:17) +(cid:13)(cid:13)Bt A∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) (by Theorem 2.6). 8 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI Corollary 2.8. Let A, B ∈ B(H ) be positive operators. Then, for all t ∈ [0, 1] and r ≥ 1, we have 1 2 B A (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) r 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1 4 + 1 max(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)Atr + A(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)Btr + B2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:1) 4(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)AtB1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) r +(cid:13)(cid:13)BtA1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) r(cid:1) . Proof. Since the spectral radius of any operator is dominated by its numerical radius, then r 1 2 (AB) ≤ w 1 2 (AB) . Applying a commutativity property of the spectral radius, we get r r 2 (AB) = r = r = r 1 2 B 1 1 1 2(cid:17) 2(cid:17) 2(cid:17)∗(cid:17) 2(cid:17)∗(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 2 r 1 2 A 1 2 B 1 2 B 1 2 B 1 2 B 1 2 A 1 1 1 1 2 B 2 B 2 (cid:16)A 2 (cid:16)A 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) . r 1 (2.3) (cid:3) r r 2 (cid:16)A 2 (cid:16)A 2 (cid:16)A 1 r A 2 B 1 2 B A = (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Now, the result follows from Corollary 2.7. An important special case of Theorem 2.6, which refines inequality (1.4) can be stated as follows. Corollary 2.9. Let A, B ∈ B(H ) and r ≥ 1. Then kA + Bkr ≤ 1 1 A2tr + A2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 22−r max(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 22−r (cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)At B1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) r(cid:17) . +(cid:13)(cid:13)B∗t A∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) B∗2tr + B∗2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17) r + In particular, if A and B are normal, then kA + Bkr ≤ 1 21−r max (kAkr , kBkr) + 1 21−r kABk r 2 . SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 9 Proof. Applying Lemma 2.2 and Theorem 2.3, we have kA + B∗kr = kT + T ∗kr ≤ 2r 4 ≤ 2rmax = 2rwr (T ) r θ∈R (cid:13)(cid:13)Re(cid:0)eiθT(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) max(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4 (cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)At B∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) 2r (by Theorem 2.6), + A2tr + A2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) r B2tr + B2(1−t)r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) r(cid:17) +(cid:13)(cid:13)Bt A∗1−t(cid:13)(cid:13) where T = " 0 A B 0 # . Now, the desired result follows by replacing B by B∗. For the particular case, since A and B are normal, then B∗ = B and A∗ = A. Applying equality (2.3) for the operators A 2 , we have 2 and B 1 1 1 2 B A (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) r 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = r r 2 (A B) ≤ kA Bk r 2 = kU ∗AB∗V k r 2 = kAB∗k r 2 , where A = UA and B = V B are the polar decompositions of the operators A and B. This completes the proof of the corollary. (cid:3) In the next result, we show another generalization of inequality (1.2). Theorem 2.10. Let A ∈ B(H ) and f, g, h be non-negative non-decreasing continuous functions on [0, ∞) such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). Then h (w(A)) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + kh(A)k(cid:17). Proof. Let A = UA be the polar decomposition of A. Then for every θ ∈ R, we have kRe(cid:0)eiθA(cid:1) k = r(cid:0)Re(cid:0)eiθA(cid:1)(cid:1) = = = 1 2 1 2 1 2 r(cid:0)eiθA + e−iθA∗(cid:1) r(cid:0)eiθUA + e−iθAU ∗(cid:1) r(cid:0)eiθU g(A)f (A) + e−iθf (A)g(A)U ∗(cid:1) . (2.4) 10 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI Now, if we put X = eiθU g(A), Y = f (A), S = e−iθf (A) and T = g(A)U ∗ in Lemma 2.1, then we get r(cid:0)eiθU g(A)f (A) + e−iθf (A)g(A)U ∗(cid:1) 1 ≤ 1 2(cid:16)w(f (A)U g(A)) + w(g(A)U ∗f (A))(cid:17) 2p4ke−iθf (A)g(A)kkg(A)U ∗eiθU f (A)k (by Lemma 2.1) + ≤ w(f (A)U g(A)) +pkf (A)kkf (A)kkg(A)kkg(A)k = w(f (A)U g(A)) +pf (kAk)g(kAk)g(kAk)f (kAk) = w(f (A)U g(A)) +pkAkkAk = w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17) + kAk. (by the functional calculus) Using inequalities (2.4), (2.5) and Lemma 2.2 we get ω(A) = max θ∈R (cid:13)(cid:13)Re(cid:0)eiθA(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17) + kAk(cid:17). Hence h (w(A)) ≤ h(cid:18)1 ≤ = 1 2 1 2 as required. (by the monotonicity of h) 2hw(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17) + kAki(cid:19) h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + 1 2 1 2 h (kAk) kh(A)k , (by the convexity of h) (2.5) (cid:3) Another proof for Theorem 2.3: We can obtain Theorem 2.3 from Theorem 2.10. To see this, first note that by the hypotheses of Theorem 2.3 we have h(A) = h(g(A)f (A)) ≤ h(cid:18) g2(A) + f 2(A) 2 (cid:19) (by the arithmetic-geometric inequality) (by the convexity of h). (2.6) 1 ≤ 2(cid:0)h(cid:0)g2(A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2(A)(cid:1)(cid:1) SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 11 Hence, using Theorem 2.10 and inequality (2.6) we get h (w(A)) ≤ ≤ = 1 1 2hh(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + kh(A)ki 2hh(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + h(cid:16)w(cid:16) Af,g(cid:17)(cid:17) + 1 2 1 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)h(cid:0)g2(A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2(A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13)i 4(cid:13)(cid:13)h(cid:0)g2(A)(cid:1) + h(cid:0)f 2(A)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) . Remark 2.11. For the special case f (x) = xt and g = x1−t (t ∈ [0, 1]), we obtain the inequality (1.2) w(A) ≤ 1 2(cid:16)w(cid:16) At(cid:17) + kAk(cid:17) , where A ∈ B(H ) and t ∈ [0, 1]. Using Theorem 2.10, we get the following result. Corollary 2.12. Let A, B ∈ B(H ) and f, g be two non-negative non-decreasing con- tinuous functions such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). Then 2wr " 0 A B 0 #! ≤ max{kAkr, kBkr} + 1 2(cid:0) kf (B)g(A∗)kr + kf (A)g(B∗)kr(cid:1), where r ≥ 1. Proof. Using Theorem 2.10 and inequality (2.2), we have 2wr " 0 A r B 0 #! ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) B 0 #(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) " 0 A + wr(cid:16) Tf,g(cid:17) = max{kAkr, kBkr} +(cid:18)1 ≤ max{kAkr, kBkr} + and the proof is complete. 2(cid:2) kf (B)g(A∗)k + kf (A)g(B∗)k(cid:3)(cid:19)r 2(cid:0) kf (B)g(A∗)kr + kf (A)g(B∗)kr(cid:1) 1 (cid:3) Corollary 2.13. Let A, B ∈ B(H ) and f, g be two non-negative non-decreasing con- tinuous functions on [0, ∞) such that f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0). Then kA + Bk ≤ max{kAk, kBk} + 1 2(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)f (B)g(A)(cid:13)(cid:13) +(cid:13)(cid:13)f (A∗)g(B∗)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17). 12 M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI Proof. Let T =" 0 A B 0 #. Then (cid:13)(cid:13)A + B ∗(cid:13)(cid:13) = (cid:13)(cid:13)T + T ≤ 2max ∗(cid:13)(cid:13) θ∈R (cid:13)(cid:13)Re(cid:0)eiθT(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) = w(T ) ≤ max{kAk, kBk} + (by Lemma 2.2) 1 2(cid:16)(cid:13)(cid:13)f (B)g(A∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) +(cid:13)(cid:13)f (A)g(B∗)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:17) (by Theorem 2.10). If we replace B by B∗, then we get the desired result. (cid:3) In the last results, we present some upper bounds for operator matrices. For this purpose, we need the following lemma. Lemma 2.14. [10, Theorem 1] Let A ∈ B(H ) and x, y ∈ H be any vectors. If f , g are non-negative continuous functions on [0, ∞) which are satisfying the relation f (x)g(x) = x (x ≥ 0), then hAx, yi 2 ≤(cid:10)f 2(A)x, x(cid:11) (cid:10)g2(A∗)y, y(cid:11) . Theorem 2.15. Let A, B, C, D ∈ B(H ) and fi, gi (1 ≤ i ≤ 4) be non-negative con- tinues functions such that fi(x)gi(x) = x (1 ≤ i ≤ 4) for all x ∈ [0, ∞). Then ω " A B C D #! ≤ maxn(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 1 (A) + g2 2(B∗) + f 2 + maxnkg1(A∗)k ,(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 2 (B) + g2 3(C ∗) + f 2 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 2 , kg4(D∗)ko 2o . 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 Proof. Let T = " A B C D # and x = " x1 x2 # be a unit vector (i.e., kx1k2 + kx2k2 = 1). Then SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 13 ≤ hAx1, x1i + hBx2, x1i + hCx1, x2i + hDx2, x2i 1 1 1 = hAx1, x1i + hBx2, x1i + hCx1, x2i + hDx2, x2i hT x, xi = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x2 #+(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) " A B C D #" x1 x2 # ," x1 x2 #+(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Cx1 + Dx2 # ," x1 " Ax1 + Bx2 (cid:10)f 2 2 +(cid:10)f 2 2 (cid:10)g2 1 (A)x1, x1(cid:11) 1(A∗)x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)f 2 2 +(cid:10)f 2 2 (cid:10)g2 3 (C)x1, x1(cid:11) 3(C ∗)x2, x2(cid:11) 2(B ∗)x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)f 2 1 (A)x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)g2 ≤ (cid:0)(cid:10)f 2 2 (B)x2, x2(cid:11) +(cid:10)g2 1(A∗)x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)f 2 +(cid:0)(cid:10)g2 3 (C)(cid:1) x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)g2 = (cid:0)(cid:10)(cid:0)f 2 4 (D)(cid:1) x2, x2(cid:11) +(cid:10)g2 +(cid:0)(cid:10)(cid:0)f 2 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx1k2 +(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 ≤ (cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 +(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx2k2 +(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 2(B ∗) + f 2 2(B ∗) + f 2 3(C ∗) + f 2 3(C ∗) + f 2 2 (B) + g2 2 (B) + g2 1 (A) + g2 1 (A) + g2 1 (by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality) 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 (cid:10)g2 2(B ∗)x1, x1(cid:11) 2 (B)x2, x2(cid:11) 2 (cid:10)g2 4 (D)x2x2(cid:11) 4(D∗)x2, x2(cid:11) 3 (C)x1, x1(cid:11) +(cid:10)g2 4(D∗)x2, x2(cid:11)(cid:1) 3(C ∗)x2, x2(cid:11) +(cid:10)f 2 4 (D)x1, x1(cid:11)(cid:1) 2(B ∗)x2, x2(cid:11)(cid:1) 1(A∗)x1, x1(cid:11)(cid:1) 4(D∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx2k2(cid:1) 1(A∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx1k2(cid:1) 2 . 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 Let 1 (A) + g2 2 (B) + g2 2(B∗) + f 2 3(C ∗) + f 2 α =(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 µ =(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) , 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) β =(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 and λ =(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 4(D∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) , 1(A∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) . It follows from max kx1k2+kx2k2=1(cid:0)αkx1k2 + βkx2k2(cid:1) = max θ∈[0,2π] (α sin2 θ + β cos2 θ) = max{α, β} and max kx1k2+kx2k2=1(cid:0)λkx1k2 + µkx2k2(cid:1) = max θ∈[0,2π] (λ sin2 θ + µ cos2 θ) = max{λ, µ} 14 that M. BAKHERAD AND K. SHEBRAWI 1 2 3(C ∗) + f 2 1 (A) + g2 2(B∗) + f 2 2(B∗) + f 2 1 (A) + g2 2 (B) + g2 hT x, xi ≤ (cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 +(cid:0)(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 ≤ maxn(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 + maxn(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 2 ,(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 = maxn(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 + maxnkg1(A∗)k ,(cid:13)(cid:13)f 2 1(A∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 (A) + g2 2 (B) + g2 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx1k2 +(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 4(D∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx2k2(cid:1) 1(A∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx1k2(cid:1) 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx2k2 +(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 2o 4(D∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ,(cid:13)(cid:13)g2 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2o 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 , kg4(D∗)ko 3 (C)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2o . 4 (D)(cid:13)(cid:13) 3(C ∗) + f 2 3(C ∗) + f 2 2(B∗) + f 2 2 (B) + g2 1 1 1 Taking the supremum over all unit vectors x we get the desired result. 1 1 1 1 2 (cid:3) Corollary 2.16. Let A, B, C, D ∈ B(H ). Then ω " A B 1 C D #! ≤ maxn(cid:13)(cid:13)A2α + B∗2γ + C2µ(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 , kD∗ωko + max(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:13)A∗β(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)B2ζ + C ∗2ν + Dκ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:9) , 0 #! ≤ max(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:13)A∗β(cid:13)(cid:13) ,(cid:13)(cid:13)Bζ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:9) +(cid:13)(cid:13)A2α + B∗2γ(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 , 1 ω " A B 0 where α + β = γ + ζ = µ + ν = ω + κ = 1. In particular, in which α + β = γ + ζ = 1. References 1. A. Abu-Omar and F. Kittaneh, A numerical radius inequality involving the generalized Aluthge transform, Studia Math. 216 (2013), 69–75. 2. A. Abu-Omar and F. Kittaneh, Generalized spectral radius and norm inequalities for Hilbert space operators, International Journal of Mathematics Vol. 26, No. 11 (2015) 1550097 (9 pages). 3. O. Axelsson, H. Lu and B. Polman, On the numerical radius of matrices and its application to iterative solution methods, Linear Multilinear Algebra. 37 (1994), 225–238. 4. M. Bakherad and M.S. Moslehian, Complementary and refined inequalities of Callebaut inequality for operators, Linear Multilinear Algebra 63 (2015), no. 8, 1678–1692. 5. K. Davidson and S.C. Power, Best approximation in C ∗-algebras, J. Reine Angew. Math. 368 (1986) 43-62. 6. K.E. Gustafson and D.K.M. Rao, Numerical Range, The Field of Values of Linear Operators and Matrices, Springer, New York, 1997. 7. P.R. Halmos, A Hilbert Space Problem Book, 2nd ed., springer, New York, 1982. SOME GENERALIZATIONS OF THE ALUTHGE TRANSFORM OF OPERATORS 15 8. O. Hirzallah, F. Kittaneh and K. Shebrawi, Numerical radius inequalities for commutators of Hilbert space operators, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 32 (2011) 739–749. 9. O. Hirzallah, F. Kittaneh and K. Shebrawi, Numerical radius inequalities for certain 2×2, operator matrices, Integral Equations Operator Theory, 71 (2011) 129–147. 10. F. Kittaneh, Notes on some inequalitis for Hilbert space operators, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 24 (2) (1988), 283–293. 11. F. Kittaneh, A numerical radius inequality and an estimate for the numerical radius of the Frobe- nius companion matrix, Studia Math. 158 (2003), 11–17. 12. K. Okubo, On weakly unitarily invariant norm and the Aluthge transformation, Linear Algebra Appl. 371 (2003) 369–375. 13. K. Shebrawi, Numerical radius inequalities for certain 2 × 2 operator matrices II, Linear Algebra Appl. (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2017.02.019 14. K. Shebrawi and H. Albadawi, Numerical radius and operator norm inequalities, J. Math. Inequal. (2009) Article ID 492154, 11 pages. 15. T. Yamazaki, On upper and lower bounds of the numerical radius and an equality condition, Studia Math. 178 (2007), 83–89. 1Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Sistan and Baluchestan, Zahedan, I.R.Iran. E-mail address: [email protected]; [email protected] 2Department of Mathematics, Al-Balqa' Applied University, Salt, Jordan. E-mail address: [email protected]; [email protected]
1407.4462	2	1407	2016-01-15T23:39:55	Weighted discrete hypergroups	[ "math.FA" ]	Weighted group algebras have been studied extensively in Abstract Harmonic Analysis where complete characterizations have been found for some important properties of weighted group algebras, namely amenability and Arens regularity. One of the generalizations of weighted group algebras is weighted hypergroup algebras. Defining weighted hypergroups, analogous to weighted groups, we study Arens regularity and isomorphism to operator algebras for them. We also examine our results on three classes of discrete weighted hypergroups constructed by conjugacy classes of FC groups, the dual space of compact groups, and hypergroup structure defined by orthogonal polynomials. We observe some unexpected examples regarding Arens regularity and operator isomorphisms of weighted hypergroup algebras.	math.FA	math	Weighted discrete hypergroups Mahmood Alaghmandan and Ebrahim Samei October 9, 2018 Abstract Weighted group algebras have been studied extensively in Abstract Harmonic Analysis where complete characterizations have been found for some important properties of weighted group algebras, namely amenability and Arens regularity. One of the generalizations of weighted group algebras is weighted hypergroup algebras. Defining weighted hypergroups, analogous to weighted groups, we study Arens regularity and isomorphism to operator algebras for them. We also examine our results on three classes of discrete weighted hypergroups constructed by conjugacy classes of FC groups, the dual space of compact groups, and hypergroup structure defined by orthogonal polynomials. We observe some unexpected examples regarding Arens regularity and operator isomorphisms of weighted hypergroup algebras. MSC 2010 classifications: 43A62, 43A77, 43A30, 20F24 Keywords: groups, polynomial hypergroups, Arens regularity, injectivity, operator algebra isomorphism. hypergroups, hypergroup algebras, weighted hypergroups, compact groups, FC 1 Introduction Discrete hypergroups were defined as a generalization of (discrete) groups. Also, some objects related to locally compact groups may be studied as discrete hypergroups. For instance, double cosets of a locally compact group with respect to a compact open subgroup. In particular, this class includes the hypergroup structures on conjugacy classes of an FC group (i.e. every conjugacy class is finite). Also, for a compact group G, the set of equivalence classes of irreducible (unitary) representations of G, denoted by (cid:98)G and called the dual of the group G, is a commutative discrete hypergroup. On one hand these examples as well as hypergroups defined by orthogonal polynomials connect the studies done on hypergroups to different topics in abstract harmonic analysis. On the other hand, the similarities of hypergroups and groups suggest that one may be able to generalize the studies on groups to hypergroups. One of the topics related to hypergroups which has been initiated based on a similar study on groups is weighted hypergroups and weighted hypergroup algebras, as they are defined in the following. The weighted hypergroup algebra, as a Banach algebra can be the subject of study for different properties of Banach algebras. The first studies over weighted hypergroup algebras may be tracked back to [4, 11, 12]. 1 In this manuscript, we study Arens regularity and isomorphism to operator algebras for weighted hypergroup algebras. To recall, the second dual of a Banach algebra can be equipped with two algebraic actions to form Banach algebras, we call a Banach algebra 'Arens regular' if these two actions coincide. Also a Banach algebra A is called an operator algebra if there is a Hilbert space H such that A is a closed subalgebra of B(H). The main result of [23] rules out Arens regularity (and subsequently operator algebra isomorphism) of weighted hypergroup algebras for non-discrete hypergroups. Consequently, this paper is only dedicated to discrete hypergroups, although many results proved in Sections 3 hold for weights on non-discrete hypergroups as well. In this manuscript, we particularly examine our results on various classes of weighted hypergroup algebras with respect to these properties. One may note that, for the specific weight ω ≡ 1, the weighted case is reduced back to regular hypergroups and their algebras. The paper is organized as follows. We start this paper by Section 2 wherein we give the definition of discrete hypergroups consistently and briefly go through three classes of hypergroup structures we use in examples. Section 3 is devoted to weights on (discrete) hypergroups, their corresponding algebras, and their examples. We continue this section by studying some examples. In particular, in Subsection 3.3, we introduce and study some hypergroup weights on the dual of compact groups. Arens regularity of weighted group algebras has been studied by Craw and Young in [8]. They showed that a locally compact group G has a weight ω such that L1(G, ω) is Arens regular if and only if G is discrete and countable. They also characterized the Arens regularity of weighted group algebras with respect to one feature of the (group) weight, called 0-clusterness as described in [9]. In Section 4, the Arens regularity of weighted hypergroup algebras for discrete hypergroups is studied and it is shown (Theorem 4.4) that the strong 0-clusterness of the corresponding hypergroup weight results in the Arens regularity of the weighted hypergroup algebra (strong 0-clusterness implies 0- clusterness, [9]). Injectivity and equivalently isomorphism of weighted group algebras to operator algebras have been studied before, see [19, 24]. In Section 5, studying the hypergroup case, we demonstrate (The- orem 5.2) that for hypergroup weights which are weakly additive and whose inverse is 2-summable over the hypergroup, the weighted hypergroup algebra is injective and hence an isomorphism to an operator algebra exists. To do so, we apply some results regarding Littlewood multipliers of hypergroups. This machinery lets us to examine a class of hypergroup weights which are not weakly additive, namely exponential weights, in Subsection 5.1. In Sections 4 and 5 we present many examples to highlight some unexpected contrasts with some results in the theory of weighted Fourier algebras on compact groups (Examples 4.6, 4.10 and 5.5). Some results of this paper were first presented in the first author's Ph.D. thesis, [2], under the supervision of Yemon Choi and Ebrahim Samei. 2 Discrete hypergroups and examples In this paper, H is always a discrete hypergroup in the sense of [15] unless otherwise is stated. For basic definitions and facts we refer the reader to the fundamental paper of Jewett, [15], or the 2 comprehensive book [6]. 2.1 Definition (cid:80) Let H be a discrete set. Let (cid:96)1(H) denote the Banach space of all functions (bounded measures) f : H → C which are absolutely summable with respect to the counting measure, i.e. (cid:107)f(cid:107)1 := x∈H f (x) < ∞. Let cc(H) and c0(H) denote respectively the space of all finitely supported and vanishing at infinity elements of (cid:96)∞(H). We call H a discrete hypergroup if the following conditions hold. (H1) There exists an associative binary operation ∗ called convolution on (cid:96)1(H) under which (cid:96)1(H) is a Banach algebra. Moreover, for every x, y in H, δx ∗ δy is a positive measure with a finite support and (cid:107)δx ∗ δy(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H) = 1. (H2) There exists an element (necessarily unique) e in H such that δe ∗ δx = δx ∗ δe = δx for all x in H. (H3) There exists a (necessarily unique) bijection x → x of H called involution satisfying (δx ∗ δy δy ∗ δx for all x, y ∈ H. ) = (H4) e belongs to supp(δx ∗ δy) if and only if y = x. We call a hypergroup H commutative if (cid:96)1(H) forms a commutative algebra. The left translation on (cid:96)∞(H) is defined by Lxf : H → C where Lxf (y) := f (δx ∗ δy) for each f in (cid:96)∞(H) and x, y ∈ H. A non-zero, positive, left invariant linear functional h (possibly unbounded) on cc(H) is called a Haar measure, [15]. For a discrete hypergroup the existence of a Haar measure is proved and it is unique up to multiplication by a positive constant. Indeed, for a discrete hypergroup, a Haar measure h : H → (0,∞) such that h(e) = 1 is defined by h(x) = (δx ∗ δx(e))−1 for all x ∈ H. with respect to the Haar measure h equipped with the convolution f ∗h g :=(cid:80) The hypergroup algebra, denoted by L1(H, h) is the Banach algebra of integrable functions on H x∈H f (x)Lxgh(x). It is easy to observe that f (cid:55)→ f h is an isometric algebra isomorphism from the Banach algebra L1(H, h) onto the Banach algebra (cid:96)1(H). Due to this isomorphism, we focus our study on (cid:96)1(H) without loss of generality. 2.2 The conjugacy classes of FC groups Let G be a (discrete) group with the group algebra (cid:96)1(G) and Conj(G) is the set of all conjugacy classes of G. We denote the centre of the group algebra by Z(cid:96)1(G). The group G is called an FC or finite conjugacy group if for each C ∈ Conj(G), C < ∞. For such groups, Conj(G) forms a commutative discrete hypergroup (which is the discrete case of the hypergroup structures defined in [15, Subsection 8.3]). Let Ψ denote the linear mapping from Z(cid:96)1(G) to (cid:96)1(Conj(G)) defined by Ψ(f )(C) = Cf (C) for C ∈ Conj(G) where Ψ(f )(C) := f (x) for (every) x ∈ C. Then one can easily check that Ψ is an isometric Banach algebra isomorphism between (cid:96)1(Conj(G)) and Z(cid:96)1(G). 3 2.3 The dual of compact groups i∈I Gi be the restricted direct product of {Gi}i∈I. Then G is a discrete FC group and Conj(G) is the hypergroup generated by the As an extension of finite products of hypergroups (or in particular groups), let {Hi}i∈I be a i∈I Hi where for each x ∈ H, x = (xi)i∈I where xi is the identity of the hypergroup Hi, eHi, for all i ∈ I except finitely many. H is called restricted direct product of {Hi}i∈I which is a hypergroup (or a group if for every i, Hi is a group). family of discrete hypergroups, then H :=(cid:76) Example 2.1 For a family of FC groups {Gi}i∈I, let G :=(cid:76) restricted direct product of {Conj(Gi)}i∈I, Conj(G) =(cid:76) Let G be a compact group and (cid:98)G denotes the set of all irreducible unitary (necessary finite- that the irreducible decomposition of the tensor products of elements of (cid:98)G leads to a discrete π for dπ the dimension of π ∈ (cid:98)G. (See [6, commutative hypergroup structure on (cid:98)G where h(π) = d2 (cid:99)SU(2) be the hypergroup of all irreducible representations on SU(2). It is known that (cid:99)SU(2) = (π(cid:96))(cid:96)∈N0 where N0 := {0, 1, 2,···} and the dimension of π(cid:96) is (cid:96) + 1. Moreover, for all (cid:96), (cid:96)(cid:48), π(cid:96) = π(cid:96) and π(cid:96) ⊗ π(cid:96)(cid:48) ∼= π(cid:96)−(cid:96)(cid:48) ⊕ π(cid:96)−(cid:96)(cid:48)+2 ⊕···⊕ π(cid:96)+(cid:96)(cid:48). This tensor decomposition is called "Clebsch-Gordan" Example 1.1.14]). Example 2.2 Let SU(2) be the compact Lie group of 2 × 2 special unitary matrices on C, and let dimensional) representations of a compact group G, up to unitary equivalence relation. It is known i∈I Conj(Gi). decomposition formula. So using the Clebsch-Gordan formula, we have that (cid:88) (cid:96)+(cid:96)(cid:48) 2 r=(cid:96)−(cid:96)(cid:48) δπ(cid:96) ∗ δπ(cid:96)(cid:48) = (r + 1) ((cid:96) + 1)((cid:96)(cid:48) + 1) δπr where (cid:88) b 2 r=a f (t) = f (a) + f (a + 2) + . . . + f (b − 2) + f (b). (2.1) Also π(cid:96) = π(cid:96) and h(π(cid:96)) = ((cid:96) + 1)2 for all (cid:96). set I. Let G := (cid:81) Example 2.3 Suppose that {Gi}i∈I is a non-empty family of compact groups for arbitrary indexing the product topology. Then (cid:98)G is the restricted direct product of hypergroups {(cid:98)Gi}i∈I, (see [14, i∈I Gi be the product of {Gi}i∈I i.e. G := {(xi)i∈I : xi ∈ Gi} equipped with Theorem 27.43]). 2.4 Polynomial hypergroups Let N0 = N ∪ {0}. Hypergroups related to systems of orthogonal polynomials in one variable have been introduced and studied by Lasser [17] and Voit [25]. Such a hypergroup structure on N0 is called a polynomial hypergroup which is also discrete and commutative ([6, Section 3.2]). 4 Example 2.4 Let N0 be equipped with the hypergroup convolution δn ∗ δm := (1/2)δn−m + (1/2)δn+m. This hypergroup structure is called Chebyshev polynomial of the first type. One can show that the hypergroup algebra of N0 is isomorphic to the subalgebra of symmetric functions on the Fourier algebra of the torus, i.e. Z±1A(T) := {f + f : f ∈ A(T)} where f (x) = f (−x). 3 Weighted discrete hypergroups and examples In this section we study weights on discrete hypergroups, their corresponding algebras, and their examples. Specially we are interested to see concrete examples of weights defined on the classes of commutative discrete hypergroups which were mentioned in Section 2. 3.1 General Theory We believe all the definitions and observations in this subsection still hold for non-discrete hyper- groups (see [11]), but here we are mainly interested in the discrete case. Definition 3.1 Let H be a discrete hypergroup. We call a function ω : H → (0,∞) a weight if, for every x, y ∈ H, ω(δx ∗ δy) ≤ ω(x)ω(y). Then we call (H, ω) a weighted hypergroup. Let (cid:96)1(H, ω) be the set of all complex functions on H such that (cid:107)f(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω) := f (t)ω(t) < ∞. (cid:88) t∈H Then one can easily observe that ((cid:96)1(H, ω),(cid:107) · (cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω)) equipped with the (extended) convolution of (cid:96)1(H) forms a Banach algebra which is called a weighted hypergroup algebra. • It is easy to see that if ω is a positive function on H such that ω(t) ≤ ω(x)ω(y) for all t, x, y ∈ H where t ∈ supp(δx ∗ δy), then ω is a weight on H. We call such a weight a central weight. We will show later that not all hypergroup weights are central. (See Examples 3.10 and 3.11) • A hypergroup weight ω on H is called weakly additive, if for some C > 0, ω(δx ∗ δy) ≤ C(ω(x) + ω(y)) for all x, y ∈ H. • Two weights ω1 and ω2 are called equivalent if there are constants C1, C2 such that C1ω1 ≤ ω2 ≤ C2ω2. Example 3.2 Let {Hi}i∈I be a family of discrete hypergroups with corresponding weights {ωi}i∈I i∈I ωi(xi) forms a such that ωi(eHi) = 1 for all i ∈ I except finitely many. Then ω(xi)i∈I := (cid:81) have H =(cid:83) A discrete hypergroup H is called finitely generated if for a finite set F ⊆ H with F = F , we hypergroup weight on the restricted direct product of hypergroups {Hi}i∈I. n∈N F ∗n then F is called a finite symmetric generator of H. We define τF : H → N ∪ {0} 5 (3.1) by τF (x) := inf{n ∈ N : x ∈ F ∗n} for all x (cid:54)= e and τF (e) = 0. It is straightforward to verify that if F (cid:48) is another finite symmetric generator of H, then for some constants C1, C2, C1τF (cid:48) ≤ τF ≤ C2τF (cid:48). If there is no risk of confusion, we may just use τ instead of τF . Definition 3.3 For a given β ≥ 0, ωβ(x) := (1 + τ (x))β is a central weight on H which is called a Polynomial weight. Similarly, for given C > 0 and 0 ≤ α ≤ 1, σα,C(x) := eCτ (x)α is a central weight on H which is called an Exponential weight. Proposition 3.4 Let H, H(cid:48) be two discrete hypergroups and φ : H1 → H2 be a surjective hypergroup homomorphism. If ω is a weight on H so that for every x ∈ H, ω(x) ≥ δ for some δ > 0. Then ω(cid:48) defined by ω(cid:48)(y) := inf{ω(x) : x ∈ H, φ(x) = y} (y ∈ H(cid:48)), is a weight on H(cid:48). Proof. Proof is immediate if one note that φ : cc(H) → cc(H(cid:48)) satisfies (cid:107)φ(f )(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H(cid:48),ω(cid:48)) ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω) and ω(cid:48)(δφ(x) ∗ δφ(z)) = (cid:107)δφ(x) ∗ δφ(z)(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H(cid:48),ω(cid:48)) = (cid:107)φ(δx ∗ δz)(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H(cid:48),ω(cid:48)) ≤ (cid:107)δx(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω)(cid:107)δz(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω) = ω(x)ω(z) for every pair x, z ∈ H. (cid:3) 3.2 Weights on Conj(G) Let (G, σ) be a weighted group i.e. σ(xy) ≤ σ(x)σ(y) for all x, y ∈ G. We use (cid:96)1(G, σ) to denote the weighted group algebra constructed by σ. Let Z(cid:96)1(G, σ) denote the center of (cid:96)1(G, σ). It is not hard to show that Z(cid:96)1(G, σ) is the set of all f ∈ (cid:96)1(G, σ) for them f (yxy−1) = f (x) for all x, y ∈ G. The following proposition lets us apply group weights to generate hypergroup weights on Conj(G). The proof is straightforward, so we omit it here. by ωσ(C) := C−1(cid:80) Proposition 3.5 Let G be an FC group possessing a weight σ. Then the mean function ωσ defined t∈C σ(t) (C ∈ Conj(G)) is a weight on the hypergroup Conj(G). Further, (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωσ) is isometrically Banach algebra isomorphic to Z(cid:96)1(G, σ). Remark 3.6 Let G be an FC group and let ω be a central weight on Conj(G). Then the mapping σω, defined on G by σω(x) := ω(Cx), is a group weight on G. And (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ω) as a Banach algebra is isometrically isomorphic to Z(cid:96)1(G, σω). Example 3.7 Let G be a discrete FC group. The mapping ω(C) = C, for C ∈ Conj(G), is a central weight on Conj(G). 6 Example 3.8 Let G = (cid:76) i∈I Gi for a family of finite groups {Gi}i∈I. Given C = (Ci)i∈I ∈ Conj(G), define IC := {i ∈ I : Ci (cid:54)= eGi}. For each α > 0, we define a mapping ωα(C) := (1 + Ci1 + ··· + Cin)α where ij ∈ IC. We show that ωα is a central weight on Conj(G). To do so let E ⊆ CD for some E, C, D ∈ Conj(G). One can easily show that for each i ∈ I, Ei ⊆ CiDi; IE ⊆ IC ∪ ID. Therefore, ωα(C) = (1 + Ei)α ≤ (1 + CiDi)α (by Example 3.7) (cid:88) 1 + (cid:88) i∈IE i∈IC (cid:88) α 1 + (cid:88) i∈IE i∈ID α Di ≤ Ci = ωα(C)ωα(D). A group G is called a group with finite commutator group or FD if its derived subgroup is finite. It is immediate that for a group G, for every C ∈ Conj(G), C ≤ G(cid:48) when G(cid:48) is the derived subgroup of G. Therefore, the order of conjugacy classes of an FD group are uniformly bounded by G(cid:48). The converse is also true, that is for an FC group G, if the order of conjugacy classes are uniformly bounded, then G is an FD group, see [22, Theorem 14.5.11]. The following proposition implies that every hypergroup weight on the conjugacy classes of an FD group which is constructed by a group weight (as given in Proposition 3.5) is equivalent to a central weight. We omit the proof of the following proposition as it is straightforward. Proposition 3.9 Let (G, σ) be a weighted FD group. Then the hypergroup weight ωz(C) := G(cid:48)2ωσ(C), for C ∈ Conj(G), forms a central weight. Here ωσ is defined as in Proposition 3.5. In contrast to Proposition 3.9, we will see in the following examples that there exist weights on FC groups (with infinite derived subgroup) which are not equivalent to any central weight. Example 3.10 Let S3 be the symmetric group of order 6. Let ω be defined on Conj(S3) by ω(Ce) = 1, ω(C(12)) = 2, and ω(C(123)) = 5. One may verify that ω is a weight on Conj(S3). On the other hand, since 5 = ω(C(123)) (cid:10) ω(C(12))2 = 4, ω is not a central weight. Example 3.11 We generate the restricted direct product G =(cid:76) ω(cid:48) :=(cid:81) For each N ∈ N, define DN :=(cid:81) n = Ce otherwise. One can verify that DN ∈ supp(δEN ∗ δEN ) for EN =(cid:81) n∈N S3. Let us define the weight n∈N ω on Conj(G) where ω is the hypergroup weight on Conj(S3) defined in Example 3.10. n = C(123) for all n ∈ 1, . . . , N and n ∈ Conj(G) n ∈ Conj(G) where D(N ) n∈N D(N ) n∈N E(N ) n = C(12) for all n ∈ 1, . . . , N and E(N ) n = Ce otherwise. Therefore D(N ) with E(N ) ω(cid:48)(DN ) ω(cid:48)(EN )2 = N(cid:89) n=1 ω(C(123)) ω(C(12))2 = (5/4)N → ∞ where N → ∞. Hence, ω(cid:48) is not equivalent to any central weight. 7 We close this subsection with the following corollary of Lemma 3.4. Corollary 3.12 Let G be an FC group, N a normal subgroup of G, and ω a weight on Conj(G) such that there is some δ > 0 such that ω(C) > δ, for any C ∈ Conj(G). Then the mapping ω : Conj(G/N ) → R+ defined by ω(CxN ) := inf{ω(Cxy) : y ∈ N}, for CxN ∈ Conj(G/N ), forms a weight on Conj(G/N ). 3.3 Weights on duals of compact groups In this subsection, G is a compact group. We recall that for each π ∈ (cid:98)G and f ∈ L1(G), (cid:98)f (π) := (cid:90) G f (x)π(x)dx is the Fourier transform of f at π. Let V N (G) denote the group von Neumann algebra of G, i.e. the von Neumann algebra generated by the left regular representation of G. It is well-known that the predual of V N (G), denoted by A(G), is a Banach algebra of continuous functions on G; it is called the Fourier algebra of G. Moreover, for every f ∈ A(G), (cid:107)f(cid:107) := (cid:88) π∈(cid:98)G dπ(cid:107)(cid:98)f (π)(cid:107)1 < ∞, where (cid:107) · (cid:107)1 denotes the trace-class operator norm (look at [14, Section 32]). In an attempt to find the noncommutative analogue of weights on groups, Lee and Samei in [18] defined a weight on A(G) to be a densely defined (not necessarily bounded) operator W affiliated with V N (G) and satisfying certain properties mentioned in [18, Definition 2.4] (see also [20]). Specially they assume that W has a bounded inverse, W −1, which belongs to V N (G). For a weight W on A(G), the Beurling-Fourier algebra denoted by A(G, W ) is defined to be the set of all f ∈ A(G) such that (cid:107)f(cid:107)A(G,W ) := dπ(cid:107)(cid:98)f (π) ◦ W(cid:107)1 < ∞. (cid:88) π∈(cid:98)G Indeed (A(G, W ),(cid:107) · (cid:107)A(G,W )) forms a Banach algebra with pointwise multiplication. For abelian groups, the definition of Beurling-Fourier algebra corresponds the classical weighted group algebra on the dual group. In [18], the authors also studied Arens regularity and isomorphism to operator algebras for Beurling-Fourier algebras. Definition 3.13 Let G be a compact group and W a weight on A(G). We define a function ωW : (cid:98)G → (0,∞) by (3.2) where (cid:107)·(cid:107)1 denotes the trace norm and Iπ is the identity matrix corresponding to the Hilbert space of π. ωW (π) := dπ (cid:107)Iπ ◦ W(cid:107)1 (π ∈ (cid:98)G), 8 dependently, in [20]), central weights on A(G) are defined. As a specific class of weights on the Fourier algebra of a compact group G, in [18] (and in- Indeed, [18, Theorem 2.12] implies that each central weight W can be represent by a unique function ωW : (cid:98)G → (0,∞) such that ωW (σ) ≤ ωW (π1)ωW (π2) for all π1, π2, σ ∈ (cid:98)G where σ ∈ supp(δπ1 ∗ δπ2). In this specific case of hypergroup (cid:98)G. In the following we show that the same is true for a general weight on A(G) as well. operator weights, ωW matches with our definition in Definition 3.13 for a central weight on the Theorem 3.14 Let G be a compact group and W a weight on A(G). Then ωW is a weight on Let us define ZA(G, W ) := {f ∈ A(G, W ) : f (yxy−1) = f (x) for all x ∈ G} which is a Banach ωW (π) = 1 for every π ∈ (cid:98)G, ZA(G, W ) = ZA(G). For more on ZA(G), look at [3]. algebra with pointwise product and (cid:107) · (cid:107)A(G,W ). Note that for the operator weights W where the hypergroup (cid:98)G and the weighted hypergroup algebra (cid:96)1((cid:98)G, ωW ) is isometrically isomorphic to T : X (G) → cc((cid:98)G) by T (χπ) = dπδπ for each π ∈ (cid:98)G. Let f =(cid:80)n i=1 αiχπi ∈ X (G) for πi ∈ (cid:98)G and ZA(G, W ). Proof. Let X (G) denote the linear span of all the characters of G. First define a linear mapping αi ∈ C. In this case, (cid:107)T (f )(cid:107)(cid:96)1((cid:98)G,ω) = = n(cid:88) n(cid:88) i=1 i=1 αidπiω(πi) = n(cid:88) i=1 dπi(cid:107) αi dπi Iπi ◦ W(cid:107)1 = i=1 αidπi n(cid:88) dπi (cid:107)Iπi ◦ W(cid:107)1 dπi(cid:107)αi(cid:98)χπi(πi) ◦ W(cid:107)1 = (cid:107)f(cid:107)A(G,W ). Therefore, T forms a norm preserving linear mapping. To show that T is an algebra homomorphism cc((cid:98)G) is dense in (cid:96)1((cid:98)G, ωW ). So T can be extended as an algebra isomorphism from ZA(G, W ) note that T (χπ1χπ2) = T (χπ1) ∗ T (χπ2). It is known that X (G) is dense in ZA(G, W ) and clearly onto (cid:96)1((cid:98)G, ωW ) which preserves the norm. In particular, (cid:96)1((cid:98)G, ωW ) forms an algebra with respect to its weighted norm and the convolution, and so ωW is actually a hypergroup weight on (cid:98)G. Lemma 3.15 Let G be a compact group and (cid:98)G be the set of all irreducible representations of G as a The proof of the following lemma is straightforward so we omit it here. (cid:3) discrete commutative hypergroup. Then ωβ(π) = dβ π = h(dπ)β/2 is a central weight for each β ≥ 0. In the following, recall defined in (2.1). Example 3.16 (Lifting weights from Z to (cid:99)SU(2)) Let σ be a weight on the group Z. We define 2 (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:96) (cid:96) + 1 2 r=−(cid:96) 9 ωσ(π(cid:96)) := 1 σ(r) ((cid:96) ∈ N0). (3.3) Recall that elements of (cid:99)SU(2) can be regarded as π(cid:96) when (cid:96) ∈ N0. Suppose that m, n ∈ N0 and without loss of generality n ≥ m. Then, ωσ(πm)ωσ(πn) = ≥ = = = σ(t) n + 1 σ(s) (cid:88) m 1 m + 1 2 t=−m 1 (m + 1)(n + 1) 1 (m + 1)(n + 1) 1 m (cid:88) (cid:88) n+m 2 t=−m 2 t=n−m n 2 s=−n n (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:32) 2 s=−t 2 s=−n t 1 σ(t + s) σ(s) (cid:88) t (†) (‡) (cid:33) σ(s) n+m (cid:88) (cid:88) n+m 2 t=n−m 2 t=n−m (t + 1) (m + 1)(n + 1) t + 1 2 s=−t (t + 1) (m + 1)(n + 1) ωσ(πt) = ωσ(δπm ∗ δπn). To show that the summations (†) and (‡) are equal, let us arrange (†) as follows. +σ(−m − n + 2) +··· +σ(−m + n − 2) +σ(−m + n) σ(−m − n) +σ(−m − n + 2) +σ(−m − n + 4) +··· +σ(−m + n) ... +σ(m − 2) +σ(m) . . . +··· +σ(m + n − 4) +··· +σ(m + n − 2) ... +σ(m) +σ(m + 2) ... +σ(−m + n + 2) ... +σ(m + n − 2) +σ(m + n) . but the sum of all the entries in the first column and the last row is equal to The next column and row give 2 s=−m−n (cid:88) m+n−2 (cid:88) m+n σ(s) . σ(s) , 2 s=−m−n+2 and so on. So by doing this finitely many times, we get (‡). Indeed, weight ωσ follows from the recipe of Definition 3.13 using the non-central weight W on A(SU(2)) defined in (A.1) in Appendix A. So instead of the above computations, one also could use Theorem 3.14 to prove that ωσ is actually a weight on (cid:99)SU(2). Fix β > 0. One may apply the construction in Example 3.16 for σ((cid:96)) := (1 − (cid:96))β 0 ≤ (cid:96) (cid:96) < 0 ((cid:96) ∈ Z) (3.4) (cid:26) 1 10 to construct a hypergroup weight ωσ on (cid:99)SU(2). Observe that the weight ωσ is equivalent to the weight ωβ defined in Lemma 3.15. We will see in Section 4, that this particular weight will give interesting classes of examples. To construct weights from subgroups of compact groups, one can look at [20, Proposition 4.11]. 3.4 Weights on polynomial hypergroups Recall that (cid:99)SU(2) is a particular example of polynomial hypergroup so-called Chebyshev polynomials. Similar arguments can be applied to construct hypergroup weights on polynomial hypergroups applying group weights of Z. Example 3.17 Let f : N0 → R+ be an increasing function such that f (0) = 1. Then ωf (n) = f (n) + 2 is a central weight on N0 when it is equipped with the Chebyshev polynomial hypergroup structure of the first type. Applying the argument in Example 2.4, we can see that (cid:96)1(N0, ωf ) is isomorphic to the symmetric subalgebra of A(T, σ), that is Z±1A(T, σ) := {f + f : f ∈ A(T, σ)}, for the group weight (cid:26) 1 σf ((cid:96)) := 4 Arens regularity (cid:96) ≥ 0 (cid:96) < 0 f (−(cid:96)) ((cid:96) ∈ Z) In [16, Chaptetr 4], Kamyabi-Gol applied the topological center of hypergroup algebras to prove some results about the hypergroup algebras and their second duals. For example, in [16, Corol- lary 4.27], he showed that for a (not necessarily discrete and commutative) hypergroup H (which possesses a Haar measure h), L1(H, h) is Arens regular if and only if H is finite. Arens regularity of weighted group algebras has been studied by Craw and Young in [8]. They showed that a locally compact group G has a weight ω such that L1(G, ω) is Arens regular if and only if G is discrete and countable. The monograph [9] presents a thorough report on Arens regularity of weighted group algebras. In the following we adapt the machinery developed in [9, Section 8] for weighted hypergroups. In [9, Section 3], the authors study repeated limit conditions and give a rich variety of results for them. Here, we will use some of them. First let us recall the following definitions. Let A be a Banach algebra. For f, g ∈ A, φ ∈ A∗, and F, G ∈ A∗∗, we define the following module actions. (cid:104)f · φ, g(cid:105) := (cid:104)φ, gf(cid:105), (cid:104)φ · F, f(cid:105) := (cid:104)F, f · φ(cid:105), (cid:104)F♦G, φ(cid:105) := (cid:104)G, φ · F(cid:105), (cid:104)φ · f, g(cid:105) := (cid:104)φ, f g(cid:105) (cid:104)F · φ, f(cid:105) := (cid:104)F, φ · f(cid:105) (cid:104)G(cid:3)F, φ(cid:105) := (cid:104)G, F · φ(cid:105). Let F, G ∈ A∗∗, and let (fα)α and (gβ)β be nets in A such that fα → F and gβ → G in the weak∗ topology. One may show that for products (cid:3) and ♦ of A∗∗, F(cid:3)G = w∗ − lim α w∗ − lim β fαgβ and F♦G = w∗ − lim β w∗ − lim α fαgβ. 11 The Banach space A∗∗ equipped with either of the multiplications (cid:3) or ♦ forms a Banach algebra. The Banach algebra A is called Arens regular if two actions (cid:3) and ♦ coincide. Let c0(H, ω−1) := {f : H → C : f ω−1 ∈ c0(H)}. Note that (cid:96)1(H, ω) is the dual of c0(H, ω−1). Hence, (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗ can be decomposed as (cid:96)1(H, ω)(cid:76) c0(H, ω−1)⊥ when c0(H, ω−1)⊥ := {F ∈ F = (f, Φ) ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω)(cid:76) c0(H, ω−1)⊥. (cid:104)F, φ(cid:105) = 0 for all φ ∈ c0(H, ω−1)}. To see this decomposition, let F ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗, (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗ : it is clear that f := Fc0(H,ω−1) ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω) and consequently Φ := F − f ∈ c0(H, ω−1)⊥. Therefore, Proposition 4.1 Let (H, ω) be a weighted hypergroup. Then (cid:96)1(H, ω) is Arens regular if the multi- plications (cid:3) and ♦ restricted to c0(H, ω−1)⊥ are constantly 0. Proof. Now let F = (f, Φ) and G = (g, Ψ) belong to (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗. First, note that f(cid:3)Ψ = f♦Ψ and (cid:3) Φ(cid:3)g = Φ♦g. Thus F(cid:3)G = (f, Φ)(cid:3)(g, Ψ) = (f g, f(cid:3)Ψ + Φ(cid:3)g) = (f g, f♦Ψ + Φ♦g) = F♦G. Let us define the bounded function Ωω : H × H → (0, 1] by Ωω(x, y) := ω(δx ∗ δy) ω(x)ω(y) (x, y ∈ H). (4.1) If there is no risk of confusion, we may use Ω instead of Ωω. For a weighted group (G, σ), the Arens regularity of weighted group algebras has been charac- terized completely; [9, Theorem 8.11] proves that it is equivalent to the 0-clusterness of the function Ωσ on G × G, that is lim n lim m Ωσ(xm, yn) = lim m lim n Ωσ(xm, yn) = 0 whenever (xm) and (yn) are sequences in G, each consisting of distinct points, and both repeated limits exist. A stronger version of 0-clusterness is called strong 0-clusterness (see [9, Section 3]). We define strongly 0-cluster functions as presented in [9, Definition 3.6] for discrete topological spaces. Definition 4.2 Let X and Y be two sets and f is a bounded function on X × Y into C. Then f 0-clusters strongly on X × Y if lim x→∞ lim sup y→∞ f (x, y) = lim y→∞ lim sup x→∞ f (x, y) = 0. Let us define Banach space isomorphism κ : (cid:96)1(H, ω) → (cid:96)1(H) where κ(f ) = f ω for each f ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω). Note that for κ∗∗ : (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗ → (cid:96)1(H)∗∗ and Φ ∈ c0(H, ω)⊥, one gets (cid:104)κ∗∗(Φ), φ(cid:105) = (cid:104)Φ, κ∗(φ)(cid:105) which is 0 for all φ ∈ c0(H). Therefore κ∗∗(Φ) ∈ c0(H)⊥. The converse (which we do not use here) is also true and straightforward to show. The following theorem is a generalization of [9, Theorem 8.8]. In the proof we use some tech- niques of the proof of [18, Theorem 3.16]. 12 Theorem 4.3 Let (H, ω) be a weighted hypergroup and let Ω 0-cluster strongly on H × H. Then Φ(cid:3)Ψ = 0 and Φ♦Ψ = 0 whenever Φ, Ψ ∈ c0(H, 1/ω)⊥. Proof. Let us show the theorem for Φ(cid:3)Ψ, the proof for the other action is similar. Let Φ, Ψ ∈ c0(H, 1/ω)⊥. By Goldstine's theorem, there are nets (fα)α, (gβ)β ⊆ (cid:96)1(H) such that fα → κ∗∗(Φ) and gβ → κ∗∗(Ψ) in the weak∗ topology of (cid:96)1(H)∗∗ while supα (cid:107)fα(cid:107)1 ≤ 1 and supβ (cid:107)gβ(cid:107)1 ≤ 1. So for each ψ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H) and Φ, Ψ ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗, (cid:104)ψω, κ∗∗(Φ(cid:3)Ψ)(cid:105) = (cid:104)κ∗(ψ), Φ(cid:3)Ψ(cid:105) = lim (cid:104)ψω, κ−1(fα) ∗ κ−1(gβ)(cid:105) = lim (cid:104)ψω, fα/ω ∗ gβ/ω(cid:105). lim β α lim β α Thus (cid:104)ψω, κ∗∗(Φ(cid:3)Ψ)(cid:105) = lim α lim β = lim α lim β (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:88) y∈H (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:104)ψω, fα/ω ∗ gβ/ω(cid:105) (cid:88) ψ(y)ω(y) (cid:88) x,z∈H x,z∈H fα(x) ω(x) ≤ lim sup α lim sup β ≤ (cid:107)ψ(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H) lim sup α = (cid:107)ψ(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H) lim sup α lim sup β lim sup β (cid:88) (cid:88) x,z∈H x,z∈H fα(x) ω(x) gβ(z) ω(z) gβ(z) ω(z) δx ∗ δz(y) (cid:88) fα(x)gβ(z)(cid:88) y∈H ψ(y)ω(y)δx ∗ δz(y) ω(y) ω(x)ω(z) δx ∗ δz(y) y∈H fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z). For a given > 0, since by the hypothesis limx lim supz Ω(x, z) = 0, there is a finite set A ⊆ H x := such that for each x ∈ Ac(= H \ A) there exists a finite set Bx ⊆ H such that for each z ∈ Bc H \ B, Ω(x, z) ≤ . First note that lim sup lim sup α β fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) ≤ lim sup α (cid:107)fα(cid:107)1(cid:107)gβ(cid:107)1 ≤ . lim sup β (cid:88) (cid:88) x∈Ac z∈Bc x Also according to our assumption about Φ and Ψ and since for each x ∈ H, δx ∈ c0(H, 1/ω), limα fα(x) = 0 and limβ gβ(x) = 0. So for the given > 0, there is α0 such that for all α0 (cid:52) α, fα(x) < /A for all x ∈ A. Moreover, for each x ∈ Ac there is some βx 0 such that for all β where (cid:52) β, gβ(z) < /Bx for all z ∈ Bx (this is possible since A and Bx are finite). Therefore, since βx 0 Ω(x, z) ≤ 1, (cid:88) (cid:88) x∈A z∈H fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) ≤ lim sup β (cid:107)gβ(cid:107)1 = lim sup lim sup α and lim sup lim sup α β β (cid:88) (cid:88) x∈Ac z∈Bx (cid:88) fα(x) lim sup β x∈Ac (cid:107)fα(cid:107)1 = . (cid:88) z∈Bx gβ(z) fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) ≤ lim sup α ≤ lim sup α 13 But (cid:88) x,z∈H fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) = + + (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) x∈Ac,z∈Bc x x∈A,z∈H x∈Ac,z∈Bx fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z) fα(x)gβ(z)Ω(x, z), and so, one gets that (cid:104)ψω, κ∗∗(Φ(cid:3)Ψ)(cid:105) ≤ 3(cid:107)ψ(cid:107)∞. Since > 0 was arbitrary, this proves the claim (cid:3) of the theorem. Theorem 4.4 Let (H, ω) be a discrete weighted hypergroup and consider the following conditions: (1) Ω 0-clusters strongly on H × H. (2) Φ(cid:3)Ψ = Φ♦Ψ = 0 for all Φ, Ψ ∈ c0(H, 1/ω)⊥. (3) (cid:96)1(H, ω) is Arens regular. Then (1) ⇒ (2) ⇒ (3). Proof. (1) ⇒ (2) by Theorem 4.3. (2) ⇒ (3) is implied from Proposition 4.1. (cid:3) Remark 4.5 Since in hypergroups, the cancellation does not necessarily exist, the argument of [8, Theorem 1] cannot be applied to show (3) implies (1). Example 4.6 Let N0 be equipped with Chebyshev polynomial hypergroup structure of the first type and σf be the group weight defined in Example 3.17 for an increasing function f . One can easily check that if limn,m f (n + m)/f (n)f (m) = 0, then Ωωf 0-clusters strongly on N0 × N0; hence, (cid:96)1(N0, ωf ) is Arens regular. Indeed, Z±A(T, σf ) is Arens regular. But note that A(T, σf ) (which is isomorphic to (cid:96)1(Z, σf ) through the Fourier transform) is not Arens regular, as Ωσf does not 0-cluster strongly on Z × Z (see [9, Theorem 8.11]). Corollary 4.7 Let (H, ω) be a weighted discrete hypergroup such that ω is a weakly additive weight. If 1/ω ∈ c0(H), then (cid:96)1(H, ω) is Arens regular. Proof. We have x→∞ lim sup lim y→∞ ω(δx ∗ δy) ω(x)ω(y) ≤ lim sup x→∞ lim sup y→∞ C ω(x) + ω(y) ω(x)ω(y) Therefore Ω 0-clusters strongly on H × H and hence (cid:96)1(H, ω) is Arens regular by Theorem 4.4. (cid:3) = C lim sup x→∞ lim sup y→∞ 1 ω(x) + 1 ω(y) = 0. 14 Corollary 4.8 Let H be a finitely generated hypergroup. Then for each polynomial weight ωβ (β > 0) on H defined in Definition 3.3, (cid:96)1(H, ωβ) is Arens regular. Proof. Here we only need to prove the case for an infinite hypergroup H. Let F be a finite generator of the hypergroup H containing the identity of H rendering the central weight ωβ. Recall that ωβ is weakly additive with constant C = min{1, 2β−1}. Moreover, for each N ∈ N, for x ∈ H \ F ∗N , τF (x) ≥ N ; hence, ωβ(x) = (1 + τF (x))β ≥ (1 + N )β. Therefore, 1/ωβ ∈ c0(H). Subsequently, (cid:3) (cid:96)1(H, ωβ) is Arens regular, by Corollary 4.7. Remark 4.9 Every finitely generated hypergroup H admits a weight for which the corresponding weighted algebra is Arens regular. On the other hand, an argument similar to [8, Corollary 1] may apply to show that for every uncountable discrete hypergroup H, H does not have any weight ω which 0-clusters strongly. Example 4.10 Let ωβ be as defined in Lemma 3.15 for some β ≥ 0. Then Ωωβ also 0-clusters strongly on (cid:99)SU(2) × (cid:99)SU(2). Therefore, (cid:96)1((cid:99)SU(2), ωβ), which is isometrically Banach algebra iso- morphic to ZA(SU(2), ωβ), is Arens regular. On the other hand, A(SU(2), ωβ) is not Arens regular if β > 0. To observe the later fact, first note that by applying [8], we obtain that (cid:96)1(Z, σ) is not Arens regular for σ defined in (3.4). Therefore, A(T, σ) is not Arens regular. Note that, ωβ can also be rendered using the weight σ through the argument of the last paragraph of Subsection 3.3. For the dual spaces V N (T, σ) and V N (SU(2), ωβ), one may verify that V N (T, σ) embeds ∗-weakly in V N (SU(2), ωβ) (the details of this embedding will appear in a manuscript by the second named author and et al). Hence, A(T, σ) is a quotient of A(SU(2), ωβ) and consequently A(SU(2), ωβ) is not Arens regular. In the following, we generalize some results on SU(2) to all SU(n)'s, the group of all n×n special unitary matrices on C, based on a recent study on the representation theory of SU(n), [7]. As an example for Lemma 3.15, ((cid:99)SU(n), ωβ) is a discrete commutative hypergroup where ωβ(π) = dβ correspondence between (cid:99)SU(n) and n-tuples (π1, . . . , πn) ∈ Nn for some β ≥ 0. See [10] for the details of representation theory of SU(n). There is a one-to-one 0 such that π1 ≥ π2 ≥ ··· ≥ πn−1 ≥ πn = 0. This presentation of the representation theory of SU(n) is called dominant weight. Using this presentation, we have the following formula which gives the dimension of each representation by the formula π (cid:89) dπ = 1≤i<j≤n πi − πj + j − i j − i (4.2) where π is the representation corresponding to (π1, . . . , πn). Suppose that π, ν, µ are representations corresponding to (π1, . . . , πn), (ν1, . . . , νn), and (µ1, . . . , µn), respectively, such that π ∈ supp(δν ∗ δµ). Collins, Lee, and `Sniady showed in [7, Corollary 1.2] there exists some Cn > 0, for each n ∈ N, such that (cid:19) dπ dµdν ≤ Cn + 1 1 + ν1 . (4.3) (cid:18) 1 1 + µ1 15 Applying (4.3), we prove that ωβ 0-clusters on (cid:99)SU(n). Proposition 4.11 For every β > 0, (cid:96)1((cid:99)SU(n), ωβ) is Arens regular. Proof. Let (µm)m∈N and (νk)k∈N be two arbitrary sequences of distinct elements of (cid:99)SU(n). Since, the elements of (µm)m∈N are distinct, limm→∞ µ(m) very same thing can be said for νk = (ν(k) 1 , . . . , ν(k) π ∈ supp(δµm ∗ δνk ), we have 1 = ∞ where µm = (µ(m) n ). The n ). For each arbitrary pair (m, k) ∈ N × N, if , . . . , µ(m) 1 dπ ≤ Cn( 1 1 + µ(m) 1 + 1 1 + ν(k) 1 )dµmdνk . Hence ωβ(π) ≤ Cβ n ( 1 1 + µ(m) 1 + 1 1 + ν(k) 1 )βωβ(µm)ωβ(νk). Therefore ωβ(δµm ∗ δνk ) = (cid:88) π∈(cid:99)SU(n) Or equivalently δµm ∗ δνk (π)ωβ(π) ≤ Cβ n ( 1 1 + µ(m) 1 + 1 1 + ν(k) 1 )βωβ(µm)ωβ(νk). ωβ(δµm ∗ δνk ) ωβ(µm)ωβ(νk) ≤ Cβ n ( 1 + 1 )β. Ωβ(µm, νk) := Hence, limm→∞ lim supk→∞ Ωβ(µm, νk) = limk→∞ lim supm→∞ Ωβ(µm, νk) = 0. Since (cid:99)SU(n) is countable, this argument implies that Ωβ 0-clusters strongly on (cid:99)SU(n) × (cid:99)SU(n) and, by Theo- rem 4.4, (cid:96)1((cid:99)SU(n), ωβ) is Arens regular. (cid:3) 1 1 + µ(m) 1 + ν(k) 1 (cid:76)∞ Example 4.12 Let SL(2, 2n) denote the finite group of special linear matrices over the field F2n with cardinal 2n, for given n ∈ N. As a direct result of the character table, [1], for each three conjugacy classes say C1, C2, D ∈ Conj(SL(2, 2n)), D ≤ 2(C1 + C2) if D ⊆ C1C2 for all n. Let us define the FC group G to be the restricted direct product of {SL(2, 2n)}n∈N i.e. G := n=1 SL(2, 2n). Therefore, one can easily show that the weight ωα, defined in Example 3.8, is a weakly additive weight with the constant M = 2α min{1, 2α−1}. Moreover, since limC→∞ ωα(C) = ∞, (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωα) is Arens regular, by Corollary 4.7. Remark 4.13 Let ω be a central weight on Conj(G) for some FC group G. Then there is a group weight σω, as defined in Remark 3.6, such that (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ω) is isometrically Banach algebra isomorphic to Z(cid:96)1(G, σω). So one may also use the embedding (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ω) (cid:44)→ (cid:96)1(G, σω) to study Example 4.12 by applying the theorems which are characterizing Arens regularity of weighted group algebras. 16 Remark 4.14 Let G be an FC group and σ a group weight on G. We defined ωσ, the derived weight on Conj(G) from σ in Proposition 3.5. Recall that in this case Z(cid:96)1(G, σ) is isomorphic to the Banach algebra (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωσ). If N is a normal subgroup of G, we defined a quotient mapping Tωσ : (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωσ) → (cid:96)1(Conj(G/N ), ωσ) in Corollary 3.12 where ωσ(CxN ) = inf{ωσ(Cxy) : y ∈ N} (CxN ∈ Conj(G/N )). Let us note that for an Arens regular Banach algebra A, every quotient algebra A/I where I is a closed ideal of A is Arens regular as well (see [9, Corollary 3.15]). Therefore, if (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωσ) is Arens regular, for every normal subgroup N , (cid:96)1(Conj(G/N ), ωσ), which is isomorphic to (cid:96)1(Conj(G), ωσ)/ Ker(Tωσ ), is Arens regular. In the final result of this section, we apply some techniques of [8] to show that for restricted direct product of hypergroups, product weights fail to admit Arens regular algebras. Proposition 4.15 Let {Hi}i∈I be an infinite family of non-trivial discrete hypergroups and for each i∈I Hi i ∈ I, ωi is a weight on Hi such that ωi(eHi) = 1 for all except finitely many i ∈ I. Let H =(cid:76) and ω =(cid:81) i∈I ωi. Then (cid:96)1(H, ω) is not Arens regular. Proof. Since I is infinite, suppose that N0 × N0 ⊆ I. Define vn = (xi)i∈I where xi = eHi for all i ∈ I \ (n, 0) and x(n,0) be a non-identity element of H(n,0) for all n ∈ N. Similarly define um = (xi)i∈I where xi = eHi for all i ∈ I \ (0, m) and x(0,m) be a non-identity element of H(0,m) for all m ∈ N. Note that for each pair of elements (n, m) ∈ N× N, supp(δvn ∗ δum) forms a singleton in H; moreover, ω(δvn ∗ δum) = ω(vn)ω(um). Hence, (δvn ∗ δum)(n,m)∈N×N forms a sequence of distinct elements in (cid:96)1(H). Let us define fn = δvn and gm = δum for all n, m ∈ N. Suppose that A := {(vn, um) : n > m} and φ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H) is the characteristic function of the subset A. Clearly, κ−1(fn) = ω−1fn and κ−1(gm) = ω−1gm belong to (cid:96)1(H, ω) for all n, m and κ∗(φ) = ωφ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H, ω−1), for the Banach space isomorphism κ : (cid:96)1(H, ω) → (cid:96)1(H) where κ(f ) = f ω for each f ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω). Note that (cid:104)ω−1fn ∗ ω−1gm, κ∗(φ)(cid:105) = (cid:104)ω−1fn ∗ ω−1gm, ωφ(cid:105) (cid:88) (ω−1fn ∗ ω−1gm)(t)ω(t)φ(t) = = t∈H ω(vn ∗ um) ω(vn)ω(um) = φ(δvn ∗ δum) = φ(δvn ∗ δum) (cid:26) 1 if n > m 0 if n ≤ m Let us recall that for each n and m, (cid:107)fn(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω) = 1 and (cid:107)gm(cid:107)(cid:96)1(H,ω) = 1. So (fn)n∈N and (gm)m∈N, as two nets in the unit ball of (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗, have two subnets (fα)α and (gβ)β such that fα and gβ converge weakly∗ to some F and G in (cid:96)1(H, ω)∗∗, respectively. Note that for the specific element φ, defined above, (cid:104)F(cid:3)G, φ(cid:105) = 0 while (cid:104)F♦G, φ(cid:105) = 1. Hence F(cid:3)G (cid:54)= F♦G and consequently (cid:96)1(H, ω) (cid:3) is not Arens regular. 17 5 Isomorphism to operator algebras Let (H, ω) be a weighted discrete hypergroup. In this section, we study the existence of an algebra isomorphism from (cid:96)1(H, ω) onto an operator algebra. A Banach algebra A is called an operator algebra if there is a Hilbert space H such that A is a closed subalgebra of B(H). Let A be a Banach algebra and m : A × A → A is the bilinear (multiplication) mapping m(f, g) = f g. Then A is called injective, if m has a bounded extension from A ⊗ A into A, where ⊗ is the injective tensor product. In this case, we denote the norm of m by (cid:107)m(cid:107). [19, Corollary 2.2.] proves that if a Banach algebra A is injective then it is isomorphic to an operator algebra. But the converse also holds for weighted hypergroup algebras. The proof is similar to the group case in [19, Theorem 2.8] and it follows from the little Grothendieck inequality (see [21]). Note that a Banach algebra which is isomorphic to an operator algebra is always Arens regular ([5, Corollary 2.5.4]). Injectivity of weighted group algebras has been studied before. Initially Varopoulos, in [24], studied the group Z equipped with the weight σα(n) = (1 + n)α for all α ≥ 0. This study looked injectivity of (cid:96)1(Z, σα). He showed that (cid:96)1(Z, σα) is injective if and only if α > 1/2. The at manuscript [19], which studied the injectivity question for a wider family of weighted group alge- bras, developed a machinery applying Littlewood multipliers. In particular, it partially extended Varopoulos's result to finitely generated groups with polynomial growth. Following the structure of [19], in this section, we study the injectivity or equivalently isomorphism to operator algebras for weighted hypergroup algebras. In this section, A ⊗γ B and A ⊗ B denote respectively the projective and injective tensor products of Banach spaces A and B. We know that (cid:96)1(H, ω) ⊗γ (cid:96)1(H, ω) is isometrically isomorphic to (cid:96)1(H × H, ω × ω). Moreover, (cid:96)1(H × H, ω × ω)∗ is (cid:96)∞(H × H, ω−1 × ω−1). Since the injective tensor norm is minimal among all cross-norm Banach space tensor norms, the identity map ι : (cid:96)1(H) × (cid:96)1(H) → (cid:96)1(H) × (cid:96)1(H) may extend to a contractive mapping ι : (cid:96)1(H) ⊗γ (cid:96)1(H) → (cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H). Since, ι has a dense range, ι∗ : ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗ → ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗γ (cid:96)1(H))∗ = (cid:96)∞(H × H) (5.1) is an injective mapping. Therefore, applying ι∗, one may embed ((cid:96)1(H)⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗ into (cid:96)∞(H × H), as a linear subspace of (cid:96)∞(H × H). Let H be a discrete hypergroup. We define Littlewood multipliers of H to be the set of all functions f : H×H → C such that there exist functions f1, f2 : H×H → C where f (x, y) = f1(x, y)+f2(x, y) for x, y ∈ G such that (cid:88) x∈H sup y∈H f1(x, y)2 < ∞ and sup x∈H 18 (cid:88) y∈H f2(x, y)2 < ∞. We denote the set of all Littlewood multipliers by T 2(H) and define the norm (cid:107) · (cid:107)T 2(H) by sup y∈H (cid:32)(cid:88) x∈H (cid:33)1/2 (cid:88) y∈H 1/2 (cid:107)f(cid:107)T 2(H) := inf f1(x, y)2 + sup x∈H f2(x, y)2 where the infimum is taken over all possible decompositions f1, f2. Note that for a decomposition f1, f2 of f ∈ T 2(H), (cid:107)f(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H×H) = sup x,y∈H f (x, y) ≤ sup x,y∈H f1(x, y) + sup x,y∈H f2(x, y) ≤ sup y∈H f1(x, y)2 + sup x∈H (cid:33)1/2 1/2 < ∞, f2(x, y)2 (cid:88) y∈H (cid:32)(cid:88) x∈H since for discrete space H, (cid:96)2(H) ⊆ (cid:96)∞(H) and (cid:107) · (cid:107)∞ ≤ (cid:107) · (cid:107)2. Since f1, f2, in the previous equation are arbitrary, (cid:107)f(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H×H) ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)T 2(H). Hence T 2(H) ⊆ (cid:96)∞(H × H). Furthermore, for each φ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H × H) and f ∈ T 2(H), f φ ∈ T 2(H) and (cid:107)f φ(cid:107)T 2(H) ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)T 2(H)(cid:107)φ(cid:107)∞. The following theorem is the hypergroup version of [19, Theorem 2.7]. Since the proof is very similar to the group case, we omit it here (although with all the details it can be found in [2]). Here we use KG to denote Grothendieck's constant. First in his celebrated "R´esum´e", Grothendieck proved the existence of the constant KG in Grothendieck's inequality. For a detailed account of Grothendieck's constant, its history, and approximations look at [21, Sections 3 and 4]. Theorem 5.1 Let I : T 2(H) → ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗γ (cid:96)1(H))∗ = (cid:96)∞(H × H) be the mapping which takes every element of T 2(H) to itself as a bounded function on H×H. Then I(T 2(H)) ⊆ ι∗(((cid:96)1(H)⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗) for the mapping ι∗ defined in (5.1). Moreover, J := ι∗−1◦I : T 2(H) → ((cid:96)1(H)⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗ is bounded and (cid:107)J(cid:107) ≤ KG. From now on, we identify ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗) with its image through the mapping ι∗; hence, J is the identity mapping which takes T 2(H) into ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗. We present our first main result of this section. This is a generalization of [19, Theorem 3.1]. Theorem 5.2 Let H be a discrete hypergroup and ω is a weight on H such that Ω, defined in (4.1), belongs to T 2(H). Then (cid:96)1(H, ω) is injective and equivalently isomorphic to an operator algebra. Moreover, for the multiplication map m on (cid:96)1(H, ω)⊗ (cid:96)1(H, ω), as defined before, (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ KG(cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H). Proof. Let Γω : (cid:96)1(H × H, ω × ω) → (cid:96)1(H, ω) such that Γω(f ⊗ g) := f ∗ g for f, g ∈ (cid:96)1(H, ω). The adjoint of Γω, Γ∗ ω, can be characterized as follows. ω(φ)(x, y) = (cid:104)Γ∗ Γ∗ ω(φ), δx ⊗ δy(cid:105) = (cid:104)φ, Γω(δx ⊗ δy)(cid:105) = (cid:104)φ, δx ∗ δy(cid:105) 19 for all φ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H, ω−1) and x, y ∈ H. Now we define L from (cid:96)∞(H) to (cid:96)∞(H × H) such that the following diagram commutes, (cid:96)∞(H, ω−1) Γ∗ ω / / (cid:96)∞(H × H, ω−1 × ω−1) P (cid:96)∞(H) L R / (cid:96)∞(H × H) where P (ϕ)(x) = ϕ(x)ω(x) for ϕ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H) and R(φ)(x, y) = φ(x, y)ω−1(x)ω−1(y) for φ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H × H, ω−1 × ω−1) and x, y ∈ H. Hence, one gets L(ϕ)(x, y) = R (Γ∗ ω ◦ P (ϕ)) (x, y) = (Γ∗ ω ◦ P (ϕ)) (x, y) ω(x)ω(y) = = = Γ∗ ω (ωϕ) (x, y) ω(x)ω(y) (cid:104)ϕω, δx ∗ δy(cid:105) ω(x)ω(y) δx ∗ δy(t) (cid:88) t∈H ω(t) ω(x)ω(y) ϕ(t). (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤(cid:88) t∈H ϕ(t) δx ∗ δy(t) ω(t) ω(x)ω(y) ϕ(t) ≤ (cid:107)ϕ(cid:107)∞Ω(x, y) for all ϕ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H). Hence, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:88) t∈H δx ∗ δy(t) ω(t) ω(x)ω(y) So there is a function vϕ : H × H → C such that (cid:104)δx ∗ δy, ωϕ(cid:105) ω(x)ω(y) = vϕ(x, y)(cid:107)ϕ(cid:107)∞Ω(x, y) and (cid:107)vϕ(cid:107)∞ ≤ 1. Therefore L(ϕ) = Λ(ϕ)Ω where Λ(ϕ)(x, y) := vϕ(x, y)(cid:107)φ(cid:107)∞ for all ϕ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H). Since Ω belongs to T 2(H) and T 2(H) is an (cid:96)∞(H × H)-module, L(ϕ) ∈ T 2(H) and (cid:107)L(ϕ)(cid:107)T 2(H) ≤ (cid:107)ϕ(cid:107)∞(cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H). Therefore L((cid:96)∞(H)) ⊆ T 2(H) ⊆ ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗. In this case, using the following diagram with A = R−1(((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗), (cid:96)∞(H, ω−1) P (cid:96)∞(H) Γ∗ ω L / A Rr / ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗ ι ι (cid:96)∞(H × H, ω−1 × ω−1) R / (cid:96)∞(H × H) One can easily verify that A = ((cid:96)1(H, ω) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H, ω))∗. So, we have shown that Γ∗ is a map ω is a map projecting (cid:96)∞(H) into ((cid:96)1(H) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H))∗ as a subset of (cid:96)∞(H × H). we see that Γ∗ 20 O O / / / / O O / / projecting (cid:96)∞(H, ω−1) into ((cid:96)1(H, ω)⊗ (cid:96)1(H, ω))∗. Hence, Γ∗ ω = m∗, where m is the multiplication extended to (cid:96)1(H, ω) ⊗ (cid:96)1(H, ω). Therefore m is bounded and (cid:107)m(cid:107) = (cid:107)Γω(cid:107) = (cid:107)RΓωP(cid:107) = (cid:107)L(cid:107). Moreover, (cid:107)L(ϕ)(cid:107)((cid:96)1(H)⊗(cid:96)1(H))∗ ≤ (cid:107)J(cid:107) (cid:107)Γ∗(ϕ)(cid:107)T 2(H) ≤ KG (cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H) (cid:107)Λ(ϕ)(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H×H) ≤ KG (cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H) (cid:107)ϕ(cid:107)(cid:96)∞(H) for all ϕ ∈ (cid:96)∞(H). Consequently, (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ KG(cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H). Example 5.3 Let ωβ be the dimension weight defined on (cid:99)SU(n) in Lemma 3.15. As we have shown in the proof of Proposition 4.11, for the polynomial weight ωβ, β ≥ 0, and µ, ν ∈ (cid:99)SU(n), (cid:3) Ωβ(µ, ν) ≤ Cβ n ( 1 + 1 )β ≤ AβCβ n 1 + µ1 1 + ν1 1 1 (1 + µ1)β + (1 + ν1)β where Aβ = min{1, 2β−1}. To study (cid:107) · (cid:107)T 2((cid:99)SU(2)) for Ωβ, let us note that for each k ∈ N ∪ {0}, there are less than (1 + k)n−2 many λ = (λ1, . . . , λn) ∈ (cid:99)SU(n) such that λ1 = k. Therefore (cid:18) (cid:19) , (cid:88) λ∈(cid:99)SU(n) 1 (1 + λ1)2β ≤ (1 + k)n−2 (1 + k)2β ∞(cid:88) k=0 where the right-hand side series converges if and only if 2β−n+2 > 1. Therefore, for β > (n−1)/2, Ωβ ∈ T 2((cid:99)SU(n)) and by Theorem 5.2, (cid:96)1((cid:99)SU(2), ωβ) is injective and consequently isomorphic to an operator algebra. Moreover, note that (cid:107)Ωβ(cid:107)T 2((cid:99)SU(n)) ≤ ≤ + n 1 + µ1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(µ, ν) (cid:55)→ AβCβ  (cid:88)  (cid:88) ν∈(cid:99)SU(n) (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) µ∈(cid:99)SU(n) µ∈(cid:99)SU(n) ν∈(cid:99)SU(n) sup sup AβCβ n 1 + ν1 + n 1 + µ1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) AβCβ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) AβCβ n 1 + ν1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T 2(H) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)21/2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)21/2 (cid:33)1/2 . ≤ AβCβ n 2 1 (1 + k)2β−n+2 k=0 Hence, for Aβ = min{1, 2β−1}, (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ 2KGAβCβ n (cid:33)1/2 1 (1 + k)2β−n+2 (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) k=0 21 Corollary 5.4 Let H be a discrete hypergroup and ω is a weakly additive weight on H with a corre- sponding constant C > 0. Then (cid:96)1(H, ω) is injective if(cid:80) (cid:32)(cid:88) 1 (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ 2CKG x∈H ω(x)−2 < ∞. Moreover, (cid:33)1/2 ω(x)2 x∈H . Proof. Suppose that(cid:80) x∈H ω(x)−2 < ∞. Note that for each t ∈ supp(δx ∗ δy), ω(t) ω(x)ω(y) ≤ C ω(x) + ω(y) ω(x)ω(y) = C ω(x) + C ω(y) . Thus, for the functions f1(x, y) = ω(x) −1 and f2(x, y) = ω(y) −1, (cid:107)Ω(cid:107)T 2(H) ≤ ≤ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(x, y) (cid:55)→ C sup (cid:32)(cid:88) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) C ω(x) y∈H x∈H ω(x) + C (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T 2(H) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)2(cid:33)1/2 ω(y) + sup x∈H (cid:88) y∈H 1/2 ≤ 2C (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) C ω(y) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)2 (cid:32)(cid:88) 1 ω(x)2 x∈H (cid:33) 1 2 . Consequently, by Theorem 5.2, (cid:96)1(H, ω) is injective and (cid:107)m(cid:107) satisfies the mentioned inequality. (cid:3) Example 5.5 Let ωf be the weight constructed by the group weight admitted by a positive increas- ing function f (see Example 3.17). One can see that, if (cid:88) n∈N0 1 f (n)2 < ∞ and sup n,m∈N0 f (n + m) f (n) + f (m) < ∞, then ωf satisfies the conditions of Corollary 5.4 and therefore, (cid:96)1(N0, ωf ) is isomorphic to an operator algebra. On the other hand, (cid:96)1(N0, ωf ) can be embedded (isomorphically as a Banach algebra) into A(T, σf ) which is not isomorphic to any operator algebra (as it is not even Arens regular, see Example 4.6). Remark 5.6 Note that the assumed condition for f in Example 5.5 implies the Arens regularity condition required in Example 4.6. Compare it with this know fact that every Banach algebra which is isomorphic to an operator algebra is Arens regular. is a weakly additive weight. One can straightforwardly show that(cid:80) Remark 5.7 Let (Conj(G), ωα) be the weighted hypergroup defined in Example 4.12. Note that ωα C∈Conj(G) ω(C)−2 = ∞. Hence, not all weakly additive weights are satisfying the other condition mentioned in Corollary 5.4. 22 For finitely generated hypergroups, we showed that that polynomial weights are weakly additive. In the following, we study operator algebra isomorphism for weighted hypergroup algebras with polynomial weights. Developing a machinery which relates exponential weights to polynomial ones, we also study exponential weights in Subsection 5.1. For the case that H is a group, this has been achieved in [19] Corollary 5.8 Let H be a finitely generated hypergroup. If F is a generator of H such that F ∗n ≤ Dnd for some d, D > 0 and ωβ is the polynomial weight on H associated to F . Then (cid:96)1(H, ωβ) is injective if 2β > d + 1. Moreover, for C = min{1, 2β−1}, (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) Dnd (1 + n)2β n=1 (cid:33)1/2 . (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ 2CKG 1 + Proof. To prove this corollary, we mainly rely on Corollary 5.4. Recall that ωβ is weakly additive whose constant is C = min{1, 2β−1}. To show the desired bound for (cid:107)m(cid:107), note that 1 ωβ(x)2 = 1 (1 + τ (x))2β = 1 (1 + n)2β (cid:88) x∈H (cid:88) x∈H ∞(cid:88) ≤ 1 + ∞(cid:88) (cid:88) n=0 {x∈F n\F n−1} ∞(cid:88) Dnd F n (1 + n)2β ≤ 1 + which is convergent if 2β > d + 1. n=1 (1 + n)2β n=1 (cid:3) Example 5.9 For a polynomial hypergroup N0, as a finitely generated hypergroup with the gener- ator F = {0, 1}, we have F ∗n = n + 1 ≤ 2n, as we have seen before. By Corollary 5.8, for the polynomial weight ωβ with β > 1 associated to F , (cid:96)1(N0, ωβ) is injective. For C = min{1, 2β−1}, Corollary 5.4 implies that (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) (cid:33)1/2 . 1 n2β (cid:107)m(cid:107) ≤ 2CKG 5.1 Hypergroups with exponential weights n=1 The other class of weights introduced for finitely generated hypergroups is the class of exponential weights. As we mentioned before, unlike polynomial weights, exponential weights are not necessarily weakly additive. In this subsection, following [19], we study operator algebra isomorphism of these weights by studying the cases for them Ω belongs to T 2(H). The following lemma is a hypergroup adaptation of [19, Theorem 3.3]. Since the proof is similar to the one of [13, Lemma B.2], we omit it here. 23 Lemma 5.10 Suppose that 0 < α < 1, C > 0, and β ≥ max p : [0,∞) → R and q : (0,∞) → R by p(x) := Cxα − β ln(1 + x) and q(x) := p(x) finitely generated hypergroup with a symmetric generator F and ω : H → (0,∞) such that Cα(1−α) 1, 6 . Define the functions x . Let H be a (cid:110) (cid:111) ω(x) = ep(τF (x)) = eτF (x)q(τF (x)) for all x ∈ H. Then ω(t) ≤ M ω(x)ω(y) for all t, x, y ∈ H such that t ∈ x ∗ y where M = max{ep(z1)−p(z2)−p(z3) : z1, z2, z3 ∈ [0, 2K] ∩ N0} and K = (cid:18) β2 Cα(1 − α) (cid:19)1/α . Theorem 5.11 Let H be a finitely generated hypergroup. If F is a symmetric generator of H such that F ∗n ≤ Dnd for some d, D > 0 and σα,C is an exponential weight on H for some 0 < α < 1 and C > 0. Then (cid:96)1(H, σα,C) is injective and equivalently isomorphic to an operator algebra. Proof. Let ωβ be the weight defined in Lemma 5.10. We define a function ω : H → (0,∞) by ω(x) := σα,C(x) ωβ(x) = eCτF (x)α−β ln(1+τF (x)) (x ∈ H) where ωβ is the polynomial weight defined on H associated to F and β > max{1, 6 Cα(1 − α) , d + 1 2 }. Therefore, by Lemma 5.10, ω(t) ≤ M ω(x)ω(y) for some M > 0 and all t, x, y ∈ H such that t ∈ x ∗ y. Therefore σα,C(t) σα,C(x)σα,C(y) ≤ M ωβ(t) ωβ(x)ωβ(y) . Therefore, σα,C(t) σα,C(x)σα,C(y) 1 (1 + τ (x))β + 1 (1 + τ (y))β ≤ M(cid:48)(cid:18) (cid:19) for a modified constant M(cid:48) > 0. Therefore by the proof of Corollary 5.8, Ωσα,C ∈ T 2(H). Now (cid:3) Theorem 5.2 finishes the proof. Example 5.12 As a result of Theorem 5.11, and to follow Example 5.9, if H is a polynomial hypergroup on N0, for each exponential weight σα,C for 0 < α < 1 and C > 0, (cid:96)1(H, σα,C) is injective. Note that this class of hypergroups includes (cid:99)SU(2). 24 Acknowledgements For this research, the first author was supported by a Ph.D. Dean's Scholarship at University of Saskatchewan and a Postdoctoral Fellowship form the Fields Institute For Research In Mathemat- ical Sciences and University of Waterloo. The second name author was also supported by NSERC Discovery grant no 409364 and a generous support from the Fields Institute. The first named author also would like to express his deep gratitude to Yemon Choi and Nico Spronk for several constructive discussions and suggestions which improved the paper significantly. The authors also would like to thank the referee for his many productive comments. A Appendix: Lifting weights from Z to weights on A(SU(2)) In this appendix, we briefly present a method to construct non-central weights on A(SU(2)) which are related to Example 3.16. Here λG denotes the left regular representation of a compact group G on L2(G) and V N (G) denotes the group von Neumann algebra generated by λG. We also identify T with the (closed) subgroup of all matrices (cid:21) (cid:20) t 0 0 t (t ∈ T) , in SU(2). It is an immediate consequence of Herz's restriction theorem that there is a canonical embedding of V N (T) into V N (SU(2)). More precisely, the mapping Γ : V N (T) → V N (SU(2)) defined by (cid:90) T Γ(λT(f )) = f (t)λSU(2)(f )dt is a weak∗-weak∗ isometric ∗-algebra homomorphism. We note that the integration in the definition of Γ is the Bochnor integration in the weak operator topology of B(L2(SU(2))). Now suppose that σ is a (group) weight on Z which is bounded below by some δ > 0, i.e. σ−1 belongs to (cid:96)∞(Z). Through the Fourier transform F on Z, F(σ−1) is an element in V N (T) defined by F(σ−1)χk = σ(k)−1χk, where χk(t) = tk (k ∈ Z) are the characters of T. We now consider the element Γ(F(σ−1)) in V N (SU(2)). Since SU(2) is compact, we can write λSU(2) as the direct sum of the irreducible unitary representations of SU(2). Moreover, if we take (cid:99)SU(2) = {π(cid:96) : (cid:96) ∈ N0}, where each π(cid:96) is a representation of dimension (cid:96) + 1, then, by a straightforward computation based on [14, Theorem 29.18], we have that Γ(F(σ−1))(π(cid:96)) is the 25  (cid:77) (cid:96) − W = σ(−(cid:96)) 0 ... 0 0 0 σ(−(cid:96) + 2) ... 0 0 0 0 ... ··· ··· . . . ··· σ((cid:96) − 2) ··· 0 0 0 ... 0 σ((cid:96))  , diagonal matrix diag(σ(−(cid:96)) −1, σ(−(cid:96) + 2) −1, . . . , σ((cid:96) − 2) −1, σ((cid:96)) −1). Therefore, if we define, (A.1) then W is a (possibly unbounded) operator L2(SU(2)) with W −1 = Γ(F(σ−1)) ∈ V N (SU(2)). Moreover, it is straightforward to check that W satisfies the assumptions in [18, Definition 2.4] so that, in particular, it is a Fourier algebra weight on A(SU(2)). We can apply the formula in Definition 3.13 to W and define the (hypergroup) weight ωσ on SU(2) presented in Example 3.16. References [1] J. Adams. Character table of SL(2, F). http://www2.math.umd.edu/jda/characters/sl2/. [2] Mahmood Alaghmandan. weighted hypergroups and some questions in abstract harmonic analysis. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2013. Thesis (Ph.D.) -- The University of Saskatchewan (Canada). [3] Mahmood Alaghmandan and Nico Spronk. Amenability properties of the algebra of central fourier algebra of a compact group. (submited). [4] H. N. Bhattarai and J. W. Fernandez. Joins of double coset spaces. Pacific J. Math., 98(2):271 -- 280, 1982. [5] David P. Blecher and Christian Le Merdy. Operator algebras and their modules -- an operator space approach, volume 30 of London Mathematical Society Monographs. New Series. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004. Oxford Science Publications. [6] Walter R. Bloom and Herbert Heyer. Harmonic analysis of probability measures on hypergroups, volume 20 of de Gruyter Studies in Mathematics. Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 1995. [7] Benoıt Collins, Hun Hee Lee, and Piotr ´Sniady. Dimensions of components of tensor products of representations of linear groups with applications to Beurling-Fourier algebras. Studia Math., 220(3):221 -- 241, 2014. [8] I. G. Craw and N. J. Young. Regularity of multiplication in weighted group and semigroup algebras. Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser. (2), 25:351 -- 358, 1974. [9] H. G. Dales and A. T.-M. Lau. The second duals of Beurling algebras. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 177(836):vi+191, 2005. [10] William Fulton and Joe Harris. Representation theory, volume 129 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer- Verlag, New York, 1991. A first course, Readings in Mathematics. [11] F. Ghahramani and A. R. Medgalchi. Compact multipliers on weighted hypergroup algebras. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 98(3):493 -- 500, 1985. [12] F. Ghahramani and A. R. Medgalchi. Compact multipliers on weighted hypergroup algebras. II. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 100(1):145 -- 149, 1986. [13] Mahya Ghandehari, Hun Hee Lee, Ebrahim Samei, and Nico Spronk. Some Beurling-Fourier algebras on compact groups are operator algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 367(10):7029 -- 7059, 2015. 26 [14] Edwin Hewitt and Kenneth A. Ross. Abstract harmonic analysis. Vol. II: Structure and analysis for compact groups. Analysis on locally compact Abelian groups. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 152. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1970. [15] Robert I. Jewett. Spaces with an abstract convolution of measures. Advances in Math., 18(1):1 -- 101, 1975. [16] Rajab Ali Kamyabi-Gol. Topological center of dual branch algebras associated to hypergroups. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 1997. Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Alberta (Canada). [17] Rupert Lasser. Orthogonal polynomials and hypergroups. Rend. Mat. (7), 3(2):185 -- 209, 1983. [18] Hun Hee Lee and Ebrahim Samei. Beurling-Fourier algebras, operator amenability and Arens regularity. J. Funct. Anal., 262(1):167 -- 209, 2012. [19] Hun Hee Lee, Ebrahim Samei, and Nico Spronk. Some weighted group algebras are operator algebras. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. (2), 58(2):499 -- 519, 2015. [20] Jean Ludwig, Nico Spronk, and Lyudmila Turowska. Beurling-Fourier algebras on compact groups: spectral theory. J. Funct. Anal., 262(2):463 -- 499, 2012. [21] Gilles Pisier. Grothendieck's theorem, past and present. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (N.S.), 49(2):237 -- 323, 2012. [22] Derek J. S. Robinson. A course in the theory of groups, volume 80 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer- Verlag, New York, second edition, 1996. [23] A. Ulger. Arens regularity of weakly sequentially complete Banach algebras. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 127(11):3221 -- 3227, 1999. [24] Nicholas Th. Varopoulos. Sur les quotients des alg`ebres uniformes. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´er. A-B, 274:A1344 -- A1346, 1972. [25] Michael Voit. Laws of large numbers for polynomial hypergroups and some applications. J. Theoret. Probab., 3(2):245 -- 266, 1990. Mahmood Alaghmandan Department of Mathematical Sciences, Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg, Gothen- burg SE-412 96, Sweden [email protected] Ebrahim Samei Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Saskatchewan, 142 Wiggins road, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5E6, Canada [email protected] 27
1203.3908	2	1203	2012-03-25T21:10:10	Normal matrix compressions	[ "math.FA" ]	The recently developed theory of higher--rank numerical ranges originated in problems of error correction in quantum information theory but its mathematical implications now include a quite satisfactory understanding of \emph{scalar} compressions of complex matrices. Here our aim is to make some first steps in the more general program of understanding \emph{normal} compressions. We establish some general principles for the program and make a detailed study of rank--two normal compressions.	math.FA	math	Normal matrix compressions 6 December 2011 John Holbrook, Nishan Mudalige, Rajesh Pereira Abstract: The recently developed theory of higher -- rank numerical ranges originated in problems of error correction in quantum information theory but its mathematical implications now include a quite satisfactory understand- ing of scalar compressions of complex matrices. Here our aim is to make some first steps in the more general program of understanding normal com- pressions. We establish some general principles for the program and make a detailed study of rank -- two normal compressions. AMS codes: MSC(2000) 47A12, 15A60, 15A90, 81P68 Key words and phrases: matrix compression, higher -- rank numerical ranges, interlacing theorems, quantum information 1: Introduction Given a linear operator T on a complex Hilbert space H, and any orthogonal projection P , we say that P TP H is a compression of T . If H = CN and T is represented by a matrix M ∈ MN (the N × N complex matrices), a second matrix C represents a compression of T (or a compression of M) iff there is a unitary matrix U such that C is a NW corner of UMU ∗. If C is k × k we say it is a rank -- k compression of M. There is a rich history of results that allow us to identify compressions by means of intrinsic criteria. A classic example is the Cauchy interlacing theorem [Cau], along with its converse [FP], which may be expressed as follows. Theorem 1: If M ∈ MN is Hermitian, with eigenvalues a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ aN , then C is a rank -- k compression of M iff C is Hermitian with eigenvalues bj satisfying a1 ≤ b1 ≤ aN −k+1, a2 ≤ b2 ≤ aN −k+2, . . . , ak ≤ bk ≤ aN . 1 In particular, C is a rank N − 1 compression iff a1 ≤ b1 ≤ a2 ≤ b2 ≤ a3 ≤ ... ≤ aN −1 ≤ bN −1 ≤ aN , the classic "interlacing" of eigenvalues. A much more recent example is provided by the theory of higher -- rank numerical ranges. The striking development of this theory was motivated originally by problems in quantum information theory. Since the introduc- tion of this concept by Choi, Kribs, and Zyczkowski [CK Z1,CK Z2] only a few years ago, it has indeed been effectively applied in the area of quantum in- formation (see [CPMS Z,KPLRdS,LP,LPS1,MM Z], for example). It has also inspired a remarkable development of its purely mathematical aspects (see, for example, [CHK Z,CGHK,Wo,LS,LPS2,DGHP Z]). From this point of view the theory of the higher -- rank numerical ranges may be described as a highly successful analysis of scalar compressions of arbitrary matrices M ∈ MN . This suggests a more general program: characterize the normal (diagonal) compressions of M. In what follows we begin to carry out this program, although at present the program in its entirety seems out -- of -- reach. The rank -- k numerical range of M, usually denoted in the literature by Λk(M), was defined by Choi, Kribs, and Zyczkowski as the set of those complex λ such that for some rank -- k orthogonal projection P we have P MP = λP. In terms of compressions, we see that λ ∈ Λk(M) iff λIk is a (matrix) com- pression of M. Thus the following fundamental result of Li and Sze [LS] may be placed in the same family as the Cauchy interlacing theorem (and, in fact, the interlacing theorem plays a role in the argument of Li and Sze). Theorem 2: Given M ∈ MN , let λj(θ) be an enumeration of the eigenvalues of the (Hermitian) Re(eiθM) = (eiθM + e−iθM ∗)/2 such that λ1(θ) ≤ λ2(θ) ≤ · · · ≤ λN (θ). For each real θ, let the half -- plane H(M, θ) be defined by H(M, θ) = eiθ{z : Re(z) ≤ λN −k+1(−θ)}. 2 Then Λk(M) = \{H(M, θ) : θ ∈ [0, 2π]}. (1) Our more general program seeks to describe all normal compressions of M, ie to describe those complex a1, . . . , ak such that diag(a1, . . . , ak) is a compression of M. Equivalently, we ask when there exist orthonormal u1, u2, . . . , uk such that (Mui, ui) = ai for each i and (Mui, uj) = 0 whenever i 6= j; in particular, Λ1(M) is nothing but the classical numerical range W (M) = {(Mu, u) : kuk = 1} (hence the "higher -- rank numerical range" terminology). In this work we usually restrict our attention to the case where M itself is also normal, al- though we occasionally comment on cases where either M or its compression may not be normal. Note that for normal M ∈ MN (C) Theorem 2 shows that Λk(M) can be explicitly described in terms of the eigenvalues z1, . . . , zN of M: Λk(M) = \#(J)=N −k+1 conv{zj : j ∈ J}. (2) We shall refer to this result, first proposed by Choi, Kribs, and Zyczkowski, as the CK Z conjecture, although it is now a theorem. The CK Z conjecture played an important role in the development of the theory of higher -- rank numerical ranges. For example, while Li and Sze gave an effective description of Λk(M) for non -- normal M (Theorem 2), their proof of the CK Z conjecture was a key step towards the general result. Of course, the case k = 1 of (2) is easy and well -- known: for normal M, W (M) = conv{z1, . . . , zN}. The following observation is often useful. Proposition 3: For every M ∈ MN , if k ≤ N, C is a rank-k compression of M, and Q is a compression of rank N − k + 1, then W (C) ∩ W (Q) 6= ∅. 3 Proof: Let S and T be the subspaces corresponding to compressions C and Q. Since the dimensions add to more than N, S and T must intersect non -- trivially; let u be a unit vector in S ∩ T . Then (Mu, u) = (Mu, PSu) = (PSMu, u) = (Cu, u) ∈ W (C), and similarly (Mu, u) ∈ W (Q). QED Applying this observation to the normal case, we see that part of the CK Z conjecture is straightforward. Proposition 4: If M ∈ MN is normal with eigenvalues z1, . . . , zN , and the rank -- k compression C is normal with eigenvalues c1, . . . , ck, then for every index set J having #(J) = N − k + 1 In particular, conv{c1, . . . , ck} ∩ conv{zj : j ∈ J} 6= ∅. Λk(M) ⊆ \#(J)=N −k+1 conv{zj : j ∈ J} (compare (2)). Proof: We have noted that for normal (finite -- dimensional) operators the numerical range is just the convex hull of the eigenvalues. Thus W (C) = conv{c1, . . . , ck}. On the other hand, let Q be the compression to the span of eigenvectors corresponding to {zj : j ∈ J}; then Q is normal and W (Q) = conv{zj : j ∈ J}. Apply Proposition 3. In particular, for points λ ∈ Λk(M) we may let c1 = c2 = · · · = ck = λ. QED On the other hand, the fact that Λk(M) completely fills the RHS of (2) is more subtle, in general, although for certain combinations of N and k it is relatively easy to see. To illustrate this, and to introduce the preoccupations of the present paper, consider the case N = 5, k = 2. In Figure 1 we see the eigenvalues z1, . . . , z5 of a normal (in fact, unitary) M as the outer points of the blue pentagram. It is easy to see that (2) implies that Λ2(M) is the inner pentagon. As far as we know, there is no simple proof that Λk(M) fills this pentagon, but three markedly disparate arguments may be found in the literature: (1) in [CHK Z] there is an argument based in part on topological concepts 4 such as simple connectivity and winding number; (2) as it is easy to conclude (see section 2) that the vertices of the inner pentagon are in Λ2(M), the fact that (whether or not M is normal) Λk(M) is convex (see [CGHK] and [Wo])) -- a striking extension of the classical Toeplitz -- Hausdorff Theorem for W (M) -- may be used; (3) as we have noted, (2) is a direct consequence of the Li and Sze result Theorem 2. 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 −0.2 −0.4 −0.6 −0.8 −1 −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Figure 1: Choosing a (red asterisk) at random in Λ2(M) (the inner pentagon), we see that B(a) includes a "starfish" that covers Λ2(M) and more. A fourth, and quite different yet again, approach can be obtained by consider- ing those eigenvalue pairs a, b that can belong to rank -- 2 normal compressions of M. Given a ∈ C we denote by B(a) the set of b that match a in this sense. 5 We shall prove in section 3 that for a in the inner pentagon B(a) includes a "starfish" (outlined in green for the example of Figure 1) covering the (filled) pentagon (our conjecture, in addition, is that the starfish is precisely B(a)). Since a ∈ B(a) says that a ∈ Λ2(M), we conclude once again that Λ2(M) fills the pentagon. Plan of the paper: section 2 has some general results, section 3 treats the case k = 2, section 4 examines continuity of B(·), and section 5 discusses non -- normal compressions. Acknowledgements: We have enjoyed many stimulating discussions of ma- trix compression, particularly those with M. -- D. Choi, C. -- K. Li, Y. -- T. Poon, N. -- S. Sze, and J. F. Queir´o. Versions of the material in this paper were developed in [M]. The work of Holbrook and Pereira was supported in part by Discovery Grants from NSERC of Canada. 2. Some general results (arbitrary k, N) Note that if C is a rank -- k compression of M ∈ MN and C ′ is a rank -- k′ compression of C, then C ′ is a rank -- k′ compression of M. Thus Proposition 3 has the following consequence. Proposition 5: If C is a compression of M ∈ MN then W (C) ⊆ W (M). Proof: Regard z ∈ W (C) as a rank -- 1 compression C ′ of C, hence of M and apply Proposition 3 with k = 1, C replaced by C ′ and Q = M. QED Whereas Proposition 4 supplies a necessary condition on the eigenvalues c1, . . . , ck of a normal compression C of normal M, the following proposition points out a sufficient condition that is sometimes useful. An interesting analysis of such necessary vs sufficient conditions may be found in [QD]. If M ∈ MN is normal with eigenvalues z1, . . . , zN then Proposition 6: c1, . . . , ck ∈ C are eigenvalues of a normal compression C of M provided that there exists a partition J1, . . . , Jk of {1, 2, . . . , N} such that for each i = 1, . . . , k ci ∈ conv{zj : j ∈ Ji}. Proof: For each i let ci = Pj∈Ji tijzj represent ci as a convex combination. 6 Let u1, . . . , uN be an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors for M, with For each i, let Muj = zjuj. wi = Xj∈Jiptijuj. It is easy to check that w1, . . . , wk are orthonormal , that (Mwi, wi) = ci, and that (Mwi, wh) = 0 if h 6= i. It follows that C = diag{c1, . . . , ck} represents the compression of M to the subspace S = span{w1, . . . , wk}, ie QED C = PSMS. In [CK Z1] Choi, Kribs, and Zyczkowski identified explicitly the higher -- rank numerical ranges of Hermitian matrices, and their argument may be viewed, along the lines of the proof of our next proposition, as an illustration of the combined force of the necessary condition from Proposition 4 with the sufficient condition from Proposition 6. Note that the result might also have been obtained as a special case of the Fan -- Pall result, Theorem 1 (taking b1 = b2 = · · · = bk). Proposition 7: If M ∈ MN is Hermitian with (real) eigenvalues a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ aN , then for each k ≤ N/2 we have Λk(M) = [ak, aN −k+1]. If aN −k+1 < ak, then ΛK(M) = ∅. Proof: If λ ∈ Λk(M) then taking c1 = ... = ck = λ in Proposition 4 we see that λ ∈ conv{ak, . . . , aN} = [ak, aN ]. Likewise, λ ∈ [a1, aN −k+1], so that Λk(M) ⊆ [ak, aN −k+1]. On the other hand, considering the partition of {1, . . . , N} into J1 = {1, N}, J2 = {2, N − 1}, . . . , Jk = {k, N − k + 1} 7 we conclude from Proposition 6 that each λ ∈ [ak, aN −k+1] is in Λk(M). QED As another example of such general arguments we treat the normal compres- sion problem for the case k = N − 1. This result goes back to Fan-Pall [FP]; their proof is algebraic in character whereas ours is more geometric. We restrict to the case where the matrix and its compression have no common eigenvalues since this is where our general principles are most pertinent; Fan and Pall also treat the general case by means of a direct sum construction. Proposition 8: Let z1, . . . , zN and c1, . . . , cN −1 be two collections of complex numbers having no elements in common. Then there is a normal M ∈ MN with eigenvalues zj having a rank -- (N − 1) normal compression C with eigen- values cj iff the zj are collinear and alternate with the cj (in some order) along the common line. Proof: Let us first show that if such M, C exist then the zj must be collinear. Label the zj lying on the boundary of W (M) in counterclockwise order: z1, . . . , zp. If the zj are not collinear there must be some zk−1, zk, zk+1 that are not collinear, as in Figure 2. Proposition 4 requires that [zk−1, zk] meets W (C) at some λ closest to zk; this λ is extreme in W (C) and so must be an eigenvalue of C. Similarly we have an eigenvalue µ of C in [zk, zk+1], as in Figure 2. Note that Proposition 4 also tells us that zk cannot be a repeated eigenvalue of M, since it would then coincide with an eigenvalue of C. Let u1, . . . , uN be an orthonormal set of eigenvectors of M, with Muj = zjuj, and let orthonormal v, w be eigenvectors of C with Cv = λv and Cw = µw. Expand v, w in terms of the uj: then v = N Xj=1 ajuj, w = N Xj=1 bjuj; λ = (Cv, v) = (Mv, v) = N Xj=1 aj2zj, so that aj = 0 unless zj lies on the line through zk−1, zk. Similarly bj = 0 unless zj lies on the line through zk, zk+1. Since zk is the only common point, 0 = (v, w) = akbk. If ak = 0 we have λ = zk−1, which we have ruled out, while if bk = 0 we have µ = zk+1, also ruled out. 8 zk µ zk+1 λ zk−1 Figure 2: An example of the eigenvalue geometry ruled out in the proof of Proposition 8. Thus the eigenvalues all lie on a common line and by an affine map M → αIN + βM this common line can be R, ie we are in the Hermitian case. Proposition 1 then completes the argument, giving the interlacing property. On the other hand, if the collinearity and interlacing conditions are met, the same sort of affine map and Proposition 1 establish the existence of M and C. QED 9 3: Results for k = 2 and small N For 2×2 normal compressions diag(a, b), we can give a more detailed account of the ab -- geometry, leading up to an understanding of the "starfish" seen in Figure 1. Recall that, given normal M ∈ MN and complex a, we denote by B(a) the set of complex b such that diag(a, b) is a compression of M. Of course, in order that B(a) should be nonempty we must have a ∈ conv{z1, z2, . . . , zN}, where the zj are the eigenvalues of M. Note that Proposition 4 also requires that for b ∈ B(a) we require that the line segment [a, b] intersect for each i = 1, . . . , N. conv{zj : j 6= i} The simplest case to consider: N = 3 and the eigenvalues of M form a nontrivial triangle. Proposition 9: Suppose that the eigenvalues z1, z2, z3 of normal M ∈ M3 are not collinear. Then b ∈ B(a) iff either a is one of these eigenvalues, say a = z1 and b ∈ [z2, z3] (the opposite side of the triangle formed by z1, z2, z3) or a is in one of the sides, say [z2, z3], and b = z1. Proof: Since [a, b] must meet each of the triangle's sides, the necessity of the condition is clear. On the other hand, Proposition 6 shows that these conditions suffice for a, b to be the eigenvalues of a normal compression. QED Remark: Here we have a very simple case of the result of Fan and Pall [FP] where they characterize in general the case k = N − 1. When N = 4 we encounter more complex behaviour, such as that seen in Figure 3, where B(a) is a curve interior to conv{z1, z2, z3, z4} (except for endpoints). 10 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 −0.2 −0.4 −0.6 −0.8 −1 −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Figure 3: For a (red asterisk) strictly inside the upper quadrant (case (a)), we see that B(a) is a curve in the opposite quadrant. To analyse such behaviour, it will be convenient to assume in what follows that the eigenvalues of M are generic in the sense that no three are collinear. We may also assume that M = diag(z1, . . . , zN ), so that the eigenvectors of M are the standard basis vectors ej. Note that if b ∈ B(a) we have orthonormal u, w such that (Mu, u) = a, (Mw, w) = b, and (Mu, w) = (Mw, u) = 0. Thus a = PN simplex, ie conv{e1, . . . , eN}; then u2 (where the operations are performed componentwise) belongs to 1 uj2zj, a convex combination. Let ∆N denote the N -- dimensional C(a) = {t ∈ ∆N : a = N X1 tjzj}. 11 By exchanging complex arguments between the components of u and w we may assume that u ≥ 0; then the possible u lie in {√t : t ∈ C(a)}. The conditions on w ∈ CN are then given by kwk = 1, w ⊥ u, w ⊥ z ◦ u, and w ⊥ z ◦ u, where ◦ indicates Schur (componentwise) multiplication, so that z ◦ u = (z1u1, . . . , zN uN )′, with ′ indicating transpose. We may thus describe B(a) as follows. Proposition 10: Given a ∈ W (M)(= conv{z1, . . . , zN}), B(a) = [t∈C(a) B(a, t), where B(a, t) = { N X1 wj2zj : kwk = 1, w ⊥ √t, z ◦ √t, z ◦ √t}. Proof: To the discussion above we need only add the observation that b = (Mw, w) = N X1 wj2zj. QED Clearly C(a) is a compact convex subset of ∆N . It is therefore the convex hull of its extreme points, which are identified in the following result. Proposition 11:The extreme points of C(a) are those t ∈ C(a) such that at most three tk > 0. Proof: Consider t ∈ C(a) such that tk > 0 for at least four values of k. We show that t is not extreme. For convenience assume t1, t2, t3, t4 > 0. The space X = {x ∈ RN : xk = 0 for k > 4} 12 is 4 -- dimensional. Hence Y = {x ∈ X : 4 X1 xk = 0, 4 X1 xkRe(zk) = 0, 4 X1 xkIm(zk) = 0} 6= {~0}. Let ~0 6= y ∈ Y . Then for sufficiently small ǫ > 0 we have t ± ǫy ∈ ∆N and Xk tkzk = a, (t ± ǫy)kzk = Xk so that t ± ǫy ∈ C(a). Hence t is not extreme. On the other hand, if at most three components, say t1, t2, t3 of t ∈ C(a) are positive, and t is the average of t′, t′′ ∈ C(a), then t′ k = 0 for k > 3. Because no three zj are collinear, k, t′′ a = t1z1 + t2z2 + t3z3 is the unique representation of a as a convex combination of z1, z2, z3. Hence t′ = t′′ = t. QED For distinct indices i, j, l, let t(i, j, l) denote the element of C(a) (if it exists) such that tk(i, j, l) = 0 whenever k 6= i, j, l. Note that such elements are uniquely determined since a = ti(i, j, l)zi + tj(i, j, l)zj + tl(i, j, l)zl represents a uniquely as a point in the triangle conv{zi, zj, zl}; here again we use the assumption that no three of the eigenvalues zj are collinear. Thus C(a) = conv{t(i, j, l) : i, j, l are distinct and a ∈ conv{zi, zj, zl}}. (3) The complexity of B(a, t) increases with the number of nonzero tk. For example, if only one tk > 0, then tk = 1 and a = zk. Here the simple sufficient condition of Proposition 6 is also necessary: B(a, t) = conv{zj : j 6= k}. 13 We see this as follows. Evidently, with u = √t = ek, u, w are orthonormal exactly when w = Pj6=k αjej with Pj6=k αj2 = 1; then b = (Nw, w) = Xj6=k αj2zj ∈ conv{zj : j 6= k}, and any b ∈ conv{zj : j 6= k} can be obtained in this way. The same sort of simplification occurs if only two or three tk > 0. Proposition 12: (a) If t ∈ C(a) has exactly two positive components, say t1, t2 > 0, then (b) If t ∈ C(a) has exactly three positive components, say t1, t2, t3 > 0, then B(a, t) = conv{zj : j > 2}. B(a, t) = conv{zj : j > 3}. Proof: (a) Since a ∈ conv{z1, z2}, Proposition 6 tells us that B(a, t) ⊇ conv{zj : j > 2}. On the other hand, with u = √t = (√t1,√t2, 0, . . . )′ we see that u, w are orthonormal iff kwk = 1 and (w1, w2) ⊥ (√t1,√t2); similarly (Mu, w) = 0 only if (w1, w2) ⊥ (√t1z1,√t2z2). Since z1 6= z2, we have w1 = w2 = 0 so that b = (Mw, w) ∈ conv{zj : j > 2}. (b) Since a ∈ conv{z1, z2, z3}, Proposition 6 tells us that On the other hand, with u = √t we have u, w orthonormal iff kwk = 1 and B(a, t) ⊇ conv{zj : j > 3}. (w1, w2, w3) ⊥ (√t1,√t2,√t3) and (Mu, w) = (Mw, u) = 0 only if (w1, w2, w3) ⊥ (√t1Re(z1),√t2Re(z2),√t3Re(z3)), (√t1Im(z1),√t2Im(z2),√t3Im(z3)). Since z1, z2, z3 are not collinear, (1, 1, 1), (Re(z1), Re(z2), Re(z3)), (Im(z1), Im(z2), Im(z3)) 14 are linearly independent. We must have w1 = w2 = w3 = 0 so that b = (Mw, w) ∈ conv{zj : j > 3}. QED We are now in a position to understand the features of Figure 3 and, indeed, to analyse all the possibilities when N = 4. We treat in detail the case where z1, z2, z3, z4 are all extreme in conv{z1, z2, z3, z4}; the case where one of the eigenvalues lies in the interior of W (M) (eg z4 ∈ conv{z1, z2, z3}) can be treated similarly. Proposition 13: Let N = 4 and suppose that z1, z2, z3, z4 are all extreme in W (M) and are numbered in counterclockwise order. The diagonals [z1, z3] and [z2, z4] meet at q and divide W (M) into four quadrants. Consider a ∈ W (M); the possibilities for B(a) are as follows. (a) See figure 3: a lies in the interior of one of the quadrants. For convenience, assume that a ∈ conv{z1, z2, q}; let x = t(1, 2, 3), y = t(1, 2, 4). Then B(a) is the curve traced out by the function b(r) defined for 0 < r < 1 by b(r) = 4 Xk=1 (xk − yk)2 (1 − r)xk + ryk zk. 4 Xk=1 (xk − yk)2 (1 − r)xk + ryk . Note that x4 = 0 and y3 = 0 so that lim r→0 b(r) = z4, lim r→1 b(r) = z3, and we obtain a continuous curve parametrized on [0, 1] when we interpret b(0) as z4 and b(1) as z3. Except for these endpoints, the curve lies in the interior of the opposite quadrant conv{z3, z4, q}. (b) If a lies in the interior of one of the sides of W (M) then B(a) is the opposite side (eg if a is inside [z1, z2] then B(a) = [z3, z4]). If a = zk then B(a) is the opposite triangle conv{zj : j 6= k}. (c) See Figure 4: a lies interior to the diagonals but is not q; say a is interior to [z1, q]. Then B(a) is the T -- shaped object [z2, z4] ∪ [q, z3]. (d) If a = q then B(a) is the union of the two diagonals. 15 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 −0.2 −0.4 −0.6 −0.8 −1 −1 z1 a q −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Figure 4: For a (red asterisk) strictly inside the segment [z1, q] (case (c)), we see that B(a) is the T -- shaped object consisting of [z2, z4] ∪ [q, z3]. Proof: (a) Since a lies in the triangles conv{z1, z2, z3} and conv{z1, z2, z4} but in no other triangle of eigenvalues, C(a) = [t(1, 2, 3), t(1, 2, 4)] = [x, y] (recall the relation (3)). For 0 < r < 1 consider the t ∈ C(a) given by t = (1 − r)x + ry. We shall see that B(a, t) consists of the single point b(r). We take u = √t and note that the conditions on w are: w ⊥ u, w ⊥ u◦Re(z), w ⊥ u◦Im(z), and kwk = 1. Thus w◦√t ⊥ ~14, Re(z), Im(z), where ~14 denotes [1, 1, 1, 1]. Again we invoke linear independence of ~14, Re(z), Im(z): w ◦ √t lies in the one -- dimensional space dC 4 ⊖ span{~14, Re(z), Im(z)}. There is a natural choice of (nonzero) vector in this space: x − y (because (x,~14) = (y,~14) = 1, (x, Re(z)) = (y, Re(z)) = Re(a), and (x, Im(z)) = (y, Im(z)) = Im(a)). Thus w = α(x − y)/ ◦ √t, 16 where /◦ indicates entrywise division and α is some complex number. Re- calling that kwk = 1, we derive our formula for (Mw, w) = b(r). The necessary condition of Proposition 4 shows that the curve (ie B(a)) lies in both conv{z2, z3, z4} and conv{z1, z3, z4}, so that it must lie in the (closed) opposite quadrant conv{z3, z4, q}. To see that the curve (except for endpoints) lies in the interior of that quadrant, examine the arguments be- low, showing that for b on the quadrant boundary (except for z3 and z4) a matching a cannot be interior to the upper quadrant, and note that b ∈ B(a) iff a ∈ B(b). (b) If a is interior to one of the sides, say [z1, z2], then C(a) consists of a single t with two positive components; apply Proposition 12(a) to see that B(a) = B(a, t) = [z3, z4]. If a = z1, Propositions 4 and 6 imply that B(a) = conv{z2, z3, z4}. (c) Suppose a is interior to [z1, q]; then the relation (3) tells us that C(a) = conv{t(1, 2, 3), t(1, 3, 4), t(1, 2, 4)}. Let t(1, 2, 3) = x = [x1, 0, x3, 0]′; this is also t(1, 3, 4). Let t(1, 2, 4) = y = [y1, y2, 0, y4]′, so that C(a) = {t(r) : 0 ≤ r ≤ 1}, where t(r) = [(1 − r)x1 + ry1, ry2, (1 − r)x3, ry4]′. For r = 0, Proposition 12(a) tells us that B(a, t(0)) = [z2, z4], while for 0 < r ≤ 1 we claim that B(a, t(r)) is a single point b(r) that moves along [z3, q), covering it completely. Indeed, reasoning as in (a), we see that b(r) = (Mw(r), w(r)) where w(r) is a normalized version of Note that w2(r), w4(r) are proportional to −y2/√ry2,−y4/√ry4 respectively, so that (t(0) − t(1))/ ◦pt(r). w2(r)2 w4(r)2 = y2 y4 . Since a = y1z1 + y2z2 + y4z4 lies on [z1, z3], we conclude that b(r) ∈ [z1, z3] also. The necessary condition of Proposition 4 then tells us that b(r) ∈ [z3, q]. Since t2(r) and t4(r) tend to 0 as r → 0, limr→0 b(r) = q. Moreover, t(1) = 17 [y1, y2, 0, y4] so that Proposition 12(b) implies that b(1) = z3. Finally, since b(r) is continuous over 0 < r ≤ 1, its values cover [z3, q). (d) This case may be treated by an argument rather similar to that of (c). QED We now have the tools to continue the theme of Proposition 12, treating the case when exactly four of the components of t ∈ C(a) are positive. Proposition 14: Suppose that N > 4 and that t ∈ C(a) has exactly four positive components; for convenience, assume that t1, t2, t3, t4 > 0 and that a lies in the upper quadrant relative to Q = conv{z1, z2, z3, z4}, ie a is interior to conv{z1, z2, q} (see Figure 3, with the understanding that it is now intended to show only the relation of a to z1, z2, z3, z4, and Proposition 13). Let β be the curve traced out by b(·) of Proposition 13(a) (and shown in Figure 3). Then Proof: With u = √t, we see that the conditions on w, namely B(a, t) = conv{β, z5, z6, . . . , zN}. w ⊥ u, u ◦ Re(z), u ◦ Im(z) and kwk = 1, reduce to w ⊥ u, u where w = (w1, w2, w3, w4)′, u = (u1, u2, u3, u4)′ etc, and ◦Re(z), u ◦Im(z), k wk2 +Xk>4 wk2 = 1. Thus w/k wk is subject to the same conditions as w in the proof of Proposition 13(a). It follows that (Mw, w) = k wk2b(r) +Xk>4 wk2zk where b(r) can be any point on the curve β. QED Proposition 14 allows us to understand, in large part, the phenomenon il- lustrated in Figure 1. Let N = 5 and suppose that each eigenvalue zk is an extreme point of W (M) = conv{z1, . . . , z5} (eg whenever M is unitary). 18 For convenience, label the zk in counterclockwise order. Suppose that a lies strictly inside the central pentagon (which is known to be Λ2(M) in this case). For each k let βk denote the curve obtained as in Proposition 14 by regarding a as an element of the quadrilateral Qk = conv{zj : j 6= k}. Note that βk connects zk+2 and zk+3 (numbering modulo 5) and lies in the quad- rant of Qk opposite to the one containing a. We claim that (as illustrated in Figure 1) B(a) includes the whole "starfish" region bounded by β1, β2, . . . , β5. To see this note that the starfish is the union of the wedges Wk = conv{βk, zk}, so it suffices to show that each Wk ⊆ B(a). Since a ∈ Qk there is t ∈ C(a) such that tk = 0. Then Proposition 14 tells us that B(a, c) = Wk. Figure 1 was obtained by first computing C(a) via the relation (3) as conv{t(k, k + 2, k + 3) : k = 1, 2, . . . , 5} (note that for a in the inner pentagon, the only eigenvalue triangles containing a correspond to the triples zk, zk+2, zk+3). To generate each of the thousands of b's in B(a), plotted as green points in Figure 1, our MATLAB program first chose a "random" point t ∈ C(a) (ie a random convex combination of the five c(k, k + 2, k + 3)), put u = √t, then computed b = (Nw, w) where w was chosen "randomly" in C5 ⊖ span{u, u ◦ Re(z), u ◦ Im(z)} (and normalized so that kwk = 1). The curves βk were added using the formula of Proposition 13(a). Such simulations strongly suggest the following "starfish conjecture", since no green dots fall outside the starfish: in such a situation (and in particular when N = 5 and M is unitary), B(a) not only contains the starfish but is equal to it. We have seen in the discussion of Figure 1 that for N = 5 and a, b ∈ Λ2(M) we always have a, b as eigenvalues of a normal compression of M. The following proposition points out that this is true for any N -- and that N = 5 is, in fact, the only subtle case. Proposition 15: Let M be normal in MN and such that the eigenvalues z1, . . . , zN are distinct and each is an extreme point of W (M) (eg M unitary). Then a, b ∈ Λ2(M) implies that (cid:20)a 0 0 b(cid:21) is a compression of M. 19 Proof: For N ≤ 3, Λ2(M) = ∅. For even N ≥ 4, the relation (2) tells us that Λ2(M) is the "inner N -- gon" cut off by the line segments [zj, zj+2] (indexing modulo N). Thus for even N ≥ 4 Λ2(M) = conv{zj : j odd} ∩ conv{zj : j even}, and Proposition 6 suffices. For N = 5 the "starfish" discussion proves our assertion. For odd N ≥ 7 we see that conv{zj : j odd} ⊇ Λ2(M) and conv{zj : j even} covers all of Λ2(M) except that part lying in Q = conv{z1, z2, zN −1, zN}. Hence Proposition 6 suffices for a 6∈ Q, b ∈ Λ2(M). The same argument applies for a 6∈ Q = conv{z2.z3, z4, z5} and because N > 5 this covers any a ∈ Q. QED 4. Continuity of B(·) A natural assertion of "continuity" for B(·) might be that dH(B(a′), B(a)) → 0 as a′ → a, where dH(X, Y ) is the Hausdorff distance between compact nonempty sets X, Y ⊂ C. Recall that where dH(X, Y ) = max{ dH(X, Y ), dH(Y, X)}, dH(X, Y ) = max x∈X y∈Y x − y). (min However, we have seen simple examples where this fails: recall the analysis of B(a) for various a ∈ conv{z1, z2, z3, z4} that was provided by Proposition 13. If a′ lies in the interior of [z1, z2] and a′ → a = z1, then B(a′) = [z3, z4] "jumps" to B(a) = conv{z2, z3, z4}. A perhaps more surprising example: let a be interior to [z1, q] as in Figure 4; for a′ approaching a from the interior of conv{z1, z2, q} we see B(a′) as a curve joining z3 and z4 in conv{z3, z4, q}, whereas for a′ approaching a from the interior of conv{z1, z4, q} we see B(a′) as a curve joining z2 and z3 in conv{z2, z3, q}. In spite of such "failures" we'll show that B(·) is continuous with respect to Hausdorff distance at most points of W (M) and enjoys a "one -- sided" Hausdorff continuity in general. Our standard set -- up for this discussion is as in section 3, ie we assume M is normal in MN and is in diagonal form: M = diag(z), where no three 20 eigenvalues are collinear. Thus W (M) = conv{z1, . . . , zN} and B(a′) = ∅ if a′ 6∈ W (M). Seeking continuity, we restrict attention to a′ → a with a′, a ∈ W (M). Note that if N = 3 and a′ is interior to W (M) = conv{z1, z2, z3}, we again have B(a′) = ∅, since b ∈ B(a′) and Proposition 4 would require that [a′, b] meet each side of the triangle W (M). We therefore restrict also to cases where N ≥ 4. Proposition 16: If N ≥ 4, B(a) is a compact nonempty set for any a ∈ W (M). Proof: Let t ∈ C(a). Since N ≥ 4, CN ⊖ span{√t,√t ◦ Re(z),√t ◦ Im(z)} is nontrivial (6= {~0}). Let w be a unit vector in this space; then b = (Mw, w) ∈ B(a, t), so B(a) 6= ∅. For compactness, consider bn ∈ B(a); there exist orthonormal pairs un, wn such that (Mun, un) = a, (Mwn, wn) = bn, (Mun, wn) = (Mwn, un) = 0. Since the sequences un, wn are bounded, local compactness in C2N implies that, for some subsequence nk, Then u, w are orthonormal and unk →k u, wnk →k w. (Mu, u) = a, (Mw, w) = lim k bnk = b, (Mu, w) = (Mw, u) = 0. The limit point b is in B(a). QED A related argument shows that, in general, B(·) is continuous in a one -- sided Hausdorff sense. Proposition 17: If a, an ∈ W (M) and an → a, then dH(B(an), B(a)) →n 0. (4) Proof: Recall that dH(X, Y ) = maxx∈X(miny∈Y x − y). Thus, if (4) were to fail we'd have some ǫ > 0, subsequence nk, and bk ∈ B(ank) such that for all b ∈ B(a) bk − b ≥ ǫ. 21 By restricting to such a subsequence we may assume that bn ∈ B(an). Let un, wn be orthonormal pairs such that (Mun, un) = an, (Mwn, wn) = bn, (Mun, wn) = (Mwn, un) = 0. There is a subsequence nk such that Hence u, w are orthonormal and unk →k u, wnk →k w. (Mu, u) = lim k ank = a, (Mw, w) = lim k bnk = b, (Mu, w) = (Mw, u) = 0. It follows that b = limk bnk ∈ B(a), contradicting bnk − b ≥ ǫ. QED In terms of the obvious extension of Hausdorff distance to compact nonempty subsets of ∆N , we note that C(·) is continuous and in fact satisfies a Lipschitz condition for each fixed M. Proposition 18: There is a constant K < ∞ depending only on M such that for all a, a′ ∈ W (M) dH(C(a), C(a′)) ≤ Ka − a′. Proof: For each triple i, j, k of distinct indices, we have assumed that zi, zj, zk are not collinear. Thus the matrix T =   1 1 1 Re(zi) Re(zj) Re(zk) Im(zi) Im(zk) Im(zj)   is nonsingular. Given a ∈ conv{zi, zj, zk}, consider tijk = t(i, j, k) as in (3). Let tijk be the vector in R3 recording the i, j, k -- components of tijk, ie the only components that may be positive. We have T tijk = (1, Re(a), Im(a))′ so that tijk = T −1(1, Re(a), Im(a))′. In terms of the operator norm kT −1k we have ktijk − t′ ijkk ≤ kT −1ka − a′ for any other a′ ∈ conv{zi, zj, zk}. Let K be the maximum of kT −1k over all such triangles conv{zi, zj, zk}. The line segments [zi, zj] form a "grid" criss -- crossing W (M), dividing it into 22 regions. Suppose a, a′ lie in the same one of these regions (boundary points allowed). Then the set Q of triples i, j, k such that a ∈ conv{zi, zj, zk} is the same as that for a′. In view of (3), each t ∈ C(a) can be expressed as a convex combination t = Xijk∈Q sijktijk. Putting t′ = Xijk∈Q sijkt′ ijk, we have t′ ∈ C(a′) and kt−t′k ≤ Ka−a′. The roles of a, a′ may be reversed, so we see that if a, a′ are in the same region (boundary points allowed), dH(C(a), C(a′)) ≤ Ka − a′. Finally, for any a, a′ ∈ W (M), the line segment [a, a′] intersects the grid in a sequence of points a0, a1, . . . , an ordered along [a, a′] with a0 = a, an = a′. By the argument above, dH(C(ak), C(ak+1)) ≤ Kak − ak+1, so that (dH is a metric) dH(C(a), C(a′)) ≤ K n−1 Xk=0 ak − ak+1 = Ka − a′. QED Next we show that B(·) is dH -- continuous at any point that is "off the grid", and that continuity is uniform if we stay bounded away from the grid. Proposition 19: If a ∈ W (M) but a does not lie on any line segment [zi, zj], then a′ → a implies that dH(B(a′), B(a)) → 0. In fact, on any subset S(d) ⊂ W (M) that is a positive distance d from the grid so that G = [{[zi, zj] : i, j = 1, . . . , N}, S(d) = {a ∈ W (M) : min g∈G a − g ≥ d}, 23 the map a 7→ B(a) is uniformly continuous. Proof: In this discussion i, j, k always denotes a triple of distinct indices. Let Q = [{C(a) : a ∈ S(d)}; we claim that min t∈Q (max i,j,k titjtk) is positive. Otherwise, by compactness, we'd have some a ∈ S(d) and t ∈ C(a) such that maxi,j,k titjtk = 0. This can only happen if t has at most two positive components, say ti, tj; then a ∈ [zi, zj], which we have ruled out. Given linearly independent q, r, s ∈ CN , let P (q, r, s) denote orthogonal pro- jection onto CN ⊖ span{q, r, s}. The map (q, r, s) 7→ P (q, r, s) is uniformly continuous if we "stay away from dependence"; to be precise, for any 0 < h < H < ∞ this map is uniformly continuous on Q(h, H) = {(q, r, s) : kqk,krk,ksk ≤ H, max i,j,k det  qj rj qi qk ri rk si sj sk   ≥ h}. Now the values (√t,√t ◦ Re(z),√t ◦ Im(z)) where t ∈ Q lie in some fixed Q(h, H) because each det  1 1 1 Re(zi) Re(zj) Re(zk) Im(zk) Im(zi) Im(zj)   is nonzero, so that max i,j,k ptitjtk det  1 1 1 Re(zi) Re(zj) Re(zk) Im(zi) Im(zk) Im(zj)   ≥ h for some positive h. Thus the map t 7→ P (√t,√t ◦ Re(z),√t ◦ Im(z)) = P [t] is uniformly continuous on Q: given ǫ1 > 0 there is δ1 > 0 such that t, t′ ∈ Q 24 and kt − t′k ≤ δ1 implies kP [t] − P [t′]k ≤ ǫ1. In view of Proposition 18, there is δ > 0 such that a − a′ ≤ δ implies dH(C(a), C(a′)) ≤ δ1. Consider b ∈ B(a); for some t ∈ C(a) we have b ∈ B(a, t) so that b = (Mw, w) for some unit w with P [t]w = w. Let t′ ∈ C(a′) be such that kt − t′k ≤ δ1; then kw − P [t′]wk ≤ ǫ1. Note that 1 − ǫ1 ≤ kP [t′]wk ≤ 1, and let w′ = P [t′]w/kP [t′]wk; then b′ = (Mw′, w′) ∈ B(a′) and b − b′ = (Mw, w) − (Mw′, w′) ≤ 2kMkkw − w′k. It is easy to see that kw− w′k ≤ 2ǫ1/(1− ǫ1), so that given any ǫ > 0 we have b − b′ ≤ ǫ by an appropriate choice of ǫ1. We have shown that a − a′ ≤ δ implies that dH(B(a), B(a′)) ≤ ǫ. Since the roles of a, a′ may be reversed, we also have dH(B(a), B(a′)) ≤ ǫ. QED Note that sometimes B(·) is continuous even at points that are on the grid. For example, from Proposition 13(a) and 13(b) we can see that there is conti- nuity everywhere on the boundary segments [zi, zi+1] except at the endpoints. 5. Related results We offer some remarks on the apparently more difficult problem of charac- terizing arbitrary compressions of a normal matrix M. Suppose again that M is N × N, and is represented by the diagonal matrix diag(z) and that X is a rank -- k compression of M, ie there is a k -- dimensional subspace S such that X = PSMS. From Proposition 3 we obtain a necessary condition on X: the (classical) numerical range W (X) of X must intersect the convex hull of any subset of the eigenvalues zj having size N − k + 1. When k = 2, ie X is represented by a 2 × 2 matrix, the numerical range W (X) determines X uniquely as an operator. Indeed, W (X) is a (filled -- in) ellipse in this case with the eigenvalues of X as foci and the length of the minor axis is the modulus of the off -- diagonal entry of any upper -- triangular matrix for X. Let's consider the problem of characterizing such compres- sions X geometrically via the elliptical W (X) in the cases where N = 3 and N = 4. 25 When N = 3, the necessary condition of above tells us that W (X) must be tangent to each of the three sides of conv{z1, z2, z3} (recall that Proposition 5 tells us that in general we must have W (X) ⊆ W (M) = conv{zj : j = 1, . . . , n}). In fact, Williams showed long ago that the necessary condition is also sufficient when N = 3 (see [Wi]). When N = 4 we consider the case where the eigenvalues zj form a quadri- lateral Q. The necessary condition above tells us that W (X) must intersect each of the four triangles Ti = conv{zj : j 6= i}. Thus W (X) must intersect each of the quadrants Ti ∩ Tk. This phenomenon is borne out by numerical experiments such as Figure 5 illustrates, but it is not clear what additional conditions must be satisfied by W (X), even in this N = 4 case. Of course, if by chance W (X) is tangent to all three sides of some Ti, then Williams' result tells us that X is indeed a 2 -- dimensional compression. 26 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 −0.2 −0.4 −0.6 −0.8 −1 −1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Figure 5: Shows the (elliptical) boundaries of the numerical ranges of several (nonnormal) compressions of a 4 × 4 normal M, each compression having a (red asterisk) as an eigenvalue (therefore seen as one of the foci of each ellipse) 27 References: [Cau] A. L. Cauchy, Sur l'´equation `a l'aide de laquelle on d´etermine les in´egalit´es s´eculaires des mouvements des plan`etes, Oeuvres compl`etes, Sec- ond Ser., IX, 174 -- 195 [CK Z1] M. -- D. Choi, D. W. Kribs, and K. Zyczkowski, Higher -- rank numer- ical ranges and compression problems, Linear Algebra Appl. 418, 828 -- 839, 2006 [CK Z2] M. -- D. Choi, D. W. Kribs, and K. Zyczkowski, Quantum error cor- recting codes from the compression formalism, Rep. Math. Phys. 58, 77 -- 91, 2006 [CHK Z] M. -- D. Choi, J. A. Holbrook, D. W. Kribs, and K. Zyczkowski, Higher -- rank numerical ranges of unitary and normal matrices, Operators and Matrices 1, 409 -- 426, 2007 [CGHK] M. -- D. Choi, M. Giesinger, J. A. Holbrook, and D. W. Kribs, Ge- ometry of higher -- rank numerical ranges, Linear and Multilinear Algebra 56, 53 -- 64, 2008 [DGHP Z] C. F. Dunkl, P. Gawron, J. Holbrook, Z. Puchala, and K. Zyczkowski, Numerical shadows: measures and densities on the numerical range, Linear Algebra Appl. 434, 2042 -- 2080, 2011 [FP] K. Fan and G. Pall, Imbedding conditions for Hermitian and normal matrices, Canadian J. Math. 9, 298 -- 304, 1957 [GPMS Z] P. Gawron, Z. Puchala, J. Miszczak, L. Skowronek, and K. Zyczkowski, Restricted numerical range: a versatile tool in the theory of quantum infor- mation, J. Math. Physics 51, 2010 [KPLRdS] D. W. Kribs, A. Pasieka, M. Laforest, C. Ryan, and M. P. da Silva, Research problems on numerical ranges in quantum computing, Lin- ear and Multilinear Algebra 57, 491-502, 2009 [LP] C. -- K. Li and Y. -- T. Poon, Generalized numerical ranges and quantum 28 error correction, J. Operator Theory 66, 335 -- 351, 2011 [LPS1] C. -- K. Li, Y. -- T. Poon, and N. -- S. Sze, Higher rank numerical ranges and low rank perturbations of quantum channels, J. Math. Analysis Appl. 348, 843 -- 855, 2008 [LPS2] C. -- K. Li, Y. -- T. Poon, and N. -- S. Sze, Condition for the higher rank numerical range to be non -- empty, Linear and Multilinear Algebra 57, 365 -- 368, 2009 [LS] C. -- K. Li and N. -- S. Sze, Canonical forms, higher -- rank numerical ranges, totally isotropic subspaces, and matrix equations, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 136, 3013 -- 3023, 2008 [MM Z] K. Majgier, H. Maassen, and K. Zyczkowski, Protected subspaces in quantum information, Quantum Information Processing 9, 343 -- 367, 2010 [M] N. Mudalige, Higher Rank Numerical Ranges of Normal Operators, MSc thesis, U of Guelph, 2010 [QD] J. F. Queir´o and A. L. Duarte, Imbedding conditions for normal ma- trices, Linear Algebra Appl. 430, 1806 -- 1811, 2009 [Wi] J. P. Williams, On compressions of matrices, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 3, 526 -- 530, 1971 [Wo] H. Woerdeman, The higher -- rank numerical range is convex, Linear and Multilinear Algebra 56, 65 -- 67, 2008 29 Author addresses: John Holbrook Dept of Mathematics and Statistics University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1 [email protected] Nishan Mudalige Dept of Mathematics and Statistics York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada [email protected] Rajesh Pereira Dept of Mathematics and Statistics University of Guelph Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1 [email protected] 30
1810.05641	1	1810	2018-10-11T20:24:44	On directional derivatives of trace functionals of the form $A\mapsto\Tr(Pf(A))$	[ "math.FA" ]	Given a function $f:(0,\infty)\rightarrow\RR$ and a positive semidefinite $n\times n$ matrix $P$, one may define a trace functional on positive definite $n\times n$ matrices as $A\mapsto \Tr(Pf(A))$. For differentiable functions $f$, the function $A\mapsto \Tr(Pf(A))$ is differentiable at all positive definite matrices $A$. Under certain continuity conditions on~$f$, this function may be extended to certain non-positive-definite matrices $A$, and the \emph{directional} derivatives of $\Tr(Pf(A)$ may be computed there. This note presents conditions for these directional derivatives to exist and computes them. These conditions hold for the function $f(x)=\log(x)$ and for the functions $f_p(x)=x^p$ for all $p>-1$. The derivatives of the corresponding trace functionals are computed here.	math.FA	math	On directional derivatives of trace functionals of the form A 7→ Tr(P f (A)) Mark W. Girard1 1Institute for Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada October 16, 2018 Abstract Given a function f : (0, ∞) → R and a positive semidefinite n × n matrix P, one may define a trace func- tional on positive definite n × n matrices as A 7→ Tr(P f (A)). For differentiable functions f , the function A 7→ Tr(P f (A)) is differentiable at all positive definite matrices A. Under certain continuity conditions on f , this function may be extended to certain non-positive-definite matrices A, and the directional deriva- tives of Tr(P f (A) may be computed there. This note presents conditions for these directional derivatives to exist and computes them. These conditions hold for the function f (x) = log(x) and for the functions f p(x) = xp for all p > −1. The derivatives of the corresponding trace functionals are computed here. 1 Introduction Let Hn denote the set of n × n Hermitian matrices over C, let Pn denote the subset of positive semidefinite n × n matrices, and let P+ n denote the positive definite ones. Any function of real numbers f : (0, ∞) → R can be extended to positive definite matrices by means of the spectral decomposition. Given a positive matrix A ∈ P+ n with spectral decomposition A = n ∑ i=1 αi viv∗ i , where α1, . . . , αn ∈ (0, ∞) are the eigenvalues of A and v1, . . . , vn ∈ Cn are the corresponding normalized eigenvectors, one defines f (A) as f (A) = n ∑ i=1 f (αi) viv∗ i , where v∗ denotes the conjugate transpose of a vector v ∈ Cn. For a positive semidefinite n × n matrix P ∈ Pn and a function f : (0, ∞) → R, one may define a function fP : P+ n → R defined as fP(A) = Tr(P f (A)) (1) for all positive definite matrices A ∈ P+ n . Functions of this type arise frequently, for example, in the study of quantum information theory [GGF14]. In this note, we investigate continuity and differentiability prop- erties of functionals of the form in (1). If the function f : (0, ∞) → R can be continuously extended to be defined at 0, the function fP can be continuously extended to be defined at all non-positive-definite n × n matrices in the natural way. However, if the limit limt→0+ f (t) does not exist, it is still possible to define fP(A) for certain non-positive-definite n × n matrices A by restricting f to the subspace spanned by the eigenvectors corresponding to nonzero 1 eigenvalues of A. For example, the quantum relative entropy of two positive n × n matrices P, Q ∈ Pn is defined by [Wat18] S(PkQ) =(cid:26) Tr(P log P) − Tr(P log Q) whenever im(P) ⊆ im(Q) otherwise, +∞ where im(P) denotes the image of P and Tr(P log Q) has a natural interpretation whenever im(P) ⊆ im(Q). Indeed, for any continuous function f : (0, ∞) → R and any matrix P ∈ Pn, it is natural to define fP(A) for non-positive-definite matrices A ∈ Pn (with im(A) ⊆ im(P)) as fP(A) = r ∑ i=1 f (αi) Tr(Pviv∗ i ), (2) where we assume that A ∈ Pn has rank r with nonzero eigenvalues α1, . . . , αr > 0 and αr+1 = · · · = αn = 0 (see, e.g., equation (2.2) in [Ras11]). 1.1 Directional derivatives of matrix trace functions Let g : A → R be a real-valued function on some subset A ⊂ Hn. For any A ∈ A and any matrix B ∈ Hn, the (one-sided) directional derivative of g at A in the direction B is defined as dg(A; B) = lim t→0+ g(A + tB) − g(A) t . Here we are interested in computing the directional derivatives of functions of the form fP(A) = Tr(P f (A)). If f is differentiable and A is positive definite, then these directional derivatives certainly exist, since the function f when extended to positive definite matrices is differentiable as a function of matrices. However, if A is not necessarily positive definite, these directional derivatives may still be computed. Knowing the derivatives is important for determining optimality conditions for certain types of optimization problems that arise in quantum information [GGF14]. The directional derivatives are presented in Theorem 1 and make use of the following notation. Let f : (0, ∞) → R be a differentiable function. The first order divided differences of f defined as f [1](x, y) =  f ′(x) f (x) − f (y) x − y if x = y if x 6= y for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞). For any positive sedefinite n × n matrix A ∈ Pn, we may define a linear mapping Φ f ,A : Hn → Hn of n × n matrices as follows. If A = diag(α1, . . . , αn) is diagonal, we can write A as A = n ∑ i=1 αi eie∗ i , where e1, . . . , en ∈ Cn are the standard orthonormal basis vectors of Cn such that the entries of any other matrix B ∈ Hn are given by Bij = hei, Beji. The matrix of divided differences of A (restricted to the nonzero eigenvalues of A) as the matrix D f ,A ∈ Hn whose entries are given by (D f ,A)ij =(cid:26) f [1](αi, αj) 0 if αi > 0 and αj > 0 if αi = 0 or αj = 0, and for all B ∈ Hn define Φ f ,A(B) as Φ f ,A(B) = D f ,A ⊙ B 2 (3) (4) where X ⊙ Y denotes the entrywise product of matrices X, Y ∈ Hn with matrix elements (X ⊙ Y)ij = XijYij for all i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}. If A is not diagonal, there exists an n × n unitary matrix U such that U AU∗ is diagonal, and one defines (5) for all B ∈ Hn, and this is independent of the choice of diagonalizing unitary U. We may now state the main theorem of this work. Φ f ,A(B) = U∗(cid:0)D f ,UAU∗ ⊙ (UBU∗)(cid:1) Theorem 1. Let f : (0, ∞) → R be a differentiable function satisfying limt→0+ t f (t) = 0, let P ∈ Pn be a positive semidefinite n × n matrix, and consider the function fP : P+ n → R as defined above. Let A ∈ Pn be a positive matrix satisfying im(P) ⊆ im(A) such that we may define fP(A) as in (2), and let B ∈ Hn. Suppose there exists ε > 0 such that A + tB ∈ Pn holds for all t ∈ [0, ε). The directional derivative of f at A in the direction B exists and can be computed by d fP(A; B) = lim t→0+ fP(A + tX) − fP(A) t = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)), (6) where Φ f ,A : Hn → Hn is the linear mapping defined above in (5). In the case when A is positive definite, we remark that the directional derivative in (6) coincides with well known results in [Bha97, Theorem V.3.3] and [HP14, Theorem 3.25]. For non-positive-definite A ∈ Pn, these derivatives were provided in [GGF14], but no proof of the existence of the directional derivatives were provided there. We note that the function f in Theorem 1 must satisfy the condition that t f (t) = 0 lim t→0+ (7) in order for the derivatives to be computed in this manner. The remainder of this note is dedicated to the proof of Theorem 1 (which will be proved using matrix perturbation methods) and to provide some examples. In particular, we note that the condition in the theorem is met for the function f (t) = log(t) and the functions f (t) = tp for all real values p > −1, as these functions satisfy (7). The derivatives of the function A 7→ Tr(P log(A)) at non-positive-definite matrices A were studied in [FG11]. For the function f (t) = t−1, the directional derivatives are no longer able to be computed in this manner, as this function does not satisfy the condition in (7), however the expression in (6) still provides a lower bound for the directional derivative. The remainder of the note is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the notation that will be used in this note, recalls some basic notions of differentiation of matrix functions, and presents some facts from perturbation theory for Hermitian matrices. The proof of Theorem 1 is presented in Section 3. In Section 4, we consider the functions f (t) = log(t) and f (t) = tp for p ∈ (−1, 1) as examples, and provide alternate proofs of the directional derivatives for these functions by the method of integral representations rather than matrix perturbation methods. Finally, in Section 5, we show that this method finds a lower bound to the directional derivatives for the choice of function f (t) = t−1. 2 Background Notions of differentiability of matrix functions are recalled in Section 2.1. Some results on spectral pertur- bation theory are reviewed in 2.2. 2.1 Derivatives of matrix functions We refer to [Bha97] for more details. Let A ⊆ Hn be a subset of the n × n Hermitian matrices and let f : A → Hn be a function of matrices. The function f is said to be (Fr´echet) differentiable at a matrix A ∈ A if 3 there exists a linear mapping Φ : Hn → Hn of matrices satisfying lim H→0 k f (A + tH) − f (A) − Φ(H)k kHk = 0, where k·k denotes the spectral norm on the space of matrices n × n. If such a mapping exists, it is called the (Fr´echet) derivative of f at A and is denoted by Φ = D f (A). In cases where the function is not differentiable at a point, it may still possess directional derivatives. Let f : (0, → R) be a differentiable functions. If A ∈ P+ tiable (as a function of matrices) at A with Fr´echet derivative n is a positive definite matrix, then f is differen- D f (A)(B) = Φ f ,A(B), (8) where Φ f ,A : Hn → Hn is the linear mapping defined in (5). Moreover, for any positive semidefinite matrix P ∈ Pn, the directional derivatives of the function fP : P+ n → R (as defined in (1)) at any positive definite matrix A ∈ P+ n are given by d fP(A; B) = Tr(P D f (A)(B)) for all B ∈ Hn. 2.2 Spectral perturbation theory for Hermitian matrices Consider now families of Hermitian matrices of the form A + tB for some choice of Hermitian matrices A, B ∈ Hn and variable t ∈ R. It is a remarkable fact from perturbation theory of linear opeators (see, e.g., [Kat80, II.6.2]) that there exists a spectral decomposition of A + tB that behaves analytically in the variable t. That is, there exist analytic functions λ1, . . . , λn : R → R for the eigenvalues of A + tB and analytic vector- valued functions u1, . . . , un : R → Cn such that A + tB may be expressed as A + tB = n ∑ i=1 λi(t) ui(t)ui(t)∗, (9) for all t ∈ R. As this is a spectral decomposition of A + tB, one has that (A + tB)ui(t) = λi(t)ui(t) and that hui(t), uj(t)i =(cid:26) 1 0 if i = j if i 6= j holds for all t ∈ R. Suppose that the eigenvalues α1, . . . , αn and the eigenvectors v1, . . . , vn of A are such that αi = λi(0) and vi = ui(0) for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n}. The first-order derivatives λ′ i(0) can be computed from B and the spectral decomposition of A, as the following propostion shows. i(0) and u′ Proposition 2. Suppose A ∈ Hn and B ∈ Hn are Hermitian matrices and let λ1(t), . . . , λn(t) and u1(t), . . . , un(t) denote the eigenvalues and coresponding eigenvectors (which are analytic as functions of t) of the matrix A + tB comprising the spectral decomposition in (9). The following statements hold. (i) For all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, it holds that λ′ i(0) = hvi, Bvii. (ii) For all i and j with i 6= j, it holds that(cid:0)αi − αj(cid:1)hvi, u′ (iii) For all i and j, it holds that hu′ j(0), vji + hvj, u′ j(0)i = hvi, Bvji. j(0)i = 0. Here, α1, . . . , αn are the eigenvalues and v1, . . . , vn are the eigenvectors of A such that αi = λi(0) and vi = ui(0) for each i ∈ {1, . . . , n} 4 Proof. For each index j, note that the expression (A + tB)uj(t) − λj(t)uj(t) = 0 is constant with respect to t. Differentiating this expression at t = 0 yields = Bvj + Au′ j(0) − λ′ j(0)vj − αju′ j(0). Taking the inner product of this expression with vi, one finds that j(0)vj − αju′ j(0) − λ′ 0 = d dt(cid:0)(A + tB)uj(t) − λj(t)uj(t)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)t=0 0 =(cid:10)vi, (cid:0)Bvj + Au′ = hvi, Bvji +(cid:0)αi − αj(cid:1)hvi, u′ = hvi, Bvji + αihvi, u′ j(0)(cid:1)(cid:11) j(0)i − αihvi, u′ j(0)i − λ′ j(0)i − λ′ i(0)hvi, vji. i(0)hvi, vji Taking i = j yields property (i) while taking i 6= j yields property (ii). To prove (iii), note that hui(t), uj(t)i is constant for all i and j. Taking the derivative yields 0 = d dt hui(t), uj(t)i(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)t=0 as desired. 3 Proof of Theorem 1 = hu′ i(0), uj(0)i + hui(0), u′ j(0)i = hu′ i(0), vji + hvi, u′ j(0)i, Proof (of Theorem 1). Let λ1, . . . , λn : R → R and u1, . . . , un : R → Cn be the analytic functions denoting the eigenvalues and corresponding orthonormal eigenvectors of A + tB, and let α1, . . . , αn be the eigenvalues and v1, . . . , vn the corresponding orthonormal eigenvectors of A comprising the spectral decomposition A = n ∑ i=1 αi viv∗ i , such that λi(0) = αi and ui(0) = vi for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}. We may assume that α1, . . . , αr > 0 are the nonzero eigenvalues of A and that αr+1 = · · · = αn = 0. Define the value of fP(A) as fP(A) = r ∑ i=1 f (αi)hvi, Pvii, where one sums only over the nonzero eigenvalues of A. Note from Proposition 2 that hvi, Bvii = λ′ i(0), and moreover that λ′ i(0) ≥ 0 must hold by assumption for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n} since A + tB is assumed to be positive semidefinite for all t ∈ [0, ε). Furthermore, it may assumed without loss of generality that hvi, Bvii > 0 for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}. Indeed, if it holds that hvi, Bvii = 0 for some i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n} then hvi, (A + tB)vii = 0 holds for all t, and one may restrict to the problem to the subspace perpendicular to vi. One therefore has that d fP(A; B) = lim t→0+ fP(A + tB) − fP(A) t = lim t→0+ = lim t→0+ Tr(P f (A + tB)) − fP(A) t r ∑ i=1 f (λi(t))hui(t), Pui(t)i − f (αi)hvi, Pvii t + lim t→0+ n ∑ i=r+1 f (λi(t))hui(t), Pui(t)i t = r ∑ i=1 f ′(αi)λ′ i(0)hui(0), Pui(0)i + r ∑ i=1 f (αi)(cid:0)hu′ i(0), Pui(0)i + hui(0), Pu′ i(0)i(cid:1) t + n ∑ i=r+1 lim t→0+ f (λi(t))hi(t) (10) , 5 where we define the functions hi(t) = hui(t), Pui(t)i for each i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}. Note that each hi is analytic with hi(0) = h′ i(0) = 0, since Pvi = 0 holds for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n} by the assumption that im(P) ⊂ im(A). The second sum in (10) reduces to r ∑ i=1 f (αi)(cid:16)hu′ i(0), Pui(0)i + hui(0), Pu′ i(0)i(cid:17) i(0), vjihvj, Pvii + hvi, Pvjihvj, u′ = = = r ∑ i,j=1 r ∑ i,j=1 r ∑ i,j=1 αi=αj f (αi)(cid:16)hu′ hvj, Pvii(cid:16) f (αi)hu′ f (αi)hvj, Pvii(cid:16)hu′ i(0)i(cid:17) j(0)i(cid:17) + r ∑ i,j=1 αi6=αj j(0)i(cid:17) } i(0), vji + f (αj)hvi, u′ i(0), vji + hvi, u′ =0 {z hvj, Pvii(cid:16) f (αi)hu′ i(0), vji + f (αj)hvi, u′ j(0)i(cid:17) where the term hu′ Thus the second sum in (10) further reduces to i(0), vji + hvi, u′ j(0)i in the last line above vanishes by statement (iii) in Proposition 2. hvj, Pvii f (αi) hvi, Bvji αj − αi + f (αj) hvi, Bvji αi − αj ! r ∑ i,j=1 αi6=αj hvj, Pviihvi, Bvji f (αi) − f (αj) αi − αj hvj, Pviihvi, Bvji f [1](αi, αj). = = r ∑ i,j=1 αi6=αj r ∑ i,j=1 αi6=αj Noting from statement (ii) of Proposition 2 that hvi, Bvji = 0 for all pairs of indices i 6= j with αi = αj, the first two sums in (10) reduce to r ∑ i=1 f ′(αi)λ′ i(0)hui(0), Pui(0)i + r ∑ i=1 f (αi)(cid:0)hu′ i(0), Pui(0)i + hui(0), Pu′ i(0)i(cid:1) hvj, Pviihvi, Bvii f ′(αi) + hvj, Pviihvi, Bvji f [1](αi, αj) r ∑ i=1 = = n ∑ i,j=1 hvj, Pviihvi, Bvji f [1](αi, αj) n ∑ i,j=1 αi6=αj Finally, as λi(0) = αi = 0 and λ′ i(0) = hvi, Bvii > 0 for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}, it holds that = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)). (11) (12) lim t→0+ f (λi(t))hi(t) t = lim t→0+ t f (λi(t)) t f (λi(t)) h′′ i (0) 2 = 0, hi(t) t2 = lim t→0+ =0 {z } for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}, where the limit vanishes from the fact that λi(0) = 0 and λ′ i(0) > 0, and by the assumption that limt→0+ t f (t) = 0. Plugging the results of (11) and (12) into (10) yields d fP(A; B) = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)), as desired. 6 4 Alternative proofs of differentiability via integral representations In this section, alternative proofs for the computations of the directional derivatives of fP are provided in the case when f (x) = log(x) or f (x) = x p for some value p ∈ (−1, 1) following the method in [VP98, Thm. 3]. This method makes use of integral representations of these functions, which may be extended to matrices in the usual way. 4.1 Directional derivatives of f p,P Let p ∈ (−1, 0) ∪ (0, 1) and consider the function f p : (0, ∞) → R defined as f p(x) = x p for all x ∈ (0, ∞). The divided differences of this function are given by For a positive matrix P ∈ Pn, consider the function f p,P defined on positive matrices as f [1] p (x, y) =  px p−1 x p − yp x − y x = y x 6= y. f p,P(A) =(cid:26) Tr(PAp) +∞ im(P) ⊆ im(A) or p ∈ (0, 1) else for all A ∈ Pn. Note that f p,P is differentiable at all positive definite matrices A, as the function f p is differentiable. As indicated by Theorem 1, the directional derivatives of f p,P at a positive semidefinite matrix A can be computed as d f p,P(A; B) = Tr(P Φ f p,A(B)) as long as im(P) ⊆ im(A), where B ∈ Hn is any Hermitian matrix such that A + tB is positive for all t > 0 small enough. Here we show how to directly compute these directional derivatives using a method of integral representations for f p. The calculation is split into the cases p ∈ (−1, 0) and p ∈ (0, 1), which are considered in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 respectively. The following integral representations will be used.1 For all x ∈ (0, ∞) one has x p = and x p = − sin(pπ) π sin(pπ) π 0 x + s sp Z ∞ sp(cid:18) 1 Z ∞ s 0 ds for all p ∈ (−1, 0) − 1 x + s(cid:19) ds for all p ∈ (0, 1). (13) (14) Furthermore, for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞) with x 6= y, and all p ∈ (−1, 1), one has px p−1 = sin(pπ) π x p − yp x − y = sin(pπ) π and 0 Z ∞ Z ∞ 0 sp (x + s)2 ds sp (x + s)(y + s) ds. In particular, for all p ∈ (−1, 1), the divided differences of the function f p : (0, ∞) → R defined by f p = x p can be given by [1] p (x, y) = f sin(pπ) π Z ∞ 0 sp (x + s)(y + s) ds (15) for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞). For the function g : (0, ∞) → R defined as g(x) = x−1 for all x ∈ (0, ∞), note that the divided differences can expressed compactly as 1c.f. [Car10, Lemma2.8] g[1](x, y) = − 1 xy 7 (16) for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞), since g′(x) = −1/x2 and g[1](x, y) = (1/x − 1/y)/(x − y) = −1/xy for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞) with x 6= y. For any positive definite matrix A ∈ P+ n and any other matrix B ∈ Hn, one has that (A + tB)−1 − A−1 t lim t→0 = Dg(A)(B), where Dg(A) : Hn → Hn is the linear Fr´echet differential operator (as defined in (8)) for g(x) = x−1. In the case when A = diag(α1, . . . αn) is diagonal and positive definite, the ij-entry of the matrix Dg(A)(B) are computed as (cid:0)Dg(A)(B)(cid:1)ij = g[1](αi, αj)Bij = − Bij αiαj for any B ∈ Hn. 4.1.1 The case p ∈ (−1, 0) First consider the case when p ∈ (−1, 0). Let A ∈ Pn be a positive matrix satisfying im(P) ⊆ im(A), which we may suppose without loss of generality is diagonal with A = diag(α1, . . . , αn). We may assume that α1, . . . , αr > 0 are the nonzero eigenvalues and that αr+1 = · · · = αn = 0. Let B ∈ Hn be an n × n Hermitian matrix and suppose there exists a positive value ε > 0 such that A + tB ∈ Pn for all t ∈ [0, ε). One may compute fα,P(A + tB) for any t ∈ [0, ε) using the integral representation in (13) as fα,P(A + tB) = Tr(P(A + tB)p) = − sin(pπ) π Z ∞ 0 Tr(cid:16)P(A + tB + s1)−1(cid:17)sp ds, whre 1 denotes the n × n identity matrix. This holds even when t = 0. The directional derivative d f p,P(A; B) can be computed as d f p,P(A; B) = lim t→0+ fα,P(A + tB) − fα,P(A) t − sin(pπ) 0 π = lim t→0+ = = − sin(pπ) π − sin(pπ) π t Z ∞ Tr(cid:16)P(cid:16)(A + tB + s1)−1 − (A + s1)−1(cid:17)(cid:17)sp ds !sp ds Tr P lim Z ∞ Z ∞ (A + tB + s1)−1 − (A + s1)−1 Tr (P Dg(A + s1)(B)) sp ds t→0+ 0 0 t where g : (0, ∞) → R is the function (defined earlier) g(x) = x−1 for all x ∈ (0, ∞). Note that A + s1 is positive definite and diagonal for all s ∈ (0, ∞) with eigenvalues αi + s. Extending g to all positive definite matrices, one sees that g is Fr´echet differentiable at the positive definite matrix A + s1 for all s > 0 where the matrix entries of the derivative Dg(A + s1)(B) are given by (cid:0)Dg(A + s1)(B)(cid:1)i,j = g[1](αi + s, αj + s)hei, Beji = − hei, Beji (αi + s)(αj + s) for all i, j ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and the divided differences are computed as in (16). As it has been assumed that im(P) ⊆ im(A), it holds that Pij = Tr(P eie∗ j ) = 0 whenever i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n} or j ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}. It follows that Tr(P Dg(A + s1)(B)) = − 8 r ∑ i,j=1 hei, Bejihej, Peii (αi + s)(αj + s) for all s > 0, where one notes that the sum above is taken from 1 to r. Making use of the integral represen- tation for the divided differences f [1] p (αi, αj) in (15), it follows that d f p,P(A; B) = r ∑ i,j=1 hei, Bejihej, Peii sin(pπ) π Z ∞ 0 sp (αi + s)(αj + s) ds = r ∑ i,j=1 e∗ a hei, Beji hej, Peii f [1] p (αi, αj) = Tr(P Φ f p,A(B)), where Φ f p,A is the linear mapping defined earlier. 4.1.2 The case p ∈ (0, 1) Now let p ∈ (0, 1). One may compute f p,P(A + tB) using integral representation in (14) as f p,P(A + tB) = Tr(P(A + tB)p) for all t ∈ [0, ε). The directional derivative d f p,P(A, B) can be computed by = sin(pπ) π Z ∞ 0 Tr(cid:16)P(cid:16)s−11 − (A + tB + s1)−1(cid:17)(cid:17)sp ds, d f p,P(A; B) = lim t→0+ f p,P(A + tB) − f p,P(A) t sin(pπ) π = lim t→0+ 0 t Z ∞ Tr(cid:16)P(cid:16)(A + s1)−1 − (A + tB + s1)−1(cid:17)(cid:17)sp ds !sp ds Tr P lim Z ∞ Z ∞ Tr(cid:16)P Dg(A + s1)(B)(cid:17)sp ds (A + s1)−1 − (A + tB + s1)−1 t→0+ t sin(pπ) π 0 − sin(pπ) π 0 = = = r ∑ i,j=1 hei, Beji hej, Peii f [1] p (αi, αj) = Tr(P Φ f p,A(B)), using the same arguments as before. 4.2 Directional derivatives of Tr(P log(A)) The same methods can be used to compute the derivatives of Tr(P log(A)). One may use the integral representation of logarithm function, which holds for all x ∈ (0, ∞): 0 (cid:18) 1 log(x) = Z ∞ s − 1 x + s(cid:19) ds. Let f : (0, ∞) → R be the function defined as f (x) = log x for all x ∈ (0, ∞). For a positive matrix P ∈ Pn, define the function fP as fP(A) = Tr(P log A) = Z ∞ 0 Tr(cid:18)P(cid:18) 1 s 1 − (A + s1)−1(cid:19)(cid:19) ds 9 for all A ∈ Pn. Let A ∈ Pn be a matrix satisfying im(P) ⊆ im(A). One may suppose without loss of generality that A = diag(α1, . . . , αn) is diagonal. Let B ∈ Hn and suppose there is a value ε > 0 such that A + tB ∈ Pn holds for all t ∈ [0, ε). Then d fP(A; B) = lim t→0+ fP(A + tB) − fP(A) t Tr(P log(A + tB)) − Tr(P log(A)) Tr(cid:18)P lim t→0+ t (A + s1)−1 − (A + tB + s1)−1 t (cid:19) ds = lim t→0+ 0 = Z ∞ = −Z ∞ 0 = r ∑ i,j=1 Tr (P Dg(A + s1)(B)) ds hei, Beji hej, Peii f [1](αi, αj) = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)), where the steps are analogous to those in Section 4.1.2. This generalizes the method in [VP98, Theorem 3]. Note that the divided differences of the function f (t) = log(t) are given by f [1](x, y) =  1 x log(x) − log(y) x − y x = y x 6= y for all x, y ∈ (0, ∞). 5 Lower bound for derivative of A 7→ Tr(PA−1) We now consider the function f : (0, ∞) → R defined by f (t) = t−1 and the corresponding trace functional fP : P+ n → R defined as fP(A) = Tr(PA−1) for all positive definite matrices A. Let A ∈ Pn be a positive semidefinite matrix with spectral decomposi- tion A = αi viv∗ i , n ∑ i=1 where α1, . . . , αr > 0 are the nonzero eigenvalues. Let B ∈ Hn and suppose there exists a positive value ε > 0 such that A + tB ∈ Pn for all t ∈ [0, ε). Let λ1(t), . . . , λn(t) and u1(t), . . . , un(t) be the analytic eigenvalues and eigenvectors of A + tB such that λi(0) = αi and ui(0) = vi for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}. As in the proof of Theorem 1, for each i ∈ {r, . . . , n} we define the function hi : R → R by hi(t) = hui(t), Pui(t)i such that hi(0) = h′ i(0) = 0. Moreover, note that i (0) = hu′ h′′ i(0), Pu′ i(0)i ≥ 0, 10 since P is positive semidefinite. Furthermore, we may assume (as in the proof of Theorem 1) that λ′ holds for all i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}. Then i(0) > 0 d fP(A; B) = lim t→0+ fP(A + tB) − fP(A) t = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)) + = Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)) + n ∑ i=r+1 n ∑ i=r+1 lim t→0+ lim t→0+ hi(t) tλj(t) f (λi(t))hi(t) t , (17) where, for i ∈ {r + 1, . . . , n}, the limits in the final line reduce to hi(t) tλi(t) = h′′ i (0) 2 lim t→0+ t λi(t) = lim t→0+ h′′ i (0) 2λ′ i(0) ≥ 0 since λ′ i(0) = 0 and h′′ i (0) ≥ 0. Thus Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)) provides the lower bound for the directional derivative, d fP(A; B) ≥ Tr(P Φ f ,A(B)), (18) and this inequality is strict in general unless im(B) ⊆ im(A). Indeed, to show that the inequality in (18) can be strict, consider the following example. Let A, P ∈ P2 and B ∈ H2 be the 2 × 2 matrices A = P =(cid:18)1 0 0 0(cid:19) and B =(cid:18)0 1 1 1(cid:19) . For the function f (x) = x−1, we may define fP(A) as fP(A) = 1, and the linear mapping Φ f ,A : H2 → H2 is given by Φ f ,A(cid:18)(cid:18)a ∗ ∗(cid:19)(cid:19) =(cid:18)a 0 0(cid:19) ∗ 0 (i.e., it simply picks out the entry in the upper-left corner and zeros out the other entries). It follows that Tr(PΦ f ,A(B)) = 0 for these matrices, but that (A + tB)−1 =(cid:18)1 t t t(cid:19)−1 = 1 1 − t(cid:18) 1 −1 1/t(cid:19) −1 such that Tr(P(A + tB)−1) = 1/(1 − t) for all t > 0, and thus d fP(A; B) = lim t→0+ fP(A + tB) − fP(A) t = lim t→0+ Tr(cid:0)P(A + tB)−1(cid:1) − 1 t = lim t→0+ 1 1 − t = 1. Hence d fP(A; B) > Tr(PΦ f ,A(B)) for these matrices. References [Bha97] Rajendra Bhatia. Matrix Analysis, volume 169 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, 1997. [Car10] Eric A. Carlen. Trace inequalities and quantum entropy: an introductory course. In Roert Sims and Daniel Ueltschi, editors, Entropy quantum Arizona Sch. Anal. with Appl., pages 73 -- 140. American Mathematical Society, 2010. 11 [FG11] Shmuel Friedland and Gilad Gour. An explicit expression for the relative entropy of entanglement in all dimensions. J. Math. Phys., 52(5):052201, jul 2011. [GGF14] Mark W. Girard, Gilad Gour, and Shmuel Friedland. On convex optimization problems in quan- tum information theory. J. Phys. A Math. Theor., 47(50):505302, dec 2014. [HP14] Fumio Hiai and D´enes Petz. Introduction to Matrix Analysis and Applications. Universitext. Springer International Publishing, 2014. [Kat80] Tosio Kato. Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators. Springer, Berlin, 1980. [Ras11] Alexey E. Rastegin. Upper continuity bounds on the relative q-entropy for q > 1. J. Math. Phys., 52(6):1 -- 7, 2011. [VP98] Vlatko Vedral and Martin B. Plenio. Entanglement measures and purification procedures. Phys. Rev. A, 57(3):1619 -- 1633, mar 1998. [Wat18] John Watrous. Theory of Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, 2018. 12
1811.01752	1	1811	2018-11-02T12:59:33	Wave-front sets in non-quasianalytic setting for Fourier Lebesgue and modulation spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	We define and study wave-front sets for weighted Fourier-Lebesgue spaces when the weights are moderate with respect to the associated functions for general sequences $\{ M_p\} $ which satisfy Komatsu's conditions $(M.1) - (M.3)'$. In particular, when $\{ M_p\} $ is the Gevrey sequence ($M_p = p!^s$, $s>1$) we recover some previously observed results. Furthermore, we consider wave-front sets for modulation spaces in the same setting, and prove the invariance property related to the Fourier-Lebesgue type wave-front sets.	math.FA	math	WAVE-FRONT SETS IN NON-QUASIANALYTIC SETTING FOR FOURIER LEBESGUE AND MODULATION SPACES NENAD TEOFANOV Abstract. We define and study wave-front sets for weighted Fourier- Lebesgue spaces when the weights are moderate with respect to the associated functions for general sequences {Mp} which satisfy Ko- matsu's conditions (M.1) − (M.3)′. In particular, when {Mp} is the Gevrey sequence (Mp = p!s, s > 1) we recover some previ- ously observed results. Furthermore, we consider wave-front sets for modulation spaces in the same setting, and prove the invariance property related to the Fourier-Lebesgue type wave-front sets. 1. Introduction Wave-front sets in the context of Fourier-Lebesgue spaces, together with the study of corresponding pseudodifferential operatros, were first considered in [40], see also [41, 42, 43]. They are recently used in [7] for a mathematical explanation of phenomena related to the interfer- ences in the Born-Jordan distribution. The conic neighborhoods in the definition of such wave-front sets are replaced in [18] by a filter of neighborhoods for the study of propagation of singularities of Fourier- Lebesgue type for partial (pseudo)differential equations, whose symbol satisfies generalized elliptic properties. An important extension of in- vestigations from [41, 42] to general weighted Fourier Banach spaces is given in [2, 3]. The above mentioned results are performed in the framework of weights of polynomial growth and, consequently, within the realm of tempered distributions. Spaces of ultradistributions in the context of weighted Fourier-Lebesgue type spaces were first observed in [27], see also [28]. The sequences of the form Mp = p!s, s > 1, are used there to define the corresponding test function spaces. This in turn leads to the analysis of weighted Fourier-Lebesgue spaces such that the growth of the weight function at infinity is bounded by ek·1/s, for some k > 0. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 35A18,35S30,42B05,35H10. Key words and phrases. Wave-front sets, weighted Fourier-Lebesgue spaces, Gelfand-Shilov spaces, ultradistributions. 1 2 N. TEOFANOV In this paper we extend the results from [27] to a more general con- text when the spaces of test functions are given by the means of {Mp} sequences which satisfy Komatsu's conditions (M.1) − (M.3)′, see Sec- tion 2. Note that this allows "fine tuning" between the two Gevrey type sequences, see Remark 2.1. The paper is organized as follows. We end the introduction with the basic notation, and a brief account on weight functions. Section2 contains a discussion on sequences and corresponding associate func- tions, which are the basic notions in our analysis. We proceed with an exposition of Gelfand-Shilov spaces and other test function spaces, and their dual spaces of ultradistributions. Section 3 contains the def- inition of wave-front sets for weighted Fourier-Lebesgue spaces when the weights are submultiplicative with respect to the associated func- tion of a given non-quasianalytic sequence {Mp}. We study its basic properties, convolution relations, and discuss its relation to some other types of wave-front sets. In Section 4 we first study the short-time Fourier transform in the context of test function spaces and their du- als from Section 2, and then define modulation spaces and recall their basic properties. Finally, in Section 5 we introduce wave-front sets for modulation spaces and show that they coincide with appropriate wave- front sets from Section 3. Since we consider general non-quasianalytic sequences {Mp}, we recover the main results from [27, 28] where the particular case Mp = p!s, s > 1, is observed. 1.1. Basic notation. We put N = {0, 1, 2, . . . }, hxi = (1 + x2)1/2, x ∈ Rd, xy = x · y denotes the scalar product on Rd and h(x, ω)is = hzis = (1 + x2 + ω2)s/2, z = (x, ω) ∈ R2d, s ∈ R. i.e., p ∈ Nd 0 and pj ≥ 0, we write ∂p = ∂p1 1 · · · ∂pd i=1 xpi (x1, . . . , xd)(p1,...,pd) = Qd The partial derivative of a vector x = (x1, . . . , xd) ∈ Rd with respect to xj is denoted by ∂j = ∂ . Given a multi-index p = (p1, . . . , pd) ≥ ∂xj d and xp = 0, i=1 hixi1/αi. Moreover, for p ∈ Nd +, we set (p!)α = (p1!)α1 . . . (pd!)αd. In the sequel, a real number r ∈ R+ may play the role of the vector with constant components rj = r, so for α ∈ Rd +, by writing α > r we mean αj > r for all j = 1, . . . , d. By X we denote an open set in Rd, and K ⋐ X means that K is compact subset in X. i . Similarly, h · x1/α = Pd 0 and α ∈ Rd The Fourier transform is normalized to be f (ω) = F f (ω) =Z f (t)e−2πitωdt. 3 We use the brackets hf, gi to denote the extension of the inner product hf, gi = R f (t)g(t)dt on L2(Rd) to the dual pairing between a test function space A and its dual A′: h·, ·i = A′h·, ·iA. We use the standard notation for usual spaces of functions and distributions, e.g. Lp(Rd), Lp loc(Ω), 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, denote Lebesgue spaces and their local versions respectively, S(Rd) denotes the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing test functions, etc. Translation and modulation operators, T and M respectively, when acting on f ∈ L2(Rd) are defined by Txf (·) = f (· − x) and Mxf (·) = e2πix·f (·), x ∈ Rd. (1.1) Then for f, g ∈ L2(Rd) the following relations hold: MyTx = e2πix·yTxMy, (Txf )= M−x f , (Mxf )= Tx f , x, y ∈ Rd. These operators are extended to other spaces of functions and distri- butions in a natural way. Throughout the paper, A . B denotes A ≤ cB for a suitable con- stant c > 0, whereas A ≍ B means that c−1A ≤ B ≤ cA for some c ≥ 1. The symbol B1 ֒→ B2 denotes the continuous and dense embedding of the topological vector space B1 into B2. 1.2. Weights. In general, a weight function is a non-negative function in L∞ loc. Definition 1.1. Let ω, v be non-negative functions. Then (1) v is called submultiplicative if v(x + y) ≤ v(x)v(y), ∀ x, y ∈ Rd; (2) ω is called v-moderate if ω(x + y) . v(x)ω(y), ∀ x, y ∈ Rd. For a given submultiplicative weight v the set of all v-moderate weights will be denoted by Mv. If v is even and ω ∈ Mv, then 1/v . ω . v, ω 6= 0 everywhere and 1/ω ∈ Mv. In the sequel we assume that v is an even submultiplicative function. Submultiplicativity implies that v is dominated by an exponential func- tion, i.e. v ≤ Cek · for some C, k > 0. For example, every weight of the form v(z) = eskzkb (1 + kzk)a logr(e + kzk) for parameters a, r, s ≥ 0, 0 ≤ b ≤ 1 satisfies the above conditions. 4 N. TEOFANOV Let s > 1. By M{s}(Rd) we denote the set of all weights which are moderate with respect to a weight v which satisfies v ≤ Cek · 1/s for some positive constants C and k. The weight v satisfy the Beurling- Domar non-quasi-analyticity condition which takes the form log v(nx) n2 < ∞, x ∈ Rd. ∞Xn=0 We refer to [21] for a detailed account on weights in time-frequency analysis. 2. Spaces of test functions and their duals Let (Mp)p∈N0 be a sequence of positive numbers monotonically in- creasing to infinity which satisfies: (M.1) M 2 p ∈ N; (M.2) There exist positive constants A, H such that p ≤ Mp−1Mp+1, Mp ≤ AH p min 0≤q≤pMp−qMq, p, q ∈ N0, or, equivalently, there exist positive constants A, H such that Mp+q ≤ AH p+qMpMq, p, q ∈ N0; p=1 Mp−1/Mp < ∞. (M.3)′ P∞ positive constant. We assume that M0 = 1, and that M 1/p p is bounded below by a The condition (M.3)′ provides the existence of nontrivial compactly supported smooth functions (and therefore partitions of unity) in the corresponding spaces of test functions. It is therefore known as the non-quasianalyticity condition. The Gevrey sequences Mp = p!s, p ∈ N, s > 1, are basic examples of sequences which satisfy (M.1) − (M.3)′. Let (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 be sequences which satisfy (M.1). We write Mp ⊂ Nq ((Mp) ≺ (Nq), respectively) if there are constants H, C > 0 (for any H > 0 there is a constant C > 0, respectively) such that Mp ≤ CH pNp, p ∈ N0. Also, (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 are said to be equivalent if Mp ⊂ Nq and Nq ⊂ Mp hold. Remark 2.1. The conditions (M.1) and (M.2) can be described as fol- lows. Let (sp)p∈N0 be a sequence of positive numbers monotonically increasing to infinity (sp ր ∞) so that for every p, q ∈ N0 there exist A, H > 0 such that sp+j = sp+1 · · · sp+q ≤ AH ps1 · · · sq = AH p qYj=1 sj. (2.1) qYj=1 Mp := p! 1 2 pYk=0 qYk=0 (M.1) and (M.2). Then the sequence (Sp)p∈N0 given by Sp = Qp Conversely, if (Sp)p∈N0 given by Sp =Qp j=1 sj, sj > 0, j ∈ N, S0 = 1, satisfies (M.1) then the sequence (sp)p∈N0 increases to infinity. If, in addition, it satisfies (M.2) then (2.1) holds. j=1 sj, S0 = 1, satisfies Furthermore, if (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 are given by 5 lk = p! 1 2 Lp, p ∈ N0, Nq := q! 1 2 rk = q! 1 2 Rq, q ∈ N0 (2.2) where (rp)p∈N0 and (lp)p∈N0 are sequences of positive numbers mono- tonically increasing to infinity such that (2.1) holds with the letter s replaced by r and l respectively, and which satisfy: For every α ∈ (0, 1] and every k > 1 so that kp ∈ N, p ∈ N, max{( rkp rp )2, ( lkp lp )2} ≤ kα, p ∈ N. (2.3) Then p! ≺ MpNp and the sequences (Rp)p∈N0 and (Lp)p∈N0 (Rp = r1 · · · rp, Lp = l1 · · · lp, p ∈ N R0 = 1, and L0 = 1) satisfy (M.1) and (M.2). Moreover, max{Rp, Lp} ≤ p!α/2, p ∈ N, for every α ∈ (0, 1]. (For p, q, k ∈ Nd 0 we have Lp = Qk≤p lk, and Rq =Qk≤q rq.) Such sequences are used in the study of localization operators in the context of quasianalytic spaces in [10]. The associated function for a given sequence (Mp) is defined by M(ρ) = sup p∈N ln+ ρpM0 Mp , 0 < ρ < ∞, (2.4) where ln+ t := max{ln t, 0}, t > 0. It is a non-negative monotonically increasing function which vanishes for sufficiently small ρ, and tends to infinity faster than ln ρp, as ρ → ∞. Moreover, if (Mp) satisfies (M.1) and (M.3)′, then kpp!/Mp → 0 as p → ∞. For example, the associated function for the Gevrey sequence Mp = p!s, p ∈ N0, s > 1, behaves at infinity as · 1/s, cf. In fact, the interplay between the defining sequence and its associated function plays an important role in the theory of ultradistributions. [35]. The following result will be intensively used in this paper. We refer to [1] for its proof. 6 N. TEOFANOV Lemma 2.1. Let there be given sequence (Mp) which satisfies (M.1). Then M( ρk) ≤ M(ρk), ρk > 0, k = 1, . . . , n. (2.5) nXk=1 nXk=1 If, in addition, (Mp) satisfies (M.2), then 2M(ρ) ≤ M(Hρ) + ln+(A), ρ > 0, (2.6) where A and H are the constants in (M.2)¿ Furthermore, if L ≥ 1, then there is a constant C > 0 such that M(Lρ) ≤ 3 2 LM(ρ) + C, ρ > 0, (2.7) and there is a constant B > 0 and a constant KL > 0 which depends on L, such that LM(ρ) ≤ M(BL−1ρ) + KL, ρ > 0. (2.8) Remark 2.2. By Lemma 2.1, it follows that estimates of the form f (·) . eM (h·) for some/every h > 0 and f (·) . ekM (·) for some/every k > 0 are equivalent. This observation will be often used in proofs. 2.1. Gelfand-Shilov spaces. We give here only the basic properties and refer to [19, 34] for a more detailed discussion and applications in partial differential equations. Definition 2.1. Let there be given sequences of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 which satisfy (M.1) and (M.2). Let S Nq,B Mp,A(Rd) be defined by S Nq,B Mp,A(Rd) = {f ∈ C ∞(Rd) kxα∂βf kL∞ ≤ CAαMαBβNβ, ∀α, β ∈ Nd for some positive constant C, and A = (A1, . . . , Ad), B = (B1, . . . , Bd), A, B > 0. 0}, Gelfand-Shilov spaces ΣNq Mp(Rd) and S Nq ductive limits of (Fr´echet) spaces S Nq,B ΣNq Mp(Rd) := proj lim A>0,B>0 S Nq ,B Mp,A(Rd); S Nq Mp(Rd) are projective and in- Mp,A(Rd) with respect to A and B: S Nq,B Mp,A(Rd). Mp(Rd) := ind lim A>0,B>0 The corresponding dual spaces of ΣNq Mp(Rd) are the spaces of ultradistributions of Beurling and Roumieu type respectively: Mp(Rd) and S Nq (ΣNq Mp)′(Rd) := ind lim (S Nq,B Mp,A)′(Rd); A>0,B>0 (S Nq Mp)′(Rd) := proj lim A>0,B>0 (S Nq ,B Mp,A)′(Rd). Gelfand-Shilov spaces are closed under translation, dilation, multi- plication with x ∈ Rd, and differentiation. Moreover, they are closed under the action of certain differential operators of infinite order (ul- tradifferentiable operators in the terminology of Komatsu). 7 Whenever nontrivial, Gelfand-Shilov spaces contain "enough func- tions" in the following sense. A test function space Φ is "rich enough" if Z f (x)ϕ(x)dx = 0, ∀ϕ ∈ Φ ⇒ f (x) ≡ 0 (a.e.). The following theorem enlightens the fundamental properties of Gelfand- Shilov spaces implicitly contained in their definition. Among other things, it states that the decay and regularity estimates of f ∈ S Nq Mp(Rd) can be studied separately. Theorem 2.1. Let there be given sequences of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 which satisfy (M.1), (M.2) and p! ⊂ MpNp (p! ≺ MpNp, respectively). Moreover, let M(·) and N(·) denote the associated func- tions for (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 respectively. Then the following con- ditions are equivalent: (1) f ∈ S Nq (2) There exist constants A, B ∈ Rd, A, B > 0 (for every A, B ∈ Mp(Rd), respectively). Mp(Rd) (f ∈ ΣNq Rd, A, B > 0 respectively), and there exist C > 0 such that keM (Ax)∂qf (x)kL∞ ≤ CBqNq, ∀p, q ∈ Nd 0. (3) There exist constants A, B ∈ Rd, A, B > 0 (for every A, B ∈ Rd, A, B > 0, respectively), and there exist C > 0 such that kxpf (x)kL∞ ≤ CApMp ∀p, q ∈ Nd 0. (4) There exist constants A, B ∈ Rd, A, B > 0 (for every A, B ∈ and k∂qf (x)kL∞ ≤ CBqNq, Rd, A, B > 0, respectively), and there exist C > 0 such that kxpf (x)kL∞ ≤ CApMp ∀p, q ∈ Nd 0. (5) There exist constants A, B ∈ Rd, A, B > 0 (for every A, B ∈ and kωq f (ω)kL∞ ≤ CBqNq, Rd, A, B > 0, respectively), such that kf (x)eM (Ax) kL∞ < ∞ and k f (ω) eN (Bω)kL∞ < ∞. Theorem 2.1 is proved in [5] and reinvented many times afterwards, see e.g. [9, 23, 30, 34, 38, 53]. By the above characterization F S Nq Mp (Rd) = S {Mp}(Rd), and ΣMp Nq we put SMp over, the Fourier transform F extends to a homeomorphism on (S {Mp})′(Rd) and on (S (Mp))′(Rd) in a usual way. Mp(Rd) = SMp Nq (Rd). When Mp = Mp(Rd) = S (Mp)(Rd). More- 8 N. TEOFANOV Next we discuss the important case when (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 are hcosen to be the Gevrey sequences Mp = p!r, p ∈ N0 and Nq = q!s, q ∈ N0, for some r, s ≥ 0, then we use the notation S Nq Mp(Rd) = S s r (Rd) and ΣNq Mp(Rd) = Σs r(Rd). If, in addition, s = r, then we put S {s}(Rd) = S s s (Rd) and Σ(s)(Rd) = Σs s(Rd). The choice of Gevrey sequences is the most often used choice in the literature since it serves well in different contexts. For example, when discussing nontriviality of Gelfand-Shilov spaces we have the following: r (Rd) is nontrivial if and only if s+r > 1, or s+r = 1 (1) the space S s and sr > 0, (2) if s + r ≥ 1 and s < 1, then every f ∈ S s r (Rd) can be extended to the complex domain as an entire function, (3) if s + r ≥ 1 and s = 1, then every f ∈ S s r (Rd) can be extended to the complex domain as a holomorphic function in a strip {x + iy ∈ Cd : y < T } some T > 0 (4) the space Σs r(Rd) is nontrivial if and only if s + r > 1, or, if s + r = 1 and sr > 0 and (s, r) 6= (1/2, 1/2). We refer to [19] or [34] for the proof in the case of S s r (Rd), and to [36] for the spaces Σs r(Rd), see also [54]. The discussion here above shows that Gelfand-Shilov classes S s r (Rd) consist of quasi-analytic functions when s ∈ (0, 1). This is in a sharp contrast with e.g. Gevrey classes Gs(Rd), s > 1, another family of functions commonly used in regularity theory of partial differential equations, whose elements are always non-quasi-analytic. Recall, for 1 < s < ∞ and an open set X ∈ Rd the Gevrey class Gs(X) is given by Gs(X) = {φ ∈ C ∞(X) (∀K ⋐ X)(∃C > 0)(∃h > 0) We refer to [44] for microlocal analysis in Gervey classes and note that ∂αφ(x) ≤ Chαα!s}. sup x∈K Gs 0(Rd) ֒→ S s s (Rd) ֒→ Gs(Rd), s > 1. When the spaces are nontrivial we have the inclusions: Σs r(Rd) ֒→ S s r (Rd) ֒→ S(Rd), and S(Rd) can be revealed as the limiting case of spaces Ss r (Rd), i.e. S(Rd) = S∞ ∞ (Rd) = lim s,r→∞ S s r (Rd), when the passage to the limit when s and r tend to infinity is inter- preted correctly, see [19, page 169]. 9 Remark 2.3. Note that Σ1/2 s(Rd) is dense in the Schwartz space whenever s > 1/2. One may consider a "fine tuning", that is the spaces ΣNq 1/2(Rd) = {0} and Σs Mp(Rd) such that {0} = Σ1/2 1/2(Rd) ֒→ ΣNq Mp(Rd) ֒→ S Nq Mp(Rd) ֒→ Σs s(Rd), s > 1/2, see also Remark 2.1. We refer to [55] where it is shown how to overcome the minimality condition (Σ1/2 1/2(Rd) = 0) by transferring the estimates for kxα∂βf kL∞ into the estimates of the form kH N f kL∞ . hN (N!)2s, for some (for every ) h > 0, where H = x2 − ∆ is the harmonic oscillator. We also mention that the Gelfand-Shilov space of analytic functions S (1)(Rd) := Σ1 1(Rd) plays a prominent role in the theory since it is isomorphic to the Sato test function space for the space of Fourier hyperfunctions. More precisely, if f ∈ S (1)(Rd) then it can be extended to a holomorphic function f (x+iy) in the strip {x+iy ∈ Cd : y < T } for some T > 0. According to Theorem 2.1, we have f ∈ S (1)(Rd) ⇐⇒ sup x∈Rd f (x)eh·x < ∞ and sup ω∈Rd f (ω)eh·ω < ∞, for every h > 0. This representation is used to establish an isomorphism between its dual space (S (1))′(Rd) and the space of Fourier hyperfunc- tions, see [4] for details. r (Rd) and S r Already in [19] it is shown that the Fourier transform is a topological isomorphism between S s s ), which extends to a continuous linear transform from (S s s )′(Rd). In par- 1/2 (Rd) ticular, if s = r and s ≥ 1/2 then F (S s is the smallest non-empty Gelfand-Shilov space invariant under the Fourier transform, cf. [53, Remark 1.2]. Similar assertions hold for Σs r )′(Rd) onto (S r s )(Rd) = S s s (Rd), and S 1/2 s (Rd) (F (S s r ) = S r r(Rd). 2.2. Test function spaces on open sets. Since we are interested in non-quasianalytic classes, we restrict our intention to the sequences which satisfy (M.1)−(M.3)′, and refer to [31] for a more general setting. Definition 2.2. Let there be given a sequence (Mp), p ∈ Nd, which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let X be an open set in Rd. For a given compact set K ⊂ X and a constant A > 0 we denote by E Mp A,K(X) the 10 N. TEOFANOV space of all ϕ ∈ C ∞(X) such that the norm kϕkMp,A,K = sup p∈Nn 0 sup x∈K Ap Mp ϕ(p)(x) < ∞. (2.9) Note that k · kMp,A,K is a norm in E Mp A,K(X). The space of functions ϕ ∈ C ∞(X) such that (2.9) holds and supp ϕ ⊆ Let (Kn)n be a sequence of compact sets such that Kn ⊂⊂ Kn+1 and K is denoted by DMp A (K). S Kn = X. Then E (Mp)(X) = proj lim n→∞ (proj lim A→∞ E Mp A,Kn)(X), E {Mp}(X) = proj lim n→∞ (ind lim A→0 E Mp A,Kn)(X), D(Mp)(X) = ind lim n→∞ (proj lim A→∞ DMp A (Kn)) = ind lim n→∞ (D(Mp) Kn ), D{Mp}(X) = ind lim n→∞ (ind lim A→0 DMp A (Kn)) = ind lim n→∞ (D{Mp} Kn ). Obviously, D(Mp)(X) (D{Mp}(X) resp.) is the subspace of E (Mp)(X) (of E {Mp}(X) resp.) whose elements are compactly supported. Remark 2.4. Let ∗ denote (Mp) or {Mp}. Then D∗, S ∗ and E ∗ corre- spond to C ∞ 0 , S and C ∞, respectively, and D∗ ⊆ C ∞ 0 , S ∗ ⊆ S and E ∗ ⊆ C ∞. The spaces of linear functionals over D(Mp)(X) and D{Mp}(X), de- noted by (D(Mp))′(X) and (D{Mp})′(X) respectively, are called the spaces of ultradistributions of Beurling and Roumieu type respectively, while the spaces of linear functionals over E (Mp)(X) and E {Mp}(X), denoted by (E (Mp))′(X) and (E {Mp})′(X), respectively are called the spaces of ultradistributions of compact support of Beurling and Roumieu type respectively. Clearly, (E {Mp})′(X) ⊆ (E (Mp))′(X), (E (Mp))′(X) ⊆ (E (Mp))′(Rd) and (E {Mp})′(X) ⊆ (E {Mp})′(Rd). 11 Moreover, and (E {Mp})′(Rd) ⊆ (S {Mp})′(Rd) ⊆ (D{Mp})′(Rd) (E (Mp))′(Rd) ⊆ (S (Mp))′(Rd) ⊆ (D(Mp))′(Rd). Any ultra-distribution with compact support can be viewed as an el- ement of (S (1))′(Rd). More generally, by using similar reasoning as in the case of distributions (see [24]), it follows that E ∗ are exactly those elements in S ∗ or D∗ with compact support. The following fact follows from the Paley-Wiener type theorems which can be found e.g. in [31]. Theorem 2.2. Let there be given a sequence (Mp), p ∈ Nd, which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let K be a compact convex set in Rd. Then ϕ ∈ D(Mp) resp.) if and only if for every h > 0 there is a constant C > 0 (there are constants h > 0 and C > 0 resp.) such that (ϕ ∈ D{Mp} K K ϕ(ξ) ≤ Ce−hM (ξ), ξ ∈ Rd. 3. Wave-front sets in weighted Fourier-Lebesgue spaces Although in principle both Beurling and Roumieu cases could be treated simultaneously (as we did in Section 2), in order to simplify the exposition, from now on we will treat the Beurling case only. See also [28] for a discussion related to a slight difference between the cases. Throughout the section {Mp} will always denote a sequence satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ and M(ρ) denotes its associated function. For the notational convenience, the set of weights ω moderated with respect to the weight eM (ρ) will be denoted by MM (ρ)(Rd) (instead of a more cumbersome notation MeM (ρ)(Rd)). Let q ∈ [1, ∞] and let ω ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd). The (weighted) Fourier (ω)(Rd), i. e. (ω)(Rd) is the inverse Fourier image of Lq Lebesgue space F Lq F Lq (ω)(Rd) consists of all f ∈ (S (1))′(Rd) such that kf kF Lq (ω) ≡ kbf · ωkLq. is finite. If ω = 1, then the notation F Lq is used instead of F Lq note that if ω(ξ) = hξis, then F Lq potential space H p s . (ω). We (ω) is the Fourier image of the Bessel Remark 3.1. We may permit an x dependency for the weight ω in the definition of Fourier Lebesgue spaces. More precisely, for each 12 N. TEOFANOV ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d) we let F Lq such that (ω) be the set of all ultradistributions f kf kF Lq (ω) ≡ kbf ω(x, · )kLq is finite. Since ω is vk-moderate it follows that different choices of x < ∞ is independent of x. give rise to equivalent norms, hence kf kF Lq Therefore, a F Lq might depend on x. (ω)(Rd) is independent of x although k · kF Lq (ω) (ω) Next we introduce local Fourier-Lebesgue spaces of ultradistributions related to the given sequence {Mp}. Let X be an open set in Rd and let ω ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd). The local Fourier Lebesgue space F Lq (ω),loc(X) consists of all f ∈ (S (1))′(Rd) such that ϕf ∈ F Lq (ω)(Rd) for each ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X). It is a Fr´echet space under the topology given by the , where ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X), and the family of seminorms f 7→ kϕf kF Lq following simple properties hold. (ω) Lemma 3.1. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} with the associate function M(ρ), ρ > 0. Let X be an open set in Rd and ω ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd). Then F Lq (ω)(Rd) ⊆ F Lq (ω),loc(Rd) ⊆ F Lq (ω),loc(X). Furthermore, let q1, q2 ∈ [1, ∞] and ω1, ω2 ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd). Then (ω2),loc(X), when q1 ≤ q2 and ω2 . ω1. (ω1),loc(X) ⊆ F Lq2 F Lq1 (3.1) (3.2) Proof. If f ∈ F Lq gives (ω)(Rd) and if ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X), then Young's inequality kϕf kF Lq (ω) = kF (ϕf ) ωkLq = (2π)−d/2k(bϕ ∗ bf ) ωkLq , (ω) Remark 2.2 it follows that for every N > 0 we have . kbϕ eM (·) ∗ bf ωkLq . kbf ωkLq = kf kF Lq if kbϕ eM (·)kL1 is finite. Since ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X), from Theorem 2.2 and Therefore kbϕeM (·)kLp < ∞ for every p ∈ [1, ∞], and (3.1) is proved. It remains to prove (3.2). The inclusion in (3.2) is clear when q1 = q2 and ω2 . ω1. It remains to show that F Lq (ω),loc increases with respect to q. Assume, without any loss of generality, that f ∈ (E (Mp))′(X), and that ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(Rd) is such that ϕ ≡ 1 in the neighborhood of bϕ(ξ)eM (ξ) . e−(N +1)M (ξ)eM (ξ) = e−N M (ξ). (3.3) supp f . Choose p ∈ [1, ∞] such that 1/q1 + 1/p = 1/q2 + 1. Then, for a eM (·)-moderate weight ω, it follows from Young's inequality that 13 kf kF L q2 (ω) for some constant C, and the result follows. . k(bϕ ∗ bf )ωkLq2 . kbϕeM (·)kLpkbf ωkLq1 = Ckf kF L , q1 (ω) (cid:3) Next we extend the definition of wave-front sets of Fourier-Lebesgue type given in [27, 40, 41]. Let {Mp} satisfy (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) denote its associated function. Furthermore, let q ∈ [1, ∞], and Γ ⊆ Rd \ 0 be an open cone. If f ∈ (S (1))′(Rd) and ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d), then we define f F Lq,Γ (ω) = f F Lq,Γ (ω),x (3.4) ≡(cid:16)ZΓ bf (ξ)ω(x, ξ)q dξ(cid:17)1/q (with obvious interpretation when q = ∞). We note that · F Lq,Γ defines a semi-norm on (S (1))′(Rd) which might attain the value +∞. Since ω is M(ρ)-moderate it follows that different x ∈ Rd gives rise to equivalent semi-norms f F Lq,Γ , see Remark 3.1. Furthermore, if Γ = Rd \ 0, f ∈ F Lq Fourier Lebesgue norm kf kF Lq (ω)(Rd) and q < ∞, then f F Lq,Γ agrees with the (ω),x (ω),x (ω),x of f . (ω),x For the sake of notational convenience we set B = F Lq (ω) = F Lq (ω)(Rd), and · B(Γ) = · F Lq,Γ (ω),x . (3.5) (ω) (f ) be the set of all ξ ∈ Rd \ 0 such that We let ΘB(f ) = ΘF Lq f B(Γ) < ∞, for some open conical neighborhood Γ = Γξ of ξ. We also let ΣB(f ) be the complement of ΘB(f ) in Rd\0. Then ΘB(f ) and ΣB(f ) are open respectively closed subsets in Rd \ 0, which are independent of the choice of x ∈ Rd in (3.4). Definition 3.1. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) be its associated function. Furthermore, let q ∈ [1, ∞], B be as in (3.5), and let X be an open subset of Rd. If ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d), then the wave-front set of f ∈ (D∗)′(X), WFB(f ) ≡ (f ) with respect to B consists of all pairs (x0, ξ0) in X ×(Rd \0) WFF Lq such that ξ0 ∈ ΣB(ϕf ) holds for each ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X) such that ϕ(x0) 6= 0. (ω) The set WFB(f ) is a closed set in Rd × (Rd \ 0), since it is obvious that its complement is open. We also note that if x ∈ Rd is fixed and ω0(ξ) = ω(x, ξ), then WFB(f ) = WFF Lq (f ), since ΣB is independent of x. (ω0) 14 N. TEOFANOV The following theorem shows that wave-front sets with respect to F Lq It also shows that (ω) satisfy appropriate micro-local properties. such wave-front sets are decreasing with respect to the parameter q, and increasing with respect to the weight ω. Theorem 3.1. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfy (M.1)− (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) be its associated function. Furthermore, let q, r ∈ [1, ∞], X be an open set in Rd and ω, ϑ ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d) be such that r ≤ q, and ω(x, ξ) . ϑ(x, ξ). Also let B be as in (3.5) and put B0 = F Lr and ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X) then (ϑ)(Rd). If f ∈ (D(Mp))′(X) WFB(ϕ f ) ⊆ WFB0(f ). Proof. When Mp = p!s, s > 1, we recover [27, Theorem 2.1]. In fact, the more general situation when {Mp} is an arbitrary sequence which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ can be proved by using the idea of the proof of [27, Theorem 2.1] as follows. By the definition it is sufficient to prove ΣB(ϕf ) ⊆ ΣB0(f ) when ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X), ϑ = ω and f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd), since the statement only involves local assertions. For the same reasons we may assume that ω(x, ξ) = ω(ξ) is independent of x. We prove the assertion for r ∈ [1, ∞), and leave the case r = ∞ to the reader. By using the idea of the proof of [44, Theorem 1.6.1] we conclude that if f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd) then there exists N0 > 0 such that bf (ξ)ω(ξ) . Choose open cones Γ1 and Γ2 in Rd such that Γ2 ⊆ Γ1. It is enough eN0M (ξ). to prove that for every N > 0, there exist CN > 0 such that when Γ2 ⊆ Γ1. ξ∈Rd(cid:0)bf (ξ)ω(ξ)e−N M (ξ)(cid:1)(cid:17) ϕf B(Γ2) ≤ CN(cid:16)f B0(Γ1) + sup Since ω ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd) by letting F (ξ) = bf (ξ)ω(ξ) and ψ(ξ) = bϕ(ξ)eM (ξ) we have ϕf B(Γ2) =(cid:16)ZΓ2 (3.6) F (ϕf )(ξ)ω(ξ)q dξ(cid:17)1/q .(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)ZRd ψ(ξ − η)F (η) dη(cid:17)q dξ(cid:17)1/q . J1 + J2, where J1 =(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)ZΓ1 J2 =(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)Z∁Γ1 , ψ(ξ − η)F (η) dη(cid:17)q ψ(ξ − η)F (η) dη(cid:17)q dξ(cid:17)1/q dξ(cid:17)1/q 15 . Let q0 be chosen such that 1/r0 + 1/r = 1 + 1/q, and let χΓ1 be the characteristic function of Γ1. Then Young's inequality gives J1 ≤(cid:16)ZRd(cid:16)ZΓ1 ψ(ξ − η)F (η) dη(cid:17)q dξ(cid:17)1/q = kψ ∗ (χΓ1F )kLq ≤ kψkLr0 kχΓ1F kLr = Cψf B0(Γ1), where Cψ = kψkLq0 < ∞. To estimate J2, we note that since ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X), then by Theorem 2.2 it follows that for every N > 0 there exist CN > 0 such that ψ(ξ) = bϕ(ξ)eM (ξ) ≤ CN e−(N +1)M (ξ)eM (ξ) ≤ CN e−N M (ξ). Furthermore, Γ2 ⊆ Γ1 implies that (3.7) ξ − η > 2c max(ξ, η) ≥ c(ξ + η), ξ ∈ Γ2, η /∈ Γ1 (3.8) holds for some constant c > 0, since this is true when 1 = ξ ≥ η. Now, a combination of Lemma 2.1, (3.7) and (3.8) (together with the monotone increasing property of M(ρ)) implies that for every N1 > 0 we have ψ(ξ − η) . Ce−2N1(M (ξ)+M (η)), which gives J2 .(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)Z∁Γ1 .(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)Z∁Γ1 e−2N1(M (ξ)+M (η))F (η) dη(cid:17)r e−2N1(M (ξ)+M (η))eN1M (η)(e−N1M (η)F (η)) dη(cid:17)r dξ(cid:17)1/r dξ(cid:17)1/r . sup η∈Rd e−N1M (η)F (η)). This implies (3.6) and the proof is finished. (cid:3) 16 N. TEOFANOV 3.1. Comparisons to other types of wave-front sets. Let ω ∈ Mv(R2d) be moderated with respect to the weight v of a polyno- mial growth at infinity, and let f ∈ D′(X). Then the wave frpont set WFF Lq (f ) in Definition 3.1 agrees with the wave-front set introduced in [41, Definition 3.1]. Therefore, the information on regularity in the background of wave-front sets of Fourier-Lebesgue type in Definition 3.1 might be compared to the information obtained from the classical wave-front sets, cf. Example 4.9 in [41]. (ω) Next we compare the wave-front sets introduced in Definition 3.1 to the wave-front sets in spaces of ultradistributions given in [24, 37, 44]. Let s > 1 and let X be an open subset of Rd. The ultradistribu- tion f ∈ (D(s))′(X) (f ∈ (D{s})′(X)) is (s)-micro-regular ({s}-micro- regular) at (x0, ξ0) if there exists ϕ ∈ D(s)(X) (ϕ ∈ D{s}(X)) such that ϕ(x) = 1 in a neighborhood of x0 and an open cone Γ which contains ξ0 such that F (ϕf )(ξ) . e−N ξ1/s , ξ ∈ Γ, (3.9) for each N > 0 (for some N > 0). The (s)-wave-front set ({s}-wave- front set) of f , WF(s)(f ) (WF{s}(f )) is defined as the complement in X × Rd \ 0 of the set of all (x0, ξ0) where f is (s)-micro-regular ({s}- micro-regular), cf. [44, Definition 1.7.1]. The {s}-wave-front set WF{s}(f ) can be found in [37] and it coincides with certain wave-front set WFL(f ) introduced in [24, Chapter 8.4]. Next we modify the definitions from [41, 27]. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfy (M.1)−(M.3)′ and let M(ρ) be its associated function. Furthermore, let ωj ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d), qj ∈ [1, ∞] when j belongs to some index set J, and let B be the array of spaces, given by (Bj) ≡ (Bj)j∈J, where Bj = F Lqj j ∈ J. (3.10) (ωj ) = F Lqj (ωj)(Rd), If f ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd), and (Bj) is given by (3.10), then we let Θsup (Bj )(f ) be the set of all ξ ∈ Rd \ 0 such that for some Γ = Γξ and each j ∈ J it holds f Bj(Γ) < ∞. We also let Θinf (Bj )(f ) be the set of all ξ ∈ Rd \ 0 such that for some Γ = Γξ and some j ∈ J it holds f Bj(Γ) < ∞. Finally we let Σsup (Bj )(f ) and Θinf (Bj )(f ) be the complements in Rd \ 0 of Θsup (Bj )(f ) and Σinf (Bj )(f ) respectively. Definition 3.2. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfy (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) be its associated function. Furthermore, let J be an index set, qj ∈ [1, ∞], ωj ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d) when j ∈ J, (Bj) be as in (3.10), and let X be an open subset of Rd. 17 (1) The wave-front set of f ∈ (D(Mp))′(X), of sup-type with respect (Bj )(f ), consists of all pairs (x0, ξ0) in X × (Rd \ 0) (Bj )(ϕf ) holds for each ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X) such that to (Bj), WF sup such that ξ0 ∈ Σsup ϕ(x0) 6= 0; (2) The wave-front set of f ∈ (D(Mp))′(X), of inf-type with respect (Bj )(f ) consists of all pairs (x0, ξ0) in X × (Rd \ 0) (Bj )(ϕf ) holds for each ϕ ∈ D(Mp)(X) such that to (Bj), WF inf such that ξ0 ∈ Σinf ϕ(x0) 6= 0. Now we are ready to rewrite the classical Gevrey wave-front sets WF{s}(f ) and WF(s)(f ) in terms of wave-front sets introduced in Def- inition 3.2. Proposition 3.1. [27] Let s > 1, and let Bj be the same as in (3.10) with qj ∈ [1, ∞] and ωj(ξ) ≡ ejξ1/s. Then the following is true: (1) if f ∈ (D{s})′(Rd), then WF inf WFBj (f ) = WF{s}(f ) ⊆ WF(s)(f ); (2) if f ∈ (D(s))′(Rd), then (Bj )(f ) =\j>0 WF(s)(f ) =[j>0 WFBj (f ) ⊆ WF sup (Bj )(f ). Remark 3.2. We recall that if f ∈ D′(Rd), and ωj(x, ξ) = hξij for j ∈ J = N, then it follows that WF sup (Bj )(f ) in Definition 3.2 is equal to the standard wave front set WF(f ) in Chapter VIII in [24]. 3.2. Convolution. We finish the section by recalling that the convo- lution properties, valid for standard wave-front sets of Hormander type, also hold for the wave-front sets of Fourier Lebesgue types, see [42, 43] for related results in the framework of tempered distributions. More generally, the following convolution result holds true. Theorem 3.2. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfy (M.1)− (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) be its associated function. Furthermore, let q, q1, q2 ∈ [1, ∞] and let ω, ω1, ω2 ∈ MM (ρ)(Rd) satisfy 1 q1 + 1 q2 = 1 q and ω(ξ) . ω1(ξ)ω2(ξ). (3.11) Then the convolution map (f1, f2) 7→ f1 ∗ f2 from S (1)(Rd) × S (1)(Rd) to S (1)(Rd) extends to a continuous mapping from F Lq1 (ω2)(Rd) to F Lq (ω)(Rd). This extension is unique if q1 < ∞ or q2 < ∞. (ω1)(Rd)×F Lq2 18 N. TEOFANOV If f1 ∈ F Lq1 supports, then (ω1),loc(Rd), f2 ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd) and f1 or f2 have compact WFF Lq (ω) (f1∗f2) ⊆ { (x+y, ξ) ; x ∈ supp f1 and (y, ξ) ∈ WFF L (f2) }. q2 (ω2) The proof is omitted, since the arguments for the first part of Theo- rem are the same as in the proof of [42, Lemma 2.1], taking into account that S (1) is dense in F Lq (ω) when q < ∞. The second part of Theorem 3.2 can be proved in the same way as [28, Theorem 2.2]. 4. Modulation Spaces In this section we first recall the action of the short-time Fourier transform on Gelfand-Shilov spaces and their dual spaces, and then proceed with modulation spaces and their properties. Since the short- time Fourier transform gives a phase-space description of a function or distribution, we first extend Definition 2.1. Definition 4.1. Let there be given sequences of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0, (Nq)q∈N0, ( Mp)p∈N0, ( Nq)q∈N0 which satisfy (M.1) and (M.2). We define S Nq, Nq,B (R2d) to be the set of smooth functions f ∈ C ∞(R2d) Mp, Mp,A such that kxα1ωα2∂β1 x ∂β2 ω f kL∞ ≤ CAα1+α2Mα1 Mα2Bβ1+β2Nβ1 Nβ2, ∀α1, α2, β1, β2 ∈ Nd 0}, and for some A, B, C > 0. Gelfand-Shilov spaces are projective and inductive limits of S Nq, Nq,B Mp, Mp,A (R2d): ΣNq, Nq Mp, Mp S Nq, Nq Mp, Mp (R2d) := proj lim A>0,B>0 (R2d) := ind lim A>0,B>0 S Nq, Nq,B Mp, Mp,A S Nq , Nq,B Mp, Mp,A (R2d); (R2d). Clearly, the corresponding dual spaces are given by (ΣNq, Nq Mp, Mp (S Nq, Nq Mp, Mp )′(R2d) := ind lim )′(R2d) := proj (S Nq, Nq,B Mp, Mp,A (S Nq , Nq,B Mp, Mp,A A>0,B>0 lim A>0,B>0 )′(R2d); )′(R2d). (R2d) to ΣMp, Mp Nq, Nq By Theorem 2.1, the Fourier transform is a homeomorphism from ΣNq, Nq (R2d) and, if F1f denotes the partial Fourier Mp, Mp transform of f (x, ω) with respect to the x variable, and if F2f denotes the partial Fourier transform of f (x, ω) with respect to the ω variable, then F1 and F2 are homeomorphisms from ΣNq, Nq (R2d) Mp, Mp (R2d) to ΣNq, Mp Mp, Nq and ΣNq, Mp Mp, Nq replaced by S Nq, Nq Mp, Mp (R2d), respectively. Similar facts hold when ΣNq, Nq Mp, Mp (R2d), (ΣNq, Nq Mp, Mp )′(R2d) or (S Nq, Nq Mp, Mp )′(R2d). When Mp = Mp and Nq = Nq we use usual abbreviated notation: Mp(R2d) = S Nq, Nq S Nq Mp, Mp (R2d) and similarly for other spaces. 19 (R2d) is 4.1. Short-time Fourier transform. Let (Mp)p∈N0 satisfy (M.1) and (M.2). For any given f, g ∈ SMp Mp(Rd), respectively) the short-time Fourier transform (STFT) of f with respect to the window g is given by Mp (Rd) (f, g ∈ ΣMp Vgf (x, ξ) = (2π)−d/2ZRd f (y) g(y − x) e−ihξ,yi dy . The following theorem (and its variations) is a folklore, in particu- lar in the framework of the duality between S(R2d) and S ′(R2d). For Gelfand-Shilov spaces we refer to e.g. [23, 50, 52, 54]. Theorem 4.1. Let there be given sequences (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 which satisfy (M.1), (M.2) and {N.1} : (∃H > 0)(∃A > 0) p!1/2 ≤ AH pMp, p ∈ N0. If f, g ∈ S Nq continuous map from (S Nq Mp(Rd), then Vφf ∈ S Nq,Mp Conversely, if Vφf ∈ S Nq,Mp Next, assume that (Mp)p∈N0 and (Nq)q∈N0 satisfy (M.1), (M.2) and Mp(Rd). Mp)′(Rd) × (SMp Mp,Nq (Rdd) then f, g ∈ S Nq Nq )′(Rd) into (S Nq ,Mp Mp,Nq )′(R2d). Mp,Nq (Rdd) and extends uniquely to a (N.1) : (∀H > 0)(∃A > 0) p!1/2 ≤ AH pMp, p ∈ N0. If f, g ∈ ΣNq continuous map from (ΣNq Mp(Rd), then Vφf ∈ ΣNq,Mp Mp)′(Rd) × (ΣMp Mp,Nq (Rdd) then f, g ∈ ΣNq Conversely, if Vφf ∈ ΣNq,Mp Mp,Nq(Rd) and extends uniquely to a Nq )′(Rd) into (ΣNq,Mp Mp,Nq)′(R2d). Mp(Rd). The conditions {N.1} and (N.1) are taken from [33] where they are Mp(Rd) called nontriviality conditions for the spaces SMp respectively, see also [32]. Mp (Rd) and ΣMp We will also need the following proposition when proving that the wave-front sets of Fourier-Lebesgue and modulation space types are the same. The first part is an extension of [9, Proposition 4.2]. Proposition 4.1. Let {Mp} satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′ and let M(ρ) denotes its associated function. Then the following is true: 20 N. TEOFANOV (1) if f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd) and φ ∈ S (Mp)(Rd), then Vφf (x, ξ) . e−hM (x)eεM (ξ), (4.1) for some ε > 0 and for every h > 0; (2) if f ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd) and φ ∈ D(Mp)(Rd)\0, then f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd), if and only if supp Vφf ⊆ K × Rd for some compact set K, and then Vφf (x, ξ) . eεM (ξ), (4.2) for some ε > 0. Proof. We only prove (1) and (3). The other statements follow by similar arguments and are left for the reader. As before, we will use Remark 2.2 in our calculations. Recall, f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd) implies that for some ε > 0, cf. [44, Theorem 1.6.1]. For φ ∈ S (Mp)(Rd) and ψ ∈ D(Mp)(Rd) such that ψ = 1 in supp f by bf (ξ) . eεM (ξ), Theorem 4.1, Lemma 2.1 and Remark 2.2 it follows that Vψφ(x, ξ) . e−hM (x)−kM (ξ), for every h, k > 0. Now straight-forward calculations give Vφf (x, ξ) = (Vφ(ψf ))(x, ξ) . (Vψφ(x, ·) ∗ bf)(ξ) =Z Vψφ(x, ξ − η)bf (η) dη .Z e−hM (x)−2εM (ξ−η)eεM (η) dη ≤ e−hM (x)Z e−2εM (η)+2εM (ξ)+εM (η) dη . e−hM (x)+2εM (ξ), and (1) follows. Next we prove (3). First assume that φ ∈ D(Mp)(Rd) \ 0 and f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd). Since both φ and f have compact support, it follows that supp(Vφf ) ⊆ K × Rd. Furthermore, by slightly modifying the proof of [54, Theorem 2.5] we conclude thay Vφf (x, ξ) . eε(M (x)+M (ξ)), for some ε > 0, see also [27, Proposition 3.2]. Since Vφf (x, ξ) has compact support in the x-variable, it follows that Vφf (x, ξ) . eεM (ξ). For the opposite direction, assume that supp Vφf ⊆ K ×Rd, for some compact set K. Assume that supp φ ⊆ K and choose ϕ ∈ D(s)(Rd) 21 such that supp ϕ ∩ 2K = ∅. Then (f, ϕ) = (kφkL2)−2(Vφf, Vφϕ) = 0, which implies that f has compact support. Here the first equality is the Moyal's identity (cf. [20]). This implies that f has compact support and the condition f ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd) now gives f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd). (cid:3) 4.2. Modulation spaces. The modulation space norms traditionally measure the joint time-frequency distribution of f ∈ S ′, we refer, for instance, to [11], [20, Ch. 11-13] and the original literature quoted there for various properties and applications. It is usually sufficient to ob- serve modulation spaces with weights which admit at most polynomial growth at infinity. However the study of ultra-distributions requires a more general approach that includes the weights of exponential or even superexponential growth, cf. [9, 55]. Note that the general approach in- troduced already in [11] includes the weights of sub-exponential growth. We refer to [13, 14] for related but even more general constructions, based on the general theory of coorbit spaces. Depending on the growth of the weight function m, different Gelfand- Shilov classes may be chosen as fitting test function spaces for modu- lation spaces, see [9, 50, 55]. The widest class of weights allowing to define modulation spaces is the weight class N . A weight function m on Rd belongs to N if it is a continuous, positive function such that m(z) = o(ecz2 ), for z → ∞, ∀c > 0, (4.3) with z ∈ Rd. For instance, every function m(z) = eszb, with s > 0 and 0 ≤ b < 2, is in N . Thus, the weight m may grow faster than exponentially at infinity. For example, the choice m ∈ N \∪vMv, when the weights v satisfy the Beurling-Domar condition from Introduction, is related to the spaces of quasianalytic functions, [10]. We notice that there is a limit in enlarging the weight class for modulation spaces, imposed by Hardy's theorem: if m(z) ≥ Cecz2, for some c > π/2, then the corresponding modulation spaces are trivial [22]. Definition 4.2. Let m ∈ N , and g a non-zero window function in S 1/2 m (Rd) consists of 1/2 (Rd). For 1 ≤ p, q ≤ ∞ the modulation space M p,q all f ∈ (S 1/2 m (R2d) (weighted mixed-norm spaces). The norm on M p,q 1/2 )′(Rd) such that Vgf ∈ Lp,q m is kf kM p,q m = kVgf kLp,q m = ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vgf (x, ω)pm(x, ω)p dx(cid:19)q/p dω!1/q 22 N. TEOFANOV (with obvious changes if either p = ∞ or q = ∞). If p, q < ∞, the 1/2 in the M p,q modulation space M p,q m - norm. If p = ∞ or q = ∞, then M p,q 1/2 in the weak∗ topology. m is the norm completion of S 1/2 m is the completion of S 1/2 When f, g ∈ S (1)(Rd), the above integral is convergent thanks to Theorem 4.1. Namely, for a given m ∈ Mv there exist l > 0 such that m(x, ω) ≤ Celk(x,ω)k and therefore (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vgf (x, ω)pm(x, ω)p dx(cid:19)q/p ≤ C(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZRd(cid:18)ZRd dω(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Vgf (x, ω)pelpk(x,ω)k dx(cid:19)q/p < ∞ dω(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) since by Theorems 4.1 and Theorem 2.1 we have Vgf (x, ω) < Ce−sk(x,ω)k for every s > 0. This implies S (1) ⊂ M p,q m . In particular, when m is a polynomial weight of the form m(x, ω) = s,t (Rd) for the modulation spaces hxithωis we will use the notation M p,q which consists of all f ∈ S ′(Rd) such that kf kM p,q s,t ≡ ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vφf (x, ω)hxithωisp dx(cid:19)q/p dω!1/q < ∞ (with obvious interpretation of the integrals when p = ∞ or q = ∞). m , and if m(z) ≡ 1 on R2d, then m , and so on. m instead of M p,p m and M p,p we write M p,q and M p for M p,q If p = q, we write M p In the next proposition we show that M p,q m (Rd) are Banach spaces whose definition is independent of the choice of the window g ∈ M 1 v \ {0}. In order to do so, we need the adjoint of the short-time Fourier transform. For given window g ∈ S (1) and a function F (x, ξ) ∈ Lp,q m (R2d) we (formally) define V ∗ g F by hV ∗ g F, f i := hF, Vgf i. Proposition 4.2. Let v be a submultiplicative weight. Fix m ∈ Mv and g, ψ ∈ S (1), with hg, ψi 6= 0. Then m (Rd), and m ≤ CkVψgkL1 m (R2d) → M p,q g F kM p,q g : Lp,q vkF kLp,q m . (1) V ∗ kV ∗ (4.4) (2) The inversion formula holds: IM p,q m = hg, ψi−1V ∗ g Vψ, where IM p,q m stands for the identity operator. 23 (3) M p,q m (Rd) are Banach spaces whose definition is independent on the choice of g ∈ S (1) \ {0}. (4) The space of admissible windows can be extended from S (1) to M 1 v . Proof. We refer to [9] for the proof which is based on the proof of [20, Proposition 11.3.2.]. Note that in (4) the density of S (1) in M p,q m is es- sential. This fact is not obvious, and we refer to [6] for the proof. Then we may proceed by using the standard arguments, cf. [20, Theorem (cid:3) 11.3.7]. The following theorem lists some basic properties of modulation spaces. We refer to [11, 20, 23, 38, 51, 54] for the proof. Theorem 4.2. Let p, q, pj, qj ∈ [1, ∞] and s, t, sj, tj ∈ R, j = 1, 2. Then: (1) M p,q s,t (Rd) are Banach spaces, independent of the choice of φ ∈ S(Rd) \ 0; (2) if p1 ≤ p2, q1 ≤ q2, s2 ≤ s1 and t2 ≤ t1, then s1,t1 (Rd) ⊆ M p2,q2 S(Rd) ⊆ M p1,q1 s,t (Rd) = S(Rd), ∪s,tM p,q s2,t2 (Rd) ⊆ S ′(Rd); s,t (Rd) = S ′(Rd); (3) ∩s,tM p,q (4) Let 1 ≤ p, q ≤ ∞, and let ws(x, ω) = esk(x,ω)k, x, ω ∈ Rd. Then Σ1 (Rd), M p,q (Σ1 ws (Rd), M p,q 1/ws 1)′(Rd) =[s≥0 1 )′(Rd) =\s>0 M p,q ws (Rd), (S 1 M p,q 1/ws (Rd). 1(Rd) = S (1)(Rd) =\s≥0 1 (Rd) = S {1}(Rd) =[s>0 S 1 1 p + 1 p′ = 1 q + 1 q′ = 1. (5) For p, q ∈ [1, ∞), the dual of M p,q s,t (Rd) is M p′,q′ −s,−t(Rd), where Remark 4.1. In the context of quasianalytic Gelfand-Shilov spaces, we recall (a special case of) [54, Theorem 3.9]: Let s, t > 1/2 and set wh(x, ω) ≡ eh(x1/t+ω1/s), h > 0, x, ω ∈ Rd. Then Σs S s t (Rd) = \h>0 t (Rd) = [h>0 M p,q wh (Rd), M p,q wh (Rd), (Σs (S s t )′(Rd) = [h>0 t )′(Rd) = \h>0 M p,q 1/wh (Rd), M p,q 1/wh (Rd). Modulation spaces include the following well-know function spaces: (1) M 2(Rd) = L2(Rd), and M 2 t,0(Rd) = L2 t (Rd); 24 N. TEOFANOV (2) The Feichtinger algebra: M 1(Rd) = S0(Rd); (3) Sobolev spaces: M 2 (4) Shubin spaces: M 2 0,s(Rd) = H 2 s (Rd) = L2 s (Rd) = {f f (ω)hωis ∈ L2(Rd)}; s (Rd) = Qs(Rd), cf. [49]. s(Rd) ∩ H 2 5. The invariance property of Wave-front sets Next we define wave-front sets with respect to modulation spaces and show that they agree with corresponding wave-front sets of Fourier Lebesgue types. More precisely, we prove that [41, Theorem 6.1] holds if the weights of polynomial growth are replaced by more general sub- multiplicative weights. Let there be given a sequence {Mp} which satisfies (M.1)−(M.3)′ and let M(ρ) denote its associated function. Furthermore, let p, q ∈ [1, ∞], and Γ ⊆ Rd\0 be an open cone. If f ∈ (S (1))′(Rd) and ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d), then we define f B(Γ) = f B(φ,Γ) ≡(cid:16)ZΓ(cid:16)ZRd Vφf (x, ξ)ω(x, ξ)p dx(cid:17)q/p dξ(cid:17)1/q when B = M p,q (ω) = M p,q (ω)(Rd). (5.1) when Γ = Rd \ 0 and φ ∈ S (s)(Rd), and We note that f B(Γ) = kf kM p,q that f B(φ,Γ) might attain +∞. Furthermore, when B = M p,q (ω) (ω), the sets ΘB(f ), ΣB(f ) and WFB(f ) with respect to the modulation space B are defined in the same way as in Section 3, after replacing the semi-norms of Fourier Lebesgue types in (3.4) with the semi-norms in (5.1). Proposition 5.1. Let there be given a sequence of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0 which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′, and let M(ρ), ρ > 0, be its associated function. If f ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd) then WFM p,q (f ) is independent of p and φ ∈ S (Mp)(Rd) \ 0 in (5.1) . (ω) Proof. We may assume that f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd) and that ω(x, ξ) = ω(ξ) since the statements only concern local assertions. (ω) We follow the idea of the proof of [27, Theorem 3,1], and in order to (f ) is independent of φ ∈ S (Mp)(Rd) \ 0, we assume prove that WFM p,q that φ, φ1 ∈ S (Mp)(Rd) \ 0 and let · C1(Γ) be the semi-norm in (5.1) after φ has been replaced by φ1. Let Γ1 and Γ2 be open cones in Rd such that Γ2 ⊆ Γ1. The asserted independency of φ follows if we prove that f C(Γ2) ≤ C(f C1(Γ1) + 1), (5.2) 25 for some positive constant C. Let Ω1 = { (x, ξ) ; ξ ∈ Γ1 } ⊆ R2d and Ω2 = ∁Ω1 ⊆ R2d, with characteristic functions χ1 and χ2 respectively, and set Fk(x, ξ) = Vφ1f (x, ξ)ω(ξ)χk(x, ξ), k = 1, 2, and G = Vφφ1(x, ξ)eM (ξ). Since ω is v-moderate, it follows from [20, Lemma 11.3.3] that Vφf (x, ξ)ω(x, ξ) .(cid:0)(F1 + F2) ∗ G(cid:1)(x, ξ), which implies that f C(Γ2) . J1 + J2, where Jk =(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)ZRd (Fk ∗ G)(x, ξ)p dx(cid:17)q/p dξ(cid:17)1/q , k = 1, 2. By Young's inequality J1 ≤ kF1 ∗ GkLp,q 1 ≤ kGkL1kF1kLp,q 1 = Cf C1(Γ1), where C = kGkL1 = kVφφ1(x, ξ)eM (ξ)kL1 < ∞, in view of Proposition 4.1. Next we consider J2. For ξ ∈ Γ2 fixed and integrating over η ∈ ∁Γ1, it follows from Propositon 4.1 and Lemma 2.1 that for some ε > 0 and every N, h > 0 we have that (F2 ∗ G)(x, ξ) is bounded by CZZR2d e−N M (y)eεM (η)e−h(M (x−y)+M (ξ−η))eM (ξ−η) dydη, for some constant C > 0. Therefore, there exist a constant c > 0 such that (F2 ∗ G)(x, ξ) e−N M (y)eεM (η)e−hM (x−y)−hc(M (ξ)+M (η))e(M (ξ)+M (η)) dydη .ZZR2d . e(−N +h)M (x)e(1−hc)M (ξ)ZZR2d e−hM (y)e(1+ε−hc)M (η) dydη, . e(−N +h)M (x)e(1−hc)M (ξ) < ∞, 26 N. TEOFANOV since N > 0 and h can be chosen arbitrarily. Therefore J2 =(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)ZRd (F2 ∗ G)(x, ξ)p dx(cid:17)q/p dξ(cid:17)1/q .(cid:16)ZΓ2(cid:16)ZRd(cid:16)e(−N +h)M (x)e(1−hc)M (ξ)(cid:17)p dx(cid:17)q/p dξ(cid:17)1/q < ∞. This proves that (5.2), and hence WFC(f ) is independent of φ ∈ S (s)(Rd) \ 0. (cid:3) The main result of this section, Theorem 5.1, now follows from Proposition 5.1 and calculations given in the proof of [27, Theorem 3.1]. For that reason we omit the proof. Theorem 5.1. Let there be given a sequence of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0 which satisfies (M.1) − (M.3)′, and let M(ρ), ρ > 0 be its associated function. Let p, q ∈ [1, ∞] and ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d). If f ∈ (D(Mp))′(Rd) then WFF Lq (ω) (f ) = WFM p,q (ω) (f ). (5.3) Finally, note that for a given sequence of positive numbers (Mp)p∈N0 which satisfies (M.1)−(M.3)′, and its associated function M(ρ), ρ > 0, when p, q ∈ [1, ∞], ω ∈ MM (ρ)(R2d) and f ∈ (E (Mp))′(Rd), then it follows from the definition of wave-front sets that then f ∈ B ⇐⇒ WFB(f ) = ∅, when B is equal to F Lq obtain (ω) or M p,q (ω). In particular, by Theorem 5.1 we F Lq (ω) ∩ (E (Mp))′(Rd) = M p,q (ω) ∩ (E (Mp))′(Rd), and we recover Corollary 6.2 in [41], Theorem 2.1 and Remark 4.6 in [45]. Acknowledgement This work is supported by MPNTR through Project 174024 and DS028 -- Tifmofus. References 1. R. D. Carmichael, A. Kami´nski, S. Pilipovi´c, Boundary Values and Convolution in Ultradistribution Spaces World Scientific, 2007. 2. S. Coriasco, K. Johansson, J. Toft, Local wave-front sets of Banach and Fr´echet types, and pseudo-differential operators, Monatsh. Math. 169 (3-4), 285 -- 316 (2013) 27 3. S. Coriasco, K. Johansson, J. Toft, Global wave-front sets of Banach, Fr´echet and modulation space types, and pseudo-differential operators. J. Differential Equations 254 (8), 3228 -- 3258 (2013) 4. Chung, J., Chung, S.-Y., Kim, D., A characterization for Fourier hyperfunc- tions, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 30 (2), 203 -- 208 (1994) 5. Chung, J., Chung, S.-Y., Kim, D., Characterization of the Gelfand -- Shilov spaces via Fourier transforms, Proceedings of the American Mathematical So- ciety 124(7), 2101 -- 2108 (1996) 6. E. Cordero, Gelfand -- Shilov window classes for weighted modulation spaces. Integral Transforms Spec. Funct. 18 (11-12), 829 -- 837 (2007) 7. E. Cordero, M. de Gosson, F. Nicola, On the reduction of the interferences in the Born-Jordan distribution. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 44 (2), 230 -- 245 (2018) 8. E. Cordero and K. Grochenig. Time-frequency analysis of localization operators. J. Funct. Anal., 205(1):107 -- 131, 2003. 9. E. Cordero, S. Pilipovi´c, L. Rodino, N. Teofanov, Localization Operators and Exponential Weights for Modulation Spaces, Mediterr. j. math. 2 (2005), 381- 394. 10. E. Cordero, S. Pilipovi´c, L. Rodino, N. Teofanov, E. Cordero, S. Pilipovic, L. Rodino, N. Teofanov - Quasianalytic Gelfand-Shilov spaces and localization operators, Rocky Mountain Journal of Mathematics, vol. 40 (4) (2010), 1123- 1147. 11. H. G. Feichtinger Modulation spaces on locally compact abelian groups. Techni- cal report, University of Vienna, Vienna, 1983; also in: M. Krishna, R. Radha, S. Thangavelu (Eds) Wavelets and their applications, Allied Publishers Pri- vate Limited, New Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Hagpur, Ahmadabad, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Lucknow, 2003, pp. 99 -- 140. 12. Modulation spaces: Looking back and ahead, Sampl. Theory Signal Im- age Process., 5 (2006), 109 -- 140. 13. H. G. Feichtinger and K. H. Grochenig Banach spaces related to integrable group representations and their atomic decompositions, I, J. Funct. Anal. 86(1989), 307 -- 340. 14. H. G. Feichtinger and K. H. Grochenig Banach spaces related to integrable group representations and their atomic decompositions, II, Monatsh. Math. 108 (1989), 129 -- 148. 15. H. G. Feichtinger and K. Grochenig. Gabor frames and time-frequency analysis of distributions, J. Funct. Anal. 146 (1997), 464 -- 495. 16. H. G. Feichtinger, T. Strohmer, editors, Gabor Analysis and Algorithms: The- ory and Applications, Birkhauser, 1998. 17. H. G. Feichtinger, T. Strohmer, editors, Advances in Gabor Analysis, Birkhauser, 2003. 18. G. Garello, A. Morando, Inhomogeneous microlocal propagation of singularities in Fourier Lebesgue spaces. J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 9 (1), 47 -- 93 (2018) 19. I. M. Gelfand, G. E. Shilov, Generalized Functions II Academic Press, New York, 1968. 20. K. Grochenig, Foundations of Time-Frequency Analysis, Birkhauser, Boston, 2001. 28 N. TEOFANOV 21. K. Grochenig, Weight functions in time-frequency analysis, In L. Rodino and et al., editors, Pseudodifferential Operators: Partial Differential Equations and Time-Frequency Analysis, volume 52, 343 - 366, 2007. 22. K. Grochenig and G. Zimmermann. Hardy's theorem and the short-time Fourier transform of Schwartz functions. J. London Math. Soc., 63:205 -- 214, 2001. 23. K. Grochenig, G. Zimmermann, Spaces of test functions via the STFT, Journal of Function Spaces and Applications, vol. 2 no. 1 (2004), 25 -- 53. 24. L. Hormander, The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators, vol I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983. 25. L. Hormander, Lectures on Nonlinear Hyperbolic Differential Equations, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1997. 26. K. Johansson, S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, Gabor pairs, and a discrete approach to wave-front sets, Monatsh. Math. 166 (2) (2012), 181199 27. K. Johansson, S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, Karoline Johansson, Stevan Pilipovic, Nenad Teofanov, Joachim Toft Micro-local analysis in some spaces of ultradistributions, Publications de lInstitut Mathematique, 92 (106) (2012), 124 28. K. Johansson, S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, A note on wave-front sets of Roumieu type ultradistributions, chapter in Pseudo-Differential Opera- tors, Generalized Functions and Asymptotics, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications (S. Molahajloo, S. Pilipovic, J. Toft, M.W. Wong, editors), Birkhauser, 231:239252 (2013) 29. Karoline Johansson, Stevan Pilipovic, Nenad Teofanov, Joachim Toft Resolu- tion of wavefront set via discrete sets, PAMM Proc. Appl. Math. Mech. 13, 495-496 (2013) 30. Kami´nski, A., Perisi´c, D., Pilipovi´c, S., On Various Integral Transformations of Tempered Ultradistributions, Demonstratio Math., 33(3), 641-655 (2000) 31. Komatsu, H., Ultradistributions, I, Structure theorems and a characterization, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA 20 (1973), 25 -- 105. 32. Langenbruch, M., Hermite functions and weighted spaces of generalized func- tions, Manuscripta Math., 119, 269 -- 285 (2006) 33. Lozanov -- Crvenkovi´c, Z., Perisi´c, D., Hermite expansions of elements of Gelfand-Shilov spaces in quasianalytic and non quasianalytic case, Novi Sad J. Math., 37 (2), 129 -- 147 (2007) 34. Nicola, F., Rodino, L., Global Pseudo-differential calculus on Euclidean spaces, Pseudo-Differential Operators. Theory and Applications 4, Birkhauser Verlag, (2010) 35. Petche, H.-J., Generalized functions and the boundary values of holomorphic functions, J. Fac. Sci. The University of Tokyo, Sec. IA, 31(2), 391 -- 431 (1984) 36. Pilipovi´c, S., Tempered ultradistributions, Bollettino della Unione Matematica Italiana, 7(2-B), 235 -- 251 (1988) 37. S. Pilipovi´c, Microlocal analysis of ultradistributions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 126 (1998), 105-113. 38. Pilipovi´c, S., Teofanov, N., Wilson bases and ultra-modulation spaces, Math. Nachr., 242, 179 -- 196 (2002) 39. S. Pilipovi´c and N. Teofanov, Pseudodifferential operators on ultra-modulation spaces J. Funct. Anal. 208:194 -- 228, 2004. 29 40. S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, Wave-front sets in Fourier Lebesgue spaces, Rendiconti del Seminario Matematico (Universita e Politecnico di Torino), 66 (4) (2008), 299 -- 319 41. S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, Micro-local analysis with Fourier Lebesgue spaces. Part I, J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 17 (3) (2011), 374 -- 407. 42. S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft, Micro-local analysis in Fourier Lebesgue and modulation spaces. Part II, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 1 (3) (2010), 341 -- 376. 43. S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, J. Toft - Singular support and FLq continuity of pseudo-differential operators, in Approximation and Computation, a volume dedicated to 60th anniversary of G.V. Milovanovic (edited by W. Gautschi, G. Mastroianni, and Th.M. Rassias), Springer, (2010) 357 - 376. 44. L. Rodino, Linear Partial Differential Operators in Gevrey Spaces, World Sci- entific, 1993. 45. M. Ruzhansky, M. Sugimoto, N. Tomita, J. Toft Changes of variables in mod- ulation and Wiener amalgam spaces, Math. Nachr., 284 (2011), 2078 - 2092. 46. M. Ruzhansky, V. Turunen, Pseudo-Differential Operators and Symmetries: Background Analysis and Advanced Topics, Birkhauser, Boston, 2010. 47. M. Ruzhansky, V. Turunen, Quantization of pseudo-differential operators on the torus, , J. Fourier Anal. Appl., published Online first, 2009. 48. L. Schwartz Th´eorie des Distributions, I -- II, Hermann & Cie, Paris, 1950 -- 51. 49. M. A. Shubin. Pseudodifferential Operators and Spectral Theory. Springer- Verlag, Berlin, second edition, 2001. 50. Teofanov, N., Ultradistributions and time-frequency analysis, in Pseudo- differential Operators and Related Topics, Operator Theory: Advances and Ap- plications, P. Boggiatto, L. Rodino, J. Toft, M.W. Wong, editors, Birkhauser, 164:173 -- 191, 2006. 51. Teofanov, N., Modulation spaces, Gelfand-Shilov spaces and pseudodifferential operators, Sampl. Theory Signal Image Process, 5 (2), 225 -- 242 (2006) 52. Teofanov, N., Gelfand-Shilov spaces and localization operators, Funct. Anal. Approx. Comput. 7 (2), 135-158 (2015) 53. Teofanov, N., The Grossmann-Royer transform, Gelfand-Shilov spaces, and continuity properties of localization operators on modulation spaces, Mathe- matical Analysis and ApplicationsPlenary Lectures, L. Rodino, J. Toft, editors, Springer, 2018. 54. Toft, J., The Bargmann transform on modulation and Gelfand-Shilov spaces, with applications to Toeplitz and pseudo-differential operators, J. Pseudo- Differ. Oper. Appl., 3 (2), 145-227 (2012) 55. Toft, J., Images of function and distribution spaces under the Bargmann trans- form, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 8 (1), 83 -- 139 (2017) 56. Toft, J., Matrix Parameterized Pseudo-differential Calculi on Modulation Spaces. In: Oberguggenberger M., Toft J., Vindas J., Wahlberg P. (eds) Gen- eralized Functions and Fourier Analysis. Operator Theory: Advances and Ap- plications, 260, Birkhauser (2017) 30 N. TEOFANOV N. Teofanov, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Depart- ment of Mathematics and Informatics, Trg Dositeja Obradovi´ca 4, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail address: [email protected]
1606.02937	2	1606	2016-09-02T07:41:04	Uncertainty Relations in the Framework of Equalities	[ "math.FA", "math-ph", "math-ph", "quant-ph" ]	We study the Schr\"odinger-Robertson uncertainty relations in an algebraic framework. Moreover, we show that some specific commutation relations imply new equalities, which are regarded as equality versions of well-known inequalities such as Hardy's inequality.	math.FA	math	Uncertainty Relations in the Framework of Equalities Tohru Ozawaa, Kazuya Yuasab aDepartment of Applied Physics, Waseda University, Tokyo 169-8555, Japan bDepartment of Physics, Waseda University, Tokyo 169-8555, Japan Abstract We study the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty relations in an algebraic framework. Moreover, we show that some specific commutation relations imply new equalities, which are regarded as equality versions of well-known inequalities such as Hardy's inequality. Keywords: uncertainty relations 2010 MSC: 81S05, 26D, 46C 1. Introduction In this paper, we study the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty relations as corollaries of equalities in a scalar product space. Moreover, we give a number of characterizations in the case where the associated inequalities are in fact equalities. Our presentation is based exclusively on an algebraic observation on the standard Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and could presumably provide a clear and explicit understanding of uncertainty relations from the point of view of orthogonality. As applications, we show that some specific commutation relations, in the Hilbert space L2(Rn) of square integrable functions on the Euclidean space Rn of dimensions n, imply new norm equalities in L2(Rn), which are regarded as equality versions of well-known inequalities such as dilation and Hardy type inequalities. In particular, we give a method of recognizing Hardy type inequalities in the framework of commutation relations of operators. This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we characterize the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty relations in the framework of equalities in a scalar product space. In Section 3, we give a number of examples of uncertainty relations on the basis of equalities in L2(Rn). In the Appendix, we summarize basic theorems on the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality in an algebraic setting. Throughout the paper, H denotes a complex vector space endowed with scalar product ( · · ) : H × H ∋ (u, v) 7→ (uv) ∈ C, which is linear (resp. antilinear) in the first (resp. second) variable. The associated norm is defined by kuk = (uu)1/2, u ∈ H. There is a large literature on the uncertainty relations. We refer the readers to [8, 10, 6, 15, 26] and references therein. 2. Uncertainty Relations Let A and B be symmetric operators in H with domains D(A) and D(B), respectively. In this and next sections, we use the terminology of operator theory (see [11, 23] for instance). According to Mourre [19], we define the commutator [A, B] as a sesquilinear form on H × H by ([A, B]ϕψ) = (BϕAψ) − (AϕBψ), ϕ, ψ ∈ M ≡ D(A) ∩ D(B). (2.1) It coincides with the usual definition AB − BA on D(AB) ∩ D(BA), which is smaller than M . In this paper, we adopt the definition (2.1) to avoid the domain problem as much as possible (see [17]) and assume that Preprint submitted to . . . M 6= {0} (2.2) October 16, 2018 to avoid trivial cases. Similarly, we define the anticommutator {A, B} by ({A, B}ϕψ) = (BϕAψ) + (AϕBψ), ϕ, ψ ∈ M. It is straightforward to verify that for all ϕ ∈ M , • ([A, B]ϕϕ) ∈ iR, ([A, B]ϕϕ) = −2i Im(AϕBϕ) = 2i Re i(AϕBϕ) = 2i Im(BϕAϕ) = −2i Re i(BϕAϕ). • ({A, B}ϕϕ) ∈ R, ({A, B}ϕϕ) = 2 Re(AϕBϕ) = 2 Im i(AϕBϕ) = 2 Re(BϕAϕ) = 2 Im i(BϕAϕ). • (AϕBϕ) = • (BϕAϕ) = 1 2 1 2 ({A, B}ϕϕ) − ({A, B}ϕϕ) + 1 2 1 2 ([A, B]ϕϕ). ([A, B]ϕϕ). (2.3) (2.4) (2.5) (2.6) (2.7) (2.8) (2.9) We now summarize algebraic identities related to the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty relations. The identities below are the direct consequences of the theorems in the Appendix. Theorem 2.1. Let ϕ ∈ M satisfy Aϕ 6= 0, Bϕ 6= 0. Then, Bϕ Bϕ (AϕBϕ) = 1 Aϕ kAϕk ∓ i Aϕ kAϕk ∓ 2! , ±i([A, B]ϕϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2! , ±({A, B}ϕϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:16)([A, B]ϕϕ)2 + ({A, B}ϕϕ)2(cid:17)1/2 = kAϕkkBϕk 2!2 + 1 −  1 − 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + eiθ Bϕ 2! = kAϕkkBϕk 1 − kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) for any θ ∈ R, where sgn z = z/z, z ∈ C \ {0}, and sgn 0 = 1. − [sgn(AϕBϕ)] Aϕ kAϕk 1 Aϕ kAϕk Bϕ 1 (2.10)± (2.11)± 1/2 Aϕ kAϕk 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ± ieiθ Bϕ 2!2 kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  (2.12) Remark 2.1. The standard uncertainty inequalities follow directly from equality (2.12). Indeed, equality (2.12) implies the inequality kAϕkkBϕk ≥ (AϕBϕ) = , (2.13) 1 2(cid:16)([A, B]ϕϕ)2 + ({A, B}ϕϕ)2(cid:17)1/2 which is called Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty inequality [10, 13]. It is further bounded from below by which is known as the Robertson uncertainty inequality [12].1 kAϕkkBϕk ≥ 1 2 ([A, B]ϕϕ), (2.14) 1There are interesting developments on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, beyond the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty relations. See for instance [20, 21, 4, 28, 24, 14, 3, 16, 5] and references therein. 2 Moreover, characterizations of extremizers are given by: Theorem 2.2. Let ϕ ∈ M . Then, the statements in each of the following Parts (1) -- (5) are equivalent: (1) (i) ({A, B}ϕϕ) = ±2kAϕkkBϕk. (ii) kBϕkAϕ = ±kAϕkBϕ. (iii) (AϕBϕ) = ±kAϕkkBϕk. (2) (i) i([A, B]ϕϕ) = ±2kAϕkkBϕk. (ii) kBϕkAϕ = ±ikAϕkBϕ. (iii) (AϕBϕ) = ±ikAϕkkBϕk. (3) (i) ({A, B}ϕϕ) = 2kAϕkkBϕk. (ii) ([A, B]ϕϕ) = 0, (AϕBϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk. (iii) 2kBϕk2Aϕ = ({A, B}ϕϕ)Bϕ. (iv) 2kAϕk2Bϕ = ({A, B}ϕϕ)Aϕ. (4) (i) ([A, B]ϕϕ) = 2kAϕkkBϕk. (ii) ({A, B}ϕϕ) = 0, (AϕBϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk. (iii) 2kBϕk2Aϕ = −([A, B]ϕϕ)Bϕ. (iv) 2kAϕk2Bϕ = ([A, B]ϕϕ)Aϕ. (5) (i) (AϕBϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk. (ii) kBϕkAϕ = [sgn(AϕBϕ)]kAϕkBϕ. (iii) kBϕk2Aϕ = (AϕBϕ)Bϕ. (iv) kAϕk2Bϕ = (AϕBϕ)Aϕ. 3. Applications In this section, we give a number of examples of commutation relations between operators in the Hilbert space L2(Rn) of square integrable functions on Rn as well as related norm identities which are regarded as equality versions of well-known inequalities. We follow the standard notation to denote a point in Rn by n)1/2. The gradient x = (x1, . . . , xn) ∈ Rn. The associated Euclidean length is defined as x = (x2 operator is defined as ∇ = (∂1, . . . , ∂n), where ∂j = ∂/∂xj is the partial differential operator in the jth direction. 1 + · · · + x2 3.1. Momentum and Position Operators Let A = −i∇ and B = x. More precisely, Aϕ = (−i∂1ϕ, . . . , −i∂nϕ), Bϕ = (x1ϕ, . . . , xnϕ) (3.1) (3.2) for any ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn; C), compactly supported smooth functions on Rn. In fact, the natural domains of A and B are given respectively by D(A) = H 1(Rn) = {ϕ ∈ L2(Rn); ∂jϕ ∈ L2(Rn) for all j with 1 ≤ j ≤ n}, D(B) = {ϕ ∈ L2(Rn); xjϕ ∈ L2(Rn) for all j with 1 ≤ j ≤ n}, (3.3) (3.4) 3 where the derivatives are understood to be distributional derivatives and H 1 denotes the standard Sobolev space of order one. Since Aϕ and Bϕ are Cn-valued, the corresponding natural Hilbert space is given by H = L2(Rn; Cn) with scalar product ((ϕ1, . . . , ϕn)(ψ1, . . . , ψn)) = (ϕjψj) = n Xj=1 n Xj=1ZRn ϕjψj dx, (3.5) where ϕj, ψj ∈ L2(Rn; C), 1 ≤ j ≤ n. Since C∞0 (Rn) is dense in L2(Rn), all computations will be carried out on C∞0 and then on M ≡ D(A) ∩ D(B) by density. Theorem 3.1. (1) Let ϕ ∈ M satisfy xϕ 6= 0, ∇ϕ 6= 0. Then, we have = kxϕk2 + k∇ϕk2 − kxϕ + ∇ϕk2, xϕ kxϕk + 2! ∇ϕ k∇ϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) nkϕk2 = −2 Re(xϕ∇ϕ) = kxϕkk∇ϕk 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 xϕ kxϕk ∇ϕ 2! . k∇ϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) and (xϕ∇ϕ) = kxϕkk∇ϕk 1 − − [sgn(xϕ∇ϕ)] (2) Let ϕ ∈ M . Then, the following statements are equivalent: (i) nkϕk2 = kxϕk2 + k∇ϕk2. (ii) xϕ = −∇ϕ. (iii) There exists θ ∈ R such that, for any x ∈ Rn, ϕ satisfies ϕ(x) = eiθ 1 πn/4 kϕk exp(cid:18)− x2 2 (cid:19) . (3) Let ϕ ∈ M satisfy xϕ 6= 0. Then, the following statements are equivalent: (i) nkϕk2 = 2kxϕkk∇ϕk. (ii) k∇ϕkxϕ = −kxϕk∇ϕ. (iii) There exists θ ∈ R such that, for any x ∈ Rn, ϕ satisfies ϕ(x) = eiθ(cid:18) k∇ϕk πkxϕk(cid:19)n/4 kϕk exp(cid:18)− k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) . (4) Let ϕ ∈ M satisfy xϕ 6= 0. Then, the following statements are equivalent: (i) (xϕ∇ϕ) = kxϕkk∇ϕk. (ii) k∇ϕkxϕ = [sgn(xϕ∇ϕ)]kxϕk∇ϕ. (iii) There exists θ ∈ R such that, for any x ∈ Rn, ϕ satisfies ϕ(x) = eiθ(cid:18)−[Re sgn(xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk πkxϕk(cid:19)n/4 kϕk exp(cid:18)[sgn (xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) . Note that for ∇ϕ 6= 0 Re(xϕ∇ϕ) = Re (xϕ∇ϕ) = − n 2 kϕk2 < 0 and hence Re sgn(xϕ∇ϕ) = Re sgn (xϕ∇ϕ) < 0. 4 (3.6) (3.7) (3.8) (3.9) (3.10) (3.11) (3.12) (3.13) Remark 3.1. In general, one of the statements in Part (2) implies any of the statements in Part (3). The converse implication holds if and only if kxϕk = k∇ϕk. Moreover, one of the statements in Part (3) implies any of the statements in Part (4). The converse implication holds if and only if (xϕ∇ϕ) = −(xϕ∇ϕ). Remark 3.2. For n = 1, the inequality kxϕkk∇ϕk ≥ 1 2 kϕk2 (3.14) implied by equality (3.7) is known as the Kennard uncertainty inequality, which is a version of the Robertson uncertainty inequality (2.14) specialized to A = −i∇ and B = x. The vector ϕ saturating the Kennard uncertainty inequality (3.14) is given by (3.11), and is known to be a squeezed state in the field of quantum optics [25, 27]. If furthermore the vector ϕ satisfies kxϕk = k∇ϕk = 1√2 kϕk, it is reduced to (3.10), and is called coherent state [25, 27]. A tighter inequality than (3.14), kxϕkk∇ϕk ≥ (xϕ∇ϕ) = , (3.15) 1 2(cid:16)kϕk2 + ((x · ∇ + ∇ · x)ϕϕ)2(cid:17)1/2 is available from equality (3.9) for n = 1, as a special version of the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty in- equality (2.13). Inequality (3.15) is saturated by the vector ϕ given in (3.12), which is again a squeezed state. The family of the extremizers (3.12) of the Schrodinger-Robertson uncertainty inequality (3.15) includes the squeezed state (3.11) and the coherent state (3.10) as special cases. Proof of Theorem 3.1. (1) Let ϕ ∈ C∞0 . Then, 2 Re(xϕ∇ϕ) =Z x · ∇ϕ2 dx = −Z (div x)ϕ2 dx = −nkϕk2. Moreover, we have kxϕ + ∇ϕk2 = kxϕk2 + k∇ϕk2 + 2 Re(xϕ∇ϕ). (3.16) (3.17) Then, equalities (3.6) -- (3.8) follow, by recalling (2.5) and (2.10)+. On the other hand, the identity (3.9) follows from (2.12), by noting sgn z = 1 and (sgn z)−1 = sgn z = sgn z. (2) The equivalence between (i) and (ii) follows from (3.8). If ϕ has the form (iii), then (ii) follows by a direct calculation. Conversely, if (ii) holds, then ∇(cid:20)exp(cid:18) x2 2 (cid:19) ϕ(cid:21) = exp(cid:18) x2 2 (cid:19) (xϕ + ∇ϕ) = 0, and therefore, for some c ∈ C, ϕ is represented as ϕ(x) = c exp(cid:18)− x2 2 (cid:19) . (3.18) (3.19) Then, (iii) follows by evaluating kϕk. (3) The equivalence between (i) and (ii) follows from (3.7). If ϕ has the form (iii), then (ii) follows by a direct calculation. Conversely, if (ii) holds, then ∇(cid:20)exp(cid:18) k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) ϕ(cid:21) = exp(cid:18) k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19)(cid:18) k∇ϕk kxϕk and therefore, for some c ∈ C, ϕ is represented as ϕ(x) = c exp(cid:18)− k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) . Then, (iii) follows by evaluating kϕk. 5 xϕ + ∇ϕ(cid:19) = 0, (3.20) (3.21) (4) The equivalence between (i) and (ii) follows from (3.9). If ϕ has the form (iii), then (ii) follows by a direct calculation. Conversely, if (ii) holds, then ∇(cid:20)exp(cid:18)−[sgn (xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) ϕ(cid:21) = exp(cid:18)−[sgn (xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19)(cid:18)−[sgn (xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk kxϕk xϕ + ∇ϕ(cid:19) = 0 by noting sgn z = (sgn z)−1, and therefore, for some c ∈ C, ϕ is represented as ϕ(x) = c exp(cid:18)[sgn (xϕ∇ϕ)] k∇ϕk kxϕk x2 2 (cid:19) . Then, (iii) follows by evaluating kϕk. We now rewrite (3.6) as and regard (3.24) as an orthogonality relation. Then, as in [18] we notice that (3.24) yields a new equality: Theorem 3.2. The following equality holds for all ϕ ∈ D(A) with x · ∇ϕ ∈ L2(Rn). There does not exist ϕ ∈ D(A) \ {0} with x · ∇ϕ ∈ L2(Rn) satisfying kϕk2 (3.25) kx · ∇ϕk2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:17) = 0 n 2 Re(cid:16)x · ∇ϕ + ϕ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kx · ∇ϕk2 =(cid:16) n 2(cid:17)2 x · ∇ϕ + n 2 n 2 kϕk ≤ kx · ∇ϕk 2 +(cid:16) n 2(cid:17)2 kϕk2. Remark 3.3. The inequality as well as the nonexistence of nontrivial extremizers has been proved in [22]. Theorem 3.2 is recognized as an optimal description of (3.27) from the point of view of equalities. Proof of Theorem 3.2. The equality (3.25) follows from (3.24), by noticing that (3.22) (3.23) (3.24) (3.26) (3.27) (3.28) (3.29) (3.30) Moreover, since (3.26) holds if and only if there exists a function f : Sn−1 → C satisfying kx · ∇ϕk2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)x · ∇ϕ + x · ∇ϕ + 2 n 2 n 2 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:17) − +(cid:16) n 2(cid:17)2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n 2 kϕk2. x · ∇ϕ + ϕ = x−n/2x · ∇(xn/2ϕ), ϕ(x) = x−n/2f(cid:16) x x(cid:17) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n 2 ZSn−1 6 for all x ∈ Rn \ {0}, where Sn−1 is the unit sphere Sn−1 = {x ∈ Rn; x = 1}. Then, ϕ ∈ L2(Rn) if and only if f (ω)2 dσ(ω) = 0, (3.31) which in turn is equivalent to f = 0 and to ϕ = 0, where σ is the surface element, namely, the Lebesgue measure on Sn−1. This proves the nonexistence of nontrivial extremizers of (3.27). In [22], it has been proved that the inequality (3.27) is equivalent to the standard Hardy inequality for n ≥ 3. The following theorem describes such relationship at the level of equalities: Theorem 3.3. Let n ≥ 3. Then, the equality for all ψ ∈ D(A) follows from (3.25). Conversely, (3.32) implies (3.25). x x (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x x · ∇ψ + n − 2 2x 2 (cid:19)2 +(cid:18) n − 2 2 ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ψ x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (3.32) Proof. Since C∞0 (Rn \ {0}) is dense in H 1(Rn) = D(A) for n ≥ 3, we may assume that ϕ, ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}). The following calculations are justified as long as ϕ, ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}) without restriction on the space dimensions. First, suppose that (3.25) holds for all ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}). Let ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}). Then, we ψ(x), x ∈ Rn \ {0}. It follows that ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}) and the left-hand side of (3.25) define ϕ by ϕ(x) = 1 x is rewritten as x · ∇ x x x x x x x x x x kx · ∇ϕk2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ψ 2 2 2 · ∇ψ − x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n 2 2 x · ∇ϕ + (cid:16) n 2(cid:17)2 2 2 1 x 2 2 x x ψ 2 , ψ ψ ψ x · ∇ψ 1 x ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) − 2 ReZ x x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ψ dx +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) −Z x2 · ∇ψ2 dx +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) +Z (cid:18)div x2(cid:19) ψ2 dx +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + (n − 1)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (cid:19)2 − (n − 1) =(cid:18) n − 2 x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n 2 n − 2 2x · ∇ψ + x x ψ x x · ∇ + 2 . ψ 2 . 2 (3.33) (3.34) (3.35) where we have used Gauss' divergence theorem, while the first term on the right-hand side of (3.25) is rewritten as Combining (3.33) and (3.34), we derive (3.32) from (3.25) with ϕ = 1 x ψ, noticing that Conversely, suppose that (3.32) holds for all ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}). Let ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}). Then, we define ψ = xϕ, x ∈ Rn \ {0}. It follows that ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}) and all the computations in (3.33) and (3.34) can be traced backward to imply (3.25). In [23], the standard Hardy type inequalities of the form ≤ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ψ x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x x 2 n − 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ψ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 2 n − 2 k∇ψk (3.36) are referred to as the uncertainty principle lemma. Here we have derived (3.36) as a corollary to (3.24), which is equivalent to (3.6), which in turn is regarded as an original form of the uncertainty relation between the position and momentum operators. 7 3.2. Generator of Dilations and Free Hamiltonian Let A = 1 2i (x · ∇ + ∇ · x) = −ix · ∇ − i n 2 and B = −∆ = −∇ · ∇ with natural domains D(A) = {ϕ ∈ H 1(Rn); x · ∇ϕ ∈ L2(Rn)}, D(B) = H 2(Rn) = {ϕ ∈ L2(Rn); ∂j∂kϕ ∈ L2(Rn) for all j, k with 1 ≤ j, k ≤ n}. (3.37) (3.38) The operator A is called the generator of dilations in the sense that one-parameter group of dilations {T (θ); θ ∈ R} defined by satisfies T ′(0)ϕ = d dθ (T (θ)ϕ)(x) = e n 2 θϕ(eθx), x ∈ Rn = iAϕ. T (θ)ϕ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)θ=0 [A, B]ϕ = 2iBϕ The generator of dilations A and the free Hamiltonian B have a special commutation relation for smooth functions ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn; C), where the commutator is understood to be AB − BA since C∞0 (Rn) ⊂ D(BA) ∩ D(AB) ⊂ D(A) ∩ D(B). Theorem 3.4. Let ϕ ∈ M ≡ D(A) ∩ D(B) satisfy Aϕ 6= 0, Bϕ 6= 0. Then, (3.39) (3.40) (3.41) (3.42) (3.43) (3.44) (3.45) (3.46) Remark 3.4. As a direct consequence, we have the inequality 2k∇ϕk2 = 2(Bϕϕ) = −i([A, B]ϕϕ) = −2 Im(AϕBϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) k∇ϕk2 ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x · ∇ϕ + Aϕ kAϕk + i Bϕ 2! . kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) k∆ϕk, n 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) which might be new. The inequality (3.46) relates the information given by the momentum operator, the generator of the dilations, and the free Hamiltonian. Remark 3.5. By (3.25), we already know that which implies (3.27) directly, as stated in Remark 3.3. kAϕk2 = kx · ∇ϕk2 −(cid:16) n 2(cid:17)2 kϕk2, (3.47) Proof of Theorem 3.4. The equalities in (3.42) -- (3.45) follow from (3.41), (2.5), (2.10)−, and the equality k∇ϕk2 = −(∆ϕϕ). (3.48) 8 3.3. Radial Derivative and Coulomb Potential 2i ( x x Let n ≥ 3 as in Theorem 3.3. Let A = 1 domains · ∇ + ∇ · x x ) = −i x x · ∇ − i n−1 2x and B = 1 x with natural D(A) = {ϕ ∈ L2(Rn); x x D(B) = {ϕ ∈ L2(Rn); 1 x ϕ ∈ L2(Rn)}, · ∇ϕ, 1 x ϕ ∈ L2(Rn)}. (3.49) (3.50) The operator A is regarded as a symmetrized radial derivative defined by ∂r ≡ x x of the gradient has a pointwise decomposition · ∇. The squared length where Lj is the jth component of the spherical derivative defined by ∇ϕ2 = ∂rϕ2 + Ljϕ2, n Xj=1 At the point x ∈ Rn, the unit outer vector is given by x , 1 ≤ j ≤ n, where x ej = (0, . . . , 0, 1, 0, . . . , 0) is the standard unit vector in the jth direction. The corresponding one-parameter family of operators acting on functions are given by x x Lj ≡ ∂j − ∂r. xj x and it is orthogonal to ej − xj x which satisfy x x(cid:17), (T (θ)ϕ)(x) = ϕ(cid:16)x + θ (Tj(θ)ϕ)(x) = ϕ(cid:16)x + θ(cid:16)ej − T (θ)ϕ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)θ=0 Tj(θ)ϕ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)θ=0 d dθ d dθ T ′j(0)ϕ = T ′(0)ϕ = [A, B]ϕ = iB2ϕ xj x x x(cid:17)(cid:17), = ∂rϕ, = Ljϕ. (3.51) (3.52) (3.53) (3.54) (3.55) (3.56) (3.57) (3.58) (3.59) (3.60) (3.61) (3.62) The (symmetrized) radial derivative and the Coulomb potential have a special commutation relation for smooth functions ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn \ {0}; C), where the commutator is understood to be AB − BA since C∞0 (Rn \ {0}) ⊂ D(BA) ∩ D(AB) ⊂ D(A) ∩ D(B). Theorem 3.5. Let n ≥ 3 and let ϕ ∈ H 1(Rn) satisfy Aϕ 6= 0, Bϕ 6= 0. Then, kBϕk2 = −i([A, B]ϕϕ) = −2 Im(AϕBϕ) = kAϕkkBϕk 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4 Aϕ kAϕk + i Bϕ 2! , kBϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kBϕk2. kAϕk2 = k∂rϕk2 − (n − 1)(n − 3) Remark 3.6. As a direct consequence of (3.60), we have the inequality 1 x (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = kBϕk ≤ 2kAϕk = 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ∂rϕ + n − 1 2x , ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) which might be new. The inequality (3.62) relates the information given by the radial derivative and Coulomb potential. To be more specific, (3.62) shows that the Coulomb potential B is A (symmetrized radial derivative)-bounded with relative bound 2. 9 Proof of Theorem 3.5. The equalities in (3.58) -- (3.60) follow from (3.57), (2.5), and (2.10)−. In the same way as in the proof of Theorem 3.3 we calculate · ∇ϕ + n − 1 2x kAϕk2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) to obtain (3.61). x x x x x x x x 2 2 2 · ∇ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + (n − 1) ReZ x x 2 · ∇ϕ 1 x ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (cid:19)2 ϕ dx +(cid:18) n − 1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (cid:19)2 x2 · ∇ϕ2 dx +(cid:18) n − 1 Z (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (cid:19)2 x2(cid:19) ϕ2 dx +(cid:18) n − 1 Z (cid:18)div (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x x x 1 x 2 1 x ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 2 2 n − 1 n − 1 + − We now rewrite (3.57) or (3.59) as Re(Bϕ − 2iAϕBϕ) = 0 2 (3.63) (3.64) and regard (3.64) as an orthogonality relation. Then, as in [18] we notice that (3.64) yields a new equality, 4kAϕk2 = k(2iAϕ − Bϕ) + Bϕk2 = k2iAϕ − Bϕ2 + kBϕk2, where the right-hand side is exactly the same as while the left-hand side is rewritten as the right-hand side of (3.61). Therefore, we have proved 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 4k∂rϕk2 = 4(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x x · ∇ϕ + n − 2 2x x x · ∇ϕ + n − 2 2x 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 , 1 x ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + (n − 2)2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 1 x 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (3.65) (3.66) , (3.67) which is exactly the same as (3.32). We have thus derived the standard Hardy type inequality (the uncer- tainty principle lemma [23]) from the orthogonality (3.64), which is equivalent to the commutation relation between the radial derivative and Coulomb potential (3.57). By (3.51), the equality (3.32) or (3.67) is also rewritten as k∇ϕk2 − n Xj=1 kLjϕk2 = k∂rϕk2 2 (cid:19)2 =(cid:18) n − 2 x x 1 x (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇ϕ + n − 2 2x . 2 ϕ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (3.68) Appendix A. Basics of the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality In this appendix, we summarize algebraic identities related to the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. For this purpose, we introduce sign function sgn : C → R by sgn z =  z/z, z ∈ C \ {0}, 1, z = 0. 10 (A.1) Theorem A.1. The following equalities hold for all u, v ∈ H \ {0}: (uv) = kukkvk 1 − ± Re(uv) = kukkvk 1 − ± Im(uv) = kukkvk 1 − − [sgn(uv)] v v 2! , kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2! , kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2! . kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) v ∓ 1 1 1 u u u kuk kuk 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kuk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) − 2 Re(cid:18) u kuk ∓ i (A.2) (A.3)± (A.4)± Proof. Let (uv) 6= 0. Then, we expand the square of the last norm on the right-hand side of (A.2) as u kuk − (uv) (uv) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 v kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) u kuk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = 2 − 2 2 Re[(uv)(uv)] kukkvk(uv) (uv) kukkvk , = 2 − 2 (uv) (uv) (uv) (uv) v kvk(cid:19) +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 v kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (A.5) which yields (A.2). If (uv) = 0, then a similar calculation yields (A.2) in the trivial case. Equalities (A.3)± can be proved in the same manner as (A.5). Or they follow from (A.2) by regarding H as a real vector space with scalar product Re( · · ) : H × H ∋ (u, v) 7→ Re(uv) ∈ R, (A.6) since the new scalar product Re(uv) satisfies sgn Re(uv) = 1 if and only if Re(uv) ≥ 0 while sgn Re(uv) = −1 if and only if −Re(uv) = Re(uv) > 0. Substituting v by iv in (A.3)± implies (A.4)±. Remark A.1. Equality (A.2) is regarded as an equality version of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (uv) ≤ kukkvk. (A.7) Indeed, the former immediately implies the latter. Remark A.2. Equalities (A.2), (A.3)+, and (A.4)+ have been noticed by Aldaz [1, 2] and are verified by similar and simpler calculations as above, too. See also [7, 9] for related subjects. Corollary A.1. The following equalities hold for all u, v ∈ H \ {0}: v 1 1 u ± kuk + 1 − + 1 − Proof. The corollary follows from (A.3)±, (A.4)±, and the equality (uv) = kukkvk 1 −  = kukkvk 1 −  2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (uv) =(cid:16)[Re(uv)]2 + [Im(uv)]2(cid:17)1/2 kuk ± u 1 1 v u kuk u kuk 1/2 1/2 . (A.8)± (A.9)± ± i ∓ i v 2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  v . (A.10) Corollary A.1 is further generalized as: 11 Corollary A.2. The following equality holds for all u, v ∈ H \ {0} and θ ∈ R: + eiθ v u kuk 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (uv) = kukkvk 1 −  2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  Proof. Substituting v by eiθv in (A.8)+ [resp. (A.9)+] yields (A.11)+ [resp. (A.11)−]. Remark A.3. Equality (A.8)+ [resp. (A.9)+] follows from (A.11)+ [resp. (A.11)−] with θ ∈ 2πZ, while equality (A.8)− [resp. (A.9)−] follows from (A.11)+ [resp. (A.11)−] with θ ∈ (2Z + 1)π. Theorem A.2. Let u, v ∈ H. Then, the statements in each of the following Parts (1) -- (5) are equivalent: 2!2 kvk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 − 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ± ieiθ v u kuk 1/2 . (A.11)± (1) (i) Re(uv) = ±kukkvk. (ii) kvku = ±kukv. (iii) (uv) = ±kukkvk. (2) (i) Im(uv) = ±kukkvk. (ii) kvku = ±ikukv. (iii) (uv) = ±ikukkvk. (3) (i) Re(uv) = kukkvk. (ii) Im(uv) = 0, (uv) = kukkvk. (iii) kvk2u = [Re(uv)]v. (iv) kuk2v = [Re(uv)]u. (4) (i) Im(uv) = kukkvk. (ii) Re(uv) = 0, (uv) = kukkvk. (iii) kvk2u = [i Im(uv)]v. (iv) kuk2v = −[i Im(uv)]u. (5) (i) (uv) = kukkvk. (ii) kvku = [sgn(uv)]kukv. (iii) kvk2u = (uv)v. (iv) kuk2v = (uv)u. Proof. If u = 0 or v = 0, then all of the equalities in the theorem trivially hold. Therefore, we assume that u 6= 0 and v 6= 0. (1) The equivalence between (i) and (ii) follows from (A.3)±. Given (ii), we calculate kvk(uv) = (kvkuv) = (±kukvv) = ±kukkvk2, (A.12) which implies (iii) by dividing both sides by kvk > 0. Finally, (iii) implies (i) by taking the real part of (uv). (2) Part (2) follows from Part (1) by replacing v by iv. 12 (5) The equivalence between (i) and (ii) follows from (A.2). Given (i) and (ii), a direct calculation yields (iii). Given (iii), we calculate kvk2kuk2 = (kvk2uu) = ((uv)vu) = (uv)(vu) = (uv)2, (A.13) which implies (i) by taking its square root. This proves the equivalence among (i) -- (iii). A similar argument shows the equivalence among (i), (ii) and (iv), or it follows by exchanging u and v in the preceding argument. (3) Given (i), we have the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality kukkvk = Re(uv) ≤(cid:16)[Re(uv)]2 + [Im(uv)]2(cid:17)1/2 = (uv) ≤ kukkvk, (A.14) where all those inequalities turn out to be equalities, which in turn imply (ii). Given (ii), we have by Part (5), which proved above where the imaginary part of (uv) vanishes to imply (iii). Given (iii), we calculate kvk2kuk2 = (kvk2uu) = ([Re(uv)]vu) = [Re(uv)](vu) kvk2u = (uv)v, (A.15) (A.16) and take its real part to obtain (i). This proves the equivalence among (i) -- (iii). A similar argument shows the equivalence among (i), (ii), and (iv), or it follows by exchanging u and v in the preceding argument. (4) Part (4) follows from Part (3) by replacing v by iv. Acknowledgments This work is partially supported by the Top Global University Project from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan. TO is supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) (No. 26247014) from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). KY is supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) (No. 26400406) from JSPS and by Waseda University Grants for Special Research Projects (No. 2015K-202 and No. 2016K-215). References [1] J. M. Aldaz, A stability version of Holder's inequality, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 343, 842 (2008). [2] J. M. Aldaz, Strengthened Cauchy-Schwarz and Holder inequalities, J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math. 10, 116 (2009). [3] C. Bastos, A. E. Bernardini, O. Bertolami, N. Costa Dias, and J. N. Prata, Robertson-Schrodinger-type formulation of Ozawa's noise-disturbance uncertainty principle, Phys. Rev. A 89, 042112 (2014). [4] C. Branciard, Error-tradeoff and error-disturbance relations for incompatible quantum measurements, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 6742 (2013). [5] P. Busch, P. Lahti, and R. F. Werner, Quantum root-mean-square error and measurement uncertainty relations, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1261 (2014). [6] P. Dang, G.-T. Deng, and T. Qian, A sharper uncertainty principle, J. Funct. Anal. 265, 2239 (2013). [7] J. J. Duistermaat and J. A. C. Kolk, Multidimensional Real Analysis II (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004). [8] G. B. Folland and A. Sitaram, The uncertainty principle: A mathematical survey, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 3, 207 (1997). [9] K. Fujiwara and T. Ozawa, Stability of the Young and Holder inequalities, J. Inequal. Appl. 2014, 162 (2014). [10] S. Furuichi and K. Yanagi, Schrodinger uncertainty relation, Wigner-Yanase-Dyson skew information and metric adjusted correlation measure, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 388, 1147 (2012). [11] S. J. Gustafson and I. M. Sigal, Mathematical Concepts of Quantum Mechanics, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2011). [12] M. Hayashi, S. Ishizaka, A. Kawachi, G. Kimura, and T. Ogawa, Introduction to Quantum Information Science (Springer, Berlin, 2015). [13] A. S. Holevo, Quantum Systems, Channels, Information: A Mathematical Introduction (Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2012). 13 [14] F. Kaneda, S.-Y. Baek, M. Ozawa, and K. Edamatsu, Experimental test of error-disturbance uncertainty relations by weak measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 020402 (2014). [15] C. K. Ko and H. J. Yoo, Schrodinger uncertainty relation and convexity for the monotone pair skew information, Tohoku Math. J. 66, 107 (2014). [16] K. Korzekwa, D. Jennings, and T. Rudolph, Operational constraints on state-dependent formulations of quantum error- disturbance trade-off relations, Phys. Rev. A 89, 052108 (2014). [17] H. Kosaki, On intersections of domains of unbounded positive operators, Kyushu J. Math. 60, 3 (2006). [18] S. Machihara, T. Ozawa, and H. Wadade, On the Hardy type inequalities, submitted. [19] E. Mourre, Absence of singular continuous spectrum for certain self-adjoint operators, Commun. Math. Phys. 78, 391 (1981). [20] M. Ozawa, Universally valid reformulation of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle on noise and disturbance in measure- ment, Phys. Rev. A 67, 042105 (2003). [21] M. Ozawa, Uncertainty relations for noise and disturbance in generalized quantum measurements, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 311, 350 (2004). [22] T. Ozawa and H. Sasaki, Inequalities associated with dilations, Commun. Contemp. Math. 11, 265 (2009). [23] M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics II: Fourier Analysis, Self-Adjointness (Academic Press, San Diego, 1975). [24] M. Ringbauer, D. N. Biggerstaff, M. A. Broome, A. Fedrizzi, C. Branciard, and A. G. White, Experimental joint quantum measurements with minimum uncertainty, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 020401 (2014). [25] M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997). [26] A. Tawfik and A. Diab, Generalized uncertainty principle: Approaches and applications, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 23, 1430025 (2014). [27] D. F. Walls and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Optics, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2008). [28] Y. Watanabe, Formulation of Uncertainty Relation Between Error and Disturbance in Quantum Measurement by Using Quantum Estimation Theory (Springer, Tokyo, 2014). 14
1207.0086	2	1207	2013-07-22T15:43:26	Semispectral Measures and Feller markov Kernels	[ "math.FA" ]	We give a characterization of commutative semispectral measures by means of Feller and Strong Feller Markov kernels. In particular: {itemize} we show that a semispectral measure $F$ is commutative if and only if there exist a self-adjoint operator $A$ and a Markov kernel $\mu_{(\cdot)}(\cdot):\Gamma\times\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})\to[0,1]$, $\Gamma\subset\sigma(A)$, $E(\Gamma)=\mathbf{1}$, such that $$F(\Delta)=\int_{\Gamma}\mu_{\Delta}(\lambda)\,dE_{\lambda},$$ \noindent and $\mu_{(\Delta)}$ is continuous for each $\Delta\in R$ where, $R\subset\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})$ is a ring which generates the Borel $\sigma$-algebra of the reals $\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R})$. Moreover, $\mu_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$ is a Feller Markov kernel and separates the points of $\Gamma$. we prove that $F$ admits a strong Feller Markov kernel $\mu_{(\cdot)}(\cdot)$, if and only if $F$ is uniformly continuous. Finally, we prove that if $F$ is absolutely continuous with respect to a regular finite measure $\nu$ then, it admits a strong Feller Markov kernel. {itemize} The mathematical and physical relevance of the results is discussed giving a particular emphasis to the connections between $\mu$ and the imprecision of the measurement apparatus.	math.FA	math	Semispectral Measures and Feller Markov Kernels Roberto Beneduci∗ Dipartimento di Matematica, Universit`a della Calabria, and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Gruppo c. Cosenza, Abstract We give a characterization of commutative semispectral measures by means of Feller and Strong Feller Markov kernels. In particular: • we show that a semispectral measure F is commutative if and only if there exist a self-adjoint operator A and a Markov kernel µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1], Γ ⊂ σ(A), E(Γ) = 1, such that F (∆) =ZΓ µ∆(λ) dEλ, and µ(∆) is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R where, R ⊂ B(R) is a ring which generates the Borel σ-algebra of the reals B(R). Moreover, µ(·)(·) is a Feller Markov kernel and separates the points of Γ. • we prove that F admits a strong Feller Markov kernel µ(·)(·), if and only if F is uniformly continuous. Finally, we prove that if F is absolutely continuous with respect to a regular finite measure ν then, it admits a strong Feller Markov kernel. The mathematical and physical relevance of the results is discussed giving a particular emphasis to the connections between µ and the imprecision of the measurement apparatus. 1 Introduction A real semispectral measure (or Positive operator Valued measure) is a map F : B(R) → L+ s (H) from the Borel σ-algebra of the reals to the space of posi- tive self-adjoint operators on a Hilbert space H. If, F (∆) is a projection opera- tor for each ∆ ∈ B(R), F is called spectral measure (or Projection Valued mea- sure). Therefore, the set of spectral measures is a subset of the set of semispec- tral measures. Moreover, spectral measures are in one-to-one correspondence ∗e-mail [email protected] 1 with self-adjoint operators (spectral theorem) [41] and are used in standard quantum mechanics to represent quantum observables. It was pointed out [1, 20, 21, 31, 40, 43] that semispectral measures are more suitable than spec- tral measures in representing quantum observables. The quantum observables described by semispectral measures are called generalized observables or un- sharp observables and play a key role in quantum information theory, quantum optics, quantum estimation theory [20, 28, 31, 44] and in the phase space for- mulation of quantum mechanics [44, 15, 16]. It is then natural to ask what are the relationships between semispectral and spectral measures. A clear answer can be given in the commutative case [1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 30, 32]. Indeed [7, 32], a real positive semispectral measure F is commutative if and only if there exist a bounded self-adjoint operator A and a Markov kernel (transition probability) µ(·)(·) : σ(A) × B(R) → [0, 1] such that F (∆) =Zσ(A) µ∆(λ) dEλ where, E is the spectral measure corresponding to A. In other words, F is a smearing of the spectral measure E corresponding to A. As an example we can consider the following unsharp position observable hψ, Qf (∆)ψi :=Z[0,1] µ∆(x) :=ZR µ∆(x) dhψ, Qxψi, ∆ ∈ B(R), ψ ∈ L2([0, 1]), (1) χ∆(x − y) f (y) dy, x ∈ [0, 1] where, f is a positive, bounded, Borel function such that f (y) = 0, y /∈ [0, 1], R[0,1] f (y)dy = 1, and Qx is the spectral measure corresponding to the position operator Q : L2([0, 1]) → L2([0, 1]) ψ(x) 7→ Qψ := xψ(x) We recall that hψ, Q(∆)ψi is interpreted as the probability that a perfectly accurate measurement (sharp measurement) of the position gives a result in ∆. Then, a possible interpretation of equation (1) is that Qf is a randomization of Q. Indeed [40], the outcomes of the measurement of the position of a particle depend on the measurement imprecision1 so that, if the sharp value of the outcome of the measurement of Q is x then the apparatus produces with probability µ∆(λ) a reading in ∆. It is worth noticing that (see example 5.6 in section 5) the Markov kernel µ∆(x) :=ZR χ∆(x − y) f (y) dy, x ∈ [0, 1] 1There are other possible interpretations of the randomization. For example, it could be due to the existence of a no-detection probability depending on hidden variables [24]. 2 in equation (1) above is such that the function x 7→ µ∆(x) is continuous for each ∆ ∈ B(R). The continuity of µ∆ means that if two sharp values x and x′ are very close to each other then, the corresponding random diffusions are very similar, i.e., the probability to get a result in ∆ if the sharp value is x is very close to the probability to get a result in ∆ if the sharp value is x′. That is quite common in important physical applications and seems to be reasonable from the physical viewpoint. It is then natural to look for general conditions which ensure the continuity of λ 7→ µ∆. That is one of the aims of the present work. What we prove is that, in general, the continuity does not hold for all the Borel sets ∆ but only for a ring of subsets which generates the Borel σ- algebra of the reals. (Anyway, that is sufficient to prove the weak convergence of µ(·)(x) to µ(·)(x′).) We also prove that the continuity for each Borel set is equivalent to the uniform continuity of F which in its turn is equivalent to require that the smearing in equation (1) can be realized by a strong Feller Markov kernel. It is our opinion that the continuity of µ∆ over a ring R which generates the Borel σ-algebra of the reals could be helpful in dealing with problems connected to the characterization of functions of the kind Gf (x) =Z f (t) dµt(x). A similar (but less general) problem arises in Ref. [12] where the relationships between Naimark extension theorem and the characterization of commutative semispectral measures as smearing of spectral measures are analyzed. That is a second motivation for the analysis of the continuity properties of µ∆. The results outlined above are contained in the two main theorems of the present work. The first is a stronger characterization of commutative semispectral measures. In particular, we show (see theorems 4.3) that a semispectral measure is com- mutative if and only if there exist a spectral measure E and a Markov kernel µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1], Γ ⊂ σ(A), E(Γ) = 1, such that F (∆) =ZΓ µ∆(λ) dEλ (2) and µ∆(·) is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R where, R ⊂ B(R) is a ring which generates the Borel σ-algebra of the reals B(R). It turns out that µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a Feller Markov kernel [38, 42]. Therefore, F is commutative if and only if there exists a Feller Markov kernel µ such that equation (2) is satisfied. We also prove that the family of functions {µ∆}∆∈B(R) separates the points of σ(A) up to a null set (see theorems 3.1, and 4.3). In other words, the probability measures µ(·)(x) and µ(·)(x′) which represent the randomizations corresponding to the sharp values x and x′ are different. 3 The second theorem is a characterization of the semispectral measures which admit a strong Feller Markov kernel, i.e., a Markov kernel µ such that the function λ 7→ µ∆(λ) is continuous for each ∆ ∈ B(R). In particular, we prove (see theorem 5.5) that a semispectral measure F admits a strong Feller Markov kernel if and only if it is uniformly continuous. As an example, we develop the details for the unsharp position observable defined in equation (1) above. Finally, we prove (see section 6) that a semispectral measure F which is absolutely continuous with respect to a regular finite measure ν is uniformly continuous (theorem 6.2). We give some examples of absolutely continuous semispectral measures (see example 6.4) and analyze the unsharp position observable which is obtained as the marginal of a phase space observable (see section 6.1). 2 Some preliminaries about Semispectral measures In what follows, we denote by B(R) and B([0, 1]) the Borel σ-algebra of R and [0,1] respectively, by 0 and 1 the null and the identity operators, by Ls(H) the space of all bounded self-adjoint linear operators acting in a Hilbert space H with scalar product h·,·i, by F(H) = L+ s (H) the subspace of all positive, bounded self-adjoint operators on H, by E(H) ⊂ F(H) the subspace of all projection operators on H. We use the symbols POVM and PVM to denote semispectral measures and spectral measures respectively. Definition 2.1. A Semispectral measure or Positive Operator Valued measure (for short, POVM) is a map F : B(R) → F(H) such that: F(cid:0) ∞[n=1 ∆n(cid:1) = ∞Xn=1 F (∆n). where, {∆n} is a countable family of disjoint sets in B(R) and the series converges in the weak operator topology. It is said to be normalized if F (R) = 1 Definition 2.2. A POVM is said to be commutative if (cid:2)F (∆1), F (∆2)(cid:3) = 0, ∀ ∆1 , ∆2 ∈ B(R). Definition 2.3. A POVM is said to be orthogonal if F (∆1)F (∆2) = 0 if ∆1 ∩ ∆2 = ∅. (3) (4) Definition 2.4. A Spectral measure or Projection Valued measure (for short, PVM) is an orthogonal, normalized POVM. 4 It is simple to see that for a PVM E, we have E(∆) = E(∆)2, for any ∆ ∈ B(R). Then, E(∆) is a projection operator for every ∆ ∈ B(R), and the PVM is a map E : B(R) → E(H). In quantum mechanics, non-orthogonal normalized POVM are also called gen- eralised or unsharp observables and PVM standard or sharp observables. In what follows, we shall always refer to real normalized POVM and we shall use the term "measurable" for the Borel measurable functions. For any vector x ∈ H the map hF (·)x, xi : B(R) → R, ∆ 7→ hF (∆)x, xi, is a Lebesgue-Stieltjes measure. There exists a one-to-one correspondence [5] between POV measures F and POV functions Fλ := F ((−∞, λ]). In the following we will use the symbol dhFλx, xi to mean integration with respect to the measure hF (·)x, xi. We shall say that a measurable function f : N ⊂ R → f (N ) ⊂ R is almost everywhere (a.e.) one-to-one with respect to a POVM F if it is one-to-one on a subset N ′ ⊂ N such that N − N ′ is a null set with respect to F . We shall say that a function f : R → R is bounded with respect to a POVM F , if it is equal to a bounded function g a.e. with respect to F , that is, if f = g a.e. with respect to the measure hF (·)x, xi, ∀x ∈ H. For any real, bounded and measurable function f and for any POVM F , there is a unique [18] bounded self-adjoint operator B ∈ Ls(H) such that hBx, xi =Z f (λ)dhFλx, xi, for each x ∈ H. (5) If equation (5) is satisfied, we write B = R f (λ)dFλ or B = R f (λ)F (dλ) equivalently. Definition 2.5. The spectrum σ(F ) of a POVM F is the closed set (cid:8)λ ∈ R : F(cid:0)(λ − δ, λ + δ)(cid:1) 6= 0, ∀δ > 0, (cid:9) . By the spectral theorem [23, 41], there is a one-to-one correspondence between PV measures E and self-adjoint operators B, the correspondence being given by Notice that the spectrum of EB coincides with the spectrum of the corre- sponding self-adjoint operator B. Moreover, in this case a functional calculus can be developed. Indeed, if f : R → R is a measurable real-valued function, we can define the self-adjoint operator [41] B =Z λdEB λ . f (B) =Z f (λ)dEB λ 5 where, EB is the PVM corresponding to B. If f is bounded, then f (B) is bounded [41]. In the following we do not distinguish between PVM and the corresponding self-adjoint operators. Let Λ be a subset of R and B(Λ) the corresponding Borel σ-algebra. Definition 2.6. A real Markov kernel is a map µ : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] such that, 1. µ∆(·) is a measurable function for each ∆ ∈ B(R), 2. µ(·)(λ) is a probability measure for each λ ∈ Λ. Definition 2.7. Let ν be a measure on Λ. A map µ : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a weak Markov kernel with respect to ν if: 1. µ∆(·) is a measurable function for each ∆ ∈ B(R), 2. 0 ≤ µR(λ) ≤ 1, 3. µR(λ) = 1, µ∅(λ) = 0, ν − a.e., ν − a.e., 4. for any sequence {∆i}i∈N, ∆i ∩ ∆j = ∅, Xi µ(∆i)(λ) = µ(∪i∆i)(λ), ν − a.e. Definition 2.8. The map µ : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a weak Markov kernel with respect to a PVM E : B(Λ) → E(H) if it is a weak Markov kernel with respect to each measure νx(·) := hE(·) x, xi, x ∈ H. In the following, by a weak Markov kernel µ we mean a weak Markov kernel with respect to a PVM E. Moreover the function λ 7→ µ∆(λ) will be denoted indifferently by µ∆ or µ∆(·). Definition 2.9. A POV measure F : B(R) → F(H) is said to be a smearing of a POV measure E : B(Λ) → E(H) if there exists a weak Markov kernel µ : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] such that, F (∆) =ZΛ µ∆(λ)dEλ, ∆ ∈ B(R). Example 2.10. In the standard formulation of quantum mechanics, the op- erator Q : L2(R) → L2(R) ψ(x) ∈ L2(R) 7→ Qψ := xψ(x) 6 is used to represent the position observable. A more realistic description of the position observable of a quantum particle is given by a smearing of Q as, for example, the optimal position semispectral measure F Q(∆) = where, 1 l √2 πZ ∞ −∞(cid:16)Z∆ e− (x−y)2 2 l2 dy(cid:17) dEQ x =Z ∞ −∞ µ∆(x) dEQ x µ∆(x) = 1 l √2 πZ∆ e− (x−y)2 2 l2 dy defines a Markov kernel and EQ is the spectral measure corresponding to the position operator Q. In the following, the symbol µ is used to denote both Markov kernels and weak Markov kernels. The symbols A and B are used to denote self-adjoint operators. Definition 2.11. Whenever F , A, and µ are such that F (∆) = µ∆(A), ∆ ∈ B(R), we say that (F, A, µ) is a von Neumann triplet. The following theorem establishes a relationship between commutative semis- pectral measures and spectral measures and gives a characterization of the former. Other characterizations and an analysis of the relationships between them can be found in Ref.s [1, 30, 4, 33]. Theorem 2.12 ([7, 32]). A semispectral measure F is commutative if and only if there exist a bounded self-adjoint operator A and a Markov kernel (weak Markov kernel) µ such that (F, A, µ) is a von Neumann triplet. Corollary 2.13. A semispectral measure F is commutative if and only if it is a smearing of a PV measure E with bounded spectrum. Definition 2.14. The von Neumann algebra generated by the semispectral measure F is the von Neumann algebra generated by the set {F (∆), ∆ ∈ B(R)}. Definition 2.15. If A and F in theorem 2.12 generate the same von Neumann algebra then A is named the sharp version of F . Theorem 2.16. [7] The sharp version A is unique up to almost everywhere bijections. 3 On the separation properties of µ In the following, the symbol S denotes the family of open intervals in R with rational end-points. The symbol R(S) denotes the ring generated by S. Notice 7 that S is countable. Then, by theorem c, page 24, in Ref. countable too. Moreover, R(S) generates the Borel σ-algebra B(R). A weak Markov kernel µ such that (F, A, µ) is a von Neumann triplet, separates the point of Γ ⊂ σ(A) if the family of functions {µ∆}∆∈B(R) separates the points of Γ or, in other words, if the set functions {µ(·)(λ)}λ∈Γ are distinct. It is then natural to ask if in general µ has that property. The following theorem answers in the positive. [27], R(S) is Theorem 3.1. Let (F, A, µ) be a von Neumann triplet and suppose that A is a sharp version of F . Then, there exists a set Γ ⊆ σ(A), EA(Γ) = 1, such that the family of functions {µ∆(·)}∆∈B(R) separates the points of Γ. Proof. In the following, AW (F ) denotes the von Neumann algebra generated by {F (∆)}∆∈B(R), O2 := {F (∆)}∆∈R(S) and AC(O2) is the C ∗-algebra gener- ated by O2. The von Neumann algebra generated by AC(O2) coincides with AW (F ) (see appendix A). Moreover, AW (F ) = AW (A) since A is the sharp version of F and generates AW (F ). By the Gelfand-Naimark theorem [23, 39], there is a * isomorphism φ between AC(O2) and the algebra of continuous functions C(Λ2) where Λ2 is the spectrum of AC(O2). Moreover, f ∈ C(Λ2) 7→ φ(f ) =ZΛ2 f (λ) deEλ where, eE is the spectral measure from the Borel σ algebra B(Λ2) to E(H) whose existence is assured by theorem 1, page 895, in Ref. [23]. The Gelfand-Naimark isomorphism φ can be extended to a homomorphism between the algebra of the Borel functions on Λ2 and the von Neumann algebra AW (F ) = AW (A) generated by AC(O2) (see Ref. [22], page 360, section 3). Therefore, there is a Borel function h such that A =ZΛ2 h(λ) deEλ (6) Let {∆i}i∈N denote an enumeration of the set R(S). Since AC(O2) is the smallest uniform closed algebra containing {F (∆i)}i∈N, C(Λ2) is the smallest uniform closed algebra of functions containing {ν∆i := φ−1(F (∆i))}i∈N. In other words {ν∆i}i∈N generates C(Λ2). The Stone-Weierstrass theorem [23] assures that {ν∆i}i∈N separates the points in Λ2. On the other hand, the fact that (F, A, µ) is a von Neumann triplet, implies that, for each ∆i ∈ R(S), there is a Borel function µ∆i such that ZΛ2 ν∆i(λ) deEλ = F (∆i) = µ∆i(A) =ZΛ2 µ∆i(h(λ)) deEλ. Then, for each ∆i ∈ R(S), there is a set Mi ⊂ Λ2, eE(Mi) = 1, such that µ∆i(h(λ)) = ν∆i(λ), (7) λ ∈ Mi. 8 Let M := ∩∞ i=1Mi. Then, eE(M ) = lim n→∞eE(∩n i=1Mi) = lim n→∞ and, for each i ∈ N, nYi=1 eE(Mi) = 1 (µ∆i ◦ h)(λ) = ν∆i(λ), λ ∈ M ⊆ Λ2. (8) Since {ν∆i}i∈N separates the points in Λ2, it separates the points in M . Then, equation (8) implies that {µ∆i}i∈N separates the points in Γ := h(M ). More- over2, where, EA is the spectral measure defined by the relation EA(Γ) = EA(h(M )) = eE[h−1(h(M ))] = 1 and such that, EA(∆) = eE(h−1(∆)) A =Z x dEA x while, h−1(h(M )) is a Borel set containing M . We have proved that the set of functions {µ∆i}i∈N separates the points of Γ and that EA(Γ) = 1. In other words, µ(·)(λ) 6= µ(·)(λ′), λ 6= λ′, λ, λ′ ∈ Γ. 4 Characterization of Commutative Semi-spectral Measures by means of Feller Markov kernels As we have seen in the last section, theorem 2.12 asserts that a semispectral measure F is commutative if and only if there exist a bounded self-adjoint operator A and a weak Markov kernel (Markov kernel) µ such that F (∆) = µ∆(A). In the present section we study the continuity of the functions µ∆. In particular, we introduce the concept of strong Markov kernel, i.e., a weak Markov kernel µ(·)(·) : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] with respect to a PVM E : B(Λ) → 2 Notice that h(M ) is a Borel set. In order to prove that, we first recall that Λ2 is a Polish space (that is, a complete, separable, space [35]). Indeed, by theorem 11, page 871, in Ref. [23], it is homeomorphic to a closed subspace of the Cartesian product Q∞ σ(F (∆i)), i=1 where σ(F (∆i)) is a complete separable metric space, and by theorem 2, page 406, and theorem 6, page 156, in Ref. [36], it is complete and separable. Moreover, h is measurable and injective on M . Therefore, Soulsin's theorem (see theorem 9 page 440 and Corollary 1 page 442 in Ref. [35]) assures that h(M ) is a Borel set. 9 E(H) such that µ(·)(λ) is a probability measure for each λ ∈ Γ ⊂ Λ, E(Γ) = 1. Then, we prove (theorem 4.3) that in order to realize the smearing in corollary 2.13, one can use a strong Markov kernel µ such that µ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R, where R is a ring which generates the Borel σ-algebra of the reals. It is worth remarking that µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a Feller Markov kernel. Therefore, F is commutative if and only if there exists a bounded self-adjoint operator A and a Feller Markov kernel µ such that F (∆) =ZΓ µ∆(λ) dEλ. Moreover, the family of functions {µ∆}∆∈R separates the points in Γ (see theorems 3.1 and 4.3). In order to prove the main theorem we need the following definitions. Definition 4.1. Let E : B(Λ) → E(H) be a PVM. The map µ(·)(·) : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a strong Markov kernel with respect to E if it is a weak Markov kernel and there exists a set Γ ⊂ Λ, E(Γ) = 1, such that µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a Markov kernel with respect to E. A strong Markov kernel is denoted by the symbol (µ, E, Γ ⊂ Λ). Definition 4.2. A Feller Markov kernel is a Markov kernel µ(·)(·) : Λ × B(R) → [0, 1] such that the function G(λ) =ZΛ f (t) dµt(λ), λ ∈ Λ is continuous and bounded whenever f is continuous and bounded. Theorem 4.3. A real POVM F : B(R) → F(H) is commutative if and only if, there exists a bounded self-adjoint operator A = R λ dEλ with spectrum σ(A) ⊂ [0, 1] and a strong Markov Kernel (µ, E, Γ ⊂ σ(A)) such that: 1) µ∆(·) : σ(A) → [0, 1] is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R(S), 2) F (∆) =RΓ µ∆(λ) dEλ, ∆ ∈ B(R). 3) µ separates the points in Γ. Moreover, µ : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a Feller Markov kernel. Proof. Let AW (F ) be the von Neumann algebra generated by F . AW (F ) coincides with the von Neumann algebra generated by {F (∆)}∆∈R(S) where, R(S) ⊂ B(R) is the ring generated by the family S of open intervals with rational end-points (see appendix A for the proof). We recall that both S and R(S) are countable (see theorem c, page 24, in Ref. [27]). Now, we proceed to the proof of the existence of A. Let {∆i}i∈N be an enumeration of the set R(S) and O2 := {F (∆)}∆∈R(S) . Let E(i) denote the 10 spectral measure corresponding to F (∆i) ∈ O2. We have F (∆i) =R x dE(i) Therefore, for each i, k ∈ N there exists a division {∆(i,k) x . }j=1,...,mi,k of [0, 1] j such that x(i,k) j E(i)(∆(i,k) j mi,kXj=1 (cid:13)(cid:13) ) − F (∆i)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1 k . (9) By the spectral theorem [23] the von Neumann algebra AW (F ) contains all the projection operators in the spectral resolution of F (∆), ∆ ∈ B(R). Therefore, the von Neumann algebra AW (D) generated by the set D := {E(i)(∆i,k j ), j ≤ mi,k, i, k ∈ N} is contained in AW (F ) and then AW (D) ⊂ AW (F ) = AW (O2). (10) Moreover, the C ∗-algebra AC(D) generated by D contains the C ∗-algebra AC(O2) generated by O2 (see equation (9)). Summing up the preceding ob- servations, we have By the double commutant theorem [34], AC(O2) ⊂ AC(D) ⊂ AW (F ). AW (F ) = [AC(O2)]′′ ⊂ [AC(D)]′′ = AW (D) so that (see equation 10), AW (D) = AW (F ). i=1{0, 1}. Let π : Λ →Q∞ [23], the spectrum Λ of AC(D) is homeo- i=1{0, 1} denote the (11) By theorem 11, page 871 in Ref. homeomorphism between the two spaces. morphic to a closed subset ofQ∞ Now, if we identify Λ with a closed subset of Q∞ π(λ) = ¯x := (x1, . . . , xn, . . . ) ∈Q∞ i=1{0, 1}. The function i=1{0, 1}, we can prove the existence of a continuous function distinguishing the points of Λ. Indeed, let f (λ) = xi 3i ∞Xi=1 is continuous and injective and then it distinguishes the points of Λ. Moreover, since Λ and [0, 1] are Hausdorff, the map f : Λ → f (Λ) is a homeomorphism. By theorem 1, page 895, in Ref. B(Λ) → F(H) such that the map [23], there exists a spectral measure eE : T : C(Λ) → B(H) g 7→ T (g) =ZΛ g(λ)deEλ defines an isometric ∗-isomorphism between AC(D) and C(Λ). (12) 11 The fact that f distinguishes the points of Λ, implies that the self-adjoint operator A =ZΛ f (λ) deEλ is a generator of the von Neumann algebra AW (D) = AW (F ). Indeed, by the Stone-Weierstrass theorem, C(Λ) is singly generated, in particular f is a generator. Then, the isomorphism between AC(D) and C(Λ) assures that AC(D) is singly generated and that A is a generator. Hence, AW (F ) = AW (D) = [AC(D)]′′ is singly generated. In particular, A generates AW (F ), i.e., AW (F ) = AW (A). Now, we proceed to the proof of the existence of the weak Markov kernel By (12), for each ∆ ∈ R(S), there exists a continuous function γ∆ ∈ C(Λ) such that eν such that (F, A,eν) is a von Neumann triplet. γ∆(λ) deEλ. F (∆) =ZΛ Now, we show that, for each ∆ ∈ R(S), there is a continuous function ν∆ : σ(A) → [0, 1] from the spectrum of A to the interval [0, 1] such that ν∆(f (λ)) = γ∆(λ), λ ∈ Λ, and F (∆) = ν∆(A). To prove this, let us consider the function ν∆(t) := (γ∆ ◦ f −1)(t), ∆ ∈ R(S). It is continuous since it is the composition of continuous functions and, ν∆(f (λ)) = γ∆(f −1(f (λ))) = γ∆(λ). Moreover, Indeed, by the change of measure principle (page 894, ref. [23]), ν∆(A) = F (∆), ∀∆ ∈ R(S). γ∆(λ) deEλ =ZΛ F (∆) =ZΛ γ∆(f −1(t)) dEt =Zσ(A) =Zσ(A) γ∆(f −1(f (λ))) deEλ ν∆(t) dEt = ν∆(A) where σ(A) = f (Λ) is the spectrum of A and E is the spectral measure corre- sponding to A defined by the relation E(∆) = eE(f −1(∆)), ∆ ∈ B(σ(A)) (see corollary 10, page 902, in Ref. [23]). For each λ ∈ σ(A), the map ν(·)(λ) : R(S) → [0, 1] defines an additive set function. Indeed, let ∆ ∈ R(S) be the disjoint union of the sets ∆1, ∆2 ∈ 12 R(S). Then, Z ν(∆1∪∆2)(λ) dEλ = F (∆1 ∪ ∆2) = F (∆1) + F (∆1) =Z ν∆1(λ) dEλ +Z ν∆2(λ) dEλ =Z (cid:2)ν∆1(λ) + ν∆2(λ)(cid:3) dEλ so that, by the continuity of the functions ν(∆1)(λ) and ν(∆2)(λ), we get (see theorem 1, page 895, in Ref. [23]) ν(∆1)(λ) + ν(∆2)(λ) = ν(∆1∪∆2)(λ), ∀λ ∈ σ(A). Now, we extend ν to all the Borel σ-algebra of [0, 1]. Since A is the generator of AW (F ), for each ∆ ∈ B([0, 1]), there exists a Borel function ω∆ such that. Then, we can consider the mapeν : σ(A) × B(R) → [0, 1] defined as follows (ω∆ ◦ f )(λ) deEλ ω∆(t) dEt =ZΛ F (∆) =Zσ(A) eν∆(λ) =(ν∆(λ) ω∆(λ) if ∆ ∈ R(S) if ∆ /∈ R(S). which is the disjoint union of the sets {∆i}i∈N, ∆i ∈ B(R). Then, Sinceeν coincides with ν on R(S) it is additive on R(S). In order to prove thateν is a weak Markov kernel, let us consider a set ∆ ∈ B(R) Z eν(∪∞ i=1∆i)(x) dEx =Z eν∆(x)dEx = F (∆) = ∞Xi=1 F (∆i) = ∞Xi=1Z eν∆i(x) dEx =Z ∞Xi=1eν∆i(x) dEx so that, by Corollary 9, page 900, in Ref. [23], ∞Xi=1eν∆i(x) =eν∆(x), E − a.e, Now, we proceed to prove the existence of the Markov kernel µ : Γ×B(R) → which implies that eν : σ(A) × B(R) → [0, 1] is a weak Markov kernel. particular (F, A,eν) is a von Neumann triplet. [7], starting from eν : σ(A) × R(S) → [0, 1] it is possible to define a Markov kernel ω : σ(A)×B(R) → [0, 1] such that (F, A, ω) [0, 1] such that items 1, 2, and 3 of the theorem are satisfied. By corollary 1 in Ref. In 13 is a von Neumann triplet. Since (F, A,eν) is a von Neumann triplet, for each ∆ ∈ B(R), hence, (13) Now, let {∆i}i∈N be an enumeration of R(S). By equation (13), for each i ∈ N, there is a set Ni ⊂ σ(A), E(Ni) = 0, such that Z eν∆(λ) dEλ = F (∆) =Z ω∆(λ) dEλ ω∆(λ) =eν∆(λ), E − a.e. ω∆i(λ) =eν∆i(λ), ω∆i(λ) =eν∆i(λ), N := ∪∞ λ ∈ σ(A) − Ni. λ ∈ σ(A) − N i=1Ni, E(N ) = 0. Then, for each i ∈ N, where, (14) (15) Therefore, for almost all λ ∈ σ(A), eν(·)(λ) is σ-additive on R(S). Now, we can define the map µ(·)(λ) =(eν(·)(λ) λ ∈ N ω(·)(λ) λ ∈ σ(A) − N If we put Γ = σ(A) − N , we have that µ(·)(·) : Γ × B(R) → [0, 1] is a Markov kernel. Therefore, µ(·)(·) : σ(A) × B(R) → [0, 1] is a strong Markov kernel. Notice that, for each ∆ ∈ R(S) and λ ∈ σ(A), so that, µ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R(S) and additive on R(S). We also have, µ∆(λ) =eν∆(λ) µ∆(A) = ω∆(A) = F (∆), ∆ ∈ R(S). We have proved items 1, 2, and 3. Item 4 comes from theorem 3.1. It remains to prove that µ is a Feller Markov kernel. By item 1, µ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R(S). Notice that for each open set O ∈ B(R), there is a countable family of sets ∆i ∈ R(S) such that O = ∪∞ i=1∆i. Therefore, by theorem 2.2 in Ref. [19], µ(·)(λn) converges weakly to µ(·)(λ), i.e., n→∞Z f (t) µt(λn) =Z f (t) µt(λ), lim f ∈ Cb(R) whenever limn→∞ λn = λ and Cb(R) is the space of bounded, continuous func- tions. Since F (∆) = µ∆(A) implies the commutativity of F , the theorem is proved. 14 5 Characterization of Semi-spectral Measures which admit strong Feller Markov Kernels In the last section we proved that each commutative semispectral measure admits a strong Markov kernel µ such that µ∆ is a continuous function for each ∆ ∈ R(S) where, R(S) is a ring which generates the Borel σ-algebra B(R). In the present section we characterize the commutative semispectral measures for which the Markov kernel µ, whose existence was proved in theorem 2.12, is such that µ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ B(R). Whenever such a Markov kernel exists, we say that the semispectral measure admits a strong Feller Markov kernel. In particular, we prove that a commutative semispectral measure F admits a strong Feller Markov kernel if and only if F is uniformly continuous. Definition 5.1. Let F : B(R) → F(H). Let ∆ = ∪∞ i=1∆i, ∆i ∩ ∆j = ∅. If lim n→∞ nXi=1 F (∆i) = F (∆) in the uniform operator topology then we say that F is uniformly continuous. Notice that the term uniformly continuous derives from the fact that the σ- additivity of F in the uniform operator topology is equivalent to the continuity in the uniform operator topology. Analogously, the σ-additivity of F in the weak operator topology is equivalent to the continuity of F in the weak oper- ator topology [18]. Definition 5.2. A Markov kernel µ(·)(·) : [0, 1] × B(R) → [0, 1] is said to be strong Feller if µ∆ is a continuous function for each ∆ ∈ B(R). Definition 5.3. We say that a commutative POVM admits a strong Feller Markov kernel if there exists a strong Feller Markov kernel µ such that F (∆) = R µ∆(λ) dEλ, where E is the sharp reconstruction of F . In order to prove the main theorem of the section we need the following lemma. Lemma 5.4. Let F be uniformly continuous. Let µ be a weak Markov kernel and (F, A, µ) a von Neumann triplet. Suppose that µ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ R(S). Then, for each λ ∈ σ(A), µ(·)(λ) is σ-additive on R(S). Proof. Let ∆, ∆i ∈ R(S), ∆i ∩ ∆j = ∅, ∪∞ i=1∆i)(cid:1) = u − lim n→∞Z (cid:0)µ∆(λ) − n→∞(cid:0)F (∆) − F (∪n nXi=1 µ∆i(λ)(cid:1) dEλ. 0 = u − lim i=1∆i = ∆. Then, 15 By the uniform continuity of F and theorem 1, page 895, in Ref. [23], it follows that, ∀ǫ > 0, there exists a number ¯n ∈ N, such that n > ¯n implies, kµ∆(λ) − nXi=1 By equation (16), µ∆i(λ)k∞ = kZ (cid:0)µ∆(λ) − nXi=1 µ∆i(λ)(cid:1) dEλk = kF (∆) − F (∪n i=1∆i)k ≤ ǫ. (16) µ∆(λ) − nXi=1 µ∆i(λ) ≤ ǫ, ∀λ ∈ σ(A). Theorem 5.5. A commutative POVM F : B(R) → F(H) admits a strong Feller Markov kernel if and only if it is uniformly continuous. steps. Proof. Suppose F uniformly continuous. By theorem 4.3, there is a weak Markov kernel µ : σ(A)×B(R) → [0, 1] such that µ∆(·) is continuous for every ∆ ∈ R(S) and a self-adjoint operator A such that (F, A, µ) is a von Neumann triplet. By lemma 5.4, µ is σ-additive on R(S). Therefore (see proposition 2 in Ref. [7]), the map µ : σ(A) × R(S) → [0, 1] can be extended to a Markov kernel eµ : σ(A) × B(R) → [0, 1] whose restriction to R(S) coincides with µ and such that F (∆) =eµ∆(A). Now we prove that eµ∆ is continuous for each ∆ ∈ B(R). We proceed by 1) eµ is continuous for each open interval. For each open interval, there exists an increasing family of sets ∆i ∈ S such that ∆i ↑ ∆. Indeed, if ∆ = (a, b), a, b ∈ R, the family of sets {(ai, bi) ∈ S}i∈N such that ai > ai+1 > a, limi→∞ ai = a, bi < bi+1, limi→∞ bi = b, is increasing and ∪∞ i=1∆i = ∆. Then, i→∞Z eµ∆i(λ) dEλ. Z eµ∆(λ) dEλ = F (∆) = u − lim keµ∆n(λ) −eµ∆m(λ)k∞ = kZ [eµ∆n(λ) −eµ∆m(λ)] dEλk By the uniform continuity of F , it follows that, ∀ǫ > 0, there exists a number ¯n ∈ N, such that n, m > ¯n implies, = kF (∆n) − F (∆m)k ≤ ǫ. F (∆i) = u − lim (17) i→∞ By equation (17), eµ∆n(λ) −eµ∆m(λ) ≤ ǫ, ∀λ ∈ σ(A). 16 (18) Since eµ is a Markov kernel, lim i→∞eµ∆i(λ) =eµ∆(λ), ∀λ ∈ σ(A). Moreover, by equation (18), the convergence is uniform and this proves the continuous for each n ∈ N, and continuity of eµ∆. 2) eµ∆ is continuous for each open set. Each open set ∆ is the disjoint union of a countable family of open intervals, i.e., ∆ = ∪∞ i=1∆i. Therefore, e∆n ↑ ∆. Moreover, µ e∆n Let us define the set e∆n := ∪n F (e∆n) = F (∆). Then, the same reasoning we used above allows us to conclude that the family of continuous functions µ e∆n i=1∆i, ∆i = (ai, bi). is converges uniformly to µ∆. u − lim i→∞ 3) eµ∆ is continuous for each Borel set. Let ∆ ∈ B(R). Since F is regular, there is a decreasing sequence of open sets Gi, ∆ ⊂ Gi, such that s − lim n→∞ F (∩n i=1Gi) = s − lim n→∞ F (Gi) = F (∆). Moreover, by the uniform continuity of F , u − lim n→∞ F (∩n i=1Gi)) = F (∩∞ i=1Gi). Therefore, F (∆) = F (∩∞ i=1Gi) and then, u − lim n→∞ F (∩n i=1Gi) = u − lim n→∞ F (Gi) = F (∆). Then, the same reasoning we used in steps 1 and 2 allows us to conclude that the family of continuous functions eµ(∩n then the continuity of eµ∆. In order to prove the second part of the theorem we show that the existence of a strong Feller Markov kernel implies the uniform continuity of F . Suppose that there exists a strong Feller Markov kernel µ such that F (∆) = µ∆(λ). Since µ is a Markov kernel it is σ-additive. Then, i=1∆i) converges uniformly to eµ∆ and lim n→∞(cid:0)µ∆(λ) − where, ∆, ∆i ∈ B([0, 1]), ∪∞ By hypothesis, i=1∆i = ∆. nXi=1 µ∆i(λ)(cid:1) = 0, λ ∈ σ(A). µ∆(λ) − nXi=1 µ∆i(λ) ∈ C(σ(A)), ∀n ∈ N. 17 Then, by theorem B1 in appendix B, u − lim n→∞(cid:0)µ∆(λ) − nXi=1 µ∆i(λ)(cid:1) = 0. nXi=1 By theorem 1, page 895, in Ref. [23], kF (∆)k = kµ∆k∞, hence n→∞kF (∆) − F (∪n lim i=1∆i)k = lim n→∞kµ∆ − µ∆ik∞ = 0. which proves that F is uniformly continuous. Example 5.6. Let us consider the following unsharp position observable Qf (∆) :=Z[0,1] µ∆(x) :=ZR µ∆(x) dQx, ∆ ∈ B(R), (19) χ∆(x − y) f (y) dy, x ∈ [0, 1] where, f is a bounded, continuous function such that f (y) = 0, y /∈ [0, 1] and Z[0,1] f (y) dy = 1, and Qx is the spectral measure corresponding to the position operator Q : L2([0, 1]) → L2([0, 1]) ψ(x) 7→ (Qψ)(x) := xψ(x) Notice that, for each ∆ ∈ B(R), µ∆ : [0, 1] → [0, 1] is continuous. Indeed, by the uniform continuity of f , for each ǫ > 0, there is a δ > 0 such that x − x′ ≤ δ implies f (x − y) − f (x′ − y) ≤ ǫ, for each y. Therefore, µ∆(x) − µ∆(x′) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZR =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z∆ χ∆(x − y) f (y) dy −ZR χ∆(x′ − y) f (y) dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) [f (x − y) − f (x′ − y)] dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ ǫZ∆∩[−1,1] By theorem 5.5 and the continuity of µ∆, ∆ ∈ B(R), Qf is uniformly contin- uous. That can be proved as follows. Suppose ∆i ↓ ∆ and f (y) ≤ M , y ∈ R. Since, for each x ∈ [0, 1], dy ≤ 2ǫ µ∆i−∆(x) =Z∆i−∆ hψ, Qf (∆i − ∆)ψi =Z[0,1] f (x − y) dy ≤ MZ(∆i−∆)∩[−1,1] µ∆i−∆(x)ψ2(x) dx ≤ MZ(∆i−∆)∩[−1,1] we have that, for each ψ ∈ H, ψ2 = 1, dx dx which proves the uniform continuity of Qf . 18 In the case of uniformly continuous POV measures, we can prove a necessary condition for the norm-1-property which has been recently used in Ref. [17] in order to study the localization in phase space of massless relativistic particles. Definition 5.7 ([29]). A semispectral measure F has the norm-1-property if kF (∆)k = 1, for each ∆ ∈ B(R) such that F (∆) 6= 0. Theorem 5.8. Let F be uniformly continuous. Then, F has the norm-1- property only if kF ({λ})k 6= 0 for each λ ∈ σ(F ). Proof. We proceed by contradiction. Suppose that F has the norm-1 property and that there exists λ ∈ σ(F ), such that kF ({λ})k = 0. Let (ai, bi) ⊂ B([0, 1]) be a sequence of open intervals such that, ai < λ < bi, (ai+1, bi+1) ⊂ (ai, bi), limi→∞ ai = λ, limi→∞ bi = λ. Then, (ai, bi) ↓ {λ}. Moreover, by the uniform continuity of F and the norm-1 property, 1 = lim i→∞kF ((ai, bi))k = lim i→∞kF ((ai, bi)) − F ({λ})k = 0. Example 5.9. Let Qf be as in example 5.6. Theorem 5.8 implies that Qf cannot have the norm-1 property. Indeed, for each λ ∈ R, Qf ({λ})ψ = lim i→∞ Qf ([λ, λi))ψ = lim i→∞ µ[λ,λi)(x)ψ(x) = 0, ∀ψ ∈ H where, λ, λi ∈ R, λi → λ. 6 Absolutely continuous semispectral measures In the present section, we prove that absolutely continuous commutative POV measures admit a strong Feller Markov kernel. Then, we apply the result to the case of the unsharp position observable. Definition 6.1. [43, 44] A POV measure F : B(R) → F(H) is absolutely continuous with respect to a measure ν : B(R) → [0, 1] if there exists a positive number c such that kF (∆)k ≤ c ν(∆), for each ∆ ∈ B(R). Theorem 6.2. Let F be absolutely continuous with respect to a finite measure ν. Then, F is uniformly continuous. Proof. Suppose ∆i ↑ ∆. We have n→∞kF (∆) − F (∆i)k = lim lim ≤ c lim which proves that F is uniformly continuous. n→∞ n→∞kF (∆ − ∆i)k ν(∆ − ∆i) = 0. 19 Corollary 6.3. Let F be absolutely continuous with respect to a finite measure ν. Then, F is commutative if and only if there exist a self-adjoint operator A and a strong Feller Markov kernel µ : R × B(R) → [0, 1] such that: F (∆) = µ∆(A), ∆ ∈ B(R) (20) Proof. By theorem 6.2, F is uniformly continuous. Then, theorem 5.5 implies the thesis. Example 6.4. Let us consider the unsharp position operator defined as fol- lows. Qf (∆) :=Z[0,1] µ∆(x) :=ZR µ∆(x) dQx, ∆ ∈ B(R), (21) χ∆(x − y) f (y) dy, x ∈ [0, 1] where, f is a positive, bounded, Borel function such that f (x) = 0, x /∈ [0, 1], Z[0,1] f (x)dx = 1, and Qx is the spectral measure corresponding to the position operator Q : L2([0, 1]) → L2([0, 1]) ψ(x) 7→ Qψ := xψ(x) Qf is absolutely continuous with respect to the measure ν(∆) = MZ∆∩[−1,1] dx. Indeed, for each ψ ∈ H, ψ2 = 1, hψ, Qf (∆)ψi =Z[0,1] µ∆(x) =Z∆ where, the inequality µ∆(x) ψ2(x) dx ≤ MZ∆∩[−1,1] f (x − y) dy ≤ MZ∆∩[−1,1] dx dx has been used. Therefore, by theorem 6.2, Qf (∆) is uniformly continuous. 20 6.1 Unsharp Position Observable In the present subsection, we study an important kind of absolutely continuous POV measures, the unsharp position observables obtained as the marginals of a covariant phase space observable. In the following H = L2(R), Q and P denote position and momentum observ- ables respectively and ∗ denotes convolution, i.e. (f∗g)(x) =R f (y)g(x−y)dy. Let us consider the joint position-momentum POV measure [1, 20, 21, 26, 31, 40, 44, 45] F (∆ × ∆′) =Z∆×∆′ Uq,p γ U ∗ q,p dq dp where, Uq,p = e−iqP eipQ and γ = fihf, f ∈ L2(R), kfk2 = 1. The marginal Qf (∆) := F (∆ × R) =Z ∞ −∞ (1∆ ∗ f2)(x) dQx, ∆ ∈ B(R), (22) is an unsharp position observable. Notice that the map µ∆(x) := 1∆ ∗ f (x)2 defines a Markov kernel. Moreover, Qf is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Indeed, Uq,p γ U ∗ Qf (∆) = F (∆ × R) =Z∆×R dqZR =Z∆ =Z∆ bQ(q) dq ≤Z∆ q,p dq dp 1 dq Uq,p γ U ∗ q,p dp bQ(q) =ZR Uq,p γ U ∗ q,p dp. where, Although Qf is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure on R, it is not uniformly continuous. That does not contradict theorem 6.2 since the Lebesgue measure on R is not finite. Anyway, Qf is uniformly continuous on each Borel set ∆ with finite Lebesgue measure. Now, we show that Qf is not in general uniformly continuous. We give the details of the following particular case. Example 6.5 (Optimal Phase Space Representation). If we choose f 2(x) = 1 l √2 π e(− x2 2 l2 ), l ∈ R − {0}. in (22), we get an optimal phase space representation of quantum mechanics [40]. In this case, 21 Qf (∆) =Z ∞ −∞(cid:16)Z∆ f (x − y)2) dy(cid:17) dQx l √2 πZ ∞ −∞(cid:16)Z∆ e− (x−y)2 2 l2 dy(cid:17) dQx =Z ∞ 1 −∞ = where, µ∆(x) = defines a Markov kernel. 1 l √2 πZ∆ e− (x−y)2 2 l2 dy µ∆(x) dQx (23) In order to prove that Qf is not uniformly continuous we consider the family of sets ∆i = (−∞, ai), limi→∞ ai = −∞ such that ∆i ↓ ∅, and prove that limi→∞ kQf (∆i)k = 1. For each i ∈ N, 2 l2 dy lim e− (x−y)2 µ∆i(x) = lim 1 x→−∞ x→−∞ l √2 πZ∆i l √2 πZ(−∞, ai−x) 1 = lim x→−∞ e− y2 2 l2 dy = 1 l √2 πZ ∞ −∞ e− y2 2 l2 dy = 1. Now, we prove that kF (∆i)k = 1, i ∈ N. Indeed, if ψn = χ[−n,−n+1](x), n→∞hψn, Qf (∆i)ψni = lim lim µ∆i(x)ψn(x)2 dx µ∆i(x) dx = 1. (24) (25) n→∞Z ∞ n→∞Z[−n,−n+1] −∞ = lim Since, for each ∆ ∈ B(R), kQf (∆)k ≤ 1, equation (24) implies that kQf (∆i)k = 1, for each i ∈ N. Hence, limi→∞ kQf (∆i)k = 1 and Qf cannot be uniformly continuous. It is worth noticing that although Qf is not uniformly continuous, µ∆ is continuous for each interval ∆ ∈ B(R). Indeed, µ∆(x) − µ∆(x′) = e− (x−y)2 1 l √2 π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z∆ l √2 π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z∆x 1 2 l2 dy −Z∆ 2 l2 −Z∆x′ ′ e− (x −y)2 2 l2 dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) l √2 π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z∆ 2 l2 dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 1 e− (y)2 e− (y)2 e− (y)2 2 l2 dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = where, ∆x = {z ∈ R z = y − x, y ∈ ∆}, ∆x′ = {z ∈ R z = y − x′, y ∈ ∆} and, Therefore, x − x′ ≤ ǫ implies, 1 µ∆(x) − µ∆(x′) ≤ ∆ = (∆x − ∆x′) ∪ (∆x′ − ∆x). l √2 π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z∆ 1 l √2 π Z∆ √2 l √π ǫ. dy = e− (y)2 2 l2 dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 22 Appendices A AW (F ) coincides with the von Neumann algebra generated by {F (∆)}∆∈R(S) We recall that S ⊂ B(R) is the countable family of open intervals with rational end-points and R(S) the ring generated by R. Theorem c, page 24, in Ref. [37] ensures the countability of R(S). Proof. Let R be the extended real line, M := {F (∆)}∆∈B(R), and AW (F ) = AW (M ) the von Neumann algebra generated by F . Let G denote the family of open subsets of R and O := {F (∆), ∆ ∈ G}. Since the POV measure F is regular, for each Borel set ∆, there exists a decreasing family of open sets Gi such that F (Gi) → F (∆) strongly. Then, O is dense in M and the von Neumann algebra generated by M coincides with the von Neumann algebra generated by O. Hence, AW (F ) = AW (M ) = AW (O). (26) Now, let G1 denote the family of open intervals in R. Let us consider the set O1 = {F (∆), ∆ ∈ G1}. Each open set ∆ is the disjoint union of a countable family of open intervals ∆i, i.e. ∆ = ∪∞ i=1∆i. Therefore, F (∆i) ∞Xi=1 i=1∆i) = F (∆) = F (∪∞ nXi=1 = lim n→∞ F (∆i) = lim n→∞ F (∪n i=1∆i). Since the von Neumann algebra generated by O1 contains F (∪n contain F (∆) = limn→∞ F (∪n i=1∆i). Therefore, i=1∆i), it must AW (O1) = AW (O). (27) Now, we prove that the von Neumann algebra AW (O2) generated by O2 = {F (∆)}∆∈R(S) coincides with AW (O1). For each open interval (a, b), a, b ∈ R, there exists a disjoint family of sets {∆i}i∈N ⊂ R(S), ∆i ⊂ (a, b), i ∈ N, such that (a, b) = ∪∞ i=1∆i. Then, F (∆i) ∞Xi=1 i=1∆i) = F (a, b) = F (∪∞ nXi=1 = lim n→∞ F (∆i) = lim n→∞ F (∪n i=1∆i). 23 Since the von Neumann algebra generated by O2 contains F (∪n n ∈ N, it must contain F (∆) = limn→∞ F (∪n AW (O2) and, by equations (26) and (27), i=1∆i) for each i=1∆i). Therefore, AW (O1) = AW (O2) = AW (O1) = AW (O) = AW (F ) (28) which proves that AW (F ) coincides with the von Neumann algebra generated by the set {F (∆)}∆∈R(S). B Sequences of continuous functions The following theorem is due to Dini. We give a proof based on the use of sequences. Theorem B1. Let {fn(λ)}n∈N be a non increasing sequence of continuous functions defined on a compact set B ⊂ [0, 1] with values in [0, 1] and such that fn(λ) → 0 point-wise. Then, fn(λ) → 0 uniformly. Proof. Since fn+1(λ) ≤ fn(λ) for each λ ∈ B, we have kfn+1k∞ ≤ kfnk∞. If kfnk∞ → 0 clearly fn(λ) → 0 uniformly. Then, suppose kfnk∞ → a > 0. Since kfn+1k∞ ≤ kfnk∞, we have kfnk∞ ≥ a, for each n ∈ N. Let λn be such that fn(λn) = kfnk∞. Since {λn} is a bounded sequence of real numbers, there exists a convergent subsequence {λnk}k∈N. Let β be its limit, i.e., β := limk→∞ λnk . The compactness of B assures that β ∈ B. Moreover, limk→∞ fnk (λnk ) = a. Let us consider the sequence of numbers fnk(β). We prove that fnk (β) ≥ a for each k ∈ N. We proceed by contradiction. Suppose that there exists ¯k ∈ N such that fn¯k (β) < a. Then, there exists a neighborhood I(β) of β such that fn¯k(λ) < a for each λ ∈ I(β). Moreover, since λnk → β, there exists l ∈ N such that k > l implies λnk ∈ I(β). Take k > max{¯k, l}. Then, λnk ∈ I(β) and fnk(λ) ≤ fn¯k (λ), for each λ ∈ B. Therefore, fnk(λnk ) ≤ fn¯k (λnk ) < a which contradicts the fact that fnk(λnk ) = kfnkk∞ ≥ a, for each k ∈ N. We have proved that fnk (β) ≥ a, for each k ∈ N. This implies that limk→∞ fnk (β) ≥ a and contradicts one of the hypothesis of the lemma, i.e., limn→∞ fn(λ) = 0 for each λ ∈ B. 24 References [1] S.T. Ali: 'A geometrical property of POV-measures and systems of co- variance.' In: Doebner, H.-D., Andersson, S.I., Petry, H.R. (eds.) 'Dif- ferential Geometric Methods in Mathematical Physics,' Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 905, pp. 207-228, Springer, Berlin (1982). [2] S.T. Ali, G.G. Emch, 'Fuzzy observables in quantum mechanics,' J. Math. Phys. 15 (1974) 176. [3] S.T. Ali, E.D. Prugovecki, Physica A, 89 (1977) 501-521. [4] S.T. Ali, C. Carmeli, T. Heinosaari, A. Toigo, Found. Phys. 39 (2009) 593-612 . [5] R. Beals: Topics in Operator Theory, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1971. [6] R. Beneduci, G. Nistic´o, J. Math. Phys. 44 (2003) 5461. [7] R. Beneduci, J. Math. Phys. 47 (2006) 062104. [8] R. Beneduci, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 3 (2006) 1559. [9] R. Beneduci, J. Math. Phys. 48 (2007) 022102. [10] R. Beneduci, Il Nuovo Cimento B, 123 (2008) 43-62. [11] R. Beneduci, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 49 (2010) 3030-3038. [12] R. Beneduci, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 42 (2010) 441-451. [13] R. Beneduci, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 43 (2010) 1224-1239. [14] R. Beneduci, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 50, (2011) 3724-3736, doi: 10.1007/s10773-011-0907-7. [15] R. Beneduci, J. Brooke, R. Curran, F. Schroeck Jr., International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 50 (2011) 3682-3696, doi: 10.1007/s10773-011- 0797-8. [16] R. Beneduci, J. Brooke, R. Curran, F. Schroeck Jr., International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 50 (2011) 3697-3723, doi: 10.1007/s10773-011- 0869-9. [17] Beneduci R.: F. Schroeck Jr., A note on the relationship between local- ization and the norm-1 property, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. vol. 46, 305303 (2013). 25 [18] S. K. Berberian, Notes on Spectral theory, Van Nostrand Mathematical Studies, New York, 1966. [19] P. Billingsley, Convergence of Probability Measures, John Wiley and Sons, New York (1968). [20] P. Busch, M. Grabowski, P. Lahti, 'Operational quantum physics,' Lec- ture Notes in Physics, vol. 31, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995. [21] E.B.Davies, J.T. Lewis, Comm. Math. Phys. 17 (1970) 239. [22] J. Dixmier, C ∗-Algebras, North-Holland, New York, 1977. [23] N. Dunford, J. T. Schwartz, Linear Operators, part II, Interscience Pub- lisher, New York, 1963. [24] C. Garola, S. Sozzo, Int. J. Theor. Phys., 49, 31013117 (2009). [25] M. C. Gemignani, Elementary topology, Dover, New York, (1972) pp. 223-227. [26] W. Guz, Int. J. Theo. Phys. 23 (1984) 157-184. [27] P. R. Halmos, Measure Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York (1974). [28] C. W. Helstrom, Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory, Academic, New York, 1976. [29] T. Heinonen, P. Lahti, J. P. Pelloppaa, S. Pulmannova, K. Ylinen, 'The norm-1 property of a quantum observable,' Journal of Mathematical Physics 44 (2003) 1998-2008. [30] A. S. Holevo, 'An analog of the theory of statistical decisions in non- commutative probability theory,' Trans, Moscow Math. Soc. 26 (1972) 133. [31] A. S. Holevo, Probabilistics and statistical aspects of quantum theory, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1982. [32] A. Jencov´a, S. Pulmannov´a, Rep. Math. Phys. 59 (2007) 257-266. [33] A. Jencov`a, S. Pulmannov`a, 'Characterizations of Commutative POV Measures,' Found. Phys. 39 (2009) 613-624. [34] R. V. Kadison, J. R. Ringrose, Fundamentals of the theory of operator algebras I and II, Academic Press, New York, 1986. [35] K. Kuratowski, A. Mostowski, Set Theory with an introduction to de- scriptive set theory, North-Holland, New York 1976. 26 [36] K. Kuratowski, Topology, Academic Press, New York, 1966. [37] M. Lo`eve, Probability Theory I, 4th edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977. [38] B. Maslowski, J. Seidler, Probability Theory and Related Fields, 118 (2000) 187-210. [39] M.A. Naimark, Normed Rings, Wolters-Noordhoff Publishing, Gronongen (1972). [40] E. Prugovecki, Stochastic Quantum Mechanics and Quantum Spacetime, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1984. [41] M.Reed, B.Simon, Methods of modern mathematical physics, Academic Press, New York, 1980. [42] D. Revuz, Markov Chains, North Holland, Amsterdam (1984). [43] F. E. Schroeck, Jr., Int. J. Theo. Phys. 28 247 (1989). [44] F. E. Schroeck, Jr., Quantum Mechanics on Phase Space, Kluwer Aca- demic Publishers, Dordrecht, (1996). [45] W. Stulpe, 'Classical Representations of Quantum Mechanics Related to Statistically Complete Observables,' Wissenschaft und Technik Verlag, Berlin 1997. Also available: quant-ph/0610122 27
1208.4013	2	1208	2012-08-21T11:42:30	The simplified version of the Spielman and Srivastava algorithm for proving the Bourgain-Tzafriri restricted invertiblity theorem	[ "math.FA" ]	By giving up the best constants, we will see that the original argument of Spielman and Srivastava for proving the Bourgain-Tzafriri Restricted Invertibility Theorem \cite{SS} still works - and is much simplier than the final version. We do not intend on publishing this since it is their argument with just a trivial modification, but we want to make it available to the mathematics community since several people have requested it already.	math.FA	math	THE SIMPLIFIED VERSION OF THE SPIELMAN AND SRIVASTAVA ALGORITHM FOR PROVING THE BOURGAIN-TZAFRIRI RESTRICTED INVERTIBLITY THEOREM PETER G. CASAZZA Abstract. By giving up the best constants, we will see that the original argument of Spielman and Srivastava for proving the Bourgain-Tzafriri Re- stricted Invertibility Theorem [2] still works - and is much simplier than the final version. We do not intend on publishing this since it is their argument with just a trivial modification, but we want to make it available to the mathematics community since several people have requested it already. 1. Introduction Recently, Spielman and Sristave [2] made a stunning achievement by show- ing that one of the deeper and most useful results in pure mathematics, the Bourgain-Tzafriri Restricted Invertibility Theorem [1], can be proved directly with an algorithm. The original proof had a technical error which they cor- rected in a later version. But this correction doubled the degree of difficulty of the proof. We will see that their original proof is still valid if we are willing to give up the best constant in the theorem. 2. The Theorem and Their Original Proof Adjusted Theorem 2.1 (Spielman and Srivastave). Let H be a Hilbert space with or- thonormal basis {vi}n i=1. Assume L : H → H is a linear operator with kLvik = 1 for all i = 1, 2, · · · , n and assume A = m Xi=1 LviLvT i , has m non-zero eigenvalues, all of which are greater than b, and b′ = b−δ > δ. If T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] ≤ −n − then there exists a vector ω ∈ {Lvi}n i=1 satisfying: 2kLk2 δ , The author was supported by NSF DMS 1008183; and NSF ATD 1042701; AFOSR DGE51: FA9550-11-1-0245. 1 2 P.G. CASAZZA 1. ωT (A − b′I)−1ω < −1, and hence ω = Lvj for some m < j ≤ n. 2. T r[LT (A + ωωT − b′I)−1L] ≤ T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] ≤ −n − 2kLk2 δ . (Note that we added a 2 to the original constant in [2] (part (2) above) and as a result we have to change their starting point barrier from (1 − ǫ) to (1 − 2ǫ).) Proof. Step I: We show: (A − bI)−1 − (A − b′I)−1 ≥ δ 2 (A − b′I)−2, Note: In the original paper the above inequality was stated to hold for δ instead of δ/2. But this isn't true and is not even true for real numbers. Our fix will change their perfect constant for the lower Riesz bound from their (1 − ǫ)2 to (1 − 2ǫ)(1 − ǫ). Proof: Note first that δ ≤ b′ implies 2b′ ≥ b′ + δ. Thus and finally Now, Also, and so Hence, = and thus 1 b′ + δ ≥ 1 2b′ , 1 b′(b′ + δ) ≥ 1 2(b′)2 . −1 b − −1 b′ = b − b′ bb′ = δ b′(b′ + δ) ≥ δ 2(b′)2 . (1) λi − b ≤ λi − b′, (λi − b)(λi − b′) ≤ (λi − b′)2. 1 (λi − b)(λi − b′) ≥ 1 (λi − b′)2 , 1 λi − b − 1 λi − b′ = b − b′ (λi − b)(λi − b′) ≥ δ (λi − b′)2 . SPIELMAN AND SRIVASTAVA 3 Step 2: We observe that T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] ≤ T r[LT (A − bI)−1L]. Proof: By Step I, we have T r[LT (A − bI)−1L − LT (A − b′I)−1L] = T r[LT ((A − bI)−1 − (A − b′I)−1)L] ≥ δ 2 T r[LT (A − b′I)−2L] ≥ 0. Step 3: We show T r[LT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1L] ≤ (T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L])(−n − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L]). Proof: Since we have and hence, T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] ≤ −n − 2kLk2 δ , kLk2 ≤ δ 2 (−n − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L)]), kLk2T r[LT (A − b′I)−2L] ≤ δ 2 T r[LT (A − b′I)−2L](−n − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L]). Applying the proof of Step I, and the facts: (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1 ≥ 0 and LLT ≤ kLk2I, we have T r[LT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1L] (2) ≤ kLk2T r[LT (A − b′I)−2L] ≤ δ 2 T r[LT (A − b′I)−2L](−n − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L]) ≤ (T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L)(−n − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L]). Step 4: We pick a vector ω satisfying (1) and T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] − ω(A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω 1 + ω(A − b′I)−1ω ≤ T r[LT (A − bI)−1L]. Proof: Noting that ωT ω = 1, it follows from inequality 2 that there is a vector ω ∈ {Lvi}n i=1 so that ωT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω (3) ≤ (T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L)](−1 − ωT (A − b′I)−1ω) 4 P.G. CASAZZA Since the left-hand side of Equation 3 is non-negative, applying Step 1 we have and hence 0 < −1 − ωT (A − b′I)−1ω, ωT (A − b′I)−1ω < −1. For 1 ≤ j ≤ m, if ω = Lvj, then m ωT (A − b′I)−1ω = λi − b′ ω2 So ω = Lvj for m < j ≤ n. Now, Equation 3 implies ωT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω Xi=1 1 i ≥ 0. −1 − ωT (A − b′I)−1ω and the result follows. ≤ T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L], Step; 5: We check part (2) of the theorem. Proof: We apply the Sherman-Morrison formula - which states, for a matrix A, (A + ωωT )−1 = A−1 − A−1ωωT A−1 1 + ωT A−1ω . It follows that (Replacing A by A − b′I) LT (A + ωωT − b′I)−1L = LT (A − b′I)−1L − LT (A − b′I)−1ωωT (A − b′I)−1L 1 + ωT (A − b′I)−1ω . Thus, T r[LT (A + ωωT − b′I)−1L] = T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] − T r[LT (A − b′I)−1ωωT (A − b′I)−1L] 1 + ωT (A − b′I)−1ω . Using the fact that T r[AB] = T r[BA], we have that the above equals T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] − T r[ωT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω] 1 + ωT (A − b′I)−1ω = T r[LT (A − b′I)−1L] − ωT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω 1 + ωT (A − b′I)−1ω . We now have applying Step 4: T r[LT (A+ωωT −b′I)−1L] = T r[(LT (A−b′I)−1L]− ωT (A − b′I)−1LLT (A − b′I)−1ω 1 + ωT (A − b′I)−1ω This completes the proof of the theorem. (cid:3) ≤ T r[LT (A − bI)−1L] SPIELMAN AND SRIVASTAVA 5 Corollary 2.2 (Bourgain-Tzafriri Restricted Invertibility Theorem). If we iterate the algorithm k times, we get k vectors from {Lvi}m i=1 with lower Riesz bound for the operator A 1 − 2ǫ − (k − 1)δ = (1 − 2ǫ)(1 − (k − 1) kLk2 ǫn ) Hence, 1. If then k = ⌈ ǫ2n kLk2 ⌉, (1 − 2ǫ)(cid:20)1 − (k − 1) kLk2 ǫn (cid:21) ≥ (1 − 2ǫ)(cid:20)1 − ǫ2n kLk2 kLk2 ǫn (cid:21) = (1 − 2ǫ)(1 − ǫ). which is BT. 2. If then k = ⌈ ǫn kLk2 ⌉, (1 − 2ǫ)(cid:20)1 − (k − 1) kLk2 ǫn (cid:21) = (1 − 2ǫ)(cid:20)1 − ǫn kLk2 kLk2 ǫn (cid:21) and the process stops. = (1 − 2ǫ)0, References [1] J. Bourgain and L. Tzafriri, Invertibility of "large" submatrices and applications to the geometry of Banach spaces and Harmonic Analysis, Israel J. Math. 57 (1987) 137-224. [2] D.A. Spielman and N. Srivastava, , Israel Jour. Math. 19 No. 1 (2012) 83-91. Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211- 4100 E-mail address: [email protected]
1307.3523	2	1307	2013-07-16T08:39:47	Virtual continuity of the measurable functions of several variables, and Sobolev embedding theorems	[ "math.FA" ]	Classical Luzin's theorem states that the measurable function of one variable is "almost" continuous. This is not so anymore for functions of several variables. The search of right analogue of the Luzin theorem leads to a notion of virtually continuous functions of several variables. This probably new notion appears implicitly in the statements like embeddings theorems and traces theorems for Sobolev spaces. In fact, it reveals their nature as theorems about virtual continuity. This notion is especially useful for the study and classification of measurable functions, aswell as in some questions on dynamical systems, polymorphisms and bistochastic measures. In this work we recall necessary definitions and properties of admissible metrics, define virtual continuity, describe some of applications. Detailed analysis is to be presented in another paper.	math.FA	math	VIRTUAL CONTINUITY OF MEASURABLE FUNCTIONS OF SEVERAL VARIABLES AND EMBEDDINGS THEOREMS A. M. Vershik, P. B. Zatitskiy, F. V. Petrov . A F h t a m [ 2 v 3 2 5 3 . 7 0 3 1 : v i X r a Abstract Classical Luzin's theorem states that the measurable function of one variable is "almost" continuous. This is not so anymore for func- tions of several variables. The search of right analogue of the Luzin theorem leads to a notion of virtually continuous functions of sev- eral variables. This probably new notion appears implicitly in the statements like embeddings theorems and traces theorems for Sobolev spaces. In fact, it reveals their nature as theorems about virtual conti- nuity. This notion is especially useful for the study and classification of measurable functions, as well as in some questions on dynamical systems, polymorphisms and bistochastic measures. In this work we recall necessary definitions and properties of admissible metrics, define virtual continuity, describe some of applications. Detailed analysis is to be presented in another paper. St. Petersburg Department of V.A.Steklov Institute of Mathematics RAS, St. Petersburg State University. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. The work is supported by RFBR grant 11-01-00677-a, President of Russia grant MK-6133.2013.1, by Chebyshev Laboratory in SPbSU, Russian Govern- ment grant 11.G34.31.0026. 1 Introduction. Admissible metrics, 1 Luzin's theorem. 1.1 Admissible metrics We consider the Lebesgue-Rokhlin standard continuous (atomless) probabilistic measure space, isomorphic to the unit segment [0, 1] with Lebesgue measure. The first author proposes [4, 8, 11] to consider on the fixed standard space (X, A, µ) different (admissible) metrics, on the contrast to usual approach, when metric space is fixed and different Borel measures are considered. Such approach is useful and necessary in ergodic theory and other situations. Agreement of the metric and measure structures leads to the notion of admissible metric triple: Definition 1. A metric or semimetric ρ on the space X is called admissible if it is measurable, regarded as a function of two variables, on the Lebesgue space (X × X, µ × µ) and there exists a subset X0 ⊂ X of full measure such that the semimetric space (X0, ρ) is separable. The standard probabilistic space (X, µ) with admissible (semi- )metric ρ is called admissible metric triple or just admissible triple (X, µ, ρ). Properties of admissible metrics are studied in details by the au- thors in [12], [17]. In particular, these works contain several equivalent definitions of admissible triples. Standartness of the space allows to get the following Proposition 1. Let ρ be the admissible metric on (X, A, µ). Then completed Borel sigma-algebra B = B(X, ρ) is a subalgebra of A. The measure µ is inner regular with respect to metric ρ, i.e. for any A ∈ A we have µ(A) = sup{µ(K) : K ⊂ A, K is compact in metric ρ}. So, for any admissible metric ρ the measure µ is Radon measure in the metric space (X, ρ). M. Gromov in the book [3] suggests to consider arbitrary metric triples (X, µ, ρ), which he calls mm-spaces. Also, Gromov asks the question about their classification, having in mind classical situations (Riemannian manifolds and so on). It is natural to consider admissible 2 triples in this framework. Define equivalence of admissible triples up to measure-preserving isometries: (X, µ, ρ) ∼ (X ′, µ′, ρ′), if ∃T : X → X ′; T µ = µ′; ρ′(T x, T y) = ρ(x, y). Here is the main result on this equivalence: Theorem 1. (Gromov [3]; Vershik [4]) Consider the map Fρ : X∞ × X∞ → M∞(R) : Fρ({xi, yj}(i,j)∈N×N) = {ρ(xi, yj)}(i,j)∈N×N, and equip infinite product X∞ ×X∞ by the product-measure µ∞ ×µ∞. Let Dρ denote the measure on the space of matrices (i.e. random matrix of distances), which is the Fρ-image of the measure µ∞ × µ∞. Call it MATRIX DISTRIBUTION of the metric ρ. It is a complete invariant of above equivalence of admissible metrics. In other words, (X, µ, ρ) ∼ (X ′, µ′, ρ′) ⇔ Dρ = Dρ′. In [5] this result is generalized to the so called pure measurable functions of several variables. The following lemma is useful in the theory of admissible metrics: Lemma 2. Let ρ1, ρ2 be admissible semimetrics on the standard space (X, µ), and suppose that ρ1 is metric. Then for any ε > 0 there exists measurable subset K ⊂ X such that µ(K) > 1 − ε and semimetric ρ2 (as a function of two variables) is continuous on K × K with respect to metric ρ1. We may choose K as a compact subset with respect to admissible metric ρ = ρ1 + ρ2, if µ(K) > 1 − ε. Lemma immediately implies the Corollary 3. Let ρ1 and ρ2 be two admissible metrics on the standard space (X, µ). Then for any ε > 0 there exists K ⊂ X such that µ(K) > 1 − ε and topologies defined by metrics ρ1 and ρ2 on K coincide. 1.2 Luzin's theorem on measurable functions of one variable Furthermore we consider (measurable) real-valued functions, though most of our results remain true for maps into standard Borel space, in 3 particular into Polish spaces. Egorov's and Luzin's classical theorems on measurable functions of one variable are well-known. The general- ized Luzin's theorem for arbitrary admissible triple follows from above results: Corollary 4 (Luzin's theorem). Let ρ be an admissible metric on the standard space (X, µ), let f be a measurable map from X into Polish space (M, d). Then for any ε > 0 there exists a measurable subset K ⊂ X such that µ(K) > 1 − ε and f is continuous on K with respect to metric ρ. Proof. Set ρ1(x, y) = ρ(x, y) + d(f (x), f (y)). Then ρ1 is a trivial example of an admissible metric, with respect to which f is continuous. By 3 there exist a subset K having measure µ(K) > 1 − ε, on which this continuity implies continuity with respect to ρ. But this fact does not hold true for functions of several variables. 2 Virtual continuity 2.1 Definitions and first examples Let f (·, ·) be a measurable function of two variables. Then Luzin's theorem analogue (continuity on the product X ′×Y ′ of sets of measure > 1 − ε with respect to given metric ρ[(x1, y1), (x2, y2)] = ρX(x1, x2) + ρY (y1, y2)) is not in general true. This leads to the following key notion of this work. (Sum of metrics may be replaced to maximum or other metric defining the topology of direct product. To stress this we denote generic metric with such topology by ρX × ρY ). Definition 2. Measurable function f (·, ·) on the product (X, µ)×(Y, ν) of standard spaces is called virtually continuous, if for any ε > 0 there exist sets X ′ ⊂ X, Y ′ ⊂ Y , each of which having measure 1 − ε, and admissible semimetrics ρX , ρY on X ′, Y ′ respectively such that function f is continuous on (X ′ × Y ′, ρX × ρY ). virtual functions of several variables are defined in the same way. It is essential that admissible metric with respect to which function becomes continuous is not arbitrary, but respects the structure of di- rect product (in more general setting, it respects selected subalgebras, see further). It is easy to verify that there does not exist universal metric of such type (i.e. such a metric that virtual continuity implies 4 continuity in this metric). defined notion. It explains the non-trivial properties of It is clear that any admissible metric (considered as a function of two variables) is virtually continuous. So is any function, which is continuous with the respect to product of admissible metrics. Degener- i=1 ϕi(x)ψi(y), where φi(·), ψi(·), i = 1, . . . n are arbitrary measurable functions, are also virtually continuous. For the proof just use Luzin's theorem for all functions ϕi(·), i = 1 . . . n, and ψi(·), i = 1 . . . n. ated functions (or "finite rank functions") f (x, y) = Pn less trivial examples of virtually continuous functions are given by functions from some Sobolev spaces and kernels of trace class opera- tors. For virtually continuous functions there exist well-define restric- tions on some subsets of zero measure -- concretely, onto supporters of (quasi)bistochastic measures, see next paragraph. An easy example of not virtually continuous measurable function on [0, 1]2 is provided by the characteristic function of the triangle {x ≥ y}. In general, for functions on the square of a compact group depending of the ratio of variables the criterion of virtual continuity is simple: Proposition 5. Let G be a metrizable compact group, f be a Haar measurable function on G. Then the function F (x, y) := f (xy−1) on G × G is virtually continuous if and only if f is equivalent to a continuous function. Stress once more that the definition of virtual continuity is not topological, but measure-theoretical in nature. It applies to the choice of various metrics on the measure space. So, the direct sense of the proposition 5 is that group structure and measure-theoretical structure allow to reconstruct topology. 2.2 Bistochastic measures and polymorphisms From the measure-theoretical point of view a function of k variables on the product of standard continuous spaces is nothing but the function on the standard continuous space (due to isomorphism of all such spaces). In order to deal with it as a function of k variables, we have to introduce another category, then just measurable spaces. namely, consider the following structure: (X , A, m), with k selected sigma-subalgebras A1, . . . , Ak in A. the measure space It is 5 natural to suppose that those subalgebras generate the whole sigma- algebra A. The connection with general viewpoint is the following: in the space X = Qk i=1(Xi, Ai, µi), m = Q µi, identify algebras Ai with subalgebras of A = Q Ai by multiplying to trivial subalgebras on other multiples. measurable iff f depends only on i-th variable xi (i = 1, . . . , k). In other words, function f (x1, . . . , xk) on X is Ai- Definition 3. Measurable function on the standard space X with k selected subalgebras, which generate the whole sigma-algebra, is called general measurable function of k variables. Consider some measure λ on the sigma-algebra A. It may be re- stricted onto sigma-subalgebras Ai, i = 1, . . . , k. Let's consider such measures λ for which those restrictions are absolutely continuous with respect to the measure m (restricted onto Ai). If restrictions of λ onto Ai coincide with m, i = 1 . . . k, such a measure λ is called multi- stochastic with respect to given subalgebras (bistochastic for k = 2); if restrictions are just equivalent to m for i = 1, . . . , k, we call λ almost multistochastic. Finally, if λ(U ) ≤ m(U ) for any U ∈ Ai, i = 1, . . . , k, we call λ submultistochastic. Of course, bistochastic measure on X × Y may be singular with respect to the product measure. For instance, in the case of direct product of segments (X, µ) = (Y, ν) = [0, 1] there is a bistochastic measure λ on diagonal {x = y} (with density dµ(x)). Furthermore we suppose for simplicity that k = 2, i.e. consider functions of two variables. But there is no serious difference for k > 2. We consider not only independent variables, most of the notions may be defined for general pair of sigma-algebras. But even the case of independent variables is often useful to treat as a general case. Bistochastic measure on the direct product of spaces define the so called polymorphism of the space (X, µ) into (Y, ν) (see [9]), i.e. "multivalued mapping" with invariant measure. The case of identified variables (X, A, µ) = (Y, B, ν) is of special interest: polymorphism in this case generalizes the concept of automorphism of measure space. Almost bistochastic measures defines a polymorphism with quasi in- variant measure. Bistochastic or almost bistochastic measure λ de- fines also a bilinear (in general case k-linear) form (f (x), g(y)) → R f (x)g(y)dλ(x, y), corresponding to the so called Markovian, resp. quasi Markovian operator in corresponding functional spaces. Note that this operator Uλ is a contraction, i.e. has norm at most 1, which 6 preserves the cone of non-negative functions. In the case of bistochas- tic measure this operator (as well as adjoint operator) preserve con- stants: Uλ1 = 1. See [9, 10, 7] about many connections of polymorphisms (Marko- vian operators, joinings, couplings, correspondences, Young measures, bibundles etc). Bistochastic measures play a key role in the intensively developing theory of continuous graphs [15]. 2.3 Further properties of virtually continuous functions First of all, virtually continuous functions enjoy the properties a priori stronger than required in the definition. On the one side, we may require for sets X ′, Y ′ from the definition to have full measure: Theorem 2. Let function f (·, ·) be virtually continuous. Then there exist sets X ′ ⊂ X, Y ′ ⊂ Y of full measure and admissible semi- metrics ρX, ρY on X ′, Y ′ respectively such that f is continuous on (X ′ × Y ′, ρX × ρY ). On the other hand, we may fix arbitrary admissible metrics: Theorem 3. Let function f (·, ·) be virtually continuous. Then for any admissible semimetrics ρX , ρY on X ′, Y ′ and for any ε > 0 there exist sets X ′ ⊂ X, Y ′ ⊂ Y , each of which having measure 1 − ε, such that function f is continuous on (X ′ × Y ′, ρX × ρY ). A function of two variables on X × Y may be treated as a map from X into the space of functions on Y (i.e. f (x, y) ≡ fx(y)). In [16] such a viewpoint is used for classification problem. Virtual continuity is described in those terms by the following equivalent definition: Theorem 4. Virtual continuity of the function f (·, ·) is equivalent to the following property of a function: for any ε > 0 there exist sets X ′ ⊂ X, Y ′ ⊂ Y having measures not less then 1 − ε, such that the set of functions fx(·) on Y ′ (variable x runs over X ′) form a totally bounded (precompact) family in L∞(Y ′). This theorem-definition has an important corollary: continuity in one variable implies virtual continuity. Lemma 6. Let (X, µ), (Y, ν) be standard continuous probabilistic spaces, ρY be an admissible metric on the set Y ′ of full measure. Let 7 measurable function f : X × Y → R be so that functions f (x, ·) are continuous on (Y ′, ρY ) for µ-almost all x ∈ X. Then f is virtually continuous. Theorem 2 immediately implies the converse: for any virtually continuous function f such a metric ρY exists. So, the statement of Lemma 6 ("continuity by appropriate metric on y for almost all fixed x") is equivalent to virtual continuity. It's remarkable that the spaces X and Y (i.e. arguments of the function) play different roles in this definition. However, a posteriori the property appears to be symmetric under the change of order of variables. This is another demonstration of the non-triviality of the virtual continuity concept. As we have seen, measurable functions f (·, ·) are classified by ma- trix distributions, i.e. by measures on the space of matrices (aij)∞ i,j=1, induced by the map f → (ai,j = f (xi, yj)) (points xi in X and yi in Y , i = 1, 2, . . . are chosen independently). Virtual continuity also may be characterized on this manner: Theorem 5. Let x1, x2, . . . (resp. y1, y2, . . . ) be independent random points in X (resp. in Y ). Virtual continuity of the measurable func- tion f (x, y) is equivalent to the following condition: for any ε > 0 there exist positive integer N such that the following event has probability 1: there exist such a partitions of naturals {1, 2, . . . , } = ⊔N i=0Ai = ⊔N i=0Bi that upper density of the set A0 ∪ B0 is less than ε (i.e. lim sup (A0 ∪ B0) ∩ [1, n]/n < ε) and f (xs, yt) − f (xr, yp) < ε for all i, j > 0, s, r ∈ Ai, p, t ∈ Bj. Aforementioned characteristics of the virtual continuity allow to deduce that virtual continuous functions form a nowhere dense set in the space of all measurable functions (with measure convergence topology). 2.4 Thickness Consider the space X × Y with product measure µ × ν. Choose two subalgebras in its sigma-algebra, defined by projections onto X and Y . For measurable set Z ⊂ X × Y define its thickness th(Z) as the infimum of the value µ(X1) + ν(Y1) taken by all pairs of measurable sets X1 ⊂ X, Y1 ⊂ Y such that µ × ν(Z \ (X1 × Y ∪ X × Y1)) = 0. (1) 8 Sets of the form X1 × Y , X × Y1 are exactly sets from our sigma- subalgebras. It allows to define generalized thickness for other selected subalgebras in the standard space. The following properties of thickness are immediate: • thickness of a set does not exceed 1 and equals 0 for and only for sets of measure 0; • thickness of a subset does not exceed a thickness of a set; • thickness of a set does not exceed its measure; • thickness of a finite or countable union of sets does not exceed sum of thicknesses. The following lemma is slightly less obvious. Lemma 1. If th(Z) = 0, then X1, Y1 of zero measure may be chosen in the definition 1. By "arbitrarily thin set" we mean "the set of arbitrarily small thickness". It allows to reformulate lemma 1 as follows: if the set may covered may arbitrarily thin set, then its complement contains mod 0 the product of full measure sets. the following equivalent definition of thickness is in some situations more appropriate for using: Lemma 2. For any set Z consider pairs of measurable functions f : X → [0, 1], g : Y → [0, 1], such that f (x) + g(y) ≥ χZ (x, y) for µ × ν- almost all pairs (x, y). Then thickness of Z is infimum of the sum of integrals RX f dµ and RY gdν. Applying this lemma and choosing weakly convergent subsequence the lower semicontinuity of thickness may be proved: Lemma 3. Let {Zn} -be increasing sequence of measurable sets, Z = ∪nZn. Then th(Z) = lim th(Zn). Note that there is no upper semicontinuity: all sets {(x, y) : 0 < x − y < 1/n} ⊂ [0, 1]2 have thickness 1, while their intersection is empty. Define the convergence of functions "in thickness" analogously to convergence in measure. This is convergence in the metrizable topol- ogy defined by the following distance: 9 Definition 4. Define the distance τ (f (x, y), g(x, y)) between arbitrary measurable functions of two variables as infimum of such ε > 0 that th{(x, y) : f (x, y) − g(x, y) > ε} ≤ ε. Convergence in this τ -metric implies convergence in measure (but not vice versa). Let ξX : X = ⊔n i=1Xi, ξY : Y = ⊔m i=1Yi be finite partitions of the spaces X, Y respectively onto measurable subsets of positive measure. Functions which are constant mod 0 on each product Xi ×Yj are called i=1 ai(x)bi(y) are called functions of finite rank. The set of measurable functions is complete in τ -metric. step functions. Finite linear combinations PN The following theorem connects finite rank functions and virtual continuity. Theorem 6. The τ -closure of the set of step functions (or the set of finite rank functions) is exactly the set of virtually continuous func- tions. This definition of virtual continuity is even more explicitly measure-theoretical, it does not appeal to metrics at all. Also, it has clear generalisation to arbitrary pair of sigma-subalgebras. See [13] on close concepts. 2.5 Norm in the space of virtually continuous functions Defined convergence in τ -metric is a virtual continuity analogue of the convergence in measure. Known Banach spaces of measurable functions also have their analogues. A measurable function h(·, ·) on the space (X × Y, µ × ν) is called subbistochastic, if the measure with µ × ν-density h(·, ·) is subbis- tochastic. Denote by S the set of subbistochastic functions. Define a finite or infinite norm of a measurable function f (·, ·) as kf k := inf{ZX a(x)dµ(x)+ZY b(y)dν(y) : f (x, y) ≤ a(x)+b(y) a.e.} Next theorem is an analogue of known L. V. Kantorovich's duality theorem [1] in the mass transportation problem (concretely, of duality between measures space with Kantorovich distance and and the space of Lipschitz functions, see also [18]). 10 Theorem 7. kf k = sup{ZX×Y f (x, y)h(x, y)dxdy : h ∈ S}. Coincidence of infimum and supremum is a duality statement in infinite-dimensional linear programming. But in our case the proof requires more delicate arguments than the Monge-Kantorovich prob- lem. The reason is that we consider L1-type space, in which the cone of non-negative functions has empty interior (on the contrast to the space of continuous functions, used in the transport problem). This does not allow to apply directly standard separability theorems. Theorem 8. The closure of step functions in above norm consists exactly of all virtually continuous functions having finite norm (in particular, each bounded virtually continuous function belongs to this closure). Denote this space by V C 1. It is an analogue of the space L1 for virtually continuous functions and is a pre-dual for the space of polymorphisms with bounded densities of projections. Theorem 9. The space dual to V C 1 is a space of signed measures η on X × Y with finite norm ∂P x ∗ η ∂µ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)L∞(X,µ) ,(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∂P y ∗ η ∂ν }, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)L∞(Y,ν) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) kηkme = max{(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) where P x and P y are projections onto X and Y respectively and η is a full variation of a signed measure η. Corollary 1. Virtually continuous functions from V C 1 (in particular, bounded virtually continuous functions) have a well defined integral not only over sets of positive measure (as all summable functions do have), but also also over bistochastic (singular) measures: for instance, over Lebesgue measure on diagonal {x = y} ⊂ [0, 1]2, or over measure concentrated on a graph of a map with quasiinvariant measure. To summarize, virtually continuous functions have traces (restrictions) on diagonal and other subsets in the sense of Sobolev trace theorems. 11 3 Applications: theo- rems, trace theorems and restrictions of metrics embeddings Here we mention some applications of virtual continuity. 3.1 Sobolev spaces and trace theorems Theorem 10. Let Ω1, Ω2 be domains of dimensions d1, d2 respectively, suppose that pl > d2 or p = 1, l = d2. Then functions from the Sobolev space W l p(Ω1 × Ω2) (l-th generalized derivatives are summable with power p) are virtually continuous as functions of two variables x ∈ Ω1, p(Ω1 × Ω2) into V C 1(Ω1, K) is continuous for y ∈ Ω2. Embedding W l any compact subset K of the domain Ω2. Proof. Using the theorem of embedding of Sobolev space into continu- ous functions (see, for instance, [2, 6]), we have the following estimate for functions h(y) ∈ W l p(Ω2): khkC(K) ≤ c(Ω2, K)khkW l p(Ω2). Let f (x, y) ∈ W l p(Ω1 × Ω2) be a smooth function. Set a(x) := kf (x, ·)kW l p(Ω2). Then by Fubini's theorem a ∈ L1(Ω1) and Z a ≤ c(Ω1, Ω2)kf (x, y)kW l p(Ω1×Ω2). The following estimate holds on Ω1 × K: f (x, y) ≤ kf (x, ·)kC(K) ≤ c(Ω2, K)a(x). Summarizing this we have kf kV C 1(Ω1,K) ≤ c(Ω1, Ω2, K)kf kW l p(Ω1×Ω2). (2) Each function in the class W l smooth functions, by (2) it is a limit in V C 1 as well. p(Ω1 × Ω2) is a limit of a sequence of So, under conditions of this theorem we may integrate functions over quasibistochastic measures. It generalizes usual theorems about traces on submanifolds. 12 3.2 Nuclear operators in Hilbert space It is well known that the space of nuclear operators in the Hilbert space L2 is a projective tensor product of Hilbert spaces. Their ker- nels are measurable functions of two variables, which can hardly be described directly. the following theorem claims that kernels of nuclear operators are virtually continuous as functions of two variables. Note that kernels of Hilbert-Schmidt operators are not in general virtually continuous. Theorem 11. Let (X, µ), (Y, ν) be standard spaces. the space of kernels of nuclear operators from L2(X) to L2(Y ) (with Schatten -- von Neumann norm) embeds continuously into V C 1. It implies that such kernels may be integrated not only over diag- onal when X = Y , which is well known, but by bistochastic measures. But the space V C 1 is wider than kernels of nuclear operators. If we look at V C 1 as to the space of kernels of integral operators, it is not unitray invariant, on the contrast to Schatten -- von Neumann indeed, the definition of V C 1 essentially uses known sigma- spaces. subalgebras, which do not have necessary invariance. Close question is considered in [14]. 3.3 Restrictions of metrics The following problem was one of origins of this paper. Let (X, µ) be a standard space with continuous measure. Assume that ρ is an admissible metric and ξ is a measurable partition of (X, µ) with parts of null measure (say, ξ is a partition onto level sets of function which is not constant on sets of positive measure). May we correctly restrict our metric (a s a function of two variables) onto elements of this partition? It is not immediately clear, since the metric is a priori just a measurable function. But admissible metric is virtually continu- ous, and so for our goal it suffices to define a bistochastic mea- sure, onto which we have to restrict it. Suppose for simplicity that X = [0, 1]2, µ is a Lebesgue measure, ξ is a partition onto ver- tical lines. Then we say about restriction of virtually continuous function defined on X 2 = [0, 1]4 onto three-dimensional submanifold {(x1, x2, x3, x4) : x1 = x3}. It is easy to see that such a submani- fold equipped by a three-dimensional Lebesgue measure defines a bis- tochastic measure on X × X. 13 4 Acknowledgements We are grateful to L.Lovasz, who sent us his recent monograph [15], in which close questions are discussed, and to A.Logunov for paying our attention to the possibility of dual definition of the thickness. 14 References [1] L. V. Kantorovich. On the Translocation of Masses, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 37, No. 7 -- 8, 227 -- 229 (1942). English translation: Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 3-2006, Volume 133, Issue 4, pp 1381-1382. [2] V. G. Maz´ya. Sobolev spaces, Izdat. Leningrad. Univ., Leningrad (1985). English translation: Springer-Verlag, Berlin, (1985). [3] M. Gromov. Metric Structure for Riemannian and Non- Riemannian Spaces. Birkhouser (1998). [4] A. Vershik. The universal Uryson space, Gromov's metric triples, and random metrics on the series of natural numbers. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 53, No.5, 57-64 (1998). English translation: Russian Math. Surveys 53, No.5, 921-928 (1998). [5] A. Vershik. Classification of measurable functions of several argu- ments, and invariantly distributed random matrices (in Russian). Funkts. Anal. Prilozh. 36, no.2, 12-28 (2002). English translation: Funct. Anal. Appl. 36, no.2, 93-105 (2002). [6] R. A. Adams, J. J. .F Fournier. Sobolev spaces. Academic press, v. 140 (2003). [7] A. Vershik. Three lectures on invariant measures and universal- ity. In: Dynamics and Randomness II, A.Maass, S.Martinez, and J.San Martin (eds.), Kluwer Academic Publ., Netherlands, 2004, pp.199-228. [8] A. Vershik. Random metric spaces and universality. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 59, No. 2(356), 65-104 (2004). English translation: Russian Math. Surveys 59, No. 2, 259-295 (2004). [9] A. Vershik. Polymorphisms, Markov processes, and quasi- similarity. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 13, No. 5, 1305-1324 (2005). [10] A. Vershik. Vershik A. What does a generic Markov operator look like? Algebra i Analiz 17, No. 5, 91-104 (2005). English translation: St. Petersburg Mathematical Journal. 17, No. 5. p. 763-772. (2006) [11] A. Vershik. Dynamic of metrics in measure spaces and their asymptotic invariants. Markov Processes and Related Fields, 16 No.1, 169-185 (2010). 15 [12] P. Zatitskiy, F. Petrov. Correction of metrics. Zapiski Nauch- nykh Seminarov POMI, 390, 201-209 (2011). English translation: arXiv:1112.2380. [13] K-T. Sturm. The space of spaces:curvature bounds and gradient flows on the space of metric measure space. (Preprint) [14] M. Denker, M. Gordin. Limit theorem for von Mises statistics of a vrasure preserving transformations. arXiv:1109.0635v2 [15] L. Lovasz. Large networks and graph limits. Colloquium Publi- cations, Vol. 60. (2012) [16] A. Vershik. On classification of measurable functions of several variables, Zapiski Nauchn. Semin. POMI 403, 35-57 (2012). En- glish version to appear in J. Math. Sci. 190, No. 3 (2013). [17] F. Petrov, A. Vershik, P. Zatitskiy. Geometry and dynamics of admissible metrics in measure spaces. Central Europ.J.Math. 11, No.3, 379-400. (2013) [18] A. Vershik. Long History of Monge-Kantorovich transportation problem. Mathem.Intellegencer, 35, No.4. (2013). 16
1808.03866	1	1808	2018-08-11T21:11:43	Log-majorization related to R\'enyi divergences	[ "math.FA" ]	For $\alpha,z>0$ with $\alpha\ne1$, motivated by comparison between different kinds of R\'enyi divergences in quantum information, we consider log-majorization between the matrix functions \begin{align} P_\alpha(A,B)&:=B^{1/2}(B^{-1/2}AB^{-1/2})^\alpha B^{1/2}, \\ Q_{\alpha,z}(A,B)&:=(B^{1-\alpha\over2z}A^{\alpha\over z}B^{1-\alpha\over2z})^z \end{align} of two positive (semi)definite matrices $A,B$. We precisely determine the parameter $\alpha,z$ for which $P_\alpha(A,B)\prec_{\log}Q_{\alpha,z}(A,B)$ and $Q_{\alpha,z}(A,B)\prec_{\log}P_\alpha(A,B)$ holds, respectively.	math.FA	math	Log-majorization related to R´enyi divergences Fumio Hiai1 1 Tohoku University (Emeritus), Hakusan 3-8-16-303, Abiko 270-1154, Japan Abstract For α, z > 0 with α 6= 1, motivated by comparison between different kinds of R´enyi divergences in quantum information, we consider log-majorization between the matrix functions Pα(A, B) := B1/2(B−1/2AB−1/2)αB1/2, Qα,z(A, B) := (B 1−α 2z A α z B 1−α 2z )z of two positive (semi)definite matrices A, B. We precisely determine the parame- ter α, z for which Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) and Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) holds, respectively. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 15A42, 15A45, 47A64 Key words and phrases: Positive definite matrix, Log-majorization, R´enyi diver- gence, Operator mean, Operator perspective, Weighted geometric mean, Unitar- ily invariant norm 1 Introduction For each n ∈ N we write Mn for the n × n complex matrices and M+ semidefinite n × n matrices. We write B > 0 if B ∈ Mn is positive definite. n for the positive Recall that for X, Y ∈ M+ n , the log-majorization X ≺log Y means that λi(X) ≤ kYi=1 kYi=1 λi(Y ), k = 1, . . . , n with equality for k = n (i.e., det X = det Y ), where λ1(X) ≥ · · · ≥ λn(X) are the eigenvalues of X in decreasing order counting multiplicities. As is well-known, X ≺log Y i=1 λi(Y ) for k = 1, . . . , n. The latter is equivalent to that kXk ≤ kY k holds for every unitarily invariant norm k · k. See, e.g., [1, 7, 12, 18] for generalities on majorization theory for matrices. implies the weak majorization X ≺w Y , i.e.,Pk i=1 λi(X) ≤Pk 1E-mail address: [email protected] 1 Let α, z > 0 with α 6= 1, and let A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0. In the present paper we are concerned with the following two-variable matrix functions Pα(A, B) := B1/2(B−1/2AB−1/2)αB1/2, Qα,z(A, B) := (B 1−α 2z A α z B 1−α 2z )z. Two special versions of Qα,z are Qα(A, B) := Qα,1(A, B) = B 1−α 2 AαB eQα(A, B) := Qα,α(A, B) = (B 1−α 2 , 2α )α. 1−α 1−α 2α AB Our motivation to consider these functions comes from different types of R´enyi diver- gences that have recently been developed in quantum information. The conventional (or standard) α-R´enyi divergence (due to Petz [21]) is Dα(AkB) := 1 α − 1 log Tr Qα(A, B) Tr A , the sandwiched α-R´enyi divergence [20, 24] is eDα(AkB) := 1 α − 1 log TreQα(A, B) Tr A , and the so-called α-z-R´enyi divergence [5] is Dα,z(AkB) := 1 α − 1 log Tr Qα,z(A, B) Tr A . In addition to Dα and eDα we define the maximal α-R´enyi divergence Tr Pα(A, B) 1 log α − 1 . Tr A bDα(AkB) := (For the term "maximal" here, see Remark 8.4.) See [13] and references therein for more background information on quantum divergences. We note that Pα(A, B) is a special case of operator perspective defined associated with a function f on (0, ∞) by Pf (A, B) := B1/2f (B−1/2AB−1/2)B1/2, A, B ∈ M+ n , A, B > 0, which was studied by Effros and Hansen [10] and others, with applications to quan- tum information. Furthermore, note that when f is a non-negative operator monotone function on (0, ∞) with f (1) = 1, Pf (A, B) is nothing but the operator mean B σf A associated with f in the Kubo-Ando sense [17]. In particular, when 0 < α < 1, Pα(A, B) = B #α A, the weighted geometric mean (first introduced by Pusz and Woronowicz [22] in the case α = 1/2). 2 log-majorization [4] (see also [2]); indeed, Qα,z(A, B) is monotone decreasing in z > 0 The inequality eDα(AkB) ≤ Dα(AkB) is well-known as a consequence of Araki's in the log-majorization order. However, the comparison between bDα and Dα,z (in particular, Dα) has not fully been investigated so far, which motivate us to consider the log-majorization between Pα and Qα,z. In this paper we present the following theorem which was announced without proofs in [13, Remark 4.6]: Theorem 1.1. Let A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0. (1) For 0 < α < 1 and z > 0, Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B). (2) For α > 1 and 0 < z ≤ min{α/2, α − 1}, Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B). (3) For α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}, Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B). In particular, Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα(A, B) if 0 < α < 1 or α ≥ 2, and Qα(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) if 1 < α ≤ 2. The paper is organized as follows. In Sections 2 and 3 we prove Theorem 1.1. In Section 4 we give an example showing that Theorem 1.1 is best possible with regard to the assumptions on the parameters α, z, so that Theorem 1.1 is completed into Theorem 4.1. In Section 5 we present the necessary and sufficient conditions on α, r, z for which Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) and Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα,r(A, B) hold, respectively, where Pα,r(A, B) := Pα(A1/r, B1/r)r. Moreover, we give a log-majorization for Pα for α ≥ 2, supplementing Ando-Hiai's log-majorization [2] for Pα for 0 < α < 1 and its complementary version recently obtained by Kian and Seo [16] for Pα for 1 < α ≤ 2. (Note that the negative power β ∈ [−1, 0) case in [16] can be rephrased into the case of Pα for α = 1 − β ∈ (1, 2], see Section 5.) Applying our log-majorization results, in Sections 6 and 7 we give norm inequalities for unitarily invariant norms and logarithmic trace inequalities. The norm inequalities here improve those given in [16] and the logarithmic trace inequalities here supplement those given in [2]. Finally in Section 8 we completely determine the parameters α, z for which bDα(AkB) ≤ Dα,z(AkB) and Dα,z(AkB) ≤ bDα(AkB) hold, respectively. 2 Log-majorization (Part 1) First, note that Araki's log-majorization [4] (see also [2]) implies that for every α > 0, Qα,z ′(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) if 0 < z ≤ z′. (2.1) The next proposition is an easy part of log-majorization results between Pα and Qα,z. Proposition 2.1. Let A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0. 3 (1) Assume that 0 < α < 1. Then for every z > 0, Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B). (2) Assume that 1 < α ≤ 2 and 0 < z ≤ α − 1. Then Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B). (3) Assume that α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}. Then Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B). Proof. (1) Although this is an immediate consequence of well-known Araki's and Ando- Hiai's log-majorization (see [4, 2]), we give a proof for the convenience of the reader. By continuity we may assume that A > 0 as well as B > 0. From the Lie-Trotter formula, letting z′ → ∞ in (2.1) gives exp(α log A + (1 − α) log B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B), z > 0. (2.2) On the other hand, when 0 < α < 1, the log-majorization in [2] says that Pα(A, B) = B#αA ≺log (Bp#αAp)1/p, 0 < p < 1. Letting p ց 0 and using [15, Lemma 3.3] we have Pα(A, B) ≺log exp(α log A + (1 − α) log B). (2.3) Combining (2.2) and (2.3) implies the asserted log-majorization. (2) By continuity we may assume that A > 0 as well as B > 0. The proof below is an easy application of the standard anti-symmetric tensor power technique (see, e.g., [2]). To show that Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B), it suffices to prove that kPα(A, B)k∞ ≤ kQα,z(A, B)k∞, where k · k∞ denotes the operator norm. Due to the positive homogeneity in A, B of both Pα and Qα,z (i.e., Pα(λA, λB) = λPα(A, B) for λ > 0 and similarly for Qα,z), it also suffices to prove that Qα,z(A, B) ≤ I =⇒ Pα(A, B) ≤ I. (2.4) Here recall the identity (B−1/2AB−1/2)α = B−1/2A1/2(A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1A1/2B−1/2, (2.5) as seen from the well-known equality Xf (X ∗X) = f (XX ∗)X (2.6) 4 for every X ∈ Mn and every continuous function f on an interval containing the eigenvalues of X ∗X (the proof is easy by approximating f by polynomials). Therefore, Pα(A, B) = A1/2(A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1A1/2, (2.7) so that for (2.4) it suffices to prove that 1−α 2z A α z B B 1−α 2z ≤ I =⇒ A1/2(A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1A1/2 ≤ I, or equivalently, α z ≤ B A α−1 z =⇒ (A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1 ≤ A−1. (2.8) Now, assume that 1 < α ≤ 2 and 0 < z ≤ α − 1, and that A 0 < z/(α − 1) ≤ 1, α z ≤ B α−1 z . Since B−1 = (B and hence α−1 z )− z α−1 ≤ (A α z )− z α−1 = A− α α−1 , A1/2B−1A1/2 ≤ A1/2A− α α−1 A1/2 = A− 1 α−1 . Since 0 < α − 1 ≤ 1, we have (A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1 ≤ (A− 1 α−1 )α−1 = A−1, proving (2.8). (3) As in the proof of (2) we may assume that both A, B are positive definite, and prove the implication opposite to (2.4). In the present case, similarly to the above, it suffices to prove that (B−1/2AB−1/2)α ≤ B−1 =⇒ A α z ≤ B α−1 z , or letting C := B−1/2AB−1/2 > 0, we may prove that C α ≤ B−1 =⇒ (B1/2CB1/2) α z ≤ B α−1 z . (2.9) Now, assume that α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}. Note by (2.1) that if once Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) holds for z = z0 with some z0 > 0, then the same does for all z ≥ z0. Hence we may further assume that z ≤ α. If C α ≤ B−1, then B ≤ C −α so that C 1/2BC 1/2 ≤ C 1−α. Since 0 ≤ α z − 1 ≤ 1, we have (C 1/2BC 1/2) α z −1 ≤ (C 1−α) Since by (2.5), α z −1 = C (1−α)( α z −1). (B1/2CB1/2) α z = B1/2C 1/2(C 1/2BC 1/2) α z −1C 1/2B1/2, 5 we have (B1/2CB1/2) α z ≤ B1/2C 1+(1−α)( α z −1)B1/2 = B1/2(C α)1− α−1 z B1/2. Since the assumption on α, z implies that 0 ≤ 1 − α−1 z < 1, we have (B1/2CB1/2) proving (2.9). α z ≤ B1/2(B−1)1− α−1 z B1/2 = B α−1 z , It should be noted that the above proofs of (2.8) and (2.9) are more or less similar to that of [23, Theorem 3] for the Furuta inequality with negative powers. Remark 2.2. When α = 2, since P2(A, B) = AB−1A is unitarily equivalent to B−1/2A2B−1/2, P2(A, B) ≺log Q2,z(A, B) is equivalent to B−1/2A2B−1/2 ≺log (B− 1 2z A 2 z B− 1 2z )z. Assume that AB 6= BA. Then from Araki's log-majorization [4] and [11, Theorem 2.1] we see that the above log-majorization holds true if and only if 0 < z ≤ 1. Similarly, Q2,z(A, B) ≺log P2(A, B) holds if and only if z ≥ 1. These are of course consistent with (2) and (3) of Proposition 2.1. In particular, when A is a projection, we have: Proposition 2.3. Let α > 1 and z > 0. Assume that E, B ∈ M+ a projection, B > 0 and EB 6= BE. Then: n are such that E is (a) Pα(E, B) ≺log Qα,z(E, B) if and only if z ≤ α − 1. (b) Qα,z(E, B) ≺log Pα(E, B) if and only if z ≥ α − 1. Proof. We write Pα(E, B) = B1/2(B−1/2EB−1/2)αB1/2 = B1/2B−1/2E(EB−1E)α−1EB−1/2B1/2 = (EB−1E)α−1. On the other hand, Qα,z(E, B) = (B Hence Pα(E, B) ≺log Qα,z(E, B) is equivalent to 2z EB 1−α 1−α 2z )z is unitarily equivalent to (EB 1−α 2z E)z. (EB−1E)α−1 ≺log (EB 1−α 2z E)z. From [11, Theorem 2.1] we see that this holds if and only if α − 1 ≥ z. Similarly, Qα,z(E, B) ≺log Pα(E, B) holds if and only if z ≥ α − 1. 6 3 Log-majorization (Part 2) Our final goal is to completely determine the regions of {(α, z) : α, z > 0} for which Pα ≺log Qα,z holds, or Qα,z ≺log Pα holds, or neither holds true, respectively. The next step to the goal is to find a region in α ≥ 2 where Pα ≺log Qα,z holds true. Since P2 ≺log Q2,z holds if and only if 0 < z ≤ 1 (see Remark 2.2), it would be reasonable to conjecture that there is a region in α ≥ 2 touching {(2, z) : 0 < z ≤ 1} where Pα ≺log Qα,z holds. We show the next log-majorization result by elaborating the anti-symmetric tensor power technique. The proof reveals essentially similar features to those of [2, Theorem 4.1] and [3, Theorem 2.1]. Proposition 3.1. Assume that α ≥ 2 and 0 < z ≤ α/2. Then for every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0, Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B). Proof. By continuity we may assume that both A, B are positive definite. Assume that α ≥ 2 and 0 < z ≤ α/2. Due to the anti-symmetric tensor power technique and the positive homogeneity in A, B of Pα and Qα,z, it suffices to prove that α z ≤ B A α−1 z =⇒ Pα(A, B) ≤ I. So assume that A 2m ≤ α ≤ 2m + 1 for some m ∈ N, so write α = 2m + λ with 0 ≤ λ ≤ 1. Note that z . We divide the proof into two cases. First, assume that z ≤ B α α−1 Pα(A, B) = B1/2(B−1/2AB−1/2)m(B−1/2AB−1/2)λ(B−1/2AB−1/2)mB1/2 = (AB−1)m(B #λ A)(B−1A)m. Since 0 < z/α ≤ 1/2, we have A ≤ B α−1 α and hence Therefore, Since B #λ A ≤ B #λ B α−1 α = B1−λB (α−1)λ α = B α−λ α . Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−1AB− α+λ α A(B−1A)m−1. (α + λ)z α(α − 1) ≤ α + λ 2(α − 1) ≤ 1 thanks to α = 2m + λ ≥ 2 + λ, we have B− α+λ α = (B α−1 z )− (α+λ)z α(α−1) ≤ (A α z )− (α+λ)z α(α−1) = A− α+λ α−1 , so that Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−1A α−2−λ α−1 (B−1A)m−1. 7 Since we have so that (α − 2 − λ)z α(α − 1) ≤ α − 2 − λ 2(α − 1) ≤ 1, α−2−λ α−1 = (A α z ) A (α−2−λ)z α(α−1) ≤ (B α−1 z ) (α−2−λ)z α(α−1) = B α−2−λ α , Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−2AB− α+2+λ α A(B−1A)m−2. The above argument can be repeated to see that for k = 0, 1, . . . , m − 1, Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−1−kAB− α+2k+λ α A(B−1A)m−1−k, and hence Pα(A, B) ≤ AB− α+2m−2+λ α A = AB− 2(α−1) α A. Finally, since 2z/α ≤ 1, we have B− 2(α−1) α ≤ (B so that Pα(A, B) ≤ I. α−1 z )− 2z α ≤ (A α z )− 2z α = A−2, Secondly, assume that 2m+1 < α < 2m+2 for some m ∈ N, so write α = 2m+2−λ with 0 < λ < 1. Note that Pα(A, B) = B1/2(B−1/2AB−1/2)m+1(B−1/2AB−1/2)−λ(B−1/2AB−1/2)m+1B1/2 = (AB−1)mAB−1/2(B−1/2AB−1/2)−λB−1/2A(B−1A)m = (AB−1)mA(B #λ A)−1A(B−1A)m. Since 0 ≤ z/(α − 1) ≤ 1, we have B ≥ A α α−1 so that Therefore, Since we have so that Since (B #λ A)−1 ≤(cid:0)A α α−1 #λ A(cid:1)−1 =(cid:0)A α(1−λ) α−1 Aλ(cid:1)−1 = A− α−λ α−1 . Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)mA α−2+λ α−1 (B−1A)m. (α − 2 + λ)z α(α − 1) ≤ α − 2 + λ 2(α − 1) ≤ 1, α−2+λ α−1 = (A α z ) A (α−2+λ)z α(α−1) ≤ (B α−1 z ) (α−2+λ)z α(α−1) = B α−2+λ α , Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−1AB− α+2−λ α A(B−1A)m−1. (α + 2 − λ)z α(α − 1) ≤ α + 2 − λ 2(α − 1) ≤ 1, 8 we have so that B− α+2−λ α = (B α−1 z )− (α+2−λ)z α(α−1) ≤ (A α z )− (α+2−λ)z α(α−1) = A− α+2−λ α−1 , Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)m−1A α−4+λ α−1 (B−1A)m−1. Repeating the above argument we have Pα(A, B) ≤ (AB−1)A α−2m+λ α−1 (B−1A) = AB−1A 2 α−1 B−1A. 2 α−1 = (A α z ) A 2z α(α−1) ≤ (B α−1 z ) 2z α(α−1) = B 2 α Since and α = (B we finally have Pα(A, B) ≤ AB− 2(α−1) B− 2(α−1) α A ≤ I. α−1 z )− 2z α ≤ (A α z )− 2z α = A−2, Now, Theorem 1.1 stated in the Introduction is proved from the log-majorization results between Pα and Qα,z obtained so far in Propositions 2.1 and 3.1. We note that some discussions involving Pα, Qα = Qα,1 and eQα = Qα,α were recently given in [8, Sect. 5]. 4 Main theorem In this section we prove that Theorem 1.1 is best possible with regard to the assump- tions on the parameters α, z. Assume that α > 1. For each x, y > 0 and θ ∈ R define 2 × 2 positive definite matrices We write sin θ cos θ (cid:21)(cid:20)1 0 0 x(cid:21)(cid:20) cos θ Aθ :=(cid:20)cos θ − sin θ B−1/2AθB−1/2 =(cid:20)1 + (x − 1) sin2 θ (1 − x)y−1/2 sin 2θ 2 − sin θ cos θ(cid:21) , sin θ 0 y(cid:21) . B :=(cid:20)1 0 xy−1 + (1 − x)y−1 sin2 θ(cid:21) (1 − x)y−1/2 sin 2θ 2 = G + θH + θ2K + o(θ2), (4.1) where G :=(cid:20)1 0 xy−1(cid:21) , H :=(cid:20) 0 0 (1 − x)y−1/2 (1 − x)y−1/2 0 (cid:21) , K :=(cid:20)x − 1 0 0 (1 − x)y−1(cid:21) , and o(θ2) denotes a small value such that o(θ2)/θ2 → 0 as θ → 0. We apply the Taylor formula with Fr´echet derivatives (see e.g., [11, Theorem 2.3.1]) to obtain (B−1/2AθB−1/2)α = Gα + D(xα)(G)(θH + θ2K) + 1 2 D2(xα)(G)(θH, θH) + o(θ2), 9 where the second and the third terms in the right-hand side are the first and the second Fr´echet derivatives of X 7→ X α (X ∈ M+ 2 , X > 0) at G, respectively. By Daleckii and Krein's derivative formula (see [7, Theorem V.3.3], [11, Theorem 2.3.1]) we have D(xα)(G)(θH + θ2K) (xα)[1](1, xy−1) α =(cid:20) (xα)[1](1, 1) =" = θ" 1−(xy−1)α 1−xy−1 0 xα−yα x−y (1 − x)y (xα)[1](1, xy−1) (xα)[1](xy−1, xy−1)(cid:21) ◦ (θH + θ2K) 1−(xy−1)α α(xy−1)α−1# ◦ (θH + θ2K) 1−xy−1 xα−yα x−y (1 − x)y 1 2 −α 0 1 2 −α # + θ2(cid:20)α(x − 1) 0 α(1 − x)xα−1y−α(cid:21) , 0 where (xα)[1] denotes the first divided difference of xα and ◦ means the Schur (or Hadamard) product. For the second divided difference of xα we compute (xα)[2](1, 1, xy−1) = α − 1 − αxy−1 + xαy−α (1 − xy−1)2 = y{(α − 1)y − αx + xαy1−α} (x − y)2 , (xα)[2](1, xy−1, xy−1) = = 1 − αxα−1y1−α + (α − 1)xαy−α (1 − xy−1)2 y{y − αxα−1y2−α + (α − 1)xαy1−α} (x − y)2 , and hence we have D2(xα)(G)(θH, θH) = θ2" (x−1)2{(α−1)y−αx+xαy1−α} (x−y)2 0 1 2 0 (x−1)2{y−αxα−1y2−α+(α−1)xαy1−α} (x−y)2 # . (In the above computation we have assumed that x 6= y.) Therefore, it follows that (B−1/2AθB−1/2)α ="1 + s(1) s(3) α θ α θ2 s(3) α θ xαy−α + s(2) α θ2# + o(θ2), where s(1) α := α(x − 1) + (x − 1)2{(α − 1)y − αx + xαy1−α} (x − y)2 , s(2) α := αxα−1(1 − x)y−α + (x − 1)2{y − αxα−1y2−α + (α − 1)xαy1−α} (x − y)2 . (The form of s(3) below.) We hence arrive at α is not written down here since it is unnecessary in the computation Tr Pα(Aθ, B) = 1 + xαy1−α +(cid:0)s(1) α + s(2) α y(cid:1)θ2 + o(θ2). 10 (4.2) Next, we write 1−α 2z A B α z θ B 1−α (1 − x z ="1 + (x ="1 + (x (1 − x α z − 1) sin2 θ 1−α 2z sin 2θ z )y α 2 α (1 − x z )y z + (1 − x 1−α α z y x α z − 1)θ2 z )y 1−α α 2z θ x α z y α 1−α (1 − x z )y z + (1 − x 2z θ z )y α 1−α z )y 1−α 2z sin 2θ 2 1−α α z sin2 θ# z θ2# + o(θ2). 1−α Since det(cid:16)tI − B 1−α 2z A α z θ B the eigenvalues of B 1−α z (cid:17) = t2 −(cid:8)1 + x α 1−α 1−α 2z A z θ B z are α z y 1−α z + (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )θ2(cid:9)t + x α z y 1−α z + o(θ2), t± α,z,θ = 1−α z + (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )θ2 α z y 1−α z )2 + 2(x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )(1 + x α z y 1−α z )θ2(cid:21) + o(θ2). α 1 z y 2(cid:20)1 + x ±q(1 − x Assuming that 1 − x x > 0), we have α z y 1−α z > 0 (this is the case when we let y → ∞ for any fixed α 1 z y 2(cid:20)1 + x ±(cid:26)1 − x t± α,z,θ = so that 1−α z + (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )θ2 α z y 1−α z + (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )(1 + x α z y 1−α z ) 1 − x 1−α z α z y θ2(cid:27)(cid:21) + o(θ2), t+ α,z,θ = 1 + t− α,z,θ = x α z y Therefore, we have (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z ) 1 − x α z y 1−α z θ2 + o(θ2), 1−α z (cid:26)1 − (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z ) 1 − x 1−α z α z y θ2(cid:27) + o(θ2). Tr Qα,z(Aθ, B) = (t+ α,z,θ)z + (t− α,z,θ)z = 1 + z (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z ) θ2 α 1 − x z y 1−α z + xαy1−α(cid:26)1 − z = 1 + xαy1−α + z (x (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z ) α 1−α z 1 − x z y z − 1)(1 − y α θ2(cid:27) + o(θ2) 1−α z )(1 − xαy1−α) z y 1−α z α 1 − x 11 θ2 + o(θ2). (4.3) Now, suppose that Qα,z(Aθ, B) ≺log Pα(Aθ, B) holds for all θ 6= 0. Then we must have Tr Qα,z(Aθ, B) ≤ Tr Pα(Aθ, B). (Since det Qα,z(Aθ, B) = det Pα(Aθ, B), Qα,z(Aθ, B) ≺log Pα(Aθ, B) is indeed equivalent to Tr Qα,z(Aθ, B) ≤ Tr Pα(Aθ, B) in the 2 × 2 case here.) So by (4.2) and (4.3) it follows that z (x α z − 1)(1 − y 1−α z )(1 − xαy1−α) z y 1−α z α 1 − x ≤ s(1) α + s(2) α y. For any x > 0, let y → ∞; then the above left-hand side converges to z(x α → α(x − 1) and s(2) s(1) x > 0, z − 1), while α → (x − 1)2 thanks to α > 1. Hence we must have for every α z(x α z − 1) ≤ α(x − 1) + (x − 1)2. Letting x ց 0 gives −z ≤ −α + 1, i.e., z ≥ α − 1. Moreover, for any x > 1, α z − 1 x x − 1 z ≤ x + α − 1, which holds true only when α/z ≤ 2, i.e., z ≥ α/2. On the other hand, suppose that Pα(Aθ, B) ≺log Qα,z(Aθ, B) holds for all θ 6= 0. Then, similarly to the above case, z ≤ α − 1 and z ≤ α/2 must follow. Thus, combining the above discussions with Theorem 1.1 proves our main theorem as follows: Theorem 4.1. Let α, z > 0 with α 6= 1. (a) The following conditions are equivalent: (i) Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (ii) Tr Pα(A, B) ≤ Tr Qα,z(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (iii) Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; 2 with A, B > 0; (iv) either 0 < α < 1 and z > 0 is arbitrary, or α > 1 and 0 < z ≤ min{α/2, α − 1}. (b) The following conditions are equivalent: (i)′ Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (ii)′ Tr Qα,z(A, B) ≤ Tr Pα(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (iii)′ Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (iv)′ α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}. n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; 2 with A, B > 0; The theorem says that neither Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) nor Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B) holds in general in the regions of 1 < α < 2 and α − 1 < z < α/2 and of α > 2 and α/2 < z < α − 1. 12 5 Further extension For A, B ∈ M+ account, we may define the two-parameter extension of Pα as n with B > 0, taking the expression Qα,z(A, B) = Qα(A1/z, B1/z)z into Pα,r(A, B) := Pα(A1/r, B1/r)r = {B1/2r(B−1/2rA1/rB−1/2r)αB1/2r}r, α, r > 0. The log-majorization in [2] says that when 0 < α < 1, Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Pα,r′(A, B) if 0 < r ≤ r′. (5.1) For every A, B > 0 and α > 0, note by (2.7) that Pα(A, B) = A1/2(A−1/2BA−1/2)βA1/2 where β := 1 − α (the right-hand side is often denoted by A♮βB when β 6∈ [0, 1] instead of A#βB for β ∈ [0, 1]). Thus, the log-majorization recently obtained in [16, Theorem 3.1] is rephrased as follows: When 1 < α ≤ 2, for every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0, Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Pα,r′(A, B) if 0 < r′ ≤ r. (5.2) In particular, when α = 2, this reduces to Araki's log-majorization (see Remark 2.2). For each α, r, z > 0 with α 6= 1, since it is easy to see that Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) (resp., Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα,r(A, B)) for every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0 if and only if Pα(A, B) ≺log Qα,z/r(A, B) (resp., Qα,z/r(A, B) ≺log Pα(A, B)) for every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0. Thus, we can extend Theorem 4.1 in the following way: Proposition 5.1. Let α, r, z > 0 with α 6= 1 (a) The following conditions are equivalent: (i) Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Qα,z(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; (ii) either 0 < α < 1 and r, z > 0 are arbitrary, or α > 1 and 0 < z/r ≤ min{α/2, α − 1}. (b) The following conditions are equivalent: (i)′ Qα,z(A, B) ≺log Pα,r(A, B) for every A, B ∈ M+ (ii)′ α > 1 and z/r ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}. n , n ∈ N, with B > 0; Although Proposition 5.1 is just a slight modification of Theorem 4.1, it can be used to show the following log-majorization supplementary to (5.1) and (5.2): Corollary 5.2. Assume that α ≥ 2. For every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0, Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Pα,r′(A, B) if 0 < r′ ≤ α 2(α−1) r. Hence Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Pα,r′(A, B) for all α ≥ 2 if 0 < r′ ≤ r/2. 13 Proof. Let α ≥ 2. By Proposition 5.1 (a) we have Pα,r(A, B) ≺log Qα,rα/2(A, B). Since (rα/2)/r′ ≥ α − 1, Proposition 5.1 (b) implies that Qα,rα/2(A, B) ≺log Pα,r′(A, B), so that the asserted log-majorization follows. Problem 5.3. Although the assumption β = 1 − α ∈ [−1, 0) (or 1 < α ≤ 2) seems essential in the proof of (5.2) in [16], it is unknown whether (5.2) holds true even for α > 2 (i.e., the bound α/2(α − 1) in the corollary can be removed) or not. For example, when α = m + 1 ∈ N with m ∈ N, m ≥ 2, noting Pm+1(A, B) = (AB−1)mA and replacing B−1 with B and 1/r with r, (5.2) is equivalent to the following extended Araki's log-majorization for every A, B ∈ M+ n : ((AB)mA)r ≺log (ArBr)mAr if r ≥ 1, (5.3) which seems difficult to hold in general, while no counter-example is at the moment known to us. But Corollary 5.2 implies that ((AB)mA)r ≺log (ArBr)mAr for r ≥ 2m/(m + 1). Here is a simple argument when m = 2. For m = 2, to prove (5.3), it suffices to show that for 0 < p ≤ 1, ABABA ≤ I =⇒ ApBpApBpAp ≤ I. Assume the left-hand inequality, i.e., (A1/2BA1/2)2 ≤ A−1; then B ≤ A−3/2 and so Ap ≤ B−2p/3. Hence ApBpApBpAp ≤ ApB4p/3Ap. If p ≤ 3/4, then B4p/3 ≤ A−2p and so ApBpApBpAp ≤ I. Therefore, (ABABA) ≺log ArBrArBrAr if r ≥ 4/3, which is just the case α = 3 of the corollary. The same argument works well when α = m + 1 for any m ∈ N, m ≥ 2, proving directly the α = m + 1 case of the corollary. 6 Norm inequalities and their equality cases A norm k·k on Mn is said to be unitarily invariant if kUXV k = kXk for all X ∈ Mn and all unitaries U, V ∈ Mn. We say (see [11]) that a unitarily invariant norm k · k is strictly increasing if for X, Y ∈ M+ n , X ≤ Y and kXk = kY k imply X = Y . For example, the Schatten p-norm kXkp := (Tr Xp)1/p is strictly increasing when 1 ≤ p < ∞. Theorem 1.1 implies the following: Corollary 6.1. Let A, B ∈ M+ Mn. n with B > 0 and k · k be a unitarily invariant norm on (1) If 0 < α < 1, then kPα(A, B)k ≤ kQα,z(A, B)k for all z > 0. (2) If α > 1 and 0 < z ≤ min{α/2, α − 1}, then kPα(A, B)k ≤ kQα,z(A, B)k. 14 (3) If α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}, then kQα,z(A, B)k ≤ kPα(A, B)k. Remark 6.2. The norm inequalities with negative power β in [16, Theorem 4.4] can be rephrased as follows (by letting α = 1 − β): When A, B > 0, for every unitarily invariant norm, kQα,z(B, A)k ≤ kPα(B, A)k kPα(B, A)k ≤ kQα,1/2(B, A)k ≤ kQα,z(B, A)k if α ∈ (1, 2], z ≥ 2, if α ∈ [3/2, 2], 0 < z ≤ 1/2. These inequalities are indeed included in (2) and (3) of Corollary 6.1 (and (2.1)). Lemma 6.3. Assume that α > 0 and α 6= 1. Let k · k be a strictly increasing unitarily invariant norm on Mn. If kQα,z(A, B)k = kQα,z ′(A, B)k for some z, z′ > 0 with z 6= z′, then AB = BA. Proof. By [11, Theorem 2.1] the assumed norm equality implies that Aα and B1−α commute and hence AB = BA. Concerning the equality cases of the inequalities in Corollary 6.1 we have: Proposition 6.4. Let k · k be a strictly increasing unitarily invariant norm on Mn. Then we have AB = BA if kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k for some α, z satisfying one of the following: (1) 0 < α < 1 and z > 0, (2) α > 1 and 0 < z < min{α/2, α − 1}, (3) α > 1 and z > max{α/2, α − 1}. Proof. (1) Assume that kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k for some α, z in (1). Choose z′ > z. By (2.1) and Corollary 6.1 (1) we have kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k ≥ kQα,z ′(A, B)k ≥ kPα(A, B)k, implying AB = BA by Lemma 6.3. (2) Assume that kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k for some α, z in (2). Choose z′ with z < z′ < min{α/2, α − 1}. By (2.1) and Corollary 6.1 (2), kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k ≥ kQα,z ′(A, B)k ≥ kPα(A, B)k, implying AB = BA by Lemma 6.3. (3) Assume that kPα(A, B)k = kQα,z(A, B)k for some α, z in (3). Choose z′ with z > z′ > max{α/2, α − 1}. Then AB = BA follows similarly to the proof for (2). 15 7 Logarithmic trace inequalities For every p > 0 and every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0, the logarithmic trace inequalities 1 p Tr A log(B−p/2ApB−p/2) ≤ Tr A(log A − log B) ≤ 1 p Tr A log(Ap/2B−pAp/2). (7.1) were shown in [15], and supplementary logarithmic trace inequalities were also in [2]. In particular, the latter inequality for p = 1 was first proved in [14], giving the comparison between the Umegaki relative entropy and the Belavkin-Staszewski relative entropy [6] (see Remark 8.5 below). Recall that this can readily be verified by taking the derivatives at α = 1 of Tr Pα(A, B) = Tr A(A1/2B−1A1/2)α−1 and Tr Qα(A, B) = Tr AαB1−α from Corollary 6.1. By the derivatives at α = 2 we have more logarithmic trace inequalities in the following: Proposition 7.1. For every A, B ∈ M+ n with B > 0, Tr AB−1A(log A − log B) ≤ Tr A1/2B−1A3/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2) = Tr B−1/2A2B−1/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) = Tr A3/2B−1A1/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2) ≤ Tr A2B−1(log A − log B). (7.2) Proof. To prove the inequalities and the equalities above, we may assume by continuity that A > 0 as well as B > 0. The inequalities in the middle of (7.2) are easily verified as Tr A1/2B−1A3/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2) = Tr A log(A1/2B−1A1/2) · A1/2B−1A1/2 = Tr A3/2B−1A1/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2) = Tr A3/2B−1/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) · B−1/2A1/2 = Tr B−1/2A2B−1/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2), where we have used (2.6) for the third equality. To prove the inequalities, we use Corollary 6.1 (2) for z = 1 to have Tr Pα(A, B) ≤ Tr Qα(A, B) for α ≥ 2. Since Tr P2(A, B) = Tr A2B−1 = Tr Q2(A, B), if follows that d dα The left-hand side of (7.3) is Tr Pα(A, B)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)α=2 ≤ d dα Tr Qα(A, B)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)α=2 . (7.3) Tr B(B−1/2AB−1/2)2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) 16 = Tr B1/2AB−1AB−/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) = Tr B1/2AB−1A1/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2) · A1/2B−1/2 = Tr A3/2B−1A1/2 log(A1/2B−1A1/2, where we have used (2.6) again for the second equality. On the other hand, the right- hand side of (7.3) is Tr A2 log A · B−1 − Tr A2B−1 log B = Tr A2B−1(log A − log B). Hence the latter inequality in (7.2) follows. Next, set C := B−1/2AB−1/2 so that A = B1/2CB1/2. Then Tr B−1/2A2B−1/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) = Tr CBC log C and Tr A2B−1(log A − log B) = Tr B1/2CBCB−1/2(cid:0)log(B1/2CB1/2) − log B(cid:1) = Tr C 1/2BCB−1/2 log(B1/2CB1/2) · B1/2C 1/2 − Tr CBC log B = Tr C 1/2BC 3/2 log(C 1/2BC 1/2) − Tr CBC log B. by (2.6) once again. Hence the latter inequality in (7.2) is rephrased as Tr CBC(log C + log B) ≤ Tr C 1/2BC 3/2 log(C 1/2BC 1/2). Replacing C, B with A, B−1, respectively, we have the first inequality in (7.2). Remark 7.2. It is obvious that if A, B are commuting, then all the inequalities of (7.1) and (7.2) become equality. In the converse direction, it is seen from [2, Theorem 5.1] and [11, Theorem 4.1] that the equality case of the second inequality of (7.1) (for some p > 0) implies AB = BA. Here we note that if equality holds in both inequalities of (7.2) then AB = BA. Indeed, the inequality between both ends of (7.2) means that Tr AB−1A log B−1 ≤ Tr A2B−1 log B−1, (7.4) which is considered as a kind of so-called gathering inequalities (see, e.g., [9] and [3]). To prove that the equality case of (7.4) implies AB = BA, we may assume that B is diagonal, so B−1 = diag(λ1, . . . , λn). Then for A = [aij]n i,j=1, equality in (7.4) means that nXi,j=1 nXi,j=1 nXi,j=1 17 which is rewritten as aij2λi log λj = aij2λi log λi, aij2(λi − λj)(log λi − log λj) = 0. Since (λi − λj)(log λi − log λj) > 0 when λi 6= λj, we must have aij = 0 for all i, j with λi 6= λj, implying AB = BA. We may naturally conjecture that if either inequality of (7.2) holds with equality then AB = BA. 8 Applications to R´enyi divergences In this section we apply our log-majorization results to the relations between R´enyi type divergences Dα, eDα, bDα and Dα,z defined in the Introduction. The equivalences (ii) ⇐⇒ (iv) and (ii)′ ⇐⇒ (iv)′ of Theorem 4.1 immediately yield the following: Corollary 8.1. Let α, z > 0 with α 6= 1. (a) The following conditions are equivalent: (i) bDα(AkB) ≤ Dα,z(AkB) for every A, B ∈ M+ B > 0; (ii) α > 1 and z ≤ min{α/2, α − 1}. n , n ∈ N, with A 6= 0 and (b) The following conditions are equivalent: (i)′ Dα,z(AkB) ≤ bDα(AkB) for every A, B ∈ M+ B > 0; (ii)′ either 0 < α < 1 and z > 0 is arbitrary, or α > 1 and z ≥ max{α/2, α − 1}. n , n ∈ N, with A 6= 0 and Moreover, specializing Corollary 6.1 to z = 1, α and the trace-norm, we have: Corollary 8.2. Let A, B ∈ M+ n with A 6= 0 and B > 0. If 0 < α ≤ 2 and α 6= 1 then (8.1) and if α ≥ 2 then eDα(AkB) ≤ Dα(AkB) ≤ bDα(AkB), eDα(AkB) ≤ bDα(AkB) ≤ Dα(AkB). Corollary 8.3. Let A, B ∈ M+ n with A 6= 0 and B > 0. If some two of Dα(AkB), Tr Pα. Also, note that if 1 < α < 2 then α > 1 > max{α/2, α − 1}, and if α > 2 then 1 < min{α/2, α − 1} and α > max{α/2, α − 1}. Hence by Proposition 6.4, eDα(AkB), and bDα(AkB) are equal for some α ∈ (0, ∞) \ {1, 2}, then AB = BA. Proof. Note that Dα = bDα means Tr Qα,1 = Tr Pα, and eDα = bDα means Tr Qα,α = either equality of Dα(AkB) = bDα(AkB) or eDα(AkB) = bDα(AkB) implies AB = BA. Furthermore, Dα(AkB) = eDα(AkB) implies AB = BA by Lemma 6.3. 18 Remark 8.4. In [13] we studied the standard f -divergence Sf (AkB) and the maximal f -divergence bSf (AkB), which are defined as Sf (AkB) := Tr B1/2f (LARB−1)(B1/2), bSf (AkB) := Tr Pf (A, B) n , A, B > 0 (and extended to general A, B ∈ M+ for A, B ∈ M+ n by convergences), where LA is the left multiplication on Mn by A and RB−1 is the right multiplication by B−1. It is known [13, Proposition 4.1] (see also [19]) that Sf (AkB) ≤ bSf (AkB) holds whenever f is an operator convex function on (0, ∞). When f (x) = −xα for 0 < α < 1 or f (x) = xα for 1 < α ≤ 2, this becomes the second inequality of (8.1). Corollaries 8.2 and 8.3 say that this is no longer true if f is a general convex function on (0, ∞). Furthermore, a special case of [13, Theorem 4.3] says that Dα(AkB) = bDα(AkB) for some α ∈ (0, 2) \ {1} implies AB = BA, which is included in Corollary 8.3. Remark 8.5. Let A, B ∈ M+ readily verified) that n with A 6= 0 and B > 0 as above. It is well-known (and lim α→1 Dα(AkB) = D1(AkB) := D(AkB) Tr A , where D(AkB) := Tr A(log A − log B), the Umegaki relative entropy. It is also known [20] that On the other hand, we note that lim α→1eDα(AkB) = D1(AkB). lim α→1bDα(AkB) = 1 Tr A Tr B1/2AB−1/2 log(B−1/2AB−1/2) = DBS(AkB) Tr A , where DBS(AkB) := Tr A log(A1/2B−1A1/2), the Belavkin-Staszewski relative entropy [6] (see also [13, Example 4.4]). By Corollary 8.2 we have D(AkB) ≤ DBS(AkB), which was first obtained in [14]. Acknowledgments This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP17K05266. References [1] T. Ando, Majorization, doubly stochastic matrices, and comparison of eigenvalues, Linear Algebra Appl. 118 (1989), 163 -- 248. 19 [2] T. Ando and F. Hiai, Log majorization and complementary Golden-Thompson type inequalities, Linear Algebra Appl. 197/198 (1994), 113 -- 131. [3] T. Ando, F. Hiai and K. Okubo, Trace inequalities for multiple products of two matrices, Math. Ineq. Appl. 3 (2000), 307 -- 318. [4] H. Araki, On an inequality of Lieb and Thirring, Lett. Math. Phys. 19 (1990), 167 -- 170. [5] K. M. R. Audenaert and N. Datta, α-z-relative entropies, J. Math. Phys. 56 (2015), 022202. [6] V. P. Belavkin and P. Staszewski, C ∗-algebraic generalization of relative entropy and entropy, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e Sect. A 37 (1982), 51 -- 58. [7] R. Bhatia, Matrix Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996. [8] R. Bhatia, T. Jain and Y. Lim, Strong convexity of sandwiched entropy and related optimization problems, Rev. Math. Phys., to appear. [9] J.-C. Bourin, Some inequalities for norms on matrices and operator, Linear Algebra Appl. 292 (1999), 139 -- 154. [10] E. Effros and F. Hansen, Non-commutative perspectives, Ann. Funct. Anal. 5 (2014), 74 -- 79. [11] F. Hiai, Equality cases in matrix norm inequalities of Golden-Thompson type, Linear and Multilinear Algebra 36 (1994), 239 -- 249. [12] F. Hiai, Matrix Analysis: Matrix Monotone Functions, Matrix Means, and Ma- jorization, Interdisciplinary Information Sciences 16 (2010), 139 -- 248. [13] F. Hiai and M. Mosonyi, Different quantum f -divergences and the reversibility of quantum operations, Rev. Math. Phys. 29 (2017), 1750023, 80 pp. [14] F. Hiai and D. Petz, The proper formula for relative entropy and its asymptotics in quantum probability, Comm. Math. Phys. 143 (1991), 99 -- 114. [15] F. Hiai and D. Petz, The Golden-Thompson trace inequality is complemented, Linear Algebra Appl. 181 (1993), 153 -- 185. [16] M. Kian and Y. Seo, Norm inequalities related to the matrix geometric mean of negative power, Sci. Math. Japon., Online, 2018. [17] F. Kubo and T. Ando, Means of positive linear operators, Math. Ann. 246 (1980), 205 -- 224. 20 [18] A. W. Marshall, I. Olkin and B. C. Arnold, Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications, Second ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, 2011. [19] K. Matsumoto, A new quantum version of f -divergence, arXiv:1311.4722, 2014. [20] M. Muller-Lennert, F. Dupuis, O. Szehr, S. Fehr and M. Tomamichel, On quantum R´enyi entropies: A new generalization and some properties, J. Math. Phys. 54 (2013), 122203. [21] D. Petz, Quasi-entropies for finite quantum systems, Rep. Math. Phys. 23 (1986), 57 -- 65. [22] W. Pusz and S. L. Woronowicz, Functional calculus for sesquilinear forms and the purification map, Rep. Math. Phys. 8 (1975), 159 -- 170. [23] K. Tanahashi, The Furuta inequality with negative powers, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 127 (1999), 1683 -- 1692. [24] M. M. Wilde, A. Winter and D. Yang, Strong converse for the classical capacity of entanglement-breaking and Hadamard channels via a sandwiched R´enyi relative Entropy, Comm. Math. Phys. 331 (2014), 593 -- 622. 21
1512.05706	1	1512	2015-12-17T18:20:27	Lower semicontinuity for an integral functional in BV	[ "math.FA" ]	We prove a lower semicontinuity result for a functional of linear growth initially defined by \[ \int_{\Omega}F\left(\frac{dDu}{d\mu}\right)\,d\mu \] for $u\in BV(\Omega;\mathbb{R}^N)$ with $Du\ll \mu$. The positive Radon measure $\mu$ is only assumed to satisfy $\mathcal L^n\ll \mu$.	math.FA	math	Lower semicontinuity for an integral functional in BV ∗ Jan Kristensen and Panu Lahti Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford, Andrew Wiles Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] July 17, 2018 Abstract We prove a lower semicontinuity result for a functional of linear growth initially defined by ZΩ F (cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ for u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) with Du ≪ µ. The positive Radon measure µ is only assumed to satisfy Ln ≪ µ. Acknowledgments: This research was done while P.L. was visiting the Oxford Centre for Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations (OxPDE) from September 2014 to July 2016. During this time, P.L. was supported by Aalto University as well as the Finnish Cultural Foundation. ∗2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 49J45, 26B30, 52A99. 1 1 Introduction In this work we prove a lower semicontinuity result for a functional of linear growth initially defined in an open set Ω ⊂ Rn by ZΩ F (cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ (1.1) for u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) with Du ≪ µ. The measure µ is merely assumed to be a positive finite Radon measure that satisfies Ln ≪ µ, where Ln is the Lebesgue measure. For the integrand F we need somewhat stronger assumptions, described in detail below. We refer the reader to Section 2 for precise notation and terminology. With the choice µ = Ln, this type of result was derived in [4] (see also [5, Section 5.5]), and later in [10] for integrands depending also on x and u. The problem was studied without a nonnegativity assumption on F in [15]. These results relied mostly on blow-up techniques. The result in [15] was generalized to x-dependent integrands in [14, Theorem 10], relying on the theory of generalized Young measures, which were first introduced by DiPerna and Majda in [8]. With a general measure µ, the problem was studied in the case p > 1 in [3], and also in [13]. In a more general setting of a metric measure space, the problem was studied in [11]. We first show that the functional (1.1), defined for general u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) by relaxation, has an integral representation ZΩ F (cid:18)dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu, where Ds,µu is the singular part of Du with respect to µ. Here we require the integrand F : RN ×n → R be nonnegative and quasiconvex, with linear growth mA ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some 0 < m ≤ M and all A ∈ RN ×n, and with a continuous recession function F ∞. Our proof will rely heavily on the theory of generalized Young measures, particularly results derived in [14]. Once we have the above integral repre- sentation, we can derive Jensen's inequalities for generalized Young measures with respect to µ, as was done in [14, Theorem 9] with respect to the Lebesgue measure. By using these inequalities, we can then prove the following lower semicontinuity theorem (Theorem 4.4) which is the main result of this work: Theorem 1.1. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded Lipschitz domain with inner bound- ary normal νΩ, let µ be a positive finite Radon measure on Ω with Ln ≪ µ, and let F : Ω× RN ×n → R be a µ×B(RN ×n)-measurable integrand with linear 2 growth 0 ≤ F (x, A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some M ≥ 0, a continuous recession function F ∞, and such that A 7→ F (x, A) is quasiconvex for each fixed x ∈ Ω. Then the functional dDu F (cid:18)x, F (u) :=ZΩ F ∞(cid:18)x, +Z∂Ω u u dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18)x, ⊗ νΩ(cid:19) u dHn−1 dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu is weakly* sequentially lower semicontinuous in BV(Ω; RN ). We remark that an easier proof is possible when the Radon -- Nikodym derivative of µ with respect to Lebesgue measure is bounded, and hence that the main contribution is the proof covering the general case. This proof seems to require the assumption about existence of a continuous recession function for the integrand F . 2 Preliminaries 2.1 Notation For N, n ∈ N, the matrix space RN ×n will always be equipped with the Euclidean norm A := (cid:16)PN , where i and j are the row and column indices, respectively. We denote by B(x, r) the open ball in Rn with center x and radius r. We denote by Bn the open unit ball in Rn and by ∂Bn the unit sphere. For a ∈ RN and b ∈ Rn, we can define the tensor product a ⊗ b = abT ∈ RN ×n. i=1Pn j=1 Ai j(cid:17)1/2 We denote the n-dimensional Lebesgue measure by Ln and the s-dimen- sional Hausdorff measure by Hs. Given any measure ν, the restriction of ν to a set A is denoted by ν A, that is, ν A(B) = ν(A ∩ B). The Borel σ-algebra on a set E ⊂ Rn is denoted by B(E). For open sets Ω, Ω′ ⊂ Rn, by Ω ⋐ Ω′ we mean that Ω ⊂ Ω′ and that Ω is compact. We denote by 1E the characteristic function of a set E. If X is a locally compact separable metric space (usually an open or closed subset of Rn), let Cc(X; Rl) be the space of continuous Rl-valued functions with compact support in X and let C0(X; Rl) be its completion with respect to the k · k∞-norm, l ∈ N. We denote by M(X; Rl) the Banach space of vector-valued finite Radon measures, equipped with the total variation norm µ(X) < ∞. By the Riesz representation theorem, M(X; Rl) can be identified with the dual space of C0(X; Rl) through the duality pairing 3 ZΩ f dµ := f dµ 1 µ(Ω)ZΩ hφ, µi := RX φ · dµ := Pl ∗⇁ µ in M(X) means hφ, µji → hφ, µi for all φ ∈ C0(X; Rl). We denote the set of positive measures and probability measures by M+(X) and M1(X), respectively. i=1RX φi dµi. Thus weak* convergence µj For a vector-valued Radon measure γ ∈ M(X; Rl) and a positive Radon measure µ ∈ M+(X), we can write the Radon-Nikodym decomposition γ = γa + γs = dγ We write dµ µ + γs of γ with respect to µ, where dγ dµ ∈ L1(X, µ; Rl). for integral averages (whenever they are defined). For sets E ⊂ Rn, F ⊂ Rl open or closed, a parametrized measure (νx)x∈E ⊂ M(F ) is a mapping from E to the set M(F ) of Radon measures on F . It is said to be weakly* µ-measurable, for µ ∈ M+(E), if x 7→ νx(B) is µ-measurable for all Borel sets B ∈ B(F ) (it suffices to check this for all rela- tively open sets). Equivalently, (νx)x∈E is weakly* µ-measurable if the func- tion x 7→RF f (x, y) dνx(y) is µ-measurable for every bounded Borel function f : E × F → R (see [5, Proposition 2.26]). We denote by L∞ w∗(E, µ; M(F )) the set of all weakly* µ-measurable parametrized measures (νx)x∈E ⊂ M(F ) with the property that ess supx∈E νx(F ) < ∞ (the essential supremum with respect to µ). We omit µ in the notation if µ = Ln. 2.2 Functions of bounded variation The theory of BV functions presented in this section can be found in e.g. the monographs [5, 9, 19], and we will give specific references only for a few key results. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be an open set. A function u ∈ L1(Ω; RN ) is a function of bounded variation, denoted by u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), if its distributional derivative is a bounded RN ×n-valued Radon measure. This means that there exists a (unique) measure Du ∈ M(Rn; RN ×n) such that for all ψ ∈ C 1 c (Ω), the integration-by-parts formula ZΩ ∂ψ ∂xj ui dLn = −ZΩ ψ dDui j, i = 1 . . . N, j = 1, . . . , n holds. We write the Radon-Nikodym decomposition of the variation measure as Du = ∇u Ln Ω + Dsu. The space BV(Ω; RN ) is a Banach space endowed with the norm kukBV(Ω;RN ) := kukL1(Ω;RN ) + Du(Ω). 4 Furthermore, we say that a sequence (uj) ⊂ BV(Ω; RN ) converges weakly* ∗⇁ Du in to u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) if uj → u strongly in L1(Ω; RN ) and Duj M(Ω, RN ×n). A norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω; RN ), i.e. (kukL1(Ω;RN ) + Duj(Ω)) < ∞, sup j∈N always has a weakly* converging subsequence. Conversely, a weakly* con- verging sequence is norm-bounded in BV(Ω, RN ), see [5, Proposition 3.13]. If uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ) and Duj(Ω) → Du(Ω), we say that the uj converge to u strictly. If even hDuji(Ω) → hDui(Ω), where for a measure ν ∈ M(Rn; RN ×n) with Radon-Nikodym decomposi- tion ν = a Ln + µs, we define the measure (related to the minimal surface functional) hνi(A) :=ZAp1 + a2 dLn + µs(A), A ∈ B(Rn), then we speak of h·i-strict convergence. This notion is stronger than strict convergence (this follows e.g. from Theorem 2.2 below), and one can show that it implies that hDuji ∗⇁ hDui as measures. For any bounded open set Ω ⊂ Rn and v ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), we can define the Dirichlet class BVv(Ω; RN ) :=(cid:8)u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) : w ∈ BV(Rn; RN ) and Dw(∂Ω) = 0(cid:9) , where w :=(u − v 0 in Ω, in Rn \ Ω. The following lemma is proved in e.g. [14, Lemma 1]. Lemma 2.1. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set, and let u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). Then there exists (vj) ⊂ BVu(Ω; RN ) ∩ C ∞(Ω; RN ) such that vj → u h·i- strictly in Ω. 2.3 Generalized Young measures Most of the theory of generalized Young measures presented in this section is derived in [14]. The symbol Ω will always denote a bounded open set in Rn. We will need the following linear transformations mapping C(Ω × Rl) to C(Ω × Bl) 5 and back, where Bl was the open unit ball in Rl: g ∈ C(Ω × Bl), define for f ∈ C(Ω × Rl) and A 1 − A! , x ∈ Ω, A ∈ Bl, and A 1 + A(cid:19) , x ∈ Ω, A ∈ Rl. (T f )(x, A) := (1 − A)f x, (T −1g)(x, A) := (1 + A)g(cid:18)x, It is an easy calculation to verify that T −1T f = f and T T −1g = g. We consider the property T f extends to a bounded continuous function on Ω × Bl. (2.1) In particular, this entails that f has linear growth at infinity, that is, there exists a constant M ≥ 0 (in fact, M = kT f kL∞(Ω×Bl) will do) such that f (x, A) ≤ M(1 + A) for all x ∈ Ω, A ∈ Rl. We collect all such integrands into the set E(Ω; Rl) := {f ∈ C(Ω × Rl) : f satisfies (2.1)}. For f ∈ E(Ω; Rl), the recession function f ∞ : Ω × Rl 7→ R is defined by f ∞(x, A) := lim x′→x A′→A t→∞ f (x′, tA′) t , x ∈ Ω, A ∈ Rl. (2.2) The limit exists since it agrees with T f on Ω × ∂BN ×n, as can be seen by substituting t = s/(1 − s), s ∈ (0, 1), and letting s → 1. The recession func- tion is clearly positively 1-homogenous in A, that is, f ∞(x, sA) = sf ∞(x, A) for all s ≥ 0, and thus takes finite values. We also consider a second class of integrands that is larger than E(Ω; Rl) and (partially) dispenses with continuity in the x-variable. A Carath´eodory function is an Ln × B(Rl)-measurable function f : Ω × Rl → R such that A 7→ f (x, A) is continuous for almost every x ∈ Ω. In fact, it can be shown that it suffices to check measurability of x 7→ f (x, A) for all fixed A ∈ Rl (see for example [5, Proposition 5.6]). With this notion, the representation integrands are defined as follows: R(Ω; Rl) := {f : Ω × Rl → R : f Carath´eodory with linear growth at infinity and ∃f ∞ ∈ C(Ω × Rl)}. (2.3) 6 A function f : RN ×n → R is said to be quasiconvex, which we denote by f ∈ Q(RN ×n), if f is Borel measurable, locally bounded from below, and for some bounded Lipschitz domain ω ⊂ Rn and every A ∈ RN ×n it holds that ωf (A) ≤Zω f (A + ∇ψ(x)) dLn(x) for all ψ ∈ W 1,∞ 0 (ω; RN ). This definition does not depend on the particular choice of the Lipschitz do- main ω (by an exhaustion argument) and it can be shown that quasiconvex functions are rank one convex, meaning that they are convex along rank one lines (see for example [5, Proposition 5.41]). See [7] for more on quasicon- vexity. A quasiconvex function does not necessarily have a recession function f ∞ in the sense of (2.2) (see [16, Theorem 2] for a counterexample), and the notion can be relaxed in the following way: for f : RN ×n → R the generalized recession function f # : RN ×n → R ∪ {±∞} is defined by f #(A) := lim sup A′→A t→∞ f (tA′) t , A ∈ RN ×n. Quasiconvex functions are globally Lipschitz continuous (see for example [6, Lemma 2.2]) and hence for quasiconvex f f #(A) = lim sup t→∞ f (tA) t , A ∈ RN ×n. (2.4) By rank one convexity, the above holds as a limit for all matrices A of rank one. We have the following version of Reshetnyak's Continuity Theorem, see the appendix of [15], as well as [17, Theorem 3] or [5, Theorem 2.39] for the original result stated for 1-homogenous functions f . Theorem 2.2. Let (γj) ⊂ M(Ω; Rl), γ ∈ M(Ω; Rl) with Radon-Nikodym decompositions γj = aj Ln Ω + γs j , γ = a Ln Ω + γs. If γj ∗⇁ γ in M(Ω; Rl) and hγji(Ω) → hγi(Ω), then for F (γ) :=ZΩ f (x, a(x)) dLn +ZΩ f ∞(cid:18)x, dγs dγs (x)(cid:19) dγs(x) with f ∈ E(Ω, Rl), we have F (γj) → F (γ). 7 Let µ ∈ M+(Ω), and assume that µ(∂Ω) = 0. The set of all generalized Young measures Y(Ω, µ; Rl) is defined to be the set of all triples (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) such that (νx)x ∈ L∞ (ν∞ x )x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω, µ; M1(Rl)), w∗(Ω, λν; M1(∂Bl)), λν ∈ M+(Ω), x 7→ h · , νxi ∈ L1(Ω, µ). Under the duality pairing hhf, νii :=ZΩ =ZΩZRN ×n hf ∞(x, ·), ν∞ hf (x, ·), νxi dµ(x) +ZΩ f (x, A) dνx(A) dµ(x) +ZΩZ∂BN ×n x i dλν(x) f ∞(x, A) dν∞ x (A) dλν(x), where f ∈ E(Ω; Rl) and ν ∈ Y(Ω, µ; Rl), the space of Young measures can be considered a part of the dual space E(Ω; Rl)∗. We say that a sequence of Young measures (νj) ⊂ Y(Ω, µ; Rl) converges weakly* to ν ∈ Y(Ω, µ; Rl) if hhf, νjii → hhf, νii for every f ∈ E(Ω; Rl). To every Radon measure γ ∈ M(Ω; Rl), with Radon-Nikodym decompo- dµ µ+γs,µ, we associate an elementary sition with respect to µ written as γ = dγ Young measure εγ ∈ Y(Ω, µ; Rl) by (εγ)x := δ dγ dµ (x), λεγ := γs,µ, (εγ)∞ x := δp(x), where p := dγs,µ dγs,µ ∈ L1(Ω, γs,µ; ∂Bl). Crucially, we have the following. Theorem 2.3. Let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with µ(∂Ω) = 0, and let (γj) ⊂ M(Ω; Rl) be a sequence of Radon measures that is bounded in the total variation norm, that is, supj∈N γj(Ω) < ∞. Then there exists a subsequence (not relabeled) and a generalized Young measure (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) with (νx)x ∈ L∞ (ν∞ x )x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω, µ; M1(Rl)), w∗(Ω, λν; M1(∂Bl)), λν ∈ M+(Ω), x 7→ h · , νxi ∈ L1(Ω, µ), such that hhf, εγj ii → hhf, νii, or equivalently f(cid:18)x, dγj dµ (x)(cid:19) µ + f ∞(cid:18)x, j dγs,µ dγs,µ j (x)(cid:19) γs,µ j ∗⇁ hf (x, ·), νxi µ + hf ∞(x, ·), ν∞ x i λν in M(Ω) (2.5) (2.6) for every f ∈ E(Ω; RN ×n). 8 Proof. This is proved in the case µ = Ln Ω in [14, Lemma 2, Corollary 2, Theorem 7], but the proofs run through also if we replace the Lebesgue measure by a more general µ. See also [2, Theorem 2.5] for a proof in the case γs j ≡ 0. Corollary 2.4. In the above theorem, (2.6) holds also for every µ × B(Rl)- measurable f ∈ R(Ω; Rl). In the case µ = Ln, (2.6) also holds for every Carath´eodory integrand f : Ω × Rl → R possessing a recession function f ∞ : Ω × Rl → R in the sense of (2.2) for (x, A) ∈ (Ω \ N) × Rl, and f ∞ is jointly continuous in (Ω \ N) × Rl, where N ⊂ Ω is a Borel set with (Ln + λν)(N) = 0. Note that a Carath´eodory function f : Ω × RN → R is by definition Ln × B(RN )-measurable, but here we need the assumption of µ × B(RN )- measurability. Proof. Again, this is proved in the case µ = Ln Ω in [14, Proposition 2], but the proof runs through also in the general case with the assumption of µ × B(RN )-measurability. In particular, given u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), we can associate to its derivative dµ µ + Ds,µu, Du ∈ M(Ω; RN ×n) the Radon-Nikodym decomposition Du = dDu and then the elementary Young measure εDu ∈ Y(Ω, µ; RN ×n) with (εDu)x := δ dDu dµ , λεDu := Ds,µu, (εDu)∞ x := δp(x), where p := Ds,µu Ds,µu ∈ L1(Ω, Ds,µu; ∂BN ×n). For a norm-bounded sequence (uj) ⊂ BV(Ω; RN ), we say that the deriva- tives Duj generate the generalized Young measure ν = (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) ∈ Y(Ω; RN ×n), if for all f ∈ E(Ω, RN ×n) we have that hhf, εDuj ii → hhf, νii for all f ∈ E(Ω; RN ×n), or equivalently f(cid:18)x, dDuj dµ (cid:19) µ + f ∞(cid:18)x, dDs,µuj dDs,µuj (x)(cid:19) Ds,µuj ∗⇁ hf (x, ·), νxi µ + hf ∞(x, ·), ν∞ x i λν in M(Ω). (2.7) We call such a generalized Young measure a gradient Young measure. Since ∗⇁ u for some u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). The (uj) is norm-bounded, we have uj barycenter of a generalized Young measure ν ∈ Y(Ω; RN ×n) is defined as the measure hid, νxi µ + hid, ν∞ x iλν. 9 Note that by choosing f to be the identity on RN ×n in (2.7) (componentwise, to be precise), we obtain that Du is the restriction of the barycenter to Ω. In the case µ = Ln, we have the following Jensen's inequalities for gradient Young measures, which are part of [14, Theorem 9]. Theorem 2.5. Let u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) and let ν ∈ Y(Ω; RN ×n), ν = (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) be a gradient Young measure with barycenter Du and satisfying λ(∂Ω) = 0. Then the following hold for any quasiconvex f : RN ×n → R with linear growth (that is, F (A) ≤ M(A + 1) for all A ∈ RN ×n and some M ≥ 0): f (∇u(x)) ≤ hf, νxi + hf #, ν∞ x i dλν dLn (x) for Ln-almost every x ∈ Ω, f #(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) Dsu ≤ hf #, ν∞ x iλs ν as measures. 3 The integral representation Let F : RN ×n 7→ R be quasiconvex, with linear growth mA ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for all A ∈ RN ×n, for some 0 < m ≤ M, such that the recession function F ∞ exists in the sense of (2.2). Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set with Ln(∂Ω) = 0, and let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ. We define a Sobolev space with respect to µ by W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) := {u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ) : Du ≪ µ}. We consider the functional j→∞ ZΩ F∗(u, Ω) := infn lim inf F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ, uj ∈ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) (3.1) uj → u in L1(Ω; RN )o for u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). Note that the convergence above is in L1(Ω; RN ) with respect to the Lebesgue measure Ln, not µ. We will prove an integral repre- sentation for the above functional. The representation is ZΩ F (cid:18)dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu (3.2) for any u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), where Ds,µu is the singular part of the variation measure Du with respect to µ. Initially we will work with a more restricted class of integrands, defined as follows. 10 Definition 3.1. Define the class SQ(RN ×n) of special quasiconvex integrands as quasiconvex functions F : RN ×n → R with linear growth F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some M ≥ 0, such that for some parameters i, ri > 0, F (A) = F ∞(A) − i for A ≥ ri, and F ∞(A) ≥ A/i for all A ∈ RN ×n. Note that the existence of the recession function F ∞ in the sense of (2.2) is part of the definition. (We could equally well require above that F (A) = F #(A) − i for A ≥ ri, recall (2.4), as this would imply the existence of F ∞.) Clearly SQ(RN ×n) ⊂ E(Ω; RN ×n) (constant in the x-variable). Given F ∈ Q(RN ×n) with linear growth 0 ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some M ≥ 0, we can define Gi(A) := max{F (A), F #(A) + A/i − i} for each i ∈ N, and then it is shown in [12, Lemma 6.3] that Gi ∈ SQ(RN ×n) and that Gi(A) ց F (A) and (Gi)∞(A) ց F ∞(A) for every A ∈ RN ×n. We will use this fact on a number of occasions. 3.1 Estimate from below In order to obtain the integral representation, we first prove the estimate from below. Proposition 3.2. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set with Ln(∂Ω) = 0, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, let F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) with mA ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some 0 < m ≤ M, and let u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). Then we have F∗(u, Ω) ≥ZΩ F (cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu. Write the Radon-Nikodym decomposition of µ as µ = a Ln + µs, with a ∈ L1(Ω). We prove the theorem by considering separately the sets where the absolutely continuous part and the singular part of µ are carried. 3.1.1 The absolutely continuous part The following lemma gives, in essence, the estimate from below for the set where the absolutely continuous part of µ is carried. At this point, we make the extra assumption that F is a special quasiconvex integrand. Lemma 3.3. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set with Ln(∂Ω) = 0, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, and let F ∈ SQ(RN ×n) with parameters i, ri > 0, 11 and with linear growth 0 ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A). Then for any open U ⊂ Ω and any sequence (uj) ⊂ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) with uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ) and lim inf j→∞ ZΩ F (cid:18) dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ < ∞, (3.3) we have lim inf j→∞ ZU ≥ZU F (cid:18)dDuj F (cid:18) ∇u dµ (cid:19) dµ a (cid:19) a dLn +ZU F ∞(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu − (Mri + i)µs(U). (3.4) Proof. Since Ln ≪ µ, we can assume that a > 0 everywhere in Ω. Pick a subsequence of (uj) (not relabeled) that gives the limit in (3.4). Since F (A) = F ∞(A) − i ≥ A/i − i for all A ≥ ri, we have by (3.3) that (uj) ∗⇁ u in BV(Ω; RN ). is a norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω; RN ). Thus uj By Theorem 2.3, the derivatives Duj generate a generalized Young measure (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) with respect to the Lebesgue measure, with λν ∈ M+(Ω) and (νx)x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω; M1(RN ×n)), (ν∞ x )x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω, λν; M1(∂BN ×n)). This means that for every representation integrand f ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) and every integrand satisfying the conditions of the latter part of Corollary 2.4, we have f (x, ∇uj(x)) Ln Ω + f ∞(cid:18)x, dDsuj dDsuj(cid:19) Dsuj ∗⇁ hf (x, ·), νxi Ln Ω + hf ∞(x, ·), ν∞ x i λν (3.5) in M(Ω). First assume that Ln(∂U) = λν(∂U) = 0. Let us start computing ZU F (cid:18) dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ =ZU =ZU F (cid:18) dDuj F (cid:18)∇uj d(aLn)(cid:19) a dLn +ZU a (cid:19) a dLn +ZU F (cid:18)dDuj dµs (cid:19) dµs F (cid:18)dDsuj dµs (cid:19) dµs =: Ij + IIj. (3.6) We wish to analyze the term Ij by using the fact that Duj generates a generalized Young measure. However, the function (x, A) 7→ F (cid:18) A a(x)(cid:19) a(x)1U (x) 12 does not necessarily satisfy the conditions of the latter part of Corollary 2.4: while it is a Carath´eodory function, its recession function need not be continuous as required. To overcome this problem, we define the super-level sets of a: Em := {x ∈ Ω : a(x) > m}, m ∈ N. Recall that a(x) > 0 for every x ∈ Ω. Denoting the minimum of a and m by a ∧ m, by the fact that F (A) = F ∞(A) − i for all A ≥ ri we have for any x ∈ U and A ∈ ∂BN ×n F (cid:16) tA′ a(x′)∧m(cid:17) t a(x′) ∧ m = lim sup A′→A t→∞ F (tA′) t lim sup x′→x A′→A t→∞ F ∞(tA′) − i t = lim sup A′→A t→∞ = lim sup A′→A t→∞ tF ∞(A′) t = lim sup A′→A F ∞(A′) = F ∞(A) by the (Lipschitz) continuity of F ∞. Note that the first equality is not necessarily true unless we take the minimum of a with m. Also, we now see that all of the limit superiors above are in fact limits. We conclude that (x, A) 7→ F (cid:18) A (a ∧ m)(x)(cid:19) (a ∧ m)(x)1U (x) (3.7) satisfies the conditions of the latter part of Corollary 2.4. Fix m ∈ N. By the fact that F (A) = F ∞(A) − i for all A ≥ ri, we can write m (cid:19) m dLn F (cid:18)∇uj a (cid:19) a − F (cid:18)∇uj F ∞(cid:18)∇uj a (cid:19) a − F (cid:18)∇uj a (cid:19) a − F (cid:18)∇uj m (cid:19) m dLn a (cid:19) a − F ∞(cid:18)∇uj m (cid:19) m dLn m (cid:19) m − i(a − m) dLn Ij −ZU a ∧ m(cid:19) a ∧ m dLn =ZU ∩Em F (cid:18) ∇uj =ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj<ari} F (cid:18)∇uj +ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj≥ari} =ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj<ari} F (cid:18)∇uj −ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj≥ari} := εm. i(a − m) dLn 13 We have by the linear growth of F (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj<ari} a (cid:19) a − F (cid:18)∇uj m (cid:19) m dLn(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) a (cid:19) a + F (cid:18)∇uj F (cid:18)∇uj m (cid:19) m dLn F (cid:18) ∇uj ≤ZU ∩Em∩{∇uj<ari} ≤ZU ∩Em ≤ZU ∩Em 2Ma(1 + ri) dµ. M(1 + ri)a + M(1 + ari/m)m dµ Clearly this last quantity converges to zero as m → ∞, as does the second term of εm, so in total εm → 0 as m → ∞. By the fact that the derivatives Duj generate a generalized Young mea- sure (recall (3.5)) and the fact that the integrand (3.7) satisfies the conditions of the latter part of Corollary 2.4 and has recession function F ∞ in U, we have F ∞(cid:18) dDsuj Ij +ZU F (cid:18) ∇uj =ZU →ZUZRN ×n dDsuj(cid:19) dDsuj − εm a ∧ m(cid:19) a ∧ m dLn +ZU F (cid:18) A F ∞(cid:18) dDsuj dDsuj(cid:19) dDsuj a ∧ m(cid:19) a ∧ m dνx(A) dLn +ZUZ∂BN ×n F ∞(A) dν∞ x (A) dλν (3.8) as j → ∞. Recalling (3.6), let us then consider the term IIj. Since F (A) = 14 F ∞(A) − i for all A ≥ ri, we estimate F ∞(cid:18) dDsuj F (cid:18)dDsuj IIj −ZU =ZU =ZU ∩{dDsuj /dµs<ri} dDsuj(cid:19) dDsuj dµs (cid:19) dµs −ZU F (cid:18)dDsuj −ZU ∩{dDsuj/dµs<ri} dµs (cid:19) dµs F ∞(cid:18)dDsuj dµs (cid:19) dµs − iµs(U ∩ {dDsuj/dµs ≥ ri}) F ∞(cid:18) dDsuj dµs (cid:19) dµs ≥ −iµs(U ∩ {dDsuj/dµs ≥ ri}) −ZU ∩{dDsuj /dµs<ri} ≥ −iµs(U) −ZU ∩{dDsuj/dµs<ri} dDsuj dµs dµs ≥ −iµs(U) − Mriµs(U). M(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) F ∞(cid:18)dDsuj dµs (cid:19) dµs (3.9) Combining (3.6), (3.8), and (3.9), we get by Jensen's inequalities for gener- alized Young measures given in Theorem 2.5, x (A) dλν lim inf j→∞ (Ij + IIj) F ∞(A) dν∞ + εm − (Mri + i)µs(U) j→∞ ZU ≥ZUZRN ×n F (cid:18) ∇u ≥ZU F (cid:18)∇u ≥ZU F (cid:18)∇u →ZU dµ (cid:19) dµ = lim inf F (cid:18)dDuj F (cid:18) A a ∧ m(cid:19) a ∧ m dνx(A) dLn +ZUZ∂BN ×n F ∞(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu a ∧ m(cid:19) a ∧ m dLn +ZU F ∞(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu a (cid:19) a ∧ m dLn +ZU dDsu(cid:19) dDsu − (Mri + i)µs(U) a (cid:19) a dLn +ZU F ∞(cid:18) dDsu + εm − (Mri + i)µs(U) + εm − (Mri + i)µs(U) as m → ∞, by the monotone convergence theorem. Finally, if U does not satisfy λν(∂U) = 0 or Ln(∂U) = 0, we define Uκ := {x ∈ U : dist(x, U c) > κ}, κ > 0, 15 and then λν(∂Uκ) = 0 and Ln(∂Uκ) = 0 for all but at most countably many κ > 0 by the fact that these are finite measures on U. For such values of κ we write lim inf j→∞ ZU ≥ lim inf F (cid:18) dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ F (cid:18) dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ j→∞ ZUκ F (cid:18)∇u a (cid:19) a dLn +ZUκ a (cid:19) a dLn +ZU F (cid:18)∇u ≥ZUκ →ZU F ∞(cid:18) dDsu F ∞(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu − (Mri + i)µs(Uκ) dDsu(cid:19) dDsu − (Mri + i)µs(U) as κ → 0, by the monotone convergence theorem. 3.1.2 The singular part Let us then consider the set where µs is carried. We prove the following lemma. Lemma 3.4. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set, let µ ∈ M+(Ω), and let F ∈ SQ(RN ×n) with F ≥ 0. Then for any sequence (uj) ⊂ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) with uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ) and lim inf j→∞ ZΩ F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ < ∞, we have for any ball B(y, r) ⊂ Ω ZB(y,r) F (cid:18) dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs ≤ lim inf j→∞ ZB(y,r) F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ. (3.10) Proof. Note again that it is enough to prove the result for a subsequence. Let i, ri > 0 be the parameters of F , see Definition 3.1. Since F (A) = F ∞(A) − i ≥ A/i − i for all A ≥ ri, the sequence dDuj dµ is norm-bounded in L1(Ω, µ; RN ×n), implying that (uj) is a norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω; RN ). By Theorem 2.3 we know that with respect to µ, a subsequence of Duj (not relabeled) generates a generalized Young measure (νx, λν, ν∞ x ), with λν ∈ M+(Ω) and (νx)x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω, µ; M1(RN ×n)), 16 (ν∞ x )x ∈ L∞ w∗(Ω, µ; M1(∂BN ×n)). This means in particular that for every integrand f ∈ E(Ω; RN ×n), f(cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19)µ ∗⇁ hf, νxiµ + hf ∞, ν∞ =(cid:18)hf, νxia + hf ∞, ν∞ x i x iλν dλν dLn(cid:19) Ln + hf, νxiµs + hf ∞, ν∞ x iλs ν (3.11) in M(Ω). By Alberti's rank one theorem, see [1], we have µs-almost every- where that dDuj dµs = ξj ⊗ η, dDu dµs = ξ ⊗ η, (3.12) where ξj, ξ ∈ RN and η ∈ ∂Bn. Note that η does not depend on j. We show that for µs-almost every x ∈ Ω, the measure νx is carried on the hyperplane RN ⊗ η(x). For this, fix ε > 0 and fix a point x0 ∈ Ω. Excluding a µs- negligible set, we can assume by the Besicovitch differentiation theorem (see e.g. [5, Theorem 2.22]) that for some radius r > 0, we have B(x0, r) ⊂ Ω and ZB(x0,r) η − η(x0) dµs < ε and ZB(x0,r) Fix R ≥ 1 and define a dLn < εµ(B(x0, r)). (3.13) f (A) := min{1, dist(A, (RN ⊗ η(x0)) ∪ B(0, R)c)}; note that there is no x-dependence, and f ∈ E(Ω; RN ×n). Since f (ξ ⊗ η) = 0 for ξ ≥ R and η = 1 and since f is 1-Lipschitz, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZB(x0,r) f (ξj ⊗ η) dµs −ZB(x0,r) ≤ RZB(x0,r) η − η(x0) dµs < Rε f (ξj ⊗ η(x0)) dµs(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (3.14) by (3.13). Since hf, νxi ∈ L1(Ω, µ) by (2.5), excluding a further µs-negligible set and possibly making r > 0 smaller, we can also assume that ZB(x0,r) hf, νxi − hf, νx0i dµ < ε. (3.15) Clearly f ∞ ≡ 0 and then by (3.11), we have f(cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) µ ∗⇁ hf, νxia Ln + hf, νxi µs in M(Ω). 17 Now by (3.15), hf, νx0i ≤ZB(x0,r) ≤ lim inf hf, νxi dµ + ε f ≤1 ≤ lim inf (3.13) ≤ lim inf j→∞ ZB(x0,r) j→∞ ZB(x0,r) j→∞ ZB(x0,r) j→∞ ZB(x0,r) j→∞ ZB(x0,r) (3.12) = lim inf (3.14) ≤ lim inf ≤ 3Rε, dµ (cid:19) dµ + ε f(cid:18)dDuj dµs (cid:19) dµs + RB(x0,r) a dLn f(cid:18)dDuj dµs (cid:19) dµs + 2ε f(cid:18)dDuj µ(B(x0, r)) f (ξj ⊗ η) dµs + 2ε f (ξj ⊗ η(x0)) dµs + Rε + 2ε + ε since f is zero on the hyperplane RN ⊗η(x0). Letting ε → 0, we get hf, νx0i = 0, implying that νx0 is carried on the set (RN ⊗ η(x0)) ∪ B(0, R)c. Letting R → ∞, we obtain that νx0 is carried on the hyperplane RN ⊗ η(x0). By choosing f to be the identity mapping on RN ×n in (3.11) (compo- ∗⇁ Du in M(Ω) (the fact ∗⇁ u in nentwise, to be precise), and noting that Duj that (uj) is a norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω; RN ) implies that uj BV(Ω; RN )), we get for the singular parts Dsu = hid, νxi µs + hid, ν∞ x i λs ν (3.16) in Ω. Using the fact that hid, νxi ∈ RN ⊗ η(x) for µs-almost every x ∈ Ω, we get hid, ν∞ x i dλs ν dµs = dDsu dµs (x) − hid, νxi = ξ(x) ⊗ η(x) − hid, νxi ∈ RN ⊗ η(x) for µs-almost every x ∈ Ω. Since F ∞ is quasiconvex and 1-homogenous, we have F ∞(A) = (F ∞)c(A) for all rank one A ∈ RN ×n, where the convex envelope is defined by Gc(A) := sup {H(A) : H convex, H ≤ G} , see [12, Corollary 1.2]. According to [2, Lemma 5.5 (i)], for any convex function g : RN ×n → R we have g(A1 + A2) ≤ g(A1) + g∞(A2) (3.17) 18 for all A1, A2 ∈ RN ×n. Note that in (3.16), all three terms belong to RN ⊗η(x) for µs-almost every x ∈ Ω. Since ξ 7→ F (ξ ⊗ η(x)) is convex for a fixed x ∈ Ω by the rank one convexity of F , we get by (3.17) F (cid:18) dDsu dµs (x)(cid:19) ≤ F (hid, νxi) + F ∞ (hid, ν∞ x i) = F (hid, νxi) + (F ∞)c (hid, ν∞ x i) Jensen ≤ hF, νxi + h(F ∞)c, ν∞ x i dλs ν dµs ≤ hF, νxi + hF ∞, ν∞ x i dλs ν dµs dλs ν dµs dλs ν dµs for µs-almost every x ∈ Ω. Combining this with (3.11) -- note that F ∈ SQ(RN ×n) ⊂ E(Ω; RN ×n) -- we get for any ball B(y, r) ⊂ Ω ZB(y,r) F (cid:18)dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs ≤ lim inf j→∞ ZB(y,r) F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ. 3.1.3 Combining the estimates Now we combine the previous two lemmas to prove Proposition 3.2. Proof of Proposition 3.2. We keep assuming that F ∈ SQ(RN ×n) with pa- rameters i, ri ≥ 1 and linear growth 0 ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A). Let (uj) ⊂ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) be a sequence with uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ), and we can also assume that (3.3) holds, so that the assumptions of both Lemma 3.3 and Lemma 3.4 are satisfied. Fix ε > 0. Let H ⊂ Ω be a Borel set with Ln(H) = 0 and µs(Ω \ H) = 0. Also, let D ⊂ Ω be a Borel set with µ(D) = 0 and Ds,µu(Ω \ D) = 0. Take an open set G ⊂ Ω with G ⊃ H \ D and Ds,µu(G) +ZG M(a + ∇u) dLn < ε. (3.18) Consider the fine cover {B(x, R)}x∈H\D of the set H \ D, with the balls B(x, R) contained in G and satisfying µs(∂B(x, R)) = 0. By Vitali's covering theorem, we can pick a countable, disjoint collection {Bi}i∈N := {B(xi, Ri)}i∈N with µs (H \ D) \ ∞ [i=1 Bi! = 0 and thus µs Ω \ Bi! = 0. ∞ [i=1 (3.19) 19 Pick also m ∈ N such that µ ∞ [i=m Bi! + MZS∞ i=m Bi(cid:18)1 + dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs < ε. By (3.10) we have lim inf j→∞ ZSm i=1 Bi F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ ≥ZSm ≥ZΩ F (cid:18)dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs dµs (cid:19) dµs − ε F (cid:18)dDsu i=1 Bi by (3.20) and the linear growth of F . By combining (3.19) and (3.20), we get µs Ω \ m [i=1 Bi! < ε. (3.20) (3.21) (3.22) Moreover, we can write (3.4) with the choice U = Ω \Sm i=1 Bi: lim inf j→∞ ZΩ\Sm ≥ZΩ\Sm i=1 Bi dµ (cid:19) dµ F (cid:18)dDuj F (cid:18)∇u a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ\Sm i=1 Bi F ∞(cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu i=1 Bi Bi! (3.22) (3.18) m i=1 Bi [i=1 − (Mri + i)ε − (Mri + i)µs Ω \ F (cid:18)∇u ≥ ZΩ\Sm F (cid:18)∇u a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ ≥ ZΩ\Sm ≥ ZΩ F (cid:18)∇u − Mε − (Mri + i)ε i=1 Bi − ε − Mε − (Mri + i)ε. (3.18) i=1 Bi a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ\Sm a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu 20 Combining this with (3.21), we get lim inf j→∞ ZΩ dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dµ (cid:19) dµ F (cid:18)dDuj F (cid:18) ∇u a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ ≥ZΩ F (cid:18) dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs − 3(Mri + i)ε +ZSm F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu a (cid:19) a dLn +ZΩ F (cid:18)∇u ≥ ZΩ F (cid:18)dDsu dµs (cid:19) dµs − 4(Mri + i)ε. +ZΩ i=1 Bi (3.20) dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu By letting ε → 0, we get the estimate from below. Finally, we remove the assumption F ∈ SQ(RN ×n). By [12, Lemma 6.3], we can find a sequence Fi ∈ SQ(RN ×n) with Fi(A) ց F (A) and F ∞ i (A) ց F ∞(A) pointwise for every A ∈ RN ×n as i → ∞, and by making M slightly larger, if necessary, we can also assume that mA ≤ Fi(A) ≤ M(1 + A) for every i ∈ N. As before, let (uj) ⊂ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ) with uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ). We can again assume that (3.3) holds, and by the coercivity mA ≤ F (A), this implies that (uj) is a norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω; RN ). Thus by Theo- rem 2.3, a subsequence of Duj (not relabeled) generates a generalized Young measure (νx, λν, ν∞ x ) with respect to µ. Thus we have for any i ∈ N dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu i (cid:18) dDs,µu F ∞ dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu (3.23) ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu F (cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ Fi(cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ ≤ZΩ dµ (cid:19) dµ Fi(cid:18) dDuj j→∞ ZΩ hFi, νxi dµ +ZΩ =ZΩ ≤ lim inf hF ∞ i , ν∞ x i dλν. On the other hand, by Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem, as well as the fact that F ∈ Q(RN ×n) ∩ R(Ω; RN ×n) ⊂ E(Ω; RN ×n), lim i→∞(cid:18)ZΩ hFi, νxi dµ +ZΩ hF ∞ i , ν∞ x i dλν(cid:19) =ZΩ hF ∞, ν∞ x i dλν hF, νxi dµ +ZΩ F (cid:18) dDuj j→∞ZΩ dµ (cid:19) dµ. = lim (3.24) 21 By combining (3.23) and (3.24), we get the desired estimate from below. 3.2 Estimate from above Recall from (3.1) the definition of the functional F∗ by relaxation. We prove that the estimate from above holds for the integral representation of F∗. Here our proof is not based on the theory of Young measures, so we can allow for somewhat weaker assumptions on F . Proposition 3.5. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, let F ∈ Q(RN ×n) with 0 ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A), A ∈ RN ×n for some M ≥ 1, and let u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). Then we have F∗(u, Ω) ≤ZΩ F (cid:18) dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu. Proof. Again, by Definition 3.1 and [12, Lemma 6.3] we can find a sequence Fi ∈ SQ(RN ×n) with parameters i ∈ N, ri > 0 such that Fi(A) ց F (A) and F ∞ i (A) ց F ∞(A) pointwise for every A ∈ RN ×n as i → ∞. Moreover, by making M slightly larger, if necessary, we have that 0 ≤ Fi(A) ≤ M(1 + A) for all i ∈ N and A ∈ RN ×n. Fix i ∈ N. The proof is based on mollifying the function u in a small set. Take a Borel set D ⊂ Ω with Ds,µu(Ω \ D) = 0 and µ(D) = 0. Then take an open set G ⊃ D with Ln(G) and µ(G) so small that ZG M(1 + ∇u) dLn +ZG M(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dDsu dµ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dµ + M(ri + i)Ln(G) + M(1 + ri)µ(G) (3.25) is less than 1/i; this is possible by the absolute continuity of integrals. By Lemma 2.1 we can pick a sequence (vj) ⊂ BVu(G; RN ) ∩ C ∞(G; RN ) (note boundary values) that converges to u h·i-strictly in BV(G; RN ). Fix also j ∈ N. Using the linear growth of Fi, we estimate ZG F (cid:18) dDvj dµ (cid:19) dµ ≤ZG Fi(cid:18)dDvj ≤ZG∩{∇vj /a>ri} dµ (cid:19) dµ =ZG Fi(cid:18)∇vj Fi(cid:18)∇vj a (cid:19) a dLn a (cid:19) a dLn + M(1 + ri)µ(G), 22 where by the fact that F (A) = F ∞(A) − i for A ≥ ri, the last integral equals ZG∩{∇vj/a>ri}(cid:18)F ∞ i (cid:18) ∇vj F ∞ i (cid:18)∇vj a (cid:19) a dLn i F ∞ (∇vj) dLn i (∇vj) dLn F ∞ a (cid:19) − i(cid:19) a dLn ≤ZG∩{∇vj /a>ri} =ZG∩{∇vj/a>ri} ≤ZG ≤ZG∩{∇vj >ri} =ZG∩{∇vj>ri} ≤ZG F ∞ i Fi (∇vj) dLn + M(ri + i)Ln(G). (∇vj) dLn + MriLn(G) (Fi (∇vj) + i) dLn + MriLn(G) Now, since Fi ∈ SQ(RN ×n) ⊂ E(G; RN ×n) (constant in the x-variable) and vj → u h·i-strictly in BV(G; RN ), we can apply Reshetnyak's continuity theorem, Theorem 2.2, to obtain lim inf j→∞ ZG F ∞ ≤ lim inf dµ (cid:19) dµ Fi (∇vj) dLn + M(ri + i)Ln(G) + M(1 + ri)µ(G) F (cid:18)dDvj j→∞ ZG Fi(∇u) dLn +ZG =ZG M(1 + ∇u) dLn +ZG ≤ZG +ZG ≤ZG i (cid:18) dDsu dDsu(cid:19) dDsu dµ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) M(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) i (cid:18) dDs,µu dDs µu(cid:19) dDs,µu + M(ri + i)Ln(G) + M(1 + ri)µ(G) i (cid:18) dDs,µu dDs µu(cid:19) dDs,µu + 1/i + M(ri + i)Ln(G) + M(1 + ri)µ(G) dDsu F ∞ F ∞ dµ by (3.25). Then define for each j ∈ N uj :=( vj u in G, in Ω \ G. The fact that vj ∈ BVu(G; RN ) implies by definition (given before Lemma 2.1) that Duj = Du Ω \ G + Dvj G. Thus it is clear that uj ∈ W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ), 23 and also uj → u in L1(Ω; RN ), so that uj is an admissible sequence for F∗(u, Ω). In total, we obtain F∗(u, Ω) ≤ lim inf F (cid:18)dDuj dµ (cid:19) dµ j→∞ ZΩ F (cid:18) dDvj dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ\G j→∞ ZG i (cid:18) dDs,µu dDs µu(cid:19) dDs,µu +ZΩ\G i (cid:18) dDs,µu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ Fi(cid:18)dDu F (cid:18)dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ dµ (cid:19) dµ + 1/i F (cid:18)dDu dDs µu(cid:19) dDs,µu + 1/i. F ∞ = lim inf F ∞ ≤ZG ≤ZΩ Letting i → ∞, by Lebesgue's monotone or dominated convergence we get the desired estimate from above. 3.3 Some examples Let us briefly consider why it is necessary to assume that Ln ≪ µ, at least in order to obtain the integral representation (3.2). The reason is that the estimate from above may be violated without this assumption. We note that the integral representation (3.2) always takes a value at most Mµ(Ω) + MDu(Ω), which is finite for a BV function u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ). On the other hand, if it is not true that Ln ≪ µ, then there can be a large set not "seen" by the measure µ, and as a result it may simply be impossible to approximate certain BV functions in the L1-sense by functions in the class W 1,1 µ (Ω; RN ). Consider the following examples. Example 3.6. Suppose that there is an open set B ⊂ Ω (which we can assume to be a ball) with µ(B) = 0 but of course Ln(B) > 0. Take a nonconstant u ∈ C 1 µ (Ω) satisfy Duj(B) = 0 and are thus constant in the ball B. Thus there is no se- quence of functions uj ∈ W 1,1 µ (Ω) with uj → u in L1(Ω), and consequently F∗(u, Ω) = ∞. c (B), and note that all functions uj ∈ W 1,1 Even if the support of µ is the whole of Ω, the estimate from above may fail. Example 3.7. Take Ω to be the open unit square on the plane, and let A ⊂ Ω be a "fat" Sierpinski carpet, with L2(A) = 1/2. Then define the 24 weight w = 1Ω\A, and µ := w L2. Clearly the absolute continuity assumption L2 ≪ µ is violated, but the support of µ is the whole of Ω. By using the properties of BV functions restricted to lines, see e.g. [5, Section 3.11], we obtain that any function v ∈ W 1,1 µ (Ω) is constant almost everywhere in A. If we define a BV function u ∈ BV(Ω) e.g. as u(x, y) := x, there is no sequence uj ∈ W 1,1 µ (Ω) for which uj → u in L1(Ω), and consequently F∗(u, Ω) = ∞. However, it is not clear to us whether the assumption Ln ≪ µ, or the assumption on the integrand F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n), are necessary in our main result, Theorem 1.1. 4 The lower semicontinuity theorem From the integral representation, we obtain the following lower semicontinu- ity result. Proposition 4.1. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set with Ln(∂Ω) = 0, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, and let F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) with mA ≤ F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some 0 < m ≤ M. Then the functional F (u) :=ZΩ F (cid:18)dDu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu, is lower semicontinuous with respect to convergence in L1(Ω; RN ). u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), Proof. The relaxed functional F∗(u, Ω) given in (3.1) is obviously lower semi- continuous with respect to convergence in L1(Ω; RN ), and by Proposition 3.2 and Proposition 3.5 it equals the functional F (u) given in this proposi- tion. We recall Jensen's inequalities for gradient Young measures with respect to the Lebesgue measure Ln, given in Theorem 2.5. We can now partially generalize these inequalities to the case of a general measure µ. Theorem 4.2. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded open set with Ln(∂Ω) = 0, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, let F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) with F ≥ 0, let u ∈ BV(Ω; RN ), and let ν ∈ Y(Ω, µ; RN ×n) be a gradient Young measure with λν(∂Ω) = 0 and with barycenter Du. Then the following hold: F (cid:18)dDu F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dµ (cid:19) ≤ hF, νxi + hF ∞, ν∞ dDs,µu(cid:19) Ds,µu ≤ hF ∞, ν∞ x i dλν dµ x iλs,µ ν (x) for µ-almost every x ∈ Ω, (4.1) as measures. (4.2) 25 Proof. Take a sequence (uj) ⊂ BV(Ω; RN ) that generates ν. We know ∗⇁ u in BV(Ω; RN ), see the discussion after (2.7). Note that F ∈ that uj R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) ⊂ E(Ω; RN ×n) (constant in the x-variable), so that F necessarily has linear growth F (A) ≤ M(1 + A) for some M ≥ 0. Let us first also assume that F has the coercivity property mA ≤ F (A) for some m > 0 and all A ∈ RN ×n. By combining our lower semicontinuity result, Proposition 4.1, with the fact that F ∈ E(Ω; RN ×n), we obtain ZΩ F (cid:18)dDu ≤ lim inf F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ j→∞ (cid:18)ZΩ F (cid:18) dDuj hFi, νxi dµ +ZΩ =ZΩ dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ , ν∞ x i dλν. hF ∞ i F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µuj dDs,µuj(cid:19) dDs,µuj(cid:19) We can equally well write the above inequality in any open U ⊂ Ω (in particular, a ball) with λν(∂U) = 0. Thus we can differentiate the inequality with respect to µ, and obtain (4.1) by the Besicovitch differentiation theorem (see e.g. [5, Theorem 2.22]). By writing the above inequality for balls from a suitable Vitali covering of Ω, we obtain (4.2). The general case can be obtained by writing (4.1) and (4.2) for integrands Fi(A) := max{F (A), A/i}, i ∈ N, and letting i → ∞. Corollary 4.3. With Ω, µ, u, and ν as in the previous theorem, there exist sets E1, E2 ⊂ Ω with µ(E1) = 0 and Ds,µu(E2) = 0 such that for every F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) with F ≥ 0, we have F (cid:18)dDu dµ (cid:19) ≤ hF, νxi + hF ∞, ν∞ F ∞(cid:18) dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) ≤ hF ∞, ν∞ x i x i (x) dλν dµ dλs,µ ν dDs,µu for every x ∈ Ω \ E1, (4.3) for every x ∈ Ω \ E2. (4.4) The point is that we can find exceptional sets that do not depend on the integrand F . Proof. Again, we note that R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n) ⊂ E(Ω; RN ×n) (constant in the x-variable). Recalling the transformation T given in Section 2.3, we have that {T (F ) : F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n), F ≥ 0} 26 contains a countable dense subset {Gi}i∈N, since it is contained in the sep- arable space C(BN ×m). Then (4.3) and (4.4) hold for some choice of sets E1, E2 ⊂ Ω with µ(E1) = 0 and Ds,µu(E2) = 0, and with F = T −1Gi for any i ∈ N. It is easy to see for any F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n), F ≥ 0 that Fk(cid:18) dDu dµ (x)(cid:19) − F (cid:18)dDu dµ (x)(cid:19) → 0 for every x ∈ Ω \ E1, for a sequence (Fk) ⊂ {T −1Gi}i∈N with T (Fk) → T (F ) in C(BN ×m). The other terms are handled similarly, and so we get the desired inequalities. Now we can prove our semicontinuity result, where we also allow for x-dependence of the integrand. The result could also be given without a boundary term, but its inclusion simplifies our proof. In the case µ = Ln, an analogous result was given in [14, Theorem 10]. Theorem 4.4. Let Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded Lipschitz domain with inner bound- ary normal νΩ, let µ ∈ M+(Ω) with Ln ≪ µ, and let F ∈ R(Ω; RN ×n) be nonnegative and µ × B(RN ×n)-measurable such that A 7→ F (x, A) is quasi- convex for each fixed x ∈ Ω. Then the functional dDu F (cid:18)x, F (u) :=ZΩ F ∞(cid:18)x, +Z∂Ω u u dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18)x, ⊗ νΩ(cid:19) u dHn−1 dDs,µu dDs,µu(cid:19) dDs,µu is weakly* sequentially lower semicontinuous in BV(Ω; RN ). Note that in the last term, u is a boundary trace, see e.g. [5, Section 3.7]. ∗⇁ u in BV(Ω; RN ). Take a bounded Lipschitz domain Ω′ ⋑ Ω, Proof. Let uj j, ue the zero extensions of uj, u to Ω′ \ Ω. Since Ω is a and denote by ue bounded Lipschitz domain, we can use standard gluing theorems for BV functions, see e.g. [5, Proposition 3.21, Theorem 3.84, Theorem 3.86], to obtain that ue j ∈ BV(Ω′; RN ) with Due j = ∇uj Ln Ω + Dsuj + uj ⊗ νΩ Hn−1 ∂Ω and kujkL1(∂Ω;RN ) ≤ CkujkBV(Ω;RN ) with C depending only on Ω; and simi- larly for ue. By the weak* convergence, uj is a norm-bounded sequence in j is a norm-bounded sequence in BV(Ω′; RN ) BV(Ω; RN ), so we have that ue ∗⇁ ue in BV(Ω′; RN ). and that ue j → ue in L1(Ω′; RN ). This implies that ue j 27 Since F ∈ R(Ω, RN ×n), F ∞(x, A) is continuous on Ω × ∂BN ×n, which is a compact set. By the Tietze extension theorem, we can extend F ∞ to Ω′ × ∂BN ×n as a continuous nonnegative function (F e)∞. If we define F e(x, tA) := t(F e)∞(x, A) for any t ≥ 0, A ∈ RN ×n, and x ∈ Ω′, we see that our notation is consistent in that the recession function of F e is indeed (F e)∞. We also extend µ by µe := µ Ω + LN (Rn \ Ω). Then we see that F e ∈ R(Ω′; RN ×n) is nonnegative and µe × B(RN ×n)-measurable. We write F e(ue j) : =ZΩ′ =ZΩ dDue j dDuj F e(cid:18)x, F (cid:18)x, +Z∂Ω dµe (cid:19) dµe +ZΩ′ dµ (cid:19) dµ +ZΩ F ∞(cid:18)x, uj uj (F e)∞(cid:18)x, F ∞(cid:18)x, ⊗ νΩ(cid:19) uj dHn−1 = F (uj), dDs,µeue j dDs,µeue j(cid:19) dDs,µe ue j dDs,µuj dDs,µuj(cid:19) dDs,µuj and similarly for ue. We conclude that we need to prove that F e(ue) ≤ lim inf j→∞ F e(ue j). Pick first a subsequence (not relabeled) that gives this limit, and then by Theorem 2.3 and Corollary 2.4 we can pick a further sub- sequence (not relabeled) such that the sequence Due j generates a generalized Young measure ν = (νx, λν, ν∞ x ), with respect to µe. Clearly λν(∂Ω′) = 0, and then the barycenter of ν is Due, see the discussion after (2.7). Note that for any fixed x ∈ Ω, F e(x, ·) ∈ R(Ω, RN ×n) ∩ Q(RN ×n), so that we can apply Corollary 4.3 to obtain lim inf j→∞ F e(ue j) =ZΩ′ F e(cid:18)x, hF e(x, ·), νxi dµe +ZΩ′ dµe (cid:19) dµe +ZΩ′ (F e)∞(cid:18)x, dDue ≥ZΩ′ = F e(ue). h(F e)∞(x, ·), ν∞ x i dλν(x) dDs,µeue dDs,µeue(cid:19) dDs,µe ue References [1] G. Alberti, Rank one property for derivatives of functions with bounded variation, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 123 (1993), no. 2, 239 -- 274. [2] J. J. Alibert and G. Bouchitt´e, Non-uniform integrability and gen- eralized Young measures, J. Convex Anal. 4 (1997), no. 1, 129 -- 147. 28 [3] L. Ambrosio, G. Buttazzo, and I. Fonseca, Lower semicontinuity problems in Sobolev spaces with respect to a measure, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 75 (1996), no. 3, 211 -- 224. [4] L. Ambrosio and G. Dal Maso, On the relaxation in BV(Ω; Rm) of quasi-convex integrals, J. Funct. Anal. 109 (1992), no. 1, 76 -- 97. [5] L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, and D. Pallara, Functions of bounded vari- ation and free discontinuity problems, Oxford Mathematical Mono- graphs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000. xviii+434 pp. [6] J. Ball, B. Kirchheim, and J. Kristensen, Regularity of quasiconvex envelopes, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 11 (2000), no. 4, 333 -- 359. [7] B. Dacorogna, Direct methods in the calculus of variations, Second edition. Applied Mathematical Sciences, 78. Springer, New York, 2008. xii+619 pp. [8] R. J. DiPerna and A. J. Majda, Oscillations and concentrations in weak solutions of the incompressible fluid equations, Comm. Math. Phys. 108 (1987), no. 4, 667 -- 689. [9] L. Evans and R. Gariepy, Measure theory and fine properties of functions, Studies in Advanced Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1992. viii+268 pp. [10] I. Fonseca and S. Muller, Relaxation of quasiconvex functionals in BV(Ω, Rp) for integrands f (x, u, ∇u), Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 123 (1993), no. 1, 1 -- 49. [11] H. Hakkarainen, J. Kinnunen, P. Lahti, and P. Lehtela, Relaxation and integral representation for functionals of linear growth on met- ric measures spaces, preprint 2014. [12] B. Kirchheim and J. Kristensen, On Rank-One Convex Functions that are homogeneous of Degree One, preprint 2015. [13] J. Kristensen, Lower semicontinuity in spaces of weakly differen- tiable functions, Math. Ann. 313 (1999), no. 4, 653710. [14] J. Kristensen and F. Rindler, Characterization of generalized gradi- ent Young measures generated by sequences in W 1,1 and BV, Arch. 29 Ration. Mech. Anal. 197 (2010), no. 2, 539 -- 598. Erratum, Ibid. 203 (2012), 693 -- 700. [15] J. Kristensen and F. Rindler, Relaxation of signed integral func- tionals in BV, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 37 (2010), no. 1-2, 29 -- 62. [16] S. Muller, On quasiconvex functions which are homogeneous of de- gree 1, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 41 (1992), no. 1, 295 -- 301. [17] Y. G. Reshetnyak, The weak convergence of completely additive vector-valued set functions, Sibirsk. Mat. J. 9 1968, 1386 -- 1394. [18] F. Rindler, Lower semicontinuity and Young measures in BV with- out Alberti's rank-one theorem, Adv. Calc. Var. 5 2012, no. 2, 127 -- 159. [19] W.P. Ziemer, Weakly differentiable functions. Sobolev spaces and functions of bounded variation Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 120. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989. 30
1501.00785	1	1501	2015-01-05T08:38:43	s-Numbers sequences for homogeneous polynomials	[ "math.FA" ]	We extend the well known theory of $s$-numbers of linear operators to homogeneous polynomials defined between Banach spaces. Approximation, Kolmogorov and Gelfand numbers of polynomials are introduced and some well-known results of the linear and multilinear settings are obtained for homogeneous polynomials.	math.FA	math	S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ERHAN C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND PILAR RUEDA Abstract. We extend the well known theory of s-numbers of linear operators to ho- mogeneous polynomials defined between Banach spaces. Approximation, Kolmogorov and Gelfand numbers of polynomials are introduced and some well-known results of the linear and multilinear settings are obtained for homogeneous polynomials. 1. Introduction A. Pietsch [18] introduced s-numbers as a tool for the study of linear operators between Banach spaces. The success of the linear operator theory gave rise to consider a multilinear and polynomial analogue that was proposed firstly by A. Pietsch and followed by many researchers in the last decades (see [8] and the references therein). The theory of s-numbers of multilinear operators among Banach spaces has been recently developed by D. L. Fernandez, M. Mastylo and E. B. da Silva [13]. While the properties of s-numbers of linear operators are well-known, the analogous theory of homogeneous polynomials has not been checked as far as it should have been. We mention only the particular case by A. Brauns, H. Junek and E. Plewnia [6] and the unpublished [7]. The aim of this paper is to elaborate the corresponding theory of s-numbers in the context of homogeneous polynomials. It is worth mentioning that in many situations dealing with polynomials instead of multilinear mappings has proved to be a subtle subject that has needed different approaches and that has yielded to different results. For instance, when trying to generalize absolutely summing operators to a non linear context, different approaches have been required, and whereas factorization theorems have been stated in the multilinear case, the search for a factorization scheme for dom- inated polynomials has turned out to be difficult and only partial results have been obtained (see [2, 3, 4]. The main purpose of the present paper is to undertake a study of the basics on s-number sequences for polynomials, that include: approximation numbers an and their relation with the adjoint and the biadjoint of a homogeneous Date: July 13, 2021. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 46G20; Secondary 46B28, 46G25. Key words and phrases. Banach spaces, homogeneous polynomials, s-numbers, approximation, Kol- mogorov, Gelfand numbers, the measure of of non-compactness. The second author was supported by MICINN MTM2011-22417. 1 2 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA polynomial introduced by Aron and Schottenloher; Kuratowski and Hausdorff mea- sures of non-compactness of homogeneous polynomials; Kolmogorov numbers dn and their relation with the approximation numbers; Gelfand numbers cn, the equivalence between P being compact and limn→∞ cn(P ) = 0 and their relation with Kolmogorov numbers. Some of the proofs we present are inspired by the linear/multilinear ones, whereas other use techniques from polynomial theory. Our aim is to present the theory from the point of view of polynomials and relate it to the linear or multilinear case with linearization techniques that will provide shorter proofs than coming from the classical theory. Furthermore, the results obtained for homogeneous polynomials can be considered extensions of the linear ones. Section 2 is devoted to fix notation and state some basic definitions and preliminary results. In a quite natural way, we introduce the notion of m−s-number sequence for m- homogeneous polynomials and relate it with the classical s-number sequences of linear operators. Section 3 contains the essentials of the n-th approximation number an(P ) of an homogeneous polynomial P and its coincidence with the n-th approximation number of the adjoint P ∗ of P in the sense of [1]. Compactness of homogeneous polynomials is treated in Section 4 by means of Kuratowski and Hausdorff measures γ and γ respectively. We prove that γ(P ) ≤ γ(P ∗) and γ(P ∗) ≤ γ(P ) among other inequalities. As an application, we recover the well-known result that a homogeneous polynomial is compact if and only if its adjoint is compact. As an attempt to quantify the non compactness character of a polynomial, we study the polynomial notion of Kolmogorov numbers dn and the polynomial m-lifting property. In particular we prove that dn(P ) = dn(PL), where PL is the linearization of an m-homogeneous polynomial P defined on a Banach space X. Moreover, dn(P ) = an(P Q), where Q is the canonical metric surjection from ℓ1(BX) onto X defined by Q({λx}) = Px∈BX λxx, {λx} ∈ l1(BX). Finally, we deal with Gelfand's numbers cn adapted to the polynomial context. We obtain characterizations of compactness of homogeneous polynomials, this time, in terms of Gelfand numbers, and we prove that cn(P ∗) ≤ dn(P ), cn(P ) = dn(P ∗) and cn(P ) ≤ 2√ncn(P ∗). 2. Notation and preliminaries The symbol K represents the field of all real numbers or complex numbers, N repre- sents the set of all positive integers. S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 3 The letters X, Y and Z will always represent (real or complex) Banach spaces. The symbol BX represents the open unit ball of X and BX the closed unit ball. We denote by X ∗ the dual Banach space of X, and by κX the canonical embedding of X into the bidual X ∗∗ of X. + n=1 Given a subset C ⊂ X, let Γ(C) denote the closed balanced convex hull of C. Let 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, with the conjugate index p′ given by 1 p′ = 1 (where p′ = 1 if p = ∞), let ℓp(X) (1 ≤ p < ∞) (resp., ℓ∞(X)) denote the set of all sequences (xn)∞ kxnkp < ∞ (resp., (xn)n is bounded), and let c0(X) denote the set in X such that n=1 in X such that xn −→ 0 in X. of all sequences (xn)∞ ∞X 1 p n=1 m times {z } Y , defined by P (x) = A(x, . . . , x Given a continuous m-linear mapping A : X × ··· × X → Y , the map P : X −→ ) for every x ∈ X, is said to be a continuous m- homogeneous polynomial. P(mX; Y ) will denote the vector space of all continuous m- homogeneous polynomials from X into Y , which is a Banach space with norm kPk = sup{kP (x)k : kxk ≤ 1}. When Y = K we will write P(mX) instead of P(mX; K) and when m = 1, L(X; Y ) := P(1X; Y ) is the space of all continuous linear operators from X to Y . Let P m := SX,Y P(mX; Y ), that is, P m is the class of all m-homogeneous polynomials defined between Banach spaces. Denote by P := Sm P m the class of all continuous homogeneous polynomials defined between Banach spaces. Let P ∈ P(mX; Y ). We define the rank of P as the dimension of the linear span of P (X) in Y : rank(P ) = dim([P (X)]). In a natural way, we introduce the notion of an m − s-number sequence for m- homogeneous continuous polynomials. Let m ∈ N and for each n ∈ N let sn : P m −→ [0,∞) be a mapping. The sequence s = (sn) is called an m − s-number sequence if the following conditions are satisfied for any n, k ∈ N: (S1) Monotonicity: For every P ∈ P(mX; Y ), sn(SP T ) ≤ kSksn(P )kTkm. (S4) Rank-property: Let P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Furthermore, if m = 1 the following condition has to be added: rank(P ) < n =⇒ sn(P ) = 0. kPk = s1(P ) ≥ s2(P ) ≥ . . . ≥ 0. (S2) Additivity: For every P, Q ∈ P(mX; Y ), sk+n−1(P + Q) ≤ sk(P ) + sn(Q). (S3) Ideal-property: For every P ∈ P(mX; Y ), S ∈ L(Y ; Z), T ∈ L(W ; X) 4 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA (S5) Norming-property: sn(Id : ℓn mapping on the n-dimensional Hilbert space ℓn 2 . 2 → ℓn 2 ) = 1, n ∈ N, where Id is the identity If (sn) is an m− s-number sequence for each m ∈ N, then (sn) is called an s-number sequence. Note that this notion coincides with the usual notion of s-number sequence for linear operators whenever m = 1. Given P ∈ P(mX; Y ), let PL denote the linearization of P ; that is the unique con- tinuous linear operator PL : ⊗πs m,sX → Y such that P (x) = PL(⊗mx). The correspon- dence P ↔ PL determines an isometric isomorphism -- denoted by ImX,Y -- between P(mX; Y ) and the space L(⊗πs m,sX to Y . Let Im : P m −→ L and I : P → L be the correspondences whose restrictions to each component P(mX; Y ) is equal to ImX,Y . m,sX → ⊗πs m,sX; Y ) of all continuous linear operators from ⊗πs If T ∈ L(X; Y ), let ⊗m,sT : ⊗πs m,sY be the continuous linear map given by ⊗m,sT (⊗mx) = ⊗mT (x). Our first interest is to relate the linear and the polynomial notions of s-number sequences. Proposition 2.1. If the mapping s = (sn) : L −→ [0,∞)N is an s-number sequence (in the linear sense) then, s ◦ Im : P m −→ [0,∞)N is an m − s-number sequence. Proof. We will pay attention just to the ideal property. This property follows from the fact that (SP T )L = SPL ⊗m,s T and k ⊗m,s Tk = kTkm, for all P ∈ P(mX; Y ), T ∈ L(W ; X) and S ∈ L(Y ; Z). (cid:3) Injectivity, surjectivity and multiplicativity have been proved useful tools for s- number sequences. Let us extend these properties to the polynomial context. (J) An m−s-number sequence s = (sn) is called injective if given any metric injection j ∈ L(Y ; Z), i.e., kj(y)k = kyk for all y ∈ Y , sn(P ) = sn(jP ) for all P ∈ P(mX; Y ) and for all Banach spaces X. (S) An m − s-number sequence s = (sn) is called surjective if given any metric surjection q ∈ L(Z; X), i.e., q(BZ ) = BX , sn(P ) = sn(P q) for all P ∈ P(mX; Y ). (M ) An s-number sequence s = (sn) is called multiplicative if, for u ∈ L(Y ; Z) and P ∈ P(mX; Y ), sk+n−1(u ◦ P ) ≤ sk(u)sn(P ), k, n ∈ N. Proposition 2.2. Let s = (sn) : L −→ [0,∞)N be an s-number sequence for linear operators. S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 5 (1) If s is injective then s ◦ Im is injective. (2) If s is surjective then, s ◦ Im is surjective. (3) If s is multiplicative then s ◦ Im is multiplicative. Proof. (1) Let j ∈ L(Y ; Z) be a metric injection and P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Then, sn ◦ Im(P ) = sn(PL) = sn(j ◦ PL) = sn((j ◦ P )L) = sn ◦ Im(j ◦ P ). (2) Let q ∈ L(Z; X) be a metric surjection and P ∈ P(mX; Y ). If ⊗q : ⊗πs ⊗πs m,sX denotes the linear map given by ⊗q(⊗x) := ⊗q(x), then ⊗ q(B⊗ m,sBX) = B⊗ Hence, for any P ∈ P(mX; Y ) and any metric surjection q ∈ L(Z; X) we have m,sq(BZ )) = Γ(⊗πs m,sZ ) = ⊗q(Γ(⊗πs m,sBZ)) = Γ(⊗πs πs m,sZ −→ πs m,sX. sn ◦ Im(P ◦ q) = sn((P ◦ q)L) = sn(PL ◦ ⊗q) = sn(PL) = sn ◦ Im(P ). (3) Let u ∈ L(Y ; Z) and P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Then, sk+n−1 ◦ Im(u ◦ P ) = sk+n−1((u ◦ P )L) = sn+k−1(u ◦ PL) ≤ sk(u)sn(PL) = sk ◦ Im(u)sn ◦ Im(P ). (cid:3) The theory of ideals of homogeneous polynomials between Banach spaces has been developed in the last decades by several authors, so the extension of the dual procedure to polynomial ideals is a natural step. In this paper we provide many results on homogeneous polynomials in connection with their adjoint concerning measure of non- compactness and s-numbers. First we need the definition of the adjoint of a continuous homogeneous polynomial. Definition 2.3. (Aron -- Schottenloher [1]) Given a continuous m-homogeneous poly- nomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) between the Banach spaces X and Y , the adjoint of P is the following continuous linear operator: P ∗ : Y ∗ −→ P(mX) , P ∗(ϕ)(x) = ϕ(P (x)). It is clear that kP ∗k = kPk. After this definition by R. Aron and M. Schottenloher, and after the works of R. Ryan [21, 22], the adjoint of a polynomial became a standard tool in the study of spaces of homogeneous polynomials and in infinite dimensional holomorphy (see, e.g. [9, 10, 17] and references therein). We refer to [9] or [16] for the properties of polynomials in infinite dimensional spaces, and to [15] for the theory of Banach spaces. 3. Approximation numbers of homogeneous polynomials Similar to the linear case we define the n-th approximation number an(P ) of any homogeneous polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) by 6 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA an(P ) := inf{kP − Qk : Q ∈ P(mX; Y ), rank(Q) < n}. If we denote an(T ) := inf{kT − Lk : L ∈ L(X; Y ), rank(L) < n}, T ∈ L(X; Y ), then an(P ) = an(PL). If a = (an) is an s-number sequence on L, Proposition 2.1 gives that a = a ◦ Im is an m − s-number sequence on P m. Therefore, a = a ◦ I is an s-number sequence. Proposition 3.1. Let (sn) : P(mX; Y ) −→ [0,∞)N be an s-number sequence. Then (i) For all P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have sn(P ) ≤ an(P ), n ∈ N. (ii) For all S ∈ L(Y ; Z), P ∈ P(mX; Y ) and all k, n ∈ N we have sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ s1(S)an(P ) and sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ ak(S)sn(P ). Proof. (i) Let P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Then for any R ∈ P(mX; Y ) with rank(R) < n, we have sn(P ) ≤ s1(P − R) + sn(R) = kP − Rk + sn(R) = kP − Rk. Hence, by definition of an(P ) we have sn(P ) ≤ an(P ). (ii) Let R ∈ P(mX; Y ) with rank(R) < n. Since rank(SR) < n, it follows that sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ sk(S(P − R)) + sn(SR) = sk(S(P − R)) ≤ kSksk(P − R)kIXkm ≤ kSks1(P − R) = kSkkP − Rk. Hence by definition of (an) we get sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ s1(S)an(P ). The proof of the second inequality can be obtained in a similar way. (cid:3) Remark 3.2. If P ∈ P(mX; Y ) has finite rank then PL has finite rank. Hence, rank(P ) = rank(PL) = rank((PL)∗) = rank(ImX,K ◦ P ∗) = rank(P ∗). It is worth mentioning that our use of polynomial techniques allows us to reduce to the linear case many proofs instead of adapting all calculations to the new setting. Proposition 3.3. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. For every polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have an(P ∗) ≤ an(P ), n ∈ N. Furthermore, if there exists a linear projection π of norm 1 from Y ∗∗ onto κY (Y ) then, for every P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have that an(P ∗) = an(P ), n ∈ N. Proof. Since ImX,K is an isometric isomorphism, it follows from, e.g., [19, p. 152, 11.7.3. Proposition] that an(P ∗) = an(ImX,K ◦ P ∗) = an((PL)∗) ≤ an(PL) = an(P ). For the second assertion, we use the analogous property for linear operators [13, Proposition 3.3] to get that an(P ) = an(PL) = an(P ∗ L) = an(ImX,K ◦ P ∗) = an(P ∗). (cid:3) S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 7 Remark 3.4. The technique we have used in this section makes use of the linearization of continuous homogeneous polynomials. A similar technique works for continuous m- linear mappings. For each integer m ∈ N, let L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) be the Banach space of all continuous m-linear mappings A : X1× . . .× Xm 7−→ Y , endowed with the sup norm kAk = sup{kA(x1, . . . , xm)k : kxik ≤ 1, i = 1, . . . , m}. If T ∈ L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) there is a unique continuous linear operator TL ∈ L(X1 ⊗π ··· ⊗πXm; Y ) such that TL(x1 ⊗ . . . ⊗ xm) = T (x1, . . . , xm), and the correspondence T ↔ TL determines an isometric isomorphism between L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) and L(X1 ⊗π ··· ⊗πXm; Y ). This could yield to alternative proofs in [13] based in the well-known linear case. 4. Compactness of homogeneous polynomials The results in this section shows that the natural extensions of Kuratowski and Hausdoff measures to polynomials keeps the harmony between linear and non linear theory. Let X be a metric space. The Kuratowski measure α(A) of non-compactness of a bounded set A ⊂ X is defined by α(A) = inf{ε > 0 : A may be covered by finitely many sets of diameter ≤ ε}. In case that we consider just finitely many balls of radius ≤ ε to cover A, the infimum is called the Hausdorff ball measure β(A) of non-compactness of A, that is β(A) = inf{ε > 0 : A may be covered by finitely many balls of radius ≤ ε}. For every bounded set A we have that β(A) ≤ α(A) ≤ 2β(A). Let X and Y be Banach spaces. Since continuous m-homogeneous polynomials are bounded on bounded sets, we can extend the Kuratowski, and the Hausdorff measure of non-compactness of linear operators to polynomials in a natural way: for any P ∈ P(mX; Y ) the Kuratowski and the Hausdorff measure, respectively, of non-compactness of P is defined by γ(P ) := α(P (BX )) and eγ(P ) := β(P (B X)) Note that P is compact if and only if eγ(P ) = γ(P ) = 0. Remark 4.1. (see [11, Theorem 2.9]) Suppose X and Y are Banach spaces and let T ∈ L(X; Y ). Then γ(T ) ≤ eγ(T ∗) and γ(T ∗) ≤ eγ(T ). Lemma 4.2. Let X be a Banach space. Then β(C) = β(Γ(C)) for any C ⊂ X. In particular, β(Γ(P (BX ))) = γ(P ). 8 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA Proof. Let ǫ, δ > 0. It suffices to be shown that if C can be covered by finitely many balls of radius ǫ then, Γ(C) can be covered by finitely many balls of radius δ + ǫ. Assume that there are x1, . . . , xN ∈ X such that C ⊂ ∪N i=1xi + ǫBX . Take i, j ∈ α + β = 1} is compact, there are i,j + δBX ). If xi ∈ xi + ǫBX, xj ∈ xj + ǫBX {1, . . . , N}. Since the set Ci,j := {αxi + βxj : i,j, . . . , zLi,j z1 and k ∈ {1, . . . , Li,j} is such that αxi + βxj ∈ zk i,j ∈ X such that Ci,j ⊂ ∪Li,j k=1(zk kαxi + β xj − zk i,j + δBX then, i,jk ≤ αkxi − xik + kαxi + βxj − zk i,jk + βkxj − xjk ≤ αǫ + δ + βǫ = δ + ǫ. i=1xi + ǫBX ) ⊂ ∪N Hence, Γ(∪N Consider the m-homogeneous polynomial J : X −→ P(mX)∗ given by J(x)(B) := B(x), x ∈ X, B ∈ P(mX). Since P ∗∗◦J = κY ◦P , the following theorem can be proved also with similar techniques to the ones given in [13, Theorem 2.1]. However, we will i,j + (δ + ǫ)BX) ⊂ ∪N i,j + (δ + ǫ)BX). (cid:3) i,j=1(∪ i,j=1(∪ Li,j k=1zk Li,j k=1zk use polynomial techniques related to tensor products to show that the polynomial case admits shorter proofs. Theorem 4.3. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. Then (1) γ(P ) ≤ eγ(P ∗) and γ(P ∗) ≤ eγ(P ), (2) 1 2 γ(P ) ≤ γ(P ∗) ≤ 2γ(P ) and 1 2eγ(P ) ≤ eγ(P ∗) ≤ 2eγ(P ). for every P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Proof. (1) Since PL(B⊗ πs m,sX ) = PL(Γ(⊗m,sBX)) = Γ(PL(⊗m,sBX)) = Γ(P (BX )), γ(PL) = α(PL(B⊗ πs m,sX )) ≥ α(P (BX )) = γ(P ). we obtain Then, γ(P ) ≤ γ(PL) ≤ γ(P ∗ L) = γ(ImX,K ◦ P ∗ L) = γ(P ∗), where the first equality follows from being ImX,K an isometric isomorphism. Now Lemma 4.2 gives that γ(P ∗) = γ(ImX,K ◦ P ∗ (2) By using part (1), L) = γ(P ∗ L) ≤ γ(PL) = β(PL(B⊗ πs m,sX)) = β(Γ(P (BX ))) = γ(P ). 1 2 γ(P ) ≤ 1 2eγ(P ∗) = 1 2 β(P ∗(BY ∗)) ≤ 1 ≤ eγ(P ) = β(P (BX )) ≤ α(P (BX )) ≤ 2α(P (B X)) = 2γ(P ), 2 α(P ∗(BY ∗)) ≤ α(P ∗(BY ∗)) = γ(P ∗) S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS and 1 2eγ(P ) = 1 2 β(P (B X)) ≤ 1 2 α(P (B X)) = 1 2 γ(P ) ≤ 1 2eγ(P ∗) ≤ eγ(P ∗) = β(P ∗(BY ∗)) ≤ α(P ∗(BY ∗)) = γ(P ∗) ≤ eγ(P ) ≤ 2eγ(P ). 9 (cid:3) As a consequence, we get R. Aron and M. Schottenloher result on compactness of polynomials: Corollary 4.4. [1, Proposition 3.6] Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. Then for every homogeneous polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have that P is compact if and only if its adjoint P ∗ is compact. The next result generalizes [12, Proposition 2] (see [13, Theorem 3.1] for the multi- linear case). Proposition 4.5. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. Then an(P ) ≤ an(P ∗∗) + 2eγ(P ) for all n ∈ N and all P ∈ P(mX; Y ). Proof. an(P ) = an(PL) ≤ an(P ∗∗ I ∗ mX,K) + 2γ(P ) = an(P ∗∗) + 2γ(P ). L ) + 2γ(PL) = an((ImX,K ◦ P ∗)∗) + 2γ(P ) = an(P ∗∗ ◦ (cid:3) Corollary 4.6. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. (1) If P ∈ P(mX; Y ) is a compact operator, then an(P ) = an(P ∗) for every n ∈ N. (2) For every P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have that an(P ) ≤ 5an(P ∗), n ∈ N. Proof. (1) Since P ∗ is a linear continuous operator between Banach spaces, we have an(P ∗∗) ≤ an(P ∗) (see, e.g., [19, p. 152, 11.7.3. Proposition]). If P is compact, then eγ(P ) = 0 and hence, by Theorem 4.5 and Proposition 3.3, we get an(P ) ≤ an(P ∗∗) + 2eγ(P ) = an(P ∗∗) ≤ an(P ∗) ≤ an(P ). (2) an(P ) = an(PL) ≤ 5an(P ∗ L) = 5an(ImX,K ◦ P ∗) = 5an(P ∗). (cid:3) An alternative proof follows from the well known fact that P is compact if and only if PL is compact (see [21]) and the corresponding property for linear operators, that is, an(P ) = an(PL) = an(P ∗ L) = an(I ◦ P ∗) = an(P ∗), for all n ∈ N. Let P ∈ P(mX; Y ). The quantity a(P ) := lim an(P ) ≥ 0 does not help when trying to measure the compactness of P . Even if P is approximable (and so compact) whenever n→∞ a(P ) = 0 the converse is, in general, not true. If we consider the approximation property (shortly, AP) on Y , then any compact m-homogeneous polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) 10 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA can be approximated by finite-rank m-homogeneous polynomials (see [5, Proposition 2.5]). Hence, similarly to the (multi)linear case, if the space Y has the AP, then P ∈ P(mX; Y ) is compact if and only if a(P ) = 0. However, by [1, Proposition 3.3] (see also [17, Theorem 4.3]) we know that P(mX) has the AP if and only if, for every Banach space Y , the space of all finite-rank polynomials Pf (mX; Y ) is norm-dense in the space of all compact polynomials Pk(mX; Y ), or equivalently, any compact m- homogeneous polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) can be approximated arbitrarily and closely by finite-rank m-homogeneous polynomials. Therefore if the space P(mX) has the AP, then P ∈ P(mX; Y ) is compact if and only if a(P ) = 0. Let us remark that, there is a reflexive separable Banach space X with basis such that P(2X) does not have the AP (see [1]). Hence, for this space X, which has the AP, there is a Banach space Y such that there is a compact polynomial P : X −→ Y which cannot be approximated by finite-rank polynomials. Note that it turns out that this space Y also cannot have the AP by [5, Proposition 2.5]. As in the (multi-)linear case, we use Kolmogorov numbers to measure how far a polynomial is from being compact. We define the n-th Kolmogorov number dn(P ) of a polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) by dn(P ) := inf{ε > 0 : P (BX) ⊂ Nε + εBY , Nε ⊂ Y, dim(Nε) < n}. For P := T ∈ L(X; Y ) we write dn(T ) := edn(P ). Kolmogorov numbers are related to approximation numbers via the equality dn(T ) = an(T Q) , n ∈ N, T ∈ L(X; Y ). Recall that Q is the canonical metric surjection from l1(BX) onto X, defined by Q({λx}) = X x∈BX λxx, {λx} ∈ l1(BX) (see [19, p. 150-151], and for the multilinear case see [13, Theorem 4.1].) To get the polynomial version of this result we will use the next proposition and the study of the lifting property for polynomials by Gonz´alez and Guti´errez [14]. πs Proposition 4.7. Given P ∈ P(mX; Y ), dn(P ) = dn(PL). Proof. Clearly dn(P ) ≤ dn(PL). On the other hand, if P (BX) ⊂ Nǫ + ǫBY then PL(B⊗ m,sX ) = Γ(P (BX )) ⊂ Γ(Nǫ + ǫBY ) = Nǫ + ǫBY ⊂ Nǫ + (ǫ + δ)B Y for all δ > 0. Hence, dn(PL) ≤ ǫ + δ for all δ > 0 and so, dn(PL) ≤ dn(P ). As in the linear case, P ∈ P(mX; Y ) is compact if and only if d(P ) := lim dn(P ) = 0. Also it is obvious that dn(P ) = 0 whenever rank(P ) < n. Propositions 2.1 and 4.7 n→∞ (cid:3) S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 11 imply that dn = dn ◦ I forms an s-number sequence. Proposition 3.1 implies that dn(P ) ≤ an(P ), for every n ∈ N and Proposition 2.2 gives that ( dn) is a surjective s-number sequence. Let m ∈ N and let X be a Banach space. We say that X has the polynomial m-lifting property if, for every continuous m-homogenous polynomial P from X to any quotient space Y /N , there is eP ∈ P(mX; Y ) such that P = QY N denotes the canonical map of Y onto the quotient space Y /N . We say that X has N eP , where QY the polynomial metric m-lifting property if, for every ε > 0 and every continuous m- homogenous polynomial P from X to any quotient space Y /N , there is eP ∈ P(mX; Y ) such that P = QY N eP and kePk ≤ (1 + ε)kPk. Proposition 4.8. Let m ∈ N. A Banach space X has the polynomial (metric) m-lifting property if, and only if, ⊗πs m,sX has the (respectively, metric) lifting property. Proof. Assume first that X has the polynomial m-lifting property. Let T be a continu- m,sX into some quotient space Y /N . Let P ∈ P(mX; Y /N ) N ◦ P = P . N ◦ ( P )L ◦ δX = P , where δX is the m-homogeneous polynomial from X to m,sX ous linear operator from ⊗πs be such that PL = T . By assumption, there is P ∈ P(mX; Y ) such that QY Since QY ⊗πs m,sX given by δX (x) = x ⊗ ··· ⊗ x (see [21]), then QY has the lifting property. N ◦ ( P )L = PL = T and ⊗πs m,sX; Y /N ). By assumption, there is fPL ∈ L( ⊗πs m,sX has the lifting property. Let P ∈ P(mX; Y /N ). Then N ◦fPL = m,sX; Y ) such that QY We now assume that ⊗πs PL ∈ L( ⊗πs PL. Then eP := fPL ◦ δX satisfies P = QY N ◦ eP . The metric case follows from the fact that kPk = kPLk. (cid:3) As a consequence, if X has the polynomial metric m-lifting property, then for every P ∈ P(mX; Y ) we have dn(P ) = dn(PL) = an(PL) = an(P ), for all n ∈ N. Theorem 4.9. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. Let P ∈ P(mX; Y ), and let Q be the canonical metric surjection from l1(BX) onto X. Then we have that dn(P ) = an(P Q) , n ∈ N. Proof. By [14, Theorem 1] l1(BX) has the polynomial metric lifting property and so, from Proposition 4.8 ⊗πs m,sl1(BX) has the metric lifting property. Then, dn(PL◦⊗mQ) = an(PL ◦ ⊗mQ). Using that (dn) is surjective we get dn(P ) = dn(PL) = dn(PL ◦ ⊗mQ) = an(PL ◦⊗mQ) = an((P ◦ Q)L) = an(P ◦ Q). (cid:3) 12 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA Note that ( dn) is the largest surjective s-number sequence. Indeed, given any surjec- tive s-number sequence (sn), then for the canonical metric surjection Q ∈ L(l1(BX); X) we have, by Theorem 4.9, that for any P ∈ P(mX; Y ) sn(P ) = sn(P Q) ≤ an(P Q) = dn(P ). By Propositions 2.2 and 4.7, ( dn) is multiplicative. As a consequence for any surjective and multiplicative s-number sequence the following estimate holds for all S ∈ L(Y ; Z) and all P ∈ P(mX; Y ): sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ sk(S) dn(P ), k, n ∈ N, In fact, Theorem 4.9 yields sk+n−1(SP ) = sk+n−1(SP Q) ≤ sk(S)sn(P Q) ≤ sk(S)an(P Q) = sk(S) dn(P ). We end the paper with another example of s-number of homogeneous polynomi- als, namely, Gelfand numbers, from which we will get alternative characterizations of compactness of homogeneous polynomials. Motivated by [19, 11.5.1. Proposition] we define the Gelfand numbers cn(P ) of an m-homogeneous polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) by cn(P ) := an(κY P ). Clearly (cn) is an s-number sequence since (an) is an s-number sequence, and for each n ∈ N we have that cn(P ) ≤ an(P ). We will just write cn(T ) := cn(P ) whenever P = T ∈ L(X; Y ). Note that cn(P ) = cn(PL) for any P ∈ P(mX; Y ). It follows from Proposition 2.2 that (cn) is the largest injective s-number sequence, and satisfies the multiplicavity property (M). We also have a polynomial version of Carl's mixing multiplicavity of an injective s-number sequence (sn), that is, for all S ∈ L(Y ; Z) and P ∈ P(mX; Y ), using Proposition 3.1 we get that sk+n−1(SP ) ≤ ck(S)sn(P ), k, n ∈ N. cn(P ), Considering the function c : P(mX; Y ) −→ [0,∞) given by c(P ) := lim n−→∞ we have that c(P ) = c(PL). Now, compactness of homogeneous polynomials can be quantified by means c and c as follows. Proposition 4.10. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. The following statements for a polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) are equivalent. (i) P is compact. (ii) c(P ) = 0. (iii) c(P ∗) = 0. S-NUMBERS SEQUENCES FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 13 Proof. We know that P is compact if and only if PL is compact (see [21]), and P is compact if and only if P ∗ is compact (see [1] or Corollary 4.4). Combining these facts with [20, 2.4.11] we get the implications (i) ⇐⇒ (ii), and (i) ⇐⇒ (iii). (cid:3) Finally, following the lines of proof of [13, Theorem 5.1] we get the following result, whose proof is omitted, which gives relation between Gelfand and Kolmogorov numbers of polynomials. Theorem 4.11. Let m ≥ 2 and let X and Y be Banach spaces. Then, for every polynomial P ∈ P(mX; Y ) and n ∈ N we have that (i) cn(P ∗) ≤ dn(P ), (ii) cn(P ) = dn(P ∗), (iii) cn(P ) ≤ 2√n cn(P ∗). Acknowledgement: The authors are deeply indebted to R. Aron, who proposed the research program on s-numbers for homogeneous polynomials and helped unselfishly to improve the paper. References [1] R. M. Aron, M. Schottenloher: Compact holomorphic mappings on Banach spaces and the approx- imation theory. J. Funct. Anal. 21 (1976), 7 -- 30. [2] G. Botelho, D. Pellegrino, P. Rueda: Pietsch's factorization theorem for dominated polynomials. J. Funct. Anal. 243 (2007), no. 1, 257269. [3] G. Botelho, D. Pellegrino, P. Rueda: Preduals of spaces of homogeneous polynomials on Lp-spaces. Linear Multilinear Algebra 60 (2012), no. 5, 565571. [4] G. Botelho, D. Pellegrino, P. Rueda: On Pietsch measures for summing operators and dominated polynomials. Linear Multilinear Algebra 62 (2014), no. 7, 860 -- 874. [5] G. Botelho, L. Polac: A polynomial Hutton theorem with applications. - J. Math. Anal. Appl. 415 (2014), no. 1, 294 -- 301. [6] H.-A. Braunss, H. Junek, E. Plewnia: Approximation numbers for polynomials. Finite or infinite dimensional complex analysis (Fukuoka, 1999), 3546, Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., 214, Dekker, New York, 2000. [7] A. Brauns, H. Junek: Ideals of polynomials and multilinear mappings. - Unpublished Notes, 2003 [8] B. Carl: On s-numbers, quasi s-numbers, s-moduli and Weyl inequalities of operators in Banach spaces. - Rev. Mat. Complut. 23:2, 2010, 467 -- 487. [9] S. Dineen: Complex Analysis on Infinite Dimensional Spaces. Berlin. Springer Monographs in Math. Springer, 1999. [10] S. Dineen, J. Mujica: The approximation property for spaces of holomorphic functions on infinite dimensional spaces II. - J. Funct. Anal. 259, 2010, 545 -- 560. [11] D. E. Edmunds, W. D. Evans: Spectral theory and differential operators. - Oxford Math. Monogr., Oxford Science Publications, The Clarendon Press, Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1987. [12] D. E. Edmunds, H.-O. Tylli: On the entropy numbers of an operator and its adjoint. - Math. Nachr. 126, 1986, 231 -- 239. [13] D.L. Fernandez, M. Mastylo, E.B. da Silva: Quasi s-numbers and measures of non-compactness of multilinear operators - Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 38, 2013, 805 -- 823. [14] M. Gonz´alez, J. M. Guti´errez: Extension and lifting of polynomials. - Arch. Math. (Basel) 81, 2003, 431-438. 14 E. C¸ ALIS¸KAN AND P. RUEDA [15] J. Lindenstrauss, L. Tzafriri: Classical Banach Spaces I. Sequence spaces. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York. Springer-Verlag 1977. [16] J. Mujica: Complex Analysis In Banach Spaces. Amsterdam. North-Holland Math. Stud. North- Holland 1986. [17] J. Mujica: Spaces of holomorphic functions and the approximation property. - IMI Graduate Lecture Notes-1, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2009 [18] A. Pietsch: s-numbers of operators in Banach spaces. - Studia Math. 51, 1974, 201 -- 223. [19] A. Pietsch: Operator ideals. - North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980. [20] A. Pietsch: Eigenvalues and s-numbers. - Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math. 13, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1987. [21] R. Ryan: Applications of topological tensor products to infinite dimensional holomorphy. Trinity College, Ph.D. Thesis, Dublin, 1980. [22] R. Ryan: Weakly compact holomorphic mappings on Banach spaces. - Pac. J. Math. 131, 1988, 179-190. (E. C¸ alı¸skan) Yıldız Technical University, Faculty of Sciences and Arts, Department of Mathematics, Davutpas¸a, 34210 Esenler, Istanbul, Turkey E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Rueda) Departamento de An´alisis Matem´atico, Universidad de Valencia, Doctor Moliner 50, 46100 Burjasot (Valencia), Spain E-mail address: [email protected]
1404.6479	2	1404	2015-12-16T20:58:59	Fourier multipliers, symbols and nuclearity on compact manifolds	[ "math.FA", "math.AP", "math.SP" ]	The notion of invariant operators, or Fourier multipliers, is discussed for densely defined operators on Hilbert spaces, with respect to a fixed partition of the space into a direct sum of finite dimensional subspaces. As a consequence, given a compact manifold endowed with a positive measure, we introduce a notion of the operator's full symbol adapted to the Fourier analysis relative to a fixed elliptic operator. We give a description of Fourier multipliers, or of operators invariant relative to the elliptic operator. We apply these concepts to study Schatten classes of operators and to obtain a formula for the trace of trace class operators. We also apply it to provide conditions for operators between Lp-spaces to be r-nuclear in the sense of Grothendieck.	math.FA	math	FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Abstract. The notion of invariant operators, or Fourier multipliers, is discussed for densely defined operators on Hilbert spaces, with respect to a fixed partition of the space into a direct sum of finite dimensional subspaces. As a consequence, given a compact manifold M endowed with a positive measure, we introduce a notion of the operator's full symbol adapted to the Fourier analysis relative to a fixed elliptic operator E. We give a description of Fourier multipliers, or of operators invariant relative to E. We apply these concepts to study Schatten classes of operators on L2(M ) and to obtain a formula for the trace of trace class operators. We also apply it to provide conditions for operators between Lp-spaces to be r-nuclear in the sense of Grothendieck. 1. Introduction Let M be a closed manifold (i.e. a compact smooth manifold without bound- ary) of dimension n endowed with a positive measure dx. Given an elliptic positive pseudo-differential operator E of order ν on M, by considering an orthonormal basis consisting of eigenfunctions of E we will associate a discrete Fourier analysis to the operator E in the sense introduced by Seeley ([See65], [See69]). This analysis allows us to introduce further a notion of invariant operators and of matrix-symbols corre- sponding to those operators. The operators on M will be then analysed in terms of the corresponding symbols relative to the operator E. As a general framework, we first discuss invariant operators, or Fourier multipliers in a general Hilbert space H. This notion is based on a partition of H into a direct sum of finite dimensional subspaces, so that a densely defined operator on H can be decomposed as acting in these subspaces. There are two main examples of this construction discussed in the paper: operators on H = L2(M) for a compact manifold M as well as operators on H = L2(G) for a compact Lie group G. The difference in approaches to these settings is in the choice of partitions of H into direct sums of subspaces: in the former case they are chosen as eigenspaces of a fixed elliptic pseudo-differential operator on M while in the latter case they are chosen as linear spans of matrix coefficients of inequivalent irreducible unitary representations of G. Date: October 13, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 35S05, 58J40; Secondary 22E30, 47B06, 47B10. Key words and phrases. Compact manifolds, pseudo-differential operators, eigenvalues, Schatten classes, nuclearity, trace formula. The first author was supported by Marie Curie IIF 301599 and by the Leverhulme Grant RPG- 2014-02. The second author was supported by EPSRC grant EP/K039407/1. No new data was collected or generated during the course of the research. 1 2 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY We note that for some results, the self-adjointness and ellipticity of E can be dropped, see [RT15]. We give applications of these notions to the derivation of conditions characterising those invariant operators on L2(M) that belong to Schatten classes. Furthermore, we also give conditions for nuclearity on Lp-spaces and, more generally, for the r- nuclearity of operators. While the theory of r-nuclear operators in general Banach spaces has been developed by Grothendieck [Gro55] with numerous further advances (e.g. in [HP10, Kon78, Olo72, Pie84, RL13]), in this paper we give conditions in terms of symbols for operators to be r-nuclear from Lp1(M) to Lp2(M) for 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞ and 0 < r ≤ 1. Consequently, we determine relations between p1, p2, r and α ensuring that the powers (I + E)−α are r-nuclear. Trace formulas are also obtained relating operator traces to expressions involving their symbols. In the recent work [DR14c] the authors found sufficient conditions for operators to belong to Schatten classes Sp on compact manifolds in terms of their Schwartz integral kernels. For p < 2, it is customary to impose regularity conditions on the kernel because there are counterexamples to conditions formulated only in terms of the integrability of kernels. Such examples go back to Carleman's work [Car16] and their relevance to Schatten classes has been discussed in [DR14b]. A characteristic feature of conditions of this paper is that no regularity is assumed neither on the symbol nor on the kernel. In the case of compact Lie groups, our results extend results on Schatten classes and on r-nuclear operators on Lp spaces that have been obtained in [DR13] and [DR14b]. We show this by relating the symbols introduced in this paper to matrix-valued symbols on compact Lie groups developed in [RT13] and in [RT10]. Schatten classes of pseudo-differential operators in the setting of the Weyl-Hor- mander calculus have been considered in [Tof06], [Tof08], [BN04], [BN07], [BT10]. Conditions for symbols of lower regularity we given in [Sob14]. For the global analysis of pseudo-differential operators on Rn see [BBR96], as well as [NR10, Chapter 4] also for the basic general introduction to Schatten classes. 1 To formulate the notions more precisely, let H be a complex Hilbert space and let T : H → H be a linear compact operator. If we denote by T ∗ : H → H the adjoint of T , then the linear operator (T ∗T ) 2 : H → H is positive and compact. Let (ψk)k be an orthonormal basis for H consisting of eigenvectors of T = (T ∗T ) 2 , and let sk(T ) be the eigenvalue corresponding to the eigenvector ψk, k = 1, 2, . . . . The non- negative numbers sk(T ), k = 1, 2, . . . , are called the singular values of T : H → H. If 0 < p < ∞ and the sequence of singular values is p-summable, then T is said to belong to the Schatten class Sp(H), and it is well known that each Sp(H) is an ideal in L (H). If 1 ≤ p < ∞, a norm is associated to Sp(H) by 1 kT kSp = ∞Xk=1 p (sk(T ))p! 1 . If 1 ≤ p < ∞ the class Sp(H) becomes a Banach space endowed by the norm kT kSp. If p = ∞ we define S∞(H) as the class of bounded linear operators on H, with kT kS∞ := kT kop, the operator norm. For the Schatten class S2 we will sometimes write kT kHS instead of kT kS2. In the case 0 < p < 1 the quantity kT kSp only defines FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 3 a quasi-norm, and Sp(H) is also complete. The space S1(H) is known as the trace class and an element of S2(H) is usually said to be a Hilbert-Schmidt operator. For the basic theory of Schatten classes we refer the reader to [GK69], [RS75], [Sim79], [Sch70]. It is well known that the class S2(L2) is characterised by the square integrability of the corresponding integral kernels, however, kernel estimates of this type are not effective for classes Sp(L2) with p < 2. This is explained by a classical Carleman's example [Car16] on the summability of Fourier coefficients of continuous functions (see [DR14b] for a complete explanation of this fact). This obstruction explains the relevance of symbolic Schatten criteria and here we will clarify the advantage of the symbol approach with respect to this obstruction. With this approach, no regularity of the kernel needs to be assumed. In Section 6 we discuss the relation of our approach to that of the global analysis on compact Lie groups. In particular, in the case of compact Lie groups the Fourier coefficients can be arranged into a (square) matrix rather than in a column leading to several simplifications. On general compact manifolds, this is not possible since the multiplicities dj do not need to be all squares of integers. We introduce ℓp-style norms on the space of symbols Σ, yielding discrete spaces ℓp(Σ) for 0 < p ≤ ∞, normed for p ≥ 1. Denoting by σT the matrix symbol of an invariant operator T provided by Theorem 4.1, Schatten classes of invariant operators on L2(M) can be characterised concisely by conditions and for 0 < p < ∞, T ∈ L (L2(M)) ⇐⇒ σT ∈ ℓ∞(Σ), T ∈ Sp(L2(M)) ⇐⇒ σT ∈ ℓp(Σ), (1.1) (1.2) see (7.4) and (7.5). Here, the condition that T is invariant will mean that T is strongly commuting with E (see Theorem 4.1). On the level of the Fourier transform this means that cT f (ℓ) = σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ) for a family of matrices σ(ℓ), i.e. T assumes the familiar form of a Fourier multiplier. In Section 2 in Theorem 2.1 we discuss the abstract notion of symbol for operators densely defined in a general Hilbert space H, and give several alternative formulations for invariant operators, or for Fourier multipliers, relative to a fixed partition of H into a direct sum of finite dimensional subspaces, H =Mj Hj. Consequently, in Theorem 2.3 we give the necessary and sufficient condition for the bounded extendability of an invariant operator to L (H) in terms of its symbol, and in Theorem 2.5 the necessary and sufficient condition for the operator to be in Schatten classes Sr(H) for 0 < r < ∞, as well as the trace formula for operators in the trace class S1(H) in terms of their symbols. As our subsequent analysis relies to a large extent on properties of elliptic pseudo-differential operators on M, in Sections 3 and 4 we specify this abstract analysis to the setting of operators densely defined on L2(M). The main difference is that we now adopt the Fourier analysis to a 4 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY fixed elliptic positive pseudo-differential operator E on M, contrary to the case of an operator Eo ∈ L (H) in Theorem 2.2. The notion of invariance depends on the choice of the spaces Hj. Thus, in the analysis of operators on M we take Hj's to be the eigenspaces of E. However, other choices are possible. For example, for H = L2(G) for a compact Lie group G, choosing Hj's as linear spans of representation coefficients for inequivalent irreducible unitary representations of G, we make a link to the quantization of pseudo-differential operator on compact Lie groups as in [RT10]. These two partitions coincide when inequivalent representations of G produce distinct eigenvalues of the Laplacian; for example, this is the case for G = SO(3). However, the partitions are different when inequivalent representations produce equal eigenvalues, which is the case, for example, for G = SO(4). For the more explicit example on H = L2(Tn) on the torus see Remark 2.6. A similar choice could be made in other settings producing a discrete spectrum and finite dimensional eigenspaces, for example for operators in Shubin classes on Rn, see Chodosh [Cho11] for the case n = 1. The analogous concept to Schatten classes in the setting of Banach spaces is the It has applications to notion of r-nuclearity introduced by Grothendieck [Gro55]. questions of the distribution of eigenvalues of operators in Banach spaces. In the setting of compact Lie groups these applications have been discussed in [DR14b] and they include conclusions on the distribution or summability of eigenvalues of operators acting on Lp-spaces. Another application is the Grothendieck-Lidskii formula which is the formula for the trace of operators on Lp(M). Once we have r-nuclearity, most of further arguments are then purely functional analytic, so they apply equally well in the present setting of closed manifolds. Because of this we omit the repetition of statements and refer the reader to [DR14b] for further such applications. Some results of this paper have been announced in [DR14a], so here we provide their proofs, including a correction to the formulation of [DR14a, Theorem 3.1, (iv)] given by Theorem 4.1, (iv), of this paper. The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we discuss Fourier multipliers and their symbols in general Hilbert spaces. In Section 3 we associate a global Fourier analysis to an elliptic positive pseudo-differential operator E on a closed manifold M. In Section 4 we introduce the class of operators invariant relative to E as well as their matrix-valued symbols, and apply this to characterise invariant operators in Schatten classes in Section 5. In Section 6 we relate the analysis developed so far to the analysis on compact Lie groups from [RT13], [RT10], and establish formula relating their matrix symbols in the case when M is a compact Lie group. In particular, we will see that left-invariant operators on compact Lie groups are invariant in our sense. In Section 7 we analyse the integral kernels of invariant operators on general closed manifolds. Finally, in Section 8 we apply our analysis to study r-nuclear operators on Lp-spaces. Throughout the paper, we denote N0 = N ∪ {0}. Also δjℓ will denote the Kronecker delta, i.e. δjℓ = 1 for j = ℓ, and δjℓ = 0 for j 6= ℓ. The authors would like to thank V´eronique Fischer, Alexandre Kirilov, and Au- gusto Almeida de Moraes Wagner for comments. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 5 2. Fourier multipliers in Hilbert spaces In this section we present an abstract set up to describe what we will call invariant operators, or Fourier multipliers, acting on a general Hilbert space H. We will give several characterisations of such operators and their symbols. Consequently, we will apply these notions to describe several properties of the operators, in particular, their boundedness on H as well as the Schatten properties. We note that direct integrals (sums in our case) of Hilbert spaces have been inves- tigated in a much greater generality, see e.g. Bruhat [Bru68], Dixmier [Dix96, Ch 2., §2], [Dix77, Appendix]. The setting required for our analysis is much simpler, so we prefer to adapt it specifically for consequent applications, also providing short proofs for our statements. The main application of the constructions below will be in the setting when M is a compact manifold without boundary, H = L2(M) and H∞ = C ∞(M), which will be described in detail in Section 3. However, several facts can be more clearly interpreted in the setting of abstract Hilbert spaces, which will be our set up in this section. With this particular example in mind, in the following theorem, we can think of {ek j } being an orthonormal basis given by eigenfunctions of an elliptic operator on M, and dj the corresponding multiplicities. However, we allow flexibility in grouping the eigenfunctions in order to be able to also cover the case of operators on compact Lie groups. Theorem 2.1. Let H be a complex Hilbert space and let H∞ ⊂ H be a dense linear subspace of H. Let {dj}j∈N0 ⊂ N and let {ek j }j∈N0,1≤k≤dj be an orthonormal basis of H such that ek k=1, and let Pj : H → Hj be the orthogonal projection. For f ∈ H, we denote j ∈ H∞ for all j and k. Let Hj := span{ek j }dj bf (j, k) := (f, ek j )H and let bf (j) ∈ Cdj denote the column of bf (j, k), 1 ≤ k ≤ dj. Let T : H∞ → H be a linear operator. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (A) For each j ∈ N0, we have T (Hj) ⊂ Hj. (B) For each ℓ ∈ N0 there exists a matrix σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ such that for all ek j (C) If in addition, ek j are in the domain of T ∗ for all j and k, then for each ℓ ∈ N0 there exists a matrix σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ such that j (ℓ, m) = σ(ℓ)mkδjℓ. dT ek cT f (ℓ) = σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ) for all f ∈ H∞. The matrices σ(ℓ) in (B) and (C) coincide. The equivalent properties (A) -- (C) follow from the condition (D) For each j ∈ N0, we have T Pj = PjT on H∞. If, in addition, T extends to a bounded operator T ∈ L (H) then (D) is equivalent to (A) -- (C). 6 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Under the assumptions of Theorem 2.1, we have the direct sum decomposition H = Hj, Hj = span{ek j }dj k=1, (2.1) ∞Mj=0 and we have dj = dim Hj. The two applications that we will consider will be with H = L2(M) for a compact manifold M with Hj being the eigenspaces of an elliptic pseudo-differential operator E, or with H = L2(G) for a compact Lie group G with Hj = span{ξkm}1≤k,m≤dξ for a unitary irreducible representation ξ ∈ [ξj] ∈ bG. The difference is that in the first case we will have that the eigenvalues of E corresponding to Hj's are all distinct, while in the second case the eigenvalues of the Laplacian on G for which Hj's are the eigenspaces, may coincide. In Remark 2.6 we give an example of this difference for operators on the torus Tn. In view of properties (A) and (C), respectively, an operator T satisfying any of the equivalent properties (A) -- (C) in Theorem 2.1, will be called an invariant operator, or a Fourier multiplier relative to the decomposition {Hj}j∈N0 in (2.1). If the collection {Hj}j∈N0 is fixed once and for all, we can just say that T is invariant or a Fourier multiplier. The family of matrices σ will be called the matrix symbol of T relative to the partition {Hj} and to the basis {ek j }. It is an element of the space Σ defined by Σ = {σ : N0 ∋ ℓ 7→ σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ}. (2.2) A criterion for the extendability of T to L (H) in terms of its symbol will be given in Theorem 2.3. For f ∈ H, in the notation of Theorem 2.1, by definition we have f = ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)ek j with the convergence of the series in H. Since {ek system on H, for all f ∈ H we have the Plancherel formula j≥0 j }1≤k≤dj is a complete orthonormal (2.3) (2.4) (2.5) ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 kf k2 H = (f, ek j )2 = bf (j, k)2 = kbf k2 where we interpret bf ∈ Σ as an element of the space ∞Xj=0 ℓ2(N0,Σ) = {h : N0 →Yd Cd : h(j) ∈ Cdj and djXk=1 ℓ2(N0,Σ), h(j, k)2 < ∞}, and where we have written h(j, k) = h(j)k. In other words, ℓ2(N0,Σ) is the space of all h ∈ Σ such that ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 h(j, k)2 < ∞. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 7 We endow ℓ2(N0, Σ) with the norm khkℓ2(N0,Σ) := ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 h(j, k)2 1 2 . (2.6) We note that the matrix symbol σ(ℓ) depends not only on the partition (2.1) but also on the choice of the orthonormal basis. Whenever necessary, we will indicate the dependance of σ on the orthonormal basis by writing (σ, {ek ) and we also will refer to (σ, {ek ) as the symbol of T . Throughout this section the orthonormal basis will be fixed and unless there is some risk of confusion the symbols will be denoted simply by σ. In the invariant language, as will be clear from the proof of Theorem 2.1, we have that the transpose of the symbol, σ(j)⊤ = T Hj is just the restriction of T to Hj, which is well defined in view of the property (A). j }1≤k≤dj j }1≤k≤dj j≥0 j≥0 We will also sometimes write Tσ to indicate that Tσ is an operator corresponding to the symbol σ. It is clear from the definition that invariant operators are uniquely determined by their symbols. Indeed, if T = 0 we obtain σ = 0 for any choice of an orthonormal basis. Moreover, we note that by taking j = ℓ in (B) of Theorem 2.1 we obtain the formula for the symbol: (2.7) σ(j)mk =dT ek j (j, m), for all 1 ≤ k, m ≤ dj. The formula (2.7) furnishes an explicit formula for the symbol in terms of the operator and the orthonormal basis. The definition of Fourier coefficients tells us that for invariant operators we have σ(j)mk = (T ek (2.8) j )L2(M ). j , em In particular, for the identity operator T = I we have σI(j) = Idj , where Idj ∈ Cdj ×dj is the identity matrix. Before proving Theorem 2.1, let us establish a formula relating symbols with respect If {eα} and {fα} are orthonormal bases of H, we to different orthonormal basis. consider the unitary operator U determined by U(eα) = fα. Then we have (T eα, eβ)H = (UT eα, Ueβ)H = (UT U ∗Ueα, Ueβ)H = (UT U ∗fα, fβ)H. If (σT , {eα}) denotes the symbol of T with respect to the orthonormal basis {eα} and (σU T U ∗, {fα}) denotes the symbol of UT U ∗ with respect to the orthonormal basis {fα} we have obtained the relation (σT , {eα}) = (σU T U ∗, {fα}). (2.9) Thus, the equivalence relation of basis {eα} ∼ {fα} given by a unitary operator U induces the equivalence relation on the set Σ of symbols given by (2.9). In view of this, we can also think of the symbol as an element of the space Σ/ ∼ with the equivalence relation given by (2.9). We make another remark concerning part (C) of Theorem 2.1. We use the condition that ek j are in the domain Dom(T ∗) of T ∗ in showing the implication (B) =⇒ (C). Since j 's give a basis in H, and are all contained in Dom(T ∗), it follows that Dom(T ∗) ek is dense in H. In particular, by [RS80, Theorem VIII.1], T must be closable (in 8 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY part (C)). These conditions are not restrictive for the further analysis since they are satisfied in the natural applications of this paper. The principal application of the notions above will be as follows, except for in the sequel we will need more general operators E unbounded on H. In order to distinguish from this general case, in the following theorem we use the notation Eo. Theorem 2.2. Continuing with the notation of Theorem 2.1, let Eo ∈ L (H) be a linear continuous operator such that Hj are its eigenspaces: Eoek j = λjek j for each j ∈ N0 and all 1 ≤ k ≤ dj. Then equivalent conditions (A) -- (C) imply the property (E) For each j ∈ N0 and 1 ≤ k ≤ j, we have T Eoek j = EoT ek j , and if λj 6= λℓ for j 6= ℓ, then (E) is equivalent to properties (A) -- (C). Moreover, if T extends to a bounded operator T ∈ L (H) then equivalent properties (A) -- (D) imply the condition (F) T Eo = EoT on H, and if also λj 6= λℓ for j 6= ℓ, then (F) is equivalent to (A) -- (E). For an operator T = F (Eo), when it is well-defined by the spectral calculus, we have (2.10) In fact, this is also well-defined then for a function F defined on λj, with finite values which are e.g. j-uniformly bounded (also for non self-adjoint Eo). We first prove Theorem 2.1. σF (Eo)(j) = F (λj)Idj . Proof of Theorem 2.1. (A) =⇒ (B). If T satisfies condition (A), we consider the ma- trix of T Hj : Hj → Hj with respect to the orthonormal basis {ei j : 1 ≤ i ≤ dj} of Hj and denote it by β(j). Then Consequenlty, we have T ek j = djXi=1 β(j)kiei j. ℓ ) = β(j)kmδjℓ = β(ℓ)kmδjℓ. We take then σ(ℓ) := β(ℓ)⊤; it belongs to Cdℓ×dℓ and satisfies (B). j (ℓ, m) =(T ek j , em (B) =⇒ (A). Since ek j ∈ H∞, writing the series (2.3) for T ek j ∈ H, we have dT ek dℓXm=1dT ek T ek j =Xℓ j (ℓ, m)em σ(ℓ)mkδjℓem ℓ = ℓ =Xℓ dℓXm=1 σ(j)mkem j ∈ Hj. (2.11) dℓXm=1 Since {em j : 1 ≤ m ≤ dj} spans Hj, we obtain (A). (B) =⇒ (C). We assume in addition that ek j are in the domain of T ∗ for all j and k. We also assume that for each ℓ ∈ N0 there exists a matrix σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ such that j (ℓ, m) = σ(ℓ)mkδjℓ. dT ek (2.12) FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 9 Now, if f ∈ H∞, then T f ∈ H, and by the inversion formula (2.3) we have f = ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)ek j . Now, using this and the fact that all em ℓ are in the domain of T ∗, we have j , em j , T ∗em ℓ ) =(f, T ∗em ℓ ) ℓ  ℓ (cid:1) cT f (ℓ, m) =(T f, em = djXk=1 bf (j, k)ek ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)(cid:0)T ek ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)dT ek ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)σ(ℓ)mkδjℓ ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 σ(ℓ)mkbf (ℓ, k), where we also used (2.12). Hence cT f (ℓ) = σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ), yielding (C). (C) =⇒ (B). If cT f (ℓ) = σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ), then j (ℓ, m) = (cid:16)σ(ℓ)bek dT ek σ(ℓ)mibek j (ℓ)(cid:17)m which gives (B), even without any assumptions on T ∗. djXi=1 djXi=1 = = = = j (ℓ, m) = j (ℓ, i) = σ(ℓ)miδjℓδki = σ(ℓ)mkδjℓ, (D) =⇒ (A). We take f ∈ Hj. Then Pjf ∈ Hj since Pjf = f , so that by assumption (D) we have implying (A). T f = T Pjf = PjT f ∈ Hj, (A) =⇒ (D). For this part we assume in addition that T extends to a bounded operator T ∈ L (H). First, we show that this together with (A) implies that T (H ⊥ j ) is orthogonal to Hj. For g ∈ H ⊥ j , we can write g =Xℓ6=j dℓXk=1 (g, ek ℓ )ek ℓ 10 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY with the convergence in H, so that T g =Xℓ6=j dℓXk=1 (g, ek ℓ )T ek ℓ with the convergence in H due to the boundedness of T on H. Since by (A) we have T ek ℓ ∈ Hℓ ⊂ H ⊥ j Let now f ∈ H∞. Writing f = f1 + f2 with f1 := Pjf so that f1 ∈ Hj and f2 ∈ H ⊥ j for ℓ 6= j we conclude that T g is orthogonal to Hj. are both in H∞, we have PjT f = PjT f1 + PjT f2 = T f1 = T Pjf, since the proved claim Pjf2 = 0 implies that PjT f2 = 0. (cid:3) We now continue with the proof of Theorem 2.2 when the basis ek j corresponds to the eigenvectors of an operator Eo ∈ L(H). Proof of Theorem 2.2. (A) =⇒ (E). Let us fix some ek write j . By condition (A) we can for some constants αi. Then T ek j = αiei j djXi=1 djXi=1 EoT ek j = Eo αiλjei j = λj αiei j = λjT ek j = T λjek j = T Eoek j , djXi=1 αiei j = djXi=1 which shows (E). (E) =⇒ (A). We note that it is enough to prove that T ek j ∈ Hj since {ek dj} forms a basis of the finite dimensional space Hj. We can assume that T ek since otherwise there is nothing to prove. We recall that Eoek (E), we have j = λjek j : 1 ≤ k ≤ j 6= 0 j . Using property λjT ek j = T Eoek j = EoT ek j . Hence T ek j ∈ H is a non-zero eigenvector of Eo corresponding to the eigenvalue λj. Consequently, since Hj are maximal eigenspaces corresponding to λj, we must have T ek j ∈ Hj. (E) =⇒ (F). Since we have already shown that (A) -- (C) always imply (E), it is enough to prove that (E) implies (F) under the additional assumption that T ∈ L (H). Let us write S := Eo ◦ T, D := T ◦ Eo and let f ∈ H. Under the assumptions both S and D are bounded on H, and hence the formula (2.3) implies Sf = lim N (f, ek j )Sek j = lim N NXj=0 djXk=1 with the convergent series in H. NXj=0 djXk=1 (f, ek j )Dek j = Df, (F) =⇒ (A). We note that we require T ∈ L (H) in order for T Eo and EoT to make sense on H. It is clear that (F) implies (E), and under the additional assumption FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 11 that λj 6= λℓ for j 6= ℓ we already know that (A) -- (C) and (E) are equivalent. If T is bounded on H, then they are also equivalent to (D). (cid:3) We have the following criterion for the extendability of a densely defined invariant operator T : H∞ → H to L (H), which was an additional hypothesis for properties (D) and (F). In the statements below we fix a partition into Hj's as in (2.1) and the invariance refers to it. Theorem 2.3. An invariant linear operator T : H∞ → H extends to a bounded operator from H to H if and only if its symbol σ satisfies sup kσ(ℓ)kL (Hℓ) < ∞. ℓ∈N0 Moreover, denoting this extension also by T , we have kT kL (H) = sup ℓ∈N0 kσ(ℓ)kL (Hℓ). Proof. We will often abbreviate writing kσ(ℓ)kop := kσ(ℓ)kL (Hℓ). Let us first suppose that kσ(ℓ)kop ≤ C for all ℓ ∈ N0. By the Plancherel formula (2.4) we have kT f k2 ℓ2(N0,Σ) H =kcT f k2 =Xℓ =Xℓ ≤Xℓ =(cid:18)sup ≤ sup ℓ ℓ ℓ2(Cdℓ ) ℓ2(Cdℓ ) kσ(ℓ)k2 kcT f (ℓ)k2 kσ(ℓ)bf (ℓ)k2 opkbf (ℓ)k2 opXℓ kbf (ℓ)k2 kσ(ℓ)kop(cid:19)2 kσ(ℓ)k2 kf k2 H. ℓ2(Cdℓ ) ℓ2(Cdℓ ) Conversely, let us suppose that T is bounded on H. Then there exists a constant C > 0 such that kT f kH ≤ C for all f such that kf kH = 1. We can take C := kT kL (H). Hence T Hj : Hj → Hj is bounded and kT Hj kL (Hj ) ≤ C. On the other hand, let β(j) denote the matrix of T Hj : Hj → Hj with respect to the orthonormal basis {ei j : 1 ≤ i ≤ dj} of Hj as in the proof of Part (A) implies (B) in Theorem 2.1. We consider an unitary operator U : Hj → Cdj which defines coordinates in Cdj of vectors in Hj with respect to the orthonormal basis {ek j : 1 ≤ k ≤ dj} of Hj. We also consider the operator A(j) : Cdj → Cdj induced by the matrix β(j). Then T Hj = U ∗A(j)U, and kσ(j)kop = kβ(j)kop = kA(j)kop = kT Hj kL (Hj ) ≤ C, completing the proof. (cid:3) We also record the formula for the symbol of the composition of two invariant operators: 12 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Proposition 2.4. If S, T : H∞ → H are invariant operators with respect to the same orthonormal partition, and such that the domain of S ◦ T contains H∞, then S ◦ T : H∞ → H is also invariant with respect to the same partition. Moreover, if σS denotes the symbol of S and σT denotes the symbols of T with respect to the same orthonormal basis then i.e. σS◦T (j) = σS(j)σT (j) for all j ∈ N0. σS◦T = σSσT , Proof. Recalling the definition of the composition of densely defined operators, the domain of S ◦ T is the space of functions f in the domain of T such that T f is in the domain of S, in which case we set (S ◦ T )f = S(T f ). The assumption says that we are in the position to use Theorem 2.1. Applying the condition (C) of Theorem 2.1 repeatedly, we have so that S ◦ T is invariant by Part (C) of Theorem 2.1. \(S ◦ T )f (j) = \S(T f )(j) = σS(j)cT f (j) = σS(j)σT (j)bf (j), (cid:3) We now show another application of the above notions to give a characterisation of Schatten classes of invariant operators in terms of their symbols. Theorem 2.5. Let 0 < r < ∞. An invariant operator T ∈ L (H) with symbol σ is in the Schatten class Sr(H) if and only if In particular, if T is in the trace class S1(H), then we have the trace formula kσ(ℓ)kr . (2.13) Sr(Hℓ)!1/r Tr(σ(ℓ)). (2.14) Moreover kσ(ℓ)kr Sr(Hℓ) < ∞. ∞Xℓ=0 kT kSr(H) = ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 Tr(T ) = Proof. First, we claim that Schatten classes of invariant operators can be charac- terised in terms of the projections to the eigenspaces Hℓ: Let us prove (2.15). Since kT kr Sr(H) = ∞Xℓ=0 kT Hℓkr Sr(Hℓ). kT kSr = kT kSr (2.15) we can assume without loss of generality that T is positive definite. We first observe that λ is an eigenvalue (singular value) of T if and only if λ is an eigenvalue (singular value) of T Hℓ(λ) for some ℓ(λ). Indeed, if λ is an eigenvalue of T there exists ϕλ ∈ H\{0} such that T ϕλ = λϕλ. Using Part (D) of Theorem 2.1, we get that T Pℓϕλ = λPℓϕλ FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 13 holds for every ℓ. Since ϕλ 6= 0, there exists ℓ(λ) such that Pℓ(λ)ϕλ 6= 0. Conse- quently, λ is the eigenvalue of T Hℓ(λ) = T Pℓ(λ). Conversely, since T (Hℓ(λ)) ⊂ Hℓ(λ), an eigenvalue of T Hℓ(λ) is also an eigenvalue of T . Therefore, we obtain (2.15). Now, given (2.15), to prove (2.13), it is enough to check that kσ(ℓ)kSr(Hℓ) = kT HℓkSr(Hℓ). (2.16) To prove (2.16) we consider an unitary operator U : Hℓ → Cdℓ which defines coordi- nates in Cdℓ of functions in Hℓ with respect to the orthonormal basis {ek ℓ : 1 ≤ k ≤ dℓ} of Hℓ. We also consider the operator A(ℓ) : Cdℓ → Cdℓ induced by the matrix (σT (ℓ))⊤. Then and basic properties of Schatten quasinorms imply that T Hℓ = U ∗A(ℓ)U, kT HℓkSr(Hℓ) = kA(ℓ)kSr(Cdℓ ) = kσ(ℓ)kSr, completing the proof of (2.16) and of (2.13). Finally, let us prove (2.14) for operators in the trace class S1(H). Since the trace Tr(T ) does not depend on the choice of the orthonormal basis in H, using property (C) and formula (2.11), we can write Tr(T ) =Xℓ dℓXk=1 (T ek ℓ , ek ℓ , ek ℓ ) σ(ℓ)mk(em dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 ℓ ) =Xℓ dℓXk=1 dℓXm=1 =Xℓ σ(ℓ)mkδmk =Xℓ completing the proof. dℓXk=1 σ(ℓ)kk =Xℓ Tr(σ(ℓ)), (cid:3) Remark 2.6. We note that the membership in L (H) and in the Schatten classes Sr(H) does not depend on the decomposition of H into subspaces Hj as in (2.1). However, the notion of invariance does depend on it. For example, let H = L2(Tn) for the n-torus Tn = Rn/Zn. Choosing Hj = span{e2πij·x}, j ∈ Zn, we recover the construction of Section 6 on compact Lie groups and moreover, invari- ant operators with respect to {Hj}j∈Zn are the translation invariant operators on the torus Tn. However, to recover the construction of Section 4 on manifolds, we takefHℓ to be the eigenspaces of the Laplacian E on Tn, so that Hj = span{e2πij·x : j ∈ Zn and j2 = ℓ}, ℓ ∈ N0. Then translation invariant operators on Tn, i.e. operators invariant relative to the the Laplacian, in terminology of Section 4). If we have information on the eigenvalues of E, like we do on the torus, we may sometimes also recover invariant operators rela- partition {Hj}j∈Zn, are also invariant relative to the partition {fHℓ}ℓ∈N0 (or relative to tive to the partition {fHℓ}ℓ∈N0 as linear combinations of translation invariant operators composed with phase shifts and complex conjugation. fHℓ = Mj2=ℓ 14 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY 3. Fourier analysis associated to an elliptic operator Our main application will be to study operators on compact manifolds, so we start this section by describing the discrete Fourier series associated to an elliptic positive pseudo-differential operator as an adaptation of the construction in Section 2. In order to fix the notation for the rest of the paper we may give some explicit expressions for notions of Section 2 in the present setting. Let M be a compact smooth manifold of dimension n without boundary, endowed with a fixed volume dx. We denote by Ψν(M) the Hormander class of pseudo- differential operators of order ν ∈ R, i.e. operators which, in every coordinate chart, are operators in Hormander classes on Rn with symbols in Sν [Shu01] or [RT10]. In this paper we will be using the class Ψν cl(M) of classical operators, i.e. operators with symbols having (in all local coordinates) an asymptotic expansion of the symbol in positively homogeneous components (see e.g. [Dui11]). Furthermore, we denote by Ψν e (M) the class of elliptic operators in Ψν +(M) the class of positive definite operators in Ψν cl(M), and by Ψν 1,0, see e.g. cl(M). Finally, Ψν e (M) +e(M) := Ψν +(M) ∩ Ψν will denote the class of classical positive elliptic pseudo-differential operators of order ν. We note that complex powers of such operators are well-defined, see e.g. Seeley [See67]. In fact, all pseudo-differential operators considered in this paper will be classical, so we may omit explicitly mentioning it every time, but we note that we could equally work with general operators in Ψν(M) since their powers have similar properties, see e.g. [Str72]. We now associate a discrete Fourier analysis to the operator E ∈ Ψν +e(M) inspired by those constructions considered by Seeley ([See65], [See69]), see also Greenfield and Wallach [GW73]. However, we adapt it to our purposes and in the sequel also prove several auxiliary statements concerning the eigenvalues of E and their multiplicities, useful to us in the subsequent analysis. In general, the construction below is exactly the one appearing in Theorem 2.1. The eigenvalues of E (counted without multiplicities) form a sequence {λj} which we order so that 0 = λ0 < λ1 < λ2 < · · · . (3.1) For each eigenvalue λj, there is the corresponding finite dimensional eigenspace Hj of functions on M, which are smooth due to the ellipticity of E. We set dj := dim Hj, and H0 := ker E, λ0 := 0. We also set d0 := dim H0. Since the operator E is elliptic, it is Fredholm, hence also d0 < ∞ (we can refer to [Ati68], [Hor85a] for various properties of H0 and d0). We fix an orthonormal basis of L2(M) consisting of eigenfunctions of E: {ek j }1≤k≤dj j≥0 , (3.2) where {ek : L2(M) → Hj be the corresponding projection. We shall denote by (·, ·) the inner product of L2(M). We is an orthonormal basis of Hj. Let Pj j }1≤k≤dj FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 15 observe that we have for f ∈ L2(M). The 'Fourier' series takes the form Pjf = (f, ek j )ek j , djXk=1 djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 f = (f, ek j )ek j , for each f ∈ L2(M). The Fourier coefficients of f ∈ L2(M) with respect to the orthonormal basis {ek j } will be denoted by (F f )(j, k) := bf (j, k) := (f, ek j ). simply the Fourier coefficients of f . We will call the collection of bf (j, k) the Fourier coefficients of f relative to E, or forms a complete orthonormal system in L2(M), for all f ∈ L2(M) Since {ek j }1≤k≤dj j≥0 we have the Plancherel formula (2.4), namely, (3.3) kf k2 L2(M ) = (f, ek j )2 = ℓ2(N0,Σ), (3.4) ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 bf (j, k)2 = kbf k2 where the space ℓ2(N0, Σ) and its norm are as in (2.5) and (2.6). We can think of F = FM as of the Fourier transform being an isometry from L2(M) into ℓ2(N0, Σ). The inverse of this Fourier transform can be then expressed by (F −1h)(x) = j (x). (3.5) If f ∈ L2(M), we also write ... h(j, k)ek djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 bf (j) = bf (j, 1)  ∈ Cdj , bf (j, dj) j (ℓ, m)(cid:17)dℓ j (ℓ) =(cid:16)bek bek bek j (ℓ, m) = δjℓδkm. m=1 thus thinking of the Fourier transform always as a column vector. In particular, we think of as of a column, and we notice that Smooth functions on M can be characterised by f ∈ C ∞(M) ⇐⇒ ∀N ∃CN : ⇐⇒ ∀N ∃CN : bf (j, k) ≤ CN (1 + λj)−N for all j, k bf (j) ≤ CN (1 + λj)−N for all j, (3.6) (3.7) 16 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY where bf (j) is the norm of the vector bf (j) ∈ Cdj . The implication '⇐=' here is immediate, while '=⇒' follows from the Plancherel formula (2.4) and the fact that for f ∈ C ∞(M) we have (I + E)N f ∈ L2(M) for any N. For u ∈ D′(M), we denote its Fourier coefficient j ), bu(j, k) := u(ek and by duality, the space of distributions can be characterised by f ∈ D′(M) ⇐⇒ ∃M ∃C : bu(j, k) ≤ C(1 + λj)M for all j, k. We will denote by H s(M) the usual Sobolev space over L2 on M. This space can be +e(M) is positive and elliptic defined in local coordinates or, by the fact that E ∈ Ψν with ν > 0, it can be characterised by f ∈ H s(M) ⇐⇒ (I + E)s/νf ∈ L2(M) ⇐⇒ {(1 + λj)s/νbf (j)}j ∈ ℓ2(N0, Σ) (1 + λj)2s/νbf (j, k)2 < ∞. djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 ⇐⇒ the last equivalence following from the Plancherel formula (2.4). For the characteri- sation of analytic functions (on compact manifolds M) we refer to Seeley [See69]. (3.8) 4. Invariant operators and symbols on compact manifolds We now discuss an application of a notion of an invariant operator and of its symbol from Theorem 2.1 in the case of H = L2(M) and H∞ = C ∞(M) and describe its basic properties. We will consider operators T densely defined on L2(M), and we will be making a natural assumption that their domain contains C ∞(M). We also note that while in Theorem 2.2 it was assumed that the operator Eo is bounded on H, this is no longer the case for the operator E here. Indeed, an elliptic pseudo-differential operator E ∈ Ψν +e(M) of order ν > 0 is not bounded on L2(M). Moreover, we do not want to assume that T extends to a bounded operator on L2(M) to obtain analogues of properties (D) and (F) in Section 2, because this is too restrictive from the point of view of differential operators. Instead, we show that in the present setting it is enough to assume that T extends to a continuous operator on D′(M) to reach the same conclusions. So, we combine the statement of Theorem 2.1 and the necessary modification of Theorem 2.2 to the setting of Section 3 as follows. We also remark that Part (iv) of the following theorem provides a correct formu- lation for a missing assumption in [DR14a, Theorem 3.1, (iv)]. Theorem 4.1. Let M be a closed manifold and let T : C ∞(M) → L2(M) be a linear operator. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i) For each j ∈ N0, we have T (Hj) ⊂ Hj. (ii) For each j ∈ N0 and 1 ≤ k ≤ j, we have T Eek (iii) For each ℓ ∈ N0 there exists a matrix σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ such that for all ek j j = ET ek j . j (ℓ, m) = σ(ℓ)mkδjℓ. dT ek (4.1) FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 17 (iv) If, in addition, the domain of T ∗ contains C ∞(M), then for each ℓ ∈ N0 there exists a matrix σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ such that for all f ∈ C ∞(M). The matrices σ(ℓ) in (iii) and (iv) coincide. cT f (ℓ) = σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ) If T extends to a linear continuous operator T : D′(M) → D′(M) then the above properties are also equivalent to the following ones: (v) For each j ∈ N0, we have T Pj = PjT on C ∞(M). (vi) T E = ET on L2(M). If any of the equivalent conditions (i) -- (iv) of Theorem 4.1 are satisfied, we say that the operator T : C ∞(M) → L2(M) is invariant (or is a Fourier multiplier) relative to E. We can also say that T is E-invariant or is an E-multiplier. This recovers the notion of invariant operators given by Theorem 2.1, with respect to the partitions Hj's in (2.1) which are fixed being the eigenspaces of E. When there is no risk of confusion we will just refer to such kind of operators as invariant operators or as multipliers. It is clear from (i) that the operator E itself or functions of E defined by the functional calculus are invariant relative to E. We note that the boundedness of T on L2(M) needed for conditions (D) and (F) in Theorem 2.1 and in Theorem 2.2 is now replaced by the condition that T is continuous on D′(M) which explored the additional structure of L2(M) and allows application to differential operators. We call σ in (iii) and (iv) the matrix symbol of T or simply the symbol. It is an element of the space Σ = ΣM defined by ΣM := {σ : N0 ∋ ℓ 7→ σ(ℓ) ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ}. (4.2) j and not on the Since the expression for the symbol depends only on the basis ek operator E itself, this notion coincides with the symbol defined in Theorem 2.1. Let us comment on several conditions in Theorem 4.1 in this setting. Assumptions (v) and (vi) are stronger than those in (i) -- (iv). On one hand, clearly (vi) contains (ii). On the other hand, as we will see in the proof, assumption (v) implies (i) without the additional hypothesis that T is continuous on D′(M). In analogy to the strong commutativity in (v), if T is continuous on D′(M), so that all the assumptions (i) -- (vi) are equivalent, we may say that T is strongly invariant relative to E in this case. The expressions in (vi) make sense as both sides are defined (and even continuous) on D′(M). We also note that without additional assumptions, it is known from the general theory of densily defined operators on Hilbert spaces that conditions (v) and (vi) are generally not equivalent, see e.g. Reed and Simon [RS80, Section VIII.5]. If T is a differential operator, the additional assumption of continuity on D′(M) for parts (v) and (vi) is satisfied. In [GW73, Section 1, Definition 1] Greenfield and Wallach called a differential operator D to be an E-invariant operator if ED = DE, which is our condition (vi). However, Theorem 4.1 describes more general operators as well as reformulates them in the form of Fourier multipliers that will be explored in the sequel. 18 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY There will be several useful classes of symbols, in particular the moderate growth class S ′(Σ) := {σ ∈ Σ : ∃N, C such that kσ(ℓ)kop ≤ C(1 + λℓ)N ∀ℓ ∈ N0}, (4.3) where kσ(ℓ)kop = kσ(ℓ)kL (Hℓ) denotes the matrix multiplication operator norm with respect to ℓ2(Cdℓ). In the case when M is a compact Lie group and E is a Laplacian on G, left- invariant operators on G, i.e. operators commuting with the left action of G, are also invariant relative to E in the sense of Theorem 4.1; this will be shown in Proposition 6.1 after we investigate in Section 6 the relation between the symbol in Theorem 4.1 and matrix symbols of operators on compact Lie groups. However, we need an adaptation of the above construction since the natural decomposition into Hj's in (2.1) may in general violate the condition (3.1). As in Section 2 since the notion of the symbol depends only on the basis, for the identity operator T = I we have σI (j) = Idj , where Idj ∈ CIdj ×Idj is the identity matrix, and for an operator T = F (E), when it is well-defined by the spectral calculus, we have σF (E)(j) = F (λj)Idj . (4.4) Proof of Theorem 4.1. Once the basis ek follows from the equivalence of (A), (B) and (C) in Theorem 2.1. j is fixed, the equivalence of (i), (ii) and (iv) j is smooth, we have T ek (ii) =⇒ (i). We first note that both ET and T E are well-defined on ek j : for the j ∈ L2(M) and hence in D′(M) where E is former, since ek well-defined as a pseudo-differential operator, while, for the latter, Eek j ∈ Hj ⊂ C ∞(M) and hence it is in the domain of T . The rest of the proof is identical to (E) =⇒ (A) in the proof of Theorem 2.2. j = λjek (i) =⇒ (ii). This is the same as (A) =⇒ (E) in the proof of Theorem 2.2. (v) =⇒ (i). We take f ∈ Hj. Then Pjf = f ∈ C ∞(M) so that by assumption (v) we have implying (i). T f = T Pjf = PjT f ∈ Hj, (i) =⇒ (v). We now assume in addition that T is continuous on D′(M). First, we j i = 0 in the j ⊂ L2(M), we have hT g, ek show that (i) implies that for any g ∈ H ⊥ sense of distributions. We can write with the convergence in L2(M). Hence g =Xℓ6=j T g =Xℓ6=j (g, ek ℓ )ek ℓ (g, ek ℓ )T ek ℓ dℓXk=1 dℓXk=1 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 19 with the convergence in D′(M). Since T ek T g is orthogonal to Hj. ℓ ∈ Hℓ ⊂ H ⊥ j for ℓ 6= j we conclude that Let now f ∈ C ∞(M). Writing f = f1 + f2 with f1 = Pjf so that f1 ∈ Hj and f2 ∈ H ⊥ j are necessarily smooth, and Pjf2 = 0, we have PjT f = PjT f1 + PjT f2 = T f1 = T Pjf, since the above property implies that PjT f2 = 0. (vi) =⇒ (ii). Trivial. (ii) =⇒ (vi). For the following, we assume that T is continuous on D′(M). Let us write S := E ◦ T, D := T ◦ E and let f ∈ L2(M). We can write f = ∞Xj=0 djXk=1 (f, ek j )ek j with the series convergent in L2(M). Since both S and D are continuous on D′(M), we now have Sf = lim N (f, ek j )Sek j = lim N (f, ek j )Dek j = Df. NXj=0 djXk=1 NXj=0 djXk=1 The limit should be understood in D′(M). Indeed, if we write fN = NXj=0 djXk=1 (f, ek j )ek j , then fN → f in L2 and hence also in D′(M), which implies SfN → Sf and DfN → Df in D′(M). (cid:3) We now discuss how invariant operators can be expressed in terms of their symbols. Proposition 4.2. An invariant operator Tσ associated to the symbol σ can be written in the following way: Tσf (x) = = ℓ (x) ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm=1 (σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ))mem [σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ)]⊤eℓ(x), (4.5) where [σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ)] denotes the column-vector, and [σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ)]⊤eℓ(x) denotes the multi- plication (the scalar product) of the column-vector [σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ)] with the column-vector ℓ (x))⊤. In particular, we also have ℓ (x), · · · , em eℓ(x) = (e1 (Tσek j )(x) = σ(j)mkem j (x). (4.6) djXm=1 If σ ∈ S ′(Σ) and f ∈ C ∞(M), the convergence in (4.5) is uniform. 20 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Proof. Formula (4.5) follows from Part (iv) of Theorem 4.1, with uniform convergence for f ∈ C ∞(M) in view of (4.3). Then, using (4.5) and (3.6) we can calculate j (ℓ))mem ℓ (x) (σ(ℓ))mibek j (ℓ, i)! em ℓ (x) (σ(ℓ))miδjℓδkiem ℓ (x) dℓXm=1 (σ(ℓ)bek dℓXm=1 dℓXi=1 dℓXm=1 dℓXi=1 (Tσek j )(x) = = = = ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 djXm=1 (σ(j))mkem j (x), yielding (4.6). (cid:3) Theorem 2.3 characterising invariant operators bounded on L2(M) now becomes Theorem 4.3. An invariant linear operator T : C ∞(M) → L2(M) extends to a bounded operator from L2(M) to L2(M) if and only if its symbol σ satisfies kσ(ℓ)kop < ∞, sup ℓ∈N0 where kσ(ℓ)kop = kσ(ℓ)kL (Hℓ) is the matrix multiplication operator norm with respect to Hℓ ≃ ℓ2(Cdℓ). Moreover, we have kT kL (L2(M )) = sup ℓ∈N0 kσ(ℓ)kop. This can be extended to Sobolev spaces. We will use the multiplication property for Fourier multipliers which is a direct consequence of Proposition 2.4: Proposition 4.4. If S, T : C ∞(M) → L2(M) are invariant operators with respect to E such that the domain of S ◦ T contains C ∞(M), then S ◦ T : C ∞(M) → L2(M) is also invariant with respect to E. Moreover, if σS denotes the symbol of S and σT denotes the symbols of T with respect to the same orthonormal basis then σS◦T = σSσT , i.e. σS◦T (j) = σS(j)σT (j) for all j ∈ N0. Recalling Sobolev spaces H s(M) in (3.8) we have: Corollary 4.5. Let an invariant linear operator T : C ∞(M) → C ∞(M) have symbol σT for which there exists C > 0 and m ∈ R such that kσT (ℓ)kop ≤ C(1 + λℓ) m ν holds for all ℓ ∈ N0. Then T extends to a bounded operator from H s(M) to H s−m(M) for every s ∈ R. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 21 Proof. We note that by (3.8) the condition that T : H s(M) → H s−m(M) is bounded is equivalent to the condition that the operator S := (I + E) s−m ν ◦ T ◦ (I + E)− s ν is bounded on L2(M). By Proposition 4.4 and the fact that the powers of E are pseudo-differential operators with diagonal symbols, see (4.4), we have σS(ℓ) = (1 + λℓ)− m ν σT (ℓ). But then kσS(ℓ)kop ≤ C for all ℓ in view of the assumption on σT , so that the statement follows from Theorem 4.3. (cid:3) 5. Schatten classes of operators on compact manifolds In this section we give an application of the constructions in the previous section to determine the membership of operators in Schatten classes and then apply it to a particular family of operators on L2(M). As a consequence of Theorem 2.5, we can now characterise invariant operators in Schatten classes on compact manifolds. We note that this characterisation does not assume any regularity of the kernel nor of the symbol. Once we observe that the conditions for the membership in the Schatten classes depend only on the basis ek j and not on the operator E, we immediately obtain: Theorem 5.1. Let 0 < r < ∞. An invariant operator T : L2(M) → L2(M) is in Sr(L2(M)) if and only if Sr < ∞. Moreover kσT (ℓ)kr ∞Pℓ=0 kT kr Sr(L2(M )) = kσT (ℓ)kr Sr. ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 Tr(T ) = Tr(σT (ℓ)). If an invariant operator T : L2(M) → L2(M) is in the trace class S1(L2(M)), then Remark 5.2. In Section 6 we will establish a relation between the notion of symbol introduced in Theorem 4.1 and the corresponding symbol in the setting of compact Lie groups (cf. [RT10, RT13]). In particular the characterisation above extends the one obtained in Theorem 3.7 of [DR13]. We now apply Theorem 5.1 to determining which powers of E belong to which Schatten classes. But first we record a useful relation between the sequences λj and dj of eigenvalues of E and their multiplicities. Proposition 5.3. Let M be a closed manifold of dimension n, and let E ∈ Ψν with ν > 0. Then there exists a constant C > 0 such that we have +e(M), for all j ≥ 1. Moreover, we also have dj ≤ C(1 + λj) n ν dj(1 + λj)−q < ∞ if and only if q > n ν . ∞Xj=1 (5.1) (5.2) as λ → ∞. This implies dj ≤ C(1 + λj)n/ν for sufficiently large λj, implying the estimate (5.1). To prove (5.2), let us denote T := (I + E)−q/2. Then the eigenvalues of T are (1 + λj)−q/2 with multiplicities dj. This implies dj(1 + λj)−q = kT k2 S2 ≍ kKk2 L2(M ×M ). (5.3) ∞Xj=0 22 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Proof. Since (1 + λj)1/ν are the eigenvalues of the first-order elliptic positive operator (I +E)1/ν with multiplicities dj, the Weyl eigenvalue counting formula for the operator (I + E)1/ν gives Xj: (1+λj )1/ν ≤λ dj = C0λn + O(λn−1) By the functional calculus of pseudo-differential operators, we have T ∈ Ψ−νq/2(M), and so its integral kernel K(x, y) is smooth for x 6= y, and near the diagonal x = y, identifying points with their local coordinates, we have K(x, y) ≤ Cαx − y−α, for any α > n − νq/2, see e.g. [Dui11] or [RT10, Theorem 2.3.1]. Thus order is sharp with respect to the order of the operator. Therefore, K ∈ L2(M × M) if and only if there exists α such that n > 2α > 2n − νq. Together with (5.3) this implies (5.2). (cid:3) Proposition 5.4. Let M be a closed manifold of dimension n, and let E ∈ Ψν +e(M) be a positive elliptic pseudo-differential operator of order ν > 0. Let 0 < p < ∞. Then we have (I + E)− α ν ∈ Sp(L2(M)) if and only if α > . (5.4) n p Proof. We note that the operator (I + E)− α are (1 + λj)− α ν with multiplicities dj. Therefore, ν is positive definite, its singular values k(I + E)− α ν kp Sp = dj(1 + λj)− αp ν , ∞Xj=0 which is finite if and only if αp > n by (5.2), implying the statement. (cid:3) 6. Relation to the setting of compact Lie groups In the recent work [DR13] the authors studied Schatten classes of operators on compact Lie groups. We now explore how the notion of the symbol from Theorem 4.1 corresponds to the matrix-valued symbols on compact Lie groups, and how the results for Schatten classes correspond to each other when M = G is a compact Lie group. In this and the following sections we assume that all operators are continuous on D′(G) so that the integral kernels of such operators are distributions. We will give two types of decompositions of L2(G) into Hj's as in (2.1). First, we choose Hj's determined by unitary irreducible representations of G. However, in this case the condition (3.1) may fail. Consequently, to view this analysis as a special case of the construction on manifolds in Section 4 with condition (3.1), we group representations corresponding to the same eigenvalue of the Laplacian together, FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 23 to form a coarser decomposition of L2(G) into a direct sum of finite dimensional subspaces. The example of this types of partitions is given in Remark 2.6 in the case of the torus Tn. Now, we recall some basic definitions. Let G be a compact Lie group of dimension classes of continuous irreducible unitary representations of G. Since G is compact, n equipped with the normalised Haar measure. Let bG denote the set of equivalence the set bG is discrete. For [ξ] ∈ bG, by choosing a basis in the representation space of ξ, we can view ξ as a matrix-valued function ξ : G → Cdξ×dξ, where dξ is the dimension of the representation space of ξ. By the Peter-Weyl theorem the collection npdξ ξij : 1 ≤ i, j ≤ dξ, [ξ] ∈ bGo FGf (ξ) ≡ bf (ξ) :=ZG f (x)ξ(x)∗dx, is the orthonormal basis of L2(G). If f ∈ L1(G) we define its group Fourier transform at ξ by where dx is the normalised Haar measure on G. If ξ is a matrix representation, we have bf (ξ) ∈ Cdξ×dξ . We note that this Fourier transform is different from the one we considered on manifolds in (3.3) which produced vector-valued Fourier coefficients instead of the matrix-valued ones obtained in (6.1). The Fourier inversion formula is a consequence of the Peter-Weyl theorem, so that we have (6.1) (6.2) f (x) = X[ξ]∈bG dξ Tr(ξ(x)bf (ξ)). For each [ξ] ∈ bG, the matrix elements of ξ are the eigenfunctions for the Lapla- cian LG (or the Casimir element of the universal enveloping algebra), with the same eigenvalues which we denote by −λ2 [ξ], so that we have − LGξij(x) = λ2 [ξ]ξij(x) for all 1 ≤ i, j ≤ dξ. (6.3) For a thorough discussion of Laplacians on compact Lie groups we refer to [Ste70]. The weight for measuring the decay or growth of Fourier coefficients in this setting 2 , the eigenvalues of the elliptic first-order pseudo-differential 1 is hξi := (1 + λ2 operator (I − LG) [ξ]) 2 . The Parseval identity takes the form 1 kf kL2(G) =X[ξ]∈bG HS dξkbf (ξ)k2 which defines the norm on ℓ2(bG). valued symbol τA(x, ξ) ∈ Cdξ×dξ by 1 2 , where kbf (ξ)k2 HS = Tr(bf (ξ)bf (ξ)∗), For a linear continuous operator A from C ∞(G) to D′(G) we define its matrix- τA(x, ξ) := ξ(x)∗(Aξ)(x) ∈ Cdξ×dξ. Then one has ([RT10], [RT13]) the global quantization Af (x) = X[ξ]∈bG dξ Tr(ξ(x)τA(x, ξ)bf (ξ)) (6.4) (6.5) 24 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY in the sense of distributions, and the sum is independent of the choice of a represen- tation ξ from each equivalence class [ξ] ∈ bG. If A is a linear continuous operator from C ∞(G) to C ∞(G), the series (6.5) is absolutely convergent and can be interpreted in the pointwise sense. We will also write A = Op(τA) for the operator A given by the formula (6.5). We refer to [RT10, RT13] for the consistent development of this quantization and the corresponding symbolic calculus. In the case of a left-invariant operator A, its symbol τA is independent of x, and formula (6.4) reduces to τA(ξ) = ξ(x)∗(Aξ)(x) = Aξ(e), (6.6) where e is the unit element of the group. We can now establish a correspondence between the two frameworks, the one in this paper and the one given in [DR13]. In the setting of compact Lie groups the unitary dual being discrete, we can enumerate the representations as ξj for 0 ≤ j < ∞. The indices (i, ℓ) of each matrix ξ(x) will be enumerated following the lexicographical order ((i, ℓ) ≤ (i′, ℓ′) if i < i′ or (i = i′ and ℓ ≤ ℓ′)). In this way, we fix the orthonormal basis {ek j } given by where dj = d2 the lexicographical order described above. Then we have the subspaces ξj and k represents an entry of the matrix of the representation following Hj ≡ H[ξj] := span{(ξj)iℓ : 1 ≤ i, ℓ ≤ dξj }. (6.8) On a compact Lie group G we can consider E to be a bi-invariant Laplacian, see Stein [Ste70] for a discussion of such operators. Then, in view of the Peter- Weyl theorem, the functions {ek j }1≤k≤dj are its eigenfunctions, with norm one in L2(G) with respect to the normalised Haar measure, and corresponding to the same eigenvalue λj. However, the condition (3.1) does not hold in general since non- equivalent representations in bG may give the same eigenvalues of the Laplacian. We now observe that there is also a correspondence between the vector-valued Fourier transform introduced in (3.3) and the matrix-valued Fourier transform de- fined in (6.1). Such correspondence can be established by applying once more the lexicographical order to the matrix-valued Fourier transform (6.1). In order to study such correspondence, for d ∈ N we will define a bijection from the set of indices of the matrix-symbol {1, . . . , d}2 onto the set of indices {1, . . . , d2} and calculate its inverse. If (j, k) ∈ {1, . . . , d}2 we define Γd(j, k) := (j − 1)d + k. The function Γd is surjective, indeed if t ∈ {1, . . . , d2}, j can be obtained from {ek j }1≤k≤dj =nqdξj (ξj)iℓo1≤i,ℓ≤dξj , (6.7) where ⌊·⌋ denotes the function defined for x ≥ 0 by ⌊x⌋ = max{y ∈ N0 : y ≤ x}. For the term k we observe that j =(cid:22)t − 1 d (cid:23) + 1, j − 1 =(cid:22)t − 1 d (cid:23) , FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 25 hence k = t −(cid:22)t − 1 d (cid:23) d. Since we are dealing with finite sets with the same number of elements, the injectivity of Γ follows. We can now establish correspondences between the Fourier transforms on G = M, for M viewed as both a compact manifold and a compact Lie group. Taking into account (6.1) and (6.7) we obtain (FM f )(i, t) = (f, et i)L2 =pdξi((FGf )(ξi)) (t−(cid:22) t−1 ξi. In the another direction we have for i ∈ N0, 1 ≤ t ≤ di = d2 dξi (cid:23)dξi ,(cid:22) t−1 dξi (cid:23)+1) , (6.9) for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ dξℓ. ((FGf )(ξℓ))i,j = 1 pdξℓ (FM f )(ℓ, Γdξℓ (j, i)), (6.10) For the sake of simplicity, we introduce the following notation: where t ∈ {1, . . . , d2}. With this notation formula (6.9) becomes (6.11) d (cid:23) + 1, φ(t, d) := t −(cid:22)t − 1 d (cid:23) d, ψ(t, d) :=(cid:22)t − 1 (FM f )(ℓ, m) =pdξℓ((FGf )(ξℓ)(φ(m,dξℓ ),ψ(m,dξℓ )). ek j = (qdξj ξj)(ψ(k,dξj ),φ(k,dξj )). (FG(ηrs)(η))ij =ZG ηrs(x)ηji(x)dx = 1 dη δ(i,j),(s,r), We also have In the calculations below we will use the following basic relations for the Fourier transform on a compact Lie group G: which means that FG(ηrs)(η) is the matrix of dimension dη × dη with the only entry different from zero equal to 1 in the position (s, r). We will denote this matrix by dη 1 (δ(i,j),(s,r))ij, and we have also δ(i,j),(s,r) = 1 if i = s and r = j, and δ(i,j),(s,r) = 0 if dη i 6= s or r 6= j. Thus, for an invariant operator we obtain (FG(T (ξrs)))(ξ) = τ (ξ)(FG(ξrs)(ξ)) = τ (ξ) 1 dξ (δ(i,j),(s,r))ij. (6.12) In other words (FG(T (ξrs)))(ξ) is a matrix of dimension dξ ×dξ with all the columns zero except for the r-column which is equal to the s-column of 1 dξ τ (ξ). We shall denote by σ the symbol corresponding to T and consider the orthonormal basis {ek j } defined in (6.7) in the sense of (4.1) on manifolds. The symbol introduced in (6.4) in the sense of groups will be denoted by τ . We now can find formulae relating 26 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY the symbols τ and σ. We begin by finding a formula for σ in terms of τ . By (6.11), (4.1) and (6.12) we obtain σ(ℓ)mi =(FM (T ei ℓ))(ℓ, m) )) ),ψ(m,dξℓ ℓ))(ξℓ))(φ(m,dξℓ =pdξℓ((FG(T ei =pdξℓ((FG(T (pdξℓξℓ)ψ(i,dξℓ ),φ(i,dξℓ )))(ξℓ))(φ(m,dξℓ ),ψ(m,dξℓ )) =dξℓ((FG(T (ξℓ)ψ(i,dξℓ ),φ(i,dξℓ )))(ξℓ))(φ(m,dξℓ ),ψ(m,dξℓ )) =dξℓd−1 ξℓ =τ (ξℓ)(φ(m,dξℓ ),φ(i,dξℓ ))δψ(i,dξℓ ),ψ(m,dξℓ ). (τ (ξℓ)(δ((p,q),(φ(i,dξℓ ),ψ(i,dξℓ )))pq)(φ(m,dξℓ ),ψ(m,dξℓ )) Therefore, we obtain σ(ℓ)mi =(cid:26) τ (ξℓ)(φ(m,dξℓ ),φ(i,dξℓ )) , 0 , if ψ(m, dξℓ) = ψ(i, dξℓ), otherwise. (6.13) We note that both functions φ and ψ are periodic with respect to the first parame- ters i and m, implying that there is a periodic structure in the 'big' manifold-symbol σ composed of some copies of the 'small' group-symbol τ . We will now give a graphical description of the relations (6.13) between the two symbols. The entries of τ (ξℓ) are distributed inside the matrix-symbol σ according to (6.13): setting d := dξℓ it is dξℓ ↓ τ (ξℓ)1d τ (ξℓ)2d ... τ (ξℓ)dd dξℓ + 1 ↓ 0 0 ... 0 i 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 ... ... 0 0 ... 0 τ (ξℓ)11 τ (ξℓ)21 ... τ (ξℓ)12 τ (ξℓ)22 ... τ (ξℓ)d1 ... ... τ (ξℓ)d2 ... ... 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 0 0 ... 0 τ (ξℓ)1d τ (ξℓ)2d ... τ (ξℓ)dd ... ... 0 0 ... 0 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ↓ 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 ... ... 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 ... ... τ (ξℓ)11 τ (ξℓ)12 τ (ξℓ)21 ... τ (ξℓ)22 ... d2 ξℓ ↓ 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 ... ... τ (ξℓ)1d τ (ξℓ)2d ... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · τ (ξℓ)d1 τ (ξℓ)d2 · · · τ (ξℓ)dd     τ (ξℓ)11 τ (ξℓ)21 ... τ (ξℓ)12 τ (ξℓ)22 ... τ (ξℓ)d1 τ (ξℓ)d2 0 0 ... 0 ... ... 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 ... ... 0 0 ... 0 On the other hand, given the symbol σ, an application of equations (6.13) for 1 ≤ m, i ≤ dξℓ gives (6.14) The proposition below shows that the Schatten quasi-norms k · kSr of the symbols τ and σ are in agreement when M = G is a compact Lie group. Thus, our results for 1 ≤ m, i ≤ dξℓ. τ (ξℓ)mi = σ(ℓ)mi, FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 27 in Section 5 are an extension of those in [DR13] concerning Schatten classes. In particular, Theorem 5.1 extents Theorem 3.7 of [DR13] as announced in Remark 5.2. We recall that on a compact Lie group G we take E to be a bi-invariant Laplacian. Proposition 6.1. Let G be a compact Lie group. If a linear operator T : C ∞(G) → L2(G), continuous on D′(G), is left-invariant then it is also invariant relative to the family of Hj's as in (6.8) in the sense of Theorem 2.1 (in fact, it is also strongly invariant). Let T : C ∞(G) → L2(G) be a left-invariant operator, and let σ be its symbol in the sense of Theorem 2.1 and τ its symbol in the sense of groups as in (6.6). Then these symbols are related by formulae (6.13) -- (6.14). Consequently, for a bounded left-invariant operator T : L2(G) → L2(G), for every 0 < r < ∞ we have and, therefore, kσ(ℓ)kr Sr = dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr Sr , Xℓ kσ(ℓ)kr Sr =Xℓ dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr Sr. Proof. The invariance in the sense of groups as in (6.6) of the group-left-invariant ope- rators follows from the relation (6.13) between symbols and from the characterisation in Theorem 2.1. For the following statements, since for Schatten quasi-norms we have kBkSr = kBkSr, we can assume that σ, τ are symmetric, and hence they can be also assumed diagonal. On the other hand, using the relation between σ and τ in (6.13) and (6.14), and by looking at the diagonal elements of σ in (6.13), we obtain kσ(ℓ)kr Sr = d2 ξℓXm=1 σ(ℓ)mmr = dξℓ dξℓXm=1 Sr and, therefore,Pℓ τ (ξℓ)mmr = dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr Sr. Sr =Pℓ Thus kσ(ℓ)kr Sr = dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr kσ(ℓ)kr dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr Sr. (cid:3) We finish this section by describing an adaptation of the above construction to put it in the framework of manifolds as described in Theorem 4.1. In the case of the torus Tn this is indicated in Remark 2.6. Recalling the definition of H[ξ] in (6.8) for each [ξ] ∈ bG, and the notation λ[ξ] for the eigenvalues as in (6.3), for the sequence 2 < . . . of eigenvalues of −LG counted without multiplicities we set 1 < λ2 0 < λ2 0 = λ2 span{ξik : 1 ≤ i, k ≤ dξ}, ℓ ∈ N0. (6.15) fHℓ := M[ξ]∈bG λ[ξ]=λℓ H[ξ] = M[ξ]∈bG λ[ξ]=λℓ The family offHℓ's is the collection of eigenspaces of the elliptic differential operator LG for which the condition (3.1) is satisfied. The symbols σ and eσ of an invariant 28 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY operator T with respect to the partitions Hj's and fHℓ's, respectively, are related by (6.16) eσ(ℓ) = O[ξj]∈bG λ[ξj ]=λℓ σ(j), witheσ(ℓ) ∈ Cedℓ×edℓ and edℓ = X[ξj]∈bG λ[ξj ]=λℓ dj = X[ξj]∈bG λ[ξj ]=λℓ d2 ξj . Recalling the relation (6.13) between the symbol σ in the sense of Theorem 2.1 and the group symbol τ as in (6.6), given by 0 ... 0 0 0 ... τ (ξj) 0 ... 0 τ (ξj) · · · · · · σ(j) ≡ σ(ξj) =  , the formula (6.16) provides the further relation between the symbol eσ in the sense λ[ξm] = λℓ for non-equivalent representations [ξ1], . . . , [ξm] ∈ bG, we have of manifolds (in Theorem 4.1) and the group symbol τ . Therefore, if λ[ξ1] = . . . = · · · · · · τ (ξj) (6.17) eσ(ℓ) = · · · · · · σ(ξ1) 0 0 ... 0 σ(ξ2) ... 0 · · · · · · σ(ξm) 0 0 ...  . (6.18) In particular, we obtain Corollary 6.2. Let G be a compact Lie group and let T : C ∞(G) → L2(G) be a linear operator, continuous on D′(G). If T is left-invariant then it is also invariant relative to the operator LG (in the sense of Theorem 4.1). The corresponding symbols are related by formulae (6.16) -- (6.18). 7. Kernels of invariant operators on compact manifolds In this section we describe invariant operators relative to E in terms of their kernels. We first observe that if T = Tσ is invariant with symbol σ, expanding Proposition FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 29 4.2 we can write Tσf (x) = ℓ (x) = ℓ (x) dℓXm=1 ∞Xℓ=0 (σ(ℓ)bf (ℓ))mem dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 ∞Xℓ=0 σ(ℓ)mkbf (ℓ)kem ℓ (x)ZM dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 =ZM dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 σ(ℓ)mkem σ(ℓ)mkem = f (y)ek ℓ (y)dy ℓ (x)ek ℓ (y)! f (y)dy. Hence, the integral kernel K(x, y) of Tσ is given by K(x, y) = ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 On the other hand we note that σ(ℓ)mkem ℓ (x)ek ℓ (y). (7.1) {em ℓ ⊗ em′ ℓ′ }1≤m≤dℓ,1≤m′≤dℓ′ ℓ,ℓ′≥0 defines an orthonormal basis of L2(M × M). If T is Hilbert-Schmidt on L2(M), not necessarily invariant, then its kernel K is square integrable and we can write its decomposition in this basis as K(x, y) = ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ′=0 dℓXm=1 ((FM ⊗ FM )K)(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′)em ℓ (x)em′ ℓ′ (y), dℓ′Xm′=1 (7.2) where ((FM ⊗ FM )K)(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′) denotes the Fourier coefficients of K with respect to the basis {em ℓ ⊗ em′ ℓ′ } given by ((FM ⊗ FM )K)(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′) =(K, em ℓ (x)em′ ℓ′ (y))L2(M ×M ) = ZM ×M K(x, y)em ℓ (x)em′ ℓ′ (y)dxdy. We observe from (7.1) and (7.2) that T is invariant relative to (E, {em only if ℓ }1≤m≤dℓ ℓ≥0 ((FM ⊗ FM )K)(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′) =(cid:26) 0, σ(ℓ)mm′, ℓ 6= ℓ′, ℓ = ℓ′. ) if and (7.3) 30 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY For example, from (7.1) we obtain (K, em ℓ (x)em′ σ(j)kiek j (x)ei ℓ (x)em′ ℓ′ (y)dxdy  ℓ′ (y))L2(M ×M ) = ZM ×M ∞Xj=0 djXi=1 djXk=1 ∞Xj=0 =(cid:26) 0, σ(ℓ)mm′, = djXk=1 djXi=1 σ(j)kiZM ℓ 6= ℓ′, ℓ = ℓ′. j(y) em ℓ (x)dxZM ek j (x)em em′ ℓ′ (y)ei j(y)dy We now introduce some notation which will be useful in order to define a suitable setting to study the above Fourier coefficients and the relation between operator's kernel and symbol. Let Σ(M × M) :=nσ = (σ(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′))1≤m≤dℓ,1≤m′≤dℓ′ 0≤ℓ,ℓ′<∞ : σ(ℓ, m, ℓ′, m′) = 0 if ℓ 6= ℓ′o , K := {K ∈ D′(M × M) : K defines an invariant operator relative to E}. We now consider the mapping K 7→ (FM ⊗ FM )K from K into Σ(M × M). We can identify the family of symbols Σ(M × M) with the matricesSℓ Cdℓ×dℓ by letting σ ≡ σ such that σ(ℓ)mm′ = σ(ℓ, m, ℓ, m′). In this way we also get the identification Σ(M × M) ≃ ΣM = Σ with Σ from (4.2). If 1 ≤ p < ∞ we define ℓp(Σ) = {σ ∈ Σ : On ℓp(Σ) we define the norm kσ(ℓ)kp Sp < ∞}. ∞Xℓ=0 kσkℓp(Σ) := ∞Xℓ=0 If p = ∞ we define kσ(ℓ)kp p Sp! 1 , 1 ≤ p < ∞. ℓ∞(Σ) = {σ ∈ Σ : sup ℓ∈N0 kσ(ℓ)kop < ∞}, and we endow ℓ∞(Σ) with the norm kσkℓ∞(Σ) := sup ℓ∈N0 kσ(ℓ)kop. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 31 The integral operator with kernel K will be sometimes denoted by TK. We note that in terms of the norms ℓp(Σ), for invariant operators Theorem 4.3 can be formulated as and Theorem 5.1 can be formulated as T ∈ L (L2(M)) ⇐⇒ σT ∈ ℓ∞(Σ), T ∈ Sp(L2(M)) ⇐⇒ σT ∈ ℓp(Σ) for 0 < p < ∞. (7.4) (7.5) For the formulation of the following theorem we will use the mixed-norm Lp spaces x Lp2 y on the manifold M for 1 ≤ p1, p2 ≤ ∞. A measurable function K(x, y) is said Lp1 to belong to Lp1 x Lp2 y (M × M) if kkK(x, y)kL y kL p2 x < ∞. p1 On Lp1 x Lp2 y (M × M) we consider the norm k · kL p1 x L p2 y y kL p2 x . We also define p1 L(p1,p2)(M × M) := Lp1 x Lp2 y (M × M) ∩ Lp1 := kk · kL y Lp2 x (M × M), endowed with norm k · kL(p1,p2) := max{k · kL p1 x L y , k · kL p2 p1 y L x }. p2 We note that in general L(p1,p2) 6= L(p2,p1). The basic properties of mixed-norm Lp spaces for many variables were first studied by Benedek and Panzone in [BP61]. In particular they proved a version of Stein's Interpolation of operators theorem and as a consequence the Riesz-Thorin theorem in that setting. A slight modification allows us to apply the Riesz-Thorin theorem when the operator T acts from a mixed-norm Lp space to an ℓp(Σ)-space. p′ = 1. Theorem 7.1. If 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and K ∈ K ∩ L(p′,p), then (FM ⊗ FM )K ∈ ℓp′(Σ), where 1 p + 1 Proof. If p = 2 we have p′ = 2. From xL2 x = K ∩ L2 K ∈ K ∩ L2 x,y ⊂ L2 x,y y ∩ L2 yL2 we get a Hilbert-Schmidt operator TK. On the other hand, by Theorem 5.1 with S2 < ∞. Hence and by (7.3) we obtain kσ(ℓ)k2 r = 2, if σ is the symbol of TK thenPℓ (FM ⊗ FM )K ∈ ℓ2(Σ). For p = 1 we have p′ = ∞. If K ∈ K ∩ L∞ x L1 y ∩ L∞ y L1 x, by Schur's Lemma we get TK ∈ L (Lr(M)) for all 1 ≤ r ≤ ∞. In particular TK ∈ L (L2(M)) and by Theorem 4.3 the symbol σ of TK satisfies sup kσ(ℓ)kop < ∞. ℓ By (7.3) we have k(FM ⊗ FM )Kkℓ∞(Σ) = sup ℓ kσ(ℓ)kop. Hence (FM ⊗ FM )K ∈ ℓ∞(Σ). We have shown that (FM ⊗ FM ) : K ∩ L(2,2) −→ ℓ2(Σ) 32 and JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY (FM ⊗ FM ) : K ∩ L(∞,1) −→ ℓ∞(Σ). By the Riesz-Thorin interpolation theorem between L(r,s) and ℓp(Σ) spaces (cf. [BP61, Theorem 2]) we obtain with 1 p 1 = 1−θ 2 + θ ∞ , 1 p 2 (FM ⊗ FM ) : K ∩ L(p1,p2) −→ ℓq(Σ), = 1−θ q = 1−θ We observe that if p = 2 2 + θ 1 , 1 2 1 − θ p1 = , p2 = 2 + θ ∞ for 0 ≤ θ ≤ 1. Hence 2 2 , q = . 1 + θ p and 2 1 − θ p−1 = p′. Thus 1+θ then θ = 2−p 1−θ = p (FM ⊗ FM ) : K ∩ L(p′,p) −→ ℓp′ (Σ), completing the proof. (cid:3) The following corollary is an immediate consequence of Theorems 7.1 and 5.1, it furnishes a sufficient kernel condition for Schatten classes with index p′ ≥ 2. Corollary 7.2. If 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and K ∈ K ∩ L(p′,p)(M × M), then TK ∈ Sp′(L2(M)). We recall that sufficient conditions of the type above in terms of kernels are not allowed for 0 < p′ < 2 as a consequence of a Carleman's example. Corollary 7.2 is known for general integral operators (cf. [Rus74, Theorem 3]). Here we have deduced a particular version for invariant operators with a simple proof by applying the notion of symbol. We now describe another representation of the kernel as the 'generalised' Fourier transform of the symbol. From formula (7.1) we have K(x, y) = = = = ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 where dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 σ(ℓ)mkem ℓ (x)ek ℓ (y) Tr(eℓ(x)⊤σ(ℓ)eℓ(y)) Tr(σ(ℓ)eℓ(y)eℓ(x)⊤) Tr(σ(ℓ)Qℓ(x, y)), We notice that the matrix-valued function Qℓ(x, y) = eℓ(y)eℓ(x)⊤ ∈ Cdℓ×dℓ. (Qℓ(x, y))mk = em ℓ (x)ek ℓ (y) is of rank one for every ℓ. Indeed, (Qℓ(x, y))mk is nothing else but the tensor product of the vectors eℓ(x), eℓ(y) ∈ Cdℓ. Since on a normed space F we have ku ⊗ vkop = kukF kvkF , we get kQℓ(x, y)kop = keℓ(x)kℓ2(Cdℓ )keℓ(y)kℓ2(Cdℓ ). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 33 From (7.2) we have Hence σ(ℓ) = ZM ×M K(x, y)Qℓ(x, y)∗dxdy. kσ(ℓ)kop ≤ kKkL1(M ×M ) sup x,y = kKkL1(M ×M ) sup x,y kQℓ(x, y)∗kop keℓ(x)kℓ2(Cdℓ )keℓ(y)kℓ2(Cdℓ ). Remark 7.3. We point out that the mere condition K ∈ L1(M × M) does not guar- antee the L2 boundedness of the corresponding integral operator T . Indeed, consider M = T1, g ∈ L1(T1)\L2(T1), h ≡ 1 ∈ L1(T1), and the kernel K(θ, φ) := g(θ)h(φ) ∈ L1(T1 × T1). It is easy to see that the kernel K(θ, φ) does not define an operator from L2(T1) into L2(T1). For example, with f = 1 ∈ L2(T1) we have (T 1)(θ) = g(θ)ZT1 h(φ)dφ = g(θ) /∈ L2(T1). 8. Applications to the nuclearity of operators in Lp(M) We now turn to the study of nuclearity in Lp-spaces on closed manifolds. Sufficient conditions for r-nuclearity on Lp on compact Lie groups have been established in [DR14b]. The study of nuclearity on Lp in this section relies on the analysis of suitable kernel decompositions and the relation between kernels and symbols described in Section 7. Let E and F be two Banach spaces and 0 < r ≤ 1, a linear operator T from E into F is called r-nuclear if there exist sequences (x′ n) in E′ and (yn) in F so that E ′kynkr F < ∞. (8.1) kx′ nkr T x =Xn hx, x′ ni yn and Xn When r = 1 they are known as nuclear operators, in that case this definition agrees with the concept of trace class operator in the setting of Hilbert spaces (E = F = H). More generally, Oloff proved in [Olo72] that the class of r-nuclear operators coincides with the Schatten class Sr(H) when E = F = H and 0 < r ≤ 1. The concept of r-nuclearity was introduced by Grothendieck [Gro55], and it has application to questions of the distribution of eigenvalues of operators in Banach spaces via e.g. the Grothendieck-Lidskii formula. We refer to [DR14b] for several conclusions in the setting of compact Lie groups concerning summability and distri- bution of eigenvalues of operators on Lp-spaces once we have information on their r-nuclearity. Since these arguments are then purely functional analytic, they apply equally well in the present setting of closed manifolds; we omit the repetition but refer the reader to [DR14b] for several relevant applications. The r-nuclear operators on Lebesgue spaces are characterised by the following the- orem (cf. [Del10]). In the statement below we consider (Ω1, M1, µ1) and (Ω2, M2, µ2) to be two σ-finite measure spaces. 34 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Theorem 8.1. Let 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞, 0 < r ≤ 1 and let q1 be such that 1 = 1. p1 An operator T : Lp1(µ1) → Lp2(µ2) is r-nuclear if and only if there exist sequences (gn)n in Lp2(µ2), and (hn)n in Lq1(µ1) such that Lq1 < ∞, and such Lp2 khnkr kgnkr + 1 q1 that for all f ∈ Lp1(µ1) we have T f (x) =Z ∞Xn=1 gn(x)hn(y)! f (y)dµ1(y), for a.e x. ∞Pn=1 In order to study nuclearity on Lp(M) spaces for a given compact manifold M of dimension n, we introduce a function Λ(j, k; n, p) which controls the Lp-norms of the family of eigenfunctions {ek j } of the operator E, i.e. we will suppose that Λ(j, k; n, p) is such that we have the estimates kek j kLp(M ) ≤ Λ(j, k; n, p). (8.2) In particular, if Λ is such a function we observe that kek j kLp(M ) ≤ vol(M) 1 p Λ(j, k; n, ∞). When M = G is a compact Lie group efficient kek j kLp(G) bounds can be obtained [DR14b]). The estimation of Lp norms for eigenfunctions of differential elliptic (cf. operators on general closed manifolds has been largely studied, see for instance [SZ02]. Some examples will be given at the end of this section. An example can be also obtained from the following simple lemma: Lemma 8.2. Let f be such that kf kL2(M ) = 1, then (i) kf kLp(M ) ≤ (vol(M)) 2−p 2p if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2. p−2 (ii) kf kLp(M ) ≤ kf k p L∞(M ) if 2 ≤ p < ∞. Proof. (i) By Holder inequality we have ZM f (x)pdx ≤(cid:18)ZM f (x)p 2 p dx(cid:19) p 2(cid:18)ZM 1p 2 2 2−p dx(cid:19) 2−p = (vol(M)) 2−p 2 . (ii) We also have ZM f (x)pdx =ZM completing the proof. f (x)p−2f (x)2dx ≤ kf kp−2 L∞(M ), (cid:3) We now formulate a sufficient condition for the r-nuclearity on Lp(M) spaces as an application of the notion of the matrix-symbol on closed manifolds. Inspired by Lemma 8.2, we will use the following function p for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞: 0 , p−2 p , 1, if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, if 2 < p < ∞, if p = ∞. (8.3) p := For p1, p2 we denote their dual indices by q1 := p′ 1, q2 := p′ 2. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 35 Theorem 8.3. Let 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞ and 0 < r ≤ 1. Let T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) be a strongly invariant linear continuous operator. Assume that its matrix-valued symbol σ(ℓ) satisfies ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm,k=1 σ(ℓ)mkrΛ(ℓ, m; n, ∞) p2rΛ(ℓ, k; n, ∞) q1r < ∞. Then the operator T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) is r-nuclear. Proof. By (7.1) the kernel of T is given by K(x, y) = ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm=1 dℓXk=1 We set σ(ℓ)mkem ℓ (x)ek ℓ (y). gℓ,m,k(x) := σ(ℓ)mkem ℓ (x), hℓ,k(y) := ek ℓ (y). Now, by Lemma 8.2 we have where Cp = max{(vol(M)) 2−p 2p , 1}. We now observe that kem ℓ kLp ≤ CpΛ(ℓ, m; n, ∞)p, kgℓ,m,kkr Lp2 khℓ,kkr Lq1 = Xℓ,m,k = ∞Xℓ=0 ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm,k=1 dℓXm,k=1 ≤(Cp2Cq1)r kσ(ℓ)mkem ℓ kr Lp2 kek ℓ kr Lq1 σ(ℓ)mkrkem ℓ kr Lp2 kek ℓ kr Lq1 ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm,k=1 σ(ℓ)mkrΛ(ℓ, m; n, ∞) p2rΛ(ℓ, k; n, ∞) q1r, finishing the proof in view of Theorem 8.1. (cid:3) In particular for formally self-adjoint invariant operators we can diagonalise each matrix σ(ℓ), so that we have Corollary 8.4. Let 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞ and 0 < r ≤ 1. Let T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) be a strongly invariant formally self-adjoint continuous operator. Assume that its matrix-valued symbol σ(ℓ) satisfies ∞Xℓ=0 dℓXm=1 σ(ℓ)mmrΛ(ℓ, m; n, ∞)( p2+ q1)r < ∞. Then the operator T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) is r-nuclear. In some cases it is possible to simplify the sufficient condition above when the control function Λ(ℓ, m; n, ∞) is independent of m. For instance a classical result (local Weyl law) due to Hormander ([Hor68, Theorem 5.1], [Hor85b, Chapter XXIX]) implies the following estimate: 36 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Lemma 8.5. Let M be a closed manifold of dimension n. Let E ∈ Ψν +e(M), then kem ℓ kL∞ ≤ Cλ n−1 2ν ℓ . (8.4) Proof. In order to explain this estimate we first consider the family of eigenvalues {λℓ} of E ordered in the increasing order 0 = λ0 ≤ λ1 ≤ · · · λℓ ≤ · · · and counted with multiplicity. For the projection Pℓ(f ) onto Hℓ, consider Eλf := Pℓ(f ) the associated partial sum operators. Its kernel is given by Pλℓ≤λ If p(x, ξ) is the principal symbol of E, by Theorem 5.1 of [Hor68] we have em ℓ (x)em ℓ (y). dℓXm=1 Eλ(x, y) = Xλℓ≤λ dℓXm=1 em Eλ(x, x) = Xλℓ≤λ ℓ (x)2 = (2π)−n Zp(x,ξ)≤λ with R(x, λ) ≤ Cλ n−1 ν , x ∈ M. dξ + R(x, λ) (8.5) Since Eµ(x, x) is increasing right-continuous with respect to µ, the fact that the dξ with respect to µ and by spectrum of E is discrete, by the continuity of taking left-hand limit in (8.5) we obtain lim µ→λ− Eµ(x, x) = Xλℓ<λ dℓXm=1 Hence em Rp(x,ξ)≤µ ℓ (x)2 = (2π)−n Zp(x,ξ)≤λ dℓXm=1 em dξ + R(x, λ−). Eλℓ(x, x) − Eλ− ℓ (x, x) = ℓ (x)2 = R(x, λℓ) − R(x, λ− ℓ ). In particular, we have em ℓ (x) ≤ 2(pR(x, λℓ) +qR(x, λ− ℓ ) ) ≤ 2Cλ n−1 2ν ℓ , (cid:3) which proves Lemma 8.5. Thus Λ(ℓ; n, ∞) = Cλ 2ν furnishes an example of Λ independent of m. For controls of type Λ(ℓ; n, ∞) we have a basis-independent condition: n−1 ℓ Corollary 8.6. Let 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞ and 0 < r ≤ 1. Let T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) be a strongly invariant formally self-adjoint continuous operator. Assume that its matrix-valued symbol σ(ℓ) satisfies kσ(ℓ)kr SrΛ(ℓ; n, ∞)( p2+ q1)r < ∞. ∞Xℓ=0 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 37 Then the operator T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) is r-nuclear. In particular, if its matrix- valued symbol σ(ℓ) satisfies kσ(ℓ)kr Sr λ (n−1) 2ν ℓ ( p2+ q1)r < ∞, (8.6) ∞Xℓ=0 then the operator T : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) is r-nuclear. Proof. Since T is E-invariant and formally self-adjoint, each matrix σ(ℓ) can be as- sumed diagonal, and the result follows from Corollary 8.4 since σ(ℓ)mmr = Tr(σ(ℓ)r) = kσ(ℓ)kr Sr, dℓXm=1 completing the proof. The r-nuclearity under condition (8.6) follows by using Lemma 8.5 and taking Λ(ℓ; n, ∞) = Cλ n−1 2ν ℓ . (cid:3) Remark 8.7. If M is a compact Lie group Corollary 8.6 absorbs Theorem 3.4 in [DR14b] by taking E to be the Laplacian and the family of eigenfunctions {ek ℓ } as in 1 (6.7). Indeed, since d and taking into (ξℓ)ij(x) ≤ d 2 ξℓ account that, by Lemma 6.1, we have one can choose Λ(ℓ; ∞) = d 1 2 ξℓ 1 2 ξℓ kσ(ℓ)kr Sr = dξℓkτ (ξℓ)kr Sr , we obtain Xℓ kσ(ℓ)kr SrΛ(ℓ; ∞)( p2+ q1)r =Xℓ 2 ( p2+ q1)r 1+ 1 ξℓ d kτ (ξℓ)kr Sr , with a right-hand side equivalent to the term giving the sufficient condition in The- orem 3.4 of [DR14b]. Indeed, 1 2 ( p2 + q1) = 1 2(cid:18)1 − 2 max{2, p2} 1 − 2 max{2, q1}(cid:19) + 1 − 1 =1 − = max{2, q1} 1 − max{2, p2} 1 , min{2, p1} max{2, p2} which was the order obtained in [DR14b, Theorem 3.4] on compact Lie groups. In order to give another example we recall Proposition 5.3 with useful relations between the eigenvalues λj and their multiplicities dj. As a consequence of Corollary 8.6 and Proposition 5.3, for the negative powers of the operator E itself we obtain: Corollary 8.8. Let 1 ≤ p1, p2 < ∞ and 0 < r ≤ 1. Let E ∈ Ψν +e(M). If α > n r + ( p2 + q1) n − 1 2 then the operator (I + E)− α ν : Lp1(M) → Lp2(M) is r-nuclear. 38 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Note that if p1 = p2 = 2, we have p2 = q1 = 0, and since Schatten class Sr and r-nuclear class coincide on L2(M), Proposition 5.4 shows that the statement of Corollary 8.8 is sharp in this case of indices. However, it does depend on the bounds for eigenvalues which can be improved in the presence of additional structures as discussed in Remark 8.9. Proof of Corollary 8.8. If we denote by λℓ the eigenvalues of E, for α > 0 we observe that σ(I+E)− α ν (ℓ) = (1 + λℓ)− α ν Idℓ. Then kσ(I+E)− α ν (ℓ)kr Sr = (1 + λℓ)− αr ν dℓ. Now by applying Corollary 8.6 we obtain kσ(ℓ)kr Srλ (n−1) 2ν ℓ ( p2+ q1)r Xℓ ≤ CXℓ dℓ(1 + λℓ)− αr ν (1 + λℓ)( p2+ q1) (n−1)r 2ν = CXℓ dℓ(1 + λℓ)(−α+( p2+ q1) (n−1) 2 ) r ν < ∞, if q = (α − ( p2 + q1) (n−1) condition α > n ) r ν > n r + ( p2 + q1) n−1 2 . 2 ν by Proposition 5.3. But this is equivalent to the (cid:3) Remark 8.9. As we pointed out in Remark 8.7, on compact Lie groups we can always choose E to be a Laplacian with an orthonormal basis given by rescaled matrix elements of representations, for which we can take Λ(ℓ; ∞) = d ℓ . At the same time, if E is an operator of second order (so that ν = 2) the best we can hope = d 1 2 ξℓ 1 4 n−1 4 ℓ 1 4 n 8 ℓ . λ view of (5.1), we always have d for on closed manifolds in general is Λ(ℓ; n, ∞) = Cλ given by Lemma 8.5. In ℓ , so that this choice on compact Lie groups is better than the general bound Λ(ℓ; n, ∞) = Cλ above. Partly, this is explained by the presence of the additional (group) structure in this case. The other point is that there is a difference in finding L∞-estimates for elements of any orthonormal basis as opposed to estimates for a favourable one that may exist due to additional assumptions or structures. However, the latter one seems to be the question much less studied in the literature, see [SZ02] or [TZ02] for some partial discussions. n−1 ℓ 4 We now give an example of the above remark in the case of the the sphere S3 ≃ SU(2). We consider the Laplacian (the Casimir element) E = −LS3. We will apply ℓ . For the 2 , since the eigenvalues of I + E are of the form (1 + ℓ)ℓ we obtain the condition given by Theorem 8.6 along with the control Λ(ℓ, ∞) = d symbol of (I + E)− α 1 4 kσ(I+E)− α 2 (ℓ)kr Sr = ((1 + ℓ)ℓ)− αr 2 dℓ ≈ ((1 + ℓ)ℓ)− αr 2 ℓ2 ≈ (1 + ℓ2)1− αr 2 . Therefore, using dℓ ≈ ℓ2, kσ(I+E)− α 2 (ℓ)kr Xℓ SrΛ(ℓ, ∞)( p2+ q1)r ≤Xℓ ≈Xℓ (1 + ℓ2)1− αr 2 ℓ 1 2 ( p2+ q1)r (1 + ℓ)2−αr+ 1 2 ( p2+ q1)r. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 39 The series on the right-hand side converges if and only if 2 − αr + 1 Thus, the condition 2( p2 + q1)r < −1. α > ensures the membership of (I + E)− α we have proved the following: + 1 2 ( p2 + q1) 3 r 2 in the Schatten class of order r. Summarising, Corollary 8.10. If α > 3 r-nuclear from Lp1(S3) into Lp2(S3). r + 1 2( p2 + q1), 0 < r ≤ 1, the operator (I − LS3)− α 2 is Corollary 8.10 gives a direct proof of Corollary 3.19 in [DR14b] which was proved there in the group setting. Remark 8.11. It is clear that the sharpness of the sufficient conditions obtained in this section depends on how sharp is the Λ function we can choose. For instance the best situation for Λ(ℓ, ∞) is when it can be chosen constant, i.e. when the eigenfunctions are uniformly bounded. This is the case of the torus Tn and unfortunately may be essentially the only one, see [TZ02]. References [Ati68] M. F. Atiyah. Global aspects of the theory of elliptic differential operators. In Proc. In- ternat. Congr. Math. (Moscow, 1966), pages 57 -- 64. Izdat. "Mir", Moscow, 1968. [BBR96] P. Boggiatto, E. Buzano, and L. Rodino. Global hypoellipticity and spectral theory, vol- ume 92 of Mathematical Research. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1996. [BN04] E. Buzano and F. Nicola. Pseudo-differential operators and Schatten-von Neumann classes. In Advances in pseudo-differential operators, volume 155 of Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., pages 117 -- 130. Birkhauser, Basel, 2004. [BN07] E. Buzano and F. Nicola. Complex powers of hypoelliptic pseudodifferential operators. J. Funct. Anal., 245(2):353 -- 378, 2007. [BP61] A. Benedek and R. D. Panzone. The spaces Lp, with mixed norms. Duke. Math. J., 28:301 -- 324, 1961. [Bru68] F. Bruhat. Lectures on Lie groups and representations of locally compact groups. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay, 1968. Notes by S. Ramanan, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Lectures on Mathematics, No. 14. [BT10] E. Buzano and J. Toft. Schatten-von Neumann properties in the Weyl calculus. J. Funct. Anal., 259(12):3080 -- 3114, 2010. [Car16] T. Carleman. Uber die Fourierkoeffizienten einer stetigen Funktion. Acta Math., 41(1):377 -- 384, 1916. Aus einem Brief an Herrn A. Wiman. [Cho11] O. Chodosh. Infinite matrix representations of isotropic pseudodifferential operators. Meth- [Del10] [Dix77] [Dix96] [DR13] ods Appl. Anal., 18(4):351 -- 371, 2011. J. Delgado. The trace of nuclear operators on Lp(µ) for σ-finite Borel measures on second countable spaces. Integral Equations Operator Theory, 68(1):61 -- 74, 2010. J. Dixmier. C ∗-algebras. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977. Translated from the French by Francis Jellett, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15. J. Dixmier. Les alg`ebres d'op´erateurs dans l'espace hilbertien (alg`ebres de von Neu- mann). Les Grands Classiques Gauthier-Villars. [Gauthier-Villars Great Classics]. ´Editions Jacques Gabay, Paris, 1996. Reprint of the second (1969) edition. J. Delgado and M. Ruzhansky. Schatten classes and traces on compact Lie groups. arXiv:1303.3914v1, 2013. [DR14a] J. Delgado and M. Ruzhansky. Kernel and symbol criteria for Schatten classes and r- nuclearity on compact manifolds. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 352(10):779 -- 784, 2014. 40 JULIO DELGADO AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY [DR14b] J. Delgado and M. Ruzhansky. Lp-nuclearity, traces, and Grothendieck-Lidskii formula on compact Lie groups. J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 102(1):153 -- 172, 2014. [DR14c] J. Delgado and M. Ruzhansky. Schatten classes on compact manifolds: kernel conditions. [Dui11] [GK69] J. Duistermaat. Fourier J. Funct. Anal., 267(3):772 -- 798, 2014. J. operators. Modern Birkhauser Classics. Birkhauser/Springer, New York, 2011. Reprint of the 1996 edition [MR1362544], based on the original lecture notes published in 1973 [MR0451313]. I. C. Gohberg and M. G. Kreın. Introduction to the theory of linear nonselfadjoint ope- rators. Translated from the Russian by A. Feinstein. Translations of Mathematical Mono- graphs, Vol. 18. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1969. integral [Gro55] A. Grothendieck. Produits tensoriels topologiques et espaces nucl´eaires. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 1955(16):140, 1955. [GW73] S. J. Greenfield and N. R. Wallach. Remarks on global hypoellipticity. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 183:153 -- 164, 1973. [Hor68] L. Hormander. The spectral function of an elliptic operator. Acta Math., 121:193 -- 218, 1968. [Hor85a] L. Hormander. The Analysis of linear partial differential operators, vol. III. Springer- Verlag, 1985. [Hor85b] L. Hormander. The Analysis of linear partial differential operators, vol. IV. Springer- Verlag, 1985. [HP10] A. Hinrichs and A. Pietsch. p-nuclear operators in the sense of Grothendieck. Math. Nachr., 283(2):232 -- 261, 2010. [Kon78] H. Konig. Eigenvalues of p-nuclear operators. In Proceedings of the International Confer- ence on Operator Algebras, Ideals, and their Applications in Theoretical Physics (Leipzig, 1977), pages 106 -- 113, Leipzig, 1978. Teubner. [NR10] F. Nicola and L. Rodino. Global pseudo-differential calculus on Euclidean spaces, volume 4 of Pseudo-Differential Operators. Theory and Applications. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 2010. [Olo72] R. Oloff. p-normierte Operatorenideale. Beitrage Anal., (4):105 -- 108, 1972. Tagungsbericht zur Ersten Tagung der WK Analysis (1970). [Pie84] A. Pietsch. Grothendieck's concept of a p-nuclear operator. Integral Equations Operator Theory, 7(2):282 -- 284, 1984. [RL13] O. I. Reinov and Q. Laif. Grothendieck-Lidskii theorem for subspaces of Lp−spaces. Math. Nachr., (2 -- 3):279 -- 282, 2013. [RS75] M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of modern mathematical physics. II. Fourier analysis, self-adjointness. Academic Press [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers], New York, 1975. [RS80] M. Reed and B. Simon. Methods of modern mathematical physics. I. Academic Press, Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], New York, second edition, 1980. Functional analysis. [RT10] M. Ruzhansky and V. Turunen. Pseudo-differential operators and symmetries. Background analysis and advanced topics, volume 2 of Pseudo-Differential Operators. Theory and Ap- plications. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 2010. [RT13] M. Ruzhansky and V. Turunen. Global quantization of pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups, SU(2), 3-sphere, and homogeneous spaces. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (11):2439 -- 2496, 2013. [RT15] M. Ruzhansky and N. Tokmagambetov. Nonharmonic analysis of boundary value prob- lems. Int. Math. Res. Notices, doi: 10.1093/imrn/rnv243, 2015. [Rus74] B. Russo. The Norm of the Lp-Fourier Transform on Unimodular Groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 192(2):293 -- 305, 1974. [Sch70] R. Schatten. Norm ideals of completely continuous operators. Second printing. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 27. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1970. [See65] R. T. Seeley. Integro-differential operators on vector bundles. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 117:167 -- 204, 1965. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS, SYMBOLS AND NUCLEARITY ON COMPACT MANIFOLDS 41 [See67] R. T. Seeley. Complex powers of an elliptic operator. In Singular Integrals (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Chicago, Ill., 1966), pages 288 -- 307. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, R.I., 1967. [See69] R. T. Seeley. Eigenfunction expansions of analytic functions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 21:734 -- 738, 1969. [Shu01] M. A. Shubin. Pseudodifferential operators and spectral theory. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, second edition, 2001. Translated from the 1978 Russian original by Stig I. Andersson. [Sim79] B. Simon. Trace ideals and their applications, volume 35 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979. [Sob14] A. V. Sobolev. On the Schatten -- von Neumann properties of some pseudo-differential ope- rators. J. Funct. Anal., 266(9):5886 -- 5911, 2014. [Ste70] E. M. Stein. Topics in harmonic analysis related to the Littlewood-Paley theory. Annals of Mathematics Studies, No. 63. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1970. [Str72] R. S. Strichartz. A functional calculus for elliptic pseudo-differential operators. Amer. J. [SZ02] [Tof06] [Tof08] [TZ02] Math., 94:711 -- 722, 1972. C. Sogge and S. Zelditch. Riemannian manifolds with maximal eigenfunction growth. Duke Math. J., 114(3):387 -- 437, 2002. J. Toft. Schatten-von Neumann properties in the Weyl calculus, and calculus of metrics on symplectic vector spaces. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 30(2):169 -- 209, 2006. J. Toft. Schatten properties for pseudo-differential operators on modulation spaces. In Pseudo-differential operators, volume 1949 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 175 -- 202. Springer, Berlin, 2008. J. Toth and S. Zelditch. Riemannian manifolds with uniformly bounded eigenfunctions. Duke Math. J., 111(1):97 -- 132, 2002. Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, 180 Queen's Gate, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, 180 Queen's Gate, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom E-mail address: [email protected]
1207.5749	1	1207	2012-07-24T17:09:12	The Bochner-Riesz means for Fourier-Bessel expansions: norm inequalities for the maximal operator and almost everywhere convergence	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper, we develop a thorough analysis of the boundedness properties of the maximal operator for the Bochner-Riesz means related to the Fourier-Bessel expansions. For this operator, we study weighted and unweighted inequalities in the spaces L^p((0,1),x^{2\nu+1}dx). Moreover, weak and restricted weak type inequalities are obtained for the critical values of p. As a consequence, we deduce the almost everywhere pointwise convergence of these means.	math.FA	math	THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS: NORM INEQUALITIES FOR THE MAXIMAL OPERATOR AND ALMOST EVERYWHERE CONVERGENCE ´OSCAR CIAURRI AND LUZ RONCAL Abstract. In this paper, we develop a thorough analysis of the boundedness properties of the maximal operator for the Bochner-Riesz means related to the Fourier-Bessel expansions. For this operator, we study weighted and un- weighted inequalities in the spaces Lp((0, 1), x2ν+1 dx). Moreover, weak and restricted weak type inequalities are obtained for the critical values of p. As a consequence, we deduce the almost everywhere pointwise convergence of these means. 1. Introduction and main results Let Jν be the Bessel function of order ν. For ν > −1 we have that j, k = 1, 2, . . . Jν(sjx)Jν (skx)x dx = (Jν+1(sj))2δj,k, 1 2 Z 1 0 where {sj}j≥1 denotes the sequence of successive positive zeros of Jν. From the previous identity we can check that the system of functions √2 Jν+1(sj) (1) ψj(x) = x−ν Jν(sjx), j = 1, 2, . . . is orthonormal and complete in L2((0, 1), dµν), with dµν (x) = x2ν+1 dx (for the completeness, see [12]). Given a function f on (0, 1), its Fourier series associated with this system, named as Fourier-Bessel series, is defined by (2) f ∼ ∞ Xj=1 aj(f )ψj , with aj(f ) =Z 1 0 f (y)ψj(y) dµν(y), provided the integral exists. When ν = n/2− 1, for n ∈ N and n ≥ 2, the functions ψj are the eigenfunctions of the radial Laplacian in the multidimensional ball Bn. The eigenvalues are the elements of the sequence {s2 j}j≥1. The Fourier-Bessel series corresponds with the radial case of the multidimensional Fourier-Bessel expansions analyzed in [1]. For each δ > 0, we define the Bochner-Riesz means for Fourier-Bessel series as R(f, x) =Xj≥1 1 − Bδ s2 j R2!δ + aj(f )ψj(x), Date: July 24, 2012. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 42C10, Secondary: 42C20, 42A45. Key words and phrases. Fourier-Bessel expansions, Bochner-Riesz means, almost everywhere convergence, maximal operators, weighted inequalities. Research supported by the grant MTM2009-12740-C03-03 from Spanish Government. 1 2 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL where R > 0 and (1 − s2)+ = max{1 − s2, 0}. Bochner-Riesz means are a regular summation method used oftenly in harmonic analysis. It is very common to analyze regular summation methods for Fourier series when the convergence of the partial sum fails. Ces`aro means are other of the most usual summation methods. B. Muckenhoupt and D. W. Webb [14] give inequalities for Ces`aro means of Laguerre polynomial series and for the supremum of these means with certain parameters and 1 < p ≤ ∞. For p = 1, they prove a weak type result. They also obtain similar estimates for Ces`aro means of Hermite polynomial series and for the supremum of those means in [15]. An almost everywhere convergence result is obtained as a corollary in [14] and [15]. The result about Laguerre polynomials is an extension of a previous result in [18]. This kind of matters has been also studied by the first author and J. L. Varona in [7] for the Ces`aro means of generalized Hermite expansions. The Ces`aro means for Jacobi polynomials were analyzed by S. Chanillo and B. Muckenhoupt in [3]. The Bochner-Riesz means themselves have been analyzed for the Fourier transform and their boundedness properties in Lp(Rn) is an important unsolved problem for n > 2 (the case n = 2 is well understood, see [2]). The target of this paper is twofold. First we will analyze the almost everywhere (a. e.) convergence, for functions in Lp((0, 1), dµν), of the Bochner-Riesz means for Fourier-Bessel expansions. By the general theory [8, Ch. 2], to obtain this result we need to estimate the maximal operator R>0(cid:12)(cid:12)Bδ Bδ(f, x) = sup in the Lp((0, 1), dµν) spaces. A deep analysis of the boundedness properties of this operator will be the second goal of our paper. This part of our work is strongly inspired by the results given in [3] for the Fourier-Jacobi expansions. R(f, x)(cid:12)(cid:12) , Before giving our results we introduce some notation. Being p0 = 4(ν+1) 2ν+3+2δ and p1 = 4(ν+1) 2ν+1−2δ , we define (3) p0, p0(δ) =(1, p1(δ) =(∞, p1, δ > ν + 1/2 or − 1 < ν ≤ −1/2, δ ≤ ν + 1/2 and ν > −1/2, δ > ν + 1/2 or − 1 < ν ≤ −1/2, δ ≤ ν + 1/2 and ν > −1/2. Concerning to the a. e. convergence of the Bochner-Riesz means, our result reads as follows Theorem 1. Let ν > −1, δ > 0, and 1 ≤ p < ∞. Then, Bδ R(f, x) → f (x) a. e., for f ∈ Lp((0, 1), dµν) if and only if p0(δ) ≤ p, where p0(δ) is as in (3). Proof of Theorem 1 is contained in Section 2 and is based on the following arguments. On one hand, to prove the necessity part, we will show the existence of functions in Lp((0, 1), dµν) for p < p0(δ) such that Bδ R diverges for them. In order to do this, we will use a reasoning similar to the one given by C. Meaney in [13] that we describe in Section 2. On the other hand, for the sufficiency, observe that the convergence result follows from the study of the maximal operator Bδf . Indeed, it is sufficient to get (p0(δ), p0(δ))-weak type estimates for this operator and this will be the content of Theorem 3. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 3 Regarding the boundedness properties of Bδf we have the following facts. First, a result containing the (p, p)-strong type inequality. Theorem 2. Let ν > −1, δ > 0, and 1 < p ≤ ∞. Then, if and only if (cid:13)(cid:13)Bδf(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkLp((0,1),dµν ) (1 < p ≤ ∞, p0 < p < p1, for −1 < ν ≤ −1/2 or δ > ν + 1/2, for δ ≤ ν + 1/2 and ν > −1/2. In the lower critical value of p0(δ) we can prove a (p0(δ), p0(δ))-weak type esti- mate. Theorem 3. Let ν > −1, δ > 0, and p0(δ) be the number in (3). Then, with C independent of f . (cid:13)(cid:13)Bδf(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp0(δ),∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkLp0(δ)((0,1),dµν ), Finally, for the upper critical value, when 0 < δ < ν + 1/2 and ν > −1/2, it is possible to obtain a (p1, p1)-restricted weak type estimate. Theorem 4. Let ν > −1/2 and 0 < δ < ν + 1/2. Then, for all measurable subsets E of (0, 1) and C independent of E. (cid:13)(cid:13)BδχE(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp1,∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkχEkLp1 ((0,1),dµν ), The previous results about norm inequalities are summarized in Figure 1 (case −1 < ν ≤ −1/2) and Figure 2 (case ν > −1/2). δ δ g n o r t s - ) p , p ( 0 k a e w - ) p , p ( g n o r t s - ) p , p ( δ = ν + 1 2 ( p , p ) - r e s t r i c . 1 p 1 0 w e a k 2ν+1 4(ν+1) k a e w - ) p , p ( ( p, p )- w ea k 2ν+3 4(ν+1) 1 p 1 Figure 1: case −1 < ν ≤ − 1 2 . Figure 2: case ν > − 1 2 . At this point, a comment is in order. Note that J. E. Gilbert [9] also proves weak type norm inequalities for maximal operators associated with orthogonal ex- pansions. The method used cannot be applied in our case, and the reason is the same as can be read in [3], at the end of Sections 15 and 16 therein. Following the technique in [9] we have to analyze some weak type inequalities for Hardy opera- tor and its adjoint with weights and these inequalities do not hold for p = p0 and p = p1. 4 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL The proof of the sufficiency in Theorem 2 will be deduced from a more general result in which we analyze the boundedness of the operator Bδf with potential weights. Before stating it, we need a previous definition. We say that the parame- ters (b, B, ν, δ) satisfy the Cp conditions if (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) p b > −2(ν + 1) B < 2(ν + 1)(cid:18)1 − b > 2(ν + 1)(cid:18) 1 2 − B ≤ 2(ν + 1)(cid:18) 1 2 − B ≤ b, 1 (≥ if p = ∞), p(cid:19) (≤ if p = 1), p(cid:19) − δ − p(cid:19) + δ + 1 2 1 2 , 1 1 (≥ if p = ∞), and in at least one of each of the following pairs the inequality is strict: (5) and (8), (6) and (8), and (7) and (8) except for p = ∞. The result concerning inequalities with potential weights is the following. Theorem 5. Let ν > −1, δ > 0, and 1 < p ≤ ∞. If (b, B, ν, δ) satisfy the Cp conditions, then with C independent of f . (cid:13)(cid:13)xbBδf(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkxBfkLp((0,1),dµν ), A result similar to Theorem 5 for the partial sum operator was proved in [10, Theorem 1]. It followed from a weighted version of a general Gilbert's maximal transference theorem, see [9, Theorem 1]. The weighted extension of Gilbert's result given in [10] depended heavily on the Ap theory and it can not be used in our case because it did not capture all the information relative to the weights. On the other hand, it is also remarkable the paper by K. Stempak [19] in which maximal inequalities for the partial sum operator of Fourier-Bessel expansions and divergence and convergence results are discussed. The necessity in Theorem 2 will follow by showing that the operator Bδf is neither (p1, p1)-weak nor (p0, p0)-strong for ν > −1/2 and 0 < δ ≤ ν + 1/2. This is the content of the next theorems. Theorem 6. Let ν > −1/2. Then kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1kBδ sup RfkLp1,∞((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C(log R)1/p0 , if 0 < δ < ν + 1/2; and kf kL∞((0,1),dµν )=1kBδ sup RfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C log R, if δ = ν + 1/2. Theorem 7. Let ν > −1/2. Then sup E⊂(0,1) kBδ RχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) kχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C(log R)1/p0 , THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 5 if 0 < δ < ν + 1/2; and sup kf kL1((0,1),dµν )=1kBδ RfkL1((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C log R, if δ = ν + 1/2. The paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we give the proof of Theorem 1. In Section 3 we first relate the Bochner-Riesz means Bδ R to the Bochner- Riesz means operator associated with the Fourier-Bessel system in the Lebesgue measure setting. Then, we prove weighted inequalities for the supremum of this new operator. With the connection between these means and the operator Bδ R, we obtain Theorem 5 and, as a consequence, the sufficiency of Theorem 2. Sections 4 and 5 will be devoted to the proofs of Theorems 3 and 4, respectively. The proofs of Theorems 6 and 7 are contained in Section 6. One of the main ingredients in the proofs of Theorems 6 and 7 will be Lemma 15, this lemma is rather technical and it will be proved in the Section 7. Throughout the paper, we will use the following notation: for each p ∈ [1,∞], p′ = 1. We shall write X ≃ Y we will denote by p′ the conjugate of p, that is, 1 when simultaneously X ≤ CY and Y ≤ CX. p + 1 2. Proof of Theorem 1 The proof of the sufficiency follows from Theorem 3 and standard arguments. In order to prove the necessity, let us see that, for 0 < δ < ν + 1/2 and ν > −1/2, R(f, x) diverges. there exists a function f ∈ Lp((0, 1), dµν ), p ∈ [1, p0), for which Bδ We follow some ideas contained in [13] and [19]. First, we need a few more ingredients. Recall the well-known asymptotics for the Bessel functions (see [20, Chapter 7]) Jν(z) = zν 2νΓ(ν + 1) + O(zν+2), z < 1, arg(z) ≤ π, (9) and (10) π z ≥ 1, νπ 2 − πz hcos(cid:16)z − 4(cid:17) + O(eIm(z)z−1)i , Jν(z) =r 2 where Dν = −(νπ/2 + π/4). It will also be useful the fact that (cf. [6, (2.6)]) (11) For our purposes, we need estimates for the Lp norms of the functions ψj. These estimates are contained in the following lemma, whose proof can be read in [5, Lemma 2.1]. Lemma 1. Let 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ and ν > −1. Then, for ν > −1/2, arg(z) ≤ π − θ, sj = O(j). kψjkLp((0,1),dµν ) ≃  , p j(ν+1/2)− 2(ν+1) (log j)1/p, 1, if p > 2(ν+1) ν+1/2 , if p = 2(ν+1) ν+1/2 , if p < 2(ν+1) ν+1/2 , and, for −1 < ν ≤ −1/2, kψjkLp((0,1),dµν ) ≃(1, jν+1/2, if p < ∞, if p = ∞. 6 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL We will also use a slight modification of a result by G. H. Hardy and M. Riesz for the Riesz means of order δ, that is contained in [11, Theorem 21]. We present here this result, adapted to the Bochner-Riesz means. We denote by SR(f, x) the partial sum associated to the Fourier-Bessel expansion, namely SR(f, x) = X0<sj ≤R The result reads as follows. aj(f )ψj(x). Lemma 2. Suppose that f can be expressed as a Fourier-Bessel expansion and for some δ > 0 and x ∈ (0, 1) its Bochner-Riesz means Bδ R(f, x) converges to c as R → ∞. Then, for sn ≤ R < sn+1, SR(f, x) − c ≤ Aδnδ sup 0<t≤sn+1 Bδ t (f, x). By using this lemma, we can write sup 0 > 2(ν+1) ν+1/2 , and δ < ν + 1/2 − 2(ν+1) 0<t≤sj+1 Bδ (12) aj(f )ψj(x) = (Ssj (f, x) − c) − (Ssj−1 (f, x) − c) ≤ Aδjδ t (f, x). Let us proceed with the proof of the necessity. Let 1 ≤ p < p0. Note that p′ 0 = p1. Therefore, p′ > p′ := λ. By Lemma 1, kψjkLp′ ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ Cjλ. Then, we have that the mapping f 7→ aj(f ), where aj(f ) was given in (2), is a bounded linear functional on Lp((0, 1), dµν ) with norm bounded below by a constant multiple of jλ. By uniform boundedness principle, for p conjugate to p′ and each 0 ≤ ε < λ, there is a function f0 ∈ Lp((0, 1), dµν) so that aj(f0)j−ε → ∞ as j → ∞. By taking ε = δ, we have that (13) p′ aj(f0)j−δ → ∞ as j → ∞. Suppose now that Bδ R(f0, x) converges. Then, by Egoroff's theorem, it converges on a subset E of positive measure in (0, 1) and, clearly, we can think that E ⊂ (η, 1) for some fixed η > 0. For each x ∈ E, we can consider j such that sjx ≥ 1 and, by (10), aj(f0)ψj (x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)aj(f0)(cid:16) √2 √2 x−ν Jν(sjx) − + aj(f0) Jν+1(sj) πsjx(cid:17)1/2 x−ν(cid:16) 2 Jν+1(sj) x−ν(cid:16) 2 √2 Jν+1(sj) √2 Jν+1(sj )aj(f0)x−ν−1/2(cid:0)O((sj x)−1) + cos(sjx + Dν)(cid:1) cos(sj x + Dν )(cid:12)(cid:12) ≃ aj(f0)x−ν−1/2(cos(sjx + Dν) + O((sj x)−1)). cos(sjx + Dν)(cid:17) πsjx(cid:17)1/2 = Cs−1/2 j By (12) on this set E, aj(f0)x−ν−1/2(cos(sjx + Dν) + O((j)−1)) ≤ Aδjδ t (f0, x) ≤ KEjδ, uniformly on x ∈ E. We also used (11) in the latter. The inequality above is equivalent to 0<t≤sj+1 Bδ sup aj(f0)(cos(sj x + Dν) + O(j−1)) ≤ KExν+1/2jδ ≤ KEjδ. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 7 Therefore, (14) Now, taking the functions aj(f0)j−δ(cos(sjx + Dν) + O((j)−1)) ≤ KE. Fj (x) = aj(f0)j−δ(cos(sj x + Dν) + O(j−1)), x ∈ E, and using an argument based on the Cantor-Lebesgue and Riemann-Lebesgue the- orems, see [13, Section 1.5] and [21, Section IX.1], we obtain that ZE Fj (x)2 dx ≥ Caj(f0)j−δ2E, where, as usual, E denotes the Lebesgue measure of the set E. On the other hand, by (14), ZE Fj(x)2 dx ≤ K 2 EE. Then, from the previous estimates, it follows that aj(f0)j−δ ≤ C, which contra- dicts (13). 3. Bochner-Riesz means for Fourier-Bessel expansions in the Lebesgue measure setting. Proof of Theorem 5 For our convenience, we are going to introduce a new orthonormal system. We will take the functions φj(x) = √2xJν(sjx) Jν+1(sj) , j = 1, 2, . . . . These functions are a slight modification of the functions (1); in fact, φj (x) = xν+1/2ψj (x). In this case, the corresponding Fourier-Bessel expansion of a function f is (15) The system {φj(x)}j≥1 is a complete orthonormal basis of L2((0, 1), dx). f (y)φj(y) dy(cid:19) bj(f ) =(cid:18)Z 1 bj(f )φj (x), f ∼ with 0 ∞ Xj=1 provided the integral exists, and for δ > 0 the Bochner-Riesz means of this expan- sion are where R > 0 and (1 − s2)+ = max{1 − s2, 0}. It follows that s2 j R2!δ + bj(f )φj (x), f (y)K δ R(x, y) dy s2 j R2!δ + φj(x)φj (y). Bδ K δ 0 Bδ R(f, x) =Xj≥1 1 − R(f, x) =Z 1 R(x, y) =Xj≥1 1 − Rf (x) =Z 1 Bδ 0 f (y)Kδ R(x, y) dµν (y), where (16) Our next target is the proof of Theorem 5. Taking into account that 8 where ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL R(x, y) =Xj≥1 1 − Kδ s2 j R2!δ + ψj(x)ψj (y), it is clear, from (15), that Kδ that the inequality R(x, y) = (xy)−(ν+1/2)K δ R(x, y). Then, it is verified kxbBδ(f, x)kLp((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkxBf (x)kLp((0,1),dµν ) is equivalent to kxb+(ν+1/2)(2/p−1)Bδ(f, x)kLp((0,1),dx) ≤ CkxB+(ν+1/2)(2/p−1)f (x)kLp((0,1),dx), that is, we can focus on the study of a weighted inequality for the operator Bδ The first results about convergence of this operator can be found in [4]. R(f, x). We are going to prove an inequality of the form kxaBδ(f, x)kLp((0,1),dx) ≤ CkxAf (x)kLp((0,1),dx) for δ > 0, 1 < p ≤ ∞, under certain conditions for a, A, ν and δ. Besides, a weighted weak type result for supR>0 Bδ R(f, x) will be proved for p = 1. The abovementioned conditions are the following. Let ν > −1, δ > 0 and 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞; parameters (a, A, ν, δ) will be said to satisfy the cp conditions provided (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) a > −1/p − (ν + 1/2) (≥ if p = ∞), A < 1 − 1/p + (ν + 1/2) (≤ if p = 1), a > −δ − 1/p (≥ if p = ∞), A ≤ 1 + δ − 1/p, A ≤ a and in at least one of each of the following pairs the inequality is strict: (18) and (21), (19) and (21), and (20) and (21) except for p = ∞. The main results in this section are the following: Theorem 8. Let ν > −1, δ > 0 and 1 < p ≤ ∞. If (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the cp conditions, then kxaBδ(f, x)kLp((0,1),dx) ≤ CkxAf (x)kLp((0,1),dx), with C independent of f . Theorem 9. Let ν > −1 and δ > 0. If (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the c1 conditions and Eλ =(cid:26)x ∈ (0, 1) : xa sup R>0(cid:0)Bδ R(f, x)(cid:1) > λ(cid:27) , then Eλ ≤ C kxAf (x)kL1((0,1),dx) λ , with C independent of f and λ. Note that, taking a = b + (ν + 1/2)(2/p − 1) and A = B + (ν + 1/2)(2/p − 1), Theorem 5 follows from Theorem 8. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 9 The proofs of Theorem 8 and Theorem 9 will be achieved by decomposing the square (0, 1) × (0, 1) into five regions and obtaining the estimates therein. The regions will be: (22) A1 = {(x, y) : 0 < x, y ≤ 4/R}, A2 = {(x, y) : 4/R < max{x, y} < 1, x − y ≤ 2/R}, A3 = {(x, y) : 4/R ≤ x < 1, 0 < y ≤ x/2}, A4 = {(x, y) : 0 < x ≤ y/2, 4/R ≤ y < 1}, A5 = {(x, y) : 4/R < x < 1, x/2 < y < x − 2/R} ∪ {(x, y) : y/2 < x ≤ y − 2/R, 4/R ≤ y < 1}. Theorem 8 and Theorem 9 will follow by showing that, if 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, then sup (23) y−AxaK δ holds for j = 1, 3, 4 and that R>0Z 1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) R(x, y)f (y)χAj dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,1),dx) 0 (24) y−AxaK δ R(x, y)f (y)χAj dy ≤ CM (f, x), Z 1 0 for j = 2, 5, where M is the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function of f , and C is independent of R, x and f . These results and the fact that M is (1, 1)-weak and (p, p)-strong if 1 < p ≤ ∞ complete the proofs. K δ To get (23) and (24) we will use a very precise pointwise estimate for the kernel R(x, y), obtained in [4]; there, it was shown that (25) with (26) K δ (xy)ν+1/2R2(ν+1), R, Φν (Rx)Φν (Ry) R(x, y) ≤ C  Φν (t) =(tν+1/2, Rδ x−yδ+1 1, , if 0 < t < 2, if t ≥ 2. (x, y) ∈ A1, (x, y) ∈ A2 (x, y) ∈ A3 ∪ A4 ∪ A5, The proof of (24) follows from the given estimate for the kernel K δ In the case of A2, from K δ R(x, y) and y−Axa ≃ C in A2 ∪ A5 because A ≤ a. R(x, y) ≤ CR we deduce easily the required inequality. For A5 the result is a consequence of Φν(Rx)Φν (Ry) ≤ C and of a decomposition of the region in strips such that Rx − y ≃ 2k, with k = 0, . . . , [log2 R] − 1; this can be seen in [4, p. 109] In this manner, to complete the proofs of Theorem 8 and Theorem 9 we only have to show (23) for j = 1, 3, 4 in the conditions cp for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, and this is the content of Corollary 1 in Subsection 3.2. In its turn, Corollary 1 follows from Lemmas 9 and 10 in the same subsection. Previously, Subsection 3.1 contains some technical lemmas that will be used in the proofs of Lemmas 9 and 10. 3.1. Technical Lemmas. To prove (23) for j = 1, 3, 4 we will use an interpolation argument based on six lemmas. These are stated below. They are small modifica- tions of the six lemmas contained in Section 3 of [14] where a sketch of their proofs can be found. 10 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL Lemma 3. Let ξ0 > 0, if r < −1, r + t ≤ −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1, then for p = 1 xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup ξ0≤ξ≤x ξsZ x ξ ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) with C independent of f . If r ≤ 0, r + t ≤ −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1 with equality holding in at most one of the first two inequalities, then this holds for p = ∞. Lemma 4. Let ξ0 > 0, if t ≤ 0, r + t ≤ −1 and r + s+ t ≤ −1, with strict inequality in the last two in case of equality in the first, then for p = 1 xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup ξ0≤ξ≤x ξsZ ∞ x ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) with C independent of f . If t < −1, r + t ≤ −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1, then this holds for p = ∞. Lemma 5. If s < 0, s + t ≤ 0 and r + s + t ≤ −1,with equality holding in at most one of the last two inequalities, then for p = 1 ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup ξ≥x ξsZ ξ x ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) with C independent of f . If s < 0, s + t ≤ −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1 this holds for p = ∞. Lemma 6. If t ≤ 0, s + t ≤ 0 and r + s + t ≤ −1,with strict inequality holding in the first two in case the third is an equality, then for p = 1 xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup ξ≥x ξsZ ∞ ξ ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) with C independent of f . If t < −1, s + t ≤ −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1 then this holds for p = ∞. Lemma 7. If s < 0, r + s < −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1, then for p = 1 xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup ξ≥x ξsZ x 1 ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) with C independent of f . If s < 0, r + s ≤ 0 and r + s + t ≤ −1, with equality holding in at most one of the last two inequalities, this holds for p = ∞. Lemma 8. If r < −1, r + s < −1 and r + s + t ≤ −1, then for p = 1 xrχ[1,∞)(x) sup 1≤ξ≤x ξsZ ξ 1 ytf (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kLp((0,∞),dx) with C independent of f . If r ≤ 0, r + s ≤ 0 and r + s + t ≤ −1, with equality in at most one of the last two inequalities, this holds for p = ∞. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 11 3.2. Proofs of Theorem 8 and Theorem 9 for regions A1, A3 and A4. This section contains the proofs of the inequality (23) for regions A1, A3 and A4. The results we will prove are included in the following Lemma 9. If ν > −1, δ > 0, R > 0, j = 1, 3, 4 and (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the c1 conditions, then (23) holds for p = 1 with C independent of f . Lemma 10. If ν > −1, δ > 0, R > 0, j = 1, 3, 4 and (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the c∞ conditions, then (23) holds for p = ∞ with C independent of f . Corollary 1. If 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, ν > −1, δ > 0, R > 0, (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the cp conditions and j = 1, 3, 4, then (23) holds with C independent of f . Proof of Corollary 1. It is enough to observe that if 1 < p < ∞ and (a, A, ν, δ) satisfy the cp conditions, then (a−1+1/p, A−1+1/p, ν, δ) satisfy the c1 conditions. So, by Lemma 9 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Z 1 0 sup R≥0Z 1 0 y−A+1−1/pxa−1+1/pK δ R(x, y)χAj (x, y)f (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)L1((0,1),dx) ≤ Ckf (x)kL1((0,1),dx), and this is equivalent to xa+1/p(cid:18)sup R≥0Z 1 0 K δ R(x, y)χAj (x, y)f (y) dy(cid:19) dx x ≤ CZ 1 0 xA+1/pf (x) dx x , where j = 1, 3, 4. Similarly, if (a, A, ν, δ) verify the cp conditions, then (a + 1/p, A + 1/p, ν, δ) satisfy the c∞ conditions. Hence, by Lemma 10 Now, we can use the Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem to obtain the inequality ≤ CkxA+1/pf (x)kL∞((0,1),dx). xa+1/p sup R≥0Z 1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Z 1 0 (cid:18)xa+1/p(cid:18)sup 0 K δ R(x, y)χAj (x, y)f (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)L∞((0,1),dx) R≥0Z 1 R(x, y)χAj (x, y)f (y) dy(cid:19)(cid:19) ≤ CZ 1 0 K δ p dx x 0 (cid:16)xA+1/pf (x)(cid:17)p dx x , for 1 < p < ∞ and the proof is finished. Finally, we will prove Lemmas 9 and 10 for Aj , j = 1, 3 and 4, separately. Proof of Lemma 9 and Lemma 10 for A1. First of all, we have to note that R(f, x) = 0 when 0 < R < s1, being s1 the first positive zero of Jν. Using the Bδ estimate (25), the left side of (23) in this case is bounded by Making the change of variables x = 4/u and y = 4/v, we have xa+ν+1/2χ[0,1](x) sup s1<R≤4/x R2(ν+1)Z 4/R 0 u−a−ν− 1 2 − 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup s1≤R≤u R2(ν+1)Z ∞ R C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) . y−A+ν+1/2f (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) p g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) 2 )−2+ 2 vA−(ν+ 1 , 12 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL where k · kLp((0,∞),du) denotes the Lp norm in the variable u, and g(v) = v−2/pf (4v−1). Note that function g(v) is supported in (1,∞) and kgkLp((0,∞),du) = kfkLp((0,1),dx). The function g will be used through the subsection, but the value 4 may be changed by another one, at some points, without comment. Now, splitting the inner integral at u, we obtain the sum of (27) u−a−ν− 1 2 − 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup s1≤R≤u R2(ν+1)Z u R vA−(ν+ 1 2 )−2+ 2 u−a−ν− 1 2 − 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup s1≤R≤u R2(ν+1)Z ∞ u vA−(ν+ 1 2 )−2+ 2 From Lemma 3 we get the required estimate for (27), using conditions (17) and (21); Lemma 4 is applied to inequality (28), there we need conditions (18) and (21) and the restriction on them. This completes the proof of Lemmas 9 and 10 for j = 1. Proof of Lemma 9 and Lemma 10 for A3. Clearly, the left side of (23) is bounded by p g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) p g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) . Splitting the inner integral at 2/R, using the bound for the kernel given in (25) and the definition of Φν, we have this expression majorized by the sum of and (28) C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (29) and (30) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) xaχ[4/R,1](x) sup 4/x≤RZ x/2 0 y−AK δ . (Ry)ν+1/2y−A R(x, y)f (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) Rδx − yδ+1 dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) Rδx − yδ+1 dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) f (y)y−A . xaχ[0,1](x) sup 4/x≤RZ 2/R 0 f (y) xaχ[0,1](x) sup 4/x≤RZ x/2 2/R (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) For (29), taking into account that x − y ≃ x in A3, the changes of variables x = 4/u, y = 2/v give us u−a+(δ+1)− 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup u≤R R−δ+(ν+1/2)Z ∞ R v−(ν+1/2)+A+ 2 p −2g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) . Lemma 6 can be used here. The required conditions for p = 1 are (18), (20) and (21) with the restriction in the pairs therein. For p = ∞ the same inequalities are needed. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 13 On the other hand, in (30), using again that x− y ≃ x, by changing of variables x = 4/u and y = 2/v we have C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) u−a+(δ+1)− 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup u≤R R−δZ R 2u u−a+(δ+1)− 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup u≤R ≤ C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) vA+ 2 p −2g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) R−δZ R vA+ 2 u p −2g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) . Lemma 5 can then be applied. For p = 1, we need δ > 0, which is an hypothesis, and (20) and (21) with its corresponding restriction. For p = ∞ the inequalities are the same, with the requirement that (20) is strict. This completes the proof of Lemmas 9 and 10 for j = 3. Proof of Lemma 9 and Lemma 10 for A4. In this case, the left hand side of (23) is estimated by To majorize this, we decompose the R-range in two regions: 4 < R ≤ 2/x and In this manner, with the bound for the kernel given in (25) and the R ≥ 2/x. definition of Φν, the previous norm is controlled by the sum of C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) xaχ[0,1/2](x) sup R>4Z 1 max(4/R,2x) xaχ[0,1/2](x) 4/R f (y) sup 4<R≤2/xZ 1 R≥2/xZ 1 2x xaχ[0,1/2](x) sup C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) . y−AK δ (Rx)ν+1/2y−A f (y)y−A R(x, y)f (y) dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) Rδx − yδ+1 dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) Rδx − yδ+1 dy(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,1),dx) 2 )Z R/4 p −2+(δ+1)g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) vA+ 2 vA+ 2 1 . . p −2+(δ+1)g(v) dv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp((0,∞),du) and C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) and (32) Next, using that x − y ≃ y in A4, with the changes of variables x = 2/u and y = 1/v the previous norms are controlled by (31) u−a− 2 p −(ν+ 1 2 )χ[4,∞)(u) sup 4<R≤u R−δ+(ν+ 1 u−a− 2 p χ[4,∞)(u) sup R≥u R−δZ u/4 1 C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) In (31), we use Lemma 8; for p = 1, conditions (17), (19) and (21) are needed; we need the same for p = ∞. For (32), Lemma 7 requires the hypothesis δ > 0 and conditions (19) and (21) for p = 1 and the same for p = ∞ with the restrictions in the pairs therein. This proves Lemmas 9 and 10 for j = 4. Now we shall prove Theorem 3. First note that, by (15), we can write 4. Proof of Theorem 3 R(f, x) =Z 1 Bδ 0 f (y)(cid:16) y x(cid:17)ν+1/2 K δ R(x, y) dy, 14 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL where K δ is enough to check that R is the kernel in (16). By taking g(y) = f (y)yν+1/2, to prove the result it ZE dµν (x) ≤ 0 g(x)px(ν+1/2)(2−p) dx, C λp Z 1 i=1 Ji, where R(x, y) dy > λo and p = p0(δ). where E =nx ∈ (0, 1) : supR>0 x−(ν+1/2)R 1 0 g(y)K δ We decompose E into four regions, such that E =S4 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 Ji =(cid:26)x ∈ (0, 1) : sup R(x, y) dy > λ(cid:27) 0 g(y)χBi (x, y)K δ for i = 1, . . . , 4, with B1 = A1, B2 = A2 ∪ A5, B3 = A3, and B4 = A4 where the sets Ai were defined in (22). Note also thatRE dµν (x) ≤P4 i=1RJi dµν(x), then we need to prove that 0 g(x)px(ν+1/2)(2−p) dx, dµν(x) ≤ (33) R>0 C λp Z 1 ZJi for i = 1, . . . , 4 and p = p0(δ). At some points along the proof we will use the notation (34) Ip :=Z 1 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy. In J1, by applying (25) and Holder inequality with p = p0, we have x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 g(y)χB1 (x, y)K δ R(x, y) dy 0 ≤ Cx−(ν+1/2)Z 4/R ≤ CR2(ν+1) Z 4/R p0 Z 4/R = CR 2(ν+1) 0 0 g(y)(xy)ν+1/2R2(ν+1) dy g(y)p0 y(ν+1/2)(2−p0) dy!1/p0 Z 4/R g(y)p0y(ν+1/2)(2−p0) dy!1/p0 ≤ CR 0 y(2ν+1) dy!1/p′ 0 2(ν+1) p0 I 1/p0 p0 . Therefore, sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 g(y)χB1 (x, y)K δ R(x, y) dy ≤ C sup R>0 χ[0,4/R](x)R 2(ν+1) p0 I 1/p0 p0 ≤ Cx− 2(ν+1) p0 I 1/p0 p0 . In the case p = 1, it is clear that and x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 sup R>0 Hence, for p = p0(δ), 0 g(y)χB1(x, y)K δ R(x, y) dy ≤ CR2(ν+1)I1 0 g(y)χB1(x, y)K δ R(x, y) dy ≤ Cx−2(ν+1)I1. J1 ⊆ {x ∈ (0, 1) : Cx− 2(ν+1) p I 1/p p > λ}, THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 15 and this gives (33) for i = 1. In J3, note first that sup R>0 = sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 g(y)χB3 (x, y)K δ x−(ν+1/2)χ[4/R,1](x) Z 2/R 0 R(x, y) dy g(y)K δ R(x, y) dy +Z x/2 2/R g(y)K δ R(x, y) dy! For R1, using (25), the inequality x/2 < x − y, which holds in B3, and Holder inequality with p = p0, := R1 + R2. R1 ≤ sup R>0 x−(ν+3/2+δ)χ[4/R,1](x)Z 2/R 0 Rν+1/2−δyν+1/2g(y) dy ≤ sup R>0 x−(ν+3/2+δ)χ[4/R,1](x)Rν+1/2−δR − 2(ν+1) p′ 0 p0 ≤ Cx− 2(ν+1) I 1/p0 p0 I 1/p0 p0 , where Ip0 is the same as in (34). In the case p = 1, the estimate R1 ≤ Cx−2(ν+1)I1 can be obtained easily. On the other hand, for R2, by using (25) and Holder inequality with p = p0 again, R2 ≤ sup R>0 ≤ sup R>0 x−(ν+3/2+δ)χ[4/R,1](x)I 1/p0 x−(ν+3/2+δ)χ[4/R,1](x)I 1/p0 2/R p0 R−δ Z x/2 p0 R−δ Z x/2 2/R y−(ν+1/2) (2−p0 )p′ 0 p0 0 dy!1/p′ y(ν+1/2) 2−p0 0 1−p0 dy!1/p′ . Using that (ν + 1/2) 2−p0 1−p0 R−δ Z x/2 2/R y(ν+1/2) 2−p0 < −1 and 4/R < x < 1, we have that 1−p0 dy!1/p′ −1(cid:17)1/p′ ≤ C(cid:16)R−(ν+1/2) 2−p0 1−p0 0 0 R−δ = C and the last inequality is true because the exponent of R is zero. Then In the case p = 1 applying Holder inequality, then R2 ≤ Cx −2(ν+1) p0 I 1/p0 p0 . R2 ≤ sup R>0 x−(ν+3/2+δ)χ[4/R,1](x)I1 R−δ sup y−(ν+1/2). y∈[2/R,x/2] Now, if ν + 1/2 > 0 and ν + 1/2 < δ, χ[4/R,1](x)R−δ sup R>0 sup y−(ν+1/2) y∈[2/R,x/2] = C sup R>0 χ[4/R,1](x)Rν+1/2−δ ≤ Cx−ν−1/2+δ; 16 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL and if ν + 1/2 ≤ 0, sup R>0 χ[4/R,1](x)R−δ sup y−(ν+1/2) y∈[2/R,x/2] = C sup R>0 χ[4/R,1](x)R−δx−(ν+1/2) ≤ Cx−ν−1/2+δ. In this manner R2 ≤ Cx−2(ν+1)I1. Therefore, collecting the estimates for R1 and R2 for p = p0 and p = 1, we have shown that J3 ⊆ {x ∈ (0, 1) : Cx −2(ν+1) p (x)I 1/p > λ}, hence we can deduce (33) for i = 3. For the region J4, we proceed as follows sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 ≤ sup 0 g(y)χB4 (x, y)K δ R(x, y) dy x−(ν+1/2)χ[0,2/R](x)Z 1 R>0 4/R g(y)K δ R(x, y) dy + sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)χ[2/R,1](x)Z 1 2x g(y)K δ x−(ν+1/2)χ[0,2/R](x)(Rx)ν+1/2Z 1 4/R R(x, y) dy g(y) Rδx − yδ+1 dy ≤ C sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)χ[2/R,1](x)Z 1 We first deal with S1, we use that y − x > y/2, then + C sup R>0 2x g(y) Rδx − yδ+1 dy := S1 + S2. S1 ≤C sup R>0 χ[0,2/R](x)Rν+1/2−δZ 1 χ[0,2/R](x)Rν+1Z 1 4/R 4/R g(y) yδ+1 dy g(y)√y ≤ C sup R>0 dy ≤ Cx−(ν+1)Z 1 x g(y)√y dy. p Now for p = p0 or p = 1, we have that 2ν +1−p(ν +1) > −1 and Hardy's inequality [17, Lemma 3.14, p. 196] is applied in the following estimate 0 (cid:18)Z 1 Z 1 0 S1(x)px2ν+1 dx ≤ CZ 1 g(y)√y ≤ CZ 1 y2ν+1−pν dy = CZ 1 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) √y (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) S2 ≤ Cx−ν−1/2+δZ 1 Concerning S2, observe that supR>0 χ[2/R,1](x)R−δ ≤ Cxδ, thus 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy. g(y) yδ+1 dy. x2ν+1−p(ν+1) dx dy(cid:19) g(y) x x p THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 17 Since for p = p0 or p = 1 we have that 2ν + 1 − p(ν + 1/2 − δ) > −1, we can use again Hardy's inequality to complete the required estimate. Indeed, p 0 (cid:18)Z 1 Z 1 0 S2(x)px2ν+1 dx ≤ CZ 1 yδ+1 dy(cid:19) g(y) ≤ CZ 1 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) yδ+1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = CZ 1 g(y) x p 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy. y2ν+1−p(ν+1/2−δ)+p dy x2ν+1−p(ν+1/2−δ) dx With the inequalities for S1 and S2, we can conclude (33) for i = 4. To prove (33) for i = 2 we define, for k a nonnegative integer, the intervals Ik = [2−k−1, 2−k], Nk = [2−k−3, 2−k+2] and the function gk(y) = g(y)χIk (y). By using (25) for x/2 < y < 2x, with x ∈ (0, 1), we have the bound K δ R(x, y) ≤ Then C Rδ(x − y + 2/R)δ+1 . Rδ(x − y + 2/R)δ+1 dy > Cλxν+1/2) . gk(t) ∞ J2 ⊂(x ∈ (0, 1) : sup Since at most three of these integrals are not zero for each x ∈ (0, 1) R>0 x/2 Xk=0Z min {2x,1} R>0Z min {2x,1} x/2 J2 ⊂ ⊂ ∞ [k=0(x ∈ (0, 1) : 3 sup [k=0nx ∈ Nk : M (gk, x) > Cλxν+1/2o ∞ where in the las step we have used that gk(t) Rδ(x − y + 2/R)δ+1 dy > Cλxν+1/2) gk(t) R>0Z min {2x,1} x/2 sup Rδ(x − y + 2/R)δ+1 dy ≤ CM (gk, x). By using the estimate x ≃ 2−k for x ∈ Nk, we can check easily that [k=1nx ∈ Nk : M (gk, x) > Cλ2−k(ν+1/2)o . J2 ⊂ ∞ Finally by using again that x ≃ 2−k for x ∈ Ik, Nk and the weak type norm inequality for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function we have ∞ ZJ2 x2ν+1 dx ≤ C 2−k(2ν+1)Z{x∈Nk:M(gk,x)>Cλ2−k(ν+1/2)} dx ∞ 2pk(ν+1/2)−k(2ν+1) Xk=0 Xk=0 ≤ C λp Z 1 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy λp C ZIk g(y)p dy ≤ and the proof is complete. 18 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL 5. Proof of Theorem 4 To conclude the result we have to prove (33) with g(x) = χE(x) and p = p1. For J1 and J2 the result follows by using the steps given in the proof of Theorem 3 for the same intervals. To analyze J3 we proceed as we did for J4 in the proof of Theorem 3. In this case we obtain that sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 g(y)χB3 (x, y)K δ ≤ C(cid:18)x−(ν+1)Z x r (x, y) g(y)√y 0 g(y)yδ dy(cid:19) . Now taking into account that for p = p1 we have 2ν + 1 − p(ν + 1) < −1 and 2ν + 1 − p(ν + 3/2 + δ) < −1 we can apply Hardy's inequalities to obtain that dy + x−(ν+3/2+δ)Z x 0 0 (cid:18)x−(ν+1)Z x Z 1 0 g(y)√y dy(cid:19)p x2ν+1 dx ≤ CZ 1 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy and Z 1 0 (cid:18)x−(ν+3/2+δ)Z x 0 g(y)yδ dy(cid:19)p x2ν+1 dx ≤ CZ 1 0 g(y)py(ν+1/2)(2−p) dy, with these two inequalities we can deduce that (33) holds for J3 with p = p1 in this case. The main difference with the previous proof appears in the analysis of J4. To deal with this case, we have to use the following lemma [3, Lemma 16.5] Lemma 11. If 1 < p < ∞, a > −1, and E ⊂ [0,∞), then (cid:18)ZE xa dx(cid:19)p ≤ 2p(a + 1)1−pZE x(a+1)p−1 dx. In this case, it is enough to prove that ZJ dµν (x) ≤ where C λp Z 1 0 χE(y) dµν (y), J =(cid:26)x ∈ (0, 1) : sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 χE(y)χB4 (x, y)yν+1/2K δ R(x, y) dy > λ(cid:27) , and this can be deduced immediately by using the inclusion (35) with J ⊆ [0, min{1, H}] H 2(ν+1) = C λp Z 1 0 χE(y) dµν(y). THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 19 Let's prove (35). By using (16) and the estimate y − x > y/2, we have sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 ≤ C sup R>0 0 χE(y)χB4 (x, y)yν+1/2K δ R−δ+ν+1/2χ[0,2/R](x)Z 1 4/R R(x, y) dy χE(y)y−δ+ν−1/2 dy + C sup R>0 R−δx−(ν+1/2)χ[2/R,1](x)Z 1 2x χE(y)y−δ+ν−1/2 dy. In the first summand we can use that R−δ+ν+1/2 ≤ Cxδ−ν−1/2 and in the second one that R−δ ≤ xδ. Moreover observing that with p = p1 it holds −δ + ν + 1/2 = 2(ν + 1)/p we obtain that sup R>0 x−(ν+1/2)Z 1 0 χE(y)χB4 yν+1/2K δ R(x, y) dy ≤ Cx−2(ν+1)/pZE ≤ Cx−2(ν+1)/pZE y−1+2(ν+1)/p dy dµν (y), where in the last step we have used Lemma 11, and this is enough to deduce the inclusion in (35). 6. Proofs of Theorem 6 and Theorem 7 This section will be devoted to the proofs of Theorem 6 and Theorem 7. To this end we need a suitable identity for the kernel and in order to do that we have to introduce some notation. H (1) ν will denote the Hankel function of the first kind, and it is defined as follows where Yν denotes the Weber's function, given by H (1) ν (z) = Jν (z) + iYν(z), Yν (z) = Jν (z) cos νπ − J−ν(z) sin νπ , ν /∈ Z, and Yn(z) = lim ν→n Jν (z) cos νπ − J−ν (z) sin νπ . From these definitions, we have J−ν(z) − e−νπiJν (z) H (1) ν (z) = i sin νπ , ν /∈ Z, and H (1) n (z) = lim ν→n J−ν(z) − e−νπiJν(z) i sin νπ . For the function H (1) ν , the asymptotic (36) H (1) ν (z) =r 2 πz ei(z−νπ/2−π/4)[A + O(z−1)], z > 1, −π < arg(z) < 2π, holds for some constant A. In [4, Lemma 1] the following lemma was proved Lemma 12. For R > 0 the following holds: K δ R(x, y) = I δ R,1(x, y) + I δ R,2(x, y) with I δ R,1(x, y) = (xy)1/2Z R 0 z(cid:18)1 − z2 R2(cid:19)δ Jν(zx)Jν (zy) dz 20 and ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL I δ R,2(x, y) = lim ε→0 (xy)1/2 2 ZSε(cid:18)1 − z2 R2(cid:19)δ zH (1) Jν(z) ν (z)Jν(zx)Jν (zy) dz, where, for each ε > 0, Sε is the path of integration given by the interval R + i[ε,∞) in the direction of increasing imaginary part and the interval −R + i[ε,∞) in the opposite direction. Then, by Lemma 12 we have Kδ R(x, y) = I δ R,1(x, y) + I δ R,2(x, y) where I δ negative results will be the following lemma R,j(x, y) = (xy)−(ν+1/2)I δ R,j(x, y) for j = 1, 2. The main tool to deduce our Lemma 13. For ν > −1/2, δ > 0, and R > 0 it is verified that (yR)ν+δ+1 + I δ R2(ν+1) Jν+δ+1(yR) Kδ R(0, y) = 2δ−νΓ(δ + 1) Γ(ν + 1) R,2(0, y), where (37) Proof. From (9), it is clear that R,2(0, y)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ C(R2ν−δ+1, (cid:12)(cid:12)I δ 2νΓ(ν + 1)Z R y−ν 0 I δ R,1(0, y) = Rν−δ+1/2y−(ν+1/2), yR ≤ 1, yR > 1. zν+1(cid:18)1 − z2 R2(cid:19)δ Jν(zy) dz. Now, by using Sonine's identity [20, Ch. 12, 12.11, p. 373] Z 1 0 sν+1(cid:0)1 − s2(cid:1)δ Jν (sy) ds = 2δΓ(δ + 1) Jν+δ+1(y) yδ+1 , ν, δ > −1, we deduce the leading term of the expression for Kδ R(0, y). To control the term I δ R,2(0, y) = lim ε→0 y−(ν+1/2) 2 ZSε(cid:18)1 − z2 R2(cid:19)δ zν+1/2H (1) Jν(z) ν (z)(zy)1/2Jν(zy) dz, we start by using the asymptotic expansions given in (36) and (10) for H (1) ν (z) and Jν(z). We see that on Sε, the path of integration described in Lemma 12, for t = Im(z) the estimate holds for t > 0. Now, from (9) and (10), it is clear that for z = ±R + it ≤ Ce−2t, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Hν (z) Jν (z)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) √zyJν (zy) ≤ CeytΦν((R + t)y) where Φν is the function in (26). Then R,2(0, y) ≤ Cy−(ν+1/2)R−2δZ ∞ I δ 0 tδ(R + t)ν+δ+1/2Φν((R + t)y)e−(2−y)t dt. THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 21 If y > 1/R we have the inequality Φν((R + t)y) ≤ C, then R,2(0, y) ≤ Cy−(ν+1/2)R−2δZ ∞ I δ 0 tδ(R + t)ν+δ+1/2e−(2−y)t dt ≤ Cy−(ν+1/2)R−δ(Rν+1/2 + R−δ) ≤ CRν−δ+1/2y−(ν+1/2) and (37) follows in this case. If y ≤ 1/R we obtain the bound in (37) with the estimate Φν((R + t)y) ≤ C(Φν (yR) + (yt)ν+1/2). Indeed, R,2(0, y) ≤ Cy−(ν+1/2)R−2δΦν(yR)Z ∞ I δ 0 tδ(R + t)ν+δ+1/2e−(2−y)t dt tν+δ+1/2(R + t)ν+δ+1/2e−(2−y)t dt + CR−2δZ ∞ ≤ C(R2ν−δ+1 + Rν−2δ+1/2 + Rν−δ+1/2 + R−2δ) ≤ R2ν−δ+1. 0 Lemma 14. For ν > −1/2 and 0 < δ ≤ ν + 1/2, the estimate kKδ R(0, y)kLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ CRν−δ+1/2(log R)1/p0 holds. Proof. We will use the decomposition in Lemma 13. By using (9) and (10) as was done in [5, Lemma 2.1] we obtain that (cid:3) With the bound (37) it can be deduced that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) R2(ν+1) Jν+δ+1(yR) (yR)ν+δ+1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ CRν−δ+1/2(log R)1/p0 . R,2(0, y)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CRν−δ+1/2. (cid:13)(cid:13)I δ With the previous estimates the proof is completed. (cid:3) Finally, the last element that we need to prove Theorems 6 and 7 is the norm inequality for finite linear combinations of the functions {ψj}j≥1 contained in the next lemma. Its proof is long and technical and it will be done in the last section. Lemma 15. For ν > −1/2, R > 0, 1 < p < ∞ and f a linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N (R) with N (R) a positive integer such that N (R) ≃ R, the inequality kfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CR2(ν+1)/pkfkLp,∞((0,1),dµν ) holds. Proof of Theorem 6. With the bound in Lemma 14 we have (log R)1/p0 ≤ CR−2(ν+1)/p1(cid:13)(cid:13)Kδ = CR−2(ν+1)/p1 = CR−2(ν+1)/p1 sup R(0, y)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp0 ((0,1),dµν ) Z 1 kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) R(0, y)f (y) dµν(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 Kδ kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1(cid:12)(cid:12)Bδ Rf (0)(cid:12)(cid:12) . sup 22 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL From the previous estimate the result for δ = ν +1/2 follows. In the case δ < ν +1/2 it is obtained by using Lemma 15 because R−2(ν+1)/p1 sup kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1(cid:12)(cid:12)Bδ Rf (0)(cid:12)(cid:12)≤ C since Bδ R. Rf (x) is a linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N (R) with N (R) ≃ (cid:3) sup kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1(cid:13)(cid:13)Bδ Rf (x)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp1,∞((0,1),dµν ) Proof of Theorem 7. In the case δ < ν + 1/2, the result follows from Theorem 6 by using a duality argument. Indeed, it is clear that sup E⊂(0,1) kBδ RχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) kχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) = sup E⊂(0,1) (38) = sup sup kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)R 1 E⊂(0,1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)R 1 0 f (y)Bδ kχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) 0 χE(y)Bδ kχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) RχE(y) dµν(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Rf (y) dµν(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup . kf kLp1 ((0,1),dµν )=1 By Theorem 6 it is possible to choose a function g such that kgkLp1((0,1),dµν ) = 1 and kBδ Then, with the notation Rg(x)kLp1,∞((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C(log R)1/p0 . we have (39) µν(E) =ZE dµν , λp1 µν(A) ≥ C(log R)p1/p0 , for some positive λ and A = {x ∈ (0, 1) : Bδ subsets of A A1 = {x ∈ (0, 1) : Bδ and we define D = A1 if µν (A1) ≥ µν (A)/2 and D = A2 otherwise. Then, by (39), we deduce that Rg(x) > λ}. Now, we consider the A2 = {x ∈ (0, 1) : Bδ Rg(x) < −λ} Rg(x) > λ} and (40) λ ≥ C (log R)1/p0 µν (D)1/p1 . Taking f = g and E = D in (38) and using (40), we see that sup E⊂(0,1) kBδ RχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) kχEkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ Cλ µν(D) kχDkLp0 ((0,1),dµν ) ≥ C(log R)1/p0 and the proof is complete in this case. For δ = ν + 1/2 the result follows from Theorem 6 with a standard duality argument. (cid:3) THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 23 7. Proof of Lemma 15 To proceed with the proof of Lemma 15 we need some auxiliary results that are included in this section. We start by defining a new operator. For each non-negative integer r, we consider the vector of coefficients α = (α1, . . . , αr+1) and we define r+1 Tr,R,αf (x) = αℓBr ℓRf (x). Xℓ=1 This new operator is an analogous of the generalized delayed means considered in [16]. In [16] the operator is defined in terms of the Ces`aro means instead of the Bochner-Riesz means. The properties of Tr,R,α that we need are summarized in the next lemma Lemma 16. For each non-negative integer r and ν ≥ −1/2, the following state- ments hold a) Tr,R,αf is a linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N ((r+1)R), where N ((r + 1)R) is a non-negative integer such that N ((r + 1)R) ≃ (r + 1)R; b) there exists a vector of coefficients α, verifying that αℓ ≤ A, for ℓ = 1, . . . , r + 1, with A independent of R and such that Tr,R,αf (x) = f (x) for each linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N (R) where N (R) is a positive integer. Moreover, in this case, for r > ν + 1/2, kT fr,R,αkL1((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkL1((0,1),dµν ) and kTr,R,αfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkL∞((0,1),dµν ), with C independent of R and f . Proof. Part a) is a consequence of the definition of Tr,R,α and the fact that the m-th zero of the Bessel function Jν, with ν ≥ −1/2, is contained in the interval (mπ + νπ/2 + π/2, mπ + νπ/2 + 3π/4). To prove b) we consider f (x) =PN (R) αℓ(cid:18)1 − coefficients such that Tr,R,αf (x) = f (x) the equations j=1 ajψj(x). In order to obtain the vector of = 1, s2 k (ℓR)2(cid:19)r r+1 for all k = 1, . . . , N (R), should be verified. After some elementary manipulations each one of the previous equations can be written as Xℓ=1 r Xj=0 s2j k (cid:18)r j(cid:19) (−1)j R2j r+1 Xℓ=1 αℓ ℓ2j = 1 and this can be considered as a polynomial in s2 we have the system of equations k which must be equal 1, therefore αℓ ℓ2j = δj,0, j = 0, . . . , r. r+1 Xℓ=1 This system has an unique solution because the determinant of the matrix of coef- ficients is a Vandermonde's one. Of course for each ℓ = 1, . . . , r + 1, it is verified that αℓ ≤ A, with A a constant depending on r but not on N (R). 24 ´O. CIAURRI AND L. RONCAL The norm estimates are consequence of the uniform boundedness kBδ RfkLp((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkLp((0,1),dµν ), for p = 1 and p = ∞ when δ > ν + 1/2 (see [4]). (cid:3) In the next lemma we will control the L∞-norm of a finite linear combination of the functions {ψj}j≥1 by its L1-norm. Lemma 17. If ν > −1/2 and f (x) is a linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N (R) with N (R) a positive integer such that N (R) ≃ R, the inequality kfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CR2(ν+1)kfkL1((0,1),dµν ) holds. Proof. It is clear that N (R) f (x) = ψj(x)Z 1 0 f (y)ψj(y) dµν(y). Xj=1 Now, using Holder inequality and Lemma 1 we have kfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ C N (R) Xj=1 kψjk2 L∞((0,1),dµν )kfkL1((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkL1((0,1),dµν ) N (R) Xj=1 j2ν+1 ≤ CR2(ν+1)kfkL1((0,1),dµν ). (cid:3) The following lemma is a version in the space ((0, 1), dµν) of Lemma 19.1 in [3]. The proof can be done in the same way, with the appropriate changes, so we omit it. Lemma 18. Let ν > −1, 1 < p < ∞ and T be a linear operator defined for functions in L1((0, 1), dµν) and such that kT fkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ AkfkL1((0,1),dµν ) and kT fkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ BkfkL∞((0,1),dµν ), then kT fkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CA1/pB1/p′ kfkLp,∞((0,1),dµν ). Now, we are prepared to conclude the proof of Lemma 15. Proof of Lemma 15. We consider the operator Tr,R,αf given in Lemma 16 b) with r > ν + 1/2. By Lemma 16 and Lemma 17 we have kTr,R,αfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ C((r + 1)R)2(ν+1)kTr,R,αfkL1((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CR2(ν+1)kfkL1((0,1),dµν ). From b) in Lemma 16 we obtain the estimate So, by using Lemma 18, we obtain the inequality kTr,R,αfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CkfkL∞((0,1),dµν ). kTr,R,αfkL∞((0,1),dµν ) ≤ CR2(ν+1)/pkfkLp,∞((0,1),dµν ) THE BOCHNER-RIESZ MEANS FOR FOURIER-BESSEL EXPANSIONS 25 for any f ∈ L1((0, 1), dµν). Now, since Tr,R,αf (x) = f (x) for a linear combination of the functions {ψj}1≤j≤N (R), the proof is complete. (cid:3) References [1] P. Balodis and A. C´ordoba, The convergence of multidimensional Fourier-Bessel series, J. Anal. Math. 77 (1999), 269 -- 286. [2] L. Carleson and P. Sjolin, Oscillatory integrals and a multiplier problem for the disc, Studia Math. 44 (1972), 287 -- 299. [3] S. Chanillo and B. Muckenhoupt, Weak type estimates for Ces`aro sums of Jacobi polynomial series, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 102 (1993). [4] ´O. Ciaurri and L. Roncal, The Bochner-Riesz means for Fourier-Bessel expansions, J. Funct. Anal. 228 (2005), 89 -- 113. [5] ´O. Ciaurri and L. Roncal, The wave equation for the Bessel Laplacian, preprint 2012. [6] ´O. Ciaurri and K. Stempak, Conjugacy for Fourier-Bessel expansions, Studia Math. 176 (2006), 215 -- 247. [7] ´O. Ciaurri and J. L. Varona, Two-weight norm inequalities for the Ces`aro means of generalized Hermite expansions, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 178 (2005), 99 -- 110. [8] J. Duoandikoetxea, "Fourier Analysis," Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 29, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. [9] J. E. Gilbert, Maximal theorems for some orthogonal series. I., Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (1969), 495 -- 515. [10] J. J. Guadalupe, M. P´erez, F. J. Ruiz and J. L. Varona, Two notes on convergence and divergence a. e. of Fourier series with respect to some orthogonal systems, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 116 (1992), 457 -- 464. [11] G. H. Hardy and M. Riesz, "A General Theory of Dirichlet Series," Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1915. [12] H. Hochstadt, The mean convergence of Fourier-Bessel series, SIAM Rev. 9 (1967), 211 -- 218. [13] C. Meaney, Divergent Ces`aro and Riesz means of Jacobi and Laguerre expansions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131 (2003), 3123 -- 3128. [14] B. Muckenhoupt and D. W. Webb, Two-weight norm inequalities for Ces`aro means of La- guerre expansions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2000), 1119 -- 1149. [15] B. Muckenhoupt and D. W. Webb, Two-weight norm inequalities for the Ces`aro means of Hermite expansions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 354 (2002), 4525 -- 4537. [16] E. Stein, Interpolation in polynomial classes and Markoff's inequality, Duke Math. J. 24 (1957), 467-476. [17] E. Stein and G. Weiss, "Introduction to Fourier aAnalysis on Euclidean Spaces," Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J. , 1970. [18] K. Stempak, Almost everywhere summability of Laguerre series II, Stud. Math. 103 (1992), 317-327. [19] K. Stempak, On convergence and divergence of Fourier-Bessel series, Elect. Trans. Num. Anal. 14 (2002), 223-235. [20] G. N. Watson, "A Treatise on the Theory of Bessel Functions," Cambridge Univ. Press, 1966. [21] A. Zygmund, Trigonometric series. Vol. I, II, Reprinting of the 1968 version, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1977. Departamento de Matem´aticas y Computaci´on, Universidad de La Rioja, 26004 Logrono, Spain E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected]
1201.6584	1	1201	2012-01-31T15:56:10	Polyhedron under Linear Transformations	[ "math.FA" ]	The image and the inverse image of a polyhedron under a linear transformation are polyhedrons.	math.FA	math	Polyhedron under Linear Transformations Zhang Zaikun† May 6, 2008 Abstract The image and the inverse image of a polyhedron under a linear transformation are polyhedrons. Keywords: polyhedron, linear transformation, Sard quotient theorem. 1 Introduction All the linear spaces discussed here are real. Definition 1.1. i.) Suppose that X is a linear space, a subset P of X is said to be a polyhedron if it has the form P = {x ∈ X ; fk (x) ≤ λi}, k=1 ⊂ X ′ , and {λk }n where n is a positive integer, {fk }n k=1 ⊂ R. If λk = 0 (k = 1, 2, 3, ..., n), then P is said to be a polyhedral cone. ii.) Suppose that X is a TVS, a subset P of X is said to be a closed polyhedron if it has the form P = {x ∈ X ; fk (x) ≤ λi}, k=1 ⊂ X ∗ , and {λk }n where n is a positive integer, {fk }n k=1 ⊂ R. If λk = 0 (k = 1, 2, 3, ..., n), then P is said to be a closed polyhedral cone. It is obvious that both ∅ and X itself are (closed) polyhedral cones. 2 Main Results Our main results are as follows. Theorem 2.1. Suppose that X and Y are linear spaces, and T : X → Y is a linear operator. i.) If A ⊂ X is a polyhedron (polyhedral cone) and T is surjective, then T (A) is a † Institute of Computational Mathematics and Scientific/Engineering Computing, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, CHINA. 1 polyhedron (polyhedral cone). ii.) If B ⊂ Y is a polyhedron (polyhedral cone), then T −1 (B ) is a polyhedron (polyhedral cone). Theorem 2.2. Suppose that X and Y are Fr´echet spaces, and T : X → Y is a bounded linear operator. i.) If A ⊂ X is a closed polyhedron (closed polyhedral cone) and T is surjective, then T (A) is a closed polyhedron (closed polyhedral cone). ii.) If B ⊂ Y is a closed polyhedron (closed polyhedral cone), then T −1 (B ) is a polyhe- dron (closed polyhedral cone). The conclusions above will be verified in section 4. 3 A Lemma The following conclusion is significant in our proof. Lemma 3.1 (Sard Quotient Theorem). i.) Suppose that X , Y and Z are linear spaces, and S : X → Y , T : X → Z are linear operators with S surjective. If ker S ⊂ ker T , then there exists a uniquely specified linear operator R : Y → Z , such that T = RS . ii.) Suppose that X , Y and Z are TVS’, and S : X → Y , T : X → Z are bounded linear operators with S surjective. If X and Y are F r ´echet spaces and ker S ⊂ ker T , then there exists a uniquely specified bounded linear operator R : Y → Z , such that T = RS . Proof. We will prove only ii.). Define and S :X/ ker S → Y [x] 7→ S x, T :X/ ker S → Z [x] 7→ T x. Then both S and T are well defined (note that ker S ⊂ ker T ) and bounded. Besides, S is bijective and S−1 is bounded, since X/ ker S and Y are both Fr´echet spaces. Now define R = T S−1 , then it is easy to show that R satisfies the requirements. The uniqueness of R is trivial. ■ 2 4 Proofs of Main Results We will prove only theorem 2.2, because the proof of theorem 2.1 is similar. Only the polyhedron case will be discussed. Proof of Theorem 2.2. i.) Suppose that A = n \ {x ∈ X ; fk (x) ≤ λk }, k=1 k=1 ⊂ X ∗ , and {λk }n where n is a positive integer, {fk }n k=1 ⊂ R. The proof will be presented in four steps. Step 1. We will prove that the conclusion holds if ker T ⊂ n \ k=1 ker fk . ..., n}, we can choose a functional gk ∈ Y ∗ such In this case, for any k ∈ {1, 2, 3, that fk = gk T (Sard quotient theorem). It can be shown without difficulty that T (A) = n \ {y ∈ Y ; gk (y) ≤ λk }. k=1 Step 2. We will prove that the conclusion holds if dim(ker T ) = 1. This is the most critical part of the proof. Suppose that ξ is a point in ker T \ {0}. Let K+ = {k ; 1 ≤ k ≤ n and fk (ξ ) > 0}, K− = {k ; 1 ≤ k ≤ n and fk (ξ ) < 0}, K0 = {k ; 1 ≤ k ≤ n and fk (ξ ) = 0}. For any i ∈ K+ and j ∈ K− , define Then define hij = fi − fi (ξ ) fj (ξ ) fj . {x ∈ X ; hij (x) ≤ λi − fi(ξ ) fj (ξ ) λj }, {x ∈ X ; fk (x) ≤ λk }. A1 = \ i∈K+ , j∈K− A2 = \ k∈K0 If K+ = ∅ or K− = ∅, we take A1 as X . Similarly, if K0 = ∅, we take A2 as X . We will prove that T (A) = T (A1 ∩ A2 ). It suffices to show that T (A1 ∩ A2 ) ⊂ T (A). 3 • If K+ = ∅ = K− , nothing needs considering. • If K+ 6= ∅ = K− , fix a point x ∈ A1 ∩ A2 , define s = min i∈K+ λi − fj (x) fi(ξ ) , then it is easy to show that x + sξ ∈ A and T (x + sξ ) = T x. The case with K− 6= ∅ = K+ is similar. • If K+ 6= ∅ 6= K− , fix a point x ∈ A1 ∩ A2 , define t = max j∈K− λj − fj (x) fj (ξ ) and consider x + tξ . It is obvious that T (x + tξ ) = y fj (x + tξ ) ≤ λj , ∀j ∈ K− ∪ K0 . t = λj0 − fj0 (x) fj0 (ξ ) (j0 ∈ K− ), and that Suppose then for any i ∈ K+ , fi (x + tξ ) =hij0 (x + tξ ) + fj0 (x + tξ ) fi (ξ ) fj0 (ξ ) fi (ξ ) fj0 (ξ ) fi (ξ ) fj0 (ξ ) ≤λi − =λi . Thus x + tξ ∈ A. λj0 + λj0 It has been shown that T (A1 ∩ A2 ) ⊂ T (A), and consequently T (A1 ∩ A2 ) = T (A). Ac- cording to Step 1, the conclusion holds under the assumption dim(ker T ) = 1. Step 3. We will prove by induction that the conclusion holds if dim(ker T ) is finite. If dim(ker T ) = 0, then T is an isomorphism as well as a homeomorphism (inverse mapping theorem), thus nothing needs proving. Now suppose that the conclusion holds when dim(ker T ) ≤ n (n ≥ 0). To prove the case with dim(ker T ) = n + 1, choose a 4 point η in ker T \ {0}, find a functional F ∈ X ∗ such that F (η) = 1 (Hahn-Banach theorem), and define T :X → Y × R x 7→ (T x, F (x)), π :Y × R → Y (y , λ) 7→ y . Then we have • T = π T ; • dim(ker T ) = n; • dim(ker π) = 1; • both T and π are surjective bounded linear operators. Thus by the induction hypothesis and the conclusion of Step 2, T (A) is a closed poly- hedron. Step 4. Now consider the general case. Let n \ M = ( k=1 ker fk ) \(ker T ), then M is a closed linear subspace of M , and therefore X/M is a Fr´echet space. Define T :X/M → Y [x] 7→ T x, fk :X/M → R [x] 7→ fk (x) where k = 1, 2, 3, ..., n. Then T and fk are well defined, T is a bounded linear operator from X/M onto Y , and { fk }n k=1 ⊂ (X/M )∗ . Besides, we have which implies that Now let n \ ( k=1 ker fk ) \(ker T ) = {0}, dim(ker T ) ≤ n. A = n {[x] ∈ X/M ; fk ([x]) ≤ λk }, \ k=1 5 then T (A) = T ( A). From what has been proved, it is easy to show that T (A) is a closed polyhedron. Proof of part i.) has been completed. ii.) This part is much easier. Suppose that B = m \ {y ∈ Y ; gk (y) ≤ µk }, k=1 k=1 ⊂ Y ∗ , and {µk }m where m is a positive integer, {gk }m k=1 ⊂ R. One can show without difficulty that T −1 (B ) = m \ {x ∈ X ; gk (T x) ≤ µk }, k=1 which is a closed polyhedron in X . ■ 5 Remarks For part i) of theorem 2.2, the completeness conditions are essential. This can be seen from the following examples. Example 5.1. Suppose that (Y , k · kY ) is an infinite dimensional Banach space, and f is an unbounded linear functional on it1 . Let X has the same elements and linear structure as Y , but the norm on X is defined by kxkX = kxkY + f (x). It is clear that the identify mapping I : X → Y is linear, bounded and bijective. Now consider ker f . It is a closed polyhedral cone in X , while its image under I is not closed in Y . Example 5.2. Suppose that X is ℓ1 . Let Y has the same elements and linear structure as X , but the norm on Y is defined by k(xk )k = sup k≥1 xk . Then f : (xk ) 7→ P xk is a bounded linear functional on X , while it is unbounded on Y . Now consider the identify mapping again. The preceding examples also imply that inverse mapping theorem and Sard quotient theorem do not hold without completeness conditions. 1For a locally bounded TVS Y , there exist unbounded linear functionals on Y provided dim Y = ∞. One of them can be constructed as follows: Let U be a bounded neighborhood of 0, and {ek ; k ≥ 1} ⊂ U be a sequence of linearly independent elements in Y . Let M = Span {ek ; k ≥ 1}, and define g : M → R, P αk ek 7→ P kαk . Then extend g to Y . 6
1711.01659	1	1711	2017-11-05T20:46:32	Besov classes on finite- and infinite-dimensional spaces and embedding theorems	[ "math.FA" ]	We give a new description of classical Besov spaces in terms of a new modulus of continuity. Then a similar approach is used to introduce Besov classes on an infinite-dimensional space endowed with a Gaussian measure.	math.FA	math	BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES AND EMBEDDING THEOREMS EGOR D. KOSOV Abstract. We give a new description of classical Besov spaces in terms of a new modulus of continuity. Then a similar approach is used to introduce Besov classes on an infinite-dimensional space endowed with a Gaussian measure. Keywords: Besov class, fractional Sobolev class, Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup, embedding theorem MSC: primary 46E35, secondary 28C20, 46G12 1. Introduction In this work we continue the study of Nikolskii–Besov classes started in [7], where an equiva- lent description of these classes was presented characterizing the inclusion of a function to the Nikolskii–Besov class in terms of action on test functions in the spirit of the classical defini- tions of Sobolev classes and the class of functions of bounded variation. Namely, a function f ∈ Lp(Rn) belongs to the Nikolskii–Besov class Bα p,∞(Rn) with 0 < α < 1 if and only if there is a constant C such that divΦ(x)f (x) dx ≤ CkΦkα q kdivΦk1−α q (1.1) for each vector field Φ of class C∞0 (Rn, Rn), where q = p/(p − 1). If we take α = 1 and p = 1, we obtain the classical definition of a function of bounded variation. This new characterization has already found some applications in the study of the distributions of polynomials on spaces with Gaussian (and general log-concave) measures (see [11], [6], and also [5]). In the present paper, we give a similar equivalent characterization for general Besov spaces p,θ(Rn) with parameters α ∈ (0, 1), p ∈ [1,∞), p,θ(Rn). We recall that the Besov space Bα Bα θ ∈ [1,∞] consists of all functions f ∈ Lp(Rn) such that the quantity ZRn is finite, where fh(x) := f (x− h) (see [2], [15], [16], and [17]). However, for further purposes, it is more convenient to use another equivalent definition in terms of the Lp-modulus of continuity. Recall that the Lp-modulus of continuity of a function f ∈ Lp(Rn) is defined by the equality (cid:18)ZRn(cid:2)h−αkfh − fkp(cid:3)θh−ndh(cid:19)1/θ ωp(f, ε) := sup h≤εkfh − fkp. Note that the function ωp(f,·) is nondecreasing and subadditive, which means that A function f ∈ Lp(Rn) belongs to the class Bα p,θ(Rn) if and only if the quantity ωp(f, ε1 + ε2) ≤ ωp(f, ε1) + ωp(f, ε2), ε1, ε2 > 0. kfkα,p,θ :=(cid:18)Z +∞ 0 (cid:2)s−αωp(f, s)(cid:3)θ s−1ds(cid:19)1/θ The author is a Young Russian Mathematics award winner and would like to thank its sponsors and jury. This research was supported by the Russian Science Foundation Grant 17-11-01058 at Lomonosov Moscow State University. 1 2 EGOR D. KOSOV is finite. We define the Besov norm of a function f by the equality kfkBα p,θ(Rn) := kfkp + kfkα,p,θ. Our equivalent characterization of Besov spaces is based on a new modulus of continuity which is equivalent to ωp(f,·) and provides the known characterization (1.1) in the case of θ = ∞. For a function f ∈ Lp(Rn) we introduce σp(f, ε) := supnZRn divΦ(x)f (x)dx, Φ ∈ C∞0 (Rn, Rn),kdivΦk p p−1 ≤ 1,kΦk p p−1 ≤ εo. The first main result of the present paper asserts the equivalence of ωp(f,·) and σp(f,·): for any function f ∈ Lp(Rn), one has 2−1ωp(f, 2ε) ≤ σp(f, ε) ≤ 6n ωp(f, ε). Actually, the function σp(f,·) has appeared implicitly in the new definition of Nikolskii–Besov spaces formulated above, since condition (1.1) can be reformulated in the following way: s−ασp(f, s) < ∞. sup s≥0 So, this is the desired modulus of continuity. The above equivalence also shows that a function f ∈ Lp(Rn) belongs to the Besov space Bα p,θ(Rn) if and only if (cid:16)Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)s−ασp(f, s)(cid:3)θ s−1ds(cid:17)1/θ < ∞. (1.2) To illustrate how our approach to the fractional smoothness in terms of the modulus of continuity σp(f,·) is related to the already known results, in Section 3 we propose the new proof of the classical Ulyanov-type embedding theorems by means of the function σp(f,·). We recall that in his seminal works [18], [19] P.L. Ulyanov obtained the following embedding theorem. Theorem. For a function f ∈ L1[0, 1] set w1(f, ε) := sup f (t + h) − f (t) dt 0≤h≤εZ 1−h 0 Then for any nondecreasing function U : [0,∞) → [0,∞) the following implications hold: (i) ∞Xn=1 [U(n + 1) − U(n)]w1(f, 1/n) < ∞ ⇒Z 1 n−2U(36nw1(f, 1/n)) < ∞ ⇒Z 1 ∞Xn=1 0 (ii) 0 f (t)U(f (t)) dt < ∞; U(f (t)) dt < ∞. Actually in the same works embedding theorems into Lr-spaces were obtained, but here we discuss only the stated results as examples of embedding theorems. The multidimensional case was considered in papers [8], [9] and [10], where the author obtained necessary and sufficient conditions for such type of embeddings. The main method used by P.L. Ulyanov himself and by other researchers in subsequent investigations of such embedding theorems is based on the so-called equimeasurable rearrangements of functions (see [10] for a discussion of the method). However, in Section 3 we employ another approach, based on the properties of the function σp(f,·), and obtain similar simple sufficient conditions for embeddings into the classes LU(L) and U(L). Actually, our conditions are a kind of integral form of Ulyanov's conditions stated above and are similar to the multidimensional results [8, Theorem 1] and [10, Corollary 4.2], BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 3 which are slightly weaker than necessary and sufficient conditions [9, Theorem 5] and [10, Theorem 4.4]. The main idea in Section 3 is to estimate the integral ZA f (x)pdx ZRn divΦ(x)f (x) dx ≤ σp(f, r) p−1 ≤ r and kdivΦk p of a function f ∈ Lp(Rn) over a Borel set A in terms of Lebesgue measure of this set A. Substituting A = {f ≥ s} we can estimate the behavior of the function f on sets of large values, which is already sufficient to prove embedding theorems we are interested in. The definition of the function σp(f,·) states that for smooth vector fields Φ with kΦk p p−1 ≤ 1. Taking Φ = ∇ϕ, solving the Poisson equation div∇ϕ = ∆ϕ = u, estimating ∇ϕ in terms of u, and taking the supremum over functions u with kukLq(A) = 1 we obtain the necessary bound. Finally, in Section 4, we proceed to Besov classes on locally convex spaces endowed with centered Gaussian measures. In paper [7], Nikolskii–Besov classes on a Gaussian space were introduced by means of relation (1.1) as the definition, where in place of the divergence operator on Rn the Gaussian divergence operator divγ was used. If we consider the standard Gaussian measure γn on Rn, which is the measure with density (2π)−n/2 exp(−x2/2), then divγnΦ = (∂iΦi − xiΦi) = divΦ − hx, Φi. nXi=1 In this paper we propose a similar approach (see Definitions 4.1 and 4.2) to general Besov classes Bα p,θ(γ) with respect to a Gaussian measure γ. The first main result of Section 4 (presented in Theorem 4.7) provides an equivalent characterization of the introduced Besov classes in terms of "shifts" on the Gaussian space, which is similar in a sense to the classical definition of Besov spaces on Rn. Namely, the function f ∈ Lp(γ) with p > 1 belongs to the Besov class Bα p,θ(γ) if and only if the quantity (cid:16)Z ∞ 0 ht−α/2(cid:16)ZZ f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) − f (x)p γ(dx)γ(dy)(cid:17)1/piθ t−1dt(cid:17)1/θ is finite. This theorem can be also viewed as an analog of Theorem 3.2 from [1]. The second main result of this section is the embedding theorem for Gaussian Besov classes. We recall (see for example [4] and [13]) that for an arbitrary function f from the Gaussian Sobolev space W 2,1(γ) the following logarithmic Sobolev inequality holds: For the Sobolev class W 1,1(γ) there is also an embedding theorem of logarithmic type. Namely, the space W 1,1(γ) is continuously embedded into the Orlicz space L log L1/2, which is defined by the condition Z f 2 ln(fkfk−1 2 )dγ ≤Z ∇f2dγ. Z f[ln(1 + f)]1/2dγ < ∞ (see [12] and [3] for the case of functions of bounded variation). Both results mean that a smoothness of a function provides some higher order of integrability. One may wonder whether this effect remains in force for the Besov smoothness condition introduced in the present paper. Theorem 4.8 is aimed to answer this question. It asserts that, for any α ∈ (0, 1), β ∈ (0, α), p ∈ (1,∞), and θ ∈ [1,∞], there is a constant C = C(p, θ, α, β) such that for all functions 4 EGOR D. KOSOV f ∈ Bα p,θ(γ) one has (cid:16)Z fp(cid:12)(cid:12)ln(fkfk−1 p )(cid:12)(cid:12)pβ/2 dγ(cid:17)1/p ≤ CkfkBα p,θ(γ). The main idea of the proof of this result is in spirit of the semigroup approach to the isoperi- metric inequality on the Gaussian space proposed by M. Ledoux in [14] and [12]. Similarly to the cited works, we use the short time behavior of the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup on functions from the Besov class and the hypercontractivity property of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup. At the end of the paper we provide an estimate of the best approximation of a function from L2(γ) by Hermite polynomials in terms of the introduced Gaussian modulus of continuity. Throughout the paper we assume that α is a fixed number from (0, 1]. Given p ∈ [1,∞], we denote by q the dual number such that 1/p + 1/q = 1. The Lp-norm of a function f with respect to a measure µ is defined as usual by kfkp := kfkLp(µ) =(cid:16)Z fp dµ(cid:17)1/p , p ∈ [1,∞), and the limiting case of p = ∞ is treated also as usual. In Sections 2 and 3 the measure µ will be the standard Lebesgue measure on Rn, but in Section 4 the measure µ will be a centered Gaussian measure on a locally convex space. We denote the space of all infinitely differential functions with compact support on Rn by C∞0 (Rn) and the space of all bounded infinitely differential functions with bounded derivatives of every order is denoted by C∞b (Rn). This section is devoted to obtaining a new characterization of Besov classes on Rn in terms 2. Besov classes on Rn of the moduli of continuity σp(f,·) andeσp(f,·). Let · denote the standard Euclidean norm on Rn generated by the standard Euclidean inner product h·,·i. Let λn be the standard Lebesgue measure on Rn. We also need the heat semigroup Pt on Rn, which is defined by the equality Ptf (x) := (2πt)−n/2ZRn f (y) exp(cid:18)−x − y2 2t (cid:19) dy, f ∈ L1(Rn). We start with the following key definitions (recall that q = p/(p − 1)). Definition 2.1. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn). Set Definition 2.2. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn). Set σp(f, ε) := supnZRn eσp(f, ε) := supnZRn divΦ(x)f (x) dx : Φ ∈ C∞0 (Rn, Rn),kdivΦkq ≤ 1,kΦkq ≤ εo. ∂eϕ(x)f (x) dx : ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn),k∂eϕkq ≤ 1,kϕkq ≤ εo. We now obtain several properties of the introduced functions. Lemma 2.3. For any function f ∈ Lp(γ), the functions σp(f,·) andeσp(f,·) are nondecreasing, subadditive, concave and continuous on (0, +∞). Proof. We consider only the function σp(f,·), since for the second one the proof is essentially the same. It is readily seen that this function is indeed nondecreasing and subadditive. We now check that it is concave. Let a, b > 0, and t ∈ (0, 1). Then for an arbitrary pair of vector fields Φ1, Φ2 ∈ C∞0 (Rn, Rn) with kdivΦ1kq ≤ 1,kΦ1kq ≤ a and kdivΦ2kq ≤ 1,kΦ2kq ≤ b we have tZRn divΦ1(x)f (x) dx + (1 − t)ZRn divΦ2(x)f (x) dx =ZRn div[tΦ1(x) + (1 − t)Φ2(x)]f (x) dx BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 5 and kdiv[tΦ1 + (1 − t)Φ2]kq ≤ 1, ktΦ1 + (1 − t)Φ2kq ≤ ta + (1 − t)b. Thus, tσp(f, a) + (1 − t)σp(f, b) ≤ σp(f, ta + (1 − t)b). The concavity implies the continuity. (cid:3) Let σ be a concave, nondecreasing and nonnegative function on (0, +∞). Let us introduce the "adjoint" function σ∗(s) := sσ(s−1). In particular, we can consider σ∗p(f, s) := sσp(f, s−1), eσ∗p(f, s) := seσp(f, s−1). Lemma 2.4. Let σ be a concave, nondecreasing and nonnegative function on (0, +∞). Then the function σ∗ is also concave and nondecreasing on (0, +∞). If, in addition, we assume that limt→0 t−1σ(t) = ∞, then the function σ∗ is strictly monotone. Proof. Let s, t ∈ (0, +∞) and s > t. Then 1/s = (t/s)1/t + (1 − t/s)0. Due to the concavity of the function σ we have σ((t/s)1/t + (1 − t/s)ε) ≥ (t/s)σ(1/t) + (1 − t/s)σ(ε) ≥ (t/s)σ(1/t). Due to the continuity of the function σ, taking the limit as ε → 0 in the above estimate, we have σ(1/s) ≥ (t/s)σ(1/t) implying σ∗(s) ≥ σ∗(t). Let again s > t > 0 and let κ ∈ (0, 1). We note that 1/s + κs = 1 κs + (1 − κ)t Thus, by the concavity of the function σ one has κs + (1 − κ)t (1 − κ)t κs + (1 − κ)t 1/t. σ((κs + (1 − κ)t)−1) ≥ κs κs + (1 − κ)t σ(1/s) + (1 − κ)t κs + (1 − κ)t σ(1/t) and σ∗(κs + (1 − κ)t) ≥ κσ∗(s) + (1 − κ)σ∗(t), i.e. σ∗ is concave. any point r > s one has Assume that there are two points s > t such that σ∗(s) = σ∗(t). Then, by the concavity, for σ∗(r) = σ∗(cid:18)r − t s − t s +(cid:16)1 − r − t s − t(cid:17)t(cid:19) ≤ Thus, which contradicts the condition limt→0 t−1σ(t) = ∞. lim r→∞ rσ(1/r) = lim r→∞ r − t s − t σ∗(s) +(cid:16)1 − σ∗(r) ≤ σ∗(s) r − t s − t(cid:17)σ∗(t) = σ∗(s). (cid:3) decreasing on (0, +∞). If, in addition, we assume that limt→0 t−1σp(f, t) = ∞ (alternatively, Corollary 2.5. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn). Then the functions σ∗p(f,·) andeσ∗p(f,·) are concave and non- limt→0 t−1eσp(f, t) = ∞), then the function σ∗p(f,·) (eσ∗p(f,·), respectively) is strictly monotone. We now proceed to the main result of this section showing the equivalence of σp(f,·),eσp(f,·), 2−1kf2h − fkp ≤eσp(f,h) ≤ σp(f,h) ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn kfhz − fkp(1 + z)e− z2 and ωp(f,·). We start with the following technical lemma (the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.4 from [7]). Lemma 2.6. For any function f ∈ Lp(Rn) one has 2 dz. 6 EGOR D. KOSOV Proof. For every function ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn) and for every unit vector e ∈ Rn we can take Φ = eφ and conclude that Let now e = h−1h. For an arbitrary function ϕ ∈ C∞0 (Rn) with kϕkq ≤ 1 we can write eσp(f, ε) ≤ σp(f, ε). ZRn ϕ(x)(fh(x) − f (x)) dx =ZRn For the function [ϕ(x + h) − ϕ(x)]f (x) dx =ZRnZ h 0 ∂eϕ(x + se) dsf (x) dx. we have kψkq ≤ hkϕkq ≤ h and k∂eψkq ≤ 2kϕkq ≤ 2, since ϕ(x + se) ds ∈ C∞0 (Rn) 0 ψ(x) =Z h ∂eψ(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z h ϕ(x)(fh(x) − f (x))dx =ZRn 0 ZRn ∂eϕ(x + se) ds(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = ϕ(x + h) − ϕ(x). ∂eψ(x)f (x) dx ≤ 2eσp(f,h/2). Thus, Taking the supremum over functions ϕ, we get the estimate kfh − fkp ≤ 2eσp(f,h/2). Finally, for every smooth vector field Φ ∈ C∞0 (Rn, Rn) we can write ZRn divΦ(x)f (x) dx =ZRn divΦ(x)(f (x) − Ptf (x)) dx +ZRn kf − Ptfkp ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn kf√tz − fkpe− z2 2 dz. We note that divΦ(x)Ptf (x) dx. (2.1) Thus, for the first term in equality (2.1) we have Integrating by parts in the second term of equality (2.1), we have divΦ(x)(f (x)−Ptf (x)) dx ≤ kdivΦkqkf−Ptfkp ≤ kdivΦkq(2π)−n/2ZRn kf√tz−fkpe− z2 ZRn divΦ(x)Ptf (x) dx = −ZRnhΦ(x),∇Ptf (x)i dx ZRn 2 dz. = t−1/2ZRnZRnhΦ(x), (x − y)t−1/2if (y)(2πt)−n/2e− x−y2 = t−1/2ZRnZRnhΦ(x), zif (x − 2t dy dx √tz)(2π)−n/2e− z2 2 dz dx. Since Z f (x)Z hΦ(x), zie− z2 2 dz dx = 0, the above expression is equal to t−1/2ZRn (2π)−n/2e− z2 2 ZRnhΦ(x), zi(f (x − √tz) − f (x)) dx dz ≤ t−1/2kΦkq(2π)−n/2ZRn ze− z2 2 kf√tz − fkp dz BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 7 Thus, we have ZRn divΦ(x)f (x) dx ≤ kdivΦkq(2π)−n/2ZRn kf√tz − fkpe− z2 2 dz Hence and taking √t = ε we conclude that σp(f, ε) ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn kf√tz − fkpe− z2 σp(f, ε) ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn The lemma is proved. 2 dz. + t−1/2kΦkq(2π)−n/2ZRn zkf√tz − fkpe− z2 2 dz + t−1/2ε(2π)−n/2ZRn zkf√tz − fkpe− z2 (1 + z)kfεz − fkpe− z2 2 dz. 2 dz (cid:3) subadditive, in particular, As we have already mentioned in the introduction, the function ωp(f,·) is nondecreasing and (2.2) ωp(f, τ s) ≤ 2τ ωp(f, s) for τ ≥ 1 and s > 0. Indeed, let k ∈ N be a number such that k ≤ τ < k + 1. Then ωp(f, τ s) ≤ ωp(f, (k + 1)s) ≤ (k + 1)ωp(f, s) = k(1 + 1/k)ωp(f, s) ≤ 2τ ωp(f, s). Now we are ready to prove the aforementioned equivalence. Theorem 2.7. For any function f ∈ Lp(Rn), we have 2−1ωp(f, 2ε) ≤eσp(f, ε) ≤ σp(f, ε) ≤ 2(1 + √n + n)ωp(f, ε). Proof. The first two inequalities are straightforward corollaries of Lemma 2.6. For the last one, by the same lemma, we have σp(f, ε) ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn kfεz − fkp(1 + z)e− z2 = (2π)−n/2Zz≤1 ωp(f, εz)(1 + z)e− z2 ωp(f, ε)(2π)−n/2Zz≤1 2 dz ≤ (2π)−n/2ZRn 2 dz + (2π)−n/2Zz>1 (1 + z)e− z2 The first integral above is estimated by 2 dz ≤ 2ωp(f, ε) ωp(f, εz)(1 + z)e− z2 ωp(f, εz)(1 + z)e− z2 2 dz. 2 dz by the monotonicity of the function ωp(f,·). The second integral, by estimate (2.2), is not greater than ωp(f, ε)(2π)−n/2Zz>1 2z(1 + z)e− z2 2 dz ≤ ωp(f, ε)(2√n + 2n). Combining these two estimates we get the announced bound. (cid:3) As a corollary of the above theorem we get an equivalent characterization of Besov classes on Rn. Let us introduce the following notation. Definition 2.8. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), p ∈ [1,∞), θ ∈ [1,∞], and α ∈ (0, 1). Set V p,θ,α(f ) =(cid:16)Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)s−ασp(f, s)(cid:3)θ s−1 ds(cid:17)1/θ . (i) f ∈ Bα p,θ(Rn); (ii) V p,θ,α(f ) < ∞; Moreover, (iii) eV p,θ,α(f ) < ∞. 2α−1kfkα,p,θ ≤ eV p,θ,α(f ) ≤ V p,θ,α(f ) ≤ 2(1 + √n + n)kfkα,p,θ. 3. Ulyanov embedding theorems In this section we study embedding theorems by means of the obtained properties of the Our first goal is to estimate the measure of the set {f ≥ t}. To provide such an estimate function σp(f,·). we need the following lemma. Lemma 3.1. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), p ∈ [1, n) or n = p = 1, and let u ∈ C∞0 (Rn) be a function such that kukq ≤ 1 (recall that q = p/(p − 1)). Then Z u(x)f (x)dx ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,kukp/n 1 (cid:1), n where C(n, p) = 1 + ν−1/p C(1, 1) = 1. Proof. By approximation, for an arbitrary vector field Φ ∈ C∞(Rn) with kΦkq ≤ ε, kdivΦkq ≤ 1 one has (n/p − 1)1/p−1, νn is the surface area of the unit sphere in Rn, and Z divΦ(x)f (x)dx ≤ σp(f, ε). Assume first that n > 2. Consider the function ϕ(x) = −(n − 2)−1ν−1 n ZRn x − y−n+2u(y) dy. It is known that div∇ϕ = ∆ϕ = u. Set K1(x) = x−n+1Ind{x<R}(x), K2(x) = x−n+1Ind{x≥R}(x). n ZRn x − y−n+1u(y) dy = ν−1 n (cid:0)K1 ∗ u(x) + K2 ∗ u(x)(cid:1). 8 EGOR D. KOSOV Definition 2.9. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), p ∈ [1,∞), θ ∈ [1,∞], and α ∈ (0, 1). Set eV p,θ,α(f ) =(cid:16)Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)s−αeσp(f, s)(cid:3)θs−1 ds(cid:17)1/θ . Corollary 2.10. For any function f ∈ Lp(Rn), the following conditions are equivalent: Let us estimate ∇ϕ: Thus, k∇ϕkq ≤ ν−1 = R + ν−1/p n ∇ϕ(x) ≤ ν−1 n (cid:0)kK1k1kukq + kK2kqkuk1(cid:1) n Z{x<R} ≤ ν−1 (cid:0)(n − 1)(q − 1) − 1(cid:1)−1/q x−n+1 dx + ν−1 n kuk1(cid:18)Z{x≥R} R1−n/pkuk1 = R + ν−1/p n x−nq+q dx(cid:19)1/q q−1/q(n/p − 1)1/p−1R1−n/pkuk1 (n/p − 1)1/p−1R1−n/pkuk1 n Setting now R = kukp/n 1 , we obtain k∇ϕkq ≤(cid:0)1 + ν−1/p n ≤ R + ν−1/p (n/p − 1)1/p−1(cid:1)kukp/n 1 . BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 9 Thus, Z u(x)f (x)dx =Z div∇ϕ(x)f (x)dx ≤ σp(cid:0)f,(cid:0)1 + ν−1/p n (n/p − 1)1/p−1(cid:1)kukp/n 1 (cid:1) where we have used the monotonicity of the function σ∗p(f,·) (see Corollary 2.5). We have obtained the announced estimate in the case n > 2. For n = 2 we can take (n/p − 1)1/p−1(cid:1)σp(cid:0)f,kukp/n 1 (cid:1), n ≤(cid:0)1 + ν−1/p ϕ(x) = −(2π)−1Z lnx − yu(y)dy and argue as above. Thus, only the case n = 1 remains. In that case we consider the function ϕ(x) =R x For this function we can write Z u(x)f (x)dx =Z ϕ′(x)f (x)dx ≤ σ1(f,kϕk∞) ≤ σ1(f,kuk1). −∞ u(t)dt. (cid:3) The lemma is proved. Corollary 3.2. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), p ∈ [1, n) or n = p = 1, then (cid:18)ZA f (x)p dx(cid:19)1/p ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,(cid:0)λn(A)(cid:1)1/n(cid:1) for an arbitrary Borel set A in Rn with C(n, p) = 1 + ν−1/p surface area of the unit sphere in Rn, and C(1, 1) = 1. Proof. Assume first that A is a bounded set, A ⊂ B(0, R), where B(0, R) is the ball of radius R centered at the origin. Consider a function u ∈ Lq(A) with kukLq(A) ≤ 1. There is a sequence of functions um ∈ C∞0 (Rn) such that supp(um) ⊂ B(0, 2R), kumkq ≤ 1, and um → u can be constructed by means of convolutions with compactly supported smooth probability densities. For each function um by the previous lemma we have in Lq(cid:0)B(0, 2R)(cid:1) (λn-a.e. in case p = 1), where u(x) = 0 if x 6∈ A. For example, such a sequence (n/p − 1)1/p−1, where νn is the n Z um(x)f (x) dx ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,kumkp/n 1 (cid:1). Since k · k1 is a continuous function on the space Lq(cid:0)B(0, 2R)(cid:1) for p > 1 (or by Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem in case p = 1), the above estimate is also valid for the function u. Thus, for every function u ∈ Lq(A) with kukLq(A) ≤ 1 we have ZA u(x)f (x) dx ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,kukp/n 1 (cid:1) ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,(cid:0)λn(A)(cid:1)1/n(cid:1). Taking the supremum over all functions u with kukLq(A) ≤ 1 we obtain the desired estimate for bounded sets A. The case of an arbitrary set A can be obtained by passing to the limit. (cid:3) We now proceed to embedding theorems, which we formulate in terms of the function σp(f,·) instead of ωp(f,·), since these functions are equivalent by Theorem 2.7. Theorem 3.3. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), where p ∈ [1, n) or n = p = 1. Let U : [0,∞) → [0,∞) be a nondecreasing continuous function. Assume that there is a number N > 0 such that where the integral is understood in the Lebesgue–Stieltjes sense. Then N Z +∞ (cid:2)σp(cid:0)f, t−p/n(cid:1)(cid:3)p ZRn f (t)pU(f (t)kfk−1 dU(t) < ∞, p ) dt < ∞. since λn(As) ≤ s−p. Integrating both sides of the above estimate from N to +∞ with respect to the locally bounded measure, generated by the monotone function U, we get We now deal with the left-hand side of the above estimate, which is equal to ≤ C(n, p)p(cid:2)σp(cid:0)f, s−p/n(cid:1)(cid:3)p , (cid:2)σp(cid:0)f, s−p/n(cid:1)(cid:3)p dU(s) < ∞. 10 EGOR D. KOSOV Proof. By Corollary 3.2 for the set As := {f ≥ kfkps} we have N ZAs f (x)p dx ≤ C(n, p)p(cid:2)σp(cid:0)f, (λn(As))1/n(cid:1)(cid:3)p ZAs f (x)p dx dU(s) ≤ C(n, p)pZ +∞ Z +∞ p ) − U(N)(cid:3) dx p ) dx −ZRn I{f≥Nkfkp}f (x)p(cid:2)U(f (x)kfk−1 =ZRn f (x)pU(f (x)kfk−1 − U(N)ZRn N ZRn Thus, ZRn f (x)pU(f (x)kfk−1 The theorem is proved. I{f<Nkfkp}f (x)pU(f (x)kfk−1 p ) dx I{f≥Nkfkp}f (x)p dx ≥ZRn f (x)pU(f (x)kfk−1 p ) dx ≤ C(n, p)pZ +∞ N (cid:2)σp(cid:0)f, s−p/n(cid:1)(cid:3)p dU(s) + U(N)kfkp p. p ) dx − U(N)kfkp p. (cid:3) We now proceed to the second theorem. Let us introduce the following notation. Let p ∈ [1, n) and let f ∈ Lp(Rn). Consider the function vp(f, t) = σp(f, t p Since the function t → t Moreover, limt→0 t−1vp(f, t) = lims→0 s−n/pσp(f, s). We note that, by concavity, (3.1) n is concave, the function vp(f,·) is also concave and nondecreasing. n ). p σp(f, s) = σp(f, s · 1 + (1 − s) · 0) ≥ sσp(f, 1). Thus, lims→0 s−n/pσ(f, s) = ∞ and the function v∗p(f, t) := tvp(f, t−1) is strictly increasing by Lemma 2.4. To unify the notation, for the case n = p = 1 we also use the symbol vp(f,·), which in this case coincides with σp(f,·). Lemma 3.4. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), where p ∈ [1, n) or n = p = 1. In the case n = p = 1 we also assume that limt→0 t−1σ1(f, t) = ∞. Then λn(f ≥ C(n, p)v∗p(f, t)) ≤ t−p, v∗p(f, t) = tσp(f, t− p n ), where C(n, p) = 1 + ν−1/p C(1, 1) = 1. n (n/p − 1)1/p−1, νn is the surface area of the unit sphere in Rn, and Proof. As we have already mentioned, the function v∗ is strictly monotone. By Corollary 3.2, for the set At := {f ≥ C(n, p)v∗p(f, t)} we have C(n, p)v∗p(f, t)λn(At)1/p ≤(cid:18)ZAt f (x)p dx(cid:19)1/p ≤ C(n, p)σp(cid:0)f,(cid:0)λn(At)(cid:1)1/n(cid:1). Thus, By the strictly monotonicity of the function v∗p(f,·) we have the estimate v∗p(f, t) ≤ v∗p(cid:0)f,(cid:0)λn(At)(cid:1)−1/p(cid:1). λn(At) ≤ t−p which completes the proof. (cid:3) BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 11 We now proceed to the theorem itself. Theorem 3.5. Let f ∈ Lp(Rn), where p ∈ [1, n) or n = p = 1. Let U : [0,∞) → [0,∞) be a strictly increasing continuous function such that U(0) = 0, limt→∞ U(t) = ∞ and there are positive constants a, r such that U(t) ≤ atp whenever 0 < t < r. Assume that there is a number N > 0 such that where C(n, p) = 1 + ν−1/p C(1, 1) = 1. Then n (n/p − 1)1/p−1, νn is the surface area of the unit sphere in Rn, and Z +∞ N t−1−pU(cid:0)C(n, p)tσp(f, t−p/n)(cid:1) dt < ∞, ZRn U(f (x)) dx < ∞. Proof. We first consider the case where either n > 1 or n = p = 1 and limt→0 t−1σp(f, t) = ∞. Set ζ(s) = C(n, p)v∗p(f, s), where v∗ is defined by equality (3.1). Under our assumptions, the function ζ(·) is continuous and strictly increasing. Set R = ζ(N). um(x) = 0 at all other points x. For these functions we have Consider the functions um such that um(x) = U(f (x)) if x ≤ m and U(f (x)) ≤ m and ZRn um(x) dx =Z m =Z U (r) λn(um ≥ t) dt ≤Z m λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt +Z U (R) U (r) 0 0 0 λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt +Z m U (R) λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt. For the first term we have Z U (r) 0 λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt =Z U (r) 0 λn(f ≥ U−1(t)) dt ≤Z U (r) 0 λn(f ≥ (a−1t)1/p) dt ≤Z ∞ 0 λn(afp ≥ t)dt = aZRn f (x)p dx, where in the second inequality we have used that a(U−1(t))p ≥ t if t ∈ (0, U(r)). For the second term we have U (r) U (R) For the third term, by Lemma 3.4, we have Z U (R) λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt ≤ (U(R) − U(r))λn(f ≥ r) ≤ (U(R) − U(r))r−pZRn f (x)p dx. Z m λn(U(f) ≥ t) dt =Z m (t)(cid:3)−p The last integral is the area under the graph of the strictly decreasing function(cid:2)(cid:0)U ◦ζ(cid:1)−1 [(U◦ζ)−1(m)]−p(cid:0)U ◦ ζ(cid:1)(t−1/p) dt − U(R)(cid:16)[ζ−1(R)]−p − [(U ◦ ζ)−1(m)]−p(cid:17) λn(cid:16)f ≥ ζ(cid:0)ζ−1(U−1(t))(cid:1)(cid:17) dt ≤Z m U (R)(cid:2)(cid:0)U ◦ ζ(cid:1)−1 Hence it is equal to [ζ −1(R)]−p Z dt. U (R) . (t)(cid:3)−p The first integral in the above expression is equal to Z (U◦ζ)−1(m) N s−1−pU(cid:0)ζ(s)(cid:1) ds ≤Z +∞ N s−1−pU(cid:0)C(n, p)v∗p(f, s)(cid:1) ds < ∞, +(cid:0)m − U(R)(cid:1)[(U ◦ ζ)−1(m)]−p. 12 EGOR D. KOSOV since v∗p(f, s) = svp(f, 1/s) = sσp(f, s−p/n). We also note that m[(U ◦ ζ)−1(m)]−p ≤ pZ +∞ (U◦ζ)−1(m) t−1−pU(cid:0)ζ(t)(cid:1) dt. Summing up these estimates and taking the limit as m tends to infinity, by Fatou's lemma, we get ZRn U(f (x)) dx ≤ aZRn f (x)p dx + (U(C(n, p)v∗p(f, N)) − U(r))r−pZRn f (x)p dx s−1−pU(cid:0)C(n, p)sσp(f, s−p/n)(cid:1) ds. +Z +∞ N which completes the proof in the case under consideration. (3.2) In the case where n = p = 1 and limt→0 t−1σp(f, t) = A for some constant A (the limit exists by monotonicity) the function f has bounded variation and is bounded by the constant A. Thus, ZR U(f (x)) dx ≤ aZ{f<r} f (x) dx + U(A)λ(f ≥ r) ≤ (a + r−1U(A))ZR f (x) dx. (cid:3) The theorem is proved. Remark 3.6. We note that the condition N is equivalent to the condition Z +∞ Z +∞ N ′ t−1−pU(cid:0)C(n, p)tσp(f, t−p/n)(cid:1) dt < ∞, s−1−nU(cid:0)C(n, p)sn/p−1σ∗p(f, s))(cid:1) ds < ∞ which can be verified by the change of variables t = sn/p. Remark 3.7. Let us consider the case n = p = 1 in Theorems 3.3 and 3.5. In this case the condition in the first theorem coincides with and the condition in the second one coincides with N Z +∞ σp(cid:0)f, t−1(cid:1) dU(t) < ∞ Z +∞ t−2U(cid:0)tσp(f, t−1)(cid:1) dt < ∞. N Both conditions are integral forms of the classical Ulyanov conditions from [18] and [19], for- mulated in the introduction. 4. Besov classes on spaces with Gaussian measures We now proceed to the infinite-dimensional Gaussian case. Let X be a real Hausdorff locally convex space with the topological dual space X∗. We recall that a Borel measure γ on X is called Radon measure if for every Borel set B ⊂ X and every ε > 0 there is a compact set K ⊂ B such that γ(B \ K) < ε. We also recall that a Radon measure γ on X is a centered Gaussian measure if, for every continuous linear functional l on X, the image measure γ ◦ l−1 is either Dirac's measure at zero or has a density of the form (2πc2)−1/2 exp(−t2/2c2). From now on let γ be a Radon centered Gaussian measure on X. For a function f ∈ Lp(γ) we set kfkp := kfkLp(γ) :=(cid:18)ZX fp dγ(cid:19)1/p . BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 13 Recall that the Cameron–Martin norm of a vector h ∈ X is defined by hH = sup(cid:26)l(h) : ZX l2 dγ ≤ 1, l ∈ X∗(cid:27). Let H ⊂ X be the linear subspace of all vectors h ∈ X such that hH < ∞. This subspace H is called the Cameron–Martin space of the measure γ. If γ is the standard Gaussian measure on Rn, then its Cameron–Martin space is Rn itself and if γ is the countable power of the standard Gaussian measure on the real line, then H is the classical Hilbert space l2. For a general Radon centered Gaussian measure, the Cameron–Martin space is also a separable Hilbert space (see [4, Theorem 3.2.7 and Proposition 2.4.6]) with the inner product h·,·iH generated by the Cameron– Martin norm · H. Let {li}∞i=1 ⊂ X∗ be an orthonormal basis in the closure X∗γ of the set X∗ in L2(γ). There is an orthonormal basis {ei}∞i=1 in H such that li(ej) = δi,j (see [4]). We will use below that for any orthonormal family l1, . . . , ln ∈ X∗γ the distribution of the vector (l1, . . . , ln), i.e., the image of the measure γ, is the standard Gaussian measure γn on Rn, i.e., the measure with density (2π)−n/2 exp(−x2/2) with respect to the standard Lebesgue measure on Rn. Let FC∞(X) denote the set of all functions ϕ on X of the form ϕ(x) = ψ(l1(x), . . . , ln(x)), where ψ ∈ C∞b (Rn), li ∈ X∗, and let FC∞0 (X) denote the set of all functions ϕ on X of the form ϕ(x) = ψ(l1(x), . . . , ln(x)), where ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn), li ∈ X∗. Let FC∞(X, H) be the set of all vector fields Φ of the form Φ(x) = Ψi(g1(x), . . . , gn(x))hi, nXi=1 where Ψi ∈ C∞b (Rn), gi ∈ X∗, hi ∈ H and let FC∞0 (X, H) be the subset of this class consisting of mappings for which Ψi can be chosen with compact support. Note that here we can actually take vectors hi orthogonal in H and functionals gi orthogonal in X∗γ such that gi(hj) = δij. We will call such vectors and functionals biorthogonal. For every ϕ ∈ FC∞(X) of the form ϕ(x) = ψ(l1(x), . . . , ln(x)) set ∂xj ψ(l1(x), . . . , ln(x))ej, ∇ϕ(x) = nXj=1 where {li} and {ei} are biorthogonal. Let divγ be the "adjoint operator" to the gradient operator ∇ with respect to γ, that is, (divγΦ)ϕ dγ = −ZXhΦ,∇ϕiH dγ. for arbitrary Φ ∈ FC∞(X, H) and φ ∈ FC∞(X). One can easily check that divγΦ(x) = ∂xj Ψj(l1(x), . . . , ln(x)) − lj(x)Ψj(l1(x), . . . , ln(x)) for a vector field Φ ∈ FC∞(X, H) of the form nXi=1 Φ(x) = Ψi(l1(x), . . . , ln(x))ei with biorthogonal {li} and {ei}. We note that for a vector field Φ from FC∞0 (X, H) its diver- gence divγΦ is a bounded function. We recall that the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup is defined by the equality ZX nXj=1 Ttf (x) :=ZX f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) γ(dy) for any function f ∈ L1(γ). e−τ √1 − e−2τ ≤ (2t)−1/2, Let us define the Gaussian modulus of continuity σγ,p(f,·) which plays the same role as the ct ≤ (2t)1/2, and lim t→∞ ct = π/2. function σp(f,·) introduced above in case of Rn. Definition 4.1. Let f ∈ Lp(γ). Set σγ,p(f, ε) := supnZ divγΦf dγ, Φ ∈ FC∞0 (X, H),kdivγΦkq ≤ 1,kΦkq ≤ εo. We note that the function σγ,p(f,·) is continuous, concave, and nondecreasing on (0, +∞), which can be proved similarly to Lemma 2.3. Thus, by approximation, in the definition of the quantity σγ,p(f, ε) the supremum can be taken over all vector fields Φ ∈ FC∞(X, H) with kdivγΦkq ≤ 1,kΦkq ≤ ε. Using the previous definition we can now introduce Besov classes on a locally convex space endowed with a Gaussian measure. Definition 4.2. Let α ∈ (0, 1], p ∈ [1,∞), θ ∈ [1,∞]. We say that a function f ∈ Lp(γ) belongs to the Gaussian Besov space Bα p,θ(γ) if the quantity 14 EGOR D. KOSOV We now fix an orthonormal basis {ln} ⊂ X∗ in X∗γ . For any function f ∈ L1(γ) let Enf be a function on Rn such that ZRn ψEnf dγn =ZX ψ(cid:0)l1(x), . . . , ln(x)(cid:1)f (x) γ(dx) ∀ ψ ∈ C∞b (Rn), where γn is the standard Gaussian measure on Rn. This equality actually means that the function Enf (l1, . . . , ln) is the conditional expectation of f with respect to the σ-field generated by functions l1, . . . , ln. By the known property of conditional expectations, for any function f ∈ Lp(γ), we have We also introduce the following functions C(p) and ct to be used further: kf − Enf (l1, . . . , ln)kp → 0, n → ∞. C(p) :=(cid:18)(2π)−1/2ZR spe− s2 2 ds(cid:19)1/p and ct :=Z t 0 e−τ √1 − e−2τ dτ. We note that V p,θ,α(f ) =(cid:16)Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)s−ασγ,p(f, s)(cid:3)θs−1ds(cid:17)1/θ is finite. and Gaussian Nikolskii–Besov class introduced in [7]. We note that in the case θ = ∞ the above definition coincides with the definition of the We will give an equivalent description of these Gaussian Besov classes in terms of the following two characteristics. Definition 4.3. For a function f ∈ Lp(γ), p ∈ [1,∞), set aγ,p(f, t) :=(cid:16)ZZ f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) − f (x)p γ(dx)γ(dy)(cid:17)1/p Ap,θ,α γ (f ) :=(cid:16)Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)t−α/2aγ,p(f, t)(cid:3)θ t−1dt(cid:17)1/θ . BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 15 We note that kf − Ttfkp ≤ aγ,p(f, t). In a sense, the function aγ,p(f,·) can be regarded as a Gaussian replacement for the finite- dimensional modulus of continuity ωp(f,·), since we cannot directly use shifts fh of the function f ∈ Lp(γ), since these shifts can fail to be in Lp(γ). We need the following technical lemma. Lemma 4.4. Let γn be the standard Gaussian measure on Rn. Then for any function f ∈ Lp(γn), where p ∈ [1,∞), we have aγn,p(f, t) ≤ 2σγn,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct). Proof. For every function ϕ ∈ C∞0 (R2n) we can write ZZ ϕ(x, y)[f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) − f (x)] γn(dx)γn(dy) =Z f (u)Z [ϕ(e−tu − √1 − e−2tv,√1 − e−2tu + e−tv) − ϕ(u, v)] γn(dv) γn(du) =Z f (u)Z t √1 − e−2sv,√1 − e−2su + e−sv) γn(dv). ∂ ∂s 0 gs(u) ds γn(du), We now note that for an arbitrary function ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn) we have where gs(u) :=Z ϕ(e−su − Z ψ(u) ∂ ∂s gs(u) γn(du) = ∂ ∂sZ ψ(u)Z ϕ(e−su − √1 − e−2sv,√1 − e−2su + e−sv) γn(dv) γn(du) = ∂ ∂sZZ ϕ(x, y)ψ(e−sx + √1 − e−2sy) γn(dx) γn(dy) = where = e−s √1 − e−2sZZ ϕ(x, y)h∇ψ(e−sx + √1 − e−2sy), e−sy − √1 − e−2sZ D∇ψ(u),Z vϕ(e−su − e−s √1 − e−2sxi γn(dx) γn(dy) √1 − e−2sv,√1 − e−2su + e−sv) γn(dv)E γn(du) = −Z ψ(u)divγnGs(u) γn(du), √1 − e−2sv,√1 − e−2su + e−sv) γn(dv) ∈ C∞b (Rn). Gs(u) := e−s √1 − e−2sZ vϕ(e−su − Thus, and Z fZ t 0 ∂ ∂s ∂ ∂s gs(u) = divγ(cid:0)−Gs(u)(cid:1) gs ds dγn =Z divγ(cid:16)−Z t 0 Gs ds(cid:17)f dγn. 16 EGOR D. KOSOV We observe that 0 0 Moreover, we have ∂ ∂s gs(u) ds Gs ds(cid:17) =Z t divγn(cid:16)−Z t 0 and that divγn(cid:0)−Gs(cid:1) ds =Z t =Z [ϕ(e−tu − (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)divγn(cid:16)−Z t (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Z t √1 − e−2tv,√1 − e−2tu + e−tv) − ϕ(u, v)] γn(dv) Gs, ds(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)q ≤ 2kϕkLq(γn⊗γn). Gs ds(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)q ≤Z t √1 − e−2sZZ hΨ(u), viϕ(e−su− √1 − e−2skϕkLq(γn⊗γn)(cid:16)ZZ hΨ(u), vip γn(dv)γn(du)(cid:17)1/p 0 (cid:13)(cid:13)Gs(cid:13)(cid:13)q ds and it remains to estimate (cid:13)(cid:13)Gs(cid:13)(cid:13)q. To do this, we note that for an arbitrary vector field Z hΨ, Gsi dγn = √1 − e−2sv,√1 − e−2su+e−sv) γn(dv)γn(du) Ψ ∈ C∞0 (Rn) e−s e−s ≤ 0 0 e−s √1 − e−2s C(p)kϕkLq(γn⊗γn)kΨkp. Thus, ≤ e−s and (cid:13)(cid:13)Gs(cid:13)(cid:13)q ≤ C(p) Gs ds(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)q ≤Z t √1 − e−2skϕkLq(γn⊗γn) 0 (cid:13)(cid:13)Gs(cid:13)(cid:13)q ds ≤ C(p)ctkϕkLq(γn⊗γn). ZZ ϕ(x, y)[f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) − f (x)] γn(dx)γn(dy) =Z fZ t Hence, for an arbitrary function ϕ ∈ C∞0 (R2n) with kϕkLq(γn⊗γn) = 1 we have (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Z t ∂ ∂s 0 0 gs ds dγn Taking the supremum over functions ϕ ∈ C∞0 (R2n) with kϕkLq(γn⊗γn) = 1 we obtain the an- nounced bound. (cid:3) =Z divγn(cid:16)−Z t 0 Gs ds(cid:17)f dγn ≤ 2σγn,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct). The following theorem is a Gaussian analog of Theorem 2.7. Theorem 4.5. For any function f ∈ Lp(γ), where p ∈ [1,∞), we have If p > 1 we have the inverse bound: aγ,p(f, t) ≤ 2σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct). σγ,p(f, ε) ≤(cid:0)1 + C(p/(p − 1))(cid:1)aγ,p(f, ε2). Proof. To prove the first part of the lemma, we fix an orthonormal basis {ln} ⊂ X∗ in X∗γ . By the previous lemma we have aγn,p(Enf, t) ≤ 2σγn,p(Enf, 2−1C(p)ct) ≤ 2σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct). We observe that aγn,p(f, t) → aγ,p(f, t) as n tends to infinity, which completes the proof. = C(q)t−1/2aγ,p(f, t)kΦkq. for an arbitrary fixed point x. Thus, the last expression is equal to − e−t √1 − e−2tZZ hΦ(x), yiH(cid:2)f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty) − f (x)(cid:3) γ(dy)γ(dx) ≤ t−1/2aγ,p(f, t)(cid:16)ZZ hΦ(x), yiHq γ(dy)γ(dx)(cid:17)1/q Z divγΦTtf dγ ≤ C(q)t−1/2aγ,p(f, t)kΦkq. So, we have proved the estimate Now we have Z divγΦf dγ =Z divγΦ[f − Ttf ] dγ +Z divγΦTtf dγ. The first term in the above expression is estimated by aγ,p(f, t)kdivγΦkq and the second term, as we have proved, is not greater than C(q)t−1/2aγ,p(f, t)kΦkq. Taking t = ε2 we obtain σγ,p(f, ε) ≤ (1 + C(q))aγ,p(f, ε2), BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 17 write Let now f ∈ Lp(γ) for some p > 1. For an arbitrary vector field Φ ∈ FC∞0 (X, H) we can Z divγΦTtf dγ = e−tZ divγTtΦf dγ √1 − e−2tZZ f (u)hΦ(e−tu − √1 − e−2tv), e−tv + √1 − e−2tuiH γ(dv)γ(du) = − e−t = − e−t √1 − e−2tZZ f (e−tx + √1 − e−2ty)hΦ(x), yiH γ(dy)γ(dx). Z f (x)hΦ(x), yiH γ(dy) = 0 We observe that which is the announced bound. Corollary 4.6. For any function f ∈ Bα u : R → R we have p,θ(γ), where p ∈ [1,∞), and for any Lipschitz function (cid:3) where Lip(u) is the Lipschitz constant of the function u. aγ,p(u(f ), t) ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θLip(u)C(p)αcα t V p,θ,α(f ), Proof. By the Lipschitz continuity of the function u and by the previous lemma we can write aγ,p(u(f ), t) =(cid:18)ZZ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)u(cid:0)f (e−tx +p1 − e−2ty)(cid:1) − u(cid:0)f (x)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Lip(u)(cid:18)ZZ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (e−tx +p1 − e−2ty) − f (x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p γ(dy)γ(dx)(cid:19)1/p γ(dy)γ(dx)(cid:19)1/p p We now note that (cid:0)2−1C(p)ct(cid:1)−αθ(cid:2)σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct)(cid:3)θ ≤ αθ = Lip(u)aγ,p(f, t) ≤ 2Lip(u)σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct). r−αθ−1[σγ,p(f, r)]θdr ≤ αθ(cid:2)V p,θ,α(f )(cid:3)θ ∞Z2−1C(p)ct . 18 Thus, as announced. EGOR D. KOSOV aγ,p(u(f ), t) ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θLip(u)C(p)αcα t V p,θ,α(f ) (cid:3) Also, as a corollary, we obtain that the conditions V p,θ,α γ (f ) < ∞ and Ap,θ,α γ (f ) < ∞ are equivalent for p > 1. Corollary 4.7. For any function f ∈ Bα p,θ(γ), where p ∈ [1,∞), we have Ap,θ,α γ (f ) ≤ 21−α+1/θC(p)αV p,θ,α γ (f ). Moreover, for p ∈ (1,∞) we have the inverse statement, that is, if for a function f ∈ Lp(γ) the quantity Ap,θ,α p,θ(γ) and γ (f ) is finite, then f ∈ Bα V p,θ,α γ Proof. For a function f ∈ Bα (f ) ≤ 2−1/θ(cid:0)1 + C(p/(p − 1))(cid:1)Ap,θ,α p,θ(γ), by Lemma 4.5, we have γ (f ). aγ,p(f, t) ≤ 2σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)ct) ≤ 2σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)t1/2). Thus, γ (cid:2)Ap,θ,α (f )(cid:3)θ =Z ∞ 0 (cid:2)t−α/2aγ,p(f, t)(cid:3)θt−1dt ≤ 2θZ ∞ = 21+θ−αθC(p)αθZ ∞ r−αθ(cid:2)σγ,p(f, r)(cid:3)θ t−αθ/2(cid:2)σγ,p(f, 2−1C(p)t1/2)(cid:3)θt−1dt r−1dr = 21+θ−αθC(p)αθ(cid:2)V p,θ,α γ 0 0 , (f )(cid:3)θ which is the announced bound. Conversely, for any function f ∈ Lp(γ) with p > 1 and finite Ap,θ,α γ (f ), Lemma 4.5 gives that σγ,p(f, ε) ≤(cid:0)1 + C(q)(cid:1)aγ,p(f, ε2), which yields γ =Z ∞ (cid:2)V p,θ,α (f )(cid:3)θ ≤(cid:0)1 + C(q)(cid:1)θZ ∞ 0 r−1dr (cid:2)r−ασγ,p(f, r)(cid:3)θ (cid:2)r−αaγ,p(f, r2)(cid:3)θr−1dt = 2−1(cid:0)1 + C(q)(cid:1)θZ ∞ 0 This is the announced estimate. 0 (cid:2)t−α/2aγ,p(f, t)(cid:3)θt−1dt (f )(cid:3)θ. = 2−1(cid:0)1 + C(q)(cid:1)θ(cid:2)Ap,θ,α γ (cid:3) We now proceed to a log-Sobolev-type embedding theorem for Besov classes with respect to a Gaussian measure. As we have mentioned in the introduction, the main idea of the proof is to use the short time behavior of the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup together with its hypercontractivity property, similarly in a sense to the approach from [14]. Theorem 4.8. For any function f ∈ Bα p,θ(γ), where p ∈ (1,∞), and for any number β ∈ (0, α) the function f lnfβ/2 belongs to Lp(γ). Moreover, there is a constant C = C(p, θ, α, β), depending only on parameters p, θ, α, and β, such that (cid:16)Z fp(cid:12)(cid:12)ln(fkfk−1 p )(cid:12)(cid:12)pβ/2 dγ(cid:17)1/p ≤ C(cid:0)kfkp + V p,θ,α γ (f )(cid:1). Proof. We recall the hypercontractivity property of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup (see [4, Theorem 5.5.3]): for any function f ∈ Lp(γ) one has kTtfk1+(p−1)e2t ≤ kfkp. BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 19 For an arbitrary number s > 0, let As := {f ≥ s}. We note that the function τ 7→ max{τ, s} is 1-Lipschitz. Thus, for an arbitrary function ϕ ∈ FC∞(X) and any number t > 0, by Corollary 4.6 and by the hypercontractivity property, we have Z ϕIAs(f − s) dγ =Z IAsϕ(max{f, s} − s) dγ =Z IAsϕ(cid:2)max{f, s} − Tt(max{f, s})(cid:3) dγ +Z IAsϕTt(max{f, s} − s) dγ ≤ kϕkqk max{f, s} − Tt(max{f, s})kp + kIAsϕk 1+(p−1)e2t (p−1)e2t kTt(max{f, s} − s)k1+(p−1)e2t (p−1)e2t kIAs(f − s)kp. (f )tα/2 + kIAsϕk 1+(p−1)e2t ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θC(p)αkϕkqV p,θ,α γ We note that 1 1 + (p − 1)e2t (p − 1)e2t = 1 + (p − 1)e2t = q(1/q + 1/(pe2t)) ≤ q. Thus, we can apply Holder's inequality to the expression kIAsϕk 1+(p−1)e2t (1/p − 1/(pe2t))−1 and (1/q + 1/(pe2t))−1, which yields (p−1)e2t ≤ [γ(As)] kIAsϕk 1+(p−1)e2t q+pe2t kϕkq. (p−1)e2t e2t −1 with the exponents Taking the supremum over functions ϕ with kϕkq = 1 we obtain the estimate kIAs(f − s)kp ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θC(p)αV p,θ,α γ We now observe that (f )tα/2 + [γ(As)] e2t −1 q+pe2t kIAs(f − s)kp. e2t − 1 q + pe2t = p−1 q−1(e2t − 1) 1 + q−1(e2t − 1) ≥ p−1 2q−1t 1 + 2q−1t ≥ t pq whenever t ≤ 1/2. Thus, whenever t ≤ 1/2, we have kIAs(f − s)kp ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θC(p)αV p,θ,α γ (f )tα/2 + [γ(As)](pq)−1tkIAs(f − s)kp. For the sets As with γ(As) ≤ e−2pq we can take t = pq(− ln γ(As))−1 ≤ 1/2 and conclude that kIAs(f − s)kp ≤ 21−α(αθ)1/θC(p)α(pq)α/2V p,θ,α γ (f )[− ln γ(As)]−α/2 + e−1kIAs(f − s)kp, since for such t. The obtained inequality can be rewritten in the form [γ(As)](pq)−1t = e−(pq)−1[− ln γ(As)]t = e−1 kIAs(f − s)kp ≤ C(p, θ, α)V p,θ,α γ (f )[− ln γ(As)]−α/2, where C(p, θ, α) = 21−α(αθ)1/θC(p)αe(e − 1)−1(pq)α/2. We now observe that γ(As) ≤ kfkp and IAs(f − s) ≥ 2−1IA2sf. Thus, if t ≥ e2q, taking s = tkfkp, we have ps−p Z I{f≥2tkfkp}fp dγ ≤(cid:0)2p−α/2C(p, θ, α)(cid:1)p(cid:2)V p,θ,α γ (f )(cid:3)p[ln t]−pα/2. Multiplying both sides of the inequality by t−1[ln t]−1+pβ/2 and integrating with respect to t from e2q to +∞ we obtain Z ∞ e2q t−1[ln t]−1+pβ/2Z I{f≥2tkfkp}fp dγ dt ≤(cid:0)2p−α/2C(p, θ, α)(cid:1)p(cid:2)V p,θ,α γ (f )(cid:3)pZ ∞ =(cid:0)2p−α/2C(p, θ, α)(cid:1)p e2q [ln t]−1−p(α−β)/2t−1dt 2p−1(α − β)−1(2q)−p(α−β)/2(cid:2)V p,α γ . (f )(cid:3)p 20 EGOR D. KOSOV The left-hand side of the above estimate is equal to Z fpI{f≥2e2qkfkp}Z fkfk−1 e2q p 2−1 t−1[ln t]−1+pβ/2 dt dγ = 2(pβ)−1Z fpI{f≥2e2qkfkp}(cid:0)[ln(fkfk−1 ≥ 2(pβ)−1p−pβ/2Z fpI{f≥2e2qkfkp}[ln(fkfk−1 p 2−1)]pβ/2 − (2q)pβ/2(cid:1) dγ p )]pβ/2 dγ − 2(pβ)−1(2q)pβ/2kfkp p = 2(pβ)−1p−pβ/2Z fp(cid:12)(cid:12)ln(fkfk−1 p )(cid:12)(cid:12)pβ/2 −2(pβ)−1p−pβ/2Z fpI{f<2e2qkfkp}(cid:12)(cid:12)ln(fkfk−1 p )(cid:12)(cid:12)pβ/2 − 2(pβ)−1(2q)pβ/2kfkp p dγ Thus, since a ln aβ/2 ≤ 2e2q(2q + 1)β/2 if a ∈ [0, 2e2q], we have Z fp(cid:12)(cid:12)ln(fkfk−1 p )(cid:12)(cid:12)pβ/2 C1(p, θ, α, β) =(cid:0)2p−α/2C(p, θ, α)(cid:1)p(α − β)−1(2q)−p(α−β)/2ppβ/2β dγ ≤ C1(p, θ, α, β)(cid:2)V p,α (f )(cid:3)p γ + C2(p, α, θ, β)kfkp p with and C2(p, θ, α, β) = (2pe2qp(2q + 1)pβ/2 + (2q)pβ/2ppβ/2) It is readily seen that the obtained bound is equivalent to the announced assertion. The theorem is proved. (cid:3) Finally, let us discuss estimates for the best approximations by Hermite polynomials in L2(γ) with respect to a Gaussian measure γ. Recall (see [4, Section 2.9]) that the space L2(γ) can be decomposed into the direct sum of mutually orthogonal subspaces Hk consisting of the so-called Hermite polynomials of a fixed degree k: L2(γ) = ∞Mk=0 Hk. This decomposition is also called the Wiener chaos decomposition. The space Hk is actually the orthogonal complement of the space of all measurable polynomials of degree k − 1 in the space of all measurable polynomials of degree k. Let Ik be the projection operator to the subspace Hk. For any function f ∈ L2(γ) set EN (f ) := inf{kf − fNk2; fN ∈ N−1Mk=0 Hk}. The quantity EN (f ) is the value of the best approximation of the function f by linear combi- nations of Hermite polynomials of the given degree. It is clear that We now prove a Jackson–Stechkin-type inequality for the quantity EN (f ) involving the EN (f ) = kf − I0(f ) − . . . − IN−1(f )k2. Gaussian modulus of continuity σγ,2(f,·). Theorem 4.9. For any function f ∈ L2(γ) we have EN−1(f ) ≤ σγ,2(f,√2πN−1/2). BESOV CLASSES ON FINITE- AND INFINITE-DIMENSIONAL SPACES 21 Proof. For an arbitrary function ϕ ∈ FC∞(X) with kϕk2 ≤ 1 we have Z ϕ(f − I0(f ) − . . . − IN−1(f )) dγ =Z (ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ))f dγ where we have used the equality 0 ∇Tt(ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ)) dt(cid:17)f dγ, =Z divγ(cid:16)−Z ∞ LTtψ(x) dt = divγ(cid:16)−Z ∞ 0 ∇Ttψ(x) dt(cid:17) ψ(x) = −Z ∞ 0 for an arbitrary function ψ ∈ FC∞(X) with R ψ dγ = 0, where L is the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck operator (see [4, Section 1.4 and Remark 5.8.7]). Recall that for any function ψ ∈ FC∞(X) and that Ttg = which yields the estimate k∇Ttψk2 ≤ e−t √1 − e−2tkψk2 ∞Xk=0 e−ktIk(g), kTt(g − I0(g) − . . . − IN−1(g))k2 ≤ e−N tkgk2, for all g ∈ L2(γ). We now note that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Z ∞ 0 ∇Tt(ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ)) dt(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ≤Z ∞ ≤ kϕk2Z ∞ ≤Z ∞ e−t/2 0 0 0 k∇Tt(ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ))k2 dt √1 − e−tkTt/2(ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ))k2 dt e−N t/2 dt = B((N + 1)/2, 1/2)kϕk2, where B(x, y) is the standard beta function. It can be easily verified that e−t/2 √1 − e−t ≤ √x, Γ(x + 1/2) Γ(x) where Γ(·) is the standard gamma function. Indeed, introducing the probability density ρx(t) := [Γ(x)]−1tx−1e−tI{t>0} and applying Jensen's inequality we obtain Γ(x + 1/2) Γ(x) =Z √tρx(t) dt ≤sZ tρx(t) dt =sΓ(x + 1) Γ(x) = √x. Thus, B((N + 1)/2, 1/2) = Γ((N + 1)/2)Γ(1/2) Γ(1 + N/2) √πΓ(N/2 + 1/2) N/2Γ(N/2) ≤ = √2πN−1/2. Therefore, (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Z ∞ 0 ∇Tt(ϕ − I0(ϕ) − . . . − IN−1(ϕ)) dt(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ≤ √2πN−1/2. We also note that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)divγ(cid:16)−Z ∞ 0 ∇Tt(ϕ− I0(ϕ)− . . .− IN−1(ϕ)) dt(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 = kϕ− I0(ϕ)− . . .− IN−1(ϕ)k2 ≤ kϕk2 ≤ 1. 22 So, EGOR D. KOSOV Z ϕ(f − I0(f ) − . . . − IN−1(f )) dγ ≤ σγ,2(f,√2πN−1/2), which completes the proof. (cid:3) References [1] Ambrosio L., Miranda Jr M. and Pallara D. "Some fine properties of BV functions on Wiener spaces", Analysis and Geometry in Metric Spaces 3:1 (2015), 212–230. [2] Besov O.V., Il'in V.P., Nikolskii S.M. Integral representations of functions and imbedding theorems, V. I, II. Winston & Sons, Washington; Halsted Press, New York – Toronto – London, 1978, 1979. [3] Fukushima M., Hino M. "On the space of BV functions and a related stochastic calculus in infinite dimensions", J. Funct. Anal. 183:1 (2001), 245–268. [4] Bogachev V.I. Gaussian measures, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, 1998. [5] Bogachev V.I. "Distributions of polynomials on multidimensional and infinite-dimensional spaces with measures", Uspehi Mat. Nauk 71:4 (2016), 107–154 (in Russian); English transl. in Russian Math. Surveys 71:4 (2016), 1–47. [6] Bogachev V.I., Kosov E.D. and Zelenov G.I. "Fractional smoothness of distributions of polynomials and a fractional analog of the Hardy–Landau–Littlewood inequality", to appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.05207. [7] Bogachev V.I., Kosov E.D. and Popova S.N. "New approach to the Nikolskii–Besov classes", to appear, https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.06477. [8] Kolyada V.I. "On imbedding in classes φ(L)", Izv. AN. SSSR 39:2 (1975), 418–437 (in Russian); English transl. in Math. USSR-Izv. 9:2 (1975), 395–413. [9] Kolyada V.I. "Estimates of rearrangements and imbedding theorems", Mat. Sb. 136(178):1(5) (1988), 3–23 (in Russian); English transl. in Math. USSR-Sb. 64:1 (1989), 1–21. [10] Kolyada V.I. "Rearrangements of functions and embedding theorems", Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 44:5(269) (1989), 61–95 (in Russian); English transl. in Russian Math. Surveys 44:5 (1989), 73–117. [11] Kosov E.D. "Fractional smoothness of images of logarithmically concave measures under polynomials", to appear, https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.00162. [12] Ledoux M. "Isoperimetry and Gaussian analysis", Lecture Notes in Math. 1648 (1996), 165–294. [13] Ledoux M. Concentration of measure and logarithmic Sobolev inequalities, Seminaire de probabilites XXXIII, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1999. [14] Ledoux M. "Semigroup proofs of the isoperimetric inequality in Euclidean and Gauss space", Bulletin des sciences mathematiques 118:6 (1994), 485–510. [15] Nikolskii S.M. Approximation of functions of several variables and imbedding theorems, Transl. from Rus- sian. Springer-Verlag, New York – Heidelberg, 1975 (Russian ed.: Moscow, 1977). [16] Triebel H. Theory of function spaces, V.II, Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 1992. [17] Stein E. Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions, Princeton University Press, Prince- ton, 1970. [18] Ul'yanov P.L. "The imbedding of certain function classes H ω p ", Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR 32:3 (1968), 649–686 (in Russian); English transl. in Math. USSR-Izv. 2:3 (1968), 601–637. [19] Ul'yanov P.L. "Imbedding theorems and relations between best approximations (moduli of continuity) in different metrics", Mat. Sb. 81(123):1 (1970), 104–131 (in Russian); English transl. in Math. USSR-Sb. 10:1 (1970), 103–126.
1609.03514	1	1609	2016-09-12T18:11:03	H\"older-Besov boundedness for periodic pseudo-differential operators	[ "math.FA" ]	In this work we give H\"older-Besov estimates for periodic Fourier multipliers. We present a class of bounded pseudo-differential operators on periodic Besov spaces with symbols of limited regularity.	math.FA	math	H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PERIODIC PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS DUV ´AN CARDONA 1 Abstract. In this work we give Holder-Besov estimates for periodic Fourier multipliers. We present a class of bounded pseudo-differential operators on periodic Besov spaces with symbols of limited regularity. MSC 2010. Primary 43A22, 43A77; Secondary 43A15. 1. Introduction In this paper we study the boundedness of periodic Fourier multipliers and periodic pseudo-differential operators from Holder spaces into Besov spaces. Let σ : Z → C be a symbol, the corresponding Fourier multiplier Op(σ) is the periodic pseudo-differential operator formally defined by the formula Op(σ(·))f = F −1(σ(ξ)F (f )), (1.1) where F is the Fourier transform on the torus T = [0, 2π) and F −1 is the in- verse Fourier transform. In 1979, Agranovich [1] proposed a global quantization of periodic pseudo-differential operators on the circle S1 ≡ T. Later, this theory was widely developed by Ruzhansky and Turunen in [29], where the theory of periodic pseudo-differential operators is considered in arbitrary dimensions. Pe- riodic Besov spaces form a class of function spaces which are of special interest in analysis and mathematical physics. They can be defined via dyadic decompo- sition and form scales Br p,q(T) carrying three indices: r ∈ R, 0 < p, q ≤ ∞. In the special case p = q = ∞, Λr(T) = Br ∞,∞(T) is nothing else but the familiar space of all Holder continuous functions of order 0 < r < 1. There are several possibilities concerning the conditions to impose on a symbol σ in the attempt to establish a periodic Fourier multiplier theorem of boundedness on Besov spaces and Lebesgue spaces for its corresponding operator (1.1) (see [5, 6, 9, 10, 11]). In this paper we investigate the action of periodic Fourier multipliers and periodic pseudo-differential operators from Holder spaces into Besov spaces. Our work is closely related with a classical result by Marcinkiewicz: if (σ(ξ))ξ∈Z is a sequence satisfying the following condition, now known as variational Marcinkiewicz con- dition: kσkL∞(Z) + sup j≥0 X2j≤ξ≤2j+1 σ(ξ + 1) − σ(ξ) < ∞, (1.2) Date: Received: xxxxxx; Revised: yyyyyy; Accepted: zzzzzz. 1 Universidad de los Andes, Mathematics Department, Bogot´a - Colombia. Key words and phrases. Besov spaces, Fourier transform, Bernstein's theorem, Fourier series, Toroidal pseudo-differential operators. 1 2 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ p,q(T) into Br then Op(σ) : Lp(T) → Lp(T) is a bounded operator for all 1 < p < ∞. Here one may consider ∆σ(·) = σ(· + 1) − σ(·) as the first derivative of σ. As a particular case of Theorem 4.2 in [4], every operator Op(σ) satisfying (1.2) is a bounded operator from Br p,q(T) for all 1 < p < ∞, r ∈ R and 1 ≤ q ≤ ∞. We observe that, by Corollary 4.3 in [4], for every r ∈ (0, 1) there exists a Fourier multiplier Op(σ) with σ satisfying (1.2), but with the property that Op(σ) is not a Fourier multiplier from Br ∞,∞(T). In order to get, in particular, boundedness of periodic Fourier multipliers on Holder spaces, we reformulate the variational Marcinkiewicz condition by imposing the following inequality on the symbol: ∞,∞(T) into Br σ(ξ) ≤ Cξ−ρ, (1.3) uniformly on ξ 6= 0, for some 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1. Later, by using estimates on Fourier multipliers, we deduce the boundedness of operators with symbols σ(x, ξ) of finite regularity on x. More precisely, symbols satisfying inequalities of the type ξ ∂β ∆α x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ−α, (1.4) for α ≤ l1,β ≤ l2, li < ∞. We note that, condition (1.4) is related with the Hormander class of symbols on the torus proposed by Ruzhansky and Turunen in [29]. In Section 3 we show that, under suitable conditions on the set of in- dices p, q, r, s and ρ, the ρ-condition (1.4) implies the boundedness of Op(σ(·)) from Bs p,q(T), then we extend these results to the case of pseudo- differential operators on the torus. We end Section 3 with a discussion of our main results and some applications. ∞,∞(T) into Br Finally, let us give some references on the topic we use along this paper. The boundedness of Fourier multipliers in Lp-spaces, Holder spaces and Besov spaces has been considered by many authors for a long time. In the general case of Compact Lie groups we refer the reader to the works of Alexopoulos, Anker, Coifman, Ruzhansky, Turunen and Wirth [2, 3, 18, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33]. The general case of operator-valued Fourier multipliers on the torus has been investigated by Arendt, Bu, Barraza, Denk, Hern´andez, and Nau in [4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11]. Lp and Holder estimates of periodic pseudo-differential operators can be found in [12, 13, 14, 19] and [26]. The quantization process, L2-compactness, spectral properties and Lp estimates of pseudo-differential operators on the circle S1 ≡ T also can be found in the works of Delgado, Wong and Molahajloo [21, 24, 25, 26, 35]. Besov continuity of Fourier multipliers and pseudo-differential operators on general compact Lie groups has been investigated by the author in [15]. 2. preliminaries We use the standard notation of pseudo-differential operators (see e.g. [29]). The Schwartz space S(Zn) denote the space of functions φ : Zn → C such that (2.1) ∀M ∈ R,∃CM > 0, φ(ξ) ≤ CMhξiM , H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 3 where hξi = (1 + ξ2) C ∞(Tn) by 1 2 . The toroidal Fourier transform is defined for any f ∈ where dx is the Haar measure on the n-torus Tn = [0, 2π)n. The inversion formula is given by e−ihx,ξif (x)dx, ξ ∈ Zn, (F f )(ξ) := bf (ξ) =ZTn f (x) = Xξ∈Zn eihx,ξibu(ξ), x ∈ Tn. We now take up the Holder space Λs, 0 < s < 1. According to the usual definition, a function f belongs to Λs if there exists a constant A so that f (x) ≤ A almost every where and fΛs := sup x,y f (x − y) − f (x) ys ≤ A. (2.2) We introduce the Besov spaces on the torus using the periodic Fourier transform as follow. Let r ∈ R, 0 ≤ q < ∞ and 0 < p ≤ ∞. If f is a measurable function on T, we say that f ∈ Br p,q(T) if f satisfies If q = ∞, Br p,∞(T) consists of those functions f satisfying kfkBr p,q := ∞Xm=0 kfkBr p,∞ := sup m∈N 2mrqk X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrk X2m≤ξ<2m+1 < ∞. 1 q Lp(T) eixξbf (ξ)kq eixξbf (ξ)kLp(T) < ∞. In the case of p = q = ∞ and 0 < r < 1 we obtain Br Banach spaces together with the norm ∞,∞(T) = Λr(T), these are kfkΛr = fΛr + sup x∈T f (x). Similarly to Besov spaces one defines the Triebel-Lizorkin spaces as follows. If r ∈ R, 0 < p ≤ ∞ 0 < q < ∞, the Triebel-Lizorkin space F r p,q(T) consists of those functions satisfying kfkF r p,q(T) :=(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xs=0 2srq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X2s≤ξ<2s+1 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) eixξbf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q with a similar modification as in Besov spaces in the case q = ∞. An interesting property regarding Besov spaces and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces is that Br p,p for all 0 < p < ∞. Now, We introduce some classes of pseudo-differential operators. The periodic Hormander class Sm ρ,δ(Tn × Rn), 0 ≤ ρ, δ ≤ 1, consists of those functions a(x, ξ) which are smooth in (x, ξ) ∈ Tn × Rn and which satisfy toroidal symbols inequalities p,p = F r x ∂α ∂β ξ a(x, ξ) ≤ Cα,βhξim−ρα+δβ. (2.6) (2.3) (2.4) (2.5) 4 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Symbols in Sm which are 1-periodic in x. If a(x, ξ) ∈ Sm differential operator is defined by ρ,δ(Tn × Rn) are symbols in Sm ρ,δ(Rn × Rn) (see [29]) of order m ρ,δ(Tn × Rn), the corresponding pseudo- a(X, Dx)u(x) =ZTnZRn ei2πhx−y,ξia(x, ξ)u(y)dξdy. (2.7) (2.8) (2.9) The set Sm smooth in x for all ξ ∈ Zn and which satisfy ρ,δ(Tn × Zn), 0 ≤ ρ, δ ≤ 1, consists of those functions a(x, ξ) which are ∀α, β ∈ Nn,∃Cα,β > 0, ∆α ξ ∂β x a(x, ξ) ≤ Cα,βhξim−ρα+δβ. The operator ∆ is the difference operator defined in [29]. The toroidal operator with symbol a(x, ξ) is defined as a(x, Dx)u(x) = Xξ∈Zn ei2πhx,ξia(x, ξ)bu(ξ), u ∈ C ∞(Tn). ρ,δ(Tn×Zn) (resp. Sm ρ,δ(Tn × Zn), (resp. Ψm The corresponding class of operators with symbols in Sm ρ,δ(Tn× ρ,δ(Tn × Rn)). There exists a Rn)) will be denoted by Ψm process to interpolate the second argument of symbols on Tn × Zn in a smooth way to get a symbol defined on Tn × Rn. Theorem 2.1. Let 0 ≤ δ ≤ 1, 0 < ρ ≤ 1. The symbol a ∈ Sm only if there exists a Euclidean symbol a′ ∈ Sm Moreover, we have Ψm ρ,δ(Tn × Zn) = Ψm ρ,δ(Tn × Zn) if ρ,δ(Tn × Rn) such that a = a′Tn×Zn. ρ,δ(Tn × Rn). Proof. The proof can be found in [29]. (cid:3) The following results provide some properties about composition and invert- ibility of periodic pseudo-differential operators. Proofs of these assertions can be found in [29, 30]. Theorem 2.2. (Composition formula). Let 0 ≤ δ < ρ ≤ 1. The composition τ (X, D)◦ σ(X, D) of two pseudo-differential operators with symbols τ ∈ Sl ρ,δ(Tn× Zn) and σ ∈ Sm ρ,δ(Tn×Zn) is a pseudo-differential operator, and its toroidal symbol ψ(x, ξ) has the following asymptotic expansion, ψ(x, ξ) ≈Xγ≥0 1 γ! ∆γ ξ τ (x, ξ) · D(γ) x σ(x, ξ). (2.10) A pseudo-differential operator σ(x, ξ) ∈ Sm ρ,δ is called elliptic, if for every M > 0, there exists R > 0 such that σ(x, ξ) ≥ Rhξim if ξ ≥ M. Theorem 2.3. (Parametrix existence). Let 0 ≤ δ < ρ ≤ 1. For every elliptic pseudo-differential operators with symbol σ ∈ Sm ρ,δ(Tn × Zn) there exists τ ∈ S−m ρ,δ (Tn × Zn) such that (2.11) where, S, R are pseudo-differential operators with symbols in S−∞ = ∩mSm ρ,δ. σ(X, D) ◦ τ (X, D) = I + R, τ (x, D) ◦ σ(X, D) = I + S, H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 5 As a consequence of the Proposition 6 in [34] and Theorem 2.1, the continuity property of pseudo-differential operators in the Holder spaces is contained in the following theorems. First we consider the case of operators on Rn as follow. Theorem 2.4. Suppose σ is a symbol in Sm is a bounded mapping from Λs(Rn) into Λs−m(Rn) whenever m < s ≤ 1. 1,0(Rn×Rn). Then the operator σ(X, D) Theorem 2.5. Suppose σ is a symbol in Sm is a bounded mapping from Λs(Tn) into Λs−m(Tn) whenever m < s ≤ 1. 1,0(Tn × Zn). Then the operator Op(σ) Our main results are analogues of the Theorem 2.5, but we consider symbols with limited smoothness on the configuration variables (x, ξ). 3. Holder-Besov boundedness of periodic operators 3.1. Main results and proofs. In this section we present the proof of our main results. Although all results in this paper are presented for the torus T1 only, extensions to the torus Tn are valid. First, we consider the Holder-Besov boundedness of periodic Holder multipliers. Later we extend this result to the case of pseudo-differential operators by considering the Sobolev embedding theorem. This approach was used by Ruzhansky and Wirth [33], (see also [31] and [32]) in order to get Lp multiplier theorems for non-invariant pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups. We reserve the notaci´on A . B if there exists c > 0 independent of A and B such that A ≤ c · B. Theorem 3.1. Let ρ ∈ [0, 1] and σ(ξ) be a symbol satisfying the ρ-condition. Then, the corresponding Fourier multiplier Op(σ) : Bs p,q(T) is a bounded operator for all r + 1 2 − ρ < s ≤ 1, 0 < p ≤ ∞ and 0 < q < ∞. If we assume r + 1 ∞,∞ into Br ∞,∞(T) → Br 2 − ρ ≤ s ≤ 1, we obtain the boundedness of Op(σ) from Bs p,∞. Proof. Let us consider f ∈ C ∞(T). In order to estimate the Besov norm of Op(σ)f we use its dyadic decomposition. First we note that Xξ∈Z−{0} F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 = ∞Xm=0 X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2. (3.1) 6 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Now we estimate every dyadic decomposition as follow. If take h = 2π/3· 2m and 2m ≤ ξ ≤ 2m+1 we have e−iξh − 1 ≥ √3. Hence we get X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 ≤ X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−ihξ − 12F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 = X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−ihξ − 12σ(ξ)F (f )(ξ)2 ≤ X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−ihξ − 12ξ−2ρF (f )(ξ)2 . X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−ihξ − 122−2mρF (f )(ξ)2 ≤ 2−2mρXξ∈Z e−ihξ − 12F (f )(ξ)2. On the other hand, Fourier inversion formula guarantees that f (t − h) − f (t) =Xξ∈Z (e−iξh − 1)(F f )(ξ)eiξt. (3.2) By the Plancherel theorem we conclude that Xξ∈Z e−ihξ − 12F (f )(ξ)2 = kf (· − h) − f (·)k2 L2(T) ≤ ( Hence 2π 3 · 2m )2skfk2 Λs(T). X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 ≤ 2−2mρ( 2π 3 · 2m )2skfk2 Λs(T) . 2−2m(ρ+s)kfk2 Λs. (3.3) (3.4) By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, for all 0 < p ≤ ∞ we get (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)eixξ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) ≤ 2π · X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ) ≤ 2π · X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 . 2−m(ρ+s)+ 1 2 (m+1)kfkΛs. 1/2 1 2 (m+1) 2 H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 7 Now, we consider the Besov-norm of Op(σ)f if 0 < p, q < ∞ : in fact, we have kOp(σ)fkBr p,q(T) := ∞Xm=0 ≤ ∞Xm=0 ∞Xm=0 . ( 2mrq(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 q eixξF ((Op(σ)f )(ξ)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Λs! 1 2 q(m+1)kfkq 2 q(m+1))1/qkfkΛs. q 2mrq2−mq(ρ+s)+ 1 2mrq2−mq(ρ+s)+ 1 1 q  Lp(T) From the condition r + 1 2 − ρ < s ≤ 1 we obtain ∞Xm=0 2mrq2−mq(ρ+s)+ 1 2 q(m+1) = 2 1 2 2mq(r−ρ−s+ 1 2 ) < ∞. (3.5) ∞Xm=0 Hence kOp(σ)fkBr q < ∞. Now we consider the case q = ∞. In fact, if we assume r − ρ + 1 we have p,q(T) . kfkΛs which shows the boundedness of Op(σ) when 2 ≤ s ≤ 1, 2mr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mr2−m(ρ+s)+ 1 eixξF ((Op(σ)f )(ξ)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) 2 (m+1)kfkΛs kOp(σ)fkBr p,∞(T) := sup 0≤m<∞ . sup 0≤m<∞ . kfkΛs. With above inequality we end the proof. Theorem 3.2. Let us consider 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1 ≤ p < ∞, 0 < q < ∞ and r + 1 s ≤ 1. If σ(x, ξ) satisfies (cid:3) 2 − ρ < ∂β x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ, β ≤ [1/p] + 1, ξ 6= 0, ∞,∞(T) → Br then the pseudo-differential operator Op(σ) : Bs operator. Proof. Let f ∈ C ∞(T). To prove this theorem we write (3.6) p,q(T) is a bounded ei(x−y)ξσ(x, ξ)! f (y)dy Op(σ)f (x) =Xξ∈Z =ZT Xξ∈Z eixξσ(x, ξ)bf (ξ) =ZT Xξ∈Z eiyξσ(x, ξ)! f (x − y)dy. κ(z, y) =Xξ∈Z eiyξσ(z, ξ). Hence, Op(σ)f (x) = (κ(x,·) ∗ f )(x), where (3.7) 8 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Moreover, if we define Azf (x) = (κ(z,·) ∗ f )(x) for every z ∈ T, we have For all 0 ≤ β ≤ [1/p] + 1 we have ∂β we have Axf (x) = Op(σ)f (x), x ∈ T. z Azf (x) = Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f (x). if 1 ≤ p < ∞ k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 By the Sobolev embedding theorem we have p dx p dx. p dx ≤ sup eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)kp e−iyξOp(σ)f (y)dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Lp :=ZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−iyξ(Ayf )(y)dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =ZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−iyξ(Azf )(y)dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) z∈TZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−iyξ(Azf )(y)dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) z∈TZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 e−iyξ(Azf )(y)dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . Xβ≤[1/p]+1ZTZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξZT z X2m≤ξ<2m+1 z Azf ))(ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Xβ≤[1/p]+1ZTZT(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 = Xβ≤[1/p]+1ZT k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 β≤[1/p]+1ZT k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 z Azf ))(ξ)kp eixξF ((∂β eixξF ((∂β z Azf ))(ξ)kp Lpdz eixξF ((∂β p dx . sup dz dx p dxdz Lpdz ∂β p sup Hence, k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)kLp . sup β≤[ 1 p ]+1ZT k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 eixξF ((Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f ))(ξ)kp Lpdz 1/p . Thus, considering 0 < q < ∞ we obtain H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 9 kOp(σ)fkBr p,q(T) = ∞Xm=0 . ∞Xm=0 . ∞Xm=0 . ∞Xm=0 2mrq 2mrq 2mrq(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2mrq sup sup β≤[ 1 sup β≤[ 1 eixξF ((Op(σ)f )(ξ)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 p ]+1ZT k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 p ]+1ZT z∈T k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 p ]+1sup z∈T k X2m≤ξ<2m+1 p,q(T) . ∞Xm=0 p ]+1,z∈TkOp(∂β ≤" p ]+1,z∈TkOp(∂β sup β≤[ 1 2mrq β≤[ 1 β≤[ 1 β≤[ 1 sup sup . kOp(σ)fkBr Hence, we can write (by using the Fatou's Lemma) q Lp(T) 1 q  eixξF ((Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f ))(ξ)kp eixξF ((Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f ))(ξ)kp eixξF ((Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f ))(ξ)kp 1 q 1 q q/p Lpdz q/p Lpdz q/p Lp 1 q . sup p ]+1,z∈Tk X2m≤ξ<2m+1 z σ(z,·))fkBr p,q(T) eixξF ((Op(∂β z σ(z,·))f ))(ξ)kq 1 q Lp z σ(z,·))kB(Λs,Br p,q)#kfkΛs. With the last inequality we end the proof. (cid:3) Remark 3.3. In order to find connection of Holder-Besov estimates and Lp- estimates, in the next theorem we endowed a Holder space of degree 0 < s < 1 with the norm kfkBs ∞,∞,p := fΛs + kfkLp, (3.8) where 1 < p < ∞. Theorem 3.4. Let 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1, and σ(x, ξ) be a measurable function satisfying ξ σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ−α, ∞,∞,p(T) → Br x ∆α ∂β Then Op(σ) : Bs s ≤ 1. Proof. We use notation as in the proof of Theorem 3.2. If we consider the condi- tion (3.9), in particular, we have ∞,∞,p(T) is a bounded operator for all r + 1 β ≤ [1/p] + 1,α ≤ 2. ξ 6= 0. (3.9) 2 − ρ ≤ ∂β x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ, β ≤ [1/p] + 1,α ≤ 2. ξ 6= 0. (3.10) 10 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ So, by Theorem 3.2, for every z ∈ T, the operator ∂β Bs ∞,∞(T) → Br Holder-norm of Op(σ) : z σ(z,·)) : ∞,∞(T) extends to bounded operator. Next, we estimate the z Az = Op(∂β Op(σ)fΛr(T) = sup = sup x,h∈TOp(σ)f (x − h) − Op(σ)f (x)h−r x,h∈TAx−hf (x − h) − Axf (x)h−r x,h,z∈TAzf (x − h) − Azf (x)h−r ≤ sup By using the Sobolev embedding Theorem we have that x,h,z∈TAzf (x − h) − Azf (x)h−r sup ≤ sup z∈T ∂β k sup z (Azf (x − h) − Azf (x)) kLp(T)h−r z∈T ∂β sup z (Azf (x − h) − Azf (x))h−r x,h∈T∂β sup z (Azf (x − h) − Azf (x))h−r sup z∈T ≤ sup x,h∈T Xβ≤[1/p]+1 x,h∈T Xβ≤[1/p]+1 ≤ Xβ≤[1/p]+1 = Xβ≤[1/p]+1 ≤ Xβ≤[1/p]+1 z∈T ∂β sup z (Azf )Λr z∈T k∂β sup z (Az)kB(Λs,Λr)kfkΛs. On the other hand, by Theorem 5.2 in [33] the operator Op(σ) is a Lp-bounded operator for all 1 < p < ∞. Hence, kOp(σ)fkLp ≤ CkfkLp. With this in mind, we conclude that kOp(σ)fkBr ∞,∞,p(T) := Op(σ)fΛr(T) + kOp(σ)fkLp(T) . kfkBs ∞,∞,p. (3.11) Theorem 3.5. Let 0 < s < 1, 2 ≤ p < ∞ and 0 < q < ∞. If r + 1 − 2 and σ(ξ) satisfies the ρ-condition, then Op(σ) : Bs linear operator. Moreover, if r +1− 2 ∞,∞(T) → Br p ≤ ρ ≤ 1, then Op(σ) : Bs is a linear bounded operator. Proof. First, we recall the Hardy-Littlewood inequality on the torus: If 2 ≤ p < ∞ then (cid:3) p < ρ ≤ 1 p,q(T) is a bounded ∞,∞(T) → Br p,∞(T) . (3.12) (1 + ξ)p−2bf (ξ)p!1/p kfkLp(T) ≤ CpXξ∈Z gm(x) = X2m≤ξ<2m+1 If we denote by gm(x) the function eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ), (3.13) H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 11 then gm = F −1[χ{2m≤ξ<2m+1} · F (Op(σ)f )(·)]. By (3.12) we have, kgmkLp(T) ≤Cp · X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrqk X2m≤ξ<2m+1 therefore, for 0 < q < ∞ we obtain ∞Xm=0 (1 + ξ)p−2F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)p 1/p , q/p . Lp(T) eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)kq ∞Xm=0 ∞Xm=0 ∞Xm=0 2mrq X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrq X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrq(cid:2)2m(p−2)2−mρp(cid:3)q/p . . (1 + ξ)p−2pF (Op(σ)f )(ξ) 2m(p−2)σ(ξ)F (f )(ξ)p kbfkq Lp(Z). q/p Considering that kbfkLp(Z) . kfkΛs for every 0 < s < 1 and 2 ≤ p < ∞ we get ∞Xm=0 p −mρqkfkq Λs. 2mrqk X2m≤ξ<2m+1 eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)kq 2mrq+m(p−2) q ∞Xm=0 Lp(T) . (3.14) Since r + 1 − 2 p < ρ we get C = ∞Xm=0 2mrq+m(p−2) q p −mρq < ∞. So, kOp(σ)kBr p,q . kfkΛs. Hence, we conclude the boundedness of Op(σ) : Bs ∞,∞(T) → Br p,q(T). The proof of the boundedness of Op(σ) when q = ∞ is analogue. (cid:3) We extend Theorem 3.5 to case of non-invariant periodic operators as follows: p < ρ ≤ 1. Theorem 3.6. Let us consider 2 ≤ p < ∞, 0 < q < ∞ and r + 1 − 2 Let σ(x, ξ) be a symbol satisfying ∂β x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ, β ≤ [1/p] + 1, ξ 6= 0. Then Op(σ) is a bounded operator from Bs ∞,∞ into Br p,q. (3.15) Proof. The proof of this theorem is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.2. (cid:3) Now, we prove results concerning Holder-Triebel boundedness of Fourier mul- tipliers. 12 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Theorem 3.7. Let us consider 0 < q < ∞, 0 < p ≤ ∞, r < ρ ≤ 1 and 1 Then Op(σ) : Bs satisfies the ρ-condition. If we assume r ≤ ρ ≤ 1, 1 Op(σ) : Bs p,∞(T), is a bounded operator. 2 < s ≤ 1. p,q(T) is a bounded operator if we consider that σ(ξ) 2 < s ≤ 1 and q = ∞ then ∞,∞(T) → F r ∞,∞(T) → F r Proof. First we consider the case of 0 < q < ∞, 0 < p ≤ ∞ and r < ρ. By the definition of Triebel-Lizorkin norm, we have kOp(σ)fkF r 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) p,q(T) :=(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) eixξσ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q  ∞Xm=0 X2m≤ξ<2m+1 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q  ∞Xm=0 X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q = ∞Xm=0 2mr−mρbf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ ∞Xm=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Xξ∈Z q!1/q 2mr−mρbf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤Xξ∈Z bf (ξ)"Xm=0 q!1/q 2qm(r−ρ)#1/q 1/q . . ∞Xm=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Xξ∈Z By using the Minkowski integral inequality (discrete version) we have From the condition r < ρ and by using the Bernstein theorem (i.e kbfkL1(Z) . 2 < s ≤ 1) we have kfkΛs, 1 kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) . kfkΛs. If q = ∞ and r ≤ ρ we observe that kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) := sup m∈N X2m≤ξ<2m+1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) eixξσ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2mr X2m≤ξ<2m+1 m(ξ)bf(ξ) 2m(r−ρ)Xξ∈Z bf (ξ) ≤ sup m∈N m∈N ≤ sup . kfkΛs. (cid:3) H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 13 In order to get boundedness from Holder into Triebel-Lizorkin spaces, we present the following lemma which is a generalization of the Bernstein Theo- rem. (See [7, 8]). We recall the equivalence Λs(T) ≡ Bs ∞,∞(T) for the Holder space of order s. Lemma 3.8. Let 2/3 < p ≤ 2 and let sp = 1/p−1/2. Then, the Fourier transform f 7→ F f from Λs(T) into Lp(T) is a bounded operator for all s, sp < s < 1. Theorem 3.9. Let 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1 < α ≤ 2, sα = 1 satisfies the ρ-condition, then Op(σ) : Bs for all 0 < p ≤ ∞, 0 < q < ∞ and sα < s < 1. Moreover, if r + 1 − 1 operator Op(σ) : Bs α < ρ ≤ 1. If σ(ξ) p,q(T) is a bounded operator α ≤ ρ, the 2, and r + 1− 1 ∞,∞(T) → F r α − 1 p,∞(T) is bounded. ∞,∞(T) → F r Proof. From the proof of Theorem 3.7 we have 1/q . On the other hand, if 1 < α ≤ 2 and 1/α + 1/α′ = 1, by using the Holder inequality we obtain 1/q ∞Xm=0 kOp(σ)fkF r X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf(ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q p,q(T) ≤ X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q  ∞Xm=0 2mq(r−ρ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ α X2m≤ξ<2m+1 Xξ∈Z bf (ξ)α! 1 ∞Xm=0 ≤ ∞Xm=0 q!1/q 2mq(r−ρ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(2 α′ )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) kbfkLα(Z) α′ )!1/q . ∞Xm=0 kbfkLα(Z). From Lemma 3.8 and the condition r + 1 − 1 α < ρ ≤ 1 we claim 1 2mq(r−ρ+ 1 α′(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q m+1 1 1/q for all sα < s < 1. By a similar argument, we may prove kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) . kfkΛs kOp(σ)fkF r p,∞(T) . sup m∈N 2m(r−ρ+1/α′)kfkΛs. Hence, for all sα < s < 1, 0 < p ≤ ∞ and r + 1 − 1 α ≤ ρ. kOp(σ)fkF r p,∞(T) . kfkΛs (cid:3) 14 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Theorem 3.10. Let us consider the periodic pseudo-differential operator Op(σ) with the symbol σ(x, ξ) satisfying ∂α x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cαξ−ρ, α ≤ [1/q] + 1, ξ 6= 0. If 1 ≤ q < ∞, 0 < p ≤ ∞, r < ρ ≤ 1 and 1 Λs into F r and r + 1 − 1 α < ρ ≤ 1, Op(σ) : Λs → F r sα < s < 1. p,q. Also, if we assume 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1 < α ≤ 2, sα = 1 2 < s ≤ 1, then Op(σ) is bounded from 2 , 0 < p ≤ ∞ p,q is a bounded linear operator for all α − 1 Proof. If 1 ≤ q < ∞, by the Sobolev embedding theorem we write, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 q eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q eixξF (Op(σ(z,·))f )(ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eixξF (Op(∂α ≤ sup z∈T(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 . Xα≤[1/q]+1ZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 α≤[1/q]+1ZT X2m≤ξ<2m+1 . sup z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)qdz eixξF (Op(∂α z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)qdz From this inequality we deduce that kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xm=0 .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xm=0 .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xm=0 . sup α≤[1/q]+1 sup eixξF (Op(∂α 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrqZT α≤[1/q]+1 X2m≤ξ<2m+1 z∈T X2m≤ξ<2m+1 2mrq X2m≤ξ<2m+1 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) eixξF −1[σ(x, ξ)bf ](ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)qdz 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)q 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)q z∈T(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  eixξF (Op(∂α eixξF (Op(∂α ∞Xm=0 α≤[1/q]+1 2mrq sup sup sup . H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 15 Hence we get (by using the Fatou's Lemma) kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) sup α≤[1/q]+1,z∈T (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xm=0 α≤[1/q]+1,z∈TkOp(∂α α≤[1/q]+1,z∈TkOp(∂α sup sup . . ≤ 2mrq X2m≤ξ<2m+1 p,q(T) z σ(z,·))fkF r z σ(z,·))kB(Λs,F r p,q)kfkΛs. eixξF (Op(∂α 1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(T) z σ(z,·))f )(ξ)q So, by the last inequality, Theorem 3.7 and Theorem 3.9, we deduce the Bound- edness of Op(σ(·,·)) from Λs into F r p,q in the following cases: • 1 ≤ q < ∞, 0 < p ≤ ∞, r < ρ, 1 • 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1, 1 < α ≤ 2, 0 < p ≤ ∞, r + 1 − 1 2 < s ≤ 1. α < ρ and sα < s < 1. (cid:3) Theorem 3.11. Let us consider Op(σ) be a Fourier multiplier with symbol sat- isfying the ρ−condition. Then Op(σ) : Bs p,q(T), 0 < p ≤ ∞, 1 < q < ∞ is a bounded operator if r + 1 2 − ρ ≤ s ≤ 1, then Op(σ) : Bs 2 − ρ < s ≤ 1. If r + 1 ∞,∞(T) → F r p,∞(T) is continuous. ∞,∞(T) → F r Proof. From the proof of Theorem 3.1 we have Hence 2π 3 · 2m )2skfk2 Λs(T) (3.16) (3.17) . 2−2m(ρ+s)kfk2 Λs. X2m≤ξ<2m+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ)2 ≤ 2−2mρ( X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q  ∞Xm=0 ≤ X2m≤ξ<2m+1 σ(ξ)bf(ξ)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2mrq(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∞Xm=0 2mrq2−mq(ρ+s)2q(m+1)/2!1/q . ∞Xm=0 1/q q/2 kfkΛs. 1/q 2q(m+1)/2 From the condition r − ρ + 1 2 < s we deduce the boundedness of Op(σ), in fact kOp(σ)fkF r p,q(T) ≤ ∞Xm=0 2mrq2−mq(ρ+s)+q(m+1)/2!1/q kfkΛs. 16 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ A similar proof is valid for q = ∞ and r − ρ + 1 Remark 3.12. We observe that similar extensions that we give here of the Theorem 3.1 to the non-invariant case of pseudo-differential operators can be obtained if in place of Br p,q(T) we write F r 2 ≤ s. p,q(T). (cid:3) We end this section with the following theorem on boundedness of periodic pseudo-differential operators on Holder spaces. Theorem 3.13. Let 2/3 < p ≤ 2, sp = 1/p − 1/2, 0 < r < 1 and sp < s < 1. If r + 1 ∞,∞(T) is a bounded Fourier multiplier. q ≤ ρ and σ(ξ) satisfies the ρ-condition, then Op(σ) : Bs ∞,∞(T) → Br Proof. First we consider the case where σ depends only on the Fourier variable ξ. So we get for s ≥ 0 kOp(σ)fkBr eixξF (Op(σ)f )(ξ)kL∞(T) ∞,∞ = sup s∈N 2srk X2s≤ξ<2s+1 2sr X2s≤ξ<2s+1 F (Op(σ)f )(ξ) 2sr X2s≤ξ<2s+1 bf (ξ)σ(ξ) ≤ sup s∈N = sup s∈N By Holder inequality we obtain kOp(σ)fkBr ∞,∞ . sup 1/q 1/p X2s≤ξ<2s+1 σ(ξ)q2srq 1/q s∈N X2s≤ξ<2s+1 f (ξ)p s∈N kbfkLp(Z) X2s≤ξ<2s+1hξi−ρq2srq 2−sρq2srq s∈N kbfkLp(Z) X2s≤ξ<2s+1 s∈N kbfkLp(Z)(cid:0)2sq(r−ρ)+s(cid:1)1/q . 1/q . sup . sup . sup By Lemma 3.8 we have k f (ξ)kLp(Z) . kfkBs we get, ∞,∞ for sp < s < 1. Since r + 1 q ≤ ρ kOp(σ)fkBr which proves the boundedness of Op(σ). ∞,∞ . kfkBs ∞,∞ (cid:3) 3.2. Remarks and examples. There exists a connection between the Lp bound- edness of Fourier multipliers on compact Lie groups and its continuity on Besov spaces. This fact was proved by the author in Theorem 1.2 of [15]. In fact, the Lie group structure of the torus T implies that every periodic Fourier multiplier H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 17 p1,q into Br bounded from Lp1 into Lp2 is bounded from Br p2,q, r ∈ R and 0 < q ≤ ∞. Since, in general, the boundedness of Fourier multipliers satisfying the ρ-condition -- or pseudo-differential operators with symbols satisfying Hormander conditions but with limited regularity -- fails for pi = ∞, we have concentrate our atten- tion to this case in the preceding subsection, in order to give boundedness of multipliers -- and of pseudo-differential operators -- in Holder spaces Λr ≡ Br ∞,∞. Remark 3.14. With the discussion above in mind, periodic Fourier multipliers with symbol σ(ξ) satisfying the variational Marcinkiewicz condition: kσkL∞(Z) + sup j≥0 X2j≤ξ≤2j+1 σ(ξ + 1) − σ(ξ) < ∞, (3.18) are bounded from Lp(T), 1 < p < ∞ and hence these operators are bounded on every Besov space Br p,q(T) but, its boundedness on Holder spaces fails (Corollary 4.3 of [4]). It is important to mention that every Fourier multiplier satisfying the ρ-condition (1.3) with 0 < ρ ≤ 1 also satisfies the variational Marcinkiewicz condition and, as a consequence, these operators are bounded on Lp, 1 < p < ∞ and on every Besov space Br p,q, r ∈ R, 1 < p < ∞ and 0 < q ≤ ∞. ∞,∞ into Besov spaces Br Remark 3.15. Theorems 3.1, 3.5, 3.7, 3.9, 3.11 and 3.13 give boundedness of Fourier multipliers from Holder spaces Bs p,q or spaces of Triebel Lizorkin F r p,q. Theorem 3.1 shows a dependence of the parameters ρ, r and s. Nevertheless, as a consequence of the Hardy-Littlewood inequality, Theorem 3.5 relaxes this type of conditions for 2 ≤ p < ∞ by imposing restrictions on ρ, r and p. On the other hand, for 2 3 < p ≤ 2, Theorem 3.13 only consider a dependence on the parameters r, ρ and q. These theorems have been proved by using non-trivial modifications of the proof of the Bernstein Theorem [7]. Theorems 3.4, 3.2 and 3.10 have been proved using the Sobolev embedding theorem as a fundamental tool. Remark 3.16. Notice that the results of this section illustrate a very important connection between Lp boundedness and Holder boundedness. Indeed, by observ- ing the proof of Theorem 3.4, the condition on the symbol ∂β x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ, (3.19) guarantees the boundedness of Op(σ), from Bs 2 ≤ ρ ≤ 1. For the Lp boundedness, 1 < p < ∞ of Op(σ) (see Theorem 3.7 of [20]) it is sufficient to consider the following condition β ≤ [1/p] + 1. ξ 6= 0, ∞,∞ for r−s+ 1 ∞,∞ into Br for ρ = 2(1− ρ) 1 p − 1 ξ ∂β ∆α x σ(x, ξ) ≤ Cβξ−ρ−ρα, β ≤ [1/p] + 1,α ≤ 2. ξ 6= 0, (3.20) 2, 0 ≤ ρ ≤ 1. Thus, if we consider the inequality (3.20), with r − s + 1 p − 1 1 2 ≤ ρ = 2(1 − ρ)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 1, we obtain the boundedness of Op(σ) from Bs ∞,∞,p into Br ∞,∞,p. We end this section with the following examples on operators satisfying the ρ-condition and on elliptic regularity in Holder spaces. 18 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ Example 3.17. Let X be a left-invariant real vector field on the torus T. By Corollary 2.7 of [33], there exists an exceptional set C ⊂ iR, such that for all c /∈ C , the operator X +c is invertible with inverse satisfying the ρ-condition with ρ = 0. By Theorem 3.1, we have for r + 1 2 < s ≤ 1, 0 < p ≤ ∞ and 0 < q < ∞ : (3.21) kfkBr p,q ≤ Ck(X + c)fkBs ∞,∞. On the other hand, if we consider r + 1 2 ≤ s ≤ 1, we obtain the estimate, kfkBr p,∞ ≤ Ck(X + c)fkBs ∞,∞. (3.22) Analogous estimates may be obtained if we apply Theorem 3.5, Theorem 3.7 or Theorem 3.13. Similar results also can be considered if we replace X by the partial Riesz transform R = (−LT)− 1 2 ◦ X, of some negative power of the Laplace operator LT. Example 3.18. Let 0 < r < 1 and f ∈ Br differential problem ∞,∞(T). Consider the toroidal pseudo- Op(σ)u = f, (3.23) where Op(σ) is an elliptic operator with symbol σ(x, ξ) ∈ Sm ρ,δ, m > 0, (in partic- ular, Op(σ) can be an elliptic differential operator of the formP0≤i≤m ai(x)∂i x, m ≥ 1). By the existence of parametrices for elliptic operators, (see Theorems 2.2 and 2.3), there exists q ∈ S−m ρ,δ and r ∈ S−∞ such that (3.24) Therefore, Op(q) ◦ Op(σ)u = u + Op(r)u = Op(q)f. By using Theorem 3.4, we have for 0 < r ≤ s + m − 1 Op(q) ◦ Op(σ) = I + Op(r). 2, 0 < s < 1, kOp(q)fkBr ∞,∞,p ≤ CkfkBs ∞,∞,p, and considering that the operator Op(r) is a smoothing operator we get u ∈ Br ∞,∞,p. In conclusion, under the pseudo-differential problem considered, if f ∈ Bs ∞,∞,p(T) then u ∈ Br ∞,∞,p(T). A similar a priori estimate can be obtained if we consider Theorem 3.10. Acknowledgments. I would like to thank the anonymous referee for his remarks which helped to improve the manuscript. The author is indebted with Alexander Cardona for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This project was partially supported by Universidad de los Andes, Mathematics Department. References 1. Agranovich, M. S.:Spectral properties of elliptic pseudodifferential operators on a closed curve Funct. Anal. Appl. Vol 13. pp 279-281.(1971) 2. Alexopoulos, G.: Spectral multipliers on Lie groups of polynomial growth. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 120, 973 -- 979, (1994) 3. Anker, J.: Lp Fourier multipliers on Riemannian symmetric spaces of the noncompact type. Ann. of Math., 132, 597 -- 628 (1990) 4. Arendt, W., Bu, S.: Operator-valued Fourier multipliers on periodic Besov spaces and applications, Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society, 47(1), 15 -- 33, (2004) H OLDER-BESOV BOUNDEDNESS FOR PSEUDO-DIFFERENTIAL OPERATORS 19 5. Barraza, B., Gonz´alez, I., Hern´andez, J.: Operator-valued Fourier multipliers on periodic Besov spaces. arXiv:1504.04408 6. Barraza Martnez, B., Denk, R., Hern´andez Monz´on, J., Nau, T.: Generation of Semigroups for Vector-Valued Pseudodifferential Operators on the Torus. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 22(4), 823 -- 853 (2016) 7. Bernstein, S.: Sur la convergence absolue des s´eries trigonom´etriques. Comptes Rendum Hebdomadaires des S´eances de l'Academie des Sciences, Paris, 158, 1661 -- 1663, (1914) 8. Bloom, W. R.: Bernstein's inequality for locally compact Abelian groups. Journal the Australian mathematical society 17, 88 -- 101 (1974) 9. Bu, S., and Kim, J.: Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems on Lpspaces Tn. Archiv. der Math. 82 , 404 -- 414, (2004) 10. Bu, S., Kim, J.: Operator-valued Fourier Multipliers on Periodic Triebel Spaces, Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series, Vol. 21, No. 5, 1049 -- 1056 (2005) 11. Bu, S., Kim, J.: A note on operator-valued Fourier multipliers on Besov spaces, Math. Nachr. 278, No. 14 1659 -- 1664 (2005) 12. Cardona, D.: Estimativos L2 para una clase de operadores pseudodiferenciales definidos en el toro Rev. Integr. Temas Mat. 31(2), (2013) 147 -- 152. 13. Cardona, D.: Weak type (1, 1) bounds for a class of periodic pseudo-differential operators. J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl., 5(4), (2014) 507-515. 14. Cardona, D.: Holder estimates for pseudo-differential operators on T 1. J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 5 (4), 517 -- 525 (2014) 15. Cardona, D.: Besov continuity for Multipliers defined on compact Lie groups. Palest. J. Math. Vol. 5(2) 35 -- 44 (2016) 16. Coifman, R., de Guzman, M.: Singular integrals and multipliers on homogeneous spaces, Rev. Un. Mat. Argentina, 25 137 -- 143 (1970) 17. Coifman, R., Weiss, G.: Analyse Harmonique Non-Commutative sur Certains Espaces Homogenes, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 242, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1971. 18. Coifman, R., Weiss, G.: Central multiplier theorems for compact Lie groups. Bull. Am. Math. Soc., 80 124 -- 126, (1973) 19. Delgado, J.: Lp bounds for pseudo-differential operators on the torus Operators Theory, advances and applications. 231, 103 -- 116 (2012) 20. Delgado, J. Ruzhansky, M.: Lp-bounds for pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups. arXiv:1605.07027 21. Delgado, J., Wong, M.W.: Lp-nuclear pseudo-differential operators on Z and S1., Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 141 (2013) no. 11, 3935 -- 3942. 22. Fefferman, C.: Lp bounds for pseudo-differential operators, Israel J. Math. 14, 413 -- 417 (1973) 23. Hormander, L.: Estimates for translation invariant operators in Lp spaces. Acta Math., 104, 93 -- 140 (1960) 24. Molahajloo, S.: A Characterization of Compact Pseudo-Differential Operators on S1, in Pseudo-Differential Operators: Analysis, Applications and Computations 213, Birkha user, Basel, 25 -- 29. 2011 25. Molahajloo, S., Wong, M. W.: Ellipticity, Fredholmness and Spectral Invariance of Pseudo- Differential Operators on S1, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 1 (2), 183 -- 205, (2010) 26. Molahajloo, S., Wong, M.W.: Pseudo-differential Operators on S1. New developments in pseudo-differential operators, Eds. L. Rodino and M.W. Wong. 297 -- 306, (2008) 27. Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: On the Fourier analysis of operators on the torus, Modern trends in pseudo-differential operators, 87-105, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., 172, Birkhauser, Basel, 2007. 28. Ruzhansky M., Turunen V.: On the toroidal quantization of periodic pseudo-differential operators, Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization, 30, 1098 -- 1124 (2009) 20 DUV ´AN CARDONA S ´ANCHEZ 29. Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.:Pseudo-differential Operators and Symmetries: Background Analysis and Advanced Topics Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, (2010) 30. Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: Quantization of Pseudo-Differential Operators on the Torus J Fourier Annal Appl. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 16, 943 -- 982 (2010) 31. Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V.: Global quantization of pseudo-differential operators on com- pact Lie groups, SU(2), 3-sphere, and homogeneous spaces Int. Math. Res. Not., 11, 2439 -- 2496 (2013) http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rns122 32. Ruzhansky M., Turunen V., Wirth J.: Hormander class of pseudo-differential operators on compact Lie groups and global hypoellipticity, J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 20, 476 -- 499 (2014) 33. Ruzhansky, M. Wirth, J.: Lp Fourier multipliers on compact Lie groups, Mathematische Zeitschrift, 1432 -- 1823 (2015). 34. Stein, E.: Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality, and oscillatory inte- grals. Princeton University Press, 1993. 35. Wong, M. W.: Discrete Fourier Analysis, Birkhauser, 2011. 1 Department of Mathematics, Universidad de los Andes, Colombia. E-mail address: [email protected]; [email protected]
1303.0322	1	1303	2013-03-02T00:04:16	Strong mixing measures for linear operators and frequent hypercyclicity	[ "math.FA", "math.DS" ]	We construct strongly mixing invariant measures with full support for operators on F-spaces which satisfy the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. For unilateral backward shifts on sequence spaces, a slight modification shows that one can even obtain exact invariant measures.	math.FA	math	Strong mixing measures for linear operators and frequent hypercyclicity M. Murillo-Arcila and A. Peris∗ Abstract We construct strongly mixing invariant measures with full support for operators on F -spaces which satisfy the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion. For unilateral backward shifts on sequence spaces, a slight modification shows that one can even obtain exact invariant measures.1 1 Introduction We recall that an operator T on a topological vector space X is called hypercyclic if there is a vector x in X such that its orbit Orb(x, T ) = {x, T x, T 2x, . . . } is dense in X. The recent books [5] and [15] contain the theory and most of the recent advances on hypercyclicity and linear dynamics, especially in topological dynamics. Here we are concerned with measure theoretic properties. Let (X, B, µ) be a probabil- ity space, where X is a topological space and B denotes the σ-algebra of Borel subsets of X. We will say that a Borel probability measure µ has full support if for each non-empty open set U ⊂ X we have µ(U) > 0. A measurable map T : (X, B, µ) → (X, B, µ) is called a measure-preserving transformation if µ(T −1(A)) = µ(A) for all A ∈ B). T is said to be strongly mixing with respect to µ if µ(A ∩ T −n(B)) = µ(A)µ(B) (A, B ∈ B), lim n→∞ reader is referred to [20, 10] for a detailed account on the above properties. n=0 T −nB then either µ(A) = 0 or µ(A) = 1. The interested and it is exact if given A ∈T∞ Ergodic theory was first used for the dynamics of linear operators by Rudnicki [18] and Flytzanis [11]. During the last few years it has been given special attention thanks to the work of Bayart and Grivaux [2, 3]. The papers [1, 4, 6, 9, 13, 19], for instance, contain recent advances on the subject. The concept of frequent hypercyclicity was introduced by Bayart and Grivaux [3] inspired by Birkhoff's ergodic theorem. They also gave the first version of a Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion, although we will consider the formulation of Bonilla and Grosse- Erdmann [8] for operators on separable F -spaces. Another (probabilistic) version of it was given by Grivaux [12]. ∗IUMPA, Universitat Polit`ecnica de Val`encia, Departament de Matem`atica Aplicada, Edifici 7A, 46022 Val`encia, Spain. e-mail: [email protected] 1Keywords: hypercyclic operators, strongly mixing measures 2010 MSC: 37A25, 47A16. 1 We derive under the hypothesis of Bonilla and Grosse-Erdmann a stronger result by showing that a T -invariant mixing measure can be obtained. Recently, Bayart and Matheron gave very general conditions expressed on eigenvector fields associated with unimodular eigenvalues under which an operator T admits a T -invariant mixing measure [6]. Actually, on the one hand our results can be deduced from [6] in the context of complex Fr´echet spaces, and on the other hand we only need rather elementary tools. From now on, T will be an operator defined on a separable F -space X. 2 Invariant measures and the frequent hypercyclicity criterion set F ⊂ {N, N + 1, N + 2, . . . }. We recall that a series Pn xn in X converges unconditionally if it converges and, for any 0-neighbourhood U in X, there exists some N ∈ N such thatPn∈F xn ∈ U for every finite We are now ready to present our main result. The idea behind the proof is to con- struct a "model" probability space (Z, µ) and a (Borel) measurable map Φ : Z → X, where Z ⊂ NZ is such that σ(Z) = Z for the Bernoulli shift σ(. . . , n−1, n0, n1, . . . ) = (. . . , n0, n1, n2, . . . ), µ is a σ−1-invariant strongly mixing measure, Y := Φ(Z) is a T - invariant dense subset of X, Φσ−1 = T Φ, and then the Borel probability measure µ on X defined by µ(A) = µ(Φ−1(A)), A ∈ B(X), is T -invariant and strongly mixing. We will use the slight generalization of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion for operators given in [15, Remark 9.10]. Theorem 1. Let T be an operator on a separable F -space X. If there is a dense subset X0 of X and a sequence of maps Sn : X0 → X such that, for each x ∈ X0, (i) P∞ (ii) P∞ n=0 T nx converges unconditionally, n=0 Snx converges unconditionally, and (iii) T nSnx = x and T mSnx = Sn−mx if n > m, then there is a T -invariant strongly mixing Borel probability measure µ on X with full support. Proof. We suppose that X0 = {xn ; n ∈ N} with x1 = 0 and Sn0 = 0 for all n ∈ N. Let (Un)n be a basis of balanced open 0-neighbourhoods in X such that Un+1 + Un+1 ⊂ Un, n ∈ N. By (i) and (ii), there exists an increasing sequence of positive integers (Nn)n with Nn+2 − Nn+1 > Nn+1 − Nn for all n ∈ N such that Skxmk ∈ Un+1, if mk ≤ 2l, for Nl < k ≤ Nl+1, l ≥ n. (1) T kxmk ∈ Un+1 and Xk>Nn Actually, this is a consequence of the completeness of X and the fact that, for each Xk>Nn 0-neighbourhood U and for all l ∈ N, there is N ∈ N such that Pk∈F T kx ∈ U and Pk∈F Skx ∈ U for any finite subset F ⊂]N, +∞[ and for each x ∈ {x1, . . . , x2l}. We define K =Qk∈Z Fk where Fk = {1, . . . m} if Nm < k ≤ Nm+1, m ∈ N, and Fk = {1}, if k ≤ N1. 1.-The model probability space (Z, µ). 2 Let K(s) := σs(K), s ∈ Z, where σ : NZ → NZ is the backward shift. K(s) is a compact space when endowed with the product topology inherited from NZ, s ∈ Z. We consider in NZ the product measure µ = Nk∈Z µk, where µk({n}) = pn for all n ∈ N and µk(N) = P∞ n=1 pn = 1, k ∈ Z. The values of pn ∈]0, 1[ are selected such that, if ∞ pi!Nj+1−Nj , j ∈ N, then βj > 0. Yj=1 βj := j Xi=1 Let Z =Ss∈Z K(s). We have µ(Z) ≥ µ(K) = Yk≤N1 µk({1}) ∞ Yl=1   YNl<k≤Nl+1 µk({1, . . . , l}) 1  = p2N1+1 βl)2 > 0. ( ∞ Yl=1 It is well-known [20] that µ is a σ−1-invariant strongly mixing Borel probability measure. Since σ(Z) = Z and it has positive measure, then µ(Z) = 1. 2.-The map Φ. Given s ∈ Z we define the map Φ : K(s) → X by Φ((nk)k∈Z) =Xk<0 S−kxnk + xn0 +Xk>0 T kxnk. (2) Φ is well-defined since, given (nk)k∈Z ∈ K(s) and for l ≥ s, we have nk ≤ 2l if Nl < k ≤ Nl+1, which shows the convergence of the series in (2) by (1). Φ is also continuous. Indeed, let (α(j))j be a sequence of elements of K(s) that converges to α ∈ K(s) and fix any n ∈ N with n > s. We will find n0 ∈ N such that Φ(α(j)) − Φ(α) ∈ Un for n ≥ n0. To do this, by definition of the topology in K(s) there exists n0 ∈ N such that α(j)k = αk if k ≤ Nn+1 and j ≥ n0. By (1) we have Φ(α(j)) − Φ(α) = Xk<−Nn+1 S−k(xα(j)k − xαk ) + Xk>Nn+1 T k(xα(j)k − xαk ) ∈ Un for all j ≥ n0. This shows the continuity of Φ : K(s) → X for every s ∈ Z. The map Φ is then well-defined on Z, and Φ : Z → X is measurable (i.e., Φ−1(A) ∈ B(Z) for every A ∈ B(X)). 3.-The measure µ on X. subset of X because Φσ−1 = T Φ. L(s) := Φ(K(s)) is compact in X, s ∈ Z, and Y := Ss∈Z L(s) is a T -invariant Borel We then define in X the measure µ(A) = µ(Φ−1(A)) for all A ∈ B(X). Obviously, µ is well-defined and it is a T -invariant strongly mixing Borel probability measure. The proof is completed by showing that µ has full support. Given a non-empty open set U in X, we pick n ∈ N satisfying xn + Un ⊂ U. Thus µ(U) ≥ µ({x = xn + Xk>Nn T kxmk + Xk>Nn Skxmk ; mk ≤ 2l for Nl < k ≤ Nl+1, l ≥ n}) 3 ≥ µ0({n}) Y0<k≤Nn µk({1}) ∞ Yl=n   YNl<k≤Nl+1 µk({1, . . . , 2l}) 1  > pnp2Nn βl)2 > 0. ( ∞ Yl=n As we mentioned in the Introduction, Theorem 1 can be deduced from [6, Corollary 1.3] when dealing with operators on separable complex Fr´echet spaces. Indeed, the argument of ´E. Matheron is the following (we thank S. Grivaux for letting us know about it): Let T : X → X be an operator on a separable complex Fr´echet space X satisfying the hypothesis of the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion given in Theorem 1, and suppose that X0 = {xn ; n ∈ N}. We define the following family of continuous T-eigenvector fields for T Em(λ) =Xn≥0 λ−nT nxm +Xn∈N λnSnxm, λ ∈ T, m ∈ N. They span X since, for any functional x∗ that vanishes on Em(λ) for each λ ∈ T and m ∈ N, the equality hx∗, Em(λ)i = 0 for fixed m and for all λ ∈ T implies that hx∗, T nxmi = 0 for every n ≥ 0. Thus, hx∗, xmi = 0 for each m ∈ N, and by density x∗ = 0. The previous Theorem can be applied to different classes of operators. A distinguished one is the class of weighted shifts on sequence F -spaces. By a sequence space we mean a topological vector space X which is continuously included in ω, the countable product of the scalar field K. A sequence F -space is a sequence space that is also an F -space. Given a sequence w = (wn)n of non-zero weights, the associated unilateral (respectively, bilateral ) weighted backward shift Bw : KN → KN is defined by Bw(x1, x2, . . . ) = (w2x2, w3x3, . . . ) (respectively, Bw : KZ → KZ is defined by Bw(. . . , x−1, x0, x1, . . . ) = (. . . , w0x0, w1x1, w2x2, . . . )). When a sequence F -space X is invariant under certain weighted backward shift T , then T is also continuous on X by the closed graph theorem. We refer the reader to, e.g., Chapter 4 of [15] for more details about hypercyclic and chaotic weighted shifts on Fr´echet sequence spaces. In particular, Theorems 4.6 and 4.12 in [15] (we refer the reader to [14] for the original results) remain valid for F -spaces, and a bilateral (respectively, unilateral) weighted backward shift T : X → X on a sequence F -space X in which the canonical unit vectors (en)n∈Z (respectively, (en)n∈N) form an unconditional basis is chaotic if, and only if, Pn∈Z en (respectively, Pn∈N en) converges unconditionally. Corollary 2. Let T : X → X be a chaotic bilateral weighted backward shift on a sequence F -space X in which (en)n∈Z is an unconditional basis. Then there exists a T -invariant strongly mixing Borel probability measure on X with full support. Remark 3. The preceding result can be improved if T is a unilateral backward shift operator on a sequence F -space. In that case, there exists a T -invariant exact Borel probability measure on X with full support. Proof. Let M = {zn ; n ∈ N} be a countable dense set in K with z1 = 0. Let (Un)n be a basis of balanced open 0-neighbourhoods in X such that Un+1 + Un+1 ⊂ Un, n ∈ N. Since n=1 en converges unconditionally, so there exists an increasing sequence of positive integers (Nn)n with Nn+2 − Nn+1 > Nn+1 − Nn for all n ∈ N such that αkek ∈ Un+1, if αk ∈ {z1, . . . , z2m}, for Nm < k ≤ Nm+1, m ≥ n. (3) T is chaotic, P∞ Xk>Nn 4 We define K =Qk∈N Fk where Fk = {z1, . . . zm} if Nm < k ≤ Nm+1, m ∈ N, and Fk = {z1}, if k ≤ N1. Let K(s) := σs(K), s ≥ 0. K(s) is a compact space when endowed with the product topology inherited from M N, s ≥ 0. We consider in M N the product measure µ = n=1 pn = 1, k ∈ N. As Nk∈N µk, where µk({zn}) = pn for all n ∈ N and µk(M) = P∞ before, we select the sequence (pn)n of positive numbers such that, if βj = j Xi=1 pi!Nj+1−Nj , then βj > 0. ∞ Yj=1 It is known [20, §4.12] that µ is a σ-invariant exact Borel probability measure. By setting Z =Ss≥0 K(s), we have µ(Z) = 1. Now we define the map Φ : K(s) → X given by Φ((αk)k∈N) = αkek. ∞ Xk=1 Φ is (well-defined and) continuous, s ≥ 0. We have that Φ : Z → X is measurable. Borel subset of X. L(s) := Φ(K(s)) is compact in X, s ≥ 0, and Y := Ss≥0 L(s) = Φ(Z) is a T -invariant We then define on X the measure µ(A) = µ(Φ−1(A)) for all A ∈ B(X). As in Theorem 1, we conclude that µ is well-defined, and now it is a T -invariant exact Borel probability measure with full support. Devaney chaos is therefore a sufficient condition for the existence of strongly mixing measures within the framework of weighted shift operators on sequence F -spaces. For some natural spaces it is even a characterization of this fact. For instance, F. Bayart and I. Z. Ruzsa [7] recently proved that weighted shift operators on ℓp, 1 ≤ p < ∞, are frequently hypercyclic if, and only if, they are Devaney chaotic. It turns out that this is equivalent to the existence of an invariant strongly mixing Borel probability measure with full support on ℓp. Also, for the space ω, every weighted shift operator is chaotic [14]. In particular, for the unilateral case we obtain exact measures. Example 4. Every unilateral weighted backward shift operator on ω = KN admits an invariant exact Borel probability measure with full support on ω. We finish the paper by mentioning that a continuous-time version of Theorem 1 can be given by using the Frequent Hypercyclicity Criterion for C0-semigroups introduced in [16]. This is part of a forthcoming paper [17]. Acknowledgements This work was supported in part by MEC and FEDER, Project MTM2010-14909, and by GV, Project PROMETEO/2008/101. The first author was also supported by a grant from the FPU Program of MEC. We thank the referee whose detailed report led to an improvement in the presentation of this work. 5 References [1] C. Badea and S. Grivaux, Unimodular eigenvalues, uniformly distributed sequences and linear dynamics, Adv. Math. 211 (2007), 766 -- 793. [2] F. Bayart and S. Grivaux, Hypercyclicity and unimodular point spectrum, J. Funct. Anal. 226 (2005), 281 -- 300. [3] F. Bayart and S. Grivaux, Frequently hypercyclic operators, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 358 (2006), 5083 -- 5117. [4] F. Bayart and S. Grivaux, Invariant Gaussian measures for operators on Banach spaces and linear dynamics, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 94 (2007), 181 -- 210. [5] F. Bayart and ´E. Matheron, Dynamics of linear operators, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009. [6] F. Bayart and ´E. Matheron, Mixing operators and small subsets of the circle, preprint (arXiv:1112.1289v1). [7] F. Bayart and I. Z. Ruzsa, Frequently hypercyclic weighted shifts, preprint. [8] A. Bonilla and K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann, Frequently hypercyclic operators and vec- tors, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 27 (2007), 383 -- 404. Erratum: Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 29 (2009), 1993 -- 1994. [9] M. De la Rosa, L. Frerick, S. Grivaux and A. Peris, Frequent hypercyclicity, chaos, and unconditional Schauder decompositions, Israel Journal of Mathematics 190 (2012), 389 -- 399. [10] M. Einsiedler and T. Ward. Ergodic theory with a view towards number theory, volume 259 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag London Ltd., London, 2011. [11] E. Flytzanis, Unimodular eigenvalues and linear chaos in Hilbert spaces, Geom. Funct. Anal. 5 (1995), 1 -- 13. [12] S. Grivaux, A probabilistic version of the frequent hypercyclicity criterion, Studia Math. 176 (2006), 279 -- 290. [13] S. Grivaux, A new class of frequently hypercyclic operators, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 60 (2011), 1177 -- 1202. [14] K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann, Hypercyclic and chaotic weighted shifts, Studia Math. 139 (2000), 47 -- 68. [15] K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann and A. Peris Manguillot. Linear chaos. Universitext, Springer-Verlag London Ltd., London, 2011. [16] E. Mangino and A. Peris, Frequently hypercyclic semigroups, Studia Math. 202 (2011), 227 -- 242. [17] M. Murillo and A. Peris, Strong mixing measures for C0-semigroups, in preparation. 6 [18] R. Rudnicki, Gaussian measure-preserving linear transformations, Univ. Iagel. Acta Math. 30 (1993), 105 -- 112. [19] R. Rudnicki, Chaoticity and invariant measures for a cell population model, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 393 (2012), 151 -- 165. [20] P. Walters, An introduction to ergodic theory, Springer, New York-Berlin, 1982. 7
1305.2497	1	1305	2013-05-11T11:18:31	An embedding theorem for weighted Sobolev classes on a John domain: case of weights that are functions of a distance to a certain h-set	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $\Omega$ be a John domain, and let $\Gamma\subset \partial \Omega$ be an $h$-set. For some functions $h$ and some weight functions depending on distance from $\Gamma$, embedding theorems for a weighted Sobolev class is obtained.	math.FA	math	An embedding theorem for weighted Sobolev classes on a John domain: case of weights that are functions of a distance to a certain h-set A.A. Vasil'eva∗ 1 Introduction Let Ω ⊂ Rd be a bounded domain (an open connected set), and let g, v : Ω → R+ be measurable functions. For each measurable vector-valued function ϕ : Ω → Rm, ϕ = (ϕk)16k6m, and for each p ∈ [1, ∞] we put 3 1 0 2 y a M 1 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 7 9 4 2 . 5 0 3 1 : v i X r a kϕkLp(Ω) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) max 16k6m . ϕk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)p Let β = (β1, . . . , βd) ∈ Zd f defined on Ω we write ∇rf = (cid:16)∂rf /∂xβ(cid:17)β=r + := (N ∪ {0})d, β = β1 + . . . + βd. For any distribution (here partial derivatives are taken in the sense of distributions), and denote by mr the number of components of the vector-valued distribution ∇rf . Set W r p,g(Ω) =(cid:8)f : Ω → R(cid:12)(cid:12) ∃ϕ : Ω → Rmr : kϕkLp(Ω) 6 1, ∇rf = g · ϕ(cid:9) ∇rf (cid:16)we denote the corresponding function ϕ by g (cid:17), kf kLq,v(Ω)=kf kq,v=kf vkLq(Ω), Lq,v(Ω) = {f : Ω → R kf kq,v < ∞} . We call the set W r p,g(Ω) a weighted Sobolev class. For properties of weighted Sobolev spaces and their generalizations, see the books [15,36,55,57,58,60] and the survey paper [33]. Sufficient conditions for boundedness and compactness of embeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces into weighted Lq-spaces were obtained by Kudryavtsev [32], Necas [47], Kufner [34 -- 36], Yakovlev [63], Triebel [55], Lizorkin and Otelbaev [43], Gurka and Opic [22 -- 24], Besov [5 -- 8], Antoci [4], Gol'dshtein and Ukhlov [21], and other authors. Notice that in these papers weighted ∗E-mail address: [email protected] 1 Sobolev classes were defined as W r for some different weight functions gi. p,g(Ω)∩Lp,w(Ω) for some weight w, or as ∩r l=0W l p,gi(Ω) For a Lipschitz domain Ω, a k-dimensional manifold Γ ⊂ Ω, and for weights depending only on distance from x to Γ, the following results were obtained. The case r = 1, p = q was considered in papers of Necas [47] (the case of power weights and Γ = ∂Ω), Kufner [34] (weights are powers of distance from a fixed point), Yakovlev [63] (weights depend on distance to k-dimensional manifold), Kadlec and Kufner [30, 31] (here weights are powers with a logarithmic factor, Γ = ∂Ω), Kufner [35] (here weights are arbitrary functions of distance from ∂Ω). For p = q, r ∈ N, Γ = ∂Ω and for power type weights, the embedding theorem was obtained by El Kolli [16]. By using Banach space interpolation, Triebel [54] extended this result to the case p 6 q. For p = q, r = 1, a k-dimensional manifold Γ and general weights Kufner and Opic [37] obtained some sufficient conditions for compactness of embeddings. For p > q, r ∈ N, for an arbitrary k-dimensional manifold Γ and power type weights the criterion of the embedding was obtained in [27 -- 29]. In addition, in [29] for r = 1 the criterion was obtained for arbitrary functions depending on distance from the manifold Γ. Notice that for p > q in the proof of embedding theorems two-weighted Hardy- type inequalities were applied. ∇f (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) In [22] sufficient conditions for the embedding were obtained for r = 1 and general weights. The norm in the weighted Sobolev space was defined by kf kg,w = + kwf kLp(Ω). The idea of the proof was the following. First the Besikovic covering of Ω was constructed, then for each ball of this covering the Sobolev embedding theorem was applied. After that the obtained estimates were summarized. Here it was essential to use the second weight w, which satisfied rather tight restricti- ons. If the boundary ∂Ω is Lipshitz and weight functions are powers of distance from ∂Ω, then it is possible to take more weak restrictions on w. To this end, the other method of proof is used (employing the Hardy inequality). In [23] embedding theorems were obtained for a Holder domain Ω and power type weights depending on distance from ∂Ω. It is also worth noting the paper [38], where the result on embedding of W 1 p,g(Ω) into Lp,v(Ω) was obtained for r = 1, p = q and weights that are powers of the distance from the irregular boundary of ∂Ω. In the present paper, we consider a John domain Ω, an h-set Γ ⊂ ∂Ω and weight functions depending on distance from Γ (their form will be written below). Let X, Y be sets, f1, f2 : X × Y → R+. We write f1(x, y) . y f2(x, y) (or f2(x, y) & y f1(x, y)) if, for any y ∈ Y , there exists c(y) > 0 such that f1(x, y) 6 c(y)f2(x, y) for each x ∈ X; f1(x, y) ≍ y f2(x, y) if f1(x, y) . y f2(x, y) and f2(x, y) . y f1(x, y). For x ∈ Rd and a > 0 we shall denote by Ba(x) the closed Euclidean ball of radius a in Rd centered at the point x. 2 Let · be an arbitrary norm on Rd, and let E, E′ ⊂ Rd, x ∈ Rd. We set diam· E = sup{y − z : y, z ∈ E}, dist· (x, E) = inf{x − y : y ∈ E}, dist· (E′, E) = inf{x − y : x ∈ E, y ∈ E′}. Definition 1. Let Ω ⊂ Rd be a bounded domain, and let a > 0. We say that Ω ∈ FC(a) if there exists a point x∗ ∈ Ω such that, for any x ∈ Ω, there exists a curve γx : [0, T (x)] → Ω with the following properties: 1. γx ∈ AC[0, T (x)], γx = 1 a.e., 2. γx(0) = x, γx(T (x)) = x∗, 3. Bat(γx(t)) ⊂ Ω for any t ∈ [0, T (x)]. Definition 2. We say that Ω satisfies the John condition (and call Ω a John domain) if Ω ∈ FC(a) for some a > 0. For a bounded domain, the John condition is equivalent to the flexible cone condition (see the definition in [9]). Reshetnyak in the papers [50, 51] constructed the integral representation for functions defined on a John domain Ω in terms of their derivatives of order r. This integral representation yields that in the case r d − p − 1 p (Ω) is compactly embedded in the space Lq(Ω) (i.e., the conditions of the compact embedding are the same as for Ω = [0, 1]d). > 0 the class W r (cid:16) 1 q(cid:17)+ Remark 1. If Ω ∈ FC(a) and a point x∗ is such as in Definition 1, then diam· Ω . d,a,· dist· (x∗, ∂Ω). (1) Denote by H the set of all non-decreasing positive functions defined on (0, 1]. We introduce the concept of h-set according to [10]. Definition 3. Let Γ ⊂ Rd be a compact set, and let h ∈ H. We say that Γ is an h-set if there exists a finite measure µ on Rd such that supp µ = Γ and µ(Bt(x)) ≍ h(t) for each x ∈ Γ, t ∈ (0, 1]. Notice that the measure µ is non-negative. The concept of h-sets for functions h of a special type appeared earlier (see papers of Edmunds, Triebel and Moura [13,14,45,56]). In these and some other papers (see, for example, [11,12,48,49,59]) properties of the operator trΓ in Besov and Triebel -- Lizorkin spaces and its composition with the operator (∆)−1 were studied. Here trΓ is the operator of restriction on the h-set Γ. In [25] Besov spaces with Muckenhoupt weights were studied; weight functions depending on the distance from a certain h-set were considered as examples. 3 In the sequel we suppose that h(t) = tθΛ(t), 0 6 θ < d, where Λ : (0, +∞) → (0, +∞) is an absolutely continuous function such that tΛ′(t) Λ(t) → t→+0 0. (2) (3) Let Ω ∈ FC(a) be a bounded domain, and let Γ ⊂ ∂Ω be an h-set. In the sequel for convenience we suppose that Ω ⊂ (cid:2)− 1 reduced to this case). Let 1 < p 6 ∞, 1 6 q < ∞, r ∈ N, δ := r + d g(x) = ϕg(dist·(x, Γ)), v(x) = ϕv(dist·(x, Γ)), 2 , 1 2(cid:3)d (the general case can be q − dp > 0, ϕg(t) = t−βgΨg(t), ϕv(t) = t−βvΨv(t), with absolutely continuous functions Ψg, Ψv such that tΨ′ g(t) Ψg(t) → t→+0 0, tΨ′ v(t) Ψv(t) → t→+0 0; in addition, we suppose that Also we assume that −βvq + d − θ > 0. a) βg + βv < δ − θ(cid:18)1 q − 1 p(cid:19)+ or b) βg + βv = δ − θ(cid:18)1 q − 1 p(cid:19)+ . In the case b) we suppose that (4) (5) (6) (7) Λ(t) = log tγτ ( log t), Ψg(t) = log t−αgρg( log t), Ψv(t) = log t−αvρv( log t), (8) functions ρg, ρv, τ are absolutely continuous, lim y→+∞ yτ ′(y) τ (y) = lim y→+∞ yρ′ g(y) ρg(y) = lim y→+∞ yρ′ v(y) ρv(y) = 0, γ < 0 and α := αg + αv > (1 − γ)(cid:18)1 q − 1 p(cid:19)+ . (9) (10) It is easy to show that the functions Λ, Ψg and Ψv satisfy (3) and (5). Remark 2. If functions Ψg and Ψv (respectively ρg and ρv) satisfy (5) (respectively (9)), then their product and each degree of these functions satisfies the similar condition. 4 Denote β = βg + βv, ρ(y) = ρg(y)ρv(y), Ψ(y) = Ψg(y)Ψv(y), Z = (r, d, p, q, βg, βv, θ, Λ, Ψg, Ψv, a). Let Pr−1(Rd) be the space of polynomials on Rd of degree not exceeding r − 1. For a measurable set E ⊂ Rd, we put Pr−1(E) = {f E : f ∈ Pr−1(Rd)}. Theorem 1. For any function f ∈ span W r Pr−1(Ω) such that p,g(Ω) there exists a polynomial P f ∈ kf − P f kLq,v(Ω) . . Z (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ∇rf g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) Here the mapping f 7→ P f can be extended to a linear continuous operator P : Lq,v(Ω) → Pr−1(Ω). Later we shall give a more general formulation of this theorem. It can be used in p,g(Ω) by piecewise polynomial problems on estimating of approximation of the class W r functions in the space Lq,v(Ω) and in problems on estimating of n-widths. We may assume that the norm on Rd is given by (x1, . . . , xd) = max 16i6d xi. The paper is organized as follows. In Sections 2 and 3, we give necessary notations and formulate the results which will be required in the sequel. In Section 4, we describe the domain Ω in terms of a tree T (see [61]) and construct a special partition of this tree. In Section 5, the discrete weighted Hardy-type inequality on a combinatorial tree is obtained for p = q. If the tree is regular, i.e., the number of vertices that follow the given vertex depends only on the distance between this vertex and the root of the tree, then we employ some convexity arguments and reduce the problem to the proof of a Hardy-type inequality for sequences. The tree which was constructed in Section 4 is not regular in general; however, it satisfies some more weak condition of regularity. For such trees it is possible to reduce the problem to the case of regular trees. To this end, a discrete analogue for theorem of Evans -- Harris -- Pick [20] is proved. At this step, some quantity BD emerges; it is defined for subtrees D and can be calculated recursively. Under some conditions on weights, we prove that BD can be estimated by some more simple quantity SD. Then for any subtree D we construct a subtree D in some regular tree A, such that SD can be estimated from above by S D. In Section 6, the discrete Hardy-type inequality on a tree is proved for p 6= q. To this end, the problem is reduced to consider the cases p = q and p = ∞; here the Holder inequality is applied. In Section 7, the embedding theorem is proved. The problem is reduced to considering the case r = d and employing the discrete Hardy-type inequality on a tree. Embedding theorems and related results for function classes on metric and combinatorial trees were studied by different authors. Naimark and Solomyak [46] 5 obtained Hardy-type inequalities on regular metric trees. For a weighted summation operator (i.e., a Hardy-type operator) on a combinatorial tree acting from l2 into l∞, Lifshits and Linde [40 -- 42] obtained estimates of entropy numbers. In [18, 19, 53] Evans, Harris, Lang and Solomyak obtained estimates of approximation numbers for weighted Hardy-type operators on metric trees. Also it is worth noting results of Evans and Harris [17] on embeddings of Sobolev classes on ridged domains into Lebesgue spaces; here the definition of a ridged domain was given in terms of metric trees. 2 Notation In what follows A (int A, mes A, card A, respectively) be, respectively, the closure (interior, Lebesgue measure, cardinality) of A. If a set A is contained in some subspace L ⊂ Rd of dimension (d − 1), then we denote by intd−1A the interior of A with respect to the induced topology on the space L. We say that sets A, B ⊂ Rd do not overlap if A ∩ B is a Lebesgue nullset. For a convex set A we denote by dim A the dimension of the affine span of the set A. A set A ⊂ Rd is said to be a parallelepiped if there are sj 6 tj, 1 6 j 6 d, such that d d Yj=1 (sj, tj) ⊂ A ⊂ [sj, tj]. Yj=1 If tj − sj = t1 − s1 for any j = 1, . . . , d, then a parallelepiped is referred to as a cube. Let K be a family of closed cubes in Rd with axes parallel to coordinate axes. For a cube K ∈ K and s ∈ Z+ we denote by Ξs(K) the set of 2sd closed non-overlapping Ξs(K). cubes of the same size that form a partition of K, and write Ξ(K) :=Ss∈Z+ We generally consider that these cubes are close (except the proof of Lemma 4). We recall some definitions from graph theory. Throughout, we assume that the graphs have neither multiple edges nor loops. Let Γ be a graph containing at most countable number of vertices. We shall denote by V(Γ) and by E(Γ) the set of vertices and the set of edges of Γ, respectively. Two vertices are called adjacent if there is an edge between them. We shall identify pairs of adjacent vertices with edges that connect them. Let ωi ∈ V(Γ), 1 6 i 6 n. The sequence (ω1, . . . , ωn) is called a path, if the vertices ωi and ωi+1 are adjacent for any i = 1, . . . , n − 1. We say that a graph is connected if any two vertices are connected by a finite path. A connected graph is a tree if it has no cycles. Let (T , ω0) be a tree with a distinguished vertex (or a root) ω0. We introduce a partial order on V(T ) as follows: we say that ω′ > ω if there exists a path (ω0, ω1, . . . , ωn, ω′) such that ω = ωk for some k ∈ 0, n. In this case, we set ρT (ω, ω′) = n + 1 − k and call this quantity the distance between ω and ω′. In addition, we set ρT (ω, ω) = 0. If ω′ > ω or ω′ = ω, then we write ω′ > ω and denote 6 [ω, ω′] := {ω′′ ∈ V(T ) : ω 6 ω′′ 6 ω′} (this set of vertices is called a segment). This partial order on T induces a partial order on its subtree. For any j ∈ Z+ we set Vj(ω) := VT j (ω) := {ω′ > ω : ρT (ω, ω′) = j}. Given ω ∈ V(T ), we denote by Tω = (Tω, ω) a subtree of T with the set of vertices {ω′ ∈ V(T ) : ω′ > ω}. (11) Let G be a subgraph in T . Denote by Vmax(G) and by Vmin(G), respectively, the sets of maximal and minimal vertices in G. Let W ⊂ V(T ). We say that G ⊂ T is a maximal subgraph on the set of vertices W if V(G) = W and if any two vertices ξ′, ξ′′ ∈ W that are adjacent in T are also adjacent in G. We need the concept of a metric tree. Let (T , ω∗) be a tree with a finite set of vertices, and let ∆ : E(T ) → 2R be a mapping such that for any λ ∈ E(T ) the set ∆(λ) = [aλ, bλ] is a non-trivial segment. Then the pair T = (T , ∆) is called a metric tree. A point on the edge λ of the metric tree T is a pair (t, λ), t ∈ [aλ, bλ], λ ∈ E(T ) (if ω′ ∈ V1(ω), ω′′ ∈ V1(ω′), λ = (ω, ω′), λ′ = (ω′, ω′′), then we set (bλ, λ) = (aλ′, λ′)). The distance between two points of T is defined as follows: if (ω0, ω1, . . . , ωn) is a path in the tree T, n > 2, λi = (ωi−1, ωi), x = (t1, λ1), y = (tn, λn), the we set n−1 y − xT = bλ1 − t1 + bλi − aλi + tn − aλn; Xi=2 if x = (t′, λ), y = (t′′, λ), then y − xT = t′ − t′′. We say that (t′, λ′) 6 (t′′, λ′′) if λ′ 6 λ′′ and t′ 6 t′′ in the case λ′ = λ′′. If (t′, λ′) 6 (t′′, λ′′) and (t′, λ′) 6= (t′′, λ′′), then we write (t′, λ′) < (t′′, λ′′). If a, x ∈ T, a 6 x, then we set [a, x] = {y ∈ T : a 6 y 6 x}. A subset A = {(t, λ) : λ ∈ E(T), t ∈ Aλ} is said to be measurable, if Aλ is measurable for any λ ∈ E(T). The Lebesgue measure of A is defined by A = Xλ∈E(T) Aλ. A function f : A → R is said to be integrable if fλ := f {(t, λ): t∈Aλ} is integrable for fλ(t) dt is finite. In this case, we set any λ ∈ E(T) and the sum Pλ∈E(T) RAλ ZA f (x) dx = Xλ∈E(T)ZAλ fλ(t) dt. Let D ⊂ T be a connected subset. Denote by TD the maximal subtree in T such that for any λ ∈ E(TD) the set ∆(λ) ∩ D is a non-trivial segment. Set ∆D(λ) = 7 ∆(λ) ∩ D, λ ∈ E(T ). Then (TD, ∆D) is a metric tree, which will be identified with the set D and which will be called a metric subtree in T. Let D be a metric subtree in T. A point t ∈ D is said to be maximal if x ∈ T\D for any x > t. 3 Preliminary results Let ∆ be a cube with a side of length 2−m, m ∈ Z. Set m(∆) = m. In particular, if 2 , 1 2, 1 We shall need Whitney's covering theorem (see, e.g., [39, p. 562]). 2(cid:3)d(cid:17), then ∆ ∈ Ξm(∆)(cid:16)(cid:2)− 1 ∆ ∈ Ξ(cid:16)(cid:2)− 1 Theorem A. Let Ω ⊂(cid:2)− 1 pairwise non-overlapping cubes Θ(Ω) = {∆j}j∈N ⊂ Ξ(cid:16)(cid:2)− 1 2(cid:3)d be an open set. Then there exists a family of closed 2(cid:3)d(cid:17) with the following 2(cid:3)d(cid:17). properties: 2 , 1 2 , 1 1. Ω = ∪j∈N∆j; 2. dist (∆j, ∂Ω) ≍ d 2−m(∆j ); 3. for any j ∈ N card {i ∈ N : dim(∆i ∩ ∆j) = d − 1} 6 12d; 4. if dim(∆i ∩ ∆j) = d − 1, then m(∆j) − 2 6 m(∆i) 6 m(∆j) + 2. (12) (13) Andersen and Heinig in [3, 26] proved discrete analogues of the two-weighted Hardy-type inequality. We formulate a particular case of their result, which will be used in the sequel. Theorem B. Let 1 6 p 6 q < ∞, and let {un}n∈Z, {wn}n∈Z be nonnegative sequences such that Then, for any sequence {an}n∈Z, C := sup n!1/q m Xn=−∞ wq m∈Z ∞ Xn=m q!1/q ukak(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=−∞ wn n 8 Xn=−∞(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∞ up′ n!1/p′ < ∞. . p,q C Xn∈Z anp!1/p . (14) Evans, Harris and Pick in [20] proved a criterion for boundedness of a two- weighted Hardy-type operator on a metric tree. Let T = (T , ∆) be a metric tree, x0 ∈ T, and let u, w : T → R+ be measurable functions. We set Tx0 = {x ∈ T : x > x0}, Iu,w,x0f (x) = w(x) x Zx0 u(t)f (t) dt. Denote by Jx0 = Jx0(T) a family of metric subtrees D ⊂ T with the following properties: 1. x0 is a minimal vertex in D; 2. if x ∈ ∂D\{x0}, then x is a maximal point in D. For D ∈ Jx0, we set kf kLp(T) : t Zx0 αD = inf  f (x)u(x) dx = 1 for any t ∈ ∂D  . Theorem C. Let 1 6 p 6 q 6 ∞. Then the operator Iu,w,x0 : Lp(Tx0) → Lq(Tx0) is bounded if and only if Cu,w := sup D∈Jx0 kwχTx0 \DkLq(T) αD < ∞. Moreover, Cu,w 6 kIu,wkLp(Tx0 )→Lq(Tx0 ) 6 4Cu,w. The quantity αD is calculated recursively. The following theorem is also proved in [20]. Theorem D. Let D ∈ Jx0, D = ∪m j=0 m, Di ∩ Dj = {y0}, i 6= j. Then Dj, D0 = [x0, y0], x0 < y0, Dj ∈ Jy0, 1 6 j 6 1 αD =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)α−1 D0 , k(αDi)m i=1k−1 lm . p (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)l2 p′ Notice that if x0 = (t′, λ), λ ∈ E(T), t′ ∈ ∆(λ), and y0 is such as in Theorem D, then y0 is a right end of ∆(λ). The following theorem is proved in [1, 2, 52]; see also [44, p. 51] and [39, p. 566]. Theorem E. Let 1 < p < q < ∞, d ∈ N, r > 0, r d + 1 q − 1 p = 0. Then the operator T f (x) =ZRd f (y)x − yr−d dy is bounded from Lp(Rd) in Lq(Rd). 9 Reshetnyak [50, 51] constructed the integral representation for smooth functions defined on a John domain Ω in terms of their derivatives of order r. We shall use the following form of his result (see also [61]). Theorem F. Let Ω ∈ FC(a), let the point x∗, the curves γx and the numbers T (x) (x∗, ∂Ω), r ∈ N. Then there exist be such as in Definition 1, and let R0 = distk·kld measurable functions Hβ : Ω × Ω → R, β = (β1, . . . , βd) ∈ Zd +, β = r, such that the inclusion supp Hβ(x, ·) ⊂ ∪t∈[0, T (x)]Bat(γx(t)) and the inequality Hβ(x, y) . a,d,r 2 x − yr−d hold for any x ∈ Ω. Moreover, the following representation holds: f (x) = Xβ=rZΩ Hβ(x, y) ∂rf (y) ∂βy dy, f ∈ C ∞(Ω), f BR0/2(x∗) = 0. The proof of the following lemma is straightforward and will be omitted. Lemma 1. Let Φ : (0, +∞) → (0, +∞), ρ : (0, +∞) → (0, +∞) be absolutely continuous functions and let lim t→+0 yρ′(y) ρ(y) = 0. Then for any ε > 0 tΦ′(t) Φ(t) = 0, lim y→+∞ tε . ε Φ(t) . ε t−ε, if t ∈ (0, 1], t−ε . ε ρ(t) . ε tε, if t ∈ [1, ∞). Let σ ∈ R, µ < −1. Then for any sequence {kj}l j=0 ⊂ Z+ such that k0 < k1 < · · · < kl, the following estimates hold: l Xj=0 Xj=0 l 2σkj Φ(2−kj ) . σ,Φ 2σk0Φ(2−k0), if σ < 0, 2σkj Φ(2−kj ) . σ,Φ 2σklΦ(2−kl), if σ > 0, l Xj=0 kµ j ρ(kj) . µ,ρ k1+µ 0 ρ(k0). 4 Construction of the partition of the tree Let Θ ⊂ Ξ(cid:16)(cid:2)− 1 2 , 1 2(cid:3)d(cid:17) be a set of non-overlapping cubes. Definition 4. Let G be a graph, and let F : V(G) → Θ be a one-to-one mapping. We say that F is consistent with the structure of the graph G if the following condition holds: for any adjacent vertices ξ′, ξ′′ ∈ V(G) the set Γξ′,ξ′′ := F (ξ′) ∩ F (ξ′′) has dimension d − 1. 10 Let (T , ξ∗) be a tree, and let F : V(T ) → Θ be a one-to-one mapping consistent with the structure of the tree T . For any adjacent vertices ξ′, ξ′′, we set Γξ′,ξ′′ = int d−1Γξ′,ξ′′, and for each subtree T ′ of T , we put ΩT ′,F =(cid:0)∪ξ∈V(T ′)int F (ξ)(cid:1) ∪(cid:16)∪(ξ′,ξ′′)∈E(T ′)Γξ′,ξ′′(cid:17) . For ξ ∈ V(T ), ∆ = F (ξ), denote mξ = m(∆), Ω6∆ = Ω[ξ∗, ξ],F . (15) Let Θ(Ω) be a Whitney covering of Ω (see Theorem A). The following lemma is proved in [61]. Lemma 2. Let Ω ⊂ (cid:2)− 1 , Ω ∈ FC(a). Then there exist a tree T and a one- to-one mapping F : V(T ) → Θ(Ω) consistent with the structure of T and which satisfies the following properties: 2, 1 2(cid:3)d 1. for any subtree T ′ of T , ΩT ′,F ∈ FC(b∗), where b∗ = b∗(a, d) > 0; (16) 2. if x ∈ F (ξ), then a curve γx from Definition 1 can be chosen so that Bb∗t(γx(t)) ⊂ Ω6F (ξ) for any t ∈ [0, T (x)]; if ξT ′ is a minimal vertex of T ′, then the center of the cube F (wT ′) can be taken as a point x∗ from Definition 1 with ΩT ′,F ∈ FC(b∗). For ξ ∈ V(T ), we set Ωξ = ΩTξ,F ; the number kξ ∈ Z+ is chosen so that 2−kξ 6 dist·(F (ξ), Γ) < 2−kξ+1. By Theorem A, 2−mξ ≍ d dist·(F (ξ), ∂Ω) 6 dist·(F (ξ), Γ) ≍ 2−kξ; hence, there exists ϑ(d) ∈ Z+ such that kξ 6 mξ + ϑ(d). (17) (18) (19) Let zξ ∈ F (ξ) be such that dist·(zξ, Γ) = dist·(F (ξ), Γ), and let zξ be a center of the cube F (ξ). Then the first relation in (18) together with zξ − zξ 6 2−mξ (20) imply that for any x ∈ Ωξ x − zξ 6 diam·Ωξ (1) . a,d dist·(zξ, ∂Ω) 6 dist·(F (ξ), ∂Ω) + zξ − zξ (18),(20) . d 2−mξ. 11 Hence, there exists c(a, d) > 0 such that x − zξ 6 c(a, d) · 2−mξ, x ∈ Ωξ. Prove that for any x ∈ F (ξ). Indeed, dist·(x, Γ) ≍ d 2−kξ 2−kξ (17) 6 dist·(F (ξ), Γ) 6 dist·(x, Γ) 6 dist·(F (ξ), Γ) + x − zξ (17) . d . 2−kξ+1 + 2−mξ (19) . d 2−kξ. Denote W = {ξ ∈ V(T ) : mξ 6 kξ + 1 + log c(a, d)}. From (19) it follows that for any ξ ∈ W 2−mξ ≍ a,d 2−kξ. Let ξ /∈ W. We show that for any x ∈ Ωξ dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d 2−kξ. Indeed, (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) dist·(x, Γ) 6 dist·(zξ, Γ) + x − zξ (17),(21) . a,d 2−kξ + 2−mξ (19) . d 2−kξ, dist·(x, Γ) > dist·(zξ, Γ) − x − zξ (17),(21) > 2−kξ − c(a, d) · 2−mξ (23) > 2−kξ−1. Denote Wν = {ξ ∈ W : kξ = ν}. (26) Then (21) and (24) imply that for any ξ ∈ Wν and for any tree T ′ ⊂ Tξ rooted at ξ diam· ΩT ′, F ≍ a,d 2−ν. (27) Lemma 3. There exist a partition of the tree T into subtrees Tk,i with minimal vertices ξk,i, k ∈ Z+, i ∈ Ik, Ik 6= ∅, and numbers νk ∈ N, satisfying the following conditions: 12 1. ν0 < ν1 < · · · < νk < . . . ; 2. ξk,i ∈ Wνk; 3. dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d 2−νk for any x ∈ ΩTk,i,F ; 4. if ξk′,i′ < ξk,i, then k′ < k. Proof. Let ν ∈ Z+, ξ ∈ Wν. Denote by T( ξ) a set of subtrees T ′ ⊂ T ξ with the minimal vertex ξ such that V(T ′)\ [l>ν+1 Wl! = ∅ (28) (this set is nonempty, since { ξ} ∈ T( ξ)). Denote by S(T ξ) a subtree in T ξ such that V(S(T ξ)) = ∪S∈T(ξ)V(S). Then S(T ξ) ∈ T( ξ). Prove that there exists ν = ν(a, d) ∈ N such that for any x ∈ ΩS(T ξ),F 2−ν−ν 6 dist·(x, Γ) 6 2−ν+ν. Indeed, dist·(x, Γ) 6 x − z ξ + dist·(z ξ, Γ) (17),(21),(26) . a,d 2−m ξ + 2−ν (19) . d 2−ν. Prove the estimate from below. Let x ∈ F (η), η ∈ V(S(T ξ)). Set η = max{ W ∩ [ ξ, η]}. Then η ∈ Wj for some j ∈ Z+; since S(T ξ) ∈ T( ξ), we have j 6 ν. If η = η, then dist·(F (η), Γ) (17) > 2−j > 2−ν. (29) Let η > η, ζ ∈ [η, η] ∩ V1(η). Then ζ /∈ W, dim(F (η) ∩ F (ζ)) = d − 1, and for any x ∈ F (η) dist·(x, Γ) (25) ≍ a,d 2−k ζ (19) & d 2−mζ (13) > 2−mη−2 (24) ≍ a,d (26),(29) > 2−ν. 2−k η Let ξ0 be a minimal vertex of the tree T . Prove that ξ0 ∈ W. Indeed, otherwise 2−kξ0 for any x ∈ ΩT ,F . Hence, Γ 6⊂ ∂Ω, which leads (25) imply that dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d to a contradiction. The further arguments are the same as the arguments in Lemma 2 from [62]. 13 Proposition 1. Let ξk,i < ξk′,i′, {ξ : ξk,i 6 ξ < ξk′,i′} ⊂ V(Tk,i). Then νk′ 6 νk + s, with s = s(a, d). Proof. Let ξ ∈ [ξk,i, ξk′,i′] be the direct predecessor of ξk′,i′. Then ξ ∈ V(Tk,i). 2−νk for any x ∈ F (ξ), as well as By Assertion 3 of Lemma 3, dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d 2−νk′ for any x ∈ F (ξk′,i′). Since the mapping F is consistent with 2−νk′ . This dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d the structure of the tree T , then F (ξ) ∩ F (ξk′,i′) 6= ∅. Hence, 2−νk ≍ a,d completes the proof. Lemma 4. Let ξ ∈ Wν0. In addition, suppose that there exists c0 > 1 such that ∀j ∈ N, t, s ∈ [2−j−1, 2−j+1] c−1 0 6 h(t) h(s) 6 c0. Given ν > ν0, we denote Then Wν( ξ) = Wν ∩ V(T ξ). card Wν( ξ) . a,d,c0 h(2−ν0) h(2−ν) . (30) (31) If, in addition, ξ is a root of the tree T , then there is k = k(a, d) ∈ N such that card Wj( ξ) & a,d,c0 h(2−ν0) h(2−ν) . ν+k Xj=ν (32) Proof. Throughout the proof of this lemma we suppose that a cube is a product of j=1[aj, bj). Then any two non-overlapping cubes do not intersect. If ξ ∈ Wν, then it follows from (24) that there is k∗(a, d) such that ν −k∗(a, d) 6 semi-intervals Qd mξ 6 ν + k∗(a, d). Further, diam Ωξ (21),(24) ≍ a,d 2−ν0. Therefore, if ξ ∈ Wν( ξ), then 2−ν ≍ a,d 2−mξ 6 diam Ωξ ≍ a,d 2−ν0. Hence, 2ν0, if Wν( ξ) 6= ∅. 2ν & a,d (33) (34) Let k ∈ Z, −k∗(a, d) 6 k 6 k∗(a, d). Denote by Wν,k( ξ) the set of ξ ∈ Wν( ξ) such that mξ = ν + k. It follows from (17) and (26) that dist·(F (ξ), Γ) 6 2−ν+1, ξ ∈ Wν( ξ). 14 This together with (33) implies that there exists a cube ∆0 and a number k0 = k0(a, d) ∈ Z+ such that F ( ξ) ∈ Ξ(∆0), ν0 − k0(a, d) 6 m(∆0) 6 ν0 + k0(a, d), Ωξ ⊂ ∆0, ∃x ∈ Γ ∩ ∆0 : dist·(x, ∂∆0) & a,d 2−ν0, ∀ξ ∈ Wν( ξ) ∃x ∈ Γ ∩ ∆0 : dist·(x, F (ξ)) 6 2−ν+1. (35) (36) (37) Let j ∈ N, j > ν0 + k∗(a, d). In this case, if ∆ ∈ Ξj(cid:16)(cid:2)− 1 ∆ ⊂ ∆0 or ∆ does not overlap with ∆0. It follows from the conditions F ( ξ) ∈ Ξ(∆0) and j > ν0 + k∗(a, d) > m ξ. Denote by ∆0,j a cube that is obtained from ∆0 by a dilatation in respect to its center, with a side length m(∆0) + 2 · 2−j. Set 2(cid:3)d(cid:17), then either 2 , 1 1 2 , Θj(∆0) =(∆ ∈ Ξj (cid:20)− Θj(∆0) =(∆ ∈ Ξj (cid:20)− 1 2 , 1 2(cid:21)d! : ∆ ⊂ ∆0, ∆ ∩ Γ 6= ∅) , 2(cid:21)d! : ∆ ⊂ ∆0,j, ∆ ∩ Γ 6= ∅) . 1 Prove that card Θj(∆0) ≍ a,d,c0 h(2−ν0) h(2−j) . (38) Let ∆ ∈ Θj(∆0). Since ∆ ∩ Γ 6= ∅, there is a cube K∆ centered at z∆, such that ∆ ∈ Ξ1(K∆), dist·(z∆, Γ) 6 2−m(∆)−1. (39) Then there are z∆ ∈ Γ, t∆ & d 2−j, t∆ . d 2−j such that Bt∆(z∆) ⊂ K∆ ⊂ Bt∆(z∆). (40) Let µ be a measure from the definition 3 (in particular, supp µ ⊂ Γ). Then (30) and (40) imply that µ(K∆) ≍ d,c0 h(2−j). On the other hand, by (30), (35) and (36), h(2−ν0) ≍ a,d,c0 h(2−ν0) ≍ a,d,c0 µ(∆0) = X∆∈Θj(∆0) µ(∆0,j) = X∆∈ Θj(∆0) µ(∆), µ(∆). 15 µ(K∆) . µ(∆). The first inequality holds since the measure µ is Therefore, in order to prove (38) it is sufficient to check that P∆∈Θj (∆0) P∆∈Θj(∆0) d P∆∈ Θj(∆0) nonnegative. Prove the second inequality. Since ∆ ∈ Ξ1(K∆), we have K∆ ⊂ ∆0,j. Denote µ(∆) 6 Θj,∆ = {∆′ ∈ Θj(∆0) : ∆′ ⊂ K∆} for ∆ ∈ Θj(∆0), j,∆′ = {∆ ∈ Θj(∆0) : ∆′ ⊂ K∆} for ∆′ ∈ Θj(∆0). Θ′ Since card Θ′ j,∆′ . d 1 for any ∆′ ∈ Θj(∆0), we have X∆∈Θj (∆0) µ(K∆) = X∆∈Θj(∆0) X∆′∈Θj,∆ µ(∆′) 6 X∆′∈ Θj (∆0) X∆∈Θ′ j,∆′ µ(∆′) . d X∆′∈ Θj (∆0) µ(∆′). This proves (38). Show that if −k∗(a, d) 6 k 6 k∗(a, d), ν > ν0 + 2k∗(a, d), then card Wν,k( ξ) . card Θν+k(∆0) a,d (41) (recall that Θj(∆0) was defined for j > ν0 + k∗(a, d)). Set A :=(∆′ ∈ Ξν+k (cid:20)− 1 2 , 1 2(cid:21)d! : ∃∆ ∈ Θν+k(∆0) : dist·(∆′, ∆) 6 2−ν+1) . From (37) it follows that {F (ξ) : ξ ∈ Wν,k( ξ)} ⊂ A and card Wν,k( ξ) 6 card A . a,d card Θν+k(∆0). If ν > ν0 + 2k∗(a, d), then (30), (38) and (41) imply (31). If Wν( ξ) 6= ∅ and ν < ν0 + 2k∗(a, d), then by (34) we get 2−ν ≍ a,d together with (24), (26), (35) and (36) yield (31). 2−ν0; hence, h(2−ν0 ) h(2−ν ) (30) ≍ a,d,c0 1. This Let us prove (32). By (38), it is sufficient to check ν+k Xj=ν card Wj( ξ) & a,d,c0 card Θν(∆0). Let ∆ ∈ Θl(∆0), and let K∆ be the cube defined above (see (39)), x∆ ∈ K∆ ∩ Γ, x∆ − z∆ 6 2−m(∆)−1. (42) (43) Since Γ ⊂ ∂Ω, by Theorem A and Lemma 2 for any m ∈ N there is a vertex ξ∆ ∈ V(T ) such that dist (x∆, F (ξ∆)) < 2−m, 2−mξ∆ . d 2−m. (44) 16 If m is sufficiently large, then it follows from (43) and (44) that F (ξ∆) ⊂ K∆. Denote η∆ = min{η ∈ [ ξ, ξ∆] : F (η) ⊂ K∆}. Show that 2−mη∆ ≍ a,d 2−l and η∆ ∈ W for sufficiently large m. (45) Indeed, since ∆ ∈ Θl(∆0), we have 2−m(∆) = 2−l. The inclusion F (η∆) ⊂ K∆ and 2−m(∆). the first relation in (39) imply that 2−mη∆ . 2−m(∆). Check that 2−mη∆ & a,d It follows from the definition of η∆ that ∂F (η∆) ∩ ∂K∆ 6= ∅. Let x ∈ ∂F (η∆) ∩ ∂K∆. (39) = 2−m(∆). By (44), there is a point y ∈ F (ξ∆) such that x∆ − y 6 Then x − z∆ 2−m. Since F (ξ∆) ⊂ Ωη∆, we have 2−mη∆ (21) & a,d diam·Ωη∆ > x − y > > x − z∆ − z∆ − x∆ − x∆ − y (43) > 2−m(∆)−1 − 2−m > 2−m(∆)−2 for large m. The first relation in (45) is proved. Check the second relation. Let η∆ /∈ W. Then, by (25), for any x ∈ Ωη∆ we have dist·(x, Γ) ≍ 2−kη∆ . Taking x ∈ F (ξ∆) ⊂ Ωη∆, we get a,d 2−mη∆ (18) . a,d 2−kη∆ ≍ a,d dist·(x, Γ) 6 x − x∆ (44) . d 2−m. It follows from the proved first relation in (45) that 2−l . a,d 2−m. It is impossible for large m. It follows from (24), (26) and (45) that η∆ ∈ Wj for some j ∈ Z+ such that 2−j ≍ a,d 2−l. Therefore, l − l∗ 6 j 6 l + l∗, with l∗ = l∗(a, d) ∈ N. (46) Set k = 2l∗. In order to prove (32), we take j = ν + l∗ and apply (46). We get card {η∆ : ∆ ∈ Θν+l∗(∆0)} 6 card Wl. ν+k Xl=ν Hence, in order to prove (42) it is sufficient to check card Θj(∆0) . d card {η∆ : ∆ ∈ Θj(∆0)} (47) and to apply (38) with (30). Let ∆, ∆′ ∈ Θj(∆0), η∆ = η∆′. Then K∆ ∩ K∆′ ⊃ ∆′′, ∆′′ ∈ Ξ1(K∆) and ∆′′ ∈ Ξ1(K∆′). Therefore, card {η∆′ : ∆′ ∈ Θj(∆0), η∆′ = η∆} . d 1, which implies (47). This completes the proof. 17 Let m ∈ N. For 0 < t0 < t1 6 ∞ denote by Gt0, t1 the maximal subgraph in T on the set of vertices V(Gt0, t1) := [t06νk<t1 [i∈Ik Tk,i (the index set Ik was defined in Lemma 3); by {Dj,i}i∈ Ij we denote the set of all connected components of the graph G1+mj, 1+m(j+1); by ξj,i = ξm j,i denote the minimal vertex of the tree Dj,i, j ∈ Z+. Then 1. ξj,i ∈ Wνk for some νk ∈ [1 + mj, 1 + m(j + 1)); in particular, 2. for any x ∈ ΩDj,i,F diam ΩDj,i,F (27) ≍ a,d,m 2−mj; dist·(x, Γ) ≍ a,d,m 2−mj (48) (49) (it follows from Assertion 3 of Lemma 3); 3. if ξj,i < ξj ′,i′, then j < j′ (indeed, ξj,i = ξk,t and ξj ′,i′ = ξk′,t′ for some k, t, k′, t′; by Assertions 4 and 1 of Lemma 3, νk < νk′; it implies that j 6 j′; the equality j = j′ is impossible; indeed, in this case the vertices ξj,i and ξj ′,i′ are incomparable). Let ξj,i < ξj ′,i′, {ξ : ξj,i 6 ξ < ξj ′,i′} ⊂ Dj,i. Then we say that the tree Dj ′,i′ follows the tree Dj,i. Remark 3. Let s be such as in Proposition 1, let m > s, and let Dj ′,i′ follow the tree Dj,i. Then j′ = j + 1. Indeed, let ξt,s ∈ Dj,i, {ξ : ξt,s < ξ < ξj ′,i′} ⊂ V(Tt,s), ξj ′,i′ = ξt′,s′. By Proposition 1, 1 + mj′ 6 νt′ 6 νt + s < 1 + m(j + 1) + s. Hence, m(j′ − j − 1) < s. Since m > s, the last inequality is possible only for j′ = j + 1. Given j ∈ Z+, l ∈ N, t ∈ Ij, we denote I l j,t = I l,m j,t = {i ∈ Ij+l : ξm j+l,i > ξm j,t}. (50) Lemma 5. Let m ∈ N be divisible by s. Suppose that (30) holds for some c0 > 1. Then card I l j,t . a,d,c0 h(2−mj) h(2−m(j+l)) . (51) 18 Proof. First consider the case m = s. By the property 1 of the trees Dj,t and Dj+l,i, ξj,t ∈ s(j+1) [ν ′=1+sj Wν ′, ξj+l,i ∈ s(j+l+1) [ν=1+s(j+l) Wν( ξj,t) (recall that Wν( ξj,t) = Wν ∩ V(T ξj,t that s(j+l+1) )). Therefore, from Lemma 4 and (30) it follows card I l j,t 6 Xν=1+s(j+l) card Wν( ξj,t) . a,d,c0 h(2−sj) h(2−s(j+l)) . Consider the case m = m′s. Then ξm j,t = ξs j ′,t′ for some j′ > m′j, ξm j+l,i = ξs m′(j+l),i′ (by Remark 3). Hence, card I l,m j,t = card I m′l,s m′j,t′ . a,d,c0 h(2−sm′j) h(2−sm′(j+l)) = h(2−mj) h(2−m(j+l)) . This completes the proof. 5 The discrete Hardy-type inequality on a tree: case p = q 5.1 The analogue of Evans -- Harris -- Pick theorem Let (A, ξ0) be a tree with a finite vertex set, let 1 6 p 6 ∞, and let u, w : V(A) → R+ be weight functions. Denote by SA,u,w the minimal constant C in the inequality   Xξ∈V(A) wp(ξ) Xξ′6ξ 1/p u(ξ′)f (ξ′)!p  6 C  Xξ∈V(A) 1/p f p(ξ)  , f : V(A) → R+. (52) Remark 4. If D ⊂ A is a subtree, then SD,u,w 6 SA,u,w. Let us obtain two-sided estimates for SA,u,w. We reduce this problem to estimating the constant in the Hardy-type inequality on a metric tree and use the result from the article [20]. Let ξ ∈ V(A), D ⊂ A ξ. We say that D ∈ J ′ ξ if the following conditions hold: 1. ξ is the minimal vertex in D, 2. if ξ ∈ V(D) is not a maximal vertex D, then V1(ξ) ⊂ V(D). 19 Denote by D the subtree in D such that V( D) = V(D)\Vmax(D). For any subgraph G ⊂ A and for any function f : V(G) → R, we denote kf klp(G) =  Xω∈V(G) f (ω)p  1/p . (53) By lp(G) we denote the space of functions f : V(G) → R equipped with the norm kf klp(G). For D ∈ J ′ ξ we set βD = inf  kf klp(A) : Xξ6ξ′6ξ Notice that if D = { ξ}, then f (ξ′)u(ξ′) = 1, ∀ξ ∈ Vmax(D)  . β{ ξ} = inf{f ( ξ) : f ( ξ)u( ξ) = 1} = u−1( ξ). Lemma 6. Suppose that there exists C > 1 such that for any ξ ∈ V(A) and let for any adjacent vertices ξ, ξ′ ∈ V(A) card V1(ξ) 6 C, Then C −1 6 u(ξ) u(ξ′) 6 C, C −1 6 w(ξ) w(ξ′) 6 C. SA ξ,u,w ≍ p, C sup D∈J ′ ξ kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ) βD . (54) (55) (56) (57) Proof. If V(A) = {ξ0}, then the assertion is trivial. Let V(A) 6= {ξ0}. Add to the set V(A) a vertex ξ∗ and join it with ξ0 by an edge. Thus we obtain the tree ( A, ξ∗). Define the mapping ∆ by ∆(λ) = [0, 1], λ ∈ E( A). Thus we get the metric tree A = ( A, ∆). For any function ψ : V(A) → R we define ψ# : A → R as follows. Let e = (ξ′, ξ) ∈ E(A), ξ > ξ′. Then we set ψ#∆(e) = ψ(ξ). Let λ ξ ∈ E(A) be an edge with the end ξ, x0 = (0, λ ξ) ∈ A. By Holder inequality, kIu#,w#,x0kLp(Ax0 )→Lp(Ax0 ) ≍ SA ξ,u,w. It follows from Theorem C that SA ξ,u,w ≍ sup D∈Jx0 kw#χAx0 \DkLp(Ax0 ) αD , 20 with kφkLp(Ax0 ) : αD = inf  t Zx0 φ(x)u#(x) dx = 1 ∀t ∈ ∂D  . Applying the Holder inequality once again (see also [20]), we obtain that αD = inf  here Ldiscr the metric tree A. p kφkLp(Ax0 ) : φ ∈ Ldiscr p (Ax0), t Zx0 φ(x)u#(x) dx = 1 ∀t ∈ ∂D  ; (A) is the set of functions φ : A → R that are constants on each edge of Let D = (D, ∆D) ∈ Jx0. Set D+ = (D, ∆), D− = ( D, ∆). Prove that D ∈ J ′ . ξ Indeed, let ξ ∈ V(D), and suppose that there exist vertices ξ′ ∈ V1(ξ)\V(D) and ξ′′ ∈ V1(ξ) ∩ V(D). Let η be a vertex in A that is the direct predecessor of ξ. Then the point (1, (η, ξ)) = (0, (ξ, ξ′)) = (0, (ξ, ξ′′)) belongs to the boundary of D, as well as it is not maximal. We have kw#χAx0 \DkLp(A) 6 kw#χAx0 \D−kLp(A) = kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A), kφkLp(Ax0 ) : φ ∈ Ldiscr p αD > inf  (Ax0), t Zx0 φ(x)u#(x) dx = 1 ∀t ∈ ∂D+  = βD. This implies the upper estimate for SA ξ,u,w. Prove the lower estimate. Notice that if D = D+, then αD = βD. If in addition Vmax(D) ∩ Vmax(A) = ∅, then kw#χAx0 \DkLp(Ax0 ) = kwχA ξ\Dklp(A ξ) (56),(57) ≍ p, C kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ). Hence, SA ξ,u,w & p, C sup( kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ) βD : D ∈ J ′ ξ , Vmax(D) ∩ Vmax(A) = ∅) =: Σ. Prove that Σ ≍ p, C sup(kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ) βD : D ∈ J ′ ξ) . To this end, it is sufficient to show that if V(D) 6= { ξ}, then kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ) βD 21 Σ. . p, C Indeed, set D1 = D. Then from (54), (56) and (57) it follows that kwχA ξ\ Dklp(A ξ) ≍ p, C and Vmax(D1) ∩ kwχA ξ\ D1 Vmax(A) = ∅. βD1. It remains to observe that D1 ∈ J ′ ξ klp(A ξ) and βD ≍ p, C Proposition 2. Let ξ∗ ∈ V(A), V1(ξ∗) = {ξ1, . . . , ξm}, Dj ∈ J ′ D = {ξ∗} ∪ D1 ∪ · · · ∪ Dm. Then ξj , 1 6 j 6 m, β−1 D =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)β−1 {ξ∗}, (cid:13)(cid:13)(βDj )m j=1(cid:13)(cid:13) −1 lm p (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)l2 p′ This assertion follows from Theorem D. . (58) 5.2 The reduction lemma Let ψ : R+ → R+ be an increasing function, ψ(0) = 0, let (A, ξ0) be a tree with a finite vertex set. In addition, suppose that there exists C∗ > 1 such that for any j0, j ∈ Z+, j > j0, ξ ∈ Vj0(ξ0) j−j0(ξ) 6 C∗2ψ(j)−ψ(j0). Let u : V(A) → (0, +∞), u(ξ) = uj for ξ ∈ VA card VA (59) j (ξ0). Suppose that there is σ ∈ (0, 1) such that for any j ∈ N uj2− ψ(j) p uj−12− ψ(j−1) p > σ− 1 p′ . (60) For each ξ∗ ∈ V(A) and for any subtree D ∈ J ′ ξ∗ we define the quantity βD by (54). Then β{ξ} We set (55) = u−1 j for ξ ∈ Vj(ξ0), and if D 6= {ξ∗}, then (58) holds. BD = 1 βD , SD = − 1 p .  Xξ∈Vmax(D) u−p(ξ)  Let D ∈ J ′ ξ∗, ξ ∈ V(D), V1( ξ) = {ξ1, . . . , ξm1}. Then D ξ = { ξ} ∪ Dξ1 ∪ · · · ∪ Dξm1 , Dξj ∈ J ′ ξj , 1 6 j 6 m1. Let ε > 0, 1 6 i 6 m1. A vertex ξi is said to be (ε, D)-regular if B−p Dξi > ε B−p Dξ1 + · · · + B−p Dξm1 m1 . (61) Notice that if ε < 1, then at least one of the vertices ξi is (ε, D)-regular. A path (η0, . . . , ηl) in D is said to be (ε, D)-regular if η0 < η1 < · · · < ηl and for any 1 6 j 6 l the vertex ηj is (ε, D)-regular. 22 Lemma 7. There exists σ = σ(p, C∗) > 0 such that if (60) holds with σ ∈ (0, σ), then for any ξ∗ ∈ V(A) and for any subtree D ∈ J ′ ξ∗ SD 6 BD 6 2SD. (62) Proof. Let νD = max{j ∈ Z+ : Vj(ξ∗) 6= ∅}. If νD = 0, then it follows from the definition that SD = BD. Let us prove the assertion for νD > 0. In this case, D = {ξ∗} ∪ D1 ∪ · · · ∪ Dm1, Dj ∈ J ′ ξj , ξj ∈ V1(ξ∗). Notice that Prove the first inequality, i.e., S−p D = S−p Di . m1 Xi=1 SD 6 BD. (63) (64) (65) Let ν ∈ Z+, and let the assertion be proved for any D such that νD 6 ν. Prove the assertion for νD = ν + 1. From (58) and the induction assumption it follows that Bp′ D = Bp′ {ξ∗} + m1 Xj=1 ′ B−p p Dj!− p ′ p S−p Dj!− p > m1 Xj=1 (64) = Sp′ D . Prove the second inequality. It is sufficient to check that BD 6 ∞ Yj=1 (1 + σj/2) 2 p′! SD (66) holds for σ ∈ (0, σ(p, C∗)). Let ε ∈ (0, 1) (it will be chosen later). Then the end of any (ε, D)-regular path that has a maximal length and starts from ξ∗ is a maximal vertex in D (otherwise one of its direct successors is (ε, D)-regular). Denote by lD the maximal length of (ε, D)- regular paths that start in ξ∗. We show by induction on νD that for σ ∈ (0, σ(p, C∗)) BD 6 lD Yj=1 (1 + σj/2) 2 p′! SD. (67) This implies (66). If νD = 0, then D is a single vertex. Therefore, BD = SD and (67) is true. 23 Let νD > 0. Then (63) holds, and by (59) m1 6 C∗2ψ(j0+1)−ψ(j0). Let li = lDi. Denote by I1 the set of i ∈ {1, . . . , m1} such that ξi is (ε, D)-regular, I2 = {1, . . . , m1}\I1. Set l = max{li : i ∈ I1} + 1. Then l = lD. Prove that there exists σ∗ = σ∗(ε, C∗, p) > 0 such that for any σ ∈ (0, σ∗) Suppose the converse, i.e., Let ξ∗ ∈ Vj0(ξ0). Then β−1 {ξ∗} = uj0 = 2 ψ(j0) p β−p′ {ξ∗} 6 σ β−p′ {ξ∗} > σ l 2 m1 Xi=1 l 2 m1 Xi=1 ′ B−p p Di!− p ′ B−p p Di!− p . . uj0+j−12− ψ(j0+j−1) p uj0+j2− ψ(j0+j) p l · Yj=1  6 uj0+l2− ψ(j0+l) · uj0+l2− ψ(j0+l) p (60) 6   p + ψ(j0) p l p′ . · σ This together with (69) yields m1 Xi=1 i.e., ′ B−p p Di!− p < σ l 2 up′ j0+l 2− p ′ ψ(j0+l) p ′ + p ψ(j0) p , Di > σ− pl B−p 2p′ 2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0)u−p . j0+l m1 Xi=1 Let (ξ∗, η1, . . . , ηl) be an (ε, D)-regular path in D. Then B−p Dη1 > ε m1 m1 Xi=1 B−p Di > ε m1 24 σ− pl 2p′ 2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0)u−p . j0+l (68) (69) (70) (71) Let 2 6 j 6 l, Dηj−1 = {ηj−1} ∪ Dj,1 ∪ · · · ∪ Dj,mj . Then Bp′ Dηj−1 (58) = Bp′ {ηj−1} + mj Xi=1 ′ B−p p Dj,i!− p > mj Xi=1 ′ B−p p Dj,i!− p , i.e., B−p Dηj−1 6 mj Pi=1 Therefore, B−p Dj,i. Since the vertex ηj is (ε, D)-regular, we have B−p Dηj > ε mj mj Xi=1 B−p Dj,i > ε mj B−p Dηj−1 . B−p Dηl > ε ml B−p Dηl−1 > ε2 ml−1ml B−p Dηl−2 > . . . > εl−1 m2 . . . ml (71) > B−p Dη1 > εl m1m2 . . . ml 2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0)u−p j0+l σ− pl 2p′ . The vertex ηl is maximal in D. Hence, BDηl = B{ηl} = uj0+l. In addition, m1m2 . . . ml (59) 6 C l ∗ 2ψ(j0+i+1)−ψ(j0+i) = C l ∗2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0). Thus, u−p j0+l > Cl ∗2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0) 2ψ(j0+l)−ψ(j0)u−p j0+l σ− pl 2p′ , l−1 Yi=0 εl ∗ σ− pl i.e., 1 > εlC −l This proves (68). 2p′ , or σ p 2p′ > εC −1 ∗ . For 0 < σ 6 (C−1 ∗ ε) 2 2p′ p we get the contradiction. Now let us prove (67). We have Bp′ D = β−p′ {ξ∗} + m1 Xi=1 ′ B−p Di!− p p (68) 6 (cid:16)1 + σ l/2(cid:17) m1 Xi=1 ′ B−p p Di!− p . (72) Show that there exists ε∗ = ε∗(p) ∈ (0, 1) such that for any ε ∈ (0, ε∗), 0 < σ < min(cid:0) 1 (cid:16)B−p 2, σ∗(ε, C∗, p)(cid:1) Dm1(cid:17)− 1 D1 + · · · + B−p p D1 + · · · + S−p 6(cid:16)S−p p  Dm1(cid:17)− 1  l−1 (1 + σj/2) Yj=1 2 p′  · (1 + σ l/2) 1 p′ . (73) 25 Then (72), (64) and (73) yield (67). The relation (73) is equivalent to B−p Di − m1 Xi=1 (1 + σl/2) S−p Di m1 p Pi=1 p′ Q l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) > 0. 2p p′ (74) Consider separately sums in i ∈ I1 and in i ∈ I2. Let l = max16i6m1 li + 1. By the induction hypotheses, BDi 6 li Yj=1 (1 + σj/2) BDi 6 li Yj=1 (1 + σj/2) 2 l−1 p′! SDi 6 Yj=1  p′! SDi 6 l−1 Yj=1 2 (1 + σj/2) (1 + σj/2) 2 p′  SDi, p′! SDi, 2 i ∈ I1, (75) i ∈ I2. (76) Hence, > = Xi∈I1 S−p Di! (1 + σl/2) l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) (75) > 2p p′ S−p Di p Pi∈I1 p′ Q B−p Di − S−p Di Xi∈I1 Pi∈I1 − (1 + σl/2) Q 2p p′ l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) (1 + σl/2) l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) p′ − 1 p p (1 + σl/2) 2p p′ p′ Q S−p Di p Pi∈I1 p′ Q p Xi∈I1 & l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) = 2p p′ S−p Di! σ l/2 (65) > Xi∈I1 B−p Di! σ l/2 2). Therefore, there exists C1(p) > 0 (the penultimate relation holds for 0 < σ < 1 such that B−p Di! σ l/2. (77) If l = l, then the sum in i ∈ I2 is estimated similarly. In this case, (74) is proved. B−p Di − Xi∈I1 (1 + σl/2) S−p Di p Pi∈I1 p′ Q l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) Let l > l + 1. Then we have for 0 < σ < min(cid:0) 1 Pi∈I2 p′ Q (1 + σl/2) Xi∈I2 Di − B−p p S−p Di 2p p′ > C1(p) Xi∈I1 2, σ∗(ε, C∗, p)(cid:1) (76) > l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) 2p p′ 26 S−p Di S−p Di 2p p′ > − (1 + σl/2) j=1(1 + σj/2) Pi∈I2 Ql−1 > Xi∈I2 > −C2(p) Xi∈I2 Pi∈I2 p′ Q Di! 1 − (1 + σl/2) p′ Ql−1 Ql−1 > −C3(p) Xi∈I2 Di! σ j=1(1 + σj/2) S−p S−p (76) l/2 2p p′ p p l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) j=l+1(1 + σj/2) B−p Di! σ l/2, > 2p p′ 2p p′ > where C2(p) > 0, C3(p) > 0. Thus, B−p Di − Xi∈I2 (1 + σl/2) l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) > −C3(p) Xi∈I2 2p p′ B−p Di! σ l/2. (78) S−p Di p Pi∈I1 p′ Q From definitions of I1 and I2 we get B−p Di Xi∈I2 m1 ε m1 6Xi∈I2 Xj=1 Xi=1 Di −Xi∈I2 B−p m1 B−p Di = Xi∈I1 B−p Dj 6 ε B−p Dj , m1 Xj=1 B−p Di > (1 − ε) B−p Di . m1 Xi=1 This together with (77) and (78) implies that m1 Di − B−p Xi=1 > C1(p) Xi∈I1 B−p Di! σ (1 + σl/2) l−1 j=1(1 + σj/2) > 2p p′ m1 p S−p Di Pi=1 p′ Q l/2 − C3(p) Xi∈I2 Xi=1 m1 B−p Di! σ l/2 > B−p Di > 0 > σl/2 ((1 − ε)C1(p) − εC3(p)) for sufficiently small ε. This completes the proof of (74). Let w : V(A) → (0, ∞), w(ξ) = wj for ξ ∈ VA j (ξ0). Suppose that there exists σ ∈(cid:0)0, 1 2(cid:1) such that for any j ∈ N wj · 2 ψ(j) p wj−1 · 2 ψ(j−1) p 27 6 σ 1 p . (79) Given D ∈ J ′ ξ∗, we denote RD =  Xξ∈Vmax(D)Xξ′>ξ wp(ξ′)  1/p , QD =  Xξ∈Vmax(D) 1/p wp(ξ)  . (80) From (79) and (59) it follows that there exists σ∗ = σ∗(p, C∗) > 0 such that for any 0 < σ < σ∗ QD 6 RD 6 2QD. (81) j ∈ N. (82) (83) (84) Construct the function ψ∗ by induction as follows: ψ∗(0) = 0, Then 2ψ∗(j)−ψ∗(j−1) ∈ N and 2ψ∗(j)−ψ∗(j−1) =(cid:2)2ψ(j)−ψ∗(j−1)(cid:3) , 2ψ∗(j) 6 2ψ(j) 6 2ψ∗(j)+1. Let ξ∗ ∈ VA j0(ξ0), and let ( A, ξ) be a tree such that card V A 1 (ξ) = 2ψ∗(j+1)−ψ∗(j), ξ ∈ V A j−j0( ξ), j > j0. Lemma 8. Let D ⊂ A be a tree rooted at ξ∗ ∈ VA j0(ξ0). Then there exists σ0 = σ0(p, C∗) > 0 satisfying the following property: if (60) and (79) hold for some σ ∈ (0, σ0), then there exists a tree D ⊂ A rooted at ξ such that SD . Q D. p S D and QD . p,C∗ Proof. Set {j1, . . . , js} = {j ∈ N : Vmax(D) ∩ Vj−j0(ξ∗) 6= ∅}, j1 < · · · < js. For each 1 6 l 6 s, we denote Vl,D = Vmax(D) ∩ VA jl−j0(ξ∗), Us = VA js−1−j0(ξ∗) ∩ V(D)\Vmax(D). Then Vs,D ⊂ ∪ξ∈Us VA js−js−1(ξ). (85) By (59) and (79), there exists σ1 = σ1(p, C∗) such that for any σ ∈ (0, σ1), 1 6 ν 6 s wp jν card VA jν −jν−1(ξ) 6 wp jν−1. Show that for any σ ∈ (0, σ1) wp jtcard Vt,D 6 wp jν · card VA jν−j0(ξ∗). s Xt=ν 28 (86) (87) We use induction on s − ν. If s − ν = 0, then the inequality is trivial. Let s − ν > 1. Denote by D the subtree in Aξ∗ with the set of maximal vertices (cid:0)∪s−1 and the root ξ∗. Then t=1 Vt,D(cid:1) ∪ Us wp jtcard Vt,D (85),(86) 6 s Xt=ν s−1 Xt=ν s−1 wp jtcard Vt,D + wp js−1card Us = wp jtcard V t, D 6 wp jν card VA jν −j0(ξ∗) = Xt=ν (the last inequality holds by the induction assumption). This completes the proof of (87). l, D ⊂ V( A ξ) with the following Applying induction on l, construct the set V properties: 1. if 1 6 t < ν 6 l, then V ν, D ∩(cid:16)∪ξ∈V t, D V A jν −jt(ξ)(cid:17) = ∅; 2. if ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl−jt(ξ) = V A jl−j0( ξ), then the tree D with the set of vertices (88) (89) V( D) = ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D [ ξ, ξ] satisfies Vmax( D) = ∪16t6lV t, D, SD . p S D and QD . p,C∗ Q D; 3. if ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl−jt(ξ) 6= V A jl−j0( ξ), (90) then card V t, D = card Vt,D for any 1 6 t 6 l. If (89) holds for some l, then the construction is interrupted. In this case, D is the desired tree. If (90) holds for any l 6 s, then we take as D the tree with the vertex set ∪16t6s ∪ξ∈V t, D [ ξ, ξ]. In this case, S D = SD and Q D = QD. The base of induction. Let l = 1. If card V1,D < 1 1, D an arbitrary subset E1 ⊂ V 22ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0), then we take A j1−j0( ξ) such that card E1 = card V1,D. By (84), as V we have (90). Let card V1,D > 1 holds). Hence, V( D) = ∪j1−j0 j=0 2 2ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0). Then we set V A j ( ξ), Vmax( D) = V 1, D = V 1, D and V A j1−j0( ξ) (in this case, (89) S−p D (84) = 2ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0)u−p j1 , Qp D (84) = 2ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0)wp j1. 29 Further, S−p D > card V1,D · u−p j1 which implies SD . p S D. Prove that QD . p, C∗ > 2ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0)u−p j1 , 1 2 Q D. Indeed, QD = s Xt=1 card Vt, D · wp jt (87) 6 wp j1 · card VA j1−j0(ξ∗) (59),(83) . C∗ wp j1 · 2ψ∗(j1)−ψ∗(j0) = Qp D . The induction step. Let 1 6 l < s, card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl)−ψ∗(jt) < 1 2 · 2ψ∗(jl)−ψ∗(j0). (91) l Xt=1 Suppose that there are the sets V t, D ⊂ V A jt−j0( ξ), 1 6 t 6 l, satisfying (88) and card V t, D = card Vt,D, 1 6 t 6 l. (92) Then 6 l Xt=1 card V A jl−jt(ξ) (84),(92) 6 l Xt=1 Xξ∈V t, D card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl)−ψ∗(jt) (91) < 1 2 2ψ∗(jl)−ψ∗(j0) (84) < card V A jl−j0( ξ). Therefore, properties 1 -- 3 of the sets V t, D hold (property 2 is trivial, since (90) holds instead of (89); property 3 follows from (92), property 1 holds since we supposed that the sets satisfy (88)). Construct the set V Let l+1, D ⊂ V A jl+1−j0( ξ)\ ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl+1−jt(ξ). card Vl+1,D + l Xt=1 card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) < 1 2 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). (93) In this case, we take an arbitrary subset V l+1, D ⊂ V A jl+1−j0( ξ)\ ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl+1−jt(ξ), card V l+1, D = card Vl+1,D. This set exists, since card Vl+1,D+ l Xt=1 Xξ∈V t, D card V A jl+1−jt(ξ) (84) = card Vl+1,D+ card V t, D·2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) l Xt=1 A jl+1−j0( ξ). (92),(93) < 1 2 · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0) (84) < card V 30 Then we have (88), (91) and (92) with l + 1 instead of l. Hence, properties 1 -- 3 for the sets {V t, D}l+1 t=1 hold. Let card Vl+1,D + Then we set l Xt=1 card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) > 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). (94) 1 2 V l+1, D = V A jl+1−j0( ξ)\ ∪l t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl+1−jt(ξ). (95) By construction, we have property 1 of the sets {V of l); i.e., t, D}l+1 t=1 and (89) (with l+1 instead V ν, D ∩(cid:16)∪ξ∈V V t, D A jν −jt(ξ)(cid:17) = ∅, ∪l+1 t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D V A jl+1−jt(ξ) = V A jl+1−j0( ξ). 1 6 t < ν 6 l + 1, (96) Therefore, it is sufficient to check property 2. Define the tree D by V( D) = ∪l+1 t=1 ∪ξ∈V t, D [ ξ, ξ]. From (96) it follows that Vmax( D) = ∪l+1 t=1 V t, D. We claim that SD . p S D and QD . p,C∗ Q D. Indeed, (92),(97) = S−p D l Xt=1 jt card Vt,D + u−p u−p jl+1card V l+1, D, S−p D > l Xt=1 jt card Vt,D + u−p u−p jl+1card Vl+1,D, (97) (98) (99) (92),(97) = Qp D l Xt=1 jtcard Vt,D + wp wp jl+1card V l+1, D, (100) Qp D = wp jtcard Vt,D + wp jtcard Vt,D (87) 6 s Pt=l+1 l Pt=1 l Pt=1 . 6 jtcard Vt,D + wp wp jl+1card VA jl+1−j0(ξ∗) (59),(83) . C∗ (101) wp jtcard Vt,D + wp jl+1 · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). l Pt=1 31 In addition, Case 1. Let Then Indeed, card V l+1, D 6 card V A jl+1−j0( ξ) (84) = 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). (102) card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) < 1 4 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). (103) l Xt=1 card Vl+1,D > 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0)−2. (104) card Vl+1,D (94),(103) > 1 2 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0) − 1 4 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0) = 1 4 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). From (98), (99), (102) and (104) it follows that SD . p S D. Prove that QD . p,C∗ Q D. By (100) and (101), it suffices to check that card V l+1, D > 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0)−1. We have card V l+1, D (84),(92),(95) > card V A jl+1−j0( ξ) − card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) (103) > l Xt=1 = 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0) − 1 4 · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0) > 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0)−1. card Vt,D · 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt) > 1 4 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). (105) Then by (60), (79) and (83), there exists σ′ 1 = σ′ 1(p, C∗) such that for any σ ∈ (0, σ′ 1) Case 2. Let l Xt=1 l l Xt=1 Xt=1 l u−p jt card Vt,D > wp jtcard Vt,D > Xt=1 Xt=1 l u−p jl+1 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt)card Vt,D wp jl+12ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(jt)card Vt,D (105) > (105) > u−p jl+1 4 wp jl+1 4 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0), 2ψ∗(jl+1)−ψ∗(j0). This together with (98), (99), (100), (101) and (102) implies that S−p D > u−p jt card Vt,D ≍ p S−p D , l Xt=1 Xt=1 l Qp D ≍ p,C∗ wp jtcard Vt,D ≍ p Qp D . 32 This completes the proof. Let (56) and (57) hold, let σ be such as in Lemma 7, and let σ0 be such as in Lemma 8. Take σ ∈ (0, min{σ, σ0}). By Lemma 6, SAξ∗ ,u,w ≍ p, C sup D∈J ′ ξ∗ kwχAξ∗ \ Dklp(Aξ∗ )BD (80) = sup D∈J ′ ξ∗ RDBD (62),(81) ≍ p sup D∈J ′ ξ∗ QDSD. (106) Lemma 9. Let ξ∗ ∈ VA there exists σ2 = σ2(p, C∗) > 0 such that SAξ∗ ,u,w . j0(ξ0), u(ξ) = uj, w(ξ) = wj for any ξ ∈ V A j−j0( ξ). Then S A,u, w for any σ ∈ (0, σ2). p, C,C∗ Proof. Suppose that the supremum of the right-hand side in (106) is attained at ξ∗. Apply Lemma 8 and construct the tree D ⊂ A rooted at ξ such the tree D ∈ J ′ Q D. Apply (106) to the trees D and D and notice that that SD . p in respect to the tree D. We get S D and QD . p,C∗ D ∈ J ′ ξ SAξ∗ ,u,w ≍ p, C SDQD . p,C∗ S DQ D (62),(81) 6 B DR D . p, C S D,u, w 6 S A,u, w (see Remark 4). 5.3 Estimates for the special class of weights Let r = d, p = q and let the conditions (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (10) hold. From (7) it follows that β 6 d. Let T , F be the tree and the mapping such as in Lemma 2, and let s = s(a, d) ∈ N be such as in Proposition 1. Let m ∈ N be divisible in s. Consider the partition {Dj,i}j∈Z+, i∈ Ij of the tree T defined at the page 18. Fix N ∈ N. Let A = A(m) be the tree with the set of vertices {ηj,i}06j6N, i∈ Ij and with the set of edges defined by VA 1 (ηj,i) = {ηj+1,s}s∈ I 1 . j,i j,i is defined in (50). By Remark 3, if Dj ′,i′ follows the tree Dj,i, then j′ = j + 1 j,i. Hence, card VA l (ηj,i) = card I l j,i for any l ∈ Z+. By Lemma 5, for any j0, j ∈ {0, . . . , N}, j > j0, and for any ξ ∈ VA j0(η0,1) we Here I 1 and i′ ∈ I 1 have with card VA j−j0(ξ) . a,d,c0 h(2−mj0) h(2−mj) (2) = 2ψ(j)−ψ(j0) ψ(j) = mθj − log2 Λ(2−mj). 33 (107) (108) Denote ξ0 = η0,1. Set uj := u(ξ) = ϕg(2−mj) · 2− mdj p′ (4) = 2mj(cid:16)βg− d p′(cid:17)Ψg(2−mj), wj := w(ξ) = ϕv(2−mj) · 2− mdj p (4) = 2mj(βv− d p )Ψv(2−mj), ξ ∈ VA j (ξ0). (109) Lemma 10. There exists m∗ = m∗(Z) ∈ N such that for any m > m∗, ξ∗ ∈ VA we have SAξ∗ ,u,w . Z we have SAξ∗ ,u,w . Z j0(ξ0) 2mj0(β−d)Ψ(2−mj0) in the case a) of (7); in the case b) for α > 0 j−α 0 ρ(j0); if α = 0 and ρ ≡ 1, then SAξ∗ ,u,w . 1. Z Proof. First suppose that βg − d p′ − θ p > 0. (110) We have uj · 2− ψ(j) p′ − θ p = 2mj(cid:16)βg− d p = 2mj(βv− d p + θ p(cid:17) · Ψg(2−mj)Λ p ) · Ψv(2−mj)Λ− 1 1 ψ(j) wj · 2 p (2−mj), p (2−mj). From (6) and (110) it follows that (60) and (79) hold with σ . Z λm ∗ , λ∗ = λ∗(Z) ∈ (0, 1). From (107) follows (59) with C∗ = C∗(a, d, c0). There exists m∗ such that σ < σ2(p, C∗) for any m > m∗ (see Lemma 9). Let the tree ( A, ξ) satisfy (84) with ψ∗ defined by (82), and let u(ξ) = uj, w(ξ) = wj for ξ ∈ Vj−j0( ξ0). By Lemma 9, SAξ∗ ,u,w . Z S A,u, w. The quantity S A,u,v equals to the minimal constant C in wp(ξ) Xξ∈V( A) p u(ξ′)f 1/p(ξ′)   Xξ6ξ′6ξ 6 C p Xξ∈V( A ξ) f (ξ), f : V( A) → R+. (111) Denote by F (f ) the left-hand side of (111). We claim that the function F is concave. Indeed, let λ ∈ [0, 1], f1, f2 : V( A ξ) → R+. Applying the inverse Minkowski inequality and the homogeneity property, we get p > Xξ∈V( A) wp(ξ)  Xξ6ξ′6ξ > (1 − λ) Xξ∈V( A) +λ Xξ∈V( A) u(ξ′) ((1 − λ)f1(ξ′) + λf2(ξ′))1/p  wp(ξ) wp(ξ)  Xξ6ξ′6ξ  Xξ6ξ′6ξ (ξ′)  (ξ′)  u(ξ′)f 1/p u(ξ′)f 1/p + . p p 2 1 34 Set nj = card V A 1 (ξ), ξ ∈ V A j ( ξ), j ∈ Z+. It follows from (84) that this quantity does not depend on ξ. Prove that = sup{F (f ) : kf kl1( A) 6 1, ∀j ∈ Z+, ∀ξ′, ξ′′ ∈ Vj( ξ) f (ξ′) = f (ξ′′)} sup{F (f ) : kf kl1( A) 6 1} = (112) (see the notation (53)). Construct fk;i1, ..., ik, ik+1 by induction on k ∈ {0, 1, . . . , N − j0}. Set f0 = f ( ξ). A k ( ξ). Then we define Let 0 6 k 6 N − j0 − 1, fk;i1, ..., ik = f (ξ) for some ξ ∈ V fk+1;i1, ..., ik, ik+1 for 1 6 ik+1 6 nk so that {fk+1;i1, ..., ik, ik+1}nk ik+1=1 = {f (ξ′) : ξ′ ∈ V A 1 (ξ)}. Denote by Sj the set of permutations of j elements. For 0 6 t 6 N − j0 − 1, σ ∈ Snt we set (f t,σ)k;i1, ..., ik =(cid:26) fk;i1, ..., ik , for k 6 t, fk;i1, ..., σ(it+1), ..., ik, for k > t, φ(t)(f ) = f t,σ. 1 card Snt Xσ∈Snt Since the function F is concave and F (f t,σ) = F (f ), we get F (f ) 6 F (φ(0)(f )) 6 F (φ(1)φ(0)(f )) 6 . . . 6 F (φ(N −j0−1) . . . φ(0)(f )). It remains to observe that (cid:0)φ(N −j0−1) . . . φ(0)(f )(cid:1) (ξ′) = (cid:0)φ(N −j0−1) . . . φ(0)(f )(cid:1) (ξ′′) for any ξ′, ξ′′ ∈ Vk( ξ), 0 6 k 6 N − j0. Thus, (112) holds. Hence, it suffices to find the minimal constant C in (111) for the family of functions f such that fVk(ξ) = fk, 0 6 k 6 N − j0. Set mk = n0 . . . nk. From (84) it follows that nk = 2ψ∗(j0+k+1)−ψ∗(j0+k) and mk = 2ψ∗(j0+k+1)−ψ∗(j0) (83),(108) ≍ 2θmk Λ(2−mj0) Λ(2−m(j0+k+1)) . (113) Let xk = (mk−1fk)1/p, m−1 = 1. Then it follows from the definition of u and w that (111) can be written as N −j0 Xk=0 mk−1wp k+j0 k Xl=0 Applying Theorem B, we get ul+j0m − 1 p l−1xl!p!1/p 6 C N −j0 Xk=0 xp k!1/p . (114) C ≍ p sup 06k6N −j0 N −j0 Xl=k ml−1wp l+j0! 1 p k Xl=0 35 up′ l+j0m ′ − p p l−1! 1 p′ . Apply Lemma 1, taking into account Remark 2. From (6), (109) and (113) it follows ml−1wp l+j0 ≍ Z mk−1wp k+j0. The condition βg > d p′ + θ p yields the inequality N −j0 Pl=k up′ l+j0m that k Pl=0 ′ − p p l−1 ≍ Z ′ − p k−1up′ p m k+j0. Therefore, C ≍ Z sup 06k6N −j0 uk+j0wk+j0 (109) = sup j06t6N 2mt(β−d)Ψ(2−mt) =: M. In the case (7), a), we have M ≍ Z 2mj0(β−d)Ψ(2−mj0). In the case (7), b) for α > 0 we get M ≍ Z,m j−α 0 ρ(j0). If α = 0 and ρ ≡ 1, then M = 1. Let, now, βg − d p′ − θ p 6 0. Since βv < d−θ p , there exists βg > d p′ + θ p such that βg + βv < d. Set u(ξ) = u(ξ) · 2(βg−βg)mj, ξ ∈ VA j (ξ0). Then SAξ∗ ,u,w 6 SAξ∗ ,u,w · 2mj0(βg−βg) . Z 2mj0(β−d)Ψ(2−mj0). This completes the proof. 6 The discrete Hardy-type inequality on the tree: case p 6= q Let the tree A be such as in the previous section, and let u(ξ) = ϕg(2−mj) · 2− mdj p′ = 2mj(cid:16)βg− d p′(cid:17)Ψg(2−mj), w(ξ) = ϕv(2−mj) · 2− mdj q = 2mj(βv− d q )Ψv(2−mj), ξ ∈ Vj(ξ0). (115) Let ξ∗ ∈ Vj0(ξ0). Denote by Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,v the minimal constant C in the inequality   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ u(ξ′)f (ξ′)!q  1 q 6 Ckf klp(Aξ∗ ). (116) Lemma 11. Let p > q. Then there exists m∗ = m∗(Z) ∈ N such that for any m > m∗ Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z 2mj0(β−d− d q + d p )Ψ(2−mj0) for the case a) in (7); in the case b), for α >(cid:16) 1 q − 1 p(cid:17) (1 − γ) Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z 2−θ( 1 q − 1 p )mj0j q − 1 p −α+ 1 0 ρ(j0). 36 Proof. First consider the case p = ∞. Let βg > d. Then 1 q 6 u(ξ′)f (ξ′)!q   wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) u(ξ′)!q wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ  Λ(2−mj) j v(2−mj) · 2mθ(j−j0) Λ(2−mj0) Xl=j0 1 q 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) 2mj(βvq−d)Ψq kf kl∞(Aξ∗ ) (107),(108),(115) . a,d,c0,m 2ml(βg−d)Ψg(2−ml)!q!1/q kf kl∞(Aξ∗ ). . N Xj=j0 This together with the condition βg > d, Lemma 1 and Remark 2 yield S∞,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z N Xj=j0 2mj(βq−d−dq+θ)Ψq(2−mj) · 2−θmj0 Λ(2−mj0) Λ(2−mj)!1/q . In the case (7), a), the right-hand side can be estimated from above up to a multiplicative constant by 2mj0(β−d− d q )Ψ(2−mj0); in the case (7), b) it is estimated by (mj)−αqρq(mj) · 2−θmj0 jγ 0 τ (mj0) jγτ (mj)! 1 q −α+ 1 2− θmj0 q q j 0 ρ(j0) . Z,m N Xj=j0 (here we use Lemma 1 and Remark 2 again). If βg 6 d, then we choose βg > d so that βg + βv < d + d−θ (it is possible by (6)), and we set u(ξ) = u(ξ) · 2mj(βg−βg), q ξ ∈ VA j (ξ0). Then S∞,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z S∞,q Aξ∗ ,u,w · 2mj0(βg−βg) . Z 2mj0(β−d− d q )Ψ(2−mj0). Let, now, q < p < ∞. Let βg,1 + βg,2 = βg, βv,1 + βv,2 = βv, u1(ξ) = 2mj(βg,1− d(p−q) p )Ψg(2−mj), u2(ξ) = 2mj(βg,2− d(q−1) p ), w1(ξ) = 2mj(βv,1− d(p−q) pq )Ψv(2−mj), w2(ξ) = 2mj(βv,2− d p ), ξ ∈ Vj(ξ0). Then u1(ξ)u2(ξ) = u(ξ), w1(ξ)w2(ξ) = w(ξ). Applying the Holder inequality, we get   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) wq 1(ξ)wq 2(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ 1/q u1(ξ′)u2(ξ′)f (ξ′)!q  6 37 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) =  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) w wq wq pq p−q 1 1(ξ)wq 2(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ (ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ 1(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ p−q 1 u p p u1(ξ′)!q  p 1 p p p q u u q − 1 p−q 1 2 (ξ′)f (ξ′)!q(1− q p ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ (ξ′)!q p   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ )  p )  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) q (ξ′)! 2(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ 2(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ q (1− q wp wq 1 p q p q = 1 p , p p q u 2 (ξ′)f q (ξ′)!q  u2(ξ′)f2(ξ′)!q  q · q p p 1 1/q 6 q2 p   with u1(ξ) = u (then f2 ∈ lq(Aξ∗)). p−q 1 (ξ), w1(ξ) = w p−q 1 (ξ), u2(ξ) = u 2 (ξ), w2(ξ) = w 2 (ξ), f2(ξ) = f q (ξ) Check that we can apply to each of multipliers the Hardy-type inequality with (p1, q1) = (∞, q) and (p2, q2) = (q, q). Indeed, for ξ ∈ Vj(ξ0) we have u1(ξ) = 2mj(βg,1 p p−q −d)Ψ p p−q g (2−mj), u2(ξ) = 2mj(cid:16)βg,2 p q − d q′(cid:17), w1(ξ) = 2mj(βv,1 p p−q − d q )Ψ p p−q v (2−mj), w2(ξ) = 2mj(βv,2 p q − d q ). By Remark 2, since the functions Ψg and Ψv satisfy (5) (ρg and ρv satisfy (9), respectively), we observe that their powers satisfy the similar conditions. First choose βv,1 and βv,2 so that βv,1 < (d − θ)(cid:18)1 q − 1 p(cid:19) , βv,2 < d − θ p , βv,1 + βv,2 = βv hold (it is possible, since βv < d−θ require q ). Then we choose βg,1, βg,2. In the case (7), a) βg,1 + βv,1 <(cid:18)1 − q p(cid:19)(cid:18)d + d q − It is possible, since βg + βv < d + d the case (7), b) we require q − d θ q(cid:19) , p − θ(cid:16) 1 βg,1 + βv,1 =(cid:18)1 − q p(cid:19)(cid:18)d + d q − The condition α p p−q > 1−γ q holds by (10). Also observe that kf2kq/p Thus, in the case (7), a) lq(Aξ∗ ) = kf klp(Aξ∗ ). βg,2 + βv,2 < qd p , βg,1 + βg,2 = βg. q − θ p . In q(cid:17) + qd q − 1 p(cid:17)(cid:16)d + d p(cid:17) =(cid:16)1 − q q(cid:19) , βg,2 + βv,2 = θ qd p . Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z h2mj0((βg,1+βv,1) p p−q −d− d q )Ψ p p−q (2−mj0)i1− q p × 38 = 2mj0(β−d− d q + d p )Ψ(2−mj0), ×h2mj0((βg,2+βv,2) p as well as in the case (7), b) Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z (cid:18)2− mθj0 − αp q j 0 p−q + 1 q q p q −d)i p−q (j0)(cid:19)1− q ρ p p = 2−θ( 1 q − 1 p)mj0j q − 1 p −α+ 1 0 ρ(j0). This completes the proof. Lemma 12. Let p < q. Then there exists m∗ = m∗(Z) ∈ N such that for any m > m∗ Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z 2mj0(β−d− d q + d p )Ψ(2−mj0) in the case a) of (7); in the case b), if α > 0, then Sp,q Aξ∗ ,u,w . Z j−α 0 ρ(j0). Proof. Set λ = 1 Applying the Holder inequality, we get q , and define the quantity p1 by 1 p − 1 p = 1−λ p1 + λ. Then 1 q = 1−λ p1 . S := wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) 6 max ξ∈V(Aξ∗ )Xξ′6ξ =  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ f p(ξ′)!λ lp(Aξ∗ ) 6 kf kλp 1 u 1−λ (ξ′)f  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ )  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) 1 with w(ξ) = w 1−λ (ξ), u(ξ) = u 1−λ (ξ), f (ξ) = f 1 1/q 6 = 1/q p p u(ξ′)f q (ξ′)f 1− p u(ξ′)f (ξ′)!q  q (ξ′)!q  q(1−λ) (ξ′)!(1−λ)q Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ 1−λ (ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ wp1(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ u(ξ′) f (ξ′)!p1  1−λ (ξ′)f w u p1 p 1 q(1−λ) (ξ). We have 1 q 6 1−λ p1 6 f 1− p q λ (ξ′)!λq  q(1−λ) (ξ′)!p1  p 1−λ p1 , k fk1−λ lp1 (Aξ∗ ) =  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) 1−λ p1 f pp1 q(1−λ)  1 q =  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) f p(ξ)  39 = kf k p q lp(Aξ∗ ). Hence, S 6 kf k 1− p lp(Aξ∗ ) · (Sp1,p1 q Aξ∗ ,u, w)1−λkf k If ξ ∈ Vj(ξ0), then p q lp(Aξ∗ ) = (Sp1,p1 Aξ∗ ,u, w)1−λkf klp(Aξ∗ ). w(ξ) = 2mj( βv 1−λ − d (1−λ)q )Ψ 1 1−λ v (2−mj) = 2mj(cid:16) βv 1−λ − d p1(cid:17)Ψ 1 1−λ v (2−mj), u(ξ) = 2mj(cid:16) βg 1−λ − d (1−λ)p′(cid:17)Ψ 1 1−λ g (2−mj). Therefore, u(ξ) = 2 mj(cid:18) βg− d p′ with Ψg = Ψ 1 1−λ g , Ψv = Ψ d − θ (6) > 0. 1 1−λ v 1(cid:19) Ψg(2−mj), , βg = βg w(ξ) = 2mj(cid:16) βv− d p1(cid:17) Ψv(2−mj), 1−λ − d (1−λ)p′ + d p′ 1 and βv = βv 1−λ. Then − βvp1 + In the case (7), a), we have β < d + d < d(1 − λ), i.e., β − d + d to βg + βv − d that 1−λ = 1 p1 p′ + d(1−λ) q . Hence, by Lemma 10, (Sp1,p1 Consider the case (7), b). Then β = d + d A,u, w)1−λ . p′ 1 Z 10 we get (Sp1,p1 A,u, w)1−λ . Z j−α 0 ρ(j0). q − d p . Check that βg + βv < d. It is equivalent < 0. It remains to observe p − d(1−λ) p1 2mj0(β−d− d q + d p )Ψ(2−mj0). q − d p . Hence, βg + βv = d, and by Lemma 7 The proof of the embedding theorem In this section we prove the main result of this article. In particular, we obtain Theorem 1. Let m∗ = m∗(Z) (see Lemmas 10, 11 and 12), and let {(Dj,i, ξj,i)}j∈Z+, i∈ Ij be the partition of T for m = m∗ (see the definition on page 18). Theorem 2. Let D ⊂ T ξj0,i0 any function f ∈ span W r r − 1 such that be a subtree with the minimal vertex ξj0,i0. Then for p,g(Ω) there exists a polynomial P f of degree not exceeding kf − P f kLq,v(ΩD,F ) . Z in the case (7), a), kf − P f kLq,v(ΩD,F ) . Z 2−m∗θ( 1 q − 1 ∇rf g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(ΩD,F ) 2m∗j0(β−δ)Ψ(2−m∗j0)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(ΩD,F ) ρ(j0)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) −α+( 1 j0j 0 ∇rf p )+ p )+ q − 1 (117) (118) in the case (7), b). Here the mapping f 7→ P f can be extended to a linear continuous operator P : Lq,v(Ω) → Pr−1(Ω). 40 Proof. We shall denote Ω = ΩD,F . Step 1. The set C ∞( Ω) ∩ W r p,g( Ω) (it can be proved in the same way as for a non-weighted case, see [44, p. 16]).1 Therefore, it is sufficient to check (117) and (118) for f ∈ C ∞( Ω). p,g( Ω) is dense W r By Lemma 2, Ω ∈ FC(b∗), b∗ = b∗(a, d). Let x∗ ∈ Ω, γx(·), T (x) be such as in (x∗, ∂ Ω). From assertion 2 of Lemma 2 it follows Definition 1, and let R0 = distk·kld that we can take the center of the cube F ( ξj0,i0) as the point x∗. It is sufficient to show that if f ∈ C ∞(Ωw0), f BR0/2(x∗) = 0, then (117), (118) hold with P f = 0 (the general case can be proved in the same way as in [62]; here we can take as f 7→ P f the Sobolev's projection operators). 2 Let ϕ(x) = ∇rf (x) g(x) . By Theorem F, for any x ∈ Ω there exists a set Gx ⊂ ∪t∈[0, T (x)]Bb∗t(γx(t)) such that {(x, y) ∈ Ω × Ω : x ∈ Ω, y ∈ Gx} is measurable, f (x) . r,d,aZGx x − yr−dg(y)ϕ(y) dy. By Assertion 2 of Lemma 2, if x ∈ ∆, ∆ ∈ Θ(Ω), then Gx ⊂ Ω6∆. (119) Thus, it is sufficient to prove that  ZΩ vq(x) ZGx q g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  dx  1/q C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω), . Z (120) with C(j0) = 2m∗j0(β−δ)Ψ(2−m∗j0) in the case (7), a), and C(j0) = 2−m∗θ( 1 q − 1 p )+ −α+( 1 j0j 0 q − 1 p )+ ρ(j0) in the case (7), b). Extending the function ϕ by zero to ΩT ξj0 ,i0 theorem, we may assume that V(D) = {ξ ∈ V(T ξj0,i0 N ∈ N. ,F \ΩD,F and applying the B. Levi's ) : ρT ( ξj0,i0, ξ) 6 N} for some Step 2. Consider the case r = d. Let (A, ξ0) = (A(m∗), ξ0) be the tree defined on the page 33. If ξ = ηj,i ∈ V(A), then we set D[ξ] = Dj,i, Ω[ξ] = ΩD[ξ],F , gξ = 2βgm∗jΨg(2−m∗j), vξ = 2βvm∗jΨv(2−m∗j). (121) 1Here C∞(Ω) is the space of functions that are smooth on the open set Ω, but not necessarily extendable to smooth functions on the whole space Rd. 41 By (48), the property 2 of the partition {Dj,i}j∈Z+, i∈ Ij and (4), we have diam Ω[ξ] ≍ a,d 2−m∗j, g(x) ≍ Z gξ, v(x) ≍ Z vξ, x ∈ ΩD[ξ],F . (122) Set ξ∗ = ηj0,i0. Then q 1/q (119) 6 q g(y)ϕ(y) dy dx   g(y)ϕ(y) dy  dx  ϕ(y) dy  q  ZΩ 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ )ZΩ[ξ] ≍ ξ ZΩ[ξ]  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) .  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) . C(j0) vq(x) ZGx vq(x)  Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ ZΩ[ξ′]  gξ′ ZΩ[ξ′]  Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ wq(ξ) Xξ∗6ξ′6ξ  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) kϕkp vq u(ξ′)kϕkLp(Ω[ξ′])!q  Lp(Ω[ξ])  1/p 1/q = C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω) (122) ≍ Z 1/q dx  (115),(121),(122) . Z . Z 1/q (the penultimate relation follows from Lemmas 10, 11 and 12). Step 3. Let r 6= d. Set G1 x = {y ∈ Gx : x − y > 2 dist·(x, Γ)}, G2 x = {y ∈ Gx : x − y < 2 dist·(x, Γ)}. Then in order to prove (120) it suffices to check the inequalities  ZΩ  ZΩ x vq(x) ZG1 vq(x) ZG2 x q q g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  dx  dx  Prove (123). At first we check that for y ∈ G1 x 1/q 1/q . Z . Z C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω), (123) C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω). (124) x − y ≍ a,d dist·(y, Γ). (125) 42 Indeed, let zx ∈ Γ, x − zx = dist·(x, Γ). Then dist·(y, Γ) 6 y − zx 6 y − x + x − zx = = x − y + dist·(x, Γ) 6 x − y + x − y 2 = 3x − y 2 . Prove the inverse inequality. Let y ∈ F (ω), ω ∈ V(T ). From (119) it follows that 2−mω . From assertion 2 x ∈ ΩTω,F . Since ΩTω,F ∈ FC(b∗), we have diam(ΩTω ,F ) . a,d 2−mω . Hence, of Theorem A it follows that dist·(y, ∂Ω) ≍ d dist·(y, Γ) > dist·(y, ∂Ω) ≍ d 2−mω (21) & a,d diam ΩTω,F > x − y. Thus, (125) is proved, and  ZΩ x vq(x) ZG1 vq(x) . ZG1 ZΩ g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  dx  g(y)ϕ(y) dy  q x dx  1/q q 1/q (4) . Z , with g(y) = ϕg(dist·(y, Γ)), ϕg(t) = ϕg(t) · tr−d = t−βgΨg(t), βg = βg + d − r. Since β − δ = βg + βv − r − d estimate which was obtained at the previous step. p = βg + βv − d − d q + d q + d p , it remains to apply the Prove (124). If y ∈ G2 x, then dist·(y, Γ) 6 dist·(x, Γ) + x − y 6 3 dist·(x, Γ). (126) Let x ∈ Ω[ηj,i], y ∈ Ω[ηj ′,i′]. From (119) and property 3 of the partition {Dj,i}j∈Z+,i∈ Ij it follows that j′ 6 j. By (49), dist·(x, Γ) ≍ . This together with (126) yield that there exists j∗ = j∗(a, d, m∗) such that j −j∗ 6 j′ 6 j. Notice that 2−m∗j, dist·(y, Γ) ≍ 2−m∗j ′ a,d,m∗ a,d,m∗ x − y . 2−m∗j. a,d,m∗ (127) Denote by Iηj,i,j∗ the maximal subgraph on the vertex set V(Iηj,i,j∗) = [j ′>j−j∗ [ηj′ ,i′ 6ηj,i V(Dηj′,i′ ) 43 and set Ω[ηj,i] = ΩIηj,i,j∗ ,F . Then for any x ∈ Ω[ηj,i], the inclusion G2 In addition, from (121) and (122) it follows that x ⊂ Ω[ηj,i] holds. g(y) ≍ Z gηj,i, y ∈ Ω[ηj,i]. (128) By (107), for any ξ′ ∈ V(Aξ∗) card {ξ ∈ V(Aξ∗) : ξ′ ∈ Iξ,j∗} . 1. Z Therefore, We have 1/p Lp( Ω[ξ])  kϕkLp( Ω). . Z (129) kϕkp x   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) vq(x) ZG2 vq(x) ZΩ[ξ]  ZΩ[ξ] ξ ZΩ[ξ] gq ξ vq  ZΩ 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ )ZΩ[ξ] ≍  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) q 1/q q g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  g(y)ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  ϕ(y)x − yr−d dy  dx  dx  dx  q 6 1/q 1/q (122),(128) ≍ Z =: S. Let ξ = ηj,i. By (122) and (127), Ω[ξ] and Ω[ξ] are contained in a ball of radius Rξ ≍ a,d,m 2−m∗j. (130) Applying Theorem E and the Holder inequality, we get S . Z   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) If p 6 q, then gq ξ vq ξ Rδq ξ kϕkq 1/q Lp( Ω[ξ])  =: S1. S1 6 max ξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) gξvξRδ ξ  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) kϕkp Lp( Ω[ξ])  44 1 p (121),(129),(130) . Z . 2m∗j0(β−δ)Ψ(2−m∗j0)kϕkLp( Ω) = C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω). If p > q, then by the Holder inequality S1 6  Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ )(cid:0)gξvξRδ ξ(cid:1) . ∞ Xj=j0 2−θm∗j0Λ(2−m∗j0) 2−θm∗jΛ(2−m∗j) (see Lemma 1). 1 q − 1 pq p−q  Lp( Ω[ξ])  1 q − 1 p kϕkp p   Xξ∈V(Aξ∗ ) p−q (2−m∗j)! pq 2(β−δ) pq p−q m∗jΨ 1 p (121),(107),(129),(130) . Z kϕkLp( Ω) (7) . Z C(j0)kϕkLp( Ω) Notice that if the condition (7), a) is replaced by βg + βv > δ − θ(cid:16) 1 or if (7), b) holds and α < (1 − γ)(cid:16) 1 unbounded in Lq,v(Ω). Indeed, let ϕ ∈ C ∞ , then the set W r 0 (Ω) is ∇rϕ(x)p dx = 1, let p,g(Ω) ∩ C ∞ p(cid:17)+ p(cid:17)+ q − 1 q − 1 , k = k(a, d) ∈ N be such as in Lemma 4, and let ξ be the minimal vertex of the tree T , ξ ∈ Wν0. Then for sufficiently large ν ∈ N 0 ([0, 1]d), ϕ > 0, R[0, 1]d Set ν+k (32) & Z h(2−ν0) h(2−ν) & Z,ν0 card Wl Xl=ν {∆j}j∈Jν =nF (ξ) : ξ ∈ ∪ν+k l=ν (24),(26) 2νθ Λ(2−ν) Wlo . . (131) Then ∆j = zj + tj[0, 1]d, tj that ≍ Z 2−ν. In addition, from (4) and (25) it follows g(x) ≍ Z 2νβgΨg(2−ν), v(x) ≍ Z 2νβvΨv(2−ν), x ∈ ∆j, j ∈ Jν. (132) ∇rϕν Let p 6 q. Take j ∈ Jν and set ϕν(x) = cνϕ(cid:16) x−zj g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) 2νβgΨg(2−ν)2ν( d = 1. Then cν (132) (132) p −r). Hence, ≍ Z (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kϕνkLq,v(Ω) ≍ Z cν · 2νβvΨv(2−ν) · 2− νd q ≍ Z 2ν(β−δ)Ψ(2−ν). tj (cid:17), with cν > 0 such that If β − δ > 0, then kϕνkLq,v(Ω) → ν→∞ ν−αρ(ν) → ν→∞ ∞. ∞. If β = δ and α < 0, then kϕνkLq,v(Ω) ≍ Z 45 Let p > q. First consider the case β > δ−θ(cid:16) 1 where cν > 0 is such that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) (card Jν)− 1 p , ∇rϕν q − 1 p(cid:17). Set ϕν(x) = cν Pj∈Jν (132) ϕ(cid:16) x−zj tj (cid:17), 2νβgΨg(2−ν)2ν( d p −r) · ≍ Z = 1. Then cν kϕνkLq,v(Ω) (132) ≍ Z cν · 2νβvΨv(2−ν) · 2− νd q (card Jν) 1 q ≍ Z 2ν(β−δ)Ψ(2−ν)(card Jν) 1 q − 1 p (131) & Z & 2ν(β−δ+θ( 1 q − 1 p ))Ψ(2−ν)(cid:0)Λ(2−ν)(cid:1) 1 p − 1 q . Therefore, kϕνkLq,v(Ω) → ν→∞ q − 1 Let β = δ − θ(cid:16) 1 ∞. p(cid:17), α < (1 − γ)(cid:16) 1 q − 1 p(cid:17). For s ∈ N denote Ns = {s + l(k + 1) : l ∈ Z+, l(k + 1) 6 s}. cνϕ(cid:16) x−zj tj (cid:17), where cν > 0 is such that = 1 and p , j ∈ Jν, ν ∈ Ns. Then (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p −r)(card Jν)− 1 p s− 1 p ∇rψs g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) (133) Then card Ns ≍ a,d s. Set ψs(x) = Pν∈Ns Pj∈Jν p (card Ns)− 1 = (card Jν)− 1 cν (132) ≍ Z 2νβgΨg(2−ν) · 2ν( d (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ∇rψs g (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(∆j) Hence, kψskLq,v(Ω) (132) ≍ Z Xν∈Ns 2νβvqΨq v(2−ν)cq ν · 2−νdcard Jν! 1 q (8),(131),(133) & Z ≍ Xν∈Ns REFERENCES 2νβqΨq(2−ν) · 2−νδq · 2νθ(1− q p )ν−γ(1− q p )[τ (ν)]−1+ q p s− q p! 1 q (8) ≍ Z ≍ s−αρ(s) · s( 1 q − 1 p)(1−γ)[τ (s)]− 1 q + 1 p → s→∞ ∞. [1] D.R. Adams, "Traces of potentials. II", Indiana Univ. Math. J., 22 (1972/73), 907 -- 918. [2] D.R. Adams, "A trace inequality for generalized potentials", Studia Math. 48 (1973), 99 -- 105. [3] K.F. Andersen, H.P. Heinig, "Weighted norm inequalities for certain integral operators", SIAM J. Math. Anal., 14 (1983), 834 -- 844. 46 [4] F. Antoci, "Some necessary and some sufficient conditions for the compactness of the embedding of weighted Sobolev spaces", Ricerche Mat. 52:1 (2003), 55 -- 71. [5] O.V. Besov, "On the compactness of embeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces on a domain with irregular boundary", Tr. Mat. Inst. im. V.A. Steklova, Ross. Akad. Nauk, 232 (2001), 72 -- 93 [Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 232 (2001), 66 -- 87]. "Sobolev's embedding theorem for a domain with irregular [6] O.V. Besov, boundary," Mat. Sb. 192:3 (2001), 3 -- 26 [Sb. Math. 192 (2001), 323 -- 346]. [7] O.V. Besov, "On the compactness of embeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces on a domain with an irregular boundary," Dokl. Akad. Nauk 376:6 (2001), 727 -- 732 [Dokl. Math. 63:1 (2001), 95 -- 100]. [8] O.V. Besov, "Integral estimates for differentiable functions on irregular domains," Mat. Sb. 201:12 (2010), 69 -- 82 [Sb. Math. 201 (2010), 1777 -- 1790]. [9] O.V. Besov, V.P. Il'in, S.M. Nikol'skii, Integral representations of functions, and imbedding theorems. "Nauka", Moscow, 1996. [Winston, Washington DC; Wiley, New York, 1979]. [10] M. Bricchi, "Existence and properties of h-sets", Georgian Mathematical Journal, 9:1 (2002), 13(cid:22)32. [11] M. Bricchi, "Compact embeddings between Besov spaces defined on h-sets", Funct. Approx. Comment. Math., 30 (2002), 7 -- 36. [12] A.M. Caetano, S. Lopes, "Spectral theory for the fractal Laplacian in the context of h-sets", Math. Nachr., 284:1 (2011), 5 -- 38. [13] D.E. Edmunds, H. Triebel, "Spectral theory for isotropic fractal drums", C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´er. I Math., 326 (1998), 1269 -- 1274. [14] D.E. Edmunds, H. Triebel, "Eigenfrequencies of isotropic fractal drums", Operator Theory: Advances and Applications, 110 (1999), 81 -- 102. [15] D.E. Edmunds, H. Triebel, Function spaces, entropy numbers, differential in Mathematics, 120 (1996). Cambridge operators. Cambridge Tracts University Press. [16] A. El Kolli, "n-i`eme ´epaisseur dans les espaces de Sobolev", J. Approx. Theory, 10 (1974), 268 -- 294. [17] W.D. Evans, D.J. Harris, "Fractals, trees and the Neumann Laplacian", Math. Ann., 296:3 (1993), 493 -- 527. [18] W.D. Evans, D.J. Harris, J. Lang, "Two-sided estimates for the approximation numbers of Hardy-type operators in L∞ and L1", Studia Math., 130:2 (1998), 171 -- 192. [19] W.D. Evans, D.J. Harris, J. Lang, "The approximation numbers of Hardy-type operators on trees", Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 83:2 (2001), 390 -- 418. [20] W.D. Evans, D.J. Harris, L. Pick, "Weighted Hardy and Poincar´e inequalities on trees", J. London Math. Soc., 52:2 (1995), 121 -- 136. 47 [21] V. Gol'dshtein, A. Ukhlov, "Weighted Sobolev spaces and embedding theorems", Trans. AMS, 361:7 (2009), 3829 -- 3850. [22] P. Gurka, B. Opic, "Continuous and compact imbeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces. I", Czech. Math. J. 38(113):4 (1988), 730 -- 744. [23] P. Gurka, B. Opic, "Continuous and compact imbeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces. II", Czech. Math. J. 39(114):1 (1989), 78 -- 94. [24] P. Gurka, B. Opic, "Continuous and compact imbeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces. III", Czech. Math. J. 41(116):2 (1991), 317 -- 341. [25] D.D. Haroske, I. Piotrowska, "Atomic decompositions of function spaces with Muckenhoupt weights and some relation to fractal analysis", Math. Nachr., 281:10 (2008), 1476 -- 1494. [26] H.P. Heinig, "Weighted norm inequalities for certain integral operators, II", Proc. AMS, 95 (1985), 387 -- 395. [27] Jain Pankaj, Bansal Bindu, Jain Pawan K., "Continuous and compact imbeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces", Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged), 66:3 -- 4 (2000), 665 -- 677. [28] Jain Pankaj, Bansal Bindu, Jain Pawan K., "Certain imbeddings of Sobolev spaces with power type weights", Indian J. Math., bf 44:3 (2002), 303 -- 321. [29] Jain Pankaj, Bansal Bindu, Jain Pawan K., "Certain imbeddings of weighted Sobolev spaces", Math. Ineq. Appl., 6:1 (2003), 105 -- 120. [30] J. Kadlec, A. Kufner, "Characterization of functions with zero traces by integrals width weight functions, I", Casopis. pest. mat., 91 (1966), 463 -- 471. [31] J. Kadlec, A. Kufner, "Characterization of functions with zero traces by integrals width weight functions, II", Casopis. pest. mat., 92 (1967), 16 -- 28. [32] L.D. Kudryavtsev, "Direct and inverse imbedding theorems. Applications to the solution of elliptic equations by variational methods", Tr. Mat. Inst. Steklova, 55 (1959), 3 -- 182 [Russian]. [33] L.D. Kudryavtsev and S.M. Nikol'skii, "Spaces of differentiable functions of several variables and imbedding theorems," in Analysis -- 3 (VINITI, Moscow, 1988), Itogi Nauki Tekh., Ser.: Sovrem. Probl. Mat., Fundam. Napravl. 26, pp. 5 -- 157; Engl. transl. in Analysis III (Springer, Berlin, 1991), Encycl. Math. Sci. 26, pp. 1 -- 140. [34] A. Kufner, Sobolevschen Raume mit "Einige Eigenschaften der Belegungsfunktionen", Czech. Math. J., 15 (90) (1965), 597 -- 620. [35] A. Kufner, "Imbedding theorems for general Sobolev weight spaces", Ann. Scuola Sup. Pisa, 23 (1969), 373 -- 386. [36] A. Kufner, Weighted Sobolev spaces. Teubner-Texte Math., 31. Leipzig: Teubner, 1980. [37] A. Kufner, B. Opic, "Remark on compactness of imbeddings in weighted spaces", Math. Nachr., 133 (1987), 63 -- 70. 48 [38] J. Lehrback, "Weighted Hardy inequalities beyond Lipschitz domains", arXiv:1209.0588v1. [39] G. Leoni, A first Course in Sobolev Spaces. Graduate studies in Mathematics, vol. 105. AMS, Providence, Rhode Island, 2009. [40] M.A. Lifshits, "Bounds for entropy numbers for some critical operators", Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 364:4 (2012), 1797 -- 1813. [41] M.A. Lifshits, W. Linde, "Compactness properties of weighted summation operators on trees", Studia Math., 202:1 (2011), 17 -- 47. [42] M.A. Lifshits, W. Linde, "Compactness properties of weighted summation operators on trees (cid:22) the critical case", Studia Math., 206:1 (2011), 75 -- 96. [43] P.I. Lizorkin and M. Otelbaev, "Imbedding and compactness theorems for spaces of Sobolev type with weights. I, II", Mat. Sb. 108: 3 (1979), 358 -- 377 [Math. USSR Sb. 36:3 (1980), 331 -- 349]; Mat. Sb. 112:1 (1980), 56 -- 85 [Math. USSR Sb. 40:1 (1981), 51- -- 77]. [44] V.G. Maz'ja [Maz'ya], Sobolev spaces (Leningrad. Univ., Leningrad, 1985; Springer, Berlin -- New York, 1985). [45] S.D. Moura, Function spaces of generalized smoothness. Dissertationes Math., 2001. 398:88 pp. [46] K. Naimark, M. Solomyak, "Geometry of Sobolev spaces on regular trees and the Hardy inequality", Russian J. Math. Phys., 8:3 (2001), 322 -- 335. [47] J. Necas, "Sur une m´ethode pour r´esoudre les equations aux d´eriv´ees partielles dy type elliptique, voisine de la varitionelle", Ann. Scuola Sup. Pisa, 16:4 (1962), 305 -- 326. [48] I. Piotrowska, "Traces on fractals of function spaces with Muckenhoupt weights", Funct. Approx. Comment. Math., 36 (2006), 95 -- 117. [49] I. Piotrowska, "Entropy and approximation numbers of embeddings between weighted Besov spaces", Function spaces VIII, 173 -- 185. Banach Center Publ., 79, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2008. [50] Yu.G. Reshetnyak, "Integral representations of differentiable functions in domains with a nonsmooth boundary", Sibirsk. Mat. Zh., 21:6 (1980), 108 -- 116 (in Russian). [51] Yu.G. Reshetnyak, "A remark on integral representations of differentiable functions of several variables", Sibirsk. Mat. Zh., 25:5 (1984), 198 -- 200 (in Russian). [52] S.L. Sobolev, "On a theorem of functional analysis", Mat. Sb., 4 (46):3 (1938), 471 -- 497 [Amer. Math. Soc. Transl., (2) 34 (1963), 39 -- 68.] [53] M. Solomyak, "On approximation of functions from Sobolev spaces on metric graphs", J. Approx. Theory, 121:2 (2003), 199 -- 219. [54] H. Triebel, "Interpolation properties of ε-entropy and widths. Geometric characteristics of function spaces of Sobolev -- Besov type", Mat. Sbornik, 98 (1975), 27 -- 41. 49 [55] H. Triebel, Interpolation theory. Function spaces. Differential operators (Dtsch. Verl. Wiss., Berlin, 1978; Mir, Moscow, 1980). [56] H. Triebel, Fractals and spectra. Birkhauser, Basel, 1997. [57] H. Triebel, Theory of function spaces III. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 2006. [58] D.E. Edmunds, W.D. Evans, Hardy Operators, Function Spaces and Embeddings. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004. [59] H. Triebel, "Approximation numbers in function spaces and the distribution of eigenvalues of some fractal elliptic operators", J. Approx. Theory, 129:1 (2004), 1 -- 27. [60] B.O. Turesson, Nonlinear potential theory and weighted Sobolev spaces. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1736. Springer, 2000. [61] A.A. Vasil'eva, "Widths of weighted Sobolev classes on a John domain", Proceedings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics, 280 (2013), 91 -- 119. [62] A.A. Vasil'eva, "Widths of weighted Sobolev classes on a John domain: strong singularity at a point" (submitted to Revista Matematica Complutense). [63] G.N. Yakovlev, "On a density of finite functions in weighted spaces", Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 170:4 (1966), 797 -- 798 [in Russian]. 50
1602.03982	1	1602	2016-02-12T08:39:41	Controlled K-frames and their invariance under Compact Perturbation	[ "math.FA" ]	K-frames were recently introduced by L. G\v{a}vruta in Hilbert spaces to study atomic systems with respect to bounded linear operator. Also controlled frames have been recently introduced by Balazs, Antoine and Grybos in Hilbert spaces to improve the numerical efficiency of interactive algorithms for inverting the frame operator. In this manuscript, the concept of controlled K-frames will be studied and the stability of Controlled K-frames under compact perturbation will be discussed.	math.FA	math	CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER COMPACT PERTURBATION A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 Abstract. K-frames were recently introduced by L. Gavruta in Hilbert spaces to study atomic systems with respect to bounded linear opera- tor. Also controlled frames have been recently introduced by Balazs, Antoine and Grybos in Hilbert spaces to improve the numerical effi- ciency of interactive algorithms for inverting the frame operator. In this manuscript, the concept of controlled K-frames will be studied and the stability of Controlled K-frames under compact perturbation will be discussed. 1. Introduction Frames in Hilbert spaces were first proposed by Duffin and Schaeffer to deal with nonharmonic Fourier series in 1952 [10] and widely studied from 1986 since the great work by Daubechies et al.[11]. Now frames play an im- portant role not only in the theoretics but also in many kinds of applications and have been widely applied in signal processing [14], sampling [12, 13], cod- ing and communications [18], filter bank theory [3], system modeling [9] and so on. For special applications many other types of frames were proposed, such as the fusion frames [5, 6] to deal with hierarchical data processing, g- frames [19] by Sun to deal with all existing frames as united object, oblique dual frames [12] by Elder to deal with sampling reconstructions, and etc. The notion of K-frames were recently introduced by L. Gavruta to study the atomic systems with respect to a bounded linear operator K in Hilbert spaces. K-frames are more general than ordinary frames in sense that the lower frame bound only holds for the elements in the range of the K, where K is a bounded linear operator in a separable Hilbert Space H. One of the newest generalization of frames is controlled frames. Controlled frames have been introduced recently to improve the numerical efficiency of interactive algorithms for inverting the frame operator on abstract Hilbert spaces [1], however they have been used earlier in [2] for spherical wavelets. This concept generalized for fusion frames in [16] and for g-frames in [17]. In this paper, the concept of controlled K-frame will be defined and it will be shown that any controlled K-frame is equivalent to a K-frame, finally we will discuss the stability of compact perturbation for controlled K-frames. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 42C40; Secondary 41A58, 47A58,. Key words and phrases. Bessel sequence, Controlled frame, Frame, K-frame, Perturbation. 1 2 A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 Throughout this paper H is a separable Hilbert space, B(H) is the family of all linear operators on H, GL(H) denotes the set of all bounded linear operators which have bounded inverses and K ∈ B(H). GL(H). Let GL+(H) be the set of all positive operators in GL(H). It is easy to see that if S, T ∈ GL(H), then T ∗, T −1 and ST are also in A bounded operator T ∈ B(H) is called positive (respectively, non- negative), if hT f, fi > 0 for all f 6= 0 (respectively, hT f, fi ≥ 0 for all f ). Every non-negative operator is clearly self-adjoint. If A ∈ B(H) is non-negative, then there exists a unique non-negative operator B such that B2 = A. Furthermore B commutes with every operator that commutes 2 . Let B+(H) be the set of positive with A. This will be denoted by B = A operators on H. For self-adjoint operators T1 and T2, the notation T1 ≤ T2 or T2 − T1 ≥ 0 means 1 hT1f, fi ≤ hT2f, fi ,∀f ∈ H. The following result is needed in the sequel, but straightforward to prove: Proposition 1.1. [8] Let T : H → H be a linear operator. Then the following condition are equivalent: (1) There exist m > 0 and M < ∞, such that mI ≤ T ≤ M I; (2) T is positive and there exist m > 0 and M < ∞, such that mkfk2 ≤ 1 kT 2 fk2 ≤ Mkfk2 for all f ∈ H; 2 ∈ GL(H); 1 (3) T is positive and T (4) There exists a self-adjoint operator A ∈ GL(H), such that A2 = T ; (5) T ∈ GL+(H); (6) There exist constants m > 0 and M < ∞ and operator (7) For every C ∈ GL+(H), there exist constants m > 0 and C ∈ GL+(H), such that m′C ≤ T ≤ M′C; M < ∞, such that m′C ≤ T ≤ M′C. It is well-known that not all bounded operators U on a Hilbert space H are invertible: an operator U needs to be injective and surjective in order to be invertible. For doing this, one can use right-inverse operator. The following lemma shows that if an operator U has closed range, there exists a right-inverse operator U† in the following sense: Lemma 1.2. [8] Let H1 and H2 be Hilbert spaces and suppose that U : H2 → H1 is a bounded operator with closed range RU . Then there exists a bounded operator U† : H1 → H2 for which U U†x = x ,∀x ∈ RU . The operator U† in the Lemma 1.2 is called the pseudo-inverse of U . In the literature, one will often see the pseudo-inverse of an operator U with closed range defined as the unique operator U† satisfying that NU † = R⊥U , RU † = N⊥U , U U†x = x ,∀x ∈ RU . CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER ... 3 A sequence {fi}i∈I in H is called a frame for H, if there exist constants 0 < A ≤ B < ∞ such that Akfk2 ≤ X i∈I hf, fii2 ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. If A = B, then {fi}i∈I is called a tight frame and if A = B = 1, then it is called a Parseval frame. A Bessel sequence {fi}i∈I is only required to fulfill the upper frame bound estimate but not necessarily the lower estimate. The frame operator Sf = Pi∈Ihf, fiifi associated with a frame {fi}i∈I is a bounded, invertible and positive operator on H. This provides the reconstruction formulas f = S−1Sf = X i∈I hf, fiiS−1fi = X i∈I hf, S−1fiifi,∀f ∈ H. Furthermore, AI ≤ S ≤ BI and B−1I ≤ S−1 ≤ A−1I. Definition 1.3. Let C ∈ GL(H). A frame controlled by the operator C or C-controlled frame is a family of vectors {fi}i∈I in H, such that there exist constants 0 < mC ≤ MC < ∞, verifying mCkfk2 ≤ X i∈I hf, fiihCfi, fi ≤ MCkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. The controlled frame operator S is defined by Sf = X i∈I hf, fiiCfi,∀f ∈ H. Because of the higher generality of K-frames, some properties of ordinary frames can not hold for K-frames, such as the frame operator of a K-frame is not an isomorphism. For more differences between K-frames and ordinary frames, we refer to [20]. Definition 1.4. Let K ∈ B(H). A sequence {fn}∞n=1 ⊂ H is called a K-frame for H, if there exist constants A, B > 0 such that (1.1) AkK∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 hf, fni2 ≤ Bkfk2, ∀f ∈ H. we call A and B lower and upper frame bound for K-frame {fn}∞n=1 ⊂ H, respectively if only the right inequality of the above inequality holds, {fn}∞n=1 ⊂ H is called a K-Bessel sequence. Remark 1.5. If K = I, then K-frame are just the ordinary frame. Remark 1.6. In the following, we will assume that R(K) is closed, since this can assure that the pseudo-inverse K† of K exists. Definition 1.7. [15] Let K ∈ B(H). A sequence {fn}∞n=1 ⊂ H is called an atomic system for K, if the following conditions are satisfied: (1) {fn}∞n=1 is a Bessel sequence. 4 A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 (2) For any x ∈ H, there exists ax = {an} ∈ l2 such that Kx = anfn ∞ X n=1 where kaxkl2 ≤ Ckxk, C is positive constant. Suppose that {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H. Obviously it is a Bessel se- quence, so we can define the following operator T : l2 → H, T a = ∞ X n=1 anfn, a = {an} ∈ l2, it follows that T ∗ : H → l2 T ∗f = {hf, fni}∞n=1,∀f ∈ H. Let S = T T ∗, we obtain Sf = ∞ X n=1 hf, fnifn ,∀f ∈ H. we call T, T ∗ and S the synthesis operator, analysis operator and frame operator for K-frame {fn}∞n=1, respectively. Theorem 1.8. Let {fn}∞n=1 be a Bessel sequence in H. Then {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H, if and only if there exists A > 0 such that S ≥ AKK∗, where S is the frame operator for {fn}∞n=1. Proof. The sequence {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H with frame bounds A, B and frame operator S if and only if AkK∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X K=1 (1.2) that is hf, fni2 = hSf, fi ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H, hAKK∗f, fi ≤ hSf, fi ≤ hBf, fi , ∀f ∈ H. so the conclusion holds. (cid:3) Remark 1.9. Frame operator of a K-frames is not invertible on H in gen- eral, but we can show that it is invertible on the subspace R(K) ⊂ H. In fact, since R(K) is closed, there exists a pseudo-inverse K† of K, such that KK†f = f , ∀f ∈ R(K) , namely KK†R(K) = IR(K), so we have I∗R(K) = (K†R(K))∗K∗. Hence for any f ∈ R(K), we obtain kfk = k(K†R(K))∗K∗fk ≤ kK†k.kK∗fk, that is, kK∗fk2 ≥ kK†k−2kfk2. Combined with (1.2) we have hSf, fi ≥ AkK∗fk2 ≥ AkK†k−2kfk2 , ∀f ∈ R(K). (1.3) CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER ... 5 So, from the definition of K-frame we have (1.4) AkK†k−2kfk ≤ kSfk ≤ Bkfk , ∀f ∈ R(K), which implies that S : R(K) → S(R(K)) is a homeomorphism, furthermore, we have B−1kfk ≤ kS−1fk ≤ A−1kK†k2kfk , ∀f ∈ S(R(K)). 2. Controlled K-frames Controlled frames for spherical wavelets were introduced in [2] to get a numerically more efficient approximation algorithm and the related theory. For general frames, it was developed in [1]. For getting a numerical solu- tion of a linear system of equations Ax = b, one can solve the system of equations P Ax = P b, where P is a suitable preconditioning matrix. It was the main motivation for introducing controlled frames in [2]. Controlled frames extended to g-frames in [17] and for fusion frames in [16]. In this section, the concept of controlled frames and controlled Bessel sequences will be extended to K-frames and it will be shown that controlled K-frames are equivalent K-frames. Definition 2.1. Let C ∈ GL+(H) (C > 0) and let CK = KC. The family {fn}∞n=1 is called C-controlled K-frame for H, if {fn}∞n=1 is a K-Bessel sequence and there exist constants A > 0 and B < ∞ such that hf, fnihf, Cfni ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. 2 K∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 1 AkC The constants A and B are called C-controlled K-frame bounds. If C = I, the C-controlled K-frame {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H with bounds A and B. If the second part of the above inequality holds, it called C-controlled K-Bessel sequence with bound B. The proof of the following lemmas is straightforward. Lemma 2.2. Let C > 0 and C ∈ GL+(H). The K-Bessel sequence {fn}∞n=1 is C-controlled K-Bessel sequence if and only if there exists constant B < ∞ such that ∞ X n=1 hf, fnihf, Cfni ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. Lemma 2.3. Let C ∈ GL+(H). A sequence {fn}∞n=1 ∈ H is a C-controlled Bessel sequence for H if and only if the operator LC : H → H , LC f = ∞ X n=1 hf, fniCfn, ∀f ∈ H. 6 A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 is well defined and there exists constant B < ∞ such that hf, fnihf, Cfni ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. ∞ X n=1 Remark 2.4. The operator LC : H → H , LC f = P∞n=1hf, fniCfn, f ∈ H is called the C-controlled Bessel sequence operator, also LC f = CSf . The following lemma characterizes C-controlled K-frames in term of their operators. Lemma 2.5. Let {fn}∞n=1 be a C-controlled K-frame in H, for C ∈ GL+(H). Then AIkC 1 2 K†k2 ≤ LC ≤ BI. Proof. Suppose that {fn}∞n=1 is a C-controlled K-frame with bounds A and B. Then AkC 1 2 K∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 hf, fnihf, Cfni ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. For f ∈ H i.e. AkC 1 2 K∗fk2 ≤ hf, LC fi ≤ Bkfk2 AkC 1 2 K∗k2I ≤ LC ≤ BI. (cid:3) The following proposition shows that for evaluation a family {fn}∞n=1 ⊂ H to be a controlled K-frame it is suffices to check just a simple operator inequality. Proposition 2.6. Let {fn}∞n=1 be a Bessel sequence in H and C ∈ GL+(H). Then {fn}∞n=1 is a C-controlled K-frame for H if and only if there exists A > 0 such that CS ≥ CAKK∗. Proof. The sequence {fn}∞n=1 is a controlled K-frame for H with frame bounds A, B and frame operator S, if and only if AkC 1 2 K∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 hf, fnihf, Cfni ≤ Bkfk2 , ∀f ∈ H. That is, hCAKK∗f, fi ≤ hCSf, fi ≤ hBf, fi, ∀f ∈ H. (cid:3) Proposition 2.7. Let {fn}∞n=1 be a C-controlled K-frame and C ∈ GL+(H). Then {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H. CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER ... 7 Proof. Suppose that {fn}∞n=1 is a controlled K-frame with bounds A and B. Then for any f ∈ H 2 K∗fk2 2 K∗fk2 hf, fnihf, C 0fni 1 1 2 C ≤ AkC ≤ kC AkK∗fk2 = AkC− 1 2k2kC− 1 2k2 ∞ X n=1 2k2 ∞ X n=1 = kC 1 1 hf, fni2. Hence for f ∈ H, AkC 1 2k−2kK∗fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 hf, fni2 On the other hand for every f ∈ H, ∞ X n=1 hf, fni2 = hf, Sfi 1 2 fi 1 1 = hf, C−1CSfi = h(C−1CS) = k(C−1CS) ≤ kC− 1 = kC− 1 ≤ kC− 1 2 f, (C−1CS) 2 fk2 2k2k(CS) 2k2hf, CSfi 2k2Bkfk2. 2 fk2 1 2k2. These inequalities yields that {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame with bounds AkC and BkC− 1 Proposition 2.8. Let C ∈ GL+(H) be a self adjoint and KC = CK, if {fn}∞n=1 is K-frame for H, then {fn}∞n=1 is a C-controlled K-frame for H. Proof. Suppose that {fn}∞n=1 be a K-frame with bounds A′ and B′. Then for all f ∈ H 2k−2 (cid:3) 1 A′kK∗fk2 ≤ hf, fni2 ≤ B′kfk2. ∞ X n=1 A′kC 1 2 K∗fk2 = A′kK∗C 1 2 fk2 ≤ ∞ X n=1 hC 1 2 f, = hC 1 2 f, fnihC ∞ X n=1 1 hfn, C 1 2 f, fni 1 2 fifni 1 2 f, C = hC 2 Sfi = hf, CSfi. 8 A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 1 2 K∗fk2 ≤ hf, CSfi for every f ∈ H. On the other hand for Hence A′kC every f ∈ H, hf, CSfi2 = hC∗f, Sfi2 = hCf, Sfi2 ≤ kCfk2kSfk2 ≤ kCk2kfk2Bkfk2. Hence A′kC 1 2 K∗fk2 ≤ hf, CSfi ≤ B′kCkkfk2. Therefore {fn}∞n=1 is a C-controlled K-frame with bounds A′ and B′kCk. (cid:3) 3. Compact Perturbation for Controlled K-frames One of the most important problems in the studying of frames and its applications specially on wavelet and Gabor systems is the invariance of these systems under perturbation. At the first, the problem of perturbation studied by Paley and Wiener for bases and then extended to frames.There are many versions of perturbation of frames in Hilbert spaces, Banach space, Hilbert C∗-modules and etc. In the last decade, several authors have gener- alized the Paley-Wiener perturbation theorem to the perturbation of frames in Hilbert spaces. The most general result of these was the following ob- tained by Casazza and Christensen [4]. Theorem 3.1. [4] Let {xj}j∈J be a frame for a Hilbert space H with frame bounds C and D. Assume that {yj}j∈J is a sequence of H and that there exist λ1, λ2, µ > 0 such that max{λ1 + µ√C , λ2} < 1. Suppose one of the following conditions holds for any finite scalar sequence {cj} and every x ∈ H. Then {yj}j∈J is also a frame for H. 1 1 (1) (Pj∈J hx, xj−yji2) µkxk (2) k Pn i=1 cj2) Moreover, if {xj}j∈J is a Riesz basis for H and {yj}j∈J satisfies (2), then 2 ≤ λ1(Pj∈J hx, xji2) i=1 cj xjk+λ2k Pn 2 +λ2(Pj∈J hx, yji2) i=1 cj yjk+µ(Pn i=1 cj(xj−yj)k ≤ λ1k Pn 1 2 + 1 2 {yj}j∈J is also a Riesz basis for H. Another type of the perturbation of frames is compact perturbation that appeared in the paper [7] by Christensen and Heil: Theorem 3.2. [7] Let {xj}j∈J be a frame for a Hilbert space H and {yj}j∈J be a sequence in H. If the operator K : ℓ2 → H, K{cj} = X cj(xj − yj) is well-defined compact operator, then {yj}j∈J is a frame sequence. The perturbation theorem investigated by X. Xiao, Y. Zhu, L. Gavruta to K-frames [20]. CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER ... 9 Theorem 3.3. [20] Suppose that {fn}∞n=1 is a K-frame for H, and α, β ∈ [0,∞], such that max{α + γ√A−1kK +k, β} < 1. If {gn}∞n=1 ⊂ H and satisfy ck(fk − gk)k ≤ αk ckfkk + βk ckgkk + γ( ck2) k 2 , n n n n 1 X k=1 X k=1 X k=1 X k=1 for any ci, i ∈ N, then {gn}∞n=1 is a PQ(R(K))K-frame for H, with frame bounds [√AkK +k−1(1 − α) − γ]2 , (1 + β)2kKk2 [√B(1 + α) + γ]2 , (1 − β)2 where PQ(R(K)) is a orthogonal projection operator for H to Q(R(K)), Q = U T ∗, T, U are synthesis operator for {fn}∞n=1 and {gn}∞n=1 respectively. Motivating the above theorems, we prove compact perturbation for con- trolled K-frames. Theorem 3.4. Let F = {fk}k∈I be a controlled K-frame for H, with op- If G = {gk}k∈I is a sequence in H erator S and frame bounds AF , BF . and E = TF − TG be a compact operator, where TG{ck}k∈I = Pk∈I ckgk for {ck}k∈I ∈ ℓ2, then G = {gk}k∈I is a controlled K-frame for H. Proof. Let {fk}k∈I be a controlled K-frame with bounds AF , BF , then kTFk2 ≤ BF . Let V = TF −E be an operator from l2(I) into H. Because TF and E are bounded, then operator V is bounded. Therefore kV k = kV ∗k. For any f ∈ H, V ∗f = T ∗f − E∗f = {hf, fki}k∈I − {hf, fk − gki}k∈I = {hf, fki}k∈I − {hf, fki − hf, gki}k∈I = {hf, gki}k∈I . V ({ck}k∈I ) = X k∈I ckgk , SG = V V ∗. hf, CSGfi = hf, CV V ∗fi = hC 2 V fk2 = kC 2k2kV fk2 = kC 1 1 = kC 1 2 V f, C 1 2 V fi 1 2k2k(TF − E)fk2 Therefore, Therefore, hf, CSGfi ≤ kTF − Ek2kfk2kC 1 2k2 ≤ (kTFk2 + 2kTFkkEk + kEk2)kfk2kC ≤ (BF + 2pBFkEk + kEk2)kfk2kC 2k2 = BF (1 + kEk√BF )2kfk2kC 2k2. 1 1 1 2k2 This inequality shows that {gk}k∈I is a K-Bessel sequence with bound BF (1 + kEk√BF )2kC 2k2. 1 10 A. RAHIMI1, SH. NAJAFZADEH2 AND M. NOURI3 In the next step, we prove that SG = V V ∗ is a surjective operator. We have, V V ∗ = (TF − E)(TF − E)∗ = (TF − E)(T ∗F − E∗) = TF T ∗F − TF E∗ − ET ∗F + EE∗ = SF + EE∗ − TF E∗ − ET ∗F s.t SF = TF T ∗F . Since E, TF and SF are compact operators, then (EE∗ − TF E∗ − ET ∗F )S−1 is a compact operator. Therefore (EE∗ − TF E∗− ET ∗F )S−1 F + I is a bounded operator with closed range. Thus, V V ∗ = EE∗ − TF E∗ − ET ∗F + SF is a bounded operator with closed range. Therefore V V ∗ is an operator on It is clear that V V ∗ is a injective. By lemma 1.2 it can span{gk}k∈I . be deduced that RV V ∗ = N†V V ∗ = span{gk}k∈I. Then SG is a surjective operator. Therefore G = {gk}k∈I is a Controlled K-frame for span{gk}k∈I . F (cid:3) References [1] P. Balazs, J. P. Antoine, A. Grybos, Wighted and Controlled Frames, Int. J. Wavelets Multiresolut. Inf. Process. 8(1) (2010) 109-132. [2] I. Bogdanova, P. Vandergheynst, J .P . Antoine, L. Jacques, M. Morvidone, Stereo- graphic wavelet frames on the sphere, Applied Comput. Harmon. Anal. (19) (2005) 223-252. [3] H. Bolcskei, F. Hlawatsch , H. G. Feichtinger,Frame- theoretic analysis of over- sam- pled filter banks, IEEE Trans. Signal process. 46 (1998) 3256-3268. [4] P. Casazza, O. Christensen, Perturbation of operators and applications to frame the- ory, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 3 (1997) 543557. [5] P. G. Casazza, G. Kutyniok, Frames of subspaces. Wavelets, frames and operator theory, College Park, MD,Contemp. Math., vol.345. American Mathematical Society, Providence,(2004) 87-113. [6] P.G. Casazza, G. Li .S. Kutyniok, Fusion frames and distributed processing, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.25 (2008) 114-132. [7] O. Christensen, C. Heil, Perturbation of Banach frames and atomic decompositions, Math. Nach. 185 (1997) 33-47. [8] O. Christensen, An introduction to frames and Riesz bases, Birkhauser, Boston 2003. [9] N. E. Duday Ward, J. R. Partington, A construction of rational wavelets and frames in Hardy-Sobolev space with applications to system modelling.SIAM.J.Control Op- tim.36 (1998) 654-679. [10] R.J. Duffin, A.C. Schaeffer, A class of nonharmonic Fourier series, Trans. Math. Soc.72 (1952) 341-366. [11] I. Daubechies, A. Grossmann, Y. Meyer, Painless non orthogonal expansions, J. Math. Phys. 27(1986) 1271-1283. [12] Y. C. Eldar, Sampling with arbitrary sampling and reconstruction spaces and oblique dual frame vectors, J. Fourier. Anal. Appl. 9(1) (2003) 77-96. [13] Y. C. Eldar, T. Werther, General framework for consistent sampling in Hilbert spaces, Int. J. walvelets Multi. Inf. Process. 3(3) (2005) 347-359. [14] P. J. S. G. Ferreira, Mathematics for multimedia signal processing II: Discrete fi- nite frames and signal reconstruction, In: Byrnes, J.s. (ed.) signals processing for multimedia, PP. 35-54.IOS press, Amsterdam (1999). [15] L. Gavruta, Frames for operators, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 32 (2012) 139-144. CONTROLLED K-FRAMES AND THEIR INVARIANCE UNDER ... 11 [16] A. Khosravi, K. Musazadeh, Controlled fusion frames, Meth. Func. Anal. Topol. Vol. 18 (2012), no. 3, 256265. [17] A. Rahimi, A. Fereydooni, Controlled G-Frames and Their G-Multipliers in Hilbert spaces , Analele Stiintifice ale Universitatii Ovidius Constanta, vol. 2(12), (2013), 223-236. [18] T. Strohmer, R. Jr. Heath, Grass manian frames with applications to coding and communications, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 14 (2003) 257- 275. [19] W. Sun, G-frames and g-Riesz bases, J. Math. Anal. 322 (2006) 437-452. [20] X. Xiao, Y. Zhu, L. Gavruta, Some Properties of K-Frames in Hilbert Spaces , Re- sults. Math. 63 (2013), 1243-1255. 1Department of Mathematics, University of Maragheh, Maragheh, Iran. E-mail address: [email protected] 2Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, Iran. E-mail address: [email protected] 3Department of Mathematics, Payame Noor University, Iran. E-mail address: [email protected]
1703.06441	1	1703	2017-03-19T14:17:14	The Hautus test for non-autonomous linear evolution equation	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper, we investigate the Hautus test for evolution equation with the operators depending on time.	math.FA	math	The Hautus test for non-autonomous linear evolution equation Duc-Trung Hoang Institute Mathematics of Bordeaux, France. [email protected] In this paper, we investigate the Hautus test for evolution equation with the Abstract operators depending on time. 1 Introduction Controllability and observability are basis concepts in system theory and control theory. They are important structural properties which have close relationships with the stability of state feedback controllers abd state observers. In this paper, we will study the controllability, the observabilty, the duality between these two concepts for the non autonomous linear system. These properties were studied well for the autonomous system. Let H be a Hilbert space. Considering U (t, s) the evolution family of two variables generating by the family of operators A(t): A(t) : D(A(t)) 7→ H. Let U be another Hilbert space and suppose C : H → U is a linear operator. We consider the system : x′(t) + A(t)x(t) = B(t)u(t) x(0) y(t) = x0 = Cx(t) (1.1)   For simplicity, we denote the above system as (A(t), B(t), C). We always assume that the family of operator A(t) is bounded from H 7→ H. The solution is defined as x(t) = U (t, 0)x0 +Z t 0 U (t, s)B(s)u(s)ds, t ≥ s Definition 1.1. A family {U (t, s)t,s} operators is called an evolution family if it satisfies the following conditions : (i) U (t, t)x = x for all t ≥ 0 and x ∈ H; (ii) U (t, s) = U (t, r).U (r, s) for all t ≥ r ≥ s ≥ 0 Such an evolution family is called continous if there exist M, ω > 0 such that (iii) kU (t, s)k ≤ M eω(t−s) (iv) U (t, s)x is jointly continuous with respect to t, s and x 1 Definition 1.2. The system (1.1) is said to be exactly controllable at time τ if for every x0, x1 in H, there exist u ∈ L2(0, τ ; U ) such that the solution satisfy x1 = x(τ ) Definition 1.3. The system (1.1) is said to be exactly null controllable at time τ if for every x0 in H, there exist u ∈ L2(0, τ ; U ) such that the solution satisfy x(τ ) = 0 Definition 1.4. The system (1.1) is said to be observable in [0, τ ] if the map O : H → L2(0, τ ; U ) : x0 → y(.) is injective. The definition express the fact that we can recover uniquely the initial state from a knowledge of the output y(.) in the time interval [0, τ ]. When the system is observable, we refer to (C, A(t)) as an observable pair. For one variable s fixed, A(s) generate a strongly continuous semigroup Ts(t). We assume that the domaine D(A(t)) is densed in H and independent of t. We consider the adjoint system z′(t) − A(t)∗z(t) = 0 = zτ z(τ ) = B(t)∗x(t) h(t) (1.2)   Russell and Weiss ([5]) showed that a necessary condition for exact observability of exponentially systems is the following Hautus test : There exits a constant m > 0 such that for every s ∈ C− and every x ∈ D(A). The Hautus test can be use for approximate observability of exponentially stable systems [3], for polynomially stable system [4], for exact observability of strongly stable Riesz-spectral systems with finite dimensional output spaces [5], and for exponentially stable C0−groups [6] k(sI − A)xk2 + ReskCxk2 ≥ Res2kxk2 where C− denotes the open left half plane. 2 Duality of controllability and observability Let A(t) be such that the uncontrolled initial value problem (cid:26) x′(t) + A(t)x(t) = 0 x(0) = x0 (2.1) admits a evolution (solution) family U (t, s). We observe that U (t, s + h) − U (t, s) = U (t, s + h)[I − U (s + h, s)] and so, dividing by h > 0 and letting h → 0+, d ds+ U (t, s) = −U (t, s)A(s) Under mild extra conditions, this derivative will exist in both directions. Now we take adjoints: d ds+hU (τ, s)∗zτ , xi = d ds+hzτ , U (τ, s)xi = hzτ ,−U (τ, s)A(s)xi = h−A(s)∗U (τ, s)∗zτ , xi. 2 This holds for all x, so we may drop duality pairing and obtain that z(t) := U (τ, t)∗zτ will solve the dual final time problem (cid:26) z′(t)−A(t)∗z(t) = 0 z(τ ) = zτ 2.1 Duality Now consider (cid:26) x′(t) + A(t)x(t) = B(t)u(t) = 0 x(0) (2.2) (2.3) and assume, that the map Ψτ : L2(0, τ ; U ) → H defined by u 7→ x(τ ) is continuous (i.e. that B(t)0≤t≤τ is an admissible family of control operators for the evolution equation). Assume further exact controllability, i.e. that for any xτ ∈ X, we can find some u ∈ L2(0, τ ; U ) such that the solution of the initial value problem (2.7) satisfies x(τ ) = xτ . Then Ψτ is bounded and surjective. Ψτ u = R τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s) ds and so (Ψ∗ τ x∗)(t) = B(t)∗U (τ, t)∗x∗. According to the "standard lemma", Ψτ is surjective iff Ψ∗ τ allows lower esti- mates, i.e. iff δkx∗k ≤ kB(t)∗U (τ, t)∗x∗kL2(0,τ ) slow solution "a la main" By the open mapping theorem we then have a constant C > 1 such that kukL2 ≤ Ckxτk. We can therefore simply let zτ = xτ in (2.2), and consider d dthx(t), z(t)i = hB(·)u(·) − A(·)x(·), z(t)i + hx(·), A(·)∗z(·)i = hB(·)u(·), z(t)i. Integrating from 0 to τ (recall x(0) = 0), one obtains 0 hu(s), B(s)∗z(s)i ds Now, by Cauchy-Schwarz and the hypothesis kukL2 ≤ Ckzτk H = kzτk2 kxτk2 H = Z τ kzτk2 H ≤ kukL2kB(·)∗z(·)kL2(0,τ ;H) ≤ CkzτkH(cid:16)Z τ 0 kB(s)∗z(s)k2 H ds(cid:17). (2.4) Dividing by kzτk, this gives the "observability estimate" of the adjoint problem (2.2), that is, the estimate kzτkH ≤ C(cid:16)Z τ 0 kB(s)∗z(s)k2 H ds(cid:17). (2.5) For the converse direction we assume (2.6), i.e. exact observability of the dual system. We aim to obtain surjectivity of Ψτ . Theorem 2.1. The system is exactly controllable on 0 ≤ τ < ∞ if and only if there exists C > 0 such that for all x ∈ H, we have kxτkH ≤ C(cid:16)Z τ 0 kB(s)∗U (τ, s)xk2 H ds(cid:17) (2.6) 3 For the converse, we define the controllability Gramian as Wt = Ψτ Ψ∗ τ = R t 0 U (t, s)B(s)B(s)∗U (t, s)∗ds be the operator depending on t. Now assuming that kzτkH ≤ C(cid:16)R τ H ds(cid:17). We have 0 kB(s)∗z(s)k2 kzτkH ≤ C(cid:16)Z τ 0 kB(s)∗U (τ, s)∗zτk2 H ds(cid:17) Or kzτk2 H ≤ C 2kΨ∗ τ zτk2 = C 2hΨ∗ τ zτ , Ψ∗ τ zτi = C 2hΨτ Ψ∗ τ zτ , zτi = hWτ zτ , zτi Hence, we conclude that Wτ is self-adjoint, injective and coercive operator. Then Wτ is boundedly invertible. Hence, Im(Wτ ) = D(Wτ )−1 = H). This implies Im(Ψτ ) = H because H = Im(Wτ ) ⊂ Im(Ψτ ). This indicates the controllability of the initial system 2.2 Necessary condition If we take G(t, s) = U (t, s)B(s)B(s)∗U (t, s)∗ be the function of two variables s, t with 0 ≤ s ≤ t. Then d dt G(t, s) = A(t)G(t) + G(t)A(t)∗ Now if we take the integral from 0 to t with respected to the variable s, we have: The controllability W (t) is the unique solution of the equation d dt W (t) = A(t)W (t) + W (t)A(t)∗ + B(t)B(t)∗ Noting that the operator Wt = ΨtΨ∗ t . We assume that Wτ is not invertible. Since, Wτ ≥ 0, there exists the sequence zn ∈ H such that kznk = 1 and hzn, Wτ zni → 0. It follows that Z t 0 aukU (τ, s)∗B(s)∗znk2dt → 0 We also have a noting that the control function u(t) and the out put function satisfy the following Z τ 0 hu(t), y(t)i = 0 2.3 Null controllability The system (cid:26) x′(t) + A(t)x(t) = B(t)u(t) = 0 x(0) (2.7) is exactly null controllable on [0, τ ] if for all x0, we can find u ∈ L2(0, τ ; U ) such that 0 = U (τ, 0)x0 +Z τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds 4 Ran(U (τ, s)) ⊂ Ran(u → Z τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds) We define the operator S : x0 → U (τ, s)x0 and T : u → R τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds. Lemma 2.2. ( see [6]) Suppose that Z1, Z2, Z3 are Hilbert spaces, the operators F ∈ L(Z1, Z3) and G ∈ L(Z2, Z3). Then the following statements are equivalent: (a) Ran(F ) ⊂ Ran(G) (b) There exists a c > 0 such that kF ∗zkZ1 ≤ ckG∗zkZ2 for all z ∈ Z3 (c) There exist an operator U ∈ L(Z1, Z2) such that F = GU We will assume that A(t)A(s)−1 are uniformly bounded for s, t ∈ [0,∞), A(∞) and limt→∞k(A(t) − A(∞))A(0)−1k = 0. Then by [1] (Theorem 8.1, chapter 5.8) there exists constant M ≥ 0 and v > 0 such that kU (t, s)k ≤ M e−v(t−s) Hence the operator S : x0 → U (τ, s)x0 is a bounded operator from H → H Lemma 2.3. The operator T : u → R τ from L2([0, τ ]; U ) → H Proof. We have: 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds is bounded linear map 0 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds 0 kU (τ, s)B(s)u(s)kH ds T (u) = Z τ ≤ Z τ ≤ Z τ ≤ M e−vτkB(t)kL(U,H)Z τ ≤ M e−vτkB(t)kL(U,H)(Z τ ≤ M e−vτkB(t)kL(U,H) M e−v(τ −s)kB(s)kL(U,H)ku(s)kH ds evsku(s)kH ds e2vsdsZ τ e2vτ − 1 v 0 1 2 ( 0 H )1/2 0 ku(s)k2 )1/2ku(s)kL2([0,τ ];U ) Since S, T are bounded operator, using the lemma there exists a constant c > 0 such that By computation: T ∗x = B∗(s)U (τ, s)∗x∗ and S∗x = U (τ, s)∗x∗. Then we obtain kS∗xk ≤ ckT ∗xk the inequality: kB∗(s)U (τ, s)∗x∗k ≥ kU (τ, s)∗x∗k 5 2.4 Minimum cost controls We have xτ = U (τ, 0)x0 +R τ u = B(s)∗U (τ, s)∗W −1 τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)u(s)ds. It is easy to check that the control We will indicate that u takes the L2 minimum-norm. Suppoing that both u and (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0) satisfies the equation. u satisfy the equation. Then we have Z τ 0 U (τ, s)B(s)(u(s) − u(s))ds = 0 For all η ∈ H, we have hZ τ 0 If we choose η = W −1 τ U (τ, s)B(s)(u(s) − u(s))ds, ηi = 0 (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0), then This impiles kuk2 L2 ≥ kuk2 L2 . In fact, hu(s) − u(s), u(s)i = 0 kuk2 0 hu, uids 0 hB(s)∗U (τ, s)∗W −1 L2 = Z τ = Z τ = hWτ (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0, (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0i = kW ∗ τ (u)k τ (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0), B(s)∗U (τ, s)∗W −1 τ (xτ − U (τ, 0)x0)ids 3 The Hautus test Observe that d/ds(cid:16)e−λsU (t, s)x(cid:17) = −λe−λsU (t, s)x − e−λsU (t, s)A(s)x and so, integrating on [0, t], −CU (t, s)x = e−λtCx +Z t 0 CU (t, s)(λ + A(s))xe−λs ds If we have exact observability, i.e. δkxk ≤ kCU (t, 0)xkL2(0,τ ), this gives δkxk ≤ kCxk/p2ℜ(λ) + kt 7→ Z t 0 CU (t, s)(λ + A(s))xe−λs dskL2 6 However, for g ∈ L2 of norm one, using admissibility (!) of C ∗ for U (t, s)∗, hZ t Z τ 0 Z t 0 kCU (t, s)(λ + A(s))xe−λskds.gi = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 hCU (t, s)(λ + A(s))xe−λs, g(t)i ds dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 h(λ + A(s))x e−λs,Z τ Z τ = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U (t, s)∗C ∗g(t)i dt ds(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ M Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s))x e−λskHkgkL2(s,τ ) ds ≤ M Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s))x e−λskH ds s we obtain the Hautus condition, δkxk ≤ kCxk√2ℜ(λ) + M Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s))xe−λskH ds Re(λ) > 0, x ∈ \s D(A(s)) as a necessry condition for exact observability. Remark: in case A(s) = A this collapses down to the Hautus test of Russell-Weiss. Remark 3.1. If A(s) ∈ B(H) for all s, we do not know whether we have "IFF" as in the autonomous case. 3.0.1 The sufficient condition We consider the case when C(s) = C. Supposing that C is admissible operator and satisfy the inequality : δkxk ≤ kCxk√ℜ(λ) ≤ kCxk√ℜ(λ) +Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s))xe−λskH ds Reλ Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s))Reλxe−λskH ds + 1 Here we assume Reλ > η > 0, and uniformly stable. If Reλ < w, we use k(λ + A(s))−1xk ≤ C Reλkxk even it is still true for C = 0. We have the following theorem Theorem 3.2. (Alan's) Let D : Ω → L(X, Y ) be an operator-valued function ana- lytic in an open set Ω ⊂ C. If D(λ) is left (resp.right) invertible for every λ ∈ Ωm then there is an analytic operator function E : Ω → L(Y, X) such that E(λ)D(λ) = IX Proof. see (?) Lemma 3.3. If we have R b that λ(E) > 0 and kf (s)xk ≥ δ b−akxk a kf (s)xkds ≥ δkxk. There exist a subset E ⊂ [a, b] such 7 Proof. By using contradiction, it is easy to verify. Due to the lemma, there exist a non-null set E ⊂ [0, τ ] such that for all λ ∈ C and s ∈ E, we have δ 2kxk ≤ Cx √Reλ + 1 Reλk(A(s) + λ)e−λsxk We have the map x 7→ (Cx, (A(s) + λ)e−λsx) is left-invertible for 0 ≤ s ≤ ∞ and λ ∈ C. Hence there exists the analytic functions Us(λ) and Vs(λ) satisfying the equation Vs(λ)(A(s) + λ)e−λsx + Vs(λ)Cx = I Vs(λ)e−λsx + Vs(λ)C(A(s) + λ)−1 = (A(s) + λ)−1 Intergating both sides we get 0 + 1 2πi Zλ=r Xk Vs(λ)C(A(s) + λ)−1dλ = I Vk(s)CA(s)k = I Then the map x 7→ (CA(s)kx)k≥0 is left-invertible. Now we suppose that the system is not exactly observablem, then there exits a sequence znn≥1 such that kznk = 1 and hzn, Qzni → 0 . Theorem 3.4. (Vitali's theorem) Let fn(z) be a sequence of functions, each regular in a region D, let fn(z) ≤ M for every n and z in D, and let fn(z) tend to a limit as n → ∞ at a set of points having a limit point inside D. Then fn(z) tends uniformly to a limit in any region bounded by a contour interior to D, the limit therefore being an analytic function of z. fn(λ) = C(t)U (λ, s)zn kfn(.)kL∞ ≤ M on an open set D. We have fn(t) → 0 on the set with accu- mulation points. By the Vitali's theoremm fn is uniformly convergent to f on a compact subset of D. Hypothese 3.5. The evolution family U (λ, s) is holomorphic. If A(t) is bounded uniformly, could we infer that U (λ, s) is holomorphic. Then there exists a subsequence of functions fnkl such that fnkl → 0 uniformly on a compact subset of D. The contour integral of fn at the point λ = ω is defined as 1 2πi ZD fn(λ) (λ − ω) = fn(λ) 8 Differentiating fn for n times at the point λ = ω gives 1 2πi ZD fn(λ) (λ − ω)n+1 = ( d dλ )nfn(λ)λ=ω = CA(t)nU (λ, s)xnλ=ω = CA(ω)nU (ω, s)xn Since fn(λ) → 0 uniformly, CA(ω)nU (ω, s)xn → 0 uniformly, we have WkCA(s)U (ω, s)xn = xn Xk Theorem 3.6. If C is admissible and A is boundedm then C is bounded. Proof. First noting that, if f is C 1 and α-Holder function for α > 0 then we have f (0) = 1 σ Z σ 0 f (s)ds −Z σ 0 In fact, Let σ > ǫ > 0. We have 1 t2 (Z t 0 f (t) − f (s)ds)dtf orallσ > 0 (3.1) Z σ ǫ 1 t2 (cid:18)Z t 0 ǫ ǫ ǫ ǫ 0 0 t t 1 f (t) f (t) f (t) − f (s) ds(cid:19) dt = Z σ = Z σ = Z σ = Z σ = Z σ σ Z σ σ Z σ t2 (cid:18)tf (t) −Z t dt −Z σ ǫ Z t dt −Z σ 0 Z σ f (s)Z σ dt −Z σ dt −Z σ f (s) ·(cid:18) ǫ Z ǫ f (s) ds − f (s) ds −Z σ ǫ Z ǫ f (s) ds = ⇐⇒ f (t) f (t) ǫ 1 = 1 1 1 t t 0 0 0 0 0 0 ǫ f (s) ds(cid:19) dt f (s) t2 ds dt f (s) t2 dt ds max{s,ǫ} dt t2 ds max{s,ǫ} 1 max{s, ǫ} − f (s) ds 1 σ(cid:19) ds 1 t2 (cid:18)Z t 0 f (t) − f (s) ds(cid:19) dt Now let ǫ → 0, we get the result. Now if we take f (t) = CU (τ, t)x then Cx = 0 1 1 σ Z σ σ Z σ CU (τ, t)xdt +Z σ CU (τ, t)xdt +Z σ (Z t t2 (Z t (Z r t2 (Z t 1 1 0 0 s 0 0 0 0 = CU (τ, r)A(r)xdr)ds)dt CU (τ, r)A(r)xds)dr)dt By triangle inequality, kCxk ≤ 1 √τ (Z τ 0 kCU (τ, t)xk2) 1 2 +Z σ 0 1 t2 Z t 0 rkCU (τ, r)A(r)xkdrdt 9 By Cauchy-Swart inequality and use the fact that C be a admissible operator, we have rkCU (τ, r)A(r)xkdr ≤ (Z t r2dr) 1 2 (Z t 0 kCU (τ, r)A(r)xdrk) 1 2 Z t 0 So, we have 0 1 √τ Z t ≤ 0 kCU (τ, r)A(r)xdrk) 1 2 ≤ Mτ√τ kxk kCxk ≤ ( Mτ√τ + 2Mτ√τ √3 kAkkxk) Hence, C is a bounded operator. 4 Hautus test for the case of fix parameter Lemma 4.1. If C is an admissible operator, i.e Z τ 0 kCT (t)xk2dt ≤ Mkxk2 for all x ∈ H. Then we have Z τ 0 kT (t)∗C ∗ykH dtk ≤ M√τkyk for all y ∈ L2(0, τ ; H) Proof. We have (cid:12)(cid:12)Z τ 0 hCT (t)x, yiU dt(cid:12)(cid:12) = (cid:12)(cid:12)Z T 0 hx, T (t)∗C ∗yiU dt(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)hx,Z τ ≤(Z τ 0 kCT (t)xk2 U ) √Mkxk√τkykU ≤ T (t)∗C ∗yiH dt(cid:12)(cid:12) 2√τykU 0 1 Then kZ τ 0 T (t)∗C ∗ydtkH = supxh ,Z τ 0 x kxk T (t)∗C ∗ydtiHdt ≤ √M√τkykU Theorem 4.2. Suppose the operators A(t) is analytics in L(H). Suppose that for all s ∈ [0, τ ] : (C, e−tA(s))t≥0 is exactly observable. Then we have (C, U (t, .)) is also exactly observable. 10 Supposing that (C, (A(s) + λ)2e−tA(s))t≥0 is exactly observable. We denote D(t) = (A(s) + λ)2e−tA(s). We obtain the inequality m2kxk ≤ 2kCx.e−λtk2 L2 +Z τ 0 k(λ + (A(s) + λ)2e−A(s)s)e−(λ)sxkds By triangle inequality m2kxk ≤ 2kCx.e−λtk2 ≤ 2 kCx.e−λtk2 ≤ 2 kCx.e−λtk2 ≤ 2 kCx.e−λtk2 0 k(λe−λs)xkL∞ +Z τ L2 +Z τ L2 + (1 − e−τ λ)kxk + k(A + λ)xkH Z τ L2 + (1 − e−τ λ)kxk + k(A + λ)xkH (1 − e−τ (A+λ) L2 + (1 − e−τ λ)kxk + k(A + λ)xkH (1 − e−τ (A+λ) 0 k(A + λ)2e−(A+λ)sxkH ds 0 k(A + λ)e−(A+λ)sxkH ds Therefore, we can refer that: (m2 + e−τ λ − 1)kxk ≤ 2kCx.e−λtk2 L2 + k(A + λ)xkH The admissibility of observable operator C means that for some τ > 0, there exists M ≥ 0 such that for any x ∈ D(A(s)), Z τ 0 kCT (t)xk2dt ≤ M.kxk2 Since (C, e−tA(s))t≥0 is exactly observable, 0 m2kxk ≤ kCT (t)xk =kC(e−λtx +Z t =2kCx.e−λtk2 =2kCx.e−λtk2 =2kCx.e−λtk2 ≤2kCx.e−λtk2 ≤2kCx.e−λtk2 T (t − s)(λ + A)e−λsds)k2 L2 0 L2)(H) L2 + 2kt 7→ Z t L2 + supkhkL2 ≤1Z τ L2 + supkhkL2 ≤1Z τ L2 +Z τ L2 +Z τ CT (t − s)(λ + A)xe−λsdsk2 0 Z t 0 h(λ + A)xe−λs,Z τ 0 k(λ + A(s)x)ke−Re(λ)s.kZ τ 0 k(λ + A(s)x)ke−Re(λ)s.Mkhk2 0 h(λ + A)xe−λs, T (t − s)∗C ∗h(t)dti T (t − s)∗C ∗h(t)dti T (t − s)∗C ∗h(t)kH L s s Finally, we obtain m2 2 + M 2kxk2 ≤ Re(λ)kCxk2 + For all λm there exists δλ positive such that 2 1 2 (Reλ)2k(λ + A)xk2 δλkxk2 ≤ kCxk2 + k(λ + A)xk2 Moreover, the functions Cx and (λ + A)x) are holormophic over the whole complex plane. So that, the map x 7→ (Cx, (λ + A)x) is left-invertible and entire. 11 Theorem 4.3. (Alan's) Let D : Ω → L(X, Y ) be an operator-valued function analytic in an open set Ω ⊂ C. If D(λ) is left (resp.right) invertible for every λ ∈ Ωm then there is an analytic operator function E : Ω → L(Y, X) such that E(λ)D(λ) = IX Hence there exists the analytic functions Us(λ) and Vs(λ) satisfying the equation Us(λ)(A + λ)x + Vs(λ)Cx = x Us(λ)x + Vs(λ)C(A + λ)−1x = (A + λ)−1x We represent Vs(λ) = P+∞ 1 0 + Vs(λ)C(A + λ)−1dλ = I k=0 λjVk(s). Intergating both sides we get 2πi Zλ=r Xk Vk(s)CAk = I Then the map x 7→ (CAkx)k≥0 is left-invertible. exist m > 0 such that Now we suppose that the system is not exactly observable, i.e there does not Z τ 0 kU (τ, t)∗Czk2dt ≥ mkzk2 for all z ∈ H, then there exists a sequence znn≥1 such that kznk = 1 and hzn, Qzni → 0 where Q = R +∞ 0 C(s)U (τ, s)U ∗(τ, s)C ∗(s)ds Theorem 4.4. (Vitali's theorem) Let fn(z) be a sequence of functions, each regular in a region D, let fn(z) ≤ M for every n and z in D, and let fn(z) tend to a limit as n → ∞ at a set of points having a limit point inside D. Then fn(z) tends uniformly to a limit in any region bounded by a contour interior to D, the limit therefore being an analytic function of z. fn(λ) = C(t)U (λ, s)zn kfn(.)kL∞ ≤ M on an open set D. We have fn(t) → 0 on the set with accu- mulation points. By the Vitali's theoremm fn is uniformly convergent to f on a compact subset of D. Hypothese 4.5. The evolution family U (λ, s) is holomorphic. If A(t) is bounded uniformly, could we infer that U (λ, s) is holomorphic. Then there exists a subsequence of functions fnk1 such that fnkl → 0 uniformly on a compact subset of D. The contour integral of fn at the point λ = ω is defined as 12 1 2πi ZD fn(λ) (λ − ω) = fn(λ) Differentiating fn for n times at the point λ = ω gives 1 2πi ZD fn(λ) (λ − ω)k+1 = ( d dλ )nfn(λ)λ=ω = CA(t)nU (λ, s)xnλ=ω = CA(ω)nU (ω, s)xn fn(λ) → 0 uniformly on δD. So that kCAkU (ω, s)xnk = k 1 2πi ZδD fn(λ) (λ − ω)k+1k ≤ kZδD maxDfn(λ) (λ − ω)k+1 dλk ≤ αn. 2πr rk+1 = αn 2π rn where αn → 0 when n → +∞, and r > 1. Therefore, CAkU (ω, s)xn → 0 when n → +∞. Using the estimation Pk Vk(s)CAk = I VkCAkU (ω, s)xn = U (ω, s)xn Xk We finally obtain kU (ω, s)xnk → 0 when n → +∞. That is a contradiction because we already assumed that kxnk = 1 for all n. As a result, the system (C, A) is exact observable. References [1] A. Pazy, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Differen- tial Equations, ESAIM, 1983. [2] B. Jacob, R. Schnaubelt, Observability of polynomially stable systems, Control Lett., 56 (2007), pp. 277-284. [3] B. Jacob, H. Zwart, observability of diagonal systems with a finite-dimensional output operator, Control Lett., 43 (2001), pp. 101-109. [4] B. Jacob, H. Zwart, On the Hautus test for exponentially stable C0-groups, SIAM J.Control Optim, vol. 48, No.3, pp 1275-1288. [5] D. L. Russell, G. Weiss, A general necessary condition for exact observability, SIAM J. Control Optim, 32 (1), 123, 1994. [6] M. Tucsnak, G. Weiss, Observation and Control for Operator Semigroups, Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 2009. 13
1801.04915	2	1801	2018-01-21T20:25:44	Phillips symmetric operators and their extensions	[ "math.FA", "math-ph", "math-ph" ]	Let $S$ be a symmetric operator with equal defect numbers and let $\mathfrak{U}$ be a set of unitary operators in a Hilbert space $\mathfrak{H}$. The operator $S$ is called $\mathfrak{U}$-invariant if $US=SU$ for all $U\in\mathfrak{U}$. Phillips \cite{PH} constructed an example of $\mathfrak{U}$-invariant symmetric operator $S$ which has no $\mathfrak{U}$-invariant self-adjoint extensions. It was discovered that such symmetric operator has a constant characteristic function \cite{KO}. For this reason, each symmetric operator $S$ with constant characteristic function is called a \emph{Phillips symmetric operator}.	math.FA	math	PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS SERGII KUZHEL,1 ∗ and LEONID NIZHNIK2 Abstract. Let S be a symmetric operator with equal defect numbers and let U be a set of unitary operators in a Hilbert space H. The operator S is called U-invariant if U S = SU for all U ∈ U. Phillips [21] constructed an example of U-invariant symmetric operator S which has no U-invariant self-adjoint extensions. It was discovered that such symmetric operator has a constant characteristic function [13]. For this reason, each symmetric operator S with constant characteristic function is called a Phillips symmetric operator. The paper is devoted to the investigation of self-adjoint (and, more generally, proper) extensions of a Phillips symmetric operator. Such extensions differ from those that are commonly studied in the literature and they have a lot of curious properties. In particular, proper extensions of a Phillips symmetric operator that have real spectrum are similar to each other. 1. Introduction Let S be a symmetric operator with equal defect numbers and let U be a family of unitary operators in a Hilbert space H such that the inclusion U ∈ U implies U∗ ∈ U. The operator S is called U-invariant if S commutes with all U ∈ U. Does there exist at least one U-invariant self-adjoint extension of S? The answer is definitely affirmative if S is assumed to be semibounded and the Friedrichs extension of S gives the required example. In general case of non-semibounded operators, R. Phillips constructed a sym- metric operator S and a family U of unitary operators commuting with S such that the U-invariant S has no U-invariant self-adjoint extensions [21, p. 382]. Precisely, the mentioned symmetric operator S acts in the Hilbert space l2(Z) and it is defined as the Cayley transform S = i(V + I)(V − 1)−1 of the isometric right shift operator V {xn}n∈Z = {xn+1}n∈Z, D(V ) = {{xn}n∈Z ∈ l2(Z) : x0 = 0}. The family U consists of unitary operators Uθ{xn}n∈Z = {yn}n∈Z (θ = 1), where yn = θxn (n ∈ N) and yn = xn (n ∈ Z \ N). The operator S is U-invariant but there are no U-invariant self-adjoint extensions of S. It was discovered [13] that the characteristic function of the symmetric oper- ator constructed in the Phillips work is a constant in the upper half-plane C+. This fact can be used for the general definition of Phillips symmetric operators. Namely, we will say that a symmetric operator S with equal defect numbers is 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47B25; Secondary 47A10. Key words and phrases. symmetric operator, characteristic function, wandering subspace, bilateral shift, Lebesgue spectrum. 1 2 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK a Phillips symmetric operator (PSO) if its characteristic function is an operator- constant on C+. The concept of characteristic function of a symmetric operator was firstly in- troduced by Shtraus [23] and, further, substantially developed by Kochubei [14] on the base of boundary triplets technique [9]. Section 2 contains all necessary results about characteristic functions which are used in the paper. The present paper is devoted to the investigation of PSO as well as theirs self- adjoint (and, more generally, proper1 extensions). Such self-adjoint extensions differ from those that are commonly studied in the literature [1] and they have a lot of curious properties. Our original definition of PSO deals with the concept of characteristic function. In many cases, an explicit calculation of a characteristic function is technically complicated. For this reason, in Section 3, we establish equivalent descriptions of PSO (Theorems 3.1, 3.4, Corollary 3.6) which can be employed as independent definitions of PSO. These results lead to the conclusion that each simple2 PSO coincides with orthogonal sum of simple maximal symmetric operators having the same nonzero defect numbers in upper C+ and lower C − half planes. Such kind of decomposition means that every simple PSO S is unitary equivalent to the momentum operator with one point interaction S = i d dx , D(S) = {u ∈ W 1 2 (R, N) : u(0) = 0} acting in the Hilbert space L2(R, N), where the dimension of the auxiliary Hilbert space N coincides with the defect number of S. Section 4 is devoted to proper extensions of PSO. The main result (Theorem 4.2) states that all proper extensions of a PSO S with real spectrum are similar to each other. In fact we can say more: each proper extension with real spectrum can be interpreted as self-adjoint extension of S for a special choice of inner product equivalent to the initial one. Some properties of PSO with defect numbers < 1, 1 > were established in [4]. In particular, analogues of Theorems 3.4, 4.2, and Corollary 4.3 were proved. In Section 5, PSO are determined as the restrictions of a given self-adjoint op- erator A. According to Theorem 5.2, Phillips symmetric operators which can be obtained in this way are in one-to-one correspondence with the wandering sub- spaces L of the Cayley transform U of A. This means that the set of restrictions of A contains PSO only in the case where A has a reducing subspace H0 such that A0 = A ↾D(A)∩H0 is a self-adjoint operator in H0 with Lebesgue spectrum on R. The existence of a simple PSO is equivalent to the fact that A has Lebesgue spectrum on R (Corollary 5.3). In Section 6, examples of PSO are considered. We establish a useful (in our opinion) characterization of wavelets as functions from the defect subspace N−i of the specially chosen PSO (Proposition 6.1). 1an extension A of a symmetric operator S is called proper if S ⊂ A ⊂ S ∗ 2a symmetric operator is called simple if its restriction to any nontrivial reducing subspace is not a self-adjoint operator PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 3 Results of Sections 4-6 show that one-point interaction of the momentum op- erator: i d dx + αδ(x − y) leads to self-adjoint operators with Lebesgue spectrum which are unitary equivalent to each other. This means that one should consider more complicated perturbations of the momentum operator for the construction of self-adjoint operators with non-trivial spectral properties. In this way, self- adjoint momentum operators acting in two intervals were studied in [12, 20]. The momentum operators defined on oriented metric graphs were investigated in [8]. General nonlocal point interactions for first order differential operators were introduced and studied in [3, 18]. In Section 7, we continue investigations of [3] and to focus on special classes of perturbations which can be characterized as one point interaction defined by the nonlocal potential γ ∈ L2(R). 2. Characteristic functions of symmetric operators Let A be a linear operator acting in a Hilbert space H. Its domain is denoted D(A), while A ↾D stands for the restriction of A onto a set D. Here and in the following we denote by C+ (C I. Let S be a closed symmetric densely defined operator with equal defect numbers acting in a separable Hilbert space H with inner product (·,·) linear in the first argument. We denote by Nλ = ker(S∗ − λI) the defect subspaces of S and consider the −) the open upper (resp. lower) half plane. linear spaces According to the von Neumann formulas (see, e.g., [15, 22]) each proper exten- Mλ = Nλ +Nλ, λ ∈ C \ R. sion A of S is uniquely determined by the choice of a subspace M ⊂ Mλ: Let us set M = Nλ in (2.1) and denote by A = S∗ ↾D(A), D(A) = D(S) +M, (2.1) (2.2) Aλ = S∗ ↾D(Aλ), D(Aλ) = D(S) +Nλ, λ ∈ C \ R the corresponding proper extensions of S. The operators sign(Im λ)Aλ are max- imal dissipative3 and A∗λ = Aλ. The resolvent set of every maximal dissipative operator contains C −. For this reason, the operator-function Sh(λ) = (Aλ − iI)(Aλ + iI)−1 ↾Ni: Ni → N−i, λ ∈ C+ (2.3) is well-defined and it coincides with the characteristic function of symmetric op- erator S defined by A. Shtraus [23]. Another (equivalent) definition of Sh(·) in [23] is based on the relation D(Aλ) = D(S) +Nλ = D(S) +(I − Sh(λ))Ni, λ ∈ C+, (2.4) which allows one to determine uniquely Sh(·). The explicit construction of Sh(·) deals with the calculation of Nλ that, some- times, is technically complicated. This inconvenience was overcame in [14] with the use of boundary triplet technique. We recall [15, 19] that a triplet (H, Γ−, Γ+), 3An operator A is called dissipative if Im(Af, f ) ≥ 0 for all f ∈ D(A) and maximal dissipa- tive if there are no dissipative extensions of A. 4 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK where H is an auxiliary Hilbert space and Γ± are linear mappings of D(S∗) into H, is called a boundary triplet of S∗ if (S∗f, g) − (f, S∗g) = i[(Γ+f, Γ+g)H − (Γ−f, Γ−g)H], f, g ∈ D(S∗) (2.5) holds and the map (Γ−, Γ+) : D(S∗) → H ⊕ H is surjective. of operators Aλ in (2.2) admit the presentation Let a boundary triplet (H, Γ−, Γ+) be given. Then the domains of definition D(Aλ) =(cid:26)f ∈ D(S∗) : Θ(λ)Γ+f = Γ−f, λ ∈ C+ Γ+f = Θ(λ)Γ−f, λ ∈ C − (cid:27) (2.6) where Θ(·) is an operator in H. The operator-valued function Θ(·) defined on C \ R is called the characteristic function of S associated with boundary triplet (H, Γ−, Γ+). It follows from the relation A∗λ = Aλ and (2.5) that Θ∗(λ) = Θ(λ). The explicit form of characteristic function depends on the choice of a boundary triplet. However, in any case, Θ(·) is a holomorphic operator-valued function whose values are strong contractions in H (i.e., kΘ(λ)k < 1) [14]. The characteristic function determines a simple symmetric operator up to uni- tary equivalence. Namely, the following result holds: Theorem 2.1 ([14]). Simple symmetric operators S1 and S2 are unitary equiva- lent if and only if some of their characteristic functions coincide. The Shtraus characteristic function Sh(·) defined in (2.3) coincides (up to the multiplication by unitary operator) with Θ(·) for special choice of boundary triplet. Precisely, the simplest (inspired by the von Neumann formulas) boundary triplets (Nµ, Γ−, Γ+) of S∗ can be constructed as follows Γ−f =p2Im µV fµ, Γ+f =p2Im µfµ, f = u + fµ + fµ ∈ D(S∗), (2.7) where µ ∈ C+ and V : Nµ → Nµ is an arbitrary unitary mapping. Assume that µ = i. Then, the characteristic function Θ(·) associated with the boundary triplet (Ni, Γ−, Γ+) coincides with the function −V Sh(·) on C+. Remark 2.2. There are various approaches to the definition of boundary triplets. For instance, [9, 22], a triplet (H, Γ0, Γ1) where Γ0, Γ1 are linear mappings of D(S∗) into H, is called a boundary triplet of S∗ if the Green's identity f, g ∈ D(S∗) (S∗f, g) − (f, S∗g) = (Γ1f, Γ0g)H − (Γ0f, Γ1g)H, The operators Γ± in (2.5) and Γi are related as follows Γ± = 1√2 holds and the map (Γ0, Γ1) : D(S∗) → H ⊕ H is surjective. (Γ1±iΓ0) and, obviously, the definitions of boundary triplets (H, Γ−, Γ+) and (H, Γ0, Γ1) are equivalent. II. The characteristic function Θ(·) admits a natural interpretation in the Krein space setting (see [2, 5] for the basic theory of Krein spaces and terminology). To explain this point, we fix a boundary triplet (H, Γ−, Γ+) and rewrite (2.5) as: (S∗f, g) − (f, S∗g) = i[Ψf, Ψg], (2.8) PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 5 (2.9) (2.10) (2.11) where maps D(S∗) into the Krein space (H, [·,·]) with the indefinite inner product Ψ =(cid:20)Γ+ Γ−(cid:21) : D(S∗) → H =(cid:20)H H(cid:21) , x =(cid:20)x0 x1(cid:21) , y =(cid:20)y0 y1(cid:21) ∈ H. [x, y] = (x0, y0) − (x1, y1), It follows from the definition of boundary triplets that the mapping Ψ : D(S∗) → In view of (2.10), the fundamental decomposition of the Krein space (H, [·,·]) H is surjective and ker Ψ = D(S). coincides with H = H+ ⊕ H−, H+ =(cid:20)H0(cid:21) , H− =(cid:20) 0 H(cid:21) , where H+ = Ψ ker Γ− and H− = Ψ ker Γ+ are respectively, maximal uniformly positive and negative subspaces with respect to the indefinite inner product [·,·]. By virtue of (2.1), each proper extension A of S is completely determined by a subspace L = ΨD(A) = Ψ(D(S) +M) = ΨM of H. In other words, there is a one-to-one correspondence between subspaces of H and proper extensions of S. In particular, proper extensions Aλ in (2.2) are determined by the subspaces Lλ = ΨD(Aλ), which are maximal uniformly positive (λ ∈ C+) and maximal uniformly negative (λ ∈ C Taking (2.6) and (2.9) into account, we arrive at the conclusion that the maxi- mal uniformly positive subspace Lλ is decomposed with respect to the fundamen- tal decomposition (2.11): −) in (H, [·,·]), see [11]. Lλ = ΨD(Aλ) =(cid:26)(cid:20) Γ+f ΘΓ+f(cid:21) : f ∈ D(Aλ)(cid:27) = {h+ + eΘ(λ)h+ : h+ ∈ H+}, λ ∈ C+. (2.12) where eΘ(·) : H+ → H− acts as follows: eΘ(λ)h+ = eΘ(λ)(cid:20)h 0(cid:21) =(cid:20) 0 Θ(λ)h(cid:21) , This means that eΘ(λ) is the angular operator of the maximal uniformly positive subspace Lλ with respect to the maximal uniformly positive subspace H+ of the fundamental decomposition (2.11) (see [5] for the concept of angular operators). Self-adjoint extensions A of S correspond to hypermaximal neutral subspaces L = ΨD(A) of the Krein space (H, [·,·]). Each hypermaximal neutral subspace is determined uniquely by a unitary mapping between subspaces H+ and H− of the fundamental decomposition (2.11). This fact leads to the conclusion that each self-adjoint extension A of S can be described as A = S∗ ↾D(A), D(A) = {f ∈ D(S∗) : TΓ+f = Γ−f}, where T is a unitary operator in H. III. The explicit form of characteristic function depends on the choice of bound- ary triplet. Let Θi(·) (i = 1, 2) be characteristic functions associated with bound- ary triplets (Hi, Γi +). Since the dimensions of the auxiliary Hilbert spaces Hi − , Γi 6 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK coincide with the defect number of S, without loss of generality, we may assume that H1 = H2 = H. It is easy to see that the operator K : H → H defined by the formula K(cid:20)Γ1 +f Γ1 − f(cid:21) =(cid:20)Γ2 +f Γ2 − f(cid:21) , f ∈ D(S∗). is surjective in H and, moreover, K is a unitary operator in the Krein space (H, [·,·]), i.e. [Kx, Ky] = [x, y], x, y ∈ H (the latter relation follows from (2.8) - (2.10)). Each unitary operator K in (H, [·,·]) determines the so-called interspher- ical linear fractional transformation [5, Chapter III, section 3] ΦK(Z) = (K21 + K22Z)(K11 + K12Z)−1, K21 K22(cid:21) , K =(cid:20)K11 K12 where Kij are operator components of decomposition of K with respect to (2.11) and a bounded linear operator Z maps H+ into H−. The interspherical trans- formation ΦK(Z) is well defined for all Z : H+ → H− with kZk ≤ 1 (i.e., 0 ∈ ρ(K11 + K12Z) ) and kΦK(Z)k ≤ 1. It is known [14, 15] that λ ∈ C+, where eΘi(·) : H+ → H− are defined similarly to (2.12). eΘ2(λ) = ΦK(eΘ1(λ)), 3. Phillips symmetric operator (2.13) We say that a symmetric operator with equal nonzero defect numbers is a Phillips symmetric operator (PSO) if its characteristic function Θ(·) is an operator- constant on C+. By virtue of (2.13), this definition does not depend on the choice of boundary triplet. However, in many cases, it is not easy to use it (because one should to calculate the characteristic function). For this reason a series of statements which can be used as (equivalent) definitions of PSO are presented below. Theorem 3.1. A symmetric operator S with equal defect numbers is a Phillips symmetric operator if and only if Nλ ⊂ D(S) +Nµ, for all λ, µ ∈ C+. (3.1) Proof. If S is a PSO, then its characteristic function Θ(·) associated with the boundary triplet (Ni, Γ−, Γ+) determined by (2.7) has to be a constant. There- fore, the Shtraus characteristic function Sh(λ) coincides with an operator U : Ni → N−i for all λ ∈ C+. In particular, Sh(i) = U. By virtue of (2.4) with λ = i, D(S) +Ni = D(S) +(I − U)Ni that is possible only for the case U = 0. Hence, Sh(λ) ≡ 0 and (2.4) implies that (3.2) Let us assume that there exists fi ∈ Ni and µ ∈ C+ such that fi = v + fµ + fµ, where v ∈ D(S) and fµ ∈ Nµ is non-zero. The last equality can be transformed Nλ ⊂ D(S) +Ni, ∀λ ∈ C+. PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 7 to efi =ev + fµ with the use of (3.2). However, the obtained relation is impossible because Im (S∗efi, efi) = kefik2 > 0 and, simultaneously, Im (S∗efi, efi) = Im (S∗(ev + fµ),ev + fµ) = Im (S∗fµ, fµ) = −(Im µ)kfµk2 < 0. Therefore, fi = v + fµ and Ni ⊂ D(S) +Nµ for all µ ∈ C. The obtained inequality and (3.2) justify (3.1). Conversely, if (3.1) holds, then, due to (2.4), D(S) +(I − Sh(λ))Ni ⊂ D(S) +Ni that is possible only for Sh(λ) ≡ 0. Remark 3.2. The inclusion (3.1) and its dual counterpart in C (cid:3) Nν ⊂ D(S) +Nξ, for all ν, ξ ∈ C −. (3.3) are equivalent. Indeed, (3.1) means that the maximal dissipative operators Aλ in (2.2) do not depend on the choice of λ ∈ C+, i.e., Aλ ≡ A+. Therefore, theirs adjoint A∗λ = A∗µ = Aν = Aξ = A∗+ (ν = λ, ξ = µ) also do not depend on ν, ξ ∈ C Corollary 3.3. Simple Phillips symmetric operators with the same defect num- bers are unitary equivalent. −. This fact justifies (3.3). −: Proof. Let S be a PSO with defect numbers < m, m >. It follows from the proof of Theorem 3.1 that the Shtraus characteristic function Sh(·) of S coincides with the zero operator. Therefore, the characteristic function of S calculated in terms of boundary triplet (Ni, Γ−, Γ+) (see (2.7)) is also zero operator acting in the auxiliary space with the dimension m. Applying now theorem 2.1 for the case of simple Phillips symmetric operators with the same defect numbers, we complete the proof. (cid:3) −. Theorem 3.4. A symmetric operator S with equal defect numbers is a Phillips symmetric operator if and only if its defect subspaces Nλ and Nν are mutually orthogonal for any λ ∈ C+ and ν ∈ C Proof. Let S be a PSO and let λ, µ ∈ C+, λ 6= µ. By virtue of (3.1), fλ = u + fµ, where fz ∈ Nz and u ∈ D(S). Therefore, 0 = (S∗ − λI)fλ = (S − λI)u + (µ − λ)fµ. (3.4) The obtained relation means that Nµ ⊂ R(S − λI) and, hence Nµ ⊥ Nλ. To prove the orthogonality of Nµ and Nµ we use again (3.4) in order to rewrite fλ = u + fµ as follows: fλ = (λ− µ)(S− λI)−1fµ + fµ. Let fµ be fixed and λ → µ. Then fλ → fµ due to the last formula for fλ. Then, (fµ, fµ) = lim λ→µ (fλ, fµ) = 0, ∀fµ ∈ Nµ, fµ ∈ Nµ. Conversely, let Nλ ⊥ Nν for any λ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C −. Assume now that the relation (3.1) is not true for some µ ∈ C+. Then there exists fλ ∈ Nλ such that fλ = u + fµ + fµ, where fµ 6= 0. Then (λ − µ)fλ = (S∗ − µI)fλ = (S − µI)u + (µ − µ)fµ. Due to our assumption Nλ ⊥ Nµ (ν = µ). Therefore, for any γµ ∈ Nµ, 0 = (λ − µ)(fλ, γµ) = (u, (S∗ − µI)γµ) + (µ − µ)(fµ, γµ) = (µ − µ)(fµ, γµ). 8 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK That is possible only for fµ = 0. Therefore, the defect subspaces of S satisfy (3.1) and S is a Phillips symmetric operator. (cid:3) Remark 3.5. Theorem 3.4 holds true if the weaker condition of orthogonality Nλ ⊥ N−i will be used instead of Nλ ⊥ Nν. Indeed, since the inequalities (3.1) and (3.2) are equivalent (see the proof of Theorem 3.1), it suffices to verify that Nλ ⊥ N−i implies (3.2). The required implication is obtained by repeating the end part of the proof of Theorem 3.4 with µ = i. Corollary 3.6. A symmetric operator S in H with equal defect numbers < m, m > is a Phillips symmetric operator if and only if the Hilbert space H can be decomposed into the orthogonal sum H = H1 ⊕ H2 ⊕ H3 of Hilbert spaces Hj leaving S invariant and such that S = S1 ⊕ S2 ⊕ S3, Sj = S ↾Hj , (3.5) where S1 and S2 are simple maximal symmetric operators in H1 and H2 with defect numbers < m, 0 > and < 0, m >, respectively and S3 is a self-adjoint operator in H3. Proof. If S has the decomposition (3.5), then its defect subspaces Nλ (λ ∈ C+) coincide with the defect subspaces Nλ(S1) of the operator S1 (since Nλ(S2) = {0} due to the defect numbers < 0, m > of S2) and therefore, Nλ ⊂ H1. Similarly, the defect numbers < m, 0 > of S1 mean that Nν = Nν(S2) ⊂ H2 for all ν ∈ C −. Therefore, Nλ ⊥ Nν and S is a Phillips symmetric operator due to Theorem 3.4. Conversely, each symmetric operator S with equal defect numbers is reduced by the decomposition H = Hα ⊕ H3, R(S − µI), (3.6) H3 = \∀µ∈C−∪C+ where H3 is the maximal invariant subspace for S on which the operator S3 = S ↾H3 is self-adjoint, while the subspace Hα coincides with the closed linear span of all ker(S∗− µI) and the restriction Sα = S ↾Hα gives rise to a simple symmetric operator in Hα with defect numbers < m, m > [10, p.9]. Assume now that S is a PSO, then its simple counterpart Sα is also PSO and Nµ = ker(S∗ − µI) = Nµ(Sα) = ker(S∗α − µI) for all µ ∈ C − ∪ C+. According to Theorem 3.4, Nλ(Sα) ⊥ Nν(Sα) (λ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C −). Therefore, we can decompose Hα = H1 ⊕ H2, where H1 and H2 coincide with the closed linear spans of defect subspaces {Nµ}µ∈C+ and defect subspaces {Nν}ν∈C−, respectively. To complete the proof we should verify that Sα = S1 ⊕ S2, where Sj = Sα ↾Hj (j = 1, 2) are maximal symmetric operators in Hj with defect numbers < m, 0 > and < 0, m >, respectively. To that end we consider a simple symmetric operator S = i d dx , D(S) = {u ∈ W 1 2 (R, N) : u(0) = 0} (3.7) acting in the Hilbert space L2(R, N), where N is an auxiliary Hilbert space with the dimension m. It is easy to see that the defect subspaces Nµ, Nν (µ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C − ) are formed, respectively, by the functions χR−(x)e−iµxn, χR+(x)e−iνxn, (3.8) PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 9 where n runs the Hilbert space N and χI(x) is the characteristic function of the interval I. Therefore, the defect numbers of S is < m, m > and S is a Phillips symmetric operator (since Nµ and Nν are mutually orthogonal). By Corollary 3.3, the symmetric operator Sα in Hα is unitary equivalent to the symmetric operator S acting in L2(R, N). For this reason, it sufficient to establish the decomposition Sα = S1 ⊕ S2 for the case where Sα = S and Hα = L2(R, N). Taking (3.8) into account, we decide that H1 = L2(R −, N) and H2 = L2(R+, N). Moreover, S = S1 ⊕ S2, where S1 = i d −, N) : u(0) = 0} is a maximal symmetric operator in L2(R −, N) with defect numbers < m, 0 > while, S2 = i d 2 (R+, N) : u(0) = 0} is maximal symmetric in L2(R+, N) with defect numbers < 0, m >. (cid:3) dx , D(S1) = {u ∈ W 1 dx , D(S2) = {u ∈ W 1 2 (R Remark 3.7. It follows from the proof of Corollary 3.6 that each simple PSO S with defect numbers < m, m > is unitary equivalent to the symmetric operator S defined by (3.7). 4. Proper extensions of a Phillips symmetric operator It follows from (3.7) and Remark 3.7 that the spectrum of a simple PSO S is continuous and it coincides with R. Furthermore, ker(S∗ − λI) = {0} for λ ∈ R. Therefore, each proper extension A of a simple PSO has a continuous spectrum on R without embedding eigenvalues. The lack of condition of being simple for a PSO means that the spectra of the corresponding proper extensions coincides with R but real point spectrum may appear due to a possible self-adjoint part S3 in (3.5). Proposition 4.1. The spectrum σ(A) of a proper extension A of a Phillips sym- metric operator S coincides with one of the following sets: (i) σ(A) = R; (ii) σ(A) = C (iii) σ(A) = C. − ∪ R or σ(A) = R ∪ C+; Proof. Let us suppose that a proper extension A has a complex point λ0 ∈ ρ(A). Without loss of generality we may assume that λ0 ∈ C −. Then, the domain of A admits the presentation D(A) = {f = u + uλ0 + Φuλ0 : ∀u ∈ D(S), ∀uλ0 ∈ Nλ0}, where Φ : Nλ0 → Nλ0 is a bounded operator defined on Nλ0. The obtained expression can be rewritten in terms of the boundary triplet (2.7) with µ = λ0: where T = V Φ is a bounded operator in the auxiliary Hilbert space Nµ. D(A) = {f ∈ D(S∗) : TΓ+f = Γ−f}, (4.1) By virtue of [15, Theorem 4.2] (see also [14, Theorem 3]), λ ∈ σ(A) ⇐⇒ 0 ∈ σ(Θ(λ) − T), λ ∈ σ(A) ⇐⇒ 0 ∈ σ(I − Θ(λ)T), λ ∈ C+, −, λ ∈ C where Θ(·) is the characteristic function of S associated with the boundary triplet (Nµ, Γ−, Γ+). Since S is PSO, the characteristic function Θ(·) is a constant on C+. 10 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK Therefore, λ ∈ σ(A) ⇐⇒ 0 ∈ σ(Θ − T), where Θ(λ) = Θ for all λ ∈ C+. The obtained relation means that either C+ belongs to σ(A) or C+ ⊂ ρ(A). Further, due to the assumption above, there is a resolvent point λ0 ∈ C − of A. Therefore 0 ∈ ρ(I − Θ∗T) and C − ⊂ ρ(A). Summing up, the spectrum σ(A) corresponds to the cases (i) or (ii) in dependence of either 0 ∈ ρ(Θ − T) or 0 ∈ σ(Θ − T). The case λ0 ∈ C+ ∩ ρ(A) is considered in the same manner. (cid:3) Theorem 4.2. Proper extensions of a Phillips symmetric operator with real spec- tra are similar to each other. Proof. By virtue of Corollaries 3.3, 3.6, it is sufficient to consider proper exten- sions of the simple PSO S determined by (3.7). In this case, S∗f = i df dx , D(S∗) = W 1 2 (R \ {0}, N) and the defect subspaces Nµ, Nµ (µ ∈ C+) are formed, respectively, by the functions χR−(x)e−iµxn and χR+(x)e−iµxn, where n runs the auxiliary Hilbert space N. Let us choose the unitary mapping V : Nµ → Nµ in the definition of boundary triplet (2.7) as V χR+(x)e−iµxn = χR−(x)e−iµxn and consider the unitary mapping W between Nµ and N as follows: W χR−(x)e−iµxn = n . p2(Im µ) Then the modified boundary triplet (W Nµ, W Γ−, W Γ+) of the boundary triplet (2.7) takes the form (N, Γ1 − +), where , Γ1 f = f (0+), Γ1 Γ1 − +f = f (0−), f ∈ D(S∗). If a proper extension A of S has real spectrum, then its domain of definition is determined by the formula (4.1), where T is a bounded operator in Nµ with bounded inverse. This means that A = S∗ ↾D(A), D(A) = {f ∈ D(S∗) : T f (0−) = f (0+)}, where T = W TW −1 is a bounded operator in N with bounded inverse. (4.2) Let F be a bounded operator with bounded inverse in N. Then, the operator UF f =(cid:26) F f (x), x > 0 f (x), x < 0 , f ∈ L2(R, N) preserves these properties as an operator acting in L2(R, N) and U−1 F = UF −1. Furthermore, UF : D(S∗) → D(S∗) and UF S∗ = S∗UF . These relations and (4.2) lead to the conclusion that UF AT f = UF S∗f = S∗UF f = AF T UF f, where AT denotes the proper extension A in (4.2). f ∈ D(AT ), (4.3) Let Aj be proper extensions of S with σ(Aj) = R. Then they are described in (4.2) by bounded operators Tj with 0 ∈ ρ(Tj) (Aj ≡ ATj ). Due to (4.3), AT1 = U−1 F AT2UF , with F = T2T −1 1 . Therefore, Aj are similar to each other. (4.4) (cid:3) PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 11 Corollary 4.3. Self-adjoint extensions of a Phillips symmetric operator S are unitary equivalent to each other. Precisely, there exists a collection of unitary operators U = {Uξ}ξ∈I (I is the set of indices) with the properties ∀ξ ∈ I Uξ ∈ T ⇐⇒ U∗ξ ∈ T, UξS = SUξ, and such that every pair of self-adjoint extensions A1, A2 of S satisfy the relation UξA1 = A2Uξ (4.5) for some ξ ∈ I. Proof. All self-adjoint extensions of the symmetric operator S are uniquely dis- tinguished in (4.2) by the set of unitary operators T acting in N (see Section 2). Therefore, the operators UT defined above are unitary operators in L2(R, N) and (4.4) can be rewritten as (4.5) where Ai = ATi are self-adjoint extensions of S and ξ = T2T −1 is unitary operator in L2(R, N). 1 It follows from the definition of UT that the set of U = {Uξ}ξ, where ξ runs the set I of unitary operators in N satisfies the conditions of Corollary 4.3. Therefore, the proof is complete for the simple PSO S defined by (3.7). This result is extended to an arbitrary simple PSO S with the use of Corollary 3.3. The required set U = {Uξ}ξ∈I for the general case of a Phillips symmetric operator is obtained on the base of previously constructed (for simple operators) set by the addition of the identity operator I3 acting in the subspace H3 (see (3.5)) corresponding to the self-adjoint part of S. (cid:3) Remark 4.4. It follows from the construction of U = {Uξ}ξ∈I in Corollary 4.3 that the symmetric operator S is U-invariant. However, there are no U-invariant self-adjoint extensions of S. Firstly, an example of such kind was constructed by Phillips [21]. Corollary 4.5. Each self-adjoint extension of a simple PSO has Lebesgue spec- trum on R. Proof. In view of Corollary 3.3, a simple PSO is unitary equivalent to the sym- metric operator S in (3.7). The momentum operator A = i d dx , D(A) = W 1 2 (R, N) (4.6) is a self-adjoint extension of S in L2(R, N) and it has Lebesgue spectrum on R. Applying now Theorem 4.2 we complete the proof. (cid:3) 5. Phillips symmetric operators as the restriction of self-adjoint ones Lemma 5.1. Let A be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space H. Each closed densely defined symmetric operator that can be determined via certain restriction of A is specified by the formula SL = A ↾D(SL), where L is a linear subspace of H such that L ∩ D(A) = {0}. D(SL) = {u ∈ D(A) : ((A − iI)u, γ) = 0, ∀γ ∈ L}, (5.1) 12 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK Proof. If S is a closed symmetric densely defined restriction of A, then S = SL, where L = H ⊖ R(S − iI). Conversely, let SL be defined by (5.1). Obviously, SL is a closed symmetric operator and, for any u ∈ D(SL) and p ∈ H, (u, p) = ((SL − iI)u, (A + iI)−1p) = ((A − iI)u, (A + iI)−1p). The obtained relation means that SL is nondensely defined ⇐⇒ (A + iI)−1p ∈ L ⇐⇒ L ∩ D(A) 6= {0}. Therefore, the condition L ∩ D(A) = {0} guarantees that SL is densely defined. (cid:3) The symmetric operator SL in (5.1) turns out to be a PSO under certain choice of L. To specify the required conditions, we consider the unitary operator U = (A + iI)(A − iI)−1, (5.2) which is the Cayley transform of A and recall that a subspace L is called a wandering subspace of U if U nL ⊥ L for any n ∈ N. Theorem 5.2. The following statements are equivalent: (A = i(U + I)(U − I)−1) (i) the operator SL defined by (5.1) is a Phillips symmetric operator; (ii) the subspace L is a wandering subspace of the unitary operator U. Proof. (ii) ⇒ (i). Let L be wandering for U. First of all we should check that L∩ D(A) = {0}. Indeed, for all f ∈ L, (U nf, f ) = 0 and, hence R 2π 0 einλd(Eλf, f ) = 0, where Eλ is the spectral function of U. By the uniqueness theorem for the Fourier-Stieltjes series, the last equality means that (Eλf, f ) = λ 2πkfk2. It follows from (5.2) that A = iZ 2π eiλ + 1 eiλ − 1 with the domain D(A) = {f ∈ H : R 2π f ∈ L, 0 0 cot(λ/2)dEλ dEλ =Z 2π 0 cot2(λ/2)d(Eλf, f ) < ∞}. In the case of 2π Z 2π Z 2π cot2(λ/2)d(Eλf, f ) = kfk2 0 0 cot2(λ/2)dλ = ∞. Therefore, L ∩ D(A) = {0} and the operator SL is densely defined. order to describe other defect subspaces Nα of SL we consider the operator It follows from (5.1) that the defect subspace N−i of SL coincides with L. In Tα = (A + iI)(A − αI)−1, − ∪ C+. The formula Nα = TαL is verified directly with the use of (5.1). the obtained expression for Tα can be rewritten as Using (5.2) we get Tα = 2U[(1+iα)U +(1−iα)I]−1. In particular, if α = λ ∈ C+ α ∈ C Tλ = 2U 1 − iλ [I − tU]−1 = 2U 1 − iλ ∞Xn=0 tnU n, t = iλ + 1 iλ − 1 (5.3) since ktUk = t < 1. Since U nL ⊥ L for all n ∈ N, the relation (5.3) yields that TλL ⊥ L for λ ∈ C+. Therefore, Nλ ⊥ N−i. Due to Remark 3.5 and Theorem 3.4, the operator SL is PSO. The implication (ii) ⇒ (i) is proved. PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 13 (i) ⇒ (ii). If SL is a PSO, then the decomposition (3.5) and (5.1) imply that L is a subspace of H1 ⊕ H2. Therefore, it is sufficient to assume that SL is a simple symmetric operator. Another important fact is that we can consider arbitrary self-adjoint extension of SL in (5.1). Indeed, let A1 be a self-adjoint extension of SL such that A1 6= A. Then, due to Corollary 4.3, there exists a unitary operator Uξ such that UξS = SUξ and UξA = A1Uξ. Hence, the domain D(SL) can be described as D(SL) = {v ∈ D(A1) : ((A1 − iI)v, g) = 0, ∀g ∈ L1 = UξL}. Since the Cayley transformations U and U1 of the operators A and A1 are related as UξU = U1Uξ, the existence of a wandering subspace L for U implies that L1 = UξL will be a wandering subspace for U1. Therefore, it does not matter which self-adjoint extension of SL we will consider in (5.1). Simple Phillips symmetric operators with the same defect numbers are unitary equivalent (Corollary 3.3). For this reason, we can consider a concrete Phillips symmetric operator in (5.1). It is useful to work with PSO SL defined in H = l2(Z, N) (N is an auxiliary Hilbert space) as follows: SLu = i(. . . , x−3 + x−2, x−2 + x−1, x−1, x1, x1 + x2, . . .), xj ∈ N, (5.4) where element at the zero position is underlined and u ∈ D(S) ⇐⇒ u = (. . . , x−3 − x−2, x−2 − x−1, x−1,−x1, x1 − x2, . . .), where Pi∈Z kxik2 N < ∞. The operator SL defined by (5.4) is a simple PSO in l2(Z, N) and the operator (5.5) Au = i(. . . , x−3 + x−2, x−2 + x−1, x−1 + x0, x0 + x1, x1 + x2, . . .) with the domain of definition u ∈ D(A) ⇐⇒ u = (. . . , x−3 − x−2, x−2 − x−1, x−1 − x0, x0 − x1, x1 − x2, . . .), Xi∈Z kxik2 N < ∞ is the self-adjoint extension of SL [15, 16]. It follows from (5.4) and (5.5) that D(SL) consists of those u ∈ D(A) for which x0 = 0. Direct calculation with use of (5.5) shows that (A − iI)u = 2i(. . . , x−2, x−1, x0, x1, x2, . . .). Therefore, the formula (5.1) gives D(SL) if L = {(. . . , 0, 0, x0, 0, 0, . . .) ∈ l2(Z, N) : ∀x0 ∈ N}. It is easy to see that the Cayley transform U of A coincides with the bilateral shift U(. . . , x−2, x−1, x0, x1, x2, . . .) = (. . . , x−3, x−2, x−1, x0, x1, . . .) in l2(Z, N). The subspace L is a wandering subspace for U. The proof is complete. (cid:3) Corollary 5.3. The set of symmetric restrictions of a given self-adjoint operator A contains a Phillips symmetric operator if and only if there exists a reducing subspace H0 of A such that the self-adjoint operator A0 = A ↾D(A)∩H0 has Lebesgue spectrum on R. 14 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK The existence of a simple PSO among symmetric restrictions of A is equivalent to the fact that A has Lebesgue spectrum on R. Proof. Due to Theorem 5.2, a PSO can appear only in the case where there U0 = U ↾H0 is a bilateral shift in H0 and its Cayley transform A0 has Lebesgue spectrum on R. exists a wandering subspace L of U. Denote H0 = Pn∈Z ⊕U nL. The operator According to Corollary 3.6, the existence of a simple PSO means that H3 = {0} in the decomposition (3.5). Therefore, the corresponding wandering subspace L (which determines a simple PSO with the help of (5.1)) has the property that H =Pn∈Z ⊕U nL. This means that A has Lebesgue spectrum on R. (cid:3) Corollary 5.4. Let Wt = eiAt be the group of unitary operators generated by a self-adjoint operator A. If there exists a nonzero h ∈ H such that (Wth, h) = 0, for all t > c, then the set of symmetric restrictions of A contains a PSO. Proof. Denote by H0 the closure of linear span of {Wth} in H. The subspace H0 reduces Wt and, by virtue of [24, Lemma 1.2], the restriction Wt ↾H0 is a bilateral shift in H0. Its generator A0 is a self-adjoint operator in H0 with the Lebesque spectrum. Applying now Corollary 5.3 we complete the proof. (cid:3) The concept of Lebesgue spectrum on R for a self-adjoint operator A can be defined in various (equivalent) ways which guarantee that the spectral type of A is equivalent to the Lebesgue one and the multiplicity of the spectrum σ(A) does not change for any real point. The last condition is obviously satisfied when A is unitary equivalent to its shifts A − tI for any t ∈ R. Development of this 'translation-invariance' idea leads to the prominent Weyl commutation relation which ensures the Lebesgue spectrum property of A. Namely, due to the von Neumann theorem [17, p. 35], a self-adjoint operator A in H has the Lebesgue spectrum on R if and only if there exists a strongly continuous group of unitary operators Vt such that VtAV−t = A − tI, ∀t ∈ R. (5.6) It should be mention that any simple PSO is also a solution of the Weyl com- mutation relation (5.6). Indeed, any operator A which is the solution of (5.6) is determined up to unitary equivalence. Therefore, it is sufficient to consider the simple PSO S defined by (3.7) in L2(R, N) and to verify that A = S is a solution of (5.6) with Vt acting as the multiplication on e−itx. 6. Examples of PSO I. Let SL be a PSO that is determined by (5.1) as the restriction of a self-adjoint operator A. Consider a unitary operator W that commutes with A. It is easy to see that S′ = W SLW −1 is also PSO and S′ is determined by (5.1) with the new wandering subspace L′ = WL, i.e., S′ = SWL. This simple observation gives rise to infinitely many PSO which are symmetric restrictions of a given self-adjoint operator A. PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 15 If A has Lebesgue spectrum on R and its multiplicity coincides with dimL, then the obtained PSO is simple. Furthermore, the space H is presented as H = Pn∈Z ⊕U nL. The last decomposition allows one to determine a unitary mapping of H onto L2(R,L) in such a way that A corresponds to the multiplication by independent variable: Af (δ) = δf (δ); the Cayley transform of A acts as the multiplication operator: Uf (δ) = δ+iI δ−iI f (δ); and the wandering subspace L (in H) is mapped onto the wandering subspace 1 If W is a unitary operator in L2(R,L) that commutes with A, then W can be realized as a multiplicative operator-valued function w(δ) on L into L which is unitary for almost all δ (see, e.g., [17, Corollary 4.2, p.53]) : δ+iL in L2(R,L) [17, Chapter 2]. W f = w(δ)f (δ), f ∈ L2(R,L). This means that the subspaces Lw ≡ W 1 δ+i L are wandering in L2(R,L) and they determines infinitely many simple PSO Sw, which, due to (5.1), are restrictions of the operator A of multiplication by δ onto linear manifolds δ+iL = w(δ) D(Sw) = {u ∈ D(A) :ZR (u(δ), w(δ)v)Ldδ = 0, ∀v ∈ L}. This result can be reformulated for the restrictions of self-adjoint momentum operator A (see (4.6) where L = N) with the use of Fourier transformation (F f )(x) = 1√2πRR e−iδxf (δ)dδ that relates Af (δ) = δf (δ) and Af = i df dx . Taking into account that AF = F A we decide that the subspaces FLw are wandering for the Cayley transform of A in L2(R,L). Simple PSO Sw are the restrictions of A onto those functions f ∈ W 1 2 (R,L) that satisfy the relation (c.f. (5.1)): ((A − iI)u, γ) = 0, ∀γ ∈ FLw. It is clear that Sw = F SwF −1. Let us set w(δ) ≡ 1. Then the wandering subspace FLw coincides with the subspace χR+(x)e−xL and the formula (5.1) leads, to the simple PSO S defined by (3.7). The operator S is the result of one-point perturbation of the momentum operator A supported at point x = 0. The symmetric operator Sw = i d dx , D(Sw) = {u ∈ W 1 2 (R,L) : u(y) = 0} (6.1) corresponding to one-point interaction supported at real point x = y is deduced from the formulas above with w(δ) = eiδy. Assume now that w(δ) = δ+iI formula (5.1) gives rise to the simple PSO δ−iI . Then FLw = F (cid:0) 1 δ−iIL(cid:1) = χR−(x)exL and the Sw = i d dx , D(Sw) = {u ∈ W 1 2 (R,L) : u(0) = 2Z 0 −∞ u(x)exdx}, (6.2) which is an example of nonlocal point interaction of the momentum operator A. II. Let Df = √2f (2x) and T f = f (x − 1) be the dilation and the translation operators in L2(R). Denote A = i(D +I)(D−I)−1. The operator A is self-adjoint in L2(R) and it has Lebesgue spectrum on R (since D is a bilateral shift). Proposition 6.1. Let S be a simple PSO that is a restriction of the self-adjoint operator A and let ψ ∈ N−i = ker(S∗ + iI) be a function such that {T kψ}k∈Z is an orthonormal basis of N−i. Then ψ is a wavelet. 16 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK Proof. If S is a restriction of A, then S is determined by (5.1), i.e., S = SL, where L = N−i. Since S is assumed to be PSO, Theorem 5.2 implies that L is a wandering subspace for the dilation operator D. Moreover, the simplicity of S means that L2(R) = Pn∈Z ⊕DjL. Therefore, {DjT kψ}j,k∈Z is an orthonormal basis of L2(R), i.e., ψ is a wavelet [7]. (cid:3) 7. Nonlocal point interactions The above results show that one-point interaction of the momentum opera- tor: A + αδ(x − y) leads to self-adjoint operators which are unitary equivalent to each other and have Lebesgue spectrum on R. This means that non-trivial spectral properties of self-adjoint operators associated with the momentum op- erator should be obtained with the help of more complicated perturbations. In the present section we consider special classes of general nonlocal one point in- teractions [3] which can be characterized as one point interaction defined by the nonlocal potential γ(x) ∈ L2(R). {0}) by the differential expression + γ(x)fr I. Let us consider the maximal operator Smax which is determined on W 1 Smaxf = i 2 (R \ df dx (x 6= 0), fr = (f (0+) + f (0−)), 1 2 where the non-local potential γ(x) belongs to L2(R). Direct calculation shows that, for all f, g ∈ D(Smax) = W 1 2 (R \ {0}), (Smaxf, g) − (f, Smaxg) = i[Γ+f Γ+g − Γ−f Γ−g], where Γ± are determined by Γ+f = f (0−) + i 2 (f, γ), Lemma 7.1. The operator Γ−f = f (0+) − i 2 (f, γ). (7.1) Smin = Smax ↾D(Smin), D(Smin) = ker Γ− ∩ ker Γ+ is a closed densely defined symmetric operator in L2(R) and such that S∗min = Smax. A triplet (C, Γ−, Γ+) , where the linear mappings Γ± : W 1 2 (R \ {0}) → C are determined by (7.1) is a boundary triplet of Smax. Proof. To complete the proof, by virtue of [6, Corollary 2.5] and Remark 2.2, it is sufficient to verify that: (i) there is a unimodular c such that the operator A = Smax ↾ker(cΓ+−Γ−) is self-adjoint in L2(R); (ii) the map (Γ−, Γ+) : D(Smax) → C2 is surjective. dx with the domain D(A) = {f∈W 1 2 (R \ {0}) : f (0−) = −f (0+)} is a self-adjoint operator. 2 (R \ {0}) such that f (0−) = h1 and f (0+) = h2. Let us fix u ∈ W 1 2 (R \ {0}) such that u(0−) = u(0+) = 0 and (u, γ) 6= 0. Using now (7.1) we decide that the vector ef = f − (f,γ) (cid:3) The condition (i) is satisfied if we choose c = −1. In this case A = i d Let h = (h1, h2) be an arbitrary element of C2. There exists f ∈ W 1 (u,γ) u solves the equation (Γ−, Γ+)ef = (h1, h2), that justifies (ii). PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 17 The boundary triplet (C, Γ−, Γ+) constructed in Lemma 7.1 allows us to de- termine self-adjoint operators df dx Aθf = i + γ(x)fr, 2 (R \ {0}), whose domains D(Aθ) consist of all functions f ∈ W 1 nonlocal boundary-value condition f ∈ D(Aθ) ⊂ W 1 θ ∈ [0, 2π) (7.2) 2 (R \ {0}) that satisfy the eiθ[f (0−) + i 2 (f, γ)] = f (0+) − i 2 (f, γ). These operators are mathematical models of one point interaction defined by the nonlocal potential γ(x). Each operator Aθ is a self-adjoint extension of the symmetric operator Smin = S∗max = i d dx with domain of definition D(Smin) =(cid:26)f ∈ W 1 2 (R \ {0}) : f (0−) + i f (0+) − i 2(f, γ) = 0 2(f, γ) = 0 (cid:27) . (7.3) The symmetric operator Smin has defect numbers < 1, 1 > and its defect sub- spaces Nλ, Nν (λ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C fλ(x) = gλ(x) − 2[1 + gλ(0)]G+ respectively. Here −) coincide with the linear span of the vectors λ (x) and fν(x) = gν(x) − 2[1 + gν(0)]G−ν (x), gz = (A − zI)−1γ =(cid:26) ie−izxR ∞ −ie−izxR x λ (x) =(cid:26) 0, x > 0 e−iλx x < 0, eizτ γ(τ )dτ, x eizτ γ(τ )dτ, z ∈ C+ z ∈ C G−ν (x) =(cid:26) e−iνx, x > 0 −∞ x < 0, − 0 G+ (7.4) and and By virtue of (6.2) and (7.1), the characteristic function Θ(·) has the form Θ(λ) = Γ−fλ Γ+fλ = fλ(0+) − i fλ(0−) + i 2 (fλ, γ) 2 (fλ, γ) = −I + 2 2 + gλ(0) − i 2(fλ, γ) . (7.5) Let us consider a particular case assuming that γ = αχR+(x)e−x, α ∈ C. Then gλ(x) = iα 1 − iλ(cid:26) e−x, e−iλx, gλ(0) − i 2 (fλ, γ) = iα 1 − iλ x > 0 x < 0 (1 − iα/4) Therefore, the characteristic function (7.5) turns out to be a constant on C+ when β = 4i. In this case, the symmetric operator Smin in (7.3) is PSO and all its self-adjoint extensions (7.2) have Lebesgue spectrum on R. II. Let the maximal operator Smax be determined by the differential expression Smaxf = i df dx + γ(x)fs (x 6= 0), fs = f (0+) − f (0−), 18 S. KUZHEL and L. NIZHNIK where the non-local potential γ(x) belongs to L2(R). Similarly to the previous case, the Green formula can be established (Smaxf, g) − (f, Smaxg) = i[Γ+f Γ+g − Γ−f Γ−g], 2 (R \ {0}) where Γ+f = f (0−)− i(f, γ) and Γ−f = f (0+)− i(f, γ). The same arguments as in the proof of Lemma 7.1 leads to the conclusion that (C, Γ−, Γ+) is a boundary triplet of Smax and the corresponding symmetric operator Smin = Smax ↾D(Smin), D(Smin) = ker Γ− ∩ ker Γ+ has the form f, g ∈ D(Smax) = W 1 Smin = i 2 (R) : f (0) = i(f, γ)}. Each self-adjoint extension Aα of Smin is determined by the formula , D(Smin) = {f ∈ W 1 (7.6) d dx Aαf = i df dx + γ(x)fs, where D(Aθ) = {f ∈ D(Smax) : eiθ[f (0−) − i(f, γ)] = f (0+) − i(f, γ)}. span of vectors The defect subspaces Nλ, Nν (λ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C −) of Smin coincide with the linear fλ(x) = gλ(x) + G+ λ (x) and fν(x) = gν(x) − G−ν (x), respectively. Let us fix γ = αχR−(x)ex and specify for which α ∈ C the corre- sponding symmetric operator Smin will be PSO. It follows from (7.4) that iαχR−(x) gλ(x) = gν(x) = − The obtained expressions allows one to calculate (e−iλx − ex), 1 + iλ iα 1 + iν (cid:26) e−iνx, ex, x > 0 x < 0. (fλ, fν) = α 2(1 − iλ)(1 − iν) (2i − α), λ ∈ C+, ν ∈ C −. The obtained expression and Theorem 3.4 mean that the symmetric operator Smin defined in (7.6) is PSO if and only if α = 2i. In this case, the PSO Smin coincides with the operator Sw determined by (6.2). References 1. S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. Høegh-Krohn, and H. Holden, Solvable Models in Quan- tum Mechanics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin/New York, 1988; 2nd ed. (with an appendix by P. Exner), AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence, RI, 2005. 2. S. Albeverio and S. Kuzhel, PT -symmetric operators in quantum mechanics: Krein spaces methods, Non-selfadjoint operators in quantum physics, 293 -- 343, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2015. 3. S. Albeverio and L.P. Nizhnik, Schrodinger operators with nonlocal potentials Meth. Funct. Anal. Topology, 19 (2013), 199 -- 210. 4. Yu. M. Arlinskii, V. A. Derkach and E. R. Tsekanovskii, On unitary equivalent quasi- Hermitian extensions of Hermitian operators Mat. Fiz., 29 (1981), 72 -- 77 ( in Russian). 5. T. Ya. Azizov and I.S. Iokhvidov, Linear Operators in Spaces with an Indefinite Metric, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1989. 6. J. Behrndt and M. Langer, On the adjoint of a symmetric operator, J. Lond. Math. Soc. 82 (2010), 563-580. 7. O. Christensen, Functions, Spaces, and Expansions, Birkhauser, Basel, 2010. PHILLIPS SYMMETRIC OPERATORS AND THEIR EXTENSIONS 19 8. P. Exner, Momentum operators on graphs, Spectral Analysis, Differential Equations and Mathematical Physics: A Festschrift in Honor of Fritz Gesztesys 60th Birthday 87 (2012), 105 -- 118. 9. M. L. Gorbachuk and V. I. Gorbachuk, Boundary-Value Problems for Operator-Differential Equations, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1991. 10. M. L. Gorbachuk, V. I. Gorbachuk, M.G. Krein's Lectures on Entire Operators, Operator Theory Advances and Applications 97, Birkhauser, Basel, 1997. 11. S. Hassi and S. Kuzhel, On J -self-adjoint operators with stable C-symmetries, Proc. Royal 12. P. Jorgensen, S. Pedersen, and F. Tian, Momentum operators in two intervals: Spectra and Soc. Edinburgh 143A (2013), 141-167. phase transition, Complex Anal. Operator Theory 7 (2013), 1735 -- 1773. 13. A. N. Kochubei, About symmetric operators commuting with a family of unitary operators, Funk. Anal. Prilozh. 13(1979) 77 -- 78. 14. A. N. Kochubei, On extensions and characteristic functions of symmetric operators, Izv. Akad. Nauk. Arm. SSR 15 (1980), 219 -- 232. (In Russian); English translation: Soviet J. Contemporary Math. Anal. 15 (1980). 15. A. Kuzhel and S. Kuzhel, Regular Extensions of Hermitian Operators, VSP, Utrecht, 1998. 16. S. Kuzhel, O. Shapovalova, and L. Vavrykovych, On J -self-adjoint extensions of the Phillips symmetric operator, Meth. Funct. Anal. Topology, 16 (2010), 333 -- 348. 17. P. D. Lax and R. F.g Phillips, Scattering Theory. Revised Edition, Academic Press, Inc. San Diego, 1989. 18. L.P. Nizhnik, Inverse spectral nonlocal problem for the first order ordinary differential equa- tion, Tamkang J. Math. 42 (2011) 385 -- 394. 19. C. R. de Oliveira, Intermediate Spectral Theory and Quantum Dynamics, Birkhuser, Basel, 2009. 20. S. Pedersen, J. D. Phillips, F. Tian, C. E. Watson, On the spectra of momentum operators, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 9 (2015), 1557 -- 1587. 21. R. S. Phillips, The extension of dual subspaces invariant under an algebra, in: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Linear Spaces (Jerusalem, 1960), pp. 366-398, Jerusalem Academic Press, 1961. 22. K. Schmudgen, Unbounded Self-adjoint Operators on Hilbert space, Springer, Berlin, 2012. 23. A. V. Shtraus, On extensions and characteristic functions of symmetric operators, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR. Ser. Mat. 32 (1968), 186 -- 207. (Russian) 24. Ja. G. Sinai, Dynamical systems with countable Lebesgue spectrum. I., Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 25 (1961) 899-924. (Russian) 1AGH University of Science and Technology, Krak´ow 30-059, Poland. E-mail address: [email protected] 2Institute of Mathematics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv 01-601, Ukraine E-mail address: [email protected]
1503.06691	1	1503	2015-03-23T15:47:50	Quasianalytic polynomially bounded operators	[ "math.FA" ]	Quasianalytic contractions form the crucial class in the quest for proper invariant and hyperinvariant subspaces for asymptotically non-vanishing Hilbert space contractions. The property of quasianalycity relies on the concepts of unitary asymptote and $H^\i$-functional calculus. These objects can be naturally defined in the setting of polynomially bounded operators too, which makes possible to extend the study of quasianalycity from contractions to this larger class. Carrying out this program we pose also several interesting questions.	math.FA	math	Quasianalytic polynomially bounded operators L´aszl´o K´erchy University of Szeged Abstract Quasianalytic contractions form the crucial class in the quest for proper invariant and hyperinvariant subspaces for asymptotically non-vanishing Hilbert space contractions. The property of quasianalycity relies on the concepts of unitary asymptote and H ∞-functional calculus. These objects can be naturally defined in the setting of polynomially bounded operators too, which makes possible to extend the study of quasianalycity from contractions to this larger class. Carrying out this program we pose also several interesting questions. AMS Subject Classification (2010): 47A15, 47A45, 47A60. Key words: unitary asymptote, polynomially bounded operator, Lebesgue decomposition, intertwining relations, quasianalytic operator. 1 Introduction Let H be a complex Hilbert space, and let L(H) stand for the C∗-algebra of all bounded linear operators acting on H. Given any T ∈ L(H), the complete lattice Lat T consists of those (closed) subspaces M of H, which are invariant for T : T M ⊂ M. A subspace M is hyperinvariant for T , if it is invariant for every operator C ∈ L(H), commuting with T : CT = T C. The complete lattice of all hyperinvariant subspaces of T is denoted by Hlat T . The most challenging open questions in operator theory are arguably the Invariant Subspace Problem (ISP) and the Hyperinvariant Subspace Problem (HSP). The first question asks whether Lat T is non-trivial (i.e., different from {{0}, H}), for every operator T ∈ L(H), provided dim H ≥ 2; while the second question asks whether Hlat T is non-trivial, whenever T is not a scalar multiple of the identity operator I. For a thorough discussion of these problems see the monographs [RR] and [CP], and the more recent papers [AM] and [GR]. Of course, dividing T by its norm, we may assume that T is a contraction: kT k ≤ 1. An opposite, local estimate is made, when we assume that the contrac- tion T is asymptotically non-vanishing, that is limn kT nhk > 0 holds for some h ∈ H. Suprisingly enough, (ISP) and (HSP) are open under these assumptions too. A useful extra tool available in this situation is the unitary asymptote of T . Relying on this and on the H ∞-functional calculus, two spectral invari- ants can be introduced for T . The first one is the residual set ω(T ), and the second one is the quasianalytic spectral set π(T ) of T . The contraction T is 1 called quasianalytic, if these measurable subsets of the unit circle T coincide: ω(T ) = π(T ). Quasianalytic contractions were investigated in the papers [K5], [K8], [K9], [KT], [KSz2] and [KSz3]. A central theorem proved is that (HSP) can be reduced to this class in the asymptotically non-vanishing case. The aim of this paper is to extend these investigations from contractions to polynomially bounded operators. It will turn out that this larger class is the natural setting for the study of quasianalycity. Our work is organized in the following way. In Section 2 we introduce unitary asymptotes for an arbitrary operator T ∈ L(H) in a categorical sense, as it has been done for contractions in [BK] and in Chapter IX of [NFBK]. The induced generalized Toeplitz operators, and the connection of the associated symbolic calculus with the commutant mapping are discussed. Existence of unitary asymptotes in the power bounded case is shown by using Banach limits. This method originates in Sz.-Nagy's pioneering work [N], and has been extended to many situations; see, e.g., [K1], [K2], [K3], [K4], [K6], [KL], [KM] and [Pr]. A new characterization is given in terms of norm-conditions. It is well-known that every contraction T can be decomposed into the or- thogonal sum T = T a ⊕ U s of an absolutely continuous contraction T a and a singular unitary operator U s. Mlak showed that analogous Lebesgue-type de- compositions can be given for polynomially bounded operators, or equivalently, for bounded representations of the disk algebra A(T). Actually, Mlak considered representations of more general function algebras; see [M1], [M2], [M3] and [M4]. Using Mlak's elementary measures, in Section 3 we give a detailed, streamlined discussion of the Lebesgue decomposition in the particular case A(T), what is of the main interest for us. Our purpose here (and partly in the next two sections) is to make Mlak's important results more accessible for a wide range of readers. In Section 4 we focus on intertwining relations. It is verified that absolute continuity and singularity are preserved under quasisimilarity. A transparent proof is given for the important known fact that every singular polynomially bounded operator is similar to its unitary asymptote. Furthermore, the problem of similarity to contractions is discussed. Sz.-Nagy and Foias introduced the effective functional calculus, working with functions in H ∞, for absolutely continuous contractions; see Chapter III in [NFBK]. Section 5 is devoted to the study of properties and possible range of this H ∞-functional calculus. A simplified proof is given for Mlak's result, stating that exactly the absolutely continuous polynomially bounded operators admit H ∞-functional calculae. In Section 6 we turn to quasianalytic operators. The sets ω(T ) and π(T ) are introduced in a uniform way, relying on the local residual sets ω(T, x) (x ∈ H). The quasianalytic spectral set π(T ) is characterized also in terms of non- monotone sequences. The central hyperinvariant subspace theorem is proved. Furthermore, the effects of intertwining relations, the asymptotic behaviour, orthogonal sums and restrictions are studied. For the theory of Hardy spaces H p, see [Ho]. In connection with the theory of contractions we refer to [NFBK]. Given operators T1 ∈ L(H1) and T2 ∈ L(H2), 2 the set of intertwining transformations is defined by I(T1, T2) := {C ∈ L(H1, H2) : CT1 = T2C} . The commutant of the operator T ∈ L(H) is {T }′ = I(T, T ), while the bicom- mutant (or double commutant) {T }′′ of T consists of those operators B ∈ L(H) which commute with every operator C in {T }′. Finally, N, Z, Z+, R, R+, C de- note the set of positive integers, integers, non-negative integers, real numbers, non-negative real numbers and complex numbers, respectively. 2 Unitary asymptotes Let H be a complex Hilbert space, and let us consider an operator T ∈ L(H). We say that (X, U ) is a unitary intertwining pair for T , if U is a unitary op- erator acting on a (complex) Hilbert space K, and X ∈ I(T, U ). The pair is n=1U −nXH = K. The unitary intertwining pair (X, U ) is called minimal, if ∨∞ a unitary asymptote of T , if for any other unitary intertwining pair (X ′, U ′) of T , there exists a unique transformation Z ∈ I(U, U ′) such that X ′ = ZX. The uniqueness of Z implies that a unitary asymptote (X, U ) is necessarily minimal. Let us assume that (X1, U1) and (X2, U2) are unitary asymptotes of T . Then there exist Z1 ∈ I(U1, U2) and Z2 ∈ I(U2, U1) such that Z1X1 = X2 and Z2X2 = X1. Therefore, I ·X1 = Z2X2 = (Z2Z1)X1, whence I = Z2Z1 follows by the definition of the unitary asymptote. The equation Z1Z2 = I can be derived similarly. Thus, the unitary intertwining pairs (X1, U1) and (X2, U2) are equiv- alent, which means the existence of an invertible transformation Z ∈ I(U1, U2) satisfying X2 = ZX1. Then the unitary operators U1 and U2 are necessarily unitarily equivalent: U1 ≃ U2. Furthermore, if the unitary intertwining pair (X2, U2) is equivalent to a unitary asymptote (X1, U1), then (X2, U2) is also a unitary asymptote. For any unitary intertwining pair (X, U ) of T we have kXhk = kU nXhk = kXT nhk ≤ kXk · kT nhk (n ∈ N), and so kXhk ≤ kXk · lim inf n→∞ kT nhk for all h ∈ H. A lower estimate for kXhk yields universality. Proposition 1 Let (X, U ) be a minimal unitary intertwining pair for T . If there exists κ ∈ (0, ∞) such that κ · lim inf n→∞ kT nhk ≤ kXhk holds for all h ∈ H, then (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T . Proof. Let (X ′, U ′) be a unitary intertwining pair for T . For every h ∈ H we have kX ′hk ≤ kX ′k · lim inf n→∞ kT nhk ≤ kX ′k · κ−1 · kXhk. 3 Hence there is a unique transformation Y+ ∈ L(K+, K′) such that Y+Xh = X ′h (h ∈ H), where K+ = (XH)−. The relations Y+U Xh = Y+XT h = X ′T h = U ′X ′h = U ′Y+Xh (h ∈ H) show that Y+ ∈ I(U+, U ′), where U+ = U K+. It is immediate that the equa- tions Y U −nk := U ′−nY+k (k ∈ K+, n ∈ N) define a norm-preserving extension Y ∈ I(U, U ′) of Y+. It is clear that Y X = X ′, and that Y is uniquely determined by these properties. (cid:3) Question 2 Does κ lim inf n→∞ kT nhk ≤ kXhk (h ∈ H) hold with a κ ∈ (0, ∞), whenever (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T ? Let (X, U ) be any unitary intertwining pair for T . Then T ∗(X ∗X)T = X ∗U ∗U X = X ∗X. Thus X ∗X belongs to the set T (T ) := {B ∈ L(H) : T ∗BT = B} of T -Toeplitz operators. It is clear that T (T ) is a selfadjoint linear manifold, which is closed in the weak operator topology. Taking Ts(T ) = {B ∈ T (T ) : B∗ = B}, we have T (T ) = Ts(T ) + iTs(T ). The set T+(T ) = {B ∈ Ts(T ) : B ≥ 0} is of particular interest. We recall that A ∈ T+(T ) is universal (weakly universal ) in T (T ), if for every B ∈ Ts(T ) (B ∈ T+(T ), respectively) there exists β ∈ R+ such that −βA ≤ B ≤ βA. It is obvious that T (U ) = {U }′. Furthermore, for any F ∈ {U }′ we have T ∗(X ∗F X)T = X ∗U ∗F U X = X ∗U ∗U F X = X ∗F X, that is X ∗F X ∈ T (T ). The positive, bounded, ∗-linear mapping ΨX : {U }′ → T (T ), F 7→ X ∗F X is the symbolic calculus for T (T ), associated with (X, U ). It is easy to see that ΨX is injective, when (X, U ) is minimal. We say that ΨX is universal, if its range coincides with T (T ). The following theorem, proved in [K6] in a slightly different form, establishes connections among these concepts. Theorem 3 Let (X, U ) be a minimal unitary intertwining pair for T . Then (i) ⇐⇒ (ii) ⇐ (iii) ⇐⇒ (iv), where (i) (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T ; (ii) A = X ∗X ∈ T+(T ) is weakly universal in T (T ); (iii) A = X ∗X ∈ T+(T ) is universal in T (T ); (iv) the symbolic calculus ΨX is universal. 4 We note that if A = X ∗X is universal in T (T ), then ΨX : {U }′ → T (T ) is invertible, and so −β0kBkA ≤ B ≤ β0kBkA holds for every B ∈ Ts(T ), where β0 = kΨ−1 X k. It may happen that there is not a universal operator in T (T ); we refer to Example 5 in [K6]. Moreover, if T (T ) contains a non-zero operator B, then the relations 0 < kBk = kT ∗nBT nk ≤ kBkkT nk2 (n ∈ N) show that the spectral radius r(T ) ≥ 1. Let us assume that (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T . Then, for every C ∈ {T }′, XC ∈ I(T, U ) holds, and so there exists a unique D ∈ {U }′ such that XC = DX. It is easy to verify that the commutant mapping γX : {T }′ → {U }′, C 7→ D is a (unital) algebra-homomorphism. Boundedness of γX follows from its rela- tion to ΨX . Proposition 4 Let (X, U ) be a unitary asymptote of T , and let us assume that A = X ∗X is universal in T (T ). Then (ΨX ◦ γX )C = AC holds for every C ∈ {T }′, and so kγX k ≤ kAk · kΨ−1 X k. The simple proof is left to the reader. Existence of unitary asymptotes can be verified in the class of power bounded operators. We recall that T ∈ L(H) is a power bounded operator, if MT := sup{kT nk : n ∈ Z+} < ∞. In that case r(T ) ≤ 1 is evidently true. If r(T ) < 1, then limn→∞ kT nk = 0, and so, for any unitary intertwining pair (X, U ) of T , the equations XT n = U nX (n ∈ N) imply that X = 0. Thus U acts on the zero space, provided (X, U ) is minimal. Therefore r(T ) = 1, whenever the power bounded operator T has a non-trivial unitary asymptote. Taking a Banach limit L : ℓ∞ → C, there exists a unique operator AL ∈ L(H) such that hALx, yi = L- lim n→∞ hT ∗nT nx, yi for all x, y ∈ H. It is evident that AL ∈ T+(T ), and AL ≤ M 2 relations hBx, xi = hBT nx, T nxi and T · I. Setting any B ∈ Ts(T ), the −kBkhT nx, T nxi ≤ hBT nx, T nxi ≤ kBkhT nx, T nxi (x ∈ H, n ∈ N) show that −kBkAL ≤ B ≤ kBkAL. Therefore, AL is universal in T (T ). Since T ∗ALT = AL implies kA1/2 L T hk = kA1/2 a unique isometry VL on the space K+,L = (A1/2 L hk (h ∈ H), there exists L H)− satisying the condition 5 L = A1/2 VLA1/2 L T . Let UL ∈ L(KL) be the minimal unitary extension of VL, and let XL ∈ L(H, KL) be defined by XLh := A1/2 L h (h ∈ H). Clearly, (XL, UL) is a minimal unitary intertwining pair for T . Taking into account that X ∗ LXL = AL is universal in T (T ), we infer by Theorem 3 that (XL, UL) is a unitary asymptote of T . We recall that the possible values of Banach limits on a real sequence ξ ∈ ℓ∞ comprise a closed interval determined by the numbers B(ξ) = B- lim n→∞ and B(ξ) = B- lim n→∞ ξ(n) := sup ξ(n) := inf For any h ∈ H, we have lim inf k→∞ 1 r lim sup k→∞ ξ(nj + k) : n1, . . . , nr ∈ N, r ∈ N rXj=1 ξ(nj + k) : n1, . . . , nr ∈ N, r ∈ N rXj=1 . 1 r kXLhk2 = hALh, hi = L- lim n→∞ kT nhk2, whence B- lim n→∞ kT nhk2 ≤ kXLhk2 ≤ B- lim n→∞ kT nhk2. These relations immediately yield that lim inf n→∞ kT nhk ≤ kXLhk ≤ lim sup n→∞ kT nhk (h ∈ H). We obtain the following characterization. Theorem 5 Let (X, U ) be a minimal unitary intertwining pair for the power bounded operator T ∈ L(H). Then (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T if and only if there exists a κ ∈ (0, ∞) such that κ · lim inf n→∞ kT nhk ≤ kXhk for all h ∈ H. Proof. If (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T , then there exists an invertible Z ∈ I(U, UL) such that XL = ZX, with a Banach limit L. Thus, for every h ∈ H, we have kXhk ≥ kZk−1kZXhk = kZk−1kXLhk ≥ kZk−1 lim inf n→∞ kT nhk. The reverse implication follows by Proposition 1. As immediate consequences, we may derive the following statements. (cid:3) Corollary 6 Let (Xj, Uj) be a unitary asymptote of the power bounded operator Tj, for j = 1, 2. Then (X1 ⊕ X2, U1 ⊕ U2) is a unitary asymptote of T1 ⊕ T2. 6 Corollary 7 If (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of the power bounded operator T ∈ L(H) and M ∈ Lat T , then (XM, U fM) is a unitary asymptote of the restriction T M, where fM := ∨n∈NU −nXM. n=1 is convergent, for every h ∈ H. Suprisingly, these sequences are convergent also in the case, when T is a ρ-contraction; see [E] and [CC]. If T ∈ L(H) is a contraction, then the decreasing sequence {kT nhk}∞ If T ∈ L(H) is an arbitrary power bounded operator, then for every h ∈ H we have lim sup n→∞ kT nhk ≤ MT lim inf n→∞ kT nhk. In particular, inf{kT nhk : n ∈ N} = 0 implies limn→∞ kT nhk = 0. In view of the previous observations we may infer the following statement. Proposition 8 If (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of the power bounded operator T ∈ L(H), then the nullspace of X coincides with the hyperinvariant subspace of those vectors, which are stable for T : ker X = H0(T ) :=nh ∈ H : lim n→∞ kT nhk = 0o . We conclude this section with norm-estimates concerning the symbolic cal- culus and the commutant mapping. Proposition 9 Setting a Banach limit L, let (XL, UL) be the corresponding unitary asymptote of the power bounded operator T ∈ L(H). Then (i) kF k ≤ kΨXL(F )k ≤ M 2 T kF k for all F ∈ {UL}′; (ii) M −2 T kALCk ≤ kγXL (C)k ≤ kALCk for all C ∈ {T }′. Proof. For (i) see the proof of Theorem 3 in [K6]. Statement (ii) is a conse- quence of (i) and Proposition 4. (cid:3) 3 Lebesgue decomposition Let P(T) denote the algebra of analytic polynomials, restricted to the unit circle T = {ζ ∈ C : ζ = 1}. C(T) is the abelian Banach algebra of all continuous functions defined on T. The disk algebra A(T) is the norm-closure of P(T) in C(T). We recall that the dual of C(T) can be identified with the Banach space M (T) of all complex Borel measures on T (which are automatically regular). Namely, by the Riesz Representation Theorem, the mapping Ψ : M (T) → C(T)#, µ 7→ ψµ, where ψµ(f ) =ZT f dµ, is a Banach space isomorophism. 7 We say that µ, ν ∈ M (T) are analytically equivalent measures, in notation: µ a∼ ν, if ZT u dµ =ZT u dν for all u ∈ A(T). It is clear that this is an equivalence relation. Furthermore, by a well-known theorem of F. & M. Riesz, µ a∼ ν holds if and only if ν = µ + h dm with a function h ∈ H 1 0 (see, e.g., [Ho]). Here and in the sequel m denotes the normalized Lebesgue measure on T, and H 1 note that if the measures µ, ν are singular (with respect to m), then µ a∼ ν holds exactly when µ = ν. 0 = {f ∈ H 1 : RT f dm = 0}. We For any T ∈ L(H), the polynomial calculus ΦT,0 : P(T) → L(H), p 7→ p(T ) is the uniquely determined (unital) algebra-homomorphism, which transforms the identical function χ(ζ) = ζ (ζ ∈ T) into T . We say that T is a polyno- mially bounded operator, if ΦT,0 is norm-continuous. In that case ΦT,0 can be continuously extended to a bounded algebra-homomorphism ΦT,1 : A(T) → L(H), u 7→ u(T ). Our aim in this section is to decompose T into the direct sum of an abso- lutely continuous component and a singular component. We shall follow Mlak's method of using elementary measures. More generally, we consider and arbitrary bounded, linear transformation Φ : A(T) → L(H). For any x, y ∈ H, ϕx,y(C) = hCx, yi defines a bounded linear functional on L(H). By the Hahn -- Banach Theorem ϕx,y ◦ Φ can be extended to a bounded linear functional on C(T), even in a norm-preserving way. The set of elementary measures of Φ at x, y is defined by M (Φ, x, y) := {µ ∈ M (T) : ψµA(T) = ϕx,y ◦ Φ} . Therefore, µ ∈ M (Φ, x, y) precisely when hΦ(u)x, yi =ZT u dµ holds for all u ∈ A(T). We say that Φ is absolutely continuous (a.c.), if for every x, y ∈ H the measures in M (Φ, x, y) are a.c. (with respect to m). On the other hand, Φ is called singular, if for every x, y ∈ H the set M (Φ, x, y) contains a measure, which is singular (with respect to m). It is well-known that every measure µ ∈ M (T) can be uniquely decomposed into the sum µ = µa + µs, where µa ∈ M (T) is a.c. and µs ∈ M (T) is singular. By the next proposition such Lebesgue-type decomposition is valid also for Φ. Proposition 10 If Φ : A(T) → L(H) is a bounded linear transformation, then 8 (i) there exists a unique decomposition Φ = Φa + Φs, where the bounded linear mapping Φa : A(T) → L(H) is a.c., and the bounded linear mapping Φs : A(T) → L(H) is singular; (ii) kΦak ≤ kΦk and kΦsk ≤ kΦk; (iii) for every x, y ∈ H, we have M (Φa, x, y) = {µa : µ ∈ M (Φ, x, y)} and M (Φs, x, y) = {µs + h dm : µ ∈ M (Φ, x, y), h ∈ H 1 0 }. Proof. For every x, y ∈ H, the singular component of the measures in M (Φ, x, y) is uniquely determined, denoted by µs Φ,x,y. Taking a measure µ ∈ M (Φ, x, y) with minimal norm, we obtain kµs Φ,x,yk ≤ kµk = kϕx,y ◦ Φk ≤ kΦk · kxk · kyk. The mapping ws Φ : H × H → M (T), (x, y) 7→ µs Φ,x,y is sesquilinear (linear in x, and conjugate linear in y). For example, let us check the linearity in x. Setting x1, x2, y ∈ H, c ∈ C, let us choose µj ∈ M (Φ, xj, yj) (j = 1, 2) and µ ∈ M (Φ, cx1 + x2, y). Then, for every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT u dµ = hΦ(u)(cx1 + x2), yi = chΦ(u)x1, yi + hΦ(u)x2, yi = cZT u dµ1 +ZT u dµ2 =ZT u d(cµ1 + µ2), whence µ a∼ cµ1 + µ2, and so µs = (cµ1 + µ2)s = cµs 2 follows. For any g ∈ C(T), let us consider the bounded linear functional 1 + µs Λg : M (T) → C, µ 7→ZT g dµ, with kΛgk = kgk. The bounded sesquilinear functional ws Φ,g := Λg ◦ ws Φ : H × H → C satisfies the condition kws Φ,gk ≤ kgkkws Φk ≤ kgkkΦk. There exists a unique operator eΦs(g) ∈ L(H) such that DeΦs(g)x, yE = ws Φ,g(x, y) =ZT holds for all x, y ∈ H; furthermore keΦs(g)k = kws the integral in g yields that the mapping eΦs : C(T) → L(H) is linear; we obtain also that keΦsk ≤ kΦk. Then Φ,gk ≤ kΦk · kgk. Linearity of g dµs Φ,x,y Φs :=eΦsA(T) : A(T) → L(H) 9 is also a bounded linear transformation, and kΦsk ≤ kΦk. Given any x, y ∈ H, for every u ∈ A(T), we have hΦs(u)x, yi =ZT u dµs Φ,x,y; hence M (Φs, x, y) = {µs Φ,x,y + h dm : h ∈ H 1 0 }, and so Φs is singular. Let us consider the bounded linear transformation Φa := Φ − Φs. Given any x, y ∈ H and setting µ ∈ M (Φ, x, y), for every u ∈ A(T), we have hΦa(u)x, yi = hΦ(u)x, yi − hΦs(u)x, yi =ZT u dµ −ZT u dµs =ZT u d(µ − µs). Thus µa = µ − µs ∈ M (Φa, x, y), and so Φa is a.c.. Choosing µ so that kµk = kϕx,y ◦ Φk, we obtain hΦa(u)x, yi ≤ kuk · kµak ≤ kuk · kµk ≤ kukkΦkkxkkyk. Therefore kΦa(u)k ≤ kΦk · kuk (u ∈ A(T)), and so kΦak ≤ kΦk. Φa 1 + Φs 1 = Φa 2 + Φs Finally, we turn to the uniqueness of the decomposition. Suppose that Φ = 2 − Φs 1 2 are Lebesgue decompositions. Then eΦ = Φa is simultaneously a.c. and singular. Thus, the elementary measures of eΦ are analytically equivalent to 0, and so eΦ = 0. 2 = Φs 1 − Φa Remark 11 We note that these considerations can be carried out in the Banach space setting also, with some restrictions. Let X be a complex Banach space, and let Φ : A(T) → L(X ) be a bounded linear transformation. For any x ∈ X and y ∈ X #, the measure µ ∈ M (T) belongs to M (Φ, x, y) if (cid:3) ZT u dµ = [Φ(u)x, y] for all u ∈ A(T). For any g ∈ C(T), we can define the bounded bilinear functional ws φ,g : X × X # → C as before. Then a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of an operator eΦs(g) ∈ L(X ) satisfying heΦs(g)x, yi = ws is that ws Φ,g(x, y) be weak-∗ continuous in y. Φ,g(x, y), for all x ∈ X , y ∈ X #, Now we turn to bounded representations of A(T). We recall that a map- ping Φ : A(T) → L(H) is called a representation, if it is a unital algebra- homomorphism. Norm-continuous representations arise as functional calculae for polynomially bounded operators: Φ = ΦT,1 where T = Φ(χ). 10 Uniqueness of the Lebesgue decomposition of measures implies transforma- tion rules for elementary measures. Given any µ, ν ∈ M (T), if µ a∼ ν then 0 , and so µa a∼ νa and µs = νs. Furthermore, ν = µ + h dm with some h ∈ H 1 for any v ∈ A(T), the equation v dµ = v dµa + v dµs yields that (v dµ)a = v dµa and (v dµ)s = v dµs. Lemma 12 Let Φ : A(T) → L(H) be a bounded representation. Setting x, y ∈ H and v ∈ A(T), let xv := Φ(v)x and y∗ v := Φ(v)∗y. If µx,y ∈ M (Φ, x, y), µxv ,y ∈ M (Φ, xv, y) and µx,y∗ v ∈ M (Φ, x, y∗ v), then µa xvy a∼ v dµa x,y, µs xv ,y = v dµs x,y, µa x,y∗ v a∼ v dµa x,y, µs x,y∗ v = v dµs x,y. Proof. For every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT uv dµx,y = hΦ(uv)x, yi = hΦ(u)Φ(v)x, yi = hΦ(u)xv, yi =ZT u dµxv,y, a∼ v dµx,y, and so µa x,y follow. The whence µxv,y other two relations can be derived similarly from the equation hΦ(uv)x, yi = hΦ(u)x, y∗ xv,y = v dµs x,y and µs a∼ v dµa xv,y vi. (cid:3) We say that the polynomially bounded operator T ∈ L(H) is absolutely continuous (singular) if its functional calculus ΦT,1 is an absolutely continuous (singular, respectively) representation. Theorem 13 Let T ∈ L(H) be a polynomially bounded operator, and let us consider the Lebesgue decomposition Φ = Φa + Φs of the bounded representation Φ = ΦT,1 : A(T) → L(H). Then (i) Φa and Φs are also bounded representations; (ii) P a = Φa(1) and P s = Φs(1) are complementary projections belonging to the bicommutant {T }′′; (iii) H = Ha + Hs, where Ha = P aH and Hs = P sH are hyperinvariant subspaces of T ; (iv) T a = T Ha is an a.c. and T s = T Hs is a singular polynomially bounded operator; the Lebesgue decomposition T = T a + T s of T is unique; further- more, Φa(u) = ΦT a,1(u) + 0 and Φs(u) = 0 + ΦT s,1(u) for all u ∈ A(T). Proof. (i): Given x, y ∈ H, set µx,y ∈ M (Φ, x, y). Then µa and v µa we have x,y ∈ M (Φa, x, y) xv,y by Proposition 10 and Lemma 12. Hence, for u, v ∈ A(T), a∼ µa x,y hΦa(uv)x, yi =ZT uv dµa x,y =ZT u dµa xv,y = hΦa(u)xv, yi = hΦa(u)Φ(v)x, yi . 11 Consequently, Similarly, Φa(uv) = Φa(u)Φ(v) for all u, v ∈ A(T). hΦa(uv)x, yi = ZT v dµa x,y∗ u uv dµa x,y =ZT = hΦa(v)x, y∗ ui = hΦa(v)x, Φ(u)∗yi = hΦ(u)Φa(v)x, yi , and so Then Φa(uv) = Φ(u)Φa(v). Φa(u)Φa(v) + Φa(u)Φs(v) = Φa(u)Φ(v) = Φa(uv) = Φ(u)Φa(v) = Φa(u)Φa(v) + Φs(u)Φa(v), whence Φa(u)Φs(v) = Φs(u)Φa(v) for all u, v ∈ A(T). Fix v ∈ A(T), and set x, y ∈ H. Let x1 := Φs(v)x and x2 := Φa(v)x. Then, for every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT Thus µa x1,y Therefore u dµa x1,y = hΦa(u)x1, yi = hΦa(u)Φs(v)x, yi = hΦs(u)Φa(v)x, yi = hΦs(u)x2, yi =ZT u dµs x2,y. a∼ µs x2,y, and so µs x2,y = 0, which implies that hΦs(u)Φa(v)x, yi = 0. Φa(u)Φs(v) = Φs(u)Φa(v) = 0 for all u, v ∈ A(T). Φa(uv) = Φa(u)Φ(v) = Φa(u)Φa(v) + Φa(u)Φs(v) = Φa(u)Φa(v), Now and so Φs(uv) = Φ(uv) − Φa(uv) = (Φa(u) + Φs(u)) (Φa(v) + Φs(v)) − Φa(u)Φa(v) = Φs(u)Φs(v). Therefore, Φa and Φs are bounded representations. (ii): It is clear that (P a)2 = (Φa(1))2 = Φa(12) = P a, and similarly (P s)2 = P s. Moreover, P aP s = Φa(1)Φs(1) = 0 = Φs(1)Φa(1) = P sP a and P a + P s = Φa(1) + Φs(1) = Φ(1) = I. 12 Let C ∈ {T }′ be arbitrary. Then CΦ(u) = Φ(u)C for any u ∈ A(T). Given x, y ∈ H, set µCx,y ∈ M (Φ, Cx, y) and µx,C ∗y ∈ M (Φ, x, C∗y). Since, for every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT u dµCx,y = hΦ(u)Cx, yi = hCΦ(u)x, yi = hΦ(u)x, C∗yi =ZT u dµx,C ∗y, it follows that µCx,y Then, for every u ∈ A(T), a∼ µx,C ∗y, and so µa Cx,y a∼ µa x,C ∗y and µs Cx,y = µs x,C ∗y. hΦa(u)Cx, yi = ZT u dµa x,C ∗y u dµa Cx,y =ZT = hΦa(u)x, C∗yi = hCΦa(u)x, yi for all x, y ∈ H. Thus Φa(u)C = CΦa(u), whence Φs(u)C = CΦs(u) follows. Therefore Φa(u), Φs(u) ∈ {T }′′ for all u ∈ A(T). In particular, P a, P s ∈ {T }′′. (iii): Since P a, P s ∈ {T }′′, it follows that the subspaces Ha = P aH and Hs = P sH are hyperinvariant for T . Furthermore, P aP s = P sP a = 0 and P a + P s = I imply that Ha + Hs = H. (iv): Let us consider the decomposition T = T a + T s, where T a := T Ha and T s := T Hs. For any u ∈ A(T), we have Φa(u)P a = P aΦa(u) = Φa(1)Φa(u) = Φa(u), whence Φa(u) = (Φa(u)Ha) + 0 follows. The bounded representation Φa 0 : A(T) → L(Ha), Φa 0(u) := Φa(u)Ha 0 = ΦT a,1. Thus T a is satisfies the condition Φa an a.c. polynomially bounded operator. Similarly, Φs(u) = 0 + (Φs(u)Hs) for u ∈ A(T), and ΦT s,1 coincides with the singular representation 0(χ) = T a = ΦT a,1(χ), and so Φa Φs 0 : A(T) → L(Hs), Φs 0(u) := Φs(u)Hs. Thus T s is a singular polynomially bounded operator. As for uniqueness, let us suppose that the decomposition H = H1 + H2 is reducing for T , the restriction T1 = T H1 is a.c., and T2 = T H2 is singular. For every u ∈ A(T), we have Φ(u) = ΦT,1(u) = ΦT1,1(u) + ΦT2,1(u). Let us consider also the bounded representations Φ1, Φ2 : A(T) → L(H) defined by Φ1(u) := ΦT1,1(u) + 0 and Φ2(u) := 0 + ΦT2,1(u). Since T1 is a.c., it follows that Φ1 is a.c.; similarly, singularity of T2 implies that Φ2 is singular. Taking into account that Φ = Φ1 + Φ2, the uniqueness part of Proposition 10 implies that Φ1 = Φa and Φ2 = Φs. Thus H1 = Φ1(1)H = Φa(1)H = Ha and H2 = Φ2(1)H = Φs(1)H = Hs. (cid:3) Concluding this section we examine the adjoint of a polynomially bounded operator T ∈ L(H). For any function f : T → C, let ef (ζ) := f (ζ) (ζ ∈ T). 13 n=0 cnζn, and so is also polynomially bounded, and kΦT ∗,0k = kΦT,0k. Taking uniform limits of n=0 cnζn, we have ep(ζ) = PN For a polynomial p(ζ) = PN p(T ∗) = ep(T )∗. Since kp(T ∗)k = kep(T )k and kpk = kepk, it follows that T ∗ polynomials, we obtain that for any u ∈ A(T), eu ∈ A(T) and u(T ∗) =eu(T )∗. For any measure µ ∈ M (T), eµ ∈ M (T) is defined by eµ(ω) := µ(ω), upper bar meaning complex conjugation. We shall use the notation M (T, x, y) = M (ΦT,1, x, y). Proposition 14 If T ∈ L(H) is polynomially bounded, then T ∗ is also polyno- mially bounded, and (i) M (T ∗, x, y) = {eµ : µ ∈ M (T, y, x)} for x, y ∈ H; (ii) T is a.c. if and only if T ∗ is a.c.; (iii) T is singular if and only if T ∗ is singular. Proof. Given x, y ∈ H, set µ ∈ M (T, y, x) and ν ∈ M (T ∗, x, y). For every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT = ZT u dν = hu(T ∗)x, yi = heu(T )∗x, yi = heu(T )y, xi =ZTeu dµ u(ζ) deµ(ζ) =ZT whence ν a∼eµ follows. Sinceeh ∈ H 1 to see that eµ is a.c. (singular) if and only if µ is a.c. (singular, respectively), which shows the validity of (ii) and (iii). u deµ, 0 , for any h ∈ H 1 0 , we obtain (i). It is easy (cid:3) 4 Intertwining relations Let T1 ∈ L(H1) and T2 ∈ L(H2) be polynomially bounded operators, and let us assume that Q ∈ I(T1, T2). Given x ∈ H1 and y ∈ H2, set µ ∈ M (T2, Qx, y) and ν ∈ M (T1, x, Q∗y). For every u ∈ A(T), we have ZT u dµ = hu(T2)Qx, yi = hu(T1)x, Q∗yi =ZT u dν, hence µ a∼ ν, and so M (T2, Qx, y) = M (T1, x, Q∗y). 14 Proposition 15 Let T1 ∈ L(H1) be an a.c. polynomially bounded operator, and let T2 ∈ L(H2) be a singular polynomially bounded operator. Then I(T1, T2) = {0} and I(T2, T1) = {0}. Proof. Let Q ∈ I(T1, T2) be arbitrary. Given x ∈ H1 and y ∈ H2, and setting µ ∈ M (T2, Qx, y) and ν ∈ M (T1, x, Q∗y), we obtain from the previous discussion that µ a∼ ν. Since µ is singular and ν is a.c., it follows that µ = 0. Then hQx, yi = RT 1 dµ = 0; and since x ∈ H1, y ∈ H2 were arbitrary, we conclude that Q = 0. Turning to adjoints and applying Proposition 14, we obtain that I(T2, T1) = {0} also holds. We recall that T1 is a quasiaffine transform of T2, in notation: T1 ≺ T2, if I(T1, T2) contains a quasiaffinity, i.e., an injective transformation with dense range. Proposition 16 Let T1 ∈ L(H1) and T2 ∈ L(H2) be polynomially bounded operators, and let us assume that T1 ≺ T2. Then (cid:3) (i) T1 is a.c. if and only if T2 is a.c.; (ii) T1 is singular if and only if T2 is singular. 2 + T s 2 ∈ L(H2) be the (oblique) projection onto Hs Proof. Let us assume that T1 is a.c., and let us consider the Lebesgue de- composition T2 = T a 2 of T2. There exists a quasiaffinity Q ∈ I(T1, T2). Let P s 2. Since the transformation Qs ∈ L(H1, Hs 2 , we infer by Proposition 15 that Qs = 0. Thus QH1 ⊂ Ha 2, and since Q has dense range, we obtain that Hs 2 = {0}. Therefore T2 is a.c.. Conversely, assuming that T2 is a.c., the relation T ∗ 1 is a.c., and then so is T1 too by Proposition 14. Statement (ii) can be proved similarly. 2 Qx (x ∈ H1), intertwines T1 with T s 2), defined by Qsx := P s 2 ≺ T ∗ 1 yields that T ∗ Let U ∈ L(K) be a unitary operator. Relying on the Gelfand transform of the abelian C∗-algebra generated by U , it can be shown that there exists a uniquely determined isometric ∗-representation Φ : C(σ(U )) → L(K) such that Φ(χ) = U . Here σ(U ) ⊂ T is the spectrum of U . This Φ induces a contractive ∗- (cid:3) representation eΦ : C(T) → L(K), defined by f (U ) = eΦ(f ) := Φ(f σ(U )). Since eΦP(T) = ΦU,0, it follows that U is polynomially bounded with kΦU,0k = 1; furthermore eΦA(T) = ΦU,1. It is known also that eΦ can be represented by integration with respect to a uniquely determined spectral measure E : BT → P(K); see, e.g., [C]. (Here BT denotes the σ-algebra of Borel sets on T, and P(K) stands for the set of orthogonal projections on K.) Namely, for every f ∈ C(T), hf (U )x, yi =ZT f dEx,y (x, y ∈ K), 15 where Ex,y ∈ M (T) is the localization of E to x, y, defined by Ex,y(ω) := hE(ω)x, yi (ω ∈ BT). Therefore M (U, x, y) = {Ex,y + h dm : h ∈ H 1 0 }. We recall that the unitary operator U is called a.c. (singular, resp.), if Ex,y is a.c. (singular, resp.) for every x, y ∈ K. The previous relation shows that these properties coincide with the corresponding properties considering U as a polynomially bounded operator. Let us consider the Lebesgue decomposition U = U a + U s ∈ L(K = Ka + Ks). Since Ka ∈ Hlat U and U ∗ = U −1 ∈ {U }′, it follows that Ka is reducing for U , and so the orthogonal projection Qa ∈ L(K) onto Ka commutes with U . Therefore QaKs ∈ I(U s, U a), whence QaKs = 0 follows by Proposition 15. We conclude that Ka is orthogonal to Ks. (For a discussion of Lebesgue decom- position of unitaries, based on spectral measures, see [Ha].) Let us consider now a contraction T ∈ L(H) : kT k ≤ 1. It is known that T can be decomposed into the orthogonal sum T = Tc ⊕ U ∈ L(H = Hc ⊕ Hu) of a completely non-unitary contraction Tc and a unitary operator U . By Sz.-Nagy's Dilation Theorem Tc has a minimal unitary dilation W , acting on a Hilbert space K, containing Hc. We recall that W is an a.c. unitary operator, T n c = PcW nHc n=1W −nHc. (Here Pc ∈ L(K) is the orthogonal for every n ∈ Z+, and K = ∨∞ projection onto Hc.) In connection with the theory of contractions we refer to [NFBK]. For every p ∈ P(T), we have kp(Tc)k = kPcp(W )Hck ≤ kp(W )k ≤ kpk, what is called the von Neumann inequality, and so Tc is polynomially bounded. Since, for any x, y ∈ Hc, hu(Tc)x, yi = hPcu(W )x, yi = hu(W )x, yi holds for every u ∈ A(T), we infer that M (Tc, x, y) = M (W, x, y). Therefore Tc is a.c.. Considering the decomposition T = Tc ⊕ U a ⊕ U s, we can see that the a.c. component of T is T a = Tc ⊕ U a, while the singular part is T s = U s. If T ∈ L(H) is a polynomially bounded operator, U ∈ L(K) is a singular unitary operator, and T ≺ U , then T is singular by Proposition 16. The fol- lowing theorem, which in different forms can be found in [AT] and [M4], states that there must be a much stronger relation between T and U in that case. Theorem 17 If T ∈ L(H) is a singular polynomially bounded operator, then (i) the funcional calculus ΦT,1 : A(T) → L(H) can be extended to a bounded representation eΦT,1 : C(T) → L(H); (ii) the operator X ∈ I(T, U ) is invertible, whenever (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T ; and so T is similar to the singular unitary operator U . 16 Proof. (i): We repeat the procedure carried out in the first part of the proof of Proposition 10. We shall write Φ = ΦT,1 and eΦ = eΦT,1 for short. For any x, y ∈ H, there exists a unique singular measure µx,y in M (T, x, y). Let us consider the bounded sesquilinear mapping wT : H × H → M (T), wT (x, y) = µx,y. For any g ∈ C(T), Λg : M (T) → C is defined by Λg(µ) =RT g dµ. The bounded sesquilinear functional wT,g := Λg ◦ wT : H × H → C uniquely determines an operator eΦ(g) ∈ L(H): heΦ(g)x, yi = wT,g(x, y) =ZT g dµx,y (x, y ∈ H). C(T), f i =ZT For v ∈ A(T), we have v dµx,y = µxv,y by Lemma 12. Thus, for any f ∈ Thus, the singular measures f dµx,y and µx,y∗ so they must coincide: f dµx,y = µx,y∗ f f dµxv ,y = heΦ(f )xv, yi = heΦ(f )Φ(v)x, yi, f =eΦ(f )∗y, for every v ∈ A(T), We know that keΦ(g)k ≤ kΦkkgk. It is clear also that eΦ is linear. We have to show yet that eΦ is multiplicative. f v dµx,y =ZT heΦ(f v)x, yi =ZT whence eΦ(f v) =eΦ(f )Φ(v) follows. Setting y∗ ZT vf dµx,y = heΦ(f v)x, yi = heΦ(f )Φ(v)x, yi = hΦ(v)x, y∗ heΦ(f g)x, yi =ZT f i = heΦ(f )eΦ(g)x, yi = heΦ(g)x, y∗ holds for every x, y ∈ H. Consequently, eΦ(f g) =eΦ(f )eΦ(g). (ii): By the multiplicativity ofeΦ we infer that T is invertible andeΦ(χn) = T n holds, for every n ∈ Z. Since kT nk ≤ keΦk = kΦk for all n ∈ Z, a well- known theorem of Sz.-Nagy yields that T is similar to a unitary operator V ; see [N]. Let Q ∈ I(T, V ) be invertible. The polynomially bounded operator T is necessarily power bounded, and so it has a unitary asymptote (X, U ). There exists a unique Y ∈ I(U, V ) such that Q = Y X. Since Q is invertible, it follows that X is bounded from below. The isometry U X is singular by Proposition 16. Considering its Wold decomposition, we can see that U X is unitary. Hence XH is reducing for U , and so the minimality of (X, U ) yields that X is a surjection. f g dµx,y =ZT are analytically equivalent, and v dµx,y∗ . f . Taking any g ∈ C(T), f g dµx,y∗ f 17 Therefore X is invertible, and then Y must be invertible too. Consequently, the operators T, U and V are similar to each other. (cid:3) We conclude this section with a discussion of further intertwining relations. Since Hilbert space contractions have a rich theory (see [NFBK]), it would be im- portant to know how more general operators can be related to contractions. An- swering a question posed by Sz.-Nagy, Foguel gave examples for power bounded operators which are not similar to contractions; see [F]. Pisier answered nega- tively also a more delicate question of Halmos, showing that not every polynomi- ally bounded operator is similar to a contraction; see [Pi]. Muller and Tomilov proved, giving negative answer for a question of the author posed in [K1], that there are power bounded operators of class C11 which are not similar to con- tractions; see [MT]. We recall that T ∈ C11 means H0(T ) = H0(T ∗) = {0}, and in that case T is quasisimilar to its unitary asymptote U : T ∼ U , that is T ≺ U and U ≺ T hold simultaneously. Question 18 If the polynomially bounded operator T is of class C11, is T sim- ilar to a contraction? For additional conditions under which a power bounded operator is similar to a contraction see [G2]. We note yet that by a fundamental characterization due to Paulsen, exactly those operators are similar to contractions which are completely bounded; see [Pa]. Quasisimilarity is a much weaker relation than similarity, but it preserves also numerous properties and plays important role in the classification of opera- tors; see, e.g., [B] and [DH]. Muller and Tomilov showed that a power bounded operator T is not necessarily quasisimilar to a contraction [MT]. On the other hand, Bercovici and Prunaru proved that if T is a polynomially bounded oper- ator, then there exist contractions T1 and T2 such that T1 ≺ T ≺ T2; see [BP]. As far as we know, the following questions are still open. Question 19 Is every polynomially bounded operator quasisimilar to a contrac- tion? Question 20 If the power bounded operator T is quasisimilar to a singular unitary operator V , does it follow that T is similar to V ? The latter question is connected with Theorem 17, and was posed in [K1]. Partial answer for it can be found in [G1]. 5 H ∞-functional calculus The Hardy class H ∞ is the weak-∗ closed subalgebra of L∞(T), consisting of those functions f whose Fourier coefficients satisfy the condition bf (−n) = 0 for n ∈ N. H ∞ can be identified as the dual of the Banach space L1(T)/H 1 0 . 18 For a detailed study of this class see [Ho]. Sz.-Nagy and Foias introduced H ∞- functional calculus for a.c. contractions, and thoroughly exploited its properties in their theory of contractions; see [NFBK] and [B]. In Chapter 2 of [CP] H ∞- functional calculus is defined for a polynomially bounded operator T acting on a complex Banach space X , which is stable, that is limn→∞ kT nxk = 0 holds for avery x ∈ X . In [M1] and [M3] Mlak considered representations of general function algebras. Here we follow Mlak's method of elementary measures, con- centrating on H ∞, and providing detailed study of the calculus in this case. We note that in [K6] our approach was based on the unitary asymptote in the C1·-case, that is when H0(T ) = {0}. We recall that L(H) is the dual of the Banach space C1(H) of trace class operators. Namely, the mapping Λ : L(H) → C1(H)#, defined by [A, Λ(C)] = tr(AC), is a Banach space isomorphism; see [Sch]. We say that the operator T ∈ L(H) admits an H ∞-functional calculus, if there exists a weak-∗ continuous representation ΦT,2 : H ∞ → L(H) such that ΦT,2(χ) = T . In that case we use the notation ΦT,2(f ) = f (T ) (f ∈ H ∞). In the following proposition we collect some basic facts about this calculus. Proposition 21 If T ∈ L(H) admits an H ∞-functional calculus, then (i) ΦT,2 is uniquely determined; (ii) ΦT,2 is norm-continuous; (iii) T is polynomially bounded, ΦT,2A(T) = ΦT,1, and kΦT,2k = kΦT,1k; (iv) H ∞(T ) := ran ΦT,2 ⊂ {T }′′; (v) Lat T = Lat H ∞(T ); (vi) for every M ∈ Lat T, T M admits an H ∞-functional calculus, and f (T M) = f (T )M (f ∈ H ∞). Proof. (i): Let us assume that Φj : H ∞ → L(H) is a weak-∗ continuous repre- sentation, for j = 1, 2, and that Φ1(χ) = Φ2(χ) holds. Then Φ1(p) = Φ2(p) is true, for every polynomial p ∈ P(T). Taking an arbitrary f ∈ H ∞, the Cesaro means of the Fourier series of f converge to f in the weak-∗ topology, as n → ∞; see, e.g., Chapter 2 in [Ho]. By continuity we obtain that Φ1(f ) = Φ2(f ). (ii): For short we write Φ = ΦT,2. The unit ball (H ∞)1 := {f ∈ H ∞ : kf k ≤ 1} is weak-∗ compact by the Banach -- Alaoglu Theorem. Since Φ is weak-∗ continuous, it follows that Φ(H ∞)1 is weak-∗ compact in L(H). Thus {[A, Φ(f )] : f ∈ (H ∞)1} is compact and so bounded in C, for every A ∈ C1(H). Then the Uniform Boundedness Principle yields that Φ(H ∞)1 is bounded in L(H), which means the norm-continuity of Φ. σf,n = nXk=0(cid:18)1 − k n + 1(cid:19)bf (k)χk 19 (iii): Since ΦP(T) = ΦT,0, we infer from (ii) that ΦT,0 is bounded: kΦT,0k ≤ kΦk. Hence T is polynomially bounded, and ΦA(T) = ΦT,1. Furthermore, for any f ∈ H ∞, we have kΦ(σf,n)k ≤ kΦT,0k · kf k (n ∈ N). Taking into account that w∗-limn Φ(σf,n) = Φ(f ), we conlude that kΦ(f )k ≤ kΦT,0k · kf k. Therefore kΦk = kΦT,0k = kΦT,1k. The statements (iv), (v), (vi) can be easily derived from the fact that H ∞ is the (sequentially) weak-∗ closure of P(T). (cid:3) The following lemma shows that it is enough to check seemingly weaker conditions in order to prove that a mapping is an H ∞-functional calculus. Lemma 22 If Φ : H ∞ → L(H) is a linear mapping, ΦA(T) is a representa- tion, and limnhΦ(fn)x, yi = 0 for every x, y ∈ H whenever w∗-limn fn = 0, then Φ is an H ∞-functional calculus. Proof. Let us assume that the sequence {fn}∞ n=1 in H ∞ converges to zero in the weak-∗ topology. By the assumption, the operators {Φ(fn)}∞ n=1 converge to zero in the weak operator topology (wot). The Uniform Boundedness Principle yields that M = sup{kΦ(fn)k : n ∈ N} < ∞. Taking an arbitrary operator A ∈ C1(H), let us consider the Hilbert -- Schmidt decomposition A = Pk sk xk ⊗ yk. Here {xk}k and {yk}k form orthonormal systems, sk ≥ 0 for all k, and Pk sk = kAk1 < ∞. These conditions imply that lim n→∞ tr(Φ(fn)A) = lim skhΦ(fn)xk, yki = 0. n→∞Xk Thus the functional ΛA ◦ Φ is sequentially weak-∗ continuous, where the weak-∗ continuous functional ΛA : L(H) → C is defined by ΛA(C) = tr(CA). By the Krein -- Smulian Theorem ΛA ◦ Φ is weak-∗ continuous; see Corollary V.12.8 in [C]. Therefore, Φ is also weak-∗ continuous; see Proposition 1.3.2 in [KR]. Setting any f, g ∈ H ∞, we know that Φ(σf,nσg,k) = Φ(σf,n)Φ(σg,k) holds for every n, k ∈ N. Since w∗-limn σf,n = f , we infer by the sequentially weak- ∗ -- wot continuity of Φ that Φ(f σg,k) = Φ(f )Φ(σg,k). Tending now k to infinity, we conclude that Φ(f g) = Φ(f )Φ(g). (cid:3) Theorem 23 The operator T ∈ L(H) admits an H ∞-functional calculus, if and only if T is an absolutely continuous polynomially bounded operator. Proof. Let us assume that T admits an H ∞-functional calculus. Then T is necessarily polynomially bounded by Proposition 21. Suppose that T is not a.c., and consider the Lebesgue decomposition T = T a + T s ∈ L(H = Ha + Hs), where Hs 6= {0}. In view of Proposition 21, T s admits an H ∞-functional calculus. We know by Theorem 17 that T s is similar to a singular unitary operator U ∈ L(K), let Q ∈ I(T, U ) be invertible. It is clear that ΦU,2(f ) := QΦT,2(f )Q−1 (f ∈ H ∞) defines an H ∞-calculus for U . Let E denote the spectral measure of U . Taking a non-zero vector x ∈ K, let us consider the 20 positive measure Ex,x. We know that Ex,x is singular and Ex,x(T) = kxk2 > 0. In view of regularity we can find a compact set K ⊂ T such that m(K) = 0 and Ex,x(K) > 0. By a result of Rudin there exists a function u ∈ A(T) such that u(ζ) = 1 for all ζ ∈ K, and u(ζ) < 1 for all ζ ∈ T \ K; see page 81 in [Ho]. Since w∗-limn un = 0, regarding the continuity properties of ΦU,2 it follows that limnhun(U )x, xi = 0. However, lim n→∞ hun(U )x, xi = lim n→∞ZT un dEx,x = Ex,x(K) > 0. We arrived at a contradiction, and so the polynomially bounded operator T must be absolutely continuous. Let us assume now that T is an a.c. polynomially bounded operator. Let f ∈ H ∞. Given any x, y ∈ H, let us choose an elementary measure µx,y ∈ M (T, x, y). Being abolutely continuous, µx,y = gx,y dm where gx,y ∈ L1(T); M (T, x, y) is of the form ν = µx,y + h dm with h ∈ H 1 hence the integral RT f dµx,y = RT f gx,y dm can be formed. Any other ν ∈ 0 , and so RT f dν = RT f dµx,y +RT f h dm = RT f dµx,y, because f h ∈ H 1 0 . Let us consider the well-defined mapping wf : H × H → C, wf (x, y) =ZT f dµx,y. It is easy to check that wf is sesquilinear, and kwf k ≤ kf k · kΦT,1k. There exists a unique operator Φ(f ) ∈ L(H) such that hΦ(f )x, yi = wf (x, y) =ZT f dµx,y (x, y ∈ H). It is clear that Φ : H ∞ → L(H) is linear, and ΦA(T) = ΦT,1 is a representation. If {fn}∞ n=1 is a sequence in H ∞ converging to 0 in the weak-∗ topology, then lim n→∞ hΦ(fn)x, yi = lim n→∞ZT fngx,y dm = 0 (x, y ∈ H). Applying Lemma 22 we obtain that Φ is an H ∞-functional calculus for T . (cid:3) Proposition 24 If T ∈ L(H) admits an H ∞-functional calculus, then so does Proof. We have seen that T is an a.c. polynomially bounded operator if and only if so is T ∗; see Proposition 14. Furthermore, for any polynomial p ∈ P(T) its adjoint T ∗. Furthermore, f (T ∗) = ef (T )∗ holds for every f ∈ H ∞. we have p(T ∗) = ep(T )∗. Let f ∈ H ∞ be arbitrary. Since w∗-limn σf,n = f and w∗-limneσf,n = ef , it follows that {σf,n(T ∗)}n converges to f (T ∗), and {eσf,n(T )}n converges to ef (T ) in the weak operator topology. The latter condi- tion implies that {eσf,n(T )∗}n converges to ef (T )∗ in wot. Therefore, the equal- ities σf,n(T ∗) =eσf,n(T )∗ (n ∈ N) yield that f (T )∗ = ef (T )∗. (cid:3) 21 6 Quasianalytic operators Let T ∈ L(H) be an a.c. polynomially bounded operator. Let (X, U ) be a unitary asymptote of T , where U ∈ L(K). Taking the Lebesgue decomposition U = U a ⊕ U s ∈ L(K = Ka ⊕ Ks), and considering the transformation Y ∈ I(T, U s), defined by Y h = P sXh, we infer by Proposition 15 that Y = 0. Hence XH ⊂ Ka, and it follows by the minimality of (X, U ) that Ks = {0}. Therefore, U is an a.c. unitary operator. Let E : BT → P(K) denote the spectral measure of U . For any x, y ∈ H, the localization of E at Xx, Xy is of the form EXx,Xy = wx,y dm, where wx,y ∈ L1(T) is the asymptotic density function of T at x, y. We note that EXx,Xy ∈ M (T, x, Ay) with A = X ∗X (see the beginning of Section 4), and EXx,Xx is the unique positive measure in M (T, x, Ax). The measurable set ω(T, x) := {ζ ∈ T : wx,x(ζ) > 0} is called the local residual set of T at x. Considering the functional model of the unitary operator U , we may easily check that the hyperinvariant subspace of U generated by Xx is just the spectral subspace corresponding to ω(T, x): E(ω(T, x))K = ∨{F Xx : F ∈ {U }′} ∈ Hlat U. More precisely, ω(T, x) is the smallest measurable set on T such that E(ω(T, x))K contains Xx, that is Xx ∈ E(α)K implies m(ω(T, x) \ α) = 0; see, e.g., [C]. Proposition 25 The local residual set ω(T, x) is independent of the particular choice of the unitary asymptote (X, U ). Proof. Let (X ′, U ′) be another unitary asymptote of T ; E′ is the spectral measure of U ′ ∈ L(K′), and ω′(T, x) is the local residual set of T at x, defined via E′. We know that there is an invertible transformation Z ∈ I(U, U ′) such that X ′ = ZX. Let us consider the polar decomposition Z = W Z, where Z ≥ 0 is invertible and W is unitary. It is easy to verify that Z ∈ {U }′ and W U = U ′W . Since the vector X ′x = ZXx belongs to the subspace ZE(ω(T, x))K = W ZE(ω(T, x))K = W E(ω(T, x))ZK = E′(ω(T, x))K′, it follows that m(ω′(T, x) \ ω(T, x)) = 0. Changing the roles of (X, U ) and (X ′, U ′) we obtain that the symmetric difference ω(T, x) △ ω′(T, x) is of zero Lebesgue measure, and so they can be considered identical. Note that the Radon -- Nikodym derivative wx,x, and so ω(T, x) also are determined up to sets of zero Lebesgue measure. (cid:3) 22 Let us consider the functional calculus ΦT,2 : H ∞ → L(H), f 7→ f (T ) for T . a We write KT = kΦT,2k for short. We recall that for f, g ∈ H ∞, f ≺ g means that f (z) ≤ g(z) for all z ∈ D := {ζ ∈ C : ζ < 1}. Then f = gh, where h ∈ H ∞ and khk ≤ 1. Thus kf (T )xk = kh(T )g(T )xk ≤ KT kg(T )xk (x ∈ H), a ≺ KT g(T ). (If T is a contraction, then KT = 1 and so ΦT,2 is that is f (T ) a monotone.) Let F = {fn}∞ ≺ fn for every n. The measurable limit function ϕF (ζ) = limn fn(ζ) is defined for almost every ζ ∈ T. Set n=1 be a decreasing sequence in H ∞, i.e. fn+1 NF := {ζ ∈ T : ϕF (ζ) > 0}. We say that F is asymptotically non-vanishing on the measurable set α ⊂ T, if m(α ∩ NF ) > 0. Proposition 26 If inf{kfn(T )xk : n ∈ N} = 0, then limn→∞ kfn(T )xk = 0. Furthermore, H0(T, F ) := {x ∈ H : lim n→∞ kfn(T )xk = 0} is a hyperinvariant subspace of T . Proof. The first statement follows from the condition fn+1(T ) N), while the second one is a consequence of sup{kfn(T )k : n ∈ N} < ∞. a ≺ KT fn(T ) (n ∈ (cid:3) The following theorem shows that the local residual set is responsible for local stability. Theorem 27 (a) If x ∈ H0(T, F ), then m(Nf ∩ ω(T, x)) = 0. (b) If m(NF ∩ ω(T, x)) = 0, then there exists a strictly increasing mapping τ : N → N such that x ∈ H0(T, G), where G = {χτ (n)fn}∞ n=1. Proof. For any x ∈ H, we have kXfn(T )xk2 = kfn(U )Xxk2 =ZT and the latter integral converges to RT ϕ2 F wx,x dm by Lebesgue's Dominated Convergence Theorem, as n → ∞. Hence (a) follows, and we obtain (b) also by applying Theorem 5. Note that ϕG = ϕF . fn2wx,x dm (n ∈ N), The previous theorem tells us that if the decreasing sequence F = {fn}∞ n=1 in H ∞ is asymptotically non-vanishing on ω(T, x), then x 6∈ H0(T, F ), that is the vector-sequence {fn(T )x}∞ n=1 is asymptotically non-vanishing. On the other hand, if F is asymptotically vanishing on ω(T, x), then a modified (strengthened) sequence {T τ (n)fn(T )x}∞ n=1 is asymptotically vanishing (stable) with a suitable mapping τ . (cid:3) 23 It is known that the measurable sets on T form a complete lattice, if we disregard of sets of measure zero. Hence, for any measurable sets α, β on T, we shall write α ⊂ β, α = β or α 6= β, when m(α \ β) = 0, m(α △ β) = 0 or m(α △ β) > 0, respectively. The following statement can be proved using the Gelfand transform of the abelian Banach algebra L∞(T); see Section 11.13 in [R]. Here we sketch an elementary proof. Lemma 28 For any system of measurable sets {ωi}i∈I on T, there exist a smallest measurable set ω = ∨i∈I ωi containing all ωi, and a largest measur- able set ω = ∧i∈I ωi contained in all ωi. Furthermore, ω and ω are uniquely determined. Proof. Let Ω be the system of those measurable sets, which contain (in the extended sense) every ωi (i ∈ I). It is clear that Ω is closed under countable n=1 in intersection. Set a = inf{m(ω) : ω ∈ Ω}, and select a sequence {bωn}∞ Ω so that limn m(bωn) = a. Then it is easy to verify that the measurable set n=1bωn has the required properties. The statement about ω can be proved ω = ∩∞ similarly, considering the system Ω of those measurable sets, which are contained in every ωi (i ∈ I), and then taking b = sup{m(ω) : ω ∈ Ω}. (cid:3) The set ω(T ) := ∨{ω(T, x) : x ∈ H} is called the residual set of T . It is clear that ω(T ) is the measurable support of the spectral measure E of U , that is E(α) = 0 exactly when m(α ∩ ω(T )) = 0. Furthermore, ω(T ) = ∅ means that K = {0}, that is H0(T ) = H, in which case T is called of class C0·. The set π(T ) := ∧{ω(T, x) : 0 6= x ∈ H} In view of Theorem 27, this is is called the quasianalytic spectral set of T . the largest measurable set with the property that H0(T, F ) = {0}, whenever n=1 is a decreasing sequence in H ∞, asymptotically non-vanishing on F = {fn}∞ π(T ). We can characterize π(T ) also with more general sequences, as in the next proposition. (For related results in connection with test sequences of stability, see [KSz1].) Proposition 29 If F = {fn}∞ lim supn kχπ(T )fnk2 > 0, then the hyperinvariant subspace n=1 is a bounded sequence in H ∞ such that H0(T, F ) := {x ∈ H : lim n→∞ kfn(T )xk = 0} reduces to zero. Furthermore, π(T ) is the largest measurable set having this property. Proof. Let F = {fn}∞ lim supnRπ(T ) fn2 dm > 0. Set M = sup{kfnk∞ : n ∈ N} < ∞. Further- more, given 0 6= x ∈ H, let α(x, N ) := {ζ ∈ π(T ) : wx,x(ζ) > N −1} for N ∈ N. n=1 be a bounded sequence in H ∞ such that c = 24 We can select N so that M 2m(π(T ) \ α(x, N )) < c/2. For every n ∈ N, we have ZT Hence fn2wx,x dm ≥ N −1Zα(x,N ) = N −1 Zπ(T ) ≥ N −1(cid:0)kχπ(T )fnk2 n→∞ ZT kXfn(T )xk2 = lim sup lim sup n→∞ fn2 dm fn2 dm! fn2 dm −Zπ(T )\α(x,N ) 2 − M 2m(π(T ) \ α(x, N ))(cid:1) fn2wx,x dm ≥ N −1c/2 > 0, and so x is not stable for F . Therefore H0(T, F ) = {0}. Let β be a measurable set on T, larger than π(T ) : β ⊃ π(T ) and β 6= π(T ). By the definition of π(T ) we can find a non-zero x0 ∈ H so that β is not contained in ω(T, x0), that is ∆ = β \ ω(T, x0) is of positive measure. Let f0 ∈ H ∞ be an outer function satisfying the condition f0 = χ∆ + (1/2)χT\∆, and let us consider the decreasing sequence F0 = {f n In view of Theorem 27, there exists a strictly increasing τ : N → N such that x0 ∈ H0(T, F ) with F = {χτ (n)f n n=1 in H ∞, with ϕF0 = χ∆. n=1. It is clear also that 0 }∞ 0 }∞ lim n→∞ which completes the proof. kχβχτ (n)f n 0 k2 2 = m(∆) > 0, (cid:3) The absolutely continuous polynomially bounded operator T ∈ L(H) is quasianalytic, if π(T ) = ω(T ) 6= ∅. We note that π(T ) ⊂ ω(T ) is evident from the definition. Theorem 3 in [KSz2] shows that our definition is consistent with the one given in the contractive case. The following theorem illuminates the importance of quasianalytic operators, showing that the challenging Hyperinvariant Subspace Problem can be reduced to this class in the asymptotically non-vanishing case. Theorem 30 Let T ∈ L(H) be an absolutely continuous polynomially bounded operator, which is asymptotically non-vanishing: H0(T ) 6= H. If T is not quasi- analytic, then it has a non-trivial hyperinvariant subspace. Proof. By our assumption we can find non-zero vectors x1, x2 ∈ H so that ω(T, x2) is not contained in ω(T, x1), that is the set ∆ = ω(T, x2) \ ω(T, x1) is of positive measure. There exists a decreasing sequence F = {fn}∞ n=1 in H ∞ such that x1 ∈ H0(T, F ) and NF = ∆; see the second part of the proof of Proposition 29. The latter relation implies by Theorem 27 that x2 6∈ H0(T, F ). Therefore, H0(T, F ) is a proper hyperinvariant subspace of T . (cid:3) The preceding proof immediately yields the following statement. 25 Proposition 31 Let T1 ∈ L(H1) and T2 ∈ L(H2) be a.c. polynomially bounded operators. If ω(T2, x2) is not contained in ω(T1, x1), then there exists a decreas- ing sequence F in H ∞ such that x1 ∈ H0(T1, F ) and x2 6∈ H0(T2, F ). We proceed with some intertwining relations. Proposition 32 Let T1 ∈ L(H1) and T2 ∈ L(H2) be a.c. polynomially bounded operators. (a) If Y ∈ I(T1, T2), then ω(T1, x) ⊃ ω(T2, Y x) holds for every x ∈ H1. (b) If I(T1, T2) contains an injection Y , then π(T1) ⊃ π(T2). (c) If both I(T1, T2) and I(T2, T1) contain injections, then π(T1) = π(T2). (d) If I(T1, T2) contains a transformation Z with dense range, then ω(T1) ⊃ ω(T2). (e) If T1 ∼ T2, then π(T1) = π(T2) and ω(T1) = ω(T2). (f) If T1 ∼ T2 and T1 is quasianalytic, then T2 is also quasianalytic. Proof. The equations Y fn(T1) = fn(T2)Y (n ∈ N) show that Y H0(T1, F ) ⊂ n=1 in H ∞. In view of H0(T2, F ) holds, for any decreasing sequence F = {fn}∞ Proposition 31 we infer that ω(T1, x) ⊃ ω(T2, Y x) for every x ∈ H1. Assuming that Y ∈ I(T1, T2) is injective, this relation yields π(T2) = ∧{ω(T2, y) : 0 6= y ∈ H2} ⊂ ∧{ω(T1, x) : 0 6= x ∈ H1} = π(T1). Let us assume now that Z ∈ I(T1, T2) has dense range. Let (Xj, Uj) be a unitary asymptote of Tj (j = 1, 2). Since X2Z ∈ I(T1, U2), there exists a 1 X1H1)− = ∨n∈NU −n 2 X2H2 = K2. unique eZ ∈ I(U1, U2) such that X2Z = eZX1. It follows that (eZK1)− = (eZ ∨n∈N U −n Considering the polar decomposition eZ = W eZ we obtain that W ∈ I(U1, U2) is a coisometry, and so U2 is unitarily equivalent to the restriction of U1 to its reducing subspace (ker W )⊥. Therefore, the measurable support ω(T1) of the spectral measure of U1 contains the measurable support ω(T2) of the spectral measure of U2. 2 eZX1H1 = ∨n∈NU −n Quasianalicity determines the asymptotic behaviour of the operator. Proposition 33 If the a.c. polynomially bounded operator T ∈ L(H) is quasi- analytic, then T is of class C10 : H0(T ) = {0} and H0(T ∗) = H. (cid:3) 26 Proof. Taking the decreasing sequence F0 = {χn}∞ n=1 in H ∞, we infer that H0(T ) = H0(T, F0) = {0} since NF0 ∩ π(T ) = π(T ) 6= ∅; see Proposition 29. Assuming that H0(T ∗) 6= H, let us consider a unitary asymptote (X ∗ ∗ ) of the adjoint T ∗. Then the a.c. unitary operator U∗ acts on a non-zero space K∗, and X∗ ∈ I(U∗, T ) is a non-zero transformation. The equations X∗U∗ = T X∗ and X∗ = T X∗U ∗ ∗ imply that the subspace ker X∗ is reducing for U∗, because of ker T ⊂ H0(T ) = {0}. Let us consider the restriction U∗,0 of U∗ to the non-zero reducing subspace K∗ ⊖ ker X∗. Since I(U∗,0, T ) contains an injection, we infer by Proposition 32 that π(U∗,0) ⊃ π(T ). However, it is clear that π(U∗,0) = ∅ holds for the a.c. unitary operator U∗,0, and so π(T ) = ∅, what is a contradiction. (cid:3) ∗ , U ∗ Now we examine the effect of taking orthogonal sums. Proposition 34 Let Tj ∈ L(Hj ) be a.c. polynomially bounded operator acting on non-zero space, for j = 1, 2, and let us form T = T1 ⊕ T2 ∈ L(H = H1 ⊕ H2). (a) Then T is also an a.c. polynomially bounded operator with π(T ) = π(T1) ∩ π(T2) and ω(T ) = ω(T1) ∪ ω(T2). (b) T is quasianalytic if and only if T1 and T2 are quasianalytic and π(T1) = π(T2). Proof. Setting x = x1 ⊕ x2, y = y1 ⊕ y2 ∈ H, and µ1 ∈ M (T1, x1, y1), µ2 ∈ M (T2, x2, y2), we have hu(T )x, yi = hu(T1)x1, y1i + hu(T2)x2, y2i =ZT u d(µ1 + µ2) for every u ∈ A(T); hence µ1 + µ2 ∈ M (T, x, y). Therefore T is an a.c. polyno- mially bounded operator. Let (Xj, Uj) be a unitary asymptote of Tj, for j = 1, 2. We know that (X, U ) will be a unitary asymptote of T , where X = X1 ⊕ X2 and U = U1 ⊕ U2; see Corollary 6. Furthermore, if E is the spectral measure of U , then EKj will be the spectral measure of Uj (j = 1, 2). Thus, for any x = x1 ⊕ x2 ∈ H we have EXx,Xx = EX1x1,X1x1 + EX2x2,X2x2, whence ω(T, x) = ω(T1, x1) ∪ ω(T2, x2) can be derived. From here the statement follows. (cid:3) We conclude with the properties of invariant subspaces. Proposition 35 Let T ∈ L(H) be an a.c. polynomially bounded operator, and let us assume that M ∈ Lat T is non-zero. (a) Then T M is also an a.c polynomially bounded operator with π(T ) ⊂ π(T M) ⊂ ω(T M) ⊂ ω(T ). (b) If T is quasianalytic, then T M is also quasianalytic and π(T M) = π(T ). 27 Proof. It is clear that M (T M, x, y) = M (T, x, y) holds for every x, y ∈ M. Hence, T M is an a.c. polynomially bounded operator. We know that if (X, U ) is a unitary asymptote of T , then (XM, U fM) is a unitary asymptote of T M; see Corollary 7. Thus, ω(T M, x) = ω(T, x) holds, for every x ∈ M. (cid:3) We recall that if T ∈ L(H) is an a.c. contraction with ω(T ) = T, then there exists M ∈ Lat T such that T M is similar to the simple unilateral shift S ∈ L(H 2), Sf = χf ; even more, these shift-type invariant subspaces span the whole space H (see Theorem IX.3.6 in [NFBK] and [K7]). Question 36 Let T ∈ L(H) be an a.c. polynomially bounded operator with ω(T ) = T (or π(T ) = T). Does there exist a non-zero M ∈ Lat T such that T M is similar to a contraction? If π(T ) = T, then such an M clearly contains a subspace M′ ∈ Lat T , where T M′ is similar to S. It would be interesting to know whether Pisier's construc- tion provides completely non-contractive (i.e., having no M ∈ Lat T \ {0} such that T M is similar to a contraction) absolutely continuous polynomially bounded operators in the case, when ω(T ) = T or π(T ) = T. References [AT] [AM] [B] [BK] [BP] [CP] [CC] [C] T. Ando and K. Takahashi, On operators with unitary ρ-dilations, Ann. Polon. Math., 66 (1997), 11 -- 14. S. A. Argyros and P. Motakis, A reflexive hereditarily indecom- posable space with the hereditary invariant subspace property, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 108 (2014), 1381 -- 1416. H. Bercovici, Operator theory and arithmetic in H ∞, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 26, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, 1988. H. Bercovici and L. K´erchy, Spectral behaviour of C10- contractions, Operator Theory Live, Theta, Bucharest, 2010, 17 -- 33. H. Bercovici and B. Prunaru, Quasiaffine transforms of polynomi- ally bounded operators, Arch. Math. (Basel ), 71 (1998), 384 -- 387. I. Chalendar and J. R. Partington, Modern approaches to the invariant-subspace problem, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics 188, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011. B. Chevreau and A. Craciunescu, On a generalization of ρ- contractions, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), to appear. J. B. Conway, A course in functional analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990. 28 [DH] [E] [F] [G1] [G2] [GR] [Ha] [Ho] [KR] [K1] [K2] [K3] [K4] [K5] [K6] [K7] K. R. Davidson and D. A. Herrero, The Jordan form of a bitrian- gular operator, J. Funct. Anal., 94 (1990), 27 -- 73. G. Eckstein, Sur les op´erateurs de class Cρ, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 33 (1972), 349 -- 352. S. Foguel, A counterexample to a problem of Sz.-Nagy, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 15 (1964), 788 -- 790. M. F. Gamal', On power bounded operators that are quasiaffine transforms of singular unitaries, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 77 (2011), 589 -- 606. M. F. Gamal', A class of power bounded operators which are similar to contractions, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 80 (2014), 625 -- 637. S. Grivaux and M. Roginskaya, A general approach to Read's type constructions of operators without non-trivial invariant closed sub- spaces, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 109 (2014), 596 -- 652. P. R. Halmos, Introduction to Hilbert space and the theory of spectral multiplicity, Chelsea Publishing Company, New York, 1951. K. Hoffman, Banach spaces of analytic functions, Dover Publica- tions, Inc., New York, 1988. R. V. Kadison and J. R. Ringrose, Fundamentals of the theory of operator algebras, Volume I: Elementary theory, Graduate Studies in Mathematics 15, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, Rhode Island, 1997. L. K´erchy, Isometric asymptotes of power bounded operators, Indi- ana Univ. Math. J., 38 (1989), 173 -- 188. L. K´erchy, Operators with regular norm-sequences, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 63 (1997), 571 -- 605. L. K´erchy, Representations with regular norm-behaviour of discrete abelian semigroups, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 65 (1999), 701 -- 726. L. K´erchy, Hyperinvariant subspaces of operators with non-vanishing orbits, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 127 (1999), 1363 -- 1370. L. K´erchy, On the hyperinvariant subspace problem for asymptot- ically nonvanishing contractions, Operator Theory Adv. Appl., 127 (2001), 399 -- 422. L. K´erchy, Generalized Toeplitz operators, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 68 (2002), 373 -- 400. L. K´erchy, Shift-type invariant subspaces of contractions, J. Funct. Anal., 246 (2007), 281 -- 301. 29 [K8] [K9] [KL] [KM] [KT] L. K´erchy, Quasianalytic contractions and function algebras, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 60 (2011), 21 -- 40. L. K´erchy, Unitary asymptotes and quasianalicity, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 79 (2013), 253 -- 271. L. K´erchy and Z. L´eka, Representations with regular norm- behaviour of locally compact abelian semigroups, Studia Mathematica, 183 (2007), 143 -- 160. L. K´erchy and V. Muller, Criteria of regularity for norm-sequences. II, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 65 (1999), 131 -- 138. L. K´erchy and V. Totik, Compression of quasianalytic spectral sets of cyclic contractions, J. Funct. Anal., 263 (2012), 2754 -- 2769. [KSz1] L. K´erchy and A. Szalai, Characterization of stability of contrac- tions, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 79 (2013), 325 -- 332. [KSz2] L. K´erchy and A. Szalai, Asymptotically cyclic quasianalytic con- tractions, Studia Mathematica, 223 (2014), 53 -- 75. [KSz3] L. K´erchy and A. Szalai, Spectral behaviour of quasianalytic con- tractions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., to appear. [M1] W. Mlak, Decompositions and extensions of operator valued repre- sentations of function algebras, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 30 (1969), 181 -- 193. [M2] W. Mlak, Decompositions of polynomially bounded operators, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. S´er. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys., 21 (1973), 317 -- 322. [M3] W. Mlak, Operator valued representations of function algebras, Lin- ear operators and approximation, II (Proc. Conf., Oberwolfach Math. Res. Inst., Oberwolfach, 1974), pp. 49 -- 79, Internat. Ser. Numer. Math. 25, Birkhauser, Basel, 1974. [M4] W. Mlak, Algebraic polynomially bounded operators, Ann. Polon. Math., 29 (1974), 133 -- 139. [MT] V. Muller and Y. Tomilov, Quasisimilarity of power bounded op- erators and Blum -- Hanson property, J. Funct. Anal., 246 (2007), 385 -- 399. [N] B. Sz.-Nagy, On uniformly bounded linear transformations in Hilbert space, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged ), 11 (1947), 152 -- 157. [NFBK] B. Sz.-Nagy, C. Foias, H. Bercovici and L. K´erchy, Harmonic analysis of operators on Hilbert space, Revised and enlarged edition, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2010. 30 [Pa] [Pi] [Pr] [RR] [R] [Sch] V. Paulsen, Completely bounded maps and operator algebras, Cam- bridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 78, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. G. Pisier, Similarity problems and completely bounded maps; Sec- ond, expanded edition, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1618, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 2001. B. Prunaru, Toeplitz operators associated to commuting row con- tractions, J. Funct. Anal., 254 (2008), 1626 -- 1641. H. Radjavi and P. Rosenthal, Invariant subspaces, Second edition, Dover Publications, INC., Mineola, New York, 2003. W. Rudin, Functional analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1973. R. Schatten, Norm ideals of completely continuous operators, Ergeb- nisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete 27, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1970. L. K´erchy, Bolyai Institute, University of Szeged, Aradi v´ertan´uk tere 1, H- 6720 Szeged, Hungary; e-mail : [email protected] 31
1811.08206	1	1811	2018-11-20T12:27:51	Continuous projections onto ideal convergent sequences	[ "math.FA", "math.GN" ]	Let $\mathcal{I}\subseteq\mathcal{P}(\omega)$ be a meager ideal. Then there are no continuous projections from $\ell_\infty$ onto the set of bounded sequences which are $\mathcal{I}$-convergent to $0$. In particular, it follows that the set of bounded sequences statistically convergent to $0$ is not isomorphic to $\ell_\infty$.	math.FA	math	CONTINUOUS PROJECTIONS ONTO IDEAL CONVERGENT SEQUENCES PAOLO LEONETTI Abstract. Let I ⊆ P(ω) be a meager ideal. Then there are no continuous projections from ℓ∞ onto the set of bounded sequences which are I-convergent to 0. In particular, it follows that the set of bounded sequences statistically convergent to 0 is not isomorphic to ℓ∞. 1. Introduction A closed subspace X of a Banach space B is said to be complemented in B if there exists a continuous projection from B onto X. It is known that c0, the space of real sequences convergent to 0, is not complemented in ℓ∞, cf. [10, 12]. The aim of this note is to show the ideal analogue of this result. Let I ⊆ P(ω) be an ideal, that is, a family closed under subsets and finite unions. It is also assumed that Fin := [ω]<ω ⊆ I and ω /∈ I. Set I + := P(ω) \ I. In particular, each I can be regarded as a subset of the Cantor space 2ω with the product topology, so we can speak of Borel ideals, Fσ ideals, etc. An ideal I is said to be a P-ideal if it is σ-directed modulo finite sets, i.e., for each sequence (An) in I there exists A ∈ I such that An \ A is finite for all n ∈ ω. We refer to [7] for a recent survey on ideals and filters. A real sequence (xn) is said to be I-convergent to y if {n : xn /∈ U} ∈ I for all neighborhoods U of y. We denote by c(I) [resp. c0(I)] the space of real sequences which are I-convergent [resp. I-convergent to 0]. The set of bounded real I- convergent sequences has been studied, e.g., in [2, 6, 8]. By an easy modification of [8, Theorem 2.3], c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ is a closed linear subspace of ℓ∞ (with the sup norm). The question addressed here, posed at the open problem session of the 45th Winter School in Abstract Analysis (Czech Republic, 2017), follows: Question 1. Is c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ complemented in ℓ∞? Before proving our main result, we recall the following: 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 40A35, 46B03. Secondary: 54A20, 46B26. Key words and phrases. Meager ideal, I-maximal almost disjoint family, complementability, asymptotic density zero sets, I-convergent sequence. 2 Paolo Leonetti Lemma 1.1. An infinite dimensional subspace X of ℓ∞ is complemented in ℓ∞ if and only if it is isomorphic to ℓ∞. Proof. See [1, Proposition 2.5.2 and Theorem 5.6.5]. (cid:3) Hence, Question 1 can be reformulated as: Question 2. Is c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ isomorphic to ℓ∞? We will prove that the answer is negative for a large class of ideals. To state our result, we recall that a family A ⊆ I + is said to be I-maximal-almost-disjoint (in short, I-mad) if A is a maximal family (with respect to inclusion) such that A ∩ B ∈ I for all distinct A, B ∈ A , so that for each X ∈ I + there exists A ∈ A such that X ∩ A ∈ I +. (The minimal cardinality a(I) of an I-mad has been studied in the literature: e.g., it is known that, if I is an analytic P-ideal, a(I) > ω if and only if I is Fσ, cf. [4, 5].) Our main result follows: Theorem 1.2. Let I be an ideal for which there exists an uncountable I-mad family. Then c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ is not complemented in ℓ∞. It can be shown that, if I is a meager ideal, there is an I-mad family of cardinality c, see Lemma 2.3 below. In particular Corollary 1.3. c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ is not complemented in (and not isomorphic to) ℓ∞ whenever I is meager. As an important example, the family of asymptotic density zero sets Z := {S ⊆ ω : S ∩ [1, n]/n → 0} is an analytic P-ideal, hence meager. Therefore: Corollary 1.4. The set of bounded real sequences statistically convergent to 0 (i.e., c0(Z)) is not is isomorphic to ℓ∞. Lastly, we obtain an analogue of the main result in [9] (for summability matri- ces): Corollary 1.5. c is complemented in c(I) ∩ ℓ∞ if and only if I = Fin. It is worth noting that Theorem 1.2 cannot be extended to all ideals I. Indeed, if I is maximal, then the set of bounded I-convergent sequences, which is isomorphic to c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞, is exactly ℓ∞. 2. Preliminaries and Proofs Thanks to Lemma 1.1, a negative question to Question 1 would follow if c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ was separable (indeed ℓ∞ is nonseparable, hence they cannot be isomorphic). However, this works only if I = Fin: Lemma 2.1. c0(I) is separable if and only if I = Fin. Projections onto ideal convergent sequences 3 Proof. The if part is known. Conversely, let us suppose that there exists A ∈ I ∩ [ω]ω. For each X ⊆ ω and ε > 0, let B(1X, ε) be the open ball with center 1X and radious ε. The collection B := {B(1X, 1/2) : X ∈ [A]ω} is an uncountable family of nonempty open sets which are pairwise disjoint, hence c0(I) is not separable. (cid:3) At this point, recall the following characterization, see [11] and [3, Theorem 4.1.2]: Lemma 2.2. I is a meager ideal if and only if there exists a finite-to-one function f : ω → ω such that f −1(A) ∈ I if and only if A is finite. In other words, the second condition is Fin ≤RB I, where ≤RB is the Rudin -- Blass ordering. This is sufficient to prove the existence of an uncountable I-mad family: Lemma 2.3. There exists an I-mad family of cardinality c, provided I is meager. [12]. Proof. It is known that there is a Fin-mad family A of cardinality c, cf. Then, thanks to Lemma 2.2, there exists a finite-to-one function f : ω → ω such that f −1(A) ∈ I if and only if A is finite, hence {f −1(A) : A ∈ A } is the claimed I-mad family. (cid:3) Let us prove our main result: Proof of Theorem 1.2. Let us suppose for the sake of contradiction that c0(I)∩ℓ∞ is complemented in ℓ∞ and denote by π : ℓ∞ → c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞ the canonical projection. Define T := I − π, hence T is bounded linear operator such that T (x) = 0 for each x ∈ c0(I) ∩ ℓ∞. Note also that, if B /∈ I, then 1B is a bounded sequence which is not I-convergent to 0, hence π(1B) 6= 1B and T (1B) 6= 0. At this point, let (Aj : j ∈ J) be an uncountable I-mad family, which exists by hypothesis. We are going to show that there exists j ∈ J such that T (1Aj ) = 0, which is impossible since Aj ∈ I +. Indeed, let us suppose that, for each j ∈ J, there exists xj = (xj,n) ∈ ℓ∞ supported on Aj with T (xj) 6= 0 and, without loss of generality, kxjk∞ = 1. It follows that there exists m, k ∈ ω such that J := {j ∈ J : xj,m ≥ 2−k} is uncountable. Also, by possibly replacing xj with −xj, let us suppose without loss of generality that xj,m > 0 for all j ∈ J. For each nonempty finite set F ⊆ J, define sF = (sF,n) := Pj∈F xj. In partic- ular, kT (sF )k∞ ≥ sF,m ≥ F 2−k. (1) Note also that I := S(Ai ∩ Aj), where the sum is extended over all distinct i, j ∈ F , belongs to I. This implies that the sequence sF ↾ I is I-convergent to 0, 4 Paolo Leonetti hence T (sF ) = T (sF ↾ I c). Therefore kT (sF )k∞ = kT (sF ↾ I c)k∞ ≤ kT k · ksF ↾ I ck∞ ≤ kT k, which, together with (1), implies F ≤ 2kkT k. This contradicts the fact the J is infinite. (cid:3) Proof of Corollary 1.5. There is nothing to prove if I = Fin. Conversely, fix I ∈ I \ Fin and define X := {x ∈ ℓ∞ : xi 6= 0 only if i ∈ I} and Y := X ∩ c0. It is clear that c ⊆ Y ⊆ X ⊆ c(I) ∩ ℓ∞ and that X and Y are isometric to ℓ∞ and c0, respectively. Hence, it is known that c can be projected continuously onto Y , let us say through T , see [10]. To conclude the proof, let us suppose that there exists a continuous projection H : c(I) ∩ ℓ∞ → c. Then the restriction T ◦ H ↾ X is a continuous projection ℓ∞ → c0. This contradicts Theorem 1.2 (in the case I = Fin). (cid:3) 2.1. Acknowledgments. The author is grateful to Tommaso Russo (Università degli Studi di Milano, IT) for suggesting Question 1 and Lemma 1.1. References 1. F. Albiac and N. J. Kalton, Topics in Banach space theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 233, Springer, New York, 2006. 2. A. Bartoszewicz, S. Głab, and A. Wachowicz, Remarks on ideal boundedness, convergence and variation of sequences, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 375 (2011), no. 2, 431 -- 435. 3. T. Bartoszyński and H. Judah, Set theory, A K Peters, Ltd., Wellesley, MA, 1995, On the structure of the real line. 4. J. E. Baumgartner, Iterated forcing, Surveys in set theory, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 87, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1983, pp. 1 -- 59. 5. B. Farkas and L. Soukup, More on cardinal invariants of analytic P -ideals, Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin. 50 (2009), no. 2, 281 -- 295. 6. R. Filipów and J. Tryba, Ideal convergence versus matrix summability, Studia Math., to appear. 7. M. Hrušák, Combinatorics of filters and ideals, Set theory and its applications, Contemp. Math., vol. 533, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2011, pp. 29 -- 69. 8. P. Kostyrko, M. Mačaj, T. Šalát, and M. Sleziak, I -convergence and extremal I -limit points, Math. Slovaca 55 (2005), no. 4, 443 -- 464. 9. J. Lindenstrauss, Mathematical Notes: A Remark Concerning Projections in Summability Domains, Amer. Math. Monthly 70 (1963), no. 9, 977 -- 978. 10. A. Sobczyk, Projection of the space (m) on its subspace (c0), Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 47 (1941), 938 -- 947. 11. M. Talagrand, Compacts de fonctions mesurables et filtres non mesurables, Studia Math. 67 (1980), no. 1, 13 -- 43. 12. R. Whitley, Mathematical Notes: Projecting m onto c0, Amer. Math. Monthly 73 (1966), no. 3, 285 -- 286. Projections onto ideal convergent sequences 5 Department of Statistics, Università "L. Bocconi", via Roentgen 1, 20136 Milan, Italy E-mail address: [email protected] URL: https://sites.google.com/site/leonettipaolo/
1710.01464	1	1710	2017-10-04T05:25:34	Positive solution to fractional thermostat model in Banach spaces via fixed point results	[ "math.FA" ]	The motive behind this manuscript is to set up the existence and uniqueness of a positive solution for a fractional thermostat model for certain values of the parameter $\lambda>0$. We accomplish sufficient conditions for the existence of a positive solution to the model, and afterwards formulate a non-trivial example to authenticate the grounds of our obtained results. Our findings are based on certain fixed point results of contractions depending on couple of altering distance functions $\phi$ and $\psi$ in the setting of Banach spaces that are discussed in this sequel.	math.FA	math	POSITIVE SOLUTION TO FRACTIONAL THERMOSTAT MODEL IN BANACH SPACES VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS HIRANMOY GARAI1, LAKSHMI KANTA DEY2, ANKUSH CHANDA3 Abstract. The motive behind this manuscript is to set up the existence and unique- ness of a positive solution for a fractional thermostat model for certain values of the parameter λ > 0. We accomplish sufficient conditions for the existence of a positive solution to the model, and afterwards formulate a non-trivial example to authenticate the grounds of our obtained results. Our findings are based on certain fixed point results of contractions depending on couple of altering distance functions φ and ψ in the setting of Banach spaces that are discussed in this sequel. 7 1 0 2 t c O 4 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 4 6 4 1 0 . 0 1 7 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction and Preliminaries Metric fixed point theory is extensively employed in different mathematical branches as well as in real world problems originating in applied sciences. The results on fixed points of contractive maps considered on different underlying spaces are mostly applied on the validation of the existence and uniqueness of solutions of functional, differential or integral equations. The plurality of these types of problems elicits the probe for more and better techniques, which is a salient feature of the recent research works in this literature. The dawning of fixed point theory on a complete metric space is integrated with the Banach contraction principle due to S. Banach [6]. Theorem 1.1. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and T be a self-mapping on X satisfying d(T x, T y) ≤ kd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X and k ∈ [0, 1). Then T has a unique fixed point z ∈ X, and for any x ∈ X the sequence of iterates (T nx) converges to z. Because of its inferences and huge usability in mathematical theory, Banach contrac- tion principle has been improved and generalized in metric spaces, partially ordered metric spaces, Banach spaces and many other spaces, see [1, 3, 4, 7, 10 -- 13, 16, 20]. In 1962, E. Rakotch [22] proved that the Theorem 1.1 still holds if the constant k is replaced by a contraction monotone decreasing function. He proved the following theorem as a corollary. Theorem 1.2. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and T : X → X be a mapping such that d(T x, T y) ≤ α(x, y)d(x, y) 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47H10, 54H25. Key words and phrases. Altering distance function, fixed point, Banach space, double sequence, thermostat model. 1 2 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA for all x, y ∈ X, where α is a function defined on [0,∞) satisfying the following condi- tions: i) α(x, y) = α(d(x, y)), i.e., α is dependent on the distance of x and y only; ii) 0 ≤ α(τ ) < 1 for all τ > 0; iii) α(τ ) is monotonically decreasing function of τ . Then T has a unique fixed point. In his research article, D.S. Jaggi [18] used the continuity and some different con- tractive conditions on the mapping to attain the succeeding result. Theorem 1.3. Let f be a continuous self-map defined on a complete metric space (X, d). Further let, f satisfies the following condition: d(f (x), f (y)) ≤ αd(x, f (x))d(y, f (y)) d(x, y) + βd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X, with x 6= y and for some α, β ∈ [0, 1) with α + β < 1. Then f has a unique fixed point in X. Thereafter, Khan et al. [19] extended and generalized the Banach principle using a control function, known as altering distance function. Definition 1.4. A function ϕ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) is called an altering distance function if it satisfies the following conditions: i) ϕ is monotone increasing and continuous; ii) ϕ(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0. In [19], the authors also proved the following fixed point theorem by means of the newly originated concept of control functions. Theorem 1.5. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞). Also suppose that f : X → X is a mapping satisfying ψ(d(f x, f y)) ≤ aψ(d(x, y)) for all x, y ∈ X and for some 0 ≤ a < 1. Then f has a unique fixed point. Alber and Guerre-Delabriere [2] introduced the notion of weak contractions in a Hilbert space. Definition 1.6. weakly contractive if and only if [2] Let (X, d) be a metric space. A mapping T : X → X is called for all x, y ∈ X, where φ is an altering distance function. d(T x, T y) ≤ d(x, y) − φ(d(x, y)) Afterwards, Rhoades [23] generalized the weak contraction condition in metric spaces and proved the following fixed point result in complete metric spaces. Theorem 1.7. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space. contractive map, then T has a unique fixed point. If T : X → X is a weakly In their research paper, Dutta and Choudhury [15] generalized Theorem 1.5 and 1.7 to obtain the following theorem. POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 3 Theorem 1.8. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and T : X → X be a mapping satisfying for all x, y ∈ X, where ψ and φ are two altering distance functions. Then T has a unique fixed point. ψ(d(T x, T y)) ≤ ψ(d(x, y)) − φ(d(x, y)) Fractional calculus has been explored for many decades mostly as a pure analytic mathematical branch. Though in recent times, many authors are showing a lot of interest in its applications for solving ordinary differential equations. Fractional dif- ferential equations appear in different engineering and scientific branches as the math- ematical modelling of systems and techniques in the domains of physics, chemistry, aerodynamics, robotics and many more. For a few recent articles in this direction, see [5, 8, 9, 14, 17, 21, 24] and the references in that respect. Considering exclusively positive solutions are effective for several applications, in- spired by the aforementioned works, in our draft, we set up an existence and uniqueness theorem to find a positive solution for a fractional thermostat model with a positive parameter. With a view to inspect the solution, we enquire into some new fixed point results in a Banach space by considering a pair of altering distance functions in a more adequate appearance. We also extend our results in a Banach space which is equipped with an arbitrary binary relation and keeps the order preserving property of the mappings. Finally, a suitable non-trivial example is furnished to substantiate the effectiveness of our results. 2. Fixed Point Results This section deals with the results on the existence and uniqueness of fixed points of maps satisfying a contractive condition with a pair of control functions in a Ba- nach space and also their proofs. Moreover, we formulate an example to elucidate our attained results. Theorem 2.1. Let (X,k.k) be a Banach space and C be a closed subset of X. Let T : C → C be a mapping. Assume that, there exist two altering distance functions φ, ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) such that φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kT x − yk) − ψ(kx − yk) (2.1) for all x, y ∈ C. Then T has a unique fixed point in C. Proof. Let x0 ∈ C be arbitrary but fixed. Consider, the iterated sequence {xn} where xn = T nx0 for each natural number n. Therefore, by given condition we have, φ(kT xn−1 − T xm−1k) ≤ φ(kT xn−1 − xm−1k) − ψ(kxn−1 − xm−1k) ⇒ φ(kxn − xmk) ≤ φ(kxn − xm−1k) − ψ(kxn−1 − xm−1k) which implies that, φ(kxn − xmk) ≤ φ(kxn − xm−1k) for all n, m ∈ N. Since φ is monotone increasing, we have kxn − xmk ≤ kxn − xm−1k for all n, m ∈ N. Interchanging the role of xn and xm in above equation we get, kxn − xmk ≤ kxn−1 − xmk (2.2) (2.3) 4 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA Thus for each fixed n ∈ N, we can conclude that the sequence {s(n) for all n, m ∈ N. negative real numbers is monotone decreasing, where, s(n) So, {s(n) m }m∈N is convergent for each n ∈ N. m }m∈N of non- m = kxn−xmk for each m ∈ N. Let, for each n ∈ N. Now from equation 2.2, we have, lim m→∞ s(n) m = a(n) φ(kxn − xmk) + ψ(kxn−1 − xm−1k) ≤ φ(kxn − xm−1k). Keeping n fixed, taking limit as m → ∞ in both sides of above in-equation and using the continuity of φ, ψ on [0,∞), we get lim m→∞ φ(kxn − xmk) + lim m→∞ ψ(kxn−1 − xm−1k) ≤ lim m→∞ φ(kxn − xm−1k) ⇒ φ( lim m→∞kxn − xmk) + ψ( lim m→∞kxn−1 − xm−1k) ≤ φ( lim m→∞kxn − xm−1k) ⇒ φ(a(n)) + ψ(a(n−1)) ≤ φ(a(n)) ⇒ ψ(a(n−1)) ≤ 0 ⇒ ψ(a(n−1)) = 0 ⇒ a(n−1) = 0 [since, ψ(t) = 0 if and only if t = 0]. m→∞kxn − xmk = 0 for all n ∈ N. lim Therefore a(n) = 0 for all n ∈ N, i.e., Now, we consider the sequence of functions {fm} defined on C by, if x = xn for some n ∈ N; otherwise. fm(x) =(cid:26) kxn − xmk, fm(x) = 0 for all x ∈ C. Thus the limit function f of the sequence Therefore, lim m→∞ 0, of functions {fm} is given by Now, let Therefore, f (x) = 0 for all x ∈ C. Mm = sup x∈C fm(x) − f (x). Mm = sup x∈C fm(x) [since, f (x) = 0 for all x ∈ C] n fm(xn) n kxn − xmk. = sup = sup But, we know from 2.3 that, kxn − xmk ≤ kxn−1 − xmk ≤ kxn−2 − xmk ≤ ... ≤ kx1 − xmk, POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 5 which implies that sup n kxn − xmk ≤ kx1 − xmk m→∞ ⇒ Mm ≤ kx1 − xmk ⇒ lim Mm ≤ lim Mm = 0. ⇒ lim m→∞ lim m→∞ m→∞kx1 − xmk = 0 Let ǫ > 0 be arbitrary. Since, that Mm = 0, so there exists a natural number N such Mm < ǫ for all m ≥ N x∈C fm(x) − f (x) < ǫ for all m ≥ N ⇒ sup ⇒ fm(x) − f (x) < ǫ for all m ≥ N and for all x ∈ C ⇒ fm(x) < ǫ for all m ≥ N and for all x ∈ C. In particular, we have Therefore, we can write, fm(xn) < ǫ for all m ≥ N and for all n ∈ N. (2.4) for all n, m ≥ N . Next, we consider the double sequence {snm}n,m∈N of real numbers, where (cid:12)(cid:12)kxn − xmk − 0(cid:12)(cid:12) < ǫ snm = kxn − xmk for all n, m ∈ N. Here using 2.4, we have This implies the double sequence {snm}n,m∈N converges to 0, i.e, snm − 0 < ǫ for all n, m ≥ N. n,m→∞kxn − xmk = 0. lim Thus, {xn} is a Cauchy sequence in C. C being complete, {xn} must converge to Now from 2.1, we have, some z ∈ C. φ(kxn+1 − T zk) ≤ φ(kxn+1 − zk) − ψ(kxn − zk) n→∞ φ(kxn+1 − T zk) ≤ lim ⇒ φ(kxn+1 − T zk) ≤ φ(kxn+1 − zk) ⇒ lim ⇒ φ( lim ⇒ φ( lim ⇒ φ( lim ⇒ lim n→∞kxn+1 − T zk) ≤ φ( lim n→∞kxn+1 − T zk) ≤ φ(0) = 0 n→∞kxn+1 − T zk) = 0 n→∞kxn+1 − T zk = 0. n→∞ φ(kxn+1 − zk) n→∞kxn+1 − zk) The above equation shows that the sequence {xn} converges to T z. Thus, T z = z and z is a fixed point of T . Finally, we check the uniqueness of the fixed point z. To check this, let z1 be another fixed point of T , i.e., T z1 = z1. 6 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA From 2.1 and using Definition 1.4, we have φ(kT z − T z1k) ≤ φ(kT z − z1k) − ψ(kz − z1k) ⇒ φ(kz − z1k) + ψ(kz − z1k) ≤ φ(kz − z1k) ⇒ ψ(kz − z1k) ≤ 0 ⇒ ψ(kz − z1k) = 0 ⇒ z = z1. Therefore, z is the only fixed point of T . (cid:3) Now, we generalize Theorem 2.1 in a Banach space which is equipped with an arbi- trary binary relation and state the subsequent theorem. Theorem 2.2. Let (X,k.k) be a Banach space and R be an equivalence relation on X. Assume that X has the property that if {xn} be any sequence in X converging to z ∈ X, then xnRz for each natural number n. Let C be a closed subset of X and T : C → C be a mapping such that T satisfies the following conditions: i) T is order-preserving; ii) φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kT x − yk) − ψ(kx − yk) for all x, y ∈ C such that xRy where φ, ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) are two altering distance functions. Then T has a unique fixed point in C if there exists x0 ∈ X such that x0RT x0. Proof. The proof of this theorem is analogous to the previous one and so omitted. (cid:3) In next portion of this section, we present a result which not only gives the guarantee of existence of fixed point but also properly point out the fixed point. Theorem 2.3. Let (X,k.k) be a Banach space and C be a closed subspace of X. Let T : C → C be a mapping. Also assume that, there exist two altering distance functions φ, ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) such that T satisfies the following conditions: (i) φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kx − yk) − ψ(kx − yk); (ii) φ(kT x − yk) ≤ φ(kx − yk) − ψ(kx − yk) for all x, y ∈ C. Then the null vector of X is the only fixed point of T . Proof. Let x0 ∈ C be arbitrary but fixed and consider the iterated sequence {xn} where xn = T nx0 for all n ∈ N. Let sn = kxn − xn+1k for all n ∈ N. Now, by condition (i) we get φ(kT xn − T xn+1k) ≤ φ(kxn − xn+1k) − ψ(kxn − xn+1k) ⇒ φ(kxn+1 − xn+2k) ≤ φ(kxn − xn+1k) ⇒ φ(sn+1) ≤ φ(sn) ⇒ sn+1 ≤ sn. This is true for all natural number n, which implies that {sn} is a decreasing sequence of non-negative reals and hence this sequence must converge. Let, lim n→∞ sn = a. POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 7 Again, from (i) we have, φ(sn) − lim n→∞ ψ(sn) φ(sn+1) ≤ φ(sn) − ψ(sn) n→∞ n→∞ ⇒ lim φ(sn+1) ≤ lim ⇒ φ(a) ≤ φ(a) − ψ(a) ⇒ ψ(a) ≤ 0 ⇒ ψ(a) = 0 ⇒ a = 0 ⇒ lim sn = 0. n→∞ Therefore, lim n→∞kxn − xn+1 − θk = 0. This shows that the sequence {un} in C converges strongly to θ, where θ is the null vector in X and un = xn − xn+1 for all natural numbers n. Now, φ(kT un − T θk) ≤ φ(kun − θk) − ψ(kun − θk) φ(kun − θk) − lim n→∞ n→∞ n→∞ ψ(kun − θk) φ(kT un − T θk) ≤ lim φ(kT un − T θk) ≤ 0 φ(kT un − T θk) = 0 n→∞kT un − T θk) = 0 n→∞ ⇒ lim ⇒ lim ⇒ lim ⇒ φ( lim ⇒ lim n→∞ n→∞kT un − T θk = 0. Again, by condition (ii) we get, φ(kT un − θk) ≤ φ(kun − θk) − ψ(kun − θk) φ(kun − θk) − lim n→∞ n→∞ φ(kT un − θk) ≤ lim φ(kT un − θk) ≤ 0 φ(kT un − θk) = 0 n→∞kT un − θk) = 0 n→∞ n→∞ ⇒ lim ⇒ lim ⇒ lim ⇒ φ( lim ⇒ lim n→∞ n→∞kT un − θk = 0. ψ(kun − θk) Therefore by the uniqueness of limit, we obtain, T θ = θ, i.e., θ is a fixed point of T . Finally, suppose z be another fixed point of T . Therefore, φ(kT z − T θk) ≤ φ(kz − θk) − ψ(kz − θk) ⇒ φ(kz − θk) ≤ φ(kz − θk) − ψ(kz − θk) ⇒ ψ(kz − θk) ≤ 0 ⇒ ψ(kz − θk) = 0 ⇒ z = θ. Therefore θ is the only fixed point of T in C. (cid:3) 8 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA Example 2.4. Consider the Banach space R endowed with the usual norm and define a relation R on R by: for x, y ∈ R xRy if and only if either x, y ∈ [−(n + 1),−n] or x, y ∈ [n, n + 1] for some n ∈ N or x = y = 0. Then clearly R is an equivalence relation on R. Now, let C = C1 ∪ C2 ∪ C3, where C1 = [−2,−1], C2 = [1, 2], C3 = {0}. Then C is Define, a mapping T : C → C by a closed subset of R. T x =(cid:26) −x, 0, if x ∈ C1; if x ∈ C2 ∪ C3. Therefore, kT x − T yk =  x − y, x, 0, kT x − yk =(cid:26) x + y, y, if x, y ∈ C1; if x ∈ C1 and y ∈ C2 ∪ C3; if x, y ∈ C2 ∪ C3. if x ∈ C1; if x /∈ C1. Consider the functions φ, ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) defined by φ(t) = t2 ψ(t) = t2 100000 for all t ∈ [0,∞). such that xRy. Then the following cases arise. Then, clearly φ, ψ are two altering distance functions. Let, x, y ∈ C be arbitrary Case I: Let x, y ∈ C1. Then, φ(kT x − T yk) + ψ(kx − yk) − φ(kT x − yk) 100000 − x + y2 = x − y2 + x − y2 (x − y)2 = −4xy + 100000 ≤ 0 ⇒ φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kT x − yk) − ψ(kx − yk). Case II: Let x, y ∈ C2. Then, φ(kT x − T yk) + ψ(kx − yk) − φ(kT x − yk) (x − y)2 100000 − y2 = 0 + ≤ 0 ⇒ φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kT x − yk) − ψ(kx − yk). Case III: Let x, y ∈ C3. Then clearly the equality holds. Thus, φ(kT x − T yk) ≤ φ(kT x − yk) − ψ(kx − yk) for all x, y ∈ C with xRy. Also it is easily seen that T is order preserving and 0 is the only fixed point of T . POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 9 3. Application to Fractional Thermostat Model The motivation of this section is to provide an application of the results discussed in this manuscript. For this purpose, we consider the following fractional thermostat model subject to the boundary conditions: CDαu(t) + λf (t, u(t)) = 0, t ∈ [0, 1], (3.1) (3.2) where CDα stands for Caputo fractional derivative of order α, λ is a positive constant and 1 < α ≤ 2, 0 ≤ η ≤ 1, β > 0 such that the following conditions hold: u′(0) = 0, β CDα−1u(1) + u(η) = 0, (1) βΓ(α) − (1 − η)(α−1) > 0; (2) f : [0, 1] × R → R+ is a continuous function; (3) u : [0, 1] → R is continuous. Our aim is to derive some sufficient conditions under which the problem 3.1 with the boundary conditions 3.2 possesses unique positive solution for certain values of the parameter λ. To proceed further, we first recall the following lemmas. Lemma 3.1. boundary value problem [21] Assume f ∈ C[0, 1]. A function u ∈ C[0, 1] is a solution of the CDαu(t) + λf (t, u(t)) = 0, t ∈ [0, 1], u′(0) = 0, β CDα−1u(1) + u(η) = 0, if and only if it satisfies the integral equation (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) for s ≤ r and where G(t, s) is the Green's function (depending on α) given by 0 G(t, s)f (s)ds u(t) =Z 1 G(t, s) = β + Hη(s) − Ht(s) and for r ∈ [0, 1], Hr(s) : [0, 1] → R is defined as Hr(s) = (r−s)α−1 Hr(s) = 0 for s > r, i.e., Γ(α) G(t, s) = Γ(α) + (η−s)α−1 Γ(α) , β − (t−s)α−1 β + (η−s)α−1 β − (t−s)α−1 Γ(α) Γ(α) , ,   β, if 0 ≤ s ≤ η, s ≤ t; if 0 ≤ s ≤ η, s ≥ t; if η ≤ s ≤ 1, s ≤ t; if η ≤ s ≤ 1, s ≥ t. Lemma 3.2. conditions: [25] The function G(t, s) arising in Lemma 3.1 satisfies the following i) G(t, s) is a continuous map defined on [0, 1] × [0, 1]; ii) for t, s ∈ (0, 1), we have G(t, s) > 0 . Now we prove the following lemma. Lemma 3.3. The Green's function G(t, s) derived in Lemma 3.1 satisfies and 0 sup t∈[0,1]Z 1 t∈[0,1]Z 1 inf 0 G(t, s)ds = β + G(t, s)ds = β + ηα Γ(α + 1) ηα − 1 Γ(α + 1) . 10 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA Proof. Let us consider the function ϕ defined on [0, 1] by ϕ(t) =Z 1 0 G(t, s)ds 0 G(t, s)ds for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Now, for t ∈ [0, 1] and t ≤ η, s ≥ η, we have t ≤ s and thus, ϕ(t) = Z 1 = Z η = Z t = Z t G(t, s)ds +Z 1 G(t, s)ds +Z η (t − s)α−1 0 {β − G(t, s)ds +Z 1 (η − s)α−1 }ds +Z η t {β + G(t, s)ds G(t, s)ds Γ(α) Γ(α) + 0 0 η η t (η − s)α−1 Γ(α) }ds +Z 1 η βds = β + ηα − tα Γ(α + 1) . 0 G(t, s)ds Again, for t ∈ [0, 1] and t ≥ η, s ≤ η, we have t ≥ s and so, ϕ(t) = Z 1 = Z η = Z η = Z η G(t, s)ds +Z 1 G(t, s)ds +Z t (t − s)α−1 0 {β − G(t, s)ds +Z 1 (η − s)α−1 }ds +Z t η {β − G(t, s)ds G(t, s)ds Γ(α) Γ(α) + 0 0 η η t = β + ηα − tα Γ(α + 1) . (t − s)α−1 Γ(α) }ds +Z 1 t βds Thus, from the above calculations we get, for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Therefore, ϕ(t) = β + ηα − tα Γ(α + 1) ϕ′(t) = −αtα−1 Γ(α + 1) < 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1]. This implies that the function ϕ is a decreasing function on [0, 1]. So, sup t∈[0,1]Z 1 0 G(t, s)ds = sup t∈[0,1] = φ(0) ϕ(t) = β + ηα Γ(α + 1) , POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 11 and inf t∈[0,1]Z 1 0 G(t, s)ds = inf t∈[0,1] = φ(1) ϕ(t) = β + ηα − 1 Γ(α + 1) . This completes the proof of the lemma. (cid:3) Lemma 3.4. For the Green's function G(t, s) derived in Lemma 3.1 G(t, s) ≤ β + ηα−1 Γ(α) for all t, s ∈ [0, 1] holds. Proof. From the formulation of G(t, s) we get ∂G(t, s) ∂t 0, Γ(α) − (α−1)(t−s)α−2 − (α−1)(t−s)α−2 Γ(α) 0, =  ∂G(t, s) ∂t , , if 0 ≤ s ≤ η, s ≤ t; if 0 ≤ s ≤ η, s ≥ t; if η ≤ s ≤ 1, s ≤ t; if η ≤ s ≤ 1, s ≥ t. ≤ 0 Therefore, for any fixed s ∈ [0, 1], we have for each t ∈ [0, 1] and thus G(t, s) is a decreasing function of t on [0, 1] for each fixed s ∈ [0, 1]. Thus, G(t, s) ≤ G(0, s) for all t, s ∈ [0, 1] (3.6) where Therefore, β, Γ(α) G(0, s) =( β + (η−s)α−1 =( −(α−1)(η−s)α−2 Γ(α) ∂s 0, ∂G(0, s) , if 0 ≤ s ≤ η; if η ≤ s ≤ 1. , if 0 ≤ s ≤ η; if η ≤ s ≤ 1. This shows that ∂G(0,s) on [0, 1]. Thus, ∂s ≤ 0 for all s ∈ [0, 1] and so G(0, s) is a decreasing function of s G(0, s) ≤ G(0, 0) = β + ηα−1 Γ(α) for all s ∈ [0, 1]. From equations 3.6 and 3.7 we get G(t, s) ≤ β + ηα−1 Γ(α) for all t, s ∈ [0, 1]. (3.7) (cid:3) Now we prove the following theorem concerning the existence and uniqueness of a positive solution to the fractional thermostat model. Theorem 3.5. Let us consider the fractional thermostat model with parameter λ > 0 given by equations 3.1 and 3.2. Assume that the following conditions hold: 12 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA (i) βΓ(α + 1) + ηα > 1; (ii) for all s ∈ [0, 1], λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)) ≤ λf (s, u(s)) − λ sup t∈[0,1]v(t) − ψ( sup t∈[0,1]u(t) − v(t)) for some altering distance function ψ and for all real valued continuous func- tions u(s), v(s) defined on [0, 1]; (iii) f is non-decreasing with respect to the second argument and there exists t0 ∈ (0, 1) such that f (t0, 0) > 0. Then the fractional thermostat model with parameter λ given by equations 3.1 and 3.2 has a unique positive solution for λ ≥ 1 Proof. Consider the Banach space C[0, 1] of all real-valued continuous functions defined on [0, 1] equipped with the sup norm. k , where k = β + ηα−1 Γ(α+1) . Define a mapping T : C[0, 1] → C[0, 1] by T u(t) = λZ 1 0 G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds for all u ∈ C[0, 1], where G(t, s) is defined as in Lemma 3.1. solution if and only if u(t) is a fixed point of T . From Lemma 3.1, it is obvious that the thermostat model 3.1 and 3.2 has u(t) as a Now, by condition (ii) we have, λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)) ≤ λf (s, u(s)) − λ sup t∈[0,1]v(t) − ψ( sup t∈[0,1]u(t) − v(t)) = λf (s, u(s)) − λkvk − ψ(ku − vk). Multiplying both sides by G(t, s), we get ⇒ λZ 1 −ψ(ku − vk)G(t, s) λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s))G(t, s) ≤ λf (s, u(s))G(t, s) − λkvkG(t, s) 0 f (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s))G(t, s)ds ≤ λZ 1 0 f (s, u(s))G(t, s)ds 0 kvkG(t, s)ds −Z 1 −λZ 1 G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − λkvkZ 1 = λZ 1 0 0 0 ψ(ku − vk)G(t, s)ds G(t, s)ds −ψ(ku − vk)Z 1 0 G(t, s)ds G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − λkvk inf G(t, s)ds t∈[0,1]Z 1 0 −ψ(ku − vk) inf t∈[0,1]Z 1 0 G(t, s)ds G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − λkkvk − kψ(ku − vk). ≤ λZ 1 0 ≤ λZ 1 0 POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 13 Now if λk ≥ 1, then from the above in-equation we obtain, 0 f (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s))G(t, s)ds ≤ λZ 1 λZ 1 ≤ λZ 1 ≤ λZ 1 0 0 0 G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − kvk − kψ(ku − vk) G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − v(t) − kψ(ku − vk) G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − v(t) (3.8) Therefore using Equation 3.8 we get, 0 T u(t) − T v(t) = λZ 1 = λZ 1 ≤ λZ 1 0 0 −kψ(ku − vk). G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − λZ 1 G(t, s)(f (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)))ds 0 G(t, s)f (s, v(s))ds G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − v(t) − kψ(ku − vk). The above inequality holds for all t ∈ [0, 1] and so we have, sup t∈[0,1]T u(t) − T v(t) ≤ sup t∈[0,1] G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds − v(t) − kψ(ku − vk) λZ 1 0 (3.9) ⇒ kT u − T vk ≤ kT u − vk − kψ(ku − vk). It is easily perceived by condition (i) that, k > 0. Define two functions φ, ψ1 : [0,∞) → [0,∞) by φ(t) = t and for all t ∈ [0,∞). Then one can easily verify that φ, ψ1 are two altering distance functions and also from equation 3.9 we get, ψ1(t) = kψ(t) φ(kT u − T vk) ≤ φ(kT u − vk) − ψ1(ku − vk). (3.10) The above inequality holds for all u, v ∈ C[0, 1] and so by Theorem 2.1, T has a unique fixed point u(t), say, in C[0, 1]. Note that, Equation 3.10 holds if λk ≥ 1. So, T has u(t) as a fixed point if λk ≥ 1, Now we have λ > 0, G(t, s) > 0 and f (s, u(s)) ≥ 0 for all t, s ∈ [0, 1]. Therefore it is i.e., u(t) is a solution of the thermostat model 3.1 and 3.2 if λk ≥ 1, i.e., λ ≥ 1 k . clear that λZ 1 for all t ∈ [0, 1]. This means that T u(t) ≥ 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1] and which leads us to the fact that u(t) ≥ 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Finally, we show that the unique solution u(t) is always positive. To show this, first we show that the zero function 0 is not a fixed point of T . G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds ≥ 0 0 Suppose in contrary, assume that the zero function 0 is a fixed point of T . Then, we have 0 = λZ 1 0 G(t, s)f (s, 0)ds, 14 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Since G(t, s)f (s, 0) ≥ 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1] and for all s ∈ [0, 1], we have G(t, s)f (s, 0) = 0, for all t ∈ [0, 1] and for almost all s ∈ [0, 1]. This fact leads us to f (s, 0) = 0 for almost all s ∈ [0, 1]. (3.11) By condition (iii), there exists t0 ∈ (0, 1) such that f (t0, 0) > 0. Again, since f is continuous at (t0, 0), there exists a subset A of [0, 1] of positive Lebesgue measure such that f (s, 0) > 0 for all s ∈ A. This is a contradiction to 3.11. So the zero function 0 is not a fixed point of T . Now, let u(t1) = 0 for some t1 ∈ (0, 1). Therefore we have, G(t1, s)f (s, u(s))ds = 0. (3.12) Z 1 0 But u(s) ≥ 0 for all s ∈ [0, 1] and f is non-decreasing with respect to the second argument. Hence 0 ≥Z 1 0 G(t1, s)f (s, u(s))ds ≥ Z 1 0 Therefore from 3.12 and 3.13, we obtain G(t1, s)f (s, 0)ds ≥ 0. (3.13) Z 1 0 G(t1, s)f (s, 0)ds = 0. As G(t1, s)f (s, 0) ≥ 0, it follows that G(t1, s)f (s, 0) = 0 for almost all s ∈ [0, 1]. This implies that f (s, 0) = 0 for almost all s ∈ [0, 1], which is a contradiction. Hence it follows that, u(t) > 0 for all t ∈ (0, 1). Again, since u is continuous on [0, 1], we have u(t) > 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Thus the fractional thermostat model, given by Equations 3.1 and 3.2, has a unique positive solution for λ ≥ 1 k , where k = β + ηα−1 Γ(α+1) . (cid:3) Theorem 3.6. Let us consider the fractional thermostat model with parameter λ given by equations 3.1 and 3.2. Assume that the following conditions hold: (i) βΓ(α + 1) + ηα > 1; (ii) for all s ∈ [0, 1], λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)) ≤ λf (s, u(s)) − λ sup t∈[0,1]v(t) − ψ( sup t∈[0,1] u(t) − v(t)), for some altering distance function ψ, for all u(s), v(s) in the set C = {u(s) ∈ C[0, 1] : 0 ≤ u(s) ≤ R, for all s ∈ [0, 1] and R is a positive constant}, (iii) Z 1 (iv) f is non-decreasing with respect to the second argument and there exists t0 ∈ , where k1 = β + ηα−1 Γ(α) ; f (s, R)ds ≤ R λk1 0 (0, 1) such that f (t0, 0) > 0. Then the fractional thermostat model with parameter λ given by equations 3.1 and 3.2 has a unique positive solution in C for λ ≥ 1 Proof. Let us take the Banach space C[0, 1] endowed with the sup norm. Then it is easily noticeable that C is a closed subset of C[0, 1]. k where k = β + ηα−1 Γ(α+1) . Now, for any u(s) ∈ C[0, 1] we have u(s) ≤ R. POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 15 The fact that f is non-decreasing with respect to the second argument gives us Z 1 0 f (s, u(s))ds ≤ Z 1 0 R λk1 ≤ f (s, R))ds . Therefore, λZ 1 0 i.e., G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds ≤ λ(cid:0)β + ≤ λk1 R λk1 , ηα−1 Γ(α)(cid:1)Z 1 0 λZ 1 Next, we define a mapping T : C → C by T u(t) = λZ 1 0 0 G(t, s)f (s, u(s)) ≤ R. G(t, s)f (s, u(s))ds f (s, u(s))ds (3.14) for all u ∈ C[0, 1], where G(t, s) is given by Lemma 3.1. From Equation 3.14 one can easily check that T is well-defined on C. We now define two functions φ, ψ1 : [0,∞) → [0,∞) by φ(t) = t ψ1(t) = kψ(t) for all t ∈ [0,∞). Then it is clear that φ, ψ1 are altering distance functions. Now proceeding as in Theorem 3.5 we get φ(kT u − T vk) ≤ φ(kT u − vk) − ψ1(ku − vk) for all u, v ∈ C if λ ≥ 1 k . theorem, T has a unique fixed point in C, say, u(t). Thus we see that all conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied if λ ≥ 1 Thus, u(t) is the unique solution of the fractional thermostat model given by Equa- tions 3.1 and 3.2, which follows by Lemma 3.1 and the definition of T . The fact that u(t) is positive on [0, 1] follows by Theorem 3.5 using condition (iv). Hence, the frac- tional thermostat model given by Equations 3.1 and 3.2 satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem 3.6, has a unique positive solution for λ ≥ 1 k . (cid:3) k . So by the Now, we demonstrate an example which validates the effectiveness of the aforemen- tioned result. Example 3.7. Let us consider the fractional thermostat model C Dαu(t) + λf (t, u(t)) = 0, t ∈ (0, 1), u′(0) = 0, βCDα−1u′(1) + u(η) = 0. (3.15) (3.16) We choose, 3 2 α = , β = 1 2 2 .√π − ( 1 5 . 1 Then, βΓ(α) − (1 − η)(α−1) = 4 2 ) , η = 4 5 1 2 > 0. and f (t, u(t)) = ln(320 + t2) + t3 + 1 24 − u(t) . 16 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA with respect to the second argument and there exists 1 Clearly f : [0, 1] × R → R+ is a continuous function and also f is non-decreasing 2 , 0) > 0. We take 2 ∈ (0, 1) such that f ( 1 i.e., here R = 20. C = {u(s) ∈ C[0, 1] : 0 ≤ u(s) ≤ 20, for all s ∈ [0, 1]} Now, and βΓ(α + 1) + ηα = 4 5 . 3 2 . 1 2 .√π + ( 1 2 ) 3 2 ≈ 1.4165 > 1, k = β + = 4 5 + ηα − 1 Γ(α + 1) ( 1 2 ) 2 − 1 2 .√π 2 . 1 3 3 ≈ 0.3135 1 k ≈ 3.1897. ⇒ k1 = β + = 4 5 + ηα − 1 Γ(α) ( 1 2 ) 2 .√π 1 1 2 We choose λ = 3.2 and clearly λ ≥ 1 k . Now, ≈ 1.5981. Z 1 0 f (s, R)ds ≤ 1 320 + 1 4 + 1 4 1 1 + 320 − R λk1 ≤ ≈ ≈ 3.9109. Next, we define a mapping ψ : [0,∞) → [0,∞) by 20 3.2 × 1.5981 ψ(t) =(cid:26) t2, Finally, for any u(s), v(s) ∈ C we have, 1, if 0 ≤ t < 1; if t ≥ 1. Then it is an easy task to note that ψ is an altering distance function. λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)) = 3.2(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 3.2(cid:0) = 1.6. 1 24 − v(s)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 24 − u(s) − 1 4 + 1 4(cid:1) But, λf (s, u(s)) − λ sup t∈[0,1]u(t) − ψ( sup t∈[0,1] u(t) − v(t)) ≥ 3.2 × 21 − 3.2 × 20 − ψ(40) = 2.20. POSITIVE SOLUTION VIA FIXED POINT RESULTS 17 Therefore, λf (s, u(s)) − f (s, v(s)) ≤ λf (s, u(s)) − λ sup t∈[0,1]u(t) − ψ( sup t∈[0,1] u(t) − v(t)) for all u(s), v(s) ∈ C. So, by Theorem 3.6 the thermostat model, given by Equations 3.15 and 3.16 has a unique positive solution in C for λ = 3.2. Acknowledgements: The first named author would like to express his genuine appreciation to CSIR, New Delhi, India for their financial supports. Also the third named author would like to convey his cordial thanks to DST-INSPIRE, New Delhi, India for their financial aid under INSPIRE fellowship scheme. References [1] R.P. Agarwal, M.A. El-Gebeily, and D. O'Regan. Generalized contractions in partially ordered metric spaces. Appl. Anal., 87(1):109 -- 116, 2008. [2] Ya.I. Alber and S. Guerre-Delabriere. Principle of weakly contractive maps in Hilbert spaces. Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., 98:7 -- 22, 1997. [3] I. Altun and H. Simsek. Some fixed point theorems on ordered metric spaces and application. Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2010, 2010. Article ID 621469. [4] A. Amini-Harandi and H. Emami. A fixed point theorem for contraction type maps in partially or- dered metric spaces and application to ordinary differential equations. Nonlinear Anal., 72(5):2238 -- 2242, 2010. [5] Z. Bai and H. Lu. Positive solutions for boundary value problem of nonlinear fractional differential equation. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 311(2):495 -- 505, 2005. [6] S. Banach. Sur les op´erations dans les ensembles abstraits et leur application aux ´equations int´egrales. Fund. Math., 3:133 -- 181, 1922. [7] I. Beg and M. Abbas. Coincidence point and invariant approximation for mappings satisfying generalized weak contractive condition. Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2006, 2006. Article ID 74503. [8] A. Cabada and G. Wang. Positive solutions of nonlinear fractional differential equations with integral boundary value conditions. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 389(1):403-411, 2012. [9] J. Caballero, J. Harjani, and K. Sadarangani. Existence and uniqueness of positive solution for a boundary value problem of fractional order. Abstr. Appl. Anal., 2011, 2011. Article ID 165641. [10] J. Caristi. Fixed point theorems for mappings satisfying inwardness conditions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 215:241 -- 251, 1976. [11] B.S. Choudhury. Unique fixed point theorem for weakly C-contractive mappings. Kathmandu Univ. J. Sci. Engg. Tech., 5(1):6 -- 13, 2009. [12] LB. ´Ciri´c. A generalization of Banach's contraction principle. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 45(2):267 -- 273, 1974. [13] LB. ´Ciri´c, B. Samet, and C. Vetro. Common fixed point theorems for families of occasionally weakly compatible mappings. Math. Comput. Modelling, 53(5-6):631 -- 636, 2010. [14] R. Dehghani and K. Ghanbari. Triple positive solutions for boundary value problem of a nonlinear fractional differential equation. Bull. Iranian Math. Soc., 33(2):1 -- 14, 2007. [15] P.N. Dutta and B.S. Choudhury. A generalisation of contraction principle in metric spaces. Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2008, 2008. Article ID 406368. [16] I. Ekeland. On the variational principle. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 47(2):324 -- 353, 1974. [17] D. Gopal, M. Abbas, D.K. Patel, and C. Vetro. Fixed points of α-type F-contractive mappings with an application to nonlinear fractional differential equation. Acta Math. Scientia., 36(3):957 -- 970, 2016. [18] D.S. Jaggi. Some unique fixed point theorems. Indian J. Pure Appl. Math, 8(2):223 -- 230, 1977. [19] M.S. Khan, M. Swalech, and S. Sessa. Fixed point theorems by altering distances between the points. Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., 30(1):1 -- 9, 1984. [20] A. Meir and E. Keeler. A theorem on contraction mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 28:326 -- 329, 1969. 18 H. GARAI, L.K. DEY, A. CHANDA [21] J.J. Nieto and J. Pimentel. Positive solutions of a fractional thermostat model. Bound. Value Probl., 2013:5, 2013. [22] E. Rakotch. A note on contractive mappings. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 13:459 -- 465, 1962. [23] B.E. Rhoades. Some theorems on weakly contractive maps. Nonlinear Anal., 47(4):2683 -- 2693, 2001. [24] T. Senapati and L.K. Dey. Relation-theoretic metrical fixed point results via w-distance with applications. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl., 2017. DOI: 10.1007/s11784-017-0462-9. [25] C. Shen, H. Zhou, and L. Yang. Existence and nonexistence of positive solutions of a fractional thermostat model with a parameter. Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 39(15):4504 -- 4511, 2016. 1 Hiranmoy Garai, Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, India. E-mail address: [email protected] 2 Lakshmi Kanta Dey, Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, India. E-mail address: [email protected] 3 Ankush Chanda, Department of Mathematics, National Institute of Technology Durgapur, India. E-mail address: [email protected]
1409.6101	2	1409	2016-04-21T07:24:03	Functional calculus on real interpolation spaces for generators of $C_{0}$-groups	[ "math.FA", "math.OA" ]	We study functional calculus properties of $C_{0}$-groups on real interpolation spaces, using transference principles. We obtain interpolation versions of the classical transference principle for bounded groups and of a recent transference principle for unbounded groups. Then we show that each group generator on a Banach space has a bounded $H^{\infty}_{1}$-calculus on real interpolation spaces. Additional results are derived from this.	math.FA	math	FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON REAL INTERPOLATION SPACES FOR GENERATORS OF C0-GROUPS MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL Abstract. We study functional calculus properties of C0-groups on real in- terpolation spaces, using transference principles. We obtain interpolation ver- sions of the classical transference principle for bounded groups and of a recent transference principle for unbounded groups. Then we show that each group generator on a Banach space has a bounded H∞ 1 -calculus on real interpolation spaces. Additional results are derived from this. The classical transference principle by Berkson, Gillespie and Muhly from [5] 1. Introduction yields an estimate (1.1) ZR (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X ≤ M 2 kLµkL(Lp(X)) kxkX for all x ∈ X, where (U (s))s∈R ⊆ L(X) is a bounded C0-group of operators on a Banach space X with uniform bound M , µ is a complex Borel measure on R and Lµ is convolution with µ on Lp(X), the space of p-integrable X-valued functions, for p ∈ [1,∞]. Under certain geometrical assumptions on X, the norm of Lµ can be bounded in terms of a suitable norm of the Fourier transform F µ of µ. For instance, if X is a Hilbert space then kLµkL(L2(X)) is equal to kF µk∞, by Plancherel's theo- rem. If X is a UMD space and p ∈ (1,∞) then bounds for kLµkL(Lp(X)) follow from the Mikhlin multiplier theorem. By combining this with (1.1), functional calculus bounds for the generator A of (U (s))s∈R can be obtained, i.e., estimates of the form kf (A)k ≤ C kfkF for all f in some function algebra F . Such bounds are important for evolution equations, conform for instance [2, 17]. Useful as this procedure is, the assumptions on the space X restrict the generality of the results. In particular, Hilbert and UMD spaces are reflexive. Therefore the approach described above generally does not yield interesting results for groups of operators on non-reflexive spaces, such as C(K)-spaces or L1-spaces. In this paper we take a different approach and consider transference principles on interpolation spaces. It is known that the functional calculus properties of operators improve upon restriction to interpolation spaces, conform for instance the result of Dore [6] that an invertible sectorial operator has a bounded sectorial H∞-calculus on real interpolation spaces. However, we are interested in functional calculus on strips, Date: September 4, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47A60, 47D03, 42B35, 42A45, 46B70. Key words and phrases. Functional calculus, Transference, Operator semigroup, Fourier mul- tiplier, Interpolation space. The second-named author is supported by NWO-grant 613.000.908 "Applications of Transfer- ence Principles". 1 2 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL the more natural choice for group generators. We use that on Besov spaces Fourier multiplier results hold that do not depend on the geometry of the underlying space [9, 16]. Since Besov spaces are obtained from real interpolation between Lp and Sobolev spaces, this fits into the setting of a transference principle on interpolation In Proposition 3.2 we derive the following version of (1.1) on the real spaces. interpolation space (X, D(A))θ,q from (1.4). For the X-valued Besov space Bθ p,q(X) see Section 2.2. Proposition 1.1. Let X be a Banach space and let θ ∈ (0, 1), p ∈ [1,∞) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that the following holds. If −iA generate a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X with M := sups∈R kU (s)k < ∞, then ≤ CM 2 kLµkL(Bθ p,q (X)) kxk(X,D(A))θ,q (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ZR U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(X,D(A))θ,q for all complex Borel meaures µ on R and x ∈ (X, D(A))θ,q. Combining Proposition 1.1 with the aforementioned Fourier multiplier results on Besov spaces yields the following, a consequence of Corollary 3.5. Corollary 1.2. Let −iA generate a uniformly bounded C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X, and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞]. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ZR s∈R F µ(s) + (1 + s)(F µ)′(s)kxk(X,D(A))θ,q for all x ∈ (X, D(A))θ,q and for each µ ∈ M(R) such that F µ ∈ C1(R) with sups∈R(1 + s)(F µ)′(s) < ∞. U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(X,D(A))θ,q ≤ C sup We also obtain an interpolation version of the transference principle for un- bounded groups from [12], as Proposition 3.1. In terms of functional calculus for the part of A in (X, D(A))θ,q, these transference principles yield a result for func- tions in the analytic Mikhlin algebra (1.2) (1.3) endowed with the norm H∞ 1 (Stω) :=(cid:26)f ∈ H∞(Stω)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup z∈Stω kfkH∞ 1 (Stω) := sup z∈Stωf (z) + (1 + z)f ′(z) (1 + z)f ′(z) < ∞(cid:27) , (f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω)). Here Stω := {z ∈ C Im(z) < ω} for ω > 0. Note that definition (1.3) of the norm in the analytic Mikhlin algebra is different from that in [12], where the quantity kfk = supz∈Stωf (z)+zf ′(z) is considered. However, the two norms are equivalent on domains containing zero, and (1.3) is more natural in the setting of transference principles on (inhomogeneous) Besov spaces, since Fourier multiplier results on such spaces require an inhomogeneous condition at zero. See also Remarks 3.7 and 4.2. Our main functional calculus result is as follows. For the group type θ(U ) see (2.1), and for a proof of this result see Theorem 4.1. Theorem 1.3. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X, and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞]. Then the part of A in (X, D(A))θ,q has a bounded H∞ 1 (Stω)-calculus for all ω > θ(U ). If (U (s))s∈R is uniformly bounded then the constant bounding the H∞ 1 (Stω)-calculus does not depend on ω > 0. FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 3 In [12], Theorem 1.3 is obtained for group generators on UMD spaces and func- tional calculus for the operator A itself. Our result shows that on interpolation spaces no assumptions on the geometry of the underlying space are required. This means that even on spaces which are not UMD, such as C(K)-spaces and L1-spaces, one can obtain functional calculus results if one is willing to restrict to interpolation spaces. Moreover, our results reaffirm the philosophy that the functional calculus properties of an operator improve when restricted to interpolation spaces, as was already evidenced for functions on sectors by the result of Dore [6, Theorem 3.2]. From Theorem 1.3 we deduce other functional calculus statements, for sectorial operators and generators of cosine functions. Section 2 provides the necessary background on functional calculus and the the- ory of Fourier multipliers on Besov spaces. In Section 3 we establish transference principles on interpolation spaces, and in Section 4 we prove Theorem 1.3. Section 5 contains additional results that can be derived from this. 1.1. Notation and terminology. The natural numbers are N := {1, 2, . . .}, and we write N0 := N ∪ {0}. The letters X and Y denote Banach spaces over the complex number field, and L(X) is the Banach algebra of all bounded operators on X. The domain D(A) ⊆ X of a closed unbounded operator A on X is a Banach space when endowed with the norm kxkD(A) := kxk + kAxk (x ∈ D(A)). The spectrum of A is σ(A) and the resolvent set ρ(A) := C \ σ(A). For z ∈ ρ(A) the operator R(z, A) := (zI − A)−1 ∈ L(X) is the resolvent of A at z. For p ∈ [1,∞], Lp(R; X) is the Bochner space of equivalence classes of X-valued Lebesgue p-integrable functions on R. The Holder conjugate of p ∈ [1,∞] is p′ and is defined by 1 p′ = 1. The norm on Lp(R; X) is usually denoted by k·kp. In the case X = C we will simply write Lp(R) = Lp(R; C). By M(R) we denote the space of complex-valued Borel measures on R with the total variation norm. For ω ≥ 0 we let Mω(R) consist of those µ ∈ M(R) of the form µ(ds) = e−ωsν(ds) for some ν ∈ M(R), with p + 1 kµkMω(R) :=(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) eω·µ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)M(R) . Note that Mω(R) is a Banach algebra under convolution. A function g such that [s 7→ g(s) eωs] ∈ L1(R) is usually identified with its associated measure µ ∈ Mω(R) given by µ(ds) = g(s)ds. For Ω 6= ∅ open in C we let H∞(Ω) be the unital Banach algebra of bounded holomorphic functions on Ω with the supremum norm kfkH∞(Ω) := sup z∈Ωf (z) (f ∈ H∞(Ω)). We mainly consider the case where Ω is a strip of the form Stω := {z ∈ C Im(z) < ω} for ω > 0, with St0 := R. The Schwartz class S(R; X) is the space of X-valued rapidly decreasing smooth functions on R, and the space of X-valued tempered distributions is S′(R; X). The Fourier transform of an X-valued tempered distribution Φ ∈ S′(R; X) is denoted 4 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL by F Φ. For instance, if µ ∈ Mω(R) for ω > 0 then F µ ∈ H∞(Stω)∩ C(Stω) is given by F µ(z) :=ZR e−iszµ(ds) (z ∈ Stω). If X and Y are Banach spaces that are embedded continuously into a Hausdorff topological vector space Z, then we call (X, Y ) an interpolation couple. We let K(t, z) := inf {kxkX + tkykY x ∈ X, y ∈ Y, x + y = z} for t > 0 and z ∈ X + Y ⊆ Z. The real interpolation space of X and Y with parameters θ ∈ [0, 1] and q ∈ [1,∞] is (1.4) (X, Y )θ,q :=(cid:8)z ∈ X + Y [t 7→ t−θK(t, z)] ∈ Lq((0,∞), dt/t)(cid:9) , (z ∈ (X, Y )θ,q). kzk(X,Y )θ,q a Banach space when equipped with the norm If T : X +Y → X +Y restricts to a bounded operator on X and a bounded operator on Y then :=(cid:13)(cid:13)t 7→ t−θK(t, z)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq((0,∞),dt/t) L(X) kTkθ kTkL((X,Y )θ,q ) ≤ kTk1−θ (1.5) for all θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞] [4, Theorem 3.1.2]. We mainly consider interpolation spaces for the couple (X, D(A)), where A is a closed operator on X. We write L(Y ) and DA(θ, q) := (X, D(A))θ,q kxkθ,q := kxkDA(θ,q) (x ∈ DA(θ, q)). For an operator B on X and a continuously embedded space Y ֒→ X, the operator BY on Y that satisfies BY y = By for elements in its domain D(BY ) := {y ∈ D(B) ∩ Y By ∈ Y } is the part of B in Y . If Y = DA(θ, q) for θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞] then we write Bθ,q := BDA(θ,q). Throughout, an X-valued function space Φ(R; X) on the real line will be denoted by Φ(X) whenever little confusion can arise. 2. Functional calculus and Fourier multipliers 2.1. Functional calculus. We assume that the reader is familiar with the basics of the theory of C0-groups as developed in, for instance, [8], and merely recall some of the notions and results in functional calculus theory that are used. Details on functional calculus for group generators can be found in [10, Chapter 4]. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X. Then the group type of U , (2.1) θ(U ) := infnω ≥ 0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)∃M ≥ 1 such that kU (s)k ≤ M eωs for all s ≥ 0o , is finite. Moreover, A is a strip-type operator of height ω0 := θ(U ), i.e., σ(A) ⊆ Stω0 and λ∈C\Stω kR(λ, A)k < ∞ for all ω > ω0. sup FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 5 The strip-type functional calculus for A is defined as follows. First, operators f (A) ∈ L(X) are associated with functions f ∈ E(Stω) :=(cid:8)g ∈ H∞(Stω)(cid:12)(cid:12)g(z) ∈ O(z−α) for some α > 1 as Re(z) → ∞(cid:9) for ω > ω0, by a Cauchy-type integral f (A) := f (z)R(z, A) dz. 1 2πiZδStω′ Here δStω′ is the positively oriented boundary of Stω′ for ω′ ∈ (ω0, ω). This proce- dure is independent of the choice of ω′ by Cauchy's theorem, and yields an algebra homomorphism E(Stω) → L(X). The definition of f (A) is extended to a larger class of functions by regularization, i.e. f (A) := e(A)−1(ef )(A) if there exists e ∈ E(Stω) with e(A) injective and ef ∈ E(Stω). This yields a closed unbounded operator f (A) on X, and the definition of f (A) is independent of the choice of the regularizer e. The algebra of all meromorphic functions on Stω that are regularizable for A is denoted by MA(Stω). Each f ∈ H∞(Stω) is regularizable by the function z 7→ (λ − z)−2, for Im(λ) > ω. Since −iA generates a C0-group, the Hille-Phillips functional calculus for A yields certain functions f that give rise to bounded operators f (A). Fix M ≥ 1 and ω ≥ 0 such that kU (s)k ≤ M eωs for all s ∈ R. For µ ∈ Mω(R) define (2.2) U (s)x µ(ds) (x ∈ X). Uµx :=ZR Then µ 7→ Uµ is an algebra homomorphism Mω(R) → L(X). The following lemma, Lemma 2.2 in [11], shows that the Hille-Phillips calculus extends the strip-type calculus for A. Lemma 2.1. Let X, A and U be as above, and let ω′ > ω ≥ 0. a) For each f ∈ E(Stω′ ) there exists µ ∈ Mω(R) such that f = F µ. b) Let µ ∈ Mω(R) be such that F µ extends to an element of MA(Stω′). Then f (A) = Uµ ∈ L(X) and t∈R kf (t + A)k ≤ M kµkMω(R) . sup We now consider functional calculus for operators on interpolation spaces. The following lemma shows that, in particular, the functional calculi for A and Aθ,q are compatible. Lemma 2.2. Let A be a strip-type operator of height ω0 on a Banach space X and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞] and m, n ∈ N0. Let Y := (D(Am), D(An))θ,q. a) The part AY of A in Y is a strip-type operator of height ω0. Moreover, f ∈ MAY (Stω) with f (AY ) = f (A)Y for all ω > ω0 and f ∈ MA(Stω). erates the C0-group (U (s)Y )s∈R. In particular, D(AY ) is dense in Y . b) If −iA generates a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on X and q < ∞, then −iAY gen- Proof. a) First note that, for all k ∈ N0 and λ ∈ ρ(A), R(λ, A) leaves D(Ak) invariant with kR(λ, A)kL(D(Ak)) ≤ kR(λ, A)kL(X). By (1.5), R(λ, A) leaves Y invariant with (2.3) kR(λ, A)kL(Y ) ≤ kR(λ, A)kL(X) . 6 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL By [10, Proposition A.2.8], σ(AY ) ⊆ σ(A) and R(λ, AY ) = R(λ, A)Y for all λ ∈ ρ(A). Hence (2.3) yields the first statement. Let ω > ω0 and f ∈ E(Stω) be given. Then f (AY )y = f (z)R(z, AY )y dz = f (z)R(z, A)y dz = f (A)y 1 2πiZΓ 1 2πiZΓ for some contour Γ and all y ∈ Y . For a general f ∈ MA(Stω), note that e is a regulariser for f in the functional calculus for AY if it is a regulariser for f in the functional calculus for A, since then e(AY ) = e(A)Y is injective. The rest follows by regularization. b) By (1.5), kU (s)Y k ≤ kU (s)k for all s ∈ R. Hence (U (s)Y )s∈R is locally bounded. Since it is strongly continuous on the dense subset D(Amax(n,m)) ⊆ Y [19, Proposition 1.2.5], it is strongly continuous on Y . By [8, p. 60], −iAY is its generator. (cid:3) Remark 2.3. Part b) of Lemma 2.2 ensures that the integral in (2.2) is well-defined and converges in DA(θ, q), for x ∈ DA(θ, q) and q < ∞. Even though (U (s))s∈R is not strongly continuous on DA(θ,∞) in general, the integral is well-defined and converges in X. Since DA(θ, q) is continuously embedded in X for all θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞], the value of the integral does not depend on the space in which convergence takes place. Hence from now on we regularly will not specify in which norm (2.2) converges. Let A be a strip-type operator of height ω0 and ω > ω0. For a Banach algebra F of functions that is continuously embedded in H∞(Stω), we say that A has a bounded F -calculus if there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that f (A) ∈ L(X) with kf (A)kL(X) ≤ C kfkF for all f ∈ F . The next lemma from [10, Proposition 5.1.7] is fundamental. Lemma 2.4 (Convergence Lemma). Let A be a densely defined strip-type operator of height ω0 on a Banach space X. Let ω > ω0 and (fj)j∈J ⊆ H∞(Stω) be a net satisfying the following conditions: (1) supj∈J kfjkH∞(Stω) < ∞; (2) f (z) := limj fj(z) exists for all z ∈ Stω; (3) supj∈J kfj(A)kL(X) < ∞. Then f ∈ H∞(Stω), f (A) ∈ L(X), fj(A) → f (A) strongly and kf (A)k ≤ lim sup j∈J kfj(A)k . 2.2. Fourier multipliers on Besov spaces. Let us summarize some results about Fourier multipliers on vector-valued Besov spaces which will be used later on. De- tails can be found in [1] and [9]. Let ψ ∈ C∞(R) be a nonnegative function with support in [ 1 for all s ∈ (0,∞). ψ(2−ks) = 1 ∞ 2 , 2] such that For k ∈ N and s ∈ R let ϕk(s) := ψ(2−ks), and let ϕ0(s) := 1 −P∞ k=1 ϕk(s). Let X be a Banach space and let p, q ∈ [1,∞] and r ∈ R be given. The (inhomo- geneous) Besov space Br p,q(R; X) consists of all X-valued tempered distributions Xk=−∞ FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 7 f ∈ S′(R; X) such that kfkBr p,q (R;X) :=(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)2kr(cid:13)(cid:13)F −1ϕk ∗ f(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R;X)(cid:17)∞ k=0(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)ℓq p,q(R;X). Then Br p,q(R; X) is a Banach space such that p,q(R; X), and a different choice of ψ leads to an equivalent norm on < ∞, endowed with the norm kfkBr S(R; X) ⊆ Br Br p,q(R; X). For n ∈ N and p ∈ [1,∞] the Sobolev space Wn,p(R; X) :=nf ∈ Lp(R; X) f (k) ∈ Lp(R; X) for all 1 ≤ k ≤ no , is a Banach space when endowed with the norm (f ∈ Wn,p(R; X)). kfkn,p := kfkWn,p(X) := kfkp + kf (n)kp In the case X = C we simply write Wn,p(R) = W1,p(R; C). The following lemma is equation (5.9) in [1]. The fact that the constant C does not depend on the particular Banach space follows from a direct sum argument. Lemma 2.5. Let θ ∈ (0, 1), p ∈ [1,∞), q ∈ [1,∞] and n ∈ N. Then there exists a constant C > 0 such that, for any Banach space X, (Lp(X), Wn,p(X))θ,q = Bnθ p,q(X) with 1 C kfkBnθ p,q (X) ≤ kfk(Lp(X),Wn,p(X))θ,q ≤ C kfkBnθ p,q (X) (f ∈ Bnθ p,q(X)). Let m ∈ L∞(R;L(X)), p, q ∈ [1,∞] and r ∈ R. We say that m is a bounded p,q(X) → p,q(X) such that p,q(X) if there is a unique bounded operator Tm : Br Fourier multiplier on Br Br (2.4) Tm(f ) = F −1 (m · F f ) for all f ∈ S(X). Each µ ∈ M(R) induces a bounded Fourier multiplier F µ with (2.5) TF µ(f ) = Lµ(f ) := µ ∗ f (f ∈ S(X)). The main result about Fourier multipliers on Besov spaces that we use is the fol- lowing, Corollary 4.15 from [9]. Proposition 2.6. There exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that the following holds. Let X be a Banach space, p, q ∈ [1,∞] and r ∈ R. If m : R → C is such that ϕkm ∈ B1/2 2,1 (R; C) for all k ∈ N0, and M := sup k∈N0 a>0k(ϕkm)(a·)kB1/2 inf 2,1 (R;C) < ∞, then m is a bounded Fourier multiplier on Br p,q(X) with kTmkL(Br p,q(X)) ≤ CM . Corollary 2.7. There exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that for all Banach spaces X, p, q ∈ [1,∞], r ∈ R and all m ∈ C1(R; C) with m is a bounded Fourier multiplier on Br N := sup s∈R m(s) + (1 + s)m′(s) < ∞, p,q(X) with kTmkL(Br p,q(X)) ≤ CN . Proof. This follows as in [9, Corollary 4.11]. See also [9, Remark 4.16]. (cid:3) 8 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL 3. Transference principles 3.1. Unbounded groups. We first establish an interpolation version of the trans- ference principle for unbounded groups from [12]. Note that, for each µ ∈ M(R) and p ∈ [1,∞], the convolution operator Lµ from (2.5) extends to a bounded operator on Lp(X), by Young's inequality. For ω ≥ 0 and µ ∈ Mω(R) let µω ∈ M(R) be given by µω(ds) := cosh(ωs)µ(ds). Proposition 3.1. Let 0 ≤ ω0 < ω, θ ∈ (0, 1), p ∈ [1,∞) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that the following holds. If −iA generates a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X such that kU (s)kL(X) ≤ M cosh(ω0s) for all s ∈ R and some M ≥ 1, then (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ZR U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)θ,q ≤ CM 2 kLµωkL(Bθ p,q(X)) kxkθ,q for all µ ∈ Mω(R) and x ∈ DA(θ, q). Proof. Let µ ∈ Mω(R) be given and let Uµ be as in (2.2). By the proof of Theorem 3.2 in [12], we can factorize Uµ as Uµ = P ◦ Lµω ◦ ι, where • ι : X → Lp(X) is given by ιx(s) := ψ(−s)U (−s)x (x ∈ X, s ∈ R), with for α > ω fixed. ψ(s) := 1 cosh(αs) (s ∈ R) • P : Lp(X) → X is given by P f :=ZR ϕ(s)U (s)f (s) ds (f ∈ Lp(X)), with ϕ(s) := √8ω π cosh(ωs) cosh(2ωs) (s ∈ R). Then, using Holder's inequality, (3.1) kιkL(X,Lp(X)) ≤ M kψ cosh(ω0·)kp , kPkL(Lp(X),X) ≤ M kϕ cosh(ω0·)kp′ . (3.2) We claim that ι : D(A) → W1,p(X) and P : W1,p(X) → D(A) are well-defined and bounded. To prove this claim, first let x ∈ D(A). Then ιx ∈ C1(R) with (ιx)′(s) = −ψ′(−s)U (−s)x + iψ(−s)U (−s)Ax tanh(αs) cosh(αs) for all s ∈ R. Hence (ιx)′ ∈ Lp(R) with = −α U (−s)x + i cosh(αs) 1 k(ιx)′kp ≤ αM ktanhkL∞(R)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) cosh(ω0·) cosh(α·) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)pkxkX + M(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U (−s)Ax cosh(ω0·) cosh(α·) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)pkAxkX . This shows that ι : D(A) → W1,p(X) is bounded. To prove the claim for P , fix f ∈ S(X) and note that kιxk1,p ≤ M (αktanhkL∞(R) + 1)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (U (h) − I)P f =ZR U (s) 1 h cosh(α·) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)pkxkD(A) . ϕ(s − h)f (s − h) − ϕ(s)f (s) ds h FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 9 Combining this with (3.1) implies that ιx ∈ W1,p(R) with cosh(ω0·) (3.3) for h > 0. The latter expression converges to −RR U (s)(ϕf )′(s) ds ∈ X as h → 0, by the dominated convergence theorem. Hence P f ∈ D(A) with AP f = lim h→0 1 h (U (h) − I)P f = −ZR U (s)(ϕ′(s)f (s) + ϕ(s)f ′(s)) ds. Another application of Holder's inequality yields kAP fkX ≤ M kϕ′ cosh(ω0·)kp′ kfkp + M kϕ cosh(ω0·)kp′ kf ′kp . Combining this with (3.2) implies (3.4) kP fkD(A) ≤ M(cid:16)kϕ cosh(ω0·)kp′ + kϕ′ cosh(ω0·)kp′(cid:17)kfk1,p . As S(X) is dense in W1,p(X), P : W1,p(X) → D(A) is bounded. Since Lµω ∈ L(W1,p(X)), we can factorize Uµ ∈ L(D(A)) as Uµ = P ◦ Lµω ◦ ι via bounded maps through W1,p(X). Applying the real interpolation method with parameters θ and q to the two factorizations of Uµ, through Lp(X) respectively W1,p(X), yields the commutative diagram of bounded maps Lµω−−−−→ (Lp(X), W1,p(X))θ,q (Lp(X), W1,p(X))θ,q ι x DA(θ, q) Uµ−−−−→ P y DA(θ, q) Finally, estimate the norms of ι and P in this diagram by applying (1.5) to (3.1) and (3.3) respectively (3.2) and (3.4). This yields kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ C′M 2 kLµkL((Lp(X),W1,p(X))θ,q ) (3.5) for a constant C′ ≥ 0 independent of µ. Now Lemma 2.5 concludes the proof. (cid:3) 3.2. Bounded groups. In this section we establish a version of the classical trans- ference principle from [5] on interpolation spaces, already stated in the Introduction as Proposition 1.1. In the proof we use the convention 1/∞ := 0. Proposition 3.2. Let θ ∈ (0, 1), p ∈ [1,∞) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that the following holds. If −iA generate a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X with M := sups∈R kU (s)k < ∞, then (3.6) p,q (X)) kxkθ,q ZR (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)θ,q ≤ CM 2 kLµkL(Bθ for all µ ∈ M(R) and x ∈ DA(θ, q). 10 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL Proof. First note that it suffices to establish (3.6) for measures with compact sup- port. Indeed, approximating by measures with compact support then extends (3.6) to all µ ∈ M(R). So fix N > 0 and let µ ∈ M(R) be such that supp(µ) ⊆ [−N, N ]. We will factorize Uµ using the abstract transference principle from [13, Section 2]. To this end, let ρ ∈ C∞(R) be defined by ρ(s) :=( c1 exp(cid:16) 1 0 s2−1(cid:17) s < 1 s ≥ 1 , where c1 ≥ 0 is such that RR ρ(s) ds = 1. Fix α, β > 0 and define σ(s) := 1 α ρ(cid:0) s α(cid:1) for s ∈ R, and σ ∗ 1[−(α+β),α+β]. ψ := σ ∗ 1[−(N +3α+β),N +3α+β] 2(α + β) ϕ := and 1 Then ψ, ϕ ∈ C∞(R) are such that supp(ϕ) ⊆ [−(2α + β), 2α + β], ψ ≡ 1 on [−(2α + N + β), 2α + N + β] Z 2α+β Hence ψ ∗ ϕ ≡ 1 on [−N, N ]. Let ι : X → Lp(X) be given by (x ∈ X, s ∈ R), ιx(s) := ψ(−s)U (−s)x and −(2α+β) and P : Lp(X) → X by P f :=ZR ϕ(s)U (s)f (s) ds (f ∈ Lp(X)). ϕ(s) ds = 1. Proposition 2.3 in [13] yields the factorization Uµ = P ◦ Lµ ◦ ι, where we use that (ψ ∗ ϕ)µ = µ. By Holder's inequality, kιkL(X,Lp(X)) ≤ M kψkp (3.7) Moreover, ι : D(A) → W1,p(X) and P : W1,p(X) → D(A) are bounded with (3.8) kPkL(Lp(X),X) ≤ M kϕkp′ and and kPkL(W1,p(X),D(A)) ≤ M kϕk1,p′ . kιkL(D(A),W1,p(X)) ≤ M kψk1,p This follows by arguments almost identical to those in the proof of Proposition 3.1. Applying the real interpolation method with parameters θ and q to the two factor- izations of Uµ, through Lp(X) and W1,p(X), produces the commutative diagram of bounded maps (Lp(X), W1,p(X))θ,q Lµ−−−−→ (Lp(X), W1,p(X))θ,q ι x DA(θ, q) P y DA(θ, q) Uµ−−−−→ Use (1.5) on (3.7) and (3.8) to estimate the norms of ι and P in this factorization as kιk ≤ M kψk1,p and kPk ≤ M kϕk1,p′. This yields (3.9) To determine kψk1,p and kϕk1,p′ , note that kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ M 2 kψk1,p kϕk1,p′ kLµkL((Lp(X),W1,p(X))θ,q) . kψkp ≤ kσk1(cid:13)(cid:13)1[−(N +3α+β),N +3α+β](cid:13)(cid:13)p = (2(N + 3α + β))1/p, 2(α + β) kσk1(cid:13)(cid:13)1[−(α+β),α+β](cid:13)(cid:13)p′ = (2(α + β))−1/p, kϕkp′ ≤ 1 FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 11 by Young's inequality. Since σ is an even function that is decreasing on [0, α] and supported on [−α, α], its derivative satisfies kσ′k1 = −2Z α 0 σ′(s) ds = 2(σ(0) − σ(α)) = 2ρ(0) α . Let c2 := 2ρ(0). Another application of Young's inequality yields 1 kψ′kp ≤ kσ′k1(cid:13)(cid:13)1[−(N +3α+β),N +3α+β](cid:13)(cid:13)p = 2(α + β) kσ′k1(cid:13)(cid:13)1[−(α+β),α+β](cid:13)(cid:13)p = kϕ′kp ≤ (cid:19)1/p α(cid:17)2(cid:18) N + 3α + β kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ M 2(cid:16)1 + α + β c2 Hence (3.9) becomes Taking the infimum over α and β yields c2 α c2 α (2(N + 3α + β))1/p, (2(α + β))−1/p. kLµkL((Lp(X),W1,p(X))θ,q) . (3.10) kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ M 2 kLµkL((Lp(X),W1,p(X))θ,q) . Lemma 2.5 now establishes (3.6) and concludes the proof. (cid:3) Remark 3.3. Note that the constant C in Proposition 3.2 comes only from the equivalence of the norms on (Lp(X), W1,p(X))θ,q and Bθ p,q(X), whereas in Propo- sition 3.1 a constant is present which is inherent to the transference method. Remark 3.4. Let p ∈ [1,∞) and let (U (s))s∈R ⊆ L(Lp(C)) be the shift group given by U (s)f (t) := f (t + s) for f ∈ Lp(C), s ∈ R and almost all t ∈ R. Then (U (s)))s∈R is generated by −iA, where Af := if ′ for f ∈ D(A) = W1,p(C). Hence DA(θ, q) = (Lp(C), W1,p(C))θ,q for θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Moreover, for µ ∈ M(R) and f ∈ Lp(C), ZR U (s)f dµ(s) = µ ∗ f = Lµ(f ). Hence, with Uµ as in (2.2), kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) = kLµkL((Lp(C),W1,p(C))θ,q ) . This shows that (3.10) is sharp in general, up to possibly a change of constant. By Lemma 2.5, the same holds for (3.6). Corollary 2.7 yields the following result, Corollary 1.2 from the Introduction. Corollary 3.5. Let θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that the following holds. Let −iA generate a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X with M := sups∈R kU (s)k < ∞, and let µ ∈ M(R) be such that F µ ∈ C1(R) with sups∈R(1 + s)(F µ)′(s) < ∞. Then (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ZR U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)θ,q ≤ CM 2 sup for all x ∈ DA(θ, q). s∈R F µ(s) + (1 + s)(F µ)′(s) kxkθ,q 12 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL Remark 3.6. To obtain Corollary 3.5 we used Corollary 2.7, but there are other ways to verify the conditions of Proposition 2.6, for instance Hormander type as- sumptions, cf. [9, pp. 47-49]. More generally, one can define a norm on the space of all bounded Fourier multipliers m on Br p,q(X)) := kTmkL(Br p,q(X)), with Tm as in (2.4). Proposition 3.2 yields kUµkL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ C kF µkM(Br p,q(X)), which cannot be improved in general, cf. Remark 3.4. p,q(X) by kmkM(Br Remark 3.7. If X is a UMD space then (1.1) and the vector-valued Mikhlin multiplier theorem [10, Theorem E.6.2 b] yield an estimate (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ZR U (s)x µ(ds)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X ≤ CM 2 kxkX sup s∈R F µ(s) + s(F µ)′(s) for all x ∈ X. Corollary 3.5 then follows from (1.5), and moreover singularities of (F µ)′ at zero are allowed. However, in our setting of general Banach spaces, the inhomogeneity of the Besov space Br p,q(X) implies that a condition at zero on the multiplier is needed to deal with the term ϕ0m in Proposition 2.6. Remark 3.8. Letting f := F µ, Corollary 3.5 yields an estimate (3.11) kf (Aθ,q)k ≤ C sup s∈R f (s) + (1 + s)f ′(s). This is a functional calculus statement for Aθ,q involving functions on the real line. One may now ask to which functions f on the real line the definition of f (Aθ,q) can be extended in a sensible manner such that (3.11) holds. We can take the closure of the Fourier transforms of measures in the space consisting of all functions f ∈ C1(R) for which sups∈R f (s) + (1 + s)f ′(s) is finite, or approximate by holomorphic functions as in [18, Lemma 4.15], using Theorem 4.1. This will yield a definition of f (Aθ,q) for a class of functions on the real line and a bound as in (3.11), but the question then remains how this definition relates to other known extensions of functional calculi. In the present article we restrict ourselves to results about holomorphic functional calculi. 4. Functional calculus results We now use the theory established in the previous sections to prove our main functional calculus result, Theorem 1.3. Recall the definition of the analytic Mikhlin algebra H∞ 1 (Stω) from (1.2). Theorem 4.1. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞] and ω > θ(U ) be given. Then there exists a constant C ≥ 0 such that f (Aθ,q) ∈ L(DA(θ, q)) with kf (Aθ,q)kL(DA(θ,q)) ≤ C kfkH∞ If (U (s))s∈R is uniformly bounded then C can be chosen for all f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω). independent of ω > 0. Proof. First consider f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω) ∩ E(Stω) and fix α ∈ (θ(U ), ω) and p ∈ [1,∞). By Lemma 2.1 there exists µ ∈ Mα(R) such that f = F µ. By Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 and Proposition 3.1, 1 (Stω ) (4.1) kf (Aθ,q)k = k(Uµ)θ,qk ≤ C1 kLµαkL(Bθ p,q(X)) = C1 kTF µαkL(Bθ p,q(X)) FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 13 for some constant C1 ≥ 0, where TF µα is as in (2.4). Since F µα(s) = f (s + iα) + f (s − iα) 2 (s ∈ R), Corollary 2.7 yields a constant C2 ≥ 0 such that (4.2) kf (Aθ,q)k ≤ C2 sup s∈R F µα(s) + (1 + s)(F µα)′(s) ≤ C2 kfkH∞ 1 (Stω ) . For general f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω) first assume that q < ∞. By part b) of Lemma 2.2, D(Aθ,q) is dense in DA(θ, q). Let τk(z) := −k2(ik − z)−2 for k ∈ N with k > ω and z ∈ Stω. Then τk, f τk ∈ H∞ k kf τkkH∞ sup 1 (Stω) ∩ E(Stω), 1 (Stω ) ≤ kfkH∞ 1 (Stω ) < ∞ k kτkkH∞ 1 (Stω) sup and f τk(z) → f (z) as k → ∞, for all z ∈ Stω. Now (4.2) yields kf τk(Aθ,q)k ≤ C2 kf τkkH∞ 1 (Stω) ≤ C kfkH∞ 1 (Stω) for some C ≥ 0. Hence the Convergence Lemma 2.4 implies f (A) ∈ L(X) and (4.3) Finally, for q = ∞ the Reiteration Theorem [4, Theorem 3.5.3] yields kf (Aθ,q)k ≤ C kfkH∞ 1 (Stω) . DA(θ,∞) = (DA(θ1, 1), DA(θ2, 1))θ3,∞ with equivalence of norms, where θ1, θ2, θ3 ∈ (0, 1) are such that θ1 6= θ2 and θ1(1 − θ3) + θ2θ3 = θ. Combining (4.3) and (1.5) concludes the proof of the first statement. In the case where (U (s))s∈R is uniformly bounded, use Proposition 3.2 instead of 3.1 in (4.1) to obtain kf (Aθ,q)k ≤ C1 kTF µkL(Bθ p,q(X)) for all f ∈ H∞ of the proof is the same as before. 1 (Stω)∩E(Stω) and some constant C1 ≥ 0 independent of ω. The rest (cid:3) Remark 4.2. Compare Theorem 4.1 with Theorem 3.6 in [12]. There an estimate (4.4) kf (A)kL(X) ≤ C sup z∈Stωf (z) + zf ′(z) is obtained when the underlying space X is a UMD space, and the constant C is independent of ω when the group in question is uniformly bounded. Theo- rem 4.1 follows from (4.4) by interpolation, and this seems to yield a stronger result since the term supz∈Stωf ′(z) does not appear in (4.4). In fact, the norms supz∈Stωf (z) +zf ′(z) and kfkH∞ 1 (Stω ) are equivalent, since 0 ∈ Stω for all ω > 0. So for generators of unbounded groups (4.4) does not yield an essentially better estimate than Theorem 4.1. This is different for generators of uniformly bounded groups, since the norm equivalence of supz∈Stωf (z) +zf ′(z) and kfkH∞ 1 (Stω ) fails as ω ↓ 0. Hence for generators of uniformly bounded groups (4.4) yields a strictly stronger result on DA(θ, q) than Theorem 4.1. Remark 4.3. Let λ ∈ C with Re(λ) > ω. By [10, Corollary 6.6.3], D((λ− iA)α) ⊆ DA(α,∞) for each α ∈ (0, 1). Hence Theorem 4.1 yields f (A)(λ − iA)−α ∈ L(X) for all ω > θ(U ), f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω) and α > 0. However, this already follows from [3, Proposition 8.2.3] in a similar manner as in [15, Remark 5.2]. Moreover, using arguments as in [15, Remark 3.9], [3, Proposition 8.2.3] already implies that f (A) : 14 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL DA(θ, q) → DA(θ′, q′) is bounded for all θ′ < θ and q, q′ ∈ [1,∞]. The improvement that Theorem 4.1 provides lies in going from θ′ < θ to θ′ = θ. Remark 4.4. As already noted in Remark 3.6, we could have used Fourier mul- tiplier results on Besov spaces other than Corollary 2.7. These lead to statements about the boundedness of functional calculi for other function algebras. For ϕ ∈ (0, π) define (4.5) Sϕ := {z ∈ C arg(z) < ϕ} , and for ψ ∈ (0, π/2) and ω > 0, Σψ := Sψ ∪ −Sψ, Vψ,ω := Stω ∪ Σψ. Lemma 4.5. Let ω > ω′ > 0 and ψ ∈ (0, π/2). Then H∞(Vω,ψ) is continuously embedded in H∞ 1 (Stω′). Proof. This follows in a straightforward manner from Lemma 4.5 in [12]. (cid:3) Corollary 4.6. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X and let θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Then Aθ,q has a bounded H∞(Vω,ψ)- calculus for all ω > θ(U ) and ψ ∈ (0, π/2). So far we have considered functional calculus on interpolation spaces for the couple (X, D(A)). The next corollary extends our results to other interpolation couples. Corollary 4.7. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞] and m, n ∈ N0 with m 6= n. Then the part of A in (D(Am), D(An))θ,q has a bounded H∞ 1 (Stω)-calculus for all ω > θ(U ). If (U (s))s∈R is uniformly bounded then the constant bounding the calculus is indepen- dent of ω > 0. Proof. First note that since (D(Am), D(An))θ,q = (D(An), D(Am))1−θ,q by [4, Theorem 3.4.1], we may assume that m < n. Using the similarity transform R(λ, A)m : X → D(Am), it suffices to let m = 0. Suppose that nθ /∈ N. By Lemma 3.1.3 and Proposition 3.1.8 in [19], (X, D(An))θ,q = (D(Ak), D(Ak+1))θ ′,q for some k ∈ N0 and θ′ ∈ (0, 1). Another similarity transform shows that we can let k = 0. Now Theorem 4.1 yields the statement. If k := nθ ∈ N, the Reiteration Theorem [4, Theorem 3.5.3] yields (X, D(An))θ,q =(cid:0)(D(Ak−1), D(Ak))1/2,q, (D(Ak), D(Ak+1))1/2,q(cid:1)1/2,q . By what we have already shown and (1.5), this concludes the proof. (cid:3) FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 15 5. Additional results We now deduce several applications of Theorem 4.1. Corollary 4.7 can be applied in this section to yield results for other interpolation couples. We first state a proposition about the convergence of certain principal value integrals, an interpolation version of [12, Theorem 4.4] on general Banach spaces. If g ∈ L1[−1, 1] is even then by PV − g(s)/s we mean the distribution defined by hPV − g(s)/s, ϕi := lim ǫց0Zǫ≤s≤1 g(s)ϕ(s) ds s for ϕ ∈ C∞(R) compactly supported. By BV[−1, 1] we denote the functions of bounded variation on [−1, 1]. Proposition 5.1. Let −iA be the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on a Banach space X. Let g ∈ BV[−1, 1] be even and set f := F (PV − g(s)/s). Then f (Aθ,q) ∈ L(DA(θ, q)) and (5.1) ǫց0Zǫ≤s≤1 for all θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞) and x ∈ DA(θ, q). Proof. By [12, Lemma 4.3], f ∈ H∞ 1 (Stω) for all ω > 0. Theorem 4.1 now yields the first statement. For (5.1) we may let q < ∞, since DA(θ,∞) ⊆ DA(θ′, 1) for θ′ < θ [19, Proposition 1.1.4]. Now use the Convergence Lemma as in the proof of [12, Theorem 4.4]. (cid:3) f (A)x = lim g(s)U (s)x ds s Remark 5.2. Convergence in (5.1) takes place in DA(θ, q) for q < ∞. For q = ∞ the limit and the integral converge in X and in DA(θ′, q′) for θ′ < θ and q′ ∈ [1,∞). Compare with Remark 2.3. 5.1. Results for sectorial operators and cosine functions. An operator A on a Banach space X is sectorial of angle ϕ ∈ (0, π) if σ(A) ⊆ Sϕ, where Sϕ is as in (4.5), and if sup{kzR(z, A)k ψ ∈ C \ Sψ} < ∞ for all ψ ∈ (ϕ, π). A functional calculus for sectorial operators can be constructed by a method similar to the one used for strip-type operators. For details see [10, Chapter 2]. If A is an injective sectorial operator of angle ϕ ∈ (0, π) then log(A) is defined, as is f (A) for all f ∈ H∞(Sψ) and ψ ∈ (ϕ, π). A sectorial operator A has bounded imaginary powers if A is injective and if −i log(A) is the generator of a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on X. Then U (s) = A−is for all s ∈ R, and we write A ∈ BIP(X). Moreover, A is sectorial of angle θA := θ(U ), by [10, Corollary 4.3.4]. log(Sψ) to be the unital Banach algebra of all f ∈ H∞(Sψ) For ψ ∈ (0, π) define H∞ for which kfkH∞ log(Sψ) := sup z∈Sψf (z) + (1 + log(z))zf ′(z) < ∞, log(Sψ). endowed with the norm k·kH∞ Proposition 5.3. Let X be a Banach space and A ∈ BIP(X) such that θA < π. Let θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞]. Set Y := (X, D(log(A)))θ,q. Then AY has a bounded H∞ bounding the calculus is independent of ψ > 0. log(Sψ)-calculus on Y for all ψ ∈ (θA, π). If sups∈R(cid:13)(cid:13)Ais(cid:13)(cid:13) < ∞ then the constant 16 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL Proof. Let ψ ∈ (θA, π) be given and note that f 7→ f ◦ log is an isometric algebra isomorphism H∞ log(Sψ). By Lemma 2.2 as well as Theorem 4.2.4 and Proposition 6.1.2 from [10], 1 (Stψ) → H∞ f (log(A)Y ) = f (log(A))Y = (f ◦ log)(A)Y = (f ◦ log)(AY ) 1 (Stψ). Now Theorem 4.1 concludes the proof. for all f ∈ H∞ Remark 5.4. Let A be an injective sectoral operator of angle ϕ ∈ (0, π), and let α > 0, θ ∈ (0, 1) and q ∈ [1,∞]. By [10, Corollary 6.6.3], a special case of which was proved by Dore [7, Theorem 3.2], the part of A in (X, D(Aα)∩ R(Aα))θ,q has a bounded H∞(Sψ)-calculus for all ψ ∈ (ϕ, π). Here R(A) is the range of A. By [10, Corollary 6.6.3] and because log(A)Aαθ(1 + A)−2αθ ∈ L(X), (cid:3) (X, D(Aα) ∩ R(Aα))θ,q ⊆ (X, D(Aα))θ,q ⊆ D(Aαθ) ⊆ D(log(A)), and in general D(log(A)) is strictly included in (X, D(log(A)))θ ′,q′ for all θ′ ∈ (0, 1) and q′ ∈ [1,∞]. Hence the result of Dore does not imply Proposition 5.3. A cosine function Cos : R → L(X) on a Banach space X is a strongly continuous mapping such that Cos(0) = I and Cos(t + s) + Cos(t − s) = 2Cos(t)Cos(s) kR(λ, A)k ≤ Mω′ pλ(cid:16)Im(√λ) − ω′(cid:17) 1 (Πω) :=(cid:26)f ∈ H∞(Πω)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) for all λ /∈ Πω′. For such operators there is a natural functional calculus, as before, and a version of Lemma 2.2 holds. For details see [14]. For ω > 0 let z∈Πωf (z) + (1 + z)f ′(z) < ∞(cid:27) , 1 (Πω ) := sup kfkH∞ H∞ a Banach algebra when endowed with the norm k·kH∞ Proposition 5.5. Let −A be the generator of a cosine function Cos on a Banach space X and let θ ∈ (0, 1), q ∈ [1,∞]. Then the part Aθ,q of A in DA(θ, q) has a bounded H∞ 1 (Πω)-calculus for all ω > θ(Cos). If sups∈R kCos(s)k < ∞ then the constant bounding the calculus is independent of ω > 0. 1 (Πω ). Proof. We mainly follow [12, Theorem 5.3], providing extra details where necessary. There is a unique subspace V ⊆ X, the Kisy´nski space, such that the operator −iA, A := i(cid:20) 0 −A 0 (cid:21) , IV for all s, t ∈ R. Then θ(Cos) := infnω ≥ 0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)∃M ≥ 0 : kCos(t)k ≤ M eωt for all t ∈ Ro < ∞. The generator of a cosine function is the unique operator −A on X that satisfies λR(λ2,−A) =Z ∞ 0 e−λtCos(t) dt for λ > θ(Cos). Then A is an operator of parabola-type ω = θ(Cos). This means that σ(A) ⊆ Πω, where Πω := (cid:8)z2 z ∈ Stω(cid:9), and that for all ω′ > ω there exists Mω′ ≥ 0 such that FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS ON INTERPOLATION SPACES 17 with domain D(A) := D(A)× V , generates a C0-group (U (s))s∈R on X × V . More- over, θ(Cos) = θ(U ) [11, Theorem 6.2]. 1 (Πω) if and only 1 (Πω ). Moreover, Let ω > θ(Cos). Then f ∈ H∞(Πω) is an element of H∞ 1 (Stω ) ≤ 4 kfkH∞ 1 (Stω), with kgkH∞ if [z 7→ g(z) := f (z2)] ∈ H∞ f (A) ⊕ f (AV ) = g(A) and for all f ∈ H∞ concludes the proof. f (Aθ,q) ⊕ f (AV ) = (f (A) ⊕ f (AV ))Y = g(A)Y = g(AY ) 1 (Πω), where Y := DA(θ, q) = DA(θ, q) × V . Hence Theorem 4.1 (cid:3) Acknowledgements. We would like to thank our colleagues for interesting discus- sions and helpful ideas. References [1] H. Amann. Operator-valued Fourier multipliers, vector-valued Besov spaces, and applications. Math. Nachr., 186:5 -- 56, 1997. [2] W. Arendt. Semigroups and evolution equations: Functional calculus, regularity and kernel estimates. In C.M.Dafermos E. Feireisl, editor, Handbook of Differential Equations, pages 1 -- 85. Elsevier/North Holland, Amsterdam, 2004. [3] W. Arendt, C.J.K. Batty, M. Hieber, and F. Neubrander. Vector-valued Laplace transforms and Cauchy problems, volume 96 of Monographs in Mathematics. Birkhauser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, second edition, 2011. [4] J. Bergh and J. Lofstrom. Interpolation spaces. An introduction. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1976. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, No. 223. [5] E. Berkson, T.A. Gillespie, and P.S. Muhly. Generalized analyticity in UMD spaces. Ark. Mat., 27(1):1 -- 14, 1989. [6] G. Dore. H∞ functional calculus in real interpolation spaces. Studia Math., 137(2):161 -- 167, 1999. [7] G. Dore. H∞ functional calculus in real interpolation spaces. II. Studia Math., 145(1):75 -- 83, 2001. [8] K. Engel and R. Nagel. One-parameter semigroups for linear evolution equations, volume 194 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000. With contributions by S. Brendle, M. Campiti, T. Hahn, G. Metafune, G. Nickel, D. Pallara, C. Perazzoli, A. Rhandi, S. Romanelli and R. Schnaubelt. [9] M. Girardi and L. Weis. Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems on Besov spaces. Math. Nachr., 251:34 -- 51, 2003. [10] M. Haase. The functional calculus for sectorial operators, volume 169 of Operator Theory: Advances and Applications. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 2006. [11] M. Haase. Functional calculus for groups and applications to evolution equations. J. Evol. Equ., 7(3):529 -- 554, 2007. [12] M. Haase. A transference principle for general groups and functional calculus on UMD spaces. Math. Ann., 345(2):245 -- 265, 2009. [13] M. Haase. Transference principles for semigroups and a theorem of Peller. J. Fun. Anal., 261(10):2959 -- 2998, 2011. [14] M. Haase. The functional calculus approach to cosine operator functions. In Recent Trends in Analysis. Proceedings of the Conference in honor of N.K. Nikolski held in Bordeaux 2011, pages 123 -- 147. Theta Foundation, 2013. [15] M. Haase and J. Rozendaal. Functional calculus for semigroup generators via transference. J. Funct. Anal., 265(12):3345 -- 3368, 2013. [16] T. Hytonen. Fourier embeddings and Mihlin-type multiplier theorems. Math. Nachr., 274/275:74 -- 103, 2004. [17] N.J. Kalton and L. Weis. The H∞-calculus and sums of closed operators. Math. Ann., 321(2):319 -- 345, 2001. [18] C. Kriegler. Spectral multipliers, R-bounded homomorphisms, and analytic diffu- sion semigroups. PhD thesis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2009. Online at http://digbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de/volltexte/1000015866 . 18 MARKUS HAASE AND JAN ROZENDAAL [19] A. Lunardi. Interpolation theory. Appunti. Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa (Nuova Serie). [Lecture Notes. Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa (New Series)]. Edizioni della Normale, Pisa, second edition, 2009. Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Mekelweg 4, 2628CD Delft, The Nether- lands E-mail address: [email protected] Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Mekelweg 4, 2628CD Delft, The Nether- lands E-mail address, corresponding author: [email protected]
1906.05124	1	1906	2019-06-12T13:14:22	Amenability and harmonic $L^p$-functions on hypergroups	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $K$ be a locally compact hypergroup with a left invariant Haar measure. We show that the Liouville property and amenability are equivalent for $K$ when it is second countable. Suppose that $\sigma$ is a non-degenerate probability measure on $K$, we show that there is no non-trivial $\sigma$-harmonic function which is continuous and vanishing at infinity. Using this, we prove that the space $H_\sigma^p(K)$ of all $\sigma$-harmonic $L^p$-functions, is trivial for all $1\leq p<\infty$. Further, it is shown that $H_\sigma^\infty(K)$ contains only constant functions if and only if it is a subalgebra of $L^\infty(K)$. In the case where $\sigma$ is adapted and $K$ is compact, we show that $H_\sigma^p(K)={\mathbb C}1$ for all $1\leq p\leq\infty$.	math.FA	math	AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS MEHDI NEMATI1 AND JILA SOHAEI2 Abstract. Let K be a locally compact hypergroup with a left invariant Haar measure. We show that the Liouville property and amenability are equivalent for K when it is second countable. Suppose that σ is a non-degenerate proba- bility measure on K, we show that there is no non-trivial σ-harmonic function which is continuous and vanishing at infinity. Using this, we prove that the σ(K) of all σ-harmonic Lp-functions, is trivial for all 1 ≤ p < ∞. Fur- space H p ther, it is shown that H ∞ σ (K) contains only constant functions if and only if it is a subalgebra of L∞(K). In the case where σ is adapted and K is compact, we show that H p σ(K) = C1 for all 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. 9 1 0 2 n u J 2 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 4 2 1 5 0 . 6 0 9 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction Let σ be a complex Borel measure on a locally compact group G. A Borel func- tion f on G is called σ-harmonic if it satisfies the convolution equation σ ∗ f = f . It is a well-known result of [4] that if G is abelian, then the only bounded contin- uous σ-harmonic function are constant functions when the support of σ generates a dense subgroup of G. Bounded harmonic functions have been investigated by several authors for various kinds of groups, e.g., nilpotent groups and compact groups [7, 8, 10, 11, 12]. Moreover, it was shown in [5] that for 1 ≤ p < ∞, any σ-harmonic Lp-function associated to an adapted probability measure σ on a locally compact group G is trivial. Harmonic functions on groups play important roles in analysis, geometry and probability theory [6]. Motivated by these observations, bounded continuous harmonic functions on nilpotent, [IN] and central hypergroups have been studied in [1, 2]. In what follows, K denotes a locally compact hypergroup with a left-invariant Haar measure. The purpose of this paper is to obtain some insight into the harmonic functions problem for the Lp-spaces, 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, of K. In Section 3, for given a complex Borel measure σ on K with kσk = 1, we first show that there is a contractive projection from Lp(K), 1 < p ≤ ∞, onto H p σ(K) = {f ∈ Lp(K) : σ ∗ f = f }. We also show that K is necessarily amenable if it has the Liouville property; that is, there exists a probability measure σ on K such that all σ-harmonic L∞-functions on K are constant. Further, we prove that a second countable hypergroup possesses the Liouville property if and only if it is amenable. In Section 4, for the case that σ is a non-degenerate probability measure on K, we show that the space of all σ-harmonic functions which are continuous and 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 43A62, 43A15, 43A07, 45E10. Key words and phrases. Amenability, hypergroup, harmonic function, Liouville property. 1 2 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI vanishing at infinity are trivial. Using this we prove that for 1 ≤ p < ∞, any σ- harmonic Lp-function is trivial. For such a measure σ, we also prove that H ∞ σ (K) is a subalgebra of L∞(K) if and only if H ∞ σ (K) = C1. In the case where σ is adapted and K is compact, we show that H p σ(K) = C1 for all 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. These extend the results for the group case in [5]. 2. Preliminaries Let K be a locally compact Hausdorff space. The space K is a hypergroup if there exists a bilinear, associative, weakly continuous convolution ∗ on the Banach space M(K) of all bounded regular complex valued Borel measures on K, such that (M(K), ∗) is an algebra and satisfies, for x, y ∈ K, (i) δx ∗ δy is a probability measure on K with compact support, (ii) the mapping K × K → C(K) , (x, y) 7→ supp(δx ∗ δy) is continuous with respect to the Michael topology on the space C(K) of nonvoid compact sets in K, (ii) the mapping K × K → M(K), (x, y) 7→ δx ∗ δy is continuous, (ii) there is an identity e ∈ K with δe ∗ δx = δx ∗ δe = δx, (iv)there is a continuous involution on K such that (δx ∗ δy) = δy ∗ δx and e ∈ supp(δx ∗ δy) if and only if x = y. The image measure of µ ∈ M(K) under such involution is denoted by µ. Given a (complex) Borel function f on K and x, y ∈ K the left translation xf and the right translation fy are defined by xf (y) = fy(x) = ZK f (t)d(δx ∗ δy)(t) = f (x ∗ y), if the integral exists, where f (x ∗ y) = RK f d(δx ∗ δy). For a Borel function f on K the Borel function f is defined by f (x) = f (x) for all x ∈ K. Given µ, ν ∈ M(K), their convolution is given by hµ ∗ ν, f i = ZK f d(µ ∗ ν) = ZK ZK f (x ∗ y) dµ(x) dν(y) (f ∈ C0(K)) and kµ ∗ νk ≤ kµkνk which shows that µ ∗ ν ∈ M(K). Also for a measure µ ∈ M(K) and a Borel function f on K, we define the convolutions µ ∗ f and f ∗ µ by f (y ∗ x) dµ(y), f ∗ µ(x) = ZK µ ∗ f (x) = ZK if the integrals exist. Note that in this case (µ ∗ f )= f ∗ µ. Moreover, if f is in Cb(K), the Banach space of bounded complex continuous functions on K, then µ ∗ f and f ∗ µ are in Cb(K) with kµ ∗ f k∞ ≤ kµkkf k∞ and hµ ∗ ν, f i = hν, µ ∗ f i. We refer the reader to [3] for details of hypergroups. f (x ∗ y) dµ(y) (x ∈ K), 3. Amenability and Liouville property Throughout of this paper, let K be a locally compact hypergroup with a left- invariant Haar measure ω; that is, a non-zero positive Radon measure on K such AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS 3 that δx ∗ ω = ω (x ∈ K). Let C0(K) be the Banach space of complex continuous functions on K vanishing at infinity. Then its dual identifies, via the Riesz representation theorem, with the space M(K). Let Lp(K) be the complex Lebesgue spaces with respect to ω, for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Given a Borel measure σ on a hypergroup K, a Borel function f on K satisfying the convolution equation σ ∗ f = f is called σ-harmonic. For 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ define H p Lp-functions; that is, H p and g at least one of which is σ-finite, define the convolution f ∗ g on K by σ(K) to be the set of all σ-harmonic σ(K) = {f ∈ Lp(K) : σ ∗ f = f }. For Borel functions f (f ∗ g)(x) = ZK f (y)g(y ∗ x)dω(y). We commence with the following lemma whose proof is similar to those given in [5]. For completeness, we present the argument here. Lemma 3.1. Let σ ∈ M(K) with kσk = 1 and let 1 < p ≤ ∞. Then there is a contractive projection Pσ : Lp(K) → Lp(K) with Pσ(Lp(K)) = H p σ(K). Moreover, if 1 < p, q < ∞ with 1 q = 1, then Pσ is the dual map of the projection Pσ : Lq(K) → Lq(K). p + 1 Proof. Let U be a free ultra-filter on N, and define Pσ : Lp(K) → Lp(K) by the weak∗ limit Pσ(f ) = lim U 1 n n Xk=1 σk ∗ f, where σk is the k-times convolution of σ with itself. It is easy to see that Pσ(f ) = σ(K). Moreover, if f ∈ Lp(K), then it is easily verified that f for all f ∈ H p σ ∗ Pσ(f ) = Pσ(f ) and so Pσ(f ) ∈ H p σ = Pσ and Pσ(Lp(K)) = H p σ(K). These show that P 2 σ(K). Suppose now that 1 < p < ∞. Then it is not hard to check that σ ∗ Pσ(f ) = Pσ(σ ∗ f ) for all f ∈ Lp(K). Therefore, for each g ∈ Lq(K), we have hσ ∗ P ∗ σ (f ), gi = hP ∗ σ (f ), σ ∗ gi = hf, Pσ(σ ∗ g)i = hf, σ ∗ Pσ(g)i = hf, Pσ(g)i = hP ∗ σ (f ), gi. This shows that σ ∗ P ∗ that σ ∗ P ∗ σ (g) = P ∗ g ∈ Lq(K), we have σ (f ) = P ∗ σ (f ) for all f ∈ Lp(K). Similarly, we can show σ (g) for all g ∈ Lq(K). Consequently, for each f ∈ Lp(K) and hPσP ∗ σ (f ), gi = hPσP ∗ σ (g), f i = hP ∗ σ (g), f i = hPσ(f ), gi. This shows that P ∗ σ (f ) = PσP ∗ σ (f ) = Pσ(f ) for all f ∈ Lp(K), as required. (cid:3) 4 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI Remark 3.2. Let σ ∈ M(K) with kσk = 1 and let 1 < p, q < ∞ be such that 1 1 q = 1. Then we have linear isometric isomorphisms H p H q Lp(K)/H q σ(K) ∼= Lp(K)/H q σ(K) ∋ f 7→ f + H q σ(K)∗, where the first isometry is given by H p p + σ(K)⊥ ∼= σ(K)⊥ ∈ σ(K)⊥. Indeed, for each f ∈ H p σ(K), we have kf k ≥ inf{kf + gk : g ∈ H q σ(K)⊥} ≥ inf{kPσ(f + g)k : g ∈ H q ≥ inf{kf k : g ∈ H q σ(K)⊥} σ(K)⊥} = kf k. Recall that the hypergroup K is called amenable if there exists a topological left invariant mean on L∞(K); that is, there exists m ∈ L∞(K)∗ such that A topological right invariant mean on L∞(K) is a functional m ∈ L∞(K)∗ such kmk = m(1) = 1 and m(g∗f ) = (RK g dω)m(f ) for all f ∈ L∞(K) and g ∈ L1(K). that kmk = m(1) = 1 and m(f ∗ g) = (RK g dω)m(f ) for all f ∈ L∞(K) and g ∈ L1(K). It is known that the involution on L1(K) can be canonically extended to a linear involution ⋆ on L1(K)∗∗; see [9, Chapter 2]. Clearly, m ∈ L∞(K)∗ is a topological left invariant mean if and only if m⋆ is a topological right invariant mean. Therefore, the existence of a topological right invariant mean on L∞(K) is equivalent to K being amenable. Theorem 3.3. Let K be a hypergroup with the Liouville property; that is, there exists a probability measure σ on K such that H ∞ σ (K) = C1. Then K is amenable. Proof. Let Pσ : L∞(K) → H ∞ σ (K) be the contractive projection as defined in Lemma 3.1. Then there is a unique functional m ∈ L∞(K)∗ such that Pσ(f ) = m(f )1 for all f ∈ L∞(K). Since σ ∗ (f ∗ g) = (σ ∗ f ) ∗ g for all f ∈ L∞(K) and g ∈ L1(K), it follows that Pσ(f ∗ g) = Pσ(f ) ∗ g. Moreover, since the projection Pσ is positive and Pσ(1) = 1, we conclude that kmk = m(1) = 1. This shows that m is a topological right invariant mean on L∞(K), which implies that K is amenable. (cid:3) For a a locally compact hypergroup K consider the closed two sided ideal L1 0(K) = (cid:26)f ∈ L1(K) : ZK f dω = 0(cid:27) in L1(K) and for each σ ∈ M(K) let Jσ be the norm closure of {f − σ ∗ f : f ∈ L1(K)} in L1(K). It is well known that L1 0(K) has codimension one in L1(K) and if σ is a probability measure, then Jσ ⊆ L1 0(K). Moreover, it is easy to see that σ = {f ∈ L∞(K) : σ ∗ f = f } = H ∞ J ⊥ We have the following lemma whose proof is similar to those given in [14, Lemma 1.1 and Remark 3, p.210] for locally compact groups. Thus, we omit the proof. σ (K) = (L1(K)/Jσ)∗ σ (K) and hence H ∞ Lemma 3.4. Let K be a locally compact hypergroup and S be a norm closed, convex subsemigroup of probability measuers on K. Let I be a separable, closed subspace of L1(K) such that (i) Jσ ⊆ I for every σ ∈ S; and AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS 5 (ii) for each ε > 0 and g ∈ I there is σ ∈ S such that d(g, Jσ) = inf{kf − gk : f ∈ Jσ} < ε. Then there is σ ∈ S such that I = Jσ. Corollary 3.5. Let K be a second countable locally compact hypergroup. Then the following conditions are equivalent. (i) K is amenable. (ii) There exists a probability measure σ on K such that L1 (iii) K has the Liouville property. 0(K) = Jσ. Proof. (i)⇒(ii). Suppose that K is amenable. Then by [13, Corollary 4.2], there is a net (fα) in P1(K) := {f ∈ L1(K) : kf k1 = RK f dω = 1} such that kfα ∗ f − fαk1 → 0 for all f ∈ P1(K). In particular, for each g ∈ L1 0(K) we have kfα ∗ gk1 → 0. Moreover, fα ∗ g − g ∈ Jσα for all α, where σα = fαω. This shows that the condition (ii) of Lemma 3.4 is satisfied. Since L1(K) is separable, we give that L1 0(K) = Jσ for some probability measure σ on K. (iii)⇒(i). This follows from Theorem 3.3. (ii)⇔(iii). This follows from the inclusion Jσ ⊆ L1 0(K)⊥ = C1. L1 0(K) with the fact that (cid:3) Proposition 3.6. Let σ be a probability measure on K and let 1 < p ≤ ∞. Then H p σ(K) is generated by its non-negative elements. Proof. Suppose that f ∈ H p σ(K). Then σ ∗ f = (σ ∗ f ) = f . This shows that H p σ(K) is self-adjoint and consequently is generated by its real function parts. Now let f ∈ H p σ(K) be a real function and let f = f+ − f−, where f+, f− are non-negative functions in Lp(K). Since σ is positive, the projection Pσ, as defined in Theorem 3.1, is positive. It follows that Pσ(f+), Pσ(f−) ∈ H p σ(K) are non-negative. Moreover, f = Pσ(f ) = Pσ(f+) − Pσ(f−), and this completes the proof. (cid:3) 4. Harmonic Lp-functions Let µ be a complex Borel measure on a locally compact hypergroup K. We say that µ is non-degenerate if ∞ K = (suppµ)n = [n=1 ∞ [n=1 suppµn, where µn is the n-fold convolution of µ and suppµn equals the closure of (suppµ)n. If µ satisfies the weaker condition that K = ∞ [n=1(cid:16)suppµ ∪ (suppµ)(cid:17)n then we say that µ is adapted. 6 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI Remark 4.1. Let µ ∈ M(K). Then it is not hard to check that non-degeneracy n=1hµn, hi > 0 for every non-zero h ∈ Cc(K)+, or of µ is equivalent to that P∞ equivalently there exists n ∈ N such that hµn, hi > 0. Therefore, if f ∈ Cb(K)+ is non-zero, then we may find h ∈ Cc(K)+ such that khk∞ = 1 and f h 6= 0. It follows that f h ∈ Cc(K)+ and f h ≤ f . Therefore, there exists n ∈ N such that 0 < hµn, f hi ≤ hµn, f i. Theorem 4.2. Let σ be a probability measure on K. Then the following state- ments are equivalent. (i) H ∞ (ii) H ∞ (iii) H ∞ σ (K) is a subalgebra of L∞(K). σ (K) is a von Neumann subalgebra of L∞(K).. σ (K) = {f ∈ L∞(K) : ∀x ∈ K, f (y ∗ x) = f (x), for σ−a.e. y ∈ K}. σ (K) is a weak∗ closed operator system, (i) implies that H ∞ Proof. Since H ∞ σ (K) is a von Neumann subalgebra of L∞(K). The implication (iii)⇒(i) is trivial. We need to prove (ii)⇒(iii). Let x ∈ K and f ∈ H ∞ σ (K). Without loss of generality assume that f is real valued. Since (f − f (x))2 ∈ H ∞ σ (K), it follows that ZK (f (y ∗ x) − f (x))2dσ(y) = σ ∗ (f − f (x))2(x) = (f (x) − f (x))2 = 0. This implies that f (y ∗ x) = f (x) for σ−almost every y ∈ K. (cid:3) For a hypergroup K, we denote by LUC(K) to be the Banach space of all bounded left uniformly continuous complex functions on K, consisting of bounded continuous function f on K such that the map K ∋ x 7→ fx ∈ Cb(K) is continu- ous. Lemma 4.3. Let σ ∈ M(K). Then H ∞ σ (K)∩LUC(K) is weak∗ dense in H ∞ σ (K). Let (φα) be a bounded approximate identity for L1(K) and f ∈ H ∞ σ (K). Then σ (K) ∩ LUC(K) for all α, by [13, Lemma 2.2]. Moreover, for each f ∗ φα ∈ H ∞ g ∈ L1(K), we have lim α hf ∗ φα, gi = lim α hf, g ∗ φαi = hf, gi. Thus, H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K) is weak∗ dense in H ∞ σ (K). Corollary 4.4. Let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then the following conditions are equivalent. (i) H ∞ (ii) H ∞ σ (K) is a subalgebra of L∞(K). σ (K) = C1. Proof. Suppose that (i) holds. Given f ∈ H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K), by Theorem 4.2 for each n ∈ N, we have f (y) = f (e) for all y ∈ (suppσ)n. It follows from non- degeneracy of σ and continuity of f that f is constant. Since H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K) is weak∗ dense in H ∞ (cid:3) σ (K), we give that H ∞ σ (K) = C1. AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS 7 A subspace X of Lp(K), 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, is called left (resp. right) translation invariant if xf ∈ X (resp. fx ∈ X) for all f ∈ X and x ∈ K. The subspace X is called translation invariant if it is left and right translation invariant. It is easy to check that for each σ ∈ M(K) the space H ∞ σ (K) is a right translation invariant subspace of L∞(K). Since RK(gx)(t)f (t)dω(t) = 1 f ∈ L∞(K), g ∈ L1(K) and x ∈ K, it follows that Jσ is also right translation invariant in L1(K), where ∆ is the modular function on K. We recall that L∞(K) is naturally a Banach L1(K)-bimodule by the following module actions ∆(x) RK g(t)(fx)(t)dω(t) for all hg · f, hi = hf, h ∗ gi, hf · g, hi = hf, g ∗ hi (f ∈ L∞(K), g, h ∈ L1(K)). It is easily verified that (g · f )(x) = ZK g(y)(xf )(y)dω(y), (f · g)(x) = ZK g(y)(fx)(y)dω(y) for all x ∈ K. Proposition 4.5. Let σ ∈ M(K). Then the following conditions are equivalent. σ (K) is translation invariant. (i) H ∞ (ii) Jσ is translation invariant. (iii) Jσ is an ideal in L1(K). (v) H ∞ (iv) RK f (y ∗ x)dσ(y) = RK f (x ∗ y)dσ(y) for all f ∈ H ∞ σ (K) is a sub-L1(K)-bimodule of L∞(K). Proof. (i)⇔(ii). Since RK(xg)(t)f (t)dω(t) = 1 L∞(K), g ∈ L1(K) and x ∈ K, it follows that H ∞ if and only if Jσ is. ∆(x) RK g(t)(xf )(t)dω(t) for all f ∈ σ (K) is left translation invariant σ (K) ∩ LUC(K). (ii)⇒(iii). It suffices to show that Jσ is a left ideal in L1(K). To prove this, given g ∈ L1(K), h ∈ Jσ and f ∈ H ∞ σ (K), we have hf, g ∗ hi = ZK = ZK f (x)(ZK g(y)(ZK g(y)h(y ∗ x)dω(y))dω(x) f (x)(yh)(x)dω(x))dω(y) = 0, which implies that g ∗ h ∈ Jσ. (iii)⇒(ii). Let (φα) be a bounded approximate identity for L1(K) and let g ∈ Jσ. Since ((xφα) ∗ g) =x (φα ∗ g) and xφα ∈ L1(K) for all α and x ∈ K, the proof follows from the fact that φα ∗ g → g. (i)⇒(iv). Suppose that f ∈ H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K). Since H ∞ σ (K) is left transla- tion invariant, we obtain that ZK f (y ∗ x)dσ(y) = x(σ ∗ f )(e) = (xf )(e) = (σ ∗ (xf ))(e) = ZK f (x ∗ y)dσ(y). 8 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI (iv)⇒(i). Suppose that f ∈ H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K), by right translation invariance of H ∞ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K) and x ∈ K. Then fx ∈ σ (K) ∩ LUC(K). More- H ∞ over, for each y ∈ K, we have (xf )(y) =x (σ ∗ f )(y) = ZK = ZK = ZK = ZK f (t ∗ x ∗ y)dσ(t) (fy)(t ∗ x)dσ(t) (fy)(x ∗ t)dσ(t) f (x ∗ t ∗ y)dσ(t) = (σ ∗ (xf ))(y). This shows that H ∞ by weak∗ density of H ∞ (i)⇒(v). Let f ∈ H ∞ σ (K)∩LUC(K) and hence H ∞ σ (K) is left translation invariant σ (K) ∩ LUC(K) in H ∞ σ (K) and g ∈ L1(K). As g · f = f ∗ g , we give that σ (K). g · f ∈ H ∞ σ (K). Moreover, by assumption tf ∈ H ∞ σ (K) for all t ∈ K. Thus, (σ ∗ (f · g))(x) = ZK (f · g)(y ∗ x)dσ(y) = ZK ZK = ZK ZK = ZK g(t)(fy∗x)(t)dσ(y)dω(t) g(t)(tf )(y ∗ x)dσ(y)dω(t) g(t)(tf )(x)dω(t) = (g · f )(x). This implies that f · g ∈ H ∞ σ (K). (v)⇒(iii). It suffices to show that Jσ is a left ideal in L1(K). Indeed, given f ∈ H ∞ σ (K), g ∈ L1(K) and h ∈ Jσ, we have hf, g ∗ hi = hf · g, hi = 0, which yields that g ∗ h ∈ Jσ, as required. (cid:3) Remark 4.6. It is obvious that under each of above equivalent conditions in Propo- sition 4.5, the quotient space L1(K)/Jσ is a Banach algebra. This implies that σ (K)∗ = (L1(K)/Jσ)∗∗ is a Banach algebra with respect to the two Arens H ∞ products. Theorem 4.7. Let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then every bounded continuous σ-harmonic function on K vanishing at infinity is constant. Proof. Let f ∈ H ∞ σ (K)∩C0(K) be real-valued. Without loss of generality assume that kf k∞ = 1. Therefor, we can find a probability measure µ on K such that kf k∞ = hµ, f i. If f 6= 1, then the function 1−f is also non-negative and non-zero σ-harmonic function in Cb(K). It is well known from [3, Proposition 1.2.16] that AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS 9 µ ∗ (1 − f ) is a non-negative and bounded continuous function. Moreover, ZK µ ∗ (1 − f )dω(x) = µ(K)ZK (1 − f )dω(x) > 0, which implies that µ ∗ (1 − f ) is non-zero. Since σ is non-degenerate, by Remark 4.1, there exists n ∈ N such that hσn, µ ∗ (1 − f )i > 0. On the other hand, since f is σ-harmonic, σn ∗ f = f . Therefore, hσn, µ ∗ (1 − f )i = hσn, (1 − µ ∗ f )i = 1 − hσn, µ ∗ f i = 1 − h σn, f ∗ µi = 1 − h σn ∗ µ, f i = 1 − hσn ∗ f, µi = 1 − hf, µi = 0 which is a contradiction. Since H ∞ elements, the proof is complete. σ (K) ∩ C0(K) is generated by its non-negative (cid:3) Corollary 4.8. Let K be non-compact and let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then the sequence (cid:0) 1 Proof. Let σ0 be a weak∗ cluster point of ( 1 k=1 σk) in M(K). Then σ ∗σ0 = σ0, which implies that σ0 is an idempotent probability measure in M(K). Moreover, for each f ∈ C0(G) we have k=1 σk(cid:1) is weak∗-convergent to 0. n Pn n Pn σ ∗ (σ0 ∗ f ) = (σ ∗ σ0) ∗ f = σ0 ∗ f. This shows that σ0 ∗ f is σ-harmonic and so it is constant by Theorem 4.7. Since K is non-compact, we must have σ0 ∗ f = 0 for all f ∈ C0(K). This in M(K). By weak∗ compactness of the unit ball of M(K) we conclude that 1 (cid:3) implies that σ0 = 0. Thus, 0 is the only weak∗ cluster point of (cid:0) 1 n Pn Corollary 4.9. The hypergroup K is compact if and only if there is a non- degenerate idempotent probability measure on K. k=1 σk(cid:1) k=1 σk w∗ n Pn −→ 0. Theorem 4.10. Let K be non-compact and let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then we have H p Proof. Let 1 < p < ∞ and let f be a non-negative function in H p kf kp = 1. Consider the probability measure σ0 on K defined by σ(K) = {0} for all 1 < p < ∞. σ(K) with σ0 := ∞ Xn=1 1 2n σn. It is easy to see that σ0 ∗ f = f . Moreover, we may find g ∈ Lq(K) with kgkq ≤ 1 such that hf, gi = kf kp = 1, where 1 < q < ∞ and 1 q = 1. It follows from [3, (1.4.11), (1.4.12)] that g ∗ f ∈ C0(K) and kg ∗ f k∞ ≤ kgkqkf kp ≤ 1. Therefore, 1 − g ∗ f ≥ 0 and p + 1 hσ0, 1 − g ∗ f i = 1 − hσ0, g ∗ f i = 1 − hσ0 ∗ f, gi = 1 − hf, gi = 0. 10 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI It follows from non-degeneracy of σ that 1 = g ∗ f ∈ C0(K), contradicting K being non-compact. Hence, f = 0. Thus, Proposition 3.6 implies that H p σ(K) = {0}. (cid:3) We use the following result which is proved in [2, Theorem 3.8] to show that if σ is an adapted probability measure on compact hypergroup K, then each σ-harmonic Lp-function is trivial for all 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Theorem 4.11. If σ is an adapted probability measure on a compact hypergroup K, then each σ-harmonic continuous function on K is constant. Theorem 4.12. Let K be a compact hypergroup and let σ be an adapted proba- bility measure on K. Then for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, we have H p σ(K) = C1. Proof. Let K be compact. Then we have L∞(K) ⊆ Lp(K) ⊆ L1(K) for all 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Thus, it suffices to prove the assertion for the case p = 1. Let f ∈ H 1 σ(K) and let (φα) be a bounded approximate identity for L1(K) such that φα is a bounded continuous function with compact support for all α; see [3, Theorem 1.6.15]. Then [13, Lemma 2.2(i)] implies that f ∗ φα is continuous and bounded for all α. Moreover, it is clear that f ∗ φα is σ-harmonic, and is therefore constant by Theorem 4.11. This shows that f is also constant, as desired. (cid:3) Corollary 4.13. Let K be a compact hypergroup and let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then any weak∗ cluster point σ0 of the sequence n Pn (cid:0) 1 k=1 σk(cid:1) in M(K) is the normalized Haar measure on K. Proof. Let σ0 be a weak∗ cluster point of ( 1 k=1 σk) in M(K). Then we have σ0 is an idempotent probability measure on K satisfying σ ∗ σ0 = σ0, and therefore σ0 ∗ f ∈ H ∞ It follows from Theorem 4.11 and the non-degeneracy of σ that for each f ∈ Cb(K) there exists λf ∈ C such that σ0 ∗ f = λf 1. Let ω be the normalized Haar measure on K. Then for each f ∈ Cb(K), σ (K) for all f ∈ Cb(K). n Pn hω, f i = ZK f (x)dω(x) = ZK (σ0 ∗ f )(x)dω(x) = λf . Moreover, h σ0, f i = h σ0 ∗ σ, f i = hσ, σ0 ∗ f i = hσ, λf 1i = λf . This shows that σ0 = ω. Since ω = ω, we conclude that σ0 = ω. (cid:3) Let σ ∈ M(K). We say that a measure µ ∈ M(K) is σ-harmonic if it satisfies the convolution equation σ ∗ µ = µ. Define Hσ(K) to be the set of all σ-harmonic measures. Theorem 4.14. Let σ ∈ M(K) with kσk = 1. Then there is a contractive projection Pσ : M(K) → M(K) with Pσ(M(K)) = Hσ(K). Proof. Let U be a free ultra-filter on N, and define Pσ : M(K) → M(K) by the weak∗ limit Pσ(µ) = lim U 1 n n σk ∗ µ. Xk=1 AMENABILITY AND HARMONIC Lp-FUNCTIONS ON HYPERGROUPS 11 It is easy to see that Pσ(µ) = µ for all µ ∈ Hσ(K). Moreover, if µ ∈ M(K), then it is easily verified that σ ∗ Pσ(µ) = Pσ(µ) and hence Pσ(µ) ∈ Hσ(K). These show that P 2 (cid:3) σ = Pσ and Pσ(M(K)) = Hσ(K). Recall that a measure µ ∈ M(K) is non-negative if hµ, f i ≥ 0 for all f ∈ C0(K)+. Proposition 4.15. Let σ be a probability measure on K. Then Hσ(K) is gener- ated by its non-negative elements. Proof. Suppose that µ ∈ Hσ(K). Then σ ∗ µ = (σ ∗ µ) = µ. This shows that Hσ(K) is generated by its real measure parts. Now let µ ∈ Hσ(K) be a real measure and let µ = µ+ − µ−, where µ+, µ− are non-negative measures in M(K). Since σ is positive, the measures Pσ(µ+), Pσ(µ−) ∈ Hσ(K) are non-negative. Moreover, µ = Pσ(µ) = Pσ(µ+) − Pσ(µ−), which completes the proof. (cid:3) Theorem 4.16. Let K be non-compact and let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then we have Hσ(K) = {0}. Proof. Suppose that µ ∈ Hσ(K) is non-zero. By Proposition 4.15, we can as- sume that µ is positive. Consider the probability measure σ0 defined by σ0 := It is clear that σ0 ∗ µ = µ. By [3, Theorem 1.6.9], we have that δx ∗ µ = µ for all x ∈ suppσ0 = K. This shows that µ is the left Haar measure that is finite on K, which is a contradiction with non-compactness of K. P∞ n=1 1 2n σn. (cid:3) Corollary 4.17. Let K be non-compact and let σ be a non-degenerate probability measure on K. Then we have H 1 σ(K) = {0}. Proof. Suppose that f ∈ H 1 measure on K. Then we have σ(K). Define µ := f ω, where ω is the left Haar µ = (σ ∗ f )ω = σ ∗ (f ω) = σ ∗ µ. Therefore, µ = 0 by Theorem 4.16 and hence f = 0. (cid:3) Theorem 4.18. let K be compact and let σ be an adabted probability measure on K. Then we have Hσ(K) = Cω, where ω is the normalized Haar measure on K. Proof. Because K is compact, the Haar measure ω is in M(K) and we have σ ∗ ω = ω. Therefore, CωK ⊆ Hσ(K). To prove the converse, suppose that µ ∈ Hσ(K). Then σ ∗ µ = µ. Let (φα) be a bounded approximate identity for w∗ L1(K) such that φα ∈ C + −→ δe; see [3, Theorem 1.6.15]. Then µ ∗ φα σ(K) for all α. Thus, Theorem 4.12 implies that µ ∗ φα is constant for all α. Hence, for every α there is λα ∈ C such that µ ∗ φα = λα1. It follows that for each f ∈ Cb(K), we have w∗ −→ µ and µ ∗ φα ∈ H 1 c (K) for every α and φα hµ ∗ φα, f i = ZK λαf dω = hλαω, f i. Therefore, hλαωK, f i −→ hµ, f i for all f ∈ Cb(K). This shows that there exists λ ∈ C such that µ = λω. It follows that Hσ(K) = Cω. (cid:3) 12 M. NEMATI AND J. SOHAEI References 1. M. Amini, Harmonic functions on [IN] and central hypergroups, Monatsh. Math. 169 (2013), 267 -- 284. 2. M. Amini and C.-H. Chu, Harmonic functions on hypergroups, J. Func. Anal. 261 (2011), 1835 -- 1864. 3. W. R. Bloom and H. Heyer, Harmonic Analysis of Probability Measures on Hypergroups, de Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 20. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1995. 4. G. Choquet and J. Deny, Sur l'´equation de convolution µ ∗ σ = µ, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. I Math. 250 (1960), 779 -- 801. 5. C.-H. Chu, Harmonic function spaces on groups, J. London Math. Soc. 70 (2004), 182 -- 198. 6. C.-H. Chu, Matrix convolution operators on groups, Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1956. Springer, Heidelberg, 2008. 7. C.-H. Chu and T. Hilberdink, The convolution equation of Choquet and Deny on nilpotent groups, Integral Equ. Oper. Theory, 26 (1996), 1 -- 13. 8. C.-H. Chu and A. T. Lau, Harmonic functions on groups and Fourier algebras, Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1782, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002. 9. H.G. Dales and A.T.-M. Lau, The second duals of Beurling algebras, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 177 no. 836, 2005. 10. E.B. Dynkin and M.B. Malyutov, Random walks on groups with a finite number of gener- ators, Soviet Math. Doklady, 2 (1961), 399 -- 402. 11. W. Jaworski, Ergodic and mixing probability measures on [SIN] groups, J. Theoret. Probab. 17 (2004), 741 -- 759. 12. B. E. Johnson, Harmonic functions on nilpotent groups, Integral Equ. Oper. Theory, 40 (2001), 454 -- 464. 13. M. Skantharajah, Amenable hypergroups, Illinois J. Math. 36 (1992), 15 -- 46. 14. G. A. Willis, Probability measures on groups and some related ideals in group algebras, J. Funct. Anal. 92 (1990) 202 -- 263. 1Department of Mathematical Sciences, Isfahan Uinversity of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran; School of Mathematics, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), P.O. Box: 19395 -- 5746, Tehran, Iran. E-mail address: [email protected] 2 Department of Mathematical Sciences, Isfahan Uinversity of Technology, Isfahan 84156-83111, Iran E-mail address: [email protected]
1109.3795	1	1109	2011-09-17T15:44:09	Test functions, Schur-Agler classes and transfer-function realizations: the matrix-valued setting	[ "math.FA", "math.OA" ]	Given a collection of test functions, one defines the associated Schur-Agler class as the intersection of the contractive multipliers over the collection of all positive kernels for which each test function is a contractive multiplier. We indicate extensions of this framework to the case where the test functions, kernel functions, and Schur-Agler-class functions are allowed to be matrix- or operator-valued. We illustrate the general theory with two examples: (1) the matrix-valued Schur class over a finitely-connected planar domain and (2) the matrix-valued version of the constrained Hardy algebra (bounded analytic functions on the unit disk with derivative at the origin constrained to have zero value). Emphasis is on examples where the matrix-valued version is not obtained as a simple higher-multiplicity tensoring of the scalar-valued version.	math.FA	math	TEST FUNCTIONS, SCHUR-AGLER CLASSES AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATIONS: THE MATRIX-VALUED SETTING JOSEPH A. BALL AND MOIS´ES D. GUERRA HUAM ´AN Abstract. Given a collection of test functions, one defines the associated Schur-Agler class as the intersection of the contractive multipliers over the collection of all positive kernels for which each test function is a contractive multiplier. We indicate extensions of this framework to the case where the test functions, kernel functions, and Schur-Agler-class functions are allowed to be matrix- or operator-valued. We illustrate the general theory with two examples: (1) the matrix-valued Schur class over a finitely-connected planar domain and (2) the matrix-valued version of the constrained Hardy algebra (bounded analytic functions on the unit disk with derivative at the origin constrained to have zero value). Emphasis is on examples where the matrix- valued version is not obtained as a simple tensoring with CN of the scalar- valued version. 1. Introduction In honor of the work of Issai Schur (see [34]), it is common nowadays to refer to the class of holomorphic functions s mapping the unit disk D into the closed unit disk D as the Schur class S. We summarize some of the many characterizations of the Schur class in the following theorem. Theorem 1.1. For a given s : D → C, the following are equivalent: (1) s ∈ S, (2) the de Branges-Rovnyak kernel associated with s is a positive kernel on D: Ks(z, w) := 1 − s(z)s(w) 1 − zw (cid:23) 0. (1.1) (3) s has a unitary transfer-function realization, i.e., there is a unitary colli- gation matrix U = [ A B C D ] : X ⊕ C → X ⊕ C so that s(z) = D + zC(I − zA)−1B. (1.2) (4) s satisfies the von Neumann inequality: for any strict contraction operator T on a Hilbert space K, ks(T )k ≤ 1. A natural multivariable generalization of the Schur class from this point of view is to consider functions s defined on the polydisk Dd (where d is a positive inte- ger). It has been known for some time that the von Neumann inequality fails in 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47A56; 47A48, 47A57, 47B32, 46E22. Key words and phrases. Schur-Agler class, test functions, positive kernels, completely positive kernels, reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces, transfer-function realization, internal tensor product of correspondences, unitary colligation matrix, separation of convex sets, interior point of convex hull, finitely connected planar domain, constrained H∞-algebra. 1 2 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN if d > 2 there is a holomorphic function s on Dd more than two variables, i.e.: (even a polynomial) with kskDd ≤ 1 and a commuting d-tuple T = (T1, . . . , Td) of strict contraction operators on a Hilbert space K for which the multivariable von Neumann inequality (1.3) fails. Nevertheless, the subclass of those Schur-class functions over Dd for which (1.3) does hold, now called the Schur-Agler class, does have characterizations anal- ogous to those given in Theorem 1.1 for the single-variable case (see [3, 5, 22]). Note that the analogue of condition (4) in Theorem 1.1 is now used as the definition of the Schur-Agler class. We then have the following analogue of Theorem 1.1 Theorem 1.2. Given s : Dd → C, the following are equivalent. ks(T )k ≤ kskDd (1) s ∈ SAd. (2) There are positive kernels K1, . . . , Kd on Dd so that dXk=1 1 − s(z)s(w) = (1 − zkwk)Kk(z, w). (1.4) (3) There is a unitary colligation matrix U = [ A B C D ] : X ⊕ C → X ⊕ C and a collection {P1, . . . Pd} of orthogonal projections with PiPj = 0 for i 6= j and withPd j=1 Pj = IX so that s(z) = D + C(I − Z(z)A)−1Z(z)B where we have set Z(z) = z1P1 + ··· + zdPd. (1.5) In the test-function approach to defining generalized Schur-Agler classes, going back to the unpublished preprint of Agler [2] and developed further in [6, 27, 29, 41], one proceeds as follows. We here describe the scalar-valued function setting, al- though the paper [27] deals with a more general semigroupoid setting. One replaces the unit disk D (or unit polydisk Dd) with a completely general point set Ω and supposes that one is given a collection of C-valued functions Ψ on Ω (the set of test functions) subject to the condition that supψ∈Ψ ψ(z) < 1 for each z ∈ Ω. The set Ψ carries with it a natural completely regular topology, namely, the weakest topology with respect to which each of the functions z ∈ Ω E(z) : ψ → ψ(z), is continuous. One then says that a positive kernel k is Ψ-admissible (written as k ∈ KΨ) if multiplication by ψ is contractive as an operator on the reproducing kernel Hilbert space H(k) associated with k, i.e., if the kernel Kψ,k(z, w) = (1 − ψ(z)ψ(w)k(z, w) is positive for each ψ ∈ Ψ. We then say that the function s : Ω → C is in the Ψ-Schur-Agler class SAΨ if multiplication by s is contractive on H(k) for each k ∈ KΨ, i.e., if the kernel Ks,k(z, w) = (1 − s(z)s(w))k(z, w) is a positive kernel for each k ∈ KΨ. We mention that the choice (1.6) leads to the classical Schur class while the choice Ω = D, Ψ = {ψ0(z) = z} Ω = Dd, Ψ = {ψk(z) = zk : k = 1, . . . , d} (where z = (z1, . . . , zd) ∈ Dd) leads to the classical Schur-Agler class SAd. with a general test-function collection Ψ. The following is the main result concerning the Schur-Agler class SAΨ associated (1.7) (1.8) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 3 Theorem 1.3. (See [27, 29] and [8] for an early version.) Given a function s : Ω → C, the following are equivalent. (1) s ∈ SAΨ. (2) There is a measure ν on Ψβ (the Stone- Cech compactification of Ψ) and a measurable family {Kψ : ψ ∈ Ψβ} of positive kernels on Ψβ so that 1 − s(z)s(w) =ZΨβ(cid:16)1 − ψ(z)ψ(w)(cid:17) Kψ(z, w) dν(ψ). (1.9) (3) There is a C(Ψβ)-unitary colligation, i.e., a bock unitary operator U = C D ] : X ⊕ C → X ⊕ C together with a ∗-representation ρ of the C∗-algebra [ A B C(Ψβ) (continuous complex-valued functions on Ψβ) into L(X ) (bounded linear operators on X ), so that s(z) = D + C(I − ρ(E(z))A)−1ρ(E(z))B (1.10) (where E(z) is as in (1.6)). Note that conditions (2) and (3) in Theorem 1.3 become conditions (2) and (3) in Theorem 1.1 when Ω and Ψ are chosen as in (1.7), and conditions (2) and (3) in Theorem 1.2 when Ω and Ψ are chosen as in (1.8). A different type of extension of the classical Schur class over the unit disk is the Schur-class SR over a bounded, finitely connected planar domain R. Here R is a bounded domain in the complex plane with boundary consisting of m + 1 disjoint smooth Jordan curves ∂0, ∂1, . . . , ∂m, where ∂0 denotes the boundary of the unbounded component of the complement of R, and we define SR as the class of all holomorphic functions from R into the closed disk D−. Work in [27, 29] identifies the Schur class SR over R as a test-function Schur-Agler class SAΨR for a certain collection of test functions ΨR = {ψx : x ∈ TR} indexed by the so-called R-torus TR defined as the Cartesian product of the connected components of ∂R: x ∈ TR := ∂0 × ∂1 × ··· × ∂m. (see Section 4.1 below for complete details). In particular, the decomposition (1.9) in Theorem 1.3 for this case gives us the following: given s ∈ SR, there is a measure ν on TR and a family of positive kernels {kx : x ∈ TR} so that S(T ) = Xn∈Zd + Sn ⊗ T n if S(z) = Xn∈Zd Snzn 1 − s(z)s(w) =ZTR(cid:16)1 − ψx(z)ψx(w)(cid:17) kx(z, w) dν(x). (1.11) We shall be interested in matrix- and operator-valued versions of these Schur and Schur-Agler classes. The operator-valued version of the Schur class over R, which we denote as SR(U,Y), consists of holomorphic functions S on R with values S(z) equal to contraction operators between two Hilbert spaces U and Y. For the case where R = D, we drop the subscript R and write simply S(U,Y); we also abbreviate SR(U,U) to SR(U). There is also an operator-valued version of the Schur-Agler class over Dd, namely: S : Dd → L(U,Y) is in the Schur-Agler class SAd(U,Y) if S is a holomorphic map from Dd into L(U,Y) such that kS(T )k ≤ 1 for any commutative tuple T = (T1, . . . , Td) of strictly contractive operators on a Hilbert space K, where we use a tensor functional calculus to define S(T ): 4 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN where we use standard multivariable notation: ··· T nd 1 ··· znd d , T n = T n1 1 zn = zn1 d for n = (n1, . . . , nd) ∈ Zd +. Then Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 have seamless extensions to the matrix-/operator-valued settings. Indeed, S ∈ S(U,Y) if and only if the de Branges-Rovnyak L(Y)-valued kernel KS(z, w) := IY − S(z)S(w)∗ 1 − zw that I − S(z)S(w)∗ =Pd is a positive kernel on D if and only if there is a unitary colligation matrix U = C D ] : X ⊕ U → X ⊕ Y so that S(z) = D + zC(I − zA)−1B. Similarly, S ∈ [ A B SAd(U,Y) if and only if there are positive L(E)-valued kernels K1, . . . , Kd on Dd so k=1(1− zkwk)Kk(z, w) if and only if S has a representation as in (1.5) but with U acting from X ⊕ U to X ⊕ Y. We mention that this result has inspired several variants where the polydisk Dd is replaced by a more general domain DQ in Cd specified by a polynomial (or more generally analytic) matrix- valued determining function Q: DQ = {z ∈ Cd : kQ(z)k < 1}; more generally the technique of the proof going through the transfer-function realization naturally leads to interpolation and commutant lifting versions of the result (see [22, 21, 53, 23, 10, 16, 9]). We mention that there is now also a noncommutative version of the Schur-Agler class [19]. However, for the case SR(CN ), the expected matrix generalization of (1.11), namely I − S(z)S(w)∗ =ZTR(cid:16)1 − ψx(z)ψx(w)(cid:17) Kx(z, w) dν(x) (1.12) for a measurable family {Kx : x ∈ TR} of positive N × N matrix-valued kernels on R, fails in general, at least in the case where R is a region with three holes having some additional symmetry properties; indeed this phenomenon is a key ingredient in the negative answer to the spectral set question for such regions R obtained by Dritschel and McCullough in [28]. One of the main motivations for the present paper is to develop a framework of test-function Schur-Agler class SAΨ for the case of matrix- or operator-valued test functions Ψ and to recover a formula of the type (1.12) for the Schur class SR(CN ) for an appropriately enlarged class ΨN R of matrix-valued test functions. We therefore develop a systematic extension of the work of [27, 29] to the matrix- and operator-valued setting: this is the main content of Section 3 below. We also emphasize the interpolation version of the main result, whereby one characterizes which functions S0 defined on some subset Ω0 of Ω can be extended to a test- function Schur-Agler-class function S defined on all of Ω. Most of the analysis builds on the earlier work of [3, 5, 22, 10, 16, 8, 27, 29], but there are places where new ideas and techniques were required. In Section 4 we take two algebras which are intrinsically defined and identify their unit balls as also arising as test-function Schur-Agler classes. The first has already been mentioned: namely, the algebra of bounded holomorphic N×N matrix functions over a multiply-connected planar domain R whose unit ball is the Schur class SR(CN ). The second is the matrix-valued version of the constrained Hardy algebra over the unit disk D (bounded holomorphic functions f on D subject to the constraint that f ′(0) = 0). The first example has been an object of much study over the years (see [1, 14, 18, 4, 28, 54]) while interest in the second is more recent [26, 17, 50]. Motivation for study of the second algebra comes from the fact that TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 5 it is a model for the bounded analytic functions on the intersection of a variety V embedded in C2 with the unit bidisk (see [7]). For these two examples we identify an appropriate class of test functions ΨN so that the unit ball of the given algebra is equal to the matrix-valued test-function Schur-Agler class SAΨN associated with ΨN . It is always possible to choose ΨN simply as the unit ball of the given algebra; the point is to find a valid class ΨN which is as small as possible. As has already been mentioned for the first example, in both examples the test-function class Ψ1 identified in previous work ([29, 30]) for the scalar-valued version fails to work for the matrix-valued case. For each of these two examples, we find a valid test- function class ΨN as a linear-fractional transform of the set of extreme points of a normalized matrix-valued Herglotz (positive real part) version of the algebra, just as has been done for the scalar-valued case in [28, 28, 30]. Identification of these extreme points for the matrix-valued case leads us to draw on results from [20] concerning extreme points for a convex cone of matrix quantum probability measures (positive matrix-valued measures with total mass equal to the identity matrix). The resulting test-function classes are not as explicit as in the scalar- valued settings; however, for the Schur class SR with R equal to an annulus, we are able to use results of McCullough [38] to obtain a more explicit test-function class and use the resulting matrix-valued continuous Agler decomposition (the matrix- valued analogue of (1.9)) to obtain a variant of McCullough's positive solution of the spectral set question for an annulus. A criticism of the study of Schur-Agler classes in general is that their intrinsic structure is a priori mysterious: after going through the several steps of the defini- tion, one does not have any intrinsic characterization of the eventual result. Our work in Section 4 (as well as the work in [29, 30]) counterbalances this concern by starting with an intrinsically defined function algebra and identifying it as a Schur- Agler class. There are now papers obtaining characterizations of which operator algebras have unit balls equal to a Schur-Agler class (see [42, 36]). Other work [37] characterizes families of kernels so that the associated contractive multipliers form a test-function Schur-Agler class. It should be of interest to extend these results to the matrix-valued setting in the spirit of the present paper. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents some preliminary mate- rial on test functions, positive kernels, and structured unitary colligation matrices needed in the sequel. Section 3 presents the main structure result (including the interpolation version as well as a representation-theoretic version) for the general matrix-valued test-function Schur-Agler class. Section 4 develops the two illustra- tive examples of matrix-valued Schur classes which can be identified as test-function Schur-Agler classes. Finally we mention that this paper together with [20] form an enhanced version of the second author's dissertation [35]. 2. Preliminaries 2.1. Test functions. We assume that we are given two coefficient Hilbert spaces UT and YT and a collection Ψ of functions ψ on the abstract set of points Ω with values in the space L(UT ,YT ) of bounded linear operators between UT and YT . We say that Ψ is a collection of test functions if it happens that sup{kψ(z)k : ψ ∈ Ψ} < 1 for each z ∈ Ω. (2.1) 6 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN We view Ψ as a subset of B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) (the space of (bounded) maps from Ω into the closed unit ball of bounded linear operators between UT and YT ). We topologize B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) with the topology of pointwise weak-∗ convergence, i.e., we view B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) as the Cartesian product ΠΩBL(UT ,YT ) with the standard Cartesian product topology). As such B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) is compact by Tychonoff's Theorem ([31, Theorem XI.1.4]), since each fiber BL(UT ,YT ) is com- pact by the Banach-Alaoglu Theorem [51, Theorem 3.15]. As a subspace of the completely regular space B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) (i.e., B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )) is Hausdorff and any closed set can be separated from a point disjoint from it by a contin- uous function), Ψ is completely regular in the subspace topology inherited from B(Ω,BL(UT ,YT )). The closure of Ψ in this topology is compact; however we shall be more interested in the Stone- Cech compactification Ψβ of Ψ [31, Section XI.8]. Then the space Cb(Ψ,L(H,K)) of bounded continuous functions f from Ψ into a space L(H,K) of bounded linear operators between two Hilbert spaces H and K can be identified with the space C(Ψβ,L(H,K)) of continuous functions from the Stone- Cech compactification Ψβ into L(H,K). An operator-valued version of the Riesz representation theorem allows us to identify the dual of Cb(Ψ,L(H,K)) with regular, bounded, weakly countably additive C1(K,H)-valued measures on Ψβ, where we use the notation C1(K,H) to denote the trace-class operators from K to H. We note that there are continuous linear functionals L in C(Ψβ,L(H,K)) such that allowing points of Ψβ \ Ψ to be part of the support of the corresponding measure µL is essential (see [29, Section 5.2]). For each ψ ∈ Ψ we define the map evψ : Cb(Ψ,L(H,K)) → L(K) by evψ : f → f (ψ). A particular element of Cb(Ψ,L(UT ,YT )) which will often come up is the function E(z) (for each z ∈ Ω) given by evψ(E(z)) = E(z)(ψ) := ψ(z). (2.2) 2.2. Positive operator-valued kernels and their multipliers. Let E be any Hilbert space and suppose that K is a function on Ω × Ω with values in L(E). We say that K is a positive kernel if the Aronszajn condition NXi,j=1 hK(zi, zj)ej, eiiE ≥ 0 for all z1, . . . , zn ∈ Ω, e1, . . . , eN ∈ E, N = 1, 2, . . . . (2.3) The following equivalent versions of the positive-kernel condition are often used in function-theoretic operator theory settings. Theorem 2.1. (See e.g. [6].) Suppose that we are give a function K : Ω × Ω → L(E). Then the following are equivalent: (1) K is a positive kernel, i.e., condition (2.3) holds. (2) There is a Hilbert space H(K) consisting of E-valued functions f such that K(·, w)e ∈ H(K) for each w ∈ Ω and e ∈ E and has the reproducing property: hf, K(·, w)eiH(K) = hf (w), eiE for all f ∈ H(K). (3) K has a Kolmogorov decomposition: there is an auxiliary Hilbert space X and a function H : X → E so that K(z, w) = H(z)H(w)∗. (2.4) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 7 In fact one can take X to be the reproducing kernel Hilbert space H(K) described in (2) above with H(z) = evz : f 7→ f (z). Rather than using a positive kernel to construct a reproducing kernel Hilbert space as in condition (2) in Theorem 2.1, it is also possible to construct a repro- ducing kernel Hilbert module as follows. By a Hilbert module over a C∗-algebra B we mean a linear space E which is a right module over B which is also equipped with an B-valued inner product and satisfies additional compatibility requirements with respect to the algebra structure of B (see [49, Section 2.1]): which satisfies the usual inner product axioms: h·,·iE : E × E → B (1) hλx + µy, zi = λhx, zi + µhy, zi, (2) hx · b, yi = hx, yib, (3) hx, yi∗ = hy, xi, (4) hx, xi ≥ 0 (as an element of B), (5) hx, xi = 0 implies that x = 0, (6) E is complete in the norm given by kxk = khx, xik1/2 A for all x, y, z ∈ E, b ∈ B and λ, µ ∈ C. (Here we follow the mathematicians'(rather than the physicists') convention that inner products are linear in the left slot; this departs from the standard usage in the operator-algebra literature.) By modifying the construction of H(K) in Theorem 2.1, one can construct a C∗-module, denoted as H(K), over the C∗-algebra L(E) characterized as follows. Theorem 2.2. Suppose that K : Ω × Ω → L(E) is a positive kernel as in (2.3). Then there is a uniquely determined C∗-module H(K) over B = L(E) with the following properties: (1) H(K) consists of L(E)-valued functions on Ω, (2) for each w ∈ Ω, K(·, w) is in H(K) and the span of such elements is dense (3) for each F ∈ H(K), in H(K), and hF, K(·, w)iH(K) = F (w) ∈ L(E). Proof. Define an inner product on a pair of kernel elements K(·, w) and K(·, z) by hK(·, w), K(·, z)iH(K) = K(z, w) and extend by linearity to the space of kernel elements. Mod out by any linear combinations having zero self inner product and take the completion to arrive at the space H(K) having all the asserted properties. Note that there is a version of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality available (see [49, Lemma 2.5]) which guarantees that the point evaluation map ev : f 7→ f (w) extends to elements of the completion, and hence elements of the completion can also be identified as L(E)-valued functions on Ω. (cid:3) It is natural now to take the next step and introduce the notion of C∗-corres- pondence (see [43]). Given two C∗-algebras A and B, by an (A, B)-correspondence we mean a Hilbert module E over B which also carries a left A-action x 7→ a · x which is a ∗-representation of A with respect to the B-valued inner product on E: ha · x, yiE = hx, a∗ · yiE. 8 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN Given three C∗-algebras A, B and C together with an (A, B)-correspondence E and a (B, C)-correspondence F , the internal tensor product E ⊗ F of E and F is defined to be the (A, C)-correspondence generated as the Hausdorff completion of the span of pure tensors e ⊗ f (e ∈ E and f ∈ F ) in the C-valued inner product given by with left A-action given by he ⊗ f, e′ ⊗ f ′iE⊗F = h(he, e′iE) · f, f ′iF It is routine to verify that one then gets the balancing property a · (e ⊗ f ) = (a · e) ⊗ f. e ⊗ (b · f ) = (e · b) ⊗ f (2.5) (2.6) (2.7) for e ∈ E, f ∈ F and b ∈ B. We shall need a couple of applications of this internal tensor-product construc- tion. The first is as follows. For K an L(E)-valued positive kernel on Ω, we view the C∗-module over B constructed in Theorem 2.2 as a (C,L(E))-correspondence. For X another coefficient Hilbert space, let C2(X ,E) be the space of Hilbert-Schmidt class operators from X into E. Then C2(X ,E) has a standard Hilbert-space inner product We also have a left action of the C∗-algebra L(E) on C2(X ,E) via left multiplication: hT, T ′iC2(X ,E) = tr(T T ′∗). X · T = XT for X ∈ L(E), T ∈ C2(X ,E) and this action gives rise to a ∗-representation of L(E) on C2(X ,E): hX · T, T ′iC2(X ,E) = hXT, T ′iC2(X ,E) = tr(XT T ′∗) = tr(T T ′∗X) = tr(T (X ∗T ′)∗) = hT, X ∗ · T ′iC2(X ,E). In this way we may view C2(X ,E) as an (L(E), C)-correspondence. We may then form the internal C∗-correspondence tensor-product H(K) ⊗ C2(X ,E). Explicitly, the inner product on pure tensors F ⊗ T (F ∈ H(K), T ∈ C2(X ,E) is given by hF ⊗ T, F ′ ⊗ T ′iH(K)⊗C2(X ,E) = tr(cid:0)hF, F ′iH(K)T T ′∗(cid:1) . When we evaluate the first factor F in a pure tensor F ⊗ T at a point w in Ω, we get a tensor of the form F (w) ⊗ T ∈ L(E) ⊗ C2(X ,E) ∼= C2(X ,E). To interpret this tensor product as a C∗-correspondence internal tensor product, we view L(E) as a (L(E),L(E))-correspondence with inner product hX, X ′i = X ′∗X ∈ L(E) and left action given by left multiplication: X ′ · X = X ′X. The balancing property (2.7) then leads to the identification L(E) ⊗ C2(X ,E) ∼= C2(X ,E). Using a linearity and approximation argument, one can show that in fact ele- ments H of H(K)⊗C2(X ,E) can be viewed as C2(X ,E)-valued functions on Ω such that K(·, w)U ∈ H(K)⊗C2(X ,E) for each w ∈ Ω and U ∈ C2(X ,E), and the kernel element K(·, w)U has the reproducing property hG, K(·, w)UiH(K)⊗C2(X ,E) = hG(w), UiC2 (X ,E) := tr (G(w)U ∗) . TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 9 Thus H(K)⊗C2(X ,U) is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space in the sense of Theorem 2.1 when we identify the range space L(E) of K as the subspace of L(C2(X ,E)) consisting of left multiplication operators by elements of L(E): X ∈ L(E) 7→ LX ∈ L(C2(X ,E)) : LX : T 7→ XT and we view C2(X ,E) as a Hilbert space in the inner product hT, T ′iC2(X ,E) := tr (T T ′∗) . In the sequel it will be convenient to use the shorthand notation H(K)X := H(K) ⊗ C2(X ,E). (2.8) Note that in this notation, if H(K) is as in Theorem 2.1, then we have H(K) = H(K)C. Remark 2.3. The space H(K)X could just as well have been constructed as equal to the space H(K) ⊗ C2(X , C) where the spaces H(K) (defined as in Theorem 2.1) and C2(X , C) (the dual version of the Hilbert space X ) are viewed as (C, C)- correspondences (i.e., as ordinary Hilbert spaces), and the tensor product reduces to the standard Hilbert-space tensor product. Suppose that we are given two coefficient Hilbert spaces U and Y and an L(U,Y)- valued function S on Ω. We define the right multiplication operator RS by (RS(F )) (z) = F (z)S(z). Thus RS maps C2(U,E)-valued functions on Ω to C2(U,E)-valued functions on Ω. Given a positive L(E)-valued kernel K on Ω, it is of interest to determine exactly when RS maps H(K)Y boundedly (or contractively) into H(K)U . The answer is given by the following theorem. Theorem 2.4. Let K be an L(E)-valued positive kernel on Ω and S an L(U,Y)- valued function on Ω. Then the right multiplication operator RS is bounded as an operator from H(K)Y to H(K)U with kRSk ≤ M if and only if the C-valued kernel (2.9) kX,S,K,M (z, w) := tr(cid:2)X(w)∗(M 2IU − S(w)∗S(z))X(z)K(z, w)(cid:3) is a positive kernel on Ω for each choice of function X : Ω → C2(E,U). Proof. By rescaling it suffices to consider the case M = 1 and kRSk ≤ 1. The computation hRSf, K(·, w)UiH(K)U = hf (w)S(w), UiC2(U ,E) = tr (f (w)S(w)U ∗) = tr (f (w)(U S(w)∗)) = hf, K(·, w)U S(w)∗iH(K)Y shows that (RS)∗ : K(·, w)U 7→ K(·, w)U S(w)∗ whenever RS is well defined as an element of L(H(K)Y ,H(K)U ). As elements of j=1 K(·, zj)Uj are dense in H(K)U , we see that kRSk ≤ 1 holds if and the formPN 10 only if J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN 2 2 2 K(·, zj)Uj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) K(·, zj)Uj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) R∗ K(·, zj)Uj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) S NXj=1 K(·, zj)UjS(zj)∗(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) NXj=1 2 0 ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) NXj=1 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) NXj=1 NXi,j=1 NXi,j=1 NXi,j=1 = = holds for all choices of z1, . . . , zN ∈ Ω and U1, . . . , UN ∈ C2(U,E) and N = 1, 2, . . . . Expanding out self inner products and using the invariance of the trace under cyclic permutations converts this condition to 0 ≤ tr (K(zi, zj)UjU ∗ i − K(zi, zj)UjS(zj)∗S(zi)U ∗ i ) tr (Uj(I − S(zj)∗S(zi))U ∗ i K(zi, zj)) tr (X(zj)∗(I − S(zj)∗S(zi))X(zi)K(zi, zj)) where we have set X(zi) = U ∗ i . This positivity condition holding for all choices of z1, . . . , zN ∈ Ω and X(z1), . . . , X(zN ) ∈ C2(E,U) for all N = 1, 2, . . . in turn is equivalent to the positivity of the kernel kX,S,K,1 on Ω for all choices of X : Ω → C2(E,U). (cid:3) We shall also need a characterization of functional Hilbert spaces of the form H(K)X . Theorem 2.5. Suppose that H is a Hilbert space whose elements are C2(X ,E)- valued functions on Ω. Then there is an L(E)-valued positive kernel K on Ω such that H is isometrically equal to H(K)X if and only if (1) the point evaluation map evw : f 7→ f (w) defines a bounded operator from (2) H is a right module over L(X ) with the right action of L(X ) commuting H into C2(X ,E) fo each w ∈ Ω, and with each point evaluation map evw: evw(f · X) = (evwf )X or (f · X)(w) = f (w)X for all w ∈ Ω. (2.10) Proof. By Theorem 2.1, from the fact that the point evaluations evw are bounded, we get that H = H(K) for an L(C2(X ,E))-valued positive kernel K(z, w) = evz · (evw)∗. The additional condition (2.10) then implies that K(z, w) commutes with the right multiplication operators RX : T 7→ T X on C2(X ,E) (X ∈ L(X )). This is enough to force K(z, w) to be a left multiplication operator K(z, w) = LK(z,w) for a K(z, w) ∈ L(E). One next verifies that K so constructed is an L(E)-valued positive kernel and that we recover H as H = H(K)X . (cid:3) We shall also have use for a far-reaching generalization of the positive kernels discussed so far introduced by Barreto, Bhat, Liebscher, and Skeide in [24]. Given TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 11 two C∗-algebras A and B, we say that a function Γ on Ω× Ω with values in L(A, B) is a completely positive kernel if NXi,j=1 b∗ i Γ(zi, zj)[a∗ i aj]bj ≥ 0 (in B) (2.11) for all choices of z1, . . . , zN ∈ Ω, a1, . . . , aN ∈ A, b1, . . . , bN ∈ B for all N = 1, 2, . . . . The following characterization of completely positive kernels is the completely pos- itive parallel to Theorems 2.1 and 2.2. Theorem 2.6. (See [24, 15].) Given a function Γ on Ω× Ω with values in L(A, B), the following are equivalent: (1) Γ is a completely positive kernel, i.e., condition (2.11) holds. (2) There is an (A, B)-correspondence H(Γ) whose elements consist of B-valued functions f on Ω such that K(·, w)[a] ∈ H(Γ) for each w ∈ Ω and a ∈ A and such that hf, K(·, w)[a]iH(Γ) = (a∗ · f ) (w) (3) K has a Kolmogorov decomposition of the following form: for all f ∈ H(Γ), a ∈ A, and w ∈ Ω. there is an (A, B)-correspondence H and a function H on Ω with values in the space L(H, B) of adjointable operators from H to B so that K(z, w)[a] = H(z)π(a)H(w)∗. Here a 7→ π(a) represents the left A-action on H: π(a)f = a· f for f ∈ H. In case B = L(E) for a Hilbert space E, then we also have Hilbert space versions of conditions (2) and (3): (2′) There is an (A, C)-correspondence H(Γ) (i.e., a Hilbert space H(Γ) equipped with a ∗-representation π : A → L(H(Γ)) of A) whose elements are E-valued functions f on Ω such that K(·, w)[a]e ∈ H(Γ) for each w ∈ Ω, a ∈ A, e ∈ E, and such that hf, K(·, w)[a]eiH(Γ) = h(a∗ · f ) (w), eiE (3′) There exists a Hilbert space H carrying a ∗-representation π of A and there for all f ∈ H(Γ), a ∈ A, w ∈ Ω. exists a function H : Ω → L(H,E) so that K(z, w)[a] = H(z)π(a)H(w)∗. Remark 2.7. The positivity condition in Theorem 2.4 can be equivalently formu- lated as the condition that the kernel kΓ,S,K(z, w) = [Γ(z, w)[I − S(w)∗S(z)], K(z, w)]C1(E)×L(E) be a positive C-valued kernel on Ω for every choice of completely positive kernel where the outside bracket Γ : Ω × Ω → L(L(U),C1(E)), is the duality pairing between the trace-class operators C1(E) and the bounded linear operators L(E). [·,·]C1(E)×L(E) 12 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN 2.3. Ψ-unitary colligations. For the transfer-function realization S(z) = D + zC(I − zA)−1B in the operator-valued test-function setting to be developed in the sequel, we shall need a more elaborate version of the unitary colligation matrix U = [ A B C D ] which we now describe. Given a collection of test functions Ψ as in Section 2.1, as de- scribed there we view Ψ as a completely regular topological space. Then the space Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) of bounded L(YT )-valued functions on Ψ is a C∗-algebra while the space Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) of continuous L(YT ,UT )-valued functions is not (unless UT = YT ). However we may view Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) as a (Cb(Ψ, ,UT ), Cb(Ψ,YT ))- correspondence, with Cb(Ψ,L(YT ))-valued inner product given by (cid:0)hF, F ′iCb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT ))(cid:1) (ψ) := F ′(ψ)∗F (ψ). If X is a Hilbert space carrying a ∗-representation ρ of Cb(Ψ,L(YT )), then we may view X as a (Cb(Ψ,L(YT )), C) correspondence (with the representation ρ pro- viding the left Cb(Ψ,L(YT ))-action on X ) and form the internal tensor product Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) ⊗ρ X . We shall say that a 2 × 2-block unitary matrix U = [ A B C D ] is a Ψ-unitary colligation if U has the form U =(cid:20)A B C D(cid:21) : (cid:20)X U(cid:21) →(cid:20)Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) ⊗ρ X Y (cid:21) for X equal to a Hilbert space carrying a ∗-representation ρ of Cb(Ψ,L(YT )). in (2.2) (for a given z ∈ Ω). Hence the tensor multiplication operator A particular element of Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) is the function E(z)∗, where E(z) is as (2.12) defines an operator from X to Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT ))⊗ρX ; one can verify that its adjoint acting on pure tensors is given by LE(z)∗ : x 7→ E(z)∗ ⊗ x As a consequence we get the identity L∗ E(z)∗ : g ⊗ x 7→ ρ(E(z)g)x. L∗ E(z)∗ LE(w)∗x = L∗ E(z)∗(E(w)∗ ⊗ x) = ρ (E(z)E(w)∗) x. (2.13) In case YT = UT (the square case), then Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )⊗ρX collapses down to X (a consequence of the balancing property (2.7)), and then L∗ E(z)∗ can be identified with L∗ E(z)∗ = ρ(E(z)). We conclude that the tensor-product construction is exactly the technical tool needed to push the square case to the non-square case. This type of colligation matrix appears in [8, 27, 29] for the square case and in [44] for the nonsquare case. 3. The Schur-Agler class associated with a collection of test functions Suppose that we are given a collection Ψ of test functions ψ : Ω → L(UT ,YT ) satisfying the admissibility condition (2.1). For E any auxiliary HIlbert space and K an L(E)-valued positive kernel on Ω, we say that K is Ψ-admissible, written as K ∈ KΨ(E), if the operator Rψ : f (z) 7→ f (z)ψ(z) is contractive from H(K)YT to H(K)UT for each ψ ∈ Ψ, or equivalently (by Theorem 2.4), if the C-valued kernel (3.1) kX,ψ,K(z, w) = tr (X(w)∗(I − ψ(w)∗ψ(z))X(z)K(z, w)) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 13 is a positive kernel for each choice of X : Ω → C2(E,UT ) and ψ ∈ Ψ. We then say that the function S : Ω → L(U,Y) is in the Ψ-Schur-Agler class SAΨ(U,Y) if the operator RS of right multiplication by S is contractive from H(Y)Y to H(Y)U for each Ψ-admissible L(Y)-valued positive kernel K, or equivalently, if the kernel (3.2) is a positive C-valued kernel for each choice of Y : Ω → C2(Y,U) and K ∈ KΨ(Y). kY,S,K(z, w) = tr(Y (w)∗(I − S(w)∗S(z))Y (z)K(z, w)) Our main result on the Schur-Agler class SAΨ(U,Y) is the following. Theorem 3.1. Suppose that we are given a collection of test functions Ψ satisfying condition (2.1) and S0 is a function on some subset Ω0 of Ω with values in L(U,Y). Consider the following conditions: (1) S0 can be extended to a function S defined on all of Ω such that S ∈ SAΨ(U,Y), i.e., the kernel (3.2) is a positive kernel for all choices of L(Y,U)-valued functions Y on Ω0 and all choices of kernels K ∈ KΨ(Y). (2) S0 has an Agler decomposition on Ω0, i.e., there is a completely positive kernel Γ : Ω0 × Ω0 → L(Cb(Ψ,L(YT )),L(Y)) so that I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ = Γ(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] (3.3) for all z, w ∈ Ω0 (where E(z) ∈ Cb(Ψ,L(UT ,YT )) is as in (2.2)). (3) There is a Hilbert state space X which carries a ∗-representation of the C∗-algebra Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) and a Ψ-unitary colligation U (see Section 2.3) (3.4) U =(cid:20)A B Y so that S0 has the transfer-function realization E(z)∗A)−1L∗ C D(cid:21) : (cid:20)X S0(z) = D + C(I − L∗ U(cid:21) →(cid:20)Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) ⊗ρ X E(z)∗B (3.5) (cid:21) for z ∈ Ω0. Then (1) ⇒ (2) ⇔ (3); if dimYT < ∞, then also (2) ⇒ (1) and hence (1), (2), (3) are all equivalent to each other. We shall prove (1) ⇒ (2) ⇒ (3) ⇒ (2) and, if dim YT < ∞, then also (2) ⇒ (1). Proof of (1) ⇒ (2): Step 1: Ω0 is a finite subset of Ω. We define a cone C by C ={Ξ : Ω0 × Ω0 → L(Y) : Ξ(z, w) = Γ(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] for some completely positive kernel Γ : Ω0 × Ω0 → L(Cb(Ψ,L(YT )),L(Y))}. Note that the elements of C can be viewed as matrices with rows and columns indexed by the finite set Ω0 and matrix entries in L(Y). Thus we may view C as a subset of the linear space V of all such matrices with topology of pointwise weak-∗ convergence. We shall need a few preliminary lemmas. It is easy to verify that C is a cone in V. Lemma 3.2. The cone C is closed in V. Proof of Lemma. Suppose that {Ξα} is a net of elements of C such that {Ξα(z, w)} converges weak-∗ to Ξ(z, w) for each z, w ∈ Ω0. Thus, for each index α there is a choice of completely positive kernel Γα so that Ξα(z, w) = Γα(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗]. (3.6) 14 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN The computation Γα(z, z)[I] = Γα(z, z)[(I − E(z)E(z)∗)1/2(I − E(z)E(w)∗)−1(I − E(z)E(z)∗)1/2] 1 1 − kE(z)k2(cid:19) (I − E(z)E(z)∗)1/2(cid:21) ≤ Γα(z, z)(cid:20)(I − E(z)E(z)∗)1/2(cid:18) =(cid:18) =(cid:18) 1 − kE(z)k2(cid:19) Γα(z, z)[I − E(z)E(z)∗] 1 − kE(z)k2(cid:19) Ξα(z, z) 1 1 shows that kΓα(z, z)k ≤ MzkΞα(z, z)k where Mz = 1 1 − kE(z)k2 , (3.7) where we used here the underlying assumption (2.1) for our set of test functions Ψ. Since the block 2 × 2 matrix (cid:20) Γα(z, z)[I] Γα(z, w)[I] Γα(w, z)[I] Γα(w, w)[I](cid:21) kΓα(z, w)k ≤ MzMwkΞα(z, w)k1/2kΞα(w, w)k1/2. is positive semidefinite for each index α and each pair of points z, w ∈ Ω0, it follows that (3.8) Since Ω0 is finite, we see that kΓα(z, w)k is in fact bounded uniformly with respect to the indices α and the points z, w in Ω0. Since L(Cb(Ψ,L(YT )),L(Y)) is the Banach- space dual of the projective tensor-product Banach space C1(Y) ⊗ Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) (see e.g. [52, Theorem IV.2.3]), it follows from the Banach-Alaoglu theorem that there is a subnet {Γβ} of {Γα} such that {Γβ(z, w)} converges weak-∗ to some Γ∞(z, w) ∈ L(Cb(Ψ,L(YT )),L(Y)). It is straightforward to verify that the defining property (2.11) for a completely positive kernel is preserved under such weak-∗ limits; hence Γ∞ is again a completely positive kernel. Moreover, from the fact that {Ξα(z, w)} converges weak-∗ to Ξ(z, w), we get that the subnet {Ξβ(z, w)} also converges weak-∗ to Ξ(z, w). Taking limits in the formula (3.6) leads us to the representation Ξ(z, w) = Γ∞(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] for the limit kernel Ξ(z, w). We conclude that the limit kernel Ξ is again in C as wanted. Lemma 3.3. Suppose that Ξ(z, w) = H(z)H(w)∗ is a positive L(Y)-valued kernel on Ω0. Then Ξ is in C. Proof of Lemma. Let us say that Ξ(z, w) = H(z)H(w)∗ where H : Ω → L(X ,Y) for some coefficient Hilbert space X . Let ψ0 be any fixed test function in Ψ. It suffices so that to find another coefficient Hilbert space eX and a function G : Ω0 → L(eX ⊗ YT ,Y) Ξ(z, w) = G(z)(cid:0)I eX ⊗ (I − ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗)(cid:1) G(w)∗, for then we have the needed representation Ξ(z, w) = Γ0(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] with Γ0 given by (cid:3) Γ0(z, w)[g] = G(z)(I eX ⊗ g(ψ0))G(w)∗. Toward this end, choose a unit vector y0 in YT and note that 0(I − ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗)y0 = 1 − y∗ y∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0 TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 15 is invertible (as an element of C) by our underlying assumption (2.1). Moreover we have the geometric series representation for the inverse: 1 = (y∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)n 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0 1 − y∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)n is a positive kernel due to the Schur multiplier (3.9) ∞Xn=0 where each term (y∗ theorem (see e.g. [48, Theorem 3.7]). Thus there exist functions gn : Ω0 → L(eGn, C) 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)n = gn(z)gn(w)∗. so that (y∗ Then we may rewrite (3.9) as 1 1 − y∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0 = ∞Xn=0 gn(z)gn(w)∗. (3.10) We conclude that Ξ(z, w) = H(z)H(w)∗ ···(cid:3) , ∞Mn=1eGn. eX = (cid:3) Let us now note that the assertion of the condition (2) in the statement of the Theorem is that the kernel ΞS0 (z, w) := I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ is in C. As V is a locally convex linear topological vector space and C is closed in V, by a standard Hahn- Banach separation principle (see [51, Theorem 3.49b)]), to show that ΞS ∈ C it suffices to show: Re L(ΞS) ≥ 0 whenever L is a continuous linear functional on V such that Re L(Ξ) ≥ 0 for each Ξ ∈ C. With this strategy in mind let us suppose that L is a continuous linear functional on V such that Re L(Ξ) ≥ 0 for each Ξ ∈ C. We then define L1 on V by L1(Ξ) = 1 2(cid:16)L(Ξ) + L(Ξ∨)(cid:17) where we set Easy properties are that Ξ∨(z, w) = Ξ(w, z)∗. L1(Ξ) = Re L(Ξ) if Ξ∨ = Ξ. (3.11) 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)IX(cid:19) H(w)∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)IX ) H(w)∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0)I eGn(cid:17) gn(w)∗H(w)∗ 0)(cid:16)I eGn ⊗ (I − ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗)(cid:17) (gn(w)∗ ⊗ y0)H(w)∗ 1 = = 1 − y∗ 0ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗y0 · (1 − y∗ H(z) (gn(z)gn(w)∗(1 − y∗ H(z)gn(z)(cid:16)(1 − y∗ H(z)(gn(z) ⊗ y∗ = H(z)(cid:18) ∞Xn=0 ∞Xn=0 ∞Xn=0 = G(z)(cid:0)I eX ⊗ (I − ψ0(z)ψ0(w)∗)(cid:1) G(w)∗ G(z) =(cid:2)H(z)(g1(z) ⊗ y∗ = 0) H(z)(g2(z) ⊗ y∗ 0) where we set 16 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN For ǫ > 0 be an arbitrarily small but positive number, we use the functional L1 to define an inner product on the space HL1,ǫ of functions f : Ω0 → Y by hf, giHL1,ǫ where we have set = L1(∆f,g) + ǫ2 Xw∈Ω0 tr (∆f,g(w, w)) ∆f,g(z, w) = f (z)g(w)∗. (3.12) By Lemma 3.3 we know that ∆f,f ∈ C and hence Re L(∆f,f ) ≥ 0. Since ∆f,f = ∆∨ f,f , as a consequence of (3.11) we know that Re L(∆f,f ) = L1(∆f,f ). From is a positive semidefinite inner product. these observations it follows that h·,·iHL1,ǫ Hence we can take the Hausdorff completion of HL1,ǫ to arrive at a Hilbert space, still denoted as HL1,ǫ. For X a coefficient Hilbert space, we shall be interested in the space HL1,ǫ ⊗ C2(X , C). The following lemma is crucial. Lemma 3.4. The space HL1,ǫ ⊗ C2(X , C) can be identified with the space (HL1,ǫ)X consisting of C2(X ,Y)-valued functions f on Ω with inner product given by tr (∆f,g(w, w)) (3.13) hf, giHL1,ǫ)X = L1(∆f,g) + ǫ2 Xw∈Ω0 where ∆f,g has the same form as in (3.12) (but where now the middle space is X rather than C): ∆f,g(z, w) = f (z)g(w)∗. Proof of lemma. For convenience of notation we drop the ǫ-term in the inner prod- uct as the ǫ > 0 case proceeds in the same way but with more cumbersome notation. For f ⊗ x∗ a pure tensor in HL1 ⊗ C2(X .C) (so f ∈ HL1 and x ∈ X ∼= L(C,X )) and similarly for f ′ ⊗ x′∗, we have hf ⊗ x∗, f ′ ⊗ x′∗iHL1 ⊗C2(X ,C) =(cid:10)hf, f ′iHL1 x∗, x′∗(cid:11)C2(X ,C) = L1(∆f,f ′ )x∗x′∗ = L1(∆f,f ′ x∗x′) where the last step follows since x∗x′ is just a complex number. Next observe that ∆f,f ′(z, w)x∗x = f (z)f ′(w)∗(x∗x′) = f (z)(x∗x′)f ′(w)∗ = (f (z)x∗) (f ′(w)x′∗)∗ = ∆f ·x∗,f ′·x′∗ (z, w). By extending this calculation to linear combinations of pure tensors, the result follows. (cid:3) With the formulation of the space (HL1,ǫ)X in hand, it makes sense to ask whether the right multiplication operator Rψ : f (z) 7→ f (z)ψ(z) defines a con- traction operator from (HL1,ǫ)YT . The answer is given by the next lemma. to (HL1,ǫ)UT Lemma 3.5. For each test function ψ ∈ Ψ, the right multiplication operator Rψ defines a contraction operator form (HL1,ǫ)YT Proof of Lemma. Rψ is contractive if and only if (HL1,ǫ)YT − kRψfk2 (HL1,ǫ)UT ≥ 0 to (HL1,ǫ)UT kfk2 . TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 17 for all f ∈ (HL1,ǫ)YT . This translates to the condition that for all such f . Observe that L1(∆f,f − ∆f ψ,f ψ) + ǫ2 Xw∈Ω0 ∆f,f (z, w) − ∆f ψ,f ψ(z, w) = f (z)(I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)f (w)∗ [∆f,f (w, w) − ∆f ψ,f ψ(w, w)] ≥ 0 from which we see that the kernel Ξ := ∆f,f − ∆f ψ,f ψ is in the cone C: note that the kernel Γ(z, w)[g] = f (z)g(ψ)f (w)∗ is completely positive since its Kolmogorov decomposition (condition (3′) in Theorem 2.6) is exhibited. Thus Re L(Ξ) ≥ 0, and hence, since Ξ = Ξ∨, also L1(Ξ) ≥ 0. The ǫ-term is also nonnegative since kψ(w)k < 1 for each w ∈ Ω0. It now follows that kRψk ≤ 1 as asserted. (cid:3) To make use of the hypothesis that S ∈ SAΨ(U,Y), we need to convert the space HL1,ǫ to a reproducing kernel space. This is done as follows; it is at this point that we make use of the ǫ-regularization of the HL1-inner product. Lemma 3.6. The space (HL1,ǫ)Y is isometrically equal to a reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces H(K)Y for a positive kernel K ∈ KΨ(Y). Proof of lemma. We wish to apply Theorem 2.5 with E and X equal to Y and with Ω0 equal to Ω. To this end, we note that elements of (HL1,ǫ)Y are C2(Y)-valued functions, at least on the dense set before the Hausdorff-completion step is carried out in the construction of the space. However, the presence of the term with the ǫ2 factor in the definition of the (HL1,ǫ)Y -inner product guarantees that the point-evaluation map evw : (HL1,ǫ)Y → C2(Y) is bounded with norm at most 1/ǫ. Hence condition (1) in Theorem 2.5 is verified. Condition (2) is straightforward since (HL1,ǫ)Y is itself a tensor-product space HL1,ǫ ⊗ C2(Y, C). We conclude that (HL1,ǫ)Y is isometrically equal to a reproducing kernel Hilbert space H(K)Y for a uniquely determined L(Y)-valued positive kernel K. Finally we must verify that K is Ψ-admissible. But this is an immediate conse- quence of Lemma 3.5. (cid:3) To conclude the proof of Step 1 (the case where Ω0 if finite), we proceed as follows. Let K be the positive kernel identified in Lemma 3.6. Since K ∈ KΨ(Y), we use the assumption that S is in the Schur-Agler class SAΨ(U,Y) to conclude that the operator RS of right multiplication by S is contractive from H(K)Y to H(K)U . As Lemma 3.6 also tells us that H(K)Y is isometrically equal to (HL1,ǫ)Y , trivially we can also say that RS is contractive from (cid:0)HL1,ǫ(cid:1)Y to (cid:0)HL1,ǫ(cid:1)U . The criterion for this to be the case is that (HL1,ǫ)U ≥ 0 for all f ∈ (HL1,ǫ)Y , or, equivalently kfk2 (HL1,ǫ)Y − kRSfk2 L1 (∆f,f − ∆f S0,f S0) + ǫ2 Xw∈Ω0 tr (∆f,f (w, w) − ∆f S0,f S0(w, w)) ≥ 0 for all f, where ∆f,f (z, w) − ∆f S0,f S0(z, w) = f (z)ΞS(z, w)f (w)∗. In particular, taking f (z) = Pn for all z ∈ Ω0 where {Pn} is an increasing sequence of finite-rank orthogonal projections converging strongly to the identity operator IY gives us L1(PnΞS0Pn) + ǫ2 Xz∈Ω0 tr (PnΞS0 (z, z)Pn) ≥ 0. 18 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN As this holds for all ǫ > 0, we may take the limit as ǫ → 0 (while holding n fixed) to get L1(PnΞS0 Pn) ≥ 0 for all n. By the weak-∗ continuity of L1 we have that L1(PnΞS0Pn) = L1(ΞS0). lim n→∞ (3.14) Taking limits in (3.14) then gives us L1(ΞS0 ) ≥ 0. As ΞS0 = Ξ∨ S0, this gives us finally Re L(ΞS0 ) ≥ 0 as required, and we conclude that S0 ∈ C as wanted. This concludes the proof of Step 1. Step 2: Ω0 is not necessarily finite. We now remove that assumption that Ω0 is finite. It is now understood how this step is efficiently handled as an application of the Kurosh Theorem (see [27, 29]). By Step 1, we know that for each finite subset ΩF of Ω, there is an associated completely positive kernel ΓF (not necessarily uniquely determined) so that the Agler decomposition ΞS0 (z, w) := I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ = ΓΩF (z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] (3.15) holds for all z, w ∈ ΩF . To set up the Kurosh Theorem, for each finite subset ΩF ⊂ Ω, we let ΦΩF denote the collection ΦΩF = {Ξ : Ξ completely positive kernel such that (3.15) holds for z, w ∈ ΩF}. By applying the argument used in the proof of Lemma 3.2, one can see that ΦΩF is compact in the pointwise weak-∗ convergence topology inherited from the space of L(Cb(Ψ,L(YT )),L(Y))-valued functions on Ω × Ω. The Kurosh Theorem (see [11, page 75]) tells us that, for each finite subset ΩF of Ω, there is a choice of completely positive kernel ΓΩF for which (3.15) holds on ΩF such that, in addition, whenever ΩF , ΩF ′ are two subsets of Ω with ΩF ⊂ ΩF ′, then ΓΩF ′ΩF ×ΩF = ΓΩF . We may then define a completely positive kernel Γ on all of Ω × Ω by Γ(z, w) = ΓΩF (z, w) where ΩF finite, z, w ∈ ΩF . The construction guarantees that Γ is well defined and the fact that each ΓΩF is completely positive on ΩF guarantees that Γ is completely positive as a kernel on all of Ω. We have now completed the proof of (1) ⇒ (2) in Theorem 3.1. (cid:3) Proof of (2) ⇒ (3). We are given a completely positive kernel Γ on Ω0 so that (3.3) holds for z, w ∈ Ω0. By condition (3′) in Theorem 2.6, Γ has a decomposition of the form Γ(z, w)[g] = H(z)ρ(g)H(w)∗ where H : Ω0 → L(X ,Y) for an auxiliary Hilbert space X which also carries a ∗-representation ρ of the C∗-algebra Cb(Ψ,L(YT )). From (3.3) we then deduce I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ = Γ(z, w)[I − E(z)E(w)∗] = H(z)ρ(I − E(z)E(w)∗)H(w)∗ = H(z)H(w)∗ − H(z)L∗ where we use (2.13). This in turn can be rearranged as E(z)∗LE(w)∗H(w)∗ H(z)L∗ E(z)∗LE(w)∗H(w)∗ + I = H(z)H(w)∗ + S0(z)S0(w)∗ TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 19 which leads to the inner product identity hLE(w)∗H(w)∗yw, LE(z)∗H(z)∗yziCb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )⊗X + hyw, yziY for arbitrary yw and yz in Y. It then follows that the mapping V given by = hH(w)∗yw, H(z)∗yzxi + hS0(w)∗yw, S0(z)∗yziU S0(w)∗yw(cid:21) (cid:21) 7→(cid:20)H(w)∗yw V : (cid:20)LE(w)∗H(w)∗yw yw Y yw extends by linearity and continuity to a well-defined isometry from the subspace onto the subspace R := span(cid:26)(cid:20)H(w)∗yw D := span(cid:26)(cid:20)LE(w)∗H(w)∗yw (cid:21) : yw ∈ Y, w ∈ Ω(cid:27) ⊂(cid:20)Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) ⊗ X ) S0(w)∗yw(cid:21) : yw ∈ Y, w ∈ Ω(cid:27) ⊂(cid:20)X U(cid:21) . By replacing X with X ′ = X ⊕ eX where eX is an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space Y (cid:3)⊖D and(cid:2) X ′ if necessary, we can arrange that the defect spaces(cid:2) X ′ U (cid:3)⊖R have the same dimension. We may also assume that eX is equipped with some representation eρ of Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) and hence X ′ is equipped with the representation ρ′ = ρ⊕eρ. We Y(cid:3) ⊖ D = dim [ X loss of generality we have dim(cid:2) X i⊖D onto We now let V0 be any unitary transformation fromh Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT ))⊗X i ∼= D ⊕(cid:16)h Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT ))⊗X i ⊖ D(cid:17) U∗ = V ⊕ V0 : h Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT ))⊗X U ] ∼= R ⊕ ([ X now assume that all this has been done and drop the prime notation; thus without U ] ⊖ R and X is equipped with a ∗-representation ρ of Cb(Ψ,L(YT )). U ] ⊖ R) . We may then write out U∗ as a block 2 × 2-matrix → [ X [ X U ] ⊖ R and set Y Y Y Since U∗ is an extension of V given by (3.16), we have U =(cid:20)A∗ C∗ B∗ D∗(cid:21) : (cid:20)Cb(Ψ,L(YT ,UT )) ⊗ X (cid:20)A∗ C∗ B∗ D∗(cid:21)(cid:20)LE(w)∗H(w)∗yw (cid:21) →(cid:20)X U(cid:21) . (cid:21) =(cid:20)H(w)∗yw S0(w)∗yw(cid:21) . yw Y (3.16) (cid:21) (3.17) The first row of (3.17) gives A∗LE(w)∗H(w)∗yw + C∗yw = H(w)∗yw. Since supψ{kψ(w)k} < 1 by the assumption (2.1) and since kA∗k ≤ 1 as U is unitary, we see that I − A∗LE(w)∗ is invertible and, by the arbitrariness of yw ∈ Y, we can solve (3.17) to get Plugging this into the second row of (3.17) then gives H(w)∗ = (I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗. B∗LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ + D∗ = S0(w)∗. Taking adjoints and replacing w by z ∈ Ω0 leads to the realization formula (3.5). 20 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN We actually get a little bit more. The right-hand side of (3.5) makes sense for z equal to any point in Ω. Thus we have actually proved: (2) ⇒ (3′) where the precise statement of (3′) is: (3′) There is a Ψ-unitary colligation U as in (3.4) such that S0 has an extension to an L(U,Y)-valued function S defined on all of Ω having the transfer- function realization S(z) = D + C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ E(z)∗B for z ∈ Ω. (3.18) (cid:3) Proof of (3) ⇒ (2). We assume that we have a transfer-function realization (3.5) and we must produce a completely positive kernel Γ so that (3.3) holds. There is a natural candidate, namely: Γ(z, w)[g] = C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1ρ(g)(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗. (3.19) E(z)∗A)−1 and π = ρ). The verification of (3.3) amounts to the identity The candidate is certainly a completely positive kernel since the formula (3.19) exhibits its Kolmogorov decomposition (condition (3′) in Theorem 2.6 with H(z) = C(I − L∗ I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ = C(I − L∗ Using the realization formula (3.5) for S0(z) and the relations E(z)∗A)−1ρ(I − E(z)E(w)∗)(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗. (3.20) AA∗ + BB∗ = I, AC∗ + BD∗ = 0, CC∗ + DD∗ = I coming out of the coisometric property UU∗ = I of U then give us I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ = I − [D + C(I − L∗ = I − DD∗ − C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ − C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ E(z)∗B][D∗ + B∗LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗] E(z)∗BD∗ − DB∗LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ E(z)∗BB∗LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ = CC∗ + C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ E(z)∗AC∗ + CA∗LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ + C(I − L∗ E(z)∗A)−1L∗ E(z)∗(AA∗ − I)LE(w)∗(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ = C(I − L∗ where we have set X equal to E(z)∗A)−1X(I − A∗LE(w)∗)−1C∗ (3.21) (3.22) X = (I − L∗ E(z)∗A)(I − A∗LE(w)∗) + L∗ E(z)∗A)A∗LE(w)∗ + L∗ E(z)∗A(I − A∗LE(w)∗) E(z)∗AA∗LE(w)∗ − L∗ + (I − L∗ E(z)∗LE(w)∗ = I − L∗ E(z)∗LE(w)∗ = ρ(I − E(z)E(w)∗) where we used (2.13) for the last step. Combining (3.21) and (3.22) gives us (3.20) as required. (cid:3) Proof of (2) ⇒ (1) if dim YT < ∞. We assume that we have an Agler decomposi- tion (3.3) and must show that S0 can be extended to an S defined on all of Ω which is in the Schur-Agler class SAΨ(U,Y). Toward this end, we note that the proof of (2) ⇒ (3) really proved (3′), i.e., that S0 extends to an S defined on all of Ω given by the realization formula (3.18). Therefore the argument behind (3) ⇒ (2) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 21 actually gives us an Agler decomposition (3.3) valid for the extended S which holds for z, w in all of Ω. In this way we may assume that S is given to us defined on all of Ω and we are given the completely positive kernel Γ on all of Ω giving rise to the Agler decomposition (3.3) for S. To check that S is in the Schur-Agler class SAΨ(U,Y), we must verify that the operator RS of right multiplication by S is contractive from H(K)Y to H(K)U for any choice of admissible kernel K ∈ KΨ(Y). Toward this end, we reverse the procedure used in the proof of (1) ⇒ (2) as follows. Given an admissible kernel K ∈ KΨ and given any finite collection of points z1, . . . , zN ∈ Ω, we must show that the kernel (3.2) is a positive kernel for all choices of functions Y : {z1, . . . , zn} → C2(Y,U). It suffices to consider the restriction K0 of K to the finite set Ω0 = {z1, . . . , zN}. Since K ∈ KΨ(Y), we know that the right multiplication operator Rψ is contractive from H(K0)YT to H(K0)UT for each ψ ∈ Ψ. Consider the modified kernel K0,ǫ(z, w) = K0(z, w) + ǫ2 Xz∈Ω0 δz,wIY where δz,w is the Kronecker delta function equal to 1 for z = w and 0 otherwise. Since the values of ψ are contractive, we see that Rψ is still contractive as an operator from H(K0,ǫ)YT to H(K0,ǫ)UT for each ǫ > 0. Also, to show that RS is contractive from H(K0)Y to H(K0)U , it is enough to show that RS is contractive from H(K0,ǫ)Y to H(K0,ǫ)U for each ǫ > 0. Our next goal is to construct a kernel Lǫ : Ω0 × Ω0 → L(Y) so that tr (Lǫ(z, w)f (z)g(w)∗) . (3.23) hf, giH(K0,ǫ) = Xz,w∈Ω0 To do this, define L(z, w) ∈ L(Y) by hLǫ(z, w)u, viY = hδzu, δwviH(K0,ǫ where δz is the point-mass function δz(z′) =(1 0 if z = z′, otherwise. In terms of the kernel function K0,ǫ, one can verify the block-matrix identity [Lǫ(z, w)]z,w,∈Ω0 = ([K0,ǫ(z, w)]z,w∈Ω0 )−1 . The fact that Rψ : H(K0,ǫ)YT → H(K0,ǫ)UT is contractive can be equivalently ex- pressed as tr (Lǫ(z, w)f (z)(I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)f (w)∗) ≥ 0 for all f : Ω → C2(YT ,Y). (3.24) To show that RS : H(K0,ǫ)Y → H(K0,ǫ)U is contractive can be expressed in a similar way as Xz,w,∈Ω0 Xz,w∈Ω0 tr (Lǫ(z, w)h(z)(I − S(z)S(w)∗)h(w)∗) ≥ 0 for all h : Ω0 → C2(Y). (3.25) By assumption we are given an Agler decomposition (3.3) for S. The completely positive kernel Γ appearing in (3.3) in turn has a Kolmogorov decomposition as in 22 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN (3′) in Theorem 2.6: Γ(z, w)[g] = H(z)ρ(g)H(w)∗ (3.26) for a ∗-representation ρ : Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) → L(X ). We now use the assumption that dimYT < ∞. This has the effect that Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) is a CCR C∗-algebra and that any representation ρ of Cb(Ψ,L(YT )) is the direct integral of multiples of irreducible representations, where an irreducible representation π0 : C(Ψβ,L(YT )) → L(YT ) has the point-evaluation form π0(g) = g(ψ0) for some ψ0 ∈ Ψβ; we refer to [13] and [35, Section 2.3] for fuller discussion. Thus we may assume that there are mutually singular measures µ∞, µ1, µ2, . . . defined on the Borel subsets of the Stone- Cech compactification Ψβ of Ψ so that ρ = ∞ · πµ∞ ⊕ 1 · πµ1 ⊕ 2 · πµ2 ⊕ ··· where πµj (g) : f (ψ) 7→ g(ψ)f (ψ) on Hπj := L2 YT (µj ) = L2(µj ) ⊗ YT and where in general n · π refers to the n-fold inflation of π: nMj=1 Hπ. (n · π)(g) = π(g) . . . π(g)  on (Hπ)n := ∞Mr=1 H(w)∗ =(cid:20) H∞(w)∗ r=1 Hr(w)∗(cid:21) YT (µ∞)∞ ⊕ YT (µr)r. L2 col∞ X = L2 Thus we may assume that the representation space X in (3.26) decomposes as Therefore the operators H(w)∗ appearing in (3.26) decompose as where each Hr(w)∗ is an operator from Y to L2 an operator-valued function Hr(w, ψ)∗ of ψ ∈ Ψβ according to YT (µr)r. This enables us to define Hr(w, ψ)∗y = ((Hr(w)∗y) (ψ). Then the adjoint Hr(z) of Hr(z)∗ is given via an integral formula: Hr(z) : G(ψ) 7→ZΨβ Hr(z, ψ)G(ψ)dµr(ψ). We conclude that the Agler decomposition (3.3) takes the more detailed form I − S(z)S(w)∗ =ZΨβ H∞(z, ψ) (Iℓ2 ⊗ (I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)) H∞(w, ψ)∗ dµ∞(ψ) + ∞Xr=1ZΨβ Hr(z, ψ) (ICr ⊗ (I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)) Hr(w, ψ)∗dµr(ψ). (3.27) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 23 ZΨβ ∞Xr=1ZΨβ Plugging this into the left-hand side of the desired inequality in (3.25) and taking the integral to the outside gives us the sum over z, w ∈ Ω0 of the following terms: tr (Lǫ(z, w)h(z)H∞(z, ψ) (Iℓ2 ⊗ (I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)) H∞(w, ψ)∗h(w)∗) dµ∞(ψ)+ tr (Lǫ(z, w)h(z)Hr(z, ψ) (ICr ⊗ (I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)) Hr(w, ψ)∗h(w)∗) dµr(ψ). From (3.24) we see that the sum over z, w ∈ Ω0 of the integrand in each of these terms is nonnegative. Hence the sum over z, w of the integrals in nonnegative and (3.25) follows as required. (cid:3) Remark 3.7. The interpolation problem for the class SAΨ(U,Y) can be formu- lated as follows: Given a subset Ω0 of Ω and a function S0 : Ω0 → L(U,Y), give necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of an S ∈ SAΨ(U,Y) such that SΩ0 = S0. Assuming that dimYT < ∞, one gets a solution criterion (arguably not particularly practical at this level of generality) immediately from the equivalence (1) ⇔ (2) in Theorem 3.1 (where we use (2) in the more concrete form (3.27)): the SAΨ(U,Y)-interpolation problem has a solution if and only if there exists a matrix-valued function (ψ, z) 7→ Hψ(z) on Ψβ × Ω0, bounded and measurable in ψ for each z, together with a finite measure µ on Ψβ, so that I − S0(z)S0(w)∗ =ZΨβ Hψ(z)(cid:0)IXψ ⊗ (I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗)(cid:1) Hψ(w)∗ dµ(ψ) for each z, w ∈ Ω0. Not so apparent from the way Theorem 3.1 is formulated is that condition (1) by itself is also a criterion for solving the interpolation problem. Indeed, if we set ΨΩ0 equal to the collection of restricted functions ΨΩ0 = {ψΩ0 : ψ ∈ Ψ}, (3.28) we may view ΨΩ0 as itself a collection of test functions generating a Schur-Agler class SAΨΩ0(U,Y) of L(U,Y)-valued functions defined only on Ω0. The only part of the hypothesis that S0 extends to an S ∈ SAΨ used to prove (1) ⇒ (2) in Theorem 3.1 is that then S0 ∈ SAΨΩ0. We conclude that we get another criterion for solution of the interpolation problem: the SAΨ(U,Y)-interpolation problem has a solution if and only if S0 ∈ SAΨΩ0. Let us say that the subset K0 Ψ(Y) of the set of admissible kernels KΨ(Y) is a generating set for KΨ(Y) if, for each kernel Ψ(Y) such that K is congruent to K 0 in the K ∈ KΨ(Y), there is a kernel K 0 ∈ K0 sense that there is an operator function Y so that K(z, w) = Y (z)K 0(z, w)Y (w)∗. It is easy to check that the kernels of the form (3.2) are positive on Ω0 for all Y and admissible K if and only if all such kernels are positive when the admissible K is restricted to those coming from the generating set K0 Ψ(Y). Hence we arrive at the following dual criterion for solution of the SAΨ(U,Y)-interpolation problem: the SAΨ(U,Y)-interpolation problem has a solution if and only if the kernel k(z, w) = tr(cid:0)Y (w)∗(I − S0(w)∗S0(z))Y (z)K 0(z, w)(cid:1) is a positive kernel on Ω0 for all Y : Ω0 → C2(Y,U) for all admissible kernels K from the generating set K0 Ψ(Y). We illustrate these ideas on the examples discussed in Section 4 below. This duality pairing between admissible kernels and test functions is central to the operator-algebra point of view of Paulsen and Solazzo toward interpolation theory (see [45, 46, 47]). 24 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN ΨΩ0 There is also an operator-algebra point of view toward the Schur-Agler class. For convenience in the following discussion, we take all the coefficient spaces U, Y, UT , and YT to be the same space U although this probably is not essential. We abbreviate the notation SAΨ(U,U) to SAΨ(U). Let ΨΩ0 be as in (3.28) and let H ∞ (U) denote the space of all L(U)-valued functions S0 on the subset Ω0 of Ω such that there exists a positive M < ∞ so that the kernel kX,S0,K,M given by (2.9) is a positive kernel on Ω0 for all choices of X : Ω0 → C2(E,U) and for all choices of K for which the kernel kY,ψ,K,1 is positive for all choices of Y : Ω0 → C2(U) and ψ ∈ Ψ, or, what is the same, such that the right multiplication operator RS has norm at most M as an operator on H(K)U for all positive kernels K for which Rψ has norm at most 1 on H(K)U for all ψ ∈ Ψ. We define the H ∞ -norm (U) is an kSkH∞ operator algebra with unit ball equal to the Schur-Agler class SAΨΩ0(U). The following representation-theoretic characterization of the Schur-Agler class will be convenient in Section 4.1 below. Theorem 3.8. Suppose that Ψ, Ω0 ⊂ Ω, and S0 are as in Theorem 3.1 with In addition to conditions (1), (2), (3) in Theorem 3.1, U = Y = UT = YT . consider: as the infimum of all such positive numbers M . Then H ∞ ΨΩ0 ΨΩ0 ΨΩ0 (4) For any representation π : H ∞ ΨΩ0 ψ ∈ Ψ, it also holds that kπ(S0)k ≤ 1. (U) → L(K) such that kπ(ψ)k ≤ 1 for all ΨΩ0 (U) → L(H(K)U ) sending G ∈ H ∞ Then (4) ⇒ (1). If dim U < ∞, then also (2) ⇒ (4) and (1), (2), (3), and (4) are all equivalent. Proof. Assume (4) holds and suppose that K ∈ KΨΩ0 (U) is an admissible kernel. We now view the map πK : H ∞ (U) to the right multiplication operator RG on H(K)U as a representation (technically, an anti-representation, but this does not affect the final results). By definition of K ∈ KΨΩ0 (U), we have πK (ψ)k ≤ 1 for each ψ ∈ Ψ. Condition (4) then tells us that π(S0)k ≤ 1, i.e., RS0 on H(K)U has norm at most 1. In this way we have verified condition (1). Conversely, we suppose dimYT = dim U < ∞ and that condition (2) holds. As in the proof of (2) ⇒ (1) we see that (2) can be written in the more explicit form (3.27). Given any L(U)-valued kernel K(z, w) with a factorization K(z, w) = F (z)G(w)∗ with F, G ∈ H ∞ (U), we use the hereditary functional calculus to extend a given representation π of H ∞ ΨΩ0 ΨΩ0 ΨΩ0 (U) to such kernels according to the rule π (F (z)G(w)∗) = π(F )π(G)∗. Applying π to (3.27) (and using continuity to push π past the integral sign) gives I − π(S0)π(S0)∗ =ZΨβ + ∞Xr=1ZΨβ π (H∞(·, ψ)) (Iℓ2 ⊗ (I − π(ψ)π(ψ)∗) π (H∞(·, ψ))∗ dµ∞(t) π (Hr(·, ψ)) (ICr ⊗ (I − π(ψ)π(ψ)∗)) π (Hr(·, ψ))∗ dµr(ψ). From the fact that kπ(ψ)k ≤ 1 for each ψ ∈ Ψ we read off from this last expression that kπ(S0)k ≤ 1 as well, i.e., (4) is verified. Remark 3.9. In the proof of Theorem 3.1 we drew on a lot of ideas which have been used in previous versions of this type of result, starting with the seminal (cid:3) TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 25 paper of Agler [3] and continuing with [5, 22, 10, 23, 32, 53, 16, 19, 8, 27, 29] as well as commutant lifting versions [23, 21, 9, 41]. In particular, the cone separation argument in the proof of (1) ⇒ (2) and the proof of (2) ⇒ (3) (the so-called lurking-isometry argument) go back to [3]. However there are some new technical difficulties in the test-function setting where some new ideas are required in order to arrive at the final result; we now discuss some of these. In the proof of (1) ⇒ (2), the use of the ǫ2-perturbation term in the definition of the HL1,ǫ norm is the ploy needed to make the point-evaluations f 7→ f (w) bounded and enables us to avoid the hypothesis that the set of test functions Ψ separates the points of any finite subset ΩF of Ω, as used in [27, 29]. Our proof of (2) ⇒ (1) (with the hypothesis that dimYT < ∞) is close to the proof of (3) ⇒ (1) in [29] (for the scalar-valued case) (which actually involves use of the representation-theory formulation (4)). These authors make use of the spectral theorem for a representation of Cb(Ψ, C), approximating a general representation ρ by a "simple representation" (approximation of the general integral in (3.27) by a simple-function integrand). Thus their proof also makes use of the CCR character of Cb(Ψ, C), and hence does not appear to extend to the case dimYT = ∞. 4. Algebras arising from test functions In this section, rather than starting with a set of test functions Ψ, we assume that we are given a function algebra A and then seek to determine a set of test functions ΨU ,Y so that the unit ball of the operator-valued version of A, say A ⊗ L(U,Y) where U, Y are two coefficient Hilbert spaces, can be identified as the associated Schur-Agler class SAΨU,Y (U,Y). The classical example is the Hardy algebra over the unit disk A = H ∞(D). The operator-valued version A ⊗ L(U,Y) has unit ball equal to the classical operator- valued Schur class S(U,Y), for which we have the now classical result: S ∈ S(U,Y) if and only if the associated de Branges-Rovnyak kernel KS(z, w) = [I − S(z)S(w)∗]/(1− zw) is a positive kernel on D. If we let KS(z, w) = H(z)H(w)∗ be the Kolmogorov decomposition of KS, then we arrive at I − S(z)S(w)∗ = H(z) ((1 − zw)IX ) H(w)∗ which is exactly the Agler decomposition (3.3) corresponding to the singleton collec- tion of test functions Ψ = {ψ0} with ψ0 equal to the coordinate function: ψ0(z) = z. For this case, moving from the scalar-valued case to the matrix- or operator-valued case necessitates no change in the choice of test-function set Ψ. A similar story holds for the case of the Schur-Agler class over the polydisk [22], the Schur-multiplier class over the Drury-Arveson space [23, 32], and the Schur-Agler class over more general domains in Dd with matrix polynomial or analytic defining function [16, 9]. How- ever the situation for the case where A is the algebra of bounded analytic functions over a finitely connected planar domain R, or where A is the constrained Hardy algebra over the unit disk (bounded holomorphic functions f on D with the extra constraint that f ′(0) = 0) is quite different. We discuss each of these in turn. 4.1. The Schur class over a multiply connected planar domain. We let R denote a bounded domain (connected, open set) in the complex plane C whose boundary consists of m + 1 smooth Jordan curves ∂0, ∂1, . . . , ∂m with ∂0 denoting the boundary of the unbounded component of the complement of R in C. We let SR denote the space of holomorphic functions mapping R into the unit disk, 26 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN and SR(U,Y) the operator-valued version consisting of holomorphic functions on R with values in the closed unit ball BL(U,Y) of bounded linear operators between two coefficient Hilbert spaces U and Y. In [28] there was identified a collection of inner functions {sx : x ∈ TR}, normalized to have value 1 at a fixed point ζ0 ∈ ∂0 and to satisfy s(t0) = 0 at a fixed point t0 ∈ R, having exactly m zeros in R (the minimal number possible for a single-valued inner function on R), and indexed by x belonging to the R-torus TR := ∂0 × ∂1 × ··· × ∂m, so that any scalar Schur class function s ∈ SR has an Agler decomposition (3.3) with respect to the family Ψ = {ψx : x ∈ TR} s in (1.11) (or (3.27) specialized to this case): 1 − s(z)s(w) =ZTR hx(z)(cid:16)1 − sx(z)sx(w)(cid:17) hx(w) dν(x). In more detail, the functions sx are constructed as follows. Let φ = {φ1, . . . , φm} be real-valued continuous functions on ∂R such that {φ1, . . . , φm} = basis for L2(ωt0) ⊖ [H 2(ωt0 ) + H 2(ωt0 )] (4.2) where ωt0 is the harmonic measure on ∂R for some fixed point t0 ∈ R (so h(t0) = ciated Hardy space, and the overline indicates complex conjugation -- see e.g. [33]. 0 , wx Then given x = (x0, x1, . . . , xm) ∈ TR, there is a unique choice of weights wx 1 , . . . , wx R∂R h(ζ) dωt0(ζ) for h harmonic on R and continuous on R−), H 2(ωt0) is the asso- m, each positive with sum equal to 1, so that (4.1) wx r φi(xr) = 0 for i = 1, . . . , m (4.3) mXr−0 (see [4, Theorem 3.1.17]). Given any x and the associated weights (wx, we associate the probability measure on ∂R: wx µx := r δxr 0 wx 1 , . . . , wx m) where δxr is the unit point-mass measure at xr. The constraint (4.3) guarantees that the harmonic function mXr=0 hx(z) =Z∂R Pz(ζ) dµx(ζ) (where Pz(ζ) is the poisson kernel normalized to have Pt0 (ζ) = 1) has single-valued harmonic conjugate. We then define fx(z) to be the unique holomorphic function on R with Re fx(z) = hx(z) and fx(t0) = 1. Finally we set sx(z) = fx(z) − 1 fx(z) + 1 . (4.4) Then sx are the inner functions appearing in (4.1), apart from the additional nor- malization that sx(ζ0) = 1 at a fixed ζ0 ∈ ∂0. Then it is shown in [29] that SR = SAΨR with the collection of test functions ΨR taken to be ΨR = {sx : x ∈ TR}. There it is shown, at least for the annulus case (m = 1), that, with the addi- tional normalization sx(ζ0) = 1 imposed, that ΨR is minimal in the sense that no nonempty open subset of TR can be omitted and still have the decomposition (4.1) hold for all s ∈ SR. TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 27 Before explaining the matrix generalization of (4.4), we first recall some ideas from [20]. Suppose that we are given a collection  φ(1) 1 ... φ(1) m φ(n) 1 ... φ(n) m φ(1) 1 IN ... φ(1) m IN φ(n) 1 IN ... φ(n) m IN of n vectors in Rm. From φ we form the block column vectors  φ =   , . . . , φ(n) = φ(1) = φ ⊗ IN = φ(1) ⊗ IN :=  , . . . , φ(n) ⊗ IN :=  in(cid:0)CN ×N(cid:1)m the zero element 0 =" 0N ×N 0N ×N# of(cid:0)CN ×N(cid:1)m there exist positive semidefinite N × N matrices W1, . . . , Wn withPn nXr=1 . We say that 0 is in the interior of the C∗- where we set φ(r) ⊗ Wr = (m × 1-column vectors with entries of size N × N ). We then say that is in the C∗-convex hull of φ ⊗ IN if r=1 Wr = IN convex hull of φ ⊗ IN if in addition the matrix weights {W1, . . . , Wn} have the property that their range spaces {Ran W1, . . . , Ran Wn} are φ-constrained weakly independent by which we mean: whenever T1, . . . , Tn are N × N complex Hermitian matrices with Ran Tr ⊂ Ran Wr for each r = 1, . . . , n such that 1 Wr φ(r) ... φ(r) m Wr φ(r) ⊗ Wr so that (4.5) 0 = ... Tr = 0 and φi(xr)Tr = 0 for i = 1, . . . , n, nXr=1 nXr=1 it follows that Tr = 0 for each r = 1, . . . , n. When all this happens, we refer to {W1, . . . , Wn} as a choice of matrix barycentric coordinates of 0 with respect to φ. By way of motivation for these notions, note that, in case N = 1 and all the weights W1 = w1, . . . , Wn = wn (now complex numbers) are nonzero (which can be arranged simply by discarding appropriate vectors φ(r) from the list of vectors φ), then 0 = 0 ∈ Rm in the interior of the C∗-convex hull of φ ⊗ I1 = φ simply means that the vector 0 ∈ Rm is in the interior of the simplex generated by the vectors φ(1), . . . , φ(n) and that w1, . . . , wn are the classical barycentric coordinates for 0 with respect to the simplex vertices φ(1), . . . , φ(m). We are now ready to explain the matrix analogue of the R-torus TR used to parametrize the set of scalar test functions (4.4). We define the matrix R-torus TN R to consist of all pairs (x, w) of the form (x, w) = (x1, . . . , xn; W1, . . . , Wn) where x1, . . . , xn is a set of n distinct points in ∂R such that 0 is in the interior of the C∗-convex hull of the set of vectors φ(x) ⊗ IN , where we set φ(x) = φ(x1) = φ1(x1) ... φm(x1)  , . . . , φ(xn) = φ1(xn) ... φm(xn)   , (4.6) 28 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN with φ1, . . . , φm as in (4.2), and with {W1, . . . , Wn} is a choice of matrix barycentric coordinates for 0 with respect to φ(x) ⊗ IN . In particular, the condition (4.5) in the present context specializes to φi(xr)Wr = 0 for i = 1, . . . , m. (4.7) nXr=1 For the case N = 1, necessarily n = m + 1, after a reindexing the collection of points (x0, x1, . . . , xm) necessarily consists of exactly one point from each bound- ary component ∂0, . . . , ∂m, and the associated scalar weights wx m are uniquely determined by x. For N > 1, the characterization of TN R is not so explicit; nevertheless it is nonempty and is a well-defined metrizable topological space which is in one-to-one correspondence with a collection of quantum measures (positive ma- trix measures with total mass equal to the identity matrix IN ) which we define next. For additional information we refer to [20]. 1 , . . . , wx 0 , wx Given (x, w) ∈ TN R, we associate a quantum measure µx,w by µx,w = nXr=1 Wrδxr if (x, w) = (x1, . . . , xn; W1, . . . , Wn) ∈ TN R. (4.8) Then a consequence of (4.7) is that the matrix-valued harmonic function Hx,w(z) =Z∂R Pz(ζ) dµx,w(ζ) has a single-valued (matrix-valued) harmonic conjugate, and hence there is a unique- ly determined holomorphic function Fx,w on R with Re Fx,w(z) = Hx,w(z) and Fx,w(t0) = IN . It can be shown that the collection of functions {Fx,w : (x, w) ∈ TN R} (4.9) is exactly the set of extreme points for the compact convex set HN (R)I of normal- ized Herglotz functions over R given by HN (R)I = {F : R 7→ CN ×N : F holomorphic, Re F (z) ≥ 0 for z ∈ R, F (t0) = IN}. Finally, we set Sx,w(z) = (Fx,w(z) + I)−1(Fx,w(z) − I). (4.10) Note that each Sx,w(z) is an N × N matrix inner function on R normalized to satisfy S(t0) = 0. Then in [20] it is shown that any matrix-valued function S in the Schur class SR(CN , CN ) has an Agler decomposition of the form I − S(z)S(w)∗ =ZTN Hx,w(z) (I − Sx,w(z)Sx,w(w)∗) Hx,w(w)∗ dν(x, w) (4.11) R for appropriate matrix functions Hx,w(z) and probability measure ν on TN R. Following the arguments in [29] (adapted to the matrix-valued setting) leads to the following identification of the matrix Schur class SR(CN ) with a matrix-valued ; the main ingredients of the proof also appear in test-function Schur class SAΨN the more involved proof of Theorem 4.4 below. R TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 29 Theorem 4.1. Let ΨN R be the collection of matrix inner functions R = {Sx,w : (x, w) ∈ TN ΨN R} (4.12) with Sx,w as in (4.10), with the additional normalization Sx,w(ζ0) = IN at some fixed point ζ0 ∈ ∂0. Then the matrix-valued Schur class SR(CN ) is identical to the matrix-valued test-function Schur-Agler class SAΨN associated with the collection of test functions ΨN R (as defined by (3.1) and (3.2)). R Combined with Theorem 3.1 and Remark 3.7, we arrive at the following dual formulations of interpolation criteria for the Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation problem for the matrix Schur class over R. Before stating the result we need a little more background concerning function theory on R. There is a standard procedure (see e.g.[1]) for introducing m disjoint simple curves γ1, . . . , γm so that R\ γ (where we set γ equal to the union γ = γ1 ∪ ··· ∪ γm) is simply connected. For each cut γr we assign some orientation, so that points z not on γr but in a sufficiently small neighborhood of γr in R can be assigned a location of either "to the left" or "to the right". For f a vector-valued function on R and z a point on some γr, we let f (z+) denote the limit of f (ζ) as ζ approaches z from the right of γr in R, and similarly, f (z−) the limit of f (ζ) as ζ approaches z from the left of γr in R, whenever these limits exist. Given a U = (U1, . . . , Um) in U(N )m (m-tuples of unitary N × N matrices), we define a Hardy space H 2(U) to consist of functions f : R → CN , holomorphic on R \ γ, subject to the jump conditions f (z−) = Urf (z+) for z ∈ γr for each r = 1, . . . , m (so kf (z)k2 is continuous and single-valued on R), and so that the well-defined integral H2(U) =Z∂R kf (ζ)k2 dωt0 kfk2 is finite. Then the space H 2(U) is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space over R (with some appropriate convention as to how elements are defined on γ); we denote its CN ×N -valued reproducing kernel function by K U: H 2(U) = H(K U). These kernels enter into the admissible-kernel formulation of the criterion for the SR(CN )- interpolation problem to have a solution. Theorem 4.2. Suppose that we are given an N × N matrix-valued function S0 on the subset R0 of R. Then the following are equivalent: (1) There is a function S in the Schur class SR(CN ) with SR0 = S0. (2) There is a matrix-valued function ((x, w), z) 7→ Hx,w(z) on TN R × R0, bounded and measurable in (x, w) for each z ∈ R0, together with a finite measure ν on TN R so that I−S0(z)S0(w)∗ =ZTN R for all z, w ∈ R0. kernel Hx,w(z)(cid:0)IXx,w ⊗ (I − Sx,w(z)Sx,w(w)∗(cid:1) Hx,w(w)∗ dν(x, w) (3) For each U = (U1, . . . , Um) in U(N )m and for each Y : R0 → CN ×N , the k(z, w) := tr(cid:0)Y (w)∗(I − S0(w)∗S0(z))Y (z))K U(z, w)(cid:1) is a positive kernel on R0. (4.13) 30 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN Proof. The equivalence of (1) and (2) is a consequence of Theorem 3.1, once the result of Theorem 4.1 is plugged in. The equivalence of (1) and (3) is a consequence of Remark 3.7, once it is verified that the set (ΨN R)0 := {K U : U ∈ U(N )m} (4.14) (CN ). Rather than doing is a generating set for the set of admissible kernels KΨN this, we observe that a solution criterion for the SAR(CN )-interpolation problem was obtained in [17, Theorem 1.5] (as a consequence of the lifting theorem from [14]), but in a somewhat different, more convoluted form than the form (4.13). If one works with right multiplication operators on the space H(K U )CN rather than with left multiplication operators on a left-side tensoring of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space consisting of row-vector functions as is done in [17], one arrives at the solution criterion (4.13) as presented here. (cid:3) R Remark 4.3. We note that the scalar-valued case N = 1 of criterion (3) in Theo- rem 4.2 is due to Abrahamse [1] -- note that the extra parameter Y (z) washes out in this case. It was later shown by Ball-Clancey [18] that no open subset of the kernels K U (U ∈ U(1)m) can be omitted for the validity of this result. However, for the case of the annulus, if one takes the set of interpolation nodes R0 to be finite and prespecified, then two kernels suffice [54]. While the Abrahamse result extends to the matrix-valued setting for the annulus case (using only scalar-valued kernels), McCullough and Paulsen [39, 40], using the C∗-algebra approach to interpolation theory, showed that the Fedorov-Vinnikov result fails for the matrix-valued case. All this story is reviewed nicely in [26]. We do not address such minimality issues here. For the case of the annulus (m = 1), by using results of McCullough [38] it is possible to obtain a more explicit test-function collection as follows. We take R to have the concrete form R = Aq where Aq = {z ∈ C : q < z < 1} for a number q satisfying 0 < q < 1. It is established in [38] that there is a curve t 7→ ϕt of inner functions on Aq (constructed from the Ahlfors function for Aq based at the point √q ∈ Aq) with the following property: for a (U, t) ∈ U(N ) × Tn (where U(n) denotes the set of N × N unitary matrices and Tn is the N -torus {t = (t1, . . . , tn) : tj = 1 for 1 ≤ j ≤ N}), set ΦU,t(z) = U ϕt1 (z) . . .  ϕtN (z) and then, for each (x, w) ∈ TN (U, t) ∈ U(N ) × TN so that RU,t(z) = (IN + ΦU,t(z))(I − ΦU,t(z))−1; Aq there is a choice of invertible N × N matrix X and a Fx,w(z) + Fx,w(z)∗ = X (RU,t(z) + RU,t(z)∗) X ∗ for all z ∈ Aq. We are now ready to introduce a new test-function class for SN Aq , namely: (4.15) (4.16) eΨN Aq = {ΦU,t : (U, t) ∈ U(N ) × TN}. TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 31 Aq Aq Aq where eΨN Conversely suppose that S ∈ SAq (CN ). To show that S ∈ SA eΨN We then have the following result. Theorem 4.4. The matrix-valued Schur class over the annulus SAq (CN ) is identi- cal to the matrix-valued test-function Schur-Agler class SA eΨN Aq is given by (4.16). Proof. Suppose first that S ∈ SA eΨN . Then the right multiplication operator RS (CN ). Such kernels is contractive on H(K)CN for each admissible kernel K in K eΨN include the Fay kernel associated with the Hardy space H 2(ωt)⊗ CN over Aq. This observation is enough to conclude that S ∈ SAq (CN ). (Cn), by (CN ) → L(K) Theorem 3.8 it suffices to show: such that kπ(ΦU,t)k ≤ 1 for all (U, t) ∈ U(N ) × TN , it follows that kπ(S)k ≤ 1. By replacing π with r · π with r < 1 and then taking a limit as r tends to 1, without loss of generality we may suppose that kπ(ΦU,t)k < 1 for each (U, t). Then π(RU,t) = (I − π(ΦU,t))−1(I + π(ΦU,t)) is a well-defined bounded operator on K such that π(RU,t) + π(RU,t)∗ = 2 (I − π(ΦU,t))−1 (I − π(ΦU,t)π(ΦU,t)∗) (I − π(ΦU,t)∗)−1 > 0. (4.17) From (4.15), we see that, for each fixed (x, w) ∈ TN Aq , π (Fx,w) is a well-defined bounded operator on K satisfying for any representation π : H ∞ eΨN Aq Aq π (Fx,w) + π (Fx,w)∗ = (X ⊗ IK) (π(RU,t) + π(RU,t)∗) (X ∗ ⊗ IK) . (4.18) From (4.17) we read off that π (Fx,w) has positive real part. We next obtain π(Sx,w) as a Cayley transform of π (Fx,w): π(Sx,w) = (π(Fx,w) + I)−1 (π(Fx,w) − I) . From the relation I − π(Sx,w)π(Sx,w)∗ = 2 (π(Fx,w) + I)−1 (π(Fx,w) + π(Fx,w)∗) (π(Fx,w)∗ + I)−1 combined with (4.18), we see that kπ(Sx,w)k ≤ 1. Finally, since S ∈ SAq (CN ), S has an Agler decomposition as in (4.11). Applying the hereditary functional calculus with the representation π through this integral representation gives π(Hx,w)(I − π(Sx,w)π(Sx,w)∗)π(Hx,w)∗ dν(x, w). I − π(S)π(S)∗ =ZTN R Since kπ(Sx,w)k ≤ 1 for each (x, w) ∈ TN that kπ(S)k ≤ 1 Aq , we read off from this last expression (cid:3) As a corollary of Theorem 4.4 combined with Theorem 3.1, we get the following structure theorem for the Schur-Agler class over the annulus Aq. To this end we introduce the space bTN Aq = (U(N )/U(1)N ) × TN , where here U(1)N is identified with unitary diagonal N × N matrices, and the action of U(1)N on U(N ) is given by u1 u : U 7→ U u for u = . . . uN  ∈ U(1)N . 32 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN Φ[U],t = ΦU,tU ∗. Aq , we abuse notation somewhat and set Note that Φ[U],t is well-defined (independent of the choice of representative of the coset [U ]). Note that each Φ[U],t is normalized to satisfy Φ[U],t(1) = IN as well For ([U ], t) ∈eTN as Φ[U],t(√q) = 0. Furthermore the expression I − ΦU,t(z)ΦU,t(w)∗ is independent of choice of coset representative for [U ]. Also it is easily checked that the set of admissible kernels KΨ associated with a given collection of test functions Ψ depends on the functions ψ ∈ Ψ only through the expressions I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗. Hence the result of Theorem 4.4 can equally well be stated as: (CN ) (4.19) where we have set Aq Aq (Cn) = SA bΨN SN Aq = {Φ[U],t : ([U ], t) ∈bTN bΨN Aq}. Then the following corollary is an immediate consequence of our man theorem on the test-function Schur-Agler class, namely Theorem 3.1. Corollary 4.5. Suppose that S ∈ SAq (CN ). Then the following hold: (1) S has an Agler decomposition of the form I − S(z)S(w)∗ =ZbTN (2) There is a representation ρ of C(bTN unitary colligation matrix Aq H[U],t(z)(cid:0)IX[U ],t ⊗ (I − Φ[U],t(z)Φ[U],t(w)∗(cid:1) H[U],t(w)∗ dν([U ], t). (4.20) Aq ,L(CN )) on a Hilbert space X and a U =(cid:20)A B C D(cid:21) : (cid:20) XCN(cid:21) →(cid:20) XCN(cid:21) so that S has the transfer-function realization S(z) = D + C(I − ρ(E(z))A)−1ρ(E(z))B. Remark 4.6. An appealing conjecture is that the Agler decomposition (4.20) is minimal in the sense of [29, Section 5.1] and [30, Section 3.6]. 4.2. The constrained Schur class over the unit disk. Following [26, 17], we define the constrained Hardy space H ∞ 1 over the unit disk D to consist of bounded analytic functions s on D such that s′(0) = 0. One can check that this is still an algebra. In this section we identify a class of test functions ΨN 1 for which the unit ball B(H ∞)N ×N of the algebra of N × N matrices over H ∞ (with norm equal to the multiplier norm as multiplication operators on (H 2)N ) can best identified as the test-function Schur-Agler class SAΨN The analysis parallels that of Section 4.1 for the Schur class over a finitely con- nected planar domain. One first identifies the extreme points for the Herglotz class HN 1 consisting of N × N matrix-valued functions F on D satisfying the normal- ization F (0) = I together with the side constraint F ′(0) = 0. Such functions are exactly the Cayley transforms (CN ). 1 1 F (z) = (I − S(z))−1(I + S(z)) of functions S in the closed unit ball B(H ∞ Hardy algebra (H ∞ 1 )N ×N of the matrix-valued constrained 1 )N ×N subject to the normalization S(0) = 0. As is the case TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 33 for any matrix-valued Herglotz function on D, there is a positive matrix-valued measure µ on T so that F has the Herglotz representation F (z) =ZT ζ + z ζ − z dµ(ζ). The constraint that F (0) = IN is equivalent to µ(T) = IN ; following the termi- nology used in Section 4.1, we then say that µ is an N × N quantum probability measure. The constraint that F ′(0) equals zero (i.e., that F ∈ HN 1 ) imposes the constraints on the measure µ: Taking real and imaginary part then gives us two real constraints ζ dµ(ζ) = 0. F ′(0) =ZT ZT ζ−1dµ(ζ) =ZT ZT Re ζ dµ(ζ) = 0, Im ζ dµ(ζ) = 0. (4.21) We thus see that the convex set HN over D) is affinely equivalent to the convex set of measures I (the constrained matrix-valued Herglotz class CN 1 = {µ : µ = N × N quantum probability measure such that (4.21) holds}. This convex set of measures is compact in the weak-∗ topology (viewing complex N ×N matrix-valued measures as the dual space of CN -valued continuous functions on T) and hence, by the Kreın-Milman theorem, has extreme points. By the same general results from [20] leading to the the identification of the set (4.9) of the normalized Herglotz class H(R)I over the planar domain R, it follows that the extreme points of CN (t, w) where t = (t1, . . . , tn) is an n-tuple of points on the unit circle T (with 1 ≤ n ≤ 3N ) and w = (W1, . . . , Wn) is an n-tuple of N × N matrix weights such that the following property holds: 0 = 0 ⊗ IN is in the interior of the C∗-convex hull of φ(t) ⊗ IN , where we set 1 can be described as follows. We let bΘN consist of all pairs φ(t) =(cid:26)(cid:20)Re t1 Im t1(cid:21) , . . . ,(cid:20)Re tn Im tn(cid:21)(cid:27) ⊂ R2. with a choice of matrix barycentric coordinates of 0 with respect to φ(t) ⊗ IN equal to {W1, . . . , Wn} (refer back to Section 4.1 for the definition of terms). One conse- quence of the definitions is that, for any such (t, w) = (t1, . . . , tn; W1, . . . , Wn) in bΘN , it holds that (Re tr)Wr = 0, nXr=1 nXr=1 (Im tr)Wr = 0. (4.22) the unit disk given by Associated with each (t, w) ∈ bΘN is a holomorphic N × N -matrix function on Ft,w(z) = Wr. nXr=1 tr + z tr − z These functions are holomorphic on D with positive real part, and moreover, as a consequence of (4.22), have the property that F ′ t,w(0) = 0. In fact, it can be shown 34 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN that the set of all such functions {Ft,w : (t, w) ∈ TN points for the normalized constrained Herglotz class over D, i.e., the class 1 )IN :={F : D → CN ×N : F holomorphic, Re F (z) ≥ 0 for z ∈ D, 1 } is exactly the set of extreme (HN F (0) = IN , F ′(0) = 0}. By using Choquet theory it then follows that a general element F of (HN an integral representation of the form 1 )IN has F (z) =Z bΘN for some probability measure on bΘN . We note that (HN strained Schur class Ft,w(z) dν(t, w) 1 )IN is exactly the Cayley transform of the normalized con- (SN 1 )0 ={S : D → CN ×N : S holomorphic, kS(z)k ≤ 1 for z ∈ D, S(0) = 0, S′(0) = 0}, i.e., S ∈ (SN F ∈ (HN 1 )0 ⇔ F := (I − S)−1(I + S) ∈ (HN 1 )IN ⇔ S := (F + I)−1(F − I) ∈ (SN 1 )IN , 1 )0. In particular, for each (t, w) ∈ TN turn leads us to the following collection of functions in (SN 1 we may define functions St,w ∈ (SN 1 )0: 1 )0 which in ΨN 1 := {St,w(z) = (Ft,w(z) + I)−1(Ft,w(z) − I) : (t, w) ∈ bΘN}. Following the proof of Theorem 5.4 in [20] (the parallel result for the matrix Schur class over a planar domain R in place of SN 1 ) then leads to the integral Agler decomposition for the normalized constrained Schur class: given S ∈ (SN 1 )0 there is a function ((t, w), z) 7→ Ht,w(z) on bΘN×D, bounded and measurable in (t, w) ∈ TN for each fixed z, together with a probability measure ν on bΘN , so that I − S(z)S(w)∗ =Z bΘN Ht,w(z) (I − St,w(z)St,w(w)∗) Ht,w(w)∗ dν(t, w). (4.24) (4.23) 1 )N ×N with kS(0)k < 1), then If S is in the strict constrained Schur class (S ∈ B(H ∞ there is a choice of matrix Mobius transformation on the N × N -matrix ball TS(0) so that TS(0)[S(z)] is in the normalized constrained Schur class (SN 1 ) (see e.g. [20, Section 5]. Using this one can see that functions S in the strict but unnormalized Schur class SN 1 )N ×N have the continuous Agler decomposition (4.24) as well. 1 := B(H ∞ 1 Once this Agler decomposition is in hand, by using the same techniques as used in the proofs of Theorems 4.1 (adaptations to the matrix-valued setting of arguments in [29] and [30]), one can arrive at the following result. Theorem 4.7. With ΨN 1 ⊂ (SN 1 )0 given by (4.23), we have the identity B(H ∞ 1 )N ×N = SAΨN . 1 There is also a dual pair of solution criteria for the interpolation problem for the 1 . We first need to introduce the generating set of admissible kernels for the β ] with (CN ) as follows. For each isometric 2N × 1 matrix, written as [ α class SN class KΨN 1 TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 35 α and β equal to N × 1 column vectors satisfying α∗α + β∗β = 1, we introduce the collection of N × N -matrix kernel functions (ΨN 1 )0 ={K α,β(z, w) := (αz + zβ)(α∗ + wβ∗) + α, β ∈ CN ×1, α∗α + β∗β = 1}. z2w2 1 − zw IN : (4.25) Then we have the following result. Theorem 4.8. Suppose that we are given an N × N matrix-valued function S0 on the subset D0 of the unit disk D. Then the following are equivalent: (1) There is a function S in the restricted Schur class SN bounded and measurable in (t, w) for each fixed z ∈ D0, together with a (2) There is a matrix-valued function ((t, w), z) 7→ Ht,w(z) on bΘN × D0, finite measure ν on bΘN , so that I−S0(z)S0(w)∗ =Z bΘN Ht,w(z)(cid:0)IXt,w ⊗ (I − St,w(z)St,w(w)∗)(cid:1) Ht,w(w)∗ dν(t, w). (3) For each 2N × 1 isometric matrix [ α β ] and for each Y : D0 → CN ×N , the 1 with SD0 = S0. kernel k(z, w) = tr(cid:0)Y (w)∗(I − S0(w)∗S0(z))Y (z))K α,β(z, w)(cid:1) (where K α,β is given by (4.25)) is a positive kernel on D0. (4.26) Proof. The proof parallels that of Theorem 4.2. To verify the equivalence of con- dition (2) with existence of a solution of the interpolation problem, use Theorem 4.7 in combination with Theorem 3.1. By Remark 3.7, the validity of condition (3) follows if we can verify that the collection (ΨN 1 )0 given by (4.25) is a generating (CN ). However, rather than doing set for the collection of admissible kernels KΨN this we use Theorem 1.3 from [17]. As was the case for the Schur class over a domain R, the form presented there is somewhat different from the form (4.26) as presented here. However, one can follow the argument in [17] and work with right multiplication operators on H(K α,β)CN rather than left multiplication operators on a left-sided tensor of the coefficient space with a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of row-vector functions to arrive at the form (4.26) as the solution criterion. (cid:3) 1 Remark 4.9. As was observed in connection with Corollary 4.5, the Schur-Agler class SAΨ associated with a collection of test functions Ψ depends on the functions ψ ∈ Ψ only through the kernels I − ψ(z)ψ(w)∗. Hence, for St,w in the test-function class ΨN 1 we may define an equivalence relation St,w ∼ St′,w′ when there is a unitary constant matrix U so that St′,w′(z) = St,w(z)U . To choose one representative out of each equivalence class, we may normalize S ∈ ΨN 1 so that S(1) = IN . This one of the points in the set of points t = (1, t2, . . . , tn) with associated weight W1 invertible; in this way we get a new smaller parameter space ΘN . Then we have 1 )N ×N = SA eΨN B(H ∞ 1 = {St,w : (t, w) ∈ ΘN} is this restricted class of test functions. For the case N = 1 (the scalar case), Theorem 4.7 is due to Dritschel-Pickering has the effect of restricting the parameter (t, w) in bΘN to those such that 1 is where eΨN 1 [30]. In this case the parameter space bΘ1 =: bΘ can be described in geometric terms as consisting of (1) triples of points on the unit circle such that 0 is in the interior of the associated triangle, with the weights then being the barycentric coordinates 36 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN 2 , 1 of 0 with respect to this triangle, or (2) a pair of antipodal points on the unit circle with weights then necessarily ( 1 2 ). When the reduction described in the previous paragraph is carried out, one restricts to triples of points t = (1, t2, t3) which include 1 and there is only one antipodal pair of points (1,−1). These authors also show that this space Θ with its natural topology is homeomorphic to the unit sphere. 1 is a minimal collection of test functions for 1 )N ×N in 1 is a minimal collection of test functions for B(H ∞ They also show that the collection eΨ1 1 . Whether eΨN BH ∞ general we leave as an open question. As we have seen, there is a dual issue of finding minimal generating sets for admissible collections of kernels KΨ(CN ), as well as finding small generating sets for R)0 such KΨ(CN ). In particular, it would be interesting to see a direct proof that (ΨN 1 )0 in (4.25) generates KΘN (CN ). We in (4.14) generates KΨN note that the proofs of the interpolation results from [1, 14, 26, 17] use the dual factorization approach (see [25] for a unified setting); an independent proof of the generating property for (ΨN 1 )0 would mean that Theorem 3.1 gives an independent proof of these interpolation results. and that the set (ΨN R)0 and (ΨN R is C + z2H ∞. Many of the Remark 4.10. An alternative description of H ∞ 1 results concerning the space H ∞ 1 have been generalized to more general algebras of the form C + BH ∞ where B is a Blaschke product (see e.g. [50]). We believe that the results from [20] are sufficiently flexible to lead to test-function Schur-Agler- class characterizations of matrix-valued versions of these more general algebras as well. References [1] M.B. Abrahamse, The Pick interpolation theorem for finite connected domains, Michigan Math. J. 26 (1979), 195 -- 203. [2] J. Agler, Interpolation, unpublished manuscript, circa 1988. [3] J. Agler, On the representation of certain holomorphic functions defined on a polydisk, in: Topics in Operator Theory: Ernst D. Hellinger Memorial Volume (ed. L. de Branges I. Go- hberg, J. Rovnyak), OT 48, Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, 1990. [4] J. Agler, J. Harland, B.J. Raphael, Classical Function Theory, Operator Dilation Theory, and Machine Computation on Multiply-Connected Domains, Memoirs of the American Math- ematical Society, Number 92, January 2008. [5] J. Agler and J.E. McCarthy, Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation on the bidisk, J. Reine Angew. Math. 506 (1999), 191 -- 204. [6] J. Agler and J.E. McCarthy, Pick Interpolation and Hilbert Function Spaces, Graduate Stud- ies in Mathematics Vol. 44, American Mathematical Society, Providence, 2002. [7] J. Agler and J.E. McCarthy, Distinguished varieties, Acta Math. 194 (2005), 133 -- 153. [8] C.-G. Ambrozie, Remarks on the operator-valued interpolation for multivariable bounded analytic functions, Indiana University Math. J. 53 (2004), 1551 -- 1576. [9] C. Ambrozie and J. Eschmeier, A commutant lifting theorem on analytic polyhedra, in: Topo- logical Algebras, Their Applications, and Related Topics, Banach Center Publications 67, Institute of Mathematics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, 2005. [10] C.-G. Ambrozie and D. Timotin, A von Neumann type inequality for certain domains in Cn, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131 (2003), 859 -- 869. [11] A.V. Arkhangel'skiı and V.V. Fedorchuk, I. The Basic Concepts and Constructions of Gen- eral Topology, in General Topology I (ed. A.V. Arkhangel'skiı and L.S. Pontryagin), pp. 1 -- 90, Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences 17, Springer, New York, 1990. [12] N. Aronszajn, Theory of reproducing kernels, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 68 (1950), 337 -- 404. [13] W. Arveson, An Invitation to C ∗-Algebras, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 39, Springer- Verlag, New York, 1976. TEST FUNCTIONS AND TRANSFER-FUNCTION REALIZATION 37 [14] J.A. Ball, A lifting theorem for operator models of finite rank on multiply-connected domains, J. Operator Theory 1 (1979), 3 -- 25. [15] J.A. Ball, A. Biswas, Q. Fang, and S. ter Horst, Multivariable generalizations of the Schur class: positive kernel characterization and transfer function realization, in: Recent Advances in Operator Theory and Applications, pp. 17 -- 79, OT 187 Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, 2008. [16] J.A. Ball and V. Bolotnikov, Realization and interpolation for Schur-Agler-class functions on domains with matrix polynomial defining function in Cd, J. Functional Analysis 213 (2004), 45-87. [17] J.A. Ball, V. Bolotnikov, and S. ter Horst, A constrained Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation problem for matrix-valued functions, Indiana University Math. J. 59 (2010) No. 1, 15 -- 51. [18] J.A. Ball and K.F. Clancey, Reproducing kernels for Hardy spaces on multiply connected domains, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 25 (1996), 35 -- 57. [19] J.A. Ball, G. Groenewald, and T. Malakorn, Conservative structured noncommutative multi- dimensional linear systems, in: The State Space Method: Generalizations and Applications (ed. D. Alpay and I. Gohberg), pp. 179 -- 223, OT 161 Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, 2005. [20] J.A. Ball and M. Guerra Huaman, Convexity analysis and matrix-valued schur class over finitely connected planar domains, preprint, 2011. [21] J.A. Ball, W.S. Li, D. Timotin, and T.T. Trent, A commutant lifting theorem on the polydisc, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 48 (1999), 653 -- 675. [22] J.A. Ball and T.T. Trent, Unitary colligations, reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces and Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation in several variables, J. Funct. Anal.157 (1998) no. 1, 1998. [23] J.A. Ball, T.T. Trent, and V. Vinnikov, Interpolation and commutant lifting for multipliers on reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces, in: The M.A. Kaashoek Anniversary Volume (Workshop in Amsterdam, November 1997) (ed. H. Bart, I. Gohberg, A.C.M. Ran), pp. 89 -- 138, OT 122 Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, 2001. [24] S.D. Barreto, B.V.R. Bhat, V. Liebscher, and M. Skeide, Type I product systems of Hilbert modules, J. Func. Anal. 212 (2004), 121 -- 181. [25] K.R. Davidson and R. Hamilton, Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation and factorization of linear functionals, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 70 (2011) no. 1, 125 -- 149. [26] K.R. Davidson, V. Paulsen, M. Raghupathi, and D. Singh, A constrained Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation problem, Indiana University Math. J. 58 (2009), 709 -- 732. [27] M.A. Dritschel, S.A.M. Marcantognini and S. McCullough, Interpolation in semigroupoid algebras, J. reine angew. Math. 606 (2007), 1 -- 40. [28] M.A. Dritschel and S. McCullough, The failure of rational dilation on a triply connected domain. J. Amer. Math Soc. 18 (2005), 873 -- 918. [29] M.A. Dritschel and S. McCullough, Test functions, kernels, realizations and interpolation, in: Operator Theory, Structured Matrices, and Dilations. Tiberiu Constantinescu Memorial Volume (ed. M. Bakonyi, A. Gheondea, M. Putinar and J. Rovnyak), pp. 153 -- 179, Theta Foundation, Bucharest, 2007. [30] M.A. Dritschel and J. Pickering, Test functions in constrained interpolation, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., to appear. [31] J. Dugundji, Topology, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1966. [32] J. Eschmeier and M. Putinar, Spherical contractions and interpolation problems on the unit ball, J. Reine Angew. Math. 542 (2002), 219 -- 236. [33] S.D. Fisher, Function Theory on Planar Domains: A Second Course in Complex Analysis, Wiley & Sons, New York, 1983; Second Edition: Dover Publications, New York, 2007. [34] I. Gohberg (ed.), I. Schur Methods in Operator Theory and Signal Processing, OT 18, Birkhauser, Basel, 1986. [35] M.D. Guerra-Huaman, Schur class of finitely connected planar domains: the test-function approach, Virginia Tech dissertation, 2011. [36] M.T. Jury, Universal commutative operator algebras and transfer function realizations of polynomials, arXiv:1009.6219v1 [math.FA], 30 Sep 2010. [37] M.T. Jury, G. Knese and S. McCullough, Agler interpolation families of kernels, Oper. Ma- trices 3(2009) no. 4, 571 -- 587. [38] S. McCullough, Matrix functions of positive real part on an annulus, Houston J. Math. 21 (1995) no. 3, 489 -- 506. [39] S. McCullough, Isometric representations of some quotients of H∞ of an annulus, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 39 (2001), 335 -- 362. 38 J.A. BALL AND M.D. GUERRA-HUAM ´AN [40] S. McCullough and V. Paulsen, C ∗-envelopes and interpolation theory, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 51 (2002), 479 -- 505. [41] S. McCullough and S. Sultanic, Ersatz commutant lifting with test functions, Complex Anal- ysis and Operator Theory 1 (2007), 581 -- 620. [42] M. Mittal and V.I. Paulsen, Operator algebras of functions, J. Funct. Anal. 258 (2010) no. 9, 3195 -- 3225. [43] P.S. Muhly and B. Solel, Tensor algebras over C ∗-correspondences: representations, dila- tions, and C ∗-envelopes, J. Funct. Anal. 158 (1998), 389 -- 457. [44] P.S. Muhly and B. Solel, Schur class operator functions and automorphisms of Hardy alge- bras, Documenta Mathematica 13 (2008), 365 -- 411. [45] V.I. Paulsen, Matrix-valued interpolation and hyperconvex sets, INtegral Equations and Op- erator Theory 41 (2001), 38 -- 62. [46] V.I. Paulsen, Operator algebras of idempotents, J. Func. Anal. 181 (2001), 209 -- 226. [47] V.I. Paulsen and J.P. Solazzo, Interpolation and balls in C2, J. Operator Theory 60 (2008) no. 2, 379 -- 398. [48] V. Paulsen, Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras, Cambridge Studies in Ad- vanced Mathematics 78, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002. [49] I. Raeburn and D.P. Williams, Morita Equivalence and Continuous-Trace C ∗-Algebras, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 60, American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1998. [50] M. Raghupathi, Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation for C + BH∞, Integral Equations and Oper- ator Theory 63 (2009), 103 -- 125. [51] W. Rudin, Functional Analysis (Second Edition), McGraw-Hill, 1991. [52] M. Takesaki, Theory of Operator Algebras I, Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences 124, Springer, New York, 1979. [53] A.T. Tomerlin, Products of Nevanlinna-Pick kernel and operator colligations, Integral Equa- tions and Operator Theory 38 (2000), 350 -- 356. [54] V. Vinnikov and S.I. Fedorov, The Nevanlinna-Pick interpolation problem in multiply con- nected domains, J. Math. Sciences 105 (2001) no. 4, 2109 -- 2126. Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0123, USA E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0123, USA E-mail address: [email protected]
1710.10065	1	1710	2017-10-27T10:41:15	Further results on the $(b, c)$-inverse, the outer inverse $A^{(2)}_{T, S}$ and the Moore-Penrose inverse in the Banach context	[ "math.FA" ]	In this article properties of the $(b, c)$-inverse, the inverse along an element, the outer inverse with prescribed range and null space $A^{(2)}_{T, S}$ and the Moore-Penrose inverse will be studied in the contexts of Banach spaces operators, Banach algebras and $C^*$-algebras. The main properties to be considered are the continuity, the differentiability and the openness of the sets of all invertible elements defined by all the aforementioned outer inverses but the Moore-Penrose inverse. The relationship between the $(b, c)$-inverse and the outer inverse $A^{(2)}_{T, S}$ will be also characterized.	math.FA	math	Further results on the (b, c)-inverse, the outer inverse A(2) T,S and the Moore-Penrose inverse in the Banach context Enrico Boasso Abstract In this article properties of the (b, c)-inverse, the inverse along an element, the outer inverse with prescribed range and null space A(2) S and the Moore-Penrose inverse will be studied in the contexts of Banach spaces operators, Banach algebras and C ∗-algebras. The main properties to be considered are the continuity, the differentiability and the openness of the sets of all invertible elements defined by all the aforementioned outer inverses but the Moore-Penrose inverse. The relationship between the (b, c)-inverse and the outer inverse A(2) S will be also characterized. T T , , Keywords: (b, c)-inverse; outer inverse A(2) C ∗-algebra; Banach space operator T , S ; Moore-Penrose inverse; Banach algebra; AMS Subjects Classifications: 46H05; 46L05; 47A05; 15A09 1 Introduction Recently two outer inverses have been introduced: the (b, c)-inverse and the inverse along an element, see [8] and [19], respectively. These two inverses are related; in fact, the latter is a particular case of the former. It is worth noticing one of the main properties of these inverses, namely, they encompass several well known outer inverses such as the Drazin inverse, the group inverse and the Moore-Penrose inverse. Furthermore, several authors have studied these notions, see for the (b, c)-inverse [4, 6, 8, 9, 14, 15, 25, 30] and for the invese along an element [1, 2, 19 -- 22, 32, 33]. In particular, in [4] and [2] several properties of the (b, c)-inverse and the inverse along an element were studied in the Banach context, respectively. On the other hand, one of the most well known outer inverses is the outer inverse with prescribed range and null space, i.e., the outer invers A(2) T,S . This inverse has been studied in the frames of matrices, Hilbert space operators and Banach space operators. To learn about the A(2) T,S outer inverse in Banach spaces, see for example [10, 18, 31]. The main objective of this article is to deepen the knowledge of the three aformentioned outer inverses in the contexts of Banach algebras, C ∗-algebras, Banach space operators and Hilbert space operators. However, as an application of the main results, properties of the Moore-Penrose inverse will be also presented. The article is organized as follows. In section 3, after having recalled some preliminary definitions and facts in section 2, the relationship between the (b, c)-inverse (in particular the inverse along an element) and the outer inverse A(2) T,S will be studied. In section 4 both the set of all (b, c)-invertible elements (in particular the set of all invertible elements along a fixed element) and the set of all operator for which the outer inverse A(2) T,S exists will be 1 proved to be open. The continuity of the (b, c)-inverse of Banach space operators and of Banach algebra and C ∗-algebra elements will be characterized in section 5; two main notions will be used to accomplish this aim: the gap between two subspaces and the Moore-Penrose inverse. The diffrentiability of the (b, c)-inverse in Banach algebras and C ∗-algebras will be studied in section 6; the Moore-Penrose inverse will be also applied in this section. Finally, the continuity and differentiability of the outer inverse A(2) T,S will be characterized in section 7 using again the gap between subspaces and the Moore-Penrose inverse. In addition, in section 5 and 6, as an application of the main results of these sections, the continuity and the differentiability of the Moore-Penrose inverse for Banach algebra elements and Banach space operators will be studied, respectively. 2 Preliminary definitions From now on, A will denote a unitary Banach algebra with unit 1 while A−1 and A• will stand for the set of invertible elements and the set of idempotents of A, respectively. A particular case is L(X), the Banach algebra of all linear and bounded maps defined on and with values in the Banach space X. However, in the present work it will be necessary to consider the Banach space of all operators defined on the Banach space X with values in the Banach space Y, which will be denoted by L(X, Y). Note that if T ∈ L(X, Y), then N(T ) ⊆ X and R(T ) ⊆ Y will stand for the null space and the range of the operator T , respectively. For example, when A is a unitary Banach algebra and x ∈ A, the operators Lx : A → A and Rx : A → A are the maps defined as follows: given z ∈ A, Lx(z) = xz and Rx(z) = zx. Observe that since A is unitary, then k La k=k a k=k Ra k. Moreover, the following notation will be used: x−1(0) = N(Lx), xA = R(Lx), x−1(0) = N(Rx), Ax = R(Rx). Note that when no confusion is possible, the identity operator defined on the Banach space X will be denoted by I ∈ L(X); otherwise it will be denoted by IX. In addition, given a Hilbert M ∈ L(H)• wil stand for the orthogonal projector space H and a closed subspace M ⊆ H, P ⊥ with range M. An element a ∈ A will be said to be regular, if there exists x ∈ A such that a = axa. The element x, which is not uniquely determined by a, will be said to be a generalized inverse or an inner inverse of a. In addition, A will stand for the set of all regular elements of A and given a ∈ A, a{1} will denote the set of all generalized inverses of a. On the other hand, if y ∈ A satisfies yay = y, then y will be said to be an outer inverse of a. Moreover, an element z will be said to be a normalized generalized inverse of a, if z is both an inner and an outer inverse of a. Recall that if b is an inner inverse of a, then bab is a normalized generalized inverse of a. Now the definition of one of the key notion of this article will be recalled. Note that this notion was originally introduced in the context of semigroup, however, since the frame of this article are Banach algebras and Banach space operators, the notion under consideration, as well as all the object considered in this work, will be introduced and studied in the Banach context. Definition 2.1 ([8, Definition 1.3]). Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider b, c ∈ A. The element a ∈ A will be said to be (b, c)-invertible, if there exists y ∈ A such that the following equations hold: 2 (i) y ∈ (bAy) ∩ (yAc), (ii) b = yab, c = cay. In the same conditions of Definition 2.1, if such an inverse exists, then it is unique ([8, Theorem 2.1 (i)]). Thus in what follows, if the element y in Definition 2.1 exists, then it will be denoted by a−(b, c). In addition, a−(b, c) is an outer inverse of a ([8, Theorem 2.1 (ii)]) and b and c are regular ([4, Remark 2.2 (iii)] or [30, Proposition 3.3]). A particular case of the (b, c)-inverse is the Bott-Duffin (p, q)-inverse. Definition 2.2 ([8, Definition 3.2]). Let A be a unitary Banaxh algebra and consider p, q ∈ A•. The element a ∈ A will be said to be Bott-Duffin (p, q)-invertible, if there exists y ∈ A such that (i) y = py = yq, (ii) yap = p and qay = q. Clearly, given p, q ∈ A•, the Bott-Duffin (p, q)-inverse is nothing but the (b, c)-inverse when b and c are idempotents. In addition, since there exists at most one (b, c)-inverse, the Bott-Duffin (p, q)-inverse is unique, if it exists. According to what has been said, if a ∈ A is Bott-Duffin (p, q)-invertible, then the element y in Definition 2.2 will be denoted by a−(p, q). To learn more on the outer inverses recalled in Definition 2.1 and Definition 2.2, see [4, 6, 8, 9, 14, 15, 25, 30]. Next the definition of the inverse along an element will be recalled. This is another particular case of the (b, c)-inverse. Definition 2.3 ([19, Definition 4]). Consider a, d ∈ A. The element a is invertible along d, if there exists b ∈ A such that b is an outer inverse of a, bA = dA and Ab = Ad. Recall that, in the same conditions of Definition 2.3, according to [19, Theorem 6], if such b ∈ A exists, then it is unique. Therefore, the element b satisfying Definition 2.3 will be said to be the inverse of a along d. In this case, the inverse under consideration will be denoted by a−d. Moreover, according to [8, Proposition 6.1], the inverse along an element is a particular case of the (b, c)-inverse. In fact, the element a is invertible along d if and only if it is (d, d)-invertible. Furthermore, in this case, a−d = a−(d,d). To learn more on this outer inverse, see [1, 2, 19 -- 22, 32, 33]. One of the most studied generalized inverses is the outer inverse A(2) T,S , i.e., the outer inverse of the operator A ∈ L(X, Y) with prescribed range T ⊆ X and null space S ⊆ Y , where X and Y are Banach spaces. This generalized inverse was studied for matrices and for operators defined on Hilbert and on Banach spaces. Recall that this inverse is unique, when it exists ([18, Lemma 1]). Definition 2.4. Let X and Y be Banach spaces, A ∈ L(X, Y) and T and S two closed subspaces of X and Y, respectively. If there exists a (necessarily unique) operator B ∈ L(Y, X) such that B is an outer inverse of A, R(B) = T and N(B) = S, then B will be said to be the A(2) T,S outer inverse of A. According to [18, Lemma 1], a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of A(2) T,S : T → A(T) is that T and S are complemented subspaces of X and Y, respectively, A A(T) T 3 is invertible and A(T) ⊕ S = Y. In particular, using this latter decomposition, A(2) following operator: T,S is the A(2) T,S S= 0, (A A(T) T )−1 = A(2) T, S T A(T) : A(T) → T. To learn more properties of the A(2) T,S outer inverse in Banach spaces, see [10, 18, 31]. To characterize the continuity of the outer inverses considered in this article, it is necessary to recall the definition of the Moore-Penrose inverse. Let A be a C ∗-algebra. An element a ∈ A will be said to be Moore-Penrose invertible, if there exists b ∈ A such that the following equations hold: a = aba, b = bab, (ab)∗ = ab, (ba)∗ = ba. To give the notion of a Moore-Penrose invertible Banach algebra element, the definition of an hermitian element need to be recalled first. Given a Banach algebra A, an element z ∈ A is said to be hermitian, if k exp(ita) k= 1, for all t ∈ R (see [29], [7, Chapter 4] and [5, Chapter I, Section 10]). When A is a C ∗-algebra, a ∈ A is hermitian if and only if it is self-adjoint ([5, Proposition 20, Chapter I, Section 12]). Now Moore-Penrose Banach algebra elements can be defined. Given a Banach algebra A, an element x ∈ A will be said to be Moore-Penrose invertible, if there exists b ∈ A such that b is a normalized generalized inverse of a and the elements ab and ba are hermitian. Since the Moore-Penrose inverse is unique, when it exists (see [26, Lemma 2.1]), the element b will be denoted by a†. Moreover, A† will stand for the set of all Moore- Penrose invertible elements of A. Note that A† ⊆ A. Furthermore, when A is a C ∗-algebra, A† = A ([11, Theorem 6]); however, when the Banach algebra A is not a C ∗-algebra, in general, this result does not hold ([3, Remark 4]). To learn the definition of the Moore- Penrose inverse for matrices, see [24]; to learn more properties of this generalized inverse see, for C ∗ algebras, [11, 12, 16], and for Banach algebras, [3, 26, 27]. To prove some of the main results of this article, the definition of the gap between two subspaces need to be recalled. Let X be a Banach space and consider M and N two closed subspaces in X. If M = 0, then set δ(M, N) = 0, otherwise set δ(M, N) = sup{dist(x, N) : x ∈ M, k x k= 1}, where dist(x, N) = inf{k x − y k : y ∈ N}. The gap between the subspaces M and N is bδ (M, N) = max{δ(M, N), δ(N, M)}. To learn more on this notion, see [10, 13]. 3 The relationship between the (b, c)-inverse and A(2) T,S The main objective of this section is to prove that given a Banach space X, the (B, C)-inverse in L(X) consists in a reformulation of the outer inverse A(2) T,S , in other words, the outer inverse introduced in [8, Definition 1.3] is an extension to semigroups of the outer inverse with prescribed range and null space. 4 First an equivalent formulation of Definition 2.1 will be given in the context of Banach space operators. To this end, however, some preparation is needed. In the following remark a particular operator will be introduced. Remark 3.1. Recall that given a Banach space X, a necessary and sufficient condition for F ∈ L(X) to be a regular operator is that N(F ) and R(F ) are closed and complemented susbpsaces of X. Suppose that F ∈ L(X) satisfies this condition and let N and M be two subspaces of X such that N(F ) ⊕ N = X = R(F ) ⊕ M. Consider the isomorphism F1 = F R(F ) follows: N : N → R(F ) and define the map SF ∈ L(X) as SF M = 0, SF R(F )= ιN,XF −1 1 , where ιN,X : N → X is the inclusion map. The operator SF ∈ L(X) will be used in the proofs of the next results. Lemma 3.2. Let X be a Banach space and consider F ∈ L(X) a regular operator and SF ∈ L(X) the map defined in Remark 3.1. The following statements hold. (i) If X ∈ L(X) is such that R(X) = R(F ), then X = F SF X. (ii) If X ∈ L(X) is such that N(X) = N(F ), then X = XSF F . Proof. Note that F SF R(F )= ιR(F ),X, where ιR(F ),X : R(F ) → X is the inclusion map. R(X) = R(F ), then X = F SF X. If Similarly, SF F N= ιN,X, where N is the subspace of X considered in Remak 3.1. If N(X) = N(F ), then since N(F ) ⊕ N = X, X = XSF F . The following proposition is a key step in the reformulation of Definition 2.1 for Banach space operators. Proposition 3.3. Let X be a Banach space and consider two regular operators F , G ∈ L(X). (i) A necessary and sufficient condition for F L(X) = G L(X) is that R(F ) = R(G). (ii) L(X)F = L(X)G if and only if N(F ) = N(G). Proof. If there exist U , V ∈ L(X) such that F = GU and G = F V , then R(F ) = R(G). On the other hand, if R(F ) = R(G), then according to Lemma 3.2 (i), G = F SF G and F = GSGF , which implies that F L(X) = G L(X). A similar argument, using in particular Lemma 3.2 (ii), proves the second statement. Theorem 3.4. Let X be a Banach space and consider two regular operators B, C ∈ L(X). The following statements are equivalent. (i) The operator A ∈ L(X) is (B, C)-invertible. (ii) There exists a bounded and linear map X ∈ L(X) such that B = XAB, C = CAX, R(X) = B, N(X) = N(C). 5 Moreover, in this case X = A−(B,C). Proof. According to Definition 2.1, if the (B, C)-inverse of A exists, then there are X, T1 and T2 ∈ L(X) such that B = XAB, C = CAX, X = BT1, X = T2C. In particular, R(B) = R(X) and N(X) = N(C). On the other hand, suppose that statement (ii) holds. Since B (respectively C) is regular and R(X) = R(B) (respectively N(X) = N(C)), according to Lemma 3.2, X = BSBX (respectively X = XSC C), where SB (respectively SC) is the operator considered in Remark 3.1. Therefore, X ∈ B L(X)X ∩ X L(X)C. Since the (B, C)-inverse is unique, when it exists, X = A−(B,C). Next the main result of this section will be proved Theorem 3.5. Let X be a Banach space and consider two regular operators B, C ∈ L(X). The following statements are equivalent. (i) The operator A ∈ L(X) is (B, C)-invertible. (ii) There exists X ∈ L(X) such that X = XAX, R(X) = R(B) and N(X) = N(C). (iii) The outer inverse A(2) R(B),N(C) exists. (iv) A R(AB) R(B) : R(B) → R(AB) is invertible and R(AB) ⊕ N(C) = X. Furthermore, in this case A−(B,C) = X = A(2) R(B),N (C). Proof. According to [8, Proposition 6.1], statement (i) is equivalent to the fact that there exists an operator X ∈ L(X) such that X is an outer inverse of A, X L(X) = B L(X) and L(X)X = L(X)C. However, according to the proof of Theorem 3.4, these conditions are equivalent to statement (ii). In addition, since the (B, C)-inverse is unique, when it exists, X = A−(B,C). Statement (ii) and (iii) are equivalent; moreover X = A(2) To prove the equivalence between statements (iii) and (iv), apply [18, Lemma 1] and recall that, since B and C are regular, R(B) and N(C) are closed and complemented subspaces of X. R(B), N(C) ([18, Lemma 1]). Note that Theorem 3.5 was proved for square matrices in [25, Theorem 1.5]. The following results will be derived from what has been proved. Corollary 3.6. Let X be a Banach space and consider A, B, C ∈ L(X) such that B and C are regular. The following statements are equivalent. (i) A−(B,C) exists. (ii) A−(F,G) exists for any F , G ∈ L(X), F ,G regular, such that R(F ) = R(B) and N(G) = N(C). (iii) The Bott-Duffin inverse A−(P,Q) exists for any P , Q ∈ L(X)• such that R(P ) = R(B) and N(Q) = N(C). 6 Furthermore, in this case, A−(B,C) = A−(F,G) = A−(P,Q). Proof. Apply Theorem 3.5. Note that Corollary 3.6 can be rephrased using the outer inverse A(2) T,S. Remark 3.7. Let X be a Banach space and consider S and T two closed and complemented subspaces of X. Let A ∈ L(X). The following statement are equivalent. (i) The outer inverse A(2) T,S exists. (ii) A−(B,C) exists for any B, C ∈ L(X), B, C regular, such that R(B) = T and N(C) = S. (iii) The Bott-Duffin inverse A−(P,Q) exists for any P , Q ∈ L(X)• such that R(P ) = T and N(Q) = S. Moreover, in this case A(2) The proof of the equivalence among statements (i)-(iii) and the last identity can be derived from Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.6. T,S = A−(B,C) = A−(P,Q). It is worth noticing, as it has been mentioned in the first paragraph of this section, that Theorem 3.5 and Remark 3.7 show that in L(X), X a Banach space, the (B, C)-inverse is a reformulation of A(2) T,S , so that [8, Definition 1.3] consists in an extension of the latter outer inverse to semigroups. In fact, given A ∈ L(X), A(2) T,S and the (B, C)-inverse of A ∈ L(X) refer to the same object -under the conditions of Theorem 3.5 and Remark 3.7, but it could be said that the former outer inverse is defined from a spatial point of view while the latter from an algebraic point of view. Actually, in the first case subspaces of an underlying space (a Banach space X or Cn, n ∈ N) are used in the definition, but in the second only elements of a semigroup can be considered; precisely, in L(X) it is possible to associate two specific subspaces to any element of this algebra -the range and the null space, which leads to the aforementioned results. Next the inverse along an operator will be considered. Corollary 3.8. Let X be a Banach space and consider A, D ∈ L(X) such that D is regular. The following statements are equivalent. (i) A−D exists. (ii) There exists X ∈ L(X) such that XAD = D = DAX, R(X) = R(D) and N(X) = N(D). (iii) There exists Y ∈ L(X) such that Y is an outer inverse of A, R(Y ) = R(D) and N(Y ) = N(D). (iv) The outer inverse A(2) R(D),N(D) exists. (v) A R(AD) R(D) : R(D) → R(AD) is invertible and R(AD) ⊕ N(D) = X. (vi) A−F exists for all F ∈ L(X) such that F is regular, R(F ) = R(D) and N(F ) = N(D). Moreover, in this case, A−D = X = Y = A(2) R(D),N(D) = A−F . 7 Proof. Recall that according to [8, Proposition 6.1], A−D = A−(D,D), when one of these outer inverses exists. Apply now Theorem 3.4, Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.6. In the following proposition the Banach algebra case will be considered. Proposition 3.9. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider a, b, c ∈ A such that b and c are regular. The following statements hold. (i) If a−(b,c) exists, then La−(b,c) = L−(Lb,Lc) a = (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) ∈ L(A). (ii) Suppose that L−(Lb,Lc) a = (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) ∈ L(A) exists and there is z ∈ A such that (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) = Lz. Then, a−(b,c) exists and a−(b,c) = z. (iii) If a−(b,c) exists, then Ra−(b,c) = R−(Rc,Rb) a = (Ra)(2) Ac,b−1(0) ∈ L(A). (iv) Suppose that R−(Rc,Rb) a = (Ra)(2) Ac,b−1(0) ∈ L(A) exists and there is w ∈ A such that (Ra)(2) Ac,b−1(0) = Rw. Then, a−(b,c) exists and a−(b,c) = w. Proof. Recall that according to [8, Proposition 6.1], necessary and sufficient for a−(b,c) to exist is that a has an outer inverse, say y (y = a−(b,c)), such that yA = bA and Ay = Ac. Thus, if a−(b,c) exists, then La−(b,c) ∈ L(A) is an outer inverse of La ∈ L(A) such that R(La−(b,c)) = a−(b,c)A = bA = R(Lb), N(La−(b,c) ) = (a−(b,c))−1(0). However, note that (a−(b,c))−1(0) = c−1(0) = N(Lc). In fact, since Aa−(b,c) = Ac, there exist u1, v1 ∈ A such that a−(b,c) = u1c and c = v1a−(b,c), which implies that (a−(b,c))−1(0) = c−1(0). Therefore, according to [18, Lemma 1] and Theorem 3.5, La−(b,c) = (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) = L−(Lb,Lc) a . Now suppose that statement (ii) holds. Note that according to Theorem 3.5, L−(Lb,Lc) ∈ bA,c−1(0) ∈ L(A) exists; moreover, in this case, both maps a L(A) exists if and only if (La)(2) coincide. Since (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) ∈ L(A) is an outer inverse of La ∈ L(A), z is an outer inverse of a. In addition, zA = R(Lz) = R((La)(2) z−1(0) = N(Lz) = N((La)(2) bA,c−1(0)) = bA, bA,c−1(0)) = c−1(0). However, since c and z are regular, according to [1, Proposition 3.1 (b) (iii)], Az = Ac. Consequently, according to [8, Proposition 6.1], a−(b,c) exists and a−(b,c) = z. 8 As in the proof of statement (i), if a−(b,c) exists, then Ra−(b,c) is an outer inverse of Ra ∈ L(A) such that R(Ra−(b,c)) = Aa−(b,c) = Ac = R(Rc), N(Ra−(b,c)) = (a−(b,c))−1(0). However, since bA = a−(b,c)A, there exist u2, v2 ∈ A such that b = a−(b,c)u2 and a−(b,c) = bv2, which implies that (a−(b,c))−1(0) = b−1(0) = N(Rb). Therefore, according to [18, Lemma 1] and Theorem 3.5, statement (iii) holds. If statement (iv) holds, then as in the proof of statement (ii), observe that according to Ac,b−1(0) exists; moreover, in this case, Ac,b−1(0) ∈ L(A) is an outer inverse of Ra ∈ L(A), Theorem 3.5, R−(Rc,Rb) both maps coincide. Furthermore, since (Ra)(2) w is an outer inverse of a. In addition, ∈ L(A) exists if and only if (Ra)(2) a Aw = R(Rw) = R((Ra)(2) w−1(0) = N(Rw) = N((Ra)(2) Ac,b1−1(0)) = Ac, Ac,b−1(0)) = b−1(0). However, since b and w are regular, according to [1, Proposition 3.1 (b) (iv)], wA = bA. Hence, according to [8, Proposition 6.1], a−(b,c) exists and a−(b,c) = w. 4 Openness Given an unitary Banach algebra A, A−1 ⊂ A is an open set. In this section the set of all (b, c)-invertible elements (b, c ∈ A) will be proved to be open. Similar results will be presented for the inverse along an element and the outer inverse A(2) T,S . Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider b, c ∈ A. Let A−(b,c) be the set of all (b, c)-invertible elements of A, i.e., A−(b,c) = {a ∈ A : a−(b,c) exists}. Recall that if b or c is not regular, then A−(b,c) = ∅ ([4, Remark 2.2 (iii)]). In addition, note that if b = 0 = c, then A−(b,c) = A. In fact, in this case, given a ∈ A, a−(b,c) = 0 satisfies Definition 2.1. Moreover, if b = 0 and c ∈ A is such that c 6= 0 (respectively if b ∈ A is such that b 6= 0 and c = 0), according to Definition 2.1, then A−(b,c) = ∅. Actually, if b = 0 (respectively c = 0) and a−(b,c) exists, then a−(b,c) = 0, which is impossible, for c 6= 0 (respectively b 6= 0). In the following theorem the set A−(b,c) will be proved to be open. Theorem 4.1. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider b, c ∈ A. Then A−(b,c) is an open set. Furthermore, if b, c ∈ A \ {0}, a ∈ A−(b,c) and e ∈ A is such that k e k< , then a + e ∈ A−(b,c) and ka−(b,c)k 1 (a + e)−(b,c) = (1 + a−(b,c)e)−1a−(b,c) = a−(b,c)(1 + ea−(b,c))−1. 9 Proof. According to what has been said in the first paragraph of this section, it is enough to consider the case b, c ∈ A \ {0}. Recall, in addition, that under this hypothesis, a−(b,c) 6= 0. In fact, according to Definition 2.1, a−(b,c) = 0 implies that b = 0 = c. Moreover, note also that since k a−(b,c)e k< 1 (respectively k ea−(b,c) k< 1), 1 + a−(b,c)e ∈ A−1 (respectively 1 + ea−(b,c) ∈ A−1). Consider the operators La, La−(b,c), Le ∈ L(A). According to Proposition 3.9 (i), La−(b,c) = bA,c−1(0). Now, since A is a unitary algebra, (La)(2) k (La)(2) bA,c−1(0) kk Le k=k a−(b,c) kk e k< 1. Thus, according to [10, Lemma 3.4], (La+e)(2) bA,c−1(0) exists and (La+e)(2) bA,c−1(0) = (I + La−(b,c) Le)−1La−(b,c) = La−(b,c)(I + LeLa−(b,c))−1. However, (I + La−(b,c) Le)−1 = L(1+a−(b,c)e)−1 , (I + LeLa−(b,c))−1 = L(1+ea−(b,c))−1 . Consequently, (1 + a−(b,c)e)−1a−(b,c) = a−(b,c)(1 + ea−(b,c))−1. Set f = (1 + a−(b,c)e)−1a−(b,c) = a−(b,c)(1 + ea−(b,c))−1. Since (La+e)(2) bA,c−1(0) = Lf , according to Proposition 3.9 (ii), (a + e)−(b,c) exists and (a + e)−(b,c) = f . In the following theorem the case of the inverse along an element will be presented. To this end, given a unitary Banach algebra A, let A−d be the set of all elements of A invertible along d ∈ A, i.e., A−d = {a ∈ A : a−d exists}. Theorem 4.2. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider d ∈ A. Then A−d is an open set. Furthermore, if d ∈ A \ {0}, a ∈ A−d and e ∈ A is such that k e k< 1 , then a + e ∈ A−d and ka−dk (a + e)−d = (1 + a−de)−1a−d = a−d(1 + ea−d)−1. Proof. Note that according to [8, Proposition 6.1], A−d = A−(d,d). Now apply Theorem 4.1. For sake of completeness, the case of the outer inverse with prescribed range and null space will be considered. Let T and S be two closed subspace of the Banach spaces X and Y, T,S will stand for the set of all operators defined on X with values in Y respectivley. whose outer inverse with range T and null space S exists, i.e., L(X, Y)(2) L(X, Y)(2) T,S = {A ∈ L(X, Y) : A(2) T,S exists}. Theorem 4.3. Let X and Y be two Banach spaces and consider T and S two closed subspaces of X and Y, respectively. Then, L(X, Y)(2) T,S is an open set. Proof. According to [18, Lemma 1], if T or S is not a complemented subspaces of X and Y respectively, then L(X, Y)(2) T,S = ∅. On the other hand, note that if A ∈ L(X, Y) is such that T,S exists and A(2) A(2) 0,Y = L(X, Y). In fact, given A ∈ L(X, Y), A(2) T,S = 0, then T = 0 and S = Y. In addition, in this case, L(X, Y)(2) 0,Y = 0. To end the proof, apply [10, Lemma 3.4]. 10 5 Continuity of the (b, c)-inverse Recall that the notion of the gap between subspaces was used to study the continuity of the Moore-Penrose inverse ([27]) and the Drazin inverse ([17, 28]) in the Banach context. In this section the aforementioned notion will be used to characterize the continuity of the (b, c)- inverse for Banach space operators and Banach algebra elements. Another notion that will be central to present more characterizations will be the Moore-Penrose inverse. First a particular case will be presented. n n n n n n n n ) = R(A−(Bn,Cn) n = 0. In fact, if (A−(Bn,Cn) )n∈N converges to 0, then (A−(Bn,Cn) n An) 6= 0, then (δ(R(A−(Bn,Cn) = 0 for each n ≥ n0. The converse implication is evident. Remark 5.1. (i) Let X be a Banach space and consider A, B, C ∈ L(X) such that B and C are regular, A is (B, C)-invertible and A−(B,C) = 0. Let (An)n∈N ⊂ L(X) be such that (An)n∈N converges to A ∈ L(X), and suppose that there exist two sequence of operators (Bn)n∈N, (Cn)n∈N ⊂ L(X) such that for each n ∈ N, Bn and Cn are regular and An is (Bn, Cn)-invertible. Then, (A−(Bn,Cn) )n∈N converges to A−(B,C)(= 0) if and only if there exists n0 ∈ N such that for each n ≥ n0, A−(Bn,Cn) An)n∈N converges to 0, and according to [17, Lemma 3.3], (δ(R(A−(Bn,Cn) An), 0))n∈N converges to 0. However, according to the definition of the gap between two subspaces (see [13, Chapter 2, Section 2, Subsection 1]), if R(A−(Bn,Cn) An), 0)) = 1. Therefore, there exists n0 ∈ N such that for each n ≥ n0, R(A−(Bn,Cn) An) = 0. As a result, A−(Bn,Cn) (ii) Let A be a Banach algebra and consider a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A such that a is (b, c)- invertible and a−(b,c) = 0. Suppose that there exist three sequence (an)n∈N ⊂ A and (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N ⊂ A such that for each n ∈ N, an is (bn, cn)-invertible and (an)n∈N converges to a. Then, statement (i) can be extended to this case, i.e., necessary and sufficient for (a−(bn,cn) )n∈N to converge to a−(b,c)(= 0) is that there exists n0 ∈ N such that for all n ≥ n0, a−(bn,cn) = 0. Actually, to prove this equivalent condition, it is enough to apply statement (i) to La, L−(Lb,Lc) ∈ L(A) and (Lan)n∈N, (L = , see Proposition 3.9 (i)). Note that since A is a unitary Banach algebra, (an)n∈N L (respectively (a−(bn,cn) )n∈N) converges to a (respectively to a−(b,c)) if and only if (Lan )n∈N n )n∈N converges to La (respectively to La−(b,c)). (respectively (L a−(bn ,cn) n (iii) In the same conditions of statement (ii), note that according to Definition 2.1, a−(b,c) = 0 implies that b = 0 = c . Similarly, for each n ≥ n0, bn = 0 = cn, i.e., the fact that (a−(bn,cn) )n∈N converges to 0 determines the elements bn and cn for which an is (bn, cn)- invertible (n ≥ n0). Naturally, given a ∈ A−(0,0), a−(0,0) = 0. (iv) It is worth noticing that if A is a unitary Banach algebra, a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A are such that a is (b, c)-invertible with a−(b,c) 6= 0, then b 6= 0 and c 6= 0 (see Definition 2.1). −(Lbn ,Lcn ) an )n∈N ⊂ L(A), (L−(Lb,Lc) a a−(bn ,cn) n = La−(b,c), L −(Lbn ,Lcn ) an a n n n Now the continuity of the (b, c)-inverse will be studied using the gap between subspaces. Next follows the characterization of the continuity of (B, C)-invertible Banach space opera- tors. Theorem 5.2. Let X be a Banach space and consider A, B, C ∈ L(X) such that B and C are regular, A is (B, C)-invertible and A−(B,C) 6= 0. Suppose that there exist three sequences of operators (An)n∈N, (Bn)n∈N, (Cn)n∈N ⊂ L(X) such that for each n ∈ N, Bn and Cn are regular and An is (Bn, Cn)-invertible. If (An)n∈N converges to A, then the following statements are equivalent. 11 (i) The sequence (A−(Bn,Cn) n )n∈N converges to A−(B,C). (ii) The sequence (A−(Bn,Cn) n An)n∈N (respectively (AnA−(Bn,Cn) n (respectively to AA−(B,C)). )n∈N) converges to A−(B,C)A (iii) The sequence (A−(Bn,Cn) n (respectively to 0). An)n∈N (respectively (δ(N(Cn), N(C)))n∈N) converges to A−(B,C)A (iv) The sequence (AnA−(Bn,Cn) n )n∈N (respectively (δ(R(Bn), R(B)))n∈N) converges to AA−(B,C) (respectively to 0). (v) The sequences (δ(R(Bn), R(B)))n∈N and (δ(N(Cn), N(C)))n∈N converge to 0. (vi) The sequences (δ(R(A−(Bn,Cn) n ), R(A−(B,C))))n∈N and (δ(N(A−(Bn ,Cn) n ), N(A−(B,C))))n∈N converge to 0. Proof. It is evident that statement (i) implies statement (ii). Observe that, since A−(B,C) is an outer inverse of A and A−(Bn,Cn) n is an outer inverse of An (n ∈ N), according to Theorem 3.4, R(A−(B,C)A) = R(A−(B,C)) = R(B), R(A−(Bn,Cn) An) = R(A−(Bn,Cn) n N(AA−(B,C)) = N(A−(B,C)) = N(C), n ) = R(Bn), N(AnA−(Bn,Cn) n ) = N(A−(Bn,Cn) n ) = N(Cn). Consequently, according to [17, Lemma 3.3], statment (ii) implies statement (iii), which in turn implies statement (v). In addition, applying again [17, Lemma 3.3], statement (ii) also implies statement (iv), which in turn implies statement (v). Note also that statement (vi) is an equivalent formulation of statement (v) (Theorem 3.5). Suppose that statement (vi) holds. According to Theorem 3.5, A−(Bn,Cn) n = An (2) R(Bn),N (Cn), A−(B,C) = A(2) R(B),N (C). Let κ =k A kk A−(B,C) k and consider n0 ∈ N such that for all n ≥ n0, un = δ(N(Cn), N(C)) < 1 3 + κ , vn = δ(R(Bn), R(B)) < 1 (1 + κ)2 , zn =k A−(B,C) kk A − An k< 2κ (1 + κ)(4 + κ) . Thus, according to [10, Theorem 3.5], k A−(Bn,Cn) n − A−(B,C) k≤ (1 + κ)(vn + un) + (1 + un)zn 1 − (1 + κ)vn − κun − (1 + un)zn k A−(B,C) k, which implies statement (i). Next the Banach algebra case will be considered. Theorem 5.3. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A such that a is (b, c)-invertible and a−(b,c) 6= 0. Suppose that there exist three sequences (an)n∈N ⊂ A and (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N ⊂ A such that an is (bn, cn)-invertible, for each n ∈ N. If (an)n∈N converges to a, then the following statements are equivalent. 12 (i) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converges to a−(b,c). (ii) The sequences (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N and (ana−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converge to a−(b,c)a and aa−(b,c), respectively. (iii) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N (respectively (δ((cn)−1(0), c−1(0)))n∈N) converges to a−(b,c)a (respectively to 0). (iv) The sequence (ana−(bn,cn) n )n∈N (respectively (δ(bnA, bA))n∈N) converges to aa−(b,c) (re- spectively to 0). (v) The sequences (δ(bnA, bA))n∈N and (δ((cn)−1(0), c−1(0)))n∈N converge to 0. (vi) The sequences (δ(a−(bn,cn) n A, a−(b,c)A))n∈N and (δ((a−(bn,cn) n )−1(0), (a−(b,c))−1(0)))n∈N con- verge to 0. (vii) The sequence (ana−(bn,cn) n (respectively to 0). )n∈N (respectively (δ((bn)−1(0), b−1(0)))n∈N) converges to aa−(b,c) (viii) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N (respectively (δ(Acn, Ac))n∈N) converges to a−(b,c)a (re- spectively to 0). (ix) The sequences (δ(Acn, Ac))n∈N and (δ((bn)−1(0), b−1(0)))n∈N converge to 0. (x) The sequences (δ(Aa−(bn,cn) n , Aa−(b,c)))n∈N and (δ((a−(bn,cn) n )−1(0), (a−(b,c))−1(0)))n∈N con- verge to 0. Proof. Recall that, according to Proposition 3.9 (i), La−(b,c) = L−(Lb,Lc) a = (La)(2) bA,c−1(0), L a−(bn ,cn) n = L −(Lbn ,Lcn ) an = (Lan)(2) bnA,cn −1(0), for each n ∈ N. In addition, note that since A is a unitary Banach algebra, (an)n∈N converges to a if and only if (Lan )n∈N converges to La. Similarly, a necessary and sufficient condition for (a−(bn,cn) )n∈N) to converge to a−(b,c) (respectively to a−(b,c)a and aa−(b,c)) is that (L Lan)n∈N and (Lan L )n∈N) converges to La−(b,c) (respectively to La−(b,c) La and LaLa−(b,c)). )n∈N (respectively for (a−(bn,cn) an)n∈N and (ana−(bn,cn) )n∈N (respectively (L a−(bn ,cn) n a−(bn ,cn) n n n n a−(bn ,cn) n Now, to prove the equivalence between statements (i)-(vi), apply Theorem 5.2 to La and (Lan)n∈N. Recall that according to the proof of Proposition 3.9, c−1(0) = (a−(b,c))−1(0) and n (0) = (a−(bn,cn) c−1 )−1(0). n A similar argument, using in particular Proposition 3.9 (iii) and Theorem 5.2, proves the equivalence between statements (i), (ii) and (vii)-(x). Next the continuity of the (b, c)-inverse will be characterized using the Moore-Penrose inverse. Theorem 5.4. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A† such that a is (b, c)-invertible and a−(b,c) 6= 0. Suppose that there exist three sequences (an)n∈N ⊂ A and (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N ⊂ A† such that an is (bn, cn)-invertible, for each n ∈ N. If (an)n∈N converges to a, then the following statements are equivalent. 13 (i) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converges to a−(b,c). (ii) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N converges to a−(b,c)a and the sequences (c†c(1 − c† ncn))n∈N, (c† ncn(1 − c†c))n∈N converge to 0. (iii) The sequence (ana−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converges to aa−(b,c) and the sequences ((1 − bb†)bnb† n)n∈N, ((1 − bnb† n)bb†)n∈N converge to 0. (iv) The sequences ((1 − bb†)bnb† (c†c(1 − c† n)n∈N, ncn))n∈N, ((1 − bnb† (c† n)bb†)n∈N, ncn(1 − c†c))n∈N converge to 0. (v) The sequence (ana−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converges to aa−(b,c) and the sequences (bb†(1 − bnb† n))n∈N, (bnb† n(1 − bb†))n∈N converge to 0. (vi) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N converge to a−(b,c)a and the sequences ((1 − c†c)c† ncn)n∈N, ((1 − c† ncn)c†c)n∈N converge to 0. (vii) The sequences (bb†(1 − bnb† ((1 − c†c)c† n))n∈N, ncn)n∈N, (bnb† ((1 − c† n(1 − bb†))n∈N, ncn)c†c)n∈N converge to 0. (viii) The sequences (bnb† n)n∈N and (c† ncn)n∈N converge to bb† and c†c, respectively. 14 Proof. Note that bA = bb†A, Ac = Ac†c, bnA = bnb† Acn = Ac† nA, nc, c−1(0) = (1 − c†c)A, b−1(0) = A(1 − bb†), c−1 n (0) = (1 − c† ncn)A, (bn)−1(0) = A(1 − bnb† n). Since A is a unitary Banach algebra, according to [27, Lemma 2.2], n k, k (1 − bnb† n)bb† k}, δ(bnA, bA) = max{k (1 − bb†)bnb† δ((cn)−1(0), c−1(0)) = max{k c†c(1 − c† δ((bn)−1(0), b−1(0)) = max{k bb†(1 − bnb† δ(Acn, Ac) = max{k (1 − c†c)c† ncn) k, k c† ncn(1 − c†c k}, n) k, k bnb† n(1 − bb†)} k}, ncn k, k (1 − c† ncn)c†c k}. Now, to prove the equivalence among statements (i)-(vii), apply Theorem 5.3 and use the identities that have been proved. Suppose that statement (i) holds. Observe that bnb† n = bb†bnb† nbb† + bb†bnb† n(1 − bb†) + (1 − bb†)bnb† nbb† + (1 − bb†)bnb† n(1 − bb†). Thus, according to statements (iv) and (vii), if fn = bb†bnb† n(1 − bb†) + (1 − bb†)bnb† nbb† + (1 − bb†)bnb† n(1 − bb†), then the sequence (fn)n∈N converges to 0. sequence (bb†(1 − bnb† to bb†. Therefore, (bnb† converges to c†c. n)bb†)n∈N converges to 0, which implies that (bb†bnb† n)n∈N converges to bb†. A similar argument proves that (c† In addition, according to statement (vii), the nbb†)n∈N convergs ncn)n∈N It is evident that statement (viii) implies statement (vii). In the following corollary, a particular case will be presented. Corollary 5.5. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A† such that a is (b, c)-invertible and a−(b,c) 6= 0. Suppose that there exist three sequences (an)n∈N ⊂ A and (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N ⊂ A† such that an is (bn, cn)-invertible, for each n ∈ N. Suppose, in addition, that the sequences (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N, (b† n)n∈N converge to b, c, b† and c†, respectively. Then, if (an)n∈N converges to a, the sequence (a−(bn,cn) )n∈N converges to a−(b,c). n)n∈N and (c† n Proof. Apply Theorem 5.4 (viii). In the context of C ∗-algebras, Theorem 5.4 and Corollary 5.5 can be reformulated as follows. Theorem 5.6. Let A be a C ∗-algebra and consider a ∈ A and b, c ∈ A such that a is (b, c)- invertible and a−(b,c) 6= 0. Suppose that there exist three sequences (an)n∈N ⊂ A and (bn)n∈N, (cn)n∈N ⊂ A such that an is (bn, cn)-invertible, for each n ∈ N. If (an)n∈N converges to a, then the following statements are equivalent. 15 (i) The sequence (a−(bn,cn) n )n∈N converges to a−(b,c). (ii) The sequences (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N and (c† ncn)n∈N converge to a−(b,c)a and c†c, respectively. (iii) The sequences (ana−(bn,cn) n )n∈N and (bnb† n)n∈N converge to aa−(b,c) and bb†, respectively. (iv) The sequences (bnb† In addition, if the sequence (bn)n∈N converges to b, then statement (iii) is equivalent to: ncn)n∈N converge to bb† and c†c, respectively. n)n∈N and (c† (v) the sequences (ana−(bn,cn) Moreover, if the sequence (cn)n∈N converge to c, then statement (ii) is equivalent to: n)n∈N converge to aa−(b,c) and b†, respectively. )n∈N and (b† n (vi) the sequences (a−(bn,cn) n an)n∈N and (c† n)n∈N converge to a−(b,c)a and c†, respectively. Furthermore, if the sequences (bn)n∈N and (cn)n∈N converge to b and c, respectively, then statement (iv) is equivalent to: (vii) the sequences (b† n)n∈N and (c† n)n∈N converge to b† and c†, respectively. Proof. Note that since ((1 − bb†)bnb† n)∗ = bnb† n(1 − bb†), ((1 − bnb† n)bb†)∗ = bb†(1 − bnb† n), according to the proof of statement (vii) implies statement (viii) in Theorem 5.4, statement (iii) is equivalent to Theorem 5.4 (iii). Now observe that, (c†c(1 − c† ncn))∗ = (1 − c† ncn)c†c, (c† ncn(1 − c†c))∗ = (1 − c†c)c† ncn. Then, a similar argument proves that statement (ii) is equivalent to Theorem 5.4 (ii). To prove statements (v)-(vii), apply [16, Theorem 1.6]. Since the inverse along an element is a particular case of the (b, c)-inverse, it is possible to apply the results of this section to obtain characterizations of the continuity of the in- verse along an element for Banach space operators and for Banach algebra and C ∗-algebra elements. In fact, given a Banach algebra (or a C ∗-algebra) A, a ∈ A and d ∈ A, to state the aforementioned characterizations, it is enough to apply the corresponding result to the (d, d)-inverse (see section 2); in the Banach operator case it is possible to proceed in a similar way. In order not to extend unnecessarily this work, these results will not be stated; the details are left to the interested reader. To end this section, as an application, characterizations of the continuity of the Moore- Penrose inverse in the contexts of Banch algebras and Banach space operators will be given; in the former frame, compare with [27, Theorem 2.5]. Corollary 5.7. Let A be a unitary Banach algebra and consider a ∈ A† \ 0. Suppose that there exists a sequence (an)n∈N ⊂ A† such that (an)n∈N converges to a. Then the following statements are equivalent. 16 (i) The sequence (a† n)n∈N converges to a†. (ii) The sequence (a† nan)n∈N converges to a†a and the sequences (aa†(1 − ana† n))n∈N, (ana† n(1 − aa†))n∈N converge to 0. (iii) The sequence (ana† n)n∈N converges to aa† and the sequences ((1 − a†a)a† nan)n∈N, ((1 − a† nan)a†a)n∈N converge to 0. (iv) The sequences ((1 − a†a)a† (aa†(1 − ana† nan)n∈N, n))n∈N, ((1 − a† (ana† nan)a†a)n∈N, n(1 − aa†))n∈N converge to 0. (v) The sequence (ana† n)n∈N converges to aa† and the sequences (a†a(1 − a† nan))n∈N, (a† nan(1 − a†a))n∈N converge to 0. (vi) The sequence (a† nan)n∈N converge to a†a and the sequences ((1 − aa†)ana† n)n∈N, ((1 − ana† n)aa†)n∈N converge to 0. (vii) The sequences (a†a(1 − a† ((1 − aa†)ana† nan))n∈N, n)n∈N, (a† ((1 − ana† nan(1 − a†a))n∈N, n)aa†)n∈N converge to 0. (viii) The sequences (a† nan)n∈N and (ana† n)n∈N converge to a†a and aa†, respectively. Proof. According to [8, Proposition 6.1], given x ∈ A†, x† = x−(x†,x†). To conclude the proof, apply Theorem 5.4 to a, b = c = a†, an and bn = cn = a† n (n ∈ N). Note that if x ∈ A†, then x† ∈ A† and (x†)† = x. 17 Remark 5.8. In the same conditions of Corollary 5.7, note that according to [27, Lemma 2.2], n δ(R(La† δ(N(L δ(N(R δ(R(R a† n a† n ), R(La† )) = δ(a† ), N(La† )) = δ((a† ), N(Ra† )) = δ((a† ), R(Ra† )) = δ(Aa† nA, a†A) = max{k (1 − a†a)a† n)−1(0), (a†)−1(0)) = max{k aa†(1 − ana† n)−1(0), (a†)−1(0)) = max{k a†a(1 − a† n, Aa†) = max{k (1 − aa†)ana† a† n n k, k (1 − ana† n)aa† k}. nan k, k (1 − a† nan)a†a} k}, n) k, k ana† n(1 − aa†) k}, nan(1 − a†a) k}, nan) k, k a† Compare Corollary 5.7 with [27, Theorem 2.5]. Corollary 5.9. Let X be a Banach space and consider a Moore-Penrose invertible operator A ∈ L(X), A 6= 0. Suppose that there exists a sequence of operators (An)n∈N such that for each n ∈ N, An is Moore-Penrose invertible. If (An)n∈N converges to A, then the following statements are equivalent. (i) The sequence (A† n)n∈N converges to A†. (ii) The sequence (A† nAn)n∈N (respectively (AnA† n)n∈N) converges to A†A (respectively to AA†). (iii) The sequence (A† nAn)n∈N (respectively (δ(N(A† n), N(A†)))n∈N) converges to A†A (respec- tively to 0). (iv) The sequence (AnA† n)n∈N (respectively (δ(R(A† n), R(A†)))n∈N) converges to AA† (respec- tively to 0). (v) The sequences (δ(R(A† n), R(A†)))n∈N and (δ(N(A† n), N(A†)))n∈N converge to 0. Proof. Proceed as in the proof of Corollary 5.7 and apply Theorem 5.2. 6 Differentiation of the (b, c)-inverse Next follows the first characterization of this section. Observe that if A is a Banach algebra, J ⊆ R and there exist functions a : J → A and b, c : J → A such that for each t ∈ J, a(t)−(b(t),c(t)) exists, then a−(b,c) : J → A is the following funciton: a−(b,c)(t) = a(t)−(b(t),c(t)). Theorem 6.1. Let A be a Banach algebra and consider a function a : J → A, where J ⊆ R is an open set. Let b, c : J → A be two functions such that for each t ∈ J , a(t)−(b(t),c(t)) exists. Suppose that there exist functions g, h : J → A such that for each t ∈ J , g(t) ∈ b(t){1} and h(t) ∈ c(t){1}. Then, given t0 ∈ J , if the functions a, bg, hc : J → A are differentiable at t0, the following statements are equivalent. (i) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is continuous at t0. (ii) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is differentiable at t0. 18 Moreover, in this case, (a−(b,c))′(t0) =a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))(hc)′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − (1 − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a(t0))(bg)′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)). Proof. It is enough to prove that statement (i) implies statement (ii). This proof can be deduced from [4, Corollary 7.12]. In fact, according to this result, a(t)−(b(t),c(t)) − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) = a(t)−(b(t),c(t))(hc(t) − hc(t0))a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − (1 − a(t)−(b(t),c(t))a(t))(bg(t) − bg(t0))a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) + a(t)−(b(t),c(t))(a(t0) − a(t))a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)). Now divide each term by t − t0 and note that the limt leads the formula of (a−(b,c))′(t0). When the function b and c in Theorem 6.1 are such that b(J) ⊆ A† and c(J) ⊆ A†, the aforementioned result can be reformulated as follows. Note first that if A is a Banach algebra and x : J → A† is a function (J ⊆ R), then x† : J → A denotes the following function: x†(t) = (x(t))†. Corollary 6.2. Let A be a Banach algebra and consider a function a : J → A, where J ⊆ R is an open set. Let b, c : J → A† be two functions such that for each t ∈ J , a(t)−(b(t),c(t)) exists. Then, given t0 ∈ J , if the functions a, bb†, c†c : J → A are differentiable at t0, the following statements are equivalent. (i) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is continuous at t0. (ii) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is differentiable at t0. Moreover, in this case, (a−(b,c))′(t0) =a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))(c†c)′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − (1 − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a(t0))(bb†)′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)). Proof. Apply Theorem 6.1 to the case under consideration. As an application of Theorem 6.1, a characterization of the differentiability of the Moore- Penrose inverse in the Banach context will be given. Corollary 6.3. Let A be a Banach algebra and consider a function a : J → A†, where J ⊆ R is an open set. Suppose that there exists t0 ∈ J such that the function a : J → A is differentiable at t0. Then, the following statements are equivalent. (i) The function a† : J → A is differentiable at t0. 19 (ii) The function a† : J → A is continuous at t0 and the functions aa†, a†a : J → A are differentiable at t0. Furthermore, in this case, (a†)′(t0) =a†(t0)(aa†)′(t0)a†(t0) − (1 − a†a(t0))(a†a)′(t0)a†(t0) − a†(t0)a′(t0)a†(t0). Proof. Recall that given x ∈ A†, x† = x−(x†,x†) ([8, Propostion 6.1])). To conclude the proof apply Theorem 6.1 to the function a, b, c : J → A, where b = c = a†. In the frame of C ∗-algebras, the hypotheses of Corollary 6.2 can be lightened. Corollary 6.4. Let A be a C ∗-algebra and consider a function a : J → A, where J ⊆ R is an open set. Let b, c : J → A be two functions such that for each t ∈ J , a(t)−(b(t),c(t)) exists. Then, given t0 ∈ J , if the functions a, b, c : J → A are differentiable at t0, the functions b†, c† : J → A are continuous at t0, and a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) 6= 0, the following statements are equivalent. (i) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is continuous at t0. (ii) The funciton a−(b,c) : J → A is differentiable at t0. Moreover, in this case, (a−(b,c))′(t0) =a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))((c†)′(t0)c(t0) + c†(t0)c′(t0))a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − (1 − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a(t0))(b′(t0)b†(t0) + b(t0)(b†)′(t0))a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) − a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0))a′(t0)a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)). Proof. Note that the condition a(t0)−(b(t0),c(t0)) 6= 0 implies that b(t0) 6= 0 and c(t0) 6= 0 (Definition 2.1). Thus, according to [16, Theorem 2.1], the functions b†, c† : J → A are differentiable at t0. To conclude the proof, apply Corollary 6.2. As in section 5, the results concerning the differentiability of the inverse along an element can be deduced from Theorem 6.1, Corollary 6.3 and Corollary 6.4. The details are left to the interested reader. 7 The outer inverse A(2) T,S Although similar arguments to the ones used in sections 5 and 6 will be applied to study the continuity and the differentiability of the outer inverse A(2) T,S , the results of this section can not be derived from the corresponding ones concerning the (b, c)-inverse. In fact, in what follows operators between two different Banach spaces will be considered. First the gap between subspaces will be used to characterize the continity of the A(2) T,S . Theorem 7.1. Let X and Y be Banach spaces and consider A ∈ L(X, Y) and two subspaces T ⊆ X and S ⊆ Y such that A(2) T,S exists. Let (An)n∈N ⊂ L(X, Y) and consider (Tn)n∈N and (Sn)n∈N two sequences of subspaces of X and Y, respectively, such that (An)(2) exists, for each n ∈ N. Suppose that (An)n∈N converges to A. The following statements are equivalent. Tn,Sn 20 (i) The sequence ((An)(2) Tn,Sn )n∈N converges to A(2) T,S. (ii) The sequences ((An)(2) Tn,Sn An)n∈N and (An(An)(2) Tn,Sn )n∈N converge to A(2) T,SA and AA(2) T,S, respectively. (iii) The sequence ((An)(2) Tn,Sn tively to 0). An)n∈N (respectively (δ(Sn, S))n∈N) converges to A(2) T,SA (respec- (iv) The sequence (An(An)(2) Tn,Sn tively to 0). )n∈N (respectively (δ(Tn, T))n∈N) converges to AA(2) T,S (respec- (v) The sequences (δ(Tn, T))n∈N and (δ(Sn, S))n∈N converge to 0. Proof. First define P = AA(2) T,S, Pn = An(An)(2) Tn,Sn , Q = A(2) T,SA, Qn = (An)(2) Tn,Sn An (P , Pn ∈ L(Y)• and Q, Qn ∈ L(X)•, n ∈ N). Note that R(Q) = T, R(Qn) = Tn, N(P ) = S, N(Pn) = Sn. Suppose that statement (v) holds. If A(2) It is evident that statement (i) implies statement (ii). Now, according to [17, Lemma 3.3], if (Pn)n∈N converges to P (respectively (Qn)n∈N con- verges to Q), then (δ(Sn, S))n∈N (respectively (δ(Tn, T))n∈N) converges to 0. Thus, statement (ii) implies statement (iii) (respectively statement (iv)), which in turn implies statement (v). T,S = 0, then T = 0 and S = Y. In particular, (δ(Tn, 0))n∈N converges to 0. However, according to [13, Chapter 2, Section 2, Subsection 1], if Tn 6= 0, δ(Tn, 0) = 1. Thus, there exists n0 ∈ N such that for each n ≥ n0, Tn = 0, which implies that (An)(2) T,S 6= 0 and appy [10, Theorem 3.5]. = 0 (n ≥ n0). To conclude the proof, assume that A(2) Tn,Sn In the follwing result the Moore-Penrose inverse will be used to characterize the continuity of the outer inverse A(2) T,S . Although it will not be used in this article, recall that given a Banach space X and P and Q ∈ L(X)• such that P and Q are hermitian, if R(P ) = R(Q), then P = Q ([23, Theorem 2.2]). In particular, given a subspace M ⊆ X, there exists at most one hermitian idempotent R such that R(R) = M. Theorem 7.2. Let X and Y be Banach spaces and consider A ∈ L(X, Y) and two subspaces T ⊆ X and S ⊆ Y such that A(2) T,S exists. Let (An)n∈N ⊂ L(X, Y) and consider (Tn)n∈N and (Sn)n∈N two sequences of subspaces of X and Y, respectively, such that (An)(2) exists, for each n ∈ N. Suppose, in addition, that there exit hermitian idempotents U ∈ L(X) (respectively V ∈ L(Y)) and Un ∈ L(X) (respectively Vn ∈ L(Y)) such that R(U ) = T and R(Un) = Tn (respectively N(V ) = S and N(Vn) = Sn), n ∈ N. If (An)n∈N converges to A, then the following statements are equivalent. Tn,Sn (i) The sequence ((An)(2) Tn,Sn )n∈N converges to A(2) T,S. 21 (ii) The sequence ((An)(2) An)n∈N converges to A(2) Tn,Sn T,SA and the sequences (V (I − Vn))n∈N and (Vn(I − V ))n∈N converge to 0. (iii) The sequence (An(An)(2) )n∈N converges to AA(2) Tn,Sn T,S and the sequences ((I − U )Un)n∈N and ((I − Un)U )n∈N converge to 0. (iv) The sequences (V (I − Vn))n∈N, (Vn(I − V ))n∈N, ((I − U )Un)n∈N and ((I − Un)U )n∈N converge to 0. Proof. Note that δ(Tn, T) = δ(R(Un), R(U )). Thus, according to [27, Lemma 2.2], the sequence (δ(Tn, T))n∈N converges to 0 if and only if the sequences ((I − U )Un)n∈N and ((I − Un)U )n∈N converge to 0. Similarly, since δ(Sn, S) = δ(R(I − Vn), R(I − V )), according to [27, Lemma 2.2], the sequence (δ(Sn, S))n∈N converges to 0 if and only if the sequences (V (I − Vn))n∈N and (Vn(I − V ))n∈N converge to 0. To conclude the proof, apply Theorem 7.1. Next the continuity of the outer inverse A(2) T,S will be studied in the context of Hilbert spaces. Theorem 7.3. Let H and K be Hilbert spaces and consider A ∈ L(H, K) and two subspaces T ⊆ H and S ⊆ K such that A(2) T,S exists. Let (An)n∈N ⊂ L(H, K) and consider (Tn)n∈N and (Sn)n∈N two sequences of subspaces of H and K, respectively, such that (An)(2) exists, for each n ∈ N. If (An)n∈N converges to A, then the following statements are equivalent. Tn,Sn (i) The sequence ((An)(2) Tn,Sn )n∈N converges to A(2) T,S. (ii) The sequences ((An)(2) Tn,Sn An)n∈N and (An(An)(2) Tn,Sn )n∈N converge to A(2) T,SA and AA(2) T,S, respectively. (iii) The sequence ((An)(2) Tn,Sn to P ⊥ S⊥). An)n∈N (respectively (P ⊥ S⊥ n )n∈N) converges to A(2) T,SA (respectively (iv) The sequence (An(An)(2) )n∈N (respectively (P ⊥ Tn )n∈N) converges to AA(2) T,S (respectively Tn,Sn to P ⊥ T ). (v) The sequences (P ⊥ S⊥ n )n∈N and (P ⊥ Tn Proof. Note that )n∈N converge to P ⊥ S⊥ and P ⊥ T , respectively. U = P ⊥ T , Un = P ⊥ Tn , V = P ⊥ S⊥ , Vn = P ⊥ S⊥ n , satisfies the hypoteses of Theorem 7.2. First it will be proved that the sequences ((I − U )Un)n∈N and ((I − Un)U )n∈N converge to 0 if and only if the sequence (P ⊥ )n∈N converges Tn to P ⊥ T . Since U , Un ∈ L(H) are self-adjoint, the sequences ((I − U )Un)n∈N and ((I − Un)U )n∈N converge to 0 if and only if the sequences (Un(I − U ))n∈N and (U (I − Un))n∈N converge to 0. In particular, the sequences ((I − U )UnU )n∈N, ((I − U )Un(I − U ))n∈N and (U Un(I − U ))n∈N 22 converge to 0. In addition, since (U (I − Un))n∈N converges to 0, the sequence (U UnU )n∈N converges to U . However, since Un = U UnU + U Un(I − Un) + (I − U )UnU + (I − Un)Un(I − U ), the sequence (P ⊥ Tn )n∈N converges to P ⊥ T . A similar argument proves that the sequences (V (I −Vn))n∈N and (Vn(I −V ))n∈N converge to 0 if and only if the sequence (P ⊥ S⊥ n )n∈N converges to P ⊥ S⊥. To conlcude the proof, apply Theorem 7.1 and Theorem 7.2. To study the differentiation of the outer inverse A(2) T,S , it is necessary to present a prelimiery result first. Lemma 7.4. Let X and Y be two Banach spaces and consider A, B ∈ L(X, Y). Let T, V ⊆ X and S, U ⊆ Y be two pairs of subspaces such that A(2) V,U exist and consider idempotents PT, PV ∈ L(X) and PS, PU ∈ L(Y) such that R(PT) = T, R(PV) = V, R(PS) = S and R(PU) = U. Then T,S and B(2) B(2) V,U − A(2) T,S =B(2) V,U(PS − PU)(IY − AA(2) − B(2) V,U(B − A)A(2) T,S. T,S) + (IX − B(2) V,UB)(PV − PT)A(2) T,S Proof. Let PT, PV ∈ L(X)• be such that R(PT) = T and R(PV) = V. According to [18, Lemma 1], (IX − B(2) V,UB)PV = 0, PTA(2) T,S = A(2) T,S. Then, B(2) V,UBA(2) T,S − A(2) T,S = −(IX − B(2) V,UB)PTA(2) T,S = (IX − B(2) V,UB)(PV − PT)A(2) T,S. Now consider PS, PU ∈ L(Y)• such that R(PS) = S and R(PU) = U. According to [18, Lemma 1], (IY − PS)(IY − AA(2) T,S) = 0, B(2) V,U = B(2) V,U(IY − PU). Consequently, B(2) V,U − B(2) V,UAA(2) T,S = B(2) = B(2) V,U(IY − PU)(IY − AA(2) V,U(PS − PU)(IY − AA(2) T,S) = B(2) T,S). V,U((IY − PU) − (IY − PS))(IY − AA(2) T,S) 23 Therefore, B(2) V,U − A(2) T,S = B(2) V,U(PS − PU)(IY − AA(2) T,S) + B(2) V,UAA(2) T,S + (IX − B(2) V,UB)(PV − PT)A(2) T,S − B(2) V,UBA(2) T,S = B(2) V,U(PS − PU)(IY − AA(2) T,S) + (IX − B(2) V,UB)(PV − PT)A(2) T,S − B(2) V,U(B − A)A(2) T,S. In what follows, the differentiation of the outer inverse A(2) T,S will be studied. Theorem 7.5. Let X and Y be Banach spaces and consider J ⊆ R an open set. Suppose that there exist functions A : J → L(X, Y), P : J → L(X)• and Q : J → L(Y)• such that for each t ∈ J , (A(t))(2) R(P(t)),R(Q(t)) exists. If the functions A, P and Q are differentiable at t0, then the following statements are equivalent. (i) The function A (2) P,Q : J → L(Y, X) is continuous at t0, (ii) the function A (2) P,Q : J → L(Y, X) is differentiable at t0, (2) P,Q(t) = (A(t))(2) R(P(t)),R(Q(t)) . where A Furthermore, (A (2) P,Q)′(t0) = − A − A (2) P,Q(t0)Q′(t0)(IY − A(t0)A (2) P,Q(t0)A′(t0)A (2) P,Q(t0). (2) P,Q(t0)) + (IX − A (2) P,Q(t0)A(t0))P′(t0)A (2) P,Q(t0) Proof. It is enough to prove that statement (i) implies statement (ii). This proof can be derived from Lemma 7.4. In fact, according to this result, A (2) P,Q(t) − A (2) P,Q(t0) = − A (2) P,Q(t)(Q(t) − Q(t0))(IY − A(t0)A (2) P,Q(t0)) + (IX − A(2) P,Q(t)A(t))(P(t) − P(t0))A(2) P,Q(t0) − A (2) P,Q(t)(A(t) − A(t0))A (2) P,Q(t0). Now divide each term by t − t0 and note that the limit leads to (A (2) P,Q)′(t0). In the Hilbert space operators context, Theorem 7.5 can be reformulated as follows. Corollary 7.6. Let H and K be Hilbert spaces and consider J ⊆ R an open set. Suppose that there exist functions A : J → L(X, Y), P⊥ : J → L(X)• and Q⊥ : J → L(Y)• such that for each t ∈ J , P⊥(t) ∈ L(X) and Q⊥(t) ∈ L(Y) are orthogonal idempotents and (A(t))(2) R(P⊥(t)),R(Q⊥(t)) exists. If the functions A, P⊥ and Q⊥ are differentiable at t0, then the following statements are equivalent. 24 (i) The function A (2) P⊥,Q⊥ : J → L(Y, X) is continuous at t0, (ii) the function A (2) P⊥,Q⊥ : J → L(Y, X) is differentiable at t0, (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t) = (A(t))(2) R(P⊥(t)),R(Q⊥ (t)) . where A Furthermore, (A (2) P⊥,Q⊥)′(t0) = − A (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t0)(Q⊥)′(t0)(IY − A(t0)A P⊥,Q⊥(t0)A(t0))(P⊥)′(t0)A (2) (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t0)) (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t0) + (IX − A − A (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t0)A′(t0)A (2) P⊥,Q⊥(t0). Proof. Apply Theorem 7.5 to the case under consideration. References [1] J. Ben´ıtez, E. Boasso, The inverse along an element in rings, Electron. J. Linear Algebra 31 (2016), 572-592. [2] J. Ben´ıtez, E. Boasso, The inverse along an element in rings with an involution, Banach algebras and C ∗-algebras, Linear Multilinear Algebra 65 (2017), 284-299. [3] E. Boasso, On the Moore-Penrose inverse, EP Banach space operators and EP Banach algebra elements, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 339 (2008), 1003-1014. [4] E. Boasso, G. Kant´un-Montiel, The (b, c)-inverse in rings and in the Banach context, Mediterr. J. Math. 14 (2017), Art. 112, 21p. [5] F. F. Bonsall, J. Duncan, Complete normed algebras, Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 1973. [6] N. Castro-Gonz´alez, J. Chen, L. Wang, Further results on generalized inverses in rings with involution, Electron. J. Linear Algebra 30 (2015), 118-134. [7] H. R. Dowson, Spectral Theory of Linear operators, Academic Press, Inc., London, New York, San Francisco 1978. [8] M. P. Drazin, A class of outer generalized inverses, Linear Algebra Appl. 436 (2012), 1909-1923. [9] M. P. Drazin, Commuting properties of generalized inverses, Linear Multilinear Algebra 61 (2013), 1675-1681. [10] F. Du, Y. Xue, Perturbation analysis of A(2) T,S on Banach spaces, Electron. J. Linear Algebra 23 (2012), 586-598. [11] R. Harte, M. Mbekhta, On generalized inverses in C ∗-algebras, Studia Math. 103 (1992), 71-77. 25 [12] R. Harte, M. Mbekhta, On generalized inverses in C ∗-algebras II, Studia Math. 106 (1993), 129-138. [13] T. Kato, Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1980. [14] Y. Ke, J. Chen, The Bott-Duffin (e, f )-inverses and their applications, Linear Algebra Appl. 489 (2016), 61-74. [15] Y. Ke, Z. Wang, J. Chen, The (b, c)-inverse for products and lower triangular matrices, J. Algebra Appl. 16 (2017), doi: 10.1142/S021949881750222X. [16] J. J. Koliha, Continuity and diffrentiability of the Moore-Penrose inverse in C ∗-algebras, Math. Scand. 88 (2001), 154-160. [17] J.J. Koliha, V. Rakocevi´c, Continuity of the Drazin inverse II, Studia Math. 131 (1998), 167-177. [18] X. Liu, Y. Yu, J. Zhong, Y. Wei, Integral and limit representations of the outer inverse in Banach space, Linear Multilinear Algebra 60 (2012), 333-347. [19] X. Mary, On generalized inverse and Green's relations, Linear Algebra Appl. 434 (2011), 1836-1844. [20] X. Mary, Natural generalized inverse and core of an element in semigroups, rings and Banach and operator algebras, Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math. 5 (2012), 160-173. [21] X. Mary, P. Patr´ıcio, The inverse along a lower triangular matrix, Appl. Math. Comput. 219 (2012), 886-891. [22] X. Mary, P. Patr´ıcio, Generalized inverses modulo H in semigroups and rings, Linear Multilinear Algebra 61 (2013), 1130-1135. [23] T. Palmer, Unbounded normal operators on Banach spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 133 (1968), 385-414. [24] R. Penrose, A generalized inverse for matrices, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 51 (1955), 406-413. [25] D. S. Raki´c, A note on Rao and Mitra's constrained inverse and Drazin's (b, c) inverse, Linear Algebra Appl. 523 (2017), 102-108. [26] V. Rakocevi´c, Moore-Penrose inverse in Banach algebras, Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sect. A 88 (1988), 57-60. [27] V. Rakocevi´c, On the continuity of the Moore-Penrose inverse in Banach algebras, Facta Univ. Ser. Math. Inform. 6 (1991), 133-138. [28] V. Rakocevi´c, Continuity of the Drazin inverse, J. Operator Theory 41 (1999), 55-68. [29] I. Vidav, Eine metrische Kennzeichnung der selbstadjungierten Operatoren, Math. Z. 66 (1956), 121-128. 26 [30] L. Wang, N. Castro-Gonz´alez, J. Chen, Characterizations of outer generalized inverses, Canad. Math. Bull. 60 (2017), 861-871. [31] Y. Yu, Y. Wei, The representation and computational procedures for the generalized T, S of an operator A in Hilbert spaces, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim. 30 (2009), inverse A(2) 168-182. [32] H. Zhu, P. Patr´ıcio, J. Chen, Y. Zhang, The inverse along a product and its applications, Linear Multilinear Algebra 64 (2016), 834-841. [33] H. Zou, J. Chen, T. Li, Y. Gao, Characterizations and representations of the inverse along an element, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (2016), doi: 10.1007/s40840-016-0430-3. Enrico Boasso E-mail address: enrico [email protected] 27
1807.10809	2	1807	2019-12-22T13:58:37	Almost-Orthogonality of Restricted Haar-Functions	[ "math.FA" ]	We consider the Haar functions $h_I$ on dyadic intervals. We show that if $p>\frac23$ and $E\subset[0,1]$ then the set of all functions $\\|h_I1_E\\|_2^{-1}h_I1_E$ with $\|I\cap E\|\geq p\|I\|$ is a Riesz sequence. For $p\leq\frac23$ we provide a counterexample.	math.FA	math	Almost-Orthogonality of Restricted Haar-Functions Julian Weigt Aalto University December 24, 2019 Abstract We consider the Haar functions hI on dyadic intervals. We show that 2 hI 1E with 3 we provide a counterexample. if p > 2 I ∩E ≥ pI is a Riesz sequence. For p ≤ 2 3 and E ⊂ [0, 1] then the set of all functions khI 1Ek−1 1 Introduction In this paper we prove a stability result for perturbed Haar functions. It grew out of the author's Master's thesis [6], written in Bonn under the supervision of Professor Christoph Thiele. It was motivated by an idea on how to to extend the result in [3] to three general functions. The Haar function of the interval I = [a, b) is given by hI = −1I l + 1I r, where I l = [a, a+b consider the Haar functions of the dyadic intervals 2 ) and I r = [ a+b 2 , b) are the left and right halves of I. We The main result of this paper is the following theorem. D =(cid:8)(cid:2)k2n, (k + 1)2n(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12) n, k ∈ Z(cid:9). Theorem 1.1. For each p > 2 3 there is a constant c > 0 such that for all measurable sets E ⊂ [0, 1) and all sequences (aI )I∈D with aI = 0 if I ∩E < pI, we have kaI hI 1Ek2 2, (1) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈D aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 2 ≥ cXI∈D whenever the right-hand side is finite. For p ≤ 2 c > 0. 3 there is no such constant Remark. The proof strategy of Theorem 1.1 resembles the well known Bellman function technique as for example in [5]. A rephrasing of the proof which re- sembles the Bellman function technique more closely can be found in Section 2.1.5 in [6]. The proof also yields an explicit value for c. We discuss its optimality in Section 4. Furthermore, if the right-hand side of (1) converges, then the sum 1 on the left-hand-side converges in L2 because for any finite subset D0 ⊂ D we have 2 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈D0 aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈D0 aI hI(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 2 kaI hI k2 2 ≤ = XI∈D0 1 p XI∈D0 kaI hI 1Ek2 2. (2) This also implies (2) with D0 = D, which means that a reverse inequality of (1) holds as for all p > 0. In a more general setting, a sequence V in a Hilbert space is called a Bessel sequence if holds, and a Riesz sequence if in addition also (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xv∈V (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xv∈V avv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) avv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ≤ C Xv∈V av2 2 ≥ cXv∈V av2 holds, where the constants c > 0 and C < ∞ respectively are independent of (av)v∈V ⊂ ℓ2(V ). Inserting for aI in (2) shows that for all p > 0, the sequence khI 1E k2 aI (3) khI1Ek2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) V =(cid:26) hI 1E I ∈ D, I ∩ E ≥ pI(cid:27) p . Theorem 1.1 states that if p > 2 is a Bessel sequence with constant 1 3 then (3) is also a Riesz sequence. A weaker result already follows from the well-known Kadison-Singer Problem, which was resolved recently by Marcus, Spielman and Srivastava in [4]. In doing so, they also solved the numerous equivalent problems, one of which is the Feichtinger Conjecture, which states that every Bessel sequence can be partitioned into finitely many Riesz sequences. This means it can already be concluded from (2) that there is a finite partition of (3) into Riesz sequences. Building upon [4], Bownik, Casazza, Marcus and Speegle also proved a quantitative version of the Feichtinger Conjecture in [1]. For the specific setting of restricted Haar functions, their Corollary 6.5 in [1] reads that if p > 3 4 then (3) can be partitioned into two Riesz sequences. Theorem 1.1 improves on that because it already applies for p > 2 3 and states that (3) is already a Riesz sequence prior to partitioning. For more details on the relation of this paper to other work; see Section 4. 2 Proof of the Case p > 2 3 For n ∈ N0 denote Dn = {I ∈ D I ≥ 2−n}. The idea is to first prove a weighted inequality, 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) XI∈Dn aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) L2(wn) kaI hI 1Ek2 2. ≥ XI∈Dn The weights are introduced in order to allow a proof by induction on n. They will be uniformly bounded from above, so that the case p > 2 3 of Theorem 1.1 follows from the weighted inequality. 2 The weights wn look as follows: Fix 2 3 < p ≤ 1. Define g : [0, 1] → R by g(q) =(1 + g(p) q p p(2−p) (3p−2)(3p−2q) q ≥ p, q ≤ p. (4) It is well defined because 2q ≤ 2 < 3p. Now on each interval I ∈ Dn+1 \ Dn abbreviate qI = I∩E if qI > 0. If qI = 0 then the value of wn does not matter. The properties of g that we need are collected in the following proposition. I and assign wn the constant value g(qI ) qI Proposition 2.1. Let 2 properties: 3 < p ≤ 1. Then the function g has the following 1) For all q1, q2 ∈ [0, 1] and a ∈ R with q1+q2 2 ≥ p or a = 0 we have (1 − a)2 2 g(q1) + (1 + a)2 2 g(q2) − g(cid:16) q1 + q2 2 (cid:17) ≥ a2. 2) There is a constant C > 0 s.t. for all q ∈ [0, 1] we have q ≤ g(q) ≤ Cq. (5) (6) Proposition 2.1 is the crucial step. After that it requires not much more 3 of Theorem 1.1. In order to prove than bookkeeping to conclude the case p > 2 Proposition 2.1, we first show the Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3. Define g : [0, 1] → R by g(q) = 1 + p(2 − p) (3p − 2)(3p − 2q) , so that g = g on q ≥ p. Lemma 2.2. Let q1, q2 ∈ [0, 1], a ∈ R. Then (1 − a)2 2 g(q1) + (1 + a)2 2 Proof. For i = 1, 2 take xi s.t. g(q2) − g(cid:16) q1 + q2 2 (cid:17) ≥ a2. g(qi) = 1 + 1 xi . Then xi > 0 and g(cid:16) q1 + q2 2 (cid:17) = 1 + Hence it suffices to confirm the positivity of 2 x1 + x2 . (1 − a)2 2 1 2 (cid:16)1 + a2(cid:16) 1 x1x2(cid:20) 1 x1 1 2 + = = (1 + a)2 1 2 x1(cid:17) + x2(cid:17) + a(cid:16) 1 1 x2 − 1 (cid:16)1 + x1(cid:17) + 1 2 1 + x2(cid:17) −(cid:16)1 + 2(cid:16) 1 2(cid:16)x1 + x2 − 4 x1 + x2(cid:17) − a2 x1 + x2(cid:17) x1 + x2(cid:17)(cid:21) x1 1 1 x2 x1x2 − 4 1 a2(x1 + x2) + a(x1 − x2) + 3 which is a quadratic polynomial in a. Since x1 + x2 ≥ 0 and positive leading coefficient. The discriminant is 1 x1x2 ≥ 0 it has a (x1 + x2)(cid:16)x1 + x2 − 4 x1x2 x1 + x2(cid:17) − (x1 − x2)2 = (x1 + x2)2 − 4x1x2 − (x1 − x2)2 = 0, and so the minimum of the polynomial is zero. Lemma 2.3. Proof. g(2p − 1) = g(2p − 1). g(2p − 1) = g(p) 2p − 1 p 2p − 1 =(cid:20)1 + p(2 − p) p(3p − 2)(cid:21) 2p − 1 p = 1 + = g(2p − 1). p 3p − 2 2p = 3p − 2 p Proof of Proposition 2.1. Lemma 2.2 with a = 0 implies that g is midpoint convex and thus convex. By Lemma 2.3 and by the definition of g(p) we have that g(q) = g(q) at the two values q = 2p − 1, p. This means that on [0, p] the function g describes the line that passes through these two distinct points. On [p, 1] recall that g = g. It follows from this that also g is convex. This means that (5) holds for a = 0 and so it suffices to consider the case q1+q2 2 ∈ [p, 1]. There we have q1 ≥ 2p − q2 ≥ 2p − 1 and similarly q2 ≥ 2p − 1. From the considerations (cid:1) which implies that for all a we have (cid:1) = g(cid:0) q1+q2 above we then get g(q1) ≥ g(q1), g(q2) ≥ g(q2), g(cid:0) q1+q2 g(q2) − g(cid:16) q1 + q2 (cid:17) g(q2) − g(cid:16) q1 + q2 (cid:17) ≥ a2, (1 + a)2 (1 + a)2 (1 − a)2 (1 − a)2 g(q1) + g(q1) + ≥ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 where the last inequality follows from Lemma 2.2. This finishes the proof of (5). The upper bound in (6) holds for C = g(1) because g is convex and non- negative and g(0) = 0. For the lower bound, recall that for q ∈ [0, p] we have g(q) = q p g(p) for all q ∈ [0, 1]. It follows from the definition of g that g(p) ≥ 1 and therefore g(q) ≥ q p g(p), so that convexity implies g(q) ≥ q p ≥ q. The following lemma translates Proposition 2.1 into our setting of Haar functions on weighted L2 spaces. Lemma 2.4. For every n ∈ N we have 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) XI∈Dn+1 and aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) L2(wn+1) 2 −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) XI∈Dn aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) L2(wn) ≥ XI∈Dn+1\Dn kaI hI 1Ek2 2 (7) The constant C is the same as in Proposition 2.1. 1 ≤ wn ≤ C. (8) 4 Proof. Recall that on I ∈ Dn+1 \ Dn we assign wn the constant value q(qI ) qI = I∩E I because the integrated function in (7) is zero a.e. on such I anyways. if qI > 0. Where I ∩ E vanishes, the value of wn does not matter with qI First note that (8) is equivalent to (6). We prove (7) using mostly (5). Partition the domain of integration on the left-hand-side of (7) into Dn+1 \ Dn so that the inequality becomes XJ∈Dn+1\DnZE∩J(cid:20)(cid:16) XI∈Dn+1 ≥ XJ∈Dn+1\DnZE (aJ hJ )2. aI hI(cid:17)2 wn+1 −(cid:16) XI∈Dn aI hI(cid:17)2 wn(cid:21) We prove this inequality for each summand J ∈ Dn+1 \ Dn individually. So fix J ∈ Dn+1 \ Dn. Then for each I ∈ Dn the function hI is constant on J. That means we may write aI hI = bJ 1J 1J XI∈Dn for some bJ ∈ R. For I ∈ Dn+1 \ Dn the function hI is nonzero if and only if I = J, so that aI hI = bJ 1J + aJ hJ . 1J XI∈Dn+1 So it suffices to show ZE∩Jh(bJ 1J + aJ hJ )2wn+1 − (bJ 1J )2wni ≥ZE in order to prove (7). Write (aJ hJ )2 (9) q1 = J l ∩ E J l , q2 = J r ∩ E J r , q1 + q2 2 = J ∩ E J so that we have 1J l wn+1 = g(q1) q1 1J l , 1J rwn+1 = g(q2) q2 1J r , 1J wn = 2 g(cid:0) q1+q2 q1+q2 2 , (cid:1) 1J . if the respective denominators are positive. Evaluating the integrals, (9) then reads (bJ − aJ )2J lg(q1) + (bJ + aJ )2J rg(q2) − b2 J Jg(cid:16) q1 + q2 2 (cid:17) ≥ J q1 + q2 2 a2 J , also if q1 or q2 are zero because g(0) = 0. Then divide both sides by J. For bJ = 0 we obtain g(q1) + g(q2) q1 + q2 ≥ 2 a2 J . a2 J 2 This inequality holds due to the lower bound in (6). In case bJ 6= 0 we addi- tionally divide by b2 J and obtain (cid:16)1 − aJ bJ(cid:17)2 1 2 g(q1) +(cid:16)1 + aJ bJ(cid:17)2 1 2 g(q2) − g(cid:16) q1 + q2 2 (cid:17) ≥ q1 + q2 2 bJ(cid:17)2 (cid:16) aJ . 5 This inequality is a consequence of (5) because q1+q2 2 ≤ 1. Note that we can also obtain the case bJ = 0 from (5) by sending aJ → ∞, instead of from (6). That way we would even get the stronger inequality without the factor q1+q2 . 2 Proof of Theorem 1.1 in case p > 2 consists of only one interval we get 3 . We use Lemma 2.4. Because D0 = {[0, 1)} 2 L2(w0) kaI hI 1Ek2 2 ≥ XI∈D0 (10) from the lower bound in (8). Summing up (10) and (7) for n = 1, . . . , k − 1 we get 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈D0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈Dk C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈Dk aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 2 kaI hI 1Ek2 2, L2(wk) ≥ XI∈Dk aI hI 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≥(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈Dk 2 . L2(wk) and the upper bound in (8) allows us to get rid of the weight This proves the part p > 2 C if we only consider finite sums. For infinite sums where the right hand side of (1) converges, we may also pass to the limit n → ∞ with the help of (2). 3 of Theorem 1.1 with c = 1 3 Proof of the Case p ≤ 2 3 Fix E = [0, 2 intervals (I2n)n=0,1,..., defined inductively by 3 ]. We build the counterexample from the sequence of dyadic I0 = [0, 1], r, I2n+1 = I2n I2n+2 = I2n+1 l. Lemma 3.1. For all n = 0, 1, . . . we have In = 2−n, I2n ∩ E = 2 3 I2n, I2n+1 ∩ E = 1 3 I2n+1. Proof. It is clear that we have In = 2−n. For the other statements we proceed by induction on n. For n = 0 we have (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) [0, 1] ∩h0, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)h 1 , 1i ∩h0, 2 2 2 3i(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 3i(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = = 2 3 2 3 = − 2 3 1 2 [0, 1], = 1 6 = . 2 1 3(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)h 1 , 1i(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Now assume the lemma holds for n. That means that the point 2 to the right from the left boundary of I2n+1, i.e. 2 left boundary of I2(n+1). Therefore we have I2(n+1) ∩ E = 2 in turn implies that the point 2 of I2(n+1), i.e. 1 Therefore we have I2(n+1)+1 ∩ E = 1 lemma for n + 1. 3 I2n+1 3 I2(n+1) to the right from the 3 I2(n+1). That 6 I2(n+1) to the right from the midpoint 3 I2(n+1)+1 to the right from the left boundary of I2(n+1)+1. 3 I2(n+1)+1, finishing the proof of the 3 lies 1 3 lies 1 6 Further set a0 = 1, a2n = 2n−1, n ≥ 1. The following proposition proves the case p ≤ 2 3 of Theorem 1.1. Proposition 3.2. For each n we have n n Xk=0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Xk=0 ka2khI2k 1Ek2 2 = 2 2 = a2khI2k 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + n 6 , . 2 3 2 3 (11) (12) Proof. By Lemma 3.1 we have I2n ∩ E = 2 3 2−2n. Thus ka0hI0 1Ek2 2 = ka2nhI2n 1Ek2 2 = 2 3 2 3 , 2−2n22(n−1) = 1 6 , n ≥ 1, which implies (11). In order to prove (12), first note that the support of hI2(n+1) 1E is I2n Therefore it follows by induction on n that r ∩ E. a2khI2k 1E = −1[0, 1 2 ) + 2n1I2n r∩E, n Xk=0 since 2n1I2n r∩E + 2nhI2(n+1) 1E = 2n+11I2(n+1) r∩E. By Lemma 3.1 we have I2n r ∩ E = 1 3 I2n r = 1 3 2−2n−1 so that we obtain n (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Xk=0 2 2 a2khI2k 1E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = 1 2 · (−1)2 + 1 3 2−2n−122n = 2 3 . 4 Remarks 4.1 Optimality of the Constant c From the proof we get an explicit expression for the constant in (1) c = 1 C = 1 g(1) = (3p − 2)2 (3p − 2)2 + p(2 − p) = and since p(2 − p) = (p − 2 3 )(cid:20) 4 3 − (p − 2 3 )(cid:21) + 7 2 3(cid:20) 4 3 + 1 3(cid:1)2 (cid:0)p − 2 3(cid:1)2 (cid:0)p − 2 )(cid:21) = 8 9 2 3 − (p − 9 p(2 − p) + O(cid:16)p − 2 3(cid:17) we have c = 3(cid:1)2 (cid:0)p − 2 81 + O(p − 2 3 ) 8 = 81 8 (cid:16)p − 2 3(cid:17)2 1 1 + O(p − 2 3 ) = 81 8 (cid:16)p − 2 3(cid:17)2 + O(cid:16)p − . 2 3(cid:17)3 However this constant c is likely not maximal because g satisfies a stronger bound than the required g(q) ≥ q, and because we dropped a factor q1+q2 in the deduction of (5). We only did this because sending q1 → q2 in (5) leads to an ODE with solution g, while with the factor q1+q2 in place we could not solve the ODE. We did however minimize C in some respect: There are multiple solutions to the ODE from (5) such that the corresponding g satisfies (6) and (5) with some C. Among all those, g has the smallest C for p → 2 3 . For a proof of this and for more details; see Section 2.1 in [6]. In Section 3 in [6] we also provide a set E for which we prove an explicit sharp constant cs which satisfies 3 )3. We conjecture that (1) holds already with this particular constant cs. In Section 4 of [6] we prove that this is indeed the case at least for certain E. cs = 27(cid:0)p − 2 3 )2 + O(p − 2 2 2 4.2 Further remarks on Theorem 1.1 For p > 2 i.e. allow a[0,2) 6= 0, even though usually [0, 2) ∩ E < p[0, 2). 3 inequality (1) still holds if we add the constant function to the sums, Furthermore, Theorem 1.1 is not a consequence of the fact that (cid:8)hI 1E (cid:12)(cid:12) I ∩ E ≥ pI(cid:9) is only a small perturbation of the orthogonal set(cid:8)hI (cid:12)(cid:12) I ∩ E ≥ pI(cid:9), in the sense that khI − hI 1Ek2 2 ≤ (1 − p)khIk2 2 < khI k2 2. 1 3 In order to see this, consider the following example. Assume that u1, . . . , un are orthonormal. Abbreviate u = u1 + . . . + un and for i = 1, . . . , n set u′ i = ui − 1 n u. kui − u′ ik2 = 1 n2 kuk2 = 1 n2 kuik2 = 1 n . n Xi=1 Then but ku′ 1 + . . . + u′ nk2 = ku − uk2 = 0 6& ku′ 1k2 + . . . + ku′ nk2. 4.3 Related Topics The starting point of this work was the following question, because its answer could provide ideas on how to to extend the result in [3] to three general func- tions. Question 1. Let D be the set of dyadic intervals of [0, 1). Let [0, 1) = E0 ∪ E1 be a partition. Is there a partition D = D0 ∪ D1 such that for i = 0, 1 the equivalence is true? (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈Di aI hI 1Ei(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 2 kaI hI 1Eik2 2 ∼ XI∈Di (13) 8 We started investigating this question in Section 5 in [6]. An initial approach to Question 1 could be to construct a partition by a majority decision: For i = 0, 1 take Di s.t. for all I ∈ Di we have I ∩ Ei ≥ 1 2 I. (14) However by the counterexample of Theorem 1.1 for p = 2 2 , this strategy does not result in the lower bound in (13). Although by (2) the majority decision (14) at least leads to the upper bound in (13). Another idea was to use the Feichtinger-Conjecture which was recently resolved by Marcus, Spielman and Srivastava in [4]. Based on [4], Bownik, Casazza, Marcus and Speegle proved a quantified version of the Feichtinger Conjecture in [1]. The following theorem is a reformulation of Corollary 6.5 in [1]. 3 ≥ 1 Theorem 4.1. Let C < 4 in a Hilbert space such that for all (av)v∈V ⊂ R 3 and c = C 2 −p2(C − 1)(2 − C). Let V be a sequence ≤ C Xv∈V kavvk2. 2 Then there is a partition V = V0 ∪ V1 such that for i = 0, 1 we have (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xv∈V (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xv∈Vi avv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) avv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ≥ c Xv∈Vi kavvk2. Unfortunately it is not clear if Theorem 4.1 can be used to answer Question 1. The closest consequence of Theorem 4.1 in that direction that we found is the following corollary. Corollary 4.2. Let p > 3 E = E0 ∪ E1 be a partition and for i = 0, 1 set 4 and c = 1 2p −q2( 1 p − 1)(2 − 1 p ). Let E ⊂ [0, 1) and Then H0 ∪ H1 can be partitioned into G0 ∪ G1 where for i = 0, 1 we have Hi =(cid:8)hI 1Ei (cid:12)(cid:12) I ∈ D, I ∩ Ei ≥ pI(cid:9). (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xv∈Gi avv(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 ≥ c Xv∈Gi kavvk2. (15) Theorem 1.1 can be seen as an improvement of Corollary 4.2. That is because by Theorem 1.1 the two sequences H0 and H1 already satisfy (15) with some other constant c > 0, and since H0 and H1 are orthogonal to one another, also their union satisfies (15), even without partitioning. And this already holds for p > 2 3 . References [1] Marcin Bownik, Pete Casazza, Adam W Marcus, and Darrin Speegle. Im- proved bounds in weaver and feichtinger conjectures. Journal fur die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal), 2016. 9 [2] Ole Christensen. An introduction to frames and Riesz bases, volume 7. Springer, 2003. [3] Vjekoslav Kova, Christoph Thiele, and Pavel Zorin-Kranich. Dyadic trian- gular hilbert transform of two general functions and one not too general function. Forum of Mathematics, Sigma, 3:e25, 2015. [4] Adam W Marcus, Daniel A Spielman, and Nikhil Srivastava. Interlacing families ii: Mixed characteristic polynomials and the kadison-singer problem. Annals of Mathematics, pages 327 -- 350, 2015. [5] Fedor Nazarov, Sergei Treil, and Alexander Volberg. The bellman functions and two-weight inequalities for haar multipliers. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 12(4):909 -- 928, 1999. [6] Julian Weigt. restricted haar functions. Master's thesis, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat Bonn, 2018. http://math.aalto.fi/~weigtj1/Thesis_updated.pdf. Almost-orthogonality of 10
1506.05383	1	1506	2015-06-17T16:41:13	Some trace monotonicity properties and applications	[ "math.FA", "math-ph", "math-ph" ]	We present some results on the monotonicity of some traces involving functions of self-adjoint operators with respect to the natural ordering of their associated quadratic forms. We also apply these results to complete a proof of the Wegner estimate for continuum models of random Schr\"odinger operators as given in \cite{co-hi1}.	math.FA	math	SOME TRACE MONOTONICITY PROPERTIES AND APPLICATIONS JEAN-MICHEL COMBES AND PETER D. HISLOP Abstract. We present some results on the monotonicity of some traces involving functions of self-adjoint operators with respect to the natural or- dering of their associated quadratic forms. We also apply these results to complete a proof of the Wegner estimate for continuum models of random Schrodinger operators as given in [4]. 1. Statement of the Problem and Result We consider two lower-semibounded self-adjoint operators A and B asso- ciated with closed symmetric, lower-semibounded quadratic forms qA and qB with form domains Q(A) and Q(B), respectively. We suppose that qA 6 qB. This inequality means that Q(B) ⊂ Q(A) and that for all ϕ ∈ Q(B), we have qA(ϕ) 6 qB(ϕ). Under these conditions, Kato proved [8, Theorem 2.21, chapter VI] the following relationship between the resolvents of the two operators A and B. For all a > − inf σ(A), we have (B + a)−1 6 (A + a)−1. (1) This resolvent inequality may be used to derive several interesting relations between the traces of functions of A and B under some additional assumptions. We will prove that if f > 0 and g is a member of a class of functions L described in Definition 2, then Tr(f (B)g(B)) 6 Tr(f (B)g(A)), see Theorem 5. We compare these inequalities with Lowner’s Theorem (see section 3) on operator monotone functions. We also use these results to com- plete a proof of Wegner’s estimate for random Schrodinger operators given in [4]. These results rely on the following technical theorem. Theorem 1. Suppose that A and B are two lower semibounded self-adjoint operators with quadratic forms qA and qB and form domains Q(A) and Q(B). Suppose that A and B are relatively form bounded in that (1) the form domains satisfy Q(B) ⊂ Q(A), and (2) for all ψ ∈ Q(B), we have qA(ψ) 6 qB(ψ). Let PB project onto a B-invariant subspace so that for some m ∈ N, and for all a > − inf σ(A), the operator PB(B + a)−m is in the trace class. Then we have PDH was partially supported by NSF through grant DMS-1103104 and the Universit´e de Toulon while some of this work was done. 2 J.-M. COMBES AND P. D. HISLOP (1) For all n ∈ N large enough so that m < 2n and for all a > − inf σ(A), Tr(PB(B + a)−2n ) 6 Tr(PB(A + a)−2n ); (2) For any t > 0, Tr(PBe−tB) 6 Tr(PBe−tA). Proof. 1. The result of Kato [8, Theorem 2.21, chapter VI], stated above, implies that (B + a)−1 6 (A + a)−1. We first suppose that PB is a non-zero rank one projection PB = Pλ, so that BPλ = λPλ. From (1), it follows that for a > − inf σ(A), we have TrPλ = (λ + a) Tr(Pλ(B + a)−1) 6 (λ + a) Tr(Pλ(A + a)−1) 6 (λ + a)kPλk2kPλ(A + a)−1k2. Since Pλ is a rank one projector, we have kPλk2 = kPλk1 = TrPλ = 1, and kPλ(A + a)−1k2 = (TrPλ(A + a)−2)1/2. Upon squaring inequality (2) and using the results (3)–(4), we obtain TrPλ 6 (λ + a)2kPλ(A + a)−1k2 2 = (λ + a)2 Tr(Pλ(A + a)−2). (2) (3) (4) (5) We continue by rewriting the trace on the right in (5) using the Hilbert-Schmidt norm. We square the resulting inequality, use (3)–(4), and obtain TrPλ 6 (λ + a)22 Tr(Pλ(A + a)−22 ). Continuing in this way, we obtain for any n ∈ N: TrPλ 6 (λ + a)2n Tr(Pλ(A + a)−2n ). This may also be written as: Tr(Pλ(B + a)−2n ) 6 Tr(Pλ(A + a)−2n ). (6) (7) (8) 2. We now assume that PB is a projection operator diagonalizing B so that PB =Pj Pλj with BPλj = λjPλj . If we take 2n > m, we can sum the inequal- ities (8) over j to obtain Tr(PB(B + a)−2n ) 6 Tr(PB(A + a)−2n ). (9) 3. For the exponential bound, we first note that by assumption PB(B + a)−m is trace class for some integer m > 0, so that PBe−tB is also trace class since (B + a)me−tB is bounded for t > 0. For t > 0 and b ∈ R so that b > − inf σ(A), MONOTONE TRACE PROPERTIES 3 we obtain TrPBe−t(A+b) = lim n→∞ > lim n→∞ Tr"PB(cid:18)1 + Tr"PB(cid:18)1 + = TrPBe−t(B+b), t(A + b) 2n (cid:19)−2n# 2n (cid:19)−2n# t(B + b) where we used (9) on the second line. It follows that Tr(PB(I)e−t(B+b)) 6 Tr(PBe−t(A+b)). This proves the second claim. (10) (11) (cid:3) 2. An application to trace inequalities Theorem 1 may be applied to a large class of functions of self-adjoint oper- ators in order to obtain some inequalities relating traces of functions of self- adjoint operators. Definition 2. A real-valued function g is in the class L if there is a nonnegative σ-finite Borel measure ρ supported on [0, ∞) so that for s > 0 g(s) =Z ∞ 0 e−stdρ(t). (12) Theorem 3. Let self-adjoint operators A, B and projector PB be as in Theorem 1. Then for any g ∈ L such that PBg(B) is trace class, one has TrPBg(B) 6 TrPBg(A). (13) Proof. By the representation of g in (12) and the inequality (10) with b = 0, one has TrPBg(B) = Z ∞ 6 Z ∞ 0 0 Tr(PBe−tB) dρ(t) Tr(PBe−tA) dρ(t) = Tr(PBg(A)). (14) (cid:3) A particularly useful example of functions g are those related to powers of the resolvent of a self-adjoint operator. Corollary 4. Let self-adjoint operators A, B and projector PB be as in Theorem 1, and let a > − inf σ(A). For any β > m, where m is defined in Theorem 1, we have Tr(PB(B + a)−β) 6 Tr(PB(A + a)−β). (15) Proof. We use the Laplace transform formula valid for α > −1 and Re z > 0: 1 z1+α = 1 Γ(1 + α)Z ∞ 0 e−zttα dt. (16) 4 J.-M. COMBES AND P. D. HISLOP This shows that the function g(s) = s−β is in the class L for any β > 0. The result (15) follows from Theorem 3. (cid:3) We conclude this section with the following generalisation of Theorem 3. It presents a trace comparison theorem for the class L of functions of self-adjoint operators. Theorem 5. Let A and B be two lower semibounded self-adjoint operators satisfying the hypotheses of Theorem 1. Suppose g ∈ L and f > 0 so that f (B)g(B) is trace class. We then have Tr(f (B)g(B)) 6 Tr(f (B)g(A)). (17) Proof. Since f (B)g(B) is assumed to be trace class, the operator B must have pure point spectrum {λj} on the support of the function f g. For any j, it follows from Theorem 3 that Tr(Pλj g(B)) 6 Tr(Pλj g(A)), (18) where, as above, BPλj = λjPλj . Multiplying both sides of (18) by f (λj) > 0, and summing over j results in (17). (cid:3) We remark that if g(B) is in the trace class, we may take f = 1 and obtain Tr(g(B)) 6 Tr(g(A)), (19) a result that also follows from the Min-Max Theorem since any function g ∈ L is decreasing. 3. A relation with operator monotone functions The following class of functions was introduced by Lowner [9] in 1934 and is the object of his famous theorem that we now recall. Definition 6. Let J ⊂ R be a finite interval or a half-line. A function g : J → R is operator monotone increasing (respectively, decreasing) in J if for all pairs of self-adjoint operators A, B with spectrum in J the operator inequality A 6 B implies the operator inequality g(A) 6 g(B) (respectively g(B) 6 g(A).) If g is operator monotone decreasing, then (17) holds for any f > 0 and for all pairs of operators A 6 B such that f (B)g(B) is trace class. Because of this, we study the relationship between operator monotone decreasing functions and the class L of Definition 2. For simplicity, we assume that J = R+. We denote by I (respectively, D) the class of operator monotone increasing (respectively, decreasing) functions on R+. The map g ∈ D → g ∈ I defined by g(s) := g(1/s), for s > 0, is a bijective involution between D and I. Lowner’s Theorem [9] (see also [1, 2, 3, 6, 7]) states that g is operator mono- tone increasing if and only if g has an analytic extension to the upper-half complex plane with a positive imaginary part. Such functions are known as Herglotz or Pick functions and have integral representations. For example, Hansen [7] proved the following representation. MONOTONE TRACE PROPERTIES 5 Lemma 7. [7, Corollary 5.1] Let g be a positive operator monotone increasing function on the half-line R+. Then there exists a bounded, positive measure µ on R+ such that g(s) =ZR+ s(1 + λ) s + λ dµ(λ), s > 0. (20) It follows easily from Kato’s result (1) that any function on R+ with a rep- resentation as on the right of (20) is in the class I. The difficult part of the proof of Lowner’s Theorem is the converse. Using the bijection g → g between D and I described above, it follows that if f ∈ D, then f has a representation of the form f (s) =ZR+ 1 + λ 1 + sλ dµ(λ), s > 0, (21) for some bounded positive measure µ on R+. Using the Laplace transform representation (14) with α = 0, we may write f as where h is defined by f (s) =ZR+ h(t) =ZR+(cid:18)1 + e−sth(t) dt, 1 λ(cid:19) e− t λ dµ(λ). (22) (23) The function h ∈ L1 loc(R+) so by Definition 2, the function f ∈ L. This shows that D ⊂ L. On the other hand, the functions on R+ such as f (s) = e−as, with a > 0, or f (s) = (s + a)−ρ, with ρ > 1 and a > 0, belong to the class L but not to the class D. As a consequence, we obtain the following theorem. Theorem 8. The class of operator monotone decreasing functions D is strictly contained in the class of functions L. 4. An application to the proof of Wegner’s estimate We complete the proof of the Wegner estimate given in [4]. Since this method of proof seems to have been used in several subsequent papers, we wanted to present the complete argument. The Wegner estimate is an upper bound on the probability that a local Hamiltonian has eigenvalues in a given energy interval. We considered a large cube Λ centered at the origin in Rd with odd integer side length. We let Hω := −∆ + Vω be the random Schrodinger operator on L2(Rd) with a standard Anderson-type random potential Vω > 0 (this condition can be removed). We denote by HΛ the restriction of Hω to Λ with Dirichlet boundary conditions. This operator has discrete spectrum. For any bounded interval I = [I−, I+] ⊂ R, we let EΛ(I) be the spectral projection for HΛ and interval I. The trace of this projection is finite and it is a random variable. The Wegner estimate proved in [4, Proposition 4.5] is P{TrEΛ(I) > 1} 6 CW IΛ, (24) where CW > 0 is a finite constant depending on I+. 6 J.-M. COMBES AND P. D. HISLOP The proof of the Wegner estimate in [4] depends on a comparison of the operator HΛ to a direct sum of operators defined on unit cubes in Λ. Let Λ = Int{∪jΛ1(j)} be a decomposition of Λ into unit cubes centered at the lattice points Λ of Λ. In the proof of Proposition 4.5 [4, section 4], we used the operator inequality HΛ > HN,Λ ≡ − ⊕j ∆N,j, (25) where −∆N,j is the Neumann Laplacian on a unit cube centered at j ∈ Λ∩ Zd, if the boundary of the cube does not intersect the boundary of Λ, or the Laplacian with mixed Neumann-Dirichlet boundary conditions if the cube’s boundary intersects the boundary of Λ. This inequality is valid only in the operator form sense. It cannot be used in conjunction with Jensen’s inequality as done after equation (4.15) in [4] since the eigenfunctions φn of HΛ are not in the operator domain of HN,Λ. We apply Theorem 1 in order to complete the proof of Wegner’s estimate as stated in [4, Proposition 4.5]. We divide the set of indices Λ of the unit cubes in Λ into two sets: The set ∂ Λ associated with unit cubes whose boundary intersects ∂Λ, and the set IntΛ of interior points. We take A = HN,Λ, as defined in (25), and B = HΛ, the restriction of H to Λ with Dirichlet boundary conditions. We verify conditions (1) and (2) of Theorem 1. As quadratic forms, we have 0 (Λ), whereas Q(A) := Q(HN,Λ) = {⊕j∈IntΛH 1(Λ1(j))} ⊕ M (Λ1(j)) consists of functions in H 1(Λ1(j)) with It follows that Q(HΛ) ⊂ Q(B) := Q(HΛ) = H 1 {⊕j∈∂ ΛH 1 Neumann boundary conditions along ∂Λ ∩ ∂Λ1(j). Q(HN,Λ). The second condition of Theorem 1 holds identically. M (Λ1(j))}, where H 1 We have inf σ(A) = 0 in this case. Then, with the notation of [4], the projection PB is EΛ(Iη). From part 2 of Theorem 1, we have TrEΛ(Iη) 6 eIη,+Tr(EΛ(Iη)e−HΛ) 6 eIη,+Tr(EΛ(Iη)e−HN,Λ) = eIη,+ (26)  Xj∈Λ∩Zd Tr(EΛ(Iη)e∆N,j χj)  , where χj is the characteristic function for the unit cube Λ1(j) centered at j ∈ Zd. In this way, we recover (4.16) of [4]. Following the remainder of the proof there, since the operators −∆N,j do not depend on the random variables, we expand the trace in the eigenfunctions of −∆N,j and apply the spectral averaging result [4, Corollary 4.2]. In this manner, one obtains (24). We refer the reader to [5] for a more general proof of the Wegner estimate. References [1] J. Bendat, S. Sherman, Monotone and convex operator functions, Trans. American Math. Soc. 79 (1955) 58–71. [2] R. Bhatia, K. Sinha, Variation of real powers of positive operators, Indiana U. Math. J. 43 (1994) 913–925. [3] P. Chansangiam, Operator monotone functions: Characterizations and integral representations, arXiv:1305.2471v1. MONOTONE TRACE PROPERTIES 7 [4] J.-M. Combes, P. D. Hislop, Localization for some continuous random Hamilto- nians in d-dimensions, J. Funct. Anal. 124 (1994) 149–180. [5] J.-M. Combes, P. D. Hislop, F. Klopp, An optimal Wegner estimate and its ap- plication to the global continuity of the integrated density of states for random Schrodinger operators, Duke Math. J. 140 (2007), 469–498. [6] W. Donoghue, Monotone matrix functions and analytic continuation, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1974. [7] F. Hansen, The fast track to Lowner’s Theorem, Linear algebra and applications 438, No. 11 (2013) 4557–4571. [8] T. Kato, Perturbation theory for linear operators, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1995. [9] C. Lowner, Uber monotone matrix funktionen, Math. Z. 38 (1934) 177-216. (J.-M. Combes) CPT CNRS, Luminy Case 907, F-13288 Marseille C´edex 9, France E-mail address: [email protected] (P. D. Hislop) Department of Mathematics, University of Kentucky, Lexing- ton, Kentucky 40506-0027, USA E-mail address: [email protected]
1310.2262	1	1310	2013-10-08T20:12:44	A characterization of Hardy spaces associated with certain Schr\"odinger operators	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $\{K_t\}_{t>0}$ be the semigroup of linear operators generated by a Schr\"odinger operator $-L=\Delta - V(x)$ on $\mathbb R^d$, $d\geq 3$, where $V(x)\geq 0$ satisfies $\Delta^{-1} V\in L^\infty$. We say that an $L^1$-function $f$ belongs to the Hardy space $H^1_L$ if the maximal function $\mathcal M_L f(x) = \sup_{t>0} \|K_tf(x)\|$ belongs to $L^1(\mathbb R^d) $. We prove that the operator $(-\Delta)^{1\slash 2} L^{-1\slash 2}$ is an isomorphism of the space $H^1_L$ with the classical Hardy space $H^1(\mathbb R^d)$ whose inverse is $L^{1\slash 2} (-\Delta)^{-1\slash 2}$. As a corollary we obtain that the space $H^1_L$ is characterized by the Riesz transforms $R_j=\frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}L^{-1\slash 2}$.	math.FA	math	A CHARACTERIZATION OF HARDY SPACES ASSOCIATED WITH CERTAIN SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ Abstract. Let {Kt}t>0 be the semigroup of linear operators generated by a Schro- dinger operator −L = ∆ − V (x) on Rd, d ≥ 3, where V (x) ≥ 0 satisfies ∆−1V ∈ L∞. We say that an L1-function f belongs to the Hardy space H 1 L if the maximal func- tion MLf (x) = supt>0 Ktf (x) belongs to L1(Rd). We prove that the operator (−∆)1/2L−1/2 is an isomorphism of the space H 1 L with the classical Hardy space H 1(Rd) whose inverse is L1/2(−∆)−1/2. As a corollary we obtain that the space L is characterized by the Riesz transforms Rj = ∂ H 1 ∂xj L−1/2. 1. Introduction and statement of the result Let Kt(x, y) be the integral kernels of the semigroup {Kt}t>0 of linear operators on Rd, d ≥ 3, generated by a Schrodinger operator −L = ∆ − V (x), where V (x) is a non-negative locally integrable function which satisfies (1.1) ∆−1V (x) = −cdZRd 1 x − yd−2 V (y) dy ∈ L∞(Rd). Since V (x) is non-negative, the Fenman-Kac formula implies that 0 ≤ Kt(x, y) ≤ (4πt)−d/2e−x−y2/4t =: Pt(x − y). (1.2) It is known, see [14], that for V (x) ≥ 0 the condition (1.1) is equivalent to the lower Gaussian bounds for Kt(x, y), that is, there are c, C > 0 such that ct−d/2e−Cx−y2/t ≤ Kt(x, y). (1.3) We say that an L1-function f belongs to the Hardy space H 1 MLf (x) = supt>0 Ktf (x) belongs to L1(Rd). Then we set kfkH 1 L = kMLfkL1(Rd). L if the maximal function The Hardy spaces H 1 L associated with Schrodinger operators with nonnegative poten- tials satisfying (1.1) were studied in [10]. It was proved that the map f (x) 7→ w(x)f (x) is an isomorphism of H 1 L onto the classical Hardy space H 1(Rd), where (1.4) w(x) = lim t→∞Z Kt(x, y) dy, 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 42B30, 35J10 (primary); 42B35 (secondary). Key words and phrases. Hardy spaces, Schrodinger operators. The research was supported by Polish funds for sciences, grants: DEC-2012/05/B/ST1/00672 and DEC-2012/05/B/ST1/00692 from Narodowe Centrum Nauki. 1 2 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ which in particular means that (1.5) kf wkH 1(Rd) ∼ kfkH 1 L , see [10, Theorem 1.1]. The function w(x) is L-harmonic, that is, Ktw = w, and satisfies 0 < δ ≤ w(x) ≤ 1. Let us remark that the classical real Hardy space H 1(Rd) can be thought as the space H 1 L associated with the classical heat semigroup et∆, that is, L = −∆ + V with V ≡ 0 in this case. Obviously, the constant functions are the only bounded harmonic functions for ∆. The present paper is a continuation of [10]. Our goal is to study the mappings L1/2(−∆)−1/2 and (−∆)1/2L−1/2 which turn out to be bounded on L1(Rd) (see Lemma 2.6). Our main result is the following theorem, which states another characterization of H 1 L. Theorem 1.6. Assume that L = −∆ + V (x) is a Schrodinger operator on Rd, d ≥ 3, with a locally integrable non-negative potential V (x) satisfying (1.1). Then the mapping f 7→ (−∆)1/2L−1/2f is an isomorphism of H 1 L onto the classical Hardy space H 1(Rd), that is, there is a constant C > 0 such that (1.7) (1.8) k(−∆)1/2L−1/2fkH 1(Rd) ≤ CkfkH 1 L , kL1/2(−∆)−1/2fkH 1 L ≤ CkfkH 1(Rd). As a corollary we immediately obtain the following Riesz transform characterization of H 1 L. Corollary 1.9. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.6 an L1-function f belongs to the space H 1 L−1/2f belong to L1(Rd) for j = 1, 2, ..., d. Moreover, there is a constant C > 0 such that L if and only if Rjf = ∂ ∂xj (1.10) C −1kfkH 1 L ≤ kfkL1(Rd) + dXj=1 kRjfkL1(Rd) ≤ CkfkH 1 L . Example 1. It is not hard to see that if for a function V (x) ≥ 0 defined on Rd, d ≥ 3, there is ε > 0 such that V ∈ Ld/2−ε(Rd) ∩ Ld/2+ε(Rd), then V satisfies (1.1). Example 2. Assume that (1.1) holds for a function V : Rd → [0,∞), d ≥ 3. Then V (x1, x2) := V (x1) defined on Rd × Rn, n ≥ 1, fulfils (1.1). The reader interested in other results concerning Hardy spaces associated with semi- groups of linear operators, and in particular semigroups generated by Schrodinger op- erators, is referred to [1], [2], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [12]. HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 3 2. Boundedness on L1 We define the operators: 0 (−∆)−1f (x) =Z ∞ L−1f (x) =Z ∞ (−∆)−1/2f = c1Z ∞ L−1/2f = c1Z ∞ 0 0 Ptf (x) dt = cdZ Ktf (x) dt =:Z Γ(x, y)f (y) dy, f (y) x − yd−2 dy =:Z Γ0(x − y)f (y) dy, x − yd−1 f (y) dy =:Z eΓ0(x − y)f (y) dy, 1 dZ = c′ dt √t Ptf =:Z eΓ(x, y)f (y) dy, 0 Ktf (2.1) dt √t where c1 = Γ(1/2)−1. Clearly, 0 ≤ Γ(x, y) ≤ c′ dx − y−d+1, The perturbation formula asserts that Pt(x − y) = Kt(x, y) +Z t = Kt(x, y) +Z t (2.2) 0 < Γ(x, y) ≤ cdx − y−d+2. 0 Z Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y) dz ds 0 Z Kt−s(x, z)V (z)Ps(z − y) dz ds. Multiplying the second inequality in (2.2) by w(x) and integrating with respect to dx we get (2.3) Z Pt(x − y)w(x) dx = w(y) +ZRdZ t 0 w(z)V (z)Ps(z, y) ds dx, since w is L-harmonic. The left-hand side of (2.3) tends to a harmonic function, which is bounded from below by δ and above by 1, as t tends to infinity. Thus there is a constant 0 < cw ≤ 1 such that (2.4) cw = w(y) +ZRd w(z)V (z)Γ0(z − y) dz. Similarly, integrating the first equation in (2.2) with respect to x and taking limit as t tends to infinity, we get (2.5) 1 = w(y) +ZRd V (z)Γ(z, y) dz. For a reasonable function f the following operators are well defined in the sense of distributions: (−∆)1/2f = c2Z ∞ L1/2 = c2Z ∞ 0 0 (Ptf − f ) dt t3/2 . (Ktf − f ) dt t3/2 , c2 = Γ(−1/2)−1, 4 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ Lemma 2.6. There is a constant C > 0 such that (2.7) (2.8) k(−∆)1/2L−1/2fkL1 ≤ CkfkL1, kL1/2(−∆)−1/2fkL1 ≤ CkfkL1. Proof. From the perturbation formula (2.2) we get (2.9) 0 (−∆)1/2L−1/2f (x) = c2Z ∞ = c2Z ∞ (Pt − Kt)L−1/2f (x) (Kt − I)L−1/2f (x) = c2Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y)L−1/2f (y) dy dz ds (Pt − I)L−1/2f (x) t3/2 + c2Z ∞ dt t3/2 dt 0 0 dt t3/2 dt t3/2 + f (x). Consider the integral kernel W (x, u) of the operator f 7→Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y)L−1/2f (y) dy dz ds dt t3/2 , that is, dt t3/2 . W (x, u) =Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y)Γ(y, u) dy dz ds Clearly 0 ≤ W (x, u). Integration of W (x, u) with respect to dx leads to Z W (x, u) dx =Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZZ V (z)Ks(z, y)Γ(y, u) dy dz ds dt t3/2 = 2Z ∞ 0 ZZ V (z)Ks(z, y)eΓ(y, u) dy dz ds √s 1 ZZ V (z)eΓ(z, y)eΓ(y, u) dy dz ≤ 2c−1 1 Z V (z)Γ(z, u)dz. = 2c−1 (2.10) Using (2.1) we see that R W (x, u) dx ≤ 2c−1 (2.7). The proof of (2.8) goes in the same way. We skip the details. 1 k∆−1V kL∞, which completes the proof of (cid:3) We finish this section by proving the following two lemmas, which will be used in the sequel. Lemma 2.11. Assume that f ∈ L1(Rd). Then (2.12) Z (−∆)1/2L−1/2f (x) dx =Z f (x)w(x) dx. HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 5 Proof. From (2.9) and (2.10) we conclude that Z (−∆)1/2L−1/2f (x) dx = c2Z Z W (x, u)f (u) dudx +Z f (x) dx = 2c2c−1 1 Z V (z)Γ(z, u)f (u) dz du + Z f (x) dx =Z (w(u) − 1)f (u) du +Z f (x) dx, where in the last equality we have used (2.5). (cid:3) Lemma 2.13. Assume that f ∈ L1(Rd). Then (2.14) Z (L1/2(−∆)−1/2f )(x)w(x) dx = cwZ f (x) dx. Proof. The proof is similar to that of Lemma 2.11. Indeed, by the perturbation formula (2.2) we have 0 Z (L1/2(−∆)−1/2f )(x)w(x) dx = c2Z Z ∞ (Kt − Pt)((−∆)−1/2)f )(x) + c2Z Z ∞ (Pt − I)((−∆)−1/2)f )(x) = −c2Z Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZZ w(x)Kt−s(x, z)V (z) × Ps(z − y)((−∆)− 1 0 dt t3/2 w(x) dx dt t3/2 w(x) dx +Z w(x)f (x) dx = −c2Z ∞ 0 Z t 0 ZRdZRd +Z w(x)f (x) dx, 2 f )(y) dydz ds dt t3/2 dx w(z)V (z)Ps(z − y)((−∆)−1/2f )(y) dydz ds dt t3/2 6 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ where in the last equality we have used that w is L-harmonic. Integrating with respect to dt and then with respect to ds yields 2c2 c1 Z Z w(z)V (z)eΓ0(z − y)((−∆)−1/2f )(y) dy dz +Z f (x)w(x) dx Z (L1/2(−∆)−1/2f )(x)w(x) dx = − =Z w(z)V (z)Γ0(z − u)f (u) du dz +Z f (x)w(x) dx =Z cwf (x) dx −Z w(y)f (y) dy +Z f (x)w(x) dx, where in the last equality we have used (2.4). (cid:3) 3. Atoms and molecules Fix 1 < q ≤ ∞. We say that a function a is an (1, q, w)-atom if there is a ball q −1, R a(x)w(x) dx = 0. The atomic λjo, B ⊂ Rd such that supp a ⊂ B, kakLq(Rd) ≤ B norm kfkH 1at,q,w is defined by = infn ∞Xj=1 kfkH 1 (3.1) at,q,w 1 are (1, q, w)-atoms. for the Hardy space H 1(Rd), which can be thought as H 1 where the infimum is taken over all representations f = P∞ j=1 λjaj, where λj ∈ C, aj Clearly, if w0(x) ≡ 1, then the (1, q, w0)-atoms coincide with the classical (1, q)-atoms As a direct consequence of Theorem 1.1 of [10] (see (1.5)) and the results about atomic decompositions of the classical real Hardy spaces (see, e.g., [3], [13], [15]), we obtain that the space H 1 L admits atomic decomposition into (1, q, w)-atoms, that is, there is a constant Cq > 0 such that −∆. (3.2) C −1 q kfkH 1 at,q,w ≤ kfkH 1 L ≤ CqkfkH 1 at,q,w . Let ε > 0, 1 < q < ∞. We say that a function b is a (1, q, ε, w)-molecule associated with a ball B = B(x0, r) if (cid:16)ZB b(x)q dx(cid:17) 1 q (3.3) and (3.4) ≤ B 1 q q −1, (cid:16)Z2kB\2k−1B b(x)q dx(cid:17) 1 Z b(x)w(x) dx = 0. ≤ 2kB 1 q −12−εk Obviously every (1, q, w)-atom is a (1, q, ε, w)-molecule. It is also not hard to see that for fixed q > 1 and ε > 0 there is a constant C > 0 such that every (1, q, ε, w) molecule HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 7 b can be decomposed into a sum ∞Xn=1 where λn ∈ C, an are (1, q, w)-atoms. The following lemma is easy to prove. b(x) = λnan, ∞Xn=1 λn ≤ C, Lemma 3.5. Let 1 < q < ∞, δ, ε > 0 be such that δ > d(1 − 1 constant C > 0 such that if b(x) satisfies (3.4) and q ) + ε. Then there is a (3.6) ≤ then b is a (1, q, ε, w)-molecule associated with B(y0, r). (cid:16)Z (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)b(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 dx(cid:17)1/q (cid:17)δ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) r q r−d+d/q C , In order to prove Theorem 1.6 we shall use general results about Hardy spaces as- sociated with Schrodinger operators with non-negative potentials which were proved in [9]. Let {Tt}t>0 be a semigroup of linear operators generated by a Schrodinger operator −L = ∆ − V(x) on Rd, where V(x) is a non-negative locally integrable potential. The Hardy space H 1 L is define by means of the maximal function, that is, L = {f ∈ L1(Rd) : kfkH 1 H 1 t>0 Ttf (x)kL1(Rd) < ∞}. := k sup L We say that a function a is a generalized (1,∞,L)-atom for the Hardy space H 1 is a ball B = B(y0, r) and a function b such that kbkL∞ ≤ B−1, a = (I − Tr2)b. supp b ⊂ B, L if there L ∼ kfkH 1 Then we say that a is associated with the ball B(y0, r). It was proved in Section 6 of [9] that the space H 1 L admits atomic decomposition with the generalized (1,∞,L)-atoms, is defined as in (3.1) with aj(x) that is, kfkH 1 replaced by the general (1,∞,L)-atoms aj(x). Lemma 3.7. There is a constant C > 0 such that for every a being a generalized (1,∞,L) atom associated with B(y0, r) one has , where the norm kfkH 1 at,∞,L at,∞,L L−1/2a(y) ≤ Cr1−d(cid:16)1 + y − y0 r (cid:17)−d . Proof. The proof follows from functional calculi (see, e.g., [11]). Note that L−1/2a = m(r)(L)b with m(r)(λ) = r(r2λ)−1/2(e−r2λ − 1) and b such that supp b ⊂ B(y0, r), kbkL∞ ≤ B(y0, r)−1. From [11] we conclude that there is a constant C > 0 such that for every r > 0 one has m(r)(L)f (x) =ZRd m(r)(x, y)f (y) dy, with m(r)(x, y) satisfying (3.8) m(r)(x, y) ≤ Cr1−d(cid:16)1 + x − y r (cid:17)−d . 8 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ Now the lemma can be easily deduced from (3.8) and the size and support property of b. (cid:3) For real numbers n > 2, β > 0 let 4. Proof of Theorem 1.6 g(x) = (1 + x)−n−β, gs(x) = s−n/2g(cid:0) x √s(cid:1). gs(x) ds ≤ Cx2−n(cid:16)1 + x√t(cid:17)−2−β ; One can easily check that 0 (4.1) (4.2) r (cid:17)−n+2 Moreover, it is easily to verify that for 1 < q < ∞, d(1 − 1 (4.3) Z t Z ∞ gs(x) ds ≤ Cr2−n(cid:16)1 + x (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)xα−d(cid:16)1 + x√t(cid:17)−d−β(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(Rd, dx) r (cid:17)−d+γ (cid:17)−β(cid:16)1 + y Z z − y2−d(cid:16)1 + z − y and (4.4) r2 r = Cα,βt(α−d+d/q)/2 for 0 < γ < β < 2 . for r > 0. q ) < α ≤ d, β > 0 one has dy ≤ Cr2(cid:16)1 + z r (cid:17)−d+γ+2−β Lemma 4.5. Assume that V (x) satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 1.6. Then for 0 < γ ≤ 2 and r > 0 one has (4.6) Proof. The left-hand side of (4.6) is bounded by ZRd Zz−y≤r r V (z)(cid:16)1 + z − y z − y(cid:17)d−2 V (z)(cid:16) r d rd−2k∆−1V kL∞. (cid:17)−d+γ dz ≤ c−1 dz +Zz−y>r ≤ c−1 V (z)(cid:16)z − y r d rd−2k∆−1V kL∞. (cid:17)−d+2 dz (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 1.6. We already have known that the operators (−∆)1/2L−1/2 and L1/2(−∆)−1/2 are bounded on L1(Rd). It suffices to prove (1.7) and (1.8). Set γ = 1 and fix q > 1 and ε > 0 such that γ > d(1 − 1 q ) + ε. Set w0(x) ≡ 1. According to the atomic and molecular decompositions (see Section 3) the proof of (1.7) will be done if we verify that (−∆)1/2L−1/2a is a multiple of a (1, q, ε, w0)-molecule for every generalized (1,∞, L)-atom a with a multiple constant independent of a. Identical arguments can be then applied to show that L1/2(−∆)−1/2a is a (1, q, ε, w)-molecule for a being a generalized atom for the classical Hardy space H 1(Rd) = H 1 −∆ with a multiple constant independent of a. 10 HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 9 Let a = (I − Kr2)b be a generalized (1,∞, L)-atom for H 1 By Lemma 2.11, since R w(x)a(x) dx = 0, we have that Z (−∆)1/2L−1/2a(x) dx = 0. L associated with B(y0, r). Set (4.7) J(x) =Z ∞ 0 Z t =Z r2 0 Z t 0 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y)(L−1/2a)(y) dy dz ds 0 ZZ ... +Z ∞ ZZ +Z ∞ r2 Z t t/2ZZ ... r2 Z t/2 0 dt t3/2 = J1(x) + J2(x) + J3(x). Thanks to (2.9) and Lemma 3.5 it suffices to show that there is a constant Cq > 0, independent of a(x) such that (4.8) (4.9) Applying Lemma 3.7 and (4.1) with n = d + 1, we obtain r (cid:17)γ J(x)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(Rd) ≤ Cqr−d+d/q. (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 J1(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z r2 0 Z t 0 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)Ks(z, y)(L−1/2a)(y) dy dz ds ≤ CZ r2 0 Z t 0 Z Pt−s(x − z)V (z)r1−d(cid:16)1 + z − y0 ≤ CZ r2 0 Z Ps(x − z)V (z)r1−d(cid:16)1 + z − y0 (cid:17)−d ≤ CNZ x − z1−d(cid:16)1 + x − z V (z)r1−d(cid:16)1 + z − y0 (cid:17)−d ds √s (cid:17)−N dz ds dz r r r r dt t3/2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt t3/2 (cid:17)−d dz. Consequently, (4.10) J1(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 ≤ CN r1−dZ x − z−d+1(cid:16)1 + x − z (cid:17)γ r r (cid:17)−N +γ V (z)(cid:16)1 + z − y0 r (cid:17)−d+γ dz. Therefore, using the Minkowski integral inequality together with (4.3) and (4.6), we get (4.11) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)J1(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 r (cid:17)γ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(dx) ≤ Cr−d+d/q. In order to estimate J2(x) we use Lemma 3.7 and (4.1) with n = d to obtain 10 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ (4.12) r r (cid:17)γ J2(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 (cid:17)γZ t/2 ZZ t−d/2e−cx−z2/tV (z) ≤ CZ ∞ r2 (cid:16)1 + x − y0 × Ks(z, y)r1−d(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)−d ≤ CZ ∞ × z − y2−d(cid:16)1 + z − y√t (cid:17)−N +γ r2 ZZ t(2γ−d−3)/2e−cx−z2/tV (z) r1−d−2γ(cid:16)1 + y − y0 dy dz ds dt t3/2 r r 0 (cid:17)−d+γ dy dz dt. Setting N = β + γ with 0 < γ < β < 2 and applying the Minkowski integral inequality together with (4.4) and (4.6) we conclude that (4.13) r r1−d−2γ(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)J2(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 (cid:17)γ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(dx) ≤ CZ ∞ r2 ZZ t−(d+3−2γ−d/q)/2V (z) × z − y2−d(cid:16)1 + z − y√t (cid:17)−β ≤ CZ ∞ r2 ZZ t−(d+3−2γ−d/q)/2V (z) (cid:17)−β(cid:16)√t r (cid:17)β r1−d−2γ(cid:16)1 + y − y0 × z − y2−d(cid:16)1 + z − y ≤ CZ r−2d+2+d/qV (z)(cid:16)1 + z − y0 (cid:17)−d+2+γ−β ≤ Cr−d+d/q. (cid:17)−d+γ dz r r r r dy dz dt (cid:17)−d+γ dy dz dt By Lemma 3.7 and (4.1) with n = d, we have J3(x) ≤ CZ ∞ r2 Z t t 2 ZZ Pt−s(x − z)V (z)t− d ×(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)−d r 2 e− cz−y2 t r1−d dy dz ds dt 3 2 t V (z) ≤ CNZ ∞ × t− d r2 ZZ x − z2−d(cid:16)1 + x − z√t (cid:17)−N 2 e−cz−y2/t(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)−d r r1−d dy dz ds dt t3/2 . HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 11 Hence, By Minkowski's integral inequality combined with (4.3) we arrive to tγV (z) r1−d−2γ dy dz ds dt t3/2 . (cid:17)−d+γ r1−d−2γ dy dz dt. r (cid:17)γ J3(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 ≤ CZ ∞ × t− d r2 ZZ x − z2−d(cid:16)1 + x − z√t (cid:17)−N +γ 2 e−c′z−y2/t(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)γ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(dx) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)J3(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 ≤Z ∞ r2 ZZ t(−d+2+d/q)/2+γ−3/2V (z) (cid:17)−d+γ r r r × t−d/2e−c′z−y2/t(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)γ(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(dx) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)J3(x)(cid:16)1 + x − y0 ≤ CZZ r2−3d+d/qV (z)(cid:16)1 + z − y ≤Z r2−2d+d/qV (z)(cid:16)1 + z − y0 ≤ Cr−d+d/q. r r r Application of (4.2) with n = 2d + 1 − d q − 2γ and then (4.6) yields (cid:17)−2d+1+d/q+2γ(cid:16)1 + y − y0 (cid:17)−2d+1+d/q+3γ dz r (cid:17)−d+γ dy dz The above inequality together with (4.11) and (4.13) gives desired (4.8) and, conse- quently, the proof of (1.7) is complete. Let us note that in the proof (1.7) we use only Lemmas 2.11, 3.7, and the upper Gaussian bounds for the kernels. The proof of (1.8) goes identically to that of (1.7) by replacing Lemma 2.11 by Lemma 2.13. (cid:3) 5. Proof of the Riesz transform characterization of H 1 L (5.1) ∂ ∂xj L−1/2f = Proof of Corollary 1.9. Assume that f ∈ H 1 L. Then, thanks to Theorem 1.6, there is g ∈ H 1(Rd) such that f = L1/2(−∆)−1/2g. By the characterization of the classical Hardy space H 1(Rd) by the Riesz transforms we have ∂ ∂xj L−1/2f ∈ L1(Rd) for j = 1, 2, ..., d. L−1/2L1/2(−∆)−1/2g = Conversely, assume that for f ∈ L1(Rd) we have ∂ Set g = (−∆)1/2L−1/2f . Then by Lemma 2.6, g ∈ L1(Rd) and ∂ (5.2) ∂xj (−∆)−1/2(−∆)1/2L−1/2f = (−∆)−1/2g ∈ L1(Rd). L−1/2f ∈ L1(Rd), (−∆)−1/2g = ∂ ∂xj ∂ ∂xj ∂ ∂xj ∂xj 12 JACEK DZIUBA ´NSKI AND JACEK ZIENKIEWICZ which implies that g ∈ H 1(Rd). Consequently, by Theorem 1.6, f ∈ H 1 can be deduced from (5.1), (5.2), and Theorem 1.6. L. Finally (1.10) (cid:3) References [1] Auscher, P., Duong, X.T., McIntosh, A.: Boundedness of Banach space valued singular integral operators and Hardy spaces, Unpublished preprint (2005) [2] Bernicot, F., Zhao, J.: New abstract Hardy spaces, J. Funct. Anal., 255, 1761 -- 1796 (2008) [3] Coifman, R.: A real variable characterization of H p, Studia Math., 51, 269 -- 274 (1974) [4] Czaja, W., Zienkiewicz, J.: Atomic characterization of the Hardy space H 1 L(R) of one-dimensional Schrodinger operators with nonnegative potentials, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 136, no. 1, 89 -- 94 (2008) [5] Duong, X.T., Yan, L.X.: Duality of Hardy and BMO spaces associated with operators with heat kernel bounds, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 18, 943 -- 973 (2005) [6] Dziuba´nski, J., Garrig´os, G., Mart´ınez, T., Torrea, J.L., Zienkiewicz, J.: BMO spaces related to Schrodinger operators with potentials satisfying a reverse Holder inequality, Math. Z., 249, 329 -- 356 (2005). [7] Dziuba´nski, J., Zienkiewicz, J.: Hardy space H 1 associated to Schrodinger operator satisfying reverse Holder inequality, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 15, 279 -- 296 (1999) [8] Dziuba´nski, J., Zienkiewicz, J.: Hardy spaces H 1 for Schrodinger operators with certain potentials, Studia Math., 164, 39 -- 53 (2004) [9] Dziuba´nski, J., Zienkiewicz, J.: On Hardy spaces associated with certain Schrodinger operators in dimension 2, Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 28, no. 4, 1035 -- 1060 (2012) [10] Dziuba´nski, J., Zienkiewicz, J.: On Isomorphisms of Hardy Spaces Associated with Schrodinger Operators, J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 19, 447 -- 456 (2013) [11] Hebisch, W.: A multiplier theorem for Schrodinger operators, Colloq. Math., 60/61, 659 -- 664 (1990) [12] Hofmann, S., Lu, G.Z., Mitrea, D., Mitrea, M., Yan, L.X.: Hardy spaces associated with non- negative self-adjoint operators satisfying Davies-Gafney estimates, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 214, no. 1007 (2011) [13] Latter, R.H.: A decomposition of H p(Rn) in terms of atoms, Studia Math., 62 no. 1, 93 -- 101 (1978) [14] Semenov, Yu.A.: Stability of Lp-spectrum of generalized Schrodinger operators and equivalence of Green's functions, Internat. Math. Res. Notices, 12, 573 -- 593 (1997). [15] Stein, E.: Harmonic Analysis: Real-Variable Methods, Orthogonality, and Oscillatory Integrals, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, (1993) HARDY SPACES FOR SCHR ODINGER OPERATORS 13 Instytut Matematyczny, Uniwersytet Wroc lawski, pl. Grunwaldzki 2/4, 50-384 Wroc law, Poland E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected]
1501.05746	2	1501	2015-10-28T20:51:34	The Riesz Capacity in Metric Spaces	[ "math.FA", "math.CA" ]	We study a capacity theory based on a definition of a Riesz potential in metric spaces with a doubling measure. In this general setting, we study the basic properties of the Riesz capacity, including monotonicity, countable subadditivity and several convergence results. We define a modified version of the Hausdorff measure and provide lower bound and upper bound estimates for the capacity in terms of the modified Hausdorff content.	math.FA	math	THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE Abstract. We study a capacity theory based on a definition of a Riesz potential in metric spaces with a doubling measure. In this general setting, we study the basic properties of the Riesz ca- pacity, including monotonicity, countable subadditivity and several convergence results. We define a modified version of the Hausdorff measure and provide lower bound and upper bound estimates for the capacity in terms of the modified Hausdorff content. 1. Introduction In this paper, we study a theory of capacity based on a metric version of the Riesz potential in the setting of a general metric space (X, d) equipped with a doubling measure µ. We define a related Hausdorff measure and study the connections between the Riesz capacity and the Hausdorff measure. With our definitions and results, we extend the classical Riesz capacity theory from the Euclidean space, with the Lebesgue measure, to the setting of a general metric measure space. In Rn, the capacity theory for the Riesz potential can be found for example in [2], [3], [29] and [30]. During the past twenty years, different capacities have been studied in metric measure spaces for example in [5], [15], [17], [19], [21], [22], [23], [24] and [25]. Also, a part of the theory for Riesz capacity follows from general results in [12] and [32]. Here, we formulate the theory explicitly and state the results to keep the paper self-contained. We define a metric version of the Riesz potential of order γ, where 0 < γ < 1, as Iγf (x) =ZX f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y). One can find a similar definition for the Riesz potential in the works of Kairema and Sjodin (see [20], [31] and [32]). In the definition, there appears only the measure of balls in the Riesz kernel. Another defini- tion for a metric version of the Riesz potential is such that it also has the distance function as a part of the kernel. This version of the Riesz potential can be found for example in [16], [18] and [26]. Also, other Riesz potentials and fractional integral operators have been studied in 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 31E05, 31B15. The research was supported by the Academy of Finland, grant no. 272886. 1 2 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE the metric setting for example in [13], [14] and [27]. We emphasize that, throughout the paper, we do not assume any type of (Ahlfors) Q-regularity on the measure µ that would give uniform lower bounds or upper bounds for the measure of balls in terms of the radii. In this generality, our definition of the Riesz potential, with no distance function as a part of the kernel, works better. In Section 3, we define a metric version of the Riesz capacity Cγ,p and show that it satisfies the basic properties of capacity. These properties include monotonicity, countable subadditivity and several convergence results. In particular, we show that the Riesz capacity is a Fatou capacity. This lower semicontinuity property of capacity is an analogue of Fatou’s lemma. We also study the capacitability of sets and show that the Riesz capacity is a so called Choquet capacity. This means that the capacity of a Borel set can be obtained by approximating with compact sets from the inside and open sets from the outside. We finish the section by briefly studying the dual Riesz capacity. In the beginning of Section 4, we prove an upper bound estimate for the capacity of balls in terms of the measure µ. This result leads us to define a modified version of the standard Hausdorff content. The main results of the section are lower bound and upper bound estimates for the Riesz capacity in terms of this modified Hausdorff content. Similar results have been studied by Sjodin in [31]. Here, we give direct proofs to results that apply not only for compact sets. In particular, we do not need to use Frostman’s lemma to obtain the results. Acknowledgements. We would like to thank Professor Juha Kin- nunen for proposing this project. We would also like to thank Juha Lehrback and Heli Tuominen for useful discussions and comments on the manuscript. 2. Notation and preliminaries 2.1. Riesz potential. We assume that X = (X, d, µ) is a locally com- pact metric measure space equipped with a metric d and a Borel reg- ular, doubling outer measure µ. The doubling property means that there is a fixed constant cd ≥ 1, called the doubling constant of µ, such that (2.1) µ(B(x, 2r)) ≤ cdµ(B(x, r)) for every ball B(x, r) = {y ∈ X : d(y, x) < r}. We also assume that the measure of each open ball is positive and finite. The doubling condition implies that (2.2) µ(B(y, r)) µ(B(x, R)) R(cid:17)Q ≥ C(cid:16) r for every 0 < r ≤ R and y ∈ B(x, R) for some C > 0 and Q > 0 that only depend on cd. In fact, we may take Q = log2 cd and C = c−2 d THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 3 (see [5]). In addition, we assume that spheres are of measure zero, i.e. (2.3) µ ({y ∈ X : d(x, y) = r}) = 0, for x ∈ X and B(x, r). This assumption is needed for the Riesz po- tential, defined below, to satisfy lower semicontinuity properties (see Remark 3.3) that are required for the capacity theory. Definition 2.1. Let 0 < γ < 1. The Riesz potential of order γ of a measurable function f is (2.4) Iγf (x) =ZX f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y). Remark 2.2. (i) To be precise, we would need to define the kernel separately for the cases x 6= y and x = y. However, we assume our space X to be such that µ vanishes on sets which consist of a single point. Then the domain of integration X \ {x} can be replaced by X (see [20]). Since we have a doubling metric measure space, this is equivalent to the condition that there are no isolated points in our space X. (ii) In the Euclidean space, with the n-dimensional Lebesgue measure, we have, with the notation α = γn ∈ (0, n), the usual Riesz potential Iαf (x) =ZRn f (y) x − yn−α dy of order α on Rn (up to a dimensional constant). Another way to define a Riesz potential in a metric space, as in [16] and [18], is (2.5) eIγf (x) =ZX f (y)d(x, y)γ µ (B(x, d(x, y))) dµ(y). If the measure µ is (Ahlfors) Q-regular, that is, there exists a constant C > 1 such that (2.6) C −1rQ ≤ µ(B(x, r)) ≤ CrQ for every x ∈ X and 0 < r < diam(X), then Iγf and eIγQf are compa- rable in the sense that there exists a constant C ≥ 1 such that C −1Iγf ≤ eIγQf ≤ CIγf. In the next sections, we do not assume the (Ahlfors) Q-regularity or any other estimates that would give uniform lower bounds or upper bounds for the measure of balls in terms of the radii. We assume only the doubling property (2.1) and develop the theory of Riesz capacity based on the definition (2.4) of the Riesz potential. In particular, this definition works better for our purposes in Section 4, where we define a modified version of the standard Hausdorff measure and prove two results that relate the Riesz capacity and the Hausdorff measure. 4 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE 2.2. Function spaces and capacities. We have by Cavalieri’s prin- ciple that Lp(X) = Lp(X, µ) is the space of all µ-measurable functions f in X such that kf kLp(X) =(cid:18)Z ∞ 0 ptp−1µ({z ∈ X : f (z) > t})dt(cid:19)1/p < ∞, which is a Banach space when 1 ≤ p < ∞. The weak Lp-space Lp,∞(X) is defined by the condition kf kLp,∞(X) := sup t>0 tµ ({z ∈ X : f (z) > t})1/p < ∞. We denote by Lp +(X) the subset of Lp(X) of non-negative functions. Definition 2.3. We define, on the family of µ-measurable subsets of X, a capacity to be a non-negative set function C, which has the following properties: (a) C(∅) = 0, (b) If A ⊂ B, then C(A) ≤ C(B), (c) C (S∞ i=1 Ai) ≤P∞ i=1 C(Ai). A1 ⊂ A2 ⊂ · · · are subsets of X and A =S∞ A capacity C is called a Fatou capacity if C(Ai) → C(A), whenever i=1 Ai. We also say that a property holds C-q.e. on X if it holds for all x ∈ X except those in a set E with C(E) = 0. The capacitary Lorentz spaces Lp,q(C), p, q > 0, are defined by the condition kf kLp,q(C) :=(cid:16)qZ ∞ 0 tq−1C ({z ∈ X : f (z) > t})q/p dt(cid:17)1/q < ∞, when q < ∞, and in the case of q = ∞ by kf kLp,∞(C) := sup t>0 t C ({z ∈ X : f (z) > t})1/p < ∞. The space Lp,∞(C) is called the weak capacitary Lp-space. For the general facts and properties of the capacitary Lorentz spaces, we refer to [6], [7] and [8]. Throughout the paper, we denote the characteristic function of a set E ⊂ X by χE. In general, C will denote a positive constant whose value is not necessarily the same at each occurrence. 3. Riesz Capacity Definition 3.1. Let 1 < p < ∞ and 0 < γ < 1. The Riesz (γ, p)- capacity of a set E ⊂ X is the number Cγ,p(E) = inf f ∈A(E) f p Lp(X), where A(E) = {f ∈ Lp +(X) : Iγf ≥ 1 on E} . THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 5 If A(E) = ∅, we set Cγ,p(E) = ∞. Functions belonging to A(E) are called admissible functions or test functions for E. From now on, we always assume in this section that 1 < p < ∞ and 0 < γ < 1. In the Euclidean space, with the Lebesgue measure, one can find the basic properties of the Riesz capacity for example in [2], [3], [29] and [30]. In the metric case, assuming only the doubling property from the Borel regular measure µ, we begin by showing that the Riesz (γ, p)-capacity is an outer measure. This means that the Riesz capacity satisfies the properties of Definition 2.3. Theorem 3.2. The Riesz (γ, p)-capacity is an outer measure. Proof. Clearly Cγ,p(∅) = 0, since 0 is an admissible function. The definition of the capacity also implies monotonicity, since if E1 ⊂ E2, then A(E2) ⊂ A(E1). To prove the countable subadditivity, let {Ai}∞ sets in X and let A = S∞ i=1 be a sequence of i=1 Cγ,p(Ai) < ∞. Then, Cγ,p(Ai) < ∞ for all i ∈ N. Let ǫ > 0, and for each i ∈ N, let fi ∈ A(Ai) be such that fip i=1 Ai. We may assume that P∞ We define f (x) := sup i∈N implies f p Lp(X) ≤ ∞Xi=1 fip Lp(X) < Cγ,p(Ai) + ǫ2−i. fi(x). We have that f (x)p ≤P∞ ∞Xi=1 (cid:0)Cγ,p(Ai) + ǫ2−i(cid:1) = ∞Xi=1 Lp(X) ≤ i=1 fi(x)p, which Cγ,p(Ai) + ǫ. Moreover, we have that Iγf (x) ≥ Iγfi(x), since f (x) ≥ fi(x) for all x ∈ X and i ∈ N. Let x ∈ A. Then there exists j ∈ N such that x ∈ Aj and hence Iγf (x) ≥ Iγfj(x) ≥ 1. Thus f is an admissible function for A =S∞ Cγ,p(cid:16) ∞[i=1 i=1 Ai. Now Ai(cid:17) ≤ f p Lp(X) ≤ ∞Xi=1 Cγ,p(Ai) + ǫ, and the claim follows by letting ǫ → 0. (cid:3) Remark 3.3. The Riesz potential, as defined in (2.4), is lower semi- continuous. For our purposes, it is enough to prove the lower semicon- tinuity for functions f ∈ Lp +(X). Let x0 ∈ X. Then Iγf (x0) =ZX f (y) µ (B(x0, d(x0, y)))1−γ dµ(y). We need to show that Iγf (x0) ≤ lim inf x→x0 Iγf (x), when x → x0. Let x ∈ X. Since for any y ∈ X B(x, d(x, y)) ⊂ B(x0, d(x, y) + d(x0, x)), 6 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE we have by the monotonicity of µ that µ (B(x, d(x, y))) ≤ µ (B(x0, d(x, y) + d(x0, x))) . The above inequality and equality (2.3) imply that lim sup x→x0 µ (B(x, d(x, y))) ≤ lim x→x0 µ(B(x0, d(x, y) + d(x0, x))) = µ (B(x0, d(x0, y))) . Now, for any y ∈ X, f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ x→x0 and, by using Fatou’s lemma, we get f (y) µ (B(x0, d(x0, y)))1−γ ≤ lim inf Iγf (x0) =ZX ≤ZX x→x0 ZX lim inf x→x0 ≤ lim inf f (y) µ (B(x0, d(x0, y)))1−γ dµ(y) f (y) f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) = lim inf x→x0 Iγf (x). In addition, we get the following lower semicontinuity property of the Riesz potential as an operator Iγf ≤ lim inf i→∞ Iγfi, when fi → f weakly in Lp +(X). The weak convergence implies that fiµ → f µ converge weakly as measures with the vague topology of [12, Section 1.1]. Also, because of equality (2.3) in the previous section, we have that our Riesz kernel is continuous and hence lower semicon- tinuous. The result then follows from [12, Lemma 2.2.1.b)] and [30, Theorem 1.2. p.58]. Using the fact that the Riesz potential of a function f is lower semi- continuous, we show that the Riesz capacity is an outer capacity. This means that the capacity of a set E ⊂ X can be obtained by approxi- mating with open sets from the outside. Theorem 3.4. Cγ,p is an outer capacity, that is, Cγ,p(E) = inf {Cγ,p(O) : O ⊃ E, O open} . Proof. By the monotonicity, Cγ,p(E) ≤ inf {Cγ,p(O) : O ⊃ E, O open}. To prove the inequality to the reverse direction, we may assume that Cγ,p(E) < ∞. Let 0 < ǫ < 1 and let f ∈ Lp +(X) be a function such that Iγf ≥ 1 on E and f p Lp(X) < Cγ,p(E) + ǫ. THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 7 We define and fǫ := 1 1 − ǫ f G := {x ∈ X : Iγfǫ(x) > 1} . Since Iγfǫ is lower semicontinuous, G is an open set. We also have that fǫ(x) > f (x) for all x ∈ X, since 0 < ǫ < 1. Now, if x ∈ E, then Iγf (x) ≥ 1 and hence Iγfǫ(x) > 1. Thus we have that x ∈ G and E ⊂ G. Moreover, fǫ is admissible for Cγ,p(G) and Cγ,p(G) ≤ fǫp Lp(X) =(cid:16) 1 1 − ǫ(cid:17)p Lp(X) ≤ Cγ,p(E)(1 − ǫ)−p + ǫ(1 − ǫ)−p. f p Since we have that inf {Cγ,p(O) : O ⊃ E, O open} ≤ Cγ,p(G), letting ǫ → 0 yields the inequality to the other direction. (cid:3) The next capacitary weak type lemma shows in particular that the Riesz potential Iγf of a nonnegative Lp-function f belongs to the weak capacitary Lp-space. Lemma 3.5. If f ∈ Lp +(X), then the capacitary weak type estimate Cγ,p ({x ∈ X : Iγf (x) > a}) ≤ a−pf p Lp(X) holds for each 0 < a < ∞. Moreover, Iγ is bounded from Lp Lp,∞(Cγ,p). Proof. Let f ∈ Lp +(X) and 0 < a < ∞. We define +(X) to and fa := f a F := {x ∈ X : Iγf (x) > a} . Since Iγfa = Iγ(cid:0) f a(cid:1) ≥ 1 on F , fa is admissible for F and Cγ,p(F ) ≤ fap Lp(X) = a−pf p Lp(X). Moreover, the capacitary weak type estimate implies that kIγf kLp,∞(Cγ,p) = sup t>0 t Cγ,p ({x ∈ X : Iγf (x) > t})1/p ≤ f Lp(X), and the second claim follows. (cid:3) We use the capacitary weak type estimate to prove the next theorem, which in particular says that the Riesz potential of a function f ∈ Lp +(X) is finite Cγ,p- q.e. It follows that Iγf , for f ∈ Lp(X), is well- defined Cγ,p- q.e. and that the Riesz potential, as an operator, is linear outside a set of capacity zero. Theorem 3.6. Let E ⊂ X. Then Cγ,p(E) = 0 if and only if there exists f ∈ Lp +(X) such that Iγf (x) = ∞ for all x ∈ E. 8 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE Proof. If Cγ,p(E) = 0, then for any integer j, we can find an admissible function fj ∈ A(E) such that fjp Lp(X) =ZX Then the function f :=P∞ P∞ Iγf (x) =ZX fj(y)pdµ(y) < 2−j. j=1 fj belongs to Lp(X) and j=1 fj(y) ∞Xj=1 µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) = Iγfj(x) = ∞ for all x ∈ E, since Iγfj ≥ 1 on E for each j. Conversely, if there exists a nonnegative function f ∈ Lp(X) such that Iγf = ∞ on E, then by the capacitary weak type estimate Cγ,p(E) ≤ Cγ,p ({x ∈ X : Iγf (x) > a}) ≤ a−pf p Lp(X) for every a > 0. By letting a → ∞, we see that Cγ,p(E) = 0. (cid:3) Corollary 3.7. Let f1, f2, f ∈ Lp(X). Then Iγ(f1 + f2) = Iγ(f1) + Iγ(f2), Cγ,p-q.e. and Iγ(af ) = aIγ(f ), Cγ,p-q.e., where a is any finite constant. Proof. If each term on the right side of the above equalities is finite at a point x ∈ X, then the equalities hold at such point by the definition of the Riesz potential. By Theorem 3.6, the sets where the equalities can fail are of capacity zero. (cid:3) Next, we are going to prove several convergence results. We start by defining the convergence of a sequence of functions in capacity. Definition 3.8. We say that a sequence {fi} converges in capacity to f , denoted fi → f in Cγ,p, if for every ǫ > 0 lim i→∞ Cγ,p ({x ∈ X : fi(x) − f (x) > ǫ}) = 0. We show that the Lp-convergence of functions implies that the corre- sponding sequence of the Riesz potentials converges in capacity. Also, for a subsequence, we have pointwise convergence except for a set of capacity zero. Theorem 3.9. Let {fi} ⊂ Lp statements is a consequence of the previous one. +(X). Each of following +(X) and f ∈ Lp (i) fi → f in Lp(X) (ii) Iγfi → Iγf in Cγ,p (iii) There exists a subsequence {fij } of {fi} such that Iγfij → Iγf pointwise Cγ,p-q.e. THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 9 Proof. We show first that (i) implies (ii). Let ǫ > 0. By Theorem 3.6, the potentials Iγfi and Iγf are finite Cγ,p-q.e. Then, we have by Corollary 3.7 and by Lemma 3.5 that Cγ,p ({x ∈ X : Iγfi(x) − Iγf (x) > ǫ}) ≤ ǫ−pfi − f p Lp(X), which proves the claim. Next, we assume that (ii) holds and show that it implies (iii). Let ǫ = 2−j. Then, there exists a subsequence {fij } such that Cγ,p(cid:0)(cid:8)x ∈ X : Iγ(fij )(x) − Iγf (x) > 2−j(cid:9)(cid:1) < 2−j. We use the notation Aj = (cid:8)x ∈ X : Iγ(fij )(x) − Iγf (x) > 2−j(cid:9). The upper limit set A = has zero capacity, since ∞\k=1 ∞[j=k Aj Cγ,p(A) ≤ ∞Xj=k Cγ,p(Aj) ≤ ∞Xj=k 2−j for all k. Now, if x ∈ X \ A then there exists k = k(x) such that x ∈ X \ Aj for j ≥ k, that is Iγ(fij )(x) − Iγf (x) ≤ 2−j. This implies that Iγ(fij )(x) → Iγf (x), as j → ∞, which proves the claim. (cid:3) By using the above theorem, we can strengthen the lower semiconti- nuity property of Iγ from Remark 3.3, at least outside a set of capacity zero. Theorem 3.10. Let {fi} ⊂ Lp(X) and f ∈ Lp(X). (i) If fi → f weakly in Lp(X), then Iγfi ≤ Iγf ≤ lim sup lim inf i→∞ i→∞ Iγfi, Cγ,p-q.e. (ii) If fi → f weakly in Lp +(X), then and Iγf ≤ lim inf i→∞ Iγfi everywhere Iγf = lim inf i→∞ Iγfi Cγ,p-q.e. Proof. We prove first the claim (i). By the Banach-Saks Theorem (see [4]), there exists a subsequence {f ′ i} such that a sequence {gj}, where gj = j−1 jXi=1 f ′ i , 10 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE converges to f in Lp(X). Then, by Theorem 3.9, there exists a subse- quence {g′ j} such that Iγf = lim j→∞ Iγg′ j Cγ,p-q.e. Then, the left inequality in (i) follows due to the fact that Iγf = lim j→∞ Iγg′ j ≥ lim inf i→∞ Iγf ′ i ≥ lim inf i→∞ Iγfi Cγ,p-q.e. The right inequality in (i) follows by replacing fi and f by −fi and −f in the previous argument. If fi → f weakly in Lp +(X), then by the lower semicontinuity of Iγ(·) (see Remark 3.3), we have that Iγf ≤ lim inf i→∞ Iγfi everywhere and it follows by (i) that Iγf = lim inf i→∞ Iγfi Cγ,p-q.e. We prove two more convergence results for the Riesz capacity. As a corollary of Theorem 3.12, we get a lower semicontinuity property for the capacity that is an analogue of Fatou’s lemma. (cid:3) Theorem 3.11. If X ⊃ K1 ⊃ K2 · · · are compact sets and K = i=1 Kj, then T∞ lim i→∞ Cγ,p(Ki) = Cγ,p(K). Proof. Clearly, by the monotonicity, limj→∞ Cγ,p(Kj) ≥ Cγ,p(K). On the other hand, let O be an open set containing K. By the compact- ness of K, we have that Kj ⊂ O for all sufficiently large j. Then limj→∞ Cγ,p(Kj) ≤ Cγ,p(O). Finally, since Cγ,p is an outer capacity by Theorem 3.4, lim j→∞ Cγ,p(Kj) ≤ inf {Cγ,p(O) : O ⊃ K, O open} = Cγ,p(K). (cid:3) Theorem 3.12. If A1 ⊂ A2 ⊂ · · · are subsets of X and A =S∞ then i=1 Ai, that is, the Riesz capacity Cγ,p is a Fatou capacity. lim i→∞ Cγ,p(Ai) = Cγ,p(A), Proof. We may assume that limi→∞ Cγ,p(Ai) = l < ∞. Let fi ≥ 0 be a test function for Cγ,p(Ai) such that (3.1) kfikp Lp(X) ≤ Cγ,p(Ai) + 1 i . THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 11 Then, the sequence {fi} is bounded in Lp(X) and there exists a sub- sequence {fij } that converges weakly to a function f ∈ Lp +(X). By Theorem 3.10 (ii), we have that and hence Iγf ≥ 1 on Ai Cγ,p-q.e. Iγf ≥ 1 on A Cγ,p-q.e. Let E be the subset of A, where the previous inequality holds. Then, by (3.1) and the weak convergence of the functions Cγ,p(A) = Cγ,p(E) ≤ kf kp Lp(X) ≤ lim inf j→∞ fij p Lp(X) ≤ l, from which the result follows. Here, we also used the the lower semi- continuity of · p (cid:3) p (see [3, Lemma 3.1.2. p.109]). Corollary 3.13. If {Ai}∞ i=1 is a sequence of sets in X, then Cγ,p(lim inf i→∞ Ai) ≤ lim inf i→∞ Cγ,p(Ai). Proof. Let S := lim inf i→∞ Ai = SjTk≥j Ak and Si := Si Then Si ⊂ Si+1 ⊂ · · · and S =S∞ i=1 Si, and by Theorem 3.12, j=1Tk≥j Ak. Cγ,p(S) = lim i→∞ Cγ,p(Si) ≤ lim inf i→∞ Cγ,p(Ai). (cid:3) The next definition extends the outer capacity property of Theorem 3.4 to the case where the Riesz capacity of a set E ⊂ X can also be obtained by approximating with compact sets from the inside. By The- orem 3.15, we have this inner capacity property for the Riesz capacity, when considering analytic sets (for the definition of analytic sets, we refer to e.g. [3], [9], [28]). Definition 3.14. A set E ⊂ X is called Cγ,p-capacitable, if Cγ,p(E) = sup{Cγ,p(K) : K ⊂ E, K compact} = inf{Cγ,p(O) : O ⊃ E, O open}. Capacitability has been studied in a very general context by Choquet in [9]. Other references are [1], [2], [3], [11], [28] and [29], and the references therein. Choquet’s capacitability theorem (see [3, pp.182– 184]) together with Theorems 3.11 and 3.12 give the next theorem, which says that all analytic sets are Cγ,p-capacitable. In particular, we have that all Borel sets are Cγ,p-capacitable, which means that the Riesz capacity is a so called Choquet capacity. Theorem 3.15. All analytic sets, and hence all Borel sets, are Cγ,p- capacitable. 12 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE For the following variational problem (3.2) minnkf kp Lp(X) : f ∈ Lp(X), Iγf ≥ 1 Cγ,p-q.e. on Ao, we call a solution f a Cγ,p-capacitary distribution of A and Iγf a Cγ,p- capacitary potential of A. Theorem 3.16. If Cγ,p(A) < ∞, then A has a unique Cγ,p-capacitary distribution f for which f ∈ Lp Lp(X) = Cγ,p(A) and +(X), kf kp ZX f (x)p−1g(x)dµ(x) ≥ 0 for all g ∈ Lp(X) such that Iγg ≥ 0 Cγ,p-q.e. on A. Proof. Using Clarkson’s inequality for Lp-norms, the theorem follows as in [29, Theorem 9] due to previous results in the paper. (cid:3) Dual Riesz capacity. Let ν be a positive measure on X, 1 < p < ∞ and A ∈ F , where F is the σ-algebra of sets which are ν-measurable for all positive measures ν with finite total variation in X. The total variation of any such ν in X is kνk = ν(X) = supnν(A) : A ⊂ X, A is measurableo. In the case of a measure of this type, we define Iγν(x) =ZX dν(y) µ(B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ , and following [29] we introduce a capacity, which uses measures as test elements cγ,p(A) = supnkνk : ν is a positive measure in X, ν(X \ A) = 0, ν < ∞ and kIγνkLp′ (X) ≤ 1o, where 1 p + 1 p′ = 1. With the same techniques as in [29, Theorem 12, Theorem 14] or [3, pp. 114–117], we see that cγ,p is an inner capacity on F that satisfies (3.3) Indeed, for the inequality cγ,p(A) ≤ Cγ,p(A)1/p, let f ∈ A(A) and let ν be a test measure for cγ,p(A). Then, by Holder’s inequality, cγ,p(A) = Cγ,p(A)1/p. ν(A) ≤ZA ≤(cid:16)ZX(cid:16)ZA Iγf (x)dν(x) =ZXZA 1 µ(B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ ≤ kf kLp(X)kIγνkLp′ (X) ≤ kf kLp(X) 1 dν(x)f (y)dµ(y) µ(B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dν(x)(cid:17)p′ dµ(y)(cid:17) 1 p′(cid:16)ZX f (y)pdµ(y)(cid:17) 1 p THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 13 and the inequality cγ,p(A) ≤ Cγ,p(A)1/p follows by taking the infimum over admissible functions f and the supremum over the test measures ν. In order to obtain the equality (3.3), one can show that (see [3] or [29]) +(X), kf kLp(X) ≤ 1(cid:9) =(cid:16) inf kνk=1 sup f ∈Lp +(X) ZX (Iγν)f dµ(cid:17)−1 Cγ,p(K)−1/p = sup Iγf (x) : f ∈ Lp x∈K f (cid:8) inf kIγνkLp′ (X)(cid:17)−1 and cγ,p(K) =(cid:16) inf kνk=1 for compact sets K, where ν is a positive measure supported on K and kf kLp(X) ≤ 1. Thus, as in [29, Theorem 14] or [3, Theorem 3.6.1, p.115], the equality (3.3) follows with the use of the Minimax Theorem (see [10]) and for general sets A by a capacitability argument. 4. Capacity estimates and Hausdorff measure In this section, we define a Hausdorff measure based on the upper bound estimate for the capacity of balls. We prove an upper bound estimate for the capacity of a set E ⊂ X in terms of this modified Hausdorff content. We also show that the Hausdorff content, satisfying a condition placed by γp, is zero if the capacity of the set is zero. For the latter result, we assume that our space X satisfies inequality (4.1) which holds in connected spaces. Similar results for compact sets can be found in [31, Theorem 2.2], where the assumption of connectedness is replaced by a density condition that gives an inequality equivalent to (4.1). In this section, we give direct and short proofs to results that apply not only for compact sets. In particular, we do not need to use a version of Frostman’s lemma in our proofs. Also, unlike in [31], we do not assume our space to be complete. We start by showing that the Riesz capacity of a ball is bounded from above by a constant times the measure of the ball to the power 1 − γp. Lemma 4.1. Let 1 < p < ∞ and 0 < γ < 1 be such that γp < 1. Then Proof. Choose Cγ,p (B(x, r)) ≤ C µ (B(x, r))1−γp . g = c2 3Q(1−γ) χB(x,r) µ (B(x, r))γ , where c > 0 and Q > 0 are some constants, for which the inequality (2.2) holds. For each z ∈ B(x, r), we have Iγg(z) = c2 3Q(1−γ) µ (B(x, r))γ ZB(x,r) 1 µ (B(z, d(z, y)))1−γ dµ(y). 14 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE For each y ∈ B(x, r), we have that d(z, y) ≤ 2r, since z ∈ B(x, r). Now µ (B(z, d(z, y))) ≤ µ (B(z, 2r)) ≤ µ (B(x, 3r)) , for each y ∈ B(x, r). Then Iγg(z) ≥ c2 3Q(1−γ) µ (B(x, r))γ ZB(x,r) 1 µ (B(x, 3r))1−γ dµ(y) = c2 3Q(1−γ) · ≥ c2 3Q(1−γ) · µ (B(x, r))1−γ µ (B(x, 3r))1−γ 1 c2 ·(cid:16) r 3r(cid:17)Q(1−γ) = 1 , where the last inequality follows by (2.2). Thus g is admissible and we get the upper bound Cγ,p (B(x, r)) ≤ gp Lp(X) = c2p 3Q(1−γ)p µ (B(x, r)) µ (B(x, r))γp = C µ (B(x, r))1−γp . (cid:3) Lemma 4.1 leads us to define a modified version of the Hausdorff measure that works in our generality. In this section, (and throughout the paper) we do not assume the doubling measure µ to satisfy the regularity (2.6) or any other estimates that would give uniform lower bounds or upper bounds for the measure of balls in terms of the radii. Recall that the usual definition for the λ-Hausdorff content of a set E ⊂ X, for 0 < r ≤ ∞, is Hλ r (E) = inf(cid:8) ∞Xi=1 rλ i : E ⊂ ∞[i=1 B(xi, ri), xi ∈ E, ri ≤ r(cid:9), and the λ-Hausdorff measure of E is Hλ(E) = limr→0 Hλ Hausdorff dimension of E is the number r (E). The dim(E) = inf(cid:8)λ > 0 : Hλ(E) = 0(cid:9) . Let 1 < p < ∞, 0 < γ < 1 and γp < 1. In our case, we define the Hausdorff content of a set E ⊂ X, for 0 < r ≤ ∞, as r (E) = inf(cid:8) ∞Xi=1 eHγ,p µ(B(xi, ri))1−γp : E ⊂ ∞[i=1 B(xi, ri), xi ∈ E, ri ≤ r(cid:9). Then, the Hausdorff measure is eHγ,p(E) = lim r→0 eHγ,p r (E). THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 15 Note that if the measure is Q-regular, then r ≈ HQ(1−γp) r . eHγ,p In the next theorem, we show that the Riesz capacity of a set E ⊂ X is bounded from above by a constant times the (modified) Hausdorff content of the set E. In particular, this implies that compact sets with positive capacity have positive Hausdorff measure (see [31, Theorem 2.2]). Theorem 4.2. Let 1 < p < ∞ and 0 < γ < 1 be such that γp < 1. ∞ (E) for each E ⊂ X, where C is the same constant as in Lemma 4.1. Then Cγ,p(E) ≤ C eHγ,p Proof. Suppose that eHγ,p ǫ > 0, there is a countable covering {B(xi, ri)} of E such that ∞ (E) < ∞, otherwise the claim is obvious. For ∞Xi=1 µ(B(xi, ri))1−γp < eHγ,p ∞ (E) + ǫ. Now, by the monotonicity and Theorem 4.1 Cγ,p(E) ≤ Cγ,p(B(xi, ri)) ≤ C ∞Xi=1 ∞Xi=1 < C(eHγ,p µ(B(xi, ri))1−γp ∞ (E) + ǫ). The claim follows by letting ǫ → 0. (cid:3) For the proof of the next theorem, we need an opposite inequality to (2.2) which is true in connected spaces. Indeed, if X is connected then by [5, Corollary 3.8] there exist constants C > 0 and s > 0 such that for all balls B(y, R) in X, all z ∈ B(y, R) and all 0 < r ≤ R, (4.1) µ(B(z, r)) µ(B(y, R)) R(cid:17)s ≤ C(cid:16) r . Note that inequality (4.1) given by the connectedness (or uniform per- fectness) of the space X is equivalent to the density condition assumed in [31]. The proof of the next theorem is direct and we do not need to use Frostman’s lemma to obtain the result. In the Euclidean space, with the Lebesgue measure, we use the notation α = γn and consider the usual Riesz potential of order α from Remark 2.2 (ii). Our result implies the classical result that if the Riesz capacity of a set E is zero, then E has Hausdorff dimension at most n − αp, where αp < n (see e.g. [30, Section 5.2, Theorem 2.3]). 16 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE Theorem 4.3. Assume that X satisfies (4.1). Let 1 < p < ∞, 1 < p < ∞, 0 < γ < 1 and 0 < γ < 1 be such that γp < 1, γ p < 1 and ∞ (E) = 0. γ p < γp. If Cγ,p(E) = 0, then eHγ,p that E = S∞ Proof. In the following, we prove the result for bounded sets E ⊂ X. If the set E is not bounded, then there exists bounded sets Ej such j=1 Ej. We then use the countable subadditivity of the Hausdorff content, the monotonicity of the Riez capacity and the result for bounded sets to obtain the result for unbounded sets E. Let E ⊂ X be a bounded set. For ǫ > 0, there is an admissible function f ≥ 0 such that f p Lp(X) < ǫ. For such a function f , at each point x ∈ E, 1 ≤ZX f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y). Let x0 ∈ E. We choose R0 > diam(E) large enough such that E ⊂ B(x0, R0) and that the integral below is more than one half. Notice that we can always find such a radius R0 but the selection depends on the set E. Define R = 2R0 and ri = 2−iR, for i ∈ N. For each point x ∈ E 1 2 ≤ZB(x0,R0) ≤ZB(x,R) f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) and hence 1 ≤ 2ZB(x,R) f (y) µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) f (y) = 2 ≤ 2 ≤ 2 ∞Xi=0 ZB(x,ri)\B(x,ri+1) ∞Xi=0 ZB(x,ri)\B(x,ri+1) µ (B(x, ri+1))1−γ ZB(x,ri) ∞Xi=0 1 µ (B(x, d(x, y)))1−γ dµ(y) f (y) µ (B(x, ri+1))1−γ dµ(y) f (y) dµ(y). Using Holder’s inequality and the doubling condition, we get 1 ≤ C ∞Xi=0 µ (B(x, ri))γ−1+ p−1 p (cid:16)ZB(x,ri) f (y)p dµ(y)(cid:17)1/p . THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 17 Next, we use the fact that for any δ > 0 there is a constant C > 0 such that Then, inequality (4.1) gives 2−iδ = C 1 = C ∞Xi=0 (cid:18) µ (B(x, ri)) µ(B(x0, R))(cid:19)δ/s . R(cid:17)δ ∞Xi=0 (cid:16) ri R(cid:17)δ ∞Xi=0 (cid:16) ri ≤ C C ∞Xi=0 = 1. Now, by putting the measure of the ball B(x0, R) as part of the con- stant, we have that C ∞Xi=0 µ(B(x, ri))δ/s ≤ ∞Xi=0 µ (B(x, ri))γ−1+ p−1 p (cid:16)ZB(x,ri) f (y)p dµ(y)(cid:17)1/p , where the constant C depends on R. For δ > 0, there exists at least one index ix ∈ N such that µ (B(x, rix))γ−1+ p−1 p (cid:16)ZB(x,rix ) f (y)p dµ(y)(cid:17)1/p and, by raising both sides to the power p, we get ≥ Cµ(B(x, rix))δ/s ZB(x,rix ) f (y)p dµ(y) ≥ Cµ(B(x, rix))δp/s−(γ−1)p−p+1 = Cµ(B(x, rix))δp/s−γp+1. We choose δ = γp − γ p p · s, which is positive, as γp > γ p. We obtain for each x ∈ E a ball B(x, rix) = Bx such that (4.2) µ(Bx)1−γ p ≤ CZBx f (y)p dµ(y). By using the basic 5r-covering theorem (see e.g. [18]), we obtain count- ably many points xj ∈ E, such that the balls Bj = Bxj are pairwise j=1 5Bj. Using the estimate (4.2), the doubling property of the measure µ and the pairwise disjointness of the balls Bj, we get disjoint and E ⊂ S∞ ∞Xj=1 ∞Xj=1ZBj eHγ,p ∞ (E) ≤ ≤ C µ(5Bj)1−γ p ≤ C µ(Bj)1−γ p ∞Xj=1 f (y)p dµ(y) ≤ CZX f (y)p dµ(y) = C f p Lp(X) < C ǫ. Letting ǫ → 0 yields the claim. (cid:3) 18 JUHO NUUTINEN AND PILAR SILVESTRE We can see that in the metric space, with a doubling measure µ, the Hausdorff content and the Hausdorff measure have the same null sets. This relation has been studied in [22, Section 7] for slightly different versions of the Hausdorff content and the Hausdorff measure. For our definitions, the result of [22, Lemma 7.6] follows without any extra assumptions. By the previous two theorems, we get as a corollary the following result for arbitrary sets E. Corollary 4.4. Let 1 < p < ∞, 1 < p < ∞, 0 < γ < 1 and 0 < γ < 1 be such that γp < 1, γ p < 1 and γ p < γp. Then If we also assume our space X to be connected, then Cγ,p(E) > 0 implies that eHγ,p(E) > 0. eHγ,p(E) > 0 implies that Cγ,p(E) > 0. References [1] D.R. Adams, Choquet integrals in potential theory, Publ. Mat. 42 (1998), 3–66. [2] D.R. Adams and L.I. Hedberg, Function Spaces and Potential Theory, Springer-Verlag (1996). [3] H. Aikawa, M.R. Ess´en, Potential theory: selected topics no.1633, Springer (1996). [4] S. Banach, S. Saks, Sur la convergence forte dans les champs Lp, Studia Mathematica 2 (1930) 51–57. [5] A. Bjorn and J. Bjorn, Nonlinear potential theory on metric spaces, EMS Tracts in Mathematics 17, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zurich (2011). [6] C. Bennett and B. Sharpley, Interpolation of Operators, Academic Press Inc. (1988). [7] J. Cerd`a, Lorentz capacitary spaces, AMS, Contemporary Mathematics 445 (2007), 49-55. [8] J. Cerd`a, J. Mart´ın and P. Silvestre, Capacitary function spaces, Collectanea Math. 62 (2011), 95–118. [9] G. Choquet, Theory of capacities, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 5 (1953-54), 131–295. [10] K. Fan, Minimax theorems, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 39 (1953), 42–47. [11] R.A. Fefferman, A theory of entropy in Fourier analysis, Adv. in Math. 30 (1978), 171–201. [12] B. Fuglede, On the theory of potentials in locally compact spaces, Acta. Math. 103 (1960), 139–215. [13] A.E. Gatto and S. V´agi, Fractional integrals on spaces of homogeneous type, Analysis and Partial Differential Equations, C. Sadosky (ed.), Dekker (1990), 171–216. [14] A.E. Gatto, C. Segovia and S. V´agi, On fractional differentiation and inte- gration on spaces of homogeneous type, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 12 (1996), 111–145. [15] V. Gol’dshtein and M. Troyanov, Capacities in metric spaces, Integral Equ. Oper. Theory 44 (2002), 212–242. [16] P. Haj lasz and P. Koskela, Sobolev met Poincar´e, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (2000). THE RIESZ CAPACITY IN METRIC SPACES 19 [17] H. Hakkarainen and J. Kinnunen, The BV-capacity in metric spaces, Manuscripta Math. 132 (2010), 369–390. [18] J. Heinonen, Lectures on analysis on metric spaces, Universitext, Springer- Verlag New York (2001). [19] J. Heinonen, P. Koskela, N. Shanmugalingam and J. Tyson, Sobolev spaces on metric measure spaces: an approach based on upper gradients, New Math- ematical Monographs. Cambridge University Press (2015). [20] A. Kairema, Sharp weighted bounds for fractional integral operators in a space of homogeneous type, Mathematica Scandinavica 114 (2014) no 2, 226–253. [21] S. Kallunki and N. Shanmugalingam, Modulus and continuous capacity. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 26 (2001), 455–464. [22] J. Kinnunen, R. Korte, N. Shanmugalingman and H. Tuominen, Lebesgue points and capacities via the boxing inequality in metric spaces. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 57 (2008), 401–430. [23] J. Kinnunen and O. Martio, The Sobolev capacity on metric spaces, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 21 (1996), 367–382. [24] J. Kinnunen and O. Martio, Choquet property for the Sobolev capacity in metric spaces, In: Proceedings on Analysis and Geometry (Russian) (Novosi- birsk Akademgorodok, 1999), 285–290. Izdat. Ross. Akad. Nauk Sib. Otd. Inst. Math., Novosibirsk (2000) [25] J. Lehrback, Neighbourhood capacities, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 37 (2012), 35–51. [26] J. Mal´y, Coarea integration in metric spaces, Nonlinear Analysis, Function Spaces and Applications, Proceedings of the Spring School held in Prague, July 17-22, 2002, Czech Academy of Sciences, Mathematical Institute, Praha, 7 (2003), 149–192. [27] J. Mal´y and L. Pick, The sharp Riesz potential estimates in metric spaces, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 51 (2002), 251–268. [28] V.G. Maz’ya, Sobolev Spaces (translated from the Russian by T. O. Shaposh- nikova), Springer-Verlag (1985). [29] N.G. Meyers, A theory of capacities for potentials of functions in Lebesgue classes, Math. Scand., 26 (1970), 255–292. [30] Y. Mizuta, Potential Theory in Euclidean Spaces, Gakuto International Series Mathematical Sciences and Applications Volume 6 (1996). [31] T. Sjodin, A Note on Capacity and Hausdorff Measure in Homogeneous Spaces, Potential Analysis 6 (1997), 87–97. [32] T. Sjodin, Polar sets and capacitary potentials in homogeneous spaces, Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 38 (2013), 771–783. J.N., Department of Mathematics and Statistics, P.O. Box 35, FI-40014 University of Jyvaskyla, Finland [email protected] P.S., Department of Mathematics, P.O. Box 11100, FI-00076 Aalto University, Finland [email protected]
1103.1032	1	1103	2011-03-05T09:38:17	Subharmonicity of the modulus of quasiregular harmonic mappings	[ "math.FA" ]	In this note we determine all numbers $q\in \mathbf R$ such that $\|u\|^q$ is a subharmonic function, provided that $u$ is a $K-$quasiregular harmonic mappings in an open subset $\Omega$ of the Euclidean space $\mathbf R^n$.	math.FA	math	SUBHARMONICITY OF THE MODULUS OF QUASIREGULAR HARMONIC MAPPINGS DAVID KALAJ AND VESNA MANOJLOVI ´C Abstract. In this note we determine all numbers q ∈ R such that uq is a subharmonic function, provided that u is a K−quasiregular harmonic mappings in an open subset Ω of the Euclidean space Rn. 1. Introduction By · we denote the Euclidean norm in Rn and let Ω be a region in Rn. In this paper we consider K-quasiregular harmonic mappings, where K > 1. We recall that a harmonic mapping u(x) = (u1(x), . . . , un(x)) : Ω → Rn with formal differential matrix is K-quasiregular if Du(x) = {∂iuj(x)}n i,j=1 (1.1) K −1Du(x)n 6 Ju(x) 6 Kl(Du(x))n, for all x ∈ Ω, where Ju is the Jacobian of u at x, and Du := max{Du(x)h : h = 1}, l(Du) := min{Du(x)h : h = 1}. See [7, p. 128] for the definition of quasiregular mappings in more general setting. A quasiregular homeomorphism is called quasiconformal. Let 0 < λ2 1 6 λ2 2 6 . . . 6 λ2 n be the eigenvalues of the matrix Du(x)Du(x)t. Here Du(x)t is the transpose of the matrix Du(x). Then (1.2) (1.3) and (1.4) n λk, Ju(x) = Yk=1 Du = λn l(Du) = λ1. For the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of the matrix Du(x), defined by kDu(x)k =pTrace(Du(x)Du(x)t) 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 31A05; Secondary 31B10. Key words and phrases. Quasiregular harmonic mappings, Subharmonic functions. 1 DAVID KALAJ AND VESNA MANOJLOVI ´C 2 we have (1.5) and (1.6) n ∂u ∂xk ∂u ∂xk • kDu(x)k =vuut Xk=1 kDu(x) =vuut Xk=1 =vuut 2 n Xk=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∂u ∂xk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) λ2 k. n Here • denotes the inner product between vectors. From (1.1), for a quasireg- ular mapping we have (1.7) λn λk , λk λ1 6 K, k = 1, . . . , n. It is well known that if u = (u1, . . . , un) is a harmonic mapping defined in a region Ω of the Euclidean space Rn, then up is subharmonic for p > 1, and that, in the general case, is not subharmonic for p < 1. Let us prove this well-known fact. If u is harmonic, then by a result in [4, Lemma 1.4.] (see also [3, Eq. (4.9)-(4.11)]) 2 . ∆u = u(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) u(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) D(cid:18) u If u(a) = 0, then So ∆u > 0 for those points x, such that u(x) 6= 0. we consider the harmonic mapping um(x) = u(x) + (1/m, 0, . . . , 0). Then um(a) 6= 0, and ∆um(x) > 0 in some neighborhood of a. It follows from the definition of subharmonic functions that the uniform limit of a convergent sequence of subharmonic functions is still subharmonic. Since um(x) → u(x), it follows that u is subharmonic in a. Since the function g(s) = sp, is convex for p > 1, we obtain that up is subharmonic providing that u is harmonic. (For the above facts we refer to [2, Chapter 2]). Recently, several authors have proved the following two propositions, which is the motivation for our study. Proposition 1.1. [5] If f is a K-quasiregular harmonic map in a plane domain, then fq is subharmonic for q > 1 − K −2. Proposition 1.2. [1] If f is a K-quasiregular harmonic map in a space domain, then fq is subharmonic for some q = q(K, n) ∈ (0, 1). This paper is continuation of [1] in which Proposition 1.1 was extended to the n-dimensional setting. In [1] the authors prove only the existence of an exponent q ∈ (0, 1) without giving the minimal value of q. Here we improve Proposition 1.2 by giving the optimal value of q. Our proof is completely different from those given in [1] and [5]. Moreover for the first time we consider the case q < 0. Our proof is based on the following well-known explicit computation. SUBHARMONICITY AND QUASIREGULAR HARMONIC MAPPINGS 3 Proposition 1.3. [6, Ch. VII 3, p.217]. Let u = (u1, . . . , un) : Ω → Rn, be harmonic, let Ω0 = Ω \ u−1(0), let q ∈ R. Then for x ∈ Ω0 Xk=1(cid:18)u • ∆uq = q"uq−2 ∇uk2 + (q − 2)uq−4 ∂xk(cid:19)# . Xk=1 1 +···+u2 Proof. Write v := uq = (u2 gives n)p, for p := q/2 . A direct computation ∂u n n vx1 = p(u2 = q(u2 1 + ··· + u2 1 + ··· + u2 n)p−1 · (2u1u1x1 + ··· + 2ununx1) n)p−1 · (u1u1x1 + ··· + ununx1), and further vx1x1 = q{2(p − 1)(u2 1 + ··· + u2 + (u2 n)p−2 · (u1u1x1 + ··· + unx1)2+ 1 + ··· + u2 n)p−1 · [u1u1x1x1 + (u1x1)2 + ··· + ununx1x1 + (unx1)2]}. Therefore ∆v = vx1x1 + ··· + vxnxn n 2 n 2 n + 2 } 2 n n n u1 un 2 xk + . . . xk )] + (q − 2)uq−4 Xk=1 = q{uq−2[(u1∆u1 + ··· + un∆un) + ( ujuj xk  Xk=1 Xj=1   xk ) + (q − 2)uq−4 Xk=1 Xk=1 = q{uq−2( Xj=1 n Xk=1 = quq−4{u2 Xj=1 ∇uj2 + (q − 2) Xk=1 xk! + (q − 2) Xk=1 Xk=1(cid:18)u •  Xj=1 uj ·  ∂xk(cid:19)2 = quq−4{u2 xk + ··· + }. ∂u un u1 2 uj n n n n n 2. Main result n n  Xk=1 Xj=1  ∂xk }  ∂uj 2 uj · 2 } ∂uj ∂xk  (cid:3) Theorem 2.1. Let u be K−quasiregular harmonic in Ω ⊂ Rn. Then the mapping g(x) = u(x)q is subharmonic in (1) Ω for q > max{1 − n−1 (2) Ω \ u−1(0), for q 6 1 − (n − 1)K 2. Moreover for 1− (n − 1)K 2 < q < 1− n−1 harmonic mapping such that uq is not subharmonic. K 2 , 0}; K 2 , there exists a K-quasiconformal 4 DAVID KALAJ AND VESNA MANOJLOVI ´C Remark 2.2. If n = 2 then 1 − n−1 K 2 = 1 − K −2. Thus Theorem 2.1 is an extension of Proposition 1.1. Remark 2.3. In the case 1 6 K 6 √n − 1 the function uq is subharmonic for all q > 0. Proof of Theorem 2.1. Let us fix such a map u : Ω → Rn and set Ω0 = Ω \ u−1{0}. We have to find all positive real numbers q such that ∆uq > 0 on Ω0. Since u is quasiregular, the set Z = {x ∈ Ω0 : det Du(x) = 0} has In particular, measure zero (see [7]), it is also closed since u is smooth. Ω1 = Ω0 \ Z is dense in Ω0 and thus it suffices to prove that ∆uq > 0 on Ω1. From Proposition 1.3, we obtain So we find all real q such that After normalization, we see that it suffices to find all constants q < 2 such Let 0 < λ2 1 6 λ2 2 6 . . . 6 λ2 n be the eigenvalues of the matrix Du(x)Du(x)t. If q > 2, then ∆uq > 0. Assume that q > 0 and q < 2 such that n n n 1 > 0. 2 6 x ∈ Ω1. ∆uq = q 2 − qu(x)2kDu(x)k2, 2 uj∇uj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) uq−2kDuk2 + (q − 2)uq−4(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1  . 2 uj∇uj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) uq−2kDuk2 + (q − 2)uq−4(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q Xj=1  (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) uj(x)∇uj(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 z∈Sn−1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) zj∇uj(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 z∈Sn−1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 z∈Sn−1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 − qkDu(x)k2, x ∈ Ω1. = λ2 n n Xj=1 = λ2 1 2 2 2 6 1 n sup n sup inf (2.1) that (2.2) Then (2.3) (2.4) and (2.5) zj∇uj(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) zj∇uj(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=1 n kDu(x)k2 = λ2 k. SUBHARMONICITY AND QUASIREGULAR HARMONIC MAPPINGS 5 Because u is K−quasiregular from (1.7) we have (2.6) 6 K, k = 1, . . . , n − 1. λn λk Thus (2.2) can be written as (2.7) λ2 n 6 1 2 − q λ2 k. n Xk=1 By (2.5) and (2.6) we get that, the inequality (2.7) is satisfied whenever (2.8) i.e. (2.9) (2.10) i.e. If q < 0, then we should have max(cid:26)0, 1 − zj∇uj(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 n inf z∈Sn−1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 1 1 + n−1 K 2 6 1 2 − q K 2 (cid:27) 6 q < 2. n − 1 > 1 2 − qkDu(x)k2, x ∈ Ω1, Xk=1 Because u is K−quasiregular from (1.7) (2.11) 2 − q > λk λ1 6 K, k = 2, . . . , n. n λ2 k λ2 1 . Thus if (2.12) q 6 1 − (n − 1)K 2, then (2.10) holds. To finish the proof we need the following lemma. Lemma 2.4. For any 1 − (n − 1)K 2 < q < 1 − n−1 there is a (linear) harmonic K-quasiconformal mapping u such that uq is not subharmonic. Proof of Lemma 2.4. Assume first that q > 0. We will consider linear map- ping u : Rn −→ Rn defined by (2.13) where K > 1. It is obviously harmonic and K−quasiconformal. If we put this mapping in formula (2.1) we get u(x1, . . . , xn−1, xn) = (x1, . . . , xn−1, Kxn), K 2 [(n − 1) + K 2]u2 + (q − 2)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n−1 Xj=1 2 xjej + K 2enxn(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ 0 6 DAVID KALAJ AND VESNA MANOJLOVI ´C which is equivalent to (n − 1 + K 2)"j−1 Xn=1 n−1 x2 j + K 2x2 n# + (q − 2)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 (n − 1 + K 2)K 2 ≥ (2 − q)K 4 xjej + K 2enxn(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 ≥ 0. By choosing x1 = ··· = xn−1 = 0 and xn = 1, we obtain which is equivalent to q ≥ 1 − n − 1 K 2 . For q < 0 we consider the linear mapping u : Rn −→ Rn defined by (2.14) u(x1, . . . , xn−1, xn) = (x1, . . . , xn−1, xn/K). To finish the proof we only need to take u = uΩ, where u is defined in (2.13) respectively in (2.14). (cid:3) (cid:3) Acknowledgment. We thank the referee for providing constructive com- ments and help in improving the contents of this paper. References [1] Arsenovi´c, M., Bozin, V. and Manojlovi´c, V. : Moduli of continuity of harmonic quasiregular mappings in Bn: Potential Analysis DOI: 10.1007/s11118-010-9195-8. [2] Hayman, W. K., Kennedy, P. B.: Subharmonic functions, I Academic Press, London-New York, 1976, xvii+284 pp. [3] Kalaj, D.: A priori estimate of gradient of a solution to certain differential inequality and quasiconformal mappings. arXiv:0712.3580v3. 24 pp. [4] Kalaj, D.: On the univalent solution of PDE ∆u = f between spherical annuli. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 327 (2007), no. 1, 1 -- 11. [5] Koji´c, V., Pavlovi´c, M.: Subharmonicity of f p for quasiregular harmonic functions with applications. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 342 (2008), 742 -- 746 . [6] Stein, E.M.: Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions. Princeton Mathematical Series, No. 30 Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. 1970 xiv+290 pp. [7] Vuorinen, M.: Conformal geometry and quasiregular mappings. Lecture Notes in Math., 1319. Springer, Berlin (1988). University of Montenegro, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Cetinjski put b.b. 8100 Podgorica, Montenegro E-mail address: [email protected] University of Belgrade, Faculty of Organizational Sciences, Jove Ili´ca 154, Belgrade, Serbia E-mail address: [email protected]
1209.1822	1	1209	2012-09-09T17:32:17	Analytic and Group-Theoretic Aspects of the Cosine Transform	[ "math.FA" ]	This is a brief survey of recent results by the authors devoted to one of the most important operators of integral geometry. Basic facts about the analytic family of cosine transforms on the unit sphere and the corresponding Funk transform are extended to the "higher-rank" case for functions on Stiefel and Grassmann manifolds. The main topics are the analytic continuation and the structure of polar sets, the connection with the Fourier transform on the space of rectangular matrices, inversion formulas and spectral analysis, and the group-theoretic realization as an intertwining operator between generalized principal series representations of SL(n, R).	math.FA	math	Analytic and Group-Theoretic Aspects of the Cosine Transform G. ´Olafsson, A. Pasquale, and B. Rubin Abstract. This is a brief survey of recent results by the authors devoted to one of the most important operators of integral geometry. Basic facts about the analytic family of cosine transforms on the unit sphere in Rn and the corre- sponding Funk transform are extended to the "higher-rank" case for functions on Stiefel and Grassmann manifolds. The main topics are the analytic continu- ation and the structure of polar sets, the connection with the Fourier transform on the space of rectangular matrices, inversion formulas and spectral analy- sis, and the group-theoretic realization as an intertwining operator between generalized principal series representations of SL(n, R). 1. Introduction The cosine transform has a long and rich history, with connections to several branches of mathematics. The name cosine transform was adopted by Lutwak [50, p. 385] for the spherical convolution which is defined on the unit sphere Sn−1 in Rn by f (v)u · v dv, u ∈ Sn−1 . (1.1) (Cf )(u) =ZSn−1 The motivation for this name is that the inner product u · v is nothing but the cosine of the angle between the unit vectors u and v. The following list of references shows some branches of mathematics, where the operator (1.1) and its generalizations arise in a natural way (sometimes implicitly, without naming) and play an important role. • Convex geometry: [1, 6, 23, 24, 32, 46, 50, 69, 71, 75]. • Pseudo-Differential Operators: [15, 61]. • Group representations: [2, 3, 11, 12, 57, 60]. • Harmonic Analysis and Singular Integrals: [4, 21, 22, 27, 48, 52, 58, 59, 63, 66, 73, 74, 79]. • Integral geometry: [5, 20, 26, 30, 62, 64, 65, 68, 70, 76, 86]. • Stochastic Geometry and Probability: [29, 49, 51, 77, 78]. The authors are thankful to Tufts University for the hospitality and support during the Joint AMS meeting and the Workshop on Geometric Analysis on Euclidean and Homogeneous Spaces in January, 2012. The research of G. ´Olafsson was supported by DMS-0801010 and DMS-1101337. A. Pasquale gratefully acknowledges travel support from the Commission de Colloques et Congr`es Internationaux (CCCI). 1 2 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN • Banach Space Theory: [38, 45, 47, 54, 72]. This list is far from being complete. In most of the publications cosine-like transforms serve as a tool for certain specific problems. At the same time, there are many papers devoted to the cosine transforms themselves. The present article is just of this kind. Our aim is to give a short overview of our recent work [57, 70] on the cosine transform and explain some of the ideas and tools behind those results. For a complex number λ, the λ-analogue of the operator (1.1) is the convolution operator (Cλf )(u) =ZSn−1 f (v)u · vλ dv, u ∈ Sn−1, (1.2) where the integral is understood in the sense of analytic continuation, if necessary. We adopt the name "the cosine transform" for (1.2) too. The same name will be used for generalizations of these operators to be defined below. In recent years more general, higher-rank cosine transforms attracted consid- erable attention. This class of operators was inspired by Matheron's injectivity conjecture [51], its disproval by Goodey and Howard [29], applications in group representations [7, 12, 57, 60, 86] and in algebraic integral geometry [3, 5, 20]. To the best of our knowledge, the higher-rank cosine transform was explicitly pre- sented (without naming) for the first time in [26, formula (3.5)]. As mentioned above, the present article gives a brief survey of recent results by the authors [57, 70] in this area. The consideration grew up from specific problems of harmonic analysis and group representations. However, we do not focus on those problems, and mention them only for better explanation of the corresponding properties of the cosine transforms and related operators of integral geometry. Here we shall restrict ourselves to the case of real numbers, referring to the above articles for the case of complex and quaternionic fields. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 contains basic facts about the cosine transforms on the unit sphere. More general higher-rank transforms on Stiefel or Grassmann manifolds are considered in Section 3, where the main tool is the classical Fourier analysis. In Sections 4 and 5 we discuss the connections to representation theory, and more precisely to the spherical representations and the intertwining properties. Section 6 is devoted to explicit spectral formulas for the cosine transforms. 2. Cosine transforms on the unit sphere In this section we discuss briefly the cosine transform on the sphere Sn−1. We keep the notation from the Introduction. For the analytic continuation of the cosine transform it is convenient to normalize it by setting (C λf )(u) = γn(λ)ZSn−1 f (v)u · vλ dv, u ∈ Sn−1. Here dv stands for the SO(n)-invariant probability measure on Sn−1 and the nor- malizing coefficient γn(λ) is given by γn(λ) = π1/2 Γ(−λ/2) Γ(n/2) Γ((1 + λ)/2) , Re λ > −1, λ 6= 0, 2, 4, . . . . (2.1) THE COSINE TRANSFORM 3 This normalization is chosen so that C λ(1) = Γ (−λ/2) Γ((n + λ)/2) . Such a normalization is convenient in many occurrences, when harmonic analysis on the sphere is performed in the multiplier language (in the same manner as analysis of pseudo-differential operators is performed in the language of their symbols). We shall see below that it also simplifies the spectrum of the cosine transform. The limit case λ = −1 gives, up to a constant, the well-known Funk transform. Specifically, if f ∈ C(Sn−1), then for every u ∈ Sn−1, where (C λf )(u) = lim λ→−1 π1/2 Γ((n − 1)/2) (F f )(u), (F f )(u) = Z f (v) duv . {v∈Sn−1u·v=0} (2.2) (2.3) In (2.3), duv stands for the rotational invariant probability measure on the (n − 2)- dimensional sphere u · v = 0; see, e.g., [69, Lemma 3.1]. The operators Cλ and C λ were investigated by different approaches. A first one employs the Fourier transform technique [45, 63, 76] and relies on the equality in the sense of distributions (cid:18) Eλ Cλf Γ((1 + λ)/2) , F ω(cid:19) = c1 (cid:18) E−λ−nf Γ(−λ/2) , ω(cid:19) , (2.4) c1 = 2n+λ π(n−1)/2 Γ(n/2). Here ω is a test function belonging to the Schwartz space S(Rn), (F ω)(y) =ZRn ω(x)eix·ydx, and (Eλf )(x) = xλf (x/x) denotes the extension by homogeneity. A second approach is based on the Funk-Hecke formula, so that for each spher- ical harmonic Yj of degree j, where mj,λ =  C λYj = mj,λ Yj, (−1)j/2 Γ(j/2 − λ/2) Γ(j/2 + (n + λ)/2) 0 if j is even, if j is odd; (2.5) (2.6) see, e.g., [63]. The Fourier-Laplace multiplier {mj,λ} forms the spectrum of C λ. Note that the normalizing coefficient in C λ was chosen so that only factors depend- ing on j are involved in the spectral functions {mj,λ}. The spectrum of C λ encodes important information about this operator. For instance, since mj,λmj,−λ−n = 1, then for any f ∈ C∞(Sn−1) the following inversion formula holds: C −λ−nC λf = f, (2.7) provided λ ∈ C, λ /∈ {−n, −n − 2, −n − 4, . . .} ∪ {0, 2, 4, . . .}. provided γ = Re λ + n + 1 2 1 p − −(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(n − 1), δ = Re λ + n + 1 2 (2.9) 1 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(n − 1), 1 p − +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 4 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN For the non-normalized transforms, (2.7) yields C−λ−nCλf = ζ(λ) f, ζ(λ) = Γ2(n/2) Γ((1 + λ)/2) Γ((1 − λ − n)/2) π Γ(−λ/2) Γ((n + λ)/2) , (2.8) λ ∈ C, λ /∈ {−1, −3, −5, . . .} ∪ {1 − n, 3 − n, 5 − n, . . .}. Formula (2.6) reveals singularities, provides information about the kernel and the image. Moreover, it plays a crucial role in the study of cosine transforms on Lp functions. For instance, the following statement was proved in [64, p.11], using the relevant results of Gadzhiev [21, 22] and Kryuchkov [48] for symbols of the Calderon-Zygmund singular integrals operators. Theorem 2.1. Let Lp e(Sn−1) and Lγ distributions), belonging to Lp(Sn−1) and the Sobolev space Lγ Then p,e(Sn−1) be the spaces of even functions (or p(Sn−1), respectively. p,e(Sn−1) ⊂ C λ(Lp Lδ e(Sn−1)) ⊂ Lγ p,e(Sn−1) λ /∈ {0, 2, 4, . . . } ∪ {−n − 1, −n − 3, −n − 5, . . . }. The embeddings (2.9) are sharp. Finally, one can use tools from the representation theory, as we will discuss in more details in the second half of this article. One can easily explain (2.5) -- but not (2.6) -- by the fact that the space of harmonic polynomials of degree j is the underlying space of an irreducible rep- resentation of K = SO(n). Then (2.5) follows from Schur's lemma and the fact that C λ commutes with rotations. Note that the group K acts by the left regular representation on L2(Sn−1) and, as a representation of K, we have the orthogonal decomposition L2(Sn−1) ≃K Mj∈N0 Y j, (2.10) where the set Y j of all spherical harmonics of degree j is an irreducible K-space. As we shall see in Section 6, the spectral multiplier (2.6) can also be computed by identifying C λ as a standard intertwining operator between certain principal series representations of the larger group SL(n, R), see [57]. The fact that C λ is zero on the odd power harmonics follows from the obser- vation that the kernel u · vλ is an even function of v. Hence C λ is actually an integral transform on the projective space P(Rn), and here the analogue of (2.10) is L2(P(Rn)) ≃K Mj∈2N0 Y j . 3. Cosine transforms on Stiefel and Grassmann manifolds In this section we introduce the higher-rank cosine transforms and collect some basic facts about these transforms. The main results are presented in Theorems 3.2, 3.3, 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8. THE COSINE TRANSFORM 5 3.1. Notation. We denote by Vn,m ∼ O(n)/O(n − m) the Stiefel manifold of n × m real matrices, the columns of which are mutually orthogonal unit n- vectors. For v ∈ Vn,m, dv stands for the invariant probability measure on Vn,m; ξ = {v} denotes the linear subspace of Rn spanned by v. These subspaces form the Grassmann manifold Gn,m ∼ O(n)/(O(n − m) × O(m)) endowed with the invariant probability measure dξ. We write Mn,m ∼ Rnm for the space of real matrices x = (xi,j ) having n rows and m columns and set dx = nYi=1 mYj=1 dxi,j , xm = det(xtx)1/2, xt being the transpose of x. If n = m, then xm is just the absolute value of the determinant of x; if m = 1, then x1 is the usual Euclidean norm of x ∈ Rn. 3.2. The Cos-function. We give two equivalent "higher-rank" substitutes for u·v in (1.1). The first one is "more geometric", while the second is "more analytic". For 1 ≤ m ≤ k ≤ n − 1, let η ∈ Gn,m and ξ ∈ Gn,k be linear subspaces of Rn of dimension m and k, respectively. Following [2, 3, 57], we set Cos(ξ, η) = volm(PrξE), (3.1) where volm(·) denotes the m-dimensional volume function, E is a convex subset of η of volume one containing the origin, Prξ denotes the orthogonal projection onto ξ. By affine invariance, this definition is independent of the choice of E. The second definition [31] gives precise meaning to the projection operator Prξ. Let u and v be arbitrary orthonormal bases of ξ and η, respectively. We regard u and v as elements of the corresponding Stiefel manifolds Vn,k and Vn,m. If k = m = 1, then u and v are unit vectors, as in (1.1). The orthogonal projection Prξ is given by the k × k matrix uut, and we can define Cos(ξ, η) ≡ Cos({u}, {v}) = (det(vtuutv))1/2 ≡ utvm. (3.2) This definition is independent of the choice of bases in ξ and η and yields u · v if k = m = 1. Remark 3.1. Note that vtuutv is a positive semi-definite matrix, and therefore, det(vtuutv) ≡ det(utvvtu) ≥ 0. It means that Cos(ξ, η) = Cos(η, ξ) ≥ 0. 3.3. Non-normalized cosine transforms. According to (3.1) and (3.2), one can use both Stiefel and Grassmannian language in the definition of the higher-rank cosine transform, namely, f (v) utvλ m dv, u ∈ Vn,k, f (η) Cosλ(ξ, η) dη, ξ ∈ Gn,k, (Cλ m,kf )(u) =ZVn,m m,kf )(ξ) =ZGn,m (Cλ (3.3) (3.4) where dv and dη stand for the relevant invariant probability measures. The fact that we have two ways of writing of the same operator, extends the arsenal of techniques (some of them will be exhibited below). Both operators agree with Cλ in (1.2), when k = m = 1. For brevity, we shall write Cλ m = Cλ m,m. We remark that there are different shifts in the power λ in the literature, all for different reasons. In particular, to make our statements in Sections 2-4 consistent with those in [70], one should set λ = α − k. To adapt to the notation in [57] one 6 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN has to change λ to λ − n/2. For unifying the presentation of the results in [70] and [57] we have preferred to adopt the unshifted notation as in (3.3) and (3.4). Following [16, 28], the Siegel gamma function of the cone Ω of positive definite m × m real symmetric matrices is defined by Γm(α) =ZΩ exp(−tr(r))rα−(m+1)/2 m dr = πm(m−1)/4 m−1Yj=0 Γ(α−j/2) (3.5) and represents a meromorphic function with polar set {(m − 1 − j)/2 j = 0, 1, 2, . . .}. (3.6) Theorem 3.2. Let 1 ≤ m ≤ k ≤ n − 1. (i) If f ∈ L1(Vn,m) and Re λ > m − k − 1, then the integral (3.3) converges for almost all u ∈ Vn,k. (ii) If f ∈ C∞(Vn,m), then for every u ∈ Vn,k, the function λ 7→ (Cλ m,kf )(u) extends to the domain Re λ ≤ m − k − 1 as a meromorphic function with the only poles m − k − 1, m − k − 2, . . . . These poles and their orders are the same as of the gamma function Γm((λ + k)/2). (iii) The normalized integral (Cλ m,kf )(u)/Γm((λ + k)/2) is an entire function of λ and belongs to C∞(Vn,k) in the u-variable. A similar statement holds for (3.4). The proof of Theorem 3.2 can be found in [70, Theorems 4.3, 7.1]. It relies on the fact that utvλ m is a special case of the composite power function (utv)λ with the vector-valued exponent λ ∈ Cm [16, 28]. The corresponding composite cosine transforms were studied in [58, 59, 70]. An important ingredient of the proof of Theorem 3.2 is the connection between the cosine transform Cλ m,kf on Vn,m and the Fourier transform ϕ(y) = (F ϕ)(y) =ZMn,m etr(iytx)ϕ(x) dx, y ∈ Mn,m . (3.7) The corresponding Parseval equality has the form ( ϕ, ω) = (2π)nm (ϕ, ω), ϕ(x)ω(x) dx. (3.8) (ϕ, ω) =ZMn,m This equality with ω in the Schwartz class S(Mn,m) of smooth rapidly decreasing functions is used to define the Fourier transform of the corresponding distributions. We will need polar coordinates on Mn,m, so that for n ≥ m, every matrix x ∈ Mn,m of rank m can be uniquely represented as x = vr1/2 with v ∈ Vn,m and r = xtx ∈ Ω. Given a function f on Vn,m, we denote (Eλf )(x) = rλ/2 m f (v). The following statement holds in the case k = m. Theorem 3.3. Let f be an integrable right O(m)-invariant function on Vn,m, ω ∈ S(Mn,m), 1 ≤ m ≤ n−1, Cλ mf = Cλ m,mf . Then for every λ ∈ C, (cid:18) EλCλ mf Γm((λ + m)/2) , F ω(cid:19) = c (cid:18) E−λ−nf Γm(−λ/2) , ω(cid:19) , c = 2m(n+λ) πnm/2 Γm(n/2) Γm(m/2) , where both sides are understood in the sense of analytic continuation. (3.9) THE COSINE TRANSFORM 7 The formula (3.9) agrees with (2.4). The more general statement for arbitrary k ≥ m can be found in [70]. Remark 3.4. It is important to note that the domains, where the left-hand side and the right-hand side of of (3.9) exist as absolutely convergent integrals, have no points in common, when m > 1. This is the principal distinction from the case m = 1, when there is a common strip of convergence −1 < Re λ < 0. To perform analytic continuation, we have to switch from Cλ m to the more general m with λ ∈ Cm and then take the restriction to the composite cosine transform Cλ diagonal λ1 = · · · = λm = λ + m. This method of analytic continuation was first used by Kh`ekalo (for another class of operators) in his papers [39, 41, 40] on Riesz potentials on the space of rectangular matrices. 3.4. The Funk transform. The higher-rank version of the classical Funk transform (2.3) sends a function f on Vn,m to a function Fm,kf on Vn,k by the formula (Fm,kf )(u) =Z{v∈Vn,m utv=0} f (v) duv, u ∈ Vn,k. (3.10) The condition utv = 0 means that subspaces {u} ∈ Gn,k and {v} ∈ Gn,m are mutually orthogonal. Hence, necessarily, k + m ≤ n. The case k = m, when both f and its Funk transform live on the same manifold, is of particular importance and coincides with (2.3) when k = m = 1. We denote Fm = Fm,m. If f is right O(m)-invariant, (Fm,kf )(u) can be identified with a function on the Grassmannians Gn,m or Gn,n−m, and can be written "in the Grassmannian language". For instance, setting ξ = {v} ∈ Gn,m, η = {u}⊥ ∈ Gn,n−k, and f (ξ) = f (v), we obtain f (ξ) dηξ = (Fm,kf )(u). (3.11) (Rm,n−k f )(η) ≡ Z ξ⊂η 3.5. Normalized cosine transforms. Our next aim is to introduce a natural m,kf of the normalized transform (2.1). "Natural" means that we m,kf to obey the relevant higher-rank modifications of the properties (2.2)- generalization C λ expect C λ (2.5). Definition 3.5. Let 1 ≤ m ≤ k ≤ n − 1. For u ∈ Vn,k and v ∈ Vn,m, we define (C λ m,kf )(u) = γn,m,k(λ)ZVn,m f (v) utvλ m dv, (3.12) where γn,m,k(λ) = Γm(m/2) Γm(n/2) Γm(−λ/2) Γm((λ + k)/2) , λ + m 6= 1, 2, . . . . We denote C λ m = C λ m,m. The integral (3.12) is absolutely convergent if Re λ > m − k − 1. The excluded values of λ belong to the polar set of Γm(−λ/2). If k = m = 1 this definition coincides with (2.1). Operators of this kind implicitly arose in [26, pp. 367, 368]. Theorem 3.6. Let 1 ≤ m ≤ k ≤ n − 1, k + m ≤ n. If f is a C∞ right O(m)-invariant function on Vn,m, then for every u ∈ Vn,k, a.c. λ=−k (C λ m,kf )(u) = Γm(m/2) Γm((n − k)/2) (Fm,kf )(u), (3.13) 8 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN where "a.c." denotes analytic continuation and (Fm,kf )(u) is the Funk transform (3.10). This statement follows from [70, Theorems 7.1 (iv) and 6.1]. Note that if m = k = 1, then (3.13) yields (2.2). However, unlike (2.2), the proof of which is straightforward, (3.13) requires a certain indirect procedure, which invokes the Fourier transform on the space of matrices and the relevant analogue of (3.9). We point out that a pointwise inversion of the Funk transform can be obtained by means of the dual cosine transform, which is defined by ∗ C λ ( m,kϕ)(v) =ZVn,k ϕ(u) utvλ m du, v ∈ Vn,m. (3.14) Indeed, the following result holds. Theorem 3.7. (cf. [70, Theorems 7.4]) Let ϕ = Fm,kf , where f is a C∞ right O(m)-invariant function on Vn,m, 1 ≤ m ≤ k ≤ n − m. Then, for every v ∈ Vn,m, ∗ C λ ( m,kϕ)(v) Γm((λ + k)/2) a.c. λ=m−n = c f (v), c = Γm(n/2) Γm(k/2) Γm(m/2) . (3.15) Regarding other inversion methods of the higher-rank Funk transform (which is also known as the Radon transform for a pair of Grassmannnians), see [31, 85] and references therein. In the case k = m the normalized cosine transform C λ m,m has a number of important features. If f ∈ C∞(Vn,m), then analytic continuation of (C λ mf )(u) is well-defined for all complex λ /∈ {1 − m, 2 − m, . . .} and belongs to C∞(Vn,m). The following inversion formulas hold. m = C λ Theorem 3.8. (cf. [70, Theorems 7.7]) Let f ∈ C∞(Vn,m) be a right O(m)- invariant function on Vn,m, 2m ≤ n. Then, for every u ∈ Vn,m, (C −λ−n m C λ mf )(u) = f (u), λ, −λ − n /∈ {1 − m, 2 − m, . . .}. (3.16) In particular, for the non-normalized transforms, (C−λ−n m Cλ mf )(u) = ζ(λ) f (u), λ + n, −λ /∈ {1, 2, 3, . . .}, (3.17) where ζ(λ) = Γ2 m(n/2) Γm((m + λ)/2) Γm((m − λ − n)/2) Γ2 m(m/2) Γm(−λ/2) Γm((n + λ)/2) . (3.18) Both equalities (3.16) and (3.18) are understood in the sense of analytic continua- tion. In the case m = 1, the formulas (3.16) and (3.17) coincide with (2.7) and (2.8), respectively, but the method of the proof is different. 4. Connection to Representation Theory The cosine transform is closely related to the representation theory of semisimple Lie groups. In particular, as we shall now discuss, it has an important group- theoretic interpretation as a standard intertwining operator between generalized principal series representations of SL(n, R). In the following we shall use the notation G = SL(n, R), K = SO(n), and 0 B(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) L = S(O(m)×O(n − m)) =(cid:26)(cid:18)A 0 A ∈ O(m) B ∈ O(n − m) , det(A)det(B) = 1(cid:27) THE COSINE TRANSFORM 9 with m ≤ n − m. Then B ≡ K/L = Gn,m is the Grassmanian of m-dimensional linear subspaces of Rn. We fix the base point bo = {(x1, . . . , xm, 0, . . . , 0) x1, . . . , xm ∈ R} ∈ B, so that B = K · b0 and every function on B can be regarded as a right L-invariant function on K. From now on, our main concern is the nonnormalized cosine transform (3.3) with equal lower indices, that is, Cλ m,m. We refer to [35, Chapter V] for harmonic analysis on compact symmetric spaces and [42] for the representation theory of semisimple Lie groups. m ≡ Cλ 4.1. Analysis on B with respect to K. The first connection to representa- tion theory is related to the left regular action of the group K on L2(B) by (cid:0)ℓ(k)f(cid:1)(b) = f (k−1b), k ∈ K , b ∈ B. For an irreducible unitary representation (π, Vπ) of K, we consider the subspace V L π := {v ∈ Vπ π(k)v = v ∀k ∈ L}, L = S(O(m)×O(n − m)). The representation (π, Vπ) is said to be L-spherical if V L π 6= {0}. As B = K/L is a symmetric space, the following result is a consequence of [35, Chapter IV, Lemma 3.6]. Proposition 4.1. If (π, Vπ) is L-spherical, then dim V L π = 1. Since V L π 6= {0}, we can choose a unit vector eπ ∈ V L π . Then we define a map Φπ : Vπ → C∞(B) ⊂ L2(B) by the formula (Φπv)(b) := d(π)−1/2hv, π(k)eπi , v ∈ Vπ, b = k · bo ∈ B = K · bo, (4.1) where d(π) = dim Vπ. This definition is meaningful because k · bo = kk′ · bo for every k′ ∈ L and eπ remains fixed under the action of π(k′). We also set Φπ(v; b) := (Φπv)(b). Recall, if (π, Vπ) and (σ, Vσ) are two representations of a Hausdorff topological group H, then an intertwining operator between π and σ is a bounded linear operator T : Vπ → Vσ such that T π(h) = σ(h)T for all h ∈ H. If π is irreducible and T intertwines π with itself, then Schur's Lemma states that T = c id for some complex number c, [17], p. 71. The map Φπ is a K-intertwining operator in the sense that it intertwines the representation π on Vπ and the left regular representation ℓ on L2(B), so that for b = h · bo and k ∈ K we have Φπ(π(k)v; b) = hπ(k)v, π(h)eπi = hv, π(k−1h)eπi = ℓ(k)Φπ(v; b) . Furthermore, the left regular representation ℓ on L2(B) is multiplicity free, see e.g. [84, Corollary 9.8.2]. Therefore, since (π, Vπ) is irreducible, any intertwining operator Vπ → L2(B) is by Schur's Lemma of the form c Φπ for some c ∈ C. We let L2 π(B) = Im Φπ. Denote by bKL the set of all equivalence classes of irreducible L-spherical representations (π, Vπ) of K. Then, see [35, Chapter V, Thm. 4.3], the decomposition of L2(B) as a K-representation is as follows. Theorem 4.2. L2(B) ≃K Mπ∈ bKL L2 π(B) . 10 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN The cosine transform is, as mentioned before, a K-intertwining operator, i.e., m(f ) for all k ∈ K and f ∈ L2(B). It follows by Schur's Lemma m(ℓ(k)f ) = ℓ(k)Cλ Cλ that for each π ∈ bKL there exists a function ηπ on C such that = ηπ(λ) id . Cλ mL2 π (4.2) Let f ∈ L2 meromorphic; cf. Theorem 3.2. π(B) of norm one. Then ηπ(λ) = hCλ(f ), f i and it follows that ηπ(λ) is 4.2. Generalized spherical principal series representations of G. The fact that Cλ m is a K-intertwining operator does not indicate how to determine the functions ηπ. In the case m = 1 and in some particular cases for the higher-rank cosine transforms [58, 59] explicit expression for ηπ can be obtained using the Funk-Hecke Theorem or the Fourier transform technique. It is a challenging open problem to proceed the same way in the most general case, using, e.g., the relevant results of Gelbart, Strichartz, and Ton-That, see, e.g., [25, 80, 82]. Below we suggest an alternative way and proceed as follows. To find ηπ explicitly, we observe that the cosine transform is an intertwining operator between certain generalized principal series representations (πλ, L2(B)) of G = SL(n, R) induced from a maximal parabolic subgroup of G. We can then use the bigger group G, or better its Lie algebra, to move between K-types. We invoke the spectrum generating technique introduced in [7] to build up a recursion relation between the spectral functions ηπ. This finally allows us to determine all of them by knowing ηtrivial. The group G = SL(n, R) acts on B by g · η := {gv v ∈ η} , where gv denotes the usual matrix multiplication. This action is transitive, as the K-action is already transitive. The stabilizer of bo is the group P = (cid:26)(cid:18)A X 0 B(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X ∈ Mm,n−m , ≃ S(GL(m) × GL(n − m)) ⋉ Mm,n−m , A ∈ GL(m, R) B ∈ GL(n − m, R) and det(A)det(B) = 1(cid:27) where Mn,m is the space of n × m real matrices; see Section 3.1. We then have B = G/P . The K-invariant probability measure on B is not G-invariant. But there exists a function j : G × B → R+ such that for all f ∈ L1(B) we have ZB f (b) db =ZB f (g · b)j(g, b)n db , g ∈ G, b ∈ B . (4.3) We include the power n to adapt our notation to [57]. By the associativity of the action we have j(gg′, b) = j(g, g′ · b)j(g′, b) for all g ∈ G and b ∈ B. Hence, for each λ ∈ C we can define a continuous representation πλ of G on L2(B) by [πλ(g)f ](b) := j(g−1, b)λ+n/2f (g−1 · b) , g ∈ G, f ∈ L2(B), β ∈ B. (4.4) A simple change of variables shows that hπλ(g)f, hiL2 = hf, π−λ(g−1)hiL2 , g ∈ G , f, h ∈ L2(B) . In particular, πλ is unitary if and only if λ is purely imaginary. The representations πλ are the so-called generalized (spherical) principal series representations (induced THE COSINE TRANSFORM 11 from the maximal parabolic subgroup P ), in the compact picture. See e.g. [42], p. 169. The representations πλ can also be realized on Stiefel manifolds as follows. According to [70, Section 7.4.3], we introduce the radial and angular components of a matrix x ∈ Mn,m of rank m by rad(x) = (xtx)1/2 ∈ Ω, ang(x) = x(xtx)−1/2 ∈ Vn,m, so that x = ang(x) rad(x). Given λ ∈ C, we define a mapping which assigns to every g ∈ GL(n, R) an operator πλ(g) acting on measurable functions f on Vn,m by the rule πλ(g)f (v) = rad(g−1v)−(λ+n/2) f (ang(g−1v)). (4.5) Clearly, πλ(In) is an identity operator. One can prove that if f is a measurable right O(m)-invariant function on Vn,m, then πλ(g1g2)f = πλ(g1) πλ(g2)f , g1, g2 ∈ GL(n, R). (4.6) The restriction of πλ to SL(n, R), acting on the space of square integrable right O(m)-invariant functions on Vn,m, coincides with the representation defined by (4.4). 4.3. The cosine transform as an intertwining operator. In this section we follow the ideas in [57]. An alternative self-contained exposition (without using the representation theory of semisimple Lie groups), can be found in [70]. The gain by using the representations πλ is that we now have a meromorphic family of representations on L2(B) and that they are irreducible for almost all λ and closely related to the cosine transform. For this, we recall some results from [83]. Theorem 4.3 (Vogan-Wallach). There exists a countable collection {pn} of non-zero holomorphic polynomials on C such that if pn(λ) 6= 0 for all n then πλ is irreducible. In particular, πλ is irreducible for almost all λ ∈ C. Proof. This is Lemma 5.3 in [83]. (cid:3) Let θ : G → G be the involutive automorphism θ(g) = (g−1)t. We remark that in [57] notation Cosλ = Cλ−n/2 m was used. Theorem 4.4. The cosine transform intertwines πλ and π−λ ◦ θ, namely, m ◦ πλ+n/2 = (π−λ−n/2 ◦ θ) ◦ Cλ Cλ m, whenever both sides of this equality are analytic functions of λ. Proof. We refer to Theorem 2.3 and (4.10) in [57]. (4.7) (cid:3) In fact, it is shown in [57], Lemma 2.5 and Theorem 4.2, that Cλ−n/2 = J(λ), where J(λ) is a standard intertwining operator, studied in detail among others by Knapp and Stein in [43, 44] and Vogan and Wallach in [83]. These authors show, in particular, that λ 7→ J(λ) has a meromorphic extension to all of C. Furthermore, Vogan and Wallach show that if f ∈ C∞(B), then the map m {λ ∈ C Re (λ) > −1 + n/2} ∋ λ 7−→ J(λ)f ∈ C∞(B) is holomorphic. As a consequence of Cλ−n/2 following theorem. m = J(λ) and [83, 1.6 Thm], we get the 12 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN Theorem 4.5. The map λ 7→ Cλ m extends meromorphically to C. In particular, for f ∈ C∞(B) the function λ 7→ Cλ m(f )(b) extends to a meromorphic function on C and the set of possibles poles can be chosen independent of f . In the complement of the singular set we have Cλ m(f ) ∈ C∞(B). Notice that precise information about analiticity of more general cosine trans- forms, including the structure of polar sets, is presented in Theorem 3.2 above. The implication of (4.7) is that C−λ−n/2 intertwines πλ with itself (in the sense of meromorphic family of operators). By Theorem 4.3 there exists a meromorphic function η on C such that ◦ Cλ−n/2 m m C−λ−n/2 m ◦ Cλ−n/2 m = η(λ) idC∞(B) (4.8) for all λ ∈ C for which the left-hand side is well defined. The shift by n/2 in the definition is chosen so that the final formulas agree with those in [57] and make some formulas more symmetric. The fact that η is meromorphic follows by noting that η(λ) = hC−λ−n/2 ◦ Cλ−n/2 (1), 1i. m m Formula (4.8) is a symmetric version of (3.18) with λ replaced by λ − n/2. The explicit value of η(λ) can be easily obtained from (3.17). An alternative, representation-theoretic method to compute the function η(λ), is presented in Sec- tion 6. The first step is the following lemma. Lemma 4.6. Let c(λ) = Cλ−n/2 m (1). Then η(λ) = c(λ)c(−λ). Note that c(λ) is nothing but ηtrivial(λ) in Theorem 6.6. Remark 4.7. There are several ways to prove the meromorphic extension of the standard intertwining operators. The proof in [83] uses tensoring with finite dimensional representations of G to deduce a relationship between Cλ m and Cλ+2n m . In fact, there exists a family of (non-invariant) differential operators Dλ on B and a polynomial b(λ), the Bernstein polynomial, such that b(λ)Cλ m(f ) = Cλ+2n m (Dλ(f )) (4.9) [83, Thm. 1.4]. Another way to derive an equation of the form (4.9) is to convert the m into an integral over the orbit of certain nilpotent group ¯N , as integral defining Cλ usually done in the study of standard intertwining operators, and then use the ideas from [8, 55, 56]. In the case where G/P is a symmetric R-space (which contains the case of Grassmann manifolds), the standard intertwining operators J(λ) have been recently studied by Clerc in [9], using Loos' theory of positive Jordan triple systems. In particular, Clerc explicitly computes the Bernstein polynomials b(λ) in (4.9), and, hence, proves the meromorphic extension of J(λ) for this class of symmetric spaces. Finally, one can stick with the domain where λ 7→ Cλ m is holomorphic and determine the K-spectrum functions ηπ(λ) in (4.2). As rational functions of Γ- factors, these functions have meromorphic extension to C. Hence, λ 7→ Cλ m itself has meromorphic extension by (4.2). We will comment more on that in Remark 6.8. 4.4. Historical remarks. We conclude this section with a few historical re- marks. The standard intertwining operators J(λ), as a meromorphic family of singular integral operators on K or ¯N , have been central objects in the study of THE COSINE TRANSFORM 13 representation theory of semimisimple Lie groups since the fundamental works of Knapp and Stein [43, 44], Harish-Chandra [33], and several others. In our case ¯N =(cid:26)(cid:18)Im 0 X In−m(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X ∈ Mm,n−m(cid:27) . Then, in the realization of the generalized principal series representations on L2(B), the kernel of J(λ) is Cosλ−n/2(b, c). But in most cases there is neither an explicit formula nor geometric interpretation of the kernel defining J(λ). Apart of customary applications of the cosine transform in convex geometry, probability, and the Banach space theory, similar integrals turned up independently as standard intertwining operators between generalized principal series representa- tions of SL(n, K), where K = R, C or H. The real case was studied in [12], the complex case in [14], and the quaternionic case in [60]. In these articles it was shown that integrals of the form ZB (x, y)λ−n/2f (x) dx, with some modification for K = C or H, define intertwining operators between generalized principal series representations induced from a maximal parabolic sub- group in SL(n + 1, K). The K-spectrum was determined, yielding the cases of irreducibility and, more generally, the composition series of those representations. Among the applications, there were some embeddings of the complementary series and the study of the so-called canonical representations on some Riemannian sym- metric spaces of the noncompact type, [10, 11, 13]. However the connections of these considerations to convex geometry, to the cosine transform and to the Funk and Radon transforms was neither discussed nor mentioned. These connections were first published in [57] in the context of the Grassmannians over R , C and H. However, it was probably S. Alesker who was the first to remark in the unpub- lished manuscript [2] that the cosine transform is a SL(n, R)-intertwining operator. It was also shown in [86] that the Sinλ-transform (a transform related to the sine transform) can be viewed as a Knapp-Stein intertwining operator. This was used to construct complementary series representations for GL(2n, R). The Sinλ- transform is then also naturally linked to reflection positivity, which relates complementary se- ries representations of GL(2n, R) to the highest weight representations of SU(n, n), [18, 19, 53, 37, 36]. Notice, however, that the definition of the Sinλ-transform in [86] differs from the one in [66], [70]; see also [67] for the sine transform on the hyperbolic space. 5. The spherical representations The functions ηπ(λ) in (4.2) are parametrized by the L-spherical representations of K. The main purpose of this section is to present this parametrization, which is given by a semilattice in a finite dimensional Euclidean space associated with a maximal flat submanifold of B. We will, therefore, have to study the structure of the symmetric space B. We refer to [81] and the books by Helgason [34, 35] for more detailed discussions and proofs. To bring the discussion closer to standard references in Lie theory we also introduce some Lie theoretical notation which we have avoided so far. 14 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN Let g = {X ∈ Mn,n tr(X) = 0} , k = {X ∈ Mn,n X t = −X} , be the Lie algebras of G = SL(n, R) and K = SO(n), respectively. The derived involution of θ on g, still denoted θ, is given by θ(X) = −X t. Hence, k = g(1, θ), the eigenspace of θ on g with eigenvalue 1. We fix once and for all the G-invariant m(n−m) tr(XY ) on g. Note that β is negative definite on k bilinear form β(X, Y ) = and hX, Y i = −β(X, θ(Y )) is an inner product on g such that ad(X)t = −ad(θ(X)), where, as usual, ad(X)Y = [X, Y ] = XY − Y X. The normalization of β is chosen so that it agrees with [57]. n We recall that B is a symmetric space corresponding to the involution τ (x) =(cid:18)Im 0 −In−m(cid:19) x(cid:18)Im 0 −In−m(cid:19) =(cid:18) A −B −C D (cid:19) 0 0 for x =(cid:18)A B C D(cid:19) , where for r ∈ N we denote by Ir the r × r identity matrix. Note that τ in fact defines an involution of G and that the derived involution on the Lie algebra g is given by the same form. We have k = l ⊕ q where l ≃ so(m) × so(n − m) is the Lie algebra of L and q = k(−1, τ ) =(cid:26) Q(X) =(cid:18)0mm −X t X 0n−m,n−m(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) X ∈ Mm,n−m(cid:27) . Let Eν,µ = (δiν δjµ)i,j denote the matrix in Mm,n−m with all entries equal to 0 but the (ν, µ)-th which is equal to 1. For t = (t1, . . . , tm)t ∈ Rm we set X(t) = − mXj=1 tjEn−2m+j,j ∈ Mm,n−m , Y (t) = Q(X(t)) ∈ q . Then b = {Y (t) t ∈ Rm} ≃ Rm is a maximal abelian subspace of q. Pm To describe the set bKL we note first that B is not simply connected. So we cannot use the Cartan-Helgason theorem [35, p. 535] directly, but only a slight modification is needed. Define ǫj(Y (t)) := itj. We will identify the element λ = j=1 λj ǫj ∈ b∗ C with the corresponding vector λ = (λ1, . . . , λm). If H ∈ b, then ad(H) is skew-symmetric on k with respect to the inner product h · , · i. Hence ad(H) is diagonalizable over C with purely imaginary eigenvalues. For α ∈ ib∗ let kα C := {X ∈ kC (∀H ∈ b) ad(H)X = α(H)X} be the joint α-eigenspace. Let ∆k = {α ∈ ib∗ α 6= 0 and kα C 6= {0}} . The dimension of kα C is called the multiplicity of α (in kC). Lemma 5.1. We have ∆k = {±ǫi ± ǫj (1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ m , ± independently), ±ǫi (1 ≤ i ≤ m) } with multiplicities respectively 1 (and not there if m = 1), 2n − m (and not there if m = n − m). THE COSINE TRANSFORM 15 Proof. This follows from [34]: the table on page 518, the description of the simple root systems on page 462 ff. and the Satake diagrams on pages 532 -- 533. (cid:3) We let ∆+ k = {ǫi ± ǫj (1 ≤ i < j ≤ m ), ǫi (1 ≤ i ≤ m) } . Lemma 5.2. Let ρk = 1 2 Xα∈∆+ k dim(kα C)α ∈ ib∗. Then ρk = mXj=1(cid:16) n 2 − j(cid:17)ǫj. Let now (π, Vπ) be a unitary irreducible representation of K. Then Vπ is finite dimensional. Moreover, π(H) = π(exp(tH)) is skew-symmetric, hence, d dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)t=0 π π ⊂ Vπ denote the joint eigenspace of eigenvalue µ. If X ∈ kα diagonalizable, for all H ∈ b (in fact, π(H) is diagonalizable for all H ∈ k). Let Γ(π) ⊂ ib∗ be the finite set of joint eigenvalues of π(H) with H ∈ b. For µ ∈ Γ(π), C and v ∈ V µ let V µ π , then π(X)v ∈ V µ+α π = {0} for all α ∈ ∆+ k . This only uses that π is finite dimensional, but the irreducibility implies that this µ is unique. It is called the highest weight of π. Finally we have π ≃ σ if and only if µπ = µσ. . Thus, there exists a µ = µπ ∈ Γ(π) such that π(kα C)V µ Let eK be the universal covering group of K. Then τ lifts to an involution eτ on eK, eL := eK eτ is connected, and eB := eK/eL is the universal covering of B. Replacing K by eK etc., we can talk about eL-spherical representations of eK and their highest Theorem 5.3. The map π 7→ µπ sets up a bijection between the set of eL- weights. The following theorem is a consequence of the Cartan-Helgason theorem [35, p. 535]. spherical representations of eK and the semi-lattice Λ+(eB) =(cid:26)µ ∈ ib∗ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (∀α ∈ ∆+ Furthermore, if m = n/2, then k ) hµ, αi hα, αi ∈ Z+(cid:27) . (5.1) Otherwise, Λ+(eB) = {(µ1, . . . , µm) ∈ Zm µ1 ≥ µ2 ≥ · · · ≥ µm−1 ≥ µm} . Λ+(eB) = {(µ1, . . . , µm) ∈ Zm µ1 ≥ µ2 ≥ · · · ≥ µm−1 ≥ µm ≥ 0} . sentation. Recall the notation Φπµ from (4.1). Let Λ+(B) denote the sublattice in If µ ∈ Λ+(eB), then we write (πµ, Vµ) for the corresponding eL-spherical repre- Λ+(eB) which corresponds to L-spherical representations of K. Then µ ∈ Λ+(B) if and only if the functions Φπµ(v), which are originally defined on eB, factor to µ and H ∈ b. We can normalize v and eπµ so functions on B. For that, let v ∈ V µ that The same argument as for the sphere [81, Ch. III.12], proves the following theorem. Φπµ(v; exp H) = eµ(H) . Theorem 5.4. If m = n − m, then Λ+(B) = {µ = mXj=1 µjεj µj ∈ 2N0 and µ1 ≥ . . . ≥ µm−1 ≥ µm } . 16 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN In all other cases, Λ+(B) = {µ = mXj=1 µjεj µj ∈ 2N0 and µ1 ≥ . . . ≥ µm ≥ 0 } . 6. The generation of the K-spectrum Recall from Section 5 the involution θ(X) = −X t on g. The Lie algebra g decom- poses into eigenspaces of θ as g = k ⊕ s, where s = g(−1, θ) = {X ∈ Mn,n θ(X) = −X and Tr(X) = 0} . Then, except in the case n = 2, the complexification sC of s is an irreducible L- spherical representation of K. For n = 2 this representation decomposes into two one-dimensional representations. Let Ho =(cid:18) n−m 0 n Im 0 n In−m(cid:19) ∈ s . − m Then Ho is L-fixed and hH0, H0i = 1. Define a := RHo. The operator ad(H0) has spectrum {0, 1, −1} and n = g(1, ad(H0)). Let Ad(k) denote the conjugation by k. Define a map ω : sC → C∞(B) by ω(Y )(k) := hY, Ad(k)Hoi = β(Y, Ad(k)Ho) = n m(n−m) Tr(Y kHok−1) and note that ω(Ad(h)Y )(k) = hAd(h)Y, Ad(k)Hoi = hY, Ad(h−1k)Hoi = ω(Y )(h−1k) . Thus ω is a K-intertwining operator. Fix an orthonormal basis X1, . . . , Xdim q of q such that X1, . . . , Xm, is an or- j the corresponding positive definite thonormal basis of b. Denote by Ω = −Pj X 2 Laplace operator on B. Then where ΩL2 µ(B) = ω(µ) id , ω(µ) = hµ + 2ρk, µi . A simple calculation then gives: Lemma 6.1. Let µ = (µ1, . . . , µm) ∈ Λ+(B). Then ω(µ) = m(n − m) 2n mXj=1(cid:16)µ2 j + µj(n − 2j)(cid:17) . For f ∈ C∞(B) denote by M (f ) : L2(B) → L2(B) the multiplication operator g 7→ f g. Recall the notation π0 for the finite dimensional spherical representation of highest weight 0 ∈ Λ+(B). Theorem 6.2. Let Y ∈ s. Then [Ω, M (ω(Y ))] = 2π0(Y ). Proof. This is Theorem 2.3 in [7]. (cid:3) For µ ∈ Λ+(B) define Ψµ : L2 µ(B) ⊗ sC → L2(B) by Ψµ(ϕ ⊗ Y ) := M (ω(Y ))ϕ . Observe that for k ∈ K, Y ∈ sC, and ϕ ∈ L2 µ(B) we have ℓ(k)(cid:0)M (ω(Y )ϕ(cid:1) =(cid:0)ℓ(k)ω(Y )(cid:1)(ℓ(k)ϕ) = M(cid:0)ω(Ad(k)Y )(cid:1)(ℓ(k)ϕ) THE COSINE TRANSFORM 17 with Ad(k)Y ∈ sC and ℓ(k)ϕ ∈ L2 K-invariant. Define a finite subset S(µ) ⊂ Λ+(B) by µ(B). Hence, Ψµ is K-equivariant and Im Ψµ is Im Ψµ ≃K Mσ∈S(µ) L2 σ(B) . Lemma 6.3. Let µ ∈ Λ+(B). Then S(µ) = {µ ± 2ǫj j = 1, . . . , m} ∩ Λ+(B) . These representations occur with multiplicity one. Denote by prσ the orthogonal projection L2(B) → L2 σ(B). The first spectrum generating relation which follows from Theorem 6.2, see also [7, Cor. 2.6], states: Lemma 6.4. Assume that µ ∈ Λ+(B). Let σ ∈ S(µ), Y ∈ sC, and λ ∈ C. Let ωσµ(Y ) := prσ ◦ M (ω(Y ))L2 µ(B) : L2 µ(B) → L2 σ(B) . Then prσ ◦ πλ(Y )L2 µ(B) = 1 2 (ω(σ) − ω(µ) + 2 m(n−m) n λ)ωσµ(Y ) . (6.1) (6.2) The spectrum generating relation that we are looking for can now easily be deducted and we get: Lemma 6.5. Let µ = (µ1, . . . , µm) ∈ Λ+(B) and λ ∈ C. Then ηµ+2ǫj (λ) ηµ(λ) = λ − µj + j − 1 λ + µj + n − j + 1 = − −λ + µj − j + 1 λ + µj + n − j + 1 (6.3) and η0(λ) = c(λ). Proof. First we apply Cλ−n/2 m mutes with prσ and that Cλ−n/2 We then get: m ◦πλ(Y ) = π−λ ◦θ(Y )◦Cλ−n/2 m to (6.2) from the left, using that Cλ−n/2 com- = −π−λ(Y )◦Cλ−n/2 . m m (cid:0)ω(σ) − ω(µ) + 2 m(n−m) n λ(cid:1)ησ(λ − n/2)ωσµ(Y ) = −(cid:0)ω(σ) − ω(µ) − 2 m(n−m) n λ(cid:1)ηµ(λ − n/2)ωσµ(Y ) . As ωσδ(Y ) is non-zero, for generic λ it can be canceled out. Now insert the expression from Lemma 6.1 to get ω(µ + 2ǫj) − ω(µ) = 2m(n−m) n (µj + n/2 − (j − 1)) and the claim follows. The last statement follows from the fact that πλ is irreducible for generic λ, hence, iterated application of (6.1) will in the end reach all K-types starting from the trivial K-type. (cid:3) Lemma 6.3 tells us that the evaluation of ηµ(λ) can be done in two steps. First we determine the function η0(λ) and then use (6.3) as an inductive procedure to determine the rest. The final result is given in the following theorem. It is presented in terms of Γ-functions associated to the cone Ω of m× m positive definite matrices, namely, ΓΩ(λ) = πm(m−1)/4 mYj=1 Γ(λj − (j − 1)/2), λ = (λ1, . . . , λm) ∈ Cm. (6.4) 18 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN This integral is a generalization of Γm(λ) in (3.5); cf. [16, p. 123], [70, Sec. 2.2]. In the following the scalar parameters, which occur in the argument of ΓΩ, are interpreted as vector valued, for instance, n ∼ (n, . . . , n), λ ∼ (λ, . . . , λ). Theorem 6.6 ([57]). Let Λ+(B) be the sublattice in Theorem 5.4 parametrizing the L-spherical representations of K, let µ = (µ1, . . . , µm) ∈ Λ+(B), and λ ∈ C. Then the K-spectrum of the cosine transform Cλ m is given by: ηµ(λ) = (−1)µ/2 Γm (n/2) Γm (m/2) Γm ((λ + m)/2)) ΓΩ ((µ − λ)/2) Γm (−λ/2) ΓΩ ((λ + n + µ)/2) . (6.5) Remark 6.7. Owing to (3.12), the spectrum of the normalized cosine transform C λ m has the simpler form ηµ(λ) = (−1)µ/2 ΓΩ ((µ − λ)/2) ΓΩ ((λ + n + µ)/2) . (6.6) In the case m = 1 this formula coincides with (2.6). Remark 6.8. In Section 4 we referred to the result of Vogan and Wallach on the meromorphic continuation of the intertwining operator J(λ). This result is not needed for the computation of ηµ(λ). Indeed, it is enough to know that J(λ) is holomorphic on some open subset of C as that is all what is needed to determine ηµ(λ) in Theorem 6.6. We can then extend Cλ m meromorphically on each K-type. Note, however, that this is weaker than the statement in [83] which extends Cλ mf for all smooth functions. References [1] A. D. Aleksandrov. On the theory of mixed volumes of convex bodies. II. New inequalities between mixed volumes and their applications. Mat. Sbornik N.S., 2:1205 -- 1238, 1937. [2] S. Alesker. The α-cosine transform and intertwining integrals on real grassmannians. 2003. [3] S. Alesker and J. Bernstein. Range characterization of the cosine transform on higher Grass- mannians. Adv. Math., 184(2):367 -- 379, 2004. [4] R. Askey and S. Wainger. On the behavior of special classes of ultraspherical expansions. I, II. J. Analyse Math., 15:193 -- 220, 1965. [5] A. Bernig. Algebraic integral geometry. arXiv:1004.3145v3, 2011. [6] W. Blaschke. Kreis und Kugel. Chelsea Publishing Co., New York, 1949. [7] T. Branson, G. ´Olafsson, and B. Ørsted. Spectrum generating operators and intertwining operators for representations induced from a maximal parabolic subgroup. J. Funct. Anal., 135(1):163 -- 205, 1996. [8] J.-L. Brylinski and P. Delorme. Vecteurs distributions H-invariants pour les s´eries princi- pales g´en´eralis´ees d'espaces sym´etriques r´eductifs et prolongement m´eromorphe d'int´egrales d'Eisenstein. Invent. Math., 109(3):619 -- 664, 1992. [9] J.-L. Clerc. Intertwining operators for the generalized principal series on symmetric R-spaces. arxiv:1209.0691v1, 2012. [10] G. van Dijk and S. C. Hille. Canonical representations related to hyperbolic spaces. J. Funct. Anal., 147(1):109 -- 139, 1997. [11] G. van Dijk and S. C. Hille. Maximal degenerate representations, Berezin kernels and canoni- cal representations. In Lie groups and Lie algebras, volume 433 of Math. Appl., pages 285 -- 298. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1998. [12] G. van Dijk and V. F. Molchanov. Tensor products of maximal degenerate series representa- tions of the group SL(n, R). J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 78(1):99 -- 119, 1999. [13] G. van Dijk and A. Pasquale. Canonical representations of Sp(1, n) associated with represen- tations of Sp(1). Comm. Math. Phys., 202(3):651 -- 667, 1999. [14] A. H. Dooley and G. Zhang. Generalized principal series representations of SL(1 + n, C). Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 125(9):2779 -- 2787, 1997. THE COSINE TRANSFORM 19 [15] G. I. Eskin. Boundary value problems for elliptic pseudodifferential equations, volume 52 of Translations of Mathematical Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1981. [16] J. Faraut and A. Kor´anyi. Analysis on symmetric cones. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press Oxford University Press, New York, 1994. [17] G. B. Folland. A course in abstract harmonic analysis. Studies in Advanced Mathematics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1995. [18] R. L. Frank and E. H. Lieb. Inversion positivity and the sharp Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 39(1-2):85 -- 99, 2010. [19] R. L. Frank and E. H. Lieb. Spherical reflection positivity and the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality. concentration, functional inequalities and isoperimetry. Contemp. Math., 545:89 -- 102, 2011. [20] J. H. G. Fu. Algebraic integral geometry. arXiv: 1103.6256v2, 2012. [21] A. D. Gadzhiev. Differential properties of the symbol of a singular operator in spaces of Bessel potentials on a sphere. Izv. Akad. Nauk Azerbaıdzhan. SSR Ser. Fiz.-Tekhn. Mat. Nauk, 3(1):134 -- 140, 1982. in Russian. [22] A. D. Gadzhiev. Exact theorems on multipliers of spherical expansions and some of their applications. In Special problems in function theory, No. IV (Russian), pages 73 -- 100. "`Elm", Baku, 1989. [23] R. J. Gardner. Geometric tomography, volume 58 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. [24] R. J. Gardner and A. A. Giannopoulos. p-cross-section bodies. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 48(2):593 -- 613, 1999. [25] S. S. Gelbart. A theory of Stiefel harmonics. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 192:29 -- 50, 1974. [26] I. M. Gel′fand, M. I. Graev, and R. Ro¸su. The problem of integral geometry and intertwining operators for a pair of real Grassmannian manifolds. J. Operator Theory, 12(2):359 -- 383, 1984. [27] I. M. Gel′fand and Z. Ya. Sapiro. Homogeneous functions and their extensions. Uspehi Mat. Nauk (N.S.), 10(3(65)):3 -- 70, 1955. in Russian. [28] S.G. Gindikin. Analysis on homogeneous domains. Russian Math. Surveys, 19(4):1 -- 89, 1964. [29] P. Goodey and R. Howard. Processes of flats induced by higher-dimensional processes. Adv. Math., 80(1):92 -- 109, 1990. [30] P. Goodey, V. Yaskin, and M. Yaskina. Fourier transforms and the Funk-Hecke theorem in convex geometry. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2), 80(2):388 -- 404, 2009. [31] E. L. Grinberg and B. Rubin. Radon inversion on Grassmannians via Garding-Gindikin frac- tional integrals. Ann. of Math. (2), 159(2):783 -- 817, 2004. [32] H. Groemer. Geometric applications of Fourier series and spherical harmonics, volume 61 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996. [33] Harish-Chandra. Harmonic analysis on real reductive groups iii. the Maass-Selberg relations and the Plancherel formula. Ann. of Math. (2), 104(1):117 -- 201, 1976. [34] S. Helgason. Differential geometry, Lie groups, and symmetric spaces, volume 80 of Pure and Applied Mathematics. Academic Press Inc., New York, 1978. [35] S. Helgason. Groups and geometric analysis. Integral geometry, invariant differential opera- tors, and spherical functions, volume 83 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000. [36] P. E. T. Jorgensen and G. ´Olafsson. Unitary representations of Lie groups with reflection symmetry. J. Funct. Anal., 158(1):26 -- 88, 1998. [37] P. E. T. Jorgensen and G. ´Olafsson. Unitary representations and Osterwalder-Schrader du- ality. In The mathematical legacy of Harish-Chandra (Baltimore, MD, 1998), volume 68 of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 333 -- 401. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2000. [38] M. Kanter. The Lp norm of sums of translates of a function. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 79:35 -- 47, 1973. [39] S. P. Kh`ekalo. Riesz potentials in the space of rectangular matrices, and the iso-Hyugens deformation of the Cayley-Laplace operator. Dokl. Math., 63(1):35 -- 37, 2001. Translated from Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 376(2): 168 -- 170. 20 G. ´OLAFSSON, A. PASQUALE, AND B. RUBIN [40] S. P. Kh`ekalo. The Cayley-Laplace differential operator on the space of rectangular matrices. Izv. Math., 61(1):191 -- 219, 2005. Translated from Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat., 69:1, 195 -- 224, 2005. [41] S. P. Kh`ekalo. The Igusa zeta function associated with a complex power function on the space of rectangular matrices. Math. Notes, 78(5):719 -- 734, 2005. Translated from Mat. Zametki, 78:5, 773 -- 791, 2005. [42] A. W. Knapp. Representation theory of semisimple groups, volume 36 of Princeton Math- ematical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1986. An overview based on examples. [43] A. W. Knapp and E. M. Stein. Intertwining operators for semisimple groups. Ann. of Math., 93:489 -- 578, 1971. [44] A. W. Knapp and E. M. Stein. Intertwining operators for semisimple groups. II. Invent. Math., 60(1):9 -- 84, 1980. [45] A. Koldobsky. Inverse formula for the Blaschke-Levy representation. Houston J. Math., 23(1):95 -- 108, 1997. [46] A. Koldobsky. Fourier analysis in convex geometry, volume 116 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2005. [47] A. Koldobsky and H. Konig. Aspects of the isometric theory of Banach spaces. In Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces, Vol. I, pages 899 -- 939. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2001. [48] V. S. Kryuchkov. Differential properties of the symbol of the singular integral Calder´on- Zygmund operator. Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov., 170:148 -- 160, 276, 1984. Studies in the theory of differentiable functions of several variables and its applications, X. [49] P. Levy. Th´eorie de l'addition des variables al´eatoires. Gauthier-Villars, 1937. [50] E. Lutwak. Centroid bodies and dual mixed volumes. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 60(2):365 -- 391, 1990. [51] G. Matheron. Un th´eor`eme d'unicit´e pour les hyperplans poissoniens. J. Appl. Probability, 11:184 -- 189, 1974. [52] S. Meda and R. Pini. Spherical convolution with kernels having singularities on an equator. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. B (7), 5(2):275 -- 290, 1991. [53] K.-H. Neeb and G. ´Olafsson. Reflection positivity and conformal symmetry. arXiv:1206.2039, 2012. [54] A. Neyman. Representation of Lp-norms and isometric embedding in Lp-spaces. Israel J. Math., 48(2-3):129 -- 138, 1984. [55] G. ´Olafsson. Fourier and Poisson transformation associated to a semisimple symmetric space. Invent. Math., 90(3):605 -- 629, 1987. [56] G. ´Olafsson and A. Pasquale. On the meromorphic extension of the spherical functions on noncompactly causal symmetric spaces. J. Funct. Anal., 181(2):346 -- 401, 2001. [57] G. ´Olafsson and A. Pasquale. The Cosλ and Sinλ transforms as intertwining operators be- tween generalized principal series representations of SL(n+1, K). Adv. Math., 229(1):267 -- 293, 2012. [58] E. Ournycheva and B. Rubin. Composite cosine transforms. Mathematika, 52(1-2):53 -- 68, 2005. [59] E. Ournycheva and B. Rubin. The composite cosine transform on the Stiefel manifold and generalized zeta integrals. In Integral geometry and tomography, volume 405 of Contemp. Math., pages 111 -- 133. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006. [60] A. Pasquale. Maximal degenerate representations of SL(n + 1, H). J. Lie Theory, 9(2):369 -- 382, 1999. [61] B. A. Plamenevskiı. Algebras of pseudodifferential operators, volume 43 of Mathematics and its Applications (Soviet Series). Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 1989. [62] B. Rubin. Fractional calculus and wavelet transforms in integral geometry. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 1(2):193 -- 219, 1998. [63] B. Rubin. Inversion of fractional integrals related to the spherical Radon transform. J. Funct. Anal., 157(2):470 -- 487, 1998. [64] B. Rubin. Fractional integrals and wavelet transforms associated with Blaschke-Levy repre- sentations on the sphere. Israel J. Math., 114:1 -- 27, 1999. [65] B. Rubin. Inversion and characterization of the hemispherical transform. J. Anal. Math., 77:105 -- 128, 1999. THE COSINE TRANSFORM 21 [66] B. Rubin. Inversion formulas for the spherical Radon transform and the generalized cosine transform. Adv. in Appl. Math., 29(3):471 -- 497, 2002. [67] B. Rubin. Radon, cosine and sine transforms on real hyperbolic space. Adv. Math., 170(2):206 -- 223, 2002. [68] B. Rubin. Notes on Radon transforms in integral geometry. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal., 6(1):25 -- 72, 2003. [69] B. Rubin. Intersection bodies and generalized cosine transforms. Adv. Math., 218(3):696 -- 727, 2008. [70] B. Rubin. Funk, cosine, and sine transforms on stiefel and grassmann manifolds. To appear in J. of Geom. Anal., 2012. [71] B. Rubin and G. Zhang. Generalizations of the Busemann-Petty problem for sections of convex bodies. J. Funct. Anal., 213(2):473 -- 501, 2004. [72] W. Rudin. Lp-isometries and equimeasurability. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 25(3):215 -- 228, 1976. [73] S. G. Samko. Generalized Riesz potentials and hypersingular integrals with homogeneous characteristics; their symbols and inversion. Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov., 156:157 -- 222, 263, 1980. Studies in the theory of differentiable functions of several variables and its applications, VIII. [74] S. G. Samko. Singular integrals over a sphere and the construction of the characteristic from the symbol. Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Mat., (4):28 -- 42, 1983. [75] R. Schneider. Convex bodies: the Brunn-Minkowski theory, volume 44 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. [76] V. I. Semjanistyı. Some integral transformations and integral geometry in an elliptic space. Trudy Sem. Vektor. Tenzor. Anal., 12:397 -- 441, 1963. [77] E. Spodarev. On the rose of intersections of stationary flat processes. Adv. in Appl. Probab., 33(3):584 -- 599, 2001. [78] E. Spodarev. Cauchy-Kubota-type integral formulae for the generalized cosine transforms. Izv. Nats. Akad. Nauk Armenii Mat., 37(1):52 -- 69 (2003), 2002. [79] R. S. Strichartz. Convolutions with kernels having singularities on a sphere. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 148:461 -- 471, 1970. [80] R. S. Strichartz. The explicit Fourier decomposition of L2(SO(n)/SO(n − m)). Canad. J. Math., 27:294 -- 310, 1975. [81] M. Takeuchi. Modern spherical functions, volume 135 of Translations of Mathematical Mono- graphs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1994. Translated from the 1975 Japanese original. [82] T. Ton-That. Lie group representations and harmonic polynomials of a matrix variable. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 216:1 -- 46, 1976. [83] D. A. Vogan, Jr. and N. R. Wallach. Intertwining operators for real reductive groups. Adv. Math., 82(2):203 -- 243, 1990. [84] J. A. Wolf. Harmonic analysis on commutative spaces, volume 142 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2007. [85] G. Zhang. Radon transform on real, complex, and quaternionic Grassmannians. Duke Math. J., 138(1):137 -- 160, 2007. [86] G. Zhang. Radon, cosine and sine transforms on Grassmannian manifolds. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (10):1743 -- 1772, 2009. Department of Mathematics, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803 USA E-mail address: [email protected] Laboratoire de Math´ematiques et Applications de Metz (UMR CNRS 7122), Univer- sit´e de Lorraine, 57045 Metz cedex 1, France E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803 USA E-mail address: [email protected]
1211.6933	1	1211	2012-11-29T14:46:37	Quasiadditivity of variational capacity	[ "math.FA" ]	We study the quasiadditivity property (a version of superadditivity with a multiplicative constant) of variational capacity in metric spaces with respect to Whitney type covers. We characterize this property in terms of a Mazya type capacity condition, and also explore the close relation between quasiadditivity and Hardy's inequality.	math.FA	math	QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM Abstract. We study the quasiadditivity property (a version of superadditivity with a multiplicative constant) of variational capacity in metric spaces with respect to Whitney type covers. We characterize this property in terms of a Mazya type capacity condition, and also explore the close relation between quasiadditivity and Hardy's inequality. 1. Introduction Given an open set Ω ⊂ Rn and a subset E ⊂ Ω, the relative p-capacity capp(E, Ω) measures the minimal energy needed by a Sobolev function that vanishes on ∂Ω to take on a value at least 1 on E. In potential theory this quantity can also be seen as a measure of the amount of rectifiable curves connecting E to ∂Ω. Hence, greater the amount of ∂Ω that is close to E the larger the relative p-capacity is. It can be seen that E 7→ capp(E, Ω) is an outer measure on subsets of Ω. In particular, capacity is countably sub-additivite: if Ek ⊂ Ω, k ∈ I ⊂ N, then (1) capp(cid:16)[k∈I Ek, Ω(cid:17) ≤Xk∈I capp(Ek, Ω). Unlike for Borel regular measures, the equality in (1) does not (usually) hold even for nice, well-separated sets. Indeed, the only sets that are measurable with respect to capp-outer measure are sets of zero capacity and their complements, see for example [30, Theorem 4.8] or [10, Theorem 2]. Nevertheless, in some cases a converse to (1), with a multiplicative constant, can be shown to hold for certain of unions of sets; this is called the quasiadditivity property of capacity. More precisely, we say that the p-capacity relative to an open set Ω is quasiadditive with respect to a given cover (or a decomposition) W of Ω if there is a constant A > 0 such that for all E ⊂ Ω. capp(E ∩ Q, Ω) ≤ A capp(E, Ω) XQ∈W The quasiadditivity property (for the linear case p = 2) was first considered by Landkof [22, Lemma 5.5] (without the name) and Adams [1] for Riesz (and Bessel) capacities with respect to annular decompositions of Rn \ {0}. Aikawa generalized these results in [2], where he showed that if the complement Rn \ Ω has a sufficiently small dimension (formulated in terms of a local version of packing condition), then the Riesz capacity of Rn is quasiadditive with respect to Whitney decompositions of Ω. On the other hand, in [3] Aikawa considered the Green capacity (obtained via the Green energy) and demonstrated that if Rn \ Ω is uniformly regular (or, equivalently, uniformly 2-fat), then the Green capacity is quasiadditive with respect to Whitney decompositions of Ω. Note that in this case, conversely to the result of [2], the complement Rn \ Ω has a large dimension. A good survey of these topics in the Euclidean setting can be found in [5, Section 7 of Part II]. Date: September 25, 2018. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 31E05, 31C45; Secondary 46E35, 26D15. The first author acknowledges the support of the Academy of Finland, grant no. 252108. The second author was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation, Collaboration Grant # 200474 and NSF grant DMS-1200915. 1 2 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM See also [5, Section 16 of Part I] and [4] for related results for nonlinear (p 6= 2) setting for which decompositions other than the Whitney decomposition are used. The aim of this note is to study the quasiadditivity problem for the relative p-capacity with respect to Whitney type covers in the setting of complete metric measure spaces satisfying the 'standard' structural assumptions (see Section 2.1). Nevertheless, most of our results are new for p 6= 2 (and for p = 2, obtained via new methods) even in Eu- clidean spaces. Part of our motivation stems from a need to clarify the relation between quasiadditivity and Hardy's inequality (a Sobolev-type inequality weighted with a power of the distance-to-boundary function; see Section 3.2). Glimpses of a connection between these concepts (and the related dimension bound of Aikawa from [2]) have appeared e.g. in [3, 5, 21, 23, 25, 32], but now our main result -- Theorem 3.3, a characterization of quasiadditivity in terms of a Mazya type capacity estimate -- reveals a simple equivalence between quasiadditivity and Hardy's inequalities (Corollary 3.5). These results also link quasiadditivity and the geometry of the boundary (or the complement) of the open set Ω. The organization of this note is as follows. In Section 2 we recall some of the necessary background material: The basic assumptions, the notions of (co)dimension for metric spaces, Sobolev type spaces and the related capacities, and Whitney covers (substitutes of the classical Whitney decompositions for our more general spaces). Since our proofs are largely based on potential-theoretic (rather than PDE-based) tools, an overview of these is given at the end of Section 2; of a particular importance for us is the weak Harnack inequality for superminimizers. Section 3 contains our main characterization of quasiadditivity and the aforementioned connection with Hardy's inequalities. A concrete outcome of these considerations is that the uniform p-fatness of X \ Ω guarantees the quasiadditivity for the relative p-capacity in Ω for 1 < p < ∞. Aikawa's dimension bound dimA(Rn \ Ω) < n − p from [2] translates to more general metric spaces as co-dimA(X \ Ω) > p. We show in Section 4 that this bound, together with an additional discrete John type condition, is sufficient for the relative p-capacity to be quasiadditive with respect to Whitney covers of Ω. Finally, in Section 5 we explain how the results involving a large complement (uniform p-fatness) or a small complement (Aikawa's condition) can be combined, allowing us to deal with more general open sets whose complements consist of parts of different sizes. For the notation we remark that C will denote positive constants whose value is not If there exist constants c1, c2 > 0 such that necessarily the same at each occurrence. c1 F ≤ G ≤ c2F , we sometimes write F ≈ G and say that F and G are comparable. 2. Preliminaries 2.1. Doubling metric spaces. We assume throughout this note that X = (X, d, µ) is a complete metric measure space, where µ is a Borel measure supported on X, with 0 < µ(B) < ∞ whenever B = B(x, r) is an open ball in X, and that µ is doubling, that is, there is a constant C > 0 such that whenever x ∈ X and r > 0, we have µ(B(x, 2r)) ≤ C µ(B(x, r)). We make the tacit assumption that each ball B ⊂ X has a fixed center xB and radius rad(B), and thus notation such as λB = B(xB, λ rad(B)) is well-defined for all λ > 0. If µ is a doubling measure, then by iterating the doubling condition we find constants Q > 0 and C > 0 such that µ(B(y, r)) µ(B(x, R)) ≥ C(cid:16) r R(cid:17)Q whenever 0 < r ≤ R < diam X and y ∈ B(x, R). Furthermore, if X is connected (this is guaranteed in our setting by the below-mentioned Poincaré inequalities), then there exists QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 3 a constant Qu > 0 such that for all 0 < r < R < diam X and y ∈ B(x, R), (2) µ(B(y, r)) µ(B(x, R)) ≤ C(cid:16) r R(cid:17)Qu . In general, 1 ≤ Qu ≤ Q. However, if we have uniform upper and lower bounds for the measures of the balls, i.e. c−1rQ ≤ µ(B(x, r)) ≤ crQ for every x ∈ X and all 0 < r < diam(X), we say that the measure µ is (Ahlfors) Q-regular. When working with a (non-regular) doubling measure µ, it is often convenient to de- scribe the sizes of sets in terms of codimensions (instead of dimensions). For instance, the Hausdorff codimension of E ⊂ X (with respect to µ) is the number where co-dimH(E) = sup(cid:8)q ≥ 0 : Hµ,q ∞ (E) = inf(cid:26)Xk ∞ (E) = 0(cid:9), rad(Bk)−qµ(Bk) : E ⊂[k Hµ,q Bk(cid:27) is the q-codimensional Hausdorff content. If µ is Q-regular, then we have for all E ⊂ X that Q − co-dimH(E) = dimH(E), the usual Hausdorff dimension. Another notion of codimension that will be useful for us is the Aikawa codimension: For E ⊂ X we define co-dimA(E) as the supremum of all q ≥ 0 for which there exists a constant Cq such that ZB(x,r) dist(y, E)−q dµ(y) ≤ Cqr−qµ(B(x, r)) for every x ∈ E and all 0 < r < diam(E). Here we interpret the integral to be +∞ if q > 0 and E has positive measure. It is not hard to see that co-dimA(E) ≤ co-dimH(E) for all E ⊂ X (cf. [25]). If µ is Ahlfors Q-regular, then we could define the Aikawa dimension of a set E ⊂ X to be the number dimA(E) = Q − co-dimA(E). Nevertheless, it was shown in [25] that for subsets of Ahlfors regular metric measure spaces this concept is actually equal to the Assouad dimension of the subset; see [26] for the basic properties of the Assouad dimension. 2.2. Sobolev-type function spaces in the metric setting. There are many analogs of Sobolev-type function spaces in the metric setting. The one considered in this note is based on the notion of upper gradients, generalizing the fundamental theorem of calculus. Given a measurable function f : X → [−∞, ∞], we say that a Borel measurable non-negative function g on X is an upper gradient of f if whenever γ is a compact rectifiable curve in X, we have f (y) − f (x) ≤ Zγ g ds. Here x, y denote the two endpoints of γ, and the above condition should be interpreted as claiming that Rγ g ds = ∞ whenever at least one of f (x), f (y) is infinite. See [12] and [6] for a good discussion on the notion of upper gradients. Using upper gradients as a substitute for modulus of the weak derivative, we define the norm kf kN 1,p(X) :=(cid:18)ZX f p dµ + inf g ZX gp dµ(cid:19)1/p , where the infimum is taken over all upper gradients g of f . The Newtonian space N 1,p(X) is the space {f : X → [−∞, ∞] : kf kN 1,p(X) < ∞}/ ∼, where the equivalence ∼ is given by u ∼ v if and only if ku − vkN 1,p(X) = 0 (see [28] or [6] for more on this function space). 4 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM In addition to the doubling property, we will also assume throughout that the space X supports a (1, p)-Poincaré inequality, that is, there exist constants C > 0 and λ ≥ 1 such that whenever B = B(x, r) ⊂ X and g is an upper gradient of a measurable function f , we have ZB where f − fB dµ ≤ C r (cid:18)ZλB f dµ =:ZB µ(B) ZB fB := 1 gp dµ(cid:19)1/p f dµ. Different notions of capacity are of fundamental importance in many questions related to the behavior of the functions belonging to a certain class. Given a set E ⊂ X, the total p-capacity of E, denoted Capp(E), is the infimum of kukp N 1,p(X) over all functions u such that u ≥ 1 on E. Just as sets of measure zero play the role of indeterminacy in the theory of Lebesgue spaces Lp(X), sets of total p-capacity zero play the corresponding role in the theory of Sobolev type spaces; see [6] or [28] for details. We say that a property holds (p-)quasieverywhere (p-q.e.) if the exeptional set is of zero total capacity. When the examinations are taking place in an open set Ω ⊂ X, then a more appropriate version of capacity is the relative p-capacity. For a measurable set E ⊂ Ω this is defined as the number capp(E, Ω) := inf u inf gu ZX gp u dµ, where the infimum is taken over all u ∈ N 1,p(X) with u = 0 on X \ Ω, u = 1 on E, 0 ≤ u ≤ 1, and over all upper gradients gu of u. A function u satisfying the above conditions is called a capacity test function for E. Should no such function u exist, we set capp(E, Ω) = ∞. When the variational capacity is taken with respect to Ω = X, it may be the case that capp(E, X) = 0 for all bounded E ⊂ X; this is certainly true if X is bounded. If X is unbounded and still capp(E, X) = 0 for all bounded E ⊂ X, then X is called p-parabolic, but if capp(E, X) > 0 for some bounded E ⊂ X, then X is p-hyperbolic. These notions will be relevant in the considerations of Section 4. See [14] and [15] for more on parabolic and hyperbolic spaces. Notice in particular that if X is bounded or p-parabolic and Ω ⊂ X is such that Capp(X \ Ω) = 0, then capp(E, Ω) = 0 for every E ⊂ Ω. Besides measuring small (exeptional) sets, the relative capacity can also be used to give conditions for the largeness of sets. For instance, a closed set E ⊂ X is said to be uniformly p-fat if there exists a constant C > 0 such that capp(E ∩ B, 2B) ≥ C capp(B, 2B) for all balls B centered at E. Here capp(B, 2B) is actually comparable with rad(B)−pµ(B) for all balls B of radius less than diam(X)/8. See [6, Chapter 6] for this and other basic properties of the total and the variational capacity on metric spaces. We remark that the uniform p-fatness can also be characterized using uniform density conditions for Hausdorff contents; see e.g. [19]. Recall that we say the variational p-capacity capp(·, Ω) to be quasiadditive with respect to a decomposition or a cover W of Ω if there exists a constant A > 0 such that capp(E ∩ Q, Ω) ≤ A capp(E, Ω) XQ∈W for every E ⊂ Ω. In the next subsection we discuss the one particular family of covers we are concerned with. QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 5 2.3. Whitney covers. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set. We often write dΩ(x) = dist(x, X \ Ω) for x ∈ Ω. When 0 < c ≤ 1/2, we fix a Whitney type cover Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈N, Ω ⊂Si∈N Bi, controlled overlap: there exists 1 ≤ C < ∞ such that Pi χBi consisting of balls Bi = B(xi, cdΩ(xi)), xi ∈ Ω, such that the balls Bi have uniformly ≤ C. Such a cover can always be constructed by considering maximal packings (or, alternatively, '5r'-covers) of the sets {x ∈ Ω : 2−k−1 ≤ dΩ(x) < 2−k}, k ∈ Z, with the balls of the above type. In pathological situations we allow Bi = ∅ for some i, if necessary. In our proofs, we need to be able to dilate the Whitney balls without having too much overlap; the existence of such a cover is established in the next (elementary) lemma. For a proof, see e.g. [7] (Theorem 3.1 together with Lemma 3.4) or [13, Chapter 3]. Lemma 2.1. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set. Fix L ≥ 1 and let Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈N be a Whitney cover of Ω with c ≤ (3L)−1. Then the balls LBi have a uniformly bounded overlap. In the proof of our main characterization of the quasiadditivity, we will need for Whitney balls B ∈ Wc(Ω) the estimate (3) c1 rad(B)−pµ(B) ≤ capp(B, Ω) ≤ c2 rad(B)−pµ(B), where c1, c2 may depend on Wc(Ω) but not on the particular B ∈ Wc(Ω). The upper bound in (3) is always true in our setting, and can be proved almost immediately by using only the doubling condition and the test function u(x) = [1 − dΩ(x)/ rad(B)]+. The lower bound is a bit more involved, and can in fact fail in some spaces satisfying our basic assumptions. Thus, in the cases where we need the lower bound, we will need to have some extra assumptions on Ω or X, e.g. those given in Lemma 2.2 below. However, we stress that the lower bound in (3) is only needed in the proof of Lemma 2.3, which on the other hand is only used to prove the Main Theorem 3.3, and then once again in the considerations of Section 5, and thus these are the only instances where such assumptions are needed. Another important case when the lower bound is valid is when X \ Ω is uniformly p- fat; the bound then follows easily (e.g.) from the p-Hardy inequality (see Section 3.2) for capacity test functions of B ∈ Wc(Ω). In this case we only need the standing assumptions that µ is doubling and X supports a (1, p)-Poincaré inequality. If we want to weaken the assumption on X \ Ω, we need to assume more on µ and p. In the following lemma we chose the condition that X is unbounded (in which case we have µ(X) = ∞ by (2)). However, if X happens to be bounded, then we could impose a further condition on Ω instead, such as diam(Ω) < 2 diam(X), in which case the constants depend on γ = µ(Ω)/µ(X) < 1. The proof in this case is similar to the one below. Recall here that Qu is the exponent from the 'upper mass bound' (2). Lemma 2.2. Assume that 1 ≤ p < Qu and X is unbounded. Then c rad(B)−pµ(B) ≤ capp(B, Ω) for all Whitney balls B ∈ Wc(Ω). Proof. Let u ∈ N 1,p(Ω) be a capacity test function for B = B(x, r) ∈ Wc(Ω), and let g ∈ Lp(Ω) be an upper gradient of u. For positive integers j let Bj = 2jB and rj = 2jr. As u ∈ Lp(X) and µ(X) = ∞ by the unboundedness of X (here we use (2)), there exists K ∈ N (depending on u) such that uBK < 1/2. On the other hand, because u ≥ 1 on B we know that uB = 1. Now a standard telescoping argument using the (1, p)-Poincaré inequality yields (4) 1 2 ≤ uB − uBK ≤ C K Xj=1 rj(cid:18)ZλBj gp dµ(cid:19)1/p . 6 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM It follows that there exists a constant C0 > 0 and some 1 ≤ j0 ≤ K such that (r/rj0)(Qu−p)/p = (2−j0)(Qu−p)/p ≤ C0rj0µ(λBj0)−1/p(cid:18)ZλBj0 gp dµ(cid:19)1/p (otherwise (4) would lead to a contradicition when compared to a geometric series). Thus we obtain, using also (2) and the assumption 1 < p < Qu, that ZΩ as desired. gp dµ ≥ C(r/rj0)Qu−pr−p j0 µ(λBj0) ≥ Cr−pµ(B), (cid:3) Let us record the following easy consequence of estimate (3) for unions of Whitney balls. Lemma 2.3. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set and let Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈N be a Whitney cover of Ω for which the lower bound in (3) holds. Furthermore, let U ⊂ Ω be a union of Whitney balls, i.e., U =Si∈I Bi for some I ⊂ N. Then dΩ(x)−p dµ ≈Xi∈I ZU capp(Bi, Ω). Proof. This follows from the fact that dΩ(x) ≈ rad(Bi) for all x ∈ Bi, with constants only depending on c, and that capp(Bi, Ω) ≈ rad(Bi)−pµ(Bi) by (3). (cid:3) 2.4. Existence and properties of p-potentials. In computing the relative p-capacity capp(E, Ω), should this capacity be finite, we can find a minimzing sequence of capacity test functions uk ∈ N 1,p(X), i.e., lim k→∞ gp uk dµ = capp(E, Ω). inf gukZX We will assume throughout that 1 < p < ∞; hence Lp(X) is reflexive, and so a standard variational argument using Mazur's lemma on Lp(X) (as in Lemma 2.4 below) tells us that if Ω ⊂ X is bounded and Capp(X \ Ω) > 0, then there is a p-potential u ∈ N 1,p(X) such that 0 ≤ u ≤ 1 on X, u = 1 on E, u = 0 on X \ Ω, and inf gu ZΩ gp u dµ = inf gu ZX gp u dµ = capp(E, Ω). Such a p-potential is unique because X supports a (1, p)-Poincaré inequality; see [29] for more details. Nevertheless, the following more general lemma tells us that a p-potential u ∈ N 1,p loc (X) exists in more general cases (e.g. if Capp(X \ Ω) = 0) as well; though, if X is p-parabolic, we would have u be a constant. In addition, the below proof shows that the reflexivity of N 1,p(X) is actually not needed for the existence of p-potentials. Lemma 2.4. Let 1 < p < ∞ and let E ⊂ Ω be such that capp(E, Ω) < ∞. Then there is a function u ∈ N 1,p loc (X) such that u = 1 p-q.e. on E, u = 0 p-q.e. in X \ Ω, 0 ≤ u ≤ 1 on X, and inf gu ZΩ gp u dµ = capp(E, Ω). Proof. If Ω is bounded, then the following proof can be easily modified, or the results of [29] can be used to obtain the desired conclusion. Hence here we will only give the proof for the case that Ω, and hence X, is unbounded. For each u ∈ N 1,p(X) there is a minimal (p-weak) upper gradient gu ∈ Lp(X); see for example [6]. Hence, from now on, we let gu denote this minimal upper gradient of u. QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 7 Let {uk}k∈N be a sequence of functions in N 1,p(X) that satisfy 0 ≤ uk ≤ 1 on X, uk = 0 on X \ Ω p-q.e., uk = 1 p-q.e. on E, and lim k→∞ZΩ gp uk dµ = capp(E, Ω). Fix x0 ∈ Ω and for each positive integer n let Bn = B(x0, n). Given that 0 ≤ uk ≤ 1, the sequences {uk}k and {guk }k are bounded in Lp(Bn) for each positive integer n, and hence because 1 < p < ∞, the uniform convexity of Lp(Bn) together with a Cantor diagonalization argument tells us that {uk}k converges weakly to a function u in Lp loc(X) and that {guk }k converges weakly to g in Lp Finally, an application of [16, Lemma 3.1] to {uk}k and {guk }k in Bn allows us to modify u on a set of measure zero to obtain a function u ∈ Lp loc(X) that has g as a p-weak upper gradient, and furthermore, from [16, Lemma 3.1] and [28, Proof of Theorem 3.7], we can conclude that u = 1 p-q.e. on E, u = 0 p-q.e. on X \ Ω, and that loc(X). ZΩ gp u dµ ≤ZΩ k→∞ZΩ gp dµ ≤ lim gp uk dµ = capp(E, Ω). This, together with the definition of capp(E, Ω) now completes the proof. (cid:3) The results from [18] show that such u, if non-constant, satisfies u > 0 on Ω with u < 1 on X \ E. Of course, should capp(E, Ω) be infinite, then no such u exists. It is clear that the p-potential u, corresponding to E ⊂ X, has the property that u is a p-superminimizer in Ω and a p-subminimizer in X \ E; in particular, u is a p-minimizer in Ω \ E. Here, we say that a function v ∈ N 1,p loc (X) is a p-superminimizer in an open set U ⊂ X if, whenever ϕ ∈ N 1,p(X) is a non-negative function such that ϕ = 0 on X \ U , we have inf gv Zsupt(ϕ) gp v dµ ≤ inf gv+ϕZsupt(ϕ) gp v+ϕ dµ, and v is a p-subminimizer in U if −v is a p-superminimizer in U . We refer the interested reader to [17] for information on minimizers; see also [6]. In particular, it is known that if v is a p-superminimizer in U and w ∈ N 1,p loc (X) is a p-minimizer in U such that w ≤ v holds p-q.e. on X \ U , then w ≤ v on U as well. This is the so-called comparison principle. Notice also that if Capp(X \ Ω) = 0 and v ∈ N 1,p loc (X) is a minimizer in Ω, then v is a minimizer in X; moreover, in this case, if u is a p-potential for capp(E, Ω) then it is a p-potential for capp(E, X). In the proofs of our results the following weak Harnack inequality for p-superminimizers is of fundamental importance. See [18] for a proof of this lemma. Lemma 2.5 (Weak Harnack). There exists constants A > 0, CA ≥ 1, and q > 0 such that if u is a p-superminimizer in CAB ⊂ Ω, then (cid:18)Z2B uq dµ(cid:19)1/q ≤ A ess inf B u. 3. Characterizations of quasiadditivity In this section we prove the main result of this note, Theorem 3.3, and provide a con- nection between quasiadditivity and p-Hardy inequalities. Recall that we always assume that 1 < p < ∞. 3.1. The main characterization. We begin by showing that quasiadditivity property for unions of balls is in fact sufficient for the quasiadditivity for general sets. Below CA is the constant from the weak Harnack inequality and λ is the dilatation constant from the p-Poincaré inequality. Xi∈I 8 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM Proposition 3.1. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set with Ω 6= X and let Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈I be a Whitney cover of Ω with c < min{(CA)−1, (30λ)−1}. Assume that the quasiadditivity condition holds for unions of Whitney balls, i.e., if U = Si∈I Bi for some I ⊂ N, Bi ∈ Wc(Ω), then capp(Bi, Ω) ≤ C1 capp(U, Ω). Then the capacity capp(·, Ω) is quasiadditive with respect to Wc(Ω), i.e., there exists a constant C > 0 such that for every E ⊂ Ω. capp(E ∩ Bi, Ω) ≤ C capp(E, Ω) Xi∈N Proof. The structure of the proof is based on the idea of Aikawa [2], but given the non- linear nature of our setting, the tools we employ are completely different. Let E ⊂ Ω. If the relative capacity capp(E, Ω) is infinite, then the desired inequality would follow. Therefore we assume that capp(E, Ω) < ∞, and let u ∈ N 1,p loc (Ω) be the p-potential corresponding to this capacity. If capp(E, Ω) = 0, then by the monotonicity of capp(·, Ω), each term in the sum on the left-hand side of the desired inequality is also zero, and the claim follows. Therefore we will assume that capp(E, Ω) > 0, and so the p-potential u is non-constant. Write Ei = E ∩ Bi. Choose C0 = (cid:0) 1 weak Harnack inequality (Lemma 2.5). We divide the union E =Si∈N Ei into the following two parts: If u(x) ≥ C0 for q.e. x ∈ Bi, then i ∈ I1, and otherwise i ∈ I2. Note also that the indices i for which capp(Ei, Ω) = 0 do not contribute to the sum on the left-hand side of the desired quasiadditivity inequality. Hence in the following argument we only consider the indices i for which capp(Ei, Ω) > 0. A , where q and A are the constants from the 4(cid:1)1/q 1 It is immediate that u C0 is an admissible test function for Thus, using the assumption that quasiadditivity holds for unions of Whitney balls, we obtain for all upper gradients gu of u that capp(cid:16) [i∈I1 Bi, Ω(cid:17). (5) Xi∈I1 capp(Ei, Ω) ≤ Xi∈I1 On the other hand, if i ∈ I2, then by the weak Harnack inequality Bi, Ω(cid:17) ≤ C1(cid:16) 1 C0(cid:17)pZΩ gp u dµ. 1 2 µ(2Bi). Now write v = 1 − u, whence v ∈ N 1,p Since 0 ≤ uq ≤ 1, it follows that for the set Ui = (cid:8)x ∈ 2Bi : uq ≥ 1 precisely the class of upper gradients of v as well. Also, Ui =(cid:8)x ∈ 2Bi : v ≤ 1 −(cid:0) 1 2(cid:9) we have µ(Ui) ≤ 2(cid:1)1/q(cid:9), loc (X) and the class of upper gradients of u is and so This gives a positive lower bound c1 for the mean-value of vp in 2Bi; 2 µ(2Bi) ≤ µ(2Bi \ Ui) =(cid:8)x ∈ 2Bi : v ≥ 1 −(cid:0) 1 2(cid:1)1/q(cid:9). 1 (vp)2Bi ≥ 1 2(cid:16)1 − 1 21/q(cid:17)p =: c1. capp(Bi, Ω) ≤ C1 capp(cid:16) [i∈I1 uq dµ(cid:19)1/q ≤ A ess inf Bi u < C0A, uqdµ ≤ (C0A)qµ(2Bi) = 1 4 µ(2Bi). (cid:18)Z2Bi Z2Bi and thus (6) QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 9 We can now use the well-known Mazya's version of the (Sobolev -- )Poincaré inequality (see e.g. [27, Chapter 10], and [8, Proposition 3.2] for the metric space version): c1 <Z2Bi vp dµ ≤ C capp(Bi ∩ {v = 0}, 2Bi)Z10λBi gp v dµ, where gv is an arbitrary upper gradient of v (and thus of u as well). Since Ei = Bi ∩{v = 0} by the comparison principle, it follows from (7) that capp(Ei, Ω) ≤ capp(Ei, 2Bi) = capp(cid:0)Bi ∩ {v = 0}, 2Bi(cid:1) ≤ C ′Z10λBi gp v dµ. Using this and the fact that the balls 10λBi do not overlap too much, guaranteed by our choice of the parameter c (with L ≥ 10λ) and Lemma 2.1, we conclude that Xi∈I2 capp(Ei, Ω) ≤ C ′Xi∈I2Z10λBi gp v dµ ≤ CZΩ gp v dµ. The claim now follows by taking the infima over all upper gradients of u in (5) and (8) (cid:3) and combining these two estimates. The next lemma can be seen as a counterpart of Proposition 3.1 for a Mazya-type condition (cf. [27, §2.3]): Proposition 3.2. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set and let Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈I be a Whitney cover of Ω with c < min{(CA)−1, (30λ)−1}. Assume the existence of a constant C0 > 0 such that (7) (8) (9) dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ C0 capp(U, Ω) dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ C capp(E, Ω) ZU ZE whenever U ⊂ Ω is a union of Whitney balls. Then there exists a constant C > 0 such that whenever E ⊂ Ω. Proof. Let E ⊂ Ω. If capp(E, Ω) = ∞ the claim follows, and thus we may again assume that capp(E, Ω) < ∞. Let u be the p-potential of E with respect to Ω, and let gu be an upper gradient of u. We denote Ei = E ∩ Bi and split the union E =Si Ei into two parts: We set i ∈ I1 if u2Bi < 1/2 and i ∈ I2 if u2Bi ≥ 1/2. In the first case i ∈ I1 we have u − u2Bi ≥ 1/2 in Ei, and so, using the (p, p)-Poincaré inequality (a consequence of the (1, p)-Poincaré inequality by [11, Theorem 5.1]) and the bounded overlap of the balls 10λBi, we obtain Xi∈I1ZEi (10) dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ CXi∈I1 r−p i Z2Bi ≤ CXi∈I1Z10λBi u − u2Bip dµ gp u dµ ≤ CZΩ gp u dµ. In the second case i ∈ I2 it follows from u2Bi ≥ 1/2 and 0 ≤ u ≤ 1 that for Ui = {u ≥ 1/4} ∩ 2Bi, 1 2 ≤ ≤ from which we obtain 1 1 u dµ +Z2Bi\Ui µ(2Bi)"ZUi u dµ# µ(2Bi)(cid:2)µ(Ui) + 1 4 µ(2Bi \ Ui)(cid:3) ≤ µ(cid:0){x ∈ 2Bi : u(x) ≥ 1/4}(cid:1) ≥ 1 µ(Ui) µ(2Bi) + 1 4 , 4 µ(2Bi). 10 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM Thus, by the weak Harnack inequality for superminimizers, we obtain that inf Bi u ≥ A−1(cid:18)Z2Bi uq dµ(cid:19)1/q ≥ C(cid:18)µ(2Bi)−1Z{u≥1/4}∩2Bi (1/4)q dµ(cid:19)1/q ≥ C1 for each i ∈ I2. Hence the function u/C1 is an admissible test function for Using the bounded overlap of the balls Bi and the assumption (9), we conclude that Xi∈I2ZEi (11) Bi, Ω(cid:17). capp(cid:16) [i∈I2 dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ Xi∈I2ZBi ≤ CZSi∈I2 ≤ C capp(cid:16) [i∈I2 Bi dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) Bi, Ω(cid:17) ≤ C C p 1 ZΩ gp u dµ. The lemma follows from estimates (10) and (11) by taking the infimum over all upper gradients of u. (cid:3) Combining the conditions from Propositions 3.1 and 3.2, we arrive at the main result of this section: Theorem 3.3. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set, and let Wc(Ω) = {Bi}i∈N be a Whitney cover of Ω with c < min{(CA)−1, (30λ)−1}. Then the following conditions are (quantitatively) equivalent: (a) There exist C > 0 such that for all E ⊂ Ω. dΩ(x)−p dµ ≤ C capp(E, Ω) ZE (b) There exist C > 0 such that dΩ(x)−p dµ ≤ C capp(U, Ω) whenever U =Si∈I Bi for Bi ∈ Wc(Ω) and I ⊂ N. (c) There exist C > 0 such that capp(E ∩ Bi, Ω) ≤ C capp(E, Ω) for all E ⊂ Ω, and the capacity estimate (3) holds. (d) There exist C > 0 such that capp(Bi, Ω) ≤ C capp(U, Ω) ZU Xi∈N Xi∈I whenever U =Si∈I Bi for Bi ∈ Wc(Ω) and I ⊂ N, and the capacity estimate (3) holds. Proof. The implications (a) =⇒ (b) and (c) =⇒ (d) are trivial and the implications converse to these are Proposition 3.2 and Proposition 3.1, respectively. As a link between these two equivalences we have (b) ⇐⇒ (d) from Lemma 2.3, and here the lower bound of (3) is needed to pass from (d) to (b). Hence we assume the validity of (3) in parts (c) and (d). Recall that the validity of (3) is guaranteed by Lemma 2.2 when the hypotheses of this lemma are satisfied, or by the uniform p-fatness of X \ Ω. (cid:3) QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 11 3.2. The Hardy connection. We say that an open set Ω ⊂ X admits a p-Hardy inequal- ity if there exists a constant C > 0 such that the inequality ZΩ u(x)p dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ CZΩ gp u dµ, holds for all u ∈ N 1,p(Ω) with u = 0 on X \ Ω and for all upper gradiets gu of u. Let us record the following Mazya-type characterization for Hardy inequalities. Lemma 3.4. An open set Ω ⊂ X admits a p-Hardy inequality if and only if (12) for all E ⊂ Ω. dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ C capp(E, Ω) ZE Proof. For compact sets K ⊂ Ω, the above characterization is proven in the metric space setting in [20, Theorem 4.1] (see also [27, §2.3] in the Euclidean setting). Thus it suffices to show that if Ω admits a p-Hardy inequality and E ⊂ Ω is an arbitrary subset, then estimate (12) holds. If capp(E, Ω) = ∞, then there is nothing to prove, and on the other hand if capp(E, Ω) < ∞, then the p-Hardy inequality, used for capacity test functions uk (cid:3) with limk→∞RΩ guk dµ = capp(E, Ω), yields the desired estimate (12). In other words, an open set Ω ⊂ X admits a p-Hardy inequality if and only if the assertion (a) of Theorem 3.3 holds. This leads immediately to the following corollary. Corollary 3.5. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set and let Wc(Ω) be a Whitney cover of Ω with a suitably small parameter 0 < c ≤ 1/2. Then Ω admits a p-Hardy inequality if and only if the capacity capp(·, Ω) is quasiadditive with respect to Wc(Ω) and the capacity estimate (3) holds for all balls B ⊂ Ω. Since uniform p-fatness of the complement X \ Ω is a sufficient condition for p-Hardy inequalities in our setting (see [9, Corollary 6.1] and [19]), we obtain a concrete sufficient condition for the quasiadditivity of the p-capacity: Corollary 3.6. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set and let Wc(Ω) be a Whitney cover of Ω with a suitably small parameter 0 < c ≤ 1/2. Assume further that the complement X \ Ω is uniformly p-fat. Then the capacity capp(·, Ω) is quasiadditive with respect to Wc(Ω). 4. Quasiadditivity and the Aikawa dimension In this section we focus on open sets Ω ⊂ X that satisfy co-dimA(X \ Ω) > p (recall In this case we also have that co-dimH(X \ Ω) > p, the definition from Section 2.1). and hence it follows from [24, Proposition 4.1] that Capp(X \ Ω) = 0. Therefore, as was remarked in Section 2.4, we know that capp(E, Ω) = capp(E, X) for every E ⊂ Ω. Recall from Section 2.2 that if X is p-parabolic, then actually capp(E, X) = 0 for all bounded E ⊂ X. Thus, if X is p-parabolic and Ω ⊂ X is such that Capp(X \ Ω) = 0, then Ω satisfies the quasiadditivity property trivially; the same is also true if X is bounded and Capp(X \ Ω) = 0. Hence in this section we assume that X is unbounded and p-hyperbolic. We say that an open set Ω = X \ E and a related Whitney cover W = Wc(Ω) satisfy a discrete John condition if there exist L > 1, a > 1, and C > 0 such that for each B ∈ W we find a chain C(B) = {Bm}∞ m=0 of Whitney balls Bm ∈ W(Ω), with B0 = B, such that Bm ∩ Bm+1 6= ∅, B ⊂ LBm, and rad(Bm) ≥ Cam rad(B) for each m ∈ N. This condition is satisfied, for instance, if Ω is an unbounded John domain (see [31]); similar chain conditions have been used e.g. in [11, 12]. Notice in particular that since our open sets are unbounded, there can not exist a 'John center' as in the usual John condition for bounded domains; essentially the 'point at infinity' acts as a John center. On the other hand, the domain Ω = {(x, y) ∈ R2 : 0 < y < x + 1} satisfies the discrete John condition, but is not an unbounded John domain (in the sense of [31]). 12 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM Proposition 4.1. Let Ω ⊂ X be an open set with co-dimA(X\Ω) > p. Assume furthermore that Ω satisfies the above discrete John condition for a Whitney cover Wc(Ω) with c ≤ (6λ)−1. Then capp(·, Ω) is quasiadditive with respect to Wc(Ω) and Ω admits a p-Hardy inequality. Proof. By Theorem 3.3 and Corollary 3.5, it suffices to show that there is a constant C > 0 such that if U =Si∈I Bi, Bi ∈ Wc(Ω), for some I ⊂ N, then dΩ(x)−p dµ(x) ≤ C capp(U, Ω). (13) ZU Fix such a set U , and write ri = rad(Bi), i ∈ I. We may clearly assume that capp(U, Ω) < ∞. Let u be a capacity test-function for U . Then uBi = 1 for each i ∈ I (and thus u2Bi ≥ α for some α > 0 since 0 ≤ u ≤ 1). On the other hand, since u ∈ Lp(Ω), we find, using the discrete John condition, for each i ∈ I a chain of Whitney balls Bi,m, m = 0, 1, . . . , Mi, where Bi,0 = Bi, Bi,m−1 ∩ Bi,m 6= ∅, rad(Bi,m) ≥ Camri for all m = 1, . . . , Mi, and u2Bi,Mi ≤ α/2. Indeed, since rad(Bi,m) ≥ Camri, we have by (2) that µ(Bi) µ(Bi,m) and thus, by Hölder's inequality, ≤ C(cid:18) ri rad(Bi,m)(cid:19)Qu ≤ Ca−mQu, u ≤ Cµ(Bi,m)−1/pkukLp(X) m→∞−−−−→ 0, Z2Bi,m allowing us to choose the index Mi as above. By a standard chaining argument using the (1, p)-Poincaré inequality (see e.g. [11] or [12]), we have that Mi (14) α/2 ≤ u2Bi − u2Bi,Mi ≤ C rad(Bi,m)(cid:18)Z2λBi,m gp u dµ(cid:19)1/p . Xm=0 Comparing the sum on the right-hand side of (14) with the convergent geometric series m=0 a−mδ, we infer that if δ > 0, then there must exist a constant C1 > 0, independent of u and Bi, and at least one index mi ∈ N such that rad(Bi,mi)(cid:18)Z2λBi,mi gp u dµ(cid:19)1/p ≥ C1a−miδ ≥ C(cid:18) ri rad(Bi,mi)(cid:19)δ . Let us now fix q such that co-dimA(X \ Ω) > q > p and set δ = (q − p)/p > 0. We thus obtain from (15) for each Bi a ball B∗ i = Bi,mi with radius r∗ i satisfying P∞ (15) (16) Using estimate (16), and changing the summation to be over all Whitney balls, we calculate rq−p i ≤ C(r∗ i )qµ(cid:0)B∗ i(cid:1)−1Z2λB∗ i gp u dµ. ZU (17) µ(Bi)r−q i i i )(r∗ µ(Bi)r−p µ(B∗ dΩ(x)−p dµ ≤ CXi ≤ CXi ≤ C XB∈W X{i:B=B∗ ≤ C XB∈WZ2λB gp i i gp u dµ µ(Bi)r−q i )−q Z2λB∗ µ(B) rad(B)−q Z2λB u dµ X{i:B=B∗ i } i } gp u dµ µ(Bi)r−q i µ(B) rad(B)−q . QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 13 If B = B∗ i , that is, B ∈ W satisfies (16) for the ball Bi, then Bi ⊂ LB by the chain i ≈ dΩ(x) for all x ∈ Bi, it follows from the bounded overlap of the condition. Since r−q Whitney balls Bi ⊂ LB and the assumption co-dimA(X \ Ω) > q, that X{i:B=B∗ i } (18) µ(Bi)r−q i µ(B) rad(B)−q ≤ C ≤ C ≤ C 1 i }ZBi dΩ(x)−q dµ µ(B) rad(B)q X{i:B=B∗ µ(B) rad(B)q ZLB µ(B) rad(B)q µ(LB) rad(LB)−q ≤ C. dΩ(x)−q dµ 1 1 By the assumption c ≤ (6λ)−1 the overlap of the balls 2λB, where B ∈ Wc(Ω), is uniformly bounded (Lemma 2.1), and so we conclude from (17) and (18) that ZU dΩ(x)−p dµ ≤ CZΩ gp u dµ. The claim (13) follows by taking the infimum over all capacity test functions for U (and their upper gradients). (cid:3) It has been shown in [25, Section 6] (following the considerations of [21]), that if Ω ⊂ X admits a p-Hardy inequality, then either co-dimH(X \ Ω) < p − δ or co-dimA(X \ Ω) > p + δ for some δ > 0 only depending on the data associated with the space X and the Hardy inequality. Moreover, there is also a local version of such a dichotomy for the dimension [25, Theorem 6.2]. These results, together with the above Proposition 4.1 (and see also the following Section 5), show clearly that the condition co-dimA(X \ Ω) > p is very natural in the context of Hardy inequalities and thus also for quasiadditivity. On the other hand, the case co-dimH(X \ Ω) < p − δ includes open sets with uniformly p-fat complements; cf. Corollary 3.6. The main open question here is whether the discrete John condition is really necessary in Proposition 4.1; we know of no counterexamples. In the Euclidean space Rn this extra condition is certainly not needed. Indeed, as commented at the end of [21], the dimension bound dimA(Rn \ Ω) < n − p implies by [2, Theorem 2] that dΩ(x)−p dx ≤ CR1,p(E) ≤ C capp(E, Ω) ZE for all (measurable) E ⊂ Ω; here R1,p(E) is a Riesz capacity of E (cf. [2] or [5] for the definition) and the second inequality is a well-known fact. Quasiadditivity for capp(·, Ω) follows by Theorem 3.3. Nevertheless, Proposition 4.1 still gives a partial answer to the question of Koskela and Zhong [21, Remark 2.8], i.e., a q-Hardy inequality holds in their setting provided that Ω satisfies the discrete John condition (and the Minkowski dimension in [21, Remark 2.8] is replaced by the correct Aikawa (co)dimension). 5. Combining fat and small parts of the complement The results studied in Section 3 gave us a criterion, uniform p-fatness of X \ Ω, under which Ω supports quasiadditivity of p-capacity for the Whitney decompositions of Ω; this condition requires X \Ω to be 'large'. Conversely, in Section 4 we gave a criterion, largeness of the Aikawa co-dimension of X \ Ω (or, smallness of the Assouad dimension -- and hence 'smallness' of X \ Ω), under which Ω supports quasiadditivity for the Whitney decompositions of Ω. Nevertheless, requiring the whole complement to be either large or small rules out many interesting cases. For instance, sometimes the complement of a domain can be decomposed into two closed subsets such that one of them is 'large' and one is 'small'; an easy example is the punctured ball B(0, 1) \ {0} ⊂ Rn. The aim of this 14 JUHA LEHRBÄCK AND NAGESWARI SHANMUGALINGAM final section is to explain how the results of the previous Sections 3 and 4 can be combined to address such more complicated sets. In the Euclidean case, some results into this direction can be found also in [23]. A full geometric characterization of domains supporting quasiadditivity of p-capacity for Whitney decompositions still seems to be beyond our reach. However, in the next lemma we demonstrate a technique which applies to a broad class of sets. Lemma 5.1. Assume that X is unbounded and that 1 < p < Qu. Suppose that Ω0 ⊂ X is an open set such that X \ Ω0 is uniformly p-fat. Suppose also that F ⊂ Ω0 is a closed set with co-dimA(F ) > p, and that X \ F satisfies the discrete John condition of Section 4. Then Ω = Ω0 \ F satisfies a quasiadditivity property with respect to Whitney covers Wc(Ω) with suitably small c > 0. Proof. Let Wc(Ω) be a Whitney decomposition of Ω, where 0 < c < min{(CA)−1, (30λ)−1}. Set W 1 to be the collection of all balls B(x, r) ∈ W satisfying dist(x, X \ Ω) = dist(x, F ) and, similarly, let W 2 be the collection of all balls B(x, r) ∈ W satisfying dist(x, X \ Ω) = dist(x, X \ Ω0). It is clear that we can extend the collection W 1 to a Whitney cover W 1∗ of X \ F =: Ω1 and the collection W 2 to a Whitney cover W 2∗ of Ω0, both with the same constant c but possibly with larger overlap constants. As before, to prove the quasiadditivity property, it suffices to consider unions of Whitney balls. Thus, let U = Si∈I Bi, where Bi ∈ Wc(Ω) and I ⊂ N; we may also assume that capp(U, Ω) < ∞. Set U1 = SBi∈W 1 Bi, U2 = SBi∈W 2 Bi. Since co-dimA(X \ Ω1) = co-dimA(F ) > p and the discrete John condition holds for Ω1, we know, by Proposition 4.1, that (19) X{i∈I:Bi∈W 1} capp(Bi, Ω1) ≤ C1 capp(U1, Ω1) ≤ C1 capp(U, Ω); here we use the facts U1 ⊂ U and Ω ⊂ Ω1. On the other hand, an application of the results of Section 3 yields (20) X{i∈I:Bi∈W 2} capp(Bi, Ω0) ≤ C2 capp(U2, Ω0) ≤ C2 capp(U, Ω). Here the last inequality follows since U2 ⊂ U and Ω0 \ Ω ⊂ F is of zero p-capacity. For the same reason we have in (20) that capp(Bi, Ω0) = capp(Bi, Ω) for each Bi ∈ W 2. To estimate the corresponding capacities on the left-hand side of (19), we use the capacity bounds from (3) (with respect to Ω and Ω1; note that the assumptions of Lemma 2.2 are valid in the latter case) to obtain for all Bi ∈ W 1 that capp(Bi, Ω) ≤ C rad(Bi)−pµ(Bi) ≤ C3 capp(Bi, Ω1). In conclusion, Xi∈I capp(Bi, Ω) ≤ C3(cid:18) X{i∈I:Bi∈W 1} ≤ C3(C1 + C2) capp(U, Ω), capp(Bi, Ω1) + X{i∈I:Bi∈W 2} capp(Bi, Ω0)(cid:19) and the claim follows by Theorem 3.3. (cid:3) References [1] D. Adams, 'Quasi-additivity and sets of finite Lp-capacity', Pacific J. Math. 79 (1978), no. 2, 283 -- 291. [2] H. Aikawa, 'Quasiadditivity of Riesz capacity', Math. Scand. 69 (1991), no. 1, 15 -- 30. [3] H. Aikawa, 'Quasiadditivity of capacity and minimal thinness', Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. 18 (1993), no. 1, 65 -- 75. [4] H. Aikawa and A. A. Borichev, 'Quasiadditivity and measure property of capacity and the tangen- tial boundary behavior of harmonic functions', Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 348 (1996), no. 3, 1013 -- 1030. QUASIADDITIVITY OF VARIATIONAL CAPACITY 15 [5] H. Aikawa and M. Essén, 'Potential theory -- selected topics', Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1633, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996. [6] A. Björn, J. Björn, 'Nonlinear potential theory on metric spaces', EMS Tracts in Mathematics, 17, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2011. xii+403 pp. [7] A. Björn, J. Björn, and N. Shanmugalingam, 'Sobolev extensions of Hölder continuous and characteristic functions on metric spaces', Canadian J. Math. 59 (2007), No. 6, 1135 -- 1153. [8] J. Björn, 'Boundary continuity for quasiminimizers on metric spaces', Illinois J. Math. 46 (2002), no. 2, 383 -- 403 [9] J. Björn, P. MacManus and N. Shanmugalingam, 'Fat sets and pointwise boundary estimates for p-harmonic functions in metric spaces', J. Anal. Math. 85 (2001), 339 -- 369. [10] W.F. Donoghue Jr., 'Remarks on potential theory', Ark. Mat. 4 (1962) 461 -- 466. [11] P. Hajłasz and P. Koskela, 'Sobolev met Poincaré', Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (2000), no. 688. [12] J. Heinonen, 'Lectures on analysis in metric spaces', Universitext, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001. [13] J. Heinonen, P. Koskela, N. Shanmugalingam and J. Tyson, 'Sobolev spaces on metric measure spaces: an approach based on upper gradients', in preparation. [14] I. Holopainen, 'Nonlinear potential theory and quasiregular mappings on Riemannian manifolds', Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. Dissertationes 74 (1990), 45 pp. [15] I. Holopainen and N. Shamugalingam, 'Singular functions on metric measure spaces', Collect. Math. 53 (2002), no. 3, 313 -- 332. [16] S. Kallunki and N. Shanmugalingam 'Modulus and continuous capacity', Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 26 (2001) 455-464. [17] J. Kinnunen and O. Martio, 'Nonlinear potential theory on metric spaces', Illinois J. Math. 46 (2002), no. 3, 857 -- 883. [18] J. Kinnunen and N. Shanmugalingam, Manuscripta Math. 105 (2001), no. 3, 401 -- 423. 'Regularity of quasi-minimizers on metric spaces', [19] R. Korte, J. Lehrbäck and H. Tuominen, 'The equivalence between pointwise Hardy inequalities and uniform fatness', Math. Ann. 351 (2011), no. 3, 711 -- 731. [20] R. Korte and N. Shanmugalingam, 'Equivalence and self-improvement of p-fatness and Hardy's inequality, and association with uniform perfectness', Math. Z. 264 (2010), no. 1, 99 -- 110. [21] P. Koskela and X. Zhong, 'Hardy's inequality and the boundary size', Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131 (2003), no. 4, 1151 -- 1158. [22] N. S. Landkof, 'Foundations of modern potential theory', Springer-Verlag, New York -- Heidelberg, 1972. [23] J. Lehrbäck, 'Weighted Hardy inequalities and the size of the boundary', Manuscripta Math. 127 (2008), no. 2, 249 -- 273. [24] J. Lehrbäck, 'Neighbourhood capacities', Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. 37 (2012), no. 1, 35 -- 51. [25] J. Lehrbäck and H. Tuominen, 'A note on the dimensions of Assouad and Aikawa', J. Math. Soc. Japan, to appear. [26] J. Luukkainen, 'Assouad dimension: antifractal metrization, porous sets, and homogeneous mea- sures', J. Korean Math. Soc. 35 (1998), no. 1, 23 -- 76. [27] V. G. Maz'ya, 'Sobolev Spaces', Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985. [28] N. Shanmugalingam, 'Newtonian spaces: an extension of Sobolev spaces to metric measure spaces', Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 16 (2000), no. 2, 243 -- 279. [29] N. Shanmugalingam, 'Harmonic functions on metric spaces', Illinois J. Math. 45 (2001), no. 3, 1021 -- 1050. [30] M. Sion, 'On capacitability and measurability', Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 13 (1963) 83 -- 98. [31] J. Väisälä, 'Exhaustions of John domains', Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A I Math. 19 (1994), no. 1, 47 -- 57. [32] A. Wannebo, 'Hardy and Hardy PDO type inequalities in domains part I', arXiv:math/0401253v1 (http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0401253), (2004). J.L.: Department of Mathematics and Statistics, P.O. Box 35 (MaD), FIN-40014 Univer- sity of Jyväskylä, Finland E-mail address: [email protected] N.S.: Department of Mathematical Sciences, P.O. Box 210025, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0025, U.S.A. E-mail address: [email protected]
0710.1753	5	0710	2015-06-28T18:26:26	A generalisation of the Cauchy-Kovalevskaia theorem	[ "math.FA" ]	I prove, under mild assumptions, that solutions to linear evolution equations admit sectorial solutions. The size of the sector depends on the regularity of the initial data. If it is regular enough the solution is holomorphic and unique otherwise it is sectorial. I also prove that the result is optimal for many partial differential systems (which includes KdV and other examples).	math.FA	math	A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM MAURICIO GARAY Abstract. We prove that time evolution of a linear analytic ini- tial value problem leads to sectorial holomorphic solutions in time. 1. Introduction Among the class of systems of partial differential equations, evo- lutionary ones form a minority. They are nevertheless of considerable importance because they describe time evolution of physical data. This can already be seen for ordinary differential equations where, among differential equations, vector fields deserve a particular attention. The aim of this paper is to prove that evolutionary linear partial differential systems always admit sectorial analytic solutions, where the width of the sector depends on the regularity of the initial condition. Before stating our main theorem, let us recall the results obtained by Kovalevskaıa in her thesis [24] (see also [1] for historical aspects). We consider the vector space Cn with coordinates z1, . . . , zn and let On be the algebra of germs of holomorphic functions at 0 ∈ Cn (series in z1, . . . , zn which are analytic in some neighbourhood of the origin). We put ∂I := ∂i1 z1∂i2 z2 . . . ∂in zn, I = (i1, . . . , in) and define the order σ(I) of the operator ∂I as the sum of the coordi- nates of the vector I ∈ Nn: σ(I) := i1 + · · · + in. An evolution equation of order s is a partial differential equation of the form ∂tx = F (x, ∂I1 z x), σ(Ij) ≤ s, x = (x1, . . . , xm), z = (z1, . . . , zn) z x, . . . , ∂Ik with some initial condition x(t = 0, ·) = x0, where F is a polynomial mapping. Date: Original version May 2012, (modified June 2015). Key words and phrases. Cauchy-Kovalevskaıa theorems, initial value problem, characteristic Cauchy data, Heat equation. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 35A10. 1 2 MAURICIO GARAY Kovalevskaıa proved that the formal solution to such an initial value problem: x(t, ·) :=Xk≥0 xktk, xk ∈ Om n exists and is unique. Then she proceeded to the analytic properties of time evolution. For s = 1, she showed that the formal solution is holomorphic, in any sufficient small neighbourhood of the origin in Cn+1. A result now called the Cauchy-Kovalevskaıa theorem. For s = 2, Kovalevskaıa considered the particular case of the one dimensional heat equation and discovered that the formal solution might be divergent. To state Kovalevskaıa's heat equation theorem, it is convenient to n of class s Gevrey series in n variables [11, 12]. introduce the space Gs These are formal power series: such that XI∈Nn XI∈Nn aIzI ∈ C[[z]] aI zI (σ(I)!)s−1 is convergent in a sufficiently small neighbourhood of the origin. For s = 1, Gevrey series are just analytic series, for s < 1 these are entire functions and for s > 1 these are divergent power series. Theorem 1.1 ([24]). The formal solution to the one dimensional heat equation ∂tx = ∂zzx, x(t = 0, −) = x0, x0 ∈ Gs 1 1) is a Gevrey class 2 series; 2) has a unique holomorphic solution if x0 ∈ G1/2 3) is divergent if x0 /∈ G1/2 . 1 ; 1 Time evolution for the heat equation theorem became a classical subject and was treated in details in Hadamard's lectures on partial differential equations [15]. In the eighties', Ouchi made an important step further, when he dis- covered that the divergent series associated to time evolution of a single linear partial differential equation are in fact asymptotic expansions of sectorial solutions [22]. We will extend the results of Kovalevskaıa thesis and Ouchi's theorem to arbitrary systems of linear partial dif- ferential equations. 2. Statement of the theorem According to the Kovalevskaıa heat equation theorem, formal solu- tions will not be analytic in general. So we must look for sectorial holomorphic solutions. Let us clarify this notion. A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 3 By sector of width α ∈ [−∞, +∞], we mean a subset of the form: Σ := {z ∈ Cn : zi ≤ r; arg zi − θi ≤ α 2 } for some direction θ = (θ1, . . . , θn) ∈ (S1)n and some radius r > 0. If the width is negative or infinite the condition on the angle is empty and the sector Σ is just a neighbourhood of the origin. We denote by Dn(r) ⊂ Cn the polydisk: Dn(r) := {z ∈ Cn : zi ≤ r, i = 1, . . . , n} and by D∗ n(r) ⊂ C the "pointed polydisk": Dn(r)∗ := {z ∈ (C∗)n : zi ≤ r, i = 1, . . . , n} We denote by Gα n(θ) the algebra of functions which are holomorphic in an open subset containing some pointed polydisk of radius r and which admit an asymptotic expansion of Gevrey class α inside any sector Σ of width less than π/(α − 1), direction θ and radius r. For instance the function e−1/t belongs to G2 1(0) which means that for any sector Σ contained in the half plane {t ∈ C, Re t > 0} the asympotic expansion of e−1/t is of Gevrey class 2. This is indeed the case since it is equal to zero. Note that there is a map which associates to such a function its asymptotic expansion and that it is not injective unless α ≤ 1. Gα n(θ) −→ Gα n Our theorem on time evolution requires some non-degeneracy con- dition. We say that a linear partial differential operator of order s is non-degenerate, if after a change of variables, it can be written in the form: ∂s zn − Xσ(I)<s AI∂I z , A ∈ M(m, Gα n(θ)). Here M(m, R) stands for m × m matrices with entries in the ring R for some positive integer m. When α = 1, for such a partial differential operator, the Cauchy- Kovalevskaıa theorem shows that there is a unique holomorphic solu- tion with initial data x(−, zn = 0) = x0, . . . , ∂s znx(−, zn = 0) = xs. For instance, an initial value problem of the form ∂2 z x = ∂tx, x(z = 0, −) = x0, ∂zx(z = 0, −) = x1 4 MAURICIO GARAY can be reduced to a system of order 1 : (cid:26)∂zx = y ∂zy = ∂tx with x(t = 0, −) = x0, y(t = 0, −) = x1. Therefore by Cauchy- Kovalevskaıa theorem, it admits a unique holomorphic solution. This is of minor interest for us, since we are interested in time evolution and not in spatial evolution. The main result of this paper is the: Theorem 2.1. LetPσ(I)≤s AI∂I with AI ∈ M(m, Gα z x be a non-degenerate linear operator n(θ)) for some direction θ. The initial value problem AI∂I z x, x0 := x(t = 0, −) ∈ (Gα n(θ))m ∂tx = Xσ(I)≤s admits solutions x ∈ Gαs 1 (θ′) ⊗Gα n(θ) for any θ′ ∈ S1. In the statement of the theorem we used a topological tensor product which can simply be understood as the space of functions in some pointed polydisk Dn+1(r)∗ which have asymptotic expansions of Gevrey class αs (resp. α) in the t variable (resp. z variable) inside the sector Σ′ (resp. Σ). For more details on topological tensor products see [14]. Example 2.2. Consider the Kovalevskaıa example: ∂tx = ∂2 z x, x(t = 0, −) = 1 1 − z . Here α = 1, s = 2 so that Σ is of the form Σ = Σ1 × D2(r) where Σ1 is a sector of width π, that is, a half plane. There exists a function x(t, z) : {(t, z) ∈ D2(r) : Re t > 0} −→ C which satisfies our initial value problem. We shall give examples of such functions in the next section. In real analysis, the solution of the heat equation in the circle can be solved by Fourier series and the flow is only defined for positive time. The situation is here completely different, since it admits solutions both for positive and negative time. Corollary 2.3. There is a unique holomorphic solution to an initial value problem of the form ∂tx = Xσ(I)≤s AI∂I z x, x0 := x(t = 0, −) ∈(cid:0)G1/s n (cid:1)m , AI ∈ M(m, G1/s n ). For the heat equation (m = n = 1, s = 2), we recover Kovalevskaıa's theorem (except for the statement on the divergence of the solution, which is discussed in the appendix). The proof of Theorem 2.1 is based on a generalisation of Cauchy's m´ethode des majorantes to general flows in infinite dimensional spaces. tn ⊗ an, Xn≥0 that is the projective limit of the vector space k[[t]]/(tn) ⊗k E. The map L induces a map id ⊗ L on E[[t]]: A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 5 3. Formal evolution We start with the definition of formal evolution. In the linear case, this is quite obvious. Let E be a vector space over a field k and L : E −→ E a linear map. We denote by E[[t]] := k[[t]] ⊗E the vector space of formal power series with coefficients in E: (id ⊗ L) (Xn≥0 tn ⊗ an) =Xn≥0 tn ⊗ L(an). We abuse notation and write L for id ⊗L. Similarly, we write ∂t instead of ∂t ⊗ Id . We also identify E with the subspace 1 ⊗ E ⊂ E[[t]]. If the field k is of characteristic zero then the exponential is well-defined and et⊗Lx0 is the unique solution to the initial value problem ∂tx = Lx, x(t = 0, −) = x0. The operator etL is called the time evolution of the operator L. In order to extend this definition of evolution to non-linear operators, we first construct the Lie derivative. So let E, F be locally convex vector spaces and let U ⊂ E denote an open subset. A mapping f : E ⊃ U −→ F, is called Gateaux differentiable at a point x ∈ U, if for any ξ ∈ E, the following limits exists Let Df (x)ξ := lim t7→0 f (x + tξ) − f (x) t . f : E −→ F, X : E −→ E be Gateaux differentiable mappings between locally convex spaces. The Lie derivative of f along X is defined by f 7→ Df (x)X(x). We would like to find some vector space which is stable under the Lie derivative. In finite dimensional differential geometry, one may choose the space of C ∞ function but these are difficult to handle in the infinite dimensional context, for general locally convex spaces. Therefore, we now assume that k = C and consider the space of holomorphic maps from E to F , denoted H(E, F ). These are defined as follows: 6 MAURICIO GARAY Definition 3.1. A mapping f : E ⊃ U −→ F is called holomorphic if it satisfies the following two conditions: i) it is continuous, ii) for any continuous linear mappings j : C −→ E, π : F −→ C the map π ◦ f ◦ j is holomorphic. For instance, a linear mapping is holomorphic if and only if it is continuous. Like in the finite dimensional case, holomorphic functions in infinitely many variables are convergent analytic power series (see [7] for more details). The elements of H(U, E) are called holomorphic vector fields in U. By contracting the differential with a vector field X ∈ H(U, E), we define the Lie derivative LX : H(U, E) −→ H(U, F ), f 7→ [x 7→ Df (x)X(x)] for general locally convex spaces. As the Lie derivative is linear map, we constructed in this way the derivation associated to a vector field in the infinite dimensional context. The map LX : eE −→ eF , eE = H(U, E), eF = H(U, F ) being linear, we can consider the time evolution of any function. Now in the particular case E = F , we may consider the time evolution of the identity mapping. This defines in turn time evolution for general vector fields: Definition 3.2. The formal flow of a holomorphic vector field X ∈ H(U, E) at x0 is the evaluation of the map etLX Id at x0, where LX is the Lie derivative along X. Note that by construction the flow is a solution of the differential equation dx dt = (LX Id )(x) = X(x). Example 3.3. Consider the inviscid Burgers equation: ∂tx = x∂zx, x(t = 0, ·) = x0. Denote by C{z} the vector space of convergent power series in one variable z, it has a natural topology (see e.g. [13]). The vector field associated to our initial value problem is C{z} −→ C{z}, x 7→ x∂zx. The Lie derivative L : H(C{z}) −→ H(C{z}), [x 7→ f (x)] 7→ [x 7→ Df (x)x∂zx] A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 7 is linear and therefore admits a unique formal time evolution. Compu- tation of time evolution up to order 2 gives: (et⊗LId )x = x + tx∂zx + t2 2 (cid:0)2x (∂zx)2 + x2∂2 z x(cid:1) + o(t2). In simple words, the possibility to define differential calculus in the space of holomorphic functions H(C{z}) allows us to define formal flows like for the finite dimensional spaces. This explains the unicity of the formal solution to initial value problems. 4. Generalisation of the heat equation theorem We proceed to the Gevrey properties of formal solutions and first recall Borel resummation procedure [4] (see also [2, 18]). Gevrey diver- gent series can be considered as asymptotic expansions of exponential integrals. For instance, the relation shows that for any polynomial, we get: More generally, if we consider a function Z +∞ 0 e− ξ k!aktk. nXk=0 t ξkdξ = k!tk. 1 0 e− ξ tZ +∞ t nXk=0 ξ 7→ y(ξ) =Xk≥0 akξk! dξ = akξk holomorphic in a neighbourhood of the real line which has at most exponential growth, then is a holomorphic function whose asymptotic expansion at the origin is: x(t) = e− ξ t y(ξ)dξ 0 1 tZ +∞ Xk≥0 k!aktk. The real line can of course be replaced by any closed curve which starts from 0 and does not come back to it, for instance a real segment [0, r]. But along the real positive half-line, if the integrand is well-defined and decreases exponentially then the associated integral transformation maps the ring Dt of partial differential operator on t to that on ξ in 8 MAURICIO GARAY the following way: Dt −→ Dξ 7→ ∂ξ 1 t ∂t 7→ ∂ξ + ξ∂2 ξ This procedure can be generalised to Gevrey classes G1+s, s ≥ 1 using the exponential integral: x(t) := 1 tsZ +∞ 0 e− ξs ts y(ξ)d(ξs) Let us now apply this resummation procedure to the heat equation with Kovalevskaıa's initial value: ∂tx = ∂zzx, x0 : (C, 0) −→ (C, 0), z 7→ 1 1 − z . The formal power series expansion of this Cauchy problem is of Gevrey class 2 x(t, z) = The substitution leads to the analytic series 1 1 − zXj,k (2k)! k! tk (1 − z)2k . k!tk 7→ ξk y(ξ, z) = 1 1 − zXj,k (2k)! (k!)2 ξk (1 − z)2k = 1 . p(1 − z)2 − 4ξ The initial condition x0 has a pole at z = 1 and the integrand has itself a singularity at ξ = (1 − z)2 4 . This is a particular case of the Lutz-Myiake-Schafke theorem which states that the solution to the initial value problem "reproduces" the singularities of the initial data [16]. Now let Γ be an arbitrary path starting at 0, asymptotic to a line in the half plane {ξ ∈ C : Re ξ ≥ 0} and which avoids the singularity ξ = 1/4. For z sufficiently small, the power series x is the asymptotic expansion at t = 0 of the function xΓ(z, t) := 1 tZΓ e− ξ t 1 p(1 − z)2 − 4ξ dξ. A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 9 As explained above, the ring of partial differential operators Dt,z is mapped to Dξ,z. Thus our function is a solution of the partial differential equation y(ξ, z) = 1 p(1 − z)2 − 4ξ (cid:0)∂ξ + ξ∂2 ξ(cid:1) y = ∂2 tZΓ(cid:0)∂ξ + ξ∂2 ξ − ∂2 z y. 1 (cid:0)∂t − ∂2 z(cid:1) xΓ = z(cid:1) ydξ = 0. But This means that the functions xΓ are solutions to our initial value prob- lem, for any such choice of the path Γ. Note that the singularity of the integrand implies that the solutions obtained by choosing different paths lead to different solutions and forces the divergence of the as- ymptotic series. This can already be observed for the case of the Euler equation: In this case the Borel transform is (−1)nn!tn+1. t2 dx dt + x = t, x(t) =Xn≥0 x(ξ) =Xn≥0 (−1)nξn+1 = 1 1 + ξ . The singularity at ξ = −1 is responsible for the non unicity of the solution to our Cauchy problem (see for instance [6, 9]). In any case, the first step to achieve Borel resummation of formal solutions is to ensure that they lie in some Gevrey class. This is estab- lished by the following Theorem 4.1. The formal solution to an initial value problem ∂tx = Xσ(I)≤s AI∂I z x, x0 := x(t = 0, −) ∈ (Gα n)m of order s is of Gevrey class αs in the time variable, that is, time evolution defines a map: n)m ⊗Gαs, x0 7→ (etLId )x0 where L is the Lie derivative associated to the operator. n)m −→ (Gα etL : (Gα For a single partial differential equation (m = 1), the theorem is again due to Ouchi. Using techniques due to Boutet de Monvel and Kree, Yonemura simplified the proof [5, 22, 25]. Gevrey properties for some particular systems of partial differential equations (other than the heat equation) is proved in [10]. We postpone the proof of our theorem to the next section and first discuss the relation between formal solutions and asymptotic ones. 10 MAURICIO GARAY The Borel transform Bs : Gs 1 −→ G1 1 = O1, Xk≥0 aktk 7→Xk≥0 ak (k!)s ξk associates a holomorphic function y(ξ) to a Gevrey series. In general this function is defined only in a small neighbourhood of the origin, therefore we cannot apply Borel resummation procedure to our formal solution as we did for the Kovalevskaıa example. So we replace, our integral formulas by xr(t) := e− ξs ts y(ξ)d(ξs) 1 tsZ r 0 where r is now some finite number. The resulting function is still as- ymptotic to the formal solution x. But under this new integral transfor- mation, the differential operator ∂t does not correspond to a differential operator in the ξ variable anylonger. Therefore our function xr is, in general, not a solution to the initial value problem but rather a solu- tion up to a flat function. For instance, for r < 1/4, the asymptotic expansion of the function xr(z, t) := 1 tZ r 0 e− ξ t 1 dξ p(1 − z)2 − 4ξ is still a formal power series which satisfies the heat equation but the function itself does not. In other words the function (∂t − ∂zz)xr is flat at t = 0 inside the half plane Re t > 0. This might sound disappointing, and one might conclude that the above theorem gives simply no information about local analytic solu- tions, fortunately: Lemma 4.2. The existence of formal solutions implies the existence of asymptotic solutions, that is: Theorem 4.1 =⇒ Theorem 2.1 Proof. Let L : Gn(θ)m −→ Gn(θ)m be a linear partial differential operator of order s ≥ 2. We consider an initial value problem ∂tx = Lx, x(t = 0, −) = x0 ∈ Gn(θ)m. Theorem 4.1 asserts that the formal solution is of Gevrey class s in the time variable. It is therefore asymptotic expansion in any sector of width ¡ π/(s − 1) of a holomorphic map u defined in the pointed disk. The function u is a solution to our initial value problem up to a flat A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 11 function. Substituting x by y + u in our system of partial differential equation, we get a new system (∗) ∂ty = Ly + (Lu − ∂tu). As the initial system is non-degenerate, in appropriate coordinates L = ∂s zn − L′ where L′ is of the form L′ = Xσ(I)<s AI∂I + Bi∂s zi. n−1Xi=1 We re-write (∗) as (∗∗) ∂s zny = ∂ty + L′y + g, g := ∂tu − Lu. For any initial data: y0 = y(−, zn = 0), y1 = ∂zny(−, zn = 0), . . . , ys−1 = ∂s−1 zn y(−, zn = 0), equation (∗∗) admits a unique holomorphic solution in the pointed disk. This can be seen, for instance, by applying the abstract Cauchy- Kovalevskaıa theorem to the Banach scale (see for instance [3, 19, 20, 21, 23]): with Er := C 0(Rr) ∩ O(Rr) Rr := {z ∈ Cn : r ≤ zi ≤ 2r}. We take the initial data y0 = · · · = ys = 0. The associated solution admits an asymptotic expansion equal zero when t goes to zero inside the given sector. Indeed, by adding ∂zny, . . . , ∂s−1 zn y as new variables: y0 = y, y1 = ∂zny, . . . , ys−1 = ∂s−1 zn y. We reduce the system of partial differential equation to a first order system of the form ∂τ Y = T Y + h, Y = (y0, . . . , ys−1) where τ = zn, T is linear and h is flat at t = 0 in Σ. The solutions are of the form Y = eτ T Y0 + α, α(τ = 0, −) = 0 where α satisfies the equation ∂τ α = T α + h. As h is flat, α = 0 is a formal solution to this equation, but the for- mal solution is unique thus α is flat at t = 0 in Σ. As the initial condition is Y0 = 0, the solution to our system of partial differential equations is constant Y = α and it is therefore flat. This shows that the holomorphic mapping provides a solution to our original initial value problem in Gn(θ)m. (cid:3) x := u + y 12 MAURICIO GARAY 5. Generalisation of Cauchy's majorant method We consider vector fields in the infinite dimensional Gevrey spaces n)m and extend the classical Cauchy majorant method by compar- (Gs ing series in these different functional spaces. Via formal Borel trans- form these topological vector spaces are isomorphic to spaces of con- vergent power series. They are therefore endowed with a standard topology (see [13] for the definition of the topology). Recall that a formal power series x := XI∈Nn aIzI ∈ C[[z]], z = (z1, . . . , zp) is majorated by another formal power series y := XI∈Nn bIzI ∈ R+[[z]] if, for all I ∈ Nn, we have the estimates: aI ≤ bI. In such cases, we use the notation x ≪ y. In particular, x ≫ 0 means that x is a formal power series with real non-negative coefficients. Definition 5.1. Let X, Y be two vector fields in (Gs X in (Gs n)m majorates another one Y if n)m. A vector field x ≫ y =⇒ X(x) ≫ Y (y). In particular X ≫ 0 means that: x ≫ 0 =⇒ X(x) ≫ 0. Example 5.2. Let X be a vector field associated to a linear partial differential operator X : (On)m −→ (On)m, x 7→ Xσ(I)≤s AI∂I x. Then X ≫ 0 provided that the entries of the matrices AI are analytic series with real positive coefficients, i.e., AI ≫ 0. The following proposition is a direct consequence of the exponential formula for time evolution: Proposition 5.3. Let X, Y be two vector fields defined in an open subset of (Gs n)m. i) If X ≪ Y then the flow of X at x0 ≫ 0 is majorated by that of Y at the same point, A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 13 ii) If X ≫ 0 and y0 ≫ x0 then the flow of X at x0 is majorated by that of X at y0. We proceed to the proof of Theorem 4.1 and start with a Proposition 5.4. The following assertions are equivalent 1) the flow of any linear initial value problem of order s in (Gα Gevrey class αs in the time variable ; 2) the flow of any linear initial value problem of order s in (Gα n)m is of n)m is of Gevrey class αs in the time variable ; 3) the flow of any linear initial value problem of order s at x0 = Pn≥0 (n!)α−1 zn ∈ Gα 4) the flow of x 7→ x0∂s class αs. 1 is of Gevrey class s ; z x at the point x0 =Pn≥0 (n!)α−1 zn is of Gevrey Proof. Let us first make a remark. Consider a vector field defined by a linear differential operator: n)m −→ (Gα z x; I = (i1, . . . , in) X : (Gα AI∂I n)m , x 7→ Xσ(I)≤s at a point x0. The map Gα n −→ Gα n, α =XI aIzI 7→ abs α :=XI aIzI induces a map on matrices with coefficients in Gα the same way. n that we denote in Replace, in the initial value problem the AI's by abs AI's and x0 by abs x0. By Proposition 5.3, if the solution of this new initial value prob- lem is of Gevrey class k then X, x0 has the same property. Therefore it is sufficient to consider the case X ≫ 0, x0 ∈ {x ≫ 0}. 2) =⇒ 1). Let us consider the linear mapping ψ : (Gα n)m −→ Gα n, (x1, . . . , xm) 7→ xk. mXk=1 AI∂I z x) = we have Write AI = (AI1, . . . , AIm) ≫ 0 and put fI =Pk AIk. For any x ≫ 0, xk) = Xσ(I)≤s ψ( Xσ(I)≤s der ψ of the flow of X at x0 is majorated by the flow of PI fI∂I The exponential formula for time evolution implies that the image un- z at z xk ≪ Xσ(I)≤s mXk=1 Xσ(I)≤s mXk=1 mXk=1 AIk)∂j z ( AIk∂I ψ(x0). ( fI∂I z ψ(x). 14 MAURICIO GARAY 3) =⇒ 2). Consider the open subset U = {x ≫ 0} ⊂ Gα n. The mapping R : C −→ Cn, z 7→ (z, . . . , z) induces a map R∗ : Gα n[[t]] ⊃ U[[t]] −→ Gα 1 [[t]], and an element is of Gevrey class β in the t variable provided that it is the case of its image under R∗. The equalities R∗∂zizk j = kzk−1δij, d dz R∗zk j = kzk−1 give the estimate R∗∂zi ≪ d dz R∗. Consider a vector field in Gα n for the form: X : x 7→XI fI∂I z x, fI ≫ 0 As R∗∂zi ≪ ∂zR∗, the flow of the vector field Gα 1 −→ Gα 1 , x 7→ Xσ(I)≤s R∗fj dσ(I)x dzσ(I) at R∗x0, x0 ≫ 0 majorates the image under R∗ of the flow of X. Consider the Gevrey series is analytic. Thus, by Hadamard's lemma, there exists A, r > 0 such that an (n!)α−1 ≤ Arn. This means that the series x0 is majorated by Af (rz). If X ≫ 0, the formal flow passing through x0 is majorated by the formal flow passing through Af (rz). Up to multiplication of x and z by constants, we may assume that A = r = 1. 4) =⇒ 3). and take The series (n!)α−1 zn ∈ Gα 1 . f (z) :=Xn≥0 x0 =Xn≥0 Xn≥0 anzn ∈ Gα 1 . an (n!)α−1 zn A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 15 Consider the flow of a vector field of the form: at f defined above. As X : x 7→ aj djx dzj sXj=0 ds dzs ≫ dj dzj for any j < s, we get that the flow of X at x0 is majorated by that of the vector field x 7→ b(z) dsx dzs , b(z) := aj(z). sXj=0 As before there exists constants A, r > 0 such that b(z) ≪ Af (rz) and without loss of generality we may assume, as above, that A = r = 1. This concludes the proof of the proposition. (cid:3) To conclude the proof of Theorem 4.1, it remains to prove that the flow of the vector field X = f (z) with initial condition is of Gevrey class αs. ds dzs , f (z) :=Xn≥0 (n!)α−1 zn x0(z) = f (z) Lemma 5.5. There exists a constant Cα > 0 such that for any real positive increasing sequence (an) we have (n!)α−1 anzn (n!)α−1 anzn. f g ≪ CαXn≥0 g :=Xn≥0 f g =Xn≥0 cnzn with Proof. Write with cn := Xi+j=n (i!)α−1 (j!)α−1 aj ≤ Xi+j=n (i!)α−1 (j!)α−1! an. 16 MAURICIO GARAY One easily sees that therefore Xi+j=n−1 Xi+j=n i!j! ≤ n! i!j! ≤ 3n! For α ≥ 1, as (an) is a positive increasing sequence, we get that: If α ≤ 1 we have Xn≥0 Xi+j=n Consequently the sequence cn ≤ 3α−1 (n!)α−1 an. (i!)α−1 (j!)α−1! = (Xi≥0 Xi+j=n (i!)α−1 (j!)α−1! n∈N (i!)α−1)2 < +∞. tends to zero at infinity. This implies that cn = o(an) and concludes the proof of the lemma. (cid:3) The above lemma gives a constant Cα such that: We have Therefore (f ∂s z)kf ≪ C k (n!)α−1 zn. (n!)α−1 zn. ∂s n! (cid:19)α zf =Xn≥0(cid:18)(n + s)! αXn≥0(cid:18) (n + ks)! α(cid:18)(n + ks)! C k n! n! (cid:19)α (cid:19)α (n!)α−1 k! x(t) ≪ Xn,k≥0 zntk. Let us write an ≡ bn if the series an/bn is bounded by a geometric series. By Stirling's formula, we have (i + j)! i!j! ≡ (i + j)i+j iijj = ei log(1+j/i)+j log(1+i/j) ≤ ei+j thus We get that: (i + j)! ≡ i!j! (cid:18) (n + ks)! n! (cid:19)α (n!)α−1 k! ≡ (k!)αs−1 (n!)α−1 . Thus the flow is of Gevrey class αs in the time variable. This concludes the proof of Theorem 4.1. A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 17 Appendix A. On the divergence of formal solutions In [17], Lysik proved a result similar to Kovalevskaıa divergence re- sult for the Korteweg -- de Vries equation, namely that the solution to the initial value problem: ∂tx = ∂ 3 z x + x∂zx, x(t = 0, ·) = 1 1 − z is not holomorphic (see also [8]). More generally, one may wonder if our Gevrey estimate for time evolution is optimal. This is indeed the case under very general asumptions: Theorem A.1. Consider an evolutionary initial value problem of or- der s ∂tx = g(x, z)∂s with x(t = 0, ·) = x0. Assume that g, G ≫ 0 and x0 ≫ 0. convergence radius of the formal Borel transform z1x + G(x, ∂I1x, ∂I2x, . . . , ∂Ikx,d∂s z1x), σ(Iα) ≤ s, If the C −→ Cm, z1 7→ Bαx(z1, 0, . . . , 0) is finite then the formal solution to this initial value problem is not of Gevrey class (αs − ε), for any ε > 0. Proof of Theorem A.1. The vector field associated to our initial value problem majorates the vector field Moreover, the flow of X at x0 obviously majorates that of X : x 7→ g(x, z)∂s z1 Y : x 7→ g(x0, z)∂j z x at the same point. Finally, let αzI, α 6= 0, I ∈ Nn be a monomial appearing with a non-zero coefficient in the Taylor expansion of g. We have Y ≫ αzI∂j z1. It remains to prove that the flow of L = zI∂s z1 at x0 is not of Gevrey class (αs − ε), for any ε > 0. Given formal power series f, g, we write f ≻ g if there are infinitely many coefficients of f which are greater than that of g. If f ≻ g and g is not of Gevrey class s then f cannot be of Gevrey class s. 18 MAURICIO GARAY Write Define x0 = (x0,1, . . . , x0,m). f (z) :=Xn≥0 (n!)α−1 zn 1 . The assumption on Bαs implies that for at least one of the components of x0, say x0,j,there exists A, r > 0 such that : x0,j ≻ Af (rz1). Up to a multiplication of z1 and x0 by constants, we may assume that A = r = 1. Now, the majorant Lk ≫ zkI∂ks z1 , j ∈ N, n! Lkf ≫ zkIXn≥0(cid:18)(n + ks)! (cid:19)α etLk x0 ≻ Xk≥0,n≥0 Consequently (n!)α−1 zn 1 ≫ zkIXn≥0 (k!)sα (n!)α−1 zn 1 . zkI(k!)sα−1 (n!)α−1 zn 1 tk. The right hand-side is not of Gevrey class sα − ε for any ε > 0. This proves the theorem. Acknowledgements. I thank Boris Dubrovin for discussions from which this paper originated. Thanks also to Duco van Straten for encourage- ments and suggestions. References 1. M. Audin, Souvenirs sur Sofia Kovalevskaya, Calvage & Mounet, 2008. 2. W. Balser, From divergent power series to analytic functions, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1582, Springer Verlag, 1994. 3. M. S. Baouendi and C. Goulaouic, Remarks on the abstract form of nonlinear Cauchy-Kovalevsky theorems, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 2 (1977), no. 11, 1151 -- 1162. 4. ´E. Borel, Le¸cons sur les s´eries divergentes, vol. 2, Gauthier-Villars, 1901. 5. L. Boutet de Monvel and P. Kr´ee, Pseudo differential operators and Gevrey classes, Annales de l'Institut Fourier 17 (1967), no. 1, 295 -- 323. 6. B. Candelpergher, J.C. Nosmas, and F. Pham, Approche de la r´esurgence, Her- mann, 1993, 289 pp. 7. S. Dineen, Complex analysis on locally convex spaces, vol. 57, North Holland Mathematical Studies, 1981, 492 pp. 8. A.V. Domrin and A.V. Domrina, On the divergence of the Kontsevich-Witten series, Russ. Math. Surv. 109 (2008), 773 -- 775. 9. J. ´Ecalle, Les fonctions r´esurgentes, vol. 1, alg`ebres de fonctions r´esurgentes, Pub. Math. Orsay (1981). A GENERALISATION OF THE CAUCHY-KOVALEVSKAIA THEOREM 19 10. M.C. Fern´andez-Fern´andez and F.J. Castro-Jim´enez, Gevrey solutions of the ir- regular hypergeometric system associated with an affine monomial curve, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 363 (2011), 923 -- 948. 11. M. Gevrey, Comptes rendus `a l'acad´emie des sciences (1913), Note du 8 d´ecembre. 12. , Sur la nature analytique des solutions des ´equations aux d´eriv´ees par- tielles, Annales scientifiques de l'´Ecole Normale Sup´erieure 35 (1918), no. 3, 129 -- 190. 13. A. Grothendieck, Espaces vectoriels topologiques, Instituto de Matem`atica Pura e Aplicada, Universidade de Sao Paulo, 1954, 240 pp., English Translation: Topological vector spaces, Gordon and Breach, 1973. 14. , Produits tensoriels topologiques et espaces nucl´eaires, Mem. of the Am. Math. Soc. 16 (1955). 15. J. Hadamard, Le probl`eme de Cauchy et les ´equations aux d´eriv´ees partielles hyperboliques, Paris Hermann et Cie, 1932, 542 pp. 16. D.A. Lutz, M. Miyake, and R. Schafke, On the Borel summability of divergent solutions of the heat equation, Nagoya Math. Journal 154 (1999), 1 -- 29. 17. G. Lysik, Non-analyticity in time of solutions to the KdV equation, Z. Anal. Anwendungen 23 (2004), no. 1, 67 -- 93. 18. B. Malgrange, Sommation des s´eries divergentes, Expositiones Mathematicae 13 (1995), no. 2/3, 163 -- 222. 19. M. Nagumo, Uber das Anfangswertproblem partieller Differentialgleichungen, Jap. J. Math. 18 (1942), 41 -- 47. 20. L. Nirenberg, An abstract form of the nonlinear Cauchy-Kowalewski theorem, J. Differential Geometry 6 (1972), 561 -- 576. 21. T. Nishida, A note on a theorem of Nirenberg, J. Differential Geom. 12 (1977), no. 4, 629 -- 633. 22. S. Ouchi, Characteristic Cauchy problems and solutions of formal power series, Ann. Inst. Fourier 33 (1983), 131 -- 176. 23. I.V. Ovsyannikov, A singular operator in a scale of Banach spaces, Soviet Math. Dokl. 6 (1965), 1025 -- 1028. 24. S. von Kowalevsky, Zur Theorie der partiellen Differentialgleichungen, Journal fur reine und angewandte Mathematik 80 (1875), 1 -- 32. 25. A. Yonemura, Newton polygons and formal Gevrey classes, Publ. RIMS 26 (1990), 197 -- 204. Mauricio Garay, Lyc´ee Franco-Allemand, Rue Collin Mamet, 78530 Buc. E-mail address: [email protected]
1701.08249	1	1701	2017-01-28T04:55:09	A sharp Adams inequality in dimension four and its extremal functions	[ "math.FA", "math.AP" ]	Let $\Omega$ be a smooth oriented bounded domain in $\mathbb R^4$, $H_0^2(\Omega)$ be the Sobolev space, and $\lambda_1(\Omega)= \inf \{\\|\Delta u\\|_2^2 : u\in H_0^2(\Omega), \\|u\\|_2 =1\}$ be the first eigenvalue of the bi-Laplacian operator $\Delta^2$ on $\Omega$. For $\alpha \in [0,\lambda_1(\Omega))$, we define $\\|u\\|_{2,\alpha}^2 = \\|\Delta u\\|_2^2 - \alpha \\|u\\|_2^2$, for $u \in H_0^2(\Omega)$. In this paper, we will prove the following inequality \[ \sup_{u\in H_0^2(\Omega),\, \\|u\\|_{2,\alpha} \leq 1} \int_{\Omega} e^{32 \pi^2 u(x)^2} dx < \infty. \] This strengthens a recent result of Lu and Yang \cite{LuYang}. We also show that there exists a function $u^\in H_0^2(\Omega)\cap C^4(\overline{\Omega})$ such that $\\|u^\\|_{2,\alpha} =1$ and the supremum above is attained by $u^*$. Our proofs are based on the blow-up analysis method.	math.FA	math	A sharp Adams inequality in dimension four and its extremal functions Van Hoang Nguyen∗ September 19, 2018 Abstract Let Ω be a smooth oriented bounded domain in R4, H 2 and λ1(Ω) = inf{k∆uk2 Laplacian operator ∆2 on Ω. For α ∈ [0, λ1(Ω)), we define kuk2 for u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω). In this paper, we will prove the following inequality 2 : u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) be the Sobolev space, 0 (Ω),kuk2 = 1} be the first eigenvalue of the bi- 2 − αkuk2 2, 2,α = k∆uk2 sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u(x)2 dx < ∞. This strengthens a recent result of Lu and Yang [30]. We also show that there exists 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω) such that ku∗k2,α = 1 and the supremum above is a function u∗ ∈ H 2 attained by u∗. Our proofs are based on the blow-up analysis method. 1 Introduction 0 0 np (Ω) ֒→ L n−kp (Ω) holds if p < n/k, where W k,p Let Ω be a smooth bounded domain in Rn. The Sobolev inequality says that the embed- ding W k,p (Ω) denotes the Sobolev space of functions vanishing on boundary ∂Ω together their derivatives of order less than k − 1. Such inequality plays an important role in many branch of mathematics such as analysis, geometric, partial differential equations, calculus of variations, etc. However, when p = n/k the embedding W k,n/k (Ω) ֒→ L∞(Ω) does not holds. In this case, the Moser -- Trudinger and 0 ∗Institut de Math´ematiques de Toulouse, Universit´e Paul Sabatier, 118 Route de Narbonne, 31062 Toulouse c´edex 09, France. Email: [email protected] 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 46E35. Key words and phrases: Adams inequality, blow-up analysis, sharp constant, extremal functions, regularity theory. 1 Adams inequalities are perfect replacement. The Moser -- Trudinger inequality was estab- lished independently by Yudovic [50], Pohozaev [35] and Trudinger [41]. This inequality was sharpened by Moser [32] by finding its sharp constant. This sharp form asserts that the existence of a constant C0 > 0 such that 1 n n−1 (1.1) exp(βf (x) n−1 )dx ≤ C0, ΩZΩ for any β ≤ β0 = nω1/(n−1) where ωn−1 denotes the surface area of the unit sphere of Rn, for any bounded domain Ω and for any function f ∈ W 1,n (Ω) with k∇fkn ≤ 1. If β > β0 then the above inequality does not hold with uniform C0 independent of f . Moser -- Trudinger is a crucial tool in studying the partial differential equation inequality with exponential nonlinearity. Because of its importance, there are many generalization of Moser -- Trudinger inequality, such as Moser -- Trudinger inequality on Heisenberg group, on complex sphere or on compact Riemannian manifold [5, 6, 22]. It was also extended to entire Euclidean space by Ruf [37] for dimension two and by Li and Ruf [25] for any dimension or entire Heisenberg group by Lam and Lu [18], or on hyperbolic space by Wang and Ye [42]. In [39], Tian and Zhu proved a Moser -- Trudinger type inequality for alomost plurisubharmonic functions on any Kahler-Einstein manifolds with positive curvature. 0 The existence of the extremal function for Moser -- Trudinger inequality was first proved by Carleson and Chang [4] for the unit ball in Rn. In [13], Flucher proved the existence of extremal function for Moser -- Trudinger inequality for any smooth domain in R2. This result was then extended to any dimension by Lin [28]. The existence of extremal function for Moser -- Trudinger inequality on compact Riemannian manifold was studied by Li [23]. We refer the reader to [7, 8, 10, 11, 24, 25, 37, 42, 44, 45, 47 -- 49] for more existence results of extremal functions for Moser -- Trudinger type inequalities. Suggesting by the concentration -- compactness principle due to Lions [29], Adimurthi and Druet established in [2] the following generalization of Moser -- Trudinger inequality on any bounded domain Ω ⊂ R2 sup 0 (Ω), k∇uk2≤1ZΩ u∈H 1 e4π(1+αkuk2 2)u2 dx < ∞, (1.2) for any 0 ≤ α < λ(Ω), where λ(Ω) = inf u∈H 1 2 is the first eigenvalue of Laplace operator −∆. The existence of extremal function for (1.2) was proved by Yang in [44]. This result was extended by Yang [45, 46] to the cases of high dimension and compact Riemannian surfaces, by Lu and Yang [31] and Zhu [51] to the version of L−norm, by Souza and do ´O [10, 11] to the whole Euclidean space, and by Tintarev [40] to the following form 0 (Ω), kuk2≤1 k∇uk2 sup 0 (Ω), k∇uk2 u∈H 1 2−αkuk2≤1ZΩ e4πu2 dx < ∞, (1.3) with 0 ≤ α < λ(Ω). Evidently, (1.3) implies (1.2). In [47], Yang generalized (1.3) to the cases that large eigenvalues are involved, as well as to the manifold case. The existence 2 of extremal functions for (1.3) also obtained in [47]. In [48], Yang and Zhu studied the singular version of (1.3). They proved the existence of extremal functions for the following singular Moser -- Trudinger inequality sup 0 (Ω), k∇uk2 u∈H 1 2−αkuk2≤1ZΩ e4π(1−β)u2 x2β dx < ∞, α < λ(Ω) (1.4) where Ω is a smooth bounded domain in R2 containing the origin in its interior and 0 ≤ β < 1. The same existence result for the singular Moser -- Trudinger inequality on whole Euclidean space was recently proved by Yang and Zhu in [49]. Adams inequality is the version of higher order of derivatives of Moser -- Trudinger in- equality. The study of this inequality was started by the work of Adams [1]. To state Adams inequality, we use the symbol ∇mu with m is a positive integer, to denote the mth order gradient for u ∈ C m, the class of mth order differentiable functions, ∇mu =(∆m/2u if m even, ∇∆(m−1)/2u if m odd, where ∇ and ∆ denotes the usual gradient operator and usual Laplacian respectively. Adams proved in [1] that for any positive integer m less than n, there exists a constant C0(n, m) such that for any bounded domain Ω ⊂ Rn, it holds m, n m 0 u∈W sup (Ω), k∇muk n m ≤1 1 ΩZΩ exp(βu n n−m )dx ≤ C0(n, m), (1.5) for any β ≤ β(n, m) with β(n, m) =  if m odd, if m even. n n 2 ) Γ( n−m+1 2 ) ωn−1 h πn/22mΓ( m+1 ) i ωn−1 h πn/22mΓ( m ) i Γ( n−m 2 2 n n−m n n−m Furthermore, for β > β(n, m) the supremum above will be infinite. Notice that when m = 1, (1.5) reduces to Moser -- Trudinger inequality (1.1). n Remark that the work of Moser and of Carleson and Chang was based on the rearrange- ment argument to reduce problem to the one-dimensional problem. However, we can not adapt this symmetrization technique in the case m ≥ 2 since we do not know whether the m norm of the mth gradient of a function decreases under the rearrangement operator. In L order to establish (1.5), Adams use the representation of u in terms of its gradient function ∇mu using a convolution operator, and then apply O'Neil's idea [34] of rearrangement of convolution of two functions together with the idea which originally goes back to Garcia. Such an argument avoids in dealing with the issue of L m norm preserving of the gradient of the rearranged functions. This idea has also been developed to derive the sharp Adams inequality on Riemannian manifolds without boundary by Fontana [14], on the measure n 3 spaces by Fontana and Morpurgo [15]. The sharp Adams inequality was also generalized to whole Euclidean space in the works of Fontana and Morgurgo [16], of Lam and Lu [19, 20] and of Ruf and Sani [38]. The sharp Adams inequality was recently established on the hyperbolic spaces by Karmakar and Sandeep [17]. It remains an open problem whether Adams inequality has an extremal function. Unlike in Moser -- Trudinger inequality with first order derivative, we can not adapt Carleson -- Chang's idea [4] of symmetrization to establish the existence of extremal function for inequalities of higher order derivatives. It is still a rather difficult problem to answer the above question in the most generality. One interesting case of the above question when n = 4 and m = 2 was addressed in [30]. Let Ω ⊂ R4 denote a smooth oriented bounded domain, H 2 0 (Ω) denote the Sobolev space which is completion of the space of compactly supported smooth functions in Ω under the Dirichlet norm kukH 2 0 (Ω) = k∆uk2. Then Adams inequality in the case n = 4 and m = 2 states that sup 0 (Ω), k∆uk2≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 eγu2 dx < ∞, (1.6) for any γ ≤ 32π2. The existence of extremal function for inequality (1.6) was proved by Lu and Yang [30]. Even, Lu and Yang established in [30] an improvement of (1.6) in spirit of Adimurthi and Druet (for improvement of Moser -- Trudinger inequality (1.2)). Let λ1(Ω) denote the first eigenvalue of the bi-Laplacian operator ∆2 on Ω, i.e., λ1(Ω) = inf 0 (Ω), u6≡0 u∈H 2 2 k∆uk2 kuk2 2 . An easy application of the variational method shows that λ1(Ω) > 0 and is attained. It was proved by Lu and Yang that sup 0 (Ω), k∆uk2≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2q(kuk2 2)u2 dx < ∞, (1.7) where q(t) = 1 + a1t+· · ·+ aktk, k ≥ 1 is a polynomial of order k in R with 0 ≤ a1 < λ1(Ω), 0 ≤ a2 ≤ λ1(Ω)a1, . . . , 0 ≤ ak ≤ λ1(Ω)ak−1. Furthermore, if a1 ≥ λ1(Ω) then the supremum above will be infinite. The existence of extremal functions for inequality (1.7) was also studied in [30]. It was proved that there exists a strictly positive constant ǫ0 < λ1(Ω) depending only on Ω such that when 0 ≤ a1 < λ1(Ω), 0 ≤ a2 ≤ λ1(Ω)a1, . . . , 0 ≤ ak ≤ λ1(Ω)ak−1, we can find u∗ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω) such that k∆u∗k2 = 1 and e32π2q(ku∗k2 2)u∗ 2 dx = ZΩ sup 0 (Ω), k∆uk2≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2q(kuk2 2)u2 dx. Obviously, this implies the existence of extremal functions for Adams inequality (1.6). 4 The first aim of this paper is to strengthen Adams inequality (1.6) in the spirit of Tintarev for the improvement of Moser -- Trudinger inequality (1.3).To do this, let us define for any 0 ≤ α < λ1(Ω), kuk2 2,α = k∆uk2 2 − αkuk2 2, u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω). Note that k · k2,α is a norm on H 2 will prove the following inequality. 0 (Ω) which is equivalent to k · kH 2 0 (Ω). In this paper, we Theorem 1.1. Let Ω ⊂ R4 be a smooth, oriented bounded domain, λ1(Ω) be the first eigenvalue of bi-Laplacian operator ∆2 on Ω. Then for any α with 0 ≤ α < λ1(Ω), we have sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx < ∞. (1.8) Remark that when α = 0, (1.8) reduces to (1.6). Moreover, for any 0 ≤ α < λ1(Ω) and 0 (Ω) such that k∆uk2 ≤ 1 denote v = u/kuk2,α, then u2 ≤ v2, and kvk2,α = 1, thus u ∈ H 2 (1.8) is indeed stronger than Adams inequality (1.6). The next result shows that (1.8) is stronger than the inequality of Lu and Yang (1.7). Proposition 1.2. Theorem 1.1 implies the inequality (1.7). The second result of this paper is the existence of the extremal functions for the in- equality (1.8). More precisely, we prove the following result. Theorem 1.3. Let Ω ⊂ R4 be a smooth, oriented bounded domain, λ1(Ω) be the first eigenvalue of bi-Laplacian operator ∆2 on Ω. Then for any α with 0 ≤ α < λ1(Ω), there exists u∗ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω) such that ku∗k2,α = 1 and e32π2u∗ 2 dx = ZΩ sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx. Note that when α = 0 we obtain the existence of extremal function for Adams inequality (1.6) which was already proved in [30]. Although, our inequality (1.8) is stronger than the one of Lu and Yang (1.7), however the existence result in Theorem 1.3 does not imply the existence result for the inequality (1.7). Also, contrary with the existence result of Lu and Yang, our Theorem 1.3 gives the existence of extremal function for the inequality (1.8) for any 0 ≤ α < λ1(Ω). We conclude this introduction by mentioning about the method of proof of our main Theorems. As usually, our method is based on the blow-up analysis method. We first establish a concentration-compactness lemma of Lion's type and using it to prove the existence of uǫ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω), ǫ ∈ (0, 32π2) such that kuǫk2,α = 1 and ZΩ 0 (Ω), kuk2,α≤1ZΩ e(32π2−ǫ)u2 e32π2uǫ u∈H 2 sup 2 dx = dx. 5 Thus, the Euler -- Lagrange equation of uǫ is given by  e(32π2−ǫ)u2 ∆2uǫ = 1 ǫ uǫ + αuǫ λǫ kuǫk2,α = 1, uǫ = ∂uǫ ∂ν = 0 λǫ =RΩ e(32π2−ǫ)u2  ǫ u2 ǫ dx, in Ω, on ∂Ω, sequence of test functions, we exclude the blow-up phenomena for the maximizing sequence where ν denotes the outward unit normal vector to ∂Ω. Without loss of generality, let cǫ = maxΩ uǫ = uǫ(xǫ). If cǫ is bounded, by the standard regularity theory we obtain uǫ → u∗ in C 4(Ω) hence finishes our proof. If cǫ → ∞ (namely, the blow-up occurs) and xǫ → p ∈ Ω, by using Pohozaev type identity and elliptic estimates, we exclude the case p ∈ ∂Ω. We also show that cǫuǫ converges to some Green function weakly in H 2 0 (Ω) which then immediately leads to Theorem 1.1. We also prove an upper bound for functional RΩ e32π2u2dx when blow-up occurs by using some capacity estimates. By constructing a of functionalRΩ e32π2u2dx. This leads to the existence result in Theorem 1.3. We emphasize here that in our proof below, we do not require the sharp Adams inequality (i.e., γ = 32π2 in (1.6)), but only require the subcritical Adams inequality (i.e., γ < 32π2 in (1.6)). We also would like to mention here that blow-up analysis technique have been already employed by numerous authors in relevant but quite different setting in dealing with Sobolev inequalities instead of Moser -- Trudinger inequality. We refer the interested reader to the works [3, 10 -- 12, 21 -- 25, 30, 42, 44 -- 49], etc. The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In section §2, we give the existence of maximizers for subcritical functional. In section §3 we analyse the asymptotic behavior of those maximizers functions. In section §4, we obtain an upper bound for the critical functional under the assumption that blow-up occurs in the interior of Ω by using some capacity estimates. We exclude the boundary bubble in section §5. The proof of Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 1.2 is given in section §6. In section §7, we construct a sequence of test functions to conclude the existence of extremal function for the critical functional and thus give the proof of Theorem 1.3. 2 Extremals for the subcritical Adams inequality For any ǫ ∈ (0, 32π2), let us consider the subcritical problems e(32π2−ǫ)u2 Cǫ = dx. sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α≤1ZΩ u∈H 2 (2.1) In this section, we mainly prove that Cǫ < ∞ and the subcritical problem (2.1) is attained. Noting that the existence of such extremals is nontrivial. In the proof, we need the following Lion's type [29] concentration -- compactness principle. 6 Proposition 2.1. Let {uj}j ⊂ H 2 and uj ⇀ u0 weakly in H 2 0 (Ω) be a sequence of functions such that kujk2,α = 1 0 (Ω). Then for any p < (1 − ku0k2 2,α)−1, lim sup j→∞ ZΩ e32π2pu2 j dx < ∞. Proof. By Rellich -- Kondrachov theorem, we have kujk2 → ku0k2 as j → ∞. Denote vj = uj k∆ujk2 = uj (1 + αkujk2 2)1/2 , then k∆vjk2 = 1 and vj ⇀ v0 = u0/(1 + αku0k2)1/2 weakly in H 2 0 (Ω). Applying the Lions type concentration -- compactness principle of Lu and Yang (see Proposition 3.1 in [30]), we have lim sup j→∞ ZΩ e32π2qv2 j dx < ∞ (2.2) for any q < 1/(1 − k∆v0k2 2). For any p < 1/(1 − ku0k2 2,α) we have lim j→∞ pk∆ujk2 2 = p(1 + αku0k2 1 + αku0k2 This implies the existence of j0 and q < 1/(1 − k∆v0k2 2) < 2 2 − k∆u0k2 2) such that 1 + αku0k2 2 = pk∆ujk2 2 ≤ q < 1 1 − k∆v0k2 2 , ∀ j ≥ j0. Thus by (2.2), we get lim sup j→∞ ZΩ as our desire. e32π2pu2 j dx = lim sup j→∞ ZΩ e32π2pk∆ujk2 2v2 j→∞ ZΩ j dx ≤ lim sup Our existence result is given in the following proposition. 1 1 − k∆v0k2 2 . e32π2qv2 j dx < ∞, Proposition 2.2. For any ǫ ∈ (0, 32π2), we have Cǫ < ∞ and there exists uǫ ∈ H 2 such that kuǫk2,α = 1 and 0 (Ω) Note that 32π2 − ǫ can be replaced by any sequence {ρǫ}ǫ with ρǫ ↑ 32π2. Proof. Let {uj}j ⊂ H 2 0 (Ω) be a sequence of functions with kujk2,α = 1 and Cǫ =ZΩ e(32π2−ǫ)u2 ǫ dx. lim j→∞ZΩ e(32π2−ǫ)u2 j dx = Cǫ. 7 Since α ∈ [0, λ1(Ω)) then 1 = kujk2 2,α ≥(cid:18)1 − α λ1(Ω)(cid:19)k∆ujk2 2. 0 (Ω). Up to a subsequence, we can assume that uj ⇀ uǫ weakly 0 (Ω), uj → uǫ in Lp(Ω) for any 1 < p < ∞ and uj → uǫ a.e., in Ω. If uǫ = 0, then by Thus {uj}j is bounded in H 2 in H 2 Rellich -- Kondrachov theorem, we have kujk2 → 0 as j → ∞. Define vj = uj k∆ujk2 = then k∆vjk2 = 1 and vj → 0 a.e., in Ω. Since uj (1 + αkujk2 2)2 , lim j→∞ (32π2 − ǫ)(1 + αkujk2 2) = 32π2 − ǫ, and by Adams inequality then there exists p > 1 such that sup j≥1ZΩ e32π2v2 j dx < ∞, sup j ZΩ e(32π2−ǫ)pu2 j dx < ∞. Thus, since vj → 0 a.e., in Ω, by letting j → ∞ we get j→∞ZΩ which is impossible. Hence uǫ 6≡ 0 and lim e(32π2−ǫ)u2 j dx = Ω, 0 < k∆uǫk2 It follows from Proposition 2.1 that 2 − αkuǫk2 2 ≤ lim inf j→∞ kujk2 2,α ≤ 1, sup j≥1ZΩ e32π2pu2 j dx < ∞ for any p < 1/(1 − kuǫk2 2,α). This together uj → uǫ a.e., in Ω implies j→∞ZΩ j dx =ZΩ e(32π2−ǫ)u2 e(32π2−ǫ)u2 ǫ dx. lim This shows that Cǫ < ∞. Obviously, we must have kuǫk2,α = 1. Hence uǫ is a maximizer for Cǫ. 8 An easy computation shows that the Euler -- Lagrange equation of uǫ is given by eαǫu2 ǫ uǫ + αuǫ uǫ = ∂uǫ ∆2uǫ = 1 λǫ kuǫk2,α = 1, λǫ =RΩ eαǫu2 αǫ = 32π2 − ǫ, Lemma 2.3. It holds lim inf ǫ→0 λǫ > 0. Proof. Using the inequality et ≤ 1 + tet for t ≥ 0, we get ∂ν = 0   ǫ u2 ǫ dx. Cǫ =ZΩ eαǫu2 ǫ dx ≤ Ω + αǫλǫ. in Ω on ∂Ω (2.3) (2.4) It is evident that lim sup ǫ→0 Cǫ ≤ sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx. For any u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) with kuk2,α = 1, by Fatou's lemma we have dx ≤ lim inf ǫ→0 ǫ→0 ZΩ dx ≤ lim inf e32π2u2 ZΩ eαǫu2 Cǫ. Taking the supremum over all such functions u, we have sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx ≤ lim inf ǫ→0 Cǫ. Thus we have shown that Cǫ = lim ǫ→0 sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx > Ω. (2.5) Combining (2.4) and (2.5) together we obtain the desired estimate. 3 Asymptotic behavior of extremals for subcritical functionals The crucial tool in studying the regularity of higher order equations is the Green's repre- sentation formula. The Green function G(x, y) for ∆2 under the Dirichlet condition is the solution of ∆2G(x, y) = δx(y) in Ω, G(x, y) = ∂G(x, y) ∂ν = 0 on ∂Ω. (3.1) All functions u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω) satisfying ∆2u = f can be represented by u(x) =ZΩ G(x, y)f (y)dy. 9 We will need the following useful estimates [9] for G in the analysis below G(x, y) ≤ C ln(2 + x − y−1), ∇iG(x, y) ≤ Cx − y−i, i ≥ 1, (3.2) for some constant C > 0 and for all x, y ∈ Ω, x 6= y. standard regularity to (2.3) we obtain uǫ → u∗ in C 4(Ω) for some u∗ ∈ H 2 with ku∗k2,α = 1. This then implies Denote cǫ = maxx∈Ω uǫ(x) = uǫ(xǫ) for xǫ ∈ Ω. If cǫ is bounded, then applying the 0 (Ω) ∩ C 4(Ω) e32π2u∗ 2 dx = ZΩ sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx, which leads to our desired results. In the sequel, we assume that cǫ → ∞. Without loss of generality we assume that cǫ = uǫ(xǫ) = max x∈Ω uǫ(x) → ∞, xǫ ∈ Ω, xǫ → p ∈ Ω as ǫ → 0. (3.3) As in [30], we call p the blow-up point. Here and in the sequel, we do not distinguish sequence and subsequence, the reader can understand it from the context. Since kuǫk2,α = 1 and α < λ1(Ω) then k∆uǫk2 2 ≤ 1 + α λ1(Ω) , hence uǫ is bounded in H 2 in Ls(Ω) for any 1 < s < ∞ and uǫ → u0 a.e., in Ω. concentration -- compactness principle (Proposition 2.1), there is p > 1 such that 0 (Ω), we can assume that uǫ ⇀ u0 weakly in H 2 0 (Ω), uǫ → u0 If u0 6≡ 0, then by Lions type sup ǫ>0ZΩ e32π2pu2 ǫ dx < ∞. Hence eαǫuǫ is bounded in Lr(Ω) for some r > 1 provided that ǫ is small enough. Ap- plying the standard regularity theory to (2.3), we obtain the boundedness of cǫ which is contradiction with (3.3). Hence, we have weakly in H 2 in Lr(Ω) for any r > 1, and a.e., in Ω, 0 (Ω), (3.4)  uǫ ⇀ 0 uǫ → 0  αǫ → 32π2. In the rest of this section we focus on the case p ∈ Ω (the case p ∈ ∂Ω will be treated below in §5). We claim that ∆uǫ2dx ⇀ δp Indeed, if (3.5) does not hold. Since k∆uǫk2 and η > 0 such that Br(p) ⊂ Ω and lim sup in the sense of measure. 2 = 1 + αkuǫk2 ǫ→0 ZBr(p) ∆uǫ2dx ≤ 1 − η. (3.5) 2 → 1 as ǫ → 0, we can find r > 0 10 From Sobolev embedding theorem and (3.4), we have ∇uǫ → 0 strongly in L2(Ω). Let φ ∈ C∞0 (Br(p)) be a cut-off function with 0 ≤ φ ≤ 1 and φ = 1 on Br/2(p). We have lim sup ǫ→0 ZBr(p) ∆(φuǫ)2dx ≤ 1 − η. ǫ is bounded in L2/(2−η)(Ω) and hence eαǫu2 By Adams inequality, eαǫφ2u2 is bounded in L2/(2−η)(Br/2(p)) provided that ǫ is small enough. Applying the standard regularity theory to (2.3), we have that uǫ is bounded in C 1(Br/4(p)). This contradicts our assumption (3.3). Hence, we obtain (3.5). In fact, we have shown that there is no other blow-up point if p lies in Ω and kuǫk2,α = 1. To proceed, we introduce the following quantities ǫ bǫ = λǫ ǫ dx RΩ uǫeαǫu2 , τ = lim ǫ→0 cǫ bǫ , σ = lim ǫ→0 RΩ uǫeαǫu2 RΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx ǫ dx Note that τ ≥ 1 or τ = ∞, σ ≤ 1. We will show that σ = 1 at the end of this section. Let . (3.6) r4 ǫ = λǫ c2 ǫ e−αǫc2 ǫ , Ωǫ = {x ∈ R4 : xǫ + rǫx ∈ Ω}. We will show that rǫ converges to zero rapidly. Indeed, for any 0 < γ < 32π2, we have r4 ǫ c2 ǫ eγc2 ǫ = e(γ−αǫ)c2 ǫZΩ ǫ eαǫu2 u2 ǫ dx ≤ZΩ ǫ eγu2 u2 ǫ dx → 0, (3.7) here we used Holder inequality, (3.4) and the fact 0 < γ < 32π2. In particular, rǫ → 0 and Ωǫ → R4 as ǫ → 0. We next define two sequences of functions on Ωǫ by ψǫ(x) = uǫ(xǫ + rǫx) cǫ , ϕǫ(x) = bǫ(uǫ(xǫ + rǫx) − cǫ) = bǫcǫ(ψǫ(x) − 1). Our next goal is to understand the asymptotic behavior of ψǫ and ϕǫ. Evidently, ψǫ ≤ 1 and ∆2ψǫ(x) = r4 ψǫ(x)eαǫuǫ(xǫ+rǫx)2 ǫ (cid:18) 1 λǫ + αψǫ(x)(cid:19) . Thus, for any R > 0 and x ∈ BR(0) we have ∆2uǫ(x)2 ≤ 1 c2 ǫ + αr4 ǫ → 0, and ZBR(0) ∆ψǫ2dx = 1 c2 ǫ ZBrǫR(xǫ) ∆uǫ2dx → 0. These estimates and the standard regularity theory give ψǫ → ψ in C 4 loc(R4) with ∆ψ = 0 in R4. Note that ψǫ ≤ 1 and ψǫ(0) = 1, then ψ ≤ 1 and ψ(0) = 1. Using Liouville theorem, we conclude that ψ ≡ 1 in R4. Thus, we have proved that 11 Lemma 3.1. It holds ψǫ → 1 in C 4 loc(R4). We next investigate the convergence of ϕǫ. Lemma 3.2. Let τ be defined in (3.6). Then ϕǫ → ϕ in C 4 loc(R4), where ϕ(x) =( 1 16π2τ ln 0 1 1+ π √6x2 if τ < ∞, if τ = ∞, (3.8) for x ∈ R4. Proof. Using Green representation formula, we have for i = 1, 2. Thus, for any R > 0, x ∈ BR(0) and i = 1, 2, by using (3.2) we have hence eαǫuǫ(y)2 λǫ uǫ(x) =ZΩ ∇iuǫ(x) =ZΩ ∇i G(x, y)(cid:18) 1 xG(x, y)(cid:18) 1 λǫ ri ∇iϕǫ(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) xG(xǫ + rǫx, y)(cid:18) 1 λǫ uǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 xǫ + rǫx − yi + ǫbǫZΩ ∇i ǫZΩ 1 ǫ ZB2Rrǫ (xǫ) λǫ 1 λǫ ≤ Cbǫri ≤ Cbǫri uǫ(y) + αuǫ(y)(cid:19) dy uǫ(y) + αuǫ(y)(cid:19) dy, uǫ(y) + αuǫ(y)(cid:19) dy(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) eαǫuǫ(y)2 eαǫuǫ(y)2 xǫ + rǫx − yi! dy αuǫ(y) uǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 xǫ + rǫx − yi dy +ZΩ\B2Rrǫ (xǫ) xǫ + rǫx − yi dy! αuǫ(y) 1 ǫcǫZΩ Ri + αbǫri +ZΩ x − zi + dz dy xǫ + rǫx − yi! 1 λǫ uǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 xǫ + rǫx − yi dy (3.9) cǫ ZB2R(0) ≤ C bǫ ≤ C(R), here we use (3.7) and bǫ ≤ cǫ. A straightforward computation shows that ϕǫ satisfies ∆2ϕǫ(x) = bǫ cǫ ψǫ(x)eαǫ cǫ bǫ (1+ψǫ(x))ϕǫ(x) + αbǫcǫr4 ǫ ψǫ(x). (3.10) Since bǫ ≤ cǫ, ψǫ → 1 in C 4 standard regularity theorey to (3.10) that ϕǫ → ϕ in C 4 loc(R4), (3.7), ϕǫ ≤ 0 and (3.9), we obtain by applying the loc(R4) for some function ϕ. We 12 have two following cases. • Case 1: τ < ∞. By letting ǫ → 0, then using Lemma 3.1, (3.7) and (3.10) we obtain (3.11) e64π2τ ϕ(x)dx < ∞. Indeed, for any R > 0, we have ψǫ(x) = 1 + oǫ,R(1) where oǫ,R(1) means that ϕ(x) ≤ ϕ(0) = 0, e64π2τ ϕ(x), ∆2ϕ(x) = ZR4 1 τ oǫ,R(1) = 0 uniformly in BR(0). lim ǫ→0 ǫ (x) = 1 + oǫ,R(1) for x ∈ BR(0) or equivalently uǫ(xǫ + rǫx)2 = c2 ǫ (1 + oǫ,R(1)) for Thus ψ2 x ∈ BR(0). Hence λǫ =ZΩ ǫ eαǫu2 u2 ǫ dx ≥ c2 ǫ (1 + oǫ,R(1))ZBRrǫ (xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx. Applying Fatou's lemma, we have ZBR(0) e64π2τ ϕ2(x)dx ≤ lim inf ǫ→0 ZBR(0) ǫ→0 ZBR(0) = lim inf eαǫ cǫ bǫ (1+ψǫ(x))ϕǫ(x)dx eαǫ(uǫ(xǫ+rǫx)2−c2 ǫ )dx = lim inf ǫ→0 = lim inf ǫ→0 ≤ lim inf ǫ→0 = 1, ǫ )dx r−4 eαǫ(uǫ(x)2−c2 ǫ ZBRrǫ (xǫ) ǫRBRrǫ (xǫ) eαǫuǫ(x)2dx λǫ c2 c2 c2 ǫRBRrǫ (xǫ) eαǫuǫ(x)2dx ǫ (1 + oǫ,R(1))RBRrǫ (xǫ) eαǫuǫ(x)2dx for any R > 0. Letting R → ∞ we get RR4 e64π2τ ϕdx < ∞. Moreover, we have ∆ϕǫ(x) = bǫr2 ǫ ZΩ ∆xG(xǫ + rǫx, y)(cid:18) 1 λǫ eαǫuǫ(y)2 uǫ(y) + αuǫ(y)(cid:19) dy. Hence, for any R > 0, by Fubini theorem we get ZBR(0) ∆ϕǫ(x)dx ≤ Cbǫr2 ǫ ZΩ 1 λǫ eαǫuǫ(y)2 uǫ(y)ZBR(0) 1 xǫ + rǫx − y2 dxdy + Cαbǫr2 ǫ ZΩ uǫ(y)ZBR(0) 1 xǫ + rǫx − y2 dxdy ≤ C′R2, 13 with C′ independent of R and ǫ. Letting ǫ → 0, we obtain ZBR(0) ∆ϕ(x)dx ≤ C′R2, for any R > 0 with C′ independent of R. This fact together (3.11) and the results in [27,43] implies that 1 1 ϕ(x) = x ∈ R4. • Case 2: τ = ∞. From (3.9) we obtain by letting ǫ → 0 that 1 + π√6x2 , 16π2τ ln ∆ϕ(x) ≤ C R2 , for any x ∈ BR(0) and for any R > 0 with C independent of R. Let R → ∞ we get ∆ϕ(x) = 0 for any x ∈ R4. Since ϕ(x) ≤ ϕ(0) = 0 for any x ∈ R4, then by Liouville Theorem, we conclude that ϕ ≡ 0. We next consider the asymptotic behavior of uǫ away from the blow-up point p. We have the following result. Lemma 3.3. bǫuǫ is bounded in H 2,r constant C depending only on Ω, λ1(Ω) and α0 such that kbǫuǫkH 2,r α ∈ [0, α0] with α0 < λ1(Ω). Proof. Let vǫ be the solution of 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2. In particular, there exists a 0 (Ω) ≤ C uniformly for (∆2vǫ = 1 vǫ = ∂vǫ λǫ ∂ν = 0 bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ in Ω, on ∂Ω. By Green representation formula, we have vǫ(x) =ZΩ G(x, y) 1 λǫ bǫuǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 dy and hence for any i = 1, 2, it holds ∇ivǫ(x) ≤ C bǫ λǫ ZΩ x − y−iuǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 dy = CZΩ x − y−i Applying Holder inequality, we obtain for any 1 < r < 2 that uǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 RΩ uǫ(z)eαǫuǫ(z)2dz dy. uǫ(y)eαǫuǫ(y)2 RΩ uǫ(z)eαǫuǫ(z)2dz Thus, by Fubini theorem, we have k∇ivǫkr ≤ C for i = 1, 2, whence ∇ivǫ(x)r ≤ C rZΩ x − y−ir dy. kvǫkH 2,r 0 ≤ C. 14 (3.12) Let wǫ = bǫuǫ − vǫ, then wǫ satisfies (∆2wǫ = αwǫ + αvǫ wǫ = ∂wǫ ∂ν = 0, in Ω, on ∂Ω. Using wǫ as testing function for this equation, we get k∆wǫk2 2 = αkwǫk2 vǫwǫdx ≤ α λ1(Ω)k∆wǫk2 2 + Thus 2 + αZΩ (cid:18)1 − α pλ1(Ω)kvǫk2k∆wǫk2. α λ1(Ω)(cid:19)k∆wǫk2 ≤ α pλ1(Ω)kvǫk2, which together (3.12) and Sobolev inequality yields k∆wǫk2 ≤ C with C depends on Ω, λ1(Ω), and α0 < λ1(Ω) such that 0 ≤ α ≤ α0. Hence kwǫkH 2 0 (Ω) ≤ C which together (3.12) implies that bǫuǫ is bounded in H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2. We proceed by showing that bǫuǫ converges to some Green function. Lemma 3.4. It holds bǫuǫ ⇀ Gα(·, p) in H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2 with (∆2Gα(·, p) = σδp + αGα(·, p) Gα(·, p) = ∂Gα(·,p) ∂ν = 0 in Ω, on ∂Ω. Furthermore, bǫuǫ → Gα(·, p) in C 4 loc(Ω \ {p}). Also, we have Gα(x, p) = − σ 8π2 ln x − p + Ap + ψ(x), (3.13) (3.14) where Ap is constant depending on p and α, ψ ∈ C 3(Ω) and ψ(p) = 0. Proof. By Lemma 3.3, there exists a function Gα(·, p) ∈ H 2,s 0 (Ω) such that bǫuǫ ⇀ Gα(·, p) weakly in H 2,s 0 (Ω) for any 1 < s < 2. For any r > 0 such that Br(p) ⊂ Ω, by (3.5) we have eαǫu2 ǫ is bounded in Ls(Ω\ Br(p)) for any s > 1 (this is based on Adams inequality and cut- off function argument). Hence, by the standard regularity theory we obtain bǫuǫ → Gα(·, p) in C 4 loc(Ω \ {p}). Notice that bǫuǫ satisfies (∆2(bǫuǫ) = 1 λǫ bǫuǫ = ∂(bǫuǫ) in Ω, on ∂Ω. bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ + αbǫuǫ ∂ν = 0 (3.15) For any φ ∈ C∞(Ω) we have ZΩ φ (cid:18) 1 λǫ bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ + αbǫuǫ(cid:19) dx =ZΩ (φ − φ(p)) 1 + φ(p)ZΩ λǫ bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx 1 λǫ bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx + αZΩ bǫuǫφdx. (3.16) 15 Note that and We will show that lim ǫ→0ZΩ bǫuǫφdx =ZΩ Gα(x, p)φ(x)dx, (3.17) lim ǫ→0ZΩ 1 λǫ bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = lim lim ǫ→0ZΩ (φ − φ(p)) 1 λǫ ǫ→0 RΩ uǫ(x)eαǫuǫ(x)2dx RΩ uǫ(x)eαǫuǫ(x)2dx bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. = σ. (3.18) (3.19) Indeed, by Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we get that lim ǫ→0Z{uǫ≤1} eαǫu2 ǫ dx = Ω. This limit and (2.5) imply lim inf ǫ→0 ZΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx ≥ lim inf = lim inf ǫ dx eαǫu2 ǫ→0 Z{uǫ≥1 ǫ→0 (cid:18)Cǫ −Z{uǫ≤1} 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ sup = u∈H 2 eαǫu2 ǫ dx(cid:19) dx − Ω e32π2u2 > 0, hence bǫ/λǫ is bounded. For any r > 0 with Br(p) ⊂ Ω, we know that eαǫu2 Ls(Ω \ Br(p)) for some s > 1 and uǫ → 0 in Lt(Ω) for any t > 1, hence ǫ is bounded in (φ − φ(p)) bǫ λǫ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. (3.20) In the other hand (φ − φ(p)) bǫ λǫ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZBr(p) Thus lim ǫ→0ZΩ\Br(p) ǫ dx(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) uǫeαǫu2 x∈Br(p)φ(x)−φ(p) ≤ sup ǫ→0ZBr(p) (φ − φ(p)) bǫ λǫ lim lim r→∞ bǫ λǫZΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = sup x∈Br(p)φ(x)−φ(p). uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. (3.21) (3.19) follows from (3.20) and (3.21). Plugging (3.17), (3.18) and (3.19) into (3.16) we obtain lim ǫ→0ZΩ φ (cid:18) 1 λǫ bǫuǫeαǫu2 ǫ + αbǫuǫ(cid:19) dx = σφ(p) + αZΩ Gα(x, p)φ(x)dx, 16 for any φ ∈ C∞(Ω), hence ∆2Gα(·, p) = σδp + αGα(·, p) in Ω. The last conclusion was proved in the proof of Lemma 4.4 in [30]. Let is recall it here for convenience of reader. Fix r > 0 such that B2r(p) ⊂ Ω and consider the cut-off function φ ∈ C∞0 (B2r(p) such that φ ≡ 1 in Br(p). Let g(x) = Gα(x, p) + σ 8π2 η(x) lnx − p. Then we have with (∆2g = f g = ∂g ∂ν = 0 on ∂Ω, in Ω, f (x) = − σ2 8π2 ∆2φ(x) lnx − p + 2∇∆φ(x) ∇ lnx − p + 2∆φ(x) ∆ lnx − p + 2∆(∇φ(x) ∇ lnx − p) + 2∇φ(x) ∇∆ lnx − p! + αGα(x, p). Lemma 3.3 and Sobolev inequality implies that f ∈ Ls(Ω) for any s > 1. By the standard regularity theory, we have g ∈ C 3(Ω). Let Ap = g(p) and ψ(x) = g(x) − g(p) + σ 8π2 (1 − φ(x)) lnx − p, we obtain the desired result. ǫ dx. The following Pohozaev type identity is very useful in our analysis below. We continue by using Pohozaev type identity to find an upper bound of RΩ eαǫu2 Lemma 3.5. Assume Ω′ ⊂ R4 is a smooth bounded domain. Let u ∈ C 4(Ω′) be a solution of ∆2u = f (u) in Ω′. Then we have for any y ∈ R4 2Z∂Ω′ +Z∂Ω′(cid:18) ∂v ∂νhx − y,∇vi − h∇u,∇vihx − y, νi(cid:19) dω, 0 f (s)ds, v = −∆u and ν is the normal outward derivative of x on ∂Ω′. F (u)dx =Z∂Ω′hx − y, νiF (u)dω + ∂νhx − y,∇ui + 4ZΩ′ v2hx − y, νidω + 2Z∂Ω′ ∂u ∂ν vdω 1 ∂u where F (u) =R u 17 The proof of this Pohozaev type identity can be found in [33, 36]. In the sequel, we will ueαǫu2 + αu. Noting that v = −∆uǫ apply it for Ω′ = Br(xǫ), y = xǫ, u = uǫ and f (u) = 1 λǫ and F (u) = 1 2 u2. By Lemma 3.5, we have eαǫu2 + α 2αǫλǫ ZBr(xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx = − ααǫλǫ b2 ǫ αǫλǫ 4b2 ǫ αǫλǫ 2b2 ǫ + − r (bǫuǫ)2dx + ZBr(xǫ) 4Z∂Br(xǫ) rZ∂Br(xǫ) ∆(bǫuǫ)2dω − rZ∂Br(xǫ)(cid:18)2 ∂∆(bǫuǫ) ∂ν eαǫu2 ǫ dω + ααǫλǫ b2 ǫ r 4Z∂Br(xǫ) (bǫuǫ)2dω ∂(bǫuǫ) ∆(bǫuǫ)dω αǫλǫ b2 ∂(bǫuǫ) ǫ Z∂Br(xǫ) ∂ν − h∇∆(bǫuǫ),∇(bǫuǫ)i(cid:19) dω. ∂ν (3.22) Using the representation of Gα in Lemma 3.4 and xǫ → p, we have ZBr(xǫ) rZ∂Br(xǫ) (bǫuǫ)2dx =ZBr(p) Gα(x, p)2dx + oǫ,r(1) = or(1) + oǫ,r(1), eαǫuǫdω = or(1) + oǫ,r(1), rZ∂Br(xǫ) (bǫuǫ)2dω = or(1) + oǫ,r(1), rZ∂Br(xǫ) ∆(bǫuǫ)2dω = rZ∂Br(p) ∆Gα(x, p)2dω + oǫ,r(1) = σ2 8π2 + or(1) + oǫ,r(1), Z∂Br(xǫ) rZ∂Br(xǫ) ∂(bǫuǫ) ∂ν ∆(bǫuǫ)dω =Z∂Br(p) ∂Gα(x, p) ∂ν ∆Gα(x, p)dω+oǫ,r(1) = ∂∆(bǫuǫ) ∂(bǫuǫ) ∂ν ∂ν dω = rZ∂Br(p) ∂∆(Gα) ∂(Gα) ∂ν ∂ν + oǫ,r(1) = − σ2 16π2 +or(1)+oǫ,r(1), σ2 8π2 + or(1) + oǫ,r(1), and rZBr(xǫ)h∇∆(bǫuǫ),∇(bǫuǫ)idω = rZBr(p)h∇∆Gα,∇Gαidω+oǫ,r(1) = − where oǫ,r(1) and or(1) mean that limǫ→0 oǫ,r(1) = 0 when r is fixed, and limr→0 or(1) = 0 respectively. Hence, we get σ2 8π2 +or(1)+oǫ,r(1), ZBr(xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx = λǫ b2 ǫ (σ2 + or(1) + oǫ,r(1)) + or(1) + oǫ,r(1). (3.23) We claim that σ2 > 0. Indeed, if this is not true, then σ2 = 0, and we have ZBr(xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx = λǫ b2 ǫ (or(1) + oǫ,r(1)) + or(1) + oǫ,r(1). 18 Since ∆uǫ2dx ⇀ δp in the measure sense, then for any r > 0 with Br(p) ⊂ Ω, by using Adams inequality and cut-off function argument, we have lim ǫ→0ZΩ\Br(p) eαǫu2 ǫ dx = Ω − Br(p). (3.24) Fix a r0 > 0 such that B2r0(p) ⊂ Ω and or(1) ≤ 1/4 for any r ≤ 2r0. Choosing ǫ0 > 0 such that xǫ − p < r0 and oǫ,2r0(1) ≤ 1/4 for any ǫ ≤ ǫ0. Thus Br0(p) ⊂ B2r0(xǫ), and hence lim sup ǫ→0 ZΩ\B2r0 (xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx ≤ Ω − Br0(p) ≤ Ω. By Holder inequality, we have λǫ b2 ǫ Thus = (cid:16)RΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ eαǫu2 ǫ dx(cid:17)2 ǫ dx ≤ZΩ RΩ u2 eαǫu2 ǫ dx ≤ 1 2 λǫ b2 ǫ + 1 2 +ZΩ\B2r0 (xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx. lim sup ǫ→0 λǫ ǫ ≤ 1 + 2Ω < ∞. b2 This together the estimates above and σ2 = 0 implies lim r→0 lim ǫ→0ZBr(xǫ) eαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. For any r > 0 such that B2r(p) ⊂ Ω, we then have Br/2(p) ⊂ Br(xǫ) ⊂ B2p(p) for sufficiently small ǫ > 0. Thus by (3.24), it holds eαǫu2 ǫ dx = Ω. (3.25) lim r→0 Finally, we get lim ǫ→0ZΩ\Br (xǫ) ǫ→0ZΩ eαǫu2 lim ǫ dx ≤ Ω, which is impossible. Then we must have σ2 > 0. This together (3.23) and (3.25) yields lim ǫ→0ZΩ eαǫu2 ǫ dx = Ω + σ2 lim ǫ→0 λǫ b2 ǫ . (3.26) We can further locate σ as follows. Lemma 3.6. It holds σ = 1. 19 Proof. We know from Lemma 3.4 that bǫuǫ → Gα(·, p) in C 4 loc(Ω \ {p}) with σ 8π2 lnx − p + Ap + ψ(x), ψ ∈ C 3(Ω), ψ(p) = 0. Gα(x, p) = − We also know that σ 6= 0. Suppose σ < 0, then Gα(·, p) ≤ −C in Br(p) for some r > 0 and C > 0. Hence uǫ < 0 in Br(p) \ {p} for ǫ small enough. In the other hand, by Holder inequality, we have thus bǫ ≥ RΩ uǫeαǫu2 RΩ eαǫu2 bǫ ≥ 1 − lim inf ǫ→0 ǫ dx ǫ dx ≥ 1 − R{uǫ≤1} RΩ eαǫu2 eαǫu2 ǫ dx , ǫ dx supu∈H 2 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1RΩ e32π2u2dx Ω > 0. Lemma 3.2 implies that uǫ > 0 on BRrǫ(xǫ) for any fixed R > 0 provided that ǫ > 0 is small enough (since cǫ → ∞). However when ǫ is small enough, we then have BRrǫ(xǫ) ⊂ Br(p). We thus get a contradiction on the sign of uǫ, hence σ > 0. Whence, Gα(·, p) ≥ C > 0 in Br(p) \ {p} for some r > 0 and C > 0, hence uǫ > 0 in Br(p) \ {p} for sufficiently small ǫ > 0, and then we have ZBr(p) uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx =ZBr(p) uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx. Since ∆uǫ2dx ⇀ δp in the measure sense, and uǫ → 0 in Ls(Ω) for any s > 1, then by using Adams inequality and cut-off function argument, we can show that lim ǫ→0ZΩ\Br(p) uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. Obviously, ZΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx ≥Z{uǫ≥1} eαǫu2 ǫ dx =ZΩ eαǫu2 ǫ dx −Z{uǫ≤1} eαǫu2 ǫ dx hence by (2.5) and Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem we have lim inf ǫ dx ≥ ǫ→0 ZΩ uǫeαǫu2 σ − 1 =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ǫ→0 RΩ uǫeαǫu2 RΩ uǫeαǫu2 sup u∈H 2 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ ǫ dx − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 2 lim ǫ dx lim Since Hence σ = 1. To summarize, we have the following result. 20 e32π2u2 dx − Ω > 0. ǫ dx ǫ→0RΩ\Br(p) uǫeαǫu2 RΩ uǫeαǫu2 ǫ dx = 0. Lemma 3.7. bǫuǫ ⇀ Gα(·, p) weakly in H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2 with (∆2Gα(·, p) = δp + αGα(·, p) Gα(·, p) = ∂Gα(·,p) ∂ν = 0 in Ω on ∂Ω. Furthermore, bǫuǫ → Gα(·, p) in C 4 loc(Ω \ {p}). Also we have Gα(x, p) = − 1 8π2 ln x − p + Ap + ψ(x), where Ap is constant depending on p and α, ψ ∈ C 3(Ω), with ψ(p) = 0. 4 Capacity estimates We follow the argument in [30]. Notice that in this section, we still assume that uǫ blows up and the blow-up point p ∈ Ω. We use capacity estimates to calculate the limit of ǫ to estimate from above the supremum of the functional RΩ e32π2u2dx over functions λǫ/b2 u ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) with kuk2,α = 1 under the assumption that uǫ blows up. The technique of using capacity estimate applied to this kind of problems was discovery by Li [22] in dealing with Moser -- Trudinger inequality of first order derivatives. Let u∗ǫ be the function constructed by Lu and Yang in section §5 in [30]. The main properties of this function are that u∗ǫ ∈ H 2(Bδ(xǫ) \ BRrǫ(xǫ)) and satisfies the boundary conditions and enery identity ZBδ (xǫ)\BRrǫ (xǫ) ∆u∗ǫ2dx =ZBδ(xǫ)\BRrǫ (xǫ) ∆uǫ2dx + o(1) b2 ǫ . Now we start to derive the capacity estimates. Consider the variational problem iδ,R,ǫ = infZBδ(xǫ)\BRrǫ (xǫ) ∆u2dx where infimum takes all over functions belonging to H 2(Bδ(xǫ) \ BRrǫ(xǫ)) with the same boundary conditions as u∗ǫ . It is well known (see [24, 26]) that this infimum is attained by a bi-harmonic function T which is defined in the annular domain Bδ(xǫ) \ BRrǫ(xǫ) with the same boundary condition as u∗ǫ . The explicit form of T is given by T (x) = A lnx − xǫ + Bx − xǫ2 + Cx − xǫ−2 + D, 21 bǫ (cid:0) 1 u∗ǫ (x) = 1 u∗ǫ (x) = cǫ + 1 bǫ ∂u∗ǫ ∂ν = − 1 ∂u∗ǫ ∂ν = 1 bǫrǫ 8π2δbǫ ∂ϕ 8π2 ln 1 on ∂BRrǫ(xǫ), δ + Ap(cid:1) on ∂Bδ(xǫ), rǫ (cid:17) ϕ(cid:16) x−xǫ rǫ (cid:17) ∂ν (cid:16) x−xǫ on ∂Bδ(xǫ), on ∂BRrǫ(xǫ),   (4.1) (4.2) with the explicit values of A,B was given in [30] (section §5) by solving a linear system. Hence iδ,R,ǫ = 8π2A2 ln + 32π2AB(δ2 − R2r2 ǫ ) + 32π2B2(δ4 − R4r4 ǫ ). δ Rrǫ By the same proof of Lemma 5.1 in [30], we conclude that 1 c2 ǫ lim ǫ→0 ln λǫ c2 ǫ = 0. From the definition of rǫ, we have ln Rrǫ δ = ln R δ + ln λǫ c2 ǫ − αǫc2 4 ǫ . (4.3) (4.4) (4.5) According to the argument in [30] with the help of (4.4) and (4.5) and using the explicit values of A and B, we obtain αǫ 1 + 4π2 ln δ − 2Ap − 1 2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + 1 bǫcǫ 8π2A2 ln δ Rrǫ 32π2 = 8π2 + ln λǫ c2 ǫ + 8 + 4 ln R r αǫc2 ǫ + O(cid:18) 1 c4 ǫ ln2 λǫ c2 bǫcǫ(cid:19)! (4.6) ǫ(cid:19) + o(cid:18) 1 ǫ ) = O(cid:18) 1 ǫ(cid:19) . (4.7) b2 and 32π2AB(δ2 − R2r2 ǫ ) = O(cid:18) 1 bǫcǫ(cid:19) , 32π2B2(δ4 − R4r4 Remark that (4.6) is exactly the formula (5.12) in [30] with a mistake on the coefficient of Rϕ′(R). We correct this mistake in (4.6). From (4.2) and definition of iδ,R,ǫ we have iδ,R,ǫ ≤ZBδ(xǫ)\BRrǫ (xǫ) ∆uǫ2dx + o(1) b2 ǫ = 1 + αkuǫk2 2 −ZΩ\Bδ (xǫ) ∆uǫ2dx −ZBRrǫ (xǫ) ∆uǫ2dx + ǫ (cid:18)ZΩ\Bδ(p) ∆Gα2dx +ZBR(0) ∆ϕ2dx − αkGαk2 1 b2 = 1 − o(1) b2 ǫ 2(cid:19) + o(1) b2 ǫ , here we use Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.4. By integration by parts, we have ZΩ\Bδ (p) ∆Gα2dx = − 1 16π2 − 1 8π2 ln δ + Ap + αkGαk2 2 + O(δ ln δ). (4.8) together (4.9) gives (4.8) (4.9) iδ,R,ǫ ≤ 1 − 1 b2 ǫ (cid:18)ZBr(0) ∆ϕ2dx − 1 16π2 − 1 8π2 ln δ + Ap + O(δ ln δ)(cid:19) + o(1) b2 ǫ . (4.10) 22 Plugging (4.3), (4.6) and (4.7) into (4.10) and using the fact 32π2/αǫ > 1, we obtain 32π2 8π2 ln λǫ c2 ǫ + 8 + 4 ln R r αǫ 2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + 1 4π2 ln δ − 2Ap − 1 bǫcǫ bǫcǫ(cid:19) ǫ(cid:19) + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 λǫ c2 ǫ (cid:18)ZBr(0) ∆ϕ2dx − 8π2 ln δ + Ap + O(δ ln δ)(cid:19) + 1 16π2 − + O(cid:18) 1 ≤ − αǫc2 ǫ 1 b2 ! c4 ǫ + 1 o(1) b2 ǫ . (4.11) Multiplying both sides of (4.11) by αǫc2 calculation, we obtain ǫ , using the fact bǫ ≤ cǫ and making a simple (cid:20) 32π2 αǫ + O(cid:18) 1 c2 ǫ ln λǫ c2 ǫ(cid:19)(cid:21) ln λǫ ǫ ≤ − c2 αǫc2 ǫ b2 ǫ (cid:18)ZBR(0) ∆ϕ2dx − − 32π2 cǫ bǫ (cid:18)2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + 1 8π2 ln δ(cid:19) − 32π2 αǫ 4 ln R δ 1 4π2 ln δ(cid:19) + O(cid:18) c2 ǫ(cid:19) . ǫ b2 Notice that ln λǫ c2 ǫ = ln λǫ b2 ǫ + ln b2 ǫ c2 ǫ , 32π2 αǫ = 1 + O(ǫ). These equalities together (4.4) and the previous inequality imply ln λǫ ǫ ≤ −(1 + o(1)) b2 − (1 + o(1)) 1 αǫc2 ǫ b2 αǫcǫ ǫ (cid:18)ZBR(0) ∆ϕ2dx − bǫ (cid:18)2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + 8π2 ln δ(cid:19) − (4 + o(1)) ln 4π2 ln δ(cid:19) − (1 + o(1)) ln R δ 1 c2 ǫ b2 ǫ + O(cid:18) c2 ǫ(cid:19) . ǫ b2 (4.12) Notice that by (2.5) and (3.26) we have limǫ→0 λǫ/b2 ǫ > 0, hence ln λǫ ǫ ≥ −C0, b2 for some C0 > 0. If τ = limǫ→o cǫ bǫ ln λǫ ǫ ≤ (4 + o(1)) b2 c2 ǫ b2 ǫ = ∞ then ϕ ≡ 0 by Lemma 3.2 which shows that + O(cid:18)c2 ǫ(cid:19) . ln δ − (4 + o(1)) ln ln δ − (8 + o(1)) R δ cǫ bǫ ǫ b2 Hence for a fixed R > 0, by choosing δ > 0 sufficiently small, we have −C0 ≤ ln λǫ ǫ ≤ 2 b2 c2 ǫ b2 ǫ ln δ − (8 + o(1)) cǫ bǫ ln δ − (4 + o(1)) ln R δ , 23 which is impossible since the right hand side tends to −∞ when ǫ → 0. This contradiction proves that 1 ≤ τ < ∞. Whence ln λǫ is also bounded from above by (4.12). Also by (4.12) we have b2 ǫ λǫ b2 ln ǫ ≤(cid:2)4 (τ − 1)2 + o(1)(cid:3) ln δ − (4 + o(1)) ln R + (64π2 + o(1))τ (ϕ(R) + 2Rϕ′(R)) + O (1) which then implies τ = 1 since otherwise by choosing ǫ > 0 and δ > 0 small enough we would obtain a contradiction with ln λǫ b2 ǫ ≥ −C0. With τ = 1, then ϕ(x) = 1 16π2 ln 1 1 + π√6x2 . In this situation, bǫ ∼ cǫ and the estimates in (4.7) are improved as (see formula (5.21) in [30]) 32π2AB(δ2 − R2r2 Consequently, (4.11) becomes ǫ ) = o(cid:18) 1 ǫ(cid:19) , c2 32π2B2(δ4 − R4r4 ǫ ) = o(cid:18) 1 ǫ(cid:19) . c2 2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + 1 ≤ − (1 + o(1)) c2 ǫ + ln λǫ c2 ǫ + 8 + 4 ln R δ 32π2c2 ǫ ! + O(cid:18) 1 ǫ(cid:19) ln2 λǫ c2 ǫ(cid:19) . 8π2 ln δ + Ap + O(δ ln δ)(cid:19) + o(cid:18) 1 c4 ǫ c2 1 (4.13) 4π2 ln δ − 2Ap − 1 c2 ǫ 8π2 (cid:18)ZBr(0) ∆ϕ2dx − 1 16π2 − Multiplying both sides of (4.13) by 32π2c2 ǫ we get (1 + o(1)) ln λǫ c2 ǫ 1 1 4π2 ln δ − 2Ap − 1 ≤ −32π2(cid:18)2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R) + − (32π2 + o(1))(cid:18)ZBr(0) ∆ϕ2dx − = −32π2(2ϕ(R) + Rϕ′(R)) − (32π2 + o(1))ZBr(0) ∆ϕ2dx + 32π2Ap − 4 ln R − 2 + o(1)(1 − ln δ) + O(δ ln δ) It was computed in [30] (see formula (5.22)) that 8π2(cid:19) − 8 − 4 ln 8π2 ln δ + Ap + O(δ ln δ)(cid:19) + o(1) 1 16π2 − R δ (4.14) Thus ZBR(0) ∆ϕ2dx = ZBR(0) ∆ϕ2dx = 1 16π2 ln(cid:18)1 + π √6 R2(cid:19) + 1 96π2 + O(R−2). 1 8π2 ln R + 1 16π2 ln π √6 + 1 96π2 + O(R−2). 24 It is easy to see that and ϕ(R) = − 1 8π2 ln R − 1 16π2 ln π √6 + O(R−2), Rϕ′(R) = − Plugging these estimates into (4.13), we get 1 8π2 + O(R−2). ln lim ǫ→0 λǫ ǫ ≤ c2 5 3 + 32π2Ap + ln π2 6 . Thus we have proved sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx ≤ Ω + π2 6 5 3 +32π2Ap. e (4.15) 5 Nonexistence of boundary bubbles 0 (Ω), uǫ → 0 strongly in H 1 The main result of this section is that the boundary bubbles do not occur. Suppose without loss of generality that cǫ = uǫ(xǫ) = maxx∈Ω uǫ → ∞ and xǫ → p ∈ ∂Ω. Note that we have uǫ ⇀ 0 weakly in H 2 0 (Ω), strongly in Ls(Ω) for any s > 1 and a.e., in Ω. Lemma 5.1. It holds ∆uǫ2dx ⇀ δp in the sense of measure. Proof. Note that RΩ ∆uǫ2dx = 1 + αRΩ uǫ2dx → 1. If the conclusion of this lemma is not true, then there is r > 0 small enough such that lim ǫ→0ZBr(p)∩Ω ∆uǫ2dx = η < 1. Choosing φ be a cut-off function on C 4(Ω) such that 0 ≤ φ ≤ 1, φ = 1 on Ω ∩ Br/2(p), φ = 0 on Ω \ Br(p), and ∇φ ≤ 4/r. Since uǫ ⇀ 0 weakly in H 2 0 (Ω) and uǫ → 0 strongly in H 1 0 (Ω), hence lim sup ǫ→0 ZBp(r)∩Ω ∆(φuǫ)2dx ≤ η. This together Adams inequality and (2.3) shows that φuǫ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) is weak solution of ∆2(φuǫ) = fǫ with fǫ is bounded in Ls(Ω) for some s > 1. Applying the standard regularity theory implies that φuǫ is bounded in C 3(Ω). In particular, cǫ is bounded which contradicts with our assumption (3.3). Lemma 5.1 proves that if there is a blow-up point on the boundary ∂Ω, then this is the unique blow-up point in Ω. We next prove a convergence for bǫuǫ. 25 Lemma 5.2. It holds bǫuǫ ⇀ 0 in H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2. Proof. By the same proof of Lemma 3.3, bǫuǫ is bounded in H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2. Hence there is F ∈ H 2,r 0 (Ω). Using the same method in the proof of Lemma 3.4, we get that F solves ∆2F = αF in Ω. Since F ∈ H 2,r 0 (Ω) for any 1 < r < 2, by the standard regularity theory, we have F ∈ C 3(Ω). However, α < λ1(Ω), we must have F ≡ 0. 0 (Ω) and bǫuǫ → H in H 1 0 (Ω) such that bǫuǫ ⇀ F in H 2,r Applying Pohozaev type identity (Lemma 3.5) to equation (2.3) on the domain Ω ∩ Br(p), we obtain by the same way in the estimates for σ2 that lim ǫ→0ZΩ eαǫu2 ǫ dx = Ω which contradicts with (2.5). Therefore, the blow-up point p can not lie on ∂Ω. 6 Proof of Theorem 1.1 Let cǫ, xǫ, p and Ap as before. We have shown in section §3 that if blow-up occurs, i.e., cǫ → ∞ then the blow-up point p lies in the interior of Ω, and the supremum sup 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ u∈H 2 e32π2u2 dx ≤ Ω + π2 6 5 3 +32π2Ap. e (6.1) We are in position to prove Theorem Proof of Theorem. If there exists a function u0 ∈ H 2 0 (Ω), kuk2,α=1ZΩ e32π2u2 ZΩ u∈H 2 0 (Ω) such that ku0k2,α = 1 and 0dx = sup e32π2u2 dx, then our proof is finished. Otherwise, the blow-up case occurs, hence Theorem follows from (6.1). We finish this section by give a proof of Proposition 1.2 which shows that our inequality (1.8) implies the one of Lu and Yang (1.7). Proof of Proposition 1.2. Let a1, a2, . . . , ak, k ≥ 1 be the number such that 0 ≤ a1 < λ1(Ω), 0 ≤ a2 ≤ λ1(Ω)a1, . . . , ak ≤ λ1(Ω)ak−1. It is easy to see that q(t) ≤ 1 + a1t + a1λ1(Ω)t2 + · · · + a1λ1(Ω)k−1tk. Denote a = a1/λ1(Ω) < 1 and p(t) = 1 + at + · · · atk then q(t) ≤ p(λ1(Ω)t). 26 We claim that there exist b ∈ (a, 1) such that , 1 p(t) ≤ 1 − bt ∀ t ∈ [0, 1]. (6.2) Indeed, this claim is equivalent to 1 − bt b (1 + t + · · · + tk−1) ≤ 1 a , ∀ t ∈ [0, 1]. Note that 1 − bt b (1 + t + · · · + tk−1) = 1 − b b (1 + t + · · · + tk−1) + 1 − tk ≤ k 1 − b b + 1. Since a < 1, hence we can choose b ∈ (a, 1) such that (6.2) holds. Denote α = bλ1(Ω) with b is given in (6.2). For any u ∈ H 2 then λ1(Ω)kuk2 2 ≤ 1. By our claim (6.2), we have 2) ≤ p(λ1(Ω)kuk2 q(kuk2 2) ≤ 1 1 − αkuk2 2 . 0 (Ω) such that k∆uk2 ≤ 1, Let v = u (1 − αkuk2 2)1/2 , then kvk2,α ≤ 1 and v2 ≥ q(kuk2 2)u2. This together (1.8) implies (1.7). 7 Proof of Theorem 1.3 In this section, we construct functions φǫ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) such that kφǫk2,α = 1 and e32π2φ2 ǫ dx > Ω + π2 6 5 3 +32π2Ap. e ZΩ This fact together (4.15) shows that the blow-up case can not occur, and hence proves our Theorem. Denote r = x − p. Recall that Gα(x, p) = − 1 8π2 ln r + Ap + ψ(x), ψ ∈ C 3(Ω), ψ(p) = 0. Following the construction in [30] (section §7), let us define a− 1 16π2 ln(cid:16)1+ π √6 c r2 ǫ2 (cid:17) + Ap+ψ c + b c r2, if r ≤ Rǫ, if r > Rǫ, (7.1) c + 1 c Gα φǫ =  where a, b, c are constants determined later such that φǫ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω) and kφǫk2,α = 1. 27 We choose R = − ln ǫ. To ensure that φǫ ∈ H 2 0 (Ω), we choose a, b, c such that lim r↑Rǫ φǫ = lim r↓Rǫ φǫ, The simple computation shows that lim r↑Rǫ∇φǫ = lim r↓Rǫ ∇φǫ. 16π2 ln(cid:16)1 + π√6 1 . R2(cid:17) − ln(Rǫ) 8π2 − bR2ǫ2, (7.2) 16π2R2ǫ2(cid:16)1+ π √6 R2(cid:17) a = −c2 + 1 b = −   16π2c2 (cid:18)ln 1 It was computed in [30] that k∆φǫk2 2 = π √6ǫ2 + 16π2Ap − 5 6(cid:19) + α c2kGαk2 2 + O(cid:18) 1 c2 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . We have ZΩ\BRrǫ (p) φ2 ǫ dx = 1 c2 ZΩ\BRrǫ (p) G2 αdx = 1 c2kGαk2 2 − 1 c2 ZBRrǫ (p) G2 αdx = 1 c2kGαk2 2 + O(ǫ4 ln6(ǫ)) c2 . On BRǫ(p) we have φǫ(x) = 1 16π2c(cid:18)ln(cid:18)1 + Ap + ψ π √6 − r2 ǫ2(cid:19)(cid:19) − R2(cid:19) − ln(cid:18)1 + R2ǫ2(cid:18)1 − π √6 R2ǫ2(cid:19) , r2 b c ln(Rǫ) 8π2c + hence c Combining all these estimates together, we get ZBRǫ(p) φ2 ǫ dx = 1 c2 O(ǫ4 ln6 ǫ). kφǫk2 2,α = 1 16π2c2(cid:18)ln π √6ǫ2 + 16π2Ap − 5 6(cid:19) + O(cid:18) 1 c2 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . Thus we can choose c such that kφǫk2,α = 1 for ǫ small enough. Moreover, we have We next compute RΩ e32π2φ2 ZΩ\BRǫ(p) c2 = 1 5 π √6ǫ2 + 16π2Ap − 16π2(cid:18)ln ǫ dx. On Ω \ BRǫ(p) we have ǫ dx ≥ZΩ\BRǫ(p)(cid:18)1 + e32π2φ2 32π2 c2 kGαk2 = Ω + 6(cid:19) + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . 32π2 α(cid:19) dx c2 G2 2 + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . 28 (7.3) (7.4) On BRǫ(p), using (7.2) and (7.3) we have φ2 ǫ ≥ c2 + 2(cid:18)a − = −c2 + 2(a + c2) − 1 16π2 ln(cid:18)1 + = − + 1 π √6ǫ2 16π2 ln 8π2 ln(cid:18)1 + − 1 ǫ2(cid:19) + 2Ap + 2ψ + 2br2 r2 1 r2 ǫ2(cid:19) + Ap + ψ + br2(cid:19) π √6 π √6 8π2 ln(cid:18)1 + 8π2 ln(cid:18)1 + π 5 √6 96π2 + ǫ2(cid:19) + Ap + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) , π √6 R2(cid:19) − r2 1 ln(Rǫ) 4π2 here we use the fact ψ(p) = 0, hence ψ = O(cid:0) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:1) on BRǫ(p) since R = − ln ǫ and also br2 = O(cid:0) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:1) on BRǫ(p). Hence, on BRǫ(p), we have R2(cid:19)4 ǫ ≥(cid:18) π2 ln2 ǫ(cid:19)(cid:19) (Rǫ)−8(cid:18)1 + π √6 ǫ2(cid:19)−4(cid:18)1 + O(cid:18) 1 r2 6ǫ4(cid:19)−1 3 +32π2Apǫ−4(cid:18)1 + 3 +32π2Ap(cid:18)1 + π √6 ǫ2(cid:19)−4(cid:18)1 + O(cid:18) 1 π √6 ln2 ǫ(cid:19)(cid:19) , e32π2φ2 π2 6 r2 = e e 5 5 since R = − ln ǫ. Integrating on BRǫ(p) and using a suitable change of variable, we get ZBRǫ(p) e32π2φ2 ǫ dx ≥(cid:18)1 + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:19)(cid:19) e 5 3 +32π2ApZBR(0) (1 + x2)−4dx. with R = π1/2R/61/4. Using polar coordinate we get ZBR(0) Finally, we have (1 + r2)4 dr 2 0 r r3 (1 + x2)−4dx = 2π2Z R = π2Z R = π2 1 6 − 6 (cid:18)1 + O(cid:18) 1 π2 = 1 0 2(1 + R (1 + r)4 dr ǫ dx ≥ Combining (7.4) together (7.5) we obtain e32π2φ2 ZBRǫ(p) π2 6 e 1 3(1 + R )3! 2 + 2 )2 ln4 ǫ(cid:19)(cid:19) . 3 +32π2Ap + O(cid:18) 1 5 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . e32π2φ2 ǫ dx ≥ Ω + π2 6 ZΩ 5 3 +32π2Ap + e 29 32π2 c2 kGαk2 2 + O(cid:18) 1 ln2 ǫ(cid:19) . (7.5) This together (7.3) imply that for ǫ is sufficiently small e32π2φ2 ǫ dx > Ω + π2 6 5 3 +32π2Ap, e ZΩ as our desire. Acknowledgments This work is supported by CIMI postdoctoral research fellowship. References [1] D. R. Adams, A sharp inequality of J. Moser for higher order derivatives, Ann. of Math., 128 (2) (1988) 385-398. [2] Adimurthi, and O. Druet, Blow-up analysis in dimension 2 and a sharp form of Trudinger -- Moser inequality, Comm. Partial Differ. Equ., 29 (2004) 295 -- 322. [3] T. Aubin, and Y. Y. Li, On the best Sobolev inequality, J. Math. Pures Appl., 78 (1999) 353 -- 387. [4] L. Carleson, and S. Y. A. Chang, On the existence of an extremal function for an inequality of J. Moser, Bull. Sci. Math., 110 (1986) 113-127. [5] W. S. Cohn, and G. Lu, Best constants for Moser-Trudinger inequalities on the Heisen- berg group, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 50 (2001) 1567-1591. [6] W. S. Cohn, and G. Lu, Sharp constants for Moser-Trudinger inequalities on spheres in complex space Cn, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 57 (2004) 1458-1493. [7] G. Csat´o, and P. Roy, Extremal functions for the singular Moser-Trudinger inequality in dimension two, Calc. Var., 54 (2015) 2341 -- 2366. [8] G. Csat´o, and P. Roye, Singular MoserTrudinger inequality on simply connected domain, Commun. in PDE, (2016) [9] A. Dall'Acqua, and G. Sweers, Estimates for Green function and Poisson kernels of higher order Dirichlet boundary value problems, J. Differ. Equa., 205 (2004) 466-487. [10] J. M. do ´O, and M. de Souza, A sharp Trudinger -- Moser type inequality in R2, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 366 (2014) 4513 -- 4549. [11] J. M. do ´O, and M. de Souza, A sharp inequality of Trudinger -- Moser type and extremal functions in H 1,n(Rn), J. Differ. Equ., 258 (2015) 4062 -- 4101. 30 [12] O. Druet, and H. Emmanuel, F. Robert, Blow-up theory for elliptic PDEs in Rie- mannian geometry, Math. Notes, vol. 45, Princeton University press, Princeton, NJ, 2004. [13] M. Flucher, Extremal functions for the Trudinger-Moser inequality in 2 dimensions Comment. Math. Helv., 67 (1992) 471 -- 497 [14] L. Fontana, Sharp borderline Sobolev inequalities on compact Riemannian manifolds, Comment. Math. Helv., 68 (1993) 415 -- 454. [15] L. Fontana, and C. Morpurgo, Adams inequalities on measure spaces, Adv. Maths., 226 (2011) 5066 -- 5119. [16] L. Fontana, and C. Morpurgo, Sharp Adams and Moser-Trudinger inequalities on Rn and other spaces of infinite measure, preprint, arXiv:1504.04678v3. [17] D. Karmakar, and K. Sandeep, Adams inequality on the hyperbolic space, J. Funct. Anal., 270 (2016) 1792-1817. [18] N. Lam, and G. Lu, Sharp Moser -- Trudinger inequality on the Heisenberg group at the critical case and applications, Adv. Math., 231 (2012) 3259 -- 3287. [19] N. Lam, and G. Lu, Sharp Adams type inequalities in Sobolev spaces W m, n m (Rn) for arbitrary integer m, J. Differential Equations, 253 (2012) 1143-1171. [20] N. Lam, and G. Lu, A new approach to sharp Moser -- Trudinger and Adams type inequalities: a rearrangement -- free argument, J. Differential Equations, 255 (213) 298- 325. [21] Y. Y. Li, and M. Zhu, Sharp Sobolev trace inequalities on Riemannian manifolds with boundary, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 50 (1997) 449 -- 487. [22] Y. Li, Moser -- Trudinger inequaity on compact Riemannian manifolds of dimension two, J. Partial Differ. Equa., 14 (2001) 163-192. [23] Y. Li, Extremal functions for the Moser-Trudinger inequalities on compact Rieman- nian manifolds, Sci. China Ser. A, 48 (2005) 618648. [24] Y. Li, and C. Ndiaye, Extremal functions for Moser -- Trudinger type inequality on compact closed 4−manifolds, J. Geom. Anal., 17 (2007) 669-699. [25] Y. Li, and B. Ruf, A sharp Trudinger-Moser type inequality for unbounded domains in Rn, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 57 (2008) 451 -- 480. [26] J. Li, Y. Li, and P. Liu, The Q−curvature on a 4−dimensional Riemannian manifold (M, g) with RM QdVg = 8π2, Adv. Math., 231 (2012) 2194 -- 2223. 31 [27] C. Lin, A classification of solutions of conformally invariant fourth order equation in R4, Comment. Math. Helv., 73 (1998) 203-231. [28] K. Lin, Extremal functions for Moser's inequality, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 348 (1996) 2663 -- 2671. [29] P. L. Lions, The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The limit case. II, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 1 (1985) 45-121. [30] G. Lu, and Y. Yang, Adams' inequalities for bi-Laplacian and extremal functions in dimension four, Adv. Maths., 220 (2009) 1135 -- 1170. [31] G. Lu, and Y. Yang, The sharp constant and extremal functions for Moser -- Trudinger inequalities involving Lp norms, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., 25 (2009) 963 -- 979. [32] J. Moser, A sharp form of an inequality by N. Trudinger, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 20 (1970/71) 1077-1092. [33] E. Mitidieri, A Rellich type identity and applications, Commun. Partial Differential Equations, 18 (1993) 125-151. [34] R. O'Neil, Convolution operators and L(p, q) spaces, Duke Math. J., 30 (1963) 129- 142. [35] S. I. Pohozaev, On the eigenfunctions of the equation ∆u + λf (u) = 0, (Russian), Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR, 165 (1965) 36-39. [36] F. Robert, and J. Wei, Asymptotic behavior of a forth order mean field equation with Dirichlet boundary condition, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 57 (2008) 2039 -- 2060. [37] B. Ruf, A sharp Trudinger-Moser type inequality for unbounded domains in R2, J. Funct. Anal., 219 (2005) 340 -- 367. [38] B. Ruf, and F. Sani, Sharp Adams-type inequalities in Rn, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 365 (2013) 645 -- 670. [39] G. Tian, and X. Zhu, A nonlinear inequality of Moser -- Trudinger type, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ., 10 (2000) 349-354. [40] C. Tintarev, Trudinger -- Moser inequality with remainder terms, J. Funct. Anal., 266 (2014) 55 -- 66. [41] N. S. Trudinger, On imbedding into Orlicz spaces and some applications, J. Math. Mech., 17 (1967) 473-483. [42] G. Wang, and D. Ye, A Hardy -- Moser -- Trudinger inequality, Adv. Math., 230 (212) 294 -- 320. 32 [43] J. Wei, and X. Xu, Classification of solutions of higher order conformally invariant equations, Math. Ann., 313 (1999) 207-228. [44] Y. Yang, Extremal functions for a sharp Moser -- Trudinger inequality, Internat. J. Math., 17 (2006) 331-338. [45] Y. Yang, A sharp form of Moser -- Trudinger inequality in high dimension, J. Funct. Anal., 239 (2006) 100 -- 126. [46] Y. Yang, A sharp form of Moser -- Trudinger inequality on a compact Riemannian surfaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 359 (2007) 5761 -- 5776. [47] Y. Yang, Extremal functions for Trudinger-Moser inequalities of Adimurthi-Druet type in dimension two, J. Differ. Equ., 258 (2015) 3161 -- 3193. [48] Y. Yang, and X. Zhu, Blow-up analysis concerning singular Trudinger -- Moser inequal- ities in dimension two, J. Funct. Anal., in press. [49] Y. Yang, and X. Zhu, Extremal functions for singular Trudinger -- Moser inequalities in the entire Euclidean space, preprint, arXiv:1612.08247v1. [50] V. I. Yudovic, Some estimates connected with integral operators and with solutions of elliptic equations, (Russian), Dokl. Akad. Nauk. SSSR, 138 (1961) 805-808. [51] J. Zhu, Improved Moser -- Trudinger inequality involving Lp norm in n dimensions, Adv. Nonlinear Study, 14 (2014) 273 -- 293. 33
1706.08957	2	1706	2019-08-11T20:31:10	Nonlinear Fokker-Planck equations with reaction as gradient flows of the free energy	[ "math.FA", "math.AP" ]	We interpret a class of nonlinear Fokker-Planck equations with reaction as gradient flows over the space of Radon measures equipped with the recently introduced Hellinger-Kantorovich distance. The driving entropy of the gradient flow is not assumed to be geodesically convex or semi-convex. We prove new generalized dissipation inequalities, which allow us to control the relative entropy by its production. We establish the entropic exponential convergence of the trajectories of the flow to the equilibrium. Along with other applications, this result has an ecological interpretation as a trend to the ideal free distribution for a class of fitness-driven models of population dynamics. Our existence theorem for weak solutions under mild assumptions on the nonlinearity is new even in the absence of the reaction term.	math.FA	math	NONLINEAR FOKKER-PLANCK EQUATIONS WITH REACTION AS GRADIENT FLOWS OF THE FREE ENERGY STANISLAV KONDRATYEV AND DMITRY VOROTNIKOV Abstract. We interpret a class of nonlinear Fokker-Planck equations with reaction as gra- dient flows over the space of Radon measures equipped with the recently introduced Hel- linger-Kantorovich distance. The driving entropy of the gradient flow is not assumed to be geodesically convex or semi-convex. We prove new generalized dissipation inequalities, which allow us to control the relative entropy by its production. We establish the entropic exponential convergence of the trajectories of the flow to the equilibrium. Along with other applications, this result has an ecological interpretation as a trend to the ideal free distri- bution for a class of fitness-driven models of population dynamics. Our existence theorem for weak solutions under mild assumptions on the nonlinearity is new even in the absence of the reaction term. Keywords: functional inequalities, optimal transport, Hellinger-Kantorovich distance, geodesic non-convexity MSC [] D, Q, Q, B . Introduction .. Setting. Let Ω be an open connected bounded domain in Rd with sufficiently smooth boundary and let ν be the outward unit normal along ∂Ω. We are interested in nonnega- tive solutions of ∂tu = − div(u∇f ) + f u, ∂f u ∂ν = 0, u = u0, (x, t) ∈ Ω × (0,∞), (x, t) ∈ ∂Ω × (0,∞), (x, t) ∈ Ω × 0. (.) (.) (.) Here u is the unknown function, f = f (x, u(x, t)) is a known nonlinear function of x and u, equation (.) is the no-flux boundary condition and the initial data u0 are nonnegative. We refer to Section . for the motivation and background.  uf , ufx ∈ C(Ω × [0,∞)) fu < 0, lim sup u→∞ lim inf u→+0 f (x, u) < 0 ∀x ∈ Ω, f (x, u) > 0 ∀x ∈ Ω, (ufx)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)u=0 f (x, u) + ufu(x, u) + ufxu(x, u) ≤ g(u) = 0. a. a. u > 0; g ∈ L1 loc[0,∞), When needed, we also assume that (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.) (.)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV When considering problem (.) -- (.), we always make the following assumptions con- cerning the function f : Ω × (0,∞) → R: f ∈ C2(Ω × (0,∞))∩ L1 loc(Ω × [0,∞)) either fx = 0 for large u or either fx = 0 for small u or lim u→∞ lim u→+0 f (x, u) = −∞ ∀x ∈ Ω f (x, u) = ∞ ∀x ∈ Ω Remark .. We make comfortable assumptions about the smoothness of f . We do not insist that f should be defined for u = 0 so as not to exclude the interesting cases such as f = −(logu + V (x)) (which corresponds to the linear Fokker-Planck equation, cf. [, ]) and f = uα − 1, −1 < α < 0, (the fast diffusion, cf. []). However, we assume in (.) that the functions uf and ufx admit continuous extensions to Ω × [0,∞). This ensures that the terms in (.) make sense. Moreover, we assume (.) to avoid certain complications with the entropy production to be defined below. Remark .. Assumption (.) is essential, it ensures the parabolicity of (.). The equa- tion may become degenerate or singular only if u = 0 or u is large. The latter does not bother us as we only consider bounded solutions in what follows. Remark .. Assumptions (.), (.) ensure the existence of a positive equilibrium, see below. Remark .. Estimate (.) ensures that the entropy and energy of the equation are well- defined and well-behaved. Note that at least some restrictions on the growth of fu as u → 0 are inevitable, as the related very fast diffusion equation is known to behave abnormally []. Remark .. Conditions (.) and (.) are convenient technical assumptions needed for L∞-bounds (hence for the existence theorem) and for controlling the energy for large u in the proof of Theorem .. However, they are not necessary everywhere, so we explicitely mention them when the need arises. Remark .. The results of the paper remain valid if Ω is the periodic box Td . FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  It follows from (.) -- (.) that for any x ∈ Ω there exists a unique m(x) > 0 such that f (x, m(x)) = 0. Clearly, m ∈ C2(Ω). It is a stationary solution of (.), (.). As we will see, all non-zero solutions of the problem converge to m. .. Energy and entropy. Now we will introduce the energy and entropy functionals for equation (.) as well as the notion of weak solution. Put Φ(x, u) = −Z u 0 ξfu(x, ξ) dξ, Ψ(x, u) =Z u 0 Φ(x, ξ) dξ. It is easy to see that Φ(x, 0) = Ψ(x, 0) = 0, Φu = −ufu, Φx = −Z u 0 ξfxu(x, ξ) dξ, Ψu = Φ. Observe that both Φ and Ψ are nonnegative and strictly increase with respect to u. Note that if u is a nonnegative function of x and possibly of t, an L∞-bound on u is translated into an L∞-bound on Φ(·, u(·)), i. e., the superposition operator associated with Φ is L∞-bounded. The same is true of Ψ. Let u be a classical solution of (.) -- (.). Equation (.) can be cast in the equivalent form where we write Φ for Φ(x, u(x, t)), etc. Multiplying by Φ(x, u(x, t)) and integrating over Ω, we obtain ∂tu = ∆Φ − div(Φx + ufx) + uf , (.) (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ dx +ZΩ uf Φ dx. (.) We call the functional ∂tZΩ Ψ dx = −ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx +ZΩ W (u) =ZΩ Ψ(x, u(x)) dx the energy of problem (.) -- (.) and equation (.), the energy identity. Thus, any classi- cal solution of (.) -- (.) satisfies the energy identity (.). For our purposes, the energy identity is useful because it allows us to control the inte- gral!QT ∇Φ2 dx dt. In particular, we can define the weak solution of (.) -- (.) in a class of functions u such that Φ(·, u(·)) ∈ L2(0, T ; H1(Ω)). It is easier to exploit this assumption in the case of equation (.). Thus, we define the weak solution as follows: Definition .. Let u0 ∈ L∞(Ω). A function u ∈ L∞(QT ) is called a weak solution of (.) -- (.) on [0, T ] if Φ(·, u(·)) ∈ L2(0, T ; H1(Ω)) and 0 ZΩ Z T (u∂tϕ + (−∇Φ + Φx + ufx)·∇ϕ + f uϕ) dx dt =ZΩ u0(x)ϕ(x, 0) dx (.)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV for any function ϕ ∈ C1(Ω× [0, T ]) such that ϕ(x, T ) = 0. A function u ∈ L∞loc([0,∞); L∞(Ω)) is called a weak solution of (.) -- (.) on [0,∞) if for any T > 0 it is a weak solution on [0, T ]. Now, let us address the entropy of the problem. Define E(x, u) = −Z u m(x) f (x, ξ) dξ. It follows from (.) that E is well-defined and continuous on Ω × [0,∞). As f decreases with respect to u and f (x, m(x)) = 0, it is clear that E ≥ 0 and E(x, u) = 0 if and only if u = m(x). The relative entropy of equation (.) is the functional E(u) =ZΩ Observe that it is well-defined at least for u ∈ L∞+ (Ω) as the superposition operator u 7→ E(·, u(·)) is bounded in the spaces L∞+ → L∞+ . A straightforward computation shows that for a positive classical solution of (.) -- (.) we have ∂tE(u) = −ZΩ u(f 2 +∇f 2) dx. E(x, u(x)) dx. (.) (.) Equation (.) is called the entropy dissipation identity and the integral on the right-hand side of (.) is called the entropy production. However, the termRΩ u∇f 2 dx may make no sense for vanishing or non-smooth u. In order to generalise the definition of the entropy production, we use the identity u∇f 2 = 1 u−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 (u > 0). Given a function u ∈ L∞+ (Ω) such that Φ(·, u(·)) ∈ H1(Ω), the right-hand side of the last identity is a nonnegative measurable function on [u > 0], so we can define the entropy production for such functions by the formula DE(u) =ZΩ uf 2 dx +Z[u>0] 1 u −∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx, where the second integral on the right-hand side may be infinite. Thus, we see that any positive classical solution of (.) -- (.) satisfies the entropy dissipation identity As usual, in the case of weak solutions we establish not the identities (.) and (.) but rather corresponding inequalities, viz. the energy inequality ∂tE(u) = −DE(u). ∂tW (u) ≤ZΩ(cid:16)−∇Φ2 + (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ + uf Φ(cid:17) dx and the entropy dissipation inequality ∂tE(u) ≤ −DE(u). (.) (.) (.) FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  For functions u ∈ L∞+ (Ω) such that Φ ∈ L2(0, T ; H1(Ω)) we understand (.) and (.) in the sense of measures, i. e., that for any smooth nonnegative compactly supported function χ : (0, T ) → R we respectively have −Z T 0 χ′(t)W (u) dt ≤"QT χ(t)(cid:16)−∇Φ2 + (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ + uf Φ(cid:17) dx dt, Z T 0 χ′(t)E(u) dt ≥Z T 0 χ(t)DE(u) dt. If (.) holds in the sense of measures, the derivative ∂tE(u) is a nonpositive distribution and hence a measure, while the entropy E(u) itself a. e. coincides with a non-increasing function. An important question is whether the entropy can be controlled by the entropy pro- duction, since this would imply the exponential stability of the equilibrium. It turns out that this is true provided that the L1-norm of u is bounded away from 0. Specifically, we have Theorem . (Entropy-entropy production inequality). Suppose that f satisfies (.) -- (.) as well as (.). Let U ⊂ L∞+ (Ω) be a set of functions such that for any u ∈ U , we have Φ(·, u(·)) ∈ H1(Ω) and (.) inf u∈U kukL1(Ω) > 0. Then there exists CU such that Theorem . is a consequence of a fairly general functional inequality established in E(u) ≤ CU DE(u) (u ∈ U). (.) Section . Theorem . (Existence of weak solutions). Suppose that f satisfies (.) -- (.) as well as (.) and (.). Then for any u0 ∈ L∞+ (Ω) there exists a nonnegative weak solution u ∈ L∞(Ω × (0,∞)) of problem (.) -- (.) enjoying the following properties: () (upper L∞-bound) kukL∞(Ω×(0,∞)) ≤ inf(ξ ≥ 0 : sup f (x, ξ) ≤ − ess sup x∈Ω x∈Ω f −(x, u0(x))) ; () u satisfies the energy inequality (.) in the sense of measures and () u satisfies the entropy dissipation inequality (.) in the sense of measures and ess lim sup t→+0 W (u(t)) ≤ W (u0); ess sup t>0 E(u(t)) ≤ E(u0); () (lower L1-bound) ku(t)kL1(Ω) ≥ k min(u0, m)kL1(Ω) a. a. t > 0. (.) (.) (.) (.)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV Remark .. Theorem ., mutatis mutandis, is also valid in the case of the pure Fokker- Planck equation (.). Even in this case, our conditions on the nonlinearity f are more relaxed than the ones available in the literature, see, e.g., [, , , , , , , ] and the references therein. Remark .. In the general case, uniqueness of solutions cannot be expected due to the non-Lipschitz reaction term. However, our weak solutions are unique provided the initial data is bounded away from zero, see Theorem .. Remark .. Under the hypotheses of Theorem ., the right-hand side of (.) is al- ways finite (see Remark .). Moreover, if u0 satisfies an estimate ku0kL∞(Ω) ≤ a, inequal- ity (.) provides an estimate kukL∞(Ω×(0,∞)) ≤ Ca. The next theorem shows that the solutions that we have constructed exponentially con- verge to m. Note that (.) is not needed for the long-time convergence. Theorem . (Convergence to equilibrium). Assume (.) and suppose that a weak so- lution u of (.) -- (.) with the initial data u0 . 0 satisfies the entropy dissipation inequal- ity (.), inequality (.), and the lower L1-bound (.). Then u exponentially converges to m in the sense of entropy: where γ > 0 can be chosen uniformly over initial data satisfying E(u(t)) ≤ E(u0)e−γt a. a. t > 0, with some c > 0. k min(u0, m)kL1(Ω) ≥ c Theorems ., ., and . are proved in Section .. .. Motivation and background. The nonlinear Fokker-Planck equation ∂tu = − div(u∇(f (x, u))) (.) (.) (.) is intended to express the behaviour of stochastic systems coming from various branches of physics, chemistry and biology, see [, , , ]. In order to take into account the creation and annihilation of mass, the general drift-diffusion-reaction equation (.) was suggested in []. In the considerations of [] (cf. also []), the crucial role is played by the free energy functional that up to an additive constant coincides with our relative entropy functional E from (.). We opt for this change of terminology (though for thermodynamists the free energy involves the (physical) entropy, the internal energy, and the temperature) because in mathematical analysis it is convenient to refer to the basic Lyapunov functional of a system as the entropy, cf. [, p. ]. On the other hand, equation (.) is a general nonlinear model for the spatial dynamics of a population that is tending to achieve the ideal free distribution [, ] (the distribu- tion that happens if everybody is free to choose its location) in a heterogeneous environ- ment. The dispersal strategy is determined by a local intrinsic characteristic of organisms called fitness (see, e.g., [, ]). The fitness manifests itself as a growth rate, and simul- taneously affects the dispersal as the species move along its gradient towards the most FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  favorable environment. In (.), u(x, t) is the density of organisms, and f (x, u) is the fit- ness. The equilibrium u(x) ≡ m(x) when the fitness is constantly zero corresponds to the ideal free distribution. The original model [, ] assumes a linear logistic fitness f = m(x)− u (.) but in general it can be any nonlinear function of the spatial variable and the density, cf. []. The assumptions (.), (.), (.) are natural as they simply mean that the fitness is decreasing with respect to the population density (as the resources are limited), being positive for very small densities and negative for very large densities. Our Theorem . indicates that the populations converge to the ideal free distribution with an exponential rate. The existence of weak solutions for the fitness-driven dispersal model (.) -- (.) with the logistic fitness (.) was shown in [], and the entropic exponential convergence to m was established in []. The same kind of results for cross-diffusion systems involving several interacting populations (with logistic fitnesses) can be found in []. Related two- species models were investigated in [, ], where one population uses the fitness-driven dispersal strategy and the other diffuses freely or does not move at all. A system of two interacting populations with a particular nonlinear fitness function has recently been con- sidered in [], which is the only existing mathematical treatment of a non-logistic fitness model that we are aware of. But perhaps our main motivation to study (.) is that it is a gradient flow of the entropy functional E with respect to the intriguing recently introduced distance on the space of Radon measures, which is related to the unbalanced optimal transport (i.e., failing to pre- serve the total transported mass), and that is referred to as the Hellinger-Kantorovich dis- tance or the Wasserstein-Fisher-Rao distance [, , , , ]. This distance endows the set of Radon measures with a formal (infinite dimensional) Riemannian metric h·,·i, and provides first- and second-order differential calculus [] in the spirit of Otto [, , ]. In particular, one can compute the metric gradients of the functionals of the form F (u) =ZΩ F(x, u(x)) dx by the formula gradF (u) = − div(cid:18)u∇ δF δu(cid:19) + u δF δu , (.) where δF δu = ∂uF(x, u) stands for the first variation with respect to u and ∇ = ∇x is the usual gradient in space. We refer to [] for further details and explanations. Since f = −∂uE, we can recast (.) as a gradient flow The entropy dissipation identity (.), which by the way was already known to Frank [], is then nothing but the archetypal property of gradient flows ∂tu = − gradE(u). (.) d dtE(u) = −hgradE(u), gradE(u)iu.  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV In this connection, we recall that for the metric gradient flows like (.), the geodesic convexity of the driving entropy functional (or at least semi-convexity, i.e., λ-convexity with a negative constant λ) makes a difference [, , , , ]. The presence of convex- ity allows one to apply minimizing movement schemes [, ] to construct solutions to the gradient flow. Moreover, λ-convexity with λ strictly positive enables the Bakry-Emery procedure that usually yields the exponential convergence of the relative entropy to zero. Minimizing movement schemes for Hellinger-Kantorovich gradient flows of geodesically convex functionals and for related reaction-diffusion equations were suggested in [, ]. Our entropy E is geodesically (−1/2)-convex with respect to the Hellinger-Kantorovich structure if f = 1 − uα, α > 0, but fails to be semi-convex for f = uα − 1, α < 0, and for f = − logu (the latter option corresponds to the interesting case of the Boltzmann entropy). The spatial heterogeneity further complicates the situation. The quadratic (lo- gistic) multicomponent entropy considered in [, ] is not even semi-convex. All this can be observed by computing the Hessian of the entropy, cf. [, Section .]; the non- convexity of the Boltzmann entropy with respect to the Hellinger-Kantorovich metric was also mentioned in [, , , ]. We refer to [] for a more detailed discussion of ex- amples of f and the corresponding geodesic non-convexity. However, Santambrogio [] emphasizes that the lack of geodesic convexity is not a universal obstacle for the study of gradient flows; our results in the current paper and in [, , , , , ] illustrate this idea. . Generalized dissipation inequalities .. Setting. Motivated by the expressions for the entropy and entropy production, we forget for a while problem (.) -- (.) and consider the integrals ZΩ E(x, u(x)) dx, (g(x, u(x)) + u∇xf (x, u(x))p) dx ZΩ (.) (.) on their own right. Here Ω a domain in Rd; p ≥ 1; the functions E, g : Ω × (0,∞) → [0,∞), f : Ω × (0,∞) → R are fixed, and u varies over a set U of functions Ω → (0,∞). Observe that the nonnega- tivity of E and g ensures the existence of the integrals (.) and (.), although they need not be finite. The functions f and E introduced in Section . are, of course, prototypes for the ones appearing in (.) and (.), but we assume no formal relationship between them. In particular, in this section we do not suppose that f satisfies (.) -- (.). We would like to know whether (.) can be controlled by (.) uniformly with respect to u ∈ U. In general, this is not the case, cf. a related discussion in []. However, we FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  show that under suitable assumptions on the functions E, f , and g, (.) does indeed control (.) provided that the set U of admissible u is separated from 0 in some sense. For simplicity, we concentrate on the regular case. Section . contains a discussion of possible generalisations. Theorem .. Let Ω be a bounded, connected, open domain in Rd admitting the relative isoperimetric inequality. Let p ≥ 1. Suppose that functions E, g ∈ C(Ω × (0,∞)) and f ∈ C1(Ω × (0,∞)) satisfy lim ε→0 E(x, u) < ∞; E ≥ 0, g ≥ 0; sup 0<u≤ε x∈Ω g(x, u) E(x, u) > 0 ∀ε > 0, inf u>ε x∈Ω E(x,u),0 inf 0<u≤ε x∈Ω lim ε→0 f (x, u) > lim ε→0 f (x, u). sup u>0 E(x,u)<ε (.) (.) (.) (.) Finally, suppose that a set U ⊂ C1(Ω) consisting of strictly positive functions contains no sequence {un} such that {E(·, un(·))} is bounded in L1(Ω) and {un} converges to 0 in measure. Then there exists a constant C = C(Ω, p, E, g, f , U) such that ZΩ E(x, u(x)) dx ≤ C ZΩ(cid:16)g(x, u(x)) + u(x)∇xf (x, u(x))p(cid:17) dx! (u ∈ U). (.) Remark .. The isoperimetric inequality for Ω reads P(A; Ω) ≥ cΩA d−1 d , A ⊂ Ω, A ≤ 1 2Ω, (.) where P(A; Ω) denotes the relative perimeter of a Lebesgue measurable set A of locally finite perimeter with respect to Ω, cf. [, Remark .], []. We recall that the relative perimeter is defined as where µA := ∇1A is the Gauss-Green measure associated with A. The support of µA is contained [] in the topological boundary of A. P(A; Ω) = µA(Ω), Remark .. If E ∈ C(Ω × R+), condition (.) is automatically true. If the set {(x, u) ∈ Ω × R+ : E(x, u) = 0} is compact, the right-hand side of (.) is simplified to maxE(x,u)=0 f (x, u) and likewise, if f ∈ C(Ω × R+), the left-hand side of (.) can be written as minx f (x, 0). As for (.), it is more tricky. In Section . we show that it always holds in a particular setting relevant for gradient flows (Theorem .). Remark .. The infimum in (.) depends on ε and may tend to zero as ε → 0, otherwise the claim would be trivial.  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV .. Strategy of the proof of Theorem .. Before starting the proof of Theorem ., we would like to informally outline the underlying ideas. For simplicity, we will opt for an argument by contradiction. Of course, a direct proof could be presented (as we have recently done in [] for a related inequality), and a quan- titative constant could be derived from it. However, this would be much more cumber- some, and the constant obtained in this way would anyway not be optimal. Any discussion of quantitative constants lies beyond the scope of this article. It easily follows from (.) that g controls E from above unless u is small. Moreover, we infer (Lemma .) that if the constant in (.) blows up, the sets where either u or E are small tend to grow and together occupy nearly all of Ω, while the 'transitional annulus' -- where neither is small -- collapses. At this point we must be prepared to face the situation where the integral (.) E dx g dx Z[u≪1] Z[u≪1] Z[E≪1] Z[u≫0,E≫0] g dx g dx is controlled neither by (because (.) is not applicable), nor by (because g may be small), nor by (because the 'annulus' is too small). This is where the term with the gradient comes into play. The crucial observation is that the total variation of f over the 'annulus' can be estimated from below. Actually, condition (.) gives a universal lower bound on the variation of f between the 'inner boundary' of the annulus (say, where u is small) and its 'outer boundary' (where E is small). All in all, the integral (.) is controlled by the area of the set [u ≪ 1] (due to (.)), which is controlled by the perimeter of this set (by the isoperimetric inequality), which is in turn controlled by the total variation of f over the 'annulus'. This eventually leads to a con- tradiction. Naturally, when this idea is implemented in Lemma . and the subsequent reasoning, we must relate the total variation and the integralRΩ u∇f p dx. Then we use the coarea formula and estimate the total variation of f by the perimeters of its superlevel sets. .. Proof of Theorem .. Here we prove Theorem .. We start with the following observations. FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Under the hypotheses of Theorem ., integral (.) is finite for u ∈ U whenever so is ZΩ g(x, u(x)) dx. Indeed, according to (.) we can choose ε > 0 such that E(x, u) < ∞. A := sup 0<u≤ε x∈Ω By (.), we have g(x, u) E(x, u) > 0 B := inf u>ε x∈Ω E(x,u),0 (possibly B = ∞). Then E(x, u) ≤ g(x, u)/B whenever u > ε, so E(x, u(x)) dx +Z[u>ε] BZΩ g(x, u(x)) dx < ∞, E(x, u(x)) dx =Z[u≤ε] ≤ AΩ + ZΩ 1 E(x, u(x)) dx as claimed. Assume that Theorem . is not true. Then there exists a sequence of functions {un} ⊂ U En dx, (.) Take sequences {εn} and {ξn} such that εn > 0, εn → 0, g(x, u) E(x, u) 0 < ξn ≤ inf u>εn x∈Ω (this is possible according to (.)), and ξn → 0. such that ZΩ (gn + un∇fnp) dx ≤ εnξnZΩ where En(x) = E(x, un(x)), fn(x) = f (x, un(x)), gn(x) = g(x, un(x)). Clearly, En, gn ∈ C(Ω) and fn ∈ C1(Ω). Moreover, it easily follows from (.) -- (.) that En(x) ≥ 0, gn(x) ≥ 0; En < ∞; lim n→∞ inf [un≤εn] and according to the choice of ξn, we have fn > lim ε→0 sup [un≤εn] lim n→∞ sup [En<ε] fn, gn ≥ ξnEn on [un > εn]. (.) (.) (.) (.)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV thus obtaining a contradiction. We want to show that the sequence {En} is bounded in L1(Ω) and un → 0 in measure, We use (.) to estimate 1 εnZΩ En dx − En dx − un∇fnp dx ≤ ξnZΩ ≤ ξnZΩ ≤ ξnZΩ = −ξn(ε−1 gn dx 1 1 εnZΩ εnZ[un>εn] εnZ[un>εn] ξn gn dx En dx En dx − n − 1)Z[un>εn] n − 1)Z[un>εn] εnZ un∇fnp dx ≤ ξn sup 1 [un≤εn] un∇fnp dx ≤ −ξn(ε−1 En dx + ξnZ[un≤εn] En dx + ξnZ[un≤εn] En[un ≤ εn]. Thus, we have 1 εnZΩ For large n, the first term on the right-hand side is negative, so we conclude that En dx. En dx. (.) From (.) we get Z[un>εn] En dx ≤ 1 ε−1 n − 1Z[un≤εn] En dx ≤ sup[un≤εn] En[un ≤ εn] ε−1 n − 1 and by (.), the last expression is bounded uniformly with respect to n. Hence the sequence {En} is bounded in L1(Ω). Lemma .. Given a > 0, lim n→∞[un > εn]∩ [En > a] = 0. (.) Proof. Using (.), we have: [un > εn]∩ [En > a] ≤ En dx 1 1 aZ[un>εn]∩[En>a] aZ[un>εn] ≤ ≤ [un ≤ εn] a(ε−1 n − 1) sup [un≤εn] En dx En → 0 (n → ∞), where we have taken into account (.), so (.) is proved. Lemma .. Given a > 0, for large n we have [En > a] ≤ 2[un ≤ εn]. (.) (.) (cid:3) (.) Proof. Using the estimate FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK obtained in the proof of Lemma ., we get [un > εn]∩ [En > a] ≤ [un ≤ εn] n − 1) [En > a] ≤ [un ≤ εn] +[un > εn]∩ [En > a] ≤ 1 + a(ε−1 En sup [un≤εn] sup[un≤εn] En a(ε−1 n − 1) ![un ≤ εn], and the lemma follows.  (cid:3) It follows from (.) that we can choose a > 0, α, and β, all independent of n, such that for large n we have sup [En≤a] fn ≤ α < β ≤ inf [un≤εn] fn. (.) We can assume that the limit exists. It follows from (.) that for large n the sets [un ≤ εn] and [En ≤ a] are disjoint, so in view of Lemma . we have lim n→∞[un ≤ εn] Thus, we actually face three logical possibilities: [un ≤ εn] +[En ≤ a] → Ω lim n→∞[un ≤ εn] = Ω; n→∞[un ≤ εn] = 0; lim lim n→∞[un ≤ εn] = µ0 ∈ (0,Ω); (.) (.) (.) (.) As εn → 0, (.) clearly implies un → 0 in measure, a contradiction. In what follows we show that (.) and (.) are in fact impossible. The following lemma is crucial. Lemma .. We have 1 1 [En > a]∩ [un > εn]p−1 Z β un∇fnpdx ≥ εnZΩ un∇fnp dx ≥Z[En>a]∩[un>εn]∇fnp dx α 1 εnZΩ P([fn > t], Ω) dt!p (.) (.) Proof. We have [En > a]∩ [un > εn]p−1 Z[En>a]∩[un>εn]∇fn dx!p 1 ≥ . (.)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV Using the coarea formula, we get: Z[En>a]∩[un>εn]∇fn dx =Z ∞ ≥Z β −∞ α P([fn > t]; [En > a]∩ [un > εn]) dx P([fn > t]; [En > a]∩ [un > εn]) dx Fix t ∈ (α, β). Evoking the definition of the relative perimeter, we have P([fn > t]; [En > a]∩ [un > εn]) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)µ[fn>t](cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ([En > a]∩ [un > εn]), where µ[fn>t] is the Gauss-Green measure. Obviously, we have supp µ[fn>t] ∩ Ω ⊂ ∂Ω[fn > t] ⊂ [fn = t] for any t ∈ (α, β). It follows from (.) that [fn = t] ⊂ [En > a]∩ [un > εn], so (.) (.) and continuing (.), we obtain supp µ[fn>t] ∩ Ω ⊂ [En > a]∩ [un > εn] P([fn > t]; [En > a]∩ [un > εn]) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)µ[fn>t](cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ([En > a]∩ [un > εn]) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)µ[fn>t](cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (Ω) = P([fn > t]; Ω). Combining this with (.) and (.), we obtain (.). (cid:3) Let us show that (.) is impossible. Assume that it holds. If at a point x we have fn(x) > t, t ∈ (α, β), (.) guarantees that En(x) > a. Hence, [fn > t] ⊂ [En > a]. It follows from (.) and (.) that [En ≤ a] → Ω, and thus [En > a] → 0, so we conclude that [fn > t] is uniformly in t small when n is large. For such large n we can apply the isoperimetric inequality: P([fn > t]; Ω) ≥ cΩ[fn > t] d−1 d . Now it follows from (.) that [un ≤ εn] ⊂ [fn > t], so we have Plugging this estimate into (.), we obtain P([fn > t]; Ω) ≥ cΩ[un ≤ εn] d−1 d . Estimating 1 εnZΩ un∇fnp dx ≥ c p Ω(β − α)p[un ≤ εn]p(d−1)/d [En > a]∩ [un > εn]p−1 . [En > a]∩ [un > εn] ≤ [En > a] ≤ 2[un ≤ εn] FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  by virtue of (.), we obtain 1 εnZΩ c un∇fnp dx ≥ where C is independent of n. p Ω(β − α)p[un ≤ εn]p(d−1)/d 2p−1[un ≤ εn]p−1 = C[un ≤ ε]1−p/d , Combining obtained estimate with (.), we get: C[un ≤ εn]1− p d ≤ ξn sup [un≤εn] En[un ≤ εn], whence C ≤ ξn sup [un≤εn] En[un ≤ εn] p d → 0 (n → ∞), as ξn → 0 and the suprema are bounded by (.). This contradicts the fact that the left-hand side is a positive constant independent of n. Thus, (.) is impossible. It remains to show that (.) is also impossible. Assume that it holds. It is easy to check that in this case we have P([fn > t]; Ω) ≥ p0 (α < t < β), where p0 > 0 is independent of t and n. Indeed, we have the inclusions (.) and as in our case the measure of the first and third terms goes to µ0 as n → ∞, we also have [un ≤ εn] ⊂ [fn > t] ⊂ [En > a] Now it suffices to apply the isoperimetric equality to [fn > t] if µ0 < 1/2 and to [fn ≤ t] otherwise. [fn > t] → µ0 uniformly in t ∈ (α, β). Plugging (.) into (.), we get un∇fnp dx ≥ Comparing this with (.), we obtain 1 εnZΩ 1 [un > εn]∩ [En > a]p−1 (β − α)pp p 0. 1 [un > εn]∩ [En > a]p−1 (β − α)pp p 0 ≤ ξn sup [un≤εn] En[un ≤ εn] → 0 (n → ∞). As n → ∞, the left-hand side remains bounded away from , while the right-hand side goes to , a contradiction. .. Generalisations and specialisations. We start with the remark that Theorem . can often be applied if U is a subset of a space X of functions defined on Ω provided that C1(Ω) is dense in X and the integrals (.) and (.) are continuous with respect to the topology of X. Indeed, if U1 = U ∩ C1(Ω) is dense in U, we apply the theorem to U1 and proceed by density to make sure that the same constant works for U as well. On the other hand, if U1 is not dense in U, we replace U with its small enlargement eU in the cone  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV density argument is used in the proof of Theorem . given in Section .. of nonnegative functions in X and apply the same reasoning to eU. A more complicated Another question is whether the constant C can be chosen uniformly with respect to (E, g, f ) if the latter triple is allowed to vary over a set X . It turns out that Theorem . can be easily extended to handle this case. Specifically, if the suprema and infima in (.) -- (.) are additionally taken over (E, g, f ) ∈ X , the constant C can be chosen independently of (E, g, f ). The proof remains essentially the same. Assuming the converse, we have violating sequences {(eEn, gn, fn)} ⊂ X and {un} ⊂ U such that (.) holds with En(x) = En(x, un(x)), fn(x) = fn(x, un(x)), gn(x) = gn(x, un(x)). Moreover, the functions En, gn, and fn satisfy (.) -- (.). The rest of the proof can be reused verbatim. It should also be noted that the bare u on the right-hand side of (.) can be replaced by a nonnegative function v(x, u(x)). Of course, in this case it no longer makes sense to require that U should consist exclusively of positive functions. The separation from 0 should be taken in the sense that no sequence {v(·, un(·))}, where un ∈ U and the sequence {En(·, un(·))} is bounded in L1(Ω), converges to 0 in measure. However, if v is, for exam- ple, an increasing function vanishing at 0, this new condition is clearly equivalent to the original one. Again, the proof remains essentially unchanged, the sets [un > εn] and [un ≤ εn] being Summarising, we have the following strengthened version of Theorem .: replaced by [vn > εn] and [vn ≤ εn], respectively (here vn(x) = v(x, un(x))). Theorem .. Let Ω be a bounded, connected, open domain in Rd admitting the relative isoperimetric inequality. Let p ≥ 1 and I be an interval (possibly unbounded). Let X = {(E, g, f , v)} be a set of tuples such that E, g, v ∈ C(Ω × I), f ∈ C1(Ω × I), and E ≥ 0, g ≥ 0, v ≥ 0 ∀(E, g, f , v) ∈ X ; inf( g(x, u) E(x, u) lim ε→0 sup{E(x, u) : (E, f , g, v) ∈ X , (x, u) ∈ Ω × I, v(x, u) ≤ ε} < ∞ : (E, f , g, v) ∈ X , (x, u) ∈ Ω × I, E(x, u) , 0, v(x, u) > ε) > 0 ∀ε > 0 (.) (.) (.) (.) lim ε→0 > lim ε→0 inf{f (x, u) : (E, f , g, v) ∈ X , (x, u) ∈ Ω × I, v(x, u) ≤ ε} sup{f (x, u) : (E, f , g, v) ∈ X , (x, u) ∈ Ω × I, E(x, u) ≤ ε} Finally, suppose that a set U ⊂ C1(Ω; I) satisfies the following requirement: for any sequences {(En, gn, fn, vn)} ⊂ X} and {un} ⊂ U such that the sequence {En(·, un(·))} is bounded in L1(Ω), the sequence {vn(·, un(·))} does not converge to 0 in measure. Then there exists a constant C FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  depending only on Ω, p, U and X such that ZΩ E(x, u(x)) dx ≤ C ZΩ(cid:16)g(x, u(x)) + v(x, u(x))∇xf (x, u(x))p(cid:17) dx! ((E, g, f , v) ∈ X , u ∈ U). The proof is left to the reader. Another option would be to allow for nonnegative instead of strictly positive u in The- orem .. In this case one assumes that E ∈ C(Ω × [0,∞)) and that the supremum in (.) is taken over 0 ≤ u ≤ ε and x ∈ Ω. The resulting inequality differs from (.) in that the integral on the right-hand side is taken over [u > 0]. The only modification needed in the proof is that whenever g or u∇f p are integrated over Ω, the domain of integration should be changed to [u > 0]. Note that this does not fit into the previous theorem because f can be undefined on [u = 0]. We conclude by showing that Theorem . is applicable in a situation relevant for gra- dient flows. In the subsequent formulation, fu and Eu denote the derivatives of the func- tions f and E, respectively, with respect to their second argument. Theorem .. Suppose that functions E ∈ C(Ω × [0,∞)), f ∈ C1(Ω × (0,∞)), and m ∈ C(Ω) satisfy E(x, u) ≥ 0, (x, u) ∈ Ω × [0,∞); m(x) > 0, E(x, m(x)) = 0, x ∈ Ω; x ∈ Ω; Eu(x, u) = −f (x, u), (x, u) ∈ Ω × (0,∞); (.) (.) (.) (.) fu(x, u) < 0, (.) and let U ⊂ C1(Ω) be a set of strictly positive functions having the property that no sequence {un} ⊂ U such that {E(·, un(·))} is bounded in L1(Ω), converges to 0 in measure. Finally, let σ ∈ (0, minΩ m) and (x, u) ∈ Ω × (0,∞) ξ 2 vσ (ξ) = max(ξ, σ) . Then we have ZΩ E(x, u(x)) dx ≤ CZΩ where C > 0 depends on Ω, f , σ, and U . vδ(u(x))(cid:16)(f (x, u(x)))2 +∇xf (x, u(x))2(cid:17) dx (u ∈ U), (.) Remark .. Observe that under the hypotheses of Theorem ., the functions E and m are uniquely determined by f . Indeed, if x ∈ Ω is fixed, E(x, u) as a function of u attains its minimum at m(x) > 0, so Eu(x, m(x)) = 0, i. e., f (x, m(x)) = 0, according to (.). This uniquely defines m(x), as it follows from (.) that f (x, u) strictly decreases with respect to u. Now, E(x, u) is the antiderivative of −f (x, u) with respect to u vanishing at m(x).  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV Proof. We check the hypotheses of Theorem . with I = (0,∞), p = 2, g(x, u) = vσ (u)(f (x, u))2, and the set X consisting of the single tuple (E, g, f , vσ ). Clearly, we have (.), while (.) -- (.) are equivalent to (.) -- (.). Recalling Remark ., we see that (.) holds. Let us check (.). Fix x ∈ Ω. The function E(x, u) is strictly convex in u and attains its zero minimum only at u = m(x). As f (x, m(x)) = 0, we see that On the other hand, as f decreases with respect to u, we have lim ε→0 sup E<ε f = max E=0 f = 0. lim ε→0 inf 0<u≤ε x∈Ω so (.) indeed holds. f (x, u) ≥ inf x∈Ω f (x, σ) = inf x∈ΩZ m(x) σ ≥ min σ≤u≤m(x) x∈Ω (−fu(x, u)) du (−fu(x, u)) min x∈Ω (m(x)− σ) > 0, It remains to check (.). Without loss of generality, assume that ε > 0 is such that ε < min x∈Ω 1 2 ε < min x∈Ω (−2m(x)fu(x, m(x))), (−fu(x, m(x))). (.) (.) By Cauchy's mean value theorem, for any x ∈ Ω, u > σ, u , m(x), we have g(x, u) E(x, u) = g(x, u)− g(x, m(x)) E(x, u)− E(x, m(x)) = gu(x, ξx,u ) Eu(x, ξx,u ) where ξx,u is some point between u and m(x). = −f (x, ξx,u )− 2ξx,ufu(x, ξx,u ), (.) By uniform continuity, there exists δ ∈ (0, minΩ m− σ) such that ξ − m(x) < δ implies − f (x, ξ)− 2ξfu(x, ξ) + 2m(x)fu(x, m(x)) < ε, fu(x, ξ)− fu(x, m(x)) < ε. Then from (.) and (.) we see that Further, using (.) and (.), we have ξ − m(x) < δ ⇒ −f (x, ξ)− 2ξfu(x, ξ) > ε. −f (x, m(x) + δ) =Z m(x)+δ (−fu(x, u) du) ≥ εδ, m(x) (.) (.) (.) FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK whence, recalling that fu is negative and f is decreasing, we conclude ξ ≥ m(x) + δ ⇒ −f (x, ξ)− 2ξfu(x, ξ) > εδ.  (.) Now, if u−m(x) < δ, the point ξx,u also satisfies ξ −m(x) < δ, so we use (.) to conclude from (.) that g(x, u) E(x, u) > ε. (.) If u ≥ m(x) + δ, then either m(x) < ξx,u < m(x) + δ and we again obtain (.), or ξx,u ≥ m(x) + δ and then we use (.) to get g(x, u) E(x, u) > εδ. g(x, u) E(x, u) ≥ min g(x, u) E(x, u) min ε≤u≤m(x)−δ x∈Ω > 0, , ε, εδ Thus, inf u>ε x∈Ω E(x,u),0 since the function g/E is continuous and positive on the compact set {(x, u) : x ∈ Ω, ε ≤ u ≤ m(x)− δ}. We have showed that (.) holds. Thus, the hypotheses of Theorem . are fulfilled and the inequality follows. (cid:3) .. Positive classical solutions. Let . Technicalities θ(s) = 1 if s > 0, 0 if s ≤ 0 be the Heaviside step function. Lemma .. If nonnegative u, u ∈ C∞(Ω) satisfy the no-flux boundary condition (.), then (.) θ(u − u) div(u∇f − u∇ f ) dx ≥ 0, ZΩ where f and f stand for f (x, u(x)) and f (x, u(x)), respectively. Proof. Without loss of generality, the functions u and u are defined and smooth on Rd. Consider the set Υ := [u− u > 0]. First let us assume that 0 is a regular value of the function u − u, then the boundary of Υ is smooth. Employing de Giorgi's Gauss-Green formula  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV [, Theorem .] and the formula for the Gauss-Green measure of an intersection [, Theorem .], we compute ZΩ θ(u − u) div(u∇f − u∇ f ) dx =ZΥ∩Ω =Z∂∗(Υ∩Ω) div(u∇f − u∇ f ) dx (u∇f − u∇ f )· νΥ∩Ω dHd−1 =Z∂Υ∩Ω +ZΥ∩∂Ω (u∇f − u∇ f )· νΩ dHd−1 +Z[νΥ=νΩ ] (u∇f − u∇ f )· νΥ dHd−1 (u∇f − u∇ f )· νΩ dHd−1, where νΥ∩Ω is the measure-theoretic outward unit normal vector along the reduced bound- ary ∂∗(Υ∩ Ω) of the intersection []. Due to the no-flux boundary condition, the last two integrals vanish. On ∂Υ ∩ Ω, we have u = u and consequently, f = f . Thus, we can write ZΩ θ(u − u) div(u∇f − u∇ f ) dx =Z∂Υ∩Ω u∇(f − f )· νΥ dHd−1. (.) Due to the monotonicity of f , we have Υ = [f − f < 0]. We see then that whenever ∇(f − f ) , 0 on ∂Υ, ∇(f − f ) is an outward normal vector along ∂Υ. Thus, ∇(f − f ) · νΥ ≥ 0 and In the general case, take a decreasing sequence εn → 0 such that 0 is a regular value of equality (.) gives (.). u − u − εn. Set By the above, we have un = u + εn, fn = f (x, un(x)). ZΩ θ(u − un) div(u∇f − un∇ fn) dx ≥ 0. (.) (cid:3) As θ is left-continuous, we have θ(u − un) → θ(u − u) pointwise in Ω; moreover, it is clear that Passing to the limit in (.), we obtain (.). fn → f in C2(Ω). Lemma . (L1-contraction for positive classical solutions). Let u and u be classical solu- tions of (.) -- (.) on [0, T ] with different initial data. Suppose that u and u satisfy 1 κ with some κ > 0 and let Lκ > 0 be such that κ ≤ u ≤ , κ ≤ u ≤ 1 κ in QT u1f (x, u1)− u2f (x, u2) ≤ Lκu1 − u2 x ∈ Ω, ∀u1, u2 ∈(cid:18)κ, Then for a. a. t > 0, ∂tZΩ (u − u)+ dx ≤ LκZΩ (u − u)+ dx. 1 κ(cid:19) . (.) (.) FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Proof. We have: ∂tZΩ (u − u)+ dx =ZΩ = −ZΩ +ZΩ θ(u − u)(∂tu − ∂t u) dx θ(u − u) div(u∇f − u∇ f ) dx θ(u − u)(uf − u f ) dx =: −I1 + I2, where f and f stand for f (x, u(x, t)) and f (x, u(x, t)), respectively. By Lemma ., we have I1 ≥ 0. To estimate I2, we use (.) and the observation that the integrand vanishes where u − u < 0, thus obtaining I2 ≤ LκZΩ (u − u)+ dx. Inequality (.) follows. For c ∈ R, define uc ∈ C2(Ω) by f (x, uc(x)) = c. (cid:3) (.) As f is monotonous in u, we see that the function uc is unique, but it does not need to exist for a given c. Note that u0 = m. Remark .. There is a simple formula for the L∞-norm of uc: kuckL∞(Ω) = inf(ξ ≥ 0 : sup f (x, ξ) ≤ c). x∈Ω It follows from the fact that due to the monotonicity of f , the inequality ξ ≥ kuckL∞(Ω) or, equivalently, ξ ≥ uc(x) for all x ∈ Ω, holds if and only if f (x, ξ) ≤ f (x, uc(x)) ≡ c for all x ∈ Ω, i. e., when (.) (.) Remark .. If (.) holds, for any u ∈ L∞+ (Ω) the function uc with f (x, ξ) ≤ c. sup x∈Ω c = − ess sup x∈Ω f −(x, u(x)) is well-defined and u ≤ uc a. e. in Ω. Indeed, if the second alternative in (.) holds, for any x ∈ Ω, the function f (x, ξ) assumes all the values in the interval (−∞, 0] as ξ varies over [m(x),∞); in particular, f (x, ξ) attains the value c. If, on the other hand, the first alternative in (.) holds, take ξ1 ≥ kukL∞ such that c1 := f (x, ξ1) is independent of x and negative. Clearly, for any fixed x ∈ Ω, the function f (x, ξ) takes all the values in the interval [c1, 0] as ξ varies over [m(x), ξ1]. Now it suffices to observe that due to the monotonicity of f , we have c ∈ [c1, 0]. One can prove in the same way that if (.) holds, for any function u essentially bounded away from 0 on Ω, there exists uc such that u ≥ uc a. e. in Ω, and c ≥ 0.  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV Remark .. It follows from Remarks . and . that if (.) holds, the right-hand side of (.) is finite for any u ∈ L∞+ (Ω). Lemma . (Restricted L1-contraction). Let u be a classical solution of (.) -- (.) on [0,∞). Then for c ≤ 0 we have ZΩ and likewise, for c ≥ 0 we have ZΩ (u − uc)+ dx ≤ZΩ (u − uc)− dx ≤ZΩ (u0 − uc)+ dx, t > 0 (u0 − uc)− dx, t > 0 (.) (.) provided that uc exists. Proof. Let us prove (.) for c ≤ 0. Computing the derivative of the left-hand side, for a. a. t > 0 we get ∂tZΩ (u − uc)+ dx =ZΩ = −ZΩ +ZΩ θ(u − uc)∂tu dx θ(u − uc) div(u∇f ) dx θ(u − uc)uf dx =: −I1 + I2. As ∇f (x, uc(x)) ≡ 0, we can use Lemma . to get I1 ≥ 0. Now, the integrand of I2 can only be non-zero where u > uc, in which case f ≤ c ≤ 0 due to the monotonicity of f ; consequently, I2 ≤ 0. Thus, we have ∂tZΩ (u − uc)+ dx ≤ 0 and (.) follows. Inequality (.) is proved in much the same way. Lemma .. Suppose that f satisfies (.) and (.). Then for any smooth u0 : Ω → (0,∞) satisfying the non-flux boundary condition, problem (.) -- (.) has a classical solution. (cid:3) Proof. Equation (.) can be cast in the form ∂tu = −ufu∆u −∇u · (fx + fu∇u)− u(fxx + 2fxu ·∇u + fuu∇u2 − f ). If we show that a classical solution is a priori bounded and stays away from , we can ignore the fact that the coefficient −ufu can be degenerate or singular at u = 0,∞ and infer the existence of the solution from the classical theory of quasilinear parabolic equations. Indeed, according to Remark ., we can find uc1 and uc2 such that c2 ≤ 0 ≤ c1 and Then it follows from Lemma . that uc1(x) ≤ u0(x) ≤ uc2(x) (x ∈ Ω). providing the required bounds. uc1(x) ≤ u(x, t) ≤ uc2(x, t) (x, t) ∈ Ω × (0,∞), (cid:3) FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  .. Positive initial data. If the initial data (.) is bounded away from 0, we approxi- mate it with smooth functions and prove the existence and uniqueness of weak solutions to (.) -- (.) stated in Theorem . below. Lemma .. Suppose that u ∈ L∞+ (QT ) satisfies the energy inequality (.) in the sense of measures; then kW (u)kL∞(0,T ) ≤ ess lim sup k∇Φ(·, u(·))kL2(QT ) ≤ 2(ess lim sup t→+0 W (u(t)) + CT , t→+0 W (u(t)) + CT ), where C > 0 is determined by an upper bound on kukL∞(Ω). Proof. The function t 7→ W (u(t))−Z t 0 −ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx +ZΩ (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ dx +ZΩ (.) (.) uf Φ dx! dt has a non-positive derivative in the sense of measures, so it a. e. coincides with a non- increasing function. In other words, for a. a. t0, t1 ∈ (0, T ), t0 < t1, we have t0 −ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx +ZΩ uf Φ dx! dt ≤ 0. (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ dx +ZΩ W (u(t1))−W (u(t0))−Z t1 An upper bound on kukL∞(QT ) defines essential upper bounds on uf , Φ = Φ(x, u(x, t)), Φx, and ufx, so for a. a. t ∈ (t0, t1) we can estimate (Φx + ufx)·∇Φ dx +ZΩ ZΩ uf Φ dx 1 2ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx + 1 2ZΩ Φx + ufx2 dx +ZΩ ≤ uf Φ dx 1 ≤ 2Z t1 t0 ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx dt ≤ W (u(t0)) + C(t1 − t0). W (u(t1)) + 2Z t1 0 ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx dt ≤ ess lim sup 1 t→+0 W (u(t)) + CT , W (u(t1)) + 1 2ZΩ ∇Φ2 dx + C, whence Passing to the essential upper limit as t0 → 0 and estimating t1 − t0 ≤ T , we obtain whence (.) and (.) follow. (cid:3) Theorem . (Solvability for positive data). Suppose that f satisfies (.) -- (.) as well as (.) and (.). Then for any u0 ∈ L∞+ such that κ ≤ u0 ≤ 1 κ a. e. in Ω  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV with some constant κ > 0, there exists a unique weak solution u ∈ L∞+ (Ω × [0,∞))∩ C([0,∞); L1(Ω)) satisfying the following properties: i) the upper bound (.) and lower bound (.); ii) the energy and entropy dissipation inequalities as well as (.) and (.); iii) the restricted con- traction (u − uc)+ dx ≤ZΩ ZΩ ZΩ (u − uc)− dx ≤ZΩ (u0 − uc)+ dx (u0 − uc)− dx (c ≤ 0), (c ≥ 0) (.) (.) whenever uc is defined; iv) if u is another such solution with the initial data u0, the L1- contraction holds: k(u(t)− u(t))+kL1(Ω) ≤ eLκtk(u0 − u0)+kL1(Ω), (.) where Lκ is defined by (.). Proof. Let {u0 tion such that n} be a sequence of smooth functions satisfying the no-flux boundary condi- and κ ≤ u0 n(x) ≤ 1 κ in Ω u0 n → u0 in L1(Ω) and a. e. in Ω. (.) (.) Let un be the classical solution of (.) -- (.) on [0,∞) with the initial data u0 T > 0, it follows from Lemma . that n. For any kun − umkC([0,T ];L1(Ω)) ≤ eLκTku0 n − u0 mkL1, so {un} is a Cauchy sequence in C([0, T ]; L1(Ω)). As T is arbitrary, we see that {un} con- verges in C([0,∞); L1(Ω)) to some function u. We claim that it is the sought-for solution. By Remark ., there exists uc (c ≤ 0) such that uc ≥ 1/κ; then uc dominates the initial data u0 n and thus, the solutions un as well, which follows from Lemma .. Consequently, the sequence {un} is bounded in L∞(Ω × (0,∞)), so it converges to u weakly* in this space, whence u ∈ L∞(Ω × (0,∞)). Put fn = f (x, un(x, t)), Φn = Φ(x, un(x, t)), Ψn = Ψ(x, un(x, t)), fxn = fx(x, un(x, t)), Φxn = Φx(x, un(x, t)), En = E(x, un(x, t)). FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Fix T > 0. As the sequence {un} is bounded in L∞(QT ), so are the sequences {unfn}, {unfxn}, {Φn}, {Φxn}, {Ψn}, and {En}. Thus, there is no loss of generality in assuming a. e. in QT , strongly in any Lp(QT ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, weakly* in L∞(QT ), and in the sense of distributions, (.) un → u unfn → uf unfxn → ufx Φn → Φ Φxn → Φx Ψn → Ψ En → E  where we write Φ for Φ(·, u(·)), etc. It follows from (.) that ∇Φn → ∇Φ in the sense of distributions. The approximate solutions satisfy the energy inequality and (.) while their initial energy is bounded, so we see from (.) that the sequence ∇Φn is bounded in L2(QT ). Consequently, Φ ∈ L2(0, T ; H1(Ω)) and ∇Φn → ∇Φ weakly in L2(QT ). (.) Let us check that u is a weak solution of (.) -- (.) on [0, T ]. Take an admissible test function ϕ. Writing the weak setting for the approximate solution, we have 0 ZΩ Z T (un∂tϕ + (−∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn)·∇ϕ + fnunϕ) dx dt =ZΩ u0 n(x)ϕ(x, 0) dx. (.) It follows from (.), (.), and (.) that we can pass to the limit in (.) and ob- tain (.) for u. Thus, u is indeed a weak solution. Let us show that u satisfies the energy inequality on [0, T ] in the sense of measures. Taking a smooth nonnegative test function ϕ ∈ C∞ vanishing outside of [0, T ], we write the energy inequality in the sense of measures for the approximate solutions: −"QT Ψnϕ′(t) dx dt ≤ −"QT ∇Φn2ϕ(t) dx dt +"QT ϕ(t)(Φxn + unfxn)·∇Φn dx dt +"QT unfnΦnϕ(t) dxcdt Convergences (.) ensure that we can pass to the limit in all the terms but for the first one on the right-hand side. As for the latter, it follows from (.) that √ϕ∇Φn → √ϕ∇Φ weakly in L2(QT ), whence "QT ϕ∇Φ2 dx dt ≤ lim inf n→∞ "QT ϕ∇Φn2 dx dt, and the energy inequality follows. Let us check (.). The approximate solutions satisfy ess lim sup t→+0 W (un(t)) ≤ W (u0 n)  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV so by virtue of (.) we obtain It follows from (.) and (.) that ess sup t∈(0,ε) W (un(t)) ≤ W (u0 n) + Cε. W (un) → W (u) weakly* in L∞(0, ε), W (u0 n) → W (u0), so we get ess sup t∈(0,ε) W (u(t)) ≤ lim inf n→∞ n→∞W (u0 ≤ lim = W (u0) + Cε. ess sup t∈(0,ε) W (un(t)) n) + Cε Now sending ε → 0 we recover (.). Let us show that u satisfies the entropy dissipation inequality on [0, T ] in the sense of measures. Let ϕ ∈ C∞ be a smooth nonnegative test function vanishing outside of [0, T ]. The approximate solutions satisfy the entropy dissipation inequality in the sense of measures, so we have −"QT Enϕ′(t) dx dt ≤ −"QT ϕ(t)unf 2 n dx dt −"un>0 ϕ(t) un −∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn2 dx dt. Consequently, for any δ > 0 we have −"QT Enϕ′(t) dx dt ≤ −"QT ϕ(t) max(un, δ) (unfn)2 dx dt −"QT ϕ(t) max(un, δ)−∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn2 dx dt. (.) Observe that ϕ(t) max(un, δ) → ϕ(t) max(u, δ) a. e. in QT , strongly in any Lp, 1 ≤ p < ∞, and weakly* in L∞(QT ), vn := −∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn → −∇Φ + Φx + ufx weakly in L2(Ω) (.) (.) We claim that "QT ϕ(t) max(u, δ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx dt n→∞ "QT ≤ lim inf ϕ(t) max(un, δ)−∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn2 dx dt. (.) FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Then, taking into account (.), we can pass to the limit in (.) obtaining −"QT Eϕ′(t) dx dt ≤ −"QT ϕ(t) max(u, δ) (uf )2 dx dt max(u, δ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx dt. On the set {(x, t) ∈ QT : u(x, t) = 0} we have ufx = 0 (by virtue of (.)), Φx = 0 and Φ = 0, whence also ∇Φ = 0 a. e. on this set. Thus, we can write −"QT Eϕ′(t) dx dt ≤ −"QT (uf )2 dx dt max(u, δ) ϕ(t) ϕ(t) −"QT −"u>0 ϕ(t) max(u, δ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx dt To prove the technical claim (.), we use a variant of the Banach-Alaoglu theorem in Letting δ → 0, by Beppo Levi's theorem we obtain the energy inequality. varying L2(dµn) spaces: Lemma .. Let O ⊂ RN be an open set, µn a sequence of finite non-negative Radon measures narrowly converging to µ, and vn a sequence of vector fields on O. If then there exists v ∈ L2(O, dµ) such that, up to extraction of some subsequence, ∀ ζ ∈ C∞c (O) : and kvnkL2(O,dµn) ≤ C, lim n→∞ZO vn · ζ dµn =ZO n→∞ kvnkL2(O,dµn). kvkL2(O,dµ) ≤ lim inf v · ζ dµ (.) (.) ϕ(t) The proof of this fact by optimal transport techniques can be found in []; this lemma also follows from a variant of the Banach-Alaoglu theorem [, Proposition .]. We will apply this lemma with O = QT , vn from (.), and the sequence of measures dµn(t, x) := max(un,δ) dx dt, which converges narrowly to dµ(t, x) = ϕ(t) max(u,δ) dx dt due to the strong con- vergence (.). Extracting a subsequence if needed, we see that there is a vector-field v ∈ L2(O, dµ) verifying (.) and (.). On the other hand, by (.) and (.), ϕ(t) vn max(un, δ) → (−∇Φ + Φx + ufx) ϕ(t) max(u, δ) weakly in L1(QT ). Evoking (.), we find that ZO v · ζ dµ =ZO (−∇Φ + Φx + ufx)· ζ dµ for all test functions ζ. By density, we conclude that v = −∇Φ + Φx + ufx in L2(O, dµ), and (.) follows from (.).  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV Inequality (.) is proved in the same way as (.) given that it holds for the approx- imate solutions. Inequalities (.) -- (.) follow from correspondent inequalities for approximate so- lutions (Lemmas . and .), as we obviously have (un(t)− un(t))+ → (u(t)− u(t))+) in L1(Ω), ∀t ≥ 0, (un(t)− uc)± → (u(t)− uc)± where the approximations un are constructed in the same way as un. Contraction (.) implies the uniqueness of u. To obtain the upper bound (.), we define c ≤ 0 by (.) and thus have u0 ≤ uc on Ω, whence in view of contraction (.), u(x, t) ≤ uc(x), (x, t) ∈ Ω × (0,∞). Recalling the formula (.) for the norm of uc, we obtain the upper bound. To obtain the lower L1-bound (.), we take uc = m in (.), obtaining (m− (u(t)− m)−) dx (m− (u0 − m)−) dx = k min(u(t), m)kL1(Ω), ku(t)kL1(Ω) ≥ k min(u(t), m)kL1(Ω) =ZΩ ≥ZΩ as required. (cid:3) .. Nonnegative initial data. If initial data (.) is only nonnegative, we approximate it with positive functions and reuse the proof of Theorem . to establish the existence of solutions to (.) -- (.) as stated in Theorem . (but not uniqueness, owing to the loss of contraction). Proof of Theorem .. Take a decreasing sequence εn → 0 and set u0 n = u0 + εn. By Theorem ., there exists a weak solution un of (.) -- (.) with the initial data u0 n. Con- traction (.) ensures the comparison principle for this sequence of solutions, whence un+1 ≤ un a. e. in Ω × (0,∞). Consequently, there exists the monotone limit u ∈ L∞(Ω × (0,∞)) and moreover, we obviously have the convergences (.). From this moment on, the proof copies that of Theorem . except that (.) and (.) hold almost everywhere rather then everywhere. (cid:3) We conclude by proving Theorems . and .. Proof of Theorem .. Let D = {(x, Φ(x, u)) : x ∈ Ω, u > 0} and consider the function Ξ : D → [0,∞) implicitly defined by the equation Φ(x, Ξ(x, φ)) = φ. As Φ is monotonous with respect to its second argument, Ξ is uniquely defined. Clearly, Ξ is C2. FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Fix u ∈ U. We claim that there exists a sequence of functions Φn ∈ C(Ω)∩ C∞(Ω) such that (x, Φn(x)) ∈ D (x ∈ Ω), in H1and a. e. in Ω Φn → Φ(·, u(·)) Indeed, take a sequence {δn}, where δn > 0 and δn → 0, puteΦn(x) = Φ(x, u(x)) + δn, and let eΦε n be the mollification of eΦn. Observe that eΦn is strictly positive and so is eΦε n. It suffices to show that for any n sufficiently large there exists εn > 0 such that whenever ε < εn, we have n(x)) : x ∈ Ω} ⊂ D. {(x,eΦε ξfu(x, ξ) dξ ≥ Φ(x, 1)+Z 1 If the second alternative in (.) holds, for every x ∈ Ω we have Φ(x, u) = Φ(x, 1)+Z 1 as u → +∞. This implies that D = Ω × (0,∞), so (.) obviously holds with any ε. depend on x if ξ ≥ ξ0 and set Assume the first alternative in (.). Take ξ0 ≥ kukL∞(Ω) such that f (x, ξ) does not u fu(x, ξ) dξ = Φ(x, 1)+f (x, 1)−f (x, u) → +∞ u (.) a = −Z ξ0+1 ξ0 ufu(x, u) dx > 0. We have: Φ(x, ξ0 + 1)−eΦn(x) = Φ(x, ξ0 + 1)− Φ(x, u(x))− δn ≥ Φ(x, ξ0 + 1)− Φ(x, ξ0)− δn = a− δn. Thus, for large n we have Upon mollification, eΦn(x) ≤ Φ(x, ξ0 + 1)− n(x) ≤ Φε(x, ξ0 + 1)− eΦε a 2 . a 2 . For a fixed n, the function Φ(·, ξ0 + 1) is continuous on Ω, so the mollifications Φε(·, ξ0 + 1) converge to it uniformly on Ω as ε → 0. Consequently, (x,eΦε n(x)) ∈ {(x, φ) ∈ Ω × (0,∞) : φ ≤ Φ(x, ξ0 + 1)} ⊂ D (.) for all x ∈ Ω, proving (.). Taking a sequence {Φn} as above, we can set un(x) = Ξ(x, Φn(x)), so that Φn(x) = Φ(x, un(x)). Clearly, un ∈ C2(Ω) and un > 0. Further, the sequence {un} is bounded in L∞(Ω) because so is {Φn}, and due to the continuity of Ξ we have un → u a. e. in Ω.  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV As a consequence, for fn = f (x, un(x)) and En = E(x, un(x)) we have un → u unfn → uf unfxn → ufx Φxn → Φx En → E  a. e. in Ω and in any Lp(Ω), 1 ≤ p < ∞ , (.) where we write f for f (·, u(·)), etc. In particular, there is no loss of generality in assuming a lower bound kunkL1(Ω) ≥ c := 1 2 inf u∈U kukL1(Ω) > 0 (positivity by virtue of (.)), where c is obviously independent not only of un but of u as well. Define By Theorem ., there exist a function eU = {w ∈ C1(Ω) : w > 0,kwkL1(Ω) ≥ c}. v(ξ) = ξ 2 max(ξ, σ) , where σ > 0, and a constant C > 0 such that ZΩ E(x, w(x)) dx ≤ CZΩ In particular, as un ∈ eU, we see that v(w(x))(f (x, w(x)) +∇f (x, w(x))2) dx (w ∈ eU). ZΩ En dx ≤ CZΩ vn(fn +∇fn2) dx, (.) where vn = v(un(x)). Let us check that we can pass to the limit in (.). First, it follows from (.) that ZΩ En dx →ZΩ E dx. Next, note that we clearly have 1 max(un, σ) → 1 max(u, σ) a. e. in Ω and weakly* in L∞(Ω) and thus, again using (.), we obtain ZΩ vnf 2 n dx =ZΩ 1 max(un, σ) (unfn)2 dx →ZΩ 1 max(u, σ) (uf )2 dx. FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  Finally, as un is smooth and positive, we can write ZΩ vn∇fn2 dx =ZΩ →ZΩ 1 max(un, σ)−∇Φn + Φxn + unfxn2 dx max(u, σ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx. 1 On the set [u = 0] we have ufx = 0 by (.), Φx = 0, and Φ = 0, the last equality implying ∇Φ = 0 a. e. on [u = 0]. Thus, we can write vn∇fn2 dx →Z[u>0] max(u, σ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx. ZΩ 1 To sum up, we have ZΩ E dx ≤ C ZΩ u2 max(u, σ) f 2 dx +Z[u>0] 1 max(u, σ)−∇Φ + Φx + ufx2 dx! , which is even stronger than (.). (cid:3) Proof of Theorem .. Let U ⊂ L∞+ be the set of functions such that for any v ∈ U, we have Φ(·, v(·)) ∈ H1(Ω) and kvkL1(Ω) ≥ c. By Theorem . we have the entropy-entropy production inequality (.) for U. Let u be a weak solution of (.) -- (.) with the initial data satisfying (.). It follows from the lower L1-bound (.) that u(t) ∈ U for a. a. t > 0. Combining the entropy dissipation and entropy-entropy production inequalities, we obtain ∂tE(u(t)) ≤ −C−1 U E(u(t)) a. a. t > 0. Letting e(t) = E(u(t))eC−1 U t, we see that ∂te(t) ≤ 0 in the sense of measures, whence e a. e. coincides with a nonincreasing function. Moreover, t→0 ess sup t>0 t→0 E(u(t))eC−1 e(t) = ess lim sup e(t) = ess lim sup U t ≤ E(u0) by virtue of (.), so e(t) ≤ E(u0) for a. a. t > 0, yielding (.) with γ = C−1 U . Acknowledgment. The idea of this paper originated from conversations of the second author with Goro Akagi and Yann Brenier during a stay at ESI in Vienna. He would like to thank Goro Akagi and Yann Brenier for the inspiring discussions and correspondence, Ulisse Stefanelli for the invitation to the thematic program Nonlinear Flows at ESI, and ESI for hospitality. The research was partially supported by the Portuguese Government through FCT/MCTES and by the ERDF through PT (projects UID/MAT//, PTDC/MAT-PUR// and TUBITAK//). (cid:3) Conflict of interest: none.  S. KONDRATYEV AND D. VOROTNIKOV References [] H. W. Alt and S. Luckhaus. Quasilinear elliptic-parabolic differential equations. Math. Z., (): -- , . [] L. Ambrosio, N. Gigli, and G. Savar´e. Gradient Flows: in Metric Spaces and in the Space of Probability Measures. Basel: Birkhauser Basel, . [] V. Barbu. Generalized solutions to nonlinear Fokker-Planck equations. J. Differential Equations, (): -- , . [] M. Bertsch and D. Hilhorst. A density dependent diffusion equation in population dynamics: stabiliza- tion to equilibrium. SIAM J. Math. Anal., (): -- , . [] T. Bodineau, J. Lebowitz, C. Mouhot, and C. Villani. Lyapunov functionals for boundary-driven nonlin- ear drift-diffusion equations. Nonlinearity, (): -- , . [] R. S. Cantrell, C. Cosner, Y. Lou, and C. Xie. Random dispersal versus fitness-dependent dispersal. J. Differential Equations, (): -- , . [] J. A. Carrillo, A. J ungel, P. A. Markowich, G. Toscani, and A. Unterreiter. Entropy dissipation methods for degenerate parabolic problems and generalized Sobolev inequalities. Monatsh. Math., (): -- , . [] L. Chizat, G. Peyr´e, B. Schmitzer, and F.-X. Vialard. An interpolating distance between optimal transport and Fisher -- Rao metrics. Foundations of Computational Mathematics, (): -- , . [] L. Chizat, G. Peyr´e, B. Schmitzer, and F.-X. Vialard. Unbalanced optimal transport: Dynamic and Kan- torovich formulations. Journal of Functional Analysis, (): -- , . [] C. Cosner. A dynamic model for the ideal-free distribution as a partial differential equation. Theoretical Population Biology, (): -- , . [] C. Cosner. Beyond diffusion: conditional dispersal in ecological models. In J. Mallet-Paret et al., editor, Infinite Dimensional Dynamical Systems, pages  -- . Springer, . [] C. Cosner and M. Winkler. Well-posedness and qualitative properties of a dynamical model for the ideal free distribution. Journal of mathematical biology, (-): -- , . [] J. Filo and J. Kacur. Local existence of general nonlinear parabolic systems. Nonlinear Anal., (): -- , . [] T. D. Frank. Asymptotic properties of nonlinear diffusion, nonlinear drift-diffusion, and nonlinear reaction-diffusion equations. Ann. Phys., (-): -- , . [] T. D. Frank. Nonlinear Fokker-Planck equations. Springer Series in Synergetics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, . Fundamentals and applications. [] S. D. Fretwell. Populations in a seasonal environment. Princeton University Press, . [] S. D. Fretwell and H. L. Lucas. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds I. Theoretical development. Acta Biotheoretica, (): -- , . [] T. Gallouet, M. Laborde, and L. Monsaingeon. An unbalanced optimal transport splitting scheme for general advection-reaction-diffusion problems. arXiv:., . [] T. O. Gallouet and L. Monsaingeon. A JKO splitting scheme for Kantorovich-Fisher-Rao gradient flows. SIAM J. Math. Anal., (): -- , . [] R. Jordan, D. Kinderlehrer, and F. Otto. The variational formulation of the Fokker -- Planck equation. SIAM journal on mathematical analysis, (): -- , . [] A. J ungel. Entropy methods for diffusive partial differential equations. SpringerBriefs in Mathematics. Springer, [Cham], . [] J. Kacur. On a solution of degenerate elliptic-parabolic systems in Orlicz-Sobolev spaces. I. Math. Z., (): -- , . [] J. Kacur. On a solution of degenerate elliptic-parabolic systems in Orlicz-Sobolev spaces. II. Math. Z., (): -- , . [] S. Kondratyev, L. Monsaingeon, and D. Vorotnikov. A fitness-driven cross-diffusion system from popu- lation dynamics as a gradient flow. J. Differential Equations, (): -- , . FREE ENERGY FOKKER-PLANCK  [] S. Kondratyev, L. Monsaingeon, and D. Vorotnikov. A new optimal transport distance on the space of finite Radon measures. Adv. Differential Equations, (-): -- , . [] S. Kondratyev, L. Monsaingeon, and D. Vorotnikov. A new multicomponent Poincar´e-Beckner inequal- ity. J. Funct. Anal., (): -- , . [] S. Kondratyev and D. Vorotnikov. Convex Sobolev inequalities related to unbalanced optimal transport. arXiv e-prints, page arXiv:., Apr . [] S. Kondratyev and D. Vorotnikov. Spherical Hellinger-Kantorovich gradient flows. SIAM J. Math. Anal., (): -- , . [] M. Liero, A. Mielke, and G. Savar´e. Optimal transport in competition with reaction: the Hellinger- Kantorovich distance and geodesic curves. SIAM J. Math. Anal., (): -- , . [] M. Liero, A. Mielke, and G. Savar´e. Optimal entropy-transport problems and a new Hellinger -- Kantorovich distance between positive measures. Inventiones mathematicae, (): -- , . [] Y. Lou, Y. Tao, and M. Winkler. Approaching the ideal free distribution in two-species competition models with fitness-dependent dispersal. SIAM J. Math. Anal., (): -- , . [] A. D. MacCall. Dynamic geography of marine fish populations. Washington Sea Grant Program Seattle, . [] F. Maggi. Sets of Finite Perimeter and Geometric Variational Problems: An Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, . [] V. G. Maz'ja. Sobolev spaces. Springer Series in Soviet Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, . Trans- lated from the Russian by T. O. Shaposhnikova. [] F. Otto. The geometry of dissipative evolution equations: the porous medium equation. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, (-): -- , . [] F. Santambrogio. {Euclidean, metric, and Wasserstein} gradient flows: an overview. Bull. Math. Sci., [] W. Shi and D. Vorotnikov. The gradient flow of the potential energy on the space of arcs. Calculus of (): -- , . Variations and Partial Differential Equations, to appear, . [] C. Tsallis. Introduction to nonextensive statistical mechanics. Springer, . [] J. L. V´azquez. Failure of the strong maximum principle in nonlinear diffusion. Existence of needles. Comm. Partial Differential Equations, (-): -- , . [] J. L. V´azquez. The porous medium equation. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, Oxford, . Mathematical theory. [] C. Villani. Topics in optimal transportation. American Mathematical Soc., . [] C. Villani. Optimal transport: old and new. Springer Science & Business Media, . [] Q. Xu, A. Belmonte, R. deForest, C. Liu, and Z. Tan. Strong solutions and instability for the fitness gradient system in evolutionary games between two populations. J. Differential Equations, (): -- , . (S. Kondratyev) CMUC, Department of Mathematics, University of Coimbra, - Coimbra, Por- tugal E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Vorotnikov) CMUC, Department of Mathematics, University of Coimbra, - Coimbra, Por- tugal E-mail address: [email protected]
0811.4432	4	0811	2010-03-29T19:33:34	Translation-finite sets, and weakly compact derivations from $\lp{1}(\Z_+)$ to its dual	[ "math.FA", "math.CO" ]	We characterize those derivations from the convolution algebra $\ell^1({\mathbb Z}_+)$ to its dual which are weakly compact. In particular, we provide examples which are weakly compact but not compact. The characterization is combinatorial, in terms of "translation-finite" subsets of ${\mathbb Z}_+$, and we investigate how this notion relates to other notions of "smallness" for infinite subsets of ${\mathbb Z}_+$. In particular, we show that a set of strictly positive Banach density cannot be translation-finite; the proof has a Ramsey-theoretic flavour.	math.FA	math	Translation-finite sets, and weakly compact derivations from ℓ1(Z+) to its dual Y. Choi, M. J. Heath∗ 12th October 2009† Abstract We characterize those derivations from the convolution algebra ℓ1(Z+) to its dual which are weakly compact, providing explicit examples which are not compact. The characterization is combinatorial, in terms of "translation-finite" subsets of Z+, and we investigate how this notion relates to other notions of "smallness" for infinite subsets of Z+. In particular, we prove that a set of strictly positive Banach density cannot be translation-finite; the proof has a Ramsey-theoretic flavour. 1 Introduction The problem of determining the weakly compact or compact homomorphisms between various Banach algebras has been much studied; the study of weakly compact or com- pact derivations, less so. In certain cases, the geometrical properties of the underlying Banach space play an important role. For instance, by a result of Morris [9], every bounded derivation from the disc algebra A(D) to its dual is automatically weakly compact. (It had already been shown in [2] that every bounded operator from A(D) to A(D)∗ is automatically 2-summing, hence weakly compact; but the proof is significantly harder than that of the weaker result in [9].) In this article, we investigate the weak compactness or otherwise of derivations from the convolution algebra ℓ1(Z+) to its dual. Unlike the case of A(D), the space of derivations is easily parametrized: every bounded derivation from ℓ1(Z+) to its dual is of the form Dψ(δ0) = 0 and Dψ(δj)(δk) = j j + k ψj+k (j ∈ N, k ∈ Z+) (1.1) for some ψ ∈ ℓ∞(N). It was shown in the second author's thesis [7] that Dψ is compact if and only if ψ ∈ c0, and that there exist ψ for which Dψ is not weakly compact. The primary purpose of the present note is to characterize those ψ for which Dψ is weakly compact (see Theorem 2.6 below). In particular, we show that there exist a plethora of ψ for which Dψ is weakly compact but not compact. Our criterion is combi- natorial and uses the notion, apparently due to Ruppert, of translation-finite subsets of ∗The 2nd author is supported by post-doctoral grant SFRH/BPD/40762/2007 from FCT (Portugal). †MSC2000: Primary 43A20, 43A46, 47B07 1 a semigroup. A secondary purpose is to construct various examples of translation-finite and non-translation-finite subsets of Z+, to clarify the connections or absence thereof with other combinatorial notions of "smallness". An example We first resolve a question from [7], by giving a very simple example of a Dψ that is non-compact but is weakly compact. Proposition 1.1 Let ψ be the indicator function of {2n : n ∈ N} ⊂ N. Then Dψ is non-compact, and the range of Dψ is contained in ℓ1(Z+). In particular, since ℓ1(Z+) ⊂ ℓp(Z+) for every 1 < p < ∞, Dψ factors through a reflexive Banach space and is therefore weakly compact. Proof . Since ψ /∈ c0, we know by [7, Theorem 5.7.3] that Dψ is non-compact. We have Dψ(δ0) = 0. For each j ∈ N, let Nj = min(n ∈ N : 2n ≥ j); then kDψ(δj)k1 = Xk≥0 j (j + k) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = Xn≥Nj j 2n = j 2Nj −1 ≤ 2 . ψj+k(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) By linearity and continuity we deduce that kDψ(a)k1 ≤ 2kak1 for all a ∈ ℓ1(Z+). The last assertion now follows, by standard results on weak compactness of operators. (cid:3) Remark 1.2 Since Dψ factors through the inclusion map ℓ1(Z+) → c0(Z+), which is known to be 1-summing, it too is 1-summing. This last remark raises the natural question: is every weakly compact derivation from ℓ1(Z+) to its dual automatically p-summing for some p < ∞? The answer, unsur- prisingly, is negative: we have deferred the relevant counterexample to an appendix. 2 Characterizing weakly compact derivations We need only the basic results on weak compactness in Banach spaces, as can be found in standard references such as [8]. Recall that if X is a closed subspace of a Banach space Y , and K ⊆ X, then K is weakly compact as a subset of X if and only if it is weakly compact as a subset of Y . Since (by Equation (1.1)) our derivations Dψ take values in c0(Z+), we may therefore work with the weak topology of c0(Z+) rather than that of ℓ∞(Z+). Moreover, we can reduce the verification of weak compactness to that of sequential pointwise compactness. This is done through some simple lemmas, which we give below. Lemma 2.1 Let (yi) be a bounded net in c0(Z+), and let y ∈ c0(Z+). Then (yi) converges weakly to y if and only if it converges pointwise to y. The proof is straightforward and we omit the details. 2 Lemma 2.2 Let T : ℓ1(Z+) → c0(Z+) be a bounded linear map. Then the following are equivalent: (i) T is weakly compact; (ii) every subsequence of (T (δn))n∈N has a further subsequence which converges point- wise to some y ∈ c0(Z+). Proof . Let B denote the closed unit ball of ℓ1(Z+), let E = {T (δn) : n ∈ N}, and let τ denote the topology of pointwise convergence in c0. Note that the restriction of τ to bounded subsets of c0 is a metrizable topology. If (i) holds, then by (the trivial half of) Lemma 2.1, the bounded set T (B) is τ - precompact, and hence sequentially τ -precompact. Thus (ii) holds. Conversely, suppose that (ii) holds, i.e. that E is sequentially τ -precompact. Then (again by metrizability) we know that E is τ -compact, and hence by Lemma 2.1 it is weakly precompact. Therefore, by Krein's theorem (as it appears in Bourbaki, see [1, §IV.5]), the closed balanced convex hull of E is weakly compact. Since this hull is T (B), T is weakly compact. (cid:3) The following notation will be used frequently. Given a subset S ⊆ Z+ and n ∈ Z+, we denote by S − n the set {t ∈ Z+ : t + n ∈ S}. We need the following definition, due to Ruppert [11] in a more general setting. Definition 2.3 ([11]) Let S ⊆ Z+. We say that S is translation-finite (TF for short) if, for every sequence n1 < n2 < . . . in Z+, there exists k such that k (S − ni) \i=1 is finite or empty. (2.1) (In the later paper [3], TF-sets are called "RW sets"; we believe that for our purposes the older terminology of Ruppert is more suggestive and apposite.) TF-sets were introduced by Ruppert in the investigation of weakly almost periodic subsets of semigroups. Recall that a bounded function f on a semigroup S is said to be weakly almost periodic if the set of translates {s · f : s ∈ S} ∪ {f · s : s ∈ S} is weakly precompact in ℓ∞(S). Specializing to the case where the semigroup in question is Z+, one of Ruppert's results can be stated as follows. Theorem 2.4 ([11]) Let S ⊆ Z+. Then S is TF if and only if all bounded functions S → C are WAP as elements of ℓ∞(Z+). In particular, if S is a TF-set then the indicator function of S belongs to WAP(Z+). It is sometimes convenient to use an alternative phrasing of the original definition (see [3] for instance). Lemma 2.5 Let S ⊆ Z+. Then S is non-TF if and only if there are strictly increasing sequences (an)n≥1, (bn)n≥1 ⊂ Z+ such that {a1, . . . , an} ⊆ S − bn for all n. 3 Proof . Suppose that there exist sequences (an), (bn) as described. Then for every n ≥ m ∈ N we have {a1, . . . , am} ⊆ S − bn. Hence {bn : n ≥ m} ⊆ m (S − ak) \k=1 where the set on the left hand side is infinite, for all m. Thus S is non-TF. that Tk Conversely, suppose S is non-TF: then there is a sequence a1 < a2 < . . . in Z+ such j=1(S − aj) is infinite for all k ∈ N. Let b1 ∈ S − a1. We inductively construct k=1(S − ak) is a sequence (bn) as follows: infinite it contains some bn+1 > bn. By construction the sequences (an) and (bn) are strictly increasing, and {a1, . . . , an} ⊆ S − bn for all n. (cid:3) if we have already chosen bn, then since Tn+1 Our main result, which characterizes weak compactness of Dψ in terms of ψ, is as follows. Theorem 2.6 Let ψ ∈ ℓ∞(N). Then Dψ is weakly compact if and only if, for all ε > 0, the set Sε := {n ∈ N : ψn > ε} is TF. It is not clear to the authors if one can deduce Theorem 2.6 in a "soft" way from Ruppert's characterization (Theorem 2.4). Instead, we give a direct argument. The proof naturally breaks into two parts, both of which can be carried out in some gener- ality. Given ψ ∈ ℓ∞(Z+) and M ∈ ℓ∞(Z+ × Z+), define T M ψ : ℓ1(Z+) → ℓ∞(Z+) by T M ψ (δj )(δk) = Mjkψj+k (j, k ∈ Z+). (2.2) In particular, if we take ψ ∈ ℓ∞(N), identified with (0, ψ1, ψ2, . . . ) ∈ ℓ∞(Z+), and take Mjk to be 0 for j = k = 0 and to be j/(j + k) otherwise, then T M ψ ≡ Dψ. Proposition 2.7 Let ψ ∈ ℓ∞(Z+) be such that Sε is TF for all ε > 0. ℓ∞(Z+ × Z+) is such that limk→∞ Mjk = 0 for all j, then T M ψ is weakly compact. If M ∈ Proof . To ease notation we write Tψ for T M condition on M implies that Tψ takes values in c0(Z+). ψ throughout this proof. Note that the Define ψε ∈ ℓ∞(Z+) as follows: set (ψε)n to be ψn if n ∈ Sε and 0 otherwise. Then ψε is supported on Sε and Tψε → Tψ as ε → 0. It therefore suffices to prove that if ψ has TF support, then Tψ is weakly compact. Let ψ ∈ ℓ∞ be supported on a TF set S. Let (jn)n≥1 ⊂ Z+ be a strictly increasing sequence and set (j0,n) = (jn), k0 = 0. For each i ≥ 1 we specify an integer ki ∈ Z+ and a sequence (ji,n)n≥1 ⊂ Z+ recursively, as follows. If there exists k ∈ Z+ \ {k0, . . . , ki−1} such that ji−1,n + k ∈ S for infinitely many n ∈ N, let ki be some such k. Otherwise, let ki = ki−1. Let (ji,n)n≥1 be the enumeration of the set {ji−1,n : n ∈ N, ji−1,n + ki ∈ S} with ji,n < ji,n+1 for each n ∈ N. Then, by induction on i, (ji,n)n is a subsequence of (jn)n and, for each l ∈ {1, . . . , i}, and each n ∈ N, we have ji,n + kl ∈ S. 4 In particular, for each i ∈ N, {ji,i + k1, . . . , ji,i + ki} ⊂ S. Hence, by our assumption that S is TF, the set {ki : i ∈ Z+} is finite. Let i0 be the smallest i for which ki = ki+1: then for each k ∈ Z+ \ {k0, . . . , ki0 }, there are only finitely many n ∈ N such that ji0,n + k ∈ S. Let K = {k0, . . . , ki0}. By the Heine-Borel theorem, there exists a subsequence (jn(m))m of (ji0,n)n such that, for each k ∈ K, limm→∞ Tψ(δjn(m))(δk) exists. Moreover, by the previous paragraph, for each k ∈ Z+ \ K there exist at most finitely many m such that jn(m) + k ∈ S; hence there exists m(k) such that Tψ(δjn(m))(δk) = Mjn(m),kψ(jn(m) + k) = 0 for all m ≥ m(k). Thus Tψ(δjn(m)) converges pointwise to some function supported on K, and the result follows by Lemma 2.2. (cid:3) Proposition 2.8 Let M ∈ ℓ∞(Z+ × Z+) satisfy lim k→∞ Mjk = 0 for all j, and inf k lim inf j→∞ Mjk = η > 0 . (2.3) Let ψ ∈ ℓ∞, and suppose that T M ψ is weakly compact. Then Sε is TF for all ε > 0. Proof . We first note that (2.3) implies that T M ψ has range contained in c0(Z+). Suppose the result is false: then there exists ε > 0 such that Sε is non-TF. Hence, by Lemma 2.5, there exist strictly increasing sequences (an), (bn) ⊂ Z+ such that {a1 + bn, . . . , an + bn} ⊂ Sε for all n. Now T M ψ (δbn )(δam ) = Mbn,amψam+bn ≥ Mbn,amε for all m ≤ n; so, by the hypothesis (2.3), we have inf m lim inf n T M ψ (δbn)(δam ) ≥ ηε . (2.4) Since T M ψ is weakly compact, by Lemma 2.2 the sequence (Tψ(δbn)) has a sub- sequence that converges pointwise to some φ ∈ c0(Z+). But by (2.4) we must have inf m φam ≥ ηε, so that φ /∈ c0(Z+). Hence we have a contradiction and the proof is complete. (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 2.6. Sufficiency of the stated condition follows from Proposition 2.7; necessity, from Proposition 2.8, once we observe that limk j/(j + k) = 0 for all j, and limj j/(j + k) = 1 for all k. (cid:3) 5 Remark 2.9 The set S = {2n : n ∈ N} is TF. In fact, it is not hard to show it has the following stronger property: for every n ∈ N, the set S ∩ (S − n) is finite or empty. (†) We therefore obtain another proof that the derivation constructed in Proposition 1.1 is weakly compact. Subsets of Z+ satisfying the condition (†) seem not to have an agreed name. They were called T -sets in work of Ramirez [10], and for ease of reference we shall use his terminology. 3 Comparing the TF-property with other notions of size Let S ⊂ Z+. For n ∈ N we define fS(n) to be the nth member of S. Proposition 3.1 Let S ⊂ Z+. Then there exists a non-TF R ⊂ Z+ with fR(n) > fS(n) for all n. Proof . For n ∈ Z+, let tn = 1 2 n(n + 1) be the nth triangular number, so that tn = tn−1 + n for all n ∈ N. Each n ∈ N has a unique representation as n = tk−1 + j where k ≥ 1 and 1 ≤ j ≤ k. Enumerate the elements of S in increasing order as s1 < s2 < s3 < . . ., and define a sequence (rn)n≥1 by rtk−1+j = stk + j (1 ≤ j ≤ k) as indicated by the following diagram: r1 = s1 + 1 r2 = s3 + 1 r3 = s3 + 2 r4 = s6 + 1 r5 = s6 + 2 r6 = s6 + 3 ... Since the sequence (sn) is strictly increasing, stk ≥ stk−1 + (tk − tk−1) = stk−1 + k (k ∈ N), and so the sequence (rn) is strictly increasing. Put R = {rn : n ∈ N}: then clearly : k ≥ m} for (cid:3) fR(n) = rn > sn = fS(n) for all n. Finally, since Tm all m, R is not a TF-set. j=1(R − j) ⊇ {st(k) On the other hand, we can find T-sets S such that fS grows at a "nearly linear" rate. Proposition 3.2 Let g : N → Z+ be any function such that g(n)/n → ∞. Then there is a strictly increasing sequence a1 < a2 < . . . in Z+, such that {an : n ∈ N} is a T-set, while an < g(n) for all but finitely many n. 6 Proof . Let N ∈ N and set kN to be the smallest natural number such that g(n) > N n for all n > kN . We now construct our sequence (an) recursively. Set a0 = 0 and suppose that a0, . . . , an have been defined: if an < k1 set an+1 = an + 1; otherwise, if kN ≤ an < kN +1 for some N ∈ N, set an+1 = an + N . Thus, the elements of [kN , kN +1] ∩ {an : n ∈ N} are in arithmetic progression with common difference N . A simple induction gives that if kN ≤ n < kN +1, then an ≤ N n. Since for n ≥ kN we also have that g(n) > N n, it follows that, for all n ≥ k1, an < g(n). Finally, let i, j ∈ N. If ai − j ∈ {an : n ∈ N} it follows that ai < kj+1 + j. Thus, (cid:3) {an : n ∈ N} is a T-set. Remark 3.3 Given that infinite arithmetic progressions are the most obvious exam- ples of non-TF sets, it may be worth noting that if g(n)/n2 → 0, the T-set constructed in the proof of Proposition 3.2 contains arbitrarily long arithmetic progressions. The previous two results indicate that the growth of a subset in Z+ tells us nothing, on its own, about whether or not it is TF. The main result of this section shows that, nevertheless, certain kinds of density property are enough to force a set to be non-TF. First we need some definitions. Definition 3.4 Let S ⊂ Z+. The upper Banach density1 of S, denoted by Bd(S), is Bd(S) := lim d→∞ max n d−1S ∩ {n + 1, . . . , n + d} (The limit always exists, by a subadditivity argument.) For example, the set R constructed in the proof of Proposition 3.1 satisfies R ⊇ {st(m) + 1, . . . , st(m) + m} for all m, and so has a Banach density of 1. Proposition 3.5 Let S ⊂ Z+ and suppose Bd(S) > 0. Then S is not TF. The converse clearly fails: for example, the set S = {2i + j2 : i ∈ N, j ∈ {0, . . . , i}} is not TF, but has Banach density zero. The proof of Proposition 3.5 builds on some preliminary lemmas, which in turn require some notation. Fix once and for all a set S ⊂ Z+ with strictly positive Banach density, and choose ε ∈ (0, 1) such that Bd(S) > ε. For shorthand, we say that a subset X ⊆ Z+ is recurrent in S if there are infinitely many n ∈ N such that X + n ⊂ S. For each d ∈ N, let Vd = {X ⊂ N : X is recurrent in S and d ≥ X ≥ dε}. Lemma 3.6 For every d ∈ N, Vd is non-empty. 1What we call "Banach density" is also referred to as upper Banach density, and is in older sources given a slightly different but equivalent definition. Some background and remarks on the literature can be found in [6, §1], for example. 7 Proof . The key step is to prove that the set {i ∈ N : S ∩ {i + 1, . . . , i + d} ≥ dε} is infinite, which we do by contradiction. For, suppose it is finite, with cardinality N , say: then for any j, n ∈ N we have (jd)−1S ∩ {n + 1, . . . , n + (jd)} = j−1 j−1 Xm=0 d−1S ∩ {n + md + 1, . . . , n + (m + 1)d} ≤ j−1(N + (j − N )ε) , so that Bd(S) = lim j (jd)−1 sup n S ∩ {n + 1, . . . , n + (jd)} ≤ lim sup j−1(N + (j − N )ε) = ε , j which contradicts our original choice of ε. It follows that there exists a strictly increasing sequence i1 < i2 < . . . in N, such that S ∩ {in + 1, . . . , in + d} ≥ dε for all n. Since there are at most finitely many subsets of {1, . . . , d}, by passing to a subsequence we may assume that the sequence of sets ((S − in) ∩ {1, . . . , d})n≥1 is constant, with value X say. Clearly X ∈ Vd, which completes the proof. (cid:3) Lemma 3.7 There exists a sequence 1 = d1 < d2 < . . . in N such that, for every j ∈ N and any X ∈ Vdj+1, there exists Y ∈ Vdj such that Y ⊆ X and max(Y ) < max(X). Proof . Put d1 = 1 and choose N1 ∈ N such that N1 > ε−1. We then inductively construct our sequence (dn) as follows: if we have already defined dj for some j ∈ N, let aj be the largest non-negative integer such that aj < djε. Then choose Nj ∈ N, Nj ≥ 2, large enough that 1 Nj (cid:20)(Nj − 1) aj dj + 1(cid:21) < ε , (3.1) and set dj+1 = Njdj. To show that this sequence has the required properties, let j ∈ N. Given X ∈ Vdj+1, put x0 = min(X), and for m = 0, 1, . . . , Nj − 1 put Ym = X ∩ {x0 + mdj, . . . , x0 + (m + 1)dj − 1}. Since X ≤ dj+1 and min(X) = x0, the sets Y0, . . . , YNj −1 form a partition of X. Since X is recurrent in S, so is each of the subsets Ym, and by construction Ym ≤ dj for all m. We claim that there exist m(1) < m(2) ∈ {0, 1, . . . , Nj − 1} such that Ym(1) and Ym(2) have cardinality ≥ djε. If this is the case then Ym(1) ∈ Vdj and max(Ym(1)) < min(Ym(2)) ≤ max(X), so that we may take Y = Ym(1) in the statement of the lemma. Suppose the claim is false. Then at least Nj − 1 of the sets Y0, . . . , YNj −1 have cardinality < djε, and hence (by the definition of aj) at least Nj − 1 of these sets have 8 cardinality ≤ aj. Now since X ⊆ {x0, . . . , x0 + dj+1 − 1}, we have X = Y0 ⊔ . . . ⊔ YNj−1, and so Nj −1 Njdjε = dj+1ε ≤ X = Xm=0 Ym ≤ dj + (Nj − 1)aj. On dividing through by Njdj, we obtain a contradiction with (3.1), and our claim is proved. (cid:3) The final ingredient in our proof of Proposition 3.5 is purely combinatorial: it is a version of 'Konig's infinity lemma', which we isolate and state for convenience. We shall paraphrase the formulation given in [5, Lemma 8.1.2], and refer the reader to that text for the proof. Lemma 3.8 Let G be a graph on a countably infinite vertex set V , and let V = `j≥1 Vj be a partition of V into mutually disjoint, non-empty finite subsets. Suppose that for each j ≥ 1, every v ∈ Vj+1 has a neighbour in Vj . Then there exists a sequence (vn)n≥1, with vn ∈ Vn for each n, such that vn+1 is a neighbour of vn. Proof of Proposition 3.5. Let (dj) be the sequence from Lemma 3.7. For each j, let Vj be the set of all subsets of {1, . . . , dj } which are also members of Vdj . The proof of Lemma 3.6 shows that Vj is non-empty, and clearly it is a finite set. Regard `j≥1 Vj as the vertex set for a graph, whose edges are defined by the following rule: for each j ∈ N and Y ∈ Vj, X ∈ Vj+1, join X to Y with an edge if and only if there exists m ∈ Z+ with Y + m ⊆ X and max(Y ) + m < max(X). Then by Lemma 3.7, every element of Vj+1 has a neighbour in Vj. Hence, by Lemma 3.8, there exists a sequence (Yj)j≥1 of finite subsets of N, and a sequence (mj) ⊂ Z+, such that (i) Yj ∈ Vj for all j; (ii) Yj + mj ⊆ Yj+1 and max(Yj) + mj < max(Yj+1) for all j. Now put X1 = Y1 and put Xj+1 = Yj+1 − (mj + · · · + m1) ⊂ N for j ≥ 1. An easy induction using both parts of (ii) above shows that Xj ( Xj+1 for all j. Since each Yi is recurrent in S, so is each Xi, and hence there exist infinitely many n such that Xi + n ⊂ S. We may therefore inductively construct n1 < n2 < . . . such that Xi + ni ⊂ S for all i. Pick c1 ∈ X1 and for each i pick ci+1 ∈ Xi+1 \ Xi; then for all 1 ≤ i ≤ j we have : i ∈ N} is infinite, by Lemma 2.5 S is (cid:3) ci + nj ∈ Xj + nj ⊂ S; and since the set {ci not TF. 4 Closing thoughts We finish with some remarks and questions that this work raises. Here and in the appendix, it will be convenient to abuse notation as follows: given S ⊆ N, we write DS for the derivation DχS , where χS is the indicator function of S. For example, with this notation DN ≡ D1. 9 Combinatorics of TF subsets of Z+ We have been unable to find much in the literature on the combinatorial properties of TF subsets of Z+. Here are some elementary facts. • Let k ∈ N; then S is TF if and only if S + k is. • Finite unions of T-sets are TF. • The set of odd numbers is non-TF, as is the set of even numbers. In particular, the complement of a non-TF set can be non-TF. • Subsets of TF sets are TF. (Immediate from the definition.) In particular, the intersection of two TF sets is TF. • If S and T are TF then so is S ∪ T . The last of these observations follows immediately if we grant ourselves Ruppert's result (Theorem 2.4 above). It also follows from our Theorem 2.6: for if S and T are TF subsets of Z+, then since S + 1, (S ∩ T ) + 1 and T + 1 are also TF, the derivations DS+1, DT +1 and D(S∩T )+1 are all weakly compact; whence D(S∪T )+1 = DS+1 − D(S∩T )+1 + DT +1 is also weakly compact, so that by the other direction of Theorem 2.6, (S ∪ T ) + 1 and hence S ∪ T are TF. It also seems worth giving a direct, combinatorial proof, which to our knowledge is not spelled out in the existing literature (cf. [11, Remark 18]). Proof . Let A1, A2 be subsets of Z+ and suppose that A1 ∪ A2 is not TF. By Lemma 2.5 there exist a1 < a2 < . . . and b1 < b2 < . . . in Z+, such that {am + bn : 1 ≤ m ≤ n} ⊆ A1 ∪ A2. Let E = {(m, n) ∈ N2 : m < n, am + bn ∈ A1} , F = {(m, n) ∈ N2 : m < n, am + bn ∈ A2 \ A1} . The sets E and F can be regarded as a partition of the set of 2-element subsets of N. Hence, by Ramsey's theorem [5, Theorem 9.1.2], there exists either an infinite set S ⊂ N such that {(x, y) ∈ S2 : x < y} ⊆ E, or an infinite set T ⊂ N such that {(x, y) ∈ T 2 : x < y} ⊆ F . In the former case, enumerate S as s0 < s1 < s2 < . . ., and put cj = asj−1, dj = bsj for j ∈ N. Then ci + dj ∈ A1 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ j; therefore, by Lemma 2.5, A1 is not TF. In the latter case, a similar argument shows that A2 is not TF. We conclude that (cid:3) at least one of A1 and A2 is non-TF, which proves the desired result. Generalizations to other (semigroup) algebras? We have relied heavily on the convenient parametrization of Der(ℓ1(Z+), ℓ1(Z+)∗) by elements of ℓ∞(N). There are analogous parametrizations for Zk +, where k ≥ 2, but it is not clear to the authors if they allow one to obtain reasonable higher-rank analogues of Theorem 2.6. We can at least make one general observation. 10 Definition 4.1 Let A be a Banach algebra and X a Banach A-bimodule. If x ∈ X, we say that x is a weakly almost periodic element of X if both a 7→ ax and a 7→ xa are weakly compact as maps from A to X. The set of all weakly almost periodic elements of X will be denoted by WAP(X). Combining Proposition 2.8 with Ruppert's result (Theorem 2.4), we see that if Dψ is weakly compact then ψ ∈ WAP(ℓ∞(Z+)), where we identify ψ ∈ ℓ∞(N) with (0, ψ1, ψ2, . . . ) ∈ ℓ∞(Z+). This is a special case of a more general result. Proposition 4.2 Let A be a unital Banach algebra, let D : A → A∗ be a weakly compact derivation, and let ψ ∈ A∗ be the functional D(·)(1). Then ψ ∈ WAP(A∗). Proof . Let κ : A → A∗∗ be the canonical embedding. By Gantmacher's theorem, D∗ : A∗∗ → A∗ is weakly compact, so D∗κ is also weakly compact. Note that D∗κ(a) = D(·)(a) for all a ∈ A. Let a ∈ A, and consider ψ · a ∈ A∗. For each b ∈ A we have (ψ · a)(b) = ψ(ab) = D(ab)(1) = D(a)(b) + D(b)(a) ; thus ψ · a = D(a) + D∗κ(a). Since D and D∗κ are weakly compact, this shows that the map a 7→ ψ · a is weakly compact. A similar argument shows that the map a 7→ a · ψ is weakly compact, and so ψ ∈ WAP(A∗) as claimed. (cid:3) When A = ℓ1(S) is the convolution algebra of a discrete monoid S, we may regard A∗ = ℓ∞(S) as an algebra with respect to pointwise multiplication. The previous proposition shows that the functional D(·)(δe) lies in WAP(A∗): is it the case that hD(·)(δe) lies in WAP(A∗) for every h ∈ ℓ∞(S)? Acknowledgments The authors thank the referee and N. J. Laustsen (as editorial adviser) for a close reading of the text and for useful corrections. A A weakly compact derivation which is not p-summing Definition A.1 Let X and Y be Banach spaces and let p ∈ [1, ∞). We say that a bounded linear map T : X → Y is p-summing if there exists C > 0 such that: m Xj=1 kT xjkp ≤ C p sup φ∈X ∗,kφk≤1 m Xj=1 φ(xj)p, for all m ∈ N and x1, . . . , xm ∈ X. (A.1) The least such C is denoted by πp(T ). If no such C exists (i.e. if T is not p-summing) we write πp(T ) = ∞. Recall that in Proposition 1.1, taking S to be the set of integer powers of 2 gives a derivation DS that is 1-summing. In this appendix, we construct a T-set A such that DA, while weakly compact, is not p-summing for any finite p. To do this, we shall need 11 some standard general results, which are collected in the following proposition for ease of reference. Proposition A.2 Let X and Y be Banach spaces and let T ∈ B(X, Y ). (i) Let 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞. Then πp(T ) ≥ πq(T ). (ii) If T is p-summing for some p ∈ [1, ∞), then it is weakly compact. We refer to [4] for the proofs: part (i) may be found as [4, Theorem 2.8]; and part (ii) follows from the Pietsch factorization theorem, see [4, Theorem 2.17]. We now specialize to operators of the form Dψ. The key observation is the following. Lemma A.3 Let ψ ∈ ℓ∞(N) and p ∈ [1, ∞) and K < πp(Dψ). There exists N ∈ N depending on ψ, on p and on K, such that for each ψ′ ∈ ℓ∞(N) satisfying ψ(k) = ψ′(k) for all k < N , we have πp(Dψ′) > K. Proof . There are x1, . . . , xm ∈ ℓ1(Z+) such that m Xj=1 kDψ(xj)kp > K p sup φ∈ℓ∞,kφk≤1 m Xj=1 φ(xj )p. (A.2) Without any loss of generality we may take x1, . . . , xn ∈ c00; write xj = Pl(j) i=0 αi,jδi. For each j ∈ {1, . . . , m}, since Dψ(xj) ∈ c0, there exists n(j) ∈ N with Dψ(xj)(δn(j)) = kDψ(xi)k. Fix N > max{l(1) + n(1), . . . , l(m) + n(m)}, and let ψ′ ∈ ℓ∞(N) be such that ψ(k) = ψ′(k) for all k < N . Observe now that for each j we have Dψ(xj)(δn(j)) = = l(j) Xi=1 l(j) Xi=1 αi,j αi,j i i + n(j) i i + n(j) ψ(i + n(j)) ψ′(i + n(j)) = Dψ′(xj)(δn(j)) . Therefore, m Xj=1 kDψ′ (xj)kp ≥ m Xj=1 Dψ′ (xj)(δn(j))p = m Xj=1 Dψ(xj)(δn(j))p = m Xj=1 kDψ(xj)kp. Combining this with Equation (A.2) yields πp(Dψ′ ) > K, and the result follows. (cid:3) We can now give the promised example. Theorem A.4 There exists a T-set A such that DA is not p-summing for any p < ∞. Proof . The set A will be the disjoint union of a sequence of finite arithmetic progressions whose "skip size" tends to infinity. For each k ∈ Z+, we shall construct, recursively, A(k) ⊂ N and ck ∈ Z+ such that 12 (a) ck > max A(k); (b) πk(DB) > k for each B ⊂ N satisfying B ∩ {1, . . . , ck} = A(k) ∩ {1, . . . , ck}; (c) A(k) ⊃ A(k − 1) for all k ≥ 1. Let A(0) = ∅ and c0 = 0. For each k ∈ N assume that we have already defined A(k − 1) ⊂ N and ck−1 ∈ N satisfying conditions (a) and (b). Let S := A(k − 1) ∪ (ck−1 + kN). Since S contains an infinite arithmetic progression, it is non-TF. Hence by Theorem 2.6 DS is not weakly compact, and so by part (i) of Proposition A.2 it is not k-summing. In particular, πk(DS ) > k, so by applying Lemma A.3 with ψ = χS, we see that there exists M such that πk(DS∩{1,...,m}) > k for all m ≥ M . (A.3) Choose n such that ck−1 + kn ≥ M , and take A(k) := S ∩ {1, . . . , ck−1 + kn} = A(k − 1) ∪ {ck−1 + k, ck−1 + 2k, . . . , ck−1 + nk} . By construction this choice satisfies condition (c). Applying Lemma A.3 with ψ = χA(k), we can choose ck satisfying conditions (a) and (b), and so our construction may continue. Set A := S∞ k=1 A(k). Then for each k ∈ N, A ∩ {1, . . . , ck} = A(k) ∩ {1, . . . , ck} and so πk(DA) > k. Thus by Proposition A.2(i) πp(DA) = ∞ for all p ∈ [1, ∞). Finally, if we enumerate the elements of A as an increasing sequence a1 < a2 < . . . , then ai+1 − ai → ∞; it follows easily that A is a T-set. (cid:3) References [1] N. Bourbaki, Topological vector spaces. Chapters 1 -- 5, Elements of Mathematics (Berlin), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987. Translated from the French by H. G. Eggleston and S. Madan. [2] J. Bourgain, 'New Banach space properties of the disc algebra and H ∞', Acta Math. 152 (1984) 1 -- 48. [3] C. Chou, 'Weakly almost periodic functions and thin sets in discrete groups', Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 321 (1990) 333 -- 346. [4] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow, A. Tonge, Absolutely summing operators, vol. 43 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1995. [5] R. Diestel, Graph theory, vol. 173 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, third ed., 2005. [6] N. Hindman, 'On creating sets with large lower density', Discrete Math. 80 (1990) 153 -- 157. 13 [7] M. J. Heath, 'Bounded derivations from Banach algebras', PhD thesis, University of Nottingham, 2008. [8] R. E. Megginson, An introduction to Banach space theory, vol. 183 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998. [9] S. E. Morris, 'Bounded derivations from uniform algebras', PhD thesis, Univer- sity of Cambridge, 1993. [10] D. E. Ramirez, 'Uniform approximation by Fourier-Stieltjes coefficients', Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 64 (1968) 615 -- 623. [11] W. A. F. Ruppert, 'On weakly almost periodic sets', Semigroup Forum 32 (1985) 267 -- 281. D´epartement de math´ematiques Departamento de Matem´atica, et de statistique, Pavillon Alexandre-Vachon Universit´e Laval Qu´ebec, QB Canada, G1V 0A6 Instituto Superior T´ecnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1049-001 Lisboa Portugal Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] 14
1811.04103	1	1811	2018-11-09T19:17:50	The algebra of bounded type holomorphic functions on the ball	[ "math.FA" ]	We study the spectrum $M_b(U)$ of the algebra of bounded type holomorphic functions on a complete Reinhardt domain in a symmetrically regular Banach space $E$ as an analytic manifold over the bidual of the space. In the case that $U$ is the unit ball of $\ell_p$, $1<p<\infty$, we prove that each connected component of $M_b(B_{\ell_p})$ naturally identifies with a ball of a certain radius. We also provide estimates for this radius and in many natural cases we have the precise value. As a consequence, we obtain that for connected components different from that of evaluations, these radii are strictly smaller than one, and can be arbitrarily small. We also show that for other Banach sequence spaces, connected components do not necessarily identify with balls.	math.FA	math	THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA Abstract. We study the spectrum Mb(U ) of the algebra of bounded type holomorphic functions on a complete Reinhardt domain in a symmetrically regular Banach space E as an analytic manifold over the bidual of the space. In the case that U is the unit ball of ℓp, 1 < p < ∞, we prove that each connected component of Mb(Bℓp ) naturally identifies with a ball of a certain radius. We also provide estimates for this radius and in many natural cases we have the precise value. As a consequence, we obtain that for connected components different from that of evaluations, these radii are strictly smaller than one, and can be arbitrarily small. We also show that for other Banach sequence spaces, connected components do not necessarily identify with balls. 1. Introduction 8 1 0 2 v o N 9 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 3 0 1 4 0 . 1 1 8 1 : v i X r a The study of the spectrum of the algebra of bounded type analytic functions on a Banach space E was initiated by the seminal article of Aron, Cole and Gamelin [3]. Their main motivation was its relation with the algebra H∞(BE) of bounded holomorphic functions on the unit ball. As in the one or finite dimensional case, there is a natural projection defined on the spectrum M of H∞, which in the infinite dimensional case, has range contained in the closed unit ball of the bidual BE ′′. The results proved in [3] imply that the interior part of the spectrum M (i.e. the subset of homomorphisms which lie in the fibers of the interior points of the ball) naturally identifies with the spectrum Mb(BE) of the algebra of bounded type holomorphic functions on the unit ball of the Banach space E. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46G20, 46E50, 46T25, 46E25. Secondary 58B12, 32D26, 32A38. Key words and phrases. Holomorphic functions, spectrum of algebras, Riemann domains. The first author was supported by conicet-pip 11220130100329CO, ANPCyT PICT 2015-2299 and UBACyT 20020130100474BA. The second author was supported by conicet-pip 11220130100329CO, ANPCyT PICT 2015-2224 and UBACyT 20020130300052BA. The third author was supported by FAPESP-Brazil, Proc. 2014/07373-0. 1 2 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA In [4], the authors continued the study of the spectrum of the algebra of bounded type analytic functions. They showed that for symmetrically regular Banach spaces, the spectrum Mb(U) of the algebra Hb(U) of bounded type holomorphic functions on an open set U ⊂ E may be endowed with an analytic structure as an infinite dimensional Banach manifold modeled over the bidual E′′ of E. This was applied, for example, to characterize the envelope of holomorphy of U in [7, 12]. The analytic structure of Mb(X) for X a Riemann domain over a symetrically regular Banach space was studied in [9]. In this article, we study the spectrum of the algebra of bounded type analytic functions on the unit ball of E (or on a complete Reinhardt domain) from this point of view. More precisely, we aim to give an accurate description of Mb(U) as analytic manifold. We show that whenever U is a complete Reinhardt domain in a reflexive space with 1-unconditional basis, each connected component of Mb(U) is (identified with) a complete Reinhardt set, which is not necessarily a multiple of U. We also prove that, when U is the unit ball of ℓp, the connected components are identified with balls in the following sense (see definitions below): they are all of the form (1) S = {ϕz : kzk < r}, for some ϕ in the fiber of 0 and some 0 < r ≤ 1. Moreover, with the exception of the component formed by evaluations, the radius r is strictly smaller that 1. Also, there are connected components with arbitrary small radius. To show these facts, we give estimates of the radius of each connected component and, for the components of most natural homomorphisms, we give their exact value. This altogether provides a thorough description of Mb(Bℓp), which in turn gives information on the spectrum of H∞(Bℓp) by [3]. The fact that connected components are identified with balls as in (1) is a particular (isometric) property of ℓp: we exhibit an example of a Banach space E with 1-unconditional basis for which the connected components of Mb(BE) are not balls. The example is actually a Banach space isomorphic to ℓ2. THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 3 We refer to [8, 11] for general theory on complex analysis in Banach spaces, and to [5, 6, 8, 10, 13] for background on the space of holomorphic functions of bounded type and its spectrum. 2. The spectrum of bounded type functions on complete Reinhardt domains Let E be a complex Banach space. We denote by E′ its dual, and by BE its open unit ball. Sometimes, when the underlying Banach space is clear, we use Br(x) to denote the open ball of radius r centered at x and write Br when the ball is centered at the origin. For an open subset U ⊂ E, a U-bounded set is a bounded set A ⊂ U whose distance to the boundary of U, denoted by dU (A), is positive. A family (Un)n∈N of subsets of U is a fundamental family of U-bounded sets if each Un is U-bounded, and if every U-bounded set is contained in some Un. Every open set U admits a fundamental family of U-bounded sets, for instance Un = {x ∈ U : kxk ≤ n, dU (x) ≥ 1 n}, for every n ∈ N. A holomorphic function on U which is bounded on U-bounded sets is called of bounded type on U. The algebra of all bounded type holomorphic functions on U is denoted by Hb(U) and it is a Fr´echet algebra when it is endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on U-bounded sets. The spectrum of Hb(U), i.e. the set of non-zero continuous complex valued homomorphisms on Hb(U), is denoted by Mb(U). For each homomorphism ϕ ∈ Mb(U), there exists a U-bounded subset A such that (2) ϕ(f ) ≤ kfkA, for every f ∈ Hb(U), where kfkA is the supremum of f over the set A. We will write ϕ ≺ A when (2) holds. There is a natural projection π : Mb(U) → E′′, defined by π(ϕ) = ϕE ′ ∈ E′′, ϕ ∈ Mb(U). We thus have the following commutative diagram: 4 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA U δ ✲ Mb(U) ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ jE ❍ ❍ ❍ π ❍ ❍❥ ❄ E′′ where δ is the point evaluation mapping and jE : E → E′′ is the natural inclusion. A Banach space E is symmetrically regular if every continuous symmetric linear mapping T : E → E′ is weakly compact (an operator T : E → E′ is symmetric if T x1(x2) = T x2(x1) for all x1, x2 ∈ E). Every reflexive Banach space is symmetrically regular. In [4], for E a symmetrically regular Banach space and U ⊂ E an open subset, a topology is defined on Mb(U) so that the mapping π above is a local homeomorphism that makes (Mb(U), π) a Riemann domain over E′′. Let us briefly describe this topology (see [4] for details). Recall that any holomorphic function f of bounded type on E may be extended to a function AB(f ) ∈ Hb(E′′) through the Aron-Berner extension [1]. Given f ∈ Hb(U) and z ∈ E′′, the function dnf (x) x 7→ AB(cid:0) n! (cid:1)(z), is a bounded type holomorphic function on U. For ϕ ∈ Mb(U), we denote by dU (ϕ) the supremum of dU (A) over the U-bounded sets A satisfying ϕ ≺ A. If r < dU (ϕ), it is possible to define, for each z ∈ E′′ with kzk < r, the homomorphism ϕz given by ϕ(cid:16)AB(cid:0) dnf (·) n! (cid:1)(z)(cid:17). ϕz(f ) = (3) ∞ X n=0 When E is symmetrically regular, the sets {ϕz : kzk < r}, with ϕ ∈ Mb(U) and r < dU (ϕ), form a basis of a Hausdorff topology for Mb(U), and each set {ϕz : kzk < r} is homeomorphic to the ball π(ϕ) + rBE ′′ via the projection π. This endows Mb(U) with an analytic structure over E′′. Definition 2.1. Let U be an open subset of a symmetrically regular Banach space. The connected component of a homomorphism ϕ ∈ Mb(U) is called the sheet of ϕ in Mb(U) and is denoted by SU (ϕ). THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 5 In the case of bounded type entire functions (i.e., U = E), the description of the connected components of Mb(E) is simpler than for a general open set U, as pointed out in [4] and [8, Section 6.3]. Given z ∈ E′′, the function x 7→ τzf (x) := AB(f )(z +jEx) is an entire function of bounded type on E. Thus, given ϕ ∈ Mb(E) and z ∈ E′′, the homomorphism ϕz can be equivalently constructed as The sheet of ϕ is exactly ϕz(f ) := ϕ(τzf ). SE(ϕ) := {ϕz : z ∈ E′′}. Since π(ϕz) = π(ϕ) + z, π is a homeomorphism between SE(ϕ) and E′′. Remark 2.2. If U ⊂ E is a balanced open set (or more generally, if U is such that entire functions of bounded type are dense in Hb(U)), the spectrum Mb(U) is naturally embedded in Mb(E). Indeed, given ϕ ∈ Mb(U) we can naturally associate a unique character on Hb(E) which is just the restriction to the bounded type entire functions: ϕHb(E). When the context is clear we will denote this restriction by ϕ. The natural projection defined on Mb(U) is just the restriction of the projection defined on Mb(E), and we will denote both as π. Suppose that U is balanced. The embedding of (Mb(U), π) into (Mb(E), π) is continuous (with their topologies as Riemann domains), so each connected component of Mb(U) is embedded into a connected component of Mb(E) (which is homeomorphic to E′′). Therefore, restricted to each sheet, the projection πSU (ϕ) is a homeomorphism onto some open set of E′′. Our main goal is to describe the connected components SU (ϕ), and a natural way to do this is to understand the image πSU (ϕ). Under the same assumptions, given ϕ ∈ Mb(U) and ψ ∈ SU (ϕ) there exists z ∈ E′′ such that ψ = (ϕ)z and then (ϕ)z belongs to Mb(U) (that is, it can be extended to Hb(U)). Thus, to describe what the connected components of Mb(U) look like, it will be useful to determine for which z ∈ E′′ the homomorphism (ϕ)z belongs to Mb(U) (which means, again, that (ϕ)z can be extended to Hb(U)). The following lemma from [2] will be useful for our results, in particular for Lemma 2.4. 6 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA Lemma 2.3. [2, Lemma 1.7]. Let E be a Banach space with Schauder basis (ek)k∈N, and denote by (e′k)k∈N its dual basic sequence. Let z ∈ E′′ and ϕ ∈ π−1(z). Then for f ∈ Hb(E) and N ∈ N: ϕ(f ) = ϕ(cid:16)x 7→ f(cid:0) N X k=1 z(e′k)ek + ∞ X k=N +1 e′k(x)ek(cid:1)(cid:17). Lemma 2.4. Let E be a Banach space with Schauder basis (ek)k∈N, and let ϕ ∈ Mb(E) ∩ π−1(0). For each N ∈ N, the following assertions hold. (1) For z ∈ E′′ and f ∈ Hb(E), ϕz(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ AB(f )(z1, . . . , zN , xN +1 + zN +1, xN +2 + zN +2, . . . )). (2) If ϕ ≺ A, then ϕ ≺ A(N ), where A(N ) = {(0, . . . , 0, xN +1, xN +2, . . . ) : x = (xj) ∈ A}. Proof: If ϕ ∈ π−1(0), then z = 0 in Lemma 2.3. Then ϕ(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f(cid:0) ∞ X k=N +1 e′k(x)ek(cid:1)) = ϕ(x 7→ f (0, . . . , 0, xN +1, xN +2, . . . )). (1) If f ∈ Hb(E), then ϕz(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ AB(f )(x + z)). If we denote g(x) = AB(f )(x + z), then it follows from Lemma 2.3 that ϕz(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ g(0, . . . , 0, xN +1, xN +2, . . . ) = AB(f )(z1, . . . , zN , xN +1 + zN +1, xN +2 + zN +2, . . . )). (2) Since ϕ ≺ A, we have ϕ(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f (0, . . . , 0, xN +1, xN +2, . . . )) ≤ sup x∈A f (0, . . . , 0, xN +1, xN +2, . . . ) = sup A(N) f. ✷ We recall that a subset U of a Banach space with unconditional basis (ek)k∈N is complete Reinhardt if P∞k=1 λkxkek ∈ U, whenever P∞k=1 xkek ∈ U and λk ≤ 1 for all k. Proposition 2.6 states that if U is a complete Reinhardt domain in a Banach space with 1-unconditional basis, then each sheet in the spectrum is also a complete Reinhardt domain. First we need the following lemma, which is probably known. THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 7 Lemma 2.5. Let E be a Banach space with unconditional basis and let U ⊂ E be a complete Reinhardt open set. Then U admits a fundamental system of U-bounded sets formed by complete Reinhardt sets. Proof: Any Banach space with unconditional basis can be renormed so that kλ · xk ≤ kxk whenever kλk∞ ≤ 1. Assuming that E has such a norm, let us show that the sets Un = {x ∈ U : kxk ≤ n, dU (x) ≥ 1 n} are complete Reinhardt. Note that it suffices to prove that if Bδ(x) ⊂ U and kλk∞ ≤ 1, then Bδ(λ · x) ⊂ U. Let y be a point in Bδ(λ · x) and define a vector z ∈ E by specifying its coordinates as follows: zj =   yj, xj xj max(xj,yj) if xj = 0, otherwise. If the index j is such that xj < yj, then zj − xj = yj − xj ≤ yj − λjxj ≤ yj − λjxj by the triangle inequality. And if j is such that xj ≥ yj, then zj − xj = 0 ≤ yj − λjxj. Thus zj − xj ≤ yj − λjxj for every index j, so kz − xk ≤ ky − λ · xk < δ. In other words, z ∈ Bδ(x), so z ∈ U. Since zj ≥ yj for every j, and U is a complete Reinhardt set, it follows that y ∈ U. But y is an arbitrary point of Bδ(λ · x), so we conclude that Bδ(λ · x) ⊂ U. ✷ If we only look at the subset of homomorphisms that project to E, then the above topology restricted to Mb(U) ∩ π−1(E) is well defined, even though E is not symmetrically regular. Thus, for an arbitrary Banach space E, (Mb(U) ∩ π−1(E), ππ−1(E)) is a Riemann domain over E (see [7]). Proposition 2.6. Let E be Banach space with 1-unconditional basis (ek)k∈N and let U ⊂ E be a complete Reinhardt open subset. Then, in each sheet of Mb(U) there is a character ϕ ∈ Mb(U)∩π−1(0) such that the set is a complete Reinhardt subset of E. {w ∈ E : (ϕ)w extends to Mb(U)} Proof: Recall that since Hb(E) is dense in Hb(U), we have that Mb(U) is embedded in Mb(E). Then, given ψ ∈ Mb(U) ∩ π−1(E) there exists ϕ ∈ Mb(E) ∩ π−1(0) and z ∈ E such that ψ = ϕz. We 8 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA must show that for every scalar sequence λ with kλk∞ ≤ 1, the vector w = λ · z satisfies that ϕw extends to Mb(U) whenever ϕz extends to Mb(U). Note that since ϕw belongs to Mb(E), it suffices to show that ϕw ≺ A for some U-bounded set A. Let us start by assuming that z = PN j=1 zjej. If f ∈ Hb(E), it follows by Lemma 2.4 that ϕw(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f (λ1z1, . . . , λN zN , xN +1, xN +2, . . . )). Let us consider the entire function of bounded type, fλ(x) = f (λ1x1, . . . , λN xN , xN +1, xN +2, . . . ), then, applying again Lemma 2.4, ϕz(fλ) = ϕ(x 7→ fλ(z1, . . . , zN , xN +1, xN +2, . . . )) = ϕ(x 7→ f (λ1z1, . . . , λN zN , xN +1, xN +2, . . . )) = ϕw(f ). By the previous lemma we may take a complete Reinhardt U-bounded set, A, such that ϕz ≺ A. Then, ϕw(f ) = ϕz(fλ) ≤ sup A fλ ≤ sup A f. Therefore ϕw ∈ Mb(U) and ϕw ≺ A. 3 3 Take now an arbitrary z ∈ E for which ϕz belongs to Mb(U) with ϕz ≺ A. Let us denote by πN the projection onto the span of {e1, . . . , eN} and choose 0 < δ < dU (A) . We can take N such that kπN (z) − zk < δ < dU (A) . Now, proceeding as in [4, page 550], we have ϕπN (z) ≺ Aδ := A + Bδ. By the first part of the proof, for kλk∞ ≤ 1 we have ϕλ·πN (z) ≺ Aδ. Since dU (Aδ) > 2δ and kλ · πN (z) − λ · zk < δ, we have ϕλ·z ≺ A2δ. Finally, since δ is arbitrary small, we conclude that ϕλ·z ≺ A. ✷ If the Banach space E is reflexive (which obviously implies that E is symmetrically regular), the above result tells us that the sheets of Mb(U) are complete Reinhardt domains. Corollary 2.7. Let E be a reflexive Banach space with 1-unconditional basis and let U ⊂ E be a complete Reinhardt open subset. Then for each sheet S of Mb(U) there exist a character ϕ ∈ THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 9 Mb(U) ∩ π−1(0) and a complete Reinhardt domain V ⊂ E such that S = {(ϕ)z ∈ Mb(U) : z ∈ V }. 3. The spectrum of bounded type functions on Bℓp We now focus in the case where U is the unit ball of ℓp. The following theorem shows that each sheet is also a ball centered at zero. We will see later in Theorem 3.3 that the radius of each sheet other than the sheet of evaluations, is strictly smaller than 1. Theorem 3.1. Let E = ℓp, 1 < p < ∞, and let U = Bℓp. Then all sheets are balls centered at 0, that is, in each sheet there is some ϕ ∈ Mb(U) ∩ π−1(0), and π(SU (ϕ)) = {w ∈ E : (ϕ)w ∈ Mb(U)} = rBℓp, for some 0 < r ≤ 1. Proof: By Corollary 2.7 we know that each sheet intersects π−1(0). So take ϕ ∈ Mb(U) ∩ π−1(0) and suppose that (ϕ)z belongs to Mb(U) for some z ∈ E. The theorem will be proved if we show that (ϕ)w ∈ Mb(U) whenever kwk < kzk. If w = (wj)j∈N and z = (zj)j∈N are such that kwk < kzk, then there exists N1 ∈ N such that kPN j=1 wjejk < kPN j=1 zjejk for every N ≥ N1. On the other hand, since (ϕ)z ∈ SU (ϕ), there exists δ > 0 such that (ϕ)z+y ∈ SU (ϕ), for all kyk < δ. So let us take N ≥ N1 such that ∞ X j=N +1 zjp < (cid:16) δ 3(cid:17)p and ∞ X j=N +1 wjp < (cid:16) δ 3(cid:17)p . Then, if v = (ΠN (z), (I − ΠN )(w)), where ΠN : ℓp −→ ℓp denotes the canonical projection, we have that (ϕ)v also belongs to SU (ϕ). Note that kwk < kvk and that (I − ΠN )(w) = (I − ΠN )(v). To show that (ϕ)w ∈ SU (ϕ), we will construct some auxiliary bounded linear transformations, as follows. First, take γ : CN −→ C such that kγk = k(v1, . . . , vN )k−1 and γ(v1, . . . , vN ) = 1. Next, we define SN : CN −→ CN by SN (x) = γ(x)(w1, . . . , wN ), 10 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA which clearly satisfies kSNk ≤ 1 and SN (v1, . . . , vN ) = (w1, . . . , wN ). Finally, let TN : ℓp −→ ℓp be given by TN (x) = (SN (ΠN (x)), (I − ΠN )(x)). In other words, TN (x) = (SN (x1, . . . , xN ), xN +1, xN +2, . . . ), for x ∈ ℓp. Note that TN (v) = w and, since kTN (x)kp = kSN (ΠN (x))kp + k(I − ΠN )(x)kp ≤ kSNkpkΠN (x)kp + k(I − ΠN )(x)kp ≤ kΠN (x)kp + k(I − ΠN )(x)kp = kxkp, we also have kTNk ≤ 1. If f ∈ Hb(E), then it follows from Lemma 2.4 that (ϕ)v(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f (ΠN (v), (I − ΠN )(x + v)) and that (ϕ)w(f ) = (ϕ)TN (v)(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f (ΠN (TN (v)), (I − ΠN )(x + TN (v))). Since ΠN (TN (v)) = SN (ΠN (v)) and (I − ΠN )(TN (v)) = (I − ΠN )(v), we have (4) (ϕ)w(f ) = (ϕ)TN (v)(f ) = ϕ(x 7→ f (SN (ΠN (v)), (I − ΠN )(x + v)). On the other hand, for f ∈ Hb(Bℓp), consider fN = f ◦ TNBℓp ∈ Hb(Bℓp). Then we have fN (ΠN (v), (I − ΠN )(x + v)) = f ◦ TN(cid:0)ΠN (v), (I − ΠN )(x + v)(cid:1) = f (TN (v1, . . . , vN , xN +1 + wN +1, xN +2 + wN +2, . . . )) = f (SN (ΠN (v)), (I − ΠN )(x + v)). Hence, (ϕ)v(fN ) = ϕ(x 7→ fN (ΠN (v), (I − ΠN )(x + v)) = ϕ(x 7→ f (SN (ΠN (v)), (I − ΠN )(x + v)) = (ϕ)w(f ). If A is a U-bounded ball such that ϕv ≺ A, then, using again that kTNk ≤ 1, we conclude that (ϕ)w(f ) = (ϕ)v(fN ) ≤ sup A f, A fN = sup TN (A)f ≤ sup THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL which shows that (ϕ)w ∈ SU (ϕ). 11 ✷. A natural question at this point is whether each sheet on Mb(BE) is necessarily a ball centered at zero, for more general Banach spaces. The next example shows that this is not always true. Example 3.2. Let E = he0i⊕∞ ℓ2. Take ϕ ∈ Mb(BE) to be any limit point of the sequence (δen/√2)n. By Proposition 2.6 we know that the projection of the sheet of ϕ π(SBE (ϕ)) = {x ∈ E : (ϕ)x ∈ Mb(BE)}, is a complete Reinhardt open set. Let us show that π(SBE (ϕ)) is not a ball centered at 0. For this we will see that (ϕ)se0 ∈ Mb(BE) for every s < 1 but that (ϕ)te1 /∈ Mb(BE) for every t > 1/√2. For the first assertion, just note that the set (se0 + en/√2)n is BE-bounded and clearly (ϕ)se0 ≺ (se0 + en/√2)n, thus (ϕ)se0 ∈ Mb(BE). For the second assertion, define the function f (x) = Pk≥1 x2 k. Then f ∈ Hb(E) and for every m ∈ N, its mth-power satisfies kf mkBE = 1. On the other hand, since (ϕ)te1 ∈ Mb(E), we know that for each m ∈ N, (ϕ)te1(f m) is a limit point of (δte1+en/√2f m)n. Finally, since f (te1 + en/√2)m = (t2 + 1 2)m → ∞ as m → ∞, we conclude that (ϕ)te1 cannot be extended to Hb(BE). Now that we know that each sheet of Mb(Bℓp) is a ball centered at zero, we would like to estimate its radius. Let us first recall some terminology from [3] that will be used in the next theorem. For ϕ ∈ Mb(BE) and m ≥ 0 we associate ϕm ∈ P(mE)′, as ϕm := ϕP(mE). Recall also that R(ϕ), the radius of ϕ, is defined as the infimum of all r > 0 such that ϕ ≺ rBE. In [3] it is shown that R(ϕ) = lim sup m∈N kϕmk 1 m = sup m∈N kϕmk 1 m . It should be mentioned that the definition of the radius and the above result were given for ϕ ∈ Mb(E), but it is easily checked that the same works for ϕ ∈ Mb(BE). Theorem 3.3. Let E = ℓp, 1 < p < ∞, and let U = Bℓp. Given a sheet S, we take ϕ ∈ S ∩ π−1(0) (which exists thanks to Theorem 3.1). Then, (1 − R(ϕ)p) p · Bℓp ⊂ π(S) ⊂ (cid:0)1 − sup 1 m≥p kϕmk(cid:1)1/⌈p⌉ · Bℓp, 12 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA where ⌈p⌉ denotes the smallest natural number which is ≥ p. 1 Proof: Let us first prove the lower inclusion. Take z ∈ (1 − R(ϕ)p) p · Bℓp. Since Mb(Bℓp) embeds in Mb(ℓp), we know that (ϕ)z ∈ Mb(ℓp). We must show that (ϕ)z belongs to Mb(Bℓp), that is, that (ϕ)z is continuous with respect to the topology in Hb(Bℓp) of uniform convergence on Bℓp-bounded sets. Recall that the seminorms qs(f ) = P∞n=0 sn(cid:13)(cid:13) n! (cid:13)(cid:13), with 0 < s < 1, define the topology on dnf (0) Hb(Bℓp) (see [8]). Let f ∈ Hb(ℓp) and let us denote by P∞n=0 Pn its Taylor series at the origin, then (ϕ)z(f ) = ∞ X n=0 ϕ(cid:0)x 7→ Pn(x + z)(cid:1). Now, since kzkp + R(ϕ)p < 1, we can find N ∈ N and r < 1 such that for every y ∈ R(ϕ) · B(N ) have z + y ∈ rBℓp. Then, by the definition of R(ϕ) and Lemma 2.4, it follows that ℓp , we Therefore, ϕ(cid:0)x 7→ Pn(z + x)(cid:1) ≤ sup y∈R(ϕ)·B(N) ℓp kPn(z + y)k ≤ rnkPnk. (ϕ)z(f ) ≤ ∞ X n=0 ϕ(cid:0)x 7→ Pn(z + x)(cid:1) ≤ ∞ X n=0 rnkPnk = qr(f ). This implies that (ϕ)z belongs to Mb(Bℓp). Now we prove the upper inclusion. By Theorem 3.1 we already know that SBℓp (ϕ) is a ball centered at zero. Let z = te1, with t⌈p⌉ + supm≥p kϕmk > 1 + δ, for some δ > 0. We will show that (ϕ)z is not continuous on Hb(Bℓp). This will prove that the radius of the ball SBℓp (ϕ) is smaller than or equal to (1 − supm≥p kϕmk)1/⌈p⌉. Let 0 < r < 1 be such that ϕ ≺ rBℓp. Consider m0 ≥ p with t⌈p⌉ + kϕm0k > 1 + δ. For ε < δ, let P0 ∈ P (m0E) be such that ϕ(P0) > kϕm0k − ε, and kP0k ≤ 1. Note that by Lemma 2.4, we have that ϕ(P0) = ϕ(P0 ◦ (I − e′1 ⊗ e1)). Let Q0 = P0 ◦ (I − e′1 ⊗ e1). It follows from Lemma 2.4 that (ϕ)te1(Q0) = ϕ(x 7→ Q0(x + te1)) = ϕ(x 7→ Q0(x)) = ϕ(Q0). THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 13 Consider the polynomial Q(x) = (e′1)⌈p⌉ + Q0(x). Since m0 ≥ p, we have supkxkp≤1 Q(x) ≤ 1. Indeed, for kxkp ≤ 1, Q(x) ≤ x1⌈p⌉ + P0 ◦ (I − e′1 ⊗ e1)(x) ≤ x1⌈p⌉ + k(I − e′1 ⊗ e1)(x)km0 p ≤ kxkp p ≤ 1. Moreover, (ϕ)te1(Q) = (ϕ)te1(cid:16)(e′1)⌈p⌉ + Q0(cid:17) = t⌈p⌉ + ϕ(Q0), and then (ϕ)te1(Q) =t⌈p⌉ + ϕ(Q0) > t⌈p⌉ + kϕm0k − ε > 1 + δ − ε > 1 + s, for some s > 0. Therefore it follows that (ϕ)te1(Qn) = (ϕ)te1(Q)n > (1 + s)n → ∞ when n → ∞, while kQnkBℓp ≤ 1 for every n. Then (ϕ)te1 /∈ Mb(Bℓp). ✷ The only homomorphism ϕ such that ϕm = 0 for sufficiently large m is δ0, so the previous Theorem allows us to conclude the following. Corollary 3.4. Let 1 < p < ∞, and let S ⊂ Mb(Bℓp) be a sheet. Then π(S) = Bℓp if, and only if, S is the sheet of evaluations. Remark 3.5. The results of this section can be summarized in the following way. Given a connected component S of Mb(Bℓp), there exists ϕ ∈ Mb(Bℓp) ∩ π−1(0) and 0 < r ≤ 1 such that S = {ϕz : kzk < r}. Moreover, r and ϕ satisfy (1 − R(ϕ)p) 1 p ≤ r ≤ (cid:0)1 − sup m≥p kϕmk(cid:1)1/⌈p⌉. Some comments deserve to be highlighted. If p is a natural number and ϕ is a homomorphism such that R(ϕ) = supm∈N kϕmk R(ϕ)p) m is attained at m = p , then it follows that π(SBℓp (ϕ)) = B(0, (1 − p ), and then we have an accurate description of the sheet of ϕ. It is interesting to mention that 1 1 this is not an artificial hypothesis, since the r-block homomorphisms considered in [7, Definition 5.3] satisfy this condition. From this point of view, [7, Proposition 5.4] can be seen now as a consequence of Theorem 3.3. 14 DANIEL CARANDO, SANTIAGO MURO, AND DANIELA M. VIEIRA In [8, Section 6.3], the spectrum Mb(E) of a symmetrically regular Banach space was informally referred to as the envelope of "bounded" holomorphy of E because each bounded type entire function is proved to extend to a holomorphic function on Mb(E) which is of bounded type on each connected component of Mb(E). However, as shown in [7, Proposition 5.1], the extension need not be of bounded type on the whole Riemann domain, even for a homogeneous polynomial. In the case of the unit ball, we do not know whether the extensions to the spectrum are of bounded type or not. If for any ϕ ∈ Mb(Bℓp) the connected components would satisfy π(SBℓp (ϕ)) = B(0, (1 − R(ϕ)p) 1 p ) (that is, if the left inclusion in Theorem 3.3 were always an equality), then it would be possible to answer this question affirmatively. Acknowledgments We would like to thank the anonymous reviewer for his/her comments, which improved the presentation of the article. We are also indebted to Professor Harold P. Boas for carefully reading the manuscript, for his valuable comments and, in particular, for providing us with a simple proof for Lemma 2.5. D. M. Vieira thanks the Departamento de Matem´atica of the Universidad de Buenos Aires and its members for their kind hospitality. References [1] R. Aron, P. Berner, A Hahn-Banach extension theorem for analytic mappings, Bull. Soc. Math. France 106 (1978) 3-24. [2] R. Aron, D. Carando, S. Lassalle, M. Maestre, Cluster values of holomorphic functions of bounded type, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 368 (2016) 2355-2369. [3] R. Aron, B. Cole, T. Gamelin, Spectra of algebras of analytic functions on a Banach space, J. Reine Angew. Math. 415 (1991) 51-93. [4] R. Aron, P. Galindo, D. Garc´ıa, M. Maestre, Regularity and algebras of analytic functions in infinite dimensions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 348 (1996) 543-559. [5] D. Carando, D. Garc´ıa, M. Maestre, Homomorphisms and composition operators on algebras of analytic functions of bounde type, Adv. Math. 197 (2005) 607-629. THE ALGEBRA OF BOUNDED TYPE HOLOMORPHIC FUNCTIONS ON THE BALL 15 [6] D. Carando, D. Garc´ıa, M. Maestre, P. Sevilla-Peris, On the spectra of algebras of analytic functions, Contempo- rary Mathematics, 561 (2012) 165-198. [7] D. Carando, S. Muro, Envelopes of holomorphy and extension of functions of bounded type, Adv. Math. 229 (2012) 2098-2121. [8] S. Dineen, Complex Analysis on Infinite Dimensional Spaces, Springer-Verlag London, 1999. [9] S. Dineen, M. Venkova. Extending bounded type holomorphic mappings on a Banach space, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 297 (2004) 645-658. [10] T. Gamelin, Analytic functions on Banach spaces, Complex potential theory. Springer, Dordrecht, 1994. 187-233. [11] J. Mujica, Complex Analysis in Banach Spaces, North-Holland Math. Stud. 120, Amsterdam, 1986. [12] S. Muro, Funciones holomorfas de tipo acotado e ideales de polinomios homog´eneos en espacios de Banach, Tesis, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, 2010. [13] D. M. Vieira, Spectra of algebras of holomorphic functions of bounded type, Indag. Math. (N.S.) 18 (2007) 269-279. Departamento de Matem´atica, Facultad de Cs. Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires and IMAS-UBA-CONICET, Argentina. Departamento de Matem´atica Facultad de Cs. Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, and CIFASIS-CONICET Departamento de Matem´atica, Instituto de Matem´atica e Estat´ıstica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brasil E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected]
1506.09010	1	1506	2015-06-30T09:53:31	Strong extensions for $q$-summing operators acting in $p$-convex Banach function spaces for $1 \le p \le q$	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $1\le p\le q<\infty$ and let $X$ be a $p$-convex Banach function space over a $\sigma$-finite measure $\mu$. We combine the structure of the spaces $L^p(\mu)$ and $L^q(\xi)$ for constructing the new space $S_{X_p}^{\,q}(\xi)$, where $\xi$ is a probability Radon measure on a certain compact set associated to $X$. We show some of its properties, and the relevant fact that every $q$-summing operator $T$ defined on $X$ can be continuously (strongly) extended to $S_{X_p}^{\,q}(\xi)$. This result turns out to be a mixture of the Pietsch and Maurey-Rosenthal factorization theorems, which provide (strong) factorizations for $q$-summing operators through $L^q$-spaces when $1 \le q \le p$. Thus, our result completes the picture, showing what happens in the complementary case $1\le p\le q$, opening the door to the study of the multilinear versions of $q$-summing operators also in these cases.	math.FA	math	STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS ACTING IN p-CONVEX BANACH FUNCTION SPACES FOR 1 ≤ p ≤ q O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P´EREZ Abstract. Let 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞ and let X be a p-convex Ba- nach function space over a σ-finite measure µ. We combine the structure of the spaces Lp(µ) and Lq(ξ) for constructing the new space S q (ξ), where ξ is a probability Radon measure on a certain Xp compact set associated to X. We show some of its properties, and the relevant fact that every q-summing operator T defined on X can be continuously (strongly) extended to S q (ξ). This result Xp turns out to be a mixture of the Pietsch and Maurey-Rosenthal factorization theorems, which provide (strong) factorizations for q-summing operators through Lq-spaces when 1 ≤ q ≤ p. Thus, our result completes the picture, showing what happens in the complementary case 1 ≤ p ≤ q, opening the door to the study of the multilinear versions of q-summing operators also in these cases. 1. Introduction Fix 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞ and let T : X → E be a Banach space valued linear operator defined on a saturated order semi-continuous Banach function space X related to a σ-finite measure µ. In this paper we prove an extension theorem for T in the case when T is q-summing and X is p-convex. In order to do this, we first define and analyze a new class Date: July 5, 2021. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 46E30, 47B38. Key words and phrases. Banach function spaces, extension of operators, order continuity, p-convexity, q-summing operators. The first author gratefully acknowledge the support of the Ministerio de Econom´ıa y Competitividad (project #MTM2012-36732-C03-03) and the Junta de Andaluc´ıa (projects FQM-262 and FQM-7276), Spain. The second author acknowledges with thanks the support of the Ministerio de Econom´ıa y Competitividad (project #MTM2012-36740-C02-02), Spain. 1 2 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ of Banach function spaces denoted by S q Xp(ξ) which have some good properties, mainly order continuity and p-convexity. The space S q Xp(ξ) is constructed by using the spaces Lp(µ) and Lq(ξ), where ξ is a finite positive Radon measure on a certain compact set associated to X. Corollary 5.2 states the desired extension for T . Namely, if T is q-summing and X is p-convex then T can be strongly extended contin- uously to a space of the type S q Xp(ξ). Here we use the term "strongly" for this extension to remark that the map carrying X into S q Xp(ξ) is actually injective; as the reader will notice (Proposition 3.1), this is one of the goals of our result. In order to develop our arguments, we introduce a new geometric tool which we call the family of p-strongly q- concave operators. The inclusion of X into S q Xp(ξ) turns out to belong to this family, in particular, it is q-concave. If T is q-summing then it is p-strongly q-concave (Proposition 5.1). Actually, in Theorem 4.4 we show that in the case when X is p-convex, T can be continuously extended to a space S q Xp(ξ) if and only if T is p-strongly q-concave. This result can be understood as an extension of some well-known relevant factorizations of the operator theory: (I) Maurey-Rosenthal factorization theorem: If T is q-concave and X is q-convex and order continuous, then T can be extended to a weighted Lq-space related to µ, see for instance [3, Corollary 5]. Several generalizations and applications of the ideas behind this fundamental factorization theorem have been recently obtained, see [1, 2, 4, 5, 9]. (II) Pietsch factorization theorem: If T is q-summing then it factors through a closed subspace of Lq(ξ), where ξ is a probability Radon measure on a certain compact set associated to X, see for instance [6, Theorem 2.13]. In Theorem 4.4, the extreme case p = q gives a Maurey-Rosenthal type factorization, while the other extreme case p = 1 gives a Pietsch type factorization. We must say also that our generalization will allow to face the problem of the factorization of several p-summing type of multilinear operators from products of Banach function spaces -- a topic of current interest -- , since it allows to understand factorization STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 3 of q-summing operators from p-convex function lattices from a unified point of view not depending on the order relation between p and q. As a consequence of Theorem 4.4, we also prove a kind of Kakutani representation theorem (see for instance [7, Theorem 1.b.2]) through the spaces S q Xp(ξ) for p-convex Banach function spaces which are p- strongly q-concave (Corollary 4.5). 2. Preliminaries Let (Ω, Σ, µ) be a σ-finite measure space and denote by L0(µ) the space of all measurable real functions on Ω, where functions which are equal µ-a.e. are identified. By a Banach function space (briefly B.f.s.) we mean a Banach space X ⊂ L0(µ) with norm k · kX, such that if f ∈ L0(µ), g ∈ X and f ≤ g µ-a.e. then f ∈ X and kf kX ≤ kgkX. In particular, X is a Banach lattice with the µ-a.e. pointwise order, in which the convergence in norm of a sequence implies the convergence µ-a.e. for some subsequence. A B.f.s. X is said to be saturated if there exists no A ∈ Σ with µ(A) > 0 such that f χA = 0 µ-a.e. for all f ∈ X, or equivalently, if X has a weak unit (i.e. g ∈ X such that g > 0 µ-a.e.). Lemma 2.1. Let X be a saturated B.f.s. For every f ∈ L0(µ), there exists (fn)n≥1 ⊂ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. Proof. Consider a weak unit g ∈ X and take gn = ng/(1 + ng). Note that 0 < gn < ng µ-a.e., so gn is a weak unit in X. Moreover, (gn)n≥1 increases µ-a.e. to the constant function equal to 1. Now, take fn = gnf χ{ω∈Ω: f ≤n}. Since 0 ≤ fn ≤ ngn µ-a.e., we have that fn ∈ X, and fn ↑ f µ-a.e. (cid:3) The Kothe dual of a B.f.s. X is the space X ′ given by the functions h ∈ X ′. Here, as usual, BX denotes the closed unit ball of X. Each h ∈ L0(µ) such that R hf dµ < ∞ for all f ∈ X. If X is saturated then X ′ is a saturated B.f.s. with norm khkX ′ = supf ∈BXR hf dµ for function h ∈ X ′ defines a functional ζ(h) on X by hζ(h), f i =R hf dµ for all f ∈ X. In fact, X ′ is isometrically order isomorphic (via ζ) to a closed subspace of the topological dual X ∗ of X. From now and on, a B.f.s. X will be assumed to be saturated. If for every f, fn ∈ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. it follows that kfnkX ↑ 4 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ kf kX, then X is said to be order semi-continuous. This is equivalent to ζ(X ′) being a norming subspace of X ∗, i.e. kf kX = suph∈BX′R f h dµ for all f ∈ X. A B.f.s. X is order continuous if for every f, fn ∈ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e., it follows that fn → f in norm. In this case, X ′ can be identified with X ∗. For general issues related to B.f.s.' see [7], [8] and [10, Ch. 15] con- sidering the function norm ρ defined as ρ(f ) = kf kX if f ∈ X and ρ(f ) = ∞ in other case. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. A B.f.s. X is said to be p-convex if there exists a constant C > 0 such that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 fip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X ≤ C(cid:16) nXi=1 kfikp X(cid:17)1/p for every finite subset (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X. In this case, M p(X) will denote the smallest constant C satisfying the above inequality. Note that M p(X) ≥ 1. A relevant fact is that every p-convex B.f.s. X has an equivalent norm for which X is p-convex with constant M p(X) = 1, see [7, Proposition 1.d.8]. The p-th power of a B.f.s. X is the space defined as Xp = {f ∈ L0(µ) : f 1/p ∈ X}, endowed with the quasi-norm kf kXp = k f 1/p kp X, for f ∈ Xp. Note that Xp is always complete, see the proof of [8, Proposition 2.22]. If X is p-convex with constant M p(X) = 1, from [3, Lemma 3], k · kXp is a norm and so Xp is a B.f.s. Note that Xp is saturated if and only if X is so. The same holds for the properties of being order continuous and order semi-continuous. 3. The space S q Xp(ξ) Let 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞ and let X be a saturated p-convex B.f.s. We can assume without loss of generality that the p-convexity constant M p(X) is equal to 1. Then, Xp and (Xp)′ are saturated B.f.s.'. Consider the topology σ(cid:0)(Xp)′, Xp(cid:1) on (Xp)′ defined by the elements of Xp. Note (Xp)′ of all positive elements of the closed unit ball of that the subset B+ (Xp)′ is compact for this topology. STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 5 Let ξ be a finite positive Radon measure on B+ (Xp)′. For f ∈ L0(µ), consider the map φf : B+ (Xp)′ → [0, ∞] defined by φf (h) =(cid:16)ZΩ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p for all h ∈ B+ (Xp)′. In the case when f ∈ X, since f p ∈ Xp, it follows that φf is continuous and so measurable. For a general f ∈ L0(µ), by Lemma 2.1 we can take a sequence (fn)n≥1 ⊂ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. Applying monotone convergence theorem, we have that φfn ↑ φf pointwise and so φf is measurable. Then, we can consider the integral φf (h)dξ(h) ∈ [0, ∞] and define the following space: (Xp)′ S q Let us endow S q (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ RB+ Xp(ξ) =(f ∈ L0(µ) : ZB+ (ξ) = ZB+ = (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) h →(cid:13)(cid:13)f h1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(µ)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(ξ) (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ Xp(ξ) with the seminorm kf kS q Xp . f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) < ∞) . f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h)!1/q In general, k · kS q (ξ) is not a norm. For instance, if ξ is the Dirac Xp measure at some h0 ∈ B+ (Xp)′ such that A = {ω ∈ Ω : h0(ω) = 0} satisfies µ(A) > 0, taking f = gχA ∈ X with g being a weak unit of X, we have that kf kS q Xp and (ξ) =(cid:16)ZA g(ω)ph0(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)1/p = 0 µ({ω ∈ Ω : f (ω) 6= 0}) = µ(A ∩ {ω ∈ Ω : g(ω) 6= 0}) = µ(A) > 0. Proposition 3.1. If the Radon measure ξ satisfies ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZA h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) = 0 ⇒ µ(A) = 0 (3.1) Xp(ξ) is a saturated B.f.s. Moreover, S q then, S q p-convex (with constant 1) and X ⊂ S q Xp(ξ) continuously. Xp(ξ) is order continuous, 6 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ Xp(ξ) and kf kS q Proof. It is clear that if f ∈ L0(µ), g ∈ S q f ∈ S q norm. Suppose that kf kS q Xp for every n ≥ 1. Since χAn ≤ nf and (ξ) ≤ kgkS q Xp Xp(ξ) and f ≤ g µ-a.e. then (ξ) is a (ξ) = 0 and set An = {ω ∈ Ω : f (ω) > 1 n } (ξ). Let us see that k · kS q Xp Xp (Xp)′(cid:16)ZAn ZB+ h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) =(cid:13)(cid:13)χAn(cid:13)(cid:13)q from (3.1) we have that µ(An) = 0 and so (ξ) ≤ nqkf kq S q Xp (ξ) = 0, S q Xp µ({ω ∈ Ω : f (ω) 6= 0}) = lim n→∞ µ(An) = 0. Now we will see that S q S q Xp(ξ) whenever (fn)n≥1 ⊂ S q Xp(ξ) is complete by showing thatPn≥1 fn ∈ Xp(ξ) with C =P kfnkS q let us prove that Pn≥1 fn < ∞ µ-a.e. For every N, n ≥ 1, taking NPn n = {ω ∈ Ω : Pn ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZAN h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p j=1 fj(ω) > N}, since χAN j=1 fj, we have dξ(h) = kχAN (ξ) < ∞. First AN that n ≤ 1 n kq S q Xp (ξ) Xp n ≤ nXj=1 1 N q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) q fj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ (ξ) C q N q . S q Xp Note that, for N fixed, (AN applying twice the monotone convergence theorem, it follows that n )n≥1 increases. Taking limit as n → ∞ and ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)Z∪n≥1AN n h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) ≤ C q N q . Then, (Xp)′(cid:16)Z∩N ≥1∪n≥1AN ZB+ n h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) ≤ lim N→∞ C q N q = 0, and so, from (3.1), µ(cid:16)nω ∈ Ω : Xn≥1 fn(ω) = ∞o(cid:17) = µ(cid:16) \N ≥1[n≥1 AN n(cid:17) = 0. STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 7 Hence, Pn≥1 fn ∈ L0(µ). Again applying the monotone convergence theorem, it follows that (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Xn≥1 ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ(cid:0)Xn≥1 ZB+ n→∞ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ(cid:0) nXj=1 lim p fn(ω)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p fn(ω)(cid:1)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p fj(ω)(cid:1)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p fj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n→∞(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) nXj=1 lim dξ(h) ≤ dξ(h) = dξ(h) = q S q Xp ≤ C q (ξ) and thusPn≥1 fn ∈ S q Xp(ξ). Note that if f ∈ X, for every h ∈ B+ (Xp)′ we have that f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω) ≤ k f p kXpkhk(Xp)′ ≤ kf kp X and so ZΩ ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ Then, X ⊂ S q particular, S q S q Xp(ξ). Let us show that S q f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p (ξ) ≤ ξ(cid:0)B+ Xp Xp(ξ) and kf kS q Xp(ξ) is saturated, as a weak unit in X is a weak unit in (Xp)′(cid:1)1/q kf kX for all f ∈ X. In dξ(h) ≤ kf kq X ξ(cid:0)B+ (Xp)′(cid:1). Xp(ξ) is order continuous. Consider f, fn ∈ S q Xp(ξ) such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. Note that, since (Xp )′(cid:16)ZΩ ZB+ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) < ∞, there exists a ξ-measurable set B with ξ(B+ f − fnph ↓ 0 µ-a.e. and f − fnph ≤ f ph µ-a.e. Then, applying RΩ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω) < ∞ for all h ∈ B. Fixed h ∈ B, we have that the dominated convergence theorem,RΩ f (ω) − fn(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω) ↓ 0. (Xp)′\B) = 0 such that 8 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ Consider the measurable functions φ, φn : B+ (Xp)′ → [0, ∞] given by φ(h) = (cid:16)ZΩ φn(h) = (cid:16)ZΩ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p f (ω) − fn(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p for all h ∈ B+ by the dominated convergence theorem, we obtain (Xp)′. It follows that φn ↓ 0 ξ-a.e. and φn ≤ φ ξ-a.e. Again kf − fnkq S q Xp (ξ) =ZB+ (Xp)′ φn(h)dξ(h) ↓ 0. Finally, let us see that S q consider the measurable functions φi : B+ defined by Xp(ξ) is p-convex. Fix (fi)n Xp(ξ) and (Xp)′ → [0, ∞] (for 1 ≤ i ≤ n) i=1 ⊂ S q fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω). for all h ∈ B+ (Xp)′. Then, (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 fip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) q S q Xp dξ(h) (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p nXi=1 (Xp)′(cid:16) nXi=1 φi(h)(cid:17)q/p kφikLq/p(ξ)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) . (ξ) φi(h) =ZΩ = ZB+ = ZB+ ≤ (cid:16) nXi=1 fip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)S q Xp Since kφikLq/p(ξ) = kfikp S q Xp (ξ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n, we have that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 (ξ) ≤(cid:16) nXi=1 kfikp S q Xp (ξ)(cid:17)1/p . (cid:3) Example 3.2. Take a weak unit g ∈ (Xp)′ and consider the Radon measure ξ as the Dirac measure at g. If A ∈ Σ is such that 0 =ZB+ (Xp )′(cid:16)ZA h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) =(cid:16)ZA g(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 9 then, gχA = 0 µ-a.e. and so, since g > 0 µ-a.e., µ(A) = 0. That is, ξ satisfies (3.1). In this case, S q Xp(ξ) = Lp(gdµ) with equal norms, as (Xp )′(cid:16)ZΩ ZB+ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) =(cid:16)ZΩ f (ω)pg(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p for all f ∈ L0(µ). Example 3.3. Write Ω = ∪n≥1Ωn with (Ωn)n≥1 being a disjoint sequence of measurable sets and take a sequence of strictly positive elements on B+ (Xp)′, where δgχΩn is the Dirac measure at gχΩn with g ∈ (Xp)′ being a weak unit. Note that for every positive function φ ∈ L0(ξ), it (αn)n≥1 ∈ ℓ1. Let us consider the Radon measure ξ = Pn≥1 αnδgχΩn follows thatRB+ φ dξ =Pn≥1 αnφ(gχΩn). If A ∈ Σ is such that (Xp )′(cid:16)ZA 0 =ZB+ g(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p h(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) =Xn≥1 then,RA∩Ωn g(ω) dµ(ω) =Xn≥1ZA∩Ωn ZA αn(cid:16)ZA∩Ωn g(ω) dµ(ω) = 0 for all n ≥ 1. Hence, g(ω) dµ(ω) = 0 (Xp )′ and so gχA = 0 µ-a.e., from which µ(A) = 0. That is, ξ satisfies (3.1). For every f ∈ L0(µ) we have that ZB+ (Xp )′(cid:16)ZΩ Xn≥1 f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p αn(cid:16)ZΩn dξ(h) = Xp(ξ) can be described as the space of functions . f (ω)pg(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p n kf kLp(gχΩn dµ)(cid:1)n≥1 ∈ ℓq. Moreover, for all f ∈ S q Xp(ξ). Then, the B.f.s. S q f ∈ ∩n≥1Lp(gχΩndµ) such that(cid:0)α1/q Lp(gχΩn dµ)(cid:17)1/q (ξ) =(cid:16)Pn≥1 αn kf kq kf kS q Xp 4. p-strongly q-concave operators Let 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞ and let T : X → E be a linear operator from a saturated B.f.s. X into a Banach space E. Recall that T is said to be 10 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ q-concave if there exists a constant C > 0 such that (cid:16) nXi=1 kT (fi)kq E(cid:17)1/q ≤ C(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 fiq(cid:17)1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X for every finite subset (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X. The smallest possible value of C will be denoted by Mq(T ). For issues related to q-concavity see for instance [7, Ch. 1.d]. We introduce a little stronger notion than q-concavity: T will be called p-strongly q-concave if there exists C > 0 such that (cid:16) nXi=1 kT (fi)kq E(cid:17)1/q ≤ C sup (βi)i≥1∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 βifip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X p − 1 q . for every finite subset (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X, where 1 < r ≤ ∞ is such that r = 1 1 In this case, Mp,q(T ) will denote the smallest constant C satisfying the above inequality. Noting that r p are conjugate exponents, it is clear that every p-strongly q-concave operator is q- concave and so continuous, and moreover kT k ≤ Mq(T ) ≤ Mp,q(T ). As usual, we will say that X is p-strongly q-concave if the identity map I : X → X is so, and in this case, we denote Mp,q(X) = Mp,q(I). p and q Our goal is to get a continuous extension of T to a space of the type S q Xp(ξ) in the case when T is p-strongly q-concave and X is p-convex. To this end we will need to describe the supremum on the right-hand side of the p-strongly q-concave inequality in terms of the Kothe dual of Xp. Lemma 4.1. If X is p-convex and order semi-continuous then sup (βi)i≥1∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 βifip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X = sup h∈B+ (Xp)′(cid:16) nXi=1(cid:16)Z fiph dµ(cid:17)q/p(cid:17)1/q for every finite subset (fi)n 1 r = 1 unit ball B(Xp)′ of (Xp)′. q and B+ p − 1 i=1 ⊂ X, where 1 < r ≤ ∞ is such that (Xp)′ is the subset of all positive elements of the closed STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 11 Proof. Given (fi)n so, and (ℓq/p)∗ = ℓr/p, as r i=1 ⊂ X, since Xp is order semi-continuous, as X is p , we have that p is the conjugate exponent of q sup (βi)∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 p X βifip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = = = = = = sup (βi)∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) sup (βi)∈Bℓr sup sup h∈B+ βifiph dµ βifiph dµ βifip(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xp nXi=1 h∈B(Xp)′Z nXi=1 (Xp)′Z nXi=1 βipZ fiph dµ nXi=1 αiZ fiph dµ nXi=1 (Xp)′(cid:16) nXi=1(cid:16)Z fiph dµ(cid:17)q/p(cid:17)p/q sup (αi)∈B+ (βi)∈Bℓr sup (Xp)′ ℓr/p . sup (βi)∈Bℓr sup h∈B+ (Xp)′ sup h∈B+ sup h∈B+ (cid:3) In the following remark, from Lemma 4.1, we obtain easily an exam- ple of p-strongly q-concave operator. Remark 4.2. Suppose that X is p-convex and order semi-continuous. For every finite positive Radon measure ξ on B+ (Xp)′ satisfying (3.1), it follows that the inclusion map i : X → S q Xp(ξ) is p-strongly q-concave. Indeed, for each (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X, we have that nXi=1 kfikq S q Xp (ξ) = (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ nXi=1ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:1) ≤ ξ(cid:0)B+ sup h∈B+ (Xp)′ fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p nXi=1(cid:16)ZΩ dξ(h) and so, Lemma 4.1 gives the conclusion for Mp,q(i) ≤ ξ(cid:0)B+ Now let us prove our main result. fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p (Xp)′(cid:1)1/q . 12 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ Theorem 4.3. If T is p-strongly q-concave and X is p-convex and order semi-continuous, then there exists a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ (Xp)′ satisfying (3.1) such that kT (f )kE ≤ Mp,q(T )(cid:16)ZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h)(cid:17)1/q (4.1) for all f ∈ X. Proof. Recall that the stated topology on (Xp)′ is σ((Xp)′, Xp), the one which is defined by the elements of Xp. For each finite subset (with possibly repeated elements) M = (fi)m i=1 ⊂ X, consider the map ψM : B+ for h ∈ B+ (Xp)′. Note that ψM attains its supremum as it is continuous on a compact set, so there exists hM ∈ B+ ψM (h) = ψM (hM ). Then, the p-strongly q-concavity of T , together with Lemma 4.1, gives (Xp)′ → [0, ∞) defined by ψM (h) = Pm i=1(cid:0)RΩ fip h dµ(cid:1)q/p (Xp)′ such that suph∈B+ (Xp)′ mXi=1 kT (fi)kq E ≤ Mp,q(T )q ≤ Mp,q(T )q mXi=1(cid:16)ZΩ ψM (h) fiph dµ(cid:17)q/p sup h∈B+ (Xp)′ sup h∈B+ (Xp)′ = Mp,q(T )q ψM (hM ). (4.2) Consider now the continuous map φM : B+ (Xp)′ → R defined by φM (h) = Mp,q(T )q ψM (h) − kT (fi)kq E mXi=1 i )k i=1, M ′ = (f ′ for h ∈ B+ every M = (fi)m tφM + (1 − t)φM ′ = φM ′′ where M ′′ = (cid:0)t1/qfi(cid:1)m (Xp)′. Take B = {φM : M is a finite subset of X}. Since for i=1 ⊂ X and 0 < t < 1, it follows that i=1, we have that B is convex. Denote by C(B+ (Xp)′) the space of continuous real functions on B+ (Xp)′, endowed with the supremum norm, and by A the open convex subset {φ ∈ C(B+ (Xp)′}. By (4.2) we have that A ∩ B = ∅. From the Hahn-Banach separation theorem, there exist ξ ∈ C(B+ (Xp)′)∗ and α ∈ R such that hξ, φi < α ≤ hξ, φMi for all φ ∈ A and φM ∈ B. Since every negative constant i=1 ∪(cid:0)(1 − t)1/qf ′ i(cid:1)k (Xp)′) : φ(h) < 0 for all h ∈ B+ STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 13 function is in A, it follows that 0 ≤ α. Even more, α = 0 as the constant function equal to 0 is just φ{0} ∈ B. It is routine to see that hξ, φi ≥ 0 whenever φ ∈ C(B+ (Xp)′) is such that φ(h) ≥ 0 for all h ∈ B+ (Xp)′) and so it can be interpreted as a finite positive Radon measure on B+ (Xp)′. Hence, we have that (Xp)′. Then, ξ is a positive linear functional on C(B+ 0 ≤ZB+ (Xp)′ φM dξ for all finite subset M ⊂ X. Dividing by ξ(B+ (Xp)′), we can suppose that ξ is a probability measure. Then, for M = {f } with f ∈ X, we obtain that kT (f )kq E ≤ Mp,q(T )qZB+ (Xp)′(cid:16)ZΩ f (ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p dξ(h) (cid:3) and so (4.1) holds. Actually, Theorem 4.3 says that we can find a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ (Xp)′ such that T : X → E is continuous when X is considered with the norm of the space S q Xp(ξ). In the next result we will see how to extend T continuously to S q Xp(ξ). Even more, we will show that this extension is possible if and only if T is p-strongly q- concave. Theorem 4.4. Suppose that X is p-convex and order semi-continuous. The following statements are equivalent: (a) T is p-strongly q-concave. (b) There exists a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ (3.1) such that T can be extended continuously to S q is a factorization for T as (Xp)′ satisfying Xp(ξ), i.e. there X i T S q Xp(ξ) E eT where eT is a continuous linear operator and i is the inclusion map. If (a)-(b) holds, then Mp,q(T ) = keT k. / / " " < < 14 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ (Xp)′ satisfying (3.1) such that kT (f )kE ≤ Mp,q(T )kf kS q Proof. (a) ⇒ (b) From Theorem 4.3, there is a probability Radon mea- sure ξ on B+ for all f ∈ X. Given 0 ≤ f ∈ S q (fn)n≥1 ⊂ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. Then, since S q continuous, we have that fn → f in S q (ξ) Xp(ξ), from Lemma 2.1, we can take Xp(ξ) is order Xp(ξ) and so (cid:0)T (fn)(cid:1)n≥1 con- verges to some element e of E. Define eT (f ) = e. Note that eT is well defined, since if (gn)n≥1 ⊂ X is such that 0 ≤ gn ↑ f µ-a.e., then Xp kT (fn) − T (gn)kE ≤ Mp,q(T )kfn − gnkS q Xp (ξ) → 0. Moreover, keT (f )kE = lim n→∞ kT (fn)kE ≤ Mp,q(T ) lim n→∞ = Mp,q(T )kf kS q Xp (ξ). kfnkS q Xp (ξ) For a general f ∈ S q Xp(ξ), writing f = f + − f − where f + and f − are the positive and negative parts of f respectively, we define eT (f ) = eT (f +) − eT (f −). Then, eT : S q extending T . Moreover keT k ≤ Mp,q(T ). Indeed, let f ∈ S q Xp(ξ) → E is a continuous linear operator Xp(ξ) and n ↑ f − n )n≥1 ⊂ X such that 0 ≤ f + n ↑ f + and 0 ≤ f − n )n≥1, (f − take (f + µ-a.e. Then, f + n → f in S q n − f − Xp(ξ) and T (f + n − f − n ) = T (f + n ) − T (f − n ) → eT (f +) − eT (f −) = eT (f ) in E. Hence, keT (f )kE = lim n→∞ kT (f + n − f − kf + n )kE n − f − ≤ Mp,q(T ) lim n→∞ = Mp,q(T )kf kS q Xp (ξ). n kS q Xp (ξ) STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 15 (b) ⇒ (a) Given (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X, we have that kT (fi)kq E = nXi=1 nXi=1 = keT kq ≤ keT kq keT (fi)kq nXi=1ZB+ sup h∈B+ (Xp)′ E ≤ keT kq (Xp )′(cid:16)ZΩ nXi=1(cid:16)ZΩ (ξ) kfikq S q Xp nXi=1 fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p fi(ω)ph(ω) dµ(ω)(cid:17)q/p . dξ(h) keT k. That is, from Lemma 4.1, T is p-strongly q-concave with Mp,q(T ) ≤ (cid:3) A first application of Theorem 4.4 is the following Kakutani type representation theorem (see for instance [7, Theorem 1.b.2]) for B.f.s.' being order semi-continuous, p-convex and p-strongly q-concave. Corollary 4.5. Suppose that X is p-convex and order semi-continuous. The following statements are equivalent: (a) X is p-strongly q-concave. (b) There exists a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ Xp(ξ) with equivalent norms. (3.1), such that X = S q (Xp)′ satisfying Proof. (a) ⇒ (b) The identity map I : X → X is p-strongly q-concave as X is so. Then, from Theorem 4.4, there exists a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ (Xp)′ satisfying (3.1), such that I factors as X i I S q Xp(ξ) X eI where eI is a continuous linear operator with keIk = Mp,q(X) and i is the inclusion map. Since ξ is a probability measure, we have that (ξ) ≤ kf kX for all f ∈ X, see the proof of Proposition 3.1. Let kf kS q Xp 0 ≤ f ∈ S q Xp(ξ). By Lemma 2.1, we can take (fn)n≥1 ⊂ X such that 0 ≤ fn ↑ f µ-a.e. Since S q Xp(ξ) is order continuous, it follows that fn → f in S q Xp(ξ) and so fn = eI(fn) → eI(f ) in X. Then, there is a / / " " < < 16 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ X. For a general f ∈ S q Xp(ξ), writing f = f + − f − where f + and f − are the positive and negative parts of f respectively, we have that f = subsequence of (fn)n≥1 converging µ-a.e. to eI(f ) and hence f =eI(f ) ∈ Xp(ξ) andeI is de identity eI(f +) −eI(f −) = eI(f ) ∈ X. Therefore, X = S q map. Moreover, kf kX = keI(f )kX ≤ keIk kf kS q (ξ) = Mp,q(X)kf kS q Xp (b) ⇒ (a) From Remark 4.2 it follows that the identity map I : X → (cid:3) X is p-strongly q-concave. for all f ∈ X. (ξ) Xp Note that under conditions of Corollary 4.5, if X is p-strongly q- Xp(ξ) with equal concave with constant Mp,q(X) = 1, then X = S q norms. 5. q-summing operators on a p-convex B.f.s. Recall that a linear operator T : X → E between Banach spaces is said to be q-summing (1 ≤ q < ∞) if there exists a constant C > 0 such that (cid:16) nXi=1 kT xikq E(cid:17)1/q ≤ C sup x∗∈BX∗(cid:16) nXi=1 hx∗, xiiq(cid:17)1/q for every finite subset (xi)n i=1 ⊂ X. Denote by πq(T ) the smallest possible value of C. Information about q-summing operators can be found in [6]. One of the main relations between summability and concavity for operators defined on a B.f.s. X, is that every q-summing operator is q-concave. This is a consequence of a direct calculation which shows that for every (fi)n i=1 ⊂ X and x∗ ∈ X ∗ it follows that (cid:16) nXi=1 hx∗, fiiq(cid:17)1/q ≤ kx∗kX ∗(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 fiq(cid:17)1/q(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X see for instance [7, Proposition 1.d.9] and the comments below. How- ever, this calculation can be slightly improved to obtain the following result. , (5.1) Proposition 5.1. Let 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞. Every q-summing linear operator T : X → E from a B.f.s. X into a Banach space E, is p- strongly q-concave with Mp,q(T ) ≤ πq(T ). STRONG EXTENSIONS FOR q-SUMMING OPERATORS 17 Proof. Let 1 < r ≤ ∞ be such that 1 subset (fi)n r = 1 i=1 ⊂ X. We only have to prove p − 1 q and consider a finite sup x∗∈BX∗(cid:16) nXi=1 hx∗, fiiq(cid:17)1/q Fix x∗ ∈ BX ∗. Noting that q using the inequality (5.1), we have (cid:16) nXi=1 hx∗, fiiq(cid:17)1/q = = ≤ p are conjugate exponents and . ≤ sup p and r sup (αi)i≥1∈B (βi)i≥1∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 ℓr/p(cid:16) nXi=1 (βi)i≥1∈Bℓr(cid:16) nXi=1 (βi)i≥1∈Bℓr(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXi=1 βifip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X αihx∗, fiip(cid:17)1/p hx∗, βifiip(cid:17)1/p βifip(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X sup sup . Taking supremum in x∗ ∈ BX ∗ we get the conclusion. (cid:3) From Proposition 5.1, Theorem 4.4 and Remark 4.2, we obtain the final result. Corollary 5.2. Set 1 ≤ p ≤ q < ∞. Let X be a saturated order semi- continuous p-convex B.f.s. and consider a q-summing linear operator T : X → E with values in a Banach space E. Then, there exists a probability Radon measure ξ on B+ (Xp)′ satisfying (3.1) such that T can be factored as X i T S q Xp(ξ) E eT where eT is a continuous linear operator with keT k ≤ πq(T ) and i is the inclusion map which turns out to be p-strongly q-concave, and so q-concave. Observe that what we obtain in Corollary 5.2 is a proper extension for T , and not just a factorization as the obtained in the Pietsch theorem for q-summing operators through a subspace of an Lq-space. / / " " < < 18 O. DELGADO AND E. A. S ´ANCHEZ P ´EREZ References [1] J. M. Calabuig, O. Delgado and E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Factorizing operators on Banach function spaces through spaces of multiplication operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 364 (2010), 88-103. [2] J. M. Calabuig, J. Rodr´ıguez and E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Strongly embedded subspaces of p-convex Banach function spaces, Positivity 17 (2013), 775-791. [3] A. Defant, Variants of the Maurey-Rosenthal theorem for quasi Kothe function spaces, Positivity 5 (2001), 153-175. [4] A. Defant and E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Maurey-Rosenthal factorization of positive operators and convexity, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 297 (2004), 771-790. [5] O. Delgado and E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Summability properties for multiplication operators on Banach function spaces, Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory 66 (2010), 197-214. [6] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow and A. Tonge, Absolutely Summing Operators, Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. [7] J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri, Classical Banach Spaces II, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979. [8] S. Okada, W. J. Ricker and E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Optimal Domain and Integral Extension of Operators acting in Function Spaces, Operator Theory: Adv. Appl., vol. 180, Birkhauser, Basel, 2008. [9] E. A. S´anchez P´erez, Factorization theorems for multiplication operators on Banach function spaces, Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory 80 (2014), 117-135. [10] A. C. Zaanen, Integration, 2nd rev. ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1967. Departamento de Matem´atica Aplicada I, E. T. S. de Ingenier´ıa de Edificaci´on, Universidad de Sevilla, Avenida de Reina Mercedes, 4 A, Sevilla 41012, Spain E-mail address: [email protected] Instituto Universitario de Matem´atica Pura y Aplicada, Univer- sitat Polit`ecnica de Val`encia, Camino de Vera s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain. E-mail address: [email protected]
1608.03699	1	1608	2016-08-12T07:47:28	Comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	Motivated by the local theory of Banach spaces we introduce a notion of finite representability for metric spaces. This allows us to develop a new technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. We illustrate this technique in two different ways by applying it to Banach spaces and metric trees. In the realm of Banach spaces we obtain results such as the following: (1) if $\mathcal{U}$ is any ultrafilter and $X$ is any Banach space, then the second dual $X^{\ast\ast}$ and the ultrapower $(X)_{\mathcal{U}}$ have the same generalized roundness as $X$, and (2) no Banach space of positive generalized roundness is uniformly homeomorphic to $c_{0}$ or $\ell_{p}$, $2 < p < \infty$. Our technique also leads to the identification of new classes of metric trees of generalized roundness one. In particular, we give the first examples of metric trees of generalized roundness one that have finite diameter. These results on metric trees provide a natural sequel to a paper of Caffarelli, Doust and Weston. In addition, we show that metric trees of generalized roundness one possess special Euclidean embedding properties that distinguish them from all other metric trees.	math.FA	math	Comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces Lukiel Levy-Moore, Margaret Nichols, and Anthony Weston Abstract. Motivated by the local theory of Banach spaces we introduce a notion of finite representability for metric spaces. This allows us to develop a new technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. We illustrate this technique in two different ways by applying it to Banach spaces and metric trees. In the realm of Banach spaces we obtain results such as the following: (1) if U is any ultrafilter and X is any Banach space, then the second dual X ∗∗ and the ultrapower (X)U have the same generalized roundness as X, and (2) no Banach space of positive generalized roundness is uniformly homeomorphic to c0 or ℓp, 2 < p < ∞. Our technique also leads to the identification of new classes of metric trees of generalized roundness one. In particular, we give the first examples of metric trees of generalized roundness one that have finite diameter. These results on metric trees provide a natural sequel to a paper of Caffarelli et al. [6]. In addition, we show that metric trees of generalized roundness one possess special Euclidean embedding properties that distinguish them from all other metric trees. Direct calculation of the generalized roundness of an infinite metric space is, in general, a difficult task. In this paper we develop a versatile technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. This leads to substantial new insights into the generalized roundness of Banach spaces and metric trees. 1. Introduction Definition 1.1. The generalized roundness of a metric space (X, d), denoted by ℘(X,d) or simply ℘X , is the supremum of the set of all p ≥ 0 that satisfy the following condition: for all integers k ≥ 2 and all choices of (not necessarily distinct) points a1, . . . , ak, b1, . . . , bk ∈ X, we have X1≤i<j≤k {d(ai, aj)p + d(bi, bj)p} ≤ X1≤i,j≤k d(ai, bj)p. (1.1) The configuration of points Dk = [a1, . . . , ak; b1, . . . , bk] ⊆ X underlying (1.1) will be called a simplex in X. We will say that p ≥ 0 is a generalized roundness exponent for (X, d) if (1.1) holds for every simplex in X. The key idea of this paper is to take an indirect approach to the calculation of ℘(X,d) that is especially well-suited to the analysis of infinite metric spaces. The notion of generalized roundness was introduced by Enflo [8] to study universal uniform embedding spaces. By showing that such spaces must have generalized roundness zero, Enflo was able to prove that Hilbert spaces are not universal uniform embedding spaces. This resolved a prominent question of Smirnov. Sometime later, Lennard et al. [25] exhibited an important connection between generalized roundness and the classical isometric embedding notion of negative type. Lafont and Prassidis [23] used this connection to show that if a finitely generated group Γ has a Cayley graph of positive generalized roundness, then Γ must satisfy the coarse Baum-Connes conjecture, and hence the strong Novikov conjecture. The interplay between these notions has a very interesting history. An overview is given by Prassidis and Weston [30]. The set of generalized roundness exponents of a given metric space (X, d) is always a closed interval of the form [0, ℘] or [0,∞), including the possibility that ℘ = 0 in which case the interval degenerates to {0}. This result is a direct consequence of Schoenberg [34, Theorem 2.7] and Lennard et al. [25, Theorem 2.4]. Faver et al. [10] have shown that the interval [0,∞) arises if and only if d is an ultrametric. For finite metric spaces it is always the case that ℘ > 0. This is the main result in Weston [36]. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 46B07, 46B80, 05C05, 05C12. Key words and phrases. Generalized roundness, negative type, uniform homeomorphism, scale isomorphism. 1 Enflo [8] constructed a separable metric space that is not uniformly embeddable in any metric space of positive generalized roundness. Dranishnikov et al. [7] modified Enflo's example to construct a locally finite metric space that is not coarsely embeddable in any Hilbert space, thereby settling a prominent question of Gromov. Kelleher et al. [19] unified these examples to construct a locally finite metric space that is not uniformly or coarsely embeddable in any metric space of positive generalized roundness. One may also use generalized roundness as a highly effective isometric invariant by exploiting the connection between generalized roundness and negative type due to Lennard et al. [25]. A general principle for using generalized roundness as an isometric invariant was recently isolated by Kelleher et al. [20, Theorem 3.24]. It is therefore a matter of great utility to be able to calculate the generalized roundness of certain metric spaces. In recent work, S´anchez [33] has provided a method of calculating, at least numerically, the generalized roundness of a given finite metric space (X, d). However, as the size of the space grows, S´anchez' method rapidly becomes computationally intensive. Nevertheless, the method is an important tool for the analysis of the generalized roundness of finite metric spaces. In [33], the method is used to calculate the generalized roundness of certain finite graphs endowed with the usual combinatorial metric. The metric graphs that we consider in this paper are countable metric trees and so we are unable to use S´anchez' method. It is prudent at this point to pin down some basic definitions pertaining to metric graphs. A graph G is connected if there is a (finite) path between any two vertices of G. A tree is an undirected, connected, locally finite graph without cycles. These definitions imply that the vertex and edge sets of a tree are at most countable. Assigning a positive length to each edge of a given tree T induces a shortest path metric d on the vertices of the tree. The resulting metric space is denoted (T, d) and is called a metric tree. Generalized roundness properties of metric trees have been studied by several authors. All additive metric spaces, and hence all metric trees, have generalized roundness at least one. This fact is folklore and it may be derived in several different ways. One such proof appears in Kelly [21, Theorem II]. Another proof follows from Faver et al. [10, Proposition 4.1]. Examples of Caffarelli et al. [6] show that some countable metric trees have generalized roundness exactly one. The situation is different for finite metric trees. Indeed, Hjorth et al. [14] have shown that all finite metric trees have strict 1-negative type. This condition ensures that all finite metric trees have generalized roundness greater than one. (One way to see this is to appeal to Lennard et al. [25, Theorem 2.4] and Li and Weston [27, Corollary 4.2].) Hence metric trees of generalized roundness one are necessarily countable. Simple examples show that the converse of this statement is not true in general. We conclude this introduction with some comments about the structure and main results of this paper. In Section 2, motivated by the local theory of Banach spaces, we introduce a notion of finite representability for metric spaces. Our purpose in introducing such a notion is to provide a new technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. The remainder of Section 2 is then devoted to a preliminary investigation of this technique in the context of infinite-dimensional Banach spaces. We prove, for example, that if U is any ultrafilter and X is any Banach space, then the second dual X∗∗ and the ultrapower (X)U have the same generalized roundness as X. In other words, ℘X = ℘X ∗∗ = ℘(X)U . It is also noted that no Banach space of positive generalized roundness is uniformly homeomorphic to c0 or ℓp, 2 < p < ∞. Caffarelli et al. [6] identified several classes of metric trees of generalized roundness one. The types of trees studied in [6] were spherically symmetric, infinitely bifurcating or comb-like trees endowed with the usual combinatorial path metric. In other words, all edges in the trees were assumed to have length one and all other distances were determined geodesically. In Sections 3 and 4 we relax this condition by considering trees endowed with weighted path metrics. Section 3 focusses on trees that resemble jagged combs. Section 4 deals with spherically symmetric trees that have systematically weighted edges. We also make a distinction between convergent and divergent spherically symmetric trees. In both cases we show that the generalized roundness of such trees can easily be one. In particular, we identify a large class of metric trees of generalized roundness one that have finite diameter. In Section 5 we examine isometric embedding properties of metric trees of generalized roundness one. We prove that all metric trees of generalized roundness one possess the stronger property of strict 1-negative type. Due to the relationship between generalized roundness and negative type, it also follows that no metric tree of generalized roundness one has p-negative type for any p > 1. Taken together, these facts imply the following embedding phase transition: If (T, d) is a metric tree of generalized roundness one, then (1) the metric transform (T,√d) is isometric to an affinely independent subset of ℓ2, and (2) the metric transform 2 (T,√dp) does not embed isometrically into ℓ2 for any p, 1 < p ≤ 2. Moreover, the only metric trees that satisfy condition (2) are those of generalized roundness one. 2. Comparing the generalized roundness of metric and Banach spaces In this section we develop a technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. In order to do this we introduce a metric space version of the Banach space notion of finite representability. This important notion in the local theory of Banach spaces was introduced by James [16, 17]. Throughout this section, all Banach spaces are assumed to be real and infinite-dimensional unless noted otherwise. The first and second duals of a Banach space X are denoted by X∗ and X∗∗, respectively. All Lp-spaces are assumed to be commutative unless noted otherwise. Definition 2.1. Let X and X′ be Banach spaces. (1) X is crudely represented in X′ if there exists an ε0 > 0 such that for each finite-dimensional subspace E ⊂ X there exists a finite-dimensional subspace F ⊂ X′ (with dim E = dim F ) and a one-to-one linear mapping T : E → F that satisfies kTkkT −1k ≤ 1 + ε0. (2) X is finitely represented in X′ if for each ε > 0 and each finite-dimensional subspace E ⊂ X there exists a finite-dimensional subspace F ⊂ X′ (with dim E = dim F ) and a one-to-one linear mapping T : E → F that satisfies (1 − ε)kxk ≤ kT xk ≤ (1 + ε)kxk (2.1) for all x ∈ E. It is easy to see that an equivalent reformulation of the condition given in Definition 2.1 is the following: for each ε > 0 and each finite-dimensional subspace E ⊂ X there exists a finite-dimensional subspace F ⊂ X′ (with dim E = dim F ) and a one-to-one linear mapping T : E → F that satisfies kTkkT −1k ≤ 1 + ε. While this reformulation makes the the relationship between crude and finite representability plain, the metric nature of Definition 2.1 (2) suits our purposes, not least because it motivates Definitions 2.2 and 2.3 below. The notion of crude representability is particularly important in the uniform theory of Banach spaces. Recall that two Banach spaces X and X′ are said to be uniformly homeomorphic if there exists a bijection f : X → X′ such that f and f−1 are both uniformly continuous. A famous result of Ribe [31] asserts that if a Banach space X is uniformly homeomorphic to a Banach space X′, then X is crudely represented in X′ and X′ is crudely represented in X. This result is sometimes known as Ribe's rigidity theorem. A one-to-one linear mapping T : E → F that satisfies condition (2.1) is said to be a (1 + ε)-isomorphism. A similar notion for metric spaces may be formulated as follows. Definition 2.2. Let (X, d) and (X′, ρ) be metric spaces, and suppose that ε > 0. A one-to-one mapping φ : X → X′ : x 7→ x′ is called a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism if there exists a constant n = n(ε) > 0 such that (1 − ε)nd(a, b) ≤ ρ(a′, b′) ≤ (1 + ε)nd(a, b) for all a, b ∈ X. It is worth noting that we will use the notation x′ to denote φ(x) throughout this section. Definition 2.3. A metric space (X, d) is said to be locally represented in a metric space (X′, ρ) if for each ε > 0 and each non-empty finite set X ♯ ⊆ X there exists a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism φ : (X ♯, d) → (X′, ρ). The following lemma notes that for Banach spaces, finite representation implies local representation. Lemma 2.4. Let X and X′ be given Banach spaces. If X is finitely represented in X′, then X is locally represented in X′. Proof. Let X ♯ be a given non-empty finite subset of X and suppose that ε > 0. Let E denote the linear span of X ♯ in X. Then E is a finite-dimensional subspace of X. As X is finitely represented in X′, there exists a (1 + ε)-isomorphism T : E → X′. Setting φ to be the restriction of T to X ♯ we obtain a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism X ♯ → X′ (with constant n = 1). Hence then X is locally represented in X′. (cid:3) We turn now to the main technical result of this section. It provides a new technique for comparing the generalized roundness of metric spaces. 3 Theorem 2.5. If a metric space (X, d) is locally represented in a metric space (X′, ρ), then every generalized roundness exponent of (X′, ρ) is a generalized roundness exponent of (X, d). Hence, ℘X ′ ≤ ℘X . Proof. It suffices to prove that if p is not a generalized roundness exponent of (X, d) then p is not a generalized roundness of (X′, ρ). Suppose that p ≥ 0 is not a generalized roundness exponent of (X, d). We immediately have that p > 0 because 0 is a generalized roundness exponent of all metric spaces. From our definition there must be a simplex [ai; bj] ⊆ X such that Xi<j (d(ai, aj)p + d(bi, bj)p) > Xi,j d(ai, bj)p. The limiting behavior y = xp in a neighborhood of x = 1 then ensures that we may choose an ε > 0 so that (1 − ε)p ·Xi<j (d(ai, aj)p + d(bi, bj)p) > (1 + ε)p ·Xi,j d(ai, bj)p. (2.2) We now let X ♯ denote the finite subset of X that consists of the simplex points ai, bj. As (X, d) is locally represented in (X′, ρ) and ε > 0, there must exist an injection φ : X ♯ → X′ : x 7→ x′ and a constant n = n(ε) > 0 such that (1 − ε)nd(a, b) ≤ ρ(a′, b′) ≤ (1 + ε)nd(a, b) for all a, b ∈ X ♯. Furthermore, if we scale the metric on X′ by defining ω = ρ/n, we immediately obtain (2.3) for all a, b ∈ X ♯. It now follows from (2.2) and (2.3) that p is not a generalized roundness exponent for the scaled metric space (X′, ω). Indeed, (1 − ε)d(a, b) ≤ ω(a′, b′) ≤ (1 + ε)d(a, b) Xi<j (cid:0)ω(a′i, a′j)p + ω(b′i, b′j)p(cid:1) ≥ (1 − ε)p ·Xi<j > (1 + ε)p ·Xi,j = Xi,j ≥ Xi,j ω(a′i, b′j)p. ((1 + ε)d(ai, bj))p (d(ai, aj)p + d(bi, bj)p) d(ai, bj)p This completes the proof because generalized roundness is preserved under any scaling of the metric ρ. (cid:3) For the remainder of this section we will consider the application of Theorem 2.5 to Banach spaces. It is germane to recall a few facts about the generalized roundness of Lp-spaces. If X is an Lp-space, then ℘X = p if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and ℘X = 0 if p > 2. These results are due to Enflo [8] in the case 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and Lennard et al. [25] in the case p > 2. With the exception of the Schatten p-classes Cp, the generalized roundness of non-commutative Lp-spaces has not been widely studied. In [25] the authors noted that ℘Cp = 0 if p > 2. It is only relatively recently that Dahma and Lennard [3] have shown that ℘Cp = 0 if 0 < p < 2. Corollary 2.6. If a Banach space X is finitely represented in a Banach space X′, then ℘X ′ ≤ ℘X . In particular, if ℘X = 0, then ℘X ′ = 0. Proof. Immediate from Lemma 2.4 and Theorem 2.5. (cid:3) Examples of Banach spaces that have generalized roundness zero include C[0, 1], ℓ∞, c0, ℓp if p > 2, and the Schatten p-class Cp if p 6= 2. For each Banach space X and each integer n ≥ 2, Dineen [5] has shown that ℓ∞ is finitely represented in the space P(nX) of bounded n-homogenous polynomials on X. Hence P(nX) has generalized roundness zero by Corollary 2.6. For each p ∈ (1,∞), c0 is finitely represented in the quasi-reflexive James space Jp. (This result is due to Giesy and James [11] in the case p = 2 and, for p 6= 2, it is due to Bird et al. [1].) Hence, for each p ∈ (1,∞), Jp has generalized roundness zero by Corollary 2.6. On the basis of existing theory and Corollary 2.6 we are able to isolate some situations where generalized roundness functions as an invariant in the uniform theory of Banach spaces. For instance, as the next corollary shows, no Banach space of positive generalized roundness is uniformly homeomorphic to ℓp for any p > 2. 4 Corollary 2.7. If a Banach space X is uniformly homeomorphic to ℓp (1 ≤ p < ∞), then ℘X ≤ ℘ℓp . In particular, if p > 2, then ℘X = 0. Proof. Ribe's rigidity theorem [31] implies that ℓp is crudely represented in X. However, if ℓp is crudely represented in X, then ℓp is finitely represented in X. This follows from Krivine's theorem [22] (as noted by Rosenthal [32] and Lemberg [24]) if 1 < p < ∞, and it is due to James [15] in the case p = 1. Thus ℘X ≤ ℘ℓp by Corollary 2.6. Moreover, if p > 2, then ℘ℓp = 0. So for p > 2 we deduce that ℘X = 0. (cid:3) The uniform structure of ℓp, 1 < p < ∞, is particularly well-understood. For instance, if a Banach space X is uniformly homeomorphic to ℓp, 1 < p < ∞, then it is linearly isomorphic to ℓp. This deep theorem is due to Enflo [9, Theorem 6.3.1] in the case p = 2 and Johnson et al. [18, Theorem 2.1] when p 6= 2. So if 1 < p < ∞, one may replace the phrase "uniformly homeomorphic" in the statement of Corollary 2.7 with the phrase "linearly isomorphic" without losing any generality. The situation for c0 is somewhat similar. Corollary 2.8. If a Banach space X is uniformly homeomorphic to c0, then ℘X = 0. In particular, no Banach space of positive generalized roundness is uniformly homeomorphic to c0. Proof. Ribe's rigidity theorem [31] implies that c0 is crudely represented in X. However, James [15] has shown that if c0 is crudely represented in X, then c0 is finitely represented in X. Thus ℘X ≤ ℘c0 by Corollary 2.6. Moreover, as ℘c0 = 0, we further deduce that ℘X = 0. (cid:3) The uniform structure of c0 is more beguiling and less well understood than that of ℓp, 1 < p < ∞. Johnson et al. [18, Corollary 3.2] proved that if a complemented subspace of a C(K) space is uniformly homeomorphic to c0, then it is linearly isomorphic to c0. Godefroy et al. [12, Theorem 5.6] have shown that a Banach space which is uniformly homeomorphic to c0 is an isomorphic predual of ℓ1 with summable Szlenk index. But it is not known whether a predual of ℓ1 with summable Szlenk index is linearly isomorphic to c0. Thus, unlike ℓp (1 < p < ∞), it remains unclear whether c0 is determined by its uniform structure. central to the local theory of Banach spaces and it is originally due to Lindenstrauss and Rosenthal [28]. In the proof of the following corollary we invoke the Principle of Local Reflexivity. This principle is Corollary 2.9. If X is a Banach space, then ℘X = ℘X ∗∗ and ℘X ∗ = ℘X ∗∗∗. Proof. As X embeds isometrically into X∗∗ we see that ℘X∗∗ ≤ ℘X . In addition, the Principle of Local Reflexivity implies that X∗∗ is finitely represented in X. Hence ℘X ≤ ℘X ∗∗ by Corollary 2.6. By combining these two inequalities we obtain ℘X = ℘X ∗∗. By replacing X with X∗ we also see that ℘X ∗ = ℘X ∗∗∗. (cid:3) Examples show that for a Banach space X we may have ℘X 6= ℘X ∗ . Indeed, if p ∈ [1, 2) and X = ℓp, then ℘X = p and ℘X ∗ = 0. By way of comparison, if p 6= 2 and X = Cp, then ℘X = ℘X ∗ = 0. Thus, given Banach space X, the entries of the sequence (℘X , ℘X ∗ , ℘X ∗∗, . . .) are restricted to take on at most two values (in the interval [0, 2]) by Corollary 2.9. Intimately related to the concept of finite representability is the notion of an ultrapower of a Banach space. Given an ultrafilter U on a set I and a Banach space X there is a canonical procedure to construct a large Banach space (X)U called the ultrapower of X. Importantly, (X)U contains a natural isometric copy of X and it is finitely represented in X. For a detailed construction of (X)U , and a discussion of the interplay between finite representability and ultrapowers, we refer the reader to H´ajek and Johanis [13]. Corollary 2.10. Let U be a given ultrafilter on a set I and let X be a Banach space. Then ℘X = ℘(X)U . Proof. As X embeds isometrically into (X)U we see that ℘(X)U ≤ ℘X . In addition, (X)U is finitely represented in X by Stern [35, Theorem 6.6]. Hence ℘X ≤ ℘(X)U by Corollary 2.6. By combining these two inequalities we obtain ℘X = ℘(X)U . (cid:3) Lennard et al. [26, Theorem 2.3] noticed that if the infimal cotype of a Banach space X is greater than two, then X must have generalized roundness zero. By utilizing deep theory and Corollary 2.6 we are able to exhibit a more precise relationship between the supremal type and infimal cotype of a Banach space and its generalized roundness. The notions of type and cotype have been paramount in the local theory of Banach spaces for quite some time and are defined in the following manner. 5 Definition 2.11. A Banach space X is said to have type p if there exists a constant A ∈ (0,∞) such that for all integers n > 0 and for all finite sequences (xj )n j=1 in X, we have Xǫ∈{−1,+1}n n Xj=1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ǫjxj 2n (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X ≤ A  n Xj=1 X kxjkp  1 p . (2.4) Cotype p is defined similarly but with the inequality (2.4) reversed. It is well-known that no Banach space can have type p > 2 or cotype q < 2. We let p(X) denote the supremum of all p such that X has type p and q(X) denote the infimum of all q such that X has cotype q. For an overview of theory of type and cotype we refer the reader to Diestel et al. [4]. A famous theorem of Maurey and Pisier [29] states that ℓp(X) and ℓq(X) are finitely represented in X. This theorem and Corollary 2.6 provide an immediate link to generalized roundness. Corollary 2.12. If X is a Banach space, then ℘X ≤ min{℘ℓp(X), ℘ℓq(X)}. In particular, if q(X) > 2, then ℘X = 0. Proof. By the Maurey-Pisier theorem, ℓp(X) and ℓq(X) are finitely represented in X. Hence ℘X ≤ ℘ℓp(X) and ℘X ≤ ℘ℓq(X) by Corollary 2.6. In particular, if q(X) > 2, then ℘ℓq(X) = 0, and so ℘X = 0. (cid:3) There are some classical Banach spaces for which the inequality in Corollary 2.12 is an equality. For example, if X is an Lp-space, 1 ≤ p < ∞, then ℘X = min{℘ℓp(X), ℘ℓq(X)}. In this case, ℘X = p if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and ℘X = 0 if p > 2. Moreover, it is well known that p(X) = min{p, 2} and q(X) = max{p, 2}. So, for example, if p > 2, then ℘X = 0 and q(x) = p. Thus ℘ℓq(X) = 0. On the other hand, if X = Cp, 1 ≤ p < ∞, then p(X) and q(X) have the same values as any Lp-space but, by inspection, ℘X = min{℘ℓp(X), ℘ℓq(X)} if and only if p ≥ 2. 3. Comb-like graphs of generalized roundness one In this section we apply Theorems 2.5 and 3.3 to analyze the generalized roundness of countable metric trees that resemble combs. We first give sufficient conditions for the existence of a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism φ : (T, d) → (T, ρ), under the assumption that d and ρ are path weighted metrics on a given finite tree T . In what follows, we let N denote the set of all non-negative integers. Moreover, given a positive integer m, we let [m] denote the segment {0, 1, 2, . . . , m}. Lemma 3.1. Let d and ρ be two path weighted metrics on a given finite tree T . Let m = max(cid:26) ρ(a, b) d(a, b) : a, b ∈ T and a 6= b(cid:27) . Then there must be an edge {x, y} in T such that m = ρ(x,y) d(x,y) . Proof. Suppose that a, c ∈ T are non-adjacent vertices such that m = ρ(a, c)/d(a, c). Then we may choose a strictly intermediate vertex b ∈ T on the geodesic from a to c. Now let q = ρ(a, b)/d(a, b) and r = ρ(b, c)/d(b, c). Without loss of generality we may assume that q ≥ r. Furthermore, as ρ and d are path metrics on T , we have ρ(a, c) = ρ(a, b) + ρ(b, c) and d(a, c) = d(a, b) + d(b, c). In particular, it follows that m = = = ρ(a, c) d(a, c) ρ(a, b) + ρ(b, c) d(a, b) + d(b, c) qd(a, b) + rd(b, c) d(a, b) + d(b, c) qd(a, b) + qd(b, c) d(a, b) + d(b, c) ≤ = q. Therefore, by definition of m, it must be the case that m = q. This shows that we can always pass to a pair of vertices connected by a geodesic with fewer edges and preserve the ratio m. Applying this logic finitely many times gives the lemma. (cid:3) 6 The following analogous lemma for minima may be proved in the same way. Lemma 3.2. Let d and ρ be two path weighted metrics on a given finite tree T . Let m∗ = min(cid:26) ρ(a, b) d(a, b) : a, b ∈ T and a 6= b(cid:27) . Then there must be an edge {x, y} in T such that m∗ = ρ(x,y) d(x,y). Theorem 3.3. Let ε > 0 be given. Let d and ρ be two path weighted metrics on a given finite tree T . If there exists a constant n = n(ε) > 0 such that (1 − ε)n ≤ ρ(x, y) d(x, y) ≤ n(1 + ε) (3.1) for each edge {x, y} in T , then the identity map φ : (T, d) → (T, ρ) : x 7→ x is a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism. Proof. Using the notation of Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2 it follows from (3.1) that (1 − ε)n ≤ m∗ ≤ m ≤ n(1 + ε). Thus, given any two distinct vertices a, b ∈ T , we deduce that (1 − ε)n ≤ ρ(a, b)/d(a, b) ≤ n(1 + ε) by definition of m and m∗. Hence the identity map φ : (T, d) → (T, ρ) : x 7→ x is a (1+ε)-scale isomorphism. (cid:3) We now apply Theorems 2.5 and 3.3 to analyze the generalized roundness of certain countable metric trees that resemble combs. Definition 3.4. The vertex set V of the infinite comb C consists of the points x0, xk and yk, where k is any positive integer. The edge set E of C consists of the unordered pairs {xk−1, xk} and {xk, yk}, where k is any positive integer. For each positive integer m, the finite subtree of C that has vertex set {x1+k, y1+k k ∈ [m]} will be called the m-comb. The m-comb will be denoted Cm. We are interested in placing various path metrics on the infinite comb C and the m-comb Cm. One way to do this is to adopt the following canonical procedure. Definition 3.5. Let f : N → (0,∞) be a function. We define a path metric ρf on the infinite comb C in the following manner: (1) ρf (xk−1, xk) = f (k − 1), and (2) ρf (xk, yk) = f (k) for each positive integer k. All other distances in C are then determined geodesically. The resulting metric tree will be denoted C(f ). If, moreover, we restrict ρf to the m-comb, the resulting metric tree will be denoted Cm(f ). There are some special cases of Definition 3.5 worth highlighting. If f (k) = 1 for all k ≥ 0, the resulting metric trees C(f ) and Cm(f ) will be denoted C(1) and Cm(1), respectively. In other words, C(1) and Cm(1) are the combs C and Cm endowed with the usual combinatorial path metric δ. Caffarelli et al. [6] have shown that ℘Cm(1) → 1 as m → ∞. Hence ℘C(1) = 1. We will see presently that by placing mild assumptions on the function f it follows that ℘C(f ) = 1. Our arguments will be facilitated by the following lemma. Lemma 3.6. If the m-comb Cm(1) is locally represented in a metric tree (T, d) for all integers m > 0, then ℘(T,d) = 1. Proof. All metric trees have generalized roundness at least one. By Theorem 2.5, ℘(T,d) ≤ ℘Cm(1) for all m > 0. Moreover, Caffarelli et al. [6] have shown that ℘Cm(1) → 1 as m → ∞. Hence ℘(T,d) = 1. (cid:3) Definition 3.7. A function f : N → (0,∞) is said to be additively sub-exponential if for each integer m > 0. f (n+m) f (n) = 1 lim n→∞ The class of additively sub-exponential functions f : N → (0,∞) is very large. For instance, f could be any rational function that takes positive values on N. Other interesting possibilities for f include inverse tangent, logarithmic functions (translated suitably), and classically sub-exponential functions such as e√n. Furthermore, if f : N → (0,∞) is an additively sub-exponential function, then so is 1/f . Theorem 3.8. If f : N → (0,∞) is additively sub-exponential function, then ℘C(f ) = 1. 7 Proof. By Lemma 3.6, it suffices to prove that Cm(1) is locally represented in C(f ) for all m > 0. Let m > 0 be a given integer. Let ε > 0 be given. As f is additively sub-exponential, we may choose an integer n0 > 0 so that 1 − ε ≤ f (n + k)/f (n) ≤ 1 + ε for each k ∈ [m] and all n ≥ n0. In particular, we have f (n0 + k) 1 − ε ≤ f (n0) ≤ 1 + ε for each k ∈ [m]. Consider the subtree Y ′ of C(f ) that has vertices xn0+k and yn0+k for all k ∈ [m]. As simple (unweighted) graphs, Y ′ and Cm(1) are one and the same graph; namely, Cm. Let φ : Cm(1) → Y ′ denote this natural identification. Let ρ denote the path metric that Y ′ inherits from C(f ). We may regard the metrics on Y ′ and Cm(1) as path metrics on Cm. For each edge {s, t} in Cm we have, by choice of n0, f (n0)(1 − ε) ≤ min k∈[m] f (n0 + k) ≤ ρ(φ(s), φ(t)) δ(s, t) ≤ max k∈[m] f (n0 + k) < f (n0)(1 + ε). It follows from Theorem 3.3 that φ : Cm(1) → Y ′ is a (1 + ε)-scale isomorphism. As Cm(1) is a finite metric space and as ε > 0 was arbitrary, we conclude that Cm(1) is locally represented in C(f ). (cid:3) It also follows from Theorem 3.8 that if f is an additively sub-exponential function, then ℘C(f ) = ℘C(1/f ). 4. Convergent and divergent spherically symmetric trees of generalized roundness one Caffarelli et al. [6] considered the generalized roundness of spherically symmetric trees endowed with the usual combinatorial path metric (wherein all edges in the tree are assumed to have unit length). In this section we consider a broader class of spherically symmetric trees by relaxing the requirement that all edges have unit length. This allows one to make a distinction between convergent and divergent spherically symmetric trees. In order to proceed we review the basic definitions and notations for spherically symmetric trees. In addition, we introduce the notion of a downward length sequence for a spherically symmetric tree. Given a vertex v0 in a tree T , we let r(T, v0) = sup{δ(v0, v) : v ∈ T}, where δ denotes the usual combinatorial path metric on T . We call r(T, v0) the v0-depth of T . Naturally included here is the possibility that the v0-depth of T may be infinite. A vertex v of T is a level k vertex of T if δ(v0, v) = k. The children of a level k vertex v ∈ T consist of all level k + 1 vertices w ∈ T such that δ(v, w) = 1. We let dk(v) denote the number of children of v. Definition 4.1. A tree T is said to be spherically symmetric if we can choose a vertex v0 ∈ T so that for any k, all level k vertices of T have the same number of children. Such a pair (T, v0) will be called a spherically symmetric tree (SST). Notice that if v is a level k vertex in a given SST (T, v0), then dk = dk(v) only depends upon k. Thus dk is the number of children of any level k vertex in T . We call the (possibly finite) sequence (dk)0≤k<r(T,v0) the downward degree sequence of (T, v0). We will say that (dk) is non-trivial provided dk > 1 for at least one k such that 0 ≤ k < r(T, v0). Now suppose that (T, v0) is a given SST with downward degree sequence (dk). If, for each k such that 0 ≤ k < r(T, v0), lk is a positive real number, we will call ℓ = (l0, l1, l2, . . .) a downward length sequence for (T, v0). Given such a sequence ℓ, we may define a path metric ρℓ on T in the following manner. For any k such that 0 ≤ k < r(T, v0), if w is a child of a level k vertex v ∈ T , we define ρℓ(v, w) = lk. All other ρℓ-distances in T are then determined geodesically. The resulting metric tree (T, ρℓ) is said to be convergent if P lk < ∞ and divergent if P lk = ∞. One significance of convergent SSTs is that they have finite diameter. We proceed to show that large classes of divergent and convergent SSTs have generalized roundness one. The following lemma is a variation of [6, Theorem 2.1]. As the statement of the lemma is complicated, we will comment on the intuition behind this result. Among all n-point metric trees endowed with the usual combinatorial path metric, the complete bipartite graph K1,n−1 has the smallest generalized roundness. Moreover, as n → ∞, the generalized roundness of K1,n−1 tends to one. The conditions placed on the SST in the statement of the following lemma ensure that it contains a star-like structure that resembles K1,q, q = d0d1 ··· dk, modulo scaling. Such an SST must have generalized roundness relatively close to one. Lemma 4.2. Let (T, v0) be a finite SST with a non-trivial downward degree sequence (d0, d1, . . . , dn−1). Suppose ℓ = (l0, l1, . . . , ln−1) is a downward length sequence for (T, v0) that satisfies 2l0 < l0 + l1 +··· + ln−1. 8 For each k, 1 ≤ k ≤ n, set Mk = Pk−1 non-negative integer k ≤ m such that d0d1 ··· dk > 1, we have i=0 li and let m be the largest integer k such that Mk < 1 2 Mn. For each ℘(T,ρℓ) ≤ ln(cid:16)2 + 2 (d0d1···dk)−1(cid:17) ln(cid:16)2 − 2Mk Mn (cid:17) . (4.1) If d0d1 ··· dm = 1, then we have the trivial bound ℘(T,ρℓ) ≤ 2. Proof. Let (T, v0) be a finite SST that satisfies the hypotheses of the lemma. Because at least one dj > 1 there must exist at least one vertex z ∈ T with at least two children x, y ∈ T . As children in T are ρℓ-equidistant from their parent we see that ρℓ(x, z) = ρℓ(x, y) 2 = ρℓ(z, y). The existence of such a metric midpoint in (T, ρℓ) ensures that ℘(T,ρℓ) ≤ 2. Now assume that d0d1 ··· dm > 1 and consider any non-negative integer k ≤ m such that d0d1 ··· dk > 1. Then there are d0d1 ··· dk−1 vertices at distance Mk from v0. For each of the dk children of such a vertex, choose a leaf which is a descendent of that child (or the child itself if it is a leaf). This results in a total of q = d0d1 ··· dk > 1 distinct leaves which we label a1, a2, . . . , aq. Set bj = v0 for all j such that 1 ≤ j ≤ q. For all i and j we have ρℓ(ai, bj) = Mn. Moreover, for all i 6= j, we have ρℓ(ai, aj) ≥ 2(Mn − Mk) and ρℓ(bi, bj) = 0. It follows that any generalized roundness exponent p of (T, ρℓ) must satisfy 1 2 q(q − 1) (2(Mn − Mk))p ≤ Xi<j {ρℓ(ai, aj)p + ρℓ(bi, bj)p} ≤ Xi,j ρℓ(ai, bj)p = q2M p n. (4.2) By comparing the left and right sides of (4.2) it follows that p must satisfy: p ≤ ln(cid:16)2 + 2 (d0d1···dk)−1(cid:17) ln(cid:16)2 − 2Mk Mn (cid:17) . As p was an arbitrary generalized roundness exponent of (T, ρℓ), we conclude that the lemma holds. (cid:3) Theorem 4.3. Let (T, v0) be a countable SST with downward degree sequence (d0, d1, d2, . . .) and down- ward length sequence ℓ = (l0, l1, l2, . . .). If di > 1 for infinitely many i and P li = ∞, then ℘(T,ρℓ) = 1. Proof. For each positive integer n let (Tn, v0) denote the finite SST with downward degree sequence (d0, d1, . . . , dn−1) and downward length sequence ℓ = (l0, l1, . . . , ln−1). For each k, 1 ≤ k ≤ n, set Mk = Pk−1 i=0 li. As P li = ∞ we will have 2l0 < l0 + l1 + ··· + ln−1 provided n is sufficiently large. Moreover, for each such integer n, we may choose the largest integer k = k(n) such that Mk ≤ ln Mn. As n → ∞, the quantities k, Mk, Mn and d0d1 ··· dk all tend to ∞. However, by construction, (2Mk)/Mn → 0 as n → ∞. Thus, by Lemma 4.2, ℘(Tn,ρℓ) → 1 as n → ∞, and so we conclude that ℘(T,ρℓ) = 1. (cid:3) Theorem 4.4. Let f : N → (0,∞) be an additively sub-exponential function. Let (T, v0) be a countable SST with downward degree sequence (dk). Let ℓ denote the downward length sequence (f (k)). If dk > 1 for each integer k ≥ 0, then ℘(T,ρℓ) = 1. Proof. The condition dk > 1 for each integer k ≥ 0 ensures that the infinite comb C(f ) is isometric to a metric subspace of (T, ρℓ). Thus ℘(T,ρℓ) ≤ ℘C(f ). Moreover, ℘C(f ) = 1 by Theorem 3.8 and ℘(T,ρℓ) ≥ 1, thereby forcing ℘(T,ρℓ) = 1. (cid:3) Theorem 4.4 provides examples of convergent SSTs with generalized roundness one. For instance, we may simply set dk = 2 and f (k) = (k + 1)−2 for all k ≥ 0 to obtain a countable SST that is convergent and has generalized roundness one. In particular, such SSTs have finite diameter. 9 5. Embedding properties of metric trees of generalized roundness one We conclude this paper with some comments on the special Euclidean embedding properties of metric trees of generalized roundness one that set them apart from all other metric trees. As noted at the outset of this paper, the notions of generalized roundness and negative type are equivalent. In order to make this statement more precise we recall the following definition, the roots of which can be traced back to an 1841 paper of Cayley [2]. Definition 5.1. Let p ≥ 0 and let (X, d) be a metric space. Then: (1) (X, d) has p-negative type if and only if for all integers k ≥ 2, all finite subsets {x1, . . . , xk} ⊆ X, and all choices of real numbers η1, . . . , ηk with η1 + ··· + ηk = 0, we have X1≤i,j≤k d(xi, xj)pηiηj ≤ 0. (5.1) (2) (X, d) has strict p-negative type if and only if it has p-negative type and the associated inequalities (5.1) are all strict except in the trivial case (η1, . . . , ηk) = (0, . . . , 0). Lennard et al. [25] proved that for all p ≥ 0, a metric space (X, d) has p-negative type if and only if p is a generalized roundness exponent of (X, d). The significance of this result is that builds a bridge between Enflo's [8] notion of generalized roundness and classical isometric embedding theory. These connections, in conjunction with contemporary results on strict negative type, enable the following theorem. Theorem 5.2. If (T, d) is a metric tree of generalized roundness one, then: (1) the metric transform (T,√d) is isometric to an affinely independent subset of ℓ2, and (2) the metric transform (T,√dp) does not embed isometrically into ℓ2 for any p, 1 < p ≤ 2. Moreover, the only metric trees that satisfy condition (2) are those of generalized roundness one. Proof. The vertex set of (T, d) is countable because it is a metric tree of generalized roundness one. Our definitions imply that each finite subset of T is contained in a finite subtree of T . Hjorth et al. [14] have shown that all finite metric trees have strict 1-negative type. Hence each finite metric subspace of (T, d) has strict 1-negative type. This ensures that (T, d) has strict 1-negative type. Equivalently, the metric transform (T,√d) has strict 2-negative type. Therefore (T,√d) is isometric to an affinely independent subset of ℓ2 by Kelleher et al. [20, Theorem 5.6]. This establishes condition (1). If the metric transform (T,√dp) were to embed isometrically into ℓ2 for some p ∈ (1, 2], this would imply that (T, d) has p-negative type. But by Lennard et al. [25], this would mean that p is a generalized roundness exponent of (T, d), thereby contradicting our assumption that ℘(T,d) = 1. This establishes condition (1). On the other hand, if a metric tree (Z, d) is not of generalized roundness one, then it must be the case that ℘(Z,d) > 1 (because 1 is a generalized roundness exponent of all metric trees). By Lennard et al. [25], this implies that (Z, d) has p-negative type for some p ∈ (1, 2]. Consequently, the metric transform (T,√dp) embeds isometrically into ℓ2 by Kelleher et al. that satisfy condition (2) are those of generalized roundness one. [20, Theorem 5.6]. We conclude that the only metric trees (cid:3) The proof of Theorem 5.2 shows that all metric trees have strict 1-negative type. Therefore every metric tree satisfies Theorem 5.2 (1) by the result of Kelleher et al. [20]. Acknowledgements The research in this paper was initiated at the 2011 Cornell University Summer Mathematics Institute (NSF grant DMS-0739338) and completed at the University of South Africa (Unisa). The second named author was partially supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (NSF grant DGE-1144082). We are indebted to the Visiting Researcher Support Programme at Unisa, the US National Science Foundation, the Department of Mathematics and the Center for Applied Mathematics at Cornell University for their support. 10 References [1] A. Bird, G. Jameson, N. J. Laustsen, The Giesy-James theorem for general index p, with an application to operator ideals on the pth James space, J. Operator Theory 70 (2013), 291–307. 4 [2] A. Cayley, On a theorem in the geometry of position, Cambridge Mathematical Journal II (1841), 267–271. (Also in The Collected Mathematical Papers of Arthur Cayley (Vol. I), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1889), pp. 1–4.) 10 [3] A. M. Dahma and C. J. Lennard, Generalized roundness of the Schatten class, Cp, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 412 (2014), 676–684. 4 [4] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow and A. M. Tonge, Absolutely Summing Operators, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 43 (1995), Cambridge U. Press, 1–474. 6 [5] S. Dineen, A Dvoretzky theorem for polynomials, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), 2817–2821. 4 [6] I. Doust, E. Caffarelli and A. Weston, Metric trees of generalized roundness one, Aeq. Math. 83 (2012), 239–256. 1, 2, 7, 8 [7] A.N. Dranishnikov, G. Gong, V. Lafforgue and G. Yu, Uniform embeddings into Hilbert space and a question of Gromov, Canad. Math. Bull. 45 (2002), 60–70. 2 [8] P. Enflo, On a problem of Smirnov, Ark. Mat. 8 (1969), 107–109. 1, 2, 4, 10 [9] P. Enflo, Uniform Structures and Square Roots in Topological Spaces II, Israel J. Math. 8 (1970), 253–272. 5 [10] T. Faver, K. Kochalski, M. Murugan, H. Verheggen, E. Wesson and A. Weston, Roundness properties of ultrametric spaces, Glasgow Math. J. 56 (2014), 519–535. 1, 2 [11] D. P. Giesy and R. C. James, Uniformly non-ℓ1 and B-convex Banach spaces, Studia Math. 48 (1973), 61–69. 4 [12] G. Godefroy, N. J. Kalton and G. Lancien, Szlenk Indices and uniform homeomorphisms, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), 3895–3918. 5 [13] P. H´ajek and M. Johanis, Smooth Analysis in Banach Spaces, De Gruyter Series in Nonlinear Analysis and Applications 19 (2014), De Gruyter, 1–497. 5 [14] P. Hjorth, P. Lisonek, S. Markvorsen and C. Thomassen, Finite metric spaces of strictly negative type, Linear Algebra Appl. 270 (1998), 255–273. 2, 10 [15] R. C. James, Uniformly nonsquare Banach spaces, Ann. of Math. 80 (1964), 542–550. 5 [16] R. C. James, Some self-dual properties of normed linear spaces, Sympos. Infinite Dimensional Topology, Ann. of Math. Studies, no. 69, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, N. J., 1972. 3 [17] R. C. James, Super-reflexive Banach spaces, Canad. J. Math. 24 (1972), 896–904. 3 [18] W. B. Johnson, J. Lindenstrauss and G. Schechtman, Banach spaces determined by their linear structure, GAFA 6 (1996), 430–470. 5 [19] C. Kelleher, D. Miller, T. Osborn and A. Weston, Strongly non-embeddable metric spaces, Topology Appl. 159 (2011), 749–755. 2 [20] C. Kelleher, D. Miller, T. Osborn and A. Weston, Polygonal equalities and virtual degeneracy in Lp-spaces, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 415 (2014), 247–268. 2, 10 [21] J. B. Kelly, Hypermetric spaces, in: Proc. Conf. Geometry of Metric and Linear Spaces, Lecture Notes in Math. 490 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1975), 17–31. 2 [22] J. L. Krivine, Sous-espaces de dimension finie des espaces de Banach r´eticul´e, Ann. of Math. 104 (1976), 1–29. 5 [23] J-F. Lafont and S. Prassidis, Roundness properties of groups, Geom. Ded. 117 (2006), 137–160. 1 [24] H. Lemberg, Nouvelle d´emonstration d'un th´eor`eme de J. L. Krivine sur la finie repr´esentation de ℓp dans un espace de Banach, Israel J. Math 39 (1981), 341–348. 5 [25] C. J. Lennard, A. M. Tonge and A. Weston, Generalized roundness and negative type, Michigan Math. J. 44 (1997), 37–45. 1, 2, 4, 10 [26] C. J. Lennard, A. M. Tonge and A. Weston, Roundness and metric type, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 252 (2000), 980–988. 5 [27] H. Li and A. Weston, Strict p-negative type of a metric space, Positivity 14 (2010), 529–545. 2 [28] J. Lindenstrauss and H. Rosenthal, The L [29] B. Maurey and G. Pisier, S´eries de variables al´eatoires vectorielles ind´ependantes et propri´et´es g´eom´etriques des espaces p spaces, Israel J. Math. 7 (1969), 325–349. 5 de Banach, Studia Math. 58 (1976), 45–90. 6 [30] E. Prassidis and A. Weston, Manifestations of non linear roundness in analysis, discrete geometry and topology. In: Arzhantseva, G., Valette, A. (eds.) Limits of Graphs in Group Theory and Computer Science. Research Proceedings of the ´Ecole Polytechnique F´ed´erale de Lausanne. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2009). 1 [31] M. Ribe, On uniformly homeomorphic normed spaces, Ark. Mat. 14 (1976), 237–244. 3, 5 [32] H. P. Rosenthal, On a theorem of J. L. Krivine concerning block finite representability of ℓp in general Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 28 (1978), 197–225. 5 [33] S. S´anchez, On the supremal p-negative type of a finite metric space, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 389 (2012), 98–107. 2 [34] I. J. Schoenberg, On certain metric spaces arising from euclidean spaces by a change of metric and their imbedding in Hilbert space, Ann. of Math. 38 (1937), 787–793. 1 [35] J. Stern, Some applications of model theory in Banach space theory, Ann. Math. Logic 9 (1976), 49–122. 5 [36] A. Weston, On the generalized roundness of finite metric spaces, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 192 (1995), 323–334. 1 11 Department of Economics, New York University, New York, NY 10012, USA E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Canisius College, Buffalo, NY 14208, USA E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Decision Sciences, University of South Africa, UNISA 0003, South Africa E-mail address: [email protected] 12
1109.5736	1	1109	2011-09-26T23:02:27	On The Uniqueness of The Strongly Irreducible Decompositions of Operators up to Similarity	[ "math.FA" ]	We give a generalization of the Jordan canonical form theorem for a class of bounded linear operators on complex separable Hilbert spaces in terms of direct integrals. Precisely, we study the uniqueness of strongly irreducible decompositions of the operators on the Hilbert spaces up to similarity.	math.FA	math	J. OPERATOR THEORY 00:0(0000), 101 -- 110 © Copyright by THETA, 0000 ON THE UNIQUENESS OF THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS UP TO SIMILARITY RUI SHI Communicated by Editor ABSTRACT. We give a generalization of the Jordan canonical form theorem for a class of bounded linear operators on complex separable Hilbert spaces in terms of direct integrals. Precisely, we study the uniqueness of strongly irre- ducible decompositions of the operators on the Hilbert spaces up to similarity. KEYWORDS: Strongly irreducible operator, von Neumann algebra, K0 group, direct integral. MSC (2000): Primary 47A67; Secondary 47A15, 47C15. 1. INTRODUCTION Throughout this article, all Hilbert spaces discussed are complex and sepa- rable. Denote by L (H ) the set of bounded linear operators on a Hilbert space H . An idempotent P is an operator in L (H ) satisfying P2 = P. A projection Q is an idempotent such that kerQ = (ranQ)⊥ (See [5]). An operator A in L (H ) is said to be irreducible if its commutant {A}′ , {B ∈ L (H ) : AB = BA} con- tains no projections other than 0 and the identity operator I on H , introduced by P. Halmos in [11]. (The separability assumption is necessary because on a non- separable Hilbert space every operator is reducible.) An operator A in L (H ) is said to be strongly irreducible if XAX−1 is irreducible for every invertible oper- ator X in L (H ) [10]. This shows that the commutant of a strongly irreducible operator contains no idempotents other than 0 and I. Strong irreducibility stays invariant up to similar equivalence while irreducibility is only an invariant up to unitary equivalence. An idempotent P in {A}′ is said to be minimal if every idem- potent Q in {A}′ ∩ {P}′ satisfies QP = P or QP = 0. For a minimal idempotent P in {A}′, it can be observed that the restriction AranP is strongly irreducible on ranP. An operator A in L (H ) is said to have a finite strongly irreducible decompo- i=1 in {A}′ such that sition if there exist finitely many minimal idempotents {Pi}n ∑n i=1 Pi = I and PiPj = PjPi = 0 for 1 ≤ i 6= j ≤ n. By the above observation, an 102 RUI SHI operator A in L (H ) having a finite strongly irreducible decomposition can be expressed as a direct sum of finitely many strongly irreducible operators. On finite dimensional Hilbert spaces, every strongly irreducible operator is similar to a Jordan block. In [12], D. A. Herrero and C. Jiang proved that for ev- ery operator T in L (H ), there exists a sequence {Tn}∞ n=1 in L (H ) such that limn→∞ kT − Tnk = 0, where every operator Tn is similar to a direct sum of finitely many strongly irreducible operators. Y. Cao, J. Fang and C. Jiang [4] stud- ied the uniqueness of finite strongly irreducible decompositions of operators in L (H ) up to similar equivalence by the K0 groups of Banach algebras. For more work around this subject, the reader is referred to [7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19]. Inspired by the ideas and results in [4], we study operators in L (H ) which may have no finite strongly irreducible decompositions. In particular, there are many operators in L (H ) whose commutants contain no minimal idempotents. To represent these operators, direct sums of strongly irreducible operators need to be generalized to direct integrals with some regular Borel measures. In [18], C. Jiang and the author of the present paper proved that an operator A in L (H ) is similar to a direct integral of strongly irreducible operators if and only if its com- mutant {A}′ contains a bounded maximal abelian set of idempotents. A direct integral of strongly irreducible operators means the integrand is strongly irre- ducible almost everywhere on the domain of integration. For related concepts and results about direct integrals and abelian von Neumann algebras, the reader is referred to [3, 5, 6, 20, 21]. Following the notation of [18], we generalize a definition mentioned above. An operator A in L (H ) is said to have a strongly irreducible decomposition if its commutant {A}′ contains a bounded maximal abelian set of idempotents. Fur- thermore, a strongly irreducible decomposition of the operator A is said to be unique up to similarity if for bounded maximal abelian sets of idempotents P and Q in {A}′, there is an invertible operator X in {A}′ such that XP X−1 = Q. As a corollary of the main theorems, a normal operator in L (H ) has unique strongly irreducible decomposition up to similarity if and only if the multiplicity function mN for N is finite a. e. on σ(N) with respect to the scalar-valued spectral measure µN . By this, the tensor product IH ⊗ N does not have unique strongly irreducible decomposition up to similarity, if dimH = ∞. To simplify the statements of the main theorems, we need to introduce the upper triangular representation for operator-valued matrices. Assume A in L (H ) is a direct integral of strongly irreducible operators in the form A = ∞Mn=1 ZΛn A(λ)dµ(λ), (1) with respect to a partitioned measure space {Λ, µ, {Λn}∞ n=1}, where µ is a regular Borel measure on a compact set Λ and {Λn}∞ n=1 is a Borel partition of Λ, and the equation µ(Λn) = 0 holds for all but finitely many n in N (0 /∈ N), and the dimension of the fibre space H λ ([1], §2) is n for almost every λ in Λn. ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 103 By ([2], Corollary 2), there is a unitary operator U such that U AU∗ = Z ∞Mn=1 Λn   Mφn Mφn 12 Mφn 13 0 Mφn Mφn 23 Mφn 0 ... ... 0 0 0 ... 0 · · · Mφn 1n · · · Mφn 2n · · · Mφn 3n ... . . . · · · Mφn  n×n (λ)dµn(λ), (2) where µn = µΛn for 1 ≤ n < ∞ and φn, φn cation operators. Denote by νn = µn ◦ φ−1 n Mφn. Let the set {Γnm}m=∞ spect to the νn-measurable multiplicity function mφn such that mφn ij ∈ L∞(µn), and Mφn, Mφn the scalar-valued spectral measure for m=1 be the Borel partition of the spectrum σ(Mφn) with re- for Mφn defined on σ(Mφn) (λ) = m for almost every λ in Γnm. Write νnm for νnΓnm, 1 ≤ m ≤ ∞. For a class of operators in L (H ) having unique strongly irreducible de- compositions up to similarity, we give a necessary and sufficient condition by K-theory for Banach algebras. Precisely, we prove the following theorems. are multipli- ij THEOREM 1.1. Assume that an operator A in L (H ) is stated as in (1) and ex- pressed as in (2) such that (i) the νn-measurable multiplicity function mφn spectrum σ(Mφn) for every n in N and is simple and may take ∞ on the (ii) every superdiagonal entry as in (2) is invertible for n in {n ∈ N : µ(Λn) > 0}. Then the following statements are equivalent. (a) The strongly irreducible decomposition of A is unique up to similarity. (b) There exists a bounded N-valued simple function rA on σ(A) such that V({A}′) ∼= { f (λ) ∈ N(rA (λ)) : f is Borel and bounded on σ(A)} and K0({A}′) ∼= { f (λ) ∈ Z(rA (λ)) : f is Borel and bounded on σ(A)}. THEOREM 1.2. If an operator A in L (H ) is expressed as in (1) and (2) such is simple and bounded on σ(Mφn) for that the νn-measurable multiplicity function mφn every n in N, then there exists a sequence of operators {Ak}∞ k=1 in L (H ) required as in Theorem 1.1 and having unique strongly irreducible decompositions up to similarity such that limk→∞ kAk − Ak = 0. 2. PROOFS The following lemma describes an important property of the superdiagonal entries in (2). 104 RUI SHI LEMMA 2.1. An upper triangular matrix in Mn(C) of the form   α11 0 0 ... 0 α12 α22 0 ... 0 α13 α23 α33 ... 0 · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · α1n α2n α3n ... αnn   is strongly irreducible if and only if the equation α11 = α22 = · · · = αnn and the inequal- ity αi,i+1 6= 0 for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 both hold. Proof. If the matrix is strongly irreducible, then the equation α11 = · · · = αnn holds. Write α for αii, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Because every strongly irreducible matrix is similar to a Jordan matrix, we know that there is an invertible matrix in Mn(C) such that   α11 0 0 ... 0 α12 α22 0 ... 0 =   x11 x21 x31 ... xn1 α13 α23 α33 ... 0 x12 x22 x32 ... xn2 · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · x13 x23 x33 ... xn3 α1n α2n α3n ... αnn · · · · · · · · · . . . · · ·   x1n x2n x3n ... xnn x11 x21 x31 ... xn1     x12 x22 x32 ... xn2 x13 x23 x33 ... xn3 · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · x1n x2n x3n ... xnn     α 1 0 0 α 1 0 ... 0 · · · · · · 0 α · · · ... . . . · · · 0 ... 0 0 0 0 ... α   . This equation yields that xij = 0 for i > j and xii = αi,i+1xi+1,i+1 for i = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1. Hence, we obtain xkk = ∏n−1 i=k αi,i+1 xnn. If αi,i+1 = 0 for some i in {1, 2, . . . , n − 1}, then the matrix (xij)1≤i,j≤n is not invertible. Therefore the inequality αi,i+1 6= 0 holds for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. On the other hand, if αi,i+1 6= 0 holds for i = 1, 2, . . . , n, then every matrix in Mn(C) commuting with the matrix (αij)1≤i,j≤n can be expressed in the form X =   x11 0 0 ... 0 x12 x11 0 ... 0 x13 x23 x11 ... 0 · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · x1n x2n x3n ... x11   . If X is an idempotent, then it must be I or 0. Thus the matrix (αij)1≤i,j≤n is strongly irreducible. Applying this lemma, we obtain the following corollary. ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 105 COROLLARY 2.2. In (2), the function φn almost everywhere on Λn for i = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1. i,i+1 in L∞(µn) satisfies φn i,i+1(λ) 6= 0 In this corollary, the Multiplication operator Mφn induced by the function φn i,i+1 is not invertible in general. But Mφn can be approximated by a sequence of invertible Multiplication operators in L (L2(µn)). Meanwhile, replacing the superdiagonal entries with invertible ones enable us to simplify the problem. That is why we add the hypothesis (ii) in Theorem 1.1. Precisely, we obtain the following two lemmas. i,i+1 i,i+1 LEMMA 2.3. If an operator An is a direct integral of strongly irreducible operators stated as in (2) in the form then for every positive integer k, there exists an operator Ank in the form An = Ank =     Mφn Mφn 12 Mφn 13 0 Mφn Mφn 23 Mφn 0 ... ... 0 0 0 ... 0 · · · Mφn 1n · · · Mφn 2n · · · Mφn 3n ... . . . · · · Mφn Mφn Mφn 12,k Mφn 13 Mφn Mφn 23,k Mφn ... 0 0 ... 0 · · · Mφn 1n · · · Mφn 2n · · · Mφn 3n ... . . . · · · Mφn 0 0 ... 0  , n×n n×n  1 k . 1 kn ; with invertible Mφn i,i+1,k for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 such that kAn − Ankk < Proof. For λ in Λn, we construct φn i,i+1,k in the form φn i,i+1,k(λ) =   Thus kMφn i,i+1 − Mφn i,i+1,k k < φn i,i+1(λ), φn i,i+1(λ) knφn i,i+1(λ) 1 kn , , if φn i,i+1(λ) ≥ ; 1 kn i,i+1(λ) < if 0 < φn if φn i,i+1(λ) = 0. 1 k(n − 1) , 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. Therefore we obtain kAn − Ankk ≤ n−1 ∑ i=1 kMφn i,i+1 − Mφn i,i+1,k k < (n − 1) 1 k(n − 1) = 1 k . By the definition, the operator Mφn i,i+1,k is invertible for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. 106 RUI SHI LEMMA 2.4. If an operator An is a direct integral of strongly irreducible operators stated as in (2) in the form An =   Mφn Mφn 12 Mφn 13 0 Mφn Mφn 23 Mφn 0 ... ... 0 0 0 ... 0 · · · Mφn 1n · · · Mφn 2n · · · Mφn 3n ... . . . · · · Mφn  n×n such that Mφn invertible operator Xn in L ((L2(µn))(n)) such that Xn AnX−1 n is invertible in L (L2(µn)) for i = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1, then there exists an is in the form i,i+1 Xn AnX−1 n =   Mφn I 0 I 0 Mφn 0 ... 0 0 Mφn ... ... 0 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 ... . . . · · · Mφn   . (3) Proof. We construct an invertible upper triangular operator-valued matrix Xn in L ((L2(µn))(n)) as follows. the equation Choose an invertible operator M fnn in L (L2(µn)). Fix an operator M fii by Mφn i,i+1 M fi+1,i+1 = M fii for i = 1, . . . , n − 1. Let {M fii Notice that every operator in the set {M fii Choose an operator M f n n−1,n equation }n i=1 be the main diagonal (0-diagonal) entries of Xn. }n i=1 is invertible in L (L2(µn)). in L (L2(µn)). Fix an operator M f n by the i,i+1 Mφn i,i+1 M f n i+1,i+2 + Mφn i,i+2 M f n i+2,i+2 = M f n i,i+1 for i = 1, . . . , n − 2. Let {M f n i,i+1 Choose an operator M f n n−l,n }n−1 i=1 be the 1-diagonal entries of Xn. in L (L2(µn)), where l is a positive integer such that 1 ≤ l ≤ n − 1. Fix an operator M f n by the equation i,i+l Mφn i,i+1 M f n i+1,i+l+1 + Mφn i,i+2 M f n i+2,i+l+1 + · · · + Mφn i,i+l+1 M f n i+l+1,i+l+1 = M f n i,i+l for i = 1, . . . , n − l − 1. Let {M f n Choose an operator M f n 1n }n−l i=1 be the l-diagonal entries of Xn. i,i+l in L (L2(µn)) to be the n-diagonal entry of Xn. ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 107 Therefore we obtain an invertible operator-valued matrix Xn in the form Xn =   12 M f11 M f n M f n 13 0 M f22 M f n 0 M f33 0 ... ... ... 0 0 0 23 · · · M f n 1n · · · M f n 2n · · · M f n 3n ... . . . · · · M fnn   such that the equation (3) holds. By Lemma 2.4, we can reduce equation (2) to the form A = Z ∞Mn=1 Λn   Mφn I 0 I 0 Mφn 0 ... 0 0 Mφn ... ... 0 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 ... . . . · · · Mφn  n×n (λ)dµn(λ), (4) in the sense of similar equivalence. For a regular Borel measure ν on C with compact support K, define Nν on L2(ν) by Nν f = z · f for each f in L2(ν). LEMMA 2.5. Let an operator An be in the form An =   N (∞) νn 0 0 ... 0 N I (∞) νn 0 ... 0 0 I (∞) νn N ... 0 0 0 0 ... · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · N (∞) νn  n×n , where νn is a regular Borel measure and supported on some compact set Kn such that 0 < νn(Kn) < ∞. Then the strongly irreducible decomposition of An is not unique up to similarity. Proof. To prove this lemma, we need to construct two bounded maximal abelian sets of idempotents in {An}′ which are not similar. (∞) νn We can write N in the form Nνn ⊗ Il2, where Il2 is the identity operator on l2. Denote by P the set of all the spectral projections of Nνn . This set forms a bounded maximal abelian set of idempotents in {Nνn }′. Let {ek}∞ k=1 be an or- thonormal basis for l2. Denote by Ek the projection such that ranEk = {λek : , {P ∈ L (l2) : P = P∗ = P2 ∈ {Ek : k ∈ N}′′}. De- λ ∈ C}. Let Q1 note by χS the characteristic function for a Borel subset S in the interval [0, 1] ∈ L (L2[0, 1]) : S ⊂ [0, 1] is Borel.}. There is a unitary op- and let erator U : L2[0, 1] → l2 such that UPU∗ ∈ L (l2) for every P ∈ Q2. The sets , U Q2U∗ and Q1 are two bounded maximal abelian sets of idempotents in Q2 , {MχS Q2 108 RUI SHI L (l2) but they are not unitarily equivalent. By the fact that W∗(P) ⊗ W∗(Q1) and W∗(P) ⊗ W∗(Q2) are both maximal abelian von Neumann algebras, we ob- tain that F1 , {P ∈ W∗(P) ⊗ W∗(Q1) : P = P∗ = P2} and F2 , {P ∈ W∗(P) ⊗ W∗(Q2) : P = P∗ = P2} are both maximal abelian sets of idempotents in {Nνn ⊗ Il2}′ = L∞(νn) ⊗ L (l2). is a bounded maximal abelian set of idempo- We need to prove that F (n) i tents in {An}′ for i = 1, 2. An operator X in {An}′ can be expressed in the form X =   X11 X12 X13 X21 X22 X23 X31 X32 X33 ... ... Xn1 Xn2 Xn3 ... · · · X1n · · · X2n · · · X3n ... . . . · · · Xnn  n×n . (5) We prove that Xij is in {Nνn ⊗ Il2}′. Note that P (∞) is the set of all the spectral projections of Nνn ⊗ Il2. Fix an projection P in (P (∞))(n). The operator A can be expressed in the form An = An1 ⊕ An2, where Ani =   N (∞) νni 0 0 ... 0 N I (∞) νni 0 ... 0 0 I (∞) νni N ... 0 0 0 0 ... · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · N (∞) νni   , i = 1, 2. The measures νn1 and νn2 are mutually singular and their supports depend on the characteristic functions corresponding to P and I − P. Hence X can also be expressed in the form X = (cid:18)Y11 Y12 Y21 Y22(cid:19) ranP ran(I − P) . The equations An1Y12 = Y12 An2 and An2Y21 = Y21 An1 yield that Y12 = Y21 = 0. Therefore P reduces X and Xijs are in {Nνn ⊗ Il2}′. A computation shows that the equation Xij = 0 holds for i > j and Xii = X11 for i = 2, . . . , n in (5). Furthermore, if X as in (5) is an idempotent, then so is every main diagonal entry Xii of X. We assume that X is an idempotent in {An}′ and commutes with F (n) . Hence Xii commutes with F1. The fact that F1 is a maximal abelian set of idempotents implies that Xii belongs to F1. Thus Xii commutes with Xij. For the 1-diagonal entries, the equation 2XiiXi,i+1 − Xi,i+1 = 0 yields Xi,i+1 = 0, 1 ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 109 for i = 1, . . . , n − 1. By this way, the k-diagonal entries of X are all zero, for k = 2, . . . , n. Therefore X is in F (n) are bounded maximal abelian sets of idempotents in {An}′. . Both F (n) and F (n) 1 1 2 We prove that F (n) and F (n) 2 {An}′ can be written in the form 1 are not similar in {An}′. Every operator X in X = Zσ(Nνn ) X(λ)dνn(λ). Suppose that there is an invertible operator X in {An}′ such that XF (n) 2 X−1 = F (n) 1 . (n) For each P in F 2 λ in σ(Nνn). But there exists an projection Q in F (n) for almost every λ in σ(Nνn). This is a contradiction. Therefore F (n) are not similar in {An}′. , the projection P(λ) is either of rank ∞ or 0, for almost every such that Q(λ) is of rank n, and F (n) 1 1 2 By ([22], Theorem 3.3), we have the following corollary. COROLLARY 2.6. Let an operator An be in the form An =   N (m) νn 0 0 ... 0 N I (m) νn 0 ... 0 0 I (m) νn N ... 0 0 0 0 ... · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · N (m) νn  n×n , where m is a positive integer and νn is a regular Borel measure supported on some compact set Kn such that 0 < νn(Kn) < ∞. Then the strongly irreducible decomposition of An is unique up to similarity. For a regular Borel measure ν with compact support, Denote by Jm(ν) an operator in the form Jm(ν) =   Nν I 0 Nν 0 ... 0 0 I 0 Nν ... ... 0 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 ... . . . · · · Nν  m×m L2(ν) L2(ν) L2(ν) ... L2(ν) . (6)     Mφ1 Mφ2 0 Mφ1 ... ... 0 0 · · · Mφm · · · Mφm−1 ... . . . · · · Mφ1   , Mφ11 0 ... 0 Mφ12 Mφ22 ... 0 · · · Mφ1m · · · Mφ2,m−1 . . . · · · Mφmm ...   . 110 RUI SHI LEMMA 2.7. Every operator in {Jm(ν)}′ is in the form where φi is in L∞(ν) for 1 ≤ i ≤ m. erator in {Jm(ν)}′ is in the form Proof. By a similar computation as in Lemma 2.5, we obtain that every op- By the equation Nν Mφi,j+1 + Mφi+1,j+1 = Mφi,j + Mφi,j+1 Nν, the k-diagonal entries are as required for 1 ≤ k ≤ n. LEMMA 2.8. Let m1 and m2 be two positive integers such that m1 > m2. Then the following equations hold: (i) {B ∈ L ((L2(ν))(m2), (L2(ν))(m1)) : Jm1 = {(CT, 0)T : C ∈ {Jm2 (ν)}′}. (ii) {B ∈ L ((L2(ν))(m1), (L2(ν))(m2)) : Jm2 = {(0, C) : C ∈ {Jm2 (ν)}′}. (ν)B = BJm2 (ν)} (ν)B = BJm1 (ν)} Proof. We only need to prove the first equation. The second equation can be obtained by the same method. Let B = (CT, DT)T such that C and D are in the form C =   B11 B12 B21 B22 ... ... Bm2 1 Bm2 2 B1m2 B2m2 ... · · · · · · . . . · · · Bm2 m2 , D =  Bm2 +1,1 ... Bm1 1 · · · Bm2 +1,m2 ... · · · Bm1 m2   .   By a similar computation as in Lemma 2.5, we can obtain that P(m1 ) B = BP(m2 ) for every spectral projection P of Nν. Thus, every Bij belongs to {Nν}′, for 1 ≤ i ≤ m1 and 1 ≤ j ≤ m2. For i = 1, . . . , m1 − 1, the equation NνBi1 + Bi+1,1 = Bi1Nν yields Bi+1,1 = 0. For i = 2, . . . , m1 − 1, the equation NνBi2 + Bi+1,2 = Bi2Nν yields Bi+1,2 = 0. By this way, we can obtain Bij = 0 for i > j. Hence D = 0 and a further computation shows that C ∈ {Jm2 (ν)}′. ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 111 LEMMA 2.9. Let m1, m2, r1, r2 be positive integers. If an idempotent P in Mn(C) is in the form P =   Im1 0 0 0 0 0r1 0 0 R11 R12 R21 R22 Im2 0 0r2 0   , where Im is the identity operator in Mm(C), then there exists an invertible operator X in the form X =   Im1 0 0 0 0 Ir1 0 0 0 −R21 Im2 0 such that and X−1 =   Im1 0 0 0 0 Ir1 0 0 0 −R12 R21 Im2 0 0 0 Ir2   R12 0 0 Ir2     Im1 0 0 0 XPX−1 = 0 0r1 0 0 0 0 Im2 0 0 0 0 0r2   . Note that the equation P2 = P implies that R11 = R22 = 0 and the construc- tion of X depends on P. In the following example, we construct an operator A and prove the strongly irreducible decomposition of A is unique up to similarity. EXAMPLE 2.10. Let A = J (2) 1 (ν). We prove that for every two bounded maximal abelian sets of idempotents P and Q in {A}′, there is an invertible operator X in {A}′ such that the equation P = XQX−1 holds and (3) 2 (ν) ⊕ J (2) 3 (ν) ⊕ J V({A}′) = { f is bounded Borel : σ(Nν) → N ⊕ N ⊕ N}, K0({A}′) = { f is bounded Borel : σ(Nν) → Z ⊕ Z ⊕ Z}. Denote by Pm1 the set of all the idempotents in {Jm1 (ν)}′. Note that Pm1 the set of all . Denote by Em2 the set of all the projections in (m1 ) equals the set of all the spectral projections of N ν (C) and by Fm1 ,m2 the diagonal projections in Mm2 {Pm1 }′′. ⊗ Em2 Let P = F3,2 ⊕ F2,3 ⊕ F1,2. We can verify that P is a bounded maximal abelian set of idempotents in {A}′. Then we only need to prove that for every bounded maximal abelian set of idempotents Q in {A}′, there is an invertible operator X in {A}′ such that P = XQX−1. We reduce the rest into two claims: (i) For every idempotent P in {A}′, there is an invertible operator X in {A}′ such that XPX−1 belongs to P. 112 RUI SHI (ii) There are seven idempotents {Qk}7 k=1 in Q such that for almost every k=1 and Q(λ) generate the same bounded maximal λ in σ(Nν), {Qk(λ)}7 abelian set of idempotents. Every operator B in {A}′ can be expressed in the form B =   B11 B12 B21 B22 ... ... B71 B72 · · · B17 · · · B27 ... . . . · · · B77   , where b11 1 0 0 B11 =   B31 = (cid:18)0 B61 = (cid:0)0 0 0 b11 2 b11 1 0 b31 1 0 b31 b13 1 0 0 b11 3 b11 2 b11 1   , B13 =  B33 =(cid:18)b33 1 (cid:19) , B63 =(cid:0)0 1 (cid:1) , b31 2 b31 1 0 b16 1 0 0 b13 2 b13 1 0   , B16 =     , 0 (cid:19) , B36 = (cid:18)b36 1 (cid:19) , B66 = (cid:0)b66 1 (cid:1) , 1 (cid:1) , b33 2 b33 1 b33 other Bijs are expressed as follows: • For 1 ≤ i, j ≤ 2, Bijs are of the same form; • For 3 ≤ i, j ≤ 5, Bijs are of the same form; • For 6 ≤ i, j ≤ 7, Bijs are of the same form; • For 1 ≤ i, j ≤ 2 and 3 ≤ j ≤ 5, Bijs are of the same form; • For 1 ≤ i, j ≤ 2 and 6 ≤ j ≤ 7, Bijs are of the same form; • For 3 ≤ i, j ≤ 5 and 1 ≤ j ≤ 2, Bijs are of the same form; • For 3 ≤ i, j ≤ 5 and 6 ≤ j ≤ 7, Bijs are of the same form; • For 6 ≤ i, j ≤ 7 and 1 ≤ j ≤ 2, Bijs are of the same form; • For 6 ≤ i, j ≤ 7 and 3 ≤ j ≤ 5, Bijs are of the same form, where bij k s belong to {Nν}′ for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ 7 and 1 ≤ k ≤ 3. For B expressed in the above form, there is a unitary operator U1 such that U1BU∗ 1 =  B11 B12 B13 B22 B23 0 B33 0 0   , ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 113 where Bijs are in the form B11 =   b11 1 b21 1 · · · 0 0 b12 1 b22 1 · · · 0 0 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 0 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... b14 1 b24 1 · · · b34 1 b44 1 b54 1 · · · 0 0 b15 1 b25 1 · · · b35 1 b45 1 b55 1 · · · 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... b16 1 b26 1 · · · b36 1 b46 1 b56 1 · · · b66 1 b76 1  7×7 b17 1 b27 1 · · · b37 1 b47 1 b57 1 · · · b67 1 b77 1 , (7) b15 2 b25 2 · · · b35 2 b45 2 b55 2 · · · 0 0  7×5  b35 1 b45 1 b55 1  b15 1 b25 1 · · · , B13 =   b11 3 b21 3 · · · 0 0 0 · · · 0 0 b12 3 b22 3 · · · 0 0 0 · · · 0 0  7×2 , , B23 =   b11 2 b21 2 · · · 0 0 0 b12 2 b22 2 · · · 0 0 0   , B33 = (cid:18)b11 1 b21 1 1 (cid:19) . b12 1 b22 b13 1 b23 1 · · · b33 1 b43 1 b53 1 · · · 0 0 b14 2 b24 2 · · · b34 2 b44 2 b54 2 · · · 0 0 B12 =   b11 2 b21 2 · · · 0 0 b12 2 b22 2 · · · 0 0 0 · · · 0 · · · 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... b13 2 b23 2 · · · b33 2 b43 2 b53 2 · · · 0 0 0 0   B22 = b11 1 b21 1 · · · b12 1 b22 1 · · · 0 0 0 0 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... b13 1 b23 1 · · · b33 1 b43 1 b53 1 b14 1 b24 1 · · · b34 1 b44 1 b54 1 114 RUI SHI If P is an idempotent in {U1 AU∗ 1 }′, then by the proof of ([22], Lemma 3.4), we can construct an invertible operator X in {U1 AU∗ 1 }′ of the form where the main diagonal blocks as in (7) are diagonal projections. There is also a unitary operator U2 in {U1 AU∗ 1 }′ of the form such that such that the equation X2 X1 X =  XPX−1 =  X3   ⊕(cid:18)X1 P11 P12 P13 P22 P23 0 P33 0 0 X2(cid:19) ⊕ X1,   , U2 =  U2 1 U2 2 U2 3   ⊕(cid:18)U2 1 2(cid:19) ⊕ U2 1, U2   =   U2 1 U2 2 U2 1   P11  U2 3 U2 2 ∗   U2 3 (λ) Is1 0 · · · 0 0 · · · 0 0 0 0t1 · · · 0 0 · · · 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... ∗ ∗ · · · Is2 0 · · · 0 0 ∗ ∗ · · · 0 0t2 · · · 0 0 ... ... ... ... ... ... ∗ ∗ ∗ · · · ∗ ∗ · · · Is3 0 ∗ · · · ∗ ∗ · · · 0 0t3   bP = U2XPX−1U∗ 2 =  bP11 0 0 bP12 bP22 0   . bP13 bP23 bP33 holds for almost every λ in σ(Nν), where si and ti are non-negative integers. Write U2XPX−1U∗ 2 in the form By Lemma 2.9, we can construct an invertible operator Y1 in {U1 AU∗ 1 }′ such that thermore, we can construct an invertible operator Y2 in {U1 AU∗ bP11, bP22, and bP33 become diagonal projections after similar transformation. Fur- diagonal blocks of Y1bPY−1 1 }′ such that the 1- 1 vanish after similar transformation. And then we can 1 }′ such that the 2-diagonal blocks construct an invertible operator Y3 in {U1 AU∗ ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 115 2 vanish after similar transformation. Thus we finish the proof of 1 Y−1 of Y2Y1bPY−1 claim (i). To prove claim (ii), we need to define a ν-measurable function rQ with re- spect to an idempotent Q in {A}′. Without loss of generality, we assume that Q ∼ (P31 ⊕ P32) ⊕ (P21 ⊕ P22 ⊕ P23) ⊕ (P11 ⊕ P12) ∈ F3,2 ⊕ F2,3 ⊕ F1,2. Define rQ (λ) , 1 3 + + Tr(P11(λ) + P12(λ)), λ ∈ σ(Nν), Tr(P31(λ) + P32(λ)) 1 2 Tr(P21(λ) + P22(λ) + P22(λ)) where Tr stands for the standard trace of a square matrix. Note that rQ stays invariant up to similarity. By the proof of ([22], Lemma 3.5), we can obtain that there are seven idempotents Qi in Q such that • the equation rQi (λ) = 1 holds a. e. on σ(Nν) for i = 1, . . . , 7 and • the equation QiQj = 0 holds for i 6= j. The idempotent Qi may be in the form Qi(λ) ∼  I3 ⊕ 0, λ ∈ Λ3; I2 ⊕ 0, λ ∈ Λ2; I1 ⊕ 0, λ ∈ Λ1, where {Λi}3 (7) projections of N ν belongs to a Pm for m = 1, 2, 3. We finish the proof of claim (ii). i=1 is a Borel partition of σ(Nν). We can choose finitely many spectral to cut Qis and to piece together new Qis such that every Qi By the proof of ([22], Lemma 3.6) and the idempotents {Qi}7 i=1 constructed above, we can obtain an invertible operator X in {A}′ such that XQX−1 = P. Therefore the strongly irreducible decomposition of A is unique up to similarity. Assume that Q1, Q2 and Q3 are in P1, P2 and P3 respectively. Then there is a group isomorphism α such that α([Q1]) = (1, 0, 0), α([Q2]) = (0, 1, 0), and α([Q3]) = (0, 0, 1), where [Qi] stands for the similar equivalence class of Qi in n=1 Mn({A}′)/ ∼. Thus we obtain α([I]) = (2, 3, 2), where I is the identity operator in {A}′. Furthermore, a routine computation yields that V({A}′) and K0({A}′) are of the forms at the beginning of this example. V({A}′) = S∞ Proof of Theorem 1.1. By the calculating in the above example, we can prove (ν) is unique up to simi- that the strongly irreducible decomposition ofLk larity, where mi, ni and k are all positive integers. There is a unitary operator V such that VAV∗ can be expressed in the form as described at the beginning of Example 2.10. Then we can apply the above lemmas to perform calculation as we need. Note that the equation (ni) mi i=1 J {( k1Mi=1 J (ni) mi (ν1)) ⊕ ( k2Mj=1 (nj) mj J (ν2))}′ = { k1Mi=1 J (ni) mi (ν1)}′ ⊕ { k2Mj=1 (nj) mj J (ν2)}′ 116 RUI SHI holds for mutually singular Borel measures ν1 and ν2. By Lemma 2.5, if the strongly irreducible decomposition of A is unique up to similarity, then every multiplicity function mφn is bounded. Then we can obtain that V({A}′) and K0({A}′) are as described in the theorem. On the other hand, if the strongly irreducible decomposition of A is not unique up to similarity, then there is a number m in {n ∈ N : µ(Λn) > 0} such that the multiplicity function takes ∞ in its codomain on a Borel subset Γm1 of measure nonzero in its mφm domain. Therefore in K0({A}′), every Borel function f vanishes on Γm1. This is a contradiction. The proof of Theorem 1.2 is an application of Lemma 2.3. Acknowledgements. The author is grateful to Professor Chunlan Jiang and Professor Guihua Gong for their advice and comments on writing this paper. Also the author was supported in part by NSFC Grant (No. 10731020) and NSFC Grant (No.10901046). REFERENCES [1] M. B. ABRAHAMSE, Multiplication operators. Hilbert space operators (Proc. Conf., Calif. State Univ., Long Beach, Calif., 1977), 17 -- 36, Lecture Notes in Math., 693, Springer, Berlin, 1978. MR0526530 (80b:47042) [2] EDWARD A. AZOFF, Borel measurability in linear algebra. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 42 (1974), 346 -- 350. MR0327799 (48 #6141) [3] E. AZOFF, C. FONG, F. GILFEATHER, A reduction theory for non-self-adjoint operator algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 224 (1976), 351 -- 366. MR0448109 (56 #6419) [4] Y. CAO, J. FANG, C. JIANG, K-groups of Banach algebras and strongly irreducible decompositions of operators. J. Operator Theory 48 (2) (2002), 235 -- 253. MR1938796 (2004f:47003) [5] JOHN B. CONWAY, A course in functional analysis. Second edition. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 96. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990. xvi+399 pp. ISBN: 0-387-97245-5. MR1070713 (91e:46001) [6] KENNETH R. DAVIDSON, C∗-algebras by example. Fields Institute Monographs, 6. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996. xiv+309 pp. ISBN: 0-8218-0599- 1. MR1402012 (97i:46095) [7] M. ENOMOTO, Y. WATATANI, Relative position of four subspaces in a Hilbert space. Adv. Math. 201 (2) (2006), 263 -- 317. MR2211531 (2009d:46044) [8] M. ENOMOTO, Y. WATATANI, Exotic indecomposable systems of four subspaces in a Hilbert space. Integral Equations and Operator Theory 59 (2) (2007), 149 -- 164. MR2345993 (2009g:47194) [9] M. ENOMOTO, Y. WATATANI, Indecomposable representations of quivers on infinite- dimensional Hilbert spaces. J. Funct. Anal. 256 (4) (2009), 959 -- 991. MR2488332 (2010c:47238) ON THE STRONGLY IRREDUCIBLE DECOMPOSITIONS OF OPERATORS 117 [10] F. GILFEATHER, Strong reducibility of operators. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 22 (4) (1972), 393 -- 397. MR0303322 (46 #2460) [11] P. HALMOS, Irreducible operators. Michigan Math. J. 15 (1968), 215 -- 223. MR0231233 (37 #6788) [12] DOMINGO A. HERRERO, CHUNLAN JIANG, Limits of strongly irreducible operators, and the Riesz decomposition theorem. Michigan Math. J. 37 (1990), no. 2, 283´lC291. MR1058401 (91k:47035) [13] C. JIANG, Similarity classification of Cowen-Douglas operators. Canad. J. Math. 56 (4) (2004), 742 -- 775. MR2074045 (2006d:47037) [14] C. JIANG, Z. WANG, The spectral picture and the closure of the similarity orbit of strongly irreducible operators. Integral Equations Operator Theory 24 (1) (1996), 81 -- 105. MR1366542 (97h:47011) [15] C. JIANG, X. GUO, K. JI, K-group and similarity classification of operators. J. Funct. Anal. 225 (1) (2005), 167 -- 192. MR2149922 (2006c:47023) [16] C. JIANG, Z. WANG, Structure of Hilbert space operators. World Scientific Publish- ing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2006. x+248 pp. ISBN: 981-256-616-3 MR2221863 (2008j:47001) [17] C. JIANG, K. JI, Similarity classification of holomorphic curves. Adv. Math. 215 (2) (2007), 446 -- 468. MR2355596 (2008g:46081) [18] C. JIANG, R. SHI, Direct Integrals of Strongly Irreducible Operators. J. Ramanujan Math. Soc. 26 (2) (2011), 165 -- 180. [19] Z. JIANG, S. SUN, On completely irreducible operators. Front. Math. China 1 (4) (2006), 569 -- 581. MR2257195 (2007g:47003) [20] H. RADJAVI, P. ROSENTHAL, Invariant subspaces. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 77. Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1973. xi+219 pp. MR0367682 (51 #3924) [21] J. T. SCHWARTZ, W∗-algebras. Gordon and Breach, New York, 1967. vi+256 pp. MR0232221 (38 #547) [22] R. SHI, On a generalization of the Jordan canonical form theorem on separable Hilbert spaces. arXiv:1109.4224v1 [math.FA]. RUI SHI, SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES, DALIAN UNIVERSITY OF TECH- NOLOGY, DALIAN, 116024, CHINA E-mail address: [email protected] Received Month dd, yyyy; revised Month dd, yyyy.
1606.03122	2	1606	2016-09-20T23:17:47	Asymptotically Hilbertian Modular Banach Spaces: Examples of Uncountable Categoricity	[ "math.FA", "math.LO" ]	We give a criterion ensuring that the elementary class of a modular Banach space E (that is, the class of Banach spaces, some ultrapower of which is linearly isometric to an ultrapower of E) consists of all direct sums E\oplus_m H, where H is an arbitrary Hilbert space and \oplus_m denotes the modular direct sum. Also, we give several families of examples in the class of Nakano direct sums of finite dimensional normed spaces that satisfy this criterion. This yields many new examples of uncountably categorical Banach spaces, in the model theory of Banach space structures.	math.FA	math	ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN MODULAR BANACH SPACES: EXAMPLES OF UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY C. WARD HENSON* AND YVES RAYNAUD Abstract. We give a criterion ensuring that the elementary class of a modular Banach space E (that is, the class of Banach spaces, some ultrapower of which is linearly isometric to an ultrapower of E) consists of all direct sums E ⊕m H, where H is an arbitrary Hilbert space and ⊕m denotes the modular direct sum. Also, we give several families of examples in the class of Nakano direct sums of finite dimensional normed spaces that satisfy this criterion. This yields many new examples of uncountably categorical Banach spaces, in the model theory of Banach space structures. 1. Introduction The aim of this paper is to give some new examples of uncountably categorical Banach space structures. The motivation is model-theoretic, but here we formulate our objectives and methods of proof in the framework of ordinary Banach space theory, using the well known ultrapower construction [4]. To begin, we give some terminology and explain briefly the model-theoretic background. Two Banach spaces X, Y are elementarily equivalent if for some ultrafilters U and V, their respective ultrapowers XU and YV are linearly isometric. This is an equivalence relation, although its transitivity is not evident. In fact this relation is identical to that of ap- proximate elementary equivalence in the first author's logic for normed space structures [5, Discussion p. 5 and Theorem 10.7] and also to that of elementary equivalence in con- tinuous logic applied to the unit balls [2, Definition 4.3, Corollary 5.6 and Theorem 5.7]. These logical counterparts are defined to mean that the two Banach spaces satisfy the same sentences having the appropriate syntactic form, and this makes it clear that the el- ementary equivalence relation defined using ultrapowers is transitive. The class of Banach spaces that are elementarily equivalent to a given Banach space is called the elementary class of this Banach space; it consists of all ultraroots of ultrapowers of the given space. (An ultraroot of a Banach space X is a Banach space Y , an ultrapower of which is linearly isometric to X). It follows from basic results of model theory, the Compactness Theorem as well as the Lowenheim-Skolem Theorems (in either of the two logics mentioned above), that the elementary class of any infinite dimensional Banach space contains spaces of all infinite density characters. If κ is an infinite cardinal number, an infinite dimensional Banach space X is said to be κ-categorical if its elementary class contains exactly one member 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 46B04, 46B45; Secondary: 03C20, 03C35. Key words and phrases. Banach spaces, ultraproducts, elementary equivalence, categoricity, isometric embeddings, modular direct sums. (*) Research of this author was supported by grant #202251 from the Simons Foundation. Part of the work was carried out during the Universality and Homogeneity program at the Hausdorff Institute of the University of Bonn (Fall 2013). 1 2 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD of density character κ. It is called uncountably categorical if it is κ-categorical for some uncountable cardinal κ; in that case it is κ-categorical for all uncountable cardinals κ, as proved independently in [1] and [12]. Note that uncountable categoricity is a property of the elementary class of X rather than of X by itself, so we should speak of an uncountably categorical class of Banach spaces. So we say that a class C of Banach spaces is uncountably categorical if and only if C is closed under ultrapowers and under ultraroots (hence it is closed under elementary equivalence), and it contains only one member Xκ of density character κ for some uncountable cardinal κ; in that case all infinite dimensional members of C will necessarily be elementarily equivalent to Xκ. Indeed, up to linear isometry there A trivial example is the class of Hilbert spaces. is only one infinite dimensional Hilbert space of any given density character; moreover, ultrapowers of any Hilbert space are Hilbert spaces, and so are closed subspaces (hence also ultraroots). Although the structure of uncountably categorical Banach space structures has begun to be investigated [13], very few examples are known. In addition to the class of Hilbert spaces, some less trivial examples consist of certain finite dimensional perturbations of Hilbert spaces: namely given a finite dimensional normed space E, the class CE of all 2-direct sums E ⊕2 H, where H is any infinite dimensional Hilbert space, is κ-categorical for all infinite cardinal κ. This fact was known to the authors for a few years; its proof is included here (in Section 6) for the sake of completeness and because it is closely tied to the other results that are expounded here. The main purpose of this article is, however, to give some less trivial examples, which include many spaces that are not linear-topologically isomorphic to a Hilbert space; one of them is even not linear-topologically embeddable in any Banach lattice with nontrivial concavity. So from the point of view of Banach space geometry, they are not close to the class of Hilbert spaces. On the other hand, in a certain asymptotic sense, which will be explained in Section 3, they have a very hilbertian character. (In a sense that is not yet well understood, the main result of [13] says that an uncountably categorical Banach space must be very closely related to the class of Hilbert spaces.) Some other model-theoretic properties of our examples will be discussed in a future paper. Here we concentrate on the methods needed to prove their categoricity, using purely Banach space theoretic arguments which have their own interest, in particular in modular sequence space theory. This paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we describe a general pattern of the examples that we present, in the framework of modular Banach spaces. We give a crite- rion guaranteeing that the elementary class of a (separable, infinite dimensional) modular space E, considered as a Banach space with no extra structure, consists exactly of all the modular direct sums E ⊕m H, where H is a Hilbert space of arbitrary hilbertian di- mension; this property clearly implies uncountable categoricity. All of our examples fit into this framework. (The concepts of modular Banach space and modular direct sum are explained in Section 2. We note that every Banach space can be considered as a modular space by taking its modular function to be the square of the norm.) We then make a brief presentation of the concrete examples whose properties are demonstrated later in the paper. All these examples are given as Nakano direct sums of a sequence of finite dimen- sional spaces. The Nakano (sequence) spaces appearing there are associated to a sequence of exponents converging to 2. In Section 3, ultrapowers of these Nakano direct sums are described; it is proved that when the geometry of the sequence of finite dimensional spaces converges to the geometry of Hilbert space in a very weak sense, then the Nakano direct sum is asymptotically hilbertian. ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 3 The main content of this paper is in Sections 4 and 5. There are two main families of examples discussed there: in the first one, which is treated in Section 4, all exponents of the underlying Nakano sequence space are distinct from 2; in the second one, treated in Section 5, all the exponents are equal to 2. In both cases, the sequence of finite dimensional spaces used in the direct sum must converge in a suitable local sense to Hilbert space. There is more flexibility in the case of exponents different from 2: here the factor spaces may be even one-dimensional; in particular, the Nakano space itself is an example. This space is not linear-topologically equivalent to Hilbert space if the convergence of the exponents to 2 is slow enough. We finish with section 6, which treats the finite dimensional perturbations of the class of Hilbert spaces already mentioned above, as an addendum to section 5. Throughout this paper, the Banach spaces considered may be either real or complex, and our proofs make no distinction between real and complex scalars. We denote the scalar field by K. For general notions about ultrapowers the reader is referred to [4, Section I]. (Our notation differs slightly from that of this author; e.g., we use EU , [xi]U , in place of (E)U , (xi)U , etc). 2. A general pattern The Banach space examples E presented in this paper have the common feature that every ultrapower of E is linearly isometric to a direct sum E ⊕ H, where H is a Hilbert space. (It can be shown that this condition implies that E is reflexive; we omit the argument since we have easier direct proofs of reflexivity for the examples presented here.) Indeed, if E is one of our examples, we show that for any ultrafilter U we have a direct sum decomposition EU = D(E) ⊕ H (1) where D : E → EU is the canonical embedding of E into its ultrapower EU (namely, D assigns to each x ∈ E the element represented in EU := EI /U by the constant family (x)i∈I ) and where H is a closed linear subspace of EU that is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space. xi Then D(E) is complemented in EU by the weak limit projection P : [xi]U 7→ w- lim i,U (which exists since E is reflexive). If ker P is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space (i.e., equation (1) holds with H = ker P ) we say that E is asymptotically hilbertian (in the iso- metric sense). Indeed this is an isometric version of the notion of asymptotically hilbertian space considered, e.g., in [11, pp. 220-221], which corresponds to the case where ker P is only linear-topologically isomorphic to a Hilbert space. The examples that we present here are indeed asymptotically hilbertian (in the isometric sense), but the reader will observe that this property is not formally required by the main theoretical tool of the present section (Theorem 2.1). To go further toward a similar description of all members of the elementary class of E, we need to make hypotheses on the nature of the direct sum. For example, if the direct sum in equation (1) is always a 2-sum, that is, if kx + hk2 = kxk2 E + khk2 holds for all x ∈ E, h ∈ H, then for any Hilbert space K: H (E ⊕2 K)U = EU ⊕2 KU = (E ⊕2 H) ⊕2 KU = E ⊕2 (H ⊕2 KU ) = E ⊕2 K′ where K′ = H ⊕2 KU is still a Hilbert space. It follows that the class C of direct sums E ⊕2 K, where K is a Hilbert space, is closed under ultrapowers. Moreover, if E is separable, then for every uncountable cardinal κ, the only member of C with density 4 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD character κ is E⊕2 Hκ, where Hκ is the Hilbert space of hilbertian dimension κ. Therefore, if C turns out to be closed under ultraroots, it is necessarily uncountably categorical. Furthermore, there are other simple kinds of direct sums, apart from the 2-sums, for which the preceding reasoning is valid, namely the modular direct sums. A convex modular on a linear space X is a convex function Θ : E → R+ that satisfies the following conditions: Θ(0) = 0, Θ is symmetric (Θ(λx) = Θ(x) for any scalar λ with λ = 1), and Θ is faithful (Θ(x) = 0 =⇒ x = 0). An associated norm on X is then defined by the Luxemburg formula (2) kxk = inf{λ > 0 : Θ(x/λ) ≤ 1}. Since we require that the convex modular has finite values, the Luxemburg norm is im- plicitly defined by the equation (3) Θ(cid:18) x kxk(cid:19) = 1. The modular direct sum X1⊕m X2 of two modular spaces (X1, Θ1), (X2, Θ2) is their linear topological direct sum equipped with the modular Θ(x1 + x2) = Θ1(x1) + Θ2(x2) x1 ∈ X1, x2 ∈ X2 . Xi Note that if norms kxkXi on Xi are given (for i = 1, 2), then convex modulars can be defined by Θi(x) = kxk2 ; moreover, the Luxemburg norms associated to these modulars coincide with the given norms and the m-direct sum coincides with the 2-direct sum. We shall systematically equip Hilbert spaces with their trivial modular ΘH(x) = kxk2. We say that a modular space (X, Θ) has a modular direct decomposition X = Y ⊕m Z if Y , Z are linear subspaces of X and for every y ∈ Y, z ∈ Z we have Θ(y + z) = Θ(y)+ Θ(z). Given two modular spaces (X1, Θ1) and (X2, Θ2), we say that a linear map T : X1 → X2 is modular preserving, or preserves modulars, if Θ2 ◦ T = Θ1. Note that such a T is necessarily isometric (for Luxemburg norms). Two modular spaces (X1, Θ1) and (X2, Θ2) are said to be linearly isomodular if there exists a modular preserving surjective linear map from X1 onto X2. This implies that X1 and X2 are isometric, and the converse is trivially true in the special case where Θi(x) = kxk2, i = 1, 2. We say that a modular Θ satisfies the ∆2 condition with constant C if we have Θ(2x) ≤ C · Θ(x) for all x ∈ X. In this case the modular is bounded by C n on the ball B(0, 2n), and thus, by the general theory of convex functions, it is Lipschitz of constant at most C n on each ball B(0, 2n). One may thus define unambiguously a function ΘU on each ultrapower XU by (4) ΘU ([xi]U ) = [Θ(xi)]U . It is immediate that ΘU is convex and symmetric. It is faithful since ΘU ([xi]U ) = 0 means Θ(xi) →i,U 0 which implies xi →i,U 0 by equivalence of modular and norm convergence under the ∆2 condition. It is also easy to see using (3) that the Luxemburg norm associated to ΘU coincides with the ultrapower norm on XU . categoricity for the specific examples treated in the rest of the paper. Our next result provides the main theoretical tool that we use in proving uncountable 2.1. Theorem. Let E be an infinite dimensional ∆2 modular Banach space such that: i) Every ultrapower of E is linearly isomodular to E ⊕m H for some Hilbert space H. ii) Every linear isometric operator E → E ⊕m H, where H is any Hilbert space, maps E onto E. ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 5 then the elementary class of E consists exactly of all modular direct sums E ⊕m H, where H is an arbitrary Hilbert space, and hence this class is uncountably categorical (and E is separable). Furthermore, if E0 is a finite dimensional ∆2 modular Banach space such that ii') Any linear isometric operator E0 ⊕m ℓ2 → E0 ⊕m H, where H is any infinite dimensional Hilbert space, maps E0 onto E0 then the elementary class of E = E0 ⊕m ℓ2 consists exactly of all modular direct sums E0 ⊕m H, where H is an arbitrary infinite dimensional Hilbert space, and hence this class is κ-categorical for every infinite cardinal κ. 2.2. Remark. Condition (i) implies that every ultrapower EU has a modular direct sum decomposition EU = E1 ⊕m H, where E1 ⊂ EU is isomodular with E and H with an Hilbert space. Condition (ii) applied to the diagonal embedding D : E → EU implies that E1 = D(E), thus E verifies eq. (1). However H has no clear reason to be the kernel of the weak limit projection, and so E may not be asymptotially hilbertian. Proof of Theorem 2.1. Assume that E is infinite dimensional and let C be the class of all Banach spaces that are linearly isometric to E ⊕m K, for some Hilbert space K. This class is closed under ultrapowers since (E ⊕m K)U = EU ⊕m KU is isomodular with (E ⊕m H) ⊕m KU = E ⊕m K′ where K′ = H ⊕m HU is also a Hilbert space. On the other hand, for every uncountable cardinal κ strictly bigger than the density character of E, the only member (up to linear isometry) of the class C having density character κ is E ⊕m Hκ, where Hκ is the Hilbert space of hilbertian dimension κ. To complete the proof of the Theorem it remains only to prove that the class C is also closed under ultraroots. Once this is proved, it follows that E must be separable, since the elementary class of E contains a separable space. Let X be a Banach space such that some ultrapower XU of X is linearly isometric to a space E ⊕m H. Let J : E ⊕m H → XU be such an isometry, DX : X ֒→ XU be the diagonal embedding and i = J−1DX be the resulting embedding of X into E⊕mH. Taking ultrapowers, we get an embedding iU : XU ֒→ (E ⊕m H)U . By the preceding argument we have a modular direct decomposition (E ⊕m H)U = E1 ⊕m K, where E1 is isometric (in fact, isomodular) to E and K is an Hilbert space. Let D : E ⊕m H ֒→ (E ⊕m H)U be the diagonal embedding. Using assumption (ii) we have that DE is an isometry from E onto E1, in particular E1 = D(E). We set S = iU J; this is an isometric embedding E⊕m H ֒→ (E⊕m H)U which need not coincide with the diagonal embedding D. However, using assumption (ii) again, we do have that SE is an isometry from E onto D(E). To summarize, we have the following commutative diagram of linear isometries: XU J iU ◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆◆ 7♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣ D S E ⊕m H / (E ⊕m H)U = D(E) ⊕m K X DX ;✈✈✈✈✈✈✈✈✈✈ ❍❍❍❍❍❍❍❍❍ i i E ⊕m H Note that iU (XU ) ∩ D(E) ⊂ Di(X). Indeed if ξ = [xi]U ∈ XU and z ∈ E are such that z. Since i(X) is a closed subspace of E ⊕m H iU ([xi]U ) = [i(xi)]U = D(z) then i(xi)−→U this implies that z ∈ i(X). ' ' ; / / # # O O / 7 6 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD For every x ∈ E we have iU J(x) = S(x) ∈ D(E); hence by the preceding argument there is x′ ∈ X such that S(x) = Di(x′). As SE : E → D(E) is surjective this shows that D(E) ⊂ Di(X) and thus E ⊂ i(X). Let π : E⊕m H → E be the first projection on the direct sum E⊕m H. By the preceding argument, the range of π is contained in i(X). Let π′ be the restriction of π to i(X); since E ⊂ i(X), the range of π′ is E. Its kernel H0 is contained in that of π, and thus H0 ⊂ H is a Hilbert space. Finally i(X) = E ⊕ H0, with the norm induced by that of E ⊕m H. That is, i(X) = E ⊕m H0. Now suppose E0 is a finite dimensional ∆2 modular Banach space that satisfies (ii). Let C be the class of all Banach spaces that are linearly isometric to E0 ⊕m K, for some Hilbert space K. Since (E0)U = E0 for any ultrafilter U , the reasoning above shows that C is closed under ultrapowers and ultraroots. However, the members of this class are not all mutually elementarily equivalent, since any finite dimensional member X of C has trivial ultrapowers (XU = X), and thus cannot be elementarily equivalent to an infinite dimensional one. The subclass C∞ consisting of all the infinite dimensional members of C is also closed under ultrapowers and ultraroots, and has a unique member of any density character (up to linear isometry). Thus C∞ is the elementary class of its unique separable member E = E0 ⊕m ℓ2. It is routine to verify that the previous argument for proving closedness by ultraroots also works for C∞ under hypothesis (ii'), which is formally weaker than (ii). (cid:3) We now introduce the examples that are treated in the next sections and summarize their connections to the hypotheses of the preceding Theorem; proofs of what we state here are given in Sections 3, 4, and 5. Typical examples of modular spaces satisfying condition (i) of Theorem 2.1 are the Nakano sequence spaces ℓ(pn) associated to a sequence of exponents (pn) converging to 2. The space N := ℓ(pn) is the linear space of sequences of (real or complex) scalars x = (x(n)) such that Θ(x) := ∞ Xn=1 x(n)pn < ∞ and Θ is a natural convex modular on N which verifies condition ∆2 (since the sequence (pn) is bounded). The Luxemburg norm on N is then defined by (2), and N is complete for this norm. Since x ≤ y clearly implies Θ(x) ≤ Θ(y), it implies also kxk ≤ kyk; i.e., N is a Banach lattice (for the Luxemburg norm). It is easy to see that if (xn) is a decreasing sequence of elements of N which converges to zero coordinatewise then Θ(xn) converges to zero and so does kxnk; hence N is order-continuous. If pn 6= 2 for all n, then N also satisfies condition (ii) of Theorem 2.1 (if pn is allowed to equal 2, this condition will only be true for the subspace N0 = span [en : pn 6= 2]). The space N is linear-topologically isomorphic to ℓ2 if a certain summation condition due to Nakano holds (see Fact 3.3 below). On the other hand, it is possible to choose the exponents to yield Nakano spaces that satisfy both conditions of Theorem 2.1 but are not linear-topologically isomorphic to a Hilbert space, and they provide new kinds of examples of uncountable categoricity. A bigger variety of examples appears when we consider vector-valued Nakano sequence spaces, that is, direct sums of a sequence of finite dimensional Banach spaces. The elements of this direct sum are sequences of vectors, the norms of which form a sequence belonging to a given Nakano space. We denote by (⊕n En)N the Nakano direct sum associated to the ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 7 family of spaces (En) and the Nakano space N . Thus (cid:0)⊕n En(cid:1)N = {(x(n)) ∈ Yn En : (kx(n)kEn ) ∈ N}. A convex modular and norm are defined on the vector-valued Nakano sequence space by taking the Nakano modular of the sequence of norms: Θ(x) := ∞ Xn=1 kx(n)kpn En and then using the associated Luxemburg norm. We show that the Nakano direct sum En)N satisfies condition (i) of Theorem 2.1 whenever the Jordan-von-Neumann con- (⊕n stants (defined below, at the beginning of Section 3) of the spaces En converge to 1 (here pn may take the value 2). These constants measure the degree of approximation to which the spaces satisfy the parallelogram inequality. It is equivalent to require that the Banach- Mazur distances from 2-dimensional subspaces of En to the 2-dimensional Hilbert space converge uniformly to 1. (Note that this is a far weaker condition than saying that the Banach-Mazur distances from En to the Hilbert space of the same dimension converge to 1.) On the other hand, provided pn 6= 2 for all n, the Nakano direct sum (⊕n En)N satisfies condition (ii) of Theorem 2.1 without any condition on the spaces En except that they are finite dimensional. The reason is that isometries distinguish the spaces En (or H) by the value of the corresponding exponent pn (resp. 2 for H). In the opposite case where pn is constantly 2, in which case N = ℓ2 and the N -direct sum is a 2-sum, the preceding argument does not work, and isometries recognize the En spaces rather by their geometric properties. For this reason the conditions on the spaces En that we assume in this case are far more restrictive than in the preceding case (the examples are essentially the ℓp n spaces or their non-commutative analogues, the Schatten classes Sp n). 3. Asymptotically hilbertian Nakano direct sums For a normed space X, its Jordan-von Neumann constant a(X) is defined by (5) a(X) = 1 2 sup{kx + yk2 + kx − yk2 : x, y ∈ X,kxk2 + kyk2 = 1}. By setting u = x + y, v = x − y it is immediate that we also have (6) It follows that a(X) ≥ 1, and that a(X) = 1 iff X is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space [7]. Note that a(X) is the norm of the operator a(X) = 2 sup{kxk2 + kyk2 : x, y ∈ X,kx + yk2 + kx − yk2 = 1}. MX : ℓ2 2(X) → ℓ2 2(X) : (x, y) 7→ 1 √2 (x + y, x − y) . The conjugate operator is easily seen to be MX ∗, so that a(X∗) = a(X). Let N be a Nakano sequence space with exponent sequence (pn) converging to 2. Let (en) be the sequence of units of N (en is the sequence (δkn)k∈N). For every n ∈ N and x ∈ N let Pn(x) = Pn k=1 x(k)ek. Clearly Pn is a projection of norm one on N . On the other hand Θ(x−Pn(x)) = P∞k=n+1 x(k)pk → 0 when n → ∞, which by the ∆2-condition for Θ implies that kx− Pn(x))k → 0. It follows that (en) is a Schauder basis for N and the generic element of N can be written x = P∞n=1 x(n)en. (This basis is clearly unconditional with constant 1; in fact, it consists of mutually disjoint atoms of the Banach lattice N ). 8 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD Let E = (cid:18)⊕n be the N -direct sum of a family (En) of Banach spaces and Θ its En(cid:19)N modular, as defined in section 2. Note that since (pn) is bounded, the modular Θ satisfies a ∆2 condition. If we set ν(x) = (kx(n)kEn ) we have clearly ΘE(x) = ΘN (ν(x)) and kxkE = kν(x)kN . The map ν : X → N is clearly 1-Lipschitz. If (en) is the natural basis of the Nakano space (as above), it can be useful to denote the generic element x = (xn) of E by Pn en ⊗ x(n). Setting Pn(x) = Pn k=1 ek ⊗ x(k), the map Pn is a linear projection on E of norm one and for every x ∈ E kx − Pn(x)kE = kν(x) − Pn(ν(x))kN → 0 when n → ∞. Since the Banach lattice N is order continuous, its dual space N∗ is also a Banach sequence space. It is well known that the dual space N∗ to the N -direct sum E = (⊕n En)N E∗n)N ∗. If moreover (pn) is bounded away from 1, then N∗ is the Nakano is then E∗ = (⊕n sequence space with the conjugate exponent sequence (p∗n), with an equivalent norm, and since the spaces En are finite dimensional we have that E∗∗ = (⊕n En)N = E (with the same norm). Thus in this case E is reflexive. This remains true if a finite number of the pn equal 1 and the remainder of the exponents are bounded away from 1 (e.g., when the sequence (pn) converges to 2). E∗∗n )N = (⊕n 3.1. Proposition. If the Nakano sequence space N has its exponent sequence converging to 2, and if the linear spaces En are finite dimensional, then every ultrapower of their Nakano direct sum E = (cid:0)⊕n En(cid:1)N has the modular decomposition EU = E ⊕m H, where E is the diagonal copy of E in EU and H is the kernel of the weak limit projection P : EU → E. Moreover ΘU (x + h) = Θ(x) + khk2 for every x ∈ E, h ∈ H. If, moreover, the Jordan-von Neumann constants a(En) converge En(cid:1)N is to 1, then the space H is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space, and E = (cid:0)⊕n asymptotically hilbertian. Proof. 1) The modular decomposition of EU . As explained at the beginning of section 2, the canonical image D(E) of E in EU is the range of the weak limit projection P . Let H = ker P ; we prove first that the direct sum EU = E ⊕ H is modular. Note that if ξ ∈ H, then for every bounded family (xi) in E representing ξ and every n ∈ N we have w − lim i,U xi(n) = 0 . If x ∈ E has finite support relative to N , that is nx = sup{n : x(n) 6= 0} < ∞, and ξ ∈ H, we can find a representing family (xi) for ξ with xi(n) = 0 for every n ≤ nx and i. Then Θ(x + xi) = Θ(x) + Θ(xi), which shows that ΘU (x + ξ) = Θ(x) + ΘU (ξ) . This equality extends to every x ∈ E, by density of finitely supported elements in E and continuity of ΘU . 2) ΘU (ξ) = kξk2 whenever ξ ∈ H. It suffices to prove that the modular restricted to H is 2-homogeneous. Given ξ ∈ H and n ∈ N, we can choose a family (xi) in E, representing ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 9 ξ and such that xi(k) = 0 for k = 1 . . . n and all i ∈ I. Then for every λ ∈ K and i ∈ I (cid:12)(cid:12)Θ(λxi) − λ2Θ(xi)(cid:12)(cid:12) = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) kλxi(k)kpk − λ2 ∞ Xk=n kxi(k)kpk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∞ Xk=n ∞ k≥n (cid:12)(cid:12)λpk − λ2(cid:12)(cid:12) Θ(xi) . Xk=n(cid:12)(cid:12)λpk − λ2(cid:12)(cid:12)kxi(k)kpk ≤ max ≤ It follows that k≥n (cid:12)(cid:12)λpk − λ2(cid:12)(cid:12) ΘU (ξ) . Then since pn → 2, by letting n → ∞ we obtain ΘU (λξ) = λ2ΘU (ξ). (cid:12)(cid:12)ΘU (λξ) − λ2ΘU (ξ)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ max 3) H is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space. If x, y ∈ En and pn ≤ 2 we have kx + ykpn + kx − ykpn 2 ≤ a(En)pn/2(cid:0)kxk2 + kyk2(cid:1)pn/2 (cid:19)pn/2 ≤ (cid:18)kx + yk2 + kx − yk2 ≤ a(En)pn/2 (kxkpn + kykpn) . 2 If pn ≥ 2 the inequalities are reversed kx + ykpn + kx − ykpn 2 ≥ a(En)−pn/2(kxkpn + kykpn) . Setting u = x + y and v = x − y we obtain in this case u + v pn kukpn + kvkpn 2 ≥ a(En)−pn/2(cid:18)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) pn(cid:19) +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) u − v 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) and relabelling the variables and rearranging the preceding inequality kx + ykpn + kx − ykpn 2 ≤ 2pn−2a(En)pn/2 (kxkpn + kykpn) . Set αn = a(En)pn/2 max(1, 2pn−2); we then have αn → 1 when n → ∞. Now assume that x, y ∈ E with x(k) = 0 = y(k) whenever k < n. We then have Θ(x + y) + Θ(x − y) ≤ βn(Θ(x) + Θ(y)) where βn = sup{αk : k ≥ n}. Observe that βn → 1 when n → ∞. Passing to the ultrapower, consider ξ, η ∈ EU that are represented by families (xi) and (yi) respectively, with xi(k) = 0 = yi(k) for all k < n and i ∈ I. By the previous argument we have 2 ≤ βn(ΘU (ξ) + ΘU (η)) . When ξ, η ∈ H, the preceding inequality is valid for all n ∈ N, hence 2 ΘU (ξ + η) + ΘU (ξ − η) ΘU (ξ + η) + ΘU (ξ − η) 2 ≤ ΘU (ξ) + ΘU (η) . Since ΘU (ξ) = kξk2 whenever ξ ∈ H, the Banach space H satisfies the parallelogram inequality and thus is linearly isometric to a Hilbert space. (cid:3) 3.2. Remark. Proposition 3.1 suggests that Nakano spaces like N (as in Corollary 4.4) are "close to being hilbertian". However they need not be linearly isomorphic to a Hilbert space. Indeed, from a result of Nakano himself [9] it is easy to deduce the following fact: 3.3. Fact. The Nakano space N = ℓ(pn) has an equivalent hilbertian norm iff for some c > 0 the series P∞n=1 c 2pn pn−2 is convergent. 10 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD Indeed by Theorem 1 in [9] this condition is necessary and sufficient for the unit vector basis of N to be equivalent to the ℓ2 basis. If N has an equivalent hilbertian norm, its unit vector basis is not necessarily an orthonormal basis for the hilbertian structure, but it remains unconditional in the hilbertian norm (since unconditionality is preserved by linear isomorphisms, although the unconditionality constant may, of course, change). Since unconditional bases in a Hilbert space are all equivalent to the ℓ2 unit basis, Nakano's condition must then hold true. 4. First example: Nakano direct sums The main result of this section (Corollary 4.4) states that every Nakano direct sum of finite dimensional normed spaces associated to a Nakano space N with exponent sequence converging to 2, but different from 2, satisfies condition (ii) of Theorem 2.1. The isometries of general Nakano spaces with exponent function strictly greater than 2 were studied in the article [6]. Here we can avoid the latter restriction on (pn) by taking advantage of the fact that the Banach lattice N is atomic. We state first a Proposition where the condition pn 6= 2 is not required, with a view to getting some partial results also in this case (Corollary 4.5 and Remark 4.7). 4.1. Proposition. Let H be any Hilbert space, and N be a Nakano sequence space with exponent sequence pn → 2. Further, let (En) be a sequence of finite dimensional normed spaces and E = (⊕n En)N their N -direct sum. Consider also the partial direct sums Eh and Enh corresponding respectively to the set of indices {n : pn = 2}, and {n : pn 6= 2}. Then every linear isometric embedding from E into E ⊕m H is modular preserving and maps Enh onto Enh and Eh into Eh ⊕m H. We first give two lemmas in preparation for the proof of Proposition 4.1. Fix N , (En), and E = (⊕n En)N as in the hypotheses of the Proposition. We regard K as the 1-dimensional modular space by taking its modular to be the square of the absolute value. If a sequence (xn) in a Hilbert space H is weakly null, then for every x ∈ H we have kx + xnk2 − (kxk2 + kxnk2) → 0 . In particular if kxnk → a then kx + xnk2 → kxk2 + a2. An analogous property for E is given by the next lemma. 4.2. Lemma. Let (xn) be a weakly null sequence in E with Θ(xn) → 1. Then for every x ∈ E and t ∈ K, we have Θ(x + txn) → Θ(x) + t2 and kx + txnkE → kx + tkE⊕mK . Proof. Let U be a nonprincipal ultrafilter on N. Since xn → 0 weakly, the corresponding element ξ = [xn]U of EU belongs to ker P = H. Thus Θ(x + txn) = ΘU (x + tξ) = Θ(x) + t2ΘU (ξ) = Θ(x) + t2 . lim n,U Since the U -limit does not depend on U , it is also the ordinary limit. Similarly lim n,U kx + txnkE = kx + tξkE⊕mH = inf{λ > 0 : Θ(cid:16) x λ(cid:17) + t2 λ2 = 1} = kx + tkE⊕mK . The next lemma, valid for any modular space M , yields an estimation of kx + tkM⊕mK for small x ∈ M . By homogeneity of the norm, it suffices to do this for t = 1. (cid:3) ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 11 4.3. Lemma. Let M be a modular space with convex modular Θ satisfying a ∆2 condition. Then for x → 0 in M we have kx + 1kM⊕mK − 1 ∼ Θ(x) . 1 2 Proof. We have hence 1 = Θ(cid:18) x + 1 kx + 1km(cid:19) = Θ(cid:18) m − 1 = kx + 1k2 kx + 1k2 1 x kx + 1km(cid:19) + m Θ(cid:18) kx + 1k2 kx + 1km(cid:19) ∼ Θ(x) x m m − 1 ∼ 2(kx + 1km − 1). and the result follows since kx + 1k2 (cid:3) Proof of Proposition 4.1. Let T be an isometric embedding from E into E ⊕m H. We denote by Θ the modular on E ⊕m H; that is, Θ(x + h) = Θ(x) + khk2 whenever x ∈ E, h ∈ H. Let (¯pk)k∈N be an enumeration of the distinct values of the exponent sequence (pn), and ¯Ek = span {en ⊗ En : pn = ¯pk}. It will be sufficient to prove that T maps each ¯Ek into itself, and Eh into Eh ⊕ H: indeed since T is injective and the spaces ¯Ek with ¯pk 6= 2 have finite dimension, so T will in fact map each of those ¯Ek onto itself, and thus Enh onto Enh. Moreover for x ∈ ¯Ek, Θ(x) = kxk¯pk , and for x ∈ H, Θ(x) = kxk2, so that the isometry T will be modular preserving. Let j ∈ N be fixed, and for every n ∈ N choose xn ∈ En with kxnk = 1. Then xn → 0 weakly in E, and for every x ∈ E we have by Lemma 4.2 kx + xnkE → kx + 1kE⊕mK . Then since T is an isometry (7) kT x + T xnkE⊕mH = kx + xnkE −→n→∞kx + 1kE⊕mK . On the other hand, since xn → 0 weakly in E as n → ∞, we see T xn → 0 weakly in E⊕H. If we let T xn = un + vn, un ∈ E, vn ∈ H be the decomposition of T en in the direct sum E ⊕ H, then we have separate weak convergences un → 0 in E and vn → 0 in H. Consider a subsequence (nk) such that Θ(unk ) and kvnkk2 converge to, say, a2 and b2 respectively. Note that a2 + b2 = limk Θ(T xnk ) = 1 since kT xnk = kxnk = 1. Let T x = u + v, with u ∈ E and v ∈ H. Then for every λ > 0 Θ((λT x + T xnk )) = Θ(λ(u + unk )) + kλ(v + vnk )k2 → Θ(λu) + λ2a2 + kλvk2 + λ2b2 = Θ(λT x) + λ2 . (by Lemma 4.2) Since the limit is independent of the subsequence, Θ(λ(T x + T xn)) → Θ(λT x) + λ2 and choosing λ = (kT x + 1k(E⊕mH)⊕mK)−1 it follows that (8) kT x + T xnkE⊕mH → kT x + 1k(E⊕mH)⊕mK . Comparing (7) and (8), we see that Assume now that x ∈ ¯Ej. By Lemma 4.3 we have for λ → 0 kx + 1kE⊕mK = kT x + 1k(E⊕mH)⊕mK . kλx + 1km − 1 ∼ Θ(λx) = 1 2 1 2λ¯pjkxk¯pj and kλT x + 1km − 1 ∼ 1 2 Θ(λT x) 12 hence C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD Θ(λT x) ∼ λ¯pjkxk¯pj . Assume that kxk = 1. We decompose T x = Pk uk + v, where uk ∈ ¯Ek and v ∈ H. Then (9) Θ(λT x) = Xk Θ(λuk) + kλvk2 H = Xk λ¯pk Θ(uk) + λ2kvk2 H and hence (10) 1 ∼ λ−¯pj Θ(λT x) = Xk λ¯pk−¯pj Θ(uk) + λ2−¯pjkvk2 H . This implies that Θ(uk) = 0 if ¯pk < ¯pj and v = 0 if 2 < ¯pj (otherwise the right side of equation (10) goes to +∞ when λ → 0). On the other hand λ¯pk−¯pj Θ(uk) → 0 and λ2−¯pjkvk2 H → 0 if 2 > ¯pj Xk: ¯pk>pj thus the right side of (10) is equivalent to Θ(uj). We have thus Θ(uj) = 1. Since kT xk = kxk = 1 we have Θ(T x) = 1 and thus equality (9) with λ = 1 shows that Θ(uk) = 0 for all k 6= j, as well as kvkH = 0 if 2 6= ¯pj. Finally, we conclude T x ∈ ¯Ej as desired, except if ¯pj = 2, in which case T x ∈ ¯Ej ⊕ H. (cid:3) By Propositions 3.1 and 4.1 and Theorem 2.1 we conclude: 4.4. Corollary. Let N be a Nakano sequence space with exponent sequence (pn), where pn 6= 2 for all n, and pn converges to 2. Let (En) be a sequence of finite dimensional normed spaces whose Jordan-von Neumann constants converge to 1. Then the elementary class of the Nakano direct sum E = (⊕En)N is equal to the class of all modular direct sums E ⊕m H of E with arbitrary Hilbert spaces, and hence it is uncountably categorical. In the scalar case we can drop the condition pn 6= 2. Denote by Nnh the Nakano space associated to the subsequence (which may be finite or not) that consists of the exponents that differ from 2 . 4.5. Corollary. Let N be a Nakano sequence space with exponent sequence (pn) converging to 2. Then the elementary class of N consists of: space H, if an infinity of exponents pn differ from 2. -- the class of all modular direct sums Nnh ⊕m H of Nnh with an arbitrary Hilbert -- the class of all modular direct sums Nnh ⊕m H of Nnh with an infinite dimensional Hilbert space H, if not. In both cases this class is uncountably categorical. Proof. If Nnh is infinite dimensional, then by Corollary 4.4, its elementary class consists of all modular direct sums Nnh⊕m H of Nnh with an arbitrary Hilbert space H. In particular N is elementarily equivalent to Nnh, and thus its elementary class is the same. If Nnh is finite dimensional, then it follows from Proposition 4.1 that every isometric linear embedding from Nnh ⊕m ℓ2 into Nnh⊕m H sends Nnh onto itself. Then by Theorem 2.1, the elementary class of Nnh ⊕m ℓ2 consists of all modular direct sums Nnh ⊕m H of Nnh with an arbitrary infinite dimensional Hilbert space H. This class contains N , the elementary class of which is thus the same. (cid:3) 4.6. Remark. We have a similar result to Corollary 4.5 for Nakano direct sums if we require that En is 1-dimensional whenever pn = 2. ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 13 Fn)ℓ2, 4.7. Remark. In section 5 we shall give several examples of 2-direct sums F = (⊕n where the normed spaces Fn are finite dimensional, such that F satisfies the hypotheses En)N , of Theorem 2.1. Given such an F , we consider further a Nakano direct sum E = (⊕n where N is a Nakano sequence space with exponents (pn) all distinct from 2 and such that either (pn) is finite or it converges to 2. Then the modular sum E ⊕m F satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1. Indeed, if H is any Hilbert space, it follows from Proposition 4.1 that every linear isometric map from E ⊕m F into E ⊕m F ⊕m H maps E onto E and F into F ⊕m H, and thus F onto F . In the spirit of the preceding Remark we now give a general lemma about isometries of modular direct sums, which will have several applications in the next section. 4.8. Lemma. Let E1, F1, E2, F2 be modular spaces, and T : E1 ⊕m F1 → E2⊕m F2 a linear isometric embedding. If T (E1) = E2 then T (F1) ⊂ F2. Proof. Let f ∈ F1 with kfk = 1 and decompose T f = x + g with x ∈ E2 and g ∈ F2. We have (11) Since T : E1 → E2 is onto we can find y ∈ E1 with x = T y, and thus g = T (f − y). Then 1 = Θ(T f ) = Θ(x) + Θ(g) . kgk = kT (f − y)k = kf − yk ≥ kfk = 1 because in the modular sum, factor projections are contractive. Using (11) we find that Θ(x) = 0 and thus x = 0. (cid:3) En)ℓ2, where the normed 5. Second example: 2-direct sums In this section we consider direct sums of the form E = (⊕n spaces En are finite dimensional. The norm of x = (xn) is given by kxk2 = P∞n=1 kxnk2 . Since this is a special case of Nakano direct sum, with constant exponent function pn ≡ 2, Proposition 3.1 of Section 3 applies: if an(En) → 1 then E is asymptotically hilbertian; in fact EU = E ⊕2 H for some Hilbert space H depending on U . However in contrast to the Nakano direct sums treated in Section 4, here we need some relatively strong hypotheses on the En's for proving that the isometric embeddings from E into E ⊕2 H send each En into itself. See Propositions 5.2 and 5.6 and Corollary 5.8 for the kinds of assumptions under which we have been able to carry out the required arguments. Example 5.9 summarizes the specific examples E = (⊕n En)ℓ2 for which we prove uncountable categoricity in this section. 5.1. Remark. If the Banach-Mazur distance d(En, ℓdn 2 ) is not bounded, where dn = dim En, then the space E is not linear-topologically isomorphic to a Hilbert space. Indeed if E is C-linearly isomorphic to a Hilbert space, so is every closed linear subspace of E. En 5.2. Proposition. Let (En) be a sequence of finite dimensional Banach spaces. Assume that for some sequence of exponents pn > 2, with pn → 2, the following conditions are satisfied: a) For every n, and every x, y ∈ En we have kx + yk2 En + kx − yk2 En ≥ 2(kxkpn En + kykpn En )2/pn ; b) For every n there exists a basis Bn of En such that for every y ∈ Bn there is x ∈ Bn such that (x, y) is an ℓpn-pair, that is kx + λykpn = 1 + λpn for every λ ∈ R. Then the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied, and the Banach space E = (⊕n En)ℓ2 En is uncountably categorical. 14 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD Proof. 1) By the hypothesis (a) and Holder's inequality we have for every x, y ∈ En = 1 En + kyk2 En) 2 − 1 pn En + kx − yk2 En ≥ 2 × 2−2/rn(kxk2 kx + yk2 with 1 . Thus by (6), a(En) ≤ 22/rn → 1 as n → ∞, and it follows from rn Proposition 3.1 that every ultrapower of E is of the form E ⊕2 H, where H is a Hilbert space. 2) Let S : En → E ⊕2 H be a linear isometric embedding, we show that its range is included in E (this will require only condition (b)). This will easily imply that any linear isometric embedding T : E → E ⊕2 H sends E into E. Let Bn be a basis of En as in the condition (b) of the proposition, it is sufficient to prove that Sy ∈ E for every y ∈ Bn. Let x ∈ Bn be choosen such that (x, y) is an ℓpn-pair. Let u = Sx, v = Sy and u = Pk u(k) + uH , v = Pk v(k) + vH, with u(k), v(k) ∈ Ek and uH , vH ∈ H. Then ku + λvk2 + ku − λvk2 = ku(k) + λv(k)k2 + ku(k) − λv(k)k2 2 (12) 2 ∞ Xk=1 + kuH + λvHk2 + kuH − λvHk2 2 . Since ku ± λvkpn = kx ± λykpn = 1 + λpn, the left side of equation (12) is equal to (1 + λpn)2/pn. On the other hand, by convexity of k · k2 and the parallelogram identity in H, the right side of (12) is bigger than ∞ Xk=1 ku(k)k2 + (kuHk2 + λ2kvHk2) = kuk2 + λ2kvHk2 = 1 + λ2kvHk2 . Thus, since pn > 2, we have kvHk2 ≤ (1 + λpn)2/pn − 1 λ2 ≤ 2 pnλpn−2 −→λ→0 0 ; hence vH, the H-component of v, is 0. 3) Now assuming both conditions (a) and (b) we show that the range of any isometric Em. We keep the notation of the embedding S : En → E ⊕2 H is included in ⊕pm≥pn preceding part. For every m ≥ 1, the right side of equation (12) is by condition (a) greater than ku(k)k2 + (ku(m)kpm + λpmkv(m)kpm )2/pm + kuHk2 . Xk6=m Hence (1 + λpn)2/pn ≥ 1 + (ku(m)kpm + λpmkv(m)kpm )2/pm − ku(m)k2 for every λ ∈ R. If u(m) = 0 we get (1 + λpn)2/pn ≥ 1 + λ2kv(m)k2 and deduce v(m) = 0 in the same way we did for vH. If u(m) 6= 0 we get (1 + λpn)2/pn − 1 ≥ ku(m)k2(cid:0)(1 + λkv(m)k/ku(m)k)pm − 1(cid:1)2/pm 2 pmku(m)k2−pmkv(m)kpmλpm as λ → 0 ; ∼ thus if pm < pn we get kv(m)kpm . pm pn ku(m)kpm−2λpn−pm −→λ→0 0 . Hence v(m), the Em-component of v, must vanish. Finally Sy ∈ ⊕pm≥pn Em as was claimed. ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 15 4) Now let T : E → E ⊕2 H be a linear isometric embedding. Let us denote by (¯pk) an enumeration of the distinct values of the pn's (for fixing ideas we may assume the sequence (¯pk) to be strictly decreasing). Note that since pn > 2 and pn → 2, each set En. By part (3) above, we Ak = {n : pn = ¯pk} is finite. For every k ≥ 1 set Gk = ⊕pn≥¯pk have that T (Gk) ⊂ Gk. Since Gk is finite dimensional and T is isometric it follows that T (Gk) = Gk. Hence the range of T contains Sk Gk, a dense subspace of E, and since this range is closed it contains E. (cid:3) 5.3. Remark. We have in fact the more precise result that T ( ¯Ek) = ¯Ek for every k ≥ 1, En. For k = 1 we have ¯E1 = G1 and thus T ( ¯E1) = ¯E1. For k ≥ 2 it will where ¯Ek = ⊕pn=¯pk be sufficient to prove that T ( ¯Ek) ⊂ ¯Ek. This is done inductively using Gk = ¯Ek ⊕m Gk−1 and Lemma 4.8. 5.4. Example. E = (cid:0) ⊕ ℓdn pn(cid:1)2 with pn > 2, pn → 2 and dn ≥ 2 satisfies the hypotheses of Proposition 5.2. Condition (b) is clearly satisfied. As for condition (a), we have for x, y ∈ ℓp, p ≥ 2: kx + yk2 = kx + y2kp/2 + kx − y2kp/2 p p + kx − yk2 2 (by convexity since p/2 ≥ 1) 2 x + y2 + x − y2 2 ≥ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)p/2 = kx2 + y2kp/2 = kx2 + y21/2k2 ≥ k(xp + yp)1/pk2 p = (kxkp p)2/p . p + kykp p (since p ≥ 2) Thus E is uncountably categorical. On the other hand if d(En, ℓdn E is not linear-topologically isomorphic to a Hilbert space. 1 2− 1 2 ) = d n pn → ∞ then Let Bn be the basis of Sdn pn(cid:1)2 with pn > 2, pn → 2, and dn ≥ 2, where Sd 5.5. Example. E = (cid:0) ⊕ Sdn p is the Schatten class of exponent p and dimension d2 (consisting of d × d matrices with complex coefficients). pn consisting of the matrix units (ei,j)1≤i,j≤dn. For each matrix unit ei,j consider another matrix unit ek,ℓ with i 6= k, j 6= ℓ. Then the pair (eij, ekℓ) is a ℓpn-pair in Sdn pn , and the condition (b) in Proposition 5.2 is satisfied. As for condition (a) we reason by interpolation. Indeed condition (a) means exactly that for p = pn the inverse of the operator M : (x, y) 7→ ( x+y√2 p ). Since 2(Sd these spaces are complex interpolation spaces, more precisely ℓ2 ∞))θ and ℓ2 p , it is sufficient to verify contractivity in the cases p = 2 and p = ∞. For p = 2, Sd 2 is a Hilbert space and condition (b) follows from the parallelogram identity. For p = ∞, Sd p = Md(C) with the matrix norm (which we denote by k · k∞) and we have for x, y ∈ Md ) is contractive from ℓ2 2(Sd ∞))θ for θ = 1 − 2 p = Sd 2(Sd p ) = (ℓ2 p ) = (ℓ2 p ) to ℓ2 2(Sd p(Sd 2 ), ℓ2 ∞(Sd 2(Sd 2 ), ℓ2 , x−y√2 p(Sd kx + yk2 ∞ + kx − yk2 ∞ = k(x + y)∗(x + y)k∞ + k(x − y)∗(x − y)k∞ 2 2 2 (x + y)∗(x + y) + (x − y)∗(x − y) ≥ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = kx∗x + y∗yk∞ ≥ max(kx∗xk∞,ky∗yk∞) = (cid:0) max(kxk∞,kyk∞)(cid:1)2 . (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)∞ 16 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD 2− 1 Thus here again E is uncountably categorical. Note that if d → ∞, it follows from n [10, Theorem 2.1] that E is not linear-topologically embeddable in any space with local unconditional structure with nontrivial cotype (in particular, any Banach lattice with nontrivial concavity). pn 1 Next we present another criterion for uncountable categoricity, similar to Proposition 5.2, but with exponents strictly less than 2. 5.6. Proposition. Assume that for some sequence of exponents 1 ≤ pn < 2, with pn → 2, the following conditions are satisfied: a) For every n, and every x, y ∈ En we have kx + yk2 En + kx − yk2 En ≤ 2(kxkpn En + kykpn En )2/pn . b) For every n there exists a basis Bn of En such that for every y ∈ Bn there is x ∈ Bn such that (x, y) is an ℓpn-pair, that is kx + λykpn = 1 + λpn for every λ ∈ R. Then the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied, and the Banach space E = (⊕n En)ℓ2 En is uncountably categorical. Proof. 1) Hypothesis (a) implies that for every x, y ∈ En En + kyk2 En ) En + kx − yk2 kx + yk2 2 , and therefore an(En) ≤ 22/rn by (5). En ≤ 2 × 22/rn (kxk2 = 1 where 1 rn pn's rearranged now in increasing order). En(cid:1)2, where ¯p1 < ¯p2 < . . . pn − 1 2) We prove that if S : ¯E1 → E ⊕2 H is an isometric embedding then S ¯E1 = ¯E1. (As before, ¯Ek = (cid:0) ⊕pn=¯pk is the sequence of distinct values of the Let (x, y) be an ℓ¯p1-pair in ¯E1; we claim that the H-component as well as the En- components for pn > ¯p1 of v = Sy all vanish. Let u = Sx, v = Sy; then for every λ ∈ R (1 + λ¯p1)2/¯p1 = ku + λvk2 + ku − λvk2 2 (13) ∞ Xn=1(cid:0)ku(n)k¯pn + kλv(n)k¯pn(cid:1)2/¯pn + kuHk2 + kλvHk2 ≤ ≤ Xpn=¯p1(cid:0)ku(n)k¯p1 + kλv(n)k¯p1(cid:1)2/¯p1 + Xpn≥¯p2(cid:0)ku(n)k¯p2 + kλv(n)k¯p2(cid:1)2/¯p2 +(cid:0)kuHk¯p2 + kλvHk¯p2(cid:1)2/¯p2 . v(n) be the components of u, v in ¯E1; then by the u(n), v ¯E1 = Ppn=¯p1 Let u ¯E1 = Ppn=¯p1 reverse Minkowski inequality in ℓ¯p1/2 (note that ¯p1/2 ≤ 1) we have Xpn=¯p1(cid:0)ku(n)k¯p1 + kλv(n)k¯p1(cid:1)2/¯p1 ≤ (cid:18)(cid:0) Xpn=¯p1 ku(n)k2(cid:1)¯p1/2 +(cid:0) Xpn=¯p1 kλv(n)k2(cid:1)¯p1/2(cid:19)2/¯p1 Set G1 = (cid:0) ⊕k≥2 ¯Ek ⊕ H(cid:1)2, and let uG1, vG1 be the components of u, v in G1; treating similarly the last two terms in (13), we obtain = (cid:0)ku ¯E1k¯p1 + kλv ¯E1k¯p1(cid:1)2/¯p1 . (14) (1 + λ¯p1)2/p1 ≤ (cid:0)ku ¯E1k¯p1 + kλv ¯E1k¯p1(cid:1)2/¯p1 +(cid:0)kuG1k¯p2 + kλvG1k¯p2(cid:1)2/¯p2 . ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 17 The left side of inequality (14) is 1 + 2 p1λ¯p1 + o(λ¯p1) while the right side of (14) is 2 ¯p1u ¯E1k2−¯p1kv ¯E1k¯p1λp1 + o(λ¯p1) + kuG1k2 + ku ¯E1k2 + 2 ¯p1u ¯E1k2−¯p1kv ¯E1k¯p1λ¯p1 + o(λ¯p1) . = 1 + 2 ¯p2uG1k2−¯p2kvG1k¯p2λ¯p2 + o(λ¯p2) Comparing the leading terms of both sides of inequality (14) we obtain 1 ≤ u ¯E1k2−¯p1kv ¯E1k¯p1; since u ¯E1k ≤ kuk = 1, kv ¯E1k ≤ kvk = 1 this implies ku ¯E1k = kv ¯E1k = 1. Then uG1k2 = 1 − u ¯E1k2 = 0 and similarly vG1k2 = 0, and u, v ∈ ¯E1 as was claimed. Thus S( ¯E1) ⊂ ¯E1, and in fact S( ¯E1) = ¯E1 since the dimension is finite. 3) If now T : E → E ⊕ H is an isometric embedding, then by part (2) we have T ( ¯E1) = ¯E1. It follows that also T (G1) ⊂ G1 by Lemma 4.8. Now starting with G1 in place of E ⊕ H, the reasoning of part (2) shows that T ( ¯E2) = ¯E2, etc. (cid:3) 5.7. Examples. E = (cid:0) ⊕ ℓdn pn(cid:1)2 with 1 ≤ pn < 2, pn → 2, and dn ≥ 2 pn(cid:1)2 and E = (cid:0) ⊕ Sdn satisfy the hypotheses of Proposition 5.6. The proof that these examples satisfy condition (a) of Proposition 5.6 is by duality (a(En) = a(E∗n)). In certain cases we can mix the examples of Propositions 5.2 and 5.6. En)2 and F = (⊕n Fn)2 be two direct sums satisfying re- 5.8. Corollary. Let E = (⊕n spectively the hypotheses of Propositions 5.6 and 5.2 with respective exponent sequences 1 ≤ pn < 2 and 2 < qn < ∞. Assume moreover that for some constant C we have (15) ∀x, y ∈ Fn, kx + yk2 + kx − yk2 ≤ 2(kxk2 + kCyk2) (that is, the spaces Fn are uniformly 2-uniformly smooth in the sense of [3]). Then every linear isometric embedding T of E ⊕2 F into E ⊕2 F ⊕2 H, where H is any Hilbert space, maps E onto E and F onto F . In particular the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied by E ⊕2 F , and hence that space is uncountably categorical. Proof. The proof that T maps E onto itself is the same as in Proposition 5.6 except that we have to replace the Hilbert space H by the direct sum G = H ⊕ F . It follows from Lemma 4.8 that T maps G into G. Then apply Proposition 5.2 to the restriction of T to G. (cid:3) satisfy the hypotheses of Corollary 5.8. pn(cid:1)2 and (cid:0) ⊕ Sdn 5.9. Examples. (cid:0) ⊕ ℓdn pn(cid:1)2 with 1 ≤ pn < ∞, pn 6= 2, pn → 2, and dn ≥ 2 Proof. We recall a proof of (15) in the case of Lp-spaces, p ≥ 2. For any scalars x, y, by an inequality of Beckner (see [8, 1.e.14] for the real case; the complex case is a special case of [8, 1.e.15]) we have: x + yp + x − yp 2 ≤ (cid:18)x + Cp y2 + x − Cp y2 2 (cid:19)p/2 18 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD with Cp = √p − 1. We deduce when x, y ∈ ℓd x + yp p + x − yp p p 2 p/2 p/2 2 (cid:18)x + Cp y2 + x − Cp y2 (cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ (cid:0)kx2kp/2 + (p − 1)ky2kp/2(cid:1)p/2 = (cid:0)kxk2 p(cid:1)p/2 . p + (p − 1)kyk2 Then by concavity of the function f (t) = t2/p: = (cid:13)(cid:13)x2 + (p − 1)y2(cid:13)(cid:13) p/2 p/2 (triangular inequality in ℓp/2) x + y2 p + x − y2 2 p ≤ (cid:18)x + yp p + (p − 1)kyk2 p . For the Schatten class case use [3, Th. 1] and the preceding concavity argument. (cid:3) 5.10. Remark. In examples 5.9 we can drop the condition dn ≥ 2 and show that these spaces are uncountably categorical by reasoning similarly as in the proof of Corollary 4.5. ≤ kxk2 2 p + x − yp p (cid:19)2/p 6. Addendum: finite dimensional perturbations of Hilbert spaces As a footnote to Section 5, we prove here that for any finite dimensional normed space E, the direct sum E ⊕2 ℓ2 is κ-categorical for every infinite cardinal number κ. This is a relatively simple example of categoricity and the proof is reasonably short; we present it here for completeness. For a similar but partial result for finite dimensional modular spaces and the modular direct sum, see Corollary 4.5 and the remark following it. 6.1. Definition. A linear projection P in a Banach space X is called a 2-projection if ∀x ∈ X kxk2 = kP xk2 + k(I − P )xk2 . A closed linear subspace E in X is called a 2-summand if it is the range of a 2-projection. In other words E is a 2-summand iff X = E ⊕2 F for some closed linear subspace F of X. 6.2. Theorem. Let E0 is a finite dimensional normed space. The following assertions are equivalent: i) E0 has no one dimensional 2-summand; ii) Any linear isometric embedding T of E0 into the 2-direct sum E0 ⊕2 H of E0 with some Hilbert space H maps E0 onto E0. To prepare for the proof of Theorem 6.2 we prove the following lemma: 6.3. Lemma. Let E0 be a Banach space without one dimensional 2-summand, and T be an isometric linear embedding of E0 into a 2-direct sum E0 ⊕2 H of E0 with a Hilbert space K. Then T (E0) ∩ H = (0). Proof. It suffices to prove that if Y is a linear subspace of X := E0 ⊕2 H then any vector ξ ∈ Y ∩ H generates a 2-summand in Y . Note that since H is a Hilbert space, every closed subspace is a 2-summand in H, in particular H = Kξ ⊕2 ξ⊥. Then X = Kξ ⊕2 (E0 ⊕2 ξ⊥), and Kξ is a 2-summand in X. Let P : X → X be the corresponding 2-projection in X with range Kξ, then its restriction PY is a 2-projection in Y with range Kξ. (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 6.2. ii) =⇒ i): It is clear that if E0 has a 2-direct decomposition E0 = E1 ⊕2 Kξ0, with ξ0 6= 0, one can define an isometric embedding T : E0 → E0 ⊕2 H by defining T as the identity on E1 and T ξ0 = ξ1 ∈ H, with kξ1k = kξ0k. Let us prove now the implication i) =⇒ ii). Let T : E0 → X := E0 ⊕2 H be an isometric embedding and P : X → E0 be the 2-projection on E0 with kernel H. Then ASYMPTOTICALLY HILBERTIAN SPACES AND UNCOUNTABLE CATEGORICITY 19 P T : E0 → E0 is a linear isomorphism, since P T x = 0 is equivalent to T x ∈ H, and T (E0) ∩ H = (0) by Lemma 6.3. Since E0 is finite dimensional, P T : E0 → E0 is onto. Let Q = IdX − P : X → X, which is the 2-projection on H with kernel E0. We then have: kxk2 = kP T xk2 + kQT xk2 = k(P T )2xk2 + kQT P T xk2 + kQT xk2 = . . . = k(P T )nxk2 + n−1 Xk=0 kQT (P T )kxk2 . Equivalently, we have a sequence of isometric linear embeddings Tn of E0 into E0 ⊕2 Hn, where Hn = ℓn 2 (H) is the 2-sum of n copies of H, defined by Tnx = ((P T )nx, QT x, QT P T x, . . . , QT (P T )n−1x) . All these Hilbert spaces Hn can be isometrically embedded in the infinite 2-sum H∞ = ℓ2(H). For defining a limit embedding of E0 into E0 ⊕2 H, fix a free ultrafilter U on N and set where ∞x = (SU x, QT x, QT P T x, . . . , QT (P T )nx, . . . ) T U SU x = lim n,U (P T )nx . This ultrafilter limit is well defined because P T is a contraction and E0 is finite dimen- sional. Then SU : E0 → E0 is a linear contraction. Note that although SU x depends a priori on the ultrafilter U , the norm kSU xk does not. In fact the sequence (k(P T )nxk) is non-increasing, and thus convergent, so that kSU xk = lim n,U k(P T )nxk = lim n→∞k(P T )nxk . If P∞ denotes the 2-projection E0 ⊕2 H∞ → E0 with kernel H∞, we have clearly SU = P∞T U . Since T U is a linear isometry it results again that SU is a linear isomorphism of E0 onto E0. This map is contractive; let us show that it is in fact an isometry. We have (SU )2x = SU lim (P T )m+nx n,U SU (P T )nx = lim n,U (P T )nx = lim (P T )m(P T )nx = lim lim lim m,U n,U n,U m,U k→∞k(P T )kxk = kSU xk . m,U k(P T )m+nxk = lim kSU SU xk = lim n,U hence Since SU : E0 → E0 is surjective, it follows that kSU yk = kyk for every y ∈ E0. Then lim ∀x ∈ E0, kxk = kSU xk ≤ kP T xk ≤ kxk and it follows that, for each x ∈ E0, kP T xk = kT xk and thus T x ∈ E0. 6.4. Corollary. If E is a finite dimensional Banach space, then the elementary class of E ⊕2 ℓ2 consists exactly of all spaces E ⊕2 H, where H is any infinite dimensional Hilbert space. Therefore, the elementary class of E ⊕2 ℓ2 is totally categorical (i.e., it is κ-categorical for every infinite cardinal number κ). (cid:3) Proof. Let K be a hilbertian subspace of E of largest dimension such that K is a 2- summand of E, and let E0 be a subspace of E for which E = E0 ⊕2 K. Evidently E0 has no one dimensional 2-summand. Regarding E0 as a modular space with the modular Φ(x) := kxk2 and applying Theorem 6.2, we see that condition (ii) in Theorem 2.1 is satisfied by E0 (and a fortiori condition (ii')). Hence the elementary class of E0 ⊕2 ℓ2 20 C. W. HENSON AND Y. RAYNAUD consists exactly of all spaces E0 ⊕2 H, where H is any infinite dimensional Hilbert space. The proof is completed by noting that for any infinite dimensional Hilbert space H, the spaces E ⊕2 H and E0 ⊕2 H are linearly isometric. (cid:3) References [1] I. Ben Yaacov, Uncountable dense categoricity in cats, J. Symb. Logic 70 (2005), no. 3, 829 -- 860. [2] I. Ben Yaacov, A. Berenstein, C. W. Henson, and A. Usvyatsov, Model theory for metric structures. Model Theory with Applications to Algebra and Analysis, Vol. 2 (Z. Chatzidakis, D. Macpherson, A. Pilllay, and A. Wilkie ed.), Cambridge Univ. Press (2008), 315 -- 427. [3] K. Ball, E. A. Carlen, and E. H. Lieb, Sharp uniform convexity and smoothness inequalities for trace norms, Invent. Math. 115 (1994), no. 3, 463-482. [4] S. Heinrich, Ultraproducts in Banach Spaces Theory. J. Reine Angew. Math. 313 (1980), 72-104. [5] C. W. Henson, J. Iovino, Ultraproducts in Analysis. Analysis and Logic (C. Finet, C. Michaux ed.), Cambridge Univ. Press (2003), 1 -- 113. [6] J.E. Jamison, A. Kami´nska, and Pei-Kee Lin, Isometries of Musielak-Orlicz spaces II, Studia Math. 104 (1993), 75-89. [7] P. Jordan, J. von Neumann, On Inner Products in Linear, Metric Spaces, Ann. of Math. (2) 36 (1935), no. 3, 719-723. [8] J. Lindenstrauss, L. Tzafriri, Classical Banach spaces II, Springer-Verlag, 1979. [9] H. Nakano, Modulared sequence spaces, Proc. Japan Acad. 27 (1951), 508-512. [10] G. Pisier, Some results on Banach spaces without local unconditional structure, Compositio Math. 37 (1978), no. 1, 3 -19. [11] G. Pisier, The volume of convex bodies and Banach space geometry, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989. [12] S. Shelah, A. Usvyatsov, Model theoretic stability and categoricity for complete metric spaces. Israel J. Math. 182 (2011), 157-198. [13] S. Shelah, A. Usvyatsov, Minimal types in stable Banach spaces, preprint, (2014), arXiv:1402.6513. C. Ward Henson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA Yves Raynaud, Institut de Math´ematiques de Jussieu-Paris Rive Gauche, CNRS/UPMC (Univ.Paris 06)/Univ. Paris-Diderot, 4 place Jussieu, F-75252 Paris Cedex 05, France
1009.1751	3	1009	2012-01-03T12:33:57	Average best $m$-term approximation	[ "math.FA", "math.NA", "math.ST", "math.ST" ]	We introduce the concept of average best $m$-term approximation widths with respect to a probability measure on the unit ball of $\ell_p^n$. We estimate these quantities for the embedding $id:\ell_p^n\to\ell_q^n$ with $0<p\le q\le \infty$ for the normalized cone and surface measure. Furthermore, we consider certain tensor product weights and show that a typical vector with respect to such a measure exhibits a strong compressible (i.e. nearly sparse) structure.	math.FA	math	Average best m-term approximation Jan Vyb´ıral∗ October 23, 2018 Abstract We introduce the concept of average best m-term approximation widths with p . We respect to a probability measure on the unit ball or the unit sphere of ℓn estimate these quantities for the embedding id : ℓn q with 0 < p ≤ q ≤ ∞ for the normalized cone and surface measure. Furthermore, we consider certain tensor product weights and show that a typical vector with respect to such a measure exhibits a strong compressible (i.e. nearly sparse) structure. This measure may be therefore used as a random model for sparse signals. p → ℓn AMS subject classification (MSC 2010): Primary: 41A46, Secondary: 52A20, 60B11, 94A12. Key words: nonlinear approximation, best m-term approximation, average widths, random sparse vectors, cone measure, surface measure. 1 Introduction 1.1 Best m-term approximation Let m ∈ N0 and let Σm be the set of all sequences x = {xj}∞ j=1 with kxk0 := # supp x = #{n ∈ N : xn 6= 0} ≤ m. Here stands #A for the number of elements of a set A. The elements of Σm are said to be m-sparse. Observe, that Σm is a non-linear subset of every ℓq := {x = {xj}∞ j=1 : kxkq < ∞}, where kxkq :=  j=1 xjq(cid:17)1/q (cid:16)P∞ supj∈N xj, , 0 < q < ∞, q = ∞. For every x ∈ ℓq, we define its best m-term approximation error by σm(x)q := inf y∈Σm kx − ykq. ∗Johann Radon Institute for Computational and Applied Mathematics, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Altenbergerstrasse 69, A-4040 Linz, Austria, email: [email protected], Tel: +43 732 2468 5262, Fax: +43 732 2468 5212. 1 Moreover for 0 < p ≤ q ≤ ∞, we introduce the best m-term approximation widths σp,q m := sup x:kxkp≤1 σm(x)q. The use of this concept goes back to Schmidt [44] and after the work of Oskolkov [39], it was widely used in the approximation theory, cf. [15, 18, 45]. In fact, it is the main prototype of nonlinear approximation [17]. It is well known, that m ≤ (m + 1)1/q−1/p, m = 0, 1, 2, . . . . 2−1/p(m + 1)1/q−1/p ≤ σp,q (1) The proof of (1) is based on the simple fact, that (roughly speaking) the best m-term approximation error of x ∈ ℓp is realized by subtracting the m largest coefficients taken in absolute value. Hence, j=m+1(x∗ j )q(cid:19)1/q , m+1 = supj≥m+1 x∗ x∗ j , 0 < q < ∞, q = ∞, (cid:18)P∞ σm(x)q =  where x∗ = (x∗ the vector (x1,x2,x3, . . . ). from above then follows by 1, x∗ 2, . . . ) denotes the so-called non-increasing rearrangement [6] of Let us recall the proof of (1) in the simplest case, namely q = ∞. The estimate σm(x)∞ = sup j≥m+1 x∗ j = x∗ m+1 ≤(cid:18)(m + 1)−1 The lower estimate is supplied by taking m+1 Xj=1 (x∗ j )p(cid:19)1/p ≤ (m + 1)−1/pkxkp. (2) x = (m + 1)−1/p ej, m+1 Xj=1 (3) j=1 are the canonical unit vectors. where {ej}∞ Holder's inequality For general q, the estimate from above in (1) may be obtained from (2) and kxkq ≤ kxkθ p · kxk1−θ ∞ , where 1 q = θ p . (4) The estimate from below follows for all q's by simple modification of (3). The discussion above exhibits two effects. (i) Best m-term approximation works particularly well, when 1/p − 1/q is large, i.e. if p < 1 and q = ∞. (ii) The elements used in the estimate from below (and hence the elements, where the best m-term approximation performs at worse) enjoy a very special struc- ture. Therefore, there is a reasonable hope, that the best m-term approximation could behave better, when considered in a certain average case. But first we point out two different interesting points of view on the subject. 2 1.2 Connection to compressed sensing The interest in ℓp spaces (and especially in their finite-dimensional counterparts ℓn p ) with 0 < p < 1 was recently stimulated by the impressive success of the novel and vastly growing area of compressed sensing as introduced in [8, 10, 11, 19]. Without going much into the details, we only note, that the techniques of compressed sensing allow to reconstruct a vector from an incomplete set of measurements utilizing the prior knowledge, that it is sparse, i.e. kxk0 is small. Furthermore, this approach may be applied [14] also to vectors, which are compressible, i.e. kxkp is small for (preferably small) 0 < p < 1. Indeed, (1) tells us, that such a vector x may be very well approximated by sparse vectors. We point to [9, 24, 25, 42] for the current state of the art of this field and for further references. This leads in a very natural way to a question, which stands in the background of this paper, namely: How does a typical vector of the ℓn p unit ball look like? or, posed in an exact way: Let µ be a probability measure on the unit ball of ℓn p . What is the mean value of σm(x)q with respect to this measure? Of course, the choice of µ plays a crucial role. There are several standard proba- p in a natural way, namely bility measures, which are connected to the unit ball of ℓn (cf. Definitions 2 and 9) (i) the normalized Lebesgue measure, (ii) the n − 1 dimensional Hausdorff measure restricted to the surface of the unit ball of ℓn p and correspondingly normalized, (iii) the so-called normalized cone measure. Unfortunately, it turns out, that all these three measures are "bad" -- a typical vector with respect to any of them does not involve much structure and corresponds rather to noise then signal (in the sense described below). Therefore, we are looking for a new type of measures (cf. Definition 13), which would behave better from this point of view. 1.3 Random models of noise and signals Random vectors play an important role in the area of signal processing. For example, if n ∈ N is a natural number, ω = (ω1, . . . , ωn) is a vector of independent Gaussian variables and ε > 0 is a real number, then εω is a classical model of noise, namely the white noise. This model is used in the theory but also in the real life applications of signal processing. The random generation of a structured signal seems to be a more complicated task. Probably the most common random model to generate sparse vectors, cf. [7, 13, 30, 40], is the so-called Bernoulli-Gaussian model. Let again n ∈ N be a 3 natural number and ε > 0 be a real number. Also ω = (ω1, . . . , ωn) stands for a vector of independent Gaussian variables. Furthermore, let 0 < p < 1 be a real number and let = (1, . . . , n) be a vector of independent Bernoulli variables defined as i =(1, with probability p, 0, with probability 1 − p. The components of the random Bernoulli-Gaussian vector x = (x1, . . . , xn) are then defined through xi = εi · ωi, i = 1, . . . , n. (5) Obviously, the average number of non-zero components of x is k := pn. Unfortu- nately, if k is much smaller than n, then the concentration of the number of non-zero components of x around k is not very strong. This becomes better, if k gets larger. But in that case, the model (5) resembles more and more the model of white noise. In some sense, (5) represents rather a randomly filtered white noise then a structured signal. It is one of the main aims of this paper to find a new measure, such that a random vector with respect to this measure would show a nearly sparse structure without the need of random filtering. 1.4 Unit sphere Let us describe the situation in the most prominent case, when p = 2, m = 0 and µ = µ2 is the normalized surface measure on the unit sphere Sn−1 of ℓn 2 . Furthermore, we denote by γn the standard Gaussian measure on Rn with the density 1 (2π)n/2 e−kxk2 2/2, x ∈ Rn. We use polar coordinates to calculate 2/2dx ZRn j=1,...,nxj dγn(x) = max = = = 1 Ωn (2π)n/2 ZRn (2π)n/2 Z ∞ (2π)n/2 Z ∞ (2π)n/2 Z ∞ Ωn Ωn 0 0 0 max j=1,...,nxj · e−kxk2 rn−1ZSn−1 rne−r2/2dr ·ZSn−1 rne−r2/2dr ·ZSn−1 max j=1,...,nrxje−krxk2 2/2dµ2(x) dr max j=1,...,nxjdµ2(x) (6) σ0(x)∞dµ2(x), where Ωn denotes the area of Sn−1. This formula connects the expected value of σ0(x)∞ with the expected value of maximum of n independent Gaussian variables. Using that this quantity is known to be equivalent to plog(n + 1), cf. [33, (3.14)], rne−r2/2dr = 2(n−1)/2Γ((n + 1)/2) and Ωn = 2πn/2 Γ(n/2) , Z ∞ 0 one obtains ZSn−1 σ0(x)∞dµ2(x) ≈r log(n + 1) n , n ∈ N. (7) Several comments on (6) and (7) are necessary. 4 (i) Quantities similar to the left-hand side of (7) have been used in the study of geometry of Banach spaces and local theory of Banach spaces since many years and are treated in detail in the work of Milman [23, 35, 36]. Especially, if k·kK is a norm in Rn and K := {x ∈ Rn : kxkK ≤ 1} denotes the corresponding unit ball, then the quantity AK =ZSn−1 kxkK dµ2(x) (and the closely connected median MK of kxkK over Sn−1) plays a crucial role in the Dvoretzky theorem [20, 22, 35] and, in general, in the study of Euclidean sections of K, cf. [36, Section 5]. Furthermore, it is known that the case of K = [−1, 1]n, when AK =ZSn−1 max j=1,...,nxjdµ2(x) =ZSn−1 σ0(x)∞dµ2(x), is extremal, cf. [35]. (ii) The connection between the estimated value of a maximum of independent Gaussian variables and the estimated value of the largest coordinate of a ran- dom vector on Sn−1 is given just by integration in polar coordinates and is one of the standard techniques in the local theory of Banach spaces. Due to the result of [43], this holds true also for other values of p, even for p < 1, with Gaussian variables replaced by variables with the density cpe−tp . This approach is nowadays classical in the study of the geometry and concentration of measure phenomenon on the ℓn p -balls, cf. [2, 3, 4, 5, 37, 38, 41]. (iii) For every x ∈ Sn−1 we obtain easily that max j=1,...,nxj ≥(cid:16) 1 n x2 j(cid:17)1/2 n Xj=1 = 1/√n. Estimate (7) shows that the average value of max j=1,...,nxj over Sn−1 is asymp- totically larger only by a logarithmic factor. The detailed study of the concen- tration of max j=1,...,nxj around its estimated value (or its mean value) is known as concentration of measure phenomena [32, 33, 36] and gives more accurate information then the one included in (7). As our main interest lies in esti- mates of average best m-term widths, cf. Definition 1, we do not investigate the concentration properties in this paper and leave this subject to further research. (iv) The calculation (6) is based on the use of polar coordinates. For p 6= 2, the normalized cone measure is exactly that measure, for which a similar formula holds, cf. (13). The estimates for n − 1 dimensional surface measure are later obtained using its density with respect to the cone measure, cf. Lemma 10. (v) As we want to keep the paper self-contained as much as possible and to make it readable also for readers without (almost) any stochastic background, we prefer to use simple and direct techniques. For example we use rather the simple estimates in Lemma 5, than any of their sophisticated improvements available in literature. 5 (vi) The connection to random Gaussian variables explains, why a random point of Sn−1 is sometimes referred to as white (or Gaussian) noise. It is usually not associated with any reasonable (i.e. structured) signal, rather it represents a good model for random noise. 1.5 Basic Definitions and Main Results 1.5.1 Definition of average best m-term widths After describing the context of our work we shall now present the definition of the so-called average best m-term widths, which are the main subject of our study. First, we observe, that σm((x1, . . . , xn))q = σm((ε1x1, . . . , εnxn))q = σm((x1, . . . ,xn))q holds for every x ∈ Rn and ε ∈ {−1, +1}n. Also all the measures, which we shall consider, are invariant under any of the mappings (x1, . . . , xn) → (ε1x1, . . . , εnxn), and therefore we restrict our attention only to Rn ε ∈ {−1, +1}n + in the following definition. Definition 1. Let 0 < p ≤ q ≤ ∞ and let n ≥ 2 and 0 ≤ m ≤ n − 1 be natural numbers. (i) We set ∆n p =({(t1, . . . , tn) ∈ Rn {(t1, . . . , tn) ∈ Rn j=1 tp + :Pn + : maxj=1,...,n tj = 1}, j = 1}, p < ∞, p = ∞. (ii) Let µ be a Borel probability measure on ∆n p . Then σp,q m (µ) =Z∆n p σm(x)qdµ(x) is called average surface best m-term width of id : ℓn (iii) Let ν be a Borel probability measure on [0, 1] · ∆n p → ℓn p . Then q with respect to µ. σp,q m (ν) =Z[0,1]·∆n p σm(x)qdν(x) is called average volume best m-term width of id : ℓn p → ℓn q with respect to ν. Let us observe, that the estimates m (µ) ≤ σp,q σp,q m and σp,q m (ν) ≤ σp,q m follow trivially by Definition 1. Furthermore, the mapping x → σm(x)q is continuous and, therefore, measurable with respect to the Borel measure µ. 6 dp dµp where (x) = c−1 p,n(cid:18) n Xi=1 p(cid:18) n Xi=1 x2p−2 i cp,n =Z∆n x2p−2 i (cid:19)1/2 , (cid:19)1/2 dµp(x) 1.5.2 Main results After introducing new notion of average best m-term width in Definition 1, we study its behavior for the measures on ∆n p , which are widely used in literature. A prominent role among them is played by the so-called normalized cone measure given by µp(A) = λ([0, 1] · A) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) , A ⊂ ∆n p . In Theorem 7 and Proposition 8 we provide basic estimates of σp,q m (µp) for q = ∞ and q < ∞, respectively. Surprisingly enough, it turns out that (7) has its direct counterpart for all 0 < p < ∞. This means (as described above), that the coordinates of a "typical" element of the surface of the ℓn p unit ball are well concentrated around the value n−1/p. So, roughly speaking, it is only ℓp-normalized noise. Another well known probability measure on ∆n p is the normalized surface measure p, cf. Definition 9. We calculate in Lemma 10 the density of p with respect to µp to be equal to is the normalizing constant. This result (which is a generalization of the work of Naor and Romik [38] to the non-convex case 0 < p < 1) might be of independent interest for the study of the geometry of ℓn p spheres. One observes immediately, that if p < 1 and one or more coordinates of xi are going to zero, then this density has a polynomial singularity and, therefore, gives more weight to areas closed to coordinate hyperplanes. We then obtain in Theorem 12 an estimate of σp,∞ (p) from above. Although the measure p concentrates around coordinate hyperplanes, it turns out, that the estimate from above of σp,∞ (µp) as obtained in Theorem 7 and the estimate of Theorem 12 differ only in the constants involved. 0 0 The last part of this paper is devoted to the search of a new probability measure on ∆n p , which would "promote sparsity" in the sense, that the mean value of σm(x)q decays rapidly with m. One possible candidate is presented in Definition 13 by introducing a new class of measures θp,β, which are given by their density with respect to the cone measure µp dθp,β dµp (x) = c−1 p,β · n Yi=1 xβ i , x ∈ ∆n p , where cp,β is a normalising constant. We refer also to Remark 4 for an equivalent characterisation. We show, that for an appropriate choice of β, namely β = p/n− 1, the estimated p -unit sphere decays expo- m−1(θp,p/n−1), which value of the m-th largest coefficient of elements of the ℓn nentially with m. Namely, Theorem 16 provides estimates of σp,∞ 7 σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ lim sup n→∞ σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ C 2 p p + 1(cid:17)m (cid:16) 1 (8) at the end imply that C 1 p p + 1(cid:17)m ≤ lim inf (cid:16) 1 n→∞ for two positive real numbers C 1 p and C 2 p , which depend only on p. This result (which is also simulated numerically in the very last section of this paper) is in a certain way independent of n. This gives a hope, that one could apply this approach also to the infinite-dimensional spaces ℓp or, using a suitable discretization technique (like wavelet decomposition), also to some function spaces. This remains a subject of our further research. Of course, the class θp,β provides only one example of measures with rapid decay of their average best m-term widths. We leave also the detailed study of other measures with such properties open to future work. Note added in the proof: Let us comment on the relation of our work with recent papers of Cevher [12] and Gribonval, Cevher, and Davis [29]. Cevher uses in [12] the concept of Order Statistics [16] to identify the probability distributions, whose independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) realizations result typically in p-compressible signals, i.e. x∗ i ≤ C R · i−1/p. Our approach here is a bit different and more connected to the geometry of ℓn p spaces. In accordance with [43], this leads to the study of ℓn p -normalized vectors with i.i.d. components. This again allows us to better distinguish between the norm of such a vector (i.e. its size or energy) and its direction (i.e. its structure). The approach of the recent preprint [29] (which was submitted during the review process of this work) comes much closer to ours. Their Definition 1 of "Compressible priors" introduces the quantity called relative best m-term approximation error as ¯σm(x)q = σm(x)q kxkq , x ∈ Rn +. mn The asymptotic behavior of this quantity for x = (x1, . . . , xn) being a vector with i.i.d. components and lim inf n→∞ n ≥ κ ∈ (0, 1) is then used to define q-compressible probability distribution functions. In contrary to [29], we consider ℓq approximation of ℓp normalized vectors and therefore our widths depend on two integrability pa- rameters p and q. Furthermore, we do not pose any restrictions on the ratio m/n to any specific regime and consider the average best m-term widths σp,q m (µ) for all 0 ≤ m ≤ n − 1. In the only case, when we speak about asymptotics (i.e. (37) of Theorem 16), we suppose m to be constant and n growing to infinity. Furthermore, Theorem 1 of [29] shows that all distributions with bounded fourth moment do not fit into their scheme and do not "promote sparsity". As we are interested in distri- butions, which are connected to the geometry of ℓn p -balls (i.e. generalized Gaussian distribution and generalized Gamma distribution), it is exactly that reason why we change the parameters of the distribution θp,β in dependence of n. Although quite inconvenient from the mathematical point of view, it is not really clear if this presents a serious obstacle for application of our approach. But the investigation of this goes beyond the scope of this work. 8 1.5.3 Structure of the paper The paper is structured as follows. The rest of Section 1 gives some notation used throughout the paper. Sections 2 and 3 provide estimates of this quantity with respect to the cone and surface measure, respectively. In Section 4, we study a new type of measures on the unit ball of ℓn p . We show, that the typical element with respect to those measures behaves in a completely different way compared to the situations discussed before. Those results are illustrated by the numerical experiments described in Section 5. 1.6 Notation We denote by R the set of real numbers, by R+ := [0,∞) the set of nonnegative real numbers and by Rn and Rn + their n-fold tensor products. The components of x ∈ Rn are denoted by x1, . . . , xn. The symbol λ stands for the Lebesgue measure on Rn and H for the n − 1 dimensional Hausdorff measure in Rn. If A ⊂ Rn and I ⊂ R is an interval, we write I · A := {tx : t ∈ I, x ∈ A}. We shall use very often the Gamma function, defined by Γ(s) :=Z ∞ 0 ts−1e−tdt, s > 0. (9) In one case, we shall use also the Beta function B(p, q) :=Z 1 0 tp−1(1 − t)q−1dt = Γ(p)Γ(q) Γ(p + q) , p, q > 0 (10) and the digamma function Ψ(s) := d ds log Γ(s) = Γ′(s) Γ(s) , s > 0. We recommend [1, Chapter 6] as a standard reference for both basic and more advanced properties of these functions. We shall need the Stirling's approximation formula (which was implicitly used already in (7)) in its most simple form Γ(x) =r 2π x (cid:16) x j=1 and b = {bj}∞ e(cid:17)x(cid:18)1 + O(cid:18) 1 x(cid:19)(cid:19) , x > 0. (11) If a = {aj}∞ j=1 are real sequences, then aj . bj means, that there is an absolute constant C > 0, such that aj ≤ C bj for all j = 1, 2, . . . . Similar convention is used for aj & bj and aj ≈ bj. The capital letter C with indices (i.e. Cp) denotes a positive real number depending only on the highlighted parameters and their meaning can change from one occurrence to another. If, for any reason, we shall need to distinguish between several numbers of this type, we shall write for example C 1 p as already done in (8). p and C 2 9 2 Normalized cone measure In this section, we study the average best m-term widths as introduced in Definition 1 for the most important measure (the so-called cone measure) on ∆n p , which is well studied in the literature within the geometry of ℓn [38, 4, 37, 5]. Essentially, we recover in Theorem 7 an analogue of the estimate (7) for all 0 < p < ∞. Definition 2. Let 0 < p ≤ ∞ and n ≥ 2. Then λ([0, 1] · A) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) , A ⊂ ∆n p spaces, cf. µp(A) = p is the normalized cone measure on ∆n p . If νp denotes the p-normalized Lebesgue measure, i.e. νp(A) = λ(A) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) , A ⊂ Rn +, then the connection between νp and µp is given by νp(A) = nZ ∞ 0 rn−1µp(cid:18){x ∈ A : kxkp = r} r (cid:19)dr. (12) The proof of (12) follows directly for sets of the type [a, b]·A with 0 < a < b < ∞ and A ⊂ ∆n p and is then finished by standard approximation arguments. The formula (12) may be generalized to the so-called polar decomposition identity, cf. [4], f (x)dλ(x) ZRn λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) + = nZ ∞ 0 rn−1Z∆n p f (rx)dµp(x)dr, (13) which holds for every f ∈ L1(Rn +). The formula (13) allows to transfer immediately the results for the average sur- face best m-term approximation with respect to µp to the average volume approxi- mation with respect to νp. Proposition 3. The identity σp,q m (νp) = σp,q m (µp) · n n + 1 holds for all 0 < p ≤ q ≤ ∞, all n ≥ 2 and all 0 ≤ m ≤ n − 1. Proof. We plug the function f (x) = σm(x)q · χ[0,1]·∆n p (x) 10 into (13) and obtain Z[0,1]·∆n p σm(x)qdλ(x) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) σm(x)qdνp(x) p =Z[0,1]·∆n = nZ 1 0 rn−1Z∆n p σm(rx)qdµp(x)dr = nZ 1 0 rndr · σp,q m (µp), which gives the result. Proposition 3 shows, that the ratio between approximation with respect to µp and p . Furthermore, for νp is equal to 1 + 1/n. This justifies our interest in measures on ∆n it shows that the quantities σp,q n → ∞) very similarly. random variables. Then Let p = 2 and let ω1, . . . , ωn be independent normally distributed Gaussian m (µp) behave asymptotically (i.e. m (νp) and σp,q 2(A) = µ2(A) = P (ω1, . . . ,ωn) j=1 ω2 j(cid:1)1/2 ∈ A!, (cid:0)Pn A ⊂ ∆n 2 . As noted in [43], this relation may be generalized to all values of p with 0 < p < ∞. Let ω1, . . . , ωn be independent random variables on R+ each with density with respect to the Lebesgue measure, where cp = p Γ(1/p) = 1 Γ(1/p+1) . cpe−tp , t ≥ 0 Then, cf. [43, Lemma 1], µp(A) = P (ω1, . . . , ωn) j=1 ωp j(cid:1)1/p ∈ A!, (cid:0)Pn A ⊂ ∆n p . (14) We shall fix ω1, . . . , ωn to the end of this paper. Also the symbols E and P are always taken with respect to these variables. 2.1 The case q = ∞ In this section we deal with uniform approximation, i.e. with the case q = ∞. To be able to imitate the calculation (6), we shall need several tools, which are subject of Lemmas 4, 5 and 6. Our main result of this section (Theorem 7) then provides the estimate of σp,∞ m (µp) from above for all m with 0 ≤ m ≤ n − 1. Furthermore, it is shown that in the range 0 ≤ m ≤ εpn this estimate is also optimal. Lemma 4. Let 0 < p < ∞ and let n ≥ 2 and 1 ≤ m ≤ n be natural numbers. Then x∗ mdµp(x) = Z∆n p Γ(n/p) Γ(n/p + 1/p) · E x∗ m. p and C 2 Furthermore, there are two positive real numbers C 1 such that p depending only on p, C 1 p · E x∗ m n1/p ≤Z∆n p E x∗ m n1/p . mdµp(x) ≤ C 2 x∗ p · 11 Proof. We put f (x) = x∗ me−xp 1−···−xp n and use the polar decomposition identity (13) ZRn + me−xp x∗ 1−···−xp ndλ(x) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) 0 = nZ ∞ = nZ ∞ 0 (rx∗ rn−1Z∆n rn−1 · re−rp p m) · e−(rx1)p−···−(rxn)p drZ∆n x∗ mdµp(x) p dµp(x)dr or, equivalently, Z∆n p The identity mdµp(x) = ZRn + x∗ me−xp x∗ 1−···−xp ndλ(x) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) · nR ∞ 0 rne−rpdr . (15) Z ∞ 0 rne−rp dr = Γ(n/p + 1/p) p , follows by a simple substitution. Furthermore, we shall need the classical formula of Dirichlet for the volume of the unit ball Bℓn p , cf. [21, p. 157], p of ℓn λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) = λ(Bℓn p ) 2n = Γ(1/p + 1)n Γ(n/p + 1) . This allows us to reformulate (15) as x∗ mdµp(x) = Z∆n p Γ(n/p + 1) E x∗ m cn p · n/p · Γ(n/p + 1/p)Γ(1/p + 1)n = Γ(n/p) E x∗ m Γ(n/p + 1/p) . Finally, we use Stirling's formula (11) to estimate n1/p · Γ(n/p) Γ(n/p + 1/p) ≤ C 1 p n1/p(n/p)n/p−1/2 (n/p + 1/p)n/p+1/p−1/2 ≤ C 2 n + 1(cid:19)n/p+1/p−1/2 p(cid:18) n ≤ C 3 p and similarly for the estimate from below. Lemma 5. Let α ∈ R and δ > 0. Then δ 1 Z ∞ 1, 1−α/δ , uαe−udu ≤ δαe−δ · δ(cid:1)α · α/δ (cid:0) α  Proof. If α ≤ 0, we may estimate uαe−udu ≤ δαZ ∞ Z ∞ 1−δ/α , δ δ if α ≤ 0, if α > 0 if α > 0 and and α δ < 1, α δ > 1. e−udu = δαe−δ. If 0 < α ≤ 1, we use partial integration and obtain Z ∞ δ uαe−udu = δαe−δ + αZ ∞ δ uα−1e−udu ≤ δαe−δ(1 + αδ−1). 12 This is smaller than δαe−δ(1 + α δ + α2 δ2 + . . . ) = δαe−δ · 1 1 − α/δ if α/δ < 1 and smaller than δαe−δ α δ (1 + δ α + δ2 α2 + . . . ) = δαe−δ α δ · 1 1 − δ/α . if α/δ > 1. If k − 1 < α ≤ k for some k ∈ N, we iterate the partial integration and arrive at Z ∞ uαe−udu ≤ δαe−δ(1 + αδ−1 + α(α − 1)δ−2 + ··· + α(α − 1) . . . (α − k + 1)δ−k) δ α δ + ≤ δαe−δ(1 + ≤ δαe−δ( 1 δ(cid:1)α+1 (cid:0) α 1−α/δ , α2 αk δk ) δ2 + ··· + if α/δ < 1, 1 1−δ/α , if α/δ > 1. Lemma 6. Let 0 < p < ∞. Then there is a positive real number Cp, such that E x∗ m ≤ Cp log1/p(cid:16) en m(cid:17) for all 1 ≤ m ≤ n. Proof. We estimate P(ω∗ m > t)dt E x∗ 0 P(ω∗ m =Z ∞ ≤ δ +(cid:18) n = δ +(cid:18) n m > t)dt = δ +Z ∞ m(cid:19)Z ∞ m(cid:19)Z ∞ P(ω1 > t)mdt. δ δ δ P(ω1 > t, ω2 > t, . . . , ωm > t)dt (16) The parameter δ > max(1, 3(1/p − 1))1/p is to be chosen later on. We substitute v = up and obtain P(ω1 > t) = cpZ ∞ t e−up du = cp p Z ∞ tp v1/p−1e−vdv. Using the first two estimates of Lemma 5 (recall that tp ≥ δp > max(1, 3(1/p− 1))), we arrive at P(ω1 > t) ≤ Cpt1−pe−tp , where Cp depends only on p. We plug this estimate into (16) and obtain E x∗ m ≤ δ +(cid:18) n m(cid:19)(Cp)mZ ∞ δ 13 tm(1−p)e−mtp dt. (17) If p ≥ 1, then Z ∞ δ tm(1−p)e−mtp dt ≤ δm(1−p)Z ∞ δ Altogether, we obtain e−mtp mδp dt ≤ δm(1−p)Z ∞ m(cid:19)(Cp)me−mδp . E x∗ m ≤ δ +(cid:18) n e−uu1/p−1du ≤ e−mδp . m )m and choosing δ = C ′ p ln( en m )1/p finishes the proof. If p < 1, we use again the second estimate of Lemma 5 m(cid:1) ≤ ( en Using (cid:0) n Z ∞ δ tm(1−p)e−mtp dt = ≤ m(cid:1) ≤ ( en Using (17) and (cid:0) n E x∗ 1 mp · m(1/p−1)(m+1)Z ∞ mp · δ(1−p)(m+1)e−mδp · 1 mδp m )m again, we get u(1/p−1)(m+1)e−udu 1 1 − 2(1/p−1) δp pδ(1−p)(m+1)e−mδp ≤ C ′ . 1 ≤ δ + exp(−mδp + m ln(en/m) + (1 − p)(m + 1) ln δ + m ln Cp + ln C ′ p) ≤ δ + exp[−m(δp + Cp ln(en/m) + 2(1 − p) ln δ)] The choice δ = C ′ p ln( en m )1/p with C ′ p large enough ensures, that δp 2 ≥ Cp ln(en/m) and δp 2 ≥ 2(1 − p) ln δ and finishes the proof. The following theorem gives the basic estimates of σp,∞ m (µp). Theorem 7. Let 0 < p ≤ ∞ and let n ≥ 2. (i) Let 0 ≤ m ≤ n − 1. Then m (µp) ≤ Cp" log(cid:16) en m+1(cid:17) n σp,∞ #1/p . (18) (ii) There is a number 0 < εp < 1, such that for 0 ≤ m ≤ εpn the following estimate holds σp,∞ m (µp) ≥ Cp(cid:20) log( en m+1 ) n (cid:21)1/p . (19) Proof. Lemma 4 and Lemma 6 imply immediately the first part of the theorem if p < ∞. If p = ∞, the proof is trivial. The proof of the second part is divided into two steps. Step 1. We start first with the case m = 0. If p = ∞, then x∗ 1 = 1 for all x ∈ ∆n assume, that p < ∞. According to Lemma 4, we have to estimate E x∗ p and the proof is trivial. Let us therefore 1 from below. 14 This was done in [43, Lemma 2]. We include a slightly different proof for readers convenience. For every t0 > 0, it holds E x∗ 1 ≥ t0 P(x∗ 1 > t0) = t0 P( max 1≤j≤n xj > t0) ≥ t0[nP(x1 > t0) −(cid:18)n 2(cid:19)P(x1 > t0)2]. We define t0 by P(x1 > t0) = 1 n and obtain E x∗ From the simple estimate 1 ≥ t0/2. cp p Z ∞ T p u1/p−1e−udu ≥ Cpe−2T p , T > 1, it follows, that there is a positive real number γp > 0, such that P(x1 > γp(log(en))1/p) ≥ 1/n. 1 ≥ Cp(log(en))1/p. This gives t0 ≥ γp(log(en))1/p and E x∗ Step 2. Let 0 ≤ m ≤ εpn, where εp > 0 will be chosen later on. We shall use the inequality 1 m m Xj=1 log1/p(cid:16) en j (cid:17) ≤ Cp log1/p(cid:16) en m(cid:17), 1 ≤ m ≤ n, (20) which follows by direct calculation for p = 1, by Holder's inequality for 1 < p < ∞ and by replacing the sum by the corresponding integral and integration by parts if 0 < p < 1. We denote By Lemma 6 and (20), kxk(m) = 1 m m Xj=1 x∗ j . Ekxk(m) = 1 m m Xj=1 E x∗ j ≤ Cp m m Xj=1 log1/p(cid:16) en j (cid:17) ≤ C 1 p log1/p(cid:16) en m(cid:17). (21) To estimate Ekxk(m) from below, we assume that 1 ≤ m ≤ n and that n/m is an integer (otherwise one has to slightly modify the argument at the cost of the constants involved). We partition the set {1, . . . , n} = A1 ∪ ··· ∪ Am, where each one of the disjoint sets Aj has n/m elements. Then we have kxk(m) ≥ 1 m m Xj=1 max l∈Aj xl and by the first step we obtain Ekxk(m) ≥ 1 m m Xj=1 E max l∈Aj xl ≥ C 2 p log1/p(cid:16) en m(cid:17). (22) 15 Let Np < 1/εp be a natural number to be chosen later on. Combining (21) with (22) gives finally 1 E x∗ m ≥ Npm Xk=m 1 Np E x∗ Npm C 1 p Np k ≥ Ekxk(Npm) − Ekxk(m) p log1/p(cid:16) en log1/p(cid:16) en Npm(cid:17) − m(cid:17) ≥ C 2 m(cid:17) p  = log1/p(cid:16) en 1 −    log(cid:16) en m(cid:17) log(Np) C 1 p Np   C 2 − 1/p . An appropriate choice of Np and εp (i.e. Np > 21/pC 1 with p /C 2 p and εp < min(1/Np, e/N 2 p )) C 2 p 1 −  log(Np) log(cid:16) e εp(cid:17)   gives the result. 1/p C 1 p Np − > 0 (i) Theorem 7 provides basic estimates of average best m-term widths Remark 1. σp,∞ In the case m = 0 a stronger result on concentration of µp was m (µp). obtained already in [43, Theorem 3 and Remark 2]. It would be certainly of interest to obtain a similar statement also for other values of m > 0, but this would go beyond the scope of this paper and we leave this direction open for further study. (ii) Theorem 7 may be interpreted in the sense of the discussion after formula (7). Namely, the average coordinate of x ∈ ∆n p is n−1/p. Theorem 7 shows, that the average value of the largest coordinate is only slightly larger (namely c[ln(en)]1/p times larger). In this sense, the average point of ∆n p is only slightly modified (and properly normalized) white noise. (iii) Using the interpolation formula (4), one may immediately extend this result to all 0 < p ≤ q < ∞. But we shall see later on, that in the case q < ∞, one may prove slightly better estimates. (iv) The behavior of σp,∞ m (µp) was studied in detail in [28, Example 10] for p = 2. It was shown that if xi are independent N (0, 1) Gaussian random variables and m ≤ n/2 + 1, then crln 2n m ≤ E x∗ m ≤ Crln 2n m , where c and C are absolute positive constants. Furthermore, if m ≥ n/2 + 1, then r π 2 n − m + 1 n + 1 ≤ E x∗ m ≤ √2π n − m + 1 n . (v) The method used in the proof of the second part of Theorem 7 may be found for example in [27]. 16 2.2 The case q < ∞ We discuss briefly also the case when q < ∞. It turns out, that in this case the logarithmic term disappears. We do not go much into details and restrict ourselves to the case m = 0. Proposition 8. Let n ≥ 2 and 0 < p ≤ q < ∞. Then (i) C 1 p,qn1/q ≤ Ekxkq ≤ C 2 p,qn1/q, (ii) C 1 p,q · Ekxkq n1/p ≤ σp,q 0 (µp) =Z∆n p kxkqdµp(x) ≤ C 2 p,q · Ekxkq n1/p and p,qn1/q−1/p ≤ σp,q (iii) C 1 0 (µp) ≤ C 2 p,qn1/q−1/p, where in all these estimates C 1 p. p and C 2 p are positive real numbers depending only on Proof. (i) The following two inequalities may be easily proved by Holder's and Minkowski inequality. n (cid:18) n (Exj)q(cid:19)1/q Xj=1 Xj=1 (cid:0) This gives for q ≥ 1 Exq Xj=1 ≤ E(cid:0) j(cid:1)1/q ≤ E(cid:0) Xj=1 n n n xq xq Exq j(cid:1)1/q ≤(cid:0) j(cid:1)1/q, Xj=1 j(cid:1)1/q ≤(cid:18) n (Exj)q(cid:19)1/q Xj=1 q ≥ 1, , q ≤ 1. and for q ≤ 1 Ekxkq ≤ n1/q(Exq j)1/q and Ekxkq ≥ n1/q Exj Ekxkq ≤ n1/qExj and Ekxkq ≥ n1/q(Exq j )1/q. Let us note, that the value of Exj and (Exq and q. j )1/q does not depend on n, only on p (ii) The proof of the second part resembles very much the proof of Lemma 4 and is left to the reader. (iii) The last point follows immediately from (i) and (ii). Remark 2. A similar statement to Proposition 8 is included in [43, Lemma 2, point 4]. 17 3 Normalized surface measure In this section we study the average best m-term widths for another classical measure on ∆n p , namely the normalized Hausdorff measure, cf. Definition 9. Intuitively, this measure gives more weight to those areas, where one or more components of x ∈ ∆n p are close to zero. It turns out, that this is really the case - with the mathematical formulation given in Lemma 10 below. This relation is then used together with Lemma 11 in Theorem 12 to provide estimates of σp,∞ (p) from above. 0 Definition 9. Let n ≥ 2 be a natural number. We denote by p(A) = H(A) H(∆n p ) , A ⊂ ∆n p the normalized n − 1 dimensional Hausdorff measure on ∆n p . Let us mention, that for p ∈ {1, 2,∞} the measure p coincides with µp. The following lemma provides a relationship between the normalized surface measure p and the cone measure µp. For p ≥ 1, it was given by [38]. We follow closely their approach and it turns out, that it may be generalized also to the non-convex case of 0 < p < 1. Lemma 10. Let 0 < p < ∞ and n ≥ 2. Then p is an absolutely continuous measure with respect to µp and for µp almost every x ∈ ∆n p it holds dp dµp (x) = nλ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) H(∆n p ) where = c−1 p,n(cid:18) n Xi=1 x2p−2 i (cid:19)1/2 , (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)∇(k · kp)(x)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 p(cid:18) n (cid:19)1/2 Xi=1 x2p−2 i cp,n =Z∆n dµp(x) is the normalizing constant. Proof. The proof imitates the proof of [38, Lemma 1 and Lemma 2], where the statement was proven for 1 ≤ p < ∞. Hence, we may assume, that 0 < p < 1. First, we introduce some notation. p , such that We fix x = (x1, . . . , xn) ∈ ∆n • the mapping y → kykp is differentiable at x, • x is a density point of H, i.e. lim ε→0+ H(B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ) εn−1Vn−1 = 1, (23) where Vn−1 denotes the Lebesgue volume of the n − 1 dimensional Euclidean unit ball. • xi > 0 for all i = 1, . . . , n. 18 Obviously, p-almost every x ∈ ∆n example to [34, Theorem 16.2] for the second one). p satisfies all the three properties (we refer for Furthermore, we put z := ∇(k · kp)(x). This means, that where kx + ykp = 1 + hz, yi + r(y), : 0 < kyk2 ≤ δ(cid:27) , θ(δ) := sup(cid:26)r(y) kyk2 (24) δ > 0 tends to zero if δ tends to zero. Using (24) for y = δx, one observes, that hz, xi = 1. We denote by H = x + z⊥ the tangent hyperplane to ∆n p at x. Let us note, that for 0 < p < 1 the set Rn p is convex. Next, we show, that hz, yi ≥ 1 for every y ∈ [1,∞) · ∆n p = [1,∞) · ∆n + \ [0, 1) · ∆n p . Indeed, 1 ≤ kx + λ(y − x)kp = 1 + hz, λ(y − x)i + r(λ(y − x)) = 1 − λ + λhz, yi + r(λ(y − x)) Dividing by λ > 0 and letting λ → 0 gives the statement. The proof of the lemma is based on the following two inclusions, namely p(cid:17) [0, 1] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε(1 − θ(ε))) ∩ H(cid:17) ⊂ [0, 1] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n (25) and [0, 1] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n First, we prove (25). To given 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 and v ∈ B(x, ε(1 − θ(ε)) ∩ H we need p(cid:17) ⊂ [0, 1 + εθ(ε)] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε(1 + θ(ε)kxk2)) ∩ H(cid:17), which hold for all ε > 0 small enough. (26) p , such that sv = tw. To do this, we set to find 0 ≤ t ≤ 1 and w ∈ B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n kvkp ∈ ∆n w := v p and t := skvkp. We need to show, that t ≤ 1 and kx − wk2 ≤ ε. We choose 0 < ε ≤ mini xi. Then xi ≤ xi − vi + vi ≤ kx − vk2 + vi ≤ ε + vi for every i = 1, . . . , n, which implies, that vi ≥ 0 and v ∈ Rn v ∈ Rn + we deduce, that kvkp ≤ 1. Hence t = skvkp ≤ kvkp ≤ 1. Next, we write +. From v ∈ H and kx − wk2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x − v kvkp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ≤ kx − vk2 +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) v − v kvkp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 1 − kvkp kvkp ≤ ε(1 − θ(ε)) + 1 − kvkp ≤ ε(1 − θ(ε)) + kvk2 · = ε(1 − θ(ε)) + 1 − {1 + hv − x, zi + r(v − x)} = ε(1 − θ(ε)) + r(v − x) ≤ ε. 19 Next, we prove (26). We need to find to given 0 ≤ t ≤ 1 and w ∈ B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n some 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 + εθ(ε) and v ∈ B(x, ε(1 + θ(ε)kxk2)) ∩ H, such that tw = sv. We put p s := thw, zi and v := w . hw, zi Let us recall, that we have shown above, that w ∈ ∆n s ≤ 1 + εθ(ε) and kv − xk2 ≤ ε(1 + θ(ε)kxk2). Of course, tw = sv and v ∈ H (as hv, zi = 1). Hence, it remains to show, that The application of (24) gives p implies that hw, zi ≥ 1. 1 = kwkp = kx + (w − x)kp = 1 + hw − x, zi + r(w − x), which again forces hw, zi ≤ 1 + εθ(ε). Then s = thw, zi ≤ hw, zi ≤ 1 + εθ(ε). Finally, we write w w x kv − xk2 =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) hw, zi − x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ kw − xk2 hw, zi +(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) hw, zi − + kxk2hw, zi − 1 hw, zi ≤ ε + εθ(ε)kxk2. hw, zi(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 hw, zi − x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 x Equipped with (25) and (26), we may finish the proof of the lemma. We write lim ε→0 p(B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ) µp(B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ) H(B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ) = lim ε→0 H(∆n p ) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) H(∆n p ) · lim ε→0 = · εn−1Vn−1 εn−1Vn−1 · εn−1Vn−1 λ([0, 1] · [B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ]) λ([0, 1] · ∆n p ) λ([0, 1] · [B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n p ]) , (27) where we have used (23). As the perpendicular distance between zero and H is equal to 1/kzk2, we observe, that vol(B(x, a) ∩ H) = an−1Vn−1 nkzk2 holds for every a > 0. Using this, we get from (25) and (26) [ε(1 − θ(ε))]n−1Vn−1 λ(cid:16)[0, 1] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε(1 − θ(ε))) ∩ H(cid:17)(cid:17) = p(cid:17)(cid:17) ≤ λ(cid:16)[0, 1] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε) ∩ ∆n ≤ λ(cid:16)[0, 1 + εθ(ε)] ·(cid:16)B(x, ε(1 + θ(ε)kxk2)) ∩ H(cid:17)(cid:17) = [1 + εθ(ε)]n · [ε(1 + θ(ε)kxk2)]n−1Vn−1 nkzk2 . nkzk2 Combining these estimates with (27) gives the result. Following lemma is analogous to Lemma 4 and reduces the calculation of σp,∞ (p) to inequalities for the estimated values of functions of the random variables x1, . . . , xn. 0 20 Lemma 11. Let 0 < p < ∞. There exists two positive real numbers C 1 such that p and C 2 p , n n E x∗ C 1 p· x2p−2 i x2p−2 i (cid:17)1/2 1(cid:16) Xi=1 (cid:17)1/2 E(cid:16) Xi=1 = Z∆n 1(cid:16) Xi=1 Z∆n p(cid:16) Xi=1 for all n ≥ 2. x2p−2 i x∗ n n p (cid:17)1/2 (cid:17)1/2 dµp(x) · n−1/p ≤ σp,∞ 0 (p) =Z∆n p x∗ 1dp (28) x2p−2 i dµp(x) ≤ C 2 p n x2p−2 i x2p−2 i E x∗ 1(cid:16) Xi=1 E(cid:16) Xi=1 n (cid:17)1/2 (cid:17)1/2 · n−1/p Proof. Only the inequalities need a proof. It resembles the proof of Lemma 4 and is again based on the polar decomposition formula (13). We plug the functions f1(x) = x∗ n 1(cid:16) Xi=1 x2p−2 i (cid:17)1/2 e−xp 1−···−xp n n and f2(x) =(cid:16) Xi=1 x2p−2 i (cid:17)1/2 e−xp 1−···−xp n into (13) and obtain σp,∞ 0 + + 0 f1(x)dx ·Z ∞ (p) = ZRn f2(x)dx ·Z ∞ ZRn (cid:17)1/2 1(cid:16) Xi=1 (cid:17)1/2 E(cid:16) Xi=1 x2p−2 i x2p−2 i E x∗ = n n 0 rn+p−2e−rp rn+p−1e−rp dr dr Γ(n/p + 1 − 1/p) Γ(n/p + 1) . · By Stirling's formula, the last expression is equivalent to n−1/p with constants of equivalence depending only on p. Theorem 12. Let 0 < p < ∞. Then there is a positive real number Cp, such that σp,∞ 0 (p) ≤ Cp(cid:20) log(n + 1) n (cid:21)1/p (29) for all n ≥ 2. Proof. We define a probability measure αp,n on R+ n by the density c−1 p,n · n Xi=1 x2p−2 i !1/2 e−xp 1−···−xp n, cp,n :=ZRn + n Xi=1 x2p−2 i !1/2 21 e−xp 1−···−xp ndx with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Let us note, that due to the inequality x2p−2 i !1/2 ≤ n Xi=1 xp−1 i n Xi=1 the integral in the definition of cp,n really converges and αp,n is well defined. According to Lemma 11, we need to estimate x∗ 1dαp,n(x). ZRn + We calculate for δ > 1, which is to be chosen later on, ZRn + x∗ 1dαp,n(x) =Z ∞ 0 αp,n(x∗ 1 > t)dt ≤ δ +Z ∞ δ αp,n(x∗ 1 > t)dt αp,n(x1 > t)dt. ≤ δ + nZ ∞ δ + . Then αp,n(x1 > t) = c−1 We write x′ = (x2, . . . , xn) ∈ Rn−1 1ZRn−1 1ZRn−1 e−xp e−xp + t p,nZ ∞ p,nZ ∞ ≤ c−1 p,nZ ∞ = c−1 t t e−xp 1 xp−1 1 + c−1 p,nZ ∞ t := I1 + I2. The inequality e−xp xp−1 x2p−2 i !1/2 + n Xi=1  1 + n Xi=2  dx1 ·ZRn−1 1 dx1 ·ZRn−1 + n Xi=2 e−xp + e−xp 2−···−xp ndx′dx1 x2p−2 i !1/2  2−···−xp ndx′ e−xp 2−···−xp ndx′dx1 x2p−2 i !1/2 e−xp 2−···−xp ndx′ cn p cp,n = cn e−xp x2p−2 p ZRn p ZRn ≥ cn p Z ∞ i !1/2 + n Xi=1 i !1/2 + n Xi=2 + n 1 dx1ZRn−1 Xi=2 x2p−2 e−xp = cn e−xp 0 1−···−xp ndx 1−···−xp ndx x2p−2 i !1/2 (30) cp,n−1 e−xp 2−···−xp ndx′ = cn−1 p shows, that I1 = e−xp 1 dx1 cpR ∞ t xp−1 1 cn p cp,n e−xp 1 dx1 cpR ∞ t xp−1 1 cpcp,1 ≤ = c−1 p,1 · e−tp p . 22 Using (30) again, we get also I2 = c−1 p,n · cp,n−1Z ∞ t t e−xp 1 dx1 ≤ cpZ ∞ I1 + I2 ≤ Cpe−tp 1dαp,n(x) ≤ δ + CpnZ ∞ δ x∗ If p ≥ 1, we get and ZRn + e−xp 1 dx1 = cp p ·Z ∞ tp s1/p−1e−sds. , t > 1 (31) e−tp dt ≤ δ + C ′ pne−δp . By choosing δ = Cp log(n + 1)1/p, we get the result. If p < 1, we use the second estimate of Lemma 5 and replace (31) with I1 + I2 ≤ Cpt1−pe−tp , t > t0 for t0 > 1 large enough and the result again follows by the choice of δ. Remark 3. (i) Theorem 12 shows, that the average size of the largest coordinate of x ∈ ∆n p taken with respect to the normalized Hausdorff measure is again only slightly larger than n−1/p. Hence, also in this case, the typical element of ∆n p seems to be far from being sparse and resembles rather properly normalized white noise in the sense described in Introduction. (ii) Using interpolation inequality (4), one may again obtain a similar estimate also for 0 < p ≤ q < ∞, namely σp,q 0 (p) ≤ Cp,q(cid:20) log(n + 1) n (cid:21)1/p−1/q . It would be probably possible to avoid the logarithmic terms and provide improved estimates also for m > 0, but we shall not go into this direction. Our main aim of this section was to show, that normalized Hausdorff measure does not prefer sparse (or nearly sparse) vectors, and this was clearly demonstrated by Theorem 12. 4 Tensor product measures As discussed already in the Introduction and proved in Theorem 7 and Theorem 12, the average vectors of ∆n p with respect to the cone measure µp and with respect to surface measure p behave "badly" meaning that (roughly speaking) many of their coordinates are approximately of the same size. As promised before, we shall now introduce a new class of measures, for which the random vector behaves in a completely different way. These measures are defined through their density with respect to the cone measure µp. This density has a strong singularity near the points with vanishing coordinates. 23 Definition 13. Let 0 < p < ∞, β > −1 and n ≥ 2. Then we define the probability measure θp,β on ∆n p by where dθp,β dµp (x) = c−1 p,β · n Yi=1 xβ i , x ∈ ∆n p , cp,β =Z∆n p n Yi=1 xβ i dµp(x). (32) (33) Remark 4. (i) If 0 > β > −1, then (32) defines the density of θp,β with respect to µp only for points, where xi 6= 0 for all i = 1, . . . , n. That means, that this density is defined µp-almost everywhere. The definition is then complemented by the statement, that θp,β is absolutely continuous with respect to µp. (ii) We shall see later on, that the condition β > −1 ensures, that (33) is finite. (iii) It was observed already in [4], that the measures θp,β allow a formula similar p into (13), where i=1 xβ i e−kxkp n p , and obtain to (14). We plug the function f (x) = χ[0,∞)·AQn A is any µp-measurable subset of ∆n p )·n·Z ∞ Z[0,∞)·A We use a similar formula also for A = ∆n pdλ(x) = λ([0, 1]·∆n i e−kxkp xβ Yi=1 0 p , which leads to rn−1+nβe−rp dr·ZA n Yi=1 xβ i dµp(x). ZA 1d θp,β = ZA Z∆n p n n Yi=1 Yi=1 xβ i dµp(x) xβ i dµp(x) n i e−kxkp xβ = Z[0,∞)·A Yi=1 ZRn i e−kxkp xβ Yi=1 n + pdx pdx . 1, . . . , ω′ Let ω′ = (ω′ n) be a vector with independent identically distributed com- ponents with respect to the density cp,βtβe−tp dt is a normalizing constant. Up to a simple substitution, this is the well known gamma distribution. We observe that the distribution of random points with respect to θp,β equals to the distribution of ℓn p normalized vectors ω′, i.e. p,β =R ∞ , t > 0, where c−1 tβe−tp 0 θp,β(A) = P (ω′ (cid:0)Pn 1, . . . , ω′ n) j=1 (ω′ j)p(cid:1)1/p ∈ A!, A ⊂ ∆n p . (34) (iv) Of course, the same procedure might be considered also for other distributions. We leave this to future work. We also refer to the discussion on the recent work of Gribonval, Cevher, and Davies [29] in the Introduction. Lemma 14. Let 0 < p < ∞, β > −1 and n ≥ 2. 24 (i) Let 1 ≤ m ≤ n. Then n σp,∞ m−1(θp,β) =Z∆n p x∗ mdθp,β = E E x∗ m xβ i n Yi=1 Yi=1 xβ i Γ(n(β + 1)/p) Γ(n(β + 1)/p + 1/p) . · (ii) E n Yi=1 xβ i =(cid:20) cp p · Γ((β + 1)/p)(cid:21)n . Proof. The proof of the first part follows again by (13), this time used for the functions f1(x) = x∗ n m(cid:16) Yi=1 1−···−xp n xβ i(cid:17)e−xp n and f2(x) =(cid:16) Yi=1 1−···−xp n. xβ i(cid:17)e−xp The proof of the second part is straightforward. It follows directly from (9), that Γ(s) tends to infinity, when s tends to zero. The following lemma quantifies this phenomenon. Although the statement seems to be well known, we were not able to find a reference and we therefore provide at least a sketch of the proof. Lemma 15. Let C ≃ 0.577 . . . denote the Euler constant. Then lim n (cid:19)n n→∞(cid:18) Γ(1/n) = e−C . Proof. It is enough to show, that lim n→∞ n · log(Γ(1 + 1/n)) = −C, which (by using the l'Hospital rule) follows from 0 s1/ne−s log s ds 0 s1/ne−sds lim n→∞R ∞ R ∞ = −C. But the numerator of this fraction is equal to Γ′(1 + 1/n) and its denominator to Γ(1 + 1/n). The whole fraction is therefore equal to Ψ(1 + 1/n) and Ψ(1 + 1/n) → Ψ(1) = −C as n tends to infinity, cf. [1, Section 6.3.2, p. 258]. Next theorem shows, that if β = p/n−1, then the measure θp,β promotes sparsity and one may even consider limiting behavior of n growing to infinity. Theorem 16. Let 0 < p < ∞ and let n ≥ 2 and 1 ≤ m ≤ n be integers. Then σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≥ C 1 p · Γ(n + 1) Γ(n − m + 1) · Γ(n/p + n − m + 1) Γ(n/p + n + 1) , (35) 25 and σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ C 2 p · Γ(n + 1) Γ(n − m + 1)(cid:26) Γ(n/p + n − m + 1) Γ(n/p + n + 1) + 1 m! ·(cid:18) e−1 Γ(1/n)(cid:19)m(cid:27)(36) where C 1 p and C 2 p are positive real numbers depending only on p. Furthermore, for every fixed m ∈ N, C 1 p p + 1(cid:17)m ≤ lim inf (cid:16) 1 n→∞ σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ lim sup n→∞ σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ C 2 p p + 1(cid:17)m , (cid:16) 1 (37) where C 1 p and C 2 p are positive real numbers depending only on p. Proof. First observe, that n(β + 1)/p = 1 for β = p/n − 1 and therefore Γ(n(β + 1)/p) Γ(n(β + 1)/p + 1/p) = 1 Γ(1 + 1/p) depends only on p. Due to Lemma 14, we have to estimate E x∗ m(cid:18) n Yi=1 xp/n−1 i (cid:19) = cn pZRd + x∗ m n Yi=1 xp/n−1 i e−xp 1−···−xp ndx. (38) Let t = x∗ m and let us assume, that there is only one coordinate j = 1, . . . , n, such that xj = t. Obviously, this assumption holds almost everywhere. Of course, we have n possibilities for j. Furthermore, m− 1 from the remaining n− 1 components of x are bigger than t and the remaining n− m components are smaller. This allows to rewrite (38) as cn p n(cid:18) n − 1 m − 1(cid:19)Z ∞ 0 tp/ne−tp(cid:18)Z t 0 up/n−1e−up du(cid:19)n−m × cn p n pn (cid:18) n − 1 m − 1(cid:19)Z ∞ 0 ×(cid:18)Z ∞ t ×(cid:18)Z ∞ ω dt up/n−1e−up du(cid:19)m−1 ω1/p+1/n−1e−ω(cid:18)Z ω s1/n−1e−sds(cid:19)m−1 0 dω. s1/n−1e−sds(cid:19)n−m × = Let us denote γ = Γ(1/n) =Z ∞ 0 s1/n−1e−sds and y(ω) = γ−1 ·Z ω 0 s1/n−1e−sds. (39) Then y(ω) is a non-decreasing function of ω, y(0) = 0 and limω→∞ y(ω) = 1. We denote by ω(y) its inverse function, i.e. y = γ−1 ·Z ω(y) 0 s1/n−1e−sds, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1. (40) 26 Using this notation, we obtain E x∗ m(cid:18) n Yi=1 xp/n−1 i (cid:19) = p γn cn pn n(cid:18) n − 1 m − 1(cid:19)Z 1 0 ω(y)1/pyn−m(1 − y)m−1dy and σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) = Γ(n + 1) Γ(m)Γ(n − m + 1)Z 1 0 ω(y)1/pyn−m(1 − y)m−1dy, (41) where ω(y) is given by (40). Step 1. Estimate from below The estimate γy =Z ω(y) 0 s1/n−1e−sds ≤Z ω(y) 0 s1/n−1ds = nω(y)1/n implies together with Lemma 15 with c independent of n. This gives finally σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≥ c1/p · = c1/p · = c1/p · Γ(n + 1) ≥ cyn ω(y) ≥(cid:16) γy n (cid:17)n Γ(m)Γ(n − m + 1) ·Z 1 Γ(m)Γ(n − m + 1) · B(n/p + n − m + 1, m) Γ(n − m + 1) · Γ(n/p + n − m + 1) Γ(n/p + n + 1) Γ(n + 1) Γ(n + 1) yn/p+n−m(1 − y)m−1dy 0 , where we used the Beta function (10) and the proof of (35) is complete. Step 2. Estimate from above Let us first take y, such that 1 − e−1/γ ≤ y ≤ 1. Then − ln(γ(1 − y)) ≥ 1 and Z ∞ − ln(γ(1−y)) s1/n−1e−sds ≤Z ∞ − ln(γ(1−y)) e−sds = γ(1 − y). Hence, ω(y) ≤ − ln(γ(1 − y)), 1 − e−1/γ ≤ y ≤ 1. (42) Finally, we observe, that f : y →Z ∞ Cyn s1/n−1e−sds is a convex function on R+, f (0) = γ and f (1 − e−1/γ) =Z ∞ ≤Z ∞ 1 s1/n−1e−sds C(1−e−1/γ)n s1/n−1e−sds ≤ e−1, 27 if we choose C so large, that C(1 − e−1/γ)n ≥ 1 for all n ∈ N. This is indeed possible, while a byproduct of Lemma 15 is also a relation limn→∞ γ/n = 1. Using the convexity of f , we obtain f (y) ≤ γ(1 − y), 0 ≤ y ≤ 1 − e−1/γ, which further leads to ω(y) ≤ Cyn, 0 ≤ y ≤ 1 − e−1/γ. We insert (42) and (43) into (41) and obtain σp,∞ m−1(θp,p/n−1) ≤ Γ(n + 1) Γ(m)Γ(n − m + 1)nC 1/pI1 + I2o , (43) (44) where and 0 yn/p+n−m(1 − y)m−1dy I1 :=Z 1−e−1/γ 1−e−1/γ ln(γ(1 − y))1/pyn−m(1 − y)m−1dy. I2 :=Z 1 The first integral may be estimated again using the Beta function, which gives I1 ≤ B(n/p + n − m + 1, m). (45) We denote by k the uniquely defined integer, such that 1/p ≤ k < 1/p + 1 holds, and estimate I2 ≤Z 1 1−e−1/γ ln(γ(1 − y))1/p(1 − y)m−1dy ≤ Ik,m :=Z e−1/γ ln(γy)kym−1dy. 0 Next, we use partial integration to estimate Ik,m. We obtain Ik,m = 1 γ (cid:19)m m(cid:18) e−1 + k m · Ik−1,m. Together with I0,m = 1/m · (e−1/γ)m, this leads finally to Ik,m ≤ (k + 1)! γ (cid:19)m m (cid:18) e−1 . This, together with (44) and (45) finishes the proof of (36). The proof of (37) then follows directly by Stirling's formula (11). Remark 5. (i) Let us take m = 0. Then the formula (37) describes an essen- tially different behavior compared to the normalized cone and surface mea- sure. Namely, the expected value of the largest coordinate of x ∈ ∆n p with respect to θp,p/n−1 does not decay to zero with n growing to infinity. We shall demonstrate this effect also numerically in next section. 28 (ii) If m > 0, then (37) shows, that σp,∞ m (θp,p/n−1) decays exponentially fast with m, as soon as n is large enough. That means, that for n large enough, the average vector of ∆n p exhibits a strong sparsity-like structure. Namely, its m-th largest component decays exponentially with m. (iii) We have chosen in (32) a different β for each n, namely βn = p/n − 1 > −1. This was of course a crucial ingredient in the proof of Theorem 16. It is not difficult to modify the analysis of the proof of Theorem 16 to the situation, when β > −1 is fixed for all n ∈ N. In this case we obtain again, that (up to logarithmic factors) σp,∞ (θp,β) is equivalent to n−1/p with constants of equivalence depending on p > 0 and β > −1. 0 (iv) Last, but not least, we observe, that one may choose p = 1 or even p = 2 in Theorem 16 and still obtains the exponential decay of coordinates as described by (37). It seems, that there is no significant connection between sparsity of an average vector of x ∈ ∆n p and the size of p > 0. 5 Numerical experiments 5.1 Cone measure We would like to demonstrate the most significant effects of the theory also by numerical experiments. We start with the case of the cone measure. The key role is played by (14). It may be interpreted in the following way. To generate a random point on ∆n p with respect to the normalized cone measure, it is enough to generate ω1, . . . , ωn with respect to the density cpe−tp , t > 0 and then calculate (ω1, . . . , ωn) j=1 ωp (cid:0)Pn p . j(cid:1)1/p ∈ ∆n This method is very practical, as the running time of this algorithm depends only linearly on n. Let us note, that the values of ωi may be generated very easily. For example the package GNU Scientific Library [26] implements a random number generator with respect to the gamma distribution using the method described in the classical work of Knuth [31]. Using this package, we generated 108 random points x ∈ ∆n p for n = 100 x∗ and p ∈ {1/2, 1, 2} to approximate numerically the value of n1/p·R∆n mdµp(x). The result may be found in the Figure 1. p 5.2 Tensor measures As pointed out in Remark 4, point (iii), a random point on ∆n 1, . . . , ω′ may be generated in the following way. We generate ω′ density cp,βtβe−tp consider the vector p with respect to θp,β n with respect to the dt is a normalizing constant and we , t > 0, where c−1 tβe−tp 0 (ω′ p,β =R ∞ (cid:0)Pn 1, . . . , ω′ n) j=1(ω′ p . j)p(cid:1)1/p ∈ ∆n 29 Also this may be easily done with the help of [26]. We generated again 108 random points x ∈ ∆n p with respect to θp,p/n−1 for n = 100 and p ∈ {1/2, 1, 2}. Then we used those points to numerically approximate the expression log10(R∆n x∗ mdθp,p/n−1). p 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 −20 −40 −60 −80 −100 −120 −140 −160 −180 0 20 40 60 80 100 (a) n1/p · R∆n p x∗ mdµp(x) (b) log10(R∆n p x∗ mdθp,p/n−1) x∗ Figure 1: Approximations of n1/p ·R∆n mdθp,p/n−1) (right) for n = 100, p = 1/2(◦), p = 1(•) and p = 2(×) based on sampling of 108 random points. mdµp(x) (left) and log10(R∆n x∗ p p Acknowledgments I would like to thank to Stephan Dahlke, Massimo Fornasier, Aicke Hinrichs, Erich Novak and Henryk Wo´zniakowski for their interest in this topic and the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and remarks, which helped to greatly improve the quality of the presented paper. In particular, the proof of the second part of Theorem 7 was suggested by one of the referees. I acknowledge the financial support provided by the START-award "Sparse Approximation and Optimization in High Dimensions" of the Fonds zur Forderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (FWF, Austrian Science Foundation). References [1] M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegun, Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1964. [2] M. Anttila, K. Ball and I. Perissinaki, The central limit problem for convex bodies, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), no. 12, 4723 -- 4735. [3] K. Ball and I. Perissinaki, The subindependence of coordinate slabs in ℓn p balls, Israel J. Math. 107 (1998), 289 -- 299. 30 [4] F. Barthe, M. Csornyei and A. Naor, A note on simultaneous polar and Carte- in: Geometric Aspects of Functional Analysis, Lecture sian decomposition, Notes in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 2003. [5] F. Barthe, O. Gu´edon, S. Mendelson and A. Naor, A probabilistic approach to the geometry of the ln p -ball, Ann. Probab. 33 (2005), no. 2, 480 -- 513. [6] C. Bennett and R. Sharpley, Interpolation of operators, Pure and Applied Math- ematics, 129, Academic Press, Boston, 1988. [7] J. Bobin, J.-L. Starck, J. M. Fadili, Y. Moudden and D. L. Donoho, Morpho- logical Component Analysis: An Adaptive Thresholding Strategy, IEEE Trans. Image Process. 16 (2007), no. 11, 2675 -- 2681. [8] E. J. Cand´es, J. K. Romberg and T. Tao, Stable signal recovery from incomplete and inaccurate measurements, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 59 (2006), no. 8, 1207 -- 1223. [9] E. J. Cand´es, Compressive sampling, In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Madrid, Spain, 2006. [10] E. J. Cand´es, J. K. Romberg and T. Tao, Robust uncertainty principles: ex- act signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 52 (2006), no. 2, 489 -- 509. [11] E. J. Cand´es and T. Tao, Decoding by linear programming, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 51 (2005), no. 12, 4203 -- 4215. [12] V. Cevher, Learning with compressible priors, In Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2009. [13] F. Champagnat, Y. Goussard and J. Idier, Unsupervised deconvolution of sparse spike trains using stochastic approximation, IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 44 (1996), no. 12, 2988 -- 2998. [14] A. Cohen, W. Dahmen, and R. DeVore, Compressed sensing and best k-term approximation, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 22 (2009), no. 1, 211 -- 231. [15] S. Dahlke, E. Novak and W. Sickel, Optimal approximation of elliptic problems by linear and nonlinear mappings I, J. Complexity 22 (2006), no. 1, 29-49. [16] H. A. David and H. N. Nagaraja, Order Statistics, Wiley-Interscience, 2004 [17] R. A. DeVore, Nonlinear approximation, Acta Num. 51 -- 150, (1998). [18] R. A. DeVore, B. Jawerth and V. Popov, Compression of wavelet decomposi- tions, Amer. J. Math. 114 (1992), no. 4, 737-785. [19] D. L. Donoho, Compressed sensing, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 52 (2006), no. 4, 1289 -- 1306. 31 [20] A. Dvoretzky, Some results on convex bodies and Banach spaces, Proc. Internat. Sympos. Linear Spaces - Jerusalem 1960, (1961), 123 -- 160. [21] J. Edwards, A treatise on the integral calculus, Vol. II, Chelsea Publishing Com- pany, New York, 1922. [22] T. Figiel, A short proof of Dvoretzky's theorem on almost spherical sections of convex bodies, Compositio Math. 33 (1976), no. 3, 297 -- 301. [23] T. Figiel, J. Lindenstrauss and V. D. Milman, The dimension of almost spherical sections of convex bodies, Acta Math. 139 (1977), no. 1-2, 53 -- 94. [24] M. Fornasier, Numerical methods for sparse recovery, Theoretical Foundations and Numerical Methods for Sparse Recovery, (Massimo Fornasier Ed.) Radon Series on Computational and Applied Mathematics 9, 2010. [25] S. Foucart and H. Rauhut, A mathematical introduction to compressive sensing, Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., Birkhauser, Boston, in preparation. [26] GNU Scientific Library, http://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/ [27] E. D. Gluskin, An octahedron is poorly approximated by random subspaces, Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozen. 20 (1986), no. 1, 14 -- 20, 96. [28] Y. Gordon, A. E. Litvak, C. Schutt, and E. Werner, On the minimum of several random variables, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 134 (2006), no. 12, 3665 -- 3675. [29] R. Gribonval, V. Cevher, and M. Davies, Compressible priors for high- dimensional statistics, preprint, 2011. [30] R. Gribonval and K. Schnass, Dictionary identification - sparse matrix fac- torisation via ℓ1 minimisation, IEEE Trans. Infor. Theory 56 (2010), no. 7, 3523 -- 3539. [31] D. E. Knuth, The Art of Computer Programming, Vol. 2: Seminumerical Al- gorithms, 3rd ed., Addison-Wesley 1998. [32] M. Ledoux, The concentration of measure phenomenon, AMS, 2001. [33] M. Ledoux and M. Talagrand, Probability in Banach spaces. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. [34] P. Mattila, Geometry of sets and measures in Euclidean Spaces, Cambridge University Press, 1995. [35] V. D. Milman, A new proof of A. Dvoretzky's theorem on cross-sections of convex bodies, Funkcional. Anal. i Prilozen. 5 (1971), no. 4, 28 -- 37. [36] V. D. Milman and G. Schechtman, Asymptotic theory of finite-dimensional normed spaces, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1200, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986. 32 [37] A. Naor, The surface measure and cone measure on the sphere of ln p . Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 359 (2007), no. 3, 1045 -- 1079. [38] A. Naor and D. Romik, Projecting the surface measure of the sphere of ln p , Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e Probab. Statist. 39 (2003), no. 2, 241 -- 261. [39] K. Oskolkov, Polygonal approximation of functions of two variables, Math. USSR Sbornik 35, 851 -- 861, (1979). [40] J. C. Pesquet, H. Krim, D. Leporini and E. Hamman, Bayesian approach to best basis selection, In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Proc., pages 2634 -- 2637, 1996. [41] S. T. Rachev and L. Ruschendorf, Approximate independence of distributions on spheres and their stability properties, Ann. Probab. 19 (1991), no. 3, 1311 -- 1337. [42] H. Rauhut, Compressive sensing and structured random matrices, Theoretical Foundations and Numerical Methods for Sparse Recovery, (Massimo Fornasier Ed.) Radon Series on Computational and Applied Mathematics 9, 2010. [43] G. Schechtman and J. Zinn, On the volume of the intersection of two Ln p balls, Proc. AMS 110 (1), 217 -- 224, (1990). [44] E. Schmidt, Zur Theorie der linearen und nichtlinearen Integralgleichungen I, Math. Anal. 63, 433 -- 476, (1907). [45] V. N. Temlyakov, Nonlinear methods of approximation, Found. Comput. Math. 3 (2003), no. 1, 33-107. 33
1901.03777	2	1901	2019-09-18T09:17:54	Multi-marginal maximal monotonicity and convex analysis	[ "math.FA", "math.OC" ]	Monotonicity and convex analysis arise naturally in the framework of multi-marginal optimal transport theory. However, a comprehensive multi-marginal monotonicity and convex analysis theory is still missing. To this end we study extensions of classical monotone operator theory and convex analysis into the multi-marginal setting. We characterize multi-marginal c-monotonicity in terms of classical monotonicity and firmly nonexpansive mappings. We provide Minty type, continuity and conjugacy criteria for multi-marginal maximal monotonicity. We extend the partition of the identity into a sum of firmly nonexpansive mappings and Moreau's decomposition of the quadratic function into envelopes and proximal mappings into the multi-marginal settings. We illustrate our discussion with examples and provide applications for the determination of multi-marginal maximal monotonicity and multi-marginal conjugacy. We also point out several open questions.	math.FA	math	Multi-marginal maximal monotonicity and convex analysis Sedi Bartz∗, Heinz H. Bauschke†, Hung M. Phan‡, and Xianfu Wang§ September 12, 2019 Abstract Monotonicity and convex analysis arise naturally in the framework of multi-marginal op- timal transport theory. However, a comprehensive multi-marginal monotonicity and convex analysis theory is still missing. To this end we study extensions of classical monotone operator theory and convex analysis into the multi-marginal setting. We characterize multi-marginal c-monotonicity in terms of classical monotonicity and firmly nonexpansive mappings. We provide Minty type, continuity and conjugacy criteria for multi-marginal maximal monotonic- ity. We extend the partition of the identity into a sum of firmly nonexpansive mappings and Moreau's decomposition of the quadratic function into envelopes and proximal mappings into the multi-marginal settings. We illustrate our discussion with examples and provide applica- tions for the determination of multi-marginal maximal monotonicity and multi-marginal con- jugacy. We also point out several open questions. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 47H05, 26B25; Secondary 49N15, 49K30, 52A01, 91B68. Keywords: c-convexity, c-monotonicity, c-splitting set, cyclic monotonicity, Kantorovich duality, maximal monotonicity, Minty Theorem, Moreau envelope, multi-marginal, optimal transport. 1 Introduction Our discussion stems from multi-marginal optimal transport theory: Let (X1, µ1), . . . , (XN, µN) be Borel probability spaces. We set X = X1 × · · · × XN and we denote by Π(X) the set of all Borel probability measures π on X such that the marginals of π are the µi's. Let c : X → R ∗Mathematics, University of Massachusetts Lowell, MA 01854, USA. E-mail: sedi [email protected]. †Mathematics, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, B.C. V1V 1V7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]. ‡Mathematics, University of Massachusetts Lowell, MA 01854, USA. E-mail: hung [email protected]. §Mathematics, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, B.C. V1V 1V7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]. 1 be a cost function. A cornerstone of multi-marginal optimal transport theory is Kellerer's [16] generalization of the Kantorovich duality theorem to the multi-marginal case. Kellerer's duality theorem asserts that, in a suitable framework, min π∈Π(X)ZX c(x)dπ(x) = max ui ∈ L1(µi), ∑1≤i≤N ui ≤ c ∑ 1≤i≤NZXi ui(xi)dµi(xi). (1) It follows that if π is a solution of the left-hand side of (1) and (u1, . . . , uN) is a solution of the right-hand side of (1), then π is concentrated on the subset Γ of X where the equality c = ∑1≤i≤N ui holds. In recent publications (see, for example, [5, 15, 17]) such subsets Γ of X are referred to as c-splitting sets: Let N ≥ 2 be a natural number and I = {1, . . . , N} an index set. Let X1, . . . , XN be nonempty sets, X = X1 × · · · × XN and c : X → R a function. Definition 1.1 (c-splitting set) Let Γ ⊆ X. We say that Γ is a c-splitting set if for each i ∈ I there exists a function ui : Xi → ]−∞, +∞] such that and ∀x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X, ∀x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ, c(x1, . . . , xN) ≤ Mi∈I c(x1, . . . , xN) = Mi∈I ui! (x) := ∑ i∈I ui(xi) ui! (x) := ∑ i∈I ui(xi). (2) (3) In this case we say that (u1, . . . , uN) is a c-splitting tuple of Γ. Given functions ui : Xi → ]−∞, +∞] that satisfy (2), we call the set of all points (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X that satisfy (3) the c-splitting set generated by the tuple (u1, . . . , uN). In the case N = 2, splitting sets are natural in convex analysis as graphs of subdifferentials. Indeed, by the Young-Fenchel inequality the graph of the subdifferential ∂ f is the c-splitting set generated by the pair ( f , f ∗) where c = h·, ·i is the classical pairing between a linear space and its dual. Similar to the two-marginal case, in the multi-marginal case monotonicity arises naturally as well: Definition 1.2 (c-cyclic monotonicity) The subset Γ of X is said to be c-cyclically monotone of order n, n-c-monotone for short, if for all n tuples (x1 N) in Γ and every N permutations σ1, . . . , σN in Sn, N), . . . , (xn 1 , . . . , xn 1, . . . , x1 n ∑ j=1 c(xσ1(j) 1 , . . . , xσN (j) N ) ≤ n ∑ j=1 c(xj 1, . . . , xj N); (4) Γ is said to be c-cyclically monotone if it is n-c-monotone for every n ∈ {2, 3, . . . }; and Γ is said to be c-monotone if it is 2-c-monotone. Finally, Γ is said to be maximally n-c-monotone if it has no proper n-c-monotone extension. 2 Cyclic monotonicity was first introduced by Rockafellar [24] in the framework of classical con- vex analysis. During the late 80s and early 90s (see [8, 23, 26]) the concept was generalized to c-cyclic monotonicity in order to hold for more general cost functions c in the framework of two- marginal optimal transport theory. Currently, it lays at the foundations of the theory (see for example [11, 28, 30]) and plays a role also in recent refinements (see, for example, [2, 3]). Ex- tending the role it plays in two-marginal optimal transport theory, in the past two and a half decades multi-marginal c-monotonicity and aspects of c-convex analysis are becoming an integral part of the fast evolving multi-marginal optimal transport theory as can be seen, for example, in [1, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 27]. An important instance of an extension from the two-marginal case relating Definition 1.1 with Definition 1.2 is the known fact that c-splitting sets are c-cyclically monotone (see, for example, [5, 15, 17, 18]). Before attending our convex analytic discussion we remark that in order to make optimal trans- port compatible with our discussion, one should exchange min for max in the left-hand side of (1), exchange max for min in the right-hand side of (1) and, finally, exchange the constraint ∑i ui ≤ c in the right-hand side of (1) with the constraint c ≤ ∑i ui as we did in Definition 1.1 and Defini- tion 1.2. In the framework of multi-marginal optimal transport, presumably the most traditional and well studied cost functions are classical extensions of the pairing between a linear space and its dual: For the remainder of our discussion, for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, we assume that Xi = H is a real Hilbert space with inner product h·, ·i and induced norm k · k. We let c : X → R be the cost function defined by c(x1, . . . , xN) = ∑ 1≤i<j≤Nhxi, xji. It follows from straightforward computation (see for example [5]) that a set Γ ⊆ X is n-c-monotone if and only if it is n-c-monotone with respect to each of the functions (x1, . . . , xN) 7→ − ∑ 1≤i<j≤N 1 2kxi − xjk2 and (x1, . . . , xN) 7→ 1 N ∑ i=1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 . xi(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Although classical convex analysis and monotonicity are instrumental in multi-marginal optimal transport, and although several multi-marginal convex analytic results are already available (as we recall in our more specific discussion further below), to the best of our knowledge, a com- prehensive multi-marginal monotonicity and convex analysis theory is still lacking. To this end, in the present paper we lay additional foundations and provide several extensions of classical monotone operator theory and convex analysis into the multi-marginal settings. The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we provide a characterization of multi-marginal c-monotonicity in terms of classical monotonicity. We employ this characterization in order to provide several equivalent criteria, including a Minty-type criterion, a criterion based 3 on the partition of the identity into a sum of firmly nonexpansive mappings, and other criteria for multi-marginal maximal c-monotonicity. In Section 3 we provide a continuity criterion for multi- marginal maximal monotonicity. In Section 4 we focus on multi-marginal convex analysis. In particular, we extend Moreau's decompositions and provide criteria for maximal c-monotonicity of c-splitting sets, the multi-marginal extensions of subdifferentials. We show that the same cri- teria also imply multi-marginal c-conjugacy of c-splitting functions. In the case N = 3 we also provide a class of c-splitting triples for which c-conjugacy implies maximal c-monotonicity. Sec- tion 5 contains examples and applications of our results to the problem of determining maximal c-monotonicity of sets and c-conjugacy of c-splitting tuples, thus reducing the need of further challenging computations of multi-marginal c-conjugate tuples. Additionally, we point out sev- eral open problems. In the remainder of this section we collect standard notations and preliminary facts from clas- sical monotone operator theory and convex analysis which, largely, follow [6]. Let A : H ⇒ H be a set-valued mapping. The domain of A is the set dom A = {x ∈ H Ax 6= ∅}. The range of A is the set ran A = A(H) = Sx∈H Ax, the graph of A is the set gra A = {(x, u) ∈ H × H u ∈ Ax} and the inverse mapping of A is the mapping A−1 satisfying x ∈ A−1u ⇔ u ∈ Ax. A is said to be monotone if (∀(x, u) ∈ gra A)(∀(y, v) ∈ gra A) hx − y, u − vi ≥ 0. A is said to be maximally monotone if there exists no monotone operator B such that gra A is a proper subset of gra B. The resolvent of A is the mapping JA = (A + Id)−1 where Id is the identity mapping. The mapping T : dom T ⊆ H → H is said to be firmly nonexpansive if (∀x ∈ dom T)(∀y ∈ dom T) kTx − Tyk2 + k(Id −T)x − (Id −T)yk2 ≤ kx − yk2, : H → ]−∞, +∞] is said to be proper if dom f where dom T ⊆ H. The function f H f (x) < ∞} 6= ∅. The Fenchel conjugate of the function f is the function f ∗ defined by := {x ∈ We set q(·) = 1 2k · k2. The Moreau envelope of f is the function defined by the infimal convolution f ∗(u) = sup x∈H(cid:0)hu, xi − f (x)(cid:1). The subdifferential of the proper function f is the mapping ∂ f : H ⇒ H defined by e f (s) = ( f (cid:3)q)(s) = inf x∈H(cid:0) f (x) + q(s − x)(cid:1). (5) (6) ∂ f (x) = (cid:8)u ∈ H (cid:12)(cid:12) f (x) + hu, y − xi ≤ f (y), ∀y ∈ H(cid:9). The indicator function of a subset C of H is the function ιC : H → ]−∞, +∞] which vanishes on C and equals +∞ on H r C. Fact 1.3 (Minty's Theorem [6, Theorem 21.1]) Let A : H ⇒ H be monotone. Then A is maximally monotone if and only if ran(Id +A) = H. Fact 1.4 ([6, Proposition 23.8]) Let A : H ⇒ H. Then 4 (i) JA is firmly nonexpansive if and only if A is monotone; (ii) JA is firmly nonexpansive and dom JA = H if and only if A is maximally monotone. Let f be a proper lower semicontinuous convex function. The proximity operator [6, Defini- tion 12.23] of f is defined by Prox f : H → H : x 7→ Prox f x = argmin y∈H (cid:0) f (y) + q(y − x)(cid:1). (7) For all s ∈ H, [6, Proposition 12.15] implies that there is a unique minimizer of f (·) + q(s − ·) over all x ∈ H; thus, the proximity operator of f is well defined. Furthermore, we also have Prox f = J∂ f . Additional properties of the Moreau envelope are: Fact 1.5 (Moreau envelope) Let f be a proper lower semicontinuous convex function. The following assertions hold: (i) (Moreau decomposition) e f + e f ∗ = q. (ii) x = Prox f s ⇔ e f (s) = f (x) + q(s − x). (iii) ([6, Proposition 12.30]) e f is Fr´echet differentiable with ∇e f = Id − Prox f . Finally, we set the marginal projections Pi : X → Xi : (x1, . . . , xN) 7→ xi for i in {1, . . . , N} and the two-marginal projections Pi,j : X → Xi × Xj : (x1, . . . , xN) 7→ (xi, xj) for i < j in {1, . . . , N}. Given a subset Γ of X, we set Γi = Pi(Γ) and Γi,j = Pi,j(Γ) (8) We also define Ai,j : Xi ⇒ Xj via gra Ai,j = Γi,j. The notation Ai is reserved for a different purpose and introduced in Section 2. 2 A characterization of multi-marginal c-monotonicity and Minty type criteria for c-monotonicity Let S : H × H → H be the mapping defined by S(x, y) = x + y. For any mapping A : H ⇒ H, we have the identity [25, Lemma 12.14] (9) JA−1 = Id−JA. If, in addition, A is monotone, then by Fact 1.4, JA and JA−1 are single-valued, thus, JA + JA−1 = IdS(gra A), 5 (10) which is equivalent to gra A being parameterized by gra A = (cid:8)(JAs, JA−1 s) s ∈ S(gra A)(cid:9). (11) Given a set Γ ⊆ X, we now associate with Γ monotone mappings as follows. Definition 2.1 Let Γ ⊆ X be a set. For each index set ∅ 6= K ( I, we define the mapping AK : H ⇒ H by gra AK = (cid:26)(cid:16) ∑ i∈K xi, ∑ i∈I\K and for each i ∈ I we set Ai = A{i}. (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ(cid:27) xi(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (12) Our first aim is to characterize the c-monotonicity of a set Γ in terms of the monotonicity of its AK's, and furthermore, extend (10) and (11) to the multi-marginal settings. To this end we will employ the sum mapping and the following fact which follows by a straightforward computation (see, e.g., [5, Fact 3.3]). S : X → H : (x1, . . . , xN) 7→ ∑ i∈I xi, (13) Fact 2.2 Let x ∈ X. If the subset Γ of X is n-c-cyclically monotone, then so is Γ + x. Lemma 2.3 Let Γ ⊆ X be a set. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (i) Γ is c-monotone; (ii) For each ∅ 6= K ( I, the mapping AK is monotone; (iii) For each ∅ 6= K ( I, the mapping JAK : S(Γ) → H is firmly nonexpansive. In this case, equivalently, Γ can be parameterized by JA1 + · · · + JAN = Id S(Γ), and, furthermore, for each ∅ 6= K ( I, Γ = (cid:8)(JA1s, . . . , JAN s) s ∈ S(Γ)(cid:9); JAK = ∑ i∈K JAi. (14) (15) (16) Proof. (i) ⇔ (ii): First we characterize the c-monotone relations of the set {z, 0} in X. We employ a similar computation to the one in [5, Lemma 4.1]: For z = (z1, . . . , zN) ∈ X and ∅ 6= K ( I we set zK = (zK 1 , . . . , zK N) ∈ X by zK i = (zi, 0, i ∈ K; i ∈ I \ K. 6 From Definition 1.2 it follows that {z, 0} is c-monotone if and only if for each ∅ 6= K ( I 0 ≤ c(z) + c(0) − c(zK) − c(zI\K) i,j∈I, i<jhzK = ∑ i,j∈I, i<jhzi, zji + 0 − ∑ i,j∈I, i<jhzi, zji − ∑ = ∑ i,j∈K, i<jhzi, zji − ∑ i , zK i j , zI\K i,j∈I, i<jhzI\K j i − ∑ i i,j∈I\K, i<jhzi, zji = (cid:28) ∑ i∈K zi, ∑ i∈I\K zi(cid:29). In general, from Definition 1.2 it follows that the set Γ ⊆ X is c-monotone if and only if for any x ∈ Γ and y ∈ Γ, the set {x, y} is c-monotone, which, in turn, by invoking Fact 2.2, is equivalent to the set {x − y, 0} being c-monotone. Summing up, we see that Γ is c-monotone if and only if for any x = (x1, . . . , xN), y = (y1, . . . , yN) ∈ Γ and any ∅ 6= K ( I, by letting z = x − y, 0 ≤ (cid:28) ∑ i∈K xi − ∑ i∈K yi, ∑ i∈I\K xi − ∑ i∈I\K yi(cid:29), i.e., AK is monotone. (ii) ⇔ (iii): By the definition of AK, it follows that dom JAK = S(Γ). Thus, the equivalence (ii) ⇔ (iii) follows immediately from Fact 1.4(i). Finally, (14), (15) and (16) follow from (iii) and the definition of AK. (cid:4) We now address maximal c-monotonicity. Equivalent statements of Minty's characterization are: Let A : H ⇒ H be a monotone mapping. Then A is maximally monotone if and only if equivalently, S(cid:0) gra(A)(cid:1) = H, gra(A) + gra(− Id) = H × H. In order to extend our discussion of these formulas into the multi-marginal settings we will employ the following definitions and notations. We denote by ∆ the subset of X = X1 × · · · × XN defined by ∆ = (cid:8)(x, . . . , x)(cid:12)(cid:12) x ∈ H(cid:9). Consequently, ∆⊥ = n(x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Corollary 2.4 Let Γ ⊆ X be a c-monotone set. Then for every u, v ∈ Γ, u − v ∈ ∆⊥ ⇔ u = v. Proof. Let u = (u1, . . . , uN) and v = (v1, . . . , vN) belong to Γ and suppose that u − v = d = (d1, . . . , dN) ∈ ∆⊥. 7 N ∑ i=1 xi = 0o. (17) (18) We prove that di = 0 for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. To this end, set 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N. By Lemma 2.3, Ai0 is monotone. Consequently we see that 0 ≤ (cid:28)ui0 − vi0, ∑ i6=i0 ui − ∑ i6=i0 vi(cid:29) = (cid:28)di0, ∑ i6=i0 di(cid:29) = hdi0, −di0i = −kdi0k2 ≤ 0. (cid:4) Combining Lemma 2.3 and Corollary 2.4 with classical two-marginal monotone operator theory, we arrive at the following result. Theorem 2.5 (multi-marginal maximal c-monotonicity) Let Γ ⊆ X be a c-monotone set. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (i) For each ∅ 6= K ( I the mapping AK defined by (12) is maximally monotone; (ii) There exists ∅ 6= K ( I such that the mapping AK is maximally monotone; (iii) Γ + ∆⊥ = X; (iv) JA1 + · · · + JAN = Id; (v) For each ∅ 6= K ( I the firmly nonexpansive mapping JAK : H → H has full domain and JAK = ∑i∈K JAi; (vi) S(Γ) = H. In this case, Γ is maximally c-monotone. Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii) is trivial. (ii) ⇒ (iii): Suppose that AK is maximally monotone and let a = (a1, . . . , aN) ∈ X. We will prove that there exist x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ and d = (d1, . . . , dN) ∈ ∆⊥ such that x + d = a. Indeed, the maximal monotonicity of AK implies that ran(AK + Id) = H. Consequently, by the definition of AK, there exists x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ such that ∑N i=1 ai. For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N we let di = ai − xi. Then ∑N i=1 di = 0, that is d = (d1, . . . , dN) ∈ ∆⊥ and x + d = a. i=1 xi = ∑N (iii) ⇒ (iv): Fix 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N. We prove that Ai0 + Id is onto. Indeed, let s ∈ H. We Indeed, let i=1 hi = s. Then (iii) implies the existence of x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ i=1 xi = s which implies that i=1 xi(cid:17) ∈ gra(Ai0 + Id). Thus, since Ai0 is monotone, we conclude that its re- is firmly nonexpansive and has full domain. This is true for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N and i=1 xi = s, we conclude that prove that there exists x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ such that (xi0, s) ∈ gra(Ai0 + Id). h = (h1, . . . , hN) ∈ X such that ∑N and d = (d1, . . . , dN) ∈ ∆⊥ such that x + d = h. Consequently, ∑N (xi0, s) = (cid:16)xi0, ∑N solvent JAi0 since for any s ∈ H there exists x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ such that ∑N i=1 JAi (s) = ∑N ∑N i=1 xi = s, that is, (iv) holds. 8 (iv) ⇒ (v): Since AK is monotone for every ∅ 6= K ( I, the resolvent JAK is firmly nonexpansive and (iv) implies it has full domain. Furthermore, by employing our notations from the previous step, we see that for every s ∈ H, ∑i∈K JAi (s) = ∑i∈K xi = JAK (s), that is, we have arrived at (v). (v) ⇒ (i): Let ∅ 6= K ( I. Since the resolvent JAK is firmly nonexpansive and has full domain, AK is maximally monotone. Summing up, we have established (i) ⇒ (ii) ⇒ (iii) ⇒ (iv) ⇒ (v) ⇒ (i). (iv) ⇒ (vi): Since for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, dom(JAi ) = S(Γ), then (iv) ⇒ (vi). (vi) ⇒ (iii): Suppose that S(Γ) = H and let y ∈ X. Then there exist x ∈ Γ such that S(y) = S(x). Consequently, y − x ∈ ∆⊥, which implies that y = x + (y − x) ∈ Γ + ∆⊥. Finally, we prove that (iii) implies the maximal c-monotonicity of Γ. Indeed, suppose that u is c- monotonically related to Γ. We then write u = d + v where d ∈ ∆⊥ and v ∈ Γ. Since u, v ∈ Γ ∪ {u} which is c-monotone and u − v ∈ ∆⊥, Corollary 2.4 implies that u = v ∈ Γ. Remark 2.6 To the best of our knowledge, the question whether the multi-marginal generalization of the other direction of Minty's characterization of maximal monotonicity holds, namely, whether the maximal c-monotonicity of the set Γ implies that Γ + ∆⊥ = X, equivalently, that JA1 + · · · + JAN = Id, is still open. (cid:4) Remark 2.7 In the partition of the identity in (14) and in Theorem 2.5(iv) we conclude from (16) and Theorem 2.5(v) that any partial sum of the firmly nonexpansive mappings is also firmly non- expansive. This is not the case for general partitions of the identity into sums of firmly nonexpan- sive mappings; indeed, an example where partial sums of a partition of the identity into firmly nonexpansive mappings fail to be firmly nonexpansive is provided in [4, Example 4.4]. We elabo- rate further on this in Example 5.7 below. 3 Multi-marginal maximal c-monotonicity via continuity In the classical two-marginal case an important class of maximally monotone operators is the one of continuous monotone operators. A continuity criterion guarantees maximality in the multi- marginal framework as well: Theorem 3.1 Let Γ ⊆ X be a c-monotone set. Suppose that Γ is the graph of a continuous mapping T = (T2, . . . , TN) : X1 → ΠN i=2Xi, i.e., where for each 2 ≤ i ≤ N the mapping Ti : H → H is continuous. Then Γ is maximally c-monotone. Γ = gra(T) = (cid:8)(x, T2x, . . . , TN x)(cid:12)(cid:12) x ∈ H(cid:9) We provide two proofs for Theorem 3.1. We begin with a direct proof. 9 Proof. Let u = (u1, . . . , uN) be c-monotonically related to Γ. We prove that u ∈ Γ. Since A1, induced from the c-monotone set Γ ∪ {u}, is monotone, ∀x ∈ H, 0 ≤ (cid:28)u1 − x, N ∑ i=2 (ui − Tix)(cid:29). For t > 0 we let xt = u1 + t ∑N i=2(ui − Tiu1). Then xt −→ u1 as t → 0+ and 0 ≤ t(cid:28) N (ui − Tixt)(cid:29). (Tiu1 − ui), N ∑ i=2 ∑ i=2 Since each Ti is continuous, we deduce that (Tiu1 − ui), N ∑ i=2 ∑ i=2 0 ≤ (cid:28) N −−−→ (cid:28) N t→0+ ∑ i=2 (Tiu1 − ui), (ui − Tixt)(cid:29) (ui − Tiu1)(cid:29) = −(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N ∑ i=2 2 , N ∑ i=2 (ui − Tiu1)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N ∑ i=2 ui = N ∑ i=2 Tiu1; (u1, . . . , uN) − (u1, T2u1, . . . , TNu1) ∈ ∆⊥. which implies equivalently, Thus, by Corollary 2.4, we have (u1, . . . , uN) = (u1, T2u1, . . . , TNu1) ∈ gra T. (19) (cid:4) The second proof of Theorem 3.1 employs the classical two-marginal fact that a monotone and continuous mapping is maximally monotone [6, Corollary 20.28], Lemma 2.3 and Theorem 2.5. Proof. Since A1(x) = ∑N i=2 Ti(x) for every x ∈ H, by employing Lemma 2.3 it follows that A1 is a monotone and continuous mapping, hence, maximally monotone. Consequently, by employing Theorem 2.5 we conclude that Γ is maximally monotone. (cid:4) 4 Maximal c-monotonicity of c-splitting sets, c-conjugate tuples and multi-marginal convex analysis We begin our discussion of c-splitting tuples by a known observation regarding the subdifferen- tials of the splitting functions: As in [12, 18, 27] we observe that if ( f1, . . . , fN) is a c-splitting tuple 10 of Γ ⊆ X, then given x = (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ and for any x′1 ∈ X1, N ∑ i=1 fi(xi) = c(x1, . . . , xN) and c(x′1, x2, . . . , xN) ≤ f1(x′1) + N ∑ i=2 fi(xi). Summing up these two inequalities followed by simplifying, we see that f1(x1) + hx′1, x2 + · · · + xNi ≤ f1(x′1) + hx1, x2 + · · · + xNi, that is, N ∑ i=2 xi ∈ ∂ f1(x1). Similarly, we conclude that for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N, xi ∈ ∂ fi0 (xi0). ∑ i6=i0 Since gra Ai0 = n(cid:0)xi0, ∑i6=i0 xi(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γo, this implies gra(Ai0) ⊆ gra(∂ fi0 ). (20) (21) Similar observations and c-monotonicity properties of Γ from Section 2 are also related to the Wasserstein barycenter as can be seen, for example, in [1]. We continue our discussion by a characterization of c-splitting tuples and their generated c- splitting sets in terms of the Moreau envelopes of the splitting functions. i=1 fi if and only if Theorem 4.1 For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, let fi : Xi → ]−∞, +∞] be proper, lower semicontinuous, and convex. Then c ≤ LN Now assume this is the case, and let Γ ⊆ X be the c-splitting set generated by ( f1, . . . , fN). Then equality in (22) holds if and only if s = x1 + · · · + xN where (x1 . . . , xN) ∈ Γ. Proof. The inequality c ≤ LN i=1 fi holds if and only if for all (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X, ∀s ∈ H, e f ∗1 (s) + · · · + e f ∗N (s) ≤ q(s). (22) c(x1, . . . , xN) ≤ fi(xi) N ∑ i=1 (23) (24) ⇔ q(x1 + · · · + xN) = c(x1, . . . , xN) + N ∑ i=1 q(xi) ≤ N ∑ i=1(cid:0) fi(xi) + q(xi)(cid:1). We see that (23) holds with equality only when (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ if and only if (24) holds with equality only when (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ. Let ϕ : X → R be defined by ϕ(x1, . . . , xN) = q(x1 + · · · + xN). 11 Then, using [6, Corollary 15.28(i)], we have ∀(x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X, ϕ∗(x1, . . . , xN) = q(x1) + ι∆(x1, . . . , xN). Since for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, ( fi + q)∗ = e f ∗i (see, for example, [6, Proposition 14.1]), we arrive at N Mi=1 (cid:16) ( fi + q)(cid:17)∗ = N Mi=1 ( fi + q)∗ = N Mi=1 e f ∗i . Consequently, (classical) Fenchel conjugation transforms (24) into (22) and vise versa. We now address the case of equality in (22). Let (x1 . . . , xN) ∈ X and s = x1 + · · · + xn. Then for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, by the Fenchel-Young inequality, hs, xii ≤ ( fi + q)∗(s) + ( fi + q)(xi) = e f ∗i (s) + ( fi + q)(xi) (25) with equality if and only if xi ∈ ∂( fi + q)∗(s), i.e., since ( fi + q)∗ = e f ∗i (see, e.g., [6, Proposition 12.30]), xi = ∇e f ∗i (s) . By summing up (25) over i, we obtain is Fr´echet differentiable hs, si = N ∑ i=1hs, xii ≤ N ∑ i=1(cid:0)e f ∗i (s) + ( fi + q)(xi)(cid:1) (26) with equality if and only if xi = ∇e f ∗i (s) for every 1 ≤ i ≤ N. (⇐): Suppose that x = (x1, . . . , xN) is in the c-splitting set Γ generated by ( f1, . . . , fN) and set s = S(x). We prove equality in (22). It follows from (20) that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, xj = s − xi ∈ ∂ fi(xi) ⇔ s ∈ ∂( fi + q)(xi), (27) ∑ j6=i which, in turn, implies that xi ∈ ∂( fi + q)∗(s), that is, xi = ∇e f ∗i equality in (26) and in (24), we obtain equality in (22). (s). Since in this case there is (⇒): Let s ∈ H be a point where equality in (22) holds. Since ∑N i=1 e f ∗i entiable and ∑N i=1 e f ∗i ≤ q, then at the point of equality s we have e f ∗i (cid:17)(s) = ∇q(s) = s. ∇(cid:16) N ∑ i=1 and q are Fr´echet differ- (s) (see, e.g., [6, eq (14.7)]). Then it follows that For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, set xi = Prox fi(s) = ∇e f ∗i s = x1 + · · · + xN. Thus, in order to complete the proof it is enough to prove that (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ or, equivalently, that there is equality in (24). Indeed, Moreau's decomposition (see, e.g., [6, Remark 14.4]) implies that e fi + e f ∗i = q for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Consequently, N ∑ i=1 e f ∗i (s) = q(s) is equivalent to N ∑ i=1 e fi(s) = (N − 1)q(s). 12 We also note that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, xi = Prox fi(s) implies that e fi(s) = min x∈H(cid:0) fi(x) + q(s − x)(cid:1) = fi(xi) + q(s − xi). Thus, we arrive at N ∑ N ∑ N ∑ i=1(cid:0)q(s − xi) + fi(xi)(cid:1) = (N − 1)q(s) N ∑ i=1hs, xii + − i=1(cid:0) fi(xi) + q(xi)(cid:1) = q(s). i=1(cid:0) fi(xi) + q(xi)(cid:1) = −q(s) ⇔ ⇔ We now address c-conjugation. Definition 4.2 (c-conjugate tuple) For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, let fi : Xi → ]−∞, +∞] be a proper function. We say that ( f1, . . . , fN) is a c-conjugate tuple if for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N, fi0 (xi0) = (cid:16)Mi6=i0 fi(cid:17)c (xi0) := sup i6=i0, xi∈Xi c(x1, . . . , xi0, . . . , xN) − ∑ i6=i0 fi(xi), xi0 ∈ Xi0. (cid:4) It follows that if ( f1, . . . , fN) is a c-conjugate tuple, then fi is lower semicontinuous and convex for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Furthermore, it is known (see [12] and [10]) that given a c-splitting tuple (u1, . . . , uN) of a set Γ ⊆ X, it can be relaxed into a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple ( f1, . . . , fN) of Γ by setting inductively, and finally fi0 = (cid:16) M1≤i≤i0−1 ui(cid:17)c f1 = (cid:16) M2≤i≤N ui(cid:17)c fi ⊕ Mi0+1≤i≤N fN = (cid:16) M1≤i≤N−1 for 2 ≤ i0 ≤ N − 1, . fi(cid:17)c In the case N = 2, let f1 : X1 → ]−∞, +∞] be proper, lower semicontinuous and convex, let f2 = f ∗1 : X2 → ]−∞, +∞] be its conjugate and let Γ = gra(∂ f1) ⊆ X1 × X2. Then it is well known that Γ is maximally monotone, see, e.g., [6, Theorem 20.25]. Since f1 = f ∗∗1 = f c 2 and also f2 = f c 1 , then we can restate as follows: 13 Let Γ ⊆ X1 × X2 be the c-splitting set generated by the c-conjugate pair ( f1, f2). Then Γ is maximally c-monotone and determines its c-conjugate c-splitting tuple ( f1, f2) uniquely up to an additive constant pair (ρ, −ρ) with ρ ∈ R. A generalization to an arbitrary N ≥ 2 would be Let Γ ⊆ X be the c-splitting set generated by the c-conjugate tuple ( f1, . . . , fN). Then Γ is maximally c-monotone and determines its c-conjugate c-splitting tuple ( f1, . . . , fN) uniquely up to an additive constant tuple (ρ1, . . . , ρN) such that ∑N i=1 ρi = 0. To the best of our knowledge, whether or not this latter assertion is true in general is still open. We do, however, provide a positive answer in a more particular case in Theorem 4.6 and additional insight in Theorem 4.3. Furthermore, we note that in the case N = 2, given a conjugate pair ( f1, f2), Moreau's decom- position can be restated as e f ∗1 + e f ∗2 = q and Prox f1 + Prox f2 = Id . (28) Combining our discussion with Theorems 4.1 and 2.3, we arrive at the following generalized multi-marginal convex analytic assertions which, in particular, generalize the decomposition (28). To this end, we again recall that for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N, gra Ai0 = n(cid:0)xi0, ∑ xi(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γo. i6=i0 : Xi → ]−∞, +∞] be convex, lower semicontinuous, and Theorem 4.3 For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, let fi proper. Suppose that Γ ⊆ X is the c-splitting set generated by ( f1, . . . , fN). Then the following assertions are equivalent: (i) There exist 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N such that Ai0 is maximally monotone; (ii) There exist 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N such that Ai0 = ∂ fi0 ; (iii) Ai = ∂ fi for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N; (iv) Prox f1 + · · · + Prox f N = Id; (v) e f ∗1 + · · · + e f ∗N = q. In this case (A) Γ is maximally c-monotone (and, consequently, maximally c-cyclically monotone); 14 (B) ( f1, . . . , fN) is a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple of Γ. Moreover, Γ determines its c-conjugate c-splitting tuple ( f1, . . . , fN) uniquely up to an additive constant tuple (ρ1, . . . , ρN) such that ∑N i=1 ρi = 0. Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii): ∂ fi0 is monotone and gra(Ai0) ⊆ gra(∂ fi0 ) (see (21)). Consequently, since Ai0 is maximally monotone, it follows that Ai0 = ∂ fi0 . (ii) ⇒ (iii): Ai0 = ∂ fi0 is maximally monotone as the subdifferential of a proper lower semicon- tinuous convex function. Consequently, it follows from Theorem 2.5(i)&(ii) that Ai is maximally monotone for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Now, ∂ fi is monotone and gra(Ai) ⊆ gra(∂ fi) (see (21)). Conse- quently, since Ai is maximally monotone, it follows that Ai = ∂ fi. (iii) ⇒ (iv): Follows from Theorem 2.5(i)&(iv) since Ai = ∂ fi is maximally monotone and Prox fi = J∂ fi = JAi. (iv) ⇒ (v): By integrating (iv) we obtain the equality in (v) up to an additive constant. Theo- rem 4.1 implies that equality in (v) holds on S(Γ); thus, the additive constant vanishes. (v) ⇒ (i): By Theorem 4.1 equality in (v) holds only on S(Γ). Consequently, (v) implies that S(Γ) = H. By employing Theorem 2.5(vi)&(i), we obtain (i). In this case Theorem 2.5 also implies Γ is maximally c-monotone. Thus, it remains to prove (B). By our preliminary discussion there exists a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple (h1, . . . , hN) of Γ. From (iii) and from (21) we conclude that gra(∂ fi) = gra(Ai) ⊆ gra(∂hi) which, by maximality, implies that ∂ fi = ∂hi for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Here there exists a constant tuple (ρ1, . . . , ρN) ∈ RN such that ( f1, . . . , fN) = (h1, . . . , hN) + (ρ1, . . . , ρN). For (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ the equality ∑N i=1 fi(xi) = i=1 hi(xi) implies that ∑N ∑N i=1 ρi = 0. Consequently, the fact that for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N fi0 − ρi0 = (cid:16) N Mi6=i0 ( fi − ρi)(cid:17)c implies that ( f1, . . . , fN) is a c-conjugate tuple. (cid:4) We now provide a smoothness criteria in the 3-marginal case where Theorem 4.3(i) -- (v)&(B) are equivalent and imply maximal c-monotonicity. To this end we will employ the following facts. Fact 4.4 ([6, Theorem 14.19]) Let g : H → ]−∞, +∞] be proper, let h : H → ]−∞, +∞] be proper, lower semicontinuous and convex. Set Then f : H → [−∞, +∞] : x 7→ (g(x) − h(x), +∞, x ∈ dom(g); x /∈ dom(g). f ∗(y) = sup v∈dom(h∗)(cid:0)g∗(y + v) − h∗(v)(cid:1). Fact 4.5 ([29, Corollary 2.3]) Let f : Rn → R be proper and lower semicontinuous. If f ∗ is essentially smooth, then f is convex. 15 Theorem 4.6 Let n ∈ N, N = 3 and H = Rn. Let g : X2 → ]−∞, +∞] and h : X3 → ]−∞, +∞] be proper, lower semicontinuous and convex functions. Suppose that f = (g ⊕ h)c (in particular if ( f , g, h) is a c-conjugate triple) and that f is essentially smooth. Let Γ be the c-splitting set generated by ( f , g, h). Then assertions (i) -- (v) of Theorem 4.3 hold and Γ is maximally c-monotone. Proof. Since f = (g ⊕ h)c and dom(g + q)∗ = dom(eg∗ ) = Rn, then by employing Fact 4.4 in (29) and then Moreau's decomposition in (30) we see that ( f + q)(x) = sup = sup y,z∈Rn(cid:0)c(x, y, z) − g(y) − h(z) + q(x)(cid:1) y,z∈Rn(cid:0)hx, yi + hy, zi + hz, xi + q(x) − g(y) − h(z)(cid:1) y∈Rn(cid:0)hx, yi + h∗(x + y) + q(x) − g(y)(cid:1) y∈Rn(cid:0)h∗(x + y) + q(x + y) − (g(y) + q(y))(cid:1) = (cid:0)(h∗ + q)∗ − (g + q)∗(cid:1)∗(x) = (eh − eg∗ )∗(x) = (q − eg∗ − eh∗ )∗(x). = sup = sup Since f + q is essentially smooth, Fact 4.5 implies that q − eg∗ − eh∗ is convex. Consequently, e f ∗ = ( f + q)∗ = (q − eg∗ − eh∗ )∗∗ = q − eg∗ − eh∗, that is, e f ∗ + eg∗ + eh∗ = q. (29) (30) (cid:4) Remark 4.7 In our discussion in the last paragraph of Section 2 we pointed out that in the par- tition of the identity in Theorem 2.5(iv) any partial sum of the firmly nonexpansive mappings is again firmly nonexpansive and, furthermore, that general partitions of the identity into firmly nonexpansive mappings partial sums may fail to be firmly nonexpansive. Thus, in the context of c-splitting sets a natural question is: Given a partition of the identity into proximal mappings, are partial sums also proximal mappings? Unlike general firmly nonexpansive mappings, a positive answer to this question is provided by [4, Theorem 4.2]. 5 Examples, observations and remarks We now apply our results in order to determine maximality of c-monotone sets. Given a multi- marginal c-cyclically monotone set Γ ⊆ X, the problem of constructing a c-splitting tuple is, in gen- eral, nontrivial. Nevertheless, constructions which are independent of maximality and uniqueness considerations are available for some classes of c-cyclically monotone sets (for example, see [5] for the case N ≥ 3). We also note that c-splitting tuples can be constructed via (21) if it is known, in addition, that the antiderivatives fi are unique up to additive constants, as guaranteed by Theo- rem 4.3. Now, suppose that a c-splitting tuple is already given. The computation and classification 16 of the c-splitting tuple as being a c-conjugate tuple were, thus far, nontrivial. We employ our re- sults for such classifications in the following examples. For these cases, we are able to conclude c-conjugacy without additional nontrivial computations of multi-marginal conjugates. In addi- tion, we demonstrate finer aspects of multi-marginal maximal monotonicity. Example 5.1 For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, set Xi = Rd and let Qi ∈ Rd×d be symmetric, positive definite, and pairwise commuting. Set For each 1 ≤ i ≤ M, define Mi ∈ Rd×d by Γ = (cid:8)(Q1v, . . . , QNv)(cid:12)(cid:12) v ∈ Rd(cid:9). Mi = (cid:16) ∑ k6=i Qk(cid:17)Q−1 i . In [5, Example 3.4], it was established that ∀(x1, . . . , xN) ∈ X, c(x1, . . . , xN) = ∑ 1≤i<j≤Nhxi, xji ≤ ∑ 1≤i≤N qMi(xi), where qMi(x) = 1 2hx, Mixi, and equality holds if and only if (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ. Thus, we conclude that Γ is the c-splitting set generated by the tuple (qM1, . . . , qMN ), and that Ai = Mi = ∇qMi for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Consequently, Theorem 4.3 implies that (qM1, . . . , qMN ) is a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple of Γ, and that Γ is maximally c-monotone. The maximal c-monotonicity of Γ is also implied by Theorem 3.1 via continuity of a parametriza- tion, say, Γ = (cid:8)(v, Q2Q−1 1 v . . . , QNQ−1 1 v)(cid:12)(cid:12) v ∈ Rd(cid:9). As a simple application of Example 5.1, we now generalize the well-known classical fact that the only conjugate pair of the form ( f , f ) is ( f , f ) = (q, q) and that in this case the generated splitting set is the graph of the identity mapping. Corollary 5.2 (self c-conjugate tuple) The only c-conjugate tuple of the form ( f , . . . , f ) is In this case, the generated c-splitting set is Γ = ∆. ( f , . . . , f ) = (N − 1)(q, . . . , q). In the settings of Example 5.1 we let Qi = Id for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Then Γ = ∆ and Proof. qMi = (N − 1)q for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. We conclude that (N − 1)(q, . . . , q) is a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple and generates the c-splitting set ∆. We now prove that it is the only c-conjugate tuple of this form. Let ( f , . . . , f ) be a c-conjugate tuple. Then for 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N and for xi0 ∈ Xi0, f (xi0 ) = sup i6=i0, xi∈H(cid:16)c(x1, . . . , xi0, . . . , xN) − ∑ i6=i0 f (xi)(cid:17). (31) 17 By letting xi = xi0 for every i in the supremum in (31) we see that f (xi0 ) ≥ c(xi0, . . . , xi0) − (N − 1) f (xi0 ) ⇒ N f ≥ N(N − 1)q ⇒ f ≥ (N − 1)q. Consequently, f = (cid:16)Mi6=i0 f(cid:17)c ≤ (cid:16)Mi6=i0 q(cid:17)c = (N − 1)q. (cid:4) A similar type of construction to the one of Example 5.1, however, a nonlinear one, is available when the marginals are one-dimensional. Example 5.3 For each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, let αi : R → R be a continuous, strictly increasing and surjective function with αi(0) = 0. Let Γ be the curve in RN defined by and for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, let In [5, Example 4.3], it was established that Γ = n(cid:0)α1(t), . . . , αN(t)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) fi(xi) = Z xi αk(cid:0)α−1 0 (cid:18) ∑ k6=i t ∈ Ro (t)(cid:1)(cid:19)dt. i (32) ∑ N ∑ i=1Z xi 1≤i<j≤N xixj ≤ 0 (cid:18) ∑ (t)(cid:1)(cid:19)dt and that equality in (33) holds if and only if xj = αj(cid:0)α−1 (xi)(cid:1) for every 1 ≤ i < j ≤ N, namely, if (x1, . . . , xN) ∈ Γ. We now conclude that Γ is the c-splitting set generated by the tuple ( f1, . . . , fN) and that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, ∀(x1, . . . , xN) ∈ RN αk(cid:0)α−1 (33) k6=i i i Ai = ∇ fi = ∑ k6=i αk ◦ α−1 i . Consequently, Theorem 4.3 implies that ( f1, . . . , fn) is a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple of the maxi- mally c-monotone curve Γ. Similar to Example 5.1, the maximal c-monotonicity of Γ can also be deduced via continuity. A linear example of a different type, where none of the two marginal projections of Γ is mono- tone, but where, however, Γ is c-cyclically monotone, is available for N = 3 and 2-dimensional marginals. Example 5.4 Suppose that N = 3 and that X1 = X2 = X3 = R2. We set M1 = 2(cid:18)1 0 0 0(cid:19) , M2 = 2(cid:18)1 0 0 1(cid:19) , M3 = 1 7(cid:18)8 3 3 2(cid:19) 18 and Set ∆2 = (cid:8)(a, a)(cid:12)(cid:12) a ∈ R(cid:9) ⊆ R2. f2 = ι∆2 + qM2 = ι∆2 + 2q, and f3 = qM3. f1 = ιR×{0} + qM1, Furthermore, set v1 = (cid:0)(0, 0), (−1, −1), (1, −5)(cid:1), v2 = (cid:0)(1, 0), (2, 2), (0, 7)(cid:1) and Γ = span{v1, v2} = n(cid:0)(s, 0), (2s − t, 2s − t), (t, 7s − 5t)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) s, t ∈ Ro. It was established in [5, Example 3.5] that (x1, x2, x3) ∈ (cid:0)R2(cid:1)3 hx1, x2i + hx2, x3i + hx3, x1i ≤ f1(x1) + f2(x2) + f3(x3) for all with equality if and only if (x1, x2, x3) ∈ Γ, namely, Γ is the c-splitting set generated by the tuple ( f1, f2, f3) and that none of the two marginal projections Γ1,2, Γ1,3 and Γ2,3 of Γ, is monotone. We observe that the matrix representation of the mapping (t, 7s − 5t) 7→ (s, 0) + (2s − t, 2s − t) s, t ∈ R is M3. Consequently, we see that A3 = M3 = ∇ f3. Thus, by employing Theorem 4.3 we conclude that ( f1, f2, f3) is a c-conjugate c-splitting tuple of the maximally c-monotone subspace Γ of(cid:0)R2(cid:1)3 . In all of our examples thus far, the set Γ was a maximally c-monotone c-splitting set. We now present maximally c-monotone sets which are not c-splitting sets. To this end, we note the fol- lowing simple fact: Suppose that the set Γ ⊆ X is n-c-monotone, then for each 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N the mapping Ai0 : H ⇒ H is n-monotone. Indeed, let Γ be n-c-monotone and assume, without the loss 1, . . . , x1 of generality, that i0 = 1. Let (x1 N) ∈ Γ and σ ∈ Sn. Then a straightforward computation implies that the inequality N), . . . , (xn 1 , . . . , xn n ∑ j=1 leads to the inequality c(xj 1, xσ(j) 2 , . . . , xσ(j) N ) ≤ n ∑ j=1 c(xj 1, . . . , xj N) n ∑ j=1(cid:28)xj 1, N ∑ i=2 xσ(j) i (cid:29) ≤ n ∑ j=1(cid:28)xj 1, N ∑ i=2 xj i(cid:29). Thus, we see that if Γ is n-c-monotone, then A1 is n-monotone. To sum up, if for some 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N the mapping Ai0 is not cyclically monotone, then the set Γ is not a c-splitting set. 19 Indeed, otherwise, Γ would have been c-cyclically monotone (as we recollected after Defini- tion 1.2) and, by the above argument, for all 1 ≤ i0 ≤ N the mapping Aio would have been cyclically monotone. We now address a trivial embedding of all classical maximally monotone operators in the multi- marginal framework. In particular, we obtain maximally c-monotone mappings which are not c-cyclically monotone. Example 5.5 Let A : H ⇒ H be a maximally monotone mapping. We set Γ ⊆ X by Γ = (cid:8)(x1, x2, 0, . . . , 0) x2 ∈ Ax1(cid:9). Then Γ is c-monotone and we see that A1 = A is maximally monotone. Consequently, by invoking Theorem 2.5 (ii) we conclude that Γ is maximally c-monotone. In addition, we see that A is n- monotone if and only if Γ is n-c-monotone. Therefore, if A is not n-monotone for some n ≥ 3, then Γ is not n-c-monotone. Furthermore, since the n-c-monotonicity of a set is invariant under shifts, the set Γ = (cid:8)(x1, x2, ρ3, . . . , ρN) x2 ∈ Ax1(cid:9) is also maximally monotone for any constant vectors ρ3, . . . , ρN ∈ H. Our next example of a maximally c-monotone set which is not a c-splitting set does not follow from an embedding of the type in Example 5.5. Example 5.6 Set N = 3 and for each 1 ≤ i ≤ 3 set Xi = R2. Let Rθ denote the counterclockwise rotation by the angle θ in R2. Let the set Γ ⊆ X = (cid:0)R2(cid:1)3 be defined by (34) Γ = n(cid:16)x, √3 2 R−π/2x, √3 x ∈ R2o. 2 R−π/2x(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x ∈ R2o =⇒ A1 = √3R−π/2. It follows that Since Γ = n(cid:16) 2√3 gra A1 = n(x, √3R−π/2x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Rπ/2x, x, x(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x ∈ R2o, we have 2 Rπ/2x(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) gra A2 = gra A3 = n(cid:16)x, x + √3 x ∈ R2o =⇒ A2 = A3 = r 7 3 Rarctan(2/√3). We see that A1, A2, and A3 are maximally monotone. Consequently, for each ∅ 6= K ( {1, 2, 3}, the mapping AK is maximally monotone and it now follows from Theorem 2.5 that Γ is maximally c-monotone in X. Furthermore, since A1 is not 3-c-cyclically monotone, it is not c-cyclically mono- tone and, consequently, Γ is not a c-splitting set. By a straightforward computation, it follows that JA1 = 1 2 Rπ/3, JA2 = JA3 = √3 4 R−π/6 and JA1 + JA2 + JA3 = Id . Finally, from (34) it is easy to see that Γi,j is monotone for all 1 ≤ i < j ≤ 3. 20 We see that in the case N = 3 the set Γ is c-monotone if and only if the mappings A1, A2 and A3 are monotone. In the following example we demonstrate that the monotonicity of all of the Ai's no longer implies the c-monotonicity of Γ in the case when N ≥ 4. Example 5.7 In [4, Lemma 4.2 and Example 4.3] it was established that: In X = R2, let n ∈ counterclockwise rotator by θ. Then the following hold: {2, 3, . . .}, let θ ∈ (cid:3)arccos(1/√2), arccos(1/√2n)(cid:3), set α = 1/(2n cos(θ)), and denote by Rθ the (i) αRθ and αR−θ are firmly nonexpansive. (ii) nαRθ and nαR−θ are not firmly nonexpansive. (iii) nαRθ + nαR−θ = Id. We employ these facts to construct a set Γ as follows. We set N = 2n and Ti = (αRθ, 1 ≤ i ≤ n; αR−θ, n + 1 ≤ i ≤ 2n. Define It then follows that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, the mapping JAi = Ti is firmly nonexpansive with full domain. We conclude that the set Γ possesses the following properties: Γ = (cid:8)(T1x, . . . , T2nx) x ∈ R2(cid:9) ⊆ X = (R2) 2n . (iv) for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N, the mapping Ai is maximally monotone, (v) JA1 + · · · + JAN = Id. However, due to (ii), the mappings JA{1,...,n} = n ∑ i=1 JAi = n ∑ i=1 Ti = nαRθ, and similarly JA{n+1,...,2n} = nαR−θ are not firmly nonexpansive, equivalently, A{1,...,n} = R−2θ and A{n+1,...,2n} = R2θ are not mono- tone. Consequently, by employing Lemma 2.3 we conclude that despite the fact that Γ possesses properties (iv) and (v), it is not a c-monotone set. Remark 5.8 In [5] the two marginal projections Γi,j of a set Γ ⊆ X were employed, it was estab- lished that if the Γi,j's are cyclically monotone, then Γ is c-cyclically monotone and an explicit construction of a c-splitting tuple is provided. However, it was also established that this is a sufficient condition for c-cyclic monotonicity of Γ but not a necessary one, in general, as can be seen in Example 5.4 where we provide a maximally c-cyclically monotone set such that all of its two-marginal projections are not monotone. In the one dimensional case (i.e., Xi = R for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N), it was established that Γ is c-monotone if and only if all of its two marginal projections 21 Γi,j are monotone. With the exception of Example 5.4, in all of our examples of c-monotone sets in this section the set Γ had monotone two-marginal projections Γi,j. Thus, a natural question is: How does the monotonicity and maximal monotonicity of the two-marginal projections Γi,j relate to the c-monotonicity and maximal c-monotonicity of Γ? Proposition 5.9 Let Xi = Rd for each 1 ≤ i ≤ N. Let Γ ⊆ X be a set. Suppose that for each 1 ≤ i < j ≤ N the set Γi,j is monotone. Then Γ is c-monotone. Proof. The mapping AK is monotone if and only if for every (x1, . . . , xN), (y1, . . . , yN) ∈ Γ, 0 ≤ *∑ xi − yi, ∑ j6∈K xj − yj+ . Since the right-hand side is equal to ∑ i∈K 0 ≤ hxi − yi, xj − yji, we see that AK is monotone. i∈K j6∈Khxi − yi, xj − yji and since, by the monotonicity of Γi,j, (cid:4) To the best of our knowledge, the question whether the maximal monotonicity of the Γi,j's im- plies the maximal c-monotonicity of Γ is still open. Finally, we note that the maximal c-monotonicity of Γ does not imply the maximal monotonic- ity of the Γi,j's even when the Γi,j's are monotone. Indeed, in Example 5.5, we see that although Γ is maximally c-monotone, Γi,j is a singleton for all 3 ≤ i < j ≤ N, thus Γi,j is monotone but not maximally monotone. Even in the case N = 3, Γ1,3 is a proper subset of the graph of the zero map- ping whenever Γ is generated by a maximally monotone mapping A without a full domain. We conclude in this case that Γ is maximally c-monotone, however, Γ1,3 is not maximally monotone. Acknowledgments We thank three anonymous referees for their kind and useful remarks. Sedi Bartz was partially supported by a University of Massachusetts Lowell startup grant. Heinz Bauschke and Xianfu Wang were partially supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Hung Phan was partially supported by Autodesk, Inc. References [1] M. Agueh and G. Carlier, Barycenters in the Wasserstein Space, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 43 (2011), 904 -- 924. [2] S. Bartz and S. Reich, Abstract convex optimal antiderivatives, Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincare (C) Non Linear Analysis 29 (2012), 435 -- 454. 22 [3] S. Bartz and S. Reich, Optimal pricing for optimal transport, Set-Valued and Variational Analy- sis 22 (2014), 467 -- 481. [4] S. Bartz, H.H. Bauschke and X. Wang, The resolvent order: a unification of the orders by Zarantonello, by Loewner, and by Moreau, SIAM Journal on Optimization 27 (2017), 466 -- 477. [5] S. Bartz, H.H. Bauschke and X. Wang, A class of multi-marginal c-cyclically monotone sets with explicit c-splitting potentials, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 461 (2018), 333 -- 348. [6] H.H. Bauschke and P.L. Combettes, Convex Analysis and Monotone Operator Theory in Hilbert Spaces, 2nd edition, Springer, 2017. [7] M. Beiglb ock and C. Griessler, An optimality principle with applications in optimal transport, arXiv preprint, arXiv:1404.7054 (2014). [8] H. Brezis, Liquid crystals and energy estimates for S2-valued maps, Theory and Applications of Liquid Crystals (Minneapolis, Minn., 1985), The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applica- tions Volume 5, Springer, (1987), 31 -- 52. [9] G. Carlier, On a class of multidimensional optimal transportation problems, Journal of Convex Analysis 10 (2003), 517 -- 529. [10] G. Carlier and B. Nazaret, Optimal transportation for the determinant, ESAIM: Control, Opti- misation and Calculus of Variations 14 (2008), 678 -- 698. [11] W. Gangbo and R. McCann, The geometry of optimal transportation, Acta Mathematica 177 (1996), 113 -- 161. [12] W. Gangbo and A. Swiech, Optimal maps for the multidimensional Monge-Kantorovich problem, Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 51 (1998), 23 -- 45. [13] N. Ghoussoub and B. Maurey, Remarks on multi-marginal symmetric Monge-Kantorovich problems, Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems 34 (2013), 1465 -- 1480. [14] N. Ghoussoub and A. Moameni, Symmetric Monge-Kantorovich problems and polar decom- positions of vector fields, Geometric and Functional Analysis 24 (2014), 1129 -- 1166. [15] C. Griessler, c-cyclical monotonicity as a sufficient criterion for optimality in the multi- marginal Monge-Kantorovich problem, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 146 (2018), 4735 -- 4740. [16] H.G. Kellerer, Duality theorems for marginal problems, Zeitschrift f ur Wahrscheinlichkeitstheo- rie und Verwandte Gebiete 67 (1984), 399 -- 432. [17] Y.-H. Kim and B. Pass, A general condition for Monge solutions in the multi-marginal optimal transport problem, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 46 (2014), 1538 -- 1550. [18] M. Knott and C.S. Smith, On a generalization of cyclic monotonicity and distances among random vectors, Linear Algebra and its Applications 199 (1994), 363 -- 371. 23 [19] S. Di Marino, L. De Pascale and M. Colombo, Multimarginal optimal transport maps for 1- dimensional repulsive costs, Canadian Journal of Mathematics 67 (2015), 350 -- 368. [20] S. Di Marino, A. Gerolin and L. Nenna, Optimal transportation theory with repulsive costs, Topological Optimization and Optimal Transport: In the Applied Sciences 9 (2017), 204 -- 256. [21] B. Pass, On the local structure of optimal measures in the multi-marginal optimal transporta- tion problem, Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations 43 (2012), 529 -- 536. [22] B. Pass, Multi-marginal optimal transport: theory and applications, ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 49 (2015), 1771 -- 1790. [23] J.-C. Rochet, A necessary and sufficient condition for rationalizability in a quasilinear context, Journal of Mathematical Economics 16 (1987), 191 -- 200. [24] R.T. Rockafellar, Characterization of the subdifferentials of convex functions, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 17 (1966), 497 -- 510. [25] R.T. Rockafellar and R.J-B. Wets, Variational Analysis, Springer, 1998. [26] L. R uschendorf, On c-optimal random variables, Statistics and Probability Letters 27 (1996), 267 -- 270. [27] L. R uschendorf and L. Uckelmann, On Optimal multivariate couplings, chapter in Distribu- tions with given Marginals and Moment Problems, Springer (1997), 261 -- 273. [28] F. Santambrogio, Optimal Transport for Applied Mathematicians, Birkhauser, 2015. [29] V. Soloviov, Duality for nonconvex optimization and its applications, Analysis Mathematica 19 (1993), 297 -- 315. [30] C. Villani, Optimal Transport: Old and New, Springer, 2009. 24
1608.07516	2	1608	2017-03-02T09:10:41	Local characterizations for the matrix monotonicity and convexity of fixed order	[ "math.FA" ]	We establish local characterizations of matrix monotonicity and convexity of fixed order by giving integral representations connecting the Loewner and Kraus matrices, previously known to characterize these properties, to respective Hankel matrices. Our results are new already in the general case of matrix convexity and our approach significantly simplifies the corresponding work on matrix monotonicity. We also obtain an extension of the original characterization for matrix convexity by Kraus, and tighten the relationship between monotonicity and convexity.	math.FA	math	LOCAL CHARACTERIZATIONS FOR THE MATRIX MONOTONICITY AND CONVEXITY OF FIXED ORDER OTTE HEIN AVAARA Abstract. We establish local characterizations of matrix monotonicity and convexity of fixed order by giving integral representations connecting the Loewner and Kraus matrices, previously known to characterize these properties, to respective Hankel matrices. Our results are new already in the general case of matrix convexity and our approach significantly simplifies the corresponding work on matrix monotonicity. We also obtain an extension of the original char- acterization for matrix convexity by Kraus, and tighten the relationship between monotonicity and convexity. 1. Introduction For an open interval (a, b), we say that f : (a, b) → R is matrix monotone (increasing) of order n (or n-monotone) if for any n × n Hermitian matrices A, B with spectra in (a, b) and A ≤ B we have f (A) ≤ f (B).1 Analogously, f : (a, b) → R is matrix convex of order n (or n-convex) if for any n × n Hermitian matrices A, B with spectra in (a, b) and λ ∈ [0, 1] we have f (λA + (1 − λ)B) ≤ λf (A) + (1 − λ)f (B). Ever since Charles Loewner (then known as Karl Lowner) introduced matrix monotone functions in 1934 [12], this class has been characterized in various ways. See for example [2, 8] for survey and recent progress. The famous theorem established in the Loewner's paper states that a function that is matrix monotone of all orders on an interval, extends to upper half-plane as a Pick- Nevanlinna function: an analytic function with non-negative imaginary part. Loewner's proof of this jewel is based on an important characterization in terms of divided differences here denoted by [·, ·, . . . , ·]f . Recall that divided differences are defined recursively by [λ]f = f (λ) and for distinct λ1, λ2, . . . , λn ∈ (a, b), [λ1, λ2, . . . , λn]f = [λ1, λ2, . . . , λn−1]f − [λ2, λ3, . . . , λn]f λ1 − λn . If f ∈ C n−1(a, b), divided difference has continuous extension to all tuples of not necessarily distinct n numbers on the interval [4]. Theorem 1 (Loewner). A function f : (a, b) → R is n-monotone (for n ≥ 2) if and only if f ∈ C1(a, b) and the Loewner matrix (2) L = ([λi, λj]f )1≤i,j≤n is positive2 for any tuple of numbers (λi)n i=1 on the same interval. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 26A48; Secondary 26A51, 47A63. Key words and phrases. Matrix monotone functions, Matrix convex functions. 1As usual, the space of Hermitian matrices is equipped with the Loewner order, i.e. the partial order induced by the convex cone of positive semi-definite matrices. 2Here and in the following, positivity of matrix means that it is positive semi-definite. 1 2 OTTE HEIN AVAARA Similarly Kraus, a student of Loewner introduced the matrix convexity in [11] and established similar characterization: Theorem 3 (Kraus). A function f : (a, b) → R is n-convex (for n ≥ 2) if and only if f ∈ C2(a, b) and the Kraus matrix (4) Kr = ([λi, λj , λ0]f )1≤i,j≤n is positive for any tuple of numbers (λi)n i=1 ∈ (a, b)n and λ0 ∈ (λi)n i=1. A different, local characterization for monotonicity was given by another student of Loewner, Dobsch in [5]: Theorem 5 (Dobsch, Donoghue). A C2n−1 function f : (a, b) → R is n-monotone if and only if the Hankel matrix (6) is positive for any t ∈ (a, b). M (t) = (cid:18) f (i+j−1)(t) (i + j − 1)!(cid:19)1≤i,j≤n By employing standard regularization techniques, one could further extend this to merely C2n−3 functions with convex derivative of order (2n−3), a class of functions for which the property makes sense for almost every t, to obtain the complete local characterization of the matrix monotonicity of fixed order. The result has a striking consequence: n-monotonicity is a local property, meaning that if function has it in two overlapping intervals, it has it for their union. This property is actually used in the proof, and although it was noted by Loewner to be easy ([12, p. 212, Theorem 5.6]), no rigorous proof was given until 40 years later in the monograph of Donoghue [6], and the proof is rather long when n > 2. The main results of this paper establish novel integral representations connecting Hankel ma- trices to the Loewner and Kraus matrices. These identities give rise to a new simple proof for Theorem 5, and more importantly, settle the conjecture in [9] (see also [10]) by establishing similar local characterization for the matrix convex functions. Theorem 7. A C2n function f : (a, b) → R is n-convex if and only if the Hankel matrix (8) is positive for any t ∈ (a, b). K(t) = (cid:18) f (i+j)(t) (i + j)! (cid:19)1≤i,j≤n Again, with regularizations we may extend this to give a complete local description of matrix convexity of fixed order, which as an immediate corollary gives the expected local property theorem for convexity. Corollary 9. For any positive integer n, n-convexity is a local property. As another byproduct, we obtain a slight improvement to Theorem 3, where λ0 may now vary freely. This also implies through divided differences a rather direct connection between matrix monotonicity and convexity. LOCAL CHARACTERIZATIONS FOR THE MATRIX MONOTONICITY AND CONVEXITY 3 2. Matrix monotone functions 2.1. Integral representation. In this section we construct the integral representations for the Loewner matrices alluded to in the introduction. Let n ≥ 2, (a, b) be an interval, and Λ = (λi)n i=1 ∈ (a, b)n be an arbitrary sequence of distinct points in (a, b). In the following the Loewner and respective Hankel matrices, introduced in the introduction in (2) and (6), for sufficiently smooth f : (a, b) → R and λ0 ∈ (a, b) are denoted by L(Λ, f ) and Mn(t, f ) respectively. Recall that as one easily verifies with Cauchy's integral formula and induction, the divided differences can be written as (10) [λ1, λ2, . . . , λn]f = for analytic f and suitable closed curve γ.3 1 2πi Zγ f (z) (z − λ1) · · · (z − λn) dz, Divided differences also admit a natural generalization for the mean value theorem [4]. Namely, for an open interval (a, b), f ∈ C n−1(a, b) and any tuple of (not necessarily distinct) real numbers Λ = (λi)n i=1 ∈ (a, b)n we have (11) for some ξ ∈ [min(Λ), max(Λ)]. [λ1, λ2, . . . , λn]f = f (n−1)(ξ) (n − 1)! We shall also need the very basic properties of regularizations. Namely for even, non-negative and smooth function φ supported on [−1, 1] and with integral 1, and integrable f : (a, b) → R, regularization (or ε-regularization, to be precise) of f , denoted by fε : (a + ε, b − ε) → R is the convolution fε(x) = Z ∞ −∞ f (x − εy)φ(y)dy. This is a smooth function, and for any continuity point x ∈ (a, b) of f we clearly have limε→0 fε(x) = f (x). Note that regularizations of matrix monotone (convex) functions are obviously matrix mono- tone (convex) functions on a slightly smaller interval. Define the functions gj for 1 ≤ j ≤ n by (12) gj,Λ(t, y) = Yk6=j (1 + y(t − λk)). Define also the matrix C(t) := C(t, Λ) by setting Ci,j to be the coefficient of yi−1 in the polynomial gj(t, y), i.e. we have (13) gj(t, y) = C1,j(t) + C2,j(t)y + . . . + Cn,j(t)yn−1. Define polynomial pΛ with pΛ(t) := Qn setting hz(x) = (z − x)−1. i=1(t − λi). Also for any z ∈ C define function hz by Lemma 14. For Λ = (λi)n i=1 as before, t ∈ R, and z ∈ C distinct from t, we have C T (t, Λ) Mn (t, hz) C (t, Λ) = L(Λ, hz) pΛ(z)2 (z − t)2n . 3For our purposes, it is enough to consider f analytic in an open half-plane and γ a circle in this half-plane enclosing the points λ1, λ2, . . . , λn. 4 OTTE HEIN AVAARA Proof. Write D = C T (t, Λ)Mn(t, hz)C(t, Λ). Note that as we have h(k) may write Mn(t, hz) = 1 (z−t)2 vvT with v = (1, 1 (z−t)2 , . . . , z−t , 1 1 (z−t)n−1 )T . Thus z (t)/k! = (z − t)−k−1, we D = 1 (z − t)2 (C(t, Λ)T v)(C(t, Λ)T v)T . One also easily sees that (C(t, Λ)T v)i = gi(t, 1 Di,j = gi(t, 1 z−t )gj(t, 1 (z − t)2 z−t ) = 1 (z − t)2 Yk6=i z−t ) so that finally (cid:18)1 + z − t (cid:19) Yk6=j t − λk (cid:18)1 + t − λk z − t (cid:19) = [λi, λj ]hz pΛ(z)2 (z − t)2n . (cid:3) Consider now the function S(z, t) := SΛ(z, t) := − (z − t)2n−2 pΛ(z)2 . As S(z, t) decays as z−2, with the residue theorem we see that for suitable closed curve γ we have 0 = 1 2πi Zγ S(z, t)dz = n Xi=1 Res z=λi S(z, t). Defining now the weight functions Ii := Ii,Λ for 1 ≤ i ≤ n by and Ii(t) = Res z=λi S(z, t), I(t) := IΛ(t) := X1≤i≤n λi<t Ii(t), we see by simple computation that Ii's are polynomials such that Ii(λi) = 0 and I is hence piecewise polynomial, continuous function supported on [min(Λ), max(Λ)]. Note that with Cauchy's integral formula we can also write I in the form I(t) = whenever t /∈ Λ. 1 2πi Z t+i∞ t−i∞ S(z, t)dz, Remark 15. The weight function I and the analogous weight J to be introduced in the convex setting are examples of weights called Peano kernels or B-splines. The properties of these kernels are discussed for example in [3]. To stay self-contained, we give proofs of the crucial properties used in our discussion. Lemma 16. For Λ = (λi)n i=1 as before and z ∈ C outside the interval [min(Λ), max(Λ)], we have (2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ I(t) (z − t)2n dt = 1 pΛ(z)2 . LOCAL CHARACTERIZATIONS FOR THE MATRIX MONOTONICITY AND CONVEXITY 5 Proof. We simply compute that (2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ I(t) (z − t)2n dt = (2n − 1) = −(2n − 1) (z − t)2n dt n λi Ii(t) Z ∞ w=λiZ ∞ Res Xi=1 Xi=1 λi n (w − t)2n−2 pΛ(w)2(z − t)2n dt = = − n Xi=1 Xi=1 n (1 − z−w z−λi )2n−1 − 1 (w − z)pΛ(w)2 Res w=λi Res w=λi 1 (w − z)pΛ(w)2 = Res w=z 1 (w − z)pΛ(w)2 − 1 2πi Zγ dw (w − z)pΛ(w)2 = 1 pΛ(z)2 , where we used the residue theorem for the function (w 7→ (w − z)−1pΛ(w)−2). (cid:3) We are then ready to formulate and prove the integral representation of the Loewner matrix. Theorem 17. For f ∈ C2n−1(a, b) and Λ as before, we have L(Λ, f ) = (2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ C T (t, Λ)Mn(t, f )C(t, Λ)IΛ(t)dt. Proof. For entire f , by Lemmas 14, 16, Fubini and (10) we have (2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ C T (t)Mn(t, f )C(t)I(t)dt = = = 1 1 −∞ 2πi Zγ (cid:18)(2n − 1)Z ∞ 2πi Zγ 2πi Zγ L(Λ, hz)f (z)dz 1 L(Λ, hz)(cid:18)(2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ C T (t)Mn(t, hz)C(t)I(t)dt(cid:19) f (z)dz pΛ(z)2 (z − t)2n I(t)dt(cid:19) f (z)dz = L(Λ, f ). The general case now follows by uniformly approximating f and its derivatives up to order (2n − 1) by entire functions on [min(Λ), max(Λ)], say, by polynomials with a suitable application of Weierstrass approximation theorem. (cid:3) 2.2. Positivity of the weight. In this section we prove the non-negativity of the weight function I introduced in the previous section. We begin with a simple lemma. Lemma 18. Let n be a positive integer and numbers Z = (ζi)n Qn i=1(ζi − t)−1, then for any non-negative integer k and t < 0 we have f (k)(t) ≥ 0. i=1 non-negative. Now if f (t) = Proof. The case of n = 1 is trivial; the general case follows now immediately from the product rule. (cid:3) 6 OTTE HEIN AVAARA Lemma 19. For Λ as before, IΛ is non-negative. Proof. We may clearly assume that Λ is strictly increasing. When checking the non-negativity at a point t, we may without loss of generality assume that t = 0 ∈ [λ1, λn]. Also by continuity we may further assume that all the λi's are non-zero. We are left to investigate 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ S(z, 0)dz = − 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ z2n−2dz pΛ(z)2 . Making the change of variable w = 1 z , we are to check that 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ dw pZ(w)2 ≥ 0, Let k (< n) be the number of the negative ζi's and denote Z− = (ζi)k i=1. Note that if we further where Z = 1 Λ , that is ζi = 1 write f (t) = (cid:0)Qi>k(t − ζi)(cid:1)−2 λi . 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ dw pZ(w)2 = , we have by suitable variant of (10) 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ f (w)dw pZ−(w)2 = [ζ1, ζ1, ζ2, ζ2, . . . , ζk, ζk]f , which is positive in the view of (11) and Lemma 18. (cid:3) 2.3. Characterizations for the matrix monotonicity. Proof of Theorem 5. The necessity of the condition can be found in [5]. For sufficiency note that by Theorem 17 we can write L(Λ) = (2n − 1)Z ∞ −∞ C T (t)M (t)C(t)I(t)dt Now if M (t) ≥ 0 for any t ∈ (a, b), also C T (t)M (t)C(t) ≥ 0 for any t ∈ (a, b). It follows from Lemma 19 that the integrand is a positive matrix, so indeed, L is positive as an integral of positive matrices. But now f is n-monotone by Theorem 1. (cid:3) Putting everything together we obtain complete characterizations of the class of n-monotone functions. Theorem 20 (Loewner, Dobsch, Donoghue). Let n ≥ 2, and (a, b) be an open interval. Now for f : (a, b) → R the following are equivalent (i) f is n-monotone. (ii) f ∈ C1(a, b) and the Loewner matrix L(Λ, f ) is positive for any tuple Λ ∈ (a, b)n. (iii) f ∈ C2n−3(a, b), f (2n−3) is convex, and the Hankel matrix Mn(t, f ), which makes sense almost everywhere, is positive for almost every t ∈ (a, b). Proof. As noted before, (i) ⇔ (ii) was proven in the original paper of Loewner [12]. For C2n−1 functions, (i) ⇔ (iii) is Theorem 5, and for merely C2n−3 functions the claim follows from standard regularization procedure, details of which can be found in [6]. For an alternate approach to the latter equivalence, see again [6]. (cid:3) Corollary 21. For any positive integer n, n-monotonicity is a local property. LOCAL CHARACTERIZATIONS FOR THE MATRIX MONOTONICITY AND CONVEXITY 7 3. Matrix convex functions 3.1. Integral representation. In this section we construct the integral representations for the Kraus matrices alluded to in the introduction. Again, let n ≥ 2, (a, b) be an interval, and Λ = (λi)n i=1 ∈ (a, b)n be an arbitrary sequence of distinct points in (a, b). In the following the Kraus and the respective Hankel matrices, introduced in the introduction, for sufficiently smooth f : (a, b) → R and λ0 ∈ (a, b) are denoted by Kr(λ0, Λ, f ) and Kn(t, f ), respectively. The integral representation for the Kraus matrix is similar to that of the Loewner matrix. Fix again n ≥ 2, open interval (a, b) and Λ = (λi)n i=1 ∈ (a, b)n, an arbitrary sequence of distinct points on (a, b). For fixed λ0 ∈ (a, b) the weights Ji,λ0 := Ji,λ0,Λ, now for 0 ≤ i ≤ n, are defined analogously as the residues at λi's of and Tλ0(z, t) := Tλ0,Λ(z, t) := − (z − t)2n−1 (z − λ0)pΛ(z)2 Jλ0 (t) := Jλ0,Λ(t) := X0≤i≤n λi<t Ji,λ0 (t). Lemma 22. For Λ = (λi)n we have i=1, as before, λ0 ∈ (a, b) and z ∈ C outside the interval [min(Λ), max(Λ)], 2nZ ∞ −∞ Jλ0 (t) (z − t)2n+1 dt = 1 (z − λ0)pΛ(z)2 . Proof. Proof is almost identical to that of Lemma 16; we just perform the residue trick with the map (w 7→ (w − z)−1(w − λ0)−1pΛ(w)−2) instead. (cid:3) Theorem 23. For f ∈ C2n(a, b), Λ as before, and λ0 ∈ (a, b), we have Kr(λ0, Λ, f ) = 2nZ ∞ C T (t, Λ)Kn(t, f )C(t, Λ)Jλ0 ,Λ(t)dt. Proof. After noting that Kn(t, hz) = 1 of Theorem 17, using Lemma 22 instead of Lemma 16. −∞ z−t Mn(t, hz), the calculation is carried out as in the proof (cid:3) 3.2. Positivity of the weight. Lemma 24. For Λ = (λi)n i=1 as before and λ0 ∈ (a, b), Jλ0,Λ is non-negative. Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 19, we can assume that t = 0 is our point of inspection and that Λ is strictly increasing. We also make the same change of variables Z = 1 Λ . Note that we may well assume that ζ0 > 0, since the other case would follow by reflecting the variables, that is considering the sequence −Z and −λ0, instead. Now the inequality is reduced to an equivalent form 1 2πi Z i∞ −i∞ dw (ζ0 − w)pZ (w)2 ≥ 0. But as in the proof of Lemma 19, the left hand side can be again written as [ζ1, ζ1, ζ2, ζ2, . . . , ζk, ζk]f where f (t) = (ζ0 − t)−1(cid:0)Qi>k(t − ζi)(cid:1)−2 and k is the number of negative ζi's. (cid:3) 8 OTTE HEIN AVAARA 3.3. Characterizations for the matrix convexity. Proof of Theorem 7. The necessity of the condition was proven in [9]. For the other direction, by Lemma 23 we can write Kr(λ, Λ) = 2nZ ∞ −∞ C T (t)K(t)C(t)Jλ0 (t)dt. But as in the proof of Theorem 5, we see now that the Kraus matrix is an integral of positive matrices, hence positive, and Theorem 3 finishes the claim. (cid:3) The next theorem finally completes the characterization of n-convex functions. The original characterization of Kraus is also improved. Theorem 25. Let n ≥ 2, and (a, b) be an open interval. Now for f : (a, b) → R the following are equivalent (i) f is n-convex. (ii) f ∈ C2(a, b) and the Kraus matrix Kr(λ0, Λ, f ) is positive for any tuple Λ ∈ (a, b)n and λ0 ∈ Λ. (iii) f ∈ C2(a, b) and the Kraus matrix Kr(λ0, Λ, f ) is positive for any tuple Λ ∈ (a, b)n and λ0 ∈ (a, b). (iv) f ∈ C2n−2(a, b), f (2n−2) is convex, and the Hankel matrix Kn(t, f ), which makes sense almost everywhere, is positive for almost every t ∈ (a, b). Proof. (i) ⇔ (ii) was proven in [11]. For C2n functions (i) ⇔ (iv) is Theorem 7; the proof of Theorem 7 also gives (iv) ⇒ (iii) in this case. For merely C2n−2 functions these claims follow from regularization techniques as in the monotone case. (iii) ⇒ (ii) is trivial. (cid:3) We also get an interesting corollary connecting the monotonicity to convexity, extending a result in [1]. Corollary 26. Let n ≥ 2, and (a, b) be an open interval. If f : (a, b) → R is n-convex, then for any λ0 ∈ (a, b) the function g = (x 7→ [x, λ0]f ) is n-monotone. Proof. Simply note that L(Λ, g) = Kr(λ0, Λ, f ). (cid:3) Remark 27. The ideas introduced in the paper can be generalized to characterize more general class of functions called matrix k-tone functions, introduced in [7]. A paper discussing related questions in this more general setting is in preparation. 4. Acknowledgements We thank the open-source mathematical software Sage [13] for invaluable support in discovering the main identities of this paper. We are also truly grateful to O. Hirviniemi, J. Junnila and E. Saksman, and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the earlier versions of the manuscript. References [1] J. Bendat and S. Sherman. Monotone and convex operator functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 79:58–71, 1955. [2] P. Chansangiam. A survey on operator monotonicity, operator convexity, and operator means. Int. J. Anal., pages Art. ID 649839, 8, 2015. [3] C. de Boor. A practical guide to splines, volume 27 of Applied Mathematical Sciences. Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1978. LOCAL CHARACTERIZATIONS FOR THE MATRIX MONOTONICITY AND CONVEXITY 9 [4] C. de Boor. Divided differences. Surv. Approx. Theory, 1:46–69, 2005. [5] O. Dobsch. Matrixfunktionen beschrankter Schwankung. Math. Z., 43(1):353–388, 1938. [6] W. F. Donoghue, Jr. Monotone matrix functions and analytic continuation. Springer-Verlag, New York- Heidelberg, 1974. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 207. [7] U. Franz, F. Hiai, and E. Ricard. Higher order extension of Lowner's theory: operator k-tone functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 366(6):3043–3074, 2014. [8] F. Hansen. The fast track to Lowner's theorem. Linear Algebra Appl., 438(11):4557–4571, 2013. [9] F. Hansen and J. Tomiyama. Differential analysis of matrix convex functions. Linear Algebra Appl., 420(1):102– 116, 2007. [10] F. Hansen and J. Tomiyama. Differential analysis of matrix convex functions. II. JIPAM. J. Inequal. Pure Appl. Math., 10(2):Article 32, 5, 2009. [11] F. Kraus. Uber konvexe Matrixfunktionen. Math. Z., 41(1):18–42, 1936. [12] K. Lowner. Uber monotone Matrixfunktionen. Math. Z., 38(1):177–216, 1934. [13] The Sage Developers. SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 7.1), 2016. http://www.sagemath.org. University of Helsinki, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, P.O. Box 68 (Gustaf Hallstromin katu 2b), FI-00014 University of Helsinki E-mail address: [email protected]
1607.01666	3	1607	2016-11-10T09:48:50	$L^p$-$L^q$ off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein--Uhlenbeck semigroup: some positive and negative results	[ "math.FA", "math.CA" ]	We investigate $L^p(\gamma)$-$L^q(\gamma)$ off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup $(e^{tL})_{t > 0}$. For sufficiently large $t$ (quantified in terms of $p$ and $q$) these estimates hold in an unrestricted sense, while for sufficiently small $t$ they fail when restricted to maximal admissible balls and sufficiently small annuli. Our counterexample uses Mehler kernel estimates.	math.FA	math	Submitted to the Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society doi:10.1017/S . . . Lp-Lq OFF-DIAGONAL ESTIMATES FOR THE ORNSTEIN–UHLENBECK SEMIGROUP: SOME POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE RESULTS ALEX AMENTA ✉ and JONAS TEUWEN Abstract We investigate Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup (etL)t>0. For sufficiently large t (quantified in terms of p and q) these estimates hold in an unrestricted sense, while for sufficiently small t they fail when restricted to maximal admissible balls and sufficiently small annuli. Our counterexample uses Mehler kernel estimates. 2010 Mathematics subject classification: primary 47D06; secondary 43A99. Keywords and phrases: Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup, off-diagonal estimates, Mehler kernel. Consider the Gaussian measure 1. Introduction dγ(x) := π−n/2e−x2 dx (1.1) on the Euclidean space Rn, where n ≥ 1. Naturally associated with this measure space is the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck operator 1 2 ∆ − hx, ∇i = − ∇∗∇, L := 1 2 where ∇∗ is the adjoint of the gradient operator ∇ with respect to the Gaussian measure. This operator generates a heat semigroup (etL)t>0 on L2(γ) = L2(Rn, γ), called the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup, with an explicit kernel: for all u ∈ L2(γ) and all x ∈ Rn we have Mt(x, y)u(y) dγ(y), etLu(x) = ZRn (1 − e−2t)n/2 exp(cid:18)−e−t x − y2 1 1 − e−2t(cid:19) exp(cid:18)2e−t hx, yi 1 + e−t(cid:19) where Mt(x, y) = (1.2) The first author acknowledges financial support from the Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP120103692 and the ANR project "Harmonic analysis at its boundaries" ANR-12-BS01-0013. The second author acknowledges partial financial support from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) by the NWO-VICI grant 639.033.604. 2 A. Amenta and J. Teuwen is the Mehler kernel. If we equip Rn with the Euclidean distance and the Gaussian measure, and if we consider operators associated with the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck op- erator, we find ourselves within the realm of Gaussian harmonic analysis: here, the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck operator takes the place of the Laplace operator ∆.1 For a deeper introduction to Gaussian harmonic analysis see the review of Sjögren [10] and the introduction of [11]. In this article we investigate whether the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup satisfies Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates: that is, estimates of (or similar to) the form (cid:18)ZF 1/q etL1E f q dγ(cid:19) . t−θ exp(cid:16)−c dist(E, F)2 t (cid:17)(cid:18)ZE 1/p f p dγ(cid:19) , (1.3) f ∈ Lp(γ), and for some parameters c > 0 and θ ≥ 0, where 1 ≤ p < q ≤ ∞, for some class of testing sets E, F ⊂ X. Often such estimates hold whenever E and F are Borel, but in applications we generally only need E to be a ball and F to be an annulus associated with E. Such estimates serve as a replacement for pointwise kernel estimates in the harmonic analysis of operators whose heat semigroups have rough kernels, or no kernels at all, most notably in the solution to the Kato square root problem [2] (see also [4]). Even though the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup has a smooth kernel, it would be useful to show that it satisfies some form of off- diagonal estimates, as this would suggest potential generalisation to perturbations of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck operator, whose heat semigroups need not have nice kernels. Various notions of off-diagonal estimates, including (1.3), have been considered by Auscher and Martell [3]. However, they only consider doubling metric measure spaces, ruling out the non-doubling Gaussian measure. Mauceri and Meda [7] observed that γ is doubling when restricted to admissible balls, in the sense that γ(B(x, 2r)) . γ(B(x, r)) when r ≤ min(1, x−1). Therefore it is reasonable to expect that the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup may satisfy some form of Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off- diagonal estimates if we restrict the testing sets E, F to admissible balls and sufficiently small annuli. Here we demonstrate both the success and failure of off-diagonal estimates of the form (1.3), as a first step in the search for the 'right' off-diagonal estimates. First we give a simple positive result (Theorem 2.3): for p ∈ (1, 2), and for t sufficiently large (depending on p), (1.3) is satisfied for all Borel E, F ⊂ Rn. This is proven by interpolating between L2(γ)–L2(γ) Davies–Gaffney-type estimates and Nelson's Lp(γ)–L2(γ) hypercontractivity. We follow with a negative result (Theorem 3.1): for 1 ≤ p < q < ∞ and for t sufficiently small (again depending on p and q), (1.3) fails when E is a 'maximal' admissible ball B(cB, cB−1) and when F is a sufficiently small annulus Ck(B), in the sense that the implicit constant in (1.3) must blow up exponentially in cB. This is shown by direct estimates of the Mehler kernel. 1 The multiplicative factor 1/2, which is not present in the usual definition of the Laplacian, arises naturally from the probabilistic interpretation of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck operator. Off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup 3 Notation Throughout the article we will work in finite dimension n ≥ 1. We will write Lp(γ) = Lp(Rn, γ). Every ball B ⊂ Rn is of the form B = B(cB, rB) = {x ∈ Rn : x − cB < rB} for some unique centre cB ∈ Rn and radius rB > 0. For each ball B and each scalar λ > 0 we define the expansion λB = λB(cB, rB) := B(cB, λrB), and we define annuli (Ck(B))k∈N by For two sets E, F ⊂ Rn we write 2B k = 0, 2k+1B \ 2kB k ≥ 1. Ck(B) :=  dist(E, F) := inf{x − y : x ∈ E, y ∈ F}. For two non-negative numbers A and B, we write A .a1,a2,... B to mean that A ≤ CB, where C is a positive constant depending on the quantities a1, a2, . . .. This constant will generally change from line to line. 2. A positive result The Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup satisfies the following 'Davies–Gaffney-type' L2(γ)–L2(γ) off-diagonal estimates. These appear in [13, Example 6.1], where they are attributed to Alan McIntosh. Theorem 2.1 (McIntosh). There exists a constant C > 0 such that for all Borel subsets E, F of Rn and all u ∈ L2(γ), k1FetL(1Eu)kL2(γ) ≤ C t dist(E, F) dist(E, F)2 2t exp(cid:16)− (cid:17)k1EukL2(γ). Furthermore, Nelson [8] established the following hypercontractive behaviour of the semigroup.1 Theorem 2.2 (Nelson). Let t > 0 and p ∈ (1 + e−2t, 2]. Then etL is a contraction from Lp(γ) to L2(γ). Note that p > 1 + e−2t if and only if t > 1 p−1. Thus the hypercontractive behaviour of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup is much more delicate than that of the usual heat semigroup et∆ on Rn, which is a contraction from Lp(Rn) into Lq(Rn) for all 1 ≤ p ≤ q ≤ ∞ and all t > 0. 2 log 1 As indicated in the proof of [1, Proposition 3.2], one can interpolate between Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 to deduce certain Lp(γ)-L2(γ) off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup. 1 This is done only for n = 1 in this reference, and a full proof for general n is given in Nelson's seminal 1973 paper [9]. These papers won him the 1995 Steele prize. 4 A. Amenta and J. Teuwen Theorem 2.3. Suppose that E, F are Borel subsets of Rn. Let t > 0 and p ∈ (1+e−2t, 2]. Then for all u ∈ Lp(γ), k1FetL(1Eu)kL2(γ) ≤ (cid:18) Ct dist(E, F) dist(E, F)2 2t exp(cid:16)− 1−δ(p,t) (cid:17)(cid:19) k1EukLp(γ), where C is the constant from Theorem 2.1 and where Proof. Write Theorem 2.1 says that δ(p, t) := 1 2 − 1 p 2 − 1 1 1+e−2t ∈ [0, 1). CM := Ct dist(E, F) exp(cid:16) dist(E, F)2 2t (cid:17). ketLkL2(γ,E)→L2(γ,F) ≤ CM. For all p0 ∈ (1 + e−2t, p) we have ketLkLp0 (γ,E)→L2(γ,F) ≤ ketLkLp0 (γ)→L2(γ) ≤ 1 by Theorem 2.2. Therefore by the Riesz–Thorin theorem we get ketLkLp(γ,E)→Lp(γ,F) ≤ Cθ(p0) M , where p−1 = (1 − θ(p0))/p0 + θ(p0)/2, or equivalently θ(p0) = 1 p − 1 p0 1 2 − 1 p0 = 1 − 1 2 − 1 p 1 2 − 1 p0 . Taking the limit as p0 → 1 + e−2t gives ketLkLp(γ,E)→Lp(γ,F) ≤ C1−δ(p,t) M and completes the proof. (cid:3) Remark 2.4. For 1 < p < q < ∞, a Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) version of Theorem 2.3 could be proven by first establishing Lq(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates-which may be obtained by interpolating between boundedness on Lq(γ) and the Davies–Gaffney type estimates-and then arguing by the Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) version of Nelson's theorem. This positive result does not rule out the possibility of some restricted Lp(γ)–L2(γ) off-diagonal estimates for p ≤ 1 + e−2t. In the next section we show one way in which these can fail. Off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup 5 3. Lower bounds and negative results In this section we show that the Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates of (1.3) are not satisfied for admissible balls and small annuli when t is sufficiently small (depending on p and q). More precisely, we show that (1.3) fails when E is a maximal admissible ball B, i.e. a ball for which rB = min(1, cB−1), and F is an annulus Ck(B) with k sufficiently small. These sets typically appear in applications of off-diagonal estimates. Theorem 3.1. Suppose that 1 ≤ p < q < ∞, and that 1 2 or equivalently that − p q(cid:19), et + 1 > 1 −(cid:18) 1 p − 1 t < log 1 + ( 1 q) q)!. p − 1 1 − ( 1 (3.1) Then the off-diagonal estimates (1.3) do not hold for the class of testing sets {(E, F) : E = B(cB, cB−1), F = Ck(B), 2k ≤ cB}. q ∈ (0, 1), so we always obtain some range of t for which the off- Note that 1 p − 1 diagonal estimates (1.3) fail. Let us compare Theorems 3.1 and 2.3. Having fixed p ∈ (1, 2), we get failure of Lp(γ)–L2(γ) off-diagonal estimates for maximal admissible balls and small annuli for p−1 the off-diagonal estimates hold for 2 log 1 etL when t < log(cid:18) 1+( 1 1−( 1 p − 1 2 ) p − 1 2 )(cid:19), and when t > 1 all Borel sets. We do not know what happens for the remaining values of t. To prove Theorem 3.1 we rely on the following lower bound. Lemma 3.2. Suppose k ≥ 1 is a natural number, 1 < q < ∞, and let B be a maximal admissible ball with cB ≥ 2k. Then 1/q (etL1B)(y)q dγ(y)(cid:19) q ) exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) 2 &k,n,t cB−n(1+ 1 (cid:18)ZCk(B) q(cid:19)(cid:19). et + 1 − 1 − 1 Proof of Lemma 3.2. Suppose x ∈ B and y ∈ C j(B). We argue by computing a lower bound for the Mehler kernel Mt(x, y) as given in (1.2). First we focus on the factor involving the inner product hx, yi, where x = (x1, x2, . . . , xn) and y = (y1, y2, . . . , yn). By symmetry we may assume that cB = cBe1. Using rB = cB−1, we get that x1y1 ≥ (cB − rB)(cB − 2k+1rB) ≥ cB2 + O(1), where we use the big-O notation O(1) to mean that x1y1 − cB2 is bounded as cB → ∞. If n ≥ 2, then by using xiyi = O(1) for i ≥ 2 we get that evidently this estimate remains true when n = 1. hx, yi ≥ cB2 + O(1); 6 A. Amenta and J. Teuwen Using the Mehler kernel representation of etL, for all y ∈ Ck(B) we thus have etL1B(y) &n,t ZB exp(cid:18)−e−t x − y2 1 − e−2t(cid:19) exp(cid:18) 2cB2 et + 1(cid:19) dγ(x). Since x − y < 2k+1rB ≤ 2, using rB = cB−1 ≤ 2−k, this gives etL1B(y) &n,t exp(cid:18) 2cB2 et + 1(cid:19)γ(B) &n cB−n exp(cid:18) 2cB2 ≃ cB−n exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) et + 1 2 et + 1 − (cB + cB−1)2(cid:19) − 1(cid:19)(cid:19) (3.2) using a straightforward estimate on γ(B). Next, we estimate γ(Ck(B)) &n Ck(B)e−(cB+2k+1rB)2 ≃n 2knrn B exp(cid:18)−(cB2 + 2k+2cBrB + 2k+2r2 B)(cid:19) ≃k,n cB−ne−cB2 . Combining this with (3.2) gives (cid:18)ZCk(B) (etL1B(y))q dγ(y)(cid:19) 1/q &n,t cB−n exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) 2 &k,n cB−n(1+ 1 et + 1 q ) exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) 2 et + 1 − 1(cid:19)(cid:19)γ(Ck(B))1/q q(cid:19)(cid:19), − 1 − 1 as claimed. (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 3.1. We argue by contradiction. Suppose that etL satisfies the Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates (1.3) for some θ ≥ 0, and for (E, F) as stated. Fix a natural number k ≥ 1 and let B be a maximal admissible ball with cB > 2k. Lemma 3.2 and the off-diagonal estimates for E = B, F = Ck(B), and f = 1B then imply cB−n(1+ 1 et + 1 q ) exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) 2 .k,n,t,θ exp(cid:18)−c ≃ γ(B)1/p − 1 − 1 q(cid:19)(cid:19) (2k+1 − 1)2r2 B t (cid:19)γ(B)1/p for some c > 0. Since γ(B)1/p .n B1/pe− 1 p (cB−rB)2 ≃n cB−n/p exp(cid:18)− cB2 p (cid:19), Off-diagonal estimates for the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup 7 this implies exp(cid:18)cB2(cid:18) 2 et + 1 − 1 + 1 p − 1 q(cid:19)(cid:19) .k,n,t,θ cB n(1−( 1 p − 1 q )) . The left hand side grows exponentially in cB when (3.1) is satisfied. However, the right hand side only grows polynomially in cB. Thus we have a contradiction. (cid:3) Remark 3.3. By the same argument we can prove failure of Lp(γ)–Lq(γ) off-diagonal estimates for the derivatives (LmetL)m∈N of the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup, with the same conditions on (p, q, t) and the same class of testing sets (E, F). This relies on an identification of the kernel of LmetL, which has been done by the second author [12]. In this article we only considered off-diagonal estimates with respect to the Gaus- sian measure γ. In future work it would be very interesting to consider appropriate weighted measures, following in particular [5] and [6], in which (among many other things) it is shown that estimates of the form ketL f kL2(γ) . k f VtkL1(γ) hold, where Vt is a certain weight depending on t. Thus the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck semigroup does satisfy a form of 'ultracontractivity', but with the caveat that one must keep track of t-dependent weights. It seems that this has not yet been explored in the context of Gaussian harmonic analysis. Acknowledgements The authors thank Mikko Kemppainen, Jan van Neerven, and Pierre Portal for valuable discussions and encouragement on this topic. We also thank an anonymous referee for their suggested simplification of the proof of Lemma 3.2. References [1] [2] [3] P. Auscher. 'On necessary and sufficient conditions for Lp-estimates of Riesz transforms associ- ated to elliptic operators on Rn and related estimates'. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 186 (871) (2007), xviii+75. P. Auscher, S. Hofmann, M. Lacey, A. McIntosh, and P. Tchamitchian. 'The solution of the Kato square root problem for second order elliptic operators on Rn'. Ann. Math. 156 (2002), 633–654. P. Auscher and J. M. Martell. 'Weighted norm inequalities, off-diagonal estimates and elliptic operators part ii: Off-diagonal estimates on spaces of homogeneous type'. J. Evol. Equ. 7 (2) (2007), 265–316. [4] A. Axelsson, S. Keith, and A. McIntosh. 'Quadratic estimates and functional calculi of perturbed Dirac operators'. Invent. Math. 163 (2006), 455–497. [5] D. Bakry, F. Bolley, and I. Gentil. 'Dimension dependent hypercontractivity for Gaussian kernels'. Probab. Theory Related Fields 154 (3-4) (2012), 845–874. [6] D. Bakry, F. Bolley, I. Gentil, and P. Maheux. 'Weighted Nash inequalities'. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 28 (3) (2012), 879–906. [7] G. Mauceri and S. Meda. 'BMO and H1 for the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator'. J. Funct. Anal. 252 (1) (2007), 278–313. [8] E. Nelson. 'A quartic interaction in two dimensions'. In Mathematical Theory of Elementary Particles (Proc. Conf., Dedham, Mass., 1965) (M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1966), 69–73. 8 A. Amenta and J. Teuwen [9] E. Nelson. 'Construction of quantum fields from Markoff fields'. J. Funct. Anal. 12 (1973), [10] [11] [12] [13] 'Operators associated with the Hermite semigroup-a survey'. 97–112. P. Sjögren. In Proceedings of the conference dedicated to Professor Miguel de Guzmán (El Escorial, 1996), Volume 3 (1997), 813–823. J. Teuwen. 'A note on Gaussian maximal functions'. Indag. Math. 26 (2015), 106–112. J. Teuwen. 'On the integral kernels of derivatives of the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup'. Infin. Dimens. Anal. Quantum Probab. Relat. Top. 19 (2016), to appear. J. van Neerven and P. Portal. 'Finite speed of propagation and off-diagonal bounds for Ornstein– Uhlenbeck operators in infinite dimensions'. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 195 (6) (2016), 1889–1915. Alex Amenta, Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Delft University of Technology, P.O. Box 5031, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands e-mail: [email protected] Jonas Teuwen, Division of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands Department of Imaging Physics, Optics Research Group, Delft University of Tech- nology e-mail: [email protected]
1804.06983	1	1804	2018-04-19T02:50:58	Characterizations of Nonsmooth Robustly Quasiconvex Functions	[ "math.FA" ]	Two criteria for the robust quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions are established in terms of Fr\'echet subdifferentials in Asplund spaces.	math.FA	math	Characterizations of Nonsmooth Robustly Quasiconvex Functions Hoa T. Bui∗, Pham Duy Khanh†,Tran Thi Tu Trinh‡ April 20, 2018 Abstract Two criteria for the robust quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions are es- tablished in terms of Fr´echet subdifferentials in Asplund spaces. Keywords Quasiconvexity, robust quasiconvexity, quasimonotone, Fr´echet subdifferential, ap- proximate mean value theorem Mathematics Subject Classification (2010) 26A48, 26A51, 49J52, 49J53 1 Introduction The question of characterizing convexity and generalized convexity properties in terms of subdifferentials receives tremendous attention in optimization theory and variational analysis. For decades, there have been received many significant contributions devoted to this question such as [8, 9, 11, 14, 16] for convex functions, [2, 3, 4, 6, 12, 13] for quasiconvex functions and [6] for robustly quasiconvex functions. This paper follows this stream of research. Our aim is to establish the first-order characterizations for the robust quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions in Asplund spaces. First, some existing results re- garding to the properties of subdifferential operators of convex, quasiconvex functions are recalled in Section 2, where the definitions and some basic results are given as well. Besides, necessary and sufficient first-order conditions for a lower semicontinuous function to be quasiconvex are reconsidered. Those characterizations moreover could be used to characterize the Asplund property of the given space. Second, two criteria for the robust quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions in Asplund spaces are obtained by using Fr´echet subdifferentials in Section 3. Each criterion corresponds to each type of analogous conditions for quasicon- vexity. The first one is based on the zero and first order condition for quasiconvexity (see Theorem 2.2(b) in Section 2). It extends [6, Proposition 5.3] from finite dimensional spaces to Asplund spaces. Moreover, its proof also overcomes a glitch in the proof of the sufficient condition of [6, Proposition 5.3]. The second criterion is totally new. It is settled from the equivalence of the quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions and the quasimonotonicity of their subdifferential operators (see Theorem 2.2(c) in Section 2). ∗Centre for Informatics and Applied Optimization, Faculty of Science and Technology, Federation University Australia, POB 663, Ballarat, Vic, 3350, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] †Department of Mathematics, HCMC University of Pedagogy, 280 An Duong Vuong, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam and Cen- ter for Mathematical Modeling, Universidad de Chile, Beauchef 851, Edificio Norte, Piso 7, Santiago, Chile. E-mails: pd- [email protected]; [email protected] ‡Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Oakland University, 318 Meadow Brook Rd, Rochester, MI 48309, USA. Email: [email protected] 1 2 Preliminaries Let X be a Banach space and X ∗ its dual space. X is called an Asplund space, or has the Asplund property, if every separable subspace Y of X has separable continuous dual space Y ∗. The duality pairing on X × X ∗ is denoted by h., .i. In what follows, R :=] − ∞, ∞]; Br(x) is the open ball of radius r > 0 centered at x ∈ X and B∗ ⊂ X ∗ is the closed ball of radius 1 centered at 0X ∗. The extended real-valued function ϕ : X → R considered mostly is proper lower semicontinuous (l.s.c), i.e. ϕ is not identically +∞, and the lower level sets ϕ≤ α := {x ∈ X : ϕ(x) ≤ α} are closed for all α ∈ R. As usual domϕ stands for the domain of ϕ, defined as For a set-valued mapping A : X ⇒ X ∗, the domain of A is written domϕ := {x ∈ X : ϕ(x) < ∞}. domA := {x ∈ X : A(x) 6= ∅}. The graphs of ϕ and A are respectively defined as graphϕ := {(x, α) ∈ X × R : ϕ(x) = α}, graphA := {(x, x∗) ∈ X × X ∗ : x∗ ∈ A(x)}. A subset U of X is convex if it contains all closed segments connecting two points in U . The function ϕ is said to be convex if the domain of ϕ is convex and for any α ∈ [0, 1], x, y ∈ domϕ we always have the inequality ϕ(αx + (1 − α)y) ≤ αϕ(x) + (1 − α)ϕ(y). As usual, the Fr´echet subdifferential of a proper lower semicontinuous function ϕ is the set-valued mapping When ϕ is convex, the Fr´echet subdifferential reduces to the convex analysis subdifferential for all x ∈ domϕ. for all x ∈ domϕ. b∂ϕ : X ⇒ X ∗ defined by y→x ky − xk ϕ(y) − ϕ(x) − hx∗, y − xi b∂ϕ(x) :=(cid:26)x∗ ∈ X ∗ : lim inf b∂ϕ(x) = ∂ϕ(x) := {x∗ ∈ X ∗ : hx∗, y − xi ≤ ϕ(y) − ϕ(x)}, ≥ 0(cid:27) , An operator A is monotone if for all x, y ∈ domA, one has hx∗ − y∗, x − yi ≥ 0 with x∗ ∈ A(x), y∗ ∈ A(y). It is well-known that when ϕ is convex, the operator b∂ϕ is monotone [16]. The inverse implication also holds in Asplund space [11, Theorem 3.56]; but it is not true in general Banach spaces. The reader is referred to the proof of the reverse implication in [10, Theorem 2.4] for a counter-example. Let us recall some notions of generalized convex functions. Definition 2.1 A function ϕ : X → R is 1. quasiconvex if ∀x, y ∈ X, λ ∈]0, 1[, f (λx + (1 − λ)y) ≤ max{f (x), f (y)}. (1) 2. α-robustly quasiconvex with α > 0 if, for every v∗ ∈ αB∗, the function ϕv∗ : x 7→ ϕ(x) + hv∗, xi is quasiconvex. Clearly, ϕ is α-robustly quasiconvex iff the function ϕv∗ is quasiconvex for all v∗ ∈ X ∗ such that kv∗k < α. Tracing back to the original definition of robustly quasiconvex functions, they were first defined in [15] under the name "s-quasiconvex" or "stable quasiconvex", and then renamed "robustly quasiconvex" in [5]. 2 This class of functions holds a notable role, as many important optimization properties of generalized convex functions are stable when disturbed by a linear functional with a sufficiently small norm (for instance, all lower level sets are convex, each minimum is global minimum, each stationary point is a global minimizer). For interested readers, we refer to [15] again, and further related works [1, 5]. Definition 2.2 An operator A : X ⇒ X ∗ is quasimonotone if for all x, y ∈ X and x∗ ∈ A(x), y∗ ∈ A(y) we have min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} ≤ 0. Significant contributions concerning dual criteria for quasiconvex functions are in [2, 4]. Those character- izations are applicable for a wide range of subdifferentials, for instance Rockafellar-Clarke subdifferentials in Banach spaces, and Fr´echet subdifferentials in reflexive spaces. These results are still unclear for Fr´echet subdifferentials in Asplund spaces. Below, we give a short proof to clarify this. Our proof relies on the proof scheme of [2] and the following approximate mean value theorem [11, Theorem 3.49]. Theorem 2.1 Let X be an Asplund space and ϕ : X → R be a proper lower semicontinuous function finite at two given points a 6= b. Consider any point c ∈ [a, b) at which the function ψ(x) := ϕ(x) − ϕ(b) − ϕ(a) ka − bk kx − ak attains its minimum on [a, b]; such a point always exists. Then, there are sequences xk satisfying Moreover, when c 6= a one has lim inf k→∞ hx∗ k, b − xki ≥ ϕ(b) − ϕ(a) ka − bk kb − ck, lim inf k→∞ hx∗ k, b − ai ≥ ϕ(b) − ϕ(a). lim k→∞ hx∗ k, b − ai = ϕ(b) − ϕ(a). ϕ → c and x∗ k ∈ b∂ϕ(xk) (2) (3) (4) Theorem 2.1 allows us to deduce the following three-points lemma which is similar to [3, Lemma 3.1]. Lemma 2.1 Let ϕ : X → R be a proper, lower semicontinuous function on an Asplund space X. Let u, v, w ∈ X such that v ∈ [u, w], ϕ(v) > ϕ(u) and λ > 0. Then, there are ¯x ∈ domϕ and ¯x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(¯x) such that ¯x ∈ Bλ([u, v]) and h¯x∗, w − ¯xi > 0, where Bλ([u, v]) := {x ∈ X : ∃y ∈ [u, v] such that kx − yk < λ}. We are in position to establish characterizations of quasiconvexity in terms of Fr´echet subdifferentials in Asplund spaces. Theorem 2.2 Let ϕ : X → R be a proper lower semicontinuous function on an Asplund space X. The following statements are equivalent (a) ϕ is quasiconvex; (b) If there are x, y ∈ X such that ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x), then hx∗, y − xi ≤ 0 for all x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x). (c) b∂ϕ is quasimonotone. 3 Proof. ϕ(x)}. Since ϕ is quasiconvex, then Sx is a convex set. Thus, we have the function f := δSx + ϕ(x) is convex, where δSx is equal to 0 for u ∈ Sx and to ∞ otherwise. On the other hand, f (x) = ϕ(x) and f (u) ≥ ϕ(u) (a)⇒(b) Assume that x, y ∈ X, ϕ(x) ≥ ϕ(y), and x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x). Consider Sx := {u ∈ X : ϕ(u) ≤ for all u ∈ X, thus b∂ϕ(x) ⊂ b∂f (x). By the definition of convex subdifferential, since x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x) ⊂ b∂f (x), (b)⇒(c) Assume that there are x, y ∈ X and x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x), y∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(y) such that hx∗, x − yi < 0 and we have hx∗, y − xi ≤ 0. hy∗, x − yi > 0. Then, by (b), ϕ(x) < ϕ(y) and ϕ(y) < ϕ(x), which is a contradiction. (c)⇒(a) By using Lemma 2.1, the proof of this assertion is similar to one in [2, Theorem 4.1]. Remark 2.1 Observe that the implications (a) ⇒ (b) and (b) ⇒ (c) hold in Banach spaces while (c) ⇒ (a) only holds in Asplund spaces. In fact, the equivalence of these statements actually can characterize the Asplund property in the sense that if X is not an Asplund space, then there is a function ϕ whose Fr´echet subdiferential satisfies (b) and (c) but is not quasiconvex. Such a function ϕ can be found in [10, Theorem 2.4]. 3 Characterizations of Robustly Quasiconvex Functions A zero and first order characterization of robust convexity was given in [6, Proposition 5.3] for finite di- mensional spaces. We remark that there is an oversight in the proof given there; although the function f is only assumed to be lower semicontinuous, the existence of z in the second paragraph actually requires continuity. Here we show that this conclusion is still correct not only when f is assumed just to be lower semicontinuous, but also when X is only assumed to be an Asplund space. To derive this generalization, we need the following lemmas, revealing that quasiconvex functions have certain nice properties which resemble those of convex functions. Lemma 3.1 If ϕ : X → R is a quasiconvex and lower semicontinuous function, and u, v ∈ X are such that ϕ(v) ≥ ϕ(u) then ϕ(v + t(u − v)) = ϕ(v). lim t↓0 (5) Suppose that u, v ∈ X and that ϕ(v) ≥ ϕ(u). Since ϕ is quasiconvex, for all t ∈]0, 1[, we have Proof. ϕ(v + t(u − v)) ≤ max{ϕ(v), ϕ(u)} = ϕ(v). It follows that lim supt↓0 ϕ(v + t(u − v)) ≤ ϕ(v). Combining the latter with the lower semicontinuity of ϕ we get (5). ✷ Lemma 3.2 Let ϕ : X → R be a quasiconvex function and u, v, w ∈ X such that v ∈]u, w[, ϕ(u) ≤ ϕ(w). Suppose that there exist v∗ ∈ X ∗ and z ∈]u, v[ such that ϕv∗ (z) > max{ϕv∗ (u), ϕv∗ (w)}. Then ϕ(u) < ϕ(z) ≤ ϕ(v) ≤ ϕ(w). (6) Proof. Since z ∈]u, v[⊂]u, w[, ϕ(u) ≤ ϕ(w) and ϕ is quasiconvex we have ϕ(z) ≤ max{ϕ(u), ϕ(w)} = ϕ(w). Hence, the latter and the inequality ϕv∗ (z) > ϕv∗ (w) implies that hv∗, zi > hv∗, wi. Again, z ∈]u, w[ implies hv∗, zi < hv∗, ui. Therefore, the inequality ϕv∗ (u) < ϕv∗ (z) yields ϕ(u) < ϕ(z). Since z ∈]u, v[ and v ∈]z, w[, we deduce ϕ(z) ≤ ϕ(v) ≤ ϕ(w) from the latter inequality and the quasiconvexity of ϕ. Hence, (6) holds. ✷ Lemma 3.3 Let ϕ : X → R be a quasiconvex, proper, and lower semicontinuous function, and v∗ ∈ X ∗. If ϕv∗ is not quasiconvex then there exist u, v, w ∈ X such that v ∈]u, w[ and ϕ(w) ≥ ϕ(v) > ϕ(u), ϕv∗ (v) > max{ϕv∗ (u), ϕv∗ (w)}, ∀γ > 0, ∃vγ ∈ Bγ(v)∩]v, w[ : ϕv∗ (v) > ϕv∗ (vγ). 4 (7) (8) (9) Since ϕv∗ is not quasiconvex, there exist u, w ∈ X such that u 6= w, ϕ(u) ≤ ϕ(w) and v0 ∈]u, w[ Proof. such that ϕv∗ (v0) > max{ϕv∗ (u), ϕv∗ (w)}. Applying Lemma 3.1, we get limt↓0 ϕ(w + t(u − w)) = ϕ(w), and so limt↓0 ϕv∗ (w + t(u − w)) = ϕv∗ (w). Since ϕv∗ (w) < ϕv∗ (v0), there exists t0 ∈]0, 1[ such that ϕv∗ (w + t(u − w)) < ϕv∗ (v0), ∀t ∈]0, t0[. (10) Consider the set L := {z ∈]u, w[: ϕv∗ (z) ≥ ϕv∗ (v0)}. Clearly, L 6= ∅ and for each z ∈ L we have kz − wk ≥ t0ku − wk by (10). It follows that r := inf{kz − wk : z ∈ L } ∈ [t0ku − wk, ku − wk[ ⊂ ]0, ku − wk[, v := w + r u − w ku − wk ∈ ]u, w[. We will show that v ∈ L and so (8) holds. Suppose on the contrary that v /∈ L . Then v0 ∈]u, v[ and we get ϕ(u) < ϕ(v0) ≤ ϕ(v) ≤ ϕ(w) by Lemma 3.2. Applying Lemma 3.1, we get limt↓0 ϕ(v + t(u − v)) = ϕ(v), and so limt↓0 ϕv∗ (v + t(u − v)) = ϕv∗ (v). By the definition of r, there exists a sequence (zn) ⊂ L such that kzn − wk → r and kzn − wk > r for all n ∈ N. Therefore, ϕv∗ (v) = lim t↓0 ϕv∗ (v + t(u − v)) kzn − wk − r (u − v)(cid:19) = lim ϕv∗(cid:18)v + = lim ϕv∗(cid:18)v − = lim ϕv∗(cid:18)v − = lim ϕv∗(cid:18)w + ku − vk r ku − vk r (u − v) + (u − w) + ku − wk kzn − wk ku − wk (u − w)(cid:19) kzn − wk ku − vk kzn − wk ku − wk (u − v)(cid:19) (u − w)(cid:19) = lim ϕv∗ (zn) ≥ ϕv∗ (v0), which is a contradiction. Now we show that v satisfies (9). Let γ be any positive real number and vγ := w + r − rγ ku − wk (u − w) with rγ := min{r/2, γ/2} > 0. Since 0 < r − rγ < r < ku − w, it implies that vγ ∈]v, w[ \ L . Therefore, ϕv∗ (vγ) < ϕv∗ (v0) ≤ ϕv∗ (v). Furthermore, kvγ − vk = (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)w + Hence, v satisfies (9). r − rγ ku − wk (u − w) − w − r u − w ku − wk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) = rγ < γ. ✷ Theorem 3.1 Let ϕ : X → R be a proper lower semicontinuous function on a Banach space X, and α > 0. Consider the following statements (a) ϕ is α−robustly quasiconvex; (b) For every x, y ∈ X ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x) =⇒ hx∗, y − xi ≤ − min {αky − xk, ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)} , ∀x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x). (11) 5 Then (a)⇒(b). Additionally, if X is an Asplund space, then (b)⇒(a). Proof. Suppose that ϕ is α−robustly quasiconvex, and x, y ∈ X satisfy ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x). Assume that x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x). We will prove hx∗, y − xi ≤ − min {αky − xk, ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)} . If x = y, the above inequality is trivial. Otherwise, we consider two cases: Case 1. We then need to prove that αky − xk ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y) hx∗, y − xi ≤ −αky − xk. (12) By the Hahn-Banach theorem, there exists v∗ ∈ X ∗, kv∗k = 1 such that hv∗, y − xi = ky − xk. Consider the function f : X → R given by f (z) = ϕ(z) + αhv∗, z − xi ∀z ∈ X. Then f (x) = ϕ(x), and f (y) = ϕ(y) + αhv∗, y − xi = ϕ(y) + αky − xk ≤ ϕ(x) = f (x), i.e., max{f (x), f (y)} = f (x). Since ϕ is α−robustly quasiconvex, f is quasiconvex. Therefore for each t ∈ [0, 1], we always have ϕ(x) = f (x) = max{f (x), f (y)} ≥ f (x + t(y − x)) = ϕ(x + t(y − x)) + tαhv∗, y − xi = ϕ(x + t(y − x)) + tαky − xk, (13) (14) (15) which implies that ϕ(x) − tαky − xk ≥ ϕ(x + t(y − x)). Since x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x), for any γ > 0, there exists a number r > 0 such that ϕ(z) ≥ ϕ(x) + hx∗, z − xi − γkz − xk ∀z ∈ Br(x). Let t ∈]0, 1[ such that x + t(y − x) ∈ Br(x). It follows from (13) and (14) that ϕ(x) − tαky − xk ≥ ϕ(x) + thx∗, y − xi − tγky − xk, and so On taking limit on both sides of the above inequality as γ → 0+, we get (12). hx∗, y − xi ≤ −αky − xk + γky − xk. Case 2. We have ¯αky − xk = ϕ(x) − ϕ(y), where αky − xk > ϕ(x) − ϕ(y) Since ϕ is ¯α−robustly quasiconvex, we derive from Case 1 that ¯α := ϕ(x) − ϕ(y) ky − xk ∈]0, α[. hx∗, y − xi ≤ − ¯αky − xk = ϕ(y) − ϕ(x) = − min {αky − xk, ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)} . 6 Conversely, assume that X is Asplund, and (b) holds. It follows from Theorem 2.2 that ϕ is quasiconvex. Suppose that ϕ is not α−robustly quasiconvex, i.e., there exists v∗ ∈ X ∗ \ {0}, kv∗k < α such that ϕv∗ is not quasiconvex. By Lemma 3.3, there are u, w ∈ X and v ∈]u, w[ satisfying (7),(8), and (9). Since ϕv∗ (v) > ϕv∗ (u), there exists δ > 0 such that ¯v∗ := (1 + δ)v∗ satisfies k¯v∗k < α and ϕ¯v∗ (v) > ϕ¯v∗ (u). Thus, we have ϕ(v) > ϕ(u), ϕv∗ (v) > ϕv∗ (u), ϕ¯v∗ (v) > ϕ¯v∗ (u) and the lower semicontinuity of ϕ, ϕv∗ , and ϕ¯v∗ . This implies the existence of γ > 0 satisfying ϕ(z) > ϕ(u), ϕv∗ (z) > ϕv∗ (u), ϕ¯v∗ (z) > ϕ¯v∗ (u) ∀z ∈ Bγ(v). (16) By the assertion (9), there is vγ ∈ Bγ(v)∩]v, w[ such that ϕv∗ (v) > ϕv∗ (vγ). Then, vγ can be written as vγ := v + λ(w − v) with λ ∈(cid:21)0, min(cid:26)1, γ kw − vk(cid:27)(cid:21) . Since ϕv∗ (v) > ϕv∗ (w) and ϕ(v) ≤ ϕ(w), we have hv∗, w − vi < 0 and so ϕ¯v∗ (vγ) − ϕ¯v∗ (v) = ϕv∗ (vγ) − ϕv∗ (v) + δhv∗, vγ − vi = ϕv∗ (vγ) − ϕv∗ (v) + δλhv∗, w − vi < 0. Applying Lemma 2.1 for ϕ¯v∗ , v ∈ [vγ, u] with ϕ¯v∗ (v) > ϕ¯v∗ (vγ), there exist x ∈ domϕ¯v∗ and x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ¯v∗ (x) such that x ∈ [vγ, v] + (r − kvγ − vk)B and hx∗, u − xi > 0. (17) Then x ∈ Bγ(v) and so ϕ(x) > ϕ(u) by (16). By the assumption (b) and the second inequality of (17), −h¯v∗, u − xi < hx∗ − ¯v∗, u − xi ≤ − min{αku − xk, ϕ(x) − ϕ(u)}. Since h¯v∗, u − xi ≤ k¯v∗kku − xk < αku − xk, the above inequality implies that h¯v∗, u − xi > ϕ(x) − ϕ(u), i.e., ϕ¯v∗ (x) < ϕ¯v∗ (u) and this contradicts (16). ✷ We next construct a completely new characterization for the robust quasiconvexity. It is based on the equivalence of the quasiconvexity of a lower semicontinuous function and the quasimonotonicity of its subdifferential operator. Theorem 3.2 Let ϕ : X → R be proper, lower semicontinuous on an Asplund space X and α > 0. Then, ϕ is α−robustly quasiconvex if and only if for any (x, x∗), (y, y∗) ∈ graph b∂ϕ, we have min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} > −αky − xk =⇒ hx∗ − y∗, x − yi ≥ 0. (18) Proof. that Suppose that ϕ is α−robustly quasiconvex and that there exist (x, x∗), (y, y∗) ∈ graph b∂ϕ such min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} > −αky − xk. Since ϕ is quasiconvex, b∂ϕ is quasimonotone by Theorem 2.2. It follows that min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} ≤ 0. Combining (19) and (20), we have 0 ≤ − min(cid:26)(cid:28)x∗, y − x ky − xk(cid:29) ,(cid:28)y∗, x − y kx − yk(cid:29)(cid:27) < α. 7 (19) (20) Without loss of generality, we may assume (cid:28)x∗, y − x ky − xk(cid:29) = min(cid:26)(cid:28)x∗, Let r > 0 be such that −(cid:28)x∗, y − x ky − xk(cid:29) ,(cid:28)y∗, ky − xk(cid:29) < r ≤ α. y − x x − y kx − yk(cid:29)(cid:27) . (21) By the Hahn-Banach theorem, there exists v∗ ∈ X ∗ satisfying hv∗, y − xi = rky − xk and kv∗k = r ≤ α. It follows that hx∗, y − xi + hv∗, y − xi > −rky − xk + rky − xk = 0. (22) Consider ϕv∗ : X → R given by ϕv∗ (u) = ϕ(u) + hv∗, ui for any u ∈ X. Then, we have b∂ϕv∗ (u) = b∂ϕ(u) + v∗ for u ∈ domϕ. Hence, by the quasiconvexity of ϕv∗ and by Theorem 2.2, we have min{hx∗, y − xi + hv∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi + hv∗, x − yi} ≤ 0. Combining with (22), it implies hy∗, x − yi + hv∗, x − yi ≤ 0, i.e., hy∗, x − yi ≤ hv∗, y − xi = rkx − yk. ky−xkE, we obtain hy∗, x − yi ≤ hx∗, x − yi and thus (18) holds. Letting r → −Dx∗, y−x Conversely, assume that (18) holds for all x, y ∈ X and x∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x), y∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(y). Taking any v∗ in αB∗, we the quasimonotonicity of b∂ϕv∗ . Taking any x, y ∈ X and x∗ ∈ b∂ϕv∗ (x), y∗ ∈ b∂ϕv∗ (y), then x∗ − v∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(x), y∗ − v∗ ∈ b∂ϕ(y). We then consider two cases. next prove that ϕv∗ : X → R, defined by ϕv∗ (u) = ϕ(u) + hv∗, ui for any u ∈ X, is quasiconvex by showing Case 1. min{hx∗ − v∗, y − xi, hy∗ − v∗, x − yi} ≤ −αky − xk Without loss of generality, assume that hx∗ − v∗, y − xi = min{hx∗ − v∗, y − xi, hy∗ − v∗, x − yi}. Since kv∗k ≤ α, we have min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} ≤ hx∗, y − xi = hx∗ − v∗, y − xi + hv∗, y − xi ≤ −αky − xk + kv∗kky − xk ≤ 0. Case 2. min{hx∗ − v∗, y − xi, hy∗ − v∗, x − yi} > −αky − xk Since (18) is satisfied, we have h(x∗ − v∗) − (y∗ − v∗), x − yi ≥ 0, i.e., hx∗ − y∗, x − yi ≥ 0. It implies that 2 min{hx∗, y − xi, hy∗, x − yi} ≤ hx∗, y − xi + hy∗, x − yi ≤ 0. Hence, b∂ϕv∗ is quasimonotone and thus ϕv∗ is quasiconvex for any v∗ ∈ αB∗ by Theorem 2.2. This yields the α-robust quasiconvexity of ϕ. ✷ 8 4 Conclusions Using Fr´echet subdifferentials, we have obtained two first-order characterizations for the robust quasicon- vexity of lower semicontinuous functions in Asplund spaces. The first one is a generalization of [6, Proposi- tion 5.3] from finite dimensional spaces to Asplund spaces and its proof also overcomes a glitch in the proof of the sufficient condition of [6, Proposition 5.3]. The second criterion is totally new and it is settled from the equivalence of the quasiconvexity of lower semicontinuous functions and the quasimonotonicity of their subdifferential operators. Further investigations are needed to apply those characterizations in partial differ- ential equations with connections to differential geometry, mean curvature, tug-of-war games, and stochastic optimal control [5, 6, 7]. Acknowlegement This work was completed while the second author was visiting Vietnam Institute for Advanced Study in Mathematics (VIASM). He would like to thank VIASM for the very kind support and hospitality. References 1. An P.T.: Stability of generalized monotone maps with respect to their characterizations. Optimization 55, 289–299 (2006) 2. Aussel D., Corvellec J.-N., Lassonde M.: Subdifferential characterization of quasiconvexity and convexity. J. Convex Anal. 1, 195-201 (1994) 3. Aussel D., Corvellec J.-N., Lassonde M.: Mean-value property and subdifferential criteria for lower semicontinuous functions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 347, 4147–4161 (1995) 4. Aussel D.: Subdifferential properties of quasiconvex and pseudoconvex functions: Unified approach. Optimization 97, 29–45 (1998) 5. Barron E.N., Goebel R., Jensen R.R.: Function which are quasiconvex under linear perturbations. SIAM J. Optim. 22, 1089–1108 (2012) 6. Barron E.N., Goebel R., Jensen R.R.: The quasiconvex envelope through first-order partial differential equations which characterize quasiconvexity of nonsmooth functions. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B 17, 1693–1706 (2012) 7. Barron, E.N., Goebel, R., Jensen, R.R.: Quasiconvex functions and nonlinear PDEs. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 365, 4229–4255 (2013) 8. Clarke F.H.: Optimization and Nonsmooth Analysis, Wiley-Interscience, New-York (1983) 9. Correa R., Jofr´e A., Thibault L.: Characterization of lower semicontinuous convex functions. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 116, 67–72 (1992) 10. Trang N.T.Q.: A note on an approximate mean value theorem for Fr´echet subgradients. Nonlinear Anal. 75, 380–383 (2012) 11. Mordukhovich B.S.: Variational Analysis and Generalized Differentiation I: Basic Theory. Springer, Berlin (2006) 9 12. Luc D.T.: Characterisations of quasiconvex functions. Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 48, 393–406 (1993) 13. Penot J.-P., Quang P.H.: Generalized convexity of functions and generalized monotonicity of set-valued maps. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 92, 343–356 (1997) 14. Poliquin R.A.: Subgradient monotonicity and convex functions. Nonlinear Anal. 14, 305–317 (1990) 15. Phu H.X., An P.T.: Stable generalization of convex functions. Optimization 38, 309–318 (1996) 16. Rockafellar R.T.: On the maximal monotonicity of subdifferential mappings, Pacific J. Math. 33. 209– 216 (1970) 10
1609.06214	1	1609	2016-09-20T15:13:16	Anisotropic Shubin operators and eigenfunctions expansions in Gelfand-Shilov spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	We derive new results on the characterization of Gelfand--Shilov spaces $\mathcal{S}^\mu_\nu (\R^n)$, $\mu,\nu >0$, $\mu+\nu \geq 1$ by Gevrey estimates of the $L^2$ norms of iterates of $(m,k)$ anisotropic globally elliptic Shubin (or $\Gamma$) type operators, $(-\Delta)^{m/2} +\| x \|^k$ with $m,k\in 2\N$ being a model operator, and on the decay of the Fourier coefficients in the related eigenfunction expansions. Similar results are obtained for the spaces $\Sigma^\mu_\nu (\R^n)$, $\mu,\nu >0$, $\mu+\nu > 1$, cf. \eqref{GSdef}. In contrast to the symmetric case $\mu = \nu$ and $k=m$ (classical Shubin operators) we encounter resonance type phenomena involving the ratio $\kappa:=\mu/\nu$; namely we obtain a characterization of $\mathcal{S}^\mu_\nu(\R^n)$ and $\Sigma^\mu_\nu(\R^n)$ in the case $\mu=kt/(k+m), \nu= mt/(k+m), t \geq 1$, that is, when $\kappa=k/m \in \Q$.	math.FA	math	ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO Abstract. We derive new results on the characterization of Gelfand -- Shilov spaces S µ ν (Rn), µ, ν > 0, µ + ν ≥ 1 by Gevrey estimates of the L2 norms of iterates of (m, k) anisotropic globally elliptic Shubin (or Γ) type operators, (−∆)m/2 +xk with m, k ∈ 2N being a model operator, and on the decay of the Fourier coefficients in the related eigenfunction expansions. Similar results are obtained for the spaces Σµ ν (Rn), µ, ν > 0, µ+ν > 1, cf. (1.2). In contrast to the symmetric case µ = ν and k = m (classical Shubin operators) we encounter resonance type phenomena involving the ratio κ := µ/ν; namely we obtain a characterization of S µ ν (Rn) in the case µ = kt/(k + m), ν = mt/(k + m), t ≥ 1, that is, when κ = k/m ∈ Q. ν (Rn) and Σµ 1. Introduction and statement of the results The main goal of the paper is to prove results on the characterization of the ν (Rn), µ, ν > 0, µ + ν ≥ 1 by non-symmetric (µ 6= ν) Gelfand -- Shilov spaces Sµ Gevrey estimates of the L2 norms of the iterates P ℓu, ℓ = 1, 2, . . . , u ∈ S (Rn), of positive anisotropic globally elliptic Shubin differential operators P of the type (m, k), m, k being even natural numbers, and on the decay of the Fourier coefficients j=1 stands for an orthonormal basis of eigenfunctions associated to the operator P . The (m, k) Shubin elliptic differential operators are modelled by uj, j ∈ N, in the eigenfunction expansions u = P∞ j=1 ujϕj, where {ϕj}∞ (1.1) Hm,k n := (−∆)m/2 + xk, x = qx2 1 + . . . + x2 n, k, m ∈ 2N. We recall that for µ > 0, ν > 0, the inductive (respectively, projective) Gelfand- Shilov classes Sµ ν (Rn), µ + ν > 1), are defined as the set of all u ∈ S (Rn) for which there exist A > 0, C > 0 (respectively, for every A > 0 there exists C > 0) such that ν (Rn), µ + ν ≥ 1 (respectively, Σµ (1.2) xβ∂α x u(x) ≤ CAα+β(α!)µ(β!)ν , α, β ∈ Nn, see [2, 12, 14, 17, 25] and [27, Chapter 6]. These spaces have recently gained a wide importance in view of the fact that they represent a suitable functional setting both for microlocal analysis and PDE and for Fourier and time-frequency analysis [1, 3, 6 -- 10, 13, 20, 35]. Concerning the investigation in the present paper, we can cite different sources of motivations. First, we recall the fundamental work of Seeley [33] on eigenfunction expansions of real analytic functions on compact manifolds (see also the recent paper of Dasgupta and Ruzhansky [15], extending the result of [33] for all Gevrey 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46F05; Secondary 34L10, 47F05. Key words and phrases. anisotropic Shubin-type operators, Gelfand-Shilov spaces, eigenfunc- tion expansions. 1 2 MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO spaces Gσ, σ > 1, on compact Lie groups). Secondly, we mention the work [19] µ (Rn) by means of on the characterization of symmetric Gelfand-Shilov spaces Sµ estimates of iterates and the decay of the Fourier coefficients in the eigenfunction expansions associated to globally elliptic (or Γ elliptic) differential operator. We also refer to [37], where general Gevrey sequences Mp are used. Finally, we mention as additional motivation the results on hypoellipticity in Sµ ν (Rn) for elliptic operators of the type Hm,k for µ ≥ k/(m + k), ν ≥ m/(m + k), k, m being even natural numbers, cf. [7] (see also the older work [6]). n Before stating our main results we need some preliminaries. As counterpart of an elliptic operator in a compact manifold, we consider in Rn the decay of the Fourier coefficients in the eigenfunction expansions associated to Hm,k n . In contrast to the symmetric case µ = ν and k = m (classical Shubin operators) we encounter new resonance type phenomena involving κ := µ/ν, namely we can characterize the spaces Sµ ν (Rn), µ + ν > 1) by iterates and eigenfunction expansions defined by Hm,k iff κ is rational number, κ = k/m. ν (Rn), µ + ν ≥ 1 (respectively Σµ n Our basic example of operator will be the anisotropic quantum harmonic oscil- lator appearing in Quantum Mechanics (1.3) H2,k n = −△ + xk, k ∈ 2N, with recovering for k = 2 the standard harmonic oscillator whose eigenfunctions are the Hermite functions (1.4) hα(x) = Hα(x)e−x2/2, α = (α1, ..., αn) ∈ Nn, where Hα(x) is the α-th Hermite polynomial. See for example [24,29,31] for related Hermite expansions as well as [18, 38] for connections with a degenerate harmonic oscillator. Here we shall consider a more general class of operators with polynomial coeffi- cients in Rn, namely (m, k) anisotropic operators: (1.5) Set (1.6) P = Xα m + β k ≤1 cαβxβ Dα x , Dα = (−i)α∂α x . Λm,k(x, ξ) = (1 + x2k + ξ2m)1/2, (x, ξ) ∈ R2n, m, k ∈ 2N. The global ellipticity for P in (1.5) is defined by imposing (1.7) Xα m + β k =1 cαβxβξα 6= 0 for (x, ξ) 6= (0, 0). or equivalently, there exist C1 > 0, C2 > 0, R > 0 such that (1.8) C2 ≤ p(x, ξ) Λm,k(x, ξ) ≤ C1, (x, ξ) ≥ R. Under the assumption (1.7) (or (1.8)), the following estimate holds for every u ∈ S (Rn): (1.9) cf. [4]. kxβDα x ukL2 ≤ C(kP ukL2 + kukL2), Xα m + β k ≤1 ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES3 For these operators, the counterpart of the standard Sobolev spaces are the spaces Qs m,k(Rn), s ∈ R, defined, for example, by requiring that (1.10) where (1.11) kΛ(x, D)sukL2 < ∞, Λ(x, ξ) = (1 + x2k + ξ2m)1/2 max{k,m}, k, m ∈ 2N. Under the global ellipticity assumption (1.7), P : Qs m,k(Rn) → L2(Rn), s = max{k, m}, is a Fredholm operator. The finite-dimensional null-space Ker P is given by func- tions in the Schwartz space S (Rn). We assume, as in [19], that P is a positive anisotropic elliptic operator, which implies that k and m are even numbers. This guarantees the existence of an or- thonormal basis of eigenfunctions ϕj, j ∈ N, with eigenvalues λj, λj = +∞ lim j→∞ (see [34]). Moreover we have that (1.12) λj ∼ Cj mk n(m+k) as j → +∞. for some C > 0, cf. [4,34]. Hence, given u ∈ L2(Rn), or u ∈ S ′(Rn), we can expand (1.13) u = ∞ Xj=1 ujϕj where the Fourier coefficients uj ∈ C are defined by (1.14) uj = (u, uj)L2, j = 1, 2, . . . with convergence in L2(Rn) or S ′(Rn) for (1.13). By the hypoellipticity results of [7] the eigenfunctions ϕj belong to Sk/(m+k) m/(m+k)(Rn). We first state an assertion on the characterization of the anisotropic Sobolev spaces Qs m,k(Rn) and the Schwartz class S (Rn). Theorem 1.1. Suppose that P is (m, k)-globally elliptic cf. (1.5), (1.7), and posi- tive. Then: (i) u ∈ Qs m,k(Rn) ⇐⇒ uj2λs/ max{m,k} j < ∞, s ∈ N. ∞ Pj=1 (ii) u ∈ S (Rn) ⇐⇒ uj = O(λ−s j ), j → ∞ ⇐⇒ uj = O(j−s), j → ∞ for all s ∈ N. ν (Rn) and Σµ Let us now come to the characterization of the spaces Sµ ν (Rn) in the case κ := µ/ν ∈ Q. We may link µ, ν with an operator of the form (1.5) for a suitable choice of k and m. In fact, observe first that we may write µ = tµo, ν = tνo for some t > 0 with µo = κ/(1 + κ), ν0 = 1/(1 + κ) so that µo + νo = 1. If µ + ν ≥ 1 we have t ≥ 1, if µ + ν > 1 then t > 1. On the other hand, for any given µo ∈ Q we may write µo = k/(k + m) for two positive integers k and m, and consequently νo = 1 − µo = m/(k + m). Multiples of k and m work as well, in particular we may assume k and m to be even natural numbers so that the symbol of Λm,k in (1.6) is a smooth function which is necessary for the proof of the hypoellipticity result of [7]. So we have µ = kt k + m , ν = mt k + m . 4 MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO For given even integers k and m, an example of globally elliptic positive operator is given by (1.1). The first main result of the paper characterizes the Gelfand-Shilov spaces in terms of estimates of the iterates of P and reads as follows. Theorem 1.2. Let P be an operator of the form (1.5) for some integers k ≥ 1, m ≥ 1, be globally elliptic, namely satisfy (1.7) and let u ∈ S (Rn). Then (Rn), t > 1) if and only if there exist (Rn), t ≥ 1 (respectively u ∈ Σ k+m u ∈ S k+m mt kt kt mt k+m k+m C > 0, R > 0 (respectively for every C > 0 there exists R > 0) such that: (1.15) kP M ukL2 ≤ RCM (M !) kmt k+m for every integer M ≥ 1. Remark 1.3. Theorem 1.2 suggests the possibility of considering new function spaces defined by the estimates (1.15) also for 0 < t < 1 (respectively 0 < t ≤ 1). Corresponding Gelfand-Shilov classes are empty in that case as well known from [17] and the equivalence in Theorem 1.2 fails. Nevertheless such definition in terms of (1.15) deserves interest, cf. also [11, 36]. Using Theorem 1.2 we can prove the following result. Theorem 1.4. Let P be a positive operator of the form (1.5) for some integers k ≥ 1, m ≥ 1, satisfying (1.7) and let u ∈ S (Rn). Let the eigenvalues λj and the Fourier coefficients uj be defined as before. The following conditions are equivalent: i) u ∈ S kt k+m mt k+m (Rn), t ≥ 1 (respectively u ∈ Σ kt k+m mt k+m (Rn), t > 1); ii) there exists ε > 0 such that (respectively for every ε > 0) we have (1.16) uj2eǫλ k+m kmt j < ∞; ∞ Xj=1 iii) there exists ε > 0 such that (respectively for every ε > 0) we have (1.17) uj2eǫλ k+m kmt j < ∞. sup j∈N iv) there exists ε > 0 such that (respectively for every ε > 0) we have for some C > 0: uj ≤ Ce−εj tn , 1 j ∈ N. The somewhat surprising fact that in iv) the estimates do not depend on the ν regularity couple (m, k), that is on (µ, ν), may find intuitive explanation in the Sµ of the eigenfunctions ϕj , cf. [7]. 2. Proof of the main results Proof of Theorem 1.1. The proof of Theorem 1.1 is easy, by using the r-th power of P, r ∈ R, that we may define as P ru = ∞ Xj=1 λr j ujϕj , ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES5 and by observing that the norms kP rukL2, r = s/ max{k, m} and kΛ(x, D)sukL2 are equivalent, see [4, 27, 34]. On the other hand, by Parseval identity kP ruk2 Xj=1 and i) follows. Since S (Rn) = Ts∈N L2 = k ∞ λr j ujϕjk2 L2 = ∞ Xj=1 λ2r j uj2 Qs m,k(Rn) we also obtain ii). (cid:3) The proof of Theorem 1.2 needs some preparation. We first define, for fixed r ≥ 0 and u ∈ L2(Rn): (2.1) ur = Xα m + β k =r kxβDαukL2 First it is useful to characterize Gelfand-Shilov spaces in terms of the norms ur as follows. Proposition 2.1. Let u ∈ L2(Rn). Then u ∈ S kt k+m mt k+m (Rn), t ≥ 1 (respectively u ∈ Σ kt k+m mt k+m (Rn), t > 1) if and only if there exist C > 0, R > 0 (respectively for every C > 0 there exists R > 0) such that (2.2) for every r > 0. ur ≤ RCrr kmrt k+m We have the following preliminary result. Lemma 2.2. There exists a constant C > 0 such that, for any given p ∈ N, (α, β) ∈ N2n, with α/m + β/k = r, p < r < p + 1, and for every ε > 0, the following estimate holds true: (2.3) for all u ∈ S (Rn). ur ≤ εup+1 + Cε− r−p p+1−r up + Cp(p + 1)! km k+m u0 The proof follows the same lines as the proof of Proposition 2.1 in [5], cf. also [23], and it is omitted. Next, fixed λ > 0, p ∈ N and u ∈ L2(Rn), we set: σp(u, λ) = λ−p(p!)− kmt k+m up. (2.4) Lemma 2.3. For every p ∈ N and for λ > 0 sufficiently large, we have: (2.5) σp+1(u, λ) ≤ (p + 1)− kmt k+m σp(P u, λ) + p Xh=0 σh(u, λ) for every u ∈ S (Rn). Proof. For p = 0 the assertion is a direct consequence of (1.9) if λ is large enough. Fix now p ∈ N, p ≥ 1 and let α, β ∈ Nn such that α/m + β/k = p + 1. It is easy to verify that we can find γ, δ ∈ Nn, with γ ≤ α, δ ≤ β such that γ/m + δ/k = p and α − γ/m + β − δ/k = 1. Then by (1.9) we can write kxβDαukL2 ≤ kxβ−δDα−γ(xδDγu)kL2 + kxβ−δ[xδ, Dα−γ]DγukL2 ≤ CkP (xδDγu)kL2 + kxβ−δ[xδ, Dα−γ]DγukL2 ≤ I1 + I2 + I3, 6 MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO where I1 = CkxδDγ(P u)kL2, Let now Jh = Xα m + β k =p+1 Then, obviously we have I2 = Ck[P, xδDγ]ukL2, I3 = kxβ−δ[xδ, Dα−γ]DγukL2. Ih, Yh = λ−p−1(p + 1)!− kmt k+m Jh, h = 1, 2, 3. up+1 ≤ J1 + J2 + J3, σp+1(λ, u) ≤ Y1 + Y2 + Y3. Now, since J1 ≤ C1P up for some C1 > 0, then we have Y1 ≤ (p+1)− kmt if λ ≥ C−1 1 . To estimate J2 and Y2 we observe that k+m σp(λ, P u), [P, xδDγ]u = X α m + β k ≤1 c α β[x βD α, xδDγ]u, and that [x C αδτ xδ+ β−τ Dγ+ α−τ u − X06=τ ≤ β,τ ≤γ βD α, xδDγ]u = X06=τ ≤ α,τ ≤δ where the constants C αδτ and C βγτ can be estimated by C2 pτ for some positive constant C2 independent of p. We observe now that in both the sums above we have C βγτ xδ+ β−τ Dγ+ α−τ u. γ + α − τ δ + β − τ r = + = p + + − τ ≤ p + 1 − km hence in particular we have 0 ≤ r < p + 1 since τ > 0. Moreover, we have km m k α m β k m + k m + k τ , In view of these considerations, we easily obtain τ ≤ km m + k (p + 1 − r). J2 ≤ C3(J ′ 2 + p km k+m up + J ′′ 2 ), where J ′ 2 = Xp<r<p+1 2 = X0≤r<p J ′′ km k+m (p+1−r)ur, p km k+m (p+1−r)ur. p Now, applying Lemma 2.2 to J ′ 2 with and using standard factorial inequalities we obtain ε = (4C3)−1p− km k+m (p+1−r), J ′ 2 ≤ (4C3)−1up+1 + C4p Similarly, writing km k+m up + Cp+1 5 (p + 1)! km k+m u0. J ′′ 2 = p km k+m (p+1)u0 + p−1 Xq=0 Xq<r<q+1 km k+m (p+1−r)ur p and applying Lemma 2.2 to each term of the sum above with ε = p− km k+m (q+1−r), ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES7 we get 2 ≤ Cp+1 J ′′ 6 (p + 1)! km k+m u0 + C7 ≤ Cp+1 8 (p + 1)! km k+m u0 + C9 from which we get p−1 Xq=0hp Xq=1 p p km k+m (p−q)uq+1 + p km k+m (p−q+1)uqi km k+m (p−q+1)uq, J2 ≤ 1 4 up+1 + Cp+1(p + 1)! km k+m u0 + C′ p Xq=1 km k+m (p−q+1)uq p for some positive constants C′, C independent of p. From the estimates above, taking λ sufficiently large and using the fact that t ≥ 1, we obtain Y2 = λ−p−1(p + 1)!− kmt k+m J2 ≤ 1 4 p+1 Xh=0 σh(λ, u). Analogous estimates can be derived for Y3 and yield (2.5). We leave the details for the reader. (cid:3) Starting from (2.5) and arguing by induction on p it is easy to prove the following result. We omit the proof for the sake of brevity. Lemma 2.4. For every p ∈ N, t ≥ 1 and λ > 0 sufficiently large we have σp(u, λ) ≤ 2pσ0(u, λ) + p Xℓ=1 2p−ℓ(cid:18)p ℓ(cid:19)(ℓ!)− kmt k+m σ0(P ℓu, λ). Proof of Theorem 1.2. The fact that the Gelfand-Shilov regularity of u implies (1.15) is easy to prove and we omit the details. In the opposite direction, by Proposition 2.1 it is sufficient to prove that u satisfies (2.2) for every r > 0. From the previous estimate, we have, for every p ∈ N: σp(u, λ) ≤ C + p Xℓ=1 2p−ℓ(cid:18)p ℓ(cid:19)Cℓ+1 ≤ C(2 + C)p+1. Therefore up ≤ Cp+1p! kmt k+m for a new constant C > 0, which gives (2.2) in the case r ∈ N. If r > 0 is not integer, then p < r < p + 1 for some p ∈ N and we can apply Lemma 2.2 which yields ur ≤ εup+1 + Cε− r−p k+m u0 km p+1−r up + Cp(p!) k+m + Cp 1 ε− r−p kmt ≤ εCp+1 1 (p + 1)! p+1−r (p + 1)! kmt k+m + Cp 1 (p + 1)! kmt k+m ≤ Cr+1 2 kmrt k+m . r Then, by Proposition 2.1 we conclude that u ∈ S u ∈ Σ kt k+m mt k+m (Rn). kt k+m mt k+m (Rn). Similarly we argue for (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 1.4. The equivalence between ii) and iii) is obvious. Moreover (Rn) iii) is equivalent to iv) in view of (1.12). The arguments are similar for S k+m mt kt k+m 8 MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO and Σ kt k+m mt k+m (Rn) classes. To conclude the proof we will show the equivalence between i) and iv). We first observe that kP M uk2 L2 = k ∞ Xj=1 ujP M ϕj k2 L2 = ∞ Xj=1 λ2M j uj2, in view of Parseval identity. By (1.12) it follows that (2.6) C1kP M uk2 L2 ≤ ∞ Xj=1 j2Mkm/(n(k+m))uj2 ≤ C2kP M uk2 L2 for suitable positive constants C1, C2. Now if iv) holds, then we have uj2 ≤ e−ǫj1/(nt) for some new constant ǫ > 0. Then from the first estimate in (2.6) we have for some C > 0 (2.7) (2.8) with ∞ kP M uk2 L2 ≤ C Xj=1 ≤ C sup j∈N j2Mkm/(n(m+k))e−ǫj1/(nt) j2Mmk/(n(m+k))e−ǫj1/(nt) C = C ∞ Xj=1 e−ǫj1/(nt) . Moreover, for any fixed ω > 0 we have eωj1/(nt) = ∞ XM=0 ωM jM/(nt) M ! . This implies that for every M ∈ N: (2.9) jM/(nt)e−ωj1/(nt) ≤ ω−M M ! Taking the 2kmt/(k + m)-th power of both sides of (2.9) and applying in the last estimate in (2.8) with ω = 2ǫkmt/(k + m), we obtain kP M uk2 L2 ≤ Cω− 2M kmt k+m (M !) 2mkt m+k , which gives i) in view of Theorem 1.2. i) ⇒ ii) Viceversa assume that u ∈ S kt k+m mt k+m (Rn). In view of iv) it is sufficient to show that (2.10) uj2eǫj 1 nt < +∞. sup j∈N Theorem 1.2 and the second inequality in (2.6) imply that 2M km n(k+m) j CM (M !) 2kmt k+m uj2 ≤ C ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES9 for every j, M ∈ N and for some C independent of j and M . Taking the supremum of the left-hand side over M we get (2.10) with ǫ = 2kmt 2kmt . This concludes the proof. (cid:3) k+m C− k+m 3. Generalizations We list some possible generalizations of the preceding results. First, one can replace the hypothesis of positivity for the operator P by assuming that P is nor- mal, i.e. P ∗P = P P ∗. This guarantees the existence of an orthonormal basis of eigenfunctions ϕj, j ∈ N, with eigenvalues λj, lim λj = +∞, see [34], and we may j→∞ then proceed as before, cf. [33]. Another possible generalization consists in replacing L2 norms with Lp norms, 1 < p < ∞. Let us observe that the basic estimate (1.9) is valid also for Lp norms, see [16, 26], and it seems easy to extend Theorem 1.2 in this direction. A much more challenging problem is an analogous characterization of the classes ν (Rn) when κ = µ/ν = k/m is irrational. First difficulty, in this case, is given by Sµ an appropriate choice of the operator P . In fact, the natural candidates P = (−∆)m/2 + (1 + x2)k/2, m ∈ 2N, k > 0, k /∈ 2N can be easily treated in the setting of temperate distributions but results of Gelfand- Shilov regularity, extending those in [7], are missing for them. Note. With great sorrow, Marco Cappiello, Stevan Pilipovic and Luigi Rodino inform that their friend Todor Gramchev passed away on October 17, 2015. He inspired and collaborated to the initial version of the present paper and appears here as co-author. References 1. A.Ascanelli, M.Cappiello, Hölder continuity in time for SG hyperbolic systems, J. Differential Equations 244 (2008), 2091 -- 2121. 2. A. Avantaggiati, S-spaces by means of the behaviour of Hermite-Fourier coefficients, Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. 6 (1985), 487 -- 495. 3. H.A. Biagioni, T. Gramchev, Fractional derivative estimates in Gevrey spaces, global regu- larity and decay for solutions to semilinear equations in Rn, J. Differential Equations 194 (2003), 140 -- 165. 4. P. Boggiatto, E. Buzano, L. Rodino, Global hypoellipticity and spectral theory. Math. Res. 92, Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1996. 5. D. Calvo, L. Rodino, Iterates of operators and Gelfand-Shilov functions, Int. Transf. Spec. Funct. 22 (2011), 269 -- 276. 6. M. Cappiello, T. Gramchev, L. Rodino, Super-exponential decay and holomorphic extensions for semilinear equations with polynomial coefficients. J. Funct. Anal. 237 (2006), 634 -- 654. 7. M. Cappiello, T. Gramchev, L. Rodino, Entire extensions and exponential decay for semilinear elliptic equations, J. Anal. Math. 111 (2010), 339 -- 367. 8. M. Cappiello, T. Gramchev, L. Rodino, Sub-exponential decay and uniform holomorphic ex- tensions for semilinear pseudodifferential equations, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 35 (2010), n. 5, 846-877. 9. M. Cappiello, L. Rodino, SG-pseudo-differential operators and Gelfand-Shilov spaces, Rocky Mountain J. Math.36 (2006) n. 4, 1117 -- 1148. 10. M. Cappiello, J. Toft, Pseudo-differential operators in a Gelfand-Shilov setting, Math. Nachr. (2016). To appear. 11. Y. Chen, M. Signahl, J. Toft, Factorizations and singular value estimates of operators with Gelfand -- Shilov and Pilipović kernels, arXiv:1511.06257 (2016). 10 MARCO CAPPIELLO, TODOR GRAMCHEV, STEVAN PILIPOVIC, AND LUIGI RODINO 12. J. Chung, S. Y. Chung, D. Kim, Characterization of the Gelfand-Shilov spaces via Fourier transforms, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 124 (1996), 2101 -- 2108. 13. E. Cordero, F. Nicola, L. Rodino, Wave packet analysis of Schrödinger equations in analytic function spaces, Adv. Math. 278 (2015), 182 -- 209. 14. E. Cordero, S. Pilipović, L. Rodino, N. Teofanov, Localization operators and exponential weights for modulation spaces, Mediterranean J. Math. 2 (2005), 381 -- 394. 15. A. Dasgupta, M. Ruzhansky, Eigenfunction expansions of ultradifferentiable func- to appear. Available at tions and ultradistributions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.2637. 16. G. Garello, A. Morando, Lp-bounded pseudo-differential operators and regularity for multi- quasi-elliptic equations, Integral Equations Operator Theory 51 (2005), 501 -- 517. 17. I.M. Gelfand, G.E. Shilov, Generalized functions II. Academic Press, New York, 1968. 18. T. Gramchev, S. Pilipović, L. Rodino, Global Regularity and Stability in S-Spaces for Classes of Degenerate Shubin Operators. Pseudo-Differential Operators: Complex Analysis and Partial Differential Equations Operator Theory: Advances and Applications 205 (2010), 81-90. 19. T. Gramchev, S. Pilipović, L. Rodino, Eigenfunction expansions in Rn, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 139 (2011), 4361 -- 4368. 20. K. Gröchenig, G. Zimmermann, Spaces of test functions via the STFT, J. Funct. Spaces Appl. 2 (2005), 1671 -- 1716. 21. B. Helffer, Théorie spectrale pour des opérateurs globalement elliptiques. Astérisque 112, Société Mathématique de France, Paris, 1984. 22. H. Komatsu, A proof of Kotake and Narashiman's Theorem. Proc. Japan Acad. 38 (1962), 615-618. 23. T. Kotake, M.S. Narasimhan, Regularity theorems for fractional powers of a linear elliptic operator. Bull. Soc. Math. France, 90 (1962), 449-471. 24. M. Langenbruch, Hermite functions and weighted spaces of generalized functions. Manuscripta Math. 119 (2006), 269 -- 285. 25. B.S. Mitjagin, Nuclearity and other properties of spaces of type S, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl., Ser. 2, 93 (1970), 45 -- 59. 26. A. Morando, Lp-regularity for a class of pseudo-differential operators in Rn, J. Partial Dif- ferential Equations 18 (2005), 241 -- 262. 27. F. Nicola, L. Rodino, Global pseudo-differential calculus on Euclidean spaces, Birkhauser, Basel, 2010. 28. S. Pilipović, Generalization of Zemanian spaces of generalized functions which have orthonor- mal series expansions, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 17 (1986), 477-484. 29. S. Pilipović, Tempered ultradistributions. Boll. Unione Mat. Ital. VII. Ser. B 2 (1988), 235 -- 251. 30. S. Pilipović, N. Teofanov, Pseudodifferential operators on ultramodulation spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 208 (2004), 194 -- 228. 31. M. Reed, B. Simon, Methods of modern mathematical physics Vol 1. Academic Press, San Diego Ca., 1975. 32. R.T. Seeley, Integro-differential operators on vector boundes, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 117 (1965), 167-204. 33. R.T. Seeley, Eigenfunction expansions of analytic functions, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 21 (1969), 734 -- 738. 34. M. Shubin, Pseudodifferential operators and spectral theory. Springer Series in Soviet Math- ematics, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1987. 35. J. Toft, Multiplication properties in Gelfand-Shilov pseudo-differential calculus. In: Molahajlo, S., Pilipović, S., Toft, J., Wong, M.W. (eds.) Pseudo-Differential Operators, Generalized Functions and Asymptotics, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications, Birkhüser, Basel, 231 (2013), 117-172. 36. J. Toft, Images of function and distribution spaces under the Bargmann transform, J. Pseudo- Differ. Oper. Appl. DOI 10.1007/s11868-016-0165-9 (2016). 37. J. Vindas, Dj. Vuckovic, Eigenfunction expansions of ultradifferentiable functions and ultra- distributions in Rn arXiv:1512.01684 (2016). 38. M.W. Wong, The heat equation for the Hermite operator on the Heisenberg group. Hokkaido Math. J. 34 (2005), 393 -- 404. ANISOTROPIC SHUBIN OPERATORS AND EIGENFUNCTION EXPANSIONS IN GELFAND-SHILOV SPACES11 Dipartimento di Matematica, Università di Torino, Via Carlo Alberto 10, 10123 Torino, Italy E-mail address: [email protected] Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Università di Cagliari, Via Ospedale 72, 09124 Cagliari, Italy Institute of Mathematics, University of Novi Sad, trg. D. Obradovica 4, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail address: [email protected] Dipartimento di Matematica, Università di Torino, Via Carlo Alberto 10, 10123 Torino, Italy E-mail address: [email protected]
1708.01231	2	1708	2018-05-19T09:02:22	Optimal constants for a non-local approximation of Sobolev norms and total variation	[ "math.FA", "math.OC" ]	We consider the family of non-local and non-convex functionals proposed and investigated by J. Bourgain, H. Brezis and H.-M. Nguyen in a series of papers of the last decade. It was known that this family of functionals Gamma-converges to a suitable multiple of the Sobolev norm or the total variation, depending on the summability exponent, but the exact constants and the structure of recovery families were still unknown, even in dimension one. We prove a Gamma-convergence result with explicit values of the constants in any space dimension. We also show the existence of recovery families consisting of smooth functions with compact support. The key point is reducing the problem first to dimension one, and then to a finite combinatorial rearrangement inequality.	math.FA	math	Optimal constants for a non-local approximation of Sobolev norms and total variation Clara Antonucci Massimo Gobbino Scuola Normale Superiore Universit`a degli Studi di Pisa PISA (Italy) PISA (Italy) e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Matteo Migliorini Nicola Picenni Scuola Normale Superiore Scuola Normale Superiore PISA (Italy) PISA (Italy) e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] 8 1 0 2 y a M 9 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 2 v 1 3 2 1 0 . 8 0 7 1 : v i X r a Abstract We consider the family of non-local and non-convex functionals proposed and in- vestigated by J. Bourgain, H. Brezis and H.-M. Nguyen in a series of papers of the last decade. It was known that this family of functionals Gamma-converges to a suitable multiple of the Sobolev norm or the total variation, depending on the summability expo- nent, but the exact constants and the structure of recovery families were still unknown, even in dimension one. We prove a Gamma-convergence result with explicit values of the constants in any space dimension. We also show the existence of recovery families consisting of smooth functions with compact support. The key point is reducing the problem first to dimension one, and then to a finite combinatorial rearrangement inequality. Mathematics Subject Classification 2010 (MSC2010): 26B30, 46E35. Key words: Gamma-convergence, Sobolev spaces, bounded variation functions, mono- tone rearrangement, non-local functional, non-convex functional. 1 Introduction where Let p ≥ 1 and δ > 0 be real numbers, let d be a positive integer, and let Ω ⊆ Rd be an open set. For every measurable function u : Ω → R we set (1.1) δp Λδ,p(u, Ω) :=ZZI(δ,u,Ω) y − xd+p dx dy, I(δ, u, Ω) :=(cid:8)(x, y) ∈ Ω2 : u(y) − u(x) > δ(cid:9) . This family of non-convex and non-local functionals was introduced, motivated and investigated in a series of papers by H.-M. Nguyen [13, 14, 15, 16, 17], J. Bourgain and H.-M. Nguyen [4], H. Brezis and H.-M. Nguyen [8] (see also [6] and [7]). We point out that the dependence on u is just on the integration set. The fixed integrand is divergent on the diagonal y = x, and the integration set is closer to the diagonal where the gradient of u is large. This suggests that Λδ,p(u, Ω) is proportional, in the limit as δ → 0+, to some norm of the gradient of u, and more precisely to the functional Λ0,p(u, Ω) := ZΩ ∇u(x)p dx total variation of u in Ω +∞ if p > 1 and u ∈ W 1,p(Ω), if p = 1 and u ∈ BV (Ω), otherwise. (1.2) It is natural to compare the family (1.1) with the classical approximations of Sobolev or BV norms, based on non-local convex functionals such as Gε,p(u, Ω) :=ZZΩ u(y) − u(x)p y − xp ρε(y − x) dx dy, (1.3) where gradients are replaced by finite differences weighted by a suitable family ρε of mollifiers. The idea of approximating integrals of the gradient with double integrals of difference quotients, where all pairs of distinct points interact, has been considered in- dependently by many authors in different contexts. For example, E. De Giorgi proposed an approximation of this kind to the Mumford-Shah functional in any space dimension, in order to overcome the anisotropy of the discrete approximation [9]. The resulting theory was put into paper in [11], and then extended in [12] to more general free dis- continuity problems, and in particular to Sobolev and BV spaces. In the same years, the case of Sobolev and BV norms was considered in details in [3] (see also [18]). The result, as expected, is that the family Gε,p(u, Rd) converges as ε → 0+ to a suitable multiple of Λ0,p(u, Rd), both in the sense of pointwise convergence, and in the sense of De Giorgi's Gamma-convergence. This provides a characterization of Sobolev functions (if p > 1), and of bounded variation functions (if p = 1), as those functions for which the pointwise limit or the Gamma-limit is finite. 1 From the heuristic point of view, the non-convex approximating family (1.1) seems to follow a different paradigm. Indeed, it has been observed by J.M. Morel (as quoted at page 4 of the transparencies of the conference [5]) that this definition involves some sort of "vertical slicing" that evokes the definition of integral `a la Lebesgue, in contrast to the definition `a la Riemann that seems closer to the "horizontal slicing" of the finite differences in (1.3). From the mathematical point of view, the asymptotic behavior of (1.1) exhibits some unexpected features. In order to state the precise results, let us introduce some notation. Let Sd−1 := {σ ∈ Rd : σ = 1} denote the unit sphere in Rd. For every p ≥ 1 we consider the geometric constant Gd,p :=ZSd−1 hv, σip dσ, (1.4) where v is any element of Sd−1 (of course the value of Gd,p does not depend on the choice of v), and the integration is intended with respect to the (d − 1)-dimensional Hausdorff measure. The main convergence results obtained so far can be summed up as follows. • Pointwise convergence for p > 1. For every p > 1 it turns out that ∀u ∈ Lp(Rd). Gd,p Λ0,p(u, Rd) 1 p lim δ→0+ Λδ,p(u, Rd) = (1.5) • Pointwise convergence for p = 1. In the case p = 1 equality (1.5) holds true c (Rd), but there do exist functions u ∈ W 1,1(Rd) for which the for every u ∈ C 1 left-hand side is infinite (while of course the right-hand side is finite). A precise characterization of equality cases is still unknown. • Gamma-convergence for every p ≥ 1. For every p ≥ 1 there exists a constant Cd,p such that Γ– lim δ→0+ Λδ,p(u, Rd) = 1 p Gd,pCd,p Λ0,p(u, Rd) ∀u ∈ Lp(Rd), where the Gamma-limit is intended with respect to the usual metric of Lp(Rd) (but the result would be the same with respect to the convergence in L1(Rd) or in measure). Moreover, it was proved that Cd,p ∈ (0, 1), namely the Gamma-limit is always nontrivial but different from the pointwise limit. As a consequence, again one can characterize the Sobolev space W 1,p(Rd) as the set of functions in Lp(Rd) for which the pointwise limit or the Gamma-limit are finite. As for BV (Rd), in this setting it can be characterized only through the Gamma-limit. Some problems remained open, and were stated explicitly in [16, 8]. • Question 1. What is the exact value of Cd,p, at least in the case d = 1? 2 • Question 2. Does Cd,p depend on d? • Question 3. Do there exist recovery families made up of continuous functions, or even of functions of class C ∞? In this paper we answer these three questions. Concerning question 1 and 2, we prove that Cd,p does not depend on d, and coincides with the value Cp conjectured in [14] for the one-dimensional case, namely 1 p − 1(cid:18)1 − 1 2p−1(cid:19) log 2 if p > 1, if p = 1. (1.6) Cp := Concerning the third question, we prove that smooth recovery families do exist. Our main result is the following. Theorem 1.1 (Gamma-convergence). Let us consider the functionals Λδ,p and Λ0,p defined in (1.1) and (1.2), respectively. Then for every positive integer d and every real number p ≥ 1 it turns out that Γ– lim δ→0+ Λδ,p(u, Rd) = 1 p Gd,pCp Λ0,p(u, Rd) ∀u ∈ Lp(Rd), where Gd,p is the geometric constant defined in (1.4), and Cp is the constant defined in (1.6). In particular, the following two statements hold true. (1) (Liminf inequality) For every family {uδ}δ>0 ⊆ Lp(Rd), with uδ → u in Lp(Rd) as δ → 0+, it turns out that lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, Rd) ≥ 1 p Gd,pCp Λ0,p(u, Rd). (1.7) (2) (Limsup inequality) For every u ∈ Lp(Rd) there exists a family {uδ}δ>0 ⊆ Lp(Rd), with uδ → u in Lp(Rd) as δ → 0+, such that 1 p Λδ,p(uδ, Rd) ≤ lim sup δ→0+ Gd,pCp Λ0,p(u, Rd). We can also assume that the family {uδ} consists of functions of class C ∞ with compact support. The proof of this result requires a different approach to the problem, which we briefly sketch below. In previous literature the constant Cd,p was defined through some sort of cell problem as 1 p Gd,pCd,p := inf(cid:26)lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(cid:0)uδ, (0, 1)d(cid:1) : uδ → u0 in Lp(cid:0)(0, 1)d(cid:1)(cid:27) , 3 where u0(x) = (x1 + . . . + xd)/√d. Unfortunately, this definition is quite implicit and provides no informations on the structure of the families that approach the optimal value. This lack of structure complicates things, in such a way that just proving that Cd,p > 0 requires extremely delicate estimates (this is the content of [4]). On the Gamma-limsup side, since Λδ,p is quite sensitive to jumps, what is difficult is glueing together the recovery families corresponding to different slopes, even in the case of a piecewise affine function in dimension one. This requires a delicate surgery near the junctions (see [16]). Finally, as for question 3, difficulties originate from the lack of convexity or continuity of the functionals (1.1), which do not seem to behave well under convolution or similar smoothing techniques. The core of our approach consists in proving that Λδ,p in dimension one behaves well under vertical δ-segmentation and monotone rearrangement. We refer to Section 3.1 for the details, but roughly speaking this means that monotone step functions whose values are consecutive integer multiples of δ are the most efficient way to fill the gap between any two given levels. The argument is purely one-dimensional, and it is carried out in Proposition 3.2. In turn, the proof relies on a discrete combinatorial rearrangement inequality, which we investigate in Theorem 2.2 under more general assumptions. We observe that this strategy, namely estimating the asymptotic cost of oscillations by reducing ourselves to a discrete combinatorial minimum problem, is the same ex- ploited in [11, 12], with the remarkable difference that now the reduction to the discrete setting is achieved through vertical δ-segmentation, while in [11, 12] it was obtained through a horizontal ε-segmentation (see Figure 1). Figure 1: vertical δ-segmentation vs horizontal ε-segmentation (δ is the distance between the parallel lines on the left, ε is the distance between the parallel lines on the right) The asymptotic estimate on the cost of oscillations opens the door to the Gamma- liminf inequality in dimension one, which at this point follows from well established techniques. As for the Gamma-limsup inequality, in dimension one we just need to exhibit a family that realizes the given explicit multiple of Λ0,p(u, R), and this can be achieved through a vertical δ-segmentation `a la Lebesgue (see Proposition 3.7). This produces a recovery family made up of step functions, and it is not difficult to modify them in order to obtain functions of class C ∞ with asymptotically the same energy 4 (see Proposition 3.9). Finally, passing from dimension one to any dimension is just an application of the one-dimensional result to all the one-dimensional sections of a function of d variables. At the end of the day, we have a completely self-contained proof of Theorem 1.1 above, and a clear indication that the true difficulty of the problem lies in dimension one, and actually in the discretized combinatorial model. We hope that these ideas could be extended to the more general functionals considered in [8]. Some steps in this direction have already been done in [2] (see also the note [1]). This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we develop a theory of monotone rearrangements, first in a discrete, and then in a semi-discrete setting. In Section 3 we prove our Gamma-convergence result in dimension one. In Section 4 we prove the Gamma-convergence result in any space dimension. We would like to thank an anonymous referee for drawing our attention to the rearrangement inequalities of [10], which could be used in place of our Theorem 2.4 in the appropriate point of the proof of Proposition 3.2. It is not difficult to realize that those rearrangement inequalities, and their discrete combinatorial counterpart known as Taylor's Lemma (see [19]), are actually equivalent to ours. Keeping this equivalence into account, we think that our Section 2 could be interesting not only because it makes the paper as self-contained as possibile, but also because it provides new proofs of some of the results of [19, 10], starting from a different perspective (`a la Lebesgue here, and `a la Riemann in previous works). It was surprising to discover that similar combinatorial problems originated in the 1970s in a completely different context. 2 An aggregation/segregation problem In this section we study the minimum problem for two simplified versions of (1.1), which we interpret as optimizing the disposition of some objects of different types (actually dinosaurs of different species). The first problem is purely discrete, namely with a finite number of dinosaurs of a finite number of species. The second one is semi-discrete, namely with a continuum of dinosaurs belonging to a finite number of species. 2.1 Discrete setting Let us consider • a positive integer n, • a function u : {1, . . . , n} → Z, • a symmetric subset E ⊆ Z2 (namely any subset with the property that (i, j) ∈ E if and only if (j, i) ∈ E), • a nonincreasing function h : {0, 1, . . . , n − 1} → R. 5 Let us introduce the discrete interaction set J(E, u) :=(cid:8)(x, y) ∈ {1, . . . , n}2 : x ≤ y, (u(x), u(y)) ∈ E(cid:9) , and let us finally define H(h, E, u) := X(x,y)∈J(E,u) h(y − x). (2.1) (2.2) Just to help intuition, we think of u as an arrangement of n dinosaurs placed in the points {1, . . . , n}. There are different species of dinosaurs, indexed by integer numbers, so that u(x) denotes the species of the dinosaur in position x. The subset E ⊆ Z2 is the list of all pairs of species that are hostile to each other. A pair of points (x, y) belongs to J(E, u) if and only if x ≤ y and the two dinosaurs placed in x and y belong to hostile species, and in this case the real number h(y − x) measures the "hostility" between the two dinosaurs. As expected, the closer are the dinosaurs, the larger is their hostility. Keeping this jurassic framework into account, sometimes in the sequel we call u a "discrete arrangement of n dinosaurs", we call E an "enemy list", we call h a "discrete hostility function", and H(h, E, u) the "total hostility of the arrangement". At this level of generality, we admit the possibility that (i, i) ∈ E for some integer i, namely that a dinosaur is hostile to dinosaurs of the same species, including itself. For this reason, the hostility function h(x) is defined also for x = 0. This generality turns out to be useful in the proof of the main result for discrete arrangements. In the sequel we focus on the special case where E coincides with Ek := {(i, j) ∈ Z2 : j − i ≥ k + 1} (2.3) for some positive integer k. In this case it is quite intuitive that the arrangements that minimize the total hostility are the "monotone" ones, namely those in which all dinosaurs of the same species are close to each other, and the groups corresponding to different species are sorted in ascending or descending order. To this end, we introduce the following notion. Definition 2.1 (Nondecreasing rearrangement – Discrete setting). Let n be a positive integer, and let u : {1, . . . , n} → Z be a function. The nondecreasing rearrangement of u is the function Mu : {1, . . . , n} → Z defined as Mu(x) := min(cid:8)j ∈ Z : {y ∈ {1, . . . , n} : u(y) ≤ j} ≥ x(cid:9) , where A denotes the number of elements of the set A. As the name suggests, Mu turns out to be a nondecreasing function, and it is uniquely characterized by the fact that the two level sets (cid:8)x ∈ {1, . . . , n} : u(x) = j(cid:9) , have the same number of elements for every j ∈ Z. hostility with respect to the enemy list Ek. (cid:8)x ∈ {1, . . . , n} : Mu(x) = j(cid:9) As expected, the main result is that monotone arrangements minimize the total 6 Theorem 2.2 (Total hostility minimization – Discrete setting). Let n and k be two positive integers, let Ek ⊆ Z2 be the subset defined by (2.3), and let h : {0, . . . , n− 1} → R be a nonincreasing function. Let u : {1, . . . , n} → Z be any function, let Mu be the nondecreasing rearrangement of u introduced in Definition 2.1, and let H(h, Ek, u) be the total hostility defined in (2.2). Then it turns out that H(h, Ek, u) ≥ H(h, Ek, Mu). (2.4) 2.2 Semi-discrete setting Let us consider • an interval (a, b) ⊆ R, • a measurable function u : (a, b) → Z with finite image, • a symmetric subset E ⊆ Z2, • a nonincreasing function c : (0, b − a) → R (note that c(σ) might diverge as σ → 0+). Let us introduce the semi-discrete interaction set I(E, u) :=(cid:8)(x, y) ∈ (a, b)2 : (u(x), u(y)) ∈ E(cid:9) , and let us finally define F (c, E, u) :=ZZI(E,u) c(y − x) dx dy. (2.5) (2.6) In analogy with the discrete setting, we interpret u(x) as a continuous arrangement of dinosaurs of a finite number of species, c(y−x) as the hostility between two dinosaurs of hostile species placed in x and y, and we think of F (c, E, u) as the total hostility of the arrangement u with respect to the enemy list E. Once again, we suspect that monotone arrangements minimize the total hostility with respect to the enemy list Ek. This leads to the following notion. Definition 2.3 (Nondecreasing rearrangement – Semi-discrete setting). Let u : (a, b) → Z be a measurable function with finite image. The nondecreasing rearrangement of u is the function Mu : (a, b) → Z defined as Mu(x) := min(cid:8)j ∈ Z : meas{y ∈ (a, b) : u(y) ≤ j} ≥ x − a(cid:9) , where meas(A) denotes the Lebesgue measure of a subset A ⊆ (a, b). 7 The function Mu is nondecreasing and satisfies meas{x ∈ (a, b) : u(x) = j} = meas{x ∈ (a, b) : Mu(x) = j} ∀j ∈ Z. The following result is the semi-discrete counterpart of Theorem 2.2. Theorem 2.4 (Total hostility minimization – Semi-discrete setting). Let (a, b) ⊆ R be an interval, let k be a positive integer, let Ek ⊆ Z2 be the subset defined by (2.3), and let c : (0, b − a) → R be a nonincreasing function. Let u : (a, b) → Z be any measurable function with finite image, let Mu be the nondecreasing rearrangement of u introduced in Definition 2.3, and let F (c, Ek, u) be the total hostility defined in (2.6). Then it turns out that F (c, Ek, u) ≥ F (c, Ek, Mu). (2.7) Remark 2.5. Theorem 2.4 above is stated in the form that we need in the proof of Proposition 3.2. With a further approximation step in the proof, one can show that the same conclusion (2.7) holds true also without assuming that the image of u is finite and contained in Z, and without assuming that k is a positive integer (but just a real number greater than −1). Theorem 2.2 is equivalent to Taylor's lemma (see [19] and [10, Theorem 1.2]). This extended result is equivalent to [10, Theorem 1.1], in the same way as our 2.3 Proof of Theorem 2.2 Despite the quite intuitive statement, the proof requires some work. To begin with, we introduce some notation, and we develop some preliminary results. Since the function h is fixed once for all, in the sequel we simply write H(E, u) instead of H(h, E, u). Left-right gap Let L and R be two finite sets of positive integers. We call left-right gap the quantity G(L, R) := h(0) +Xℓ∈L h(ℓ) +Xr∈R h(r) − X(ℓ,r)∈L×R(cid:0)h(ℓ + r − 1) − h(ℓ + r)(cid:1) . We prove that (2.8) (2.9) G(L, R) ≤ L+RXi=0 h(i). To this end, we argue by induction on the number of elements of R. If R = ∅, from (2.8) we deduce that G(L, R) := h(0) +Xℓ∈L h(ℓ) ≤ LXi=0 h(i) = L+RXi=0 h(i), 8 where the inequality is true term-by-term because h is nonincreasing. Let us assume now that the conclusion holds true whenever R has n elements, and let us consider any pair (L, R) with R = n + 1. Let us set a := max R, b := min{n ∈ N \ {0} : n 6∈ L}, and let us consider the new pair (L1, R1) defined as L1 := L ∪ {b}, R1 := R \ {a}. In words, we have removed the largest element of R, and added the smallest possible element to L. We observe that R1 = n and L1 + R1 = L + R. Therefore, if we show that (2.10) G(L, R) ≤ G(L1, R1), then (2.9) follows from the inductive assumption. In order to prove (2.10), we expand the left-hand side and the right-hand side according to (2.8). After canceling out the common terms, with some algebra we obtain that inequality (2.10) holds true if and only if h(a) +Xr∈R1(cid:0)h(b + r − 1) − h(b + r)(cid:1) ≤ h(b) +Xℓ∈L(cid:0)h(ℓ + a − 1) − h(ℓ + a)(cid:1) . (2.11) All terms in the sums are nonnegative because h is nonincreasing. Let us consider the left-hand side. If a > 1 we know that R1 ⊆ {1, . . . , a − 1}, and hence h(a) +Xr∈R1(cid:0)h(b + r − 1) − h(b + r)(cid:1) ≤ h(a) + a−1Xr=1(cid:0)h(b + r − 1) − h(b + r)(cid:1) = h(a) + h(b) − h(a + b − 1). (2.12) The same inequality is true for trivial reasons also if a = 1. Let us consider now the right-hand side of (2.11). If b > 1 we know that L ⊇ {1, . . . , b − 1}, and hence h(b) +Xℓ∈L(cid:0)h(ℓ + a − 1) − h(ℓ + a)(cid:1) ≥ h(b) + b−1Xℓ=1(cid:0)h(ℓ + a − 1) − h(ℓ + a)(cid:1) = h(b) + h(a) − h(a + b − 1). As before, the same inequality is true for trivial reasons also if b = 1. Combining (2.13) and (2.12) we obtain (2.11), which in turn is equivalent to (2.10). (2.13) This completes the proof of (2.9). 9 Reduction of an arrangement and hostility gap For every function v : {1, . . . , n} → Z, let us set µ := max{v(i) : i ∈ {1, . . . , n}}, and let m ∈ {1, . . . , n} be the largest index such that v(m) = µ. If n ≥ 2, we call reduction of v the function Rv : {1, . . . , n − 1} → Z defined by [Rv](i) :=(cid:26) v(i) v(i + 1) if i < m, if i ≥ m. In terms of dinosaurs, Rv is the arrangement obtained from v by removing the rightmost dinosaur of the species indexed by the highest integer, and by shifting one position to the left all subsequent dinosaurs. When passing from v to Rv, the total hostility changes by an amount that we call hostility gap, defined as ∆(E, v) := H(E, v) − H(E, Rv). We observe that interactions between any two dinosaurs placed on the same side of the removed one are equal before and after the removal, and therefore they cancel out when computing the gap. On the contrary, if two hostile dinosaurs are placed within distance d on opposite sides of the removed one, their hostility changes from h(d) to h(d − 1) after the removal. It follows that the hostility gap can be written as ∆(E, v) = Xi∈J1(E,u,m) h(m − i) − X(i,j)∈J2(E,u,m)(cid:0)h(j − i − 1) − h(j − i)(cid:1) , (2.14) where and J1(E, u, m) :=(cid:8)i ∈ {1, . . . , n} : (u(i), u(m)) ∈ E(cid:9) J2(E, u, m) :=(cid:8)(i, j) ∈ {1, . . . , n}2 : i < m < j, (u(i), u(j)) ∈ E(cid:9) . The first sum in (2.14) keeps into account the interactions of the removed dinosaur with the rest of the world, the second sum represents the increment of the total hostility due to the reduction of distances among the others. Monotone rearrangement decreases the hostility gap We prove that ∆(Ek, v) ≥ ∆(Ek, Mv) (2.15) for every arrangement v of n dinosaurs. In order to prove this inequality, we consider the new enemy list Ehµi := Z2 \ {µ, µ − 1, . . . , µ − k}2, 10 and we claim that ∆(Ek, v) ≥ ∆(Ehµi, v) ≥ ∆(Ehµi, Mv) = ∆(Ek, Mv), (2.16) which of course implies (2.15). The equality between the last two terms of (2.16) follows from formula (2.14). In- deed, since Mv is nondecreasing, the removed dinosaur is the rightmost one, and there- fore in both cases the second sum in (2.14) is void. Also the first sum in (2.14) is the same in both cases, because a dinosaur of the highest species is hostile to another di- nosaur with respect to the enemy list Ek if and only if it is hostile to the same dinosaur with respect to the enemy list Ehµi. The inequality between the first two terms of (2.16) follows again from formula (2.14). Indeed, the first sum has the same terms both in the case of the enemy list Ek and in the case of the enemy list Ehµi, as observed above. As for the second sum, the interactions with respect to Ek are also interactions with respect to Ehµi, and therefore when passing from Ek to Ehµi the second sum cannot decrease. Since the second sum appears in (2.14) with negative sign, the hostility gap with respect to Ehµi is less than or equal to the hostility gap with respect to Ek. It remains to prove that ∆(Ehµi, v) ≥ ∆(Ehµi, Mv). To this end, we introduce the complement enemy list (2.17) Ec hµi := {µ, µ − 1, . . . , µ − k}2 = Z2 \ Ehµi. Since Z2 is the disjoint union of Ehµi and Ec hµi, and the total hostility is additive with respect to the enemy list, we deduce that H(Ehµi, w) = H(Z2, w) − H(Ec hµi, w) for every arrangement w, and for the same reason ∆(Ehµi, w) = ∆(Z2, w) − ∆(Ec hµi, w). Moreover, we observe that the total hostility with respect to Z2 depends only on the number of dinosaurs, and in particular ∆(Z2, v) = ∆(Z2, Mv). As a consequence, proving (2.17) is equivalent to showing that ∆(Ec hµi, v) ≤ ∆(Ec hµi, Mv). (2.18) The advantage of this "complement formulation" is that hostility gaps with respect hµi depend only on the relative positions of the removed dinosaur with respect to to Ec the other dinosaurs of the species with indices between µ − k and µ. 11 To be more precise, let us compute the left-hand side of (2.18). Let m denote as usual the position of the dinosaur that is removed from v to Rv, and let us set R(v) := {r ≥ 1 : v(m + r) ∈ {µ, µ − 1, . . . , µ − k}} , L(v) := {ℓ ≥ 1 : v(m − ℓ) ∈ {µ, µ − 1, . . . , µ − k}} . In other words, this means that {m − ℓ : ℓ ∈ L(v)} ∪ {m} ∪ {m + r : r ∈ R(v)} is the set of all integers i ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that v(i) ∈ {µ, µ − 1, . . . , µ − k}, namely the set of positions where the dinosaurs of the last k + 1 species are placed. With this notation, the first sum in (2.14) is h(0) + Xℓ∈L(v) h(ℓ) + Xr∈R(v) h(r) (we recall that in this "complement formulation" the dinosaur in m is also hostile to itself), while the second sum in (2.14) is X(ℓ,r)∈L(v)×R(v)(cid:0)h(ℓ + r − 1) − h(ℓ + r)(cid:1) . h(ℓ) + Xr∈R(v) h(r) − X(ℓ,r)∈L(v)×R(v)(cid:0)h(ℓ + r − 1) − h(ℓ + r)(cid:1) Therefore, it turns out that ∆(Ec hµi, v) = h(0) + Xℓ∈L(v) = G(L(v), R(v)), (2.19) where G is the left-right gap defined in (2.8). On the other hand, in the nondecreasing arrangement Mv the rightmost dinosaur has L(v) + R(v) dinosaurs of the last k + 1 species exactly on its left, and therefore ∆(Ec hµi, Mv) = L(v)+R(v)Xi=0 h(i). (2.20) Keeping (2.19) and (2.20) into account, inequality (2.18) is exactly (2.9). Conclusion We are now ready to prove (2.4). To this end, we argue by induction on the number n of dinosaurs. In the case n = 1 there is nothing to prove. Let us assume now that the conclusion holds true for all arrangements of n dinosaurs. Let u be any arrangement of n + 1 dinosaurs, and let Ru denote its reduction. Since Ru is an arrangement of n dinosaurs, from the inductive assumption we know that H(Ek, Ru) ≥ H(Ek, M(Ru)). 12 On the other hand, from (2.15) we know that Since M(Ru) = R(Mu), we finally conclude that ∆(Ek, u) ≥ ∆(Ek, Mu). H(Ek, u) = H(Ek, Ru) + ∆(Ek, u) ≥ H(Ek, M(Ru)) + ∆(Ek, Mu) = H(Ek, R(Mu)) + ∆(Ek, Mu) = H(Ek, Mu), which proves the conclusion for arrangements of n + 1 dinosaurs. (cid:3) 2.4 Proof of Theorem 2.4 The proof relies on the following approximation result (we omit the proof, which is an exercise in basic measure theory). Lemma 2.6. Let m be a positive integer, and let D1, . . . , Dm be disjoint measurable subsets of (0, 1) such that Then for every ε > 0 there exist disjoint subsets D1,ε, . . . , Dm,ε of [0, 1] such that Di = (0, 1). Di,ε = (0, 1), m[i=1 m[i=1 and such that for every i = 1, . . . , m it turns out that • Di,ε is a finite union of intervals with rational endpoints, • the Lebesgue measure of the symmetric difference between Di and Di,ε is less than or equal to ε. (cid:3) We are now ready to prove Theorem 2.4. First of all, we observe that (2.7) is invari- ant by translations and homotheties. As a consequence, there is no loss of generality in assuming that (a, b) = (0, 1) and c : (0, 1) → R. Then we proceed in three steps. To begin with, we prove (2.7) in the special case where the hostility function c is bounded and the arrangement u has a very rigid structure, then for general u but again bounded hostility function, and finally in the general setting. 13 Step 1 We prove (2.7) under the additional assumption that the hostility function c : (0, 1) → R is bounded, and that there exists a positive integer d such that u(x) is constant in each interval of the form ((i − 1)/d, i/d) with i = 1, . . . , d. Indeed, this is actually the discrete setting. To be more precise, we introduce the discrete arrangement v : {1, . . . , d} → Z defined as d (cid:19) v(i) := u(cid:18)i − 1/2 ∀i ∈ {1, . . . , d}, and the discrete hostility function h : {0, . . . , d − 1} → R defined as h(i) :=Z 1/d 0 dxZ (i+1)/d i/d c(y − x) dy ∀i ∈ {0, . . . , d − 1}, which represents the contribution to the total hostility of two intervals of length 1/d occupied by hostile dinosaurs, and placed at distance i/d from each other. Then for every enemy list Ek it turns out that F (c, Ek, u) = 2H(h, Ek, v), where H(h, Ek, v) is the discrete total hostility defined in (2.2), and the factor 2 keeps into account that both (x, y) and (y, x) are included in the semi-discrete interaction set I(Ek, u), while only one of them is included in the discrete counterpart J(Ek, v) (see (2.1) and (2.5)). Moreover, the monotone rearrangement Mv of v is related to the monotone rearrangement Mu of u by the formula Mv(i) = Mu(cid:18) i − 1/2 d (cid:19) ∀i ∈ {1, . . . , d}, and again it turns out that F (c, Ek, Mu) = 2H(h, Ek, Mv) for every enemy list Ek. At this point, (2.7) is equivalent to which in turn is true because of Theorem 2.2. H(h, Ek, v) ≥ H(h, Ek, Mv), Step 2 We prove (2.7) for a general arrangement u : (0, 1) → Z, but again under the additional assumption that the hostility function c : (0, 1) → R is bounded. To this end, let z1 < z2 < . . . < zm denote the elements in the image of u, and let Di := {x ∈ (0, 1) : u(x) = zi} ∀i ∈ {1, . . . , m} 14 denote the set of positions of dinosaurs of the species zi. For every ε > 0, let us consider the sets D1,ε, . . . , Dm,ε given by Lemma 2.6, and the function uε : (0, 1) → Z defined as uε(x) = zi ∀x ∈ Di,ε. Since the hostility function c is bounded, and the symmetric difference between Di and Di,ε has measure less than or equal to ε, there exists a constant Γ (depending on m and c, but independent of ε) such that F (c, Ek, Mu) − F (c, Ek, Muε) ≤ Γε. F (c, Ek, u) − F (c, Ek, uε) ≤ Γε On the other hand, the function uε satisfies the assumptions of the previous step, and and therefore From all these inequalities it follows that F (c, Ek, uε) ≥ F (c, Ek, Muε). F (c, Ek, u) ≥ F (c, Ek, Mu) − 2Γε. Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, (2.7) is proved in this case. Step 3 We prove (2.7) without assuming that the hostility function c(x) is bounded. To this end, for every n ∈ N we consider the truncated hostility function We observe that cn(x) := min{c(x), n} ∀x ∈ (0, 1). F (c, Ek, u) ≥ F (cn, Ek, u) ∀n ∈ N because c(x) ≥ cn(x) for every x ∈ (0, 1), and F (cn, Ek, u) ≥ F (cn, Ek, Mu) ∀n ∈ N because of the result of the previous step applied to the bounded hostility function cn(x). As a consequence, we obtain that ∀n ∈ N. On the other hand, by monotone convergence we deduce that F (c, Ek, u) ≥ F (cn, Ek, Mu) (2.21) F (c, Ek, Mu) = sup n∈N F (cn, Ek, Mu), and therefore (2.7) follows from (2.21). (cid:3) 15 3 Gamma-convergence in dimension one In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 for d = 1, in which case G1,p = 2 ∀p ≥ 1. (3.1) To begin with, we introduce the notion of vertical δ-segmentation, which is going to play a crucial role in many parts of the proof. Definition 3.1 (Vertical δ-segmentation). Let X be any set, let w : X → R be any function, and let δ > 0. The vertical δ-segmentation of w is the function Sδw : X → R defined by δ (cid:23) Sδw(x) := δ(cid:22) w(x) ∀x ∈ X. (3.2) The function Sδw takes its values in δZ, and it is uniquely characterized by the fact that Sδw(x) = kδ for some k ∈ Z if and only if kδ ≤ w(x) < (k + 1)δ. 3.1 Asymptotic cost of oscillations Let us assume that a function uδ(x) oscillates between two values A and B in some interval (a, b). Does this provide an estimate from below for Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)), at least when δ is small enough? The following Proposition and the subsequent corollaries give a sharp quantitative answer to this question. They are the fundamental tool in the proof of the liminf inequality. Proposition 3.2 (Limit cost of vertical oscillations). Let p ≥ 1 be a real number, let (a, b) ⊆ R be an interval, and let {uδ}δ>0 ⊆ Lp((a, b)) be a family of functions. Let us assume that there exist two real numbers A ≤ B such that lim inf δ→0+ meas{x ∈ (a, b) : uδ(x) ≤ A + ε} > 0 ∀ε > 0, and lim inf δ→0+ meas{x ∈ (a, b) : uδ(x) ≥ B − ε} > 0 ∀ε > 0. Then it turns out that lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) ≥ 2 p · Cp · (B − A)p (b − a)p−1 , where Cp is the constant defined in (1.6). (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) 16 Proof To begin with, we observe that (3.5) is trivial if A = B, or if the left-hand side is infinite. Up to restricting ourselves to a sequence δk → 0+, we can also assume that the liminf is actually a limit. Therefore, in the sequel we assume that the left-hand side of (3.5) is uniformly bounded from above, and that A < B. Let us fix ε > 0 such that 4ε < B − A. Due to assumptions (3.3) and (3.4), there exist η > 0 and δ0 > 0 such that meas{x ∈ (a, b) : uδ(x) ≤ A + ε} ≥ η meas{x ∈ (a, b) : uδ(x) ≥ B − ε} ≥ η ∀δ ∈ (0, δ0), ∀δ ∈ (0, δ0). (3.6) (3.7) Truncation, δ-segmentation and monotone rearrangement In this section of the proof, we replace {uδ} with a new family {buδ} of monotone piecewise constant functions that still satisfies (3.3) and (3.4), without increasing the left-hand side of (3.5). To this end, we perform three operations on uδ(x). The first operation is a truncation between A and B. To be more precise, we define TA,Buδ : (a, b) → R by setting TA,Buδ(x) := We observe that the implication A uδ(x) B if uδ(x) < A, if A ≤ uδ(x) ≤ B, if uδ(x) > B. TA,Buδ(y) − TA,Buδ(x) > δ =⇒ uδ(y) − uδ(x) > δ holds true for every x and y in (a, b), and hence Λδ,p(TA,Buδ, (a, b)) ≤ Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) ∀δ > 0. We also observe that (3.6) and (3.7) remain true if we replace uδ(x) by TA,Buδ(x). The second operation is a vertical δ-segmentation, namely we replace TA,Buδ by the function SδTA,Buδ defined according to (3.2). Again we observe that the implications SδTA,Buδ(y) − SδTA,Buδ(x) > δ =⇒ SδTA,Buδ(y) − SδTA,Buδ(x) ≥ 2δ =⇒ TA,Buδ(y) − TA,Buδ(x) > δ hold true for every x and y in (a, b), and hence Λδ,p(SδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) ≤ Λδ,p(TA,Buδ, (a, b)) ∀δ > 0. As for (3.6) and (3.7), we set δ1 := min{ε, δ0}, and we observe that now ∀δ ∈ (0, δ1), meas{x ∈ (a, b) : SδTA,Buδ(x) ≤ A + 2ε} ≥ η (3.8) 17 meas{x ∈ (a, b) : SδTA,Buδ(x) ≥ B − 2ε} ≥ η ∀δ ∈ (0, δ1). (3.9) The third and last operation we perform is monotone rearrangement, namely we replace SδTA,Buδ with the nondecreasing function MSδTA,Buδ in (a, b) whose level sets have the same measure of the level sets of SδTA,Buδ (see Definition 2.3). From (3.8) and (3.9) we deduce that now MSδTA,Buδ(x) ≤ A + 2ε MSδTA,Buδ(x) ≥ B − 2ε Moreover, we claim that ∀x ∈ (a, a + η), ∀x ∈ (b − η, b), ∀δ ∈ (0, δ1), ∀δ ∈ (0, δ1). Λδ,p(MSδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) ≤ Λδ,p(SδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) ∀δ > 0. (3.10) (3.11) (3.12) This is a straightforward consequence of Theorem 2.4. To be more formal, let us consider the semi-discrete arrangement vδ : (a, b) → Z defined by vδ(x) := SδTA,Buδ(x) ∀x ∈ (a, b) 1 δ (we recall that SδTA,Buδ takes its values in δZ, and hence vδ(x) is integer valued), and the hostility function c : (0, b − a) → R defined as c(σ) := δpσ−1−p. We observe that MSδTA,Buδ(x) = δMvδ(x) ∀x ∈ (a, b), where Mvδ is the nondecreasing rearrangement of vδ according to Definition 2.3. We observe also that for every pair of points x and y in (a, b) it turns out that (x, y) ∈ I(δ, SδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) ⇐⇒ vδ(y) − vδ(x) ≥ 2 ⇐⇒ (x, y) ∈ I(E1, vδ), where E1 is the enemy list defined in (2.3), and I(E1, vδ) is the semi-discrete interaction set defined according to (2.5). It follows that Λδ,p(SδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) = F (c, E1, vδ), and therefore (3.12) is equivalent to (2.7). Λδ,p(MSδTA,Buδ, (a, b)) = F (c, E1, Mvδ), In conclusion, the three operations described so far delivered us a family satisfies (3.10) and (3.11), and of nondecreasing functions such that the image of buδ is contained in δZ. This family (3.13) ∀δ > 0. In the sequel we are going to show that any such family satisfies buδ := MSδTA,Buδ Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) ≥ Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)) lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)) ≥ 18 Due to (3.13) and the arbitrariness of ε > 0, this is enough to prove (3.5). 2 p · Cp · (B − A − 4ε)p (b − a)p−1 . (3.14) Extension of the integrals to a vertical strip In this section of the proof we modify the domain of integration in order to simplify the computation of Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)). To begin with, we observe that δp δp y − x1+p dx dy ≥ZZBδ Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)) =ZZAδ y − x1+p dx dy, Aδ := I(δ,buδ, (a, b)) =(cid:8)(x, y) ∈ (a, b)2 : buδ(y) −buδ(x) > δ(cid:9) , Bδ :=(cid:8)(x, y) ∈ (a + η, b − η) × (a, b) : buδ(y) −buδ(x) > δ(cid:9) . y − x1+p dx dy =ZZBδ ∪Cδ y − x1+p dx dy −ZZCδ δp δp δp y − x1+p dx dy, Then we write the last integral in the form where ZZBδ where Cδ := (a + η, b − η) × (R \ (a, b)). In other words, the set Bδ ∪ Cδ consists of the vertical strip (a + η, b− η)× R minus Now we observe that the set of points (x, y) ∈ (a + η, b − η) × (a, b) such that buδ(y) −buδ(x) ≤ δ. ZZCδ δp y − x1+p dx dy = 2δpZ b−η a+η dxZ +∞ b 1 y − x1+p dy. From the convergence of the last double integral it follows that and therefore lim inf δ→0+ δ→0+ZZCδ lim δp y − x1+p dx dy = 0, δ→0+ ZZBδ δ→0+ ZZBδ∪Cδ δp y − x1+p dx dy δp y − x1+p dx dy. Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)) ≥ lim inf = lim inf Computing the integrals lim inf δ→0+ ZZBδ∪Cδ In this last part of the proof we show that (B − A − 4ε)p δp . 2 p · Cp · y − x1+p dx dy ≥ (b − a)p−1 (3.15) (3.16) Recalling (3.15), this proves (3.14), and hence also (3.5). function with finite image. Let us consider the partition To this end, we need to introduce some notation. We know thatbuδ is a nondecreasing a = x0 < x1 < . . . < xn = b 19 and different intervals correspond to different constants. Let us set of (a, b) with the property thatbuδ(x) is constant in each interval of the form (xi−1, xi), h := min{i ∈ {1, . . . , n} : xi ≥ a + η}, k := max{i ∈ {0, . . . , n − 1} : xi ≤ b − η}. δp Of course n, h, k, as well as the partition, do depend on δ. Now we claim that 2 p · Cp · δp(k − h − 1)p y − x1+p dx dy ≥ ZZBδ∪Cδ To begin with, we show that the values of buδ(x) in neighboring intervals are con- secutive multiples of δ, namely if buδ(x) = mδ in (xi−1, xi) for some m ∈ Z, then buδ(x) = (m + 1)δ in (xi, xi+1). Let us assume indeed thatbuδ(x) ≥ (m + 2)δ in (xi, xi+1). In this case it turns out that ∀δ ∈ (0, δ1). (b − a)p−1 (3.17) δp Λδ,p(buδ, (a, b)) ≥Z xi xi−1 dxZ xi+1 xi (y − x)1+p dy, which is absurd because the left-hand side is uniformly bounded from above and the integral in the right-hand side is divergent. With these notations it turns out that Now we distinguish two cases. • If p = 1, computing the integrals we obtain that ZZBδ∪Cδ δ (y − x)2 dx dy ≥ δ k−1Xi=h+1 log(cid:18)xi+1 − xi−1 xi+1 − xi xi+1 − xi−1 xi − xi−1 (cid:19) . · If ℓi := xi − xi−1 denotes the length of the i-th interval of the partition, and we apply the inequality between arithmetic and geometric mean, we obtain that ZZBδ∪Cδ δ (ℓi + ℓi+1)2 ℓi · ℓi+1 log (y − x)2 dx dy ≥ δ ≥ δ = 2 log 2 · δ(k − h − 1), log 4 k−1Xi=h+1 k−1Xi=h+1 20 ZZBδ∪Cδ δp y − x1+p dx dy k−1Xi=h+1(cid:18)Z xi ≥ k−1Xi=h+1(cid:18)Z xi δp p xi−1 = δp xi+1 y − x1+p dy +Z xi+1 dxZ +∞ (xi+1 − x)p dx +Z xi+1 dxZ xi−1 (x − xi−1)p dx(cid:19) . −∞ 1 1 xi xi xi−1 δp y − x1+p dy(cid:19) which proves (3.17) in this case. • If p > 1, computing the integrals we obtain that ZZBδ ∪Cδ δp y − x1+p dx dy ≥ δp p(p − 1) k−1Xi=h+1 1 ℓp−1 i+1 + 1 i − ℓp−1 (ℓi+1 + ℓi)p−1! , 2 where we set ℓi := xi−xi−1 as before. Therefore, with two applications of Jensen's inequality to the convex function t → t1−p, we obtain that ZZBδ ∪Cδ δp y − x1+p dx dy ≥ ≥ ≥ = δp 2p − 2 (ℓi+1 + ℓi)p−1 (k − h − 1)p k−1Xi=h+1 p(p − 1) δp(2p − 2) p(p − 1) · (cid:16)Pk−1 i=h+1(ℓi+1 + ℓi)(cid:17)p−1 δp(2p − 2) p(p − 1) · 2 p · Cp · (k − h − 1)p (2(b − a))p−1 δp(k − h − 1)p , (b − a)p−1 which proves (3.17) also in this case. Now it remains to estimate δ(k−h−1). To this end, from (3.10) and the minimality of h we deduce that ∀x ∈ (xh−1, xh). Similarly, from (3.11) and the maximality of k we deduce that ∀x ∈ (xk, xk+1). A + 2ε ≥buδ(x) =: mAδ B − 2ε ≤buδ(x) =: mBδ Since the values ofbuδ in consecutive intervals are consecutive multiples of δ, it turns mB = mA + (k − h + 1), out that and therefore (k − h − 1)δ = (k − h + 1)δ − 2δ = (mB − mA)δ − 2δ ≥ B − A − 4ε − 2δ. Plugging this inequality into (3.17), and letting δ → 0+, we obtain (3.16), which completes the proof. (cid:3) The following result is a straightforward consequence of Proposition 3.2. Corollary 3.3. Let us assume that uδ → u in Lp(R), and let (a, b) ⊆ R be an interval whose endpoints a and b are Lebesgue points of u. Then it turns out that lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) ≥ 2 p · Cp · u(b) − u(a)p (b − a)p−1 . 21 It is enough to apply Proposition 3.2 with A := min{u(a), u(b)} and B := Proof max{u(a), u(b)}. Assumptions (3.3) and (3.4) are satisfied because a and b are Lebesgue points of the limit of the sequence uδ. (cid:3) We conclude with another variant of Proposition 3.2. We do not need this statement in the sequel, but we think that it clarifies once more the relation between oscillations of uδ and values of Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)). Corollary 3.4. Let (a, b) ⊆ R be an interval, let {uδ}δ>0 ⊆ Lp((a, b)) be a family of functions, and let osc(uδ, (a, b)) denote the essential oscillation of uδ in (a, b). Then it turns out that lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) ≥ 2 p Cp 1 (b − a)p−1(cid:18)lim inf δ→0+ osc(uδ, (a, b))(cid:19)p . Proof Let iδ and sδ denote the essential infimum and the essential supremum of uδ(x) in (a, b), respectively. Let us assume that iδ and sδ are real numbers (otherwise an analogous argument works with standard minor changes). Let us set wδ(x) := uδ(x)−iδ, and let us observe that Λδ,p(uδ, (a, b)) = Λδ,p(wδ, (a, b)) ∀δ > 0. Now it is enough to apply Proposition 3.2 with A := 0 and B := lim inf δ→0+ (sδ − iδ) = lim inf δ→0+ osc(uδ, (a, b)). (cid:3) 3.2 Gamma-liminf Corollary 3.3 represents a "localized" version of the liminf inequality (1.7), which now follows from well established techniques (see for example [11, 12]). To this end, we need the following characterization of Λ0,p(u, R) (we omit the standard proof, based on the convexity of the norm). Lemma 3.5 (Piecewise affine horizontal segmentation). Let p ≥ 1 be a real number, and let u ∈ Lp(R). Then there exists c ∈ R such that c + q is a Lebesgue point of u for every q ∈ Q. Moreover, if for every positive integer k we consider the piecewise affine function vk : R → R such that then it turns out that k(cid:19) = u(cid:18)c + i k(cid:19) ∀i ∈ Z, i vk(cid:18)c + k→+∞ZR v′ Λ0,p(u, R) = lim k(x)p dx = sup k(x)p dx. (cid:3) k≥1ZR v′ 22 We are now ready to prove (1.7) in the case d = 1. Let uδ → u be any family converging in Lp(R), and let c and vk be as in Lemma 3.5. For every i ∈ Z, we set ck,i := c + i/k, and we apply Corollary 3.3 in the interval (ck,i, ck,i+1). We obtain that lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p (uδ, (ck,i, ck,i+1)) ≥ Cpu(ck,i+1) − u(ck,i)p (1/k)p−1 2 p = 2 p CpZ ck,i+1 ck,i v′ k(x)p dx. Since we deduce that Λδ,p(uδ, R) ≥Xi∈Z Λδ,p(uδ, (ck,i, ck,i+1)) ∀δ > 0, lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, R) ≥ lim inf Λδ,p(uδ, (ck,i, ck,i+1)) δ→0+ Xi∈Z ≥ Xi∈Z ≥ = 2 p 2 p lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, (ck,i, ck,i+1)) v′ k(x)p dx ck,i CpXi∈ZZ ck,i+1 CpZR v′ k(x)p dx. Letting k → +∞, and recalling (3.1), we obtain exactly (1.7). (cid:3) 3.3 Gamma-limsup This subsection is devoted to a proof of statement (2) of Theorem 1.1 in the case d = 1. It is well-known that we can limit ourselves to showing the existence of recovery families for every u belonging to a subset of Lp(R) that is dense in energy with respect to Λ0,p(u, R). Classical examples of subsets that are dense in energy are the space c (R) of functions of class C ∞ with compact support, or the space of piecewise affine C ∞ functions with compact support. Here for the sake of generality we consider the space P C 1 Definition 3.6. Let u : R → R be a function. We say that u ∈ P C 1 c (R) if u has compact support, it is Lipschitz continuous, and there exists a finite subset S ⊆ R such that u ∈ C 1(R \ S). c (R) of piecewise C 1 functions with compact support, defined as follows. We show that for every u ∈ P C 1 c (R) the family Sδu of vertical δ-segmentations of u is a recovery family. This proves the Gamma-limsup inequality in dimension one. Proposition 3.7 (Existence of recovery families). Let p ≥ 1 be a real number, and c (R) be a piecewise C 1 function with compact support according to Defini- let u ∈ P C 1 tion 3.6. For every δ > 0, let Sδu denote the vertical δ-segmentation of u according to Definition 3.1. 23 Then it turns out that lim sup δ→0+ Λδ,p(Sδu, R) ≤ 2 p CpZR u′(x)p dx. (3.18) Proof To begin with, we introduce some notation. Let R0 ≥ 1 be any real number such that the support of u is contained in [−R0 + 1, R0 − 1]. Let L be the Lipschitz constant of u in R, and let S ⊆ R be a finite set such that u ∈ C 1(R \ S). For every x ∈ R and every δ > 0 we set J(δ, u, x) := {y ∈ R : Sδu(y) − Sδu(x) > δ}, (3.19) δp y − x1+p dy, Hδ,p(x) :=ZJ(δ,u,x) Λδ,p(Sδu, R) =ZR Hδ,p(x) dx ∀δ > 0. (3.20) In the sequel we call Hδ,p(x) the "pointwise hostility function". It represents the contribution of each point x to the double integral defining Λδ,p(Sδu, R). Strategy of the proof The outline of the proof is the following. First of all, we show that Then we define an averaged pointwise hostility function bHδ,p(x) with the property −∞ lim δ→0+Z −R0 Z R0 −R0 Hδ,p(x) dx = lim R0 δ→0+Z +∞ Hδ,p(x) dx =Z R0 −R0 bHδ,p(x) dx. We also show that the averaged pointwise hostility function satisfies the uniform Hδ,p(x) dx = 0. (3.21) and so that that bound (3.22) (3.23) (3.24) and the asymptotic estimate 2 p Lp bHδ,p(x) ≤ δ→0+ bHδ,p(x) ≤ lim sup ∀x ∈ [−R0, R0], ∀δ > 0, 2 p Cpu′(x)p ∀x ∈ [−R0, R0] \ S. 24 At this point, from Fatou's lemma we deduce that lim sup δ→0+ Z R0 −R0 Hδ,p(x) dx = lim sup δ→0+ Z R0 −R0 bHδ,p(x) dx δ→0+ bHδ,p(x) dx CpZ R0 −R0 u′(x)p dx. lim sup −R0 ≤ Z R0 2 p ≤ Keeping (3.20) and (3.21) into account, this estimate implies (3.18). Reducing integration to a bounded interval We prove (3.21). To this end, let us consider any x ≤ −R0. We observe that in this case the set J(δ, u, x) defined in (3.19) is contained in the support of u, and hence Z −R0 −∞ Hδ,p(x) dx ≤ δpZ −R0 −∞ dxZ R0−1 −R0+1 1 y − x1+p dy. At this point the first limit in (3.21) follows from the convergence of the double integral. The proof of the second limit is analogous. Uniform bound on the pointwise hostility function We prove that Hδ,p(x) ≤ 2 p Lp ∀x ∈ [−R0, R0], ∀δ > 0. (3.25) To this end, we observe that the implication Sδu(y) − Sδu(x) > δ =⇒ u(y) − u(x) > δ holds true for every (x, y) ∈ R2. Since u is Lipschitz continuous, we deduce that Sδu(y) − Sδu(x) > δ =⇒ y − x ≥ δ L , and hence as required. Hδ,p(x) ≤Zy−x≥δ/L δp y − x1+p dy = 2Z +∞ δ/L δp z1+p dz = 2 p Lp, 25 The averaged pointwise hostility function bHδ,p : R → R is defined as Hδ,p(s) ds 1 b − aZ b a bHδ,p(x) := Averaged pointwise hostility function In this part of the proof we introduce the averaged pointwise hostility function. To this end, we consider the open set A(u, δ) := {x ∈ (−R0, R0) : u(x) 6∈ δZ}. A connected component (a, b) of A(u, δ) is called monotone if [a, b] ∩ S = ∅, and u′(x) ≥ δ for every x ∈ [a, b]. In this case there exists k ∈ Z such that u(a) = kδ and u(b) = kδ ± δ, where the sign depends on the sign of u′(x) in (a, b). From the Lipschitz continuity of u we deduce that A(u, δ) has only a finite number of monotone connected components. otherwise. At this point, inequality (3.23) follows from (3.25), while (3.22) is true because the if x ∈ [a, b) for some monotone connected component of A(δ, u), and bHδ,p(x) := Hδ,p(x) integrals of Hδ,p(x) and bHδ,p(x) are the same both in all monotone connected compo- nents, and in the complement set. Asymptotic estimate in stationary points We prove that (3.24) holds true for every x ∈ (−R0, R0) \ S with u′(x) = 0. To begin with, we observe that in this case x 6∈ [a, b) for every monotone connected component (a, b) of A(δ, u) (because u′(x) is strictly positive in the closure of every If J(δ, u, x) = ∅ for every δ > 0, then u is identically null, and the conclusion is trivial. Otherwise J(δ, u, x) 6= ∅ when δ is small enough. In this case, let rδ be the largest positive real number such that monotone connected component), and therefore bHδ,p(x) = Hδ,p(x) for every δ > 0. (x − rδ, x + rδ) ∩ J(δ, u, x) = ∅, so that Hδ,p(x) ≤Z x−rδ −∞ δp y − x1+p dy +Z +∞ x+rδ δp y − x1+p dy = 2 p(cid:18) δ rδ(cid:19)p . Let δk → 0+ be any sequence such that δ rδ lim sup δ→0+ = lim k→+∞ δk rδk . (3.26) Up to subsequences, we can also assume that rδk tends to some r0. If r0 > 0, then the limit in the right-hand side of (3.26) is 0, which proves (3.24) in this case. If r0 = 0, 26 then from the maximality of rδk we deduce that u(x ± rδk) − u(x) = δk for a suitable choice of the sign, which might depend on k. In any case, the limit in the right-hand side of (3.26) turns out to be lim k→+∞ δk rδk = lim k→+∞ u(x ± rδk ) − u(x) rδk = u′(x) = 0, which proves (3.24) also in this case. Asymptotic estimate in non-stationary points We prove that (3.24) holds true for every x ∈ (−R0, R0) \ S with u′(x) > 0. Let us assume, without loss of generality, that u′(x) > 0 (the other case is analogous). Then for every δ > 0 small enough it turns out that x lies in the closure of a monotone connected component of A(δ, u). More precisely, there exist four real numbers aδ, bδ, cδ, dδ with and kδ ∈ Z such that u(aδ) = (kδ − 1)δ, and aδ < bδ ≤ x < cδ < dδ, u(bδ) = kδδ, u(cδ) = (kδ + 1)δ, u(dδ) = (kδ + 2)δ, u(y) ∈ ((kδ − 1)δ, kδδ) u(y) ∈ (kδδ, (kδ + 1)δ) ∀y ∈ (aδ, bδ), ∀y ∈ (bδ, cδ), u(y) ∈ ((kδ + 1)δ, (kδ + 2)δ) ∀y ∈ (cδ, dδ). We observe that aδ, bδ, cδ, and dδ tend to x as δ → 0+, and hence lim δ→0+ δ bδ − aδ = lim δ→0+ u(bδ) − u(aδ) bδ − aδ = u′(x). Similarly it turns out that lim δ→0+ δ cδ − bδ = lim δ→0+ δ cδ − aδ = lim δ→0+ δ dδ − cδ δ dδ − bδ = u′(x), = u′(x) 2 . and also lim δ→0+ From (3.27) through (3.29) we deduce that (3.27) (3.28) (3.29) (3.30) (3.31) (3.32) J(δ, u, s) ⊆ (−∞, aδ] ∪ [dδ, +∞) ∀s ∈ (bδ, cδ). It follows that Hδ,p(s) ≤ZR\(aδ ,dδ) δp y − s1+p dy = δp p (cid:18) 1 (dδ − s)p + 1 (s − aδ)p(cid:19) ∀s ∈ [bδ, cδ), 27 and hence bHδ,p(x) = 1 cδ − bδZ cδ bδ Hδ,p(s) ds ≤ δp p 1 bδ (cid:18) cδ − bδZ cδ 1 (dδ − s)p + 1 (s − aδ)p(cid:19) ds (3.33) for every x ∈ [bδ, cδ). Now we distinguish two cases. • If p = 1, computing the integrals in (3.33) we obtain that cδ − aδ δ δ bHδ,p(x) ≤ cδ − bδ log(cid:18)dδ − bδ δ · dδ − cδ · δ δ bδ − aδ(cid:19) , · and therefore (3.24) follows from (3.30) through (3.32). • If p > 1, computing the integrals in (3.33) we obtain that bHδ,p(x) ≤ 1 δ p(p − 1) cδ − bδ · (dδ − cδ)p−1 + δp−1 ·(cid:26) δp−1 (bδ − aδ)p−1 − δp−1 (dδ − bδ)p−1 − δp−1 (cδ − aδ)p−1(cid:27) , and therefore also in this case (3.24) follows from (3.30) through (3.32). This completes the proof. (cid:3) 3.4 Smooth recovery families The aim of this subsection is refining the Gamma-limsup inequality by showing the existence of recovery families consisting of C ∞ functions with compact support. To this end, we introduce the following notion. Definition 3.8 (δ-step functions). Let δ be a positive real number. A function u : R → R is called a δ-step function if there exists a positive integer n, a (n + 1)-uple x0 < x1 < . . . < xn of real numbers, and (k1, . . . , kn) ∈ Zn such that • u(x) = 0 for every x ∈ (−∞, x0) ∪ (xn, +∞), • u(x) = kiδ in (xi−1, xi) for every i = 1, . . . , n, • k1 = kn = 1 and ki − ki−1 = 1 for every i = 2, . . . , n. The values of u(x) for x ∈ {x0, x1, . . . , xn} are not relevant (just to fix ideas, we can i and the limit of u(x) define u(xi) as the maximum between the limit of u(x) as x → x+ as x → x− i ). 28 Now we show that, for every fixed δ > 0, every δ-step function can be approximated in energy by functions of class C ∞ with compact support. Roughly speaking, this is possible because the rigid structure of δ-step functions allows to control the effect of convolutions, which otherwise is unpredictable due to the sensitivity of the integration region in (1.1) to small perturbations. Proposition 3.9 (Smooth approximation of δ-step functions). Let δ > 0 and p ≥ 1 be real numbers, and let u : R → R be a δ-step function. Then there exists a family {uε}ε>0 ⊆ C ∞ c (R) such that and lim ε→0+ uε = u in Lp(R), lim ε→0+ Λδ,p(uε, R) = Λδ,p(u, R). Proof Let n, xi and ki be as in the definition of δ-step functions, and let τ := min{xi − xi−1 : i = 1, . . . , n} be the length of the smallest interval of the partition. We observe that points in neighboring intervals do not contribute to the computation of Λδ,p(u, R). In particular, if we write as usual Λδ,p(u, R) :=ZZI(δ,u,R) δp y − x1+p dx dy, then it turns out that y − x ≥ τ ∀(x, y) ∈ I(δ, u, R). (3.34) c (R) with Let us fix a mollifier ρ ∈ C ∞ • ρ(x) ≥ 0 for every x ∈ R, • ρ(x) = 0 for every x ∈ R with x ≥ 1, • RR ρ(x) dx = 1, and let us consider the usual regularization by convolution uε(x) :=ZR u(x + εy)ρ(y) dy. It is well-known that uε ∈ C ∞ Let us assume that 2ε < τ , let us consider the two open sets out that uε → u in Lp(R) as ε → 0+. c (R) for every ε > 0, and that for every p ≥ 1 it turns Aε := n[i=0 (xi − ε, xi + ε) ⊆ R, Bε := (Aε × R) ∪ (R × Aε) ⊆ R2, 29 and let us write Λδ,p(uε, R) =ZZI(δ,uε,R)∩Bε δp y − x1+p dx dy +ZZI(δ,uε,R)\Bε δp y − x1+p dx dy. Since the support of ρ is contained in [−1, 1], it turns out that uε(x) = u(x) for every x ∈ R \ Aε. It follows that I(δ, uε, R) \ Bε = I(δ, u, R) \ Bε, and therefore ε→0+ZZI(δ,uε,R)\Bε lim δp y − x1+p dx dy = lim ε→0+ZZI(δ,u,R)\Bε δp y − x1+p dx dy = Λδ,p(u, R), where the last equality follows from Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem because Bε shrinks to a set of null measure. So it remains to show that ε→0+ZZI(δ,uε,R)∩Bε lim δp y − x1+p dx dy = 0. (3.35) To this end, from (3.34) and the properties of the support of the mollifier, we deduce that now and therefore ZZI(δ,uε,R)∩Bε y − x ≥ τ − 2ε ∀(x, y) ∈ I(δ, uε, R), δp y − x1+p dx dy ≤ 2 ≤ 2 4 p = δp z1+p dz xi−ε nXi=0Z xi+ε dxZz≥τ −2ε nXi=0Z xi+ε τ − 2εp dx τ − 2εp · 2ε(n + 1), 2 p xi−ε δp δp which implies (3.35). (cid:3) We are now ready to show the existence of smooth recovery families. As usual, it is enough to show the existence of such a family for every u in a subset of Lp(R) which is dense in energy for Λ0,p(u, R). In this case we consider the space PAc(R) of piecewise affine functions with compact support. Since piecewise affine functions are piecewise C 1, we know from Proposition 3.7 that the family Sδu of vertical δ-segmentations of u is a (non-smooth) recovery family for u. The key point is that the vertical δ-segmentation of a piecewise affine function with compact support is a δ-step function according to Definition 3.8. Thus from Proposition 3.9 we deduce the existence of a function uδ ∈ C ∞ c (R) such that kuδ − SδukLp(R) ≤ δ and Λδ,p(uδ, R) ≤ Λδ,p(Sδu, R) + δ for every δ > 0. This implies that {uδ} is a smooth recovery family for u. (cid:3) 30 4 Gamma-convergence in any dimension It remains to prove Theorem 1.1 in any space dimension. This follows from well es- tablished sectioning techniques. For every σ ∈ Sd−1, let hσi⊥ denote the hyperplane orthogonal to σ, namely hσi⊥ := {z ∈ Rd : hz, σi = 0}. Given any u : Rd → R, for every σ ∈ Sd−1 and every z ∈ hσi⊥, we consider the one-dimensional section uσ,z : R → R defined as uσ,z(x) := u(z + σx) ∀x ∈ R. The main idea is that Sobolev norms, total variation, and functionals such as Λδ,p computed in u are a sort of average of the same quantities computed on the one- dimensional sections uσ,z. The result is the following. Proposition 4.1 (Integral-geometric representation). Let u : Rd → R be any measur- able function. Let Λδ,p and Λ0,p be the functionals defined in (1.1) and (1.2), respectively. (1) For every p ≥ 1 it turns out that Λ0,p(uσ,z, R) dz = Gd,p Λ0,p(u, Rd), where Gd,p is the geometric constant defined in (1.4). (2) For every δ > 0 and every p ≥ 1 it turns out that Λδ,p(uσ,z, R) dz = 2Λδ,p(u, Rd). (cid:3) ZSd−1 dσZhσi⊥ ZSd−1 dσZhσi⊥ We skip the details of the proof of Proposition 4.1, which is a simple application of variable changes in multiple integrals. More generally, for every σ ∈ Sd−1 and every g ∈ L1(Rd) it turns out that ZRd g(y) dy =Zhσi⊥ dzZR g(z + σx) dx, and this is the main ingredient in the proof of statement (1). Similarly, for every g ∈ L1(Rd × Rd) it turns out that ZZRd×Rd g(u, v) du dv = 1 2ZSd−1 dσZhσi⊥ dzZZR×R g(z + σx, z + σy) · y − xd−1 dx dy, and this is the main ingredient in the proof of statement (2). We are now ready to prove Theorem 1.1. 31 Gamma-liminf Let us assume that uδ → u in L1(Rd). Then for every σ ∈ Sd−1 it turns out that for almost every z ∈ hσi⊥. Therefore, from the integral-geometric representations of Proposition 4.1, Fatou's lemma, and the one-dimensional result, we obtain that (uδ)σ,z → uσ,z in L1(R) lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p(uδ, Rd) = lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p((uδ)σ,z, R) dz dσZhσi⊥ 1 2ZSd−1 dσZhσi⊥ dσZhσi⊥ 1 2ZSd−1 2ZSd−1 1 1 p Gd,pCp Λ0,p(u, Rd). lim inf δ→0+ Λδ,p((uδ)σ,z, R) dz 2 p Cp Λ0,p(uσ,z, R) dz ≥ ≥ = ≤ ≤ = Gamma-limsup Let u ∈ C ∞ c (Rd) be any function with compact support. For every δ > 0 we consider the vertical δ-segmentation Sδu of u, and we observe that this operation commutes with the one-dimensional sections, in the sense that (Sδu)σ,z = Sδ(uσ,z) ∀σ ∈ Sd−1, ∀z ∈ hσi⊥. Therefore, from the integral-geometric representations of Proposition 4.1, Fatou's lemma, and the one-dimensional result, we obtain that lim sup δ→0+ Λδ,p(Sδu, Rd) = lim sup δ→0+ Λδ,p((Sδu)σ,z, R) dz dσZhσi⊥ 1 2ZSd−1 dσZhσi⊥ dσZhσi⊥ 1 2ZSd−1 2ZSd−1 1 1 p Gd,pCp Λ0,p(u, Rd). lim sup Λδ,p((Sδu)σ,z, R) dz δ→0+ 2 p Cp Λ0,p(uσ,z, R) dz The δ-independent bounds on Λδ,p((Sδu)σ,z, R) needed in order to apply Fatou's lemma follow from the Lipschitz continuity of u and the boundedness of its support. It remains to show the existence of smooth recovery families. Smooth recovery families The strategy is analogous to the one-dimensional case, and therefore we limit ourselves to outlining the argument, sparing the reader all technicalities. 32 To begin with, we observe that it is enough to construct smooth recovery families for every u ∈ PAc(Rd). In this case, a non-smooth recovery family is provided by the vertical δ-segmentations Sδu of u. On the other hand, vertical δ-segmentations of piecewise affine functions with compact support are δ-step functions, and these functions can be approximated in energy by smooth functions. It follows that for every δ > 0 there exists uδ ∈ C ∞ c (Rd) such that kuδ − SδukLp(Rd) ≤ δ and Λδ,p(uδ, Rd) ≤ Λδ,p(Sδu, Rd) + δ, and therefore {uδ} is the required recovery family. The last approximation step can be proved by convolution as we did in Proposi- tion 3.9. To be more precise, a δ-step function in dimension d is a function v : Rd → R with the property that there exist a finite set P1, . . . , Pm of disjoint open polytopes (bounded intersections of half-spaces), and integer numbers k1, . . . , km such that • v(x) = kiδ in Pi for every i = 1, . . . , m, • v(x) = 0 in the open set P0 defined as the complement set of the closure of P1 ∪ . . . ∪ Pm, • ki − kj ≤ 1 whenever the closure of Pi intersects the closure of Pj, • ki ≤ 1 whenever the closure of Pi intersects the closure of P0. In words, the level sets of a δ-step function are finite unions of polytopes, and values in adjacent regions differ by δ. The key point is that for every δ-step function v there exists a positive real number τ such that (x, y) ∈ I(δ, v, Rd) =⇒ y − x ≥ τ. As a consequence, when we define vε as the convolution of v with a mollifier whose support is contained in the ball with center in the origin and radius ε, we obtain that (x, y) ∈ I(δ, vε, Rd) =⇒ y − x ≥ τ − 2ε, and at this point the conclusion follows exactly as in the proof of Proposition 3.9. (cid:3) Acknowledgments The second author has been introduced to this family of non-local functionals by the inspiring talk [5] given by H. Brezis during the congress "A mathematical tribute to Ennio De Giorgi", held in Pisa in September 2016 in the 20-th anniversary of his death. The same author had been introduced to non-local approximations of free discontinuity problems by E. De Giorgi himself in the last year of his life. We are all deeply grateful to both of them. 33 References [1] C. Antonucci, M. Gobbino, M. Migliorini, N. Picenni. On the gap be- tween Gamma-limit and pointwise limit for a non-local approximation of the total variation. arXiv:1712.04413. [2] C. Antonucci, M. Gobbino, N. Picenni. On the gap between gamma- limit and pointwise limit for a non-local approximation of the total variation. arXiv:1708.01231. [3] J. Bourgain, H. Brezis, P. Mironescu. Another look at Sobolev spaces. In Optimal control and partial differential equations, pages 439–455. IOS, Amsterdam, 2001. [4] J. Bourgain, H.-M. Nguyen. A new characterization of Sobolev spaces. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 343 (2006), no. 2, 75–80. [5] H. Brezis. Another triumph for De Giorgi's Gamma convergence. URL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y6fvZX1fx8. Conference held during the congress "A mathematical tribute to Ennio De Giorgi" (Pisa, September 2016). [6] H. Brezis. New approximations of the total variation and filters in imaging. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 26 (2015), no. 2, 223–240. [7] H. Brezis, H.-M. Nguyen. Non-convex, non-local functionals converging to the total variation. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 355 (2017), no. 1, 24–27. [8] H. Brezis, H.-M. Nguyen. Non-local Functionals Related to the Total Variation and Connections with Image Processing. Ann. PDE 4 (2018), no. 1, 4:9. [9] A. Chambolle. Image segmentation by variational methods: Mumford and Shah functional and the discrete approximations. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 55 (1995), no. 3, 827–863. [10] A. M. Garsia, E. Rodemich. Monotonicity of certain functionals under rear- rangement. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 24 (1974), no. 2, vi, 67–116. [11] M. Gobbino. Finite difference approximation of the Mumford-Shah functional. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 51 (1998), no. 2, 197–228. [12] M. Gobbino, M. G. Mora. Finite-difference approximation of free-discontinuity problems. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 131 (2001), no. 3, 567–595. [13] H.-M. Nguyen. Some new characterizations of Sobolev spaces. J. Funct. Anal. 237 (2006), no. 2, 689–720. 34 [14] H.-M. Nguyen. Γ-convergence and Sobolev norms. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 345 (2007), no. 12, 679–684. [15] H.-M. Nguyen. Further characterizations of Sobolev spaces. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 10 (2008), no. 1, 191–229. [16] H.-M. Nguyen. Γ-convergence, Sobolev norms, and BV functions. Duke Math. J. 157 (2011), no. 3, 495–533. [17] H.-M. Nguyen. Estimates for the topological degree and related topics. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 15 (2014), no. 1, 185–215. [18] A. C. Ponce. A new approach to Sobolev spaces and connections to Γ- convergence. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 19 (2004), no. 3, 229–255. [19] H. Taylor. Rearrangements of incidence tables. J. Combinatorial Theory Ser. A 14 (1973), 30–36. 35
1209.3624	1	1209	2012-09-17T11:02:22	The $\epsilon-\epsilon^\beta$ property, the boundedness of isoperimetric sets in $\R^N$ with density, and some applications	[ "math.FA" ]	We show that every isoperimetric set in R^N with density is bounded if the density is continuous and bounded by above and below. This improves the previously known boundedness results, which basically needed a Lipschitz assumption; on the other hand, the present assumption is sharp, as we show with an explicit example. To obtain our result, we observe that the main tool which is often used, namely a classical "\epsilon-\epsilon" property already discussed by Allard, Almgren and Bombieri, admits a weaker counterpart which is still sufficient for the boundedness, namely, an "\epsilon-\epsilon^\beta" version of the property. And in turn, while for the validity of the first property the Lipschitz assumption is essential, for the latter the sole continuity is enough. We conclude by deriving some consequences of our result about the existence and regularity of isoperimetric sets.	math.FA	math	THE ε − εβ PROPERTY, THE BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS IN RN WITH DENSITY, AND SOME APPLICATIONS E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Abstract. We show that every isoperimetric set in RN with density is bounded if the density is continuous and bounded by above and below. This improves the previously known bound- edness results, which basically needed a Lipschitz assumption; on the other hand, the present assumption is sharp, as we show with an explicit example. To obtain our result, we observe that the main tool which is often used, namely a classical "ε − ε" property already discussed by Allard, Almgren and Bombieri, admits a weaker counterpart which is still sufficient for the boundedness, namely, an "ε − εβ" version of the property. And in turn, while for the validity of the first property the Lipschitz assumption is essential, for the latter the sole continuity is enough. We conclude by deriving some consequences of our result about the existence and regularity of isoperimetric sets. 1. Introduction This paper deals with the isoperimetric problem in RN with density. More precisely, we consider a given l.s.c. function f : RN → R+ (the "density") and we define the weighted volume and perimeter of a set E ⊆ RN as (cid:90) (cid:90) E Ef := f (y) dH N−1(y) , f (x) dH N (x) , ∂∗E Pf (E) := (1.1) where for every set E of locally finite perimeter we denote as usual by ∂∗E its reduced boundary, while Pf (E) = +∞ for every set which is not locally of finite perimeter (the basic properties of sets of finite perimeter will be briefly recalled in Section 1.2). The isoperimetric problem, then, consists in searching for sets of minimal (weighted) perimeter among those of fixed (weighted) volume. The study of the isoperimetric problem in RN with density has been deeply studied in last years, also because of its close connection with the isoperimetric problems on Riemannian manifolds (a short and incomplete list is [9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 22, 24, 25]). The three main questions which one wants to understand are usually the existence, the boundedness, and the regularity of isoperimetric sets (only in very specific examples one can try to determine explicitely the minimizers). Concerning the boundedness, it is to be pointed out that it is not only interesting by itself, but it is also important when proving the existence (roughly speaking, when trying to show the existence of an isoperimetric set for volume m, it is useful to know that there do not exist unbounded isoperimetric sets for volumes less than m). We will be able to give some new results concerning all the three questions; in particular, we will find a sharp boundedness theorem (Theorem 1.1). One important tool in many of the works on isoperimetric problems is a classical "ε − ε" property already discussed by Allard, by Almgren, and by Bombieri since the 1970's (see for 1 2 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI instance [1, 2, 3, 4, 8]); this property basically means that a certain set can be locally modified in order to increase its volume by ε, while the perimeter increases at most by Cε (we leave the formal definitions to Section 1.1). This property is trivial to establish if the density and the set are supposed to be regular enough, but its validity is also known if the set is even just of locally finite perimeter and the density is only Lipschitz continuous (see [21, 23]); on the other hand, it is very easy to observe that the validity may fail as soon as the density is not Lipschitz. This is more or less the reason why most of the different boundedness and regularity results in this context use at least a Lipschitz assumption on the density. N (this is the content of our Theorem A). Then, our main result implies that the ε−ε In this paper, we start from the following observation. It is classical and very easy to prove that, if an isoperimetric set fulfills the ε − ε property, then it must be bounded; but in fact, to get its boundedness, a weaker property is really needed, namely, the "ε − εβ" property, which states that it is possible to increase its volume by ε and its perimeter at most by Cεβ, for some N−1 β ≥ N−1 N property is always true for any set of locally finite perimeter whenever the density is continuous. N < β ≤ 1 such that, Moreover, for every 0 < α ≤ 1 there exists some β = β(α, N ), with N−1 if the density is C0,α, then the ε − εβ property holds (this will be proved in Theorem B). Putting together the two results, the following consequence will be immediate (the meaning of "essentially bounded" density is clarified in Definition 1.7, anyway any density which is bounded from above and below is essentially bounded). Theorem 1.1. Assume that f is continuous and essentially bounded. Then every isoperimetric set is bounded. We underline that this result is sharp. In fact, many examples (see for instance those in [24]) show the existence of unbounded isoperimetric sets for densities which are unbounded from above or from below; and on the other hand, in Section 4 we are able to build the example of an unbounded isoperimetric set for a density which is bounded both from above and from below but not continuous. As we said above, Theorem 1.1 is stronger than the previously known results, which all needed at least a Lipschitz assumption. More precisely, to give a comparison, we just recall the following very recent boundedness result. Theorem 1.2 ([24], Corollary 5.11). Let E be an isoperimetric set in RN with a C1 density f . Then E is bounded if any of the following three hypotheses hold: (1) N = 2 and f is increasing, or (2) f is radial and increasing, or (3) Df ≤ Cf . Let us now briefly pass to describe our contributions to the questions of the existence and regularity of isoperimetric sets, which come as applications of Theorems A and B. Concerning the existence, we will only recall that some existence results available in the literature require, as an a priori assumption, the boundedness of the isoperimetric sets. Since all these results concern densities which are essentially bounded and continuous, the boundedness assumption can be removed, because it now directly follows from Theorem 1.1. ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 3 Concerning the regularity, instead, we will recall some very classical results, and we check their consequences in view of the ε − εβ property that we have established. The theorem that we obtain, Theorem 5.7, says that if the density f is essentially C0,α then any isoperimetric set is of class C0, 2N (1−α)+2α . Stronger regularity results are contained in the forthcoming paper [11]. Observe that, as usual, results on RN with density admit counterparts in the context of Riemannian manifolds; however, we do not study the extension here (for an overview of the known results in this direction, see for instance [21]). α The plan of the paper is the following. In Section 1.1 we give all the formal definitions and the claims of our main results, while in Section 1.2 we recall some basic properties of the sets of finite perimeter. Then, in Sections 2 and 3 we give the proof of Theorems A and B. Later on, in Section 4 we give the example of a situation where an isoperimetric set is unbounded, while the density is essentially bounded but not continuous. Finally, in Section 5 we discuss the questions of the existence and regularity of isoperimetric sets. 1.1. Preliminary definitions and claims of the main theorems. This section is devoted to present the relevant definitions that we will need during the paper, and to claim our main results. We consider a given l.s.c. function f : RN → R+ = [0, +∞], such that the points x for which f (x) = 0 or f (x) = +∞ are locally finite, and we work with the weighted notion of volume and f := f H k for any k ∈ {0, . . . , N}, so that perimeter given by (1.1). For brevity we will denote H k definition (1.1) can be rewritten as Ef = H N (∂∗E); given an open set A ⊆ RN , we will denote the relative perimeter of E in A as Pf (E, A) = H N−1 (A ∩ ∂∗E). Sometimes we will need to consider the Euclidean volume, or perimeter, or relative perimeter, of a set E, which will be denoted by Eeucl, Peucl(E) or Peucl(E, A) respectively (while we will not use the notation P (E) or E to avoid ambiguity). We will always call BR the open ball centered at the origin and with radius R, and BR(x) the ball centered at x and with radius R. The next definition is sometimes useful. Definition 1.3. For every set E ⊆ RN , we define the spherical rearrangement E∗ ⊆ RN as f (E) and Pf (E) = H N−1 f f where g : R+ → R+ is the unique function such that for every R > 0 one has E∗ := (cid:110) x ∈ RN : x1 ≥ g(cid:0)x(cid:1)(cid:111) (cid:1) = H N−1(cid:0)E ∩ ∂BR , (cid:1) . H N−1(cid:0)E∗ ∩ ∂BR The definition of spherical rearrangement is not so much useful for a generic density f , but it becomes very important when f is radial, thanks to the following result, whose proof can be found for instance in [24] or [16]. Theorem 1.4. Assume that f is radial and E ⊆ RN . Then, one has (cid:12)(cid:12)E∗(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f , Pf (E∗) ≤ Pf (E) . 4 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Let us give now the particular definitions that we will use in this paper. Definition 1.5. Let E ⊆ RN be a set of locally finite perimeter, 0 ≤ β ≤ 1, and C > 0. We say that E fulfills the ε − εβ property with constant C if there exist a ball B and a constant ¯ε > 0 such that, for every ε < ¯ε, there is a set F ⊆ RN such that F(cid:52)E ⊂⊂ B , Ff − Ef = ε , Pf (F ) ≤ Pf (E) + Cεβ . We give also the following simple definition, which will only be used within the subsequent (cid:9) Definition 1.7. Definition 1.6. A family(cid:8)Uδ has H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ Uδ (cid:1) > 0 for some arbitrarily small δ. (cid:1) = 0. H N−1(cid:0)RN \(cid:83) a well-decreasing family(cid:8)Uδ bounded, and there exist a well-decreasing family (cid:8)Uδ δ>0 Uδ (cid:9) In the paper, we will always assume one of the following hypotheses on f . Definition 1.7. The l.s.c. function f : RN → R+ is said to be essentially bounded if there exist M < f (x) < M for every x ∈ Uδ. Analogously, f is said to be essentially α-Holder for some 0 ≤ α ≤ 1 if f is essentially δ>0 and constants M = M (δ) such that f (x)− f (y) ≤ Mx− yα for every x, y ∈ Uδ. Observe that f is essentially α-Holder with α = 0 if and only if it is essentially bounded. δ>0 and constants M = M (δ) such that 1 (cid:9) δ>0 of open subsets of RN is said well-decreasing if one has that RN \ Uδ is bounded for every δ > 0, and for any measurable set E (cid:54)= ∅ of finite perimeter one Notice that, for instance, the sets Uδ = RN \ Bδ form a well-decreasing family; more in general, for a family of open sets with RN \ Uδ bounded, to be well-decreasing it is enough that Notice that, clearly, if f is bounded by above and below then it is also essentially bounded, and similarly if it is α-Holder continuous then it is also essentially α-Holder, hence we could have simply restricted our attention to standard bounded or Holder densities. Nevertheless, we prefer to use the above slightly more complicate definitions for two reasons. First of all, this allows to consider also the typical class of examples where the density may vanish of explode at the origin, such as f (x) = xp 1 + xp , or f (x) = 1 + 1 xp for p > 0. Second, as one can see later, this choice does not effect at all any of the proofs, so we can obtain slightly stronger results for free. Another comment deserves to be done concerning the choice of considering only densities which are (at least in the essential sense) bounded both from above and from below. In fact, this is unavoidable, since many examples (see for instance those in [24]) enlighten that both existence and boundedness can easily fail otherwise, thus no general result can be obtained without this assumption. We are now in position to claim our two main theorems. ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 5 Theorem A (Boundedness of isoperimetric sets). Assume that f is essentially bounded and that E is an isoperimetric set fulfilling the ε− εβ property, either with β > N−1 N and some C > 0, or with β = N−1 N and every small C > 0. Then, E is bounded. Notice that, in the above theorem, we do not need any continuity assumption on f : the sole ε−εβ property together with the essential boundedness of f is enough to ensure the boundedness of any isoperimetric set E. Theorem B (The ε − εβ property). Assume that f is essentially α-Holder for some 0 ≤ α ≤ 1. Then every set E of locally finite perimeter fulfills the ε − εβ property with some C, where β is defined by β = β(α, N ) := . (1.2) α + (N − 1)(1 − α) α + N (1 − α) Moreover, if f is essentially bounded and continuous, then every set E of locally finite perimeter still fulfills the ε − εβ property with β = N−1 N and with any constant C > 0. Notice that, once N is fixed, β is a continuous and strictly increasing function of α with N for α = 0, and β = 1 for α = 1, and moreover β > α for every 0 ≤ α < 1. Notice also β = N−1 that Theorem 1.1 is an immediate consequence of the two above theorems. Remark 1.8. It is essential to underline a very delicate point in the claim of Theorem B, namely, that in the case when f is just essentially bounded and continuous, the ε − εβ property with β = N−1 N holds true for every constant C > 0 (of course, when C becomes smaller, so in fact, as the proof does the constant ¯ε in Definition 1.5). This is of primary importance: of Theorem A will enlighten, when a set fulfills the ε − εβ property with some β > N−1 N , then the constant C is unessential; on the other hand, if β = N−1 N , then it is fundamental that the constant C can be chosen arbitrarily small. And indeed, if f is essentially bounded but not N−1 continuous then the ε − ε N property holds true, but not with any constant C, and hence one cannot apply Theorem A and in fact an isoperimetric set can be unbounded, as we will show with the example in Section 4. 1.2. Basic properties of sets of finite perimeter. Since a basic knowledge of the theory of sets of finite perimeter is needed for the proof of our results, we recall here very briefly what we are going to use. For a general tractation of this subject, and for the proof of all the claims of this section, the interested reader should refer for instance to [6]. Let then E ⊆ RN be a set of locally finite volume. We say that E is of locally finite perimeter if the characteristic function χE of E is a BVloc function. In other words, we require µE := DχE to be a vector valued and locally finite Radon measure. If E is a set of locally finite perimeter, one defines the reduced boundary ∂∗E of E as the set of all those points x ∈ RN such that there exists a (necessarily unique) vector νE(x) ∈ SN−1 with the property that (cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩ B(x, r)(cid:12)(cid:12)eucl (cid:12)(cid:12)B(x, r)(cid:12)(cid:12)eucl lim r(cid:38)0 = lim r(cid:38)0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩ B(x, r) ∩(cid:8)y : (y − x) · νE(x) < 0(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)eucl (cid:12)(cid:12)B(x, r)(cid:12)(cid:12)eucl = 1 2 . The vector νE(x) is called the (measure theoretical) outer normal of E at x. 6 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI One can prove that µE coincides with the vector valued measure νE(x)H N−1 ∂∗E; finally, one says that the (Euclidean) perimeter of E is defined as Peucl(E) = µE(RN ) = H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E(cid:1) = (cid:90) ∂∗E 1 dH N−1(x) . It is easy to show that, if the set E is regular enough, then this general notion of perimeter coincides with the usual perimeter, the reduced boundary coincides with the usual topological boundary, and the measure theoretical outer normal coincides with the usual outer normal. However, there exist sets of finite perimeter for which the topological boundary and the reduced boundary do not coincide; for instance, the set of the points in RN with rational coordinates has an empty reduced boundary and so null perimeter, but its topological boundary is the whole RN . We conclude by recalling three classical results, that we will use extensively in the sequel. Theorem 1.9 (Blow-up Theorem). Let E ⊆ RN and x ∈ ∂∗E. For every ε > 0, define the ε (E − x), and call µε := µEε and H = {x ∈ RN : x · ν(x) < 0}. Then, when blow-up set Eε := 1 ε (cid:38) 0, one has that the sets Eε converge to H in the L1 loc sense, while the measures µε (resp., µε) weak* converge to the measure νE(x)H N−1 ∂H (resp., H N−1 ∂H). To state the following result, the Vol'pert Theorem, we need a simple preliminary piece of notation. Definition 1.10. Let E ⊆ RN be a Borel set. We define the vertical section of E at any level y ∈ RN−1, and the horizontal section of E at any level t ∈ R as Ey := {t ∈ R : (y, t) ∈ E} , Et := {y ∈ RN−1 : (y, t) ∈ E} . y ∈ RN−1 the vertical section Ey is a set of finite perimeter in R, and ∂∗(Ey) = (cid:0)∂∗E(cid:1) Theorem 1.11 (Vol'pert). Let E be a set of locally finite perimeter. Then, for H N−1-a.e. y. Analogously, for H 1-a.e. t ∈ R the horizontal section Et is a set of finite perimeter in RN−1, and ∂∗(Et) = (∂∗E)t up to an H N−2-negligible set. The proof of this result can be found in [6, 28] for the case of the vertical sections, while the analogous for the horizontal sections (or in general, for sections of any codimension) is proved in [16, 15, 7]. x ∈ ∂∗E, the outer normal of E at x as νE(x) =(cid:0)ν(cid:48)(x), νN (x)(cid:1) ∈ RN−1 × R. For every Borel Theorem 1.12 (Coarea formula). Let E be a set of locally finite perimeter and denote, for (cid:90) (cid:90) function g : RN → R+ it is (cid:112) and analogously g(x) ∂∗E 1 − νN (x)2 dH N−1(x) = (cid:112) 1 − ν(cid:48)(x)2 dH N−1(x) = (cid:90) g(x) ∂∗E (cid:90) (cid:90) +∞ (cid:90) −∞ RN−1 ∂∗Ey g(y, t) dH N−2(y) dt , ∂∗Et g(y, t) dH 0(t) dH N−1(y) . ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 7 2. Proof of Theorem A This section is entirely devoted to give a proof of Theorem A. Proof (of Theorem A). Let E be an isoperimetric set. Since f is essentially bounded, we can M ≤ f ≤ M outside BR(cid:48). Let us now use the assumption take some R(cid:48) > 0 and M > 1 such that 1 that E fulfills the ε − εβ property, finding constants C, R(cid:48)(cid:48), ¯ε > 0 with R(cid:48)(cid:48) ≥ R(cid:48) such that, for every 0 < ε < ¯ε, there exists a set F with F = E outside the ball BR(cid:48)(cid:48), and Pf (F ) ≤ Pf (E) + Cεβ ; Ff = Ef + ε , (2.1) in addition, we are also allowed to assume C ≤ 2N ω1/N N M 2 Let us now define, for every R > R(cid:48)(cid:48), (cid:12)(cid:12)f , ε(R) :=(cid:12)(cid:12)E \ BR (cid:90) (cid:90) ∞ ε(R) = R ∂Br g(R) := H N−1 f χE(x)f (x) dH N−1(x) dr = if β = . (2.2) N − 1 N (cid:90) (cid:1) = (cid:0)E ∩ ∂BR E∩∂BR (cid:0)E ∩ ∂BR (cid:90) ∞ H N−1 f R f (x) dH N−1(x) ; (cid:1) dr = (cid:90) ∞ R g(r)dr , the function R (cid:55)→ ε(R) is decreasing and goes to 0 as R goes to ∞. Moreover, observe that hence ε ∈ W1,1 competitor (cid:101)E by cutting away the part of E which is outside the ball BR, and then using the loc(R(cid:48)(cid:48), +∞) and ε(cid:48)(R) = −g(R). Pick now any R > R(cid:48)(cid:48): we can consider a ε − εβ property to recover the correct volume without increasing too much the perimeter. More (cid:1) + 2g(R) . (2.3) (cid:0)E ∩ BR (cid:1) = Pf (E)− Pf precisely, first of all we notice that (cid:1) ≥ 1 (cid:0)E \ BR (cid:1) = Pf (E)− Pf (cid:12)(cid:12) N−1 (cid:0)E ∩ ∂BR (cid:12)(cid:12)E \ BR Then, we apply the standard Euclidean isoperimetric inequality and the bounds on f to get (cid:0)E \ BR N ω1/N N−1 N , N ω1/N N ε(R) 1 2N−1 eucl ≥ N Peucl Pf Pf N M N f (cid:0)E \ BR (cid:1) + 2H N−1 (cid:0)E \ BR (cid:1) ≥ 1 (cid:1) ≤ Pf (E) − M M (cid:0)E ∩ BR Pf 1 2N−1 N M N ω1/N N ε(R) N−1 N + 2g(R) . (2.4) which inserted into (2.3) gives We apply now (2.1) with ε = ε(R) to find a set F ⊆ RN with Ff = Ef + ε and Pf (F ) ≤ Pf (E) + Cεβ. Since F coincides with E outside BR(cid:48)(cid:48) and R > R(cid:48)(cid:48), we can finally define the competitor (cid:101)E as F ∩ BR. By construction we find (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:101)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩ BR (cid:12)(cid:12)f + ε(R) = Ef , (cid:1) + Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ Pf (E) − N ω1/N N 2N−1 while by (2.4) it is also (cid:0)(cid:101)E(cid:1) = Pf (cid:0)E ∩ BR Pf N−1 N + 2g(R) + Cε(R)β . ε(R) M N 8 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Since E is an isoperimetric set and (cid:101)E has the same volume as E, we derive that for every R > R(cid:48)(cid:48) it must be Pf ((cid:101)E) ≥ Pf (E), which implies g(R) ≥ N ω1/N ε(R)β . ε(R) (2.5) N 2N−1 N 2M N−1 N − C 2 We claim then what follows: there exist two positive constants γ and ε ≤ ¯ε such that g(R) ≥ γε(R) N−1 N ∀ R > R(cid:48)(cid:48) : ε(R) ≤ ε . (2.6) It is immediate to prove the validity of this estimate by considering separately the case β = N−1 and the case β > N−1 N . Indeed, in the first case (2.6) is just an immediate consequence of (2.5) N−1 N (cid:29) εβ when ε is small enough, and of the choice (2.2). On the other hand, if β > N−1 then (2.6) readily follows by (2.5). Since R (cid:55)→ ε(R) is a continuous and decreasing function, we can select R(cid:48)(cid:48)(cid:48) ≥ R(cid:48)(cid:48) such that ε(R) ≤ ε for every R ≥ R(cid:48)(cid:48)(cid:48). N , then ε Let us now directly show the boundedness of E: if E ⊆ BR(cid:48)(cid:48)(cid:48), then there is nothing to prove; otherwise, let j ∈ N be such that ε(R(cid:48)(cid:48)(cid:48)) ≥ 2−j, and for every i ≥ j let R(i) be such that ε(Ri) = 2−i. Then, recalling (2.6) and the fact that ε(cid:48) = −g, for every i ≥ j we can evaluate Ri+1 − Ri 2(i+1) N−1 2i+1 = ε(cid:0)Ri 2i − 1 (cid:1) − ε(cid:0)Ri+1 (cid:90) Ri+1 (cid:90) Ri+1 N−1 N dR ≥ γ g(R) dR ≥ (cid:1) = γε(R) Ri Ri N N , 1 1 2i+1 = from which we deduce that and in turn this implies that ε(R) = 0 for every R ≥ R∞, that is, E ⊆ BR∞ is bounded. (cid:3) 3. Proof of Theorem B In this section we give the proof of our main result, Theorem B. Since the proof is quite involved, we have divided it for simplicity in three parts and several steps. Proof (of Theorem B). Let us consider a function f as in the claim, and an isoperimetric set E. In the first part, we will show that the ε− εα property holds. Since α < β unless β = α = 1, the property is in fact weaker than what we need; nevertheless, we prefer to start with this somehow easier case, because the proof of the stronger ε − εβ property, which will be done in the second part, will be a careful modification of the same argument. And in turn, also the case when f is only essentially continuous will eventually be treated, in the third part, with the same strategy. By Definition 1.7, there exists an open set U ⊆ RN with U ∩ ∂∗E (cid:54)= ∅ and such that, for a suitable M > 1, one has < f (x) < M ∀ x ∈ U , f (x) − f (y) ≤ Mx − yα ∀ x , y ∈ U . 1 M Let ¯x be a point in U ∩ ∂∗E. We can assume for simplicity that ¯x coincides with the origin in RN , and that the outer normal of E at ¯x is the vertical direction ν(¯x) = (0, 1) ∈ RN−1 × R. This immediately implies that, for every (cid:96) ≥ j, Ri+1 − Ri ≤ 1 γ 2− i+1 N . R(cid:96) ≤ Rj + 1 γ (cid:0)2− 1 N(cid:1)i+1 ≤ Rj + 1 1 γ (cid:0)2− 1 N(cid:1)i+1 =: R∞ < +∞ , 1 (cid:96)−1(cid:88) i=j ∞(cid:88) i=j ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 9 Part I. The ε − εα property. We start considering the case when f is essentially α-Holder, and prove the ε− εα property; the proof is divided in many steps. Step (i). Choice of the cube QN . In this first step, we will select a suitably small constant a, and from now on we will restrict our attention to the cube QN = (−a/2, a/2)N , which is entirely contained inside U as soon as a (cid:28) 1. Let us denote by Q = (−a/2, a/2)N−1 the horizontal cube, and by ϕ : RN → RN the constant vector field ϕ ≡ (0, 1) ∈ RN−1 × R; let moreover ρ > 0 be a sufficiently small constant, that will be precised later. We aim to choose a > 0 such that QN is contained in the open set U defined above, and moreover all the following properties hold: ≤ 1 + ρ , aN−1 aN−1 1 − ρ ≤ H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN ∩ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:1) H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:1) H N(cid:0)E ∩ QN ∩ {xN < 0}(cid:1) H N(cid:0)E ∩ QN ∩ {xN > 0}(cid:1) (cid:90) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2N +1aN−2 . ϕ · dµE ≥ (1 − ρ)aN−1 , H N−2(cid:16) ≥ 1 − ρ , ≤ ρ , aN /2 aN /2 ≤ ρ , QN (3.1) (3.2) (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) (3.6) (cid:90) ¯a/2 We show now that such a choice of a is possible. Indeed, the first five conditions (3.1) -- (3.5) are true for every a small enough, say a ≤ ¯a, as a direct consequence of the blow-up Theorem 1.9. It remains then only to show that there exists some a ≤ ¯a satisfying also condition (3.6). To do so observe that, also by (3.1) and (3.2), ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂(−t, t)N−1 × (−¯a/2, ¯a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) H N−2(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ H N−2(cid:16) dt ≤ H N−1(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0) − ¯a/2, ¯a/2(cid:1)N(cid:17) ≤(cid:0)1 + 2ρ(cid:1)¯aN−1 . ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂(−a/2, a/2)N−1 × (−¯a/2, ¯a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) Therefore, there exists a ∈ (¯a/2, ¯a) for which H N−2(cid:16) ¯a/4 (cid:0)1 + 2ρ(cid:1)¯aN−1 ≤ 4 ≤ 5¯aN−2 ≤ 2N +1aN−2 . ¯a E ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) = ∂∗(cid:16) Notice that, thanks to Vol'pert Theorem, without loss of generality we can assume H N−2 − a.e. . (3.7) We have then found some a ≤ ¯a for which also (3.6) holds true. This concludes the first step. Step (ii). Definition of A, B, G and Γ. In this step, we subdivide the horizontal cube Q into four sets A, B, G and Γ, depending on the properties of ∂∗(E ∩ QN )x(cid:48). Since in the whole proof we are concentrated only on what 10 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI happens inside QN , we will always consider the horizontal and vertical sections inside the cube, even without specifying it; in other words, we will write Ey or Et (respectively ∂∗Ey or ∂∗Et) instead of (E ∩ QN )y or (E ∩ QN )t (respectively ∂∗(E ∩ QN )y or ∂∗(E ∩ QN )t). This is a slight abuse of notation, but it will simplify a lot the formulas in the rest of the proof. The sets are the following A := {x(cid:48) ∈ Q : ∂∗(Ex(cid:48)) (cid:54)= (∂∗E)x(cid:48)} , B := {x(cid:48) ∈ Q \ A : H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) = 0} , G := {x(cid:48) ∈ Q \ A : H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) = 1, ∂∗Ex(cid:48) ⊆ (−aρ, aρ), Ex(cid:48) ⊆ (−a/2, aρ)} , Γ := Q \ (A ∪ B ∪ G) . Let us briefly discuss the meaning of these sets: thanks to Step (i), we can imagine E ∩ QN to be close to the half-cube QN ∩ {xN < 0}, thus we expect the vertical sections Ex(cid:48) to be close to (−a/2, 0). The "good" set G is precisely the set of those x(cid:48) ∈ Q for which this holds, namely, Ex(cid:48) is a "lower" segment starting at −a/2 and ending between −aρ and aρ. All the other x(cid:48) ∈ Q are then contained in the "bad" sets A, B and Γ. More precisely, A collects those x(cid:48) for which Vol'pert Theorem does not hold true (keep in mind that we know by Theorem 1.11 that A is H N−1 negligible, but this does not imply that the sections corresponding to A do not carry perimeter!). Instead, B is the set of the sections which have no boundary, thus are either the full segment (−a/2, a/2), or they are empty. Finally, Γ is the set of the sections having some boundary, but not contained in G. Observe that this can happen for several different reasons: if ∂∗Ex(cid:48) contains exactly one point, then either this point is not between −aρ and aρ, or Ex(cid:48) is an "upper" segment starting between −aρ and aρ, and ending at a/2. On the other hand, if ∂∗Ex(cid:48) has more than one point, then the points can be finitely many or infinitely many. We further subdivide Γ in four subsets according to the above possibilities, namely, we define Γ0 :=(cid:8)x(cid:48) ∈ Γ : H 0(∂∗E)x(cid:48) = 1, ∂∗Ex(cid:48) /∈ (−aρ, aρ)(cid:9) , Γ1 :=(cid:8)x(cid:48) ∈ Γ \ Γ0 : H 0(∂∗E)x(cid:48) = 1(cid:9) , Γ2 :=(cid:8)x(cid:48) ∈ Γ \ (Γ0 ∪ Γ1) : ∂∗Ex(cid:48) contains a finite number of points(cid:9) , Γ3 := Γ \(cid:0)Γ0 ∪ Γ1 ∪ Γ2 (cid:1) . The aim of this step is to show that G fills a big portion of Q, and that the perimeter of E in the sections not belonging to G is extremely small. Let us start by observing that, thanks to (3.5), one has (1 − ρ)aN−1 ≤ ϕ · dµE = ϕ · dµE + ϕ · dµE A×(−a/2,a/2) B×(−a/2,a/2) ϕ · dµE + G×(−a/2,a/2) Γ×(−a/2,a/2) (3.8) ϕ · dµE . (cid:90) QN (cid:90) (cid:90) + (cid:90) (cid:90) ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 11 We have now to estimate each of the terms in the right-hand side of last inequality. First, since by construction dµE = 0 on the set B × (−a/2, a/2), we have (cid:90) B×(−a/2,a/2) ϕ · dµE = 0 . (3.9) We address now the integral on Γ0 × (−a/2, a/2). Recall that, as already observed, if x(cid:48) ∈ Γ0 and (x(cid:48), xN ) ∈ ∂∗E, then xN /∈ (−aρ, aρ). Therefore, using (3.2), we get (cid:90) (cid:90) ϕ · dµE ≤ ϕ dµE = H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ0}) Γ0×(−a/2,a/2) Γ0×(−a/2,a/2) ≤ H N−1(∂∗E ∩ QN \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}) ≤ ρaN−1 . Concerning A, we just recall that by Vol'pert Theorem 1.11 it is H N−1(A) = 0 . Let us pass now to Γ3; as already observed, for every x(cid:48) ∈ Γ3 the set ∂∗(Ex(cid:48)) = (∂∗E)x(cid:48) contains infinitely many points. Then, since for any K ≥ 1 it is clearly H N−1(cid:16)(cid:8)x(cid:48) ∈ Q \ A : H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) ≥ K(cid:9)(cid:17) ≤ 1 H N−1(∂∗E ∩ QN ) , K (3.10) (3.11) (3.12) (3.13) by sending K → ∞ we derive H N−1(Γ3) = 0 . (cid:90) Thanks to (3.11) and (3.12), the coarea formula (Theorem 1.12) directly gives (Γ3∪A)×(−a/2,a/2) QN∩∂∗E∩{x(cid:48)∈Γ3∪A} (cid:90) (cid:90) (cid:90) ϕ · dµE = = = (0, 1) · νE dH N−1 (cid:113) (cid:32)(cid:90) 1 − ν(cid:48) E(x)2 dH N−1(x) (cid:33) 1 dH 0(xN ) dH N−1(x(cid:48)) = 0 . QN∩∂∗E∩{x(cid:48)∈Γ3∪A} QN∩Γ3∪A ∂∗Ex(cid:48) We address now Γ1. Recall that, by definition, if x(cid:48) ∈ Γ1 then ∂∗Ex(cid:48) = {p} with p = p(x) ∈ E(x(cid:48), p) < 1, that is, the levels x(cid:48) such that the outer normal at (x(cid:48), p) is not horizontal. We remark the well known fact that (−aρ, aρ). Call then (cid:101)Γ1 the set of those x(cid:48) ∈ Γ1 for which ν(cid:48) H N−1(cid:0)Γ1 \(cid:101)Γ1 (cid:1) = 0. Using again the coarea formula, denoting by δp the Dirac mass at p ∈ R we find µE (cid:0)(cid:101)Γ1 × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) = δp ⊗ H N−1 (cid:101)Γ1 (cid:112)1 − ν(cid:48) νE(x(cid:48), p) · (0, 1) δp ⊗ H N−1 (cid:101)Γ1 . 1 E(x(cid:48), p)2 1 = E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI (cid:0)Γ1 × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) (cid:0)(cid:101)Γ1 × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) 12 (cid:90) Hence we have Γ1×(−a/2,a/2) ϕ · dµE = = = for every x(cid:48) ∈(cid:101)Γ1. Q (0, 1) · νE(x) dµE (cid:90) (cid:90) (0, 1) · νE(x) dµE (cid:90) (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), p) (cid:101)Γ1 Q Note that the "−" sign comes from that fact that νE(x(cid:48), p) has clearly a negative last component The very same argument used for Γ1 can be repeated for G, recalling that for every x(cid:48) ∈ G one has that ∂∗Ex(cid:48) = {q} with some q = q(x) ∈ (−aρ, aρ). Therefore, since νE(x(cid:48), q) has a positive last component, in place of (3.14) we find now (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), p) dH N−1(x(cid:48)) = −H N−1((cid:101)Γ1) = −H N−1(Γ1) . (3.14) (cid:90) G×(−a/2,a/2) (cid:90) ϕ · dµE = H N−1(G) . (3.15) Finally, we address Γ2. First of all, recall that H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) ≥ 2 for almost every x ∈ Γ2. Thus H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}) ≥ H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) dH N−1(x(cid:48)) ≥ 2H N−1(Γ2) . (3.16) Γ2 Moreover, by definition, for every x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2 there exist k ∈ N and pi ∈ (−a/2, a/2), for i = 1, ..., k, such that ∂∗Ex(cid:48) =(cid:83)k i=1 pi. Let us call again(cid:101)Γ2 the set of those x(cid:48) for which all the corresponding pi have a non-horizontal outer normal, where again H N−1(cid:0)Γ2 \(cid:101)Γ2 (cid:1) = 0. Using the coarea µE ((cid:101)Γ2 × (−a/2, a/2)) = αx(cid:48) ⊗ H N−1 (cid:101)Γ2 , formula exactly as we did for Γ1 and G, we have that where αx(cid:48) = 1 νE(x(cid:48), pi) · (0, 1) δpi . Therefore we have, analogously as in (3.14) or (3.15), (cid:90) i=1 k(cid:88) (cid:90) (cid:101)Γ2 k(cid:88) i=1 ϕ · dµE = Γ2×(−a/2,a/2) (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), pi) (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), pi) dH N−1(x(cid:48)) . (3.17) discuss carefully the signs. For x(cid:48) ∈ (cid:101)Γ2, we have that Ex(cid:48) = (cid:83)h Recall that, in the last expression, the integer k and the points pi depend on x(cid:48). Observe now that, in the right hand side of last equation, the integrand is always a finite sum of ±1; let us j=1(bj, cj) is a finite union of segments. Moreover, by construction {pi}i=1,...,k = {bj}j=1,...,h ∪{cj}j=1,...,h \{−a/2, a/2}, since (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), bj) (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), bj) = −1 we are working within the open cube QN . In addition, one has that for every j = 1, ..., h such that bj (cid:54)= −a/2, since the normal vector at any point (x(cid:48), bj) has a (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), cj) (0, 1) · νE(x(cid:48), cj) = 1 for every j = 1, ..., h such negative last component; similarly, we have that cj (cid:54)= a/2. In conclusion, for every x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2 the value of the integrand in (3.17) is either ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 13 −1, or 0, or 1, depending whether or not b1 = −a/2 or ch = a/2. Therefore we have, also recalling (3.16), ϕ · dµE ≤ H N−1(Γ2) ≤ H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}) 2 . (3.18) Γ2×(−a/2,a/2) (cid:90) Combining (3.8), (3.9), (3.10), (3.13), (3.14), (3.15), and (3.18), we have H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN )x(cid:48) ∈ G}(cid:1) + H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}(cid:1) 1 2 H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}(cid:1) ≥ H N−1(G) + (cid:90) = G×(−a/2,a/2) 1 2 ϕ · dµE + H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}) ≥ (1 − 2ρ)aN−1 . 1 2 On the other hand, using (3.1) and (3.2) of we get the upper bound H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ G}) + H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}) ≤ H N−1(∂∗E ∩ QN ) ≤ (1 + 2ρ)aN−1 . Combining together (3.19) and (3.20), we deduce H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ Γ2}) ≤ 8ρaN−1 . This, together with (3.19) again, implies that H N−1(∂∗E ∩ {(x(cid:48), xN ) : x(cid:48) ∈ G}) ≥ H N−1(G) ≥ (1 − 6ρ)aN−1 . Finally, this last estimate implies on one hand, since A ∪ G ∪ B ∪ Γ = Q, that (3.19) (3.20) (3.21) (3.22) (3.23) (3.24) and on the other hand, recalling (3.1) and (3.2), that H N−1(A) + H N−1(B) + H N−1(Γ) ≤ 6ρaN−1 , H N−1(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)A ∪ B ∪ Γ(cid:1) × (−a/2, a/2) (cid:17) ≤ 8ρaN−1 . Step (iii). Definition of σ−, σ+ and F . Definition of σ+. Let ¯δ (cid:28) ρa be a fixed number; we can take H := disjoint horizontal strips Si := Q × (σi, σi + ¯δ) ⊆ QN with aρ < σi < a/2 − 2ρ for every 1 ≤ i ≤ H. By assumptions (3.2) and (3.4), we have ¯δ (cid:20) a(1/2 − 3ρ) (cid:21) H(cid:88) i=1 aH N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ Si ≤ aH N−1(cid:16) (cid:1) + H N(cid:0)E ∩ Si ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Q × [aρ, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) (cid:1) + H N(cid:16) E ∩(cid:0)Q × [aρ, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2ρaN . Therefore there exists i ∈ {1, ..., H} such that aH N−1(∂∗E ∩ Si) + H N (E ∩ Si) ≤ 2ρaN H ≤ 6¯δρaN−1 , (3.25) recalling that by definition H ≥ a 3¯δ . We set σ+ := σi, for such an i. To show that this is possible, we apply (3.2) and Vol'pert Theorem 1.11 to obtain that (3.26) 14 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Definition of σ−. We now select a horizontal level σ− ∈ (−a/2,−aρ) such that ∂∗(Eσ− (∂∗E)σ− in the H N−2 sense, and ) = H N−2(cid:0)∂∗Eσ−(cid:1) ρ ≥ H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN ∩ {xN < −aρ}(cid:1) (cid:18) 1 aN−1 H N−2(∂∗Et) (cid:19) (cid:90) −aρ aN−2 = − ρ 2 -- −a/2 aN−2 dt ≥ 1 3 ≤ 3ρ . (cid:90) −aρ (cid:90) −aρ −a/2 ≥ -- −a/2 H N−2(∂∗Et) aN−1 dt H N−2(∂∗Et) aN−2 dt , from which the existence of some σ− satisfying (3.26) immediately follows. Definition of F . We want now to construct the competitor F . To do so, we take a constant ¯δ/(4M 2) ≤ δ ≤ ¯δ, and we define the set F = F (δ) as  x ∈ F ⇐⇒ x ∈ E \ QN , x ∈ E ∩ QN ∩(cid:0){xN ≤ σ−} ∪ {xN > σ+ + δ(cid:1) , (x(cid:48), σ−) ∈ E ∩ QN and σ− < xN ≤ σ− + δ , (x(cid:48), xN − δ) ∈ E ∩ QN and σ− + δ < xN ≤ σ+ + δ . In words, we eliminate the intersection of E with the strip Q × (σ+, σ+ + δ) ⊆ S¯i, and we move up of a distance δ all the part of E between the levels σ− and σ+. Notice that by definition σ+ + δ < a/2, so nothing changes outside of QN . Step (iv). Evaluation of the volume and perimeter of F . We are now ready to evaluate the volume and the perimeter of the set F , in order to obtain the ε − εα property. Volume. By the definition of F , it is easy to expect that its volume should equal that of E plus something similar to aN−1δ, since we are moving up of a distance δ a set within the cube of (N − 1)-dimensional volume equal to aN−1. This is exactly what we are going to prove, but some care is required since, in passing from E to F , we could also lose some volume, basically for two reasons. First, because we are eliminating the strip Q× (σ+, σ+ + δ) ⊆ S¯i (with which E has a small intersection, though). Second, because the density is not constant, and then there is in principle the risk of moving the mass where the density is lower. 1 := E \ F ∩(cid:0)Q × (σ−, σ+)(cid:1), and E− 2 := E \ F ∩ 2 ). By construction we have E+ ∩ E = ∅, 1 ∪ E− (cid:0)Q × (σ+, σ+ + δ)(cid:1), so that F = E ∪ E+ \ (E− Let us define the sets E+ := F \ E, E− E− 1 ∩ E− 2 = ∅, and E− 1 ∪ E− 2 ⊆ E, thus Ff − Ef = E+f − E− 1 f − E− 2 f . Let us estimate the terms on the right-hand side of this equality, starting with E− f ≤ M in QN and (3.25), and recalling that ¯δ/(4M 2) ≤ δ ≤ ¯δ, we have that ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩ S¯i (cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤ M H N(cid:0)E ∩ S¯i (cid:1) ≤ 6ρM aN−1¯δ (cid:12)(cid:12)E− 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩(cid:0)Q × (σ+, σ+ + δ(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (3.27) 2 . Using that (3.28) ≤ 24ρM 3aN−1δ . ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 15 We pass now to E+. Observe that E+ =(cid:83) x(cid:48) ⊇(cid:83) x(cid:48) and that, if x(cid:48) ∈ G, then E+ x(cid:48) is a segment of length δ. Therefore, using (3.22) and recalling that f ≥ 1/M on QN , we deduce x(cid:48)∈Q E+ x(cid:48)∈G E+ δaN−1(1 − 6ρ) . E+f ≥ 1 M δH N−1(G) ≥ 1 M (3.29) Since we need also an upper bound for E+f , we consider separately the sets G and Q \ G. In G we have (cid:12)(cid:12)E+ ∩ (G × (−a/2, a/2))(cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤ M δH N−1(G) ≤ M δaN−1 . (3.30) Recall now that Q\ G = A∪ B ∪ Γ. By definition of B, if x(cid:48) ∈ B then Ex(cid:48) is either empty or the whole segment (−a/2, a/2): in both cases, E+ x(cid:48) = ∅. Therefore, recalling also (3.11) and (3.12), we have (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E+ ∩(cid:0)(A ∪ B ∪ Γ3) × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f Finally, observe that (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)E+ ∪ E− 1 Therefore, using (3.24), we deduce that for every x(cid:48) ∈ Γ0 ∪ Γ1 ∪ Γ2 , 1 )x(cid:48) ≤ M (cid:90) (cid:90) (E+)x(cid:48) ∪ (E− H 1(cid:16) (cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (cid:1) ∩(cid:16)(cid:0)Γ0 ∪ Γ1 ∪ Γ2 (cid:1) × (−a/2, a/2) (cid:17) H 1(cid:16) ≤ M δH N−1(cid:16) (cid:1) × (−a/2, a/2) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Γ0 ∪ Γ1 ∪ Γ2 1 ∩(cid:0)(A ∪ B ∪ G ∪ Γ3) × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E− 1 . Observe that if x(cid:48) ∈ B ∪ G then (E− H 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) dH N−1(x(cid:48)) (E+)x(cid:48) ∪ (E− dH N−1(x(cid:48)) Γ0∪Γ1∪Γ2 Γ0∪Γ1∪Γ2 ≤ M δ 1 )x(cid:48) = 0 . (cid:17) ≤ δH 0(∂∗Ex(cid:48)) . (cid:17) ≤ 8ρM δaN−1 . (3.31) (3.32) It remains to estimate E− as we did to get (3.31), using (3.11) and (3.12), we have 1 )x(cid:48) = ∅: then, arguing exactly (3.33) We have now all the ingredients to estimate Ff − Ef both from above and below, thanks to (3.27). Indeed, on one hand, combining (3.29), (3.32), (3.33) and (3.28), and up to take ρ sufficiently small, we get = 0 . Ff − Ef ≥ δaN−1 (1 − 6ρ) − 8ρM − 24M 3ρ ≥ δaN−1 2M . (3.34) (cid:18) 1 M (cid:19) On the other hand, combining (3.30), (3.31), and (3.32), we also find Ff − Ef ≤ E+f ≤ M δaN−1(1 + 8ρ) ≤ 2M δaN−1 . (3.35) Perimeter. We are then left to find an upper bound for Pf (F ) − Pf (E) in terms of δ. This will be the only point in this Part where we are going to use the α-Holder assumption on f . We start pointing out that the change in perimeter has four contributions. First, since we move upwards the set E of a distance δ inside the cube QN , on the lateral boundary ∂Q × (−a/2, a/2) we are adding a surface T + 1 :=(cid:0)∂∗F \ ∂∗E(cid:1) ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) . 1 of "height" δ, namely, T + 2 as soon as ∂∗Eσ− 2 := ∂∗Eσ− × (σ−, σ− + δ) . T + 16 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Second, since in the strip Q× (σ−, σ− + δ) the set F is defined as F = Eσ− × (σ−, σ− + δ), then we are creating some new surface T + is not empty. More precisely, we set Third, since we are cutting away the set E ∩(cid:0)Q × (σ+, σ+ + δ)(cid:1), then we are removing some 3 in the strip, but at the same time we might also create some new surface T + 3 at the surface T − level σ+ + δ. Hence, we call 3 := ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Q × (σ+, σ+ + δ)(cid:1) , T − 3 := π(cid:48)(cid:0)T − 3 (cid:1) , being π(cid:48) : QN → Q ×(cid:8)xN = σ+ + δ(cid:9) the projection on the last variable. The last contribution comes from the fact that, since we are slightly moving ∂∗E ∩ QN between the levels σ− and σ+, we have to take into account that the density is changing. We set then finally T + 4 := ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Q × (σ−, σ+)(cid:1) , T − By construction, we can write ∂∗F ⊆(cid:16) ∂∗E \ (T − 3 ∪ T − 4 ) (cid:9) . T + 4 :=(cid:8)(x(cid:48), xN + δ) : (x(cid:48), xN ) ∈ T − (cid:17) ∪(cid:16) 1 ∪ T + T + 2 ∪ T + 3 ∪ T + (cid:17) 4 4 . Thus, since the sets T + can estimate 3 and T − i are H N−1-essentially pairwise disjoint, and so are also T − (cid:17) (cid:17) 1 ) + H N−1 (T + + (cid:16)H N−1 (cid:16)H N−1 4 ) − H N−1 (T + 3 ) − H N−1 (T + (T − 3 ) (T − 4 ) (T + 2 ) . f f f f f f + Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ H N−1 4 , one (3.36) We now estimate the terms in the right hand side of the above inequality one by one: while the first two terms (H N−1(T + i ) for i = 1, 2) are small by the sole essential boundedness of f , to show that the last two terms (H N−1(T + i ) for i = 3, 4) are small one needs to use the essential α-Holder assumption on f . i )− H N−1(T − Let us begin by considering T + 1 : by the definition, and also recalling (3.7), it is easy to show the inclusion of course to be intended in the H N−1-sense. Therefore, by using (3.6), we directly find (cid:111) , 1 ⊆(cid:110) T + (x(cid:48), xN ) ∈ ∂Q ×(cid:0) − a/2, a/2(cid:1) : ∃ (x(cid:48), t) ∈ ∂∗E, xN − δ ≤ t ≤ xN ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2N +1M δaN−2 . 1 ) ≤ M δH N−2(cid:16) (cid:1) ≤ M δH N−2(∂∗Eσ−) ≤ 3M ρaN−2δ . (cid:0)T + H N−1 2 , it is sufficient to recall (3.26) in order to obtain (T + f 2 H N−1 f Concerning T + (3.37) (3.38) ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 17 We compare now T + we have by (3.25) and recalling that ¯δ/(4M 2) ≤ δ ≤ ¯δ that 3 and T − 3 . Since the projection π(cid:48) is 1-Lipschitz and f is α-Holder on QN , H N−1 f 3 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 3 ) = f (x) dH N−1(x) − (cid:90) (cid:90) (cid:90) (cid:17) dH N−1(y) ≤ M δαH N−1(cid:0)T − (cid:1) ≤ 24M 3δα+1ρaN−2 . ≤ M δαH N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ S¯i f (x) dH N−1(x) f (π(cid:48)(y)) − f (y) (cid:16) T − T − ≤ T + 3 3 3 3 (cid:90) (cid:90) T + 4 (cid:16) (cid:90) 4 as follows f (x) dH N−1(x) 4 and T − (cid:17) T − 4 f (x(cid:48), xN + δ)) − f (x(cid:48), xN ) dH N−1(x) T − = ≤ M δαH N−1(T − 4 4 ) ≤ M δαaN−1(1 + 2ρ) . (cid:1) (3.39) (3.40) Finally, using again the α-Holder property, we can compare T + H N−1 f 4 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 4 ) = f (x) dH N−1(x) − Plugging (3.37), (3.38), (3.39) and (3.40) into (3.36), and recalling that ρ, a and δ are as small as we desire, we conclude Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ 2M δαaN−1 . (3.41) Step (v). Conclusion of the ε − εα property. We can now conclude very quickly the ε − εα property. Indeed, take a very small ε > 0, and let ¯δ = 2M ε/aN−1. Then, observe that the volume of the set F = F (δ) is a continuous function of δ ∈(cid:0)¯δ/(4M 2), ¯δ(cid:1): thus, thanks to (3.34) and (3.35), there exists some admissible δ for which Ff − Ef = ε. In particular, δ satisfies ε 2M ≤ δaN−1 ≤ 2M ε . (3.42) Therefore, (3.41) immediately implies Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ (2M )1+αa(N−1)(1−α)εα. To finish the proof of the ε − εα property, we have to consider the case when ε < 0 and ε (cid:28) 1. To do so, still assuming for simplicity that the origin of RN belongs to U ∩ ∂∗E and the outer normal of E at the origin is the vertical direction, we define E(cid:48) = B(1) \ E. Of course E(cid:48) is a set of finite perimeter, and ∂∗E = ∂∗E(cid:48) inside the unit ball. We can then apply all the preceding construction to the set E(cid:48), finding a new set F (cid:48) such that being F (cid:48) \ QN = E(cid:48) \ QN , (cid:12)(cid:12)F (cid:48)(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:48)(cid:12)(cid:12)f + ε , Defining then F =(cid:0)E \ QN(cid:1) ∪(cid:0)QN \ F (cid:48)(cid:1), we clearly have (cid:12)(cid:12)F(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f + ε , F \ QN = E \ QN , C = (2M )1+αa(N−1)(1−α) . Pf (F (cid:48)) ≤ Pf (E(cid:48)) + Cεα , Pf (F ) ≤ Pf (E) + Cεα , so the ε − εα property is finally established. Part II. The ε − εβ property. This second part of the proof is devoted to show the ε − εβ property for E, where β = β(α, N ) 18 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI is defined in (1.2). Notice that we can assume 0 ≤ α < 1, since otherwise β = α and then the property has been already shown in Part I. Our idea is to follow exactly the construction of Part I except for a single, yet fundamental, detail. To explain this, recall that in Part I we have selected a cube QN , of small but fixed side a; then, for any small constant ε > 0, we have defined F by moving up the set E in the whole cube QN = Q× (−a/2, a/2) of a distance δ ≈ ε -- in the sense of (3.42). What we will do now, instead, will be the following: for every small constant ε > 0, we will find a smaller (N − 1)-dimensional horizontal cube Qε ⊆ Q of side aεγ, being γ a suitable constant to be specified later. Then, we will define F by moving up the set E only inside Qε × (−a/2, a/2), and of a bigger distance δ ≈ ε1−(N−1)γ. Of course, this can make sense for arbitrarily small ε only if 0 < γ < 1 N−1 . Once had this idea, the proof is only a quite simple modification of the argument of Part I; basically, one only has to select carefully the small (N − 1)-dimensional cube Qε, write down the new form of all the estimates already found in Part I, and then select the right constant γ. We will again split the proof in some steps. First of all, we fix the constant a > 0 and the cube QN = (−a/2, a/2)N exactly as in Step (i) of Part I, and we also let 0 < γ < 1 N−1 be a constant, which will be explicitely chosen later. Step (i). Selection of H "candidate cubes" satisfying (3.45). Let 0 < ε (cid:28) 1 be a suitably small positive number. We aim to select a (N − 1)-dimensional cube Qε ⊆ Q of side aεγ; to do so, we will proceed in two different steps. In this first one, we select a high number of cubes satisfying the new version of the boundary estimate (3.6), namely, the estimate (3.45) below; then, in next step, we will choose one of those cubes, which will fulfill also all the other conditions that we need. We start setting (cid:35) (cid:34) ε(1−N )γ 2N +1 , (cid:9) H := j=1, ..., 2H contained in Q and having side 2aεγ; this is of course possible by definition of H as soon as ε is small enough. Let us now concentrate on a the cube centered at ¯x(cid:48) and and selecting 2H disjoint cubes (cid:8)(cid:101)Qj single cube (cid:101)Qj, which is centered at some ¯x(cid:48) ∈ Q, and call (cid:101)Q1/2 having side aεγ. For every x(cid:48) ∈ (cid:101)Q1/2 (cid:19) , we call (cid:18) j j N−1(cid:89) 2 i=1 ensures that the cube of side aεγ centered at x(cid:48), which is of course contained in (cid:101)Qj. A simple rough estimate H N−1(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)(cid:101)Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) (cid:90) H N−2(cid:16) (cid:101)Q1/2 H N−2(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q(x(cid:48)) × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Q(x(cid:48)) × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) 2(N − 1)(aεγ)N−2 dH N−1(x(cid:48)) . dH N−1(x(cid:48)) aεγ ≥ = 1 j Q(x(cid:48)) := i − aεγ x(cid:48) , x(cid:48) i + aεγ 2 (cid:90) (cid:101)Q1/2 -- j 2(N − 1) j ∈ (cid:101)Q1/2 j ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS aεγ such that H N−1(cid:16) As a consequence, there exists some x(cid:48) H N−2(cid:16) ∂∗E∩(cid:0)∂Q(x(cid:48) Observe now that, since the cubes (cid:101)Qj are disjoint and contained in Q, it is H N−1(cid:16) 2H(cid:88) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)(cid:101)Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ ∂∗E∩(cid:0)(cid:101)Qj ×(−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) j)×(−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2(N − 1) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)(cid:101)Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN(cid:1) ≤(cid:0)1 + 2ρ(cid:1)aN−1 . ≤ 2N +1(cid:0)1 + 3ρ(cid:1)(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 . Among the 2H cubes (cid:101)Qj, there are then at least H cubes which satisfy (cid:0)1 + 2ρ(cid:1)aN−1 H N−1(cid:16) j=1 H 19 . (3.43) (3.44) joint (N −1)-dimensional cubes(cid:8)Qj Up to renumbering, we can assume that those "good" cubes correspond to the indices j = 1, 2, . . . , H. Hence, for any such j we define Qj := Q(x(cid:48) j). Summarizing, we have found H dis- j=1, ..., H of side aεγ contained inside Q, and inserting (3.44) (cid:9) in (3.43) we find that each of these cubes satisfies the estimate H N−2(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2N +2N(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−2 , (3.45) which can be seen as the new version of (3.6). Exactly as in (3.7), Vol'pert Theorem 1.11 allows us to assume, without loss of generality, that for every 1 ≤ j ≤ H it is ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) = ∂∗(cid:16) E ∩(cid:0)∂Qj × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) H N−2 − a.e. . (3.46) Step (ii). Choice of the cube Qε. In this step, we will select one of the H cubes found in Step (i), and we will call it Qε. We will denote by Aε, Bε, Gε and Γε the intersections of A, B, G and Γ with Qε, where we consider the decomposition Q = A ∪ B ∪ G ∪ Γ already presented in Step (ii) of Part I, and we will write for ε = Qε × (−a/2, a/2). We aim to choose Qε in such a way that the following holds: brevity QN ≤ 1 + 2N +4 · 8ρ , ε (cid:1) H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN (cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 ε \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:1) H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN (cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 ε ∩ {xN > 0}(cid:1) H N(cid:0)E ∩ QN H N−1(cid:0)Gε (cid:1) (cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 ≥ 1 − 2N +4 · 6ρ . aN εγ(N−1)/2 ≤ 2N +4ρ , ≤ 2N +4ρ , (3.47) (3.48) (3.49) (3.50) Let us show that this is possible. First of all, writing for brevity QN every 1 ≤ j ≤ H, we can apply (3.2) to find aN−1ρ ≥ H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:1) ≥ H(cid:88) H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN j = Qj × (−a/2, a/2) for j \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:1) . j=1 20 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI As a consequence, strictly more than 75% of the H cubes satisfy aN−1ρ j \ {−aρ < xN < aρ}(cid:17) ≤ 4 H N−1(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩ QN ≤ 2N +4ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 , H that is, (3.48). In the very same way, applying (3.4) we observe that more than 75% of the cubes satisfy (3.49), and applying (3.22) we observe than more than 75% of the cubes satisfy (3.50). In fact, let π : QN → Q be the Some additional care is required to obtain also (3.47). projection on the horizontal variables, and define the measure µ ∈ M(Q) as (cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN(cid:1)(cid:17) − H N−1 G . (cid:16)H N−1 ∂∗E ∩(cid:8)(x(cid:48), xN ) ∈ QN : x(cid:48) ∈ V(cid:9)(cid:17) − H N−1(cid:0)V ∩ G(cid:1) . µ := π# µ(V ) := H N−1(cid:16) In other words, for every (N − 1)-dimensional Borel set V ⊆ Q, we set By construction and by definition of G, one clearly has that µ is a positive measure; hence, by (3.1), (3.2) and (3.22) we deduce (cid:107)µ(cid:107) = µ(Q) = H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN(cid:1) − H N−1(G) ≤ 8ρaN−1 . Thus, arguing as before, we find that more than 75% of the cubes satisfy µ(cid:0)Qj (cid:1) ≤ 4 (cid:1) = H N−1(cid:0)Qj ∩ G(cid:1) + µ(cid:0)Qj H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ QN 8ρaN−1 H j ≤ 2N +4 · 8ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 . (cid:1) ≤(cid:0)1 + 2N +4 · 8ρ(cid:1)(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 , For each of those cubes, it is clearly thus (3.47) holds. As a consequence, there must be at least one of the cubes Qj which satisfies contemporar- ily (3.47), (3.48), (3.49) and (3.50), hence we conclude this step by calling Qε one of those "good" cubes. Recall that, since Qε is one of the H cubes found in Step (i), then also (3.45) holds true. Step (iii). Definition of F and evaluation of its volume and perimeter. We can now easily give the definition of σ+, σ− and F , and evaluate the volume and perimeter of F , performing the very same arguments done in Steps (iii) and (iv) of Part I. In fact, we will see that (3.45) -- (3.50) are the analogous of everything that we really needed there. We start again by fixing some ¯δ (cid:28) a: then, exactly as we proved (3.25), we can use (3.48) and (3.49) to find aρ < σ+ < a/2 − 2ρ such that the horizontal strip S¯i = Qε × (σ+, σ+ + ¯δ) satisfies aH N−1(∂∗E ∩ Si) + H N (E ∩ Si) ≤ 2N +6¯δρ(aεγ)N−1 . (3.51) Moreover, exactly as we used (3.2) to prove (3.26), we can use (3.48) to get the existence of some −a/2 < σ− < −aρ such that H N−2(cid:0)∂∗(E ∩ QN ε )σ−(cid:1) ≤ 3 · 2N +4ρ (cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 a ≤ 3 · 2N +4ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−2 . (3.52) ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 21 We can now generalize also the definition of the competitor set in the obvious way. More precisely, for every ¯δ/(4M 2) ≤ δ ≤ ¯δ we set F = F (δ) as  x ∈ F ⇐⇒ ε ∩(cid:0){xN ≤ σ−} ∪ {xN > σ+ + δ(cid:9)) , ε and σ− < xN ≤ σ− + δ , x ∈ E \ QN ε , x ∈ E ∩ QN (x(cid:48), σ−) ∈ E ∩ QN (x(cid:48), xN − δ) ∈ E ∩ QN ε and σ− + δ < xN ≤ σ+ + δ . 2 f . 2 : recalling that f ≤ M in QN , and using (3.51), 1 f −E− Let us evaluate now the volume and perimeter of F . Concerning the volume, similarly as in Part I we define 2 := E \ F ∩(cid:0)Qε × (σ+, σ+ + δ)(cid:1) , Now, since Aε, Bε, Gε and Γ3,ε are contained by definition in A, B, G and Γ3, by (3.31) and (3.33) we immediately deduce that 1 ∪ E− 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)E− 2 E+f ≥ 1 M δH N−1(Gε) ≥ 1 M E+ := F \ E , E− so that F = E ∪ E+ \(cid:0)E− We start with the estimate of the volume of E− we get 1 := E \ F ∩(cid:0)Qε × (σ−, σ+)(cid:1) , E− (cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)E ∩ S¯i To estimate from below the volume E+, it is enough to recall that E+ ⊇ ∪x(cid:48)∈GεE+ x(cid:48) is a segment of length δ for every x(cid:48) ∈ Gε. Thus, by (3.50) we get E+ (cid:1) and (3.27) holds, namely, Ff −Ef = E+f −E− (cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤ 2N +6M ¯δρ(aεγ)N−1 ≤ 2N +8M 3δρ(aεγ)N−1 . δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1(cid:0)1 − 2N +4 · 6ρ(cid:1) , and conversely (cid:12)(cid:12)E+ ∩ (Gε × (−a/2, a/2))(cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤ M δH N−1(Gε) ≤ M δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 . 1 ∩(cid:0)Gε × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)E− (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:16) (cid:17) (cid:1) × (−a/2, a/2) (cid:17) − H N−1(cid:16) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Gε × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) (cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f ≤ 2N +4 · 14M ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1δ . (cid:1) × (−a/2, a/2) ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Aε ∪ Bε ∪ Γε = H N−1(cid:16) ≤ 2N +4 · 14ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 , 1 ∪ E+(cid:17) ∩(cid:16) H N−1(cid:16) which is the perfect analogous of (3.24). Thus, exactly as in (3.32), we obtain Finally observe that, thanks to (3.47) and (3.50) and by the definition of G, we have (Aε ∪ Bε ∪ Γ3,ε) × (−a/2, a/2) ∂∗E ∩ QN ε E− = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)E− 1 ∪ E+(cid:1) ∩(cid:16)(cid:0)Γ0,ε ∪ Γ1,ε ∪ Γ2,ε Ff − Ef ≥ δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 (cid:18) 1 (3.58) We can finally write down the estimates for Ff − Ef . Indeed, on one hand, by (3.54), (3.58), (3.56) and (3.53), and up to take ρ sufficiently small, we get (cid:19) (cid:0)1 − 2N +4 · 6ρ(cid:1) − 2N +4 · 14M ρ − 2N +8M 3ρ ≥ δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 2M . (3.53) x(cid:48) , and that (3.54) (3.55) = 0 . (3.56) (3.57) On the other hand, putting together (3.55), (3.56), and (3.58), we also find M Ff − Ef ≤ E+f ≤ M δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1(cid:16) (cid:17) ≤ 2M δ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1 . 1 + 2N +4 · 14ρ 22 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI 2M ε1−(N−1)γ aN−1 , The same argument used in Step (v) of Part I ensures then that, if we define ¯δ = then there exists an admissible δ such that Ff − Ef = ε , ε1−(N−1)γ 2M aN−1 ≤ δ ≤ 2M ε1−(N−1)γ aN−1 . (3.59) T + T + T − T − Let us now pass to study the perimeter of F . Exactly as in Step (iv) of Step I, we define 1 :=(cid:0)∂∗F \ ∂∗E(cid:1) ∩(cid:0)∂Qε × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1) , 3 := ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Qε × (σ+, σ+ + δ)(cid:1) , 4 := ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)Qε × (σ−, σ+)(cid:1) , 2 := ∂∗(cid:0)E ∩ QN (cid:1)σ− × (σ−, σ− + δ) , 3 := π(cid:48)(cid:0)T − (cid:1) , (cid:9) . 4 :=(cid:8)(x(cid:48), xN + δ) : (x(cid:48), xN ) ∈ T − ε → Qε ×(cid:8)xN = σ+ + δ(cid:9) is the projection on the last variable. Then, we clearly 1 ) ≤ M δH N−2(cid:16) where π(cid:48) : QN still have the validity of (3.36), so we need to estimate the H N−1 The same argument which proved (3.37), keeping in mind (3.46) and using (3.45) in place measures of the sets T ± i . of (3.6), gives now H N−1 f (3.60) (T + T + T + 4 3 f ε Concerning T + 2 , (3.52) immediately gives H N−1 (cid:1) ≤ M δH N−2(cid:0)∂∗(cid:0)E ∩ QN (cid:0)T + f 2 Exactly as in (3.39), a comparison between the H N−1(T + from (3.51) and using the α-Holder property of f , since H N−1 f 3 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 3 ) ≤ ε ∂∗E ∩(cid:0)∂Qε × (−a/2, a/2)(cid:1)(cid:17) ≤ 2N +2N M(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−2δ . (cid:1)σ−(cid:1) ≤ 3 · 2N +4M ρ(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−2δ . (cid:90) (cid:17) dH N−1(y) ≤ M δαH N−1(cid:0)T − (cid:1) ≤ 2N +8M 3δα+1ρ(aεγ)N−1 ≤ M δαH N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ S¯i (cid:90) 3 ) and H N−1(T − f (π(cid:48)(y)) − f (y) (cid:16) T − a 3 . 3 f (x(cid:48), xN + δ)) − f (x(cid:48), xN ) dH N−1(x) 4 ) ≤ M δα(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1(cid:0)1 + 2N +4 · 8ρ(cid:1) . ≤ M δαH N−1(T − (cid:16) T − 4 (cid:17) (cid:1) H N−1 f 4 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 4 ) = Finally, using once again the α-Holder property of f as in (3.40), and recalling (3.47), we get (3.61) 3 ) readily comes (3.62) (3.63) Step (iv). Choice of γ and conclusion. We are finally ready to conclude our proof. In the preceding steps, we have shown that for every 0 < ε (cid:28) 1 there exists some set F which equals E out of a small cube QN and such that Ff −Ef = ε. Moreover, putting together (3.60), (3.61), (3.62) and (3.63), and recalling (3.59), we also have the estimate δεγ(N−2) + δαεγ(N−1)(cid:17) ≤ C(cid:48)(cid:48)(cid:16) ε1−γ + εα+γ(N−1)(1−α)(cid:17) Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ C(cid:48)(cid:16) , (3.64) being C(cid:48)(cid:48) = 2N +4N M 2 a + (2M )1−αa(N−1)(1−α) . Recall now that 0 < γ < 1 N−1 is a fixed constant, still to be chosen. It is then finally clear what is the best choice for γ: indeed, notice that γ1 = 1 − γ is a decreasing function of γ, while ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 23 γ2 = α +γ(N −1)(1−α) is an increasing one, and notice also that, since 0 < α < 1, then γ1 > γ2 (resp., γ1 < γ2) for γ ≈ 0 (resp., γ ≈ 1 N−1 ). Therefore, the optimal choice of γ corresponds to the situation when γ1 = γ2, which means that we can decide γ := 1 − α α + N (1 − α) . Summarizing, we have been able to build a set F with Ff − Ef = ε and with Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ 2C(cid:48)(cid:48)εβ α + (N − 1)(1 − α) α + N (1 − α) , β = (3.65) (3.66) which corresponds to (1.2). To conclude the ε − εβ property, we only have to deal with the case when ε < 0 and ε (cid:28) 1; however, the case of negative ε can be derived from the case of positive ε exactly as we did in Step (v) of Part I. Hence, also this second part is concluded. Part III. The case when f is continuous. Let us conclude our proof by considering the case when f is only essentially bounded and continuous. By the result of Part II, the essential boundedness of f , thus the essential α-Holder N−1 property with α = 0, already tells us that the ε − ε N property holds true with some constant C(cid:48)(cid:48), since β = N−1 N when α = 0 by (3.66). What we want to do, is to show the validity of the same property with any arbitrarily small constant. To do so, recall that the estimate of Pf (F ) − Pf (E) comes from four terms, see (3.60) -- (3.63) above. Our strategy will be to slightly modify the definition of ¯δ in order to decrease as desired the first two terms; unfortunately, while doing so the last two terms will correspondingly increase. However, using the fact that f is continuous, instead of only essentially bounded, we will be able to let also the last two terms become arbitrarily small. Let us be more precise: we fix a small number c > 0 and we aim to show the ε − ε N−1 N property with constant C = c. To do so, we recall the construction and the estimates of Step II with γ = 1/N , which corresponds to the case α = 0. The only difference now, is that we fix a large constant L, to be specified later, and we want to build a set F such that To do so, the only required change is to define Ff − Ef = ε := ε L . ¯δ := 2M ε1−(N−1)γ LaN−1 = 1 N 2M ε LaN−1 , which of course reduces to the old choice of ¯δ if L = 1. Then, we find again some δ satisfying Ff − Ef = ε , 1 ε N N−1 N aN−1 2M L 1 N ≤ δ ≤ 2M ε N−1 N aN−1 L . (3.67) 24 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI which still reduces to (3.59) if L = 1. By (3.60) and (3.61), recalling (3.67) and up to take ρ small enough, we know that 1 ) + H N−1 (T + 2 ) ≤ 2N +3N M(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−2δ = 2N +3N M aN−2 ε H N−1 N−2 N L N−2 N δ (T + f f ≤ 2N +4N M 2 1 N aL ε N−1 N ≤ c 3 N−1 N , ε (3.68) where the last inequality holds true up to choose a sufficiently large constant L. We have now to evaluate H N−1 4 ). If we just insert the new choice of δ into (3.62) and (3.63), these two estimates become worse because of the presence of the big constant L: in fact, it is now time to use the continuity assumption on f . Let us then call ω the standard continuity modulus of f on QN , i.e., f f f f (T − ω(c) = sup since f is continuous, thus uniformly continuous on QN , we have that ω (cid:38) 0 when c (cid:38) 0. We can then easily modify the calculation of (3.62) as H N−1 f 3 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 3 ) ≤ 3 ) − H N−1 (T + 3 ) and H N−1 (T − 4 ) − H N−1 (T + (cid:111) (cid:110)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (x) − f (y)(cid:12)(cid:12) : x, y ∈ QN , x − y ≤ c (cid:90) (cid:17) (cid:16) dH N−1(y) ≤ ω(δ)H N−1(cid:0)T − ≤ ω(δ)H N−1(cid:0)∂∗E ∩ S¯i (cid:1) ≤ 2N +7M ρ (cid:90) (cid:17) f (π(cid:48)(y)) − f (y) εω(δ) ≤ c 3 N−1 N , (cid:16) f (x(cid:48), xN + δ)) − f (x(cid:48), xN ) T − ε a 3 ; 3 dH N−1(x) 4 ) ≤ ω(δ)(cid:0)aεγ(cid:1)N−1(cid:0)1 + 2N +4 · 8ρ(cid:1) (cid:18) 2M ε N−1 N aN−1 ε N−1 N ω 1 N ≤ 2L N−1 N aN−1 ε N−1 N ω(δ) ≤ 2L ≤ ω(δ)H N−1(T − (cid:1) N−1 N aN−1 L (cid:18) 2M ε 1 N ω N−1 N aN−1 L (cid:19) ≤ c N−1 N aN−1 6L (3.69) (3.70) (cid:19) , where the last inequality is true if ε is small enough. Finally, the estimate (3.63) now becomes H N−1 f 4 ) − H N−1 (T + f (T − 4 ) = T − 4 using also (3.67). We can select a sufficiently small ¯ε such that, whenever 0 < ε < ¯ε, one has (recall that L has been already fixed). As a consequence, (3.70) yields (3.71) Summarizing, for any c > 0 we have found 0 < ¯ε (cid:28) 1 such that, for any 0 < ε < ¯ε, there exists F which, by (3.68), (3.69) and (3.71), satisfies ε f f H N−1 4 ) − H N−1 (T + (T − 4 ) ≤ c 3 N−1 N . Ff − Ef = ε , Pf (F ) − Pf (E) ≤ cε N−1 N . N−1 N property with any constant c > 0. Arguing in the usual way to treat the case of ε < 0, ε < ¯ε, we have then concluded the validity of the ε − ε (cid:3) Remark 3.1. We underline that, in Theorem B, the validity of the ε − εβ property with any small constant is a peculiarity of the case when f is continuous, but it cannot be inferred for the general case of a α-Holder function f . ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 25 4. An example of an unbounded isoperimetric set This section is devoted to show an example of an essentially bounded but discontinuous function f which admits an unbounded isoperimetric set. This will show the sharpness of the assumption in Theorem B. i∈N be a sequence of disjoint balls of Euclidean volume(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi (cid:9) (cid:12)(cid:12)eucl = 1/2i, sufficiently Let(cid:8)Bi far from each other, and let f : RN → R be defined as (cid:40) 1 M if x ∈(cid:83) otherwise , i ∂Bi , f (x) := where M > 1 is a constant, big enough, to be precised later. We will show that B = ∪iBi, which is an unbounded set, is the unique isoperimetric set of volume M . To do so, let us pick a smooth set E ⊆ RN with Ef = M ; we aim to show that, for a suitable constant ξ > 0, one has Pf (E) ≥ Pf (B) + ξη N−1 N , (4.1) being B(cid:52)E = (B \ E) ∪ (E \ B) the symmetric difference between E and B. By the density of smooth sets among sets of finite perimeter, (4.1) will show that B is the unique isoperimetric set of volume M . where η := 2 , (cid:12)(cid:12)B(cid:52)E(cid:12)(cid:12)eucl Claim 1. It is admissible to assume that every connected component of E intersects exactly one of the balls Bi. Proof. Assume first that a connected component of E intersects two different balls. We argue which is far enough from each of the balls, and replacing it with a ball of the same volume (not intersecting B ∪ E); the very same calculation done in the proof of Theorem A ensures that, if exactly as in the proof of Theorem A: one can build a competitor (cid:101)E by cutting the part of E the balls are chosen sufficiently far from each other, there will be such a set (cid:101)E having perimeter smaller than that of E. Since by construction(cid:12)(cid:12)B(cid:52)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:101)B(cid:52)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f , we can reduce ourselves to show (4.1) for the set (cid:101)E; this shows that it is admissible to assume that no connected component of E intersects two different balls. Suppose now, instead, that there is a connected component of E which does not intersect any ball; then, we can simply translate this component around RN until it touches one of the balls Bi, or one of the other connected components which in turn touches some ball. Since the density is constant in RN \ B, this translation does not effect the perimeter nor the volume of E, hence it is admissible to assume that every connected component of E intersects at least one (cid:3) ball. The proof of the claim is then concluded. Thanks to the above claim, for every i we can consider the (possibly empty) connected component of E which intersects Bi, and subdivide it into two parts, the set Ei ⊆ Bi and the remaining set Fi, as depicted in Figure 1. We call now εi :=(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi \ Ei (cid:12)(cid:12)eucl , δi :=(cid:12)(cid:12)Fi (cid:12)(cid:12)eucl , 26 and notice that E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI (cid:88) (cid:88) (4.2) by the definition of η in (4.1) and since Ef = Bf = M . Our next observation is the following. δi = η εi = i i F1 E1 F2 E2 B2 E3 B3 B1 Figure 1. Sketch of the situation in the Example of Section 4; the set F3 is empty. Claim 2. For every i ∈ N one has Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (Bi) ≥ M − 1 (cid:12)(cid:12) N−1 (cid:12)(cid:12)Fi (cid:1) = Peucl(Fi) ≥ N ω1/N 2 H N−1(cid:0)∂Fi N ω1/N N δ N−1 N i . Proof. First of all, we know by the Euclidean isoperimetric inequality that N−1 N (4.3) it is done by two parts, namely, Γ1 = ∂Fi \ Bi and Γ2 = Consider now the boundary of Fi: ∂Fi ∩ ∂Bi. Call now π : RN \ Bi → ∂Bi the projection on Bi: since the ball in convex, π is 1-Lipschitz; therefore, N . i N eucl = N ω1/N N δ As a consequence, Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (Bi) = H N−1 H N−1(Γ1) ≥ H N−1(cid:0)π(Γ1)(cid:1) ≥ H N−1(Γ2) . (cid:1) = M H N−1(cid:0)Γ1 (cid:1) − H N−1 ≥ (M − 1)H N−1(cid:0)Γ1 H N−1(cid:0)∂Fi ≥ M − 1 (cid:0)Γ2 (cid:1) ≥ M − 1 (cid:0)Γ1 N−1 N N ω1/N N δ i 2 , f f 2 (cid:1) (cid:1) − H N−1(cid:0)Γ2 (cid:1) recalling that ∂Fi = Γ1 ∪ Γ2 and (4.3). The proof of the claim is then concluded. As an immediate corollary, just adding over i ∈ N, using the concavity of t (cid:55)→ t recalling (4.2), we get (cid:88) i∈N Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (B) = Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (Bi) (cid:16) (cid:88) i∈N ≥ M − 1 2 (cid:17) ≥ M − 1 (cid:17) N−1 2 M − 1 N = 2 (cid:88) i∈N N ω1/N N N−1 N δ i N ω1/N N η N−1 N . (cid:16)(cid:88) N ω1/N N i∈N δi Now, since a quick observation tells us that Pf (Ei ∪ Fi) − Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) ≥ Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) , (cid:3) N−1 N , and (4.4) (4.5) ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 27 and thanks to (4.4), we are basically reduced to evaluate Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) in terms of εi. We can start with an easy bound. Claim 3. For every i ∈ N, one has Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) ≥ −N ω1/N N ε N−1 N i . Proof. The Euclidean isoperimetric inequality tells us that Peucl(Ei) ≥ N ω1/N N Ei N−1 N eucl = N ω1/N N−1 N , we have N therefore, again by the concavity of t (cid:55)→ t Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) ≥ Peucl(Ei) − Peucl(Bi) ≥ N ω1/N N (cid:17) N−1 (cid:16)Bieucl − εi (cid:18)(cid:16)Bieucl − εi (cid:17) N−1 N − Bi N−1 N ; N eucl ≥ −N ω1/N N ε N−1 N i . (cid:19) (cid:3) Unfortunately, we cannot simply conclude comparing (4.4) and last claim, because the N now works against our estimate, since(cid:80)−ε concavity of t (cid:55)→ t this problem, we subdivide N into two parts, namely, N−1 N−1 N i ≤ −η N−1 N . To overcome (cid:26) I := i ∈ N : (cid:27) (cid:12)(cid:12)Bi (cid:12)(cid:12)eucl εi ≤ 1 4 , J := (cid:26) i ∈ N : (cid:12)(cid:12)Bi (cid:12)(cid:12)eucl εi > 1 4 (cid:27) ; in words, the indices belonging to I (resp., J) are those corresponding to sets Ei which contain more (resp., less) than 75% of the corresponding ball Bi. The key point is that for indices in I something much stronger than Claim 3 can be found. Claim 4. For every i ∈ I, one has Pf (Ei) ≥ Pf (Bi). Proof. First of all, we consider the spherical symmetrization E∗ of Ei, which satisfies Pf (E∗) ≤ Pf (Ei) by Theorem 1.4 (and since f is obviously radial in a neighborhood of Bi); notice that it is also E∗eucl = Eeucl, since f is constant in Bi. Then, we write ∂E∗ = Γ1 ∪ Γ2, where Γ1 = ∂E∗ ∩ Bi and Γ2 = ∂E∗ ∩ ∂Bi; in particular, Γ2 is a (possibly empty) spherical cap in Bi. Let us then call P the (N − 1)-dimensional ball whose boundary coincides with the boundary In other words, since Γ2 is a spherical cap then up to a rotation of Γ2 as a subset of ∂Bi. one has Γ2 = (cid:8)x ∈ ∂Bi : x · ν ≤ κ(cid:9) for suitable κ ∈ R and ν ∈ SN−1, we define the ball P =(cid:8)x ∈ Bi : x · ν = κ(cid:9); the situation is depicted in Figure 2. We have now to distinguish two cases. Case I. H N−1(Γ2) ≥ H N−1(∂Bi)/2. In this case, as in Claim 2 we call π the projection over P , which is 1-Lipschitz by the convexity of P ; then, we can again estimate H N−1(Γ1) ≥ H N−1(cid:0)π(Γ1)(cid:1) ≥ H N−1(P ) . 28 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI Γ2 E∗ Γ1 P Bi Figure 2. Situation in Claim 4. Moreover, since H N−1(Γ2) ≥ H N−1(∂Bi)/2, then H N−1(cid:0)∂Bi \ Γ2 (cid:1) ≤ N ωN 2ωN−1 H N−1(P ) ≤ N H N−1(P ) . Putting these two observation together, and assuming without loss of generality that M ≥ N , one directly gets Pf (Ei) ≥ Pf (E∗) = M H N−1(Γ1) + H N−1(Γ2) ≥ M H N−1(P ) + H N−1(∂Bi) − H N−1(∂Bi \ Γ2) ≥ H N−1(∂Bi) = Pf (Bi) , hence we have concluded in this case (without even using the assumption that i ∈ I). Case II. H N−1(Γ2) < H N−1(∂Bi)/2. In this case, the Euclidean isoperimetric inequality and the fact that i ∈ I tell us that Peucl(E∗) ≥ N ω1/N N E∗ N−1 N eucl = N ω1/N N N ≥ 3 4 N ω1/N N Bi N−1 eucl = N 3 4 Pf (Bi) . (cid:0)Bieucl − εi (cid:1) N−1 On the other hand, the assumption of this case gives Peucl(E) = H N−1(Γ1) + H N−1(Γ2) ≤ H N−1(Γ1) + 1 2 Pf (Bi) . The two preceding estimates imply H N−1(Γ1) ≥ 1 4 Pf (Bi), which in turn yields Pf (E) ≥ M H N−1(Γ1) ≥ Pf (Bi) , as soon as M ≥ 4. The proof is then concluded also for this last case. (cid:3) The next step is to observe what happens for indices in J. Claim 5. One has(cid:80) (cid:16) (cid:17) ≥ −C(N )η Pf (Ei)−Pf (Bi) i∈J N−1 N , where C(N ) is a purely dimensional constant. Proof. The claim is emptily true if J = ∅, then we can directly suppose J (cid:54)= ∅ and call j the smallest element of J. A simple calculation, recalling that εj > 1/(4 · 2j), yields (cid:88) N−1 N i ε ≤(cid:88) i>j i>j (cid:0)2 N − 1(cid:1) · 2j N−1 1 N N−1 1 2i N−1 N = ≤ C1(N )ε N−1 N j , ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 29 where N−1 4 N N−1 N − 1 Therefore, using Claim 3, Claim 4 and (4.2), we deduce N−1 N (cid:17) ≥ −N ω1/N Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) (cid:88) C1(N ) = (cid:16) 2 ε i N . (cid:19) (cid:18) N−1 N j ε ≥ −N ω1/N N i∈J N−1 N (cid:18) (cid:88) (cid:0)C1(N ) + 1(cid:1)ε + ε j j i∈J, i>j ≥ −N ω1/N = −C(N )η N N−1 N . N−1 N = −C(N )ε N−1 N j ≥ −C(N ) (cid:88) (cid:16)(cid:88) i>j ε + (cid:19) (cid:17) N−1 N N−1 N i i∈N εi (cid:3) We are finally in position to conclude. In fact, putting together (4.4), (4.5), Claims 3, 4 and 5, and assuming without loss of generality that E has finite perimeter, we have Pf (E) − Pf (B) = Pf (Ei ∪ Fi) − Pf (B) i∈N (cid:88) (cid:88) ≥(cid:88) ≥(cid:88) i∈N i∈N = i∈J (cid:16) (cid:16) (cid:16) Pf (Ei ∪ Fi) − Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) Pf (Ei) − Pf (Bi) (cid:17) (cid:17) (cid:88) + + i∈N M − 1 2 (cid:17) + (cid:88) i∈N Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (B) Pf (Bi ∪ Fi) − Pf (B) N ω1/N N η N−1 N ≥ ξη N−1 N , where ξ > 0 if M is big enough. We have then established the validity of (4.1), thus it is definitively proved that B is the (unique) isoperimetric set of volume M , as desired. 5. Applications on existence and regularity This final section is devoted to show two applications of Theorems A and B to the questions of the existence and regularity of isoperimetric sets. Even if those two are only simple conse- quences of the above theorems and of the known facts about existence and regularity, the results that we can find are stronger than those which were previously known. More refined new results concerning the regularity in the 2-dimensional case are contained in the forthcoming paper [11]. 5.1. On the existence of isoperimetric sets. Let us start discussing the question of existence of isoperimetric sets. As we explained in the Introduction, the existence is deeply connected with the boundedness; in particular, some results in [24] provide existence of isoperimetric sets (for a certain volume m) under the assumption that all the isoperimetric sets for volumes smaller than m (if any) are bounded. Of course, in all these results the boundedness assumption can be removed whenever it comes directly from Theorem A. Let us be more precise: we recall the following result (which can be found in [24, Theorems 7.9, 7.11, 7.13]). Theorem 5.1. Let f be a density on RN approaching a finite limit a > 0 at infinity, and assume that the isoperimetric sets are bounded. Then there exist isoperimetric sets of all volumes if one of the following properties holds: 30 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI (i) for every V > 0 and for every R > 0, there is some ball B of volume V at distance from the origin at least R such that (cid:16) (cid:17) N−1 N ; f (x) ≤ a 1 N sup x∈B f (x) inf x∈B (ii) f is radial and, for any c > 0 and any ρ > 0, there exists some R ≥ ρ such that (iii) for any V > 0, there exist balls B of volume V arbitrarily far from the origin satisfying the mean inequality f (R) ≤ a − e−cR ; (cid:90) -- ∂B (cid:18) (cid:90) f -- B (cid:19) N−1 N . f ≤ a 1 N As an immediate application of Theorem A we can then strengthen the above existence result as follows (notice that there is no need of requiring the essential boundedness to f , by the assumption that f converges to a > 0 at infinity). Theorem 5.2. Let f be a continuous density on RN approaching a finite limit a > 0 at infinity. Then there exist isoperimetric sets of all volumes if one of the properties (i), (ii), or (iii) of Theorem 5.1 holds true. 5.2. On the regularity of isoperimetric sets. We pass now to the regularity issue. To start, we recall what is known up to now concerning the regularity of isoperimetric sets in RN with density (see for instance [21, Proposition 3.5 and Corollary 3.8]). Theorem 5.3. Let f be a smooth or Ck,α density on Rn, with k ≥ 1. Then the boundary of any isoperimetric set is a smooth or Ck+1,α submanifold except on a singular set of Hausdorff dimension at most n − 8. Notice that, as we already explained in the Introduction, the known result covers only cases in which the density is at least Lipschitz, while there are no results for lower regularity of the density. Our theorems, instead, allow to obtain some regularity results for the isoperimetric sets even with just bounded densities. What we will do here, in fact, is just to put together our Theorem B and the well-known regularity theory in the standard Euclidean setting. To do so, let us first briefly recall a couple of important notions of minimality for the perimeter and the corresponding regularity properties (whose proofs can be found for instance in [12, 19, 27], see also [18]); then, we will derive the regularity results for our setting. Definition 5.4. Let E ⊆ RN be a set of locally finite perimeter. We say that E is quasi-minimal if, for some C > 0 and for every ball Br(x), (cid:0)E, Br(x)(cid:1) ≤ CrN−1 . Peucl Moreover, we say that E is ω-minimal, for some continuous and increasing function ω : R+ → R+ with ω(0) = 0, if, for every ball Br(x) and every set F such that F(cid:52)E ⊂⊂ Br(x), one has (5.1) (cid:0)F, Br(x)(cid:1) + ω(r) rN−1 . (cid:0)E, Br(x)(cid:1) ≤ Peucl Peucl ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS 31 Definition 5.5. Let E be a Borel subset of RN . We say that E is porous if there exists a small constant δ > 0 such that, for every x ∈ ∂E and every arbitrarily small ball Br(x) centered at x, there are two balls B1, B2 ⊆ Br(x) of radius δr such that B1 ⊆ E and B2 ⊆ RN \ E. Theorem 5.6. If a set E is quasi-minimal, then it is porous and the reduced and the topological boundaries coincide (H N−1-a.e.). Moreover, if E is ω-minimal with ω(r) = Crη for some 0 < η ≤ 1, then ∂∗E is C1,η/2. We will see that an isoperimetric set is always quasi-minimal if the density is even just bounded from above and below, hence the porosity holds true in all these cases. Instead, the ω-minimality holds true as soon as f is Holder continuous, thus in these more particular cases we will get also some further regularity. More precisely, we obtain the following result. Theorem 5.7. Let E be an isoperimetric set corresponding to the density f . If f is bounded from above and below, then E is porous and ∂∗E = ∂E. If moreover f is α-Holder, then one has also that ∂∗E ∈ C1, 2N (1−α)+2α . α We point out that the regularity given by the above theorem is surely not optimal. Indeed, in the forthcoming paper [11] we will improve the above regularity result by showing that, in dimension N = 2, if f ∈ C0,α then the boundary of any isoperimetric set is of class C1, α 3−2α , while Theorem 5.7 gives only C1, α 4−2α . Before giving the proof of Theorem 5.7, a couple of remarks is in order. Remark 5.8. We have claimed the regularity theorem under the assumption that the density is bounded, or Holder, instead of essentially bounded or essentially Holder, just for simplicity of notations. However, it is very easy to deduce the general claim. In fact, assume that f is essentially bounded, or essentially α-Holder, and let Uδ be the open sets as in Definition 1.7. Then, just arguing inside each open set Uδ, in the essentially bounded case we derive that an δ>0 Uδ. 2N (1−α)+2α . isoperimetric set E satisfies the porosity property on each Uδ, and that ∂E = ∂∗E on(cid:83) Similarly, in the essentially α-Holder case, we deduce that ∂∗E∩(cid:83) δ>0 Uδ is of class C1, α Remark 5.9. One could try to obtain some regularity for the isoperimetric sets also starting from other standard regularity results (whose proofs can be found in [5, 20, 27]). For instance, a set E is of class C1 if it has the uniform interior and exterior ball property. Recall that E is said to satisfy the interior (resp., exterior) ball property if there is ¯r > 0 such that, for every x ∈ ∂∗E, there exists a ball B¯r(y) contained in E (resp., in RN \ E) such that x ∈ ∂B¯r(y). In addition, E is even of class C1,γ for every 0 < γ < 1 (and even C1,1 if N = 2) if it is Λ-minimal, that is, there exists Λ ≥ 0 such that for every set F one has Peucl(E) ≤ Peucl(F ) + ΛF(cid:52)Eeucl. But unfortunately, both these conditions seem to become useful only when f is at least Lipschitz (while we are interested in the lower regularity case). To be more precise, concerning the interior-exterior ball property one can easily observe that, if f is not Lipschitz, it is not even true that an arc of circle of small radius is longer than the corresponding chord. And concerning the Λ-minimality, one cannot hope to have it if f is α-Holder and α < 1, as one can derive arguing as in the proof of Theorem 5.7 below, and as one can also guess because otherwise the 32 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI regularity result (f of class C0,α would imply any isoperimetric set of class C1,1−ε) would be excessively strong. We are now ready to conclude the paper with the proof of the regularity Theorem 5.7. Proof of Theorem 5.7. Keeping in mind Theorem 5.6, we are reduced to check that an isoperi- metric set E is quasi-minimal if f is bounded from above and below, while E is ¯ω-minimal with ¯ω(r) = C r N (1−α)+α if f is also α-Holder. α Let us start by assuming that 1/M < f < M , and suppose by contradiction that an isoperimetric set E is not quasi-minimal. Hence, for any large constant K there exists a ball Br(x) such that Let then Br(x) be any such ball, and define the set F := E \ Br(x): provided that K is very large, we deduce Peucl (cid:0)E, Br(x)(cid:1) > KrN−1 . (cid:0)E, Br(x)(cid:1) + N ωN rN−1M Pf (F ) ≤ Pf (E) − Pf ≤ Pf (E) − K M rN−1 + N ωN rN−1M ≤ Pf (E) − K 2M rN−1 . Thanks to Theorem B, we know that F fulfills the ε − ε thus there exists a further set (cid:101)E satisfying (cid:101)Ef = Ef and with Pf ((cid:101)E) ≤ Pf (F ) + C ≤ Pf (E) − K 2M (cid:17) N−1 (cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:101)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f −(cid:12)(cid:12)F(cid:12)(cid:12)f M ωN rN(cid:17) N−1 (cid:16) rN−1 + C N ≤ Pf (E) − K 2M N−1 N property with some constant C, (cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f −(cid:12)(cid:12)F(cid:12)(cid:12)f (cid:17) N−1 N rN−1 + C N ≤ Pf (E) − K 3M rN−1 < Pf (E) , where we are assuming again K to be large enough. Since this inequality is against the isoperi- metric property of E, the contradiction shows the quasi-minimality of E. Let us now assume that f is also α-Holder and E is an isoperimetric set: to conclude the N (1−α)+α and some suitable C. proof, we need to show that E is ¯ω-minimal with ¯ω(r) = C r To do so, we pick 0 < η ≤ 1 and we investigate whether, for some suitable constant C, E is ω-minimal with ω(r) = Crη (eventually, we will find that the best choice is ω = ¯ω). α Therefore we suppose that, for any large constant K, there exist a ball Br(x) and a set F with F(cid:52)E ⊂⊂ Br(x), such that Peucl(E, Br(x)) > Peucl(F, Br(x)) + Krη+N−1 . (5.2) By the first part of the proof we know that E is quasi-minimal, thus Peucl(E, Br(x)) ≤ C1rN−1, and by (5.2) it is then also Peucl(F, Br(x)) ≤ C1rN−1. Let us assume, just for simplicity of notations, that minBr(x) f = 1; hence, since f is α-Holder, it is maxBr(x) f ≤ 1 + M rα, so that (cid:0)F, Br(x)(cid:1) ≤ (1 + M rα)Peucl (cid:0)F, Br(x)(cid:1) . Pf (cid:0)E, Br(x)(cid:1) ≥ Peucl(E, Br(x)) , Pf Recalling (5.2), we deduce Pf (F ) − Pf (E) = Pf (F, Br(x)) − Pf (E, Br(x)) ≤ (1 + M rα)Peucl(F, Br(x)) − Peucl(E, Br(x)) ≤ C2rα+N−1 − Krη+N−1 . (5.3) (cid:0)(cid:101)E(cid:1) ≤ Pf (F ) + C3 Pf Combining this estimate with (5.3), we get ε − εβ PROPERTY, BOUNDEDNESS OF ISOPERIMETRIC SETS AND APPLICATIONS Applying now Theorem B, we can define a competitor set (cid:101)E with (cid:16)(cid:12)(cid:12)Ff − (cid:101)Ef (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:17)β ≤ Pf (F ) + C4rN β . (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:101)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f =(cid:12)(cid:12)E(cid:12)(cid:12)f , Pf ((cid:101)E) − Pf (E) ≤ Pf (F ) − Pf (E) + C4rN β ≤ C2rα+N−1 − Krη+N−1 + C4rN β . 33 Since by the definition (1.2) of β one immediately checks that α + N − 1 ≥ N β for any α ∈ (0, 1], we have a contradiction with the optimality of E -- with the choice of a sufficiently large K -- as soon as η + N − 1 ≤ N β, that is, η ≤ N (1−α)+α . Summarizing, we have shown the ¯ω-minimality (cid:3) of E and hence the proof is concluded. α Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Luigi Ambrosio, Guido De Philippis, Nicola Fusco, Francesco Maggi, Frank Morgan and Emanuele Spadaro for some fruitful discussions and for their sugges- tions on a preliminary version of this paper. Both authors have been supported by the ERC Starting Grant "AnOptSetCon" n. 258685, while AP has been also supported by the ERC Advanced Grant "AnTeGeFI" n. 226234. References [1] W.K. Allard, A regularity theorem for the first variation of the area integrand, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 77 (1971), 772 -- 776. [2] W.K. Allard, On the first variation of a varifold. Ann. of Math. (2) 95 (1972), 417 -- 491. [3] F.J. Almgren, Jr., Existence and regularity almost everywhere of solutions to elliptic variational problems with constraints, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (1976), no. 165. [4] F.J. Almgren, Jr., Almgren's big regularity paper. Q-valued functions minimizing Dirichlet's integral and the regularity of area-minimizing rectifiable currents up to codimension 2. World Scientific Monograph Series in Mathematics, Vol. 1: xvi+955 pp. (2000). [5] L. Ambrosio, Corso introduttivo alla teoria geometrica della misura e alle superfici minime, Edizioni della Normale (1996). [6] L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, D. Pallara, Functions of Bounded Variation and Free Discontinuity Problems, Oxford University Press (2000). [7] M. Barchiesi, F. Cagnetti, N. Fusco, Stability of the Steiner symmetrization of convex sets, J. Eur. Math. Soc., to appear. [8] E. Bombieri, Regularity theory for almost minimal currents. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 78 (1982), no. 2, 99 -- 130. [9] A. Canete, M. Jr. Miranda, D. Vittone, Some isoperimetric problems in planes with density, J. Geom. Anal. 20 (2010), no. 2, 243 -- 290. [10] A. Cianchi, N. Fusco, F. Maggi, A. Pratelli, On the isoperimetric deficit in Gauss space, Amer. J. Math. 133 (2011), no. 1, 131 -- 186. [11] E. Cinti, A. Pratelli, Regularity of isoperimetric sets with density in dimension 2, forthcoming. [12] G. David, S. Semmes, Quasiminimal surfaces of codimension 1 and John domains, Pacific J. Math. 183 (1998), no. 2, 213 -- 277. [13] A. D´ıaz, N. Harman, S. Howe, D. Thompson, Isoperimetric problems in sectors with density, Adv. Geom., to appear (available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.0450). 34 E. CINTI AND A. PRATELLI [14] A. Figalli, F. Maggi, On the isoperimetric problem for radial log-convex densities, Calc. Var. Partial Differ- ential Equations, to appear. [15] N. Fusco, The classical isoperimetric Theorem, Rend. Acc. Sc. Fis. Mat. Napoli, 71 (2004), 63 -- 107. [16] N. Fusco, F. Maggi, A. Pratelli, The sharp quantitative isoperimetric inequality, Ann. of Math. (2) 168 (2008), no. 3, 941 -- 980. [17] N. Fusco, F. Maggi, A. Pratelli, On the isoperimetric problem with respect to a mixed Euclidean-Gaussian density, J. Funct. Anal. 260 (2011), no. 12, 3678 -- 3717. [18] M. Giaquinta, E. Giusti, Quasi-minima, Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e Anal. Non Lin´eaire 1 (1984), no. 2, 79 -- 107. [19] J. Kinnunen, R. Korte, A. Lorent, N. Shanmugalingam, Regularity of sets with quasiminimal boundary surfaces in metric spaces, preprint (2011). Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3058. [20] F. Maggi, Sets of Finite Perimeter and Geometric Variational Problems: an Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics no. 135, Cambridge University Press (2012). [21] F. Morgan, Regularity of isoperimetric hypersurfaces in Riemannian manifolds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), n. 12, 5041 -- 5052. [22] F. Morgan, Manifolds with density, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 52 (2005), no. 8, 853 -- 858. [23] F. Morgan, Geometric Measure Theory: a Beginner's Guide, Academic Press, 4th edition, 2009. [24] F. Morgan, A. Pratelli, Existence of isoperimetric regions in Rn with density, Ann. Global Anal. Geom, to appear. [25] C. Rosales, A. Canete, V. Bayle, F. Morgan, On the isoperimetric problem in Euclidean space with density, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 31 (2008), no. 1, 27 -- 46. [26] R. Schoen, L. Simon, A new proof of the regularity theorem for rectifiable currents which minimize para- metric elliptic functionals, Indiana U. Math. J. 31 (1982), 415 -- 434. [27] I. Tamanini, Regularity results for almost-minimal oriented hypersurfaces in RN , Quaderni del Dipartimento di Matematica dell'Universit`a del Salento (1984). [28] V.A.I. Vol'pert, Spaces BV and quasilinear equations, Math. USSR Sb, 17 (1967), 225 -- 267.
1112.1632	1	1112	2011-12-07T17:18:32	On a family of frames for Krein spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	A definition of frames for Krein spaces is proposed, which extends the notion of $J$-orthonormal basis of Krein spaces. A $J$-frame for a Krein space $(\HH, \K{\,}{\,})$ is in particular a frame for $\HH$ in the Hilbert space sense. But it is also compatible with the indefinite inner product $\K{\,}{\,}$, meaning that it determines a pair of maximal uniformly $J$-definite subspaces with different positivity, an analogue to the maximal dual pair associated to a $J$-orthonormal basis. Also, each $J$-frame induces an indefinite reconstruction formula for the vectors in $\HH$, which resembles the one given by a $J$-orthonormal basis.	math.FA	math	On a family of frames for Krein spaces J. I. Giribet, A. Maestripieri, F. Mart´ınez Per´ıa and P. Massey Abstract A definition of frames for Krein spaces is proposed, which extends the notion of J-orthonormal basis of Krein spaces. A J-frame for a Krein space (H, [ , ]) is in particular a frame for H in the Hilbert space sense. But it is also compatible with the indefinite inner product [ , ], meaning that it determines a pair of maximal uniformly J-definite subspaces with different positivity, an analogue to the maximal dual pair associated to a J-orthonormal basis. Also, each J-frame induces an indefinite reconstruction formula for the vectors in H, which re- sembles the one given by a J-orthonormal basis. keywords: Krein spaces, MSC 2000: 46C20, 47B50, 42C15 frames, uniformly J-definite subspaces 1 Introduction In recent years, frame theory for Hilbert spaces has been thoroughly developed, see e. g. [6, 8, 9, 16]. Fixed a Hilbert space (H,h , i), a frame for H is a (generally overcomplete) family of vectors F = {fi}i∈I in H which satisfies the inequalities Akfk2 ≤Xi∈I h f, fi i2 ≤ Bkfk2, for every f ∈ H, (1) for positive constants 0 < A ≤ B. The (bounded, linear) operator S : H → H defined by Sf =Xi∈I h f, fi i fi, f ∈ H, (2) is known as the frame operator associated to F . The inequalities in Eq. (1) imply that S is a (positive) boundedly invertible operator, and it allows to reconstruct each vector f ∈ H in terms of the family F as follows: (3) f =Xi∈I (cid:10) f, S−1fi(cid:11) fi =Xi∈I h f, fi i S−1fi. The above formula is known as the reconstruction formula associated to F . Notice that if F is a Parseval if S = I, then the reconstruction formula resembles the Fourier series of f associated to an frame, i.e. orthonormal basis B = {bk}k∈K of H: f = Xk∈K h f, bk i bk, but the frame coefficients {h f, fi i}i∈I given by F allow to reconstruct f even when some of these coefficients are missing (or corrupted). Indeed, each vector f ∈ H may admit several reconstructions in terms of the frame coefficients as a consequence of the redundancy of F . These are some of the advantages of frames over (orthonormal, orthogonal or Riesz) bases in signal processing applications, when noisy channels are involved, e.g. see [3, 17, 22]. Given a Krein space (H, [ , ]) with fundamental symmetry J, a J-orthonormalized system is a family E = {ei}i∈I such that [ ei, ej ] = ±δij, for i, j ∈ I. A J-orthonormal basis is a J-orthonormalized system which is also a Schauder basis for H. If E = {ei}i∈I is a J-orthonormal basis of H then the vectors in H can be represented as follows: (4) σi [ f, ei ] ei, f ∈ H, f =Xi∈I 1 where σi = [ ei, ei ] = ±1. J-orthonormalized systems (and bases) are intimately related to the notion of dual pair. In fact, each J-orthonormalized system generates a dual pair, i.e. a pair (L+,L−) of subspaces of H such that L+ is J-nonnegative, L− is J-nonpositive and L+ is J-orthogonal to L−, i.e. [L+,L− ] = 0. Moreover, if E is a J-orthonormal basis of H, the dual pair associated to E is maximal (with respect to the inclusion preorder) and the subspaces L+ and L− are uniformly J-definite, see [18, Ch.1, §10]. Therefore the dual pair (L+,L−) is a fundamental decomposition of H. Notice that, considering the Hilbert space structure induced by the above fundamental decomposition, the J-orthonormal basis E turns out to be an orthonormal basis in the associated Hilbert space. Therefore, each J-orthonormal basis can be realized as an orthonormal basis of H (respect to an appropriate definite inner product). Given a pair of maximal uniformly J-definite subspaces M+ and M− of a Krein space H, with different positivity, if F± = {fi}i∈I± is a frame for the Hilbert space (M±,±[ , ]), it is easy to see that F = F+ ∪ F−, is a frame for H, which produces an indefinite reconstruction formula: f =Xi∈I σi[ f, gi ]fi =Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]gi, f ∈ H, where σi = sgn[ fi, fi ] and {gi}i∈I is some (equivalent) frame for H (see Example 2 and Proposition 5.3). The aim of this work is to introduce and characterize a particular family of frames for a Krein space (H, [ , ]) -hereafter called J-frames- that are compatible with the indefinite inner product [ , ]. Some different approaches to frames for Krein spaces and indefinite reconstruction formulas are developed in [14] and [21], respectively. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 contains some preliminaries results both in Krein spaces and in frame theory for Hilbert spaces. Section 3 presents the J-frames. Briefly, a J-frame for the Krein space (H, [ , ]) is a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I with synthesis operator T : ℓ2(I) → H such that the ranges of T+ := T P+ and T− := T (I − P+) are maximal uniformly J-positive and maximal uniformly J-negative subspaces, respectively, where I+ = {i ∈ I : [ fi, fi ] > 0} and P+ is the orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(I+), as a subspace of ℓ2(I). It is immediate that J-orthonormal bases are J-frames, because they generate maximal dual pairs [18, Ch. 1, §10.12]. Also, if F is a J-frame for H, observe that R(T ) = R(T+) + R(T−) and recall that the sum of a pair of maximal uniformly J-definite subspaces with different positivity coincides with H [2, Corollary 1.5.2]. Therefore, each J-frame is in fact a frame for H in the Hilbert space sense. Moreover, it is shown that F+ = {fi}i∈I+ is a frame for the Hilbert space (R(T+), [ , ]) and F− = {fi}i∈I\I+ is a frame for (R(T−),−[ , ]), i.e. there exist constants B− ≤ A− < 0 < A+ ≤ B+ such that A±[ f, f ] ≤ Xi∈I± [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B±[ f, f ] for every f ∈ R(T±). (5) The optimal constants satisfying the above inequalities can be characterized in terms of T± and the Gramian operators of their ranges. This section ends with a geometrical characterization of J-frames, in terms of the (minimal) angles between the uniformly J-definite subspace R(T±) and the cone of neutral vectors of the Krein space. Section 4 is devoted to study the synthesis operators associated to J-frames. Fixed a Krein space H and given a bounded operator T : ℓ2(I) → H, it is described under which conditions T is the synthesis operator of a J-frame. In Section 5 the J-frame operator is introduced. Given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I , the J-frame operator S : H → H is defined by Sf =Xi∈I σi [ f, fi ] fi, f ∈ H, where σi = sgn([ fi, fi ]). This operator resembles the frame operator for frames in Hilbert spaces (see Eq. (2)), and it has similar properties, in particular S = T T # if T : ℓ2(I) → H is the synthesis operator of 2 F (see Proposition 5.1). Furthermore, each J-frame F = {fi}i∈I determines an indefinite reconstruction formula, which depends on the J-frame operator S: f =Xi∈I σi [ f, S−1fi ] fi =Xi∈I σi [ f, fi ] S−1fi, for every f ∈ H. (6) In this case the family {S−1fi}i∈I turns out to be a J-frame too. Finally, it will be shown that the J-frame operator of a J-frame F is intimately related to the projection Q = PR(T+)//R(T−) determined by the decomposition H = R(T+) ∔ R(T−). In fact, fixed a J-selfadjoint invertible operator S acting on a Krein space H, it is the J-frame operator for a J-frame F if and only if there exists a projection Q with uniformly J-definite range and kernel such that QS is a J-positive operator and (I − Q)S is a J-negative operator, see Theorem 5.5. 2 Preliminaries If K is another Hilbert space then Along this work H denotes a complex (separable) Hilbert space. L(H,K) is the algebra of bounded linear operators from H into K and L(H) = L(H,H). The groups of linear invertible and unitary operators acting on H are denoted by GL(H) and U(H), respectively. Also, L(H)+ denotes the cone of positive semidefinite operators acting on H and GL(H)+ = GL(H) ∩ L(H)+. If T ∈ L(H,K) then T ∗ ∈ L(K,H) denotes the adjoint operator of T , R(T ) stands for its range and N (T ) for its nullspace. Also, if T ∈ L(H,K) has closed range, T † ∈ L(K,H) denotes the Moore-Penrose inverse of T . Hereafter, S ∔ T denotes the direct sum of two (closed) subspaces S and T of H. On the other hand, S ⊕ T stands for the (direct) orthogonal sum of them and S ⊖ T := S ∩ (S ∩ T )⊥. If H = S ∔ T , the oblique projection onto S along T is the unique projection with range S and nullspace T . It is denoted by PS//T . In particular, PS := PS//S⊥ is the orthogonal projection onto S. 2.1 Krein spaces In what follows we present the standard notation and some basic results on Krein spaces. For a complete exposition on the subject (and the proofs of the results below) see the books by J. Bogn´ar [4] and T. Ya. Azizov and I. S. Iokhvidov [18] and the monographs by T. Ando [2] and by M. Dritschel and J. Rovnyak [13]. Given a Krein space (H, [ , ]) with a fundamental decomposition H = H+∔H−, the direct (orthogonal) Observe that the indefinite metric and the inner product of H are related by means of a fundamental sum of the Hilbert spaces (H+, [ , ]) and (H−,−[ , ]) is denoted by (H,h , i). symmetry, i.e. a unitary selfadjoint operator J ∈ L(H) which satisfies: [ x, y ] = h Jx, y i , x, y ∈ H. If H and K are Krein spaces, L(H,K) stands for the vector space of linear transformations which are bounded respect to the associated Hilbert spaces (H,h , iH) and (K,h , iK). Given T ∈ L(H,K), the J-adjoint operator of T is defined by T # = JHT ∗JK, where JH and JK are the fundamental symmetries associated to H and K, respectively. An operator T ∈ L(H) is J-selfadjoint if T = T #. A vector x ∈ H is J-positive if [ x, x ] > 0. A subspace S of H is J-positive if every x ∈ S, x 6= 0, is a J-positive vector. A subspace S of H is uniformly J-positive if there exists α > 0 such that [ x, x ] ≥ αkxk2, for every x ∈ S, J-nonnegative, J-neutral, J-negative, J-nonpositive and uniformly J-negative vectors and subspaces where k k stands for the norm of the associated Hilbert space (H,h , i). are defined analogously. Remark 2.1. If S+ is a closed uniformly J-positive subspace of a Krein space (H, [ , ]), observe that (S+, [ , ]) is a Hilbert space. In fact, the forms [ , ] and h , i are equivalent inner products on S+, because αkfk2 ≤ [ f, f ] ≤ kfk2, for every f ∈ S+. Analogously, if S− is a closed uniformly J-negative subspace of (H, [ , ]), (S−,−[ , ]) is a Hilbert space. 3 Proposition 2.2 ([18], Cor. 7.17). Let H be a Krein space with fundamental symmetry J and S a J-nonnegative closed subspace of H. Then, S is the range of a J-selfadjoint projection if and only if S is uniformly J-positive. Recall that, given a closed subspace M of a Krein space H, the Gramian operator of M is defined by: GM = PMJPM, where PM is the orthogonal projection onto M and J is the fundamental symmetry of H. If M is J-semidefinite, then M ∩ M[⊥] coincides with N := {f ∈ M : [ f, f ] = 0}. Therefore, it is easy to see that GM = GM⊖N . Given a subspace S of a Krein space H, the J-orthogonal companion to S is defined by S[⊥] = {x ∈ H : [ x, s ] = 0 for every s ∈ S}. A subspace S of H is J-non degenerated if S ∩ S[⊥] = {0}. Notice that if S is a J-definite subspace of H then it is J-non degenerated. 2.2 Angles between subspaces and reduced minimum modulus Given two closed subspaces S and T of a Hilbert space H, the cosine of the Friedrichs angle between S and T is defined by c(S,T ) = sup{h x, y i : x ∈ S ⊖ T ,kxk = 1, y ∈ T ⊖ S,kyk = 1}. It is well known that c(S,T ) < 1 ⇔ S + T is closed ⇔ c(S⊥,T ⊥) < 1. Furthermore, if PS and PT are the orthogonal projections onto S and T , respectively, then c(S,T ) < 1 if and only if (I − PS)PT has closed range. See [10] for further details. The next definition is due to T. Kato, see [19, Ch. IV, § 5]. Definition. The reduced minimum modulus γ(T ) of an operator T ∈ L(H,K) is defined by γ(T ) = inf{kT xk : x ∈ N (T )⊥, kxk = 1}. Observe that γ(T ) = sup{C ≥ 0 : Ckxk ≤ kT xk for every x ∈ N (T )⊥, kxk = 1}. It is well known that γ(T ) = γ(T ∗) = γ(T ∗T )1/2. Also, it can be shown that an operator T 6= 0 has closed range if and only if γ(T ) > 0. In this case, γ(T ) = kT †k−1. If H and K are Krein spaces with fundamental symmetries JH and JK, respectively, and T ∈ L(H,K) then γ(T #) = γ(JHT ∗JK) = γ(T ∗) = γ(T ), because JH (resp. JK) is a unitary operator on H (resp. K). Remark 2.3. If M+ is a closed J-nonnegative subspace of a Krein space H then γ(GM+ ) = α+, (7) where α+ ∈ [0, 1] is the supremum among the constants α ∈ [0, 1] such that αkfk2 ≤ [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M+. From now on, the constant α+ is called the definiteness bound of M+. Notice that α+ is in fact a maximum for the above set and M+ is uniformly J-positive if and only if α+ > 0. Analogously, if M− is a J-nonpositive subspace then γ(GM− ) = α−, where α− is the definiteness bound of M−, i.e. α− = max{α ∈ [0, 1] : [ f, f ] ≤ −αkfk2 for every f ∈ M−}. 4 2.3 Frames for Hilbert spaces The following is the standard notation and some basic results on frames for Hilbert spaces, see [6, 8, 16]. A frame for a Hilbert space H is a family of vectors F = {fi}i∈I ⊂ H for which there exist constants 0 < A ≤ B < ∞ such that A kfk2 ≤Xi∈I hf, fii2 ≤ B kfk2 , for every f ∈ H. (8) The optimal constants (maximal for A and minimal for B) are known, respectively, as the upper and lower frame bounds. If a family of vectors F = {fi}i∈I satisfies the upper bound condition in (8), then F is a Bessel family. For a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I , the synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) is defined by T x =Xi∈I h x, ei i fi, where {ei}i∈I is the standard orthonormal basis of ℓ2(I). It holds that F is a frame for H if and only if T is surjective. In this case, the operator S = T T ∗ ∈ L(H) is invertible and is called the frame operator. It can be easily verified that (9) h f, fi i fi, for every f ∈ H. Sf =Xi∈I This implies that the frame bounds can be computed as: A = kS−1k−1 and B = kSk. From (9), it is also easy to obtain the canonical reconstruction formula for the vectors in H: f =Xi∈I (cid:10) f, S−1fi(cid:11) fi =Xi∈I h f, fi i S−1fi, for every f ∈ H, and the frame {S−1fi}i∈I is called the canonical dual frame of F . More generally, if a frame G = {gi}i∈I satisfies (10) h f, fi i gi, for every f ∈ H, f =Xi∈I then G is called a dual frame of F . h f, gi i fi =Xi∈I 3 J -frames: definition and basic properties Let H be a Krein space with fundamental symmetry J. Given a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I in H consider the synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H). If I+ = {i ∈ I : [ fi, fi ] < 0}, consider the orthogonal decomposition of ℓ2(I) given by [ fi, fi ] ≥ 0} and I− = {i ∈ I : and denote by P± the orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(I±). Also, let T± = T P±. If M± = span{fi : i ∈ I±}, notice that span{fi : i ∈ I±} ⊆ R(T±) ⊆ M± and ℓ2(I) = ℓ2(I+) ⊕ ℓ2(I−), (11) R(T ) = R(T+) + R(T−). Definition. The Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame for H if R(T+) is a maximal uniformly J-positive subspace of H and R(T−) is a maximal uniformly J-negative subspace of H. Notice that, in particular, every J-orthogonalized basis of a Krein space H is a J-frame for H, because it generates a maximal dual pair, see [18, Ch. 1, §10.12]. If F is a J-frame, as a consequence of its maximality, R(T±) is closed. So, R(T±) = M± and, by [2, Corollary 1.5.2], M+ + M− = H. Then, it follows that F is a frame for the associated Hilbert space (H,h , i) because R(T ) = R(T+) + R(T−) = M+ + M− = H. 5 Given a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I , consider the subspaces R(T+) and R(T−) as above. If K± : D± → H∓ is the angular operator associated to R(T±), the operator of transition associated to the Bessel family F is defined by F = K+P + K−(I − P ) : D+ + D− → H, 2 (I + J) is the J-selfadjoint projection onto H+ and D± is a subspace of H± (the domain of where P = 1 K±), see [15]. Proposition 3.1. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a Bessel family in H. Then, F is a J-frame if and only if F is everywhere defined (i.e. D+ + D− = H) and kFk < 1. Proof. Proof See [15, Proposition 2.6]. It follows from the definition that, given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I for the Krein space H, [ fi, fi ] 6= 0 for every i ∈ I, i.e. I± = {i ∈ I : ±[ fi, fi ] > 0}. This fact allows to endow the coefficients space ℓ2(I) with a Krein space structure. Denote σi = sgn([ fi, fi ]) = ±1 for every i ∈ I. Then, the diagonal operator J2 ∈ L(ℓ2(I)) defined by (12) J2 ei = σi ei, for every i ∈ I, is a selfadjoint involution on ℓ2(I). Therefore, ℓ2(I) with the fundamental symmetry J2 is a Krein space. Now, if T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) is the synthesis operator of F , the J-adjoints of T , T+ and T− can be easily calculated, in fact if f ∈ H: T # ± f = ± Xi∈I± [ f, fi ]ei, and T #f = (T+ + T−)#f = T # + f + T # − f =Pi∈I+ [ f, fi ]ei −Pi∈I− [ f, fi ]ei =Pi∈I σi[ f, fi ]ei. Example 1. It is easy to see that not every frame of J-nonneutral vectors is a J-frame: given the Krein space obtained by endowing C3 with the sesquilinear form [(x1, x2, x3), (y1, y2, y3)] = x1y1 + x2y2 − x3y3, consider f1 = (1, 0, 1√2 C3 because it is a (linear) basis for the space. ), f2 = (0, 1, 1√2 ) and f3 = (0, 0, 1). Observe that F = {f1, f2, f3} is a frame for On the other hand, M+ = span{f1, f2} and M− = span{f3}. If (a, b, 1√2 vector in M+ then so M+ is a J-nonnegative subspace of C3. But M+ is not uniformly J-positive, because (1, 1,√2) ∈ M+ is a (non trivial) J-neutral vector. Therefore, F is not a J-frame for (C3, [ , ]). [ f, f ] = a2 + b2 − 1 2a − b2 ≥ 0, 2a + b2 = 1 (a + b)) is an arbitrary The following is a handy way to construct J-frames for a given Krein space. Along this section, it will be shown that every J-frame can be realized in this way. Example 2. Given a Krein space H with fundamental symmetry J, let M+ (resp. M−) be a maximal uniformly J-positive (resp. J-negative) subspace of H. If F± = {fi}i∈I± is a frame for the Hilbert space (M±,±[ , ]) then F = F+ ∪ F− is a J-frame for H. Indeed, by Remark 2.1, F+ and F− are Bessel families in H. Hence, F is a Bessel family and, if I = I+ ∪I− (the disjoint union of I+ and I−), the synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) of F is given by T x = T+x+ + T−x− if x = x+ + x− ∈ ℓ2(I+) ⊕ ℓ2(I−) =: ℓ2(I), where T± : ℓ2(I±) → M± is the synthesis operator of F±. Then, it is clear that R(T P±) = M± is a maximal uniformly J-definite subspace of H. 6 Proposition 3.2. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a J-frame for H. Then, F± = {fi}i∈I± is a frame for the Hilbert space (M±,±[ , ]), i.e. there exist constants B− ≤ A− < 0 < A+ ≤ B+ such that for every f ∈ M±. [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B±[ f, f ] (13) A±[ f, f ] ≤ Xi∈I± Proof. Proof If F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame for H, then R(T+) = M+ is a (maximal) uniformly J-positive subspace of H. So, T+ is a surjection from ℓ2(I) onto the Hilbert space (M+, [ , ]). Therefore, F+ is a frame for (M+, [ , ]). In particular, there exist constants 0 < A+ ≤ B+ such that Eq. (13) is satisfied for M+. The assertion on F− follows analogously. Now, assuming that F is a J-frame for a Krein space (H, [ , ]), a set of constants {B−, A−, A+, B+} satisfying Eq. (13) is going to be computed. They depend only on the definiteness bounds for R(T±), the norm and the reduced minimum modulus of T±. Suppose that F is a J-frame for a Krein space (H, [ , ]) with synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H). Since R(T+) = M+ is a (maximal) uniformly J-positive subspace of H, there exists α+ > 0 such that α+kfk2 ≤ [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M+. So, Xi∈I+ where B+ = kT # + k2 α+ [ f, fi ]2 = kT # + fk2 ≤ kT # + k2kfk2 ≤ B+[ f, f ], for every f ∈ M+, = kT+k2 α+ . Furthermore, since N (T # + )⊥ = J(M+), if f ∈ M+, Xi∈I+ [ f, fi ]2 = kT # + fk2 = kT # + PJ(M+)fk2 ≥ γ(T # + )2kPJ(M+)fk2 = γ(T+)2kPM+ Jfk2 = = γ(T+)2kGM+ fk2 ≥ γ(T+)2γ(GM+ )2kfk2 ≥ A+[ f, f ], where A+ = γ(T+)2γ(GM+ )2 = γ(T+)2α2 +, see Remark 2.3. is the definiteness bound of the (maximal) uniformly J-negative subspace M−. Analogously, A− = −γ(T−)2α2 Usually, the bounds A± = ±α2 − and B− = − kT−k2 ±γ(T±)2 and B± = ± kT±k2 α± α− satisfy Eq (13) for every f ∈ R(T−) = M−, if α− are not optimal for the J-frame F . Definition. Let F be a J-frame for the Krein space H. The optimal constants B− ≤ A− < 0 < A+ ≤ B+ satisfying Eq. (13) are called the J-frame bounds of F . In order to compute the J-frame bounds associated to a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I , consider the uniformly J-definite subspaces M+ and M−. Recall that F+ = {fi}i∈I+ is a frame for the Hilbert space (M+, [ , ]). Then, if G+ = GM+M+ ∈ GL(M+), the frame bounds for F+ are given by A+ = k(SG+ )−1k−1 + and B+ = kSG+k+, where SG+ = T+T ∗+G+ is the frame operator of F+ and kfk+ = [ f, f ]1/2 = kG1/2 + fk, f ∈ M+, is the operator norm associated to the inner product [ , ]. Therefore, A+ = k(SG+)−1k−1 + = kG1/2 + (T+T ∗+G+)−1k−1 = kG−1/2 + (T+T ∗+)−1k−1, and B+ = kSG+k+ = kG1/2 Hilbert space (M−,−[ , ]). So, the frame bounds for F− are given by and B− = kG1/2 A− = kG−1/2 −)−1k−1 (T−T ∗ − − T−T ∗ −G−k, + T+T ∗+G+k. Analogously, it follows that F− = {fi}i∈I− is a frame for the where G− = GM−M− ∈ GL(M−). Thus, the J-frame bound associated to F can be fully characterized in terms of T± and the Gramian operators GM±. 3.1 Characterizing J -frames in terms of frame inequalities Given a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I in a Krein space H, the inequalities: A [ f, f ] ≤Xi∈I [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M = span{fi : i ∈ I}, (14) 7 with B ≥ A > 0, ensure that M is a J-nonnegative subspace of H. However, they do not imply that M is uniformly J-positive, i.e. (M, [ , ]) is not necessarily a inner product space. See the example below. Example 3. Consider again the Krein space (C3, [ , ]) as in Example 1. As it was mentioned before, M = span{f1 = (1, 0, 1/√2), f2 = (0, 1, 1/√2)} is a J-nonnegative but not uniformly J-positive subspace of C3. In this case, the orthogonal basis 2 , 1√2 v1 = ( 1 2 , 1 ) , v2 = ( 1√2 , −1√2 , 0) and v3 = ( 1√2 , 1√2 ,−1), is a basis of eigenvectors of GM, corresponding to the eigenvalues λ1 = 0, λ2 = 1 and λ3 = 0, respectively. Moreover, M = span{v1, v2}. Thus, if f ∈ M there exists α, β ∈ C such that f = αv1 + βv2 and then, since GMv1 = 0 ∈ C3, it is easy to see that [ f, f1 ]2 + [ f, f2 ]2 = β2(h v2, f1 i2 + h v2, f2 i2) = β2 = [ f, f ]. Therefore, Eq. (14) holds with A = B = 1, but {f1, f2} cannot be extended to a J-frame, since M is not a uniformly J-positive subspace. The next result gives a complete characterization of the families satisfying Eq. (14) for B ≥ A > 0. It is straightforward to formulate and prove analogues of all these assertions for a family satisfying Eq. (14) for negative constants B ≤ A < 0. Proposition 3.3. Given a Bessel family F = {fi}i∈I in a Krein space H, let M = span{fi : i ∈ I} and N = M ∩ M[⊥]. If there exist constants 0 < A ≤ B such that for every f ∈ M, [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B [ f, f ] A [ f, f ] ≤Xi∈I then M ⊖ N is a (closed) uniformly J-positive subspace of M. Moreover, if F is a frame for the Hilbert space (M,h , i), the converse holds. Proof. Proof First, suppose that there exist 0 < A ≤ B such that Eq. (15) holds. So, M is a J- nonnegative subspace of H, or equivalently, (M, [ , ]) is a semi-inner product space. If T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) is the synthesis operator of the Bessel sequence F and C = kT ∗k2 > 0, then T T ∗ ≤ CPM. So, using Eq. (15) it is easy to see that: (15) Ah GMf, f i ≤ kT #(PMf )k2 = h (PMJT T ∗JPM)f, f i ≤ C(cid:10) (GM)2f, f(cid:11) , f ∈ H. A (GM)2. Applying Douglas' theorem [11] it is easy to see that Thus, 0 ≤ GM ≤ C (16) R((GM)1/2) ⊆ R(GM) ⊆ R((GM)1/2). Moreover, it follows that R(GM) is closed because R(GM) = R((GM)1/2). R(GM) is closed, there exists α > 0 such that Let M′ = M ⊖ N and notice that M′ is a closed uniformly J-positive subspace of H. In fact, since [ f, f ] = h GMf, f i = k(GM)1/2fk2 ≥ αkfk2 for every f ∈ N (GM)⊥ = M ⊖ N . Conversely, suppose that F is a frame for (M,h , i), i.e. there exist constants B′ ≥ A′ > 0 such that A′PM ≤ T T ∗ ≤ B′PM, where T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),M) is the synthesis operator of F . If M′ = M⊖N is a uniformly J-positive subspace of H, then there exists α > 0 such that αPM′ ≤ GM′ ≤ PM′ . As a consequence of Douglas' theorem, R((GM′ )1/2) = M′ = R(GM′ ). Since GM = GM′ it is easy to see that A′(GM)2 = A′(GM′ )2 ≤ PMJT T ∗JPM ≤ B′(GM′ )2 = B′(GM)2. Therefore, R(PMJT ) = R(GM′ ) = R((GM′ )1/2), or equivalently, there exist B ≥ A > 0 such that AGM = AGM′ ≤ PMJT T ∗JPM ≤ BGM′ = BGM, i.e. A [ f, f ] ≤Pi∈I [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M. 8 Theorem 3.4. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a frame for H. span{fi : i ∈ I±} then, F is a J-frame if and only if M± ∩ M[⊥] A− < 0 < A+ ≤ B+ such that If I± = {i ∈ I : ±[ fi, fi ] ≥ 0} and M± = ± = {0} and there exist constants B− ≤ A± [ f, f ] ≤ Xi∈I± [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B± [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M±. (17) Proof. Proof If F is a J-frame, the conditions on M± follow by its definition and by Proposition 3.2. Conversely, if M+ is J-non degenerated and there exist constants 0 < A+ ≤ B+ such that A+ [ f, f ] ≤ Xi∈I± [ f, fi ]2 ≤ B+ [ f, f ] for every f ∈ M+, then, by Proposition 3.3, M+ is a uniformly J-positive subspace of H. Therefore, there exist constants 0 < A ≤ B such that A kPM+fk2 ≤ kT # But these inequalities can be rewritten as + PM+ fk2 ≤ BkPM+ fk2 for every f ∈ H. A PM+ ≤ PM+ JT+T ∗+JPM+ ≤ B PM+ . Then, by Douglas' theorem, R(PM+ JT+) = R(PM+ ) = M+. Furthermore, PJ(M+)(R(T+)) = J(M+) because J(M+) = J(R(PM+ JT+)) = R((JPM+ J)T+) = R(PJ(M+)T+) = PJ(M+)(R(T+)). Therefore, taking the counterimage of PJ(M+)(R(T+)) by PJ(M+), it follows that H = R(T+) ∔ J(M+)⊥ ⊆ M+ ∔ M[⊥] + = H. Thus, R(T+) = M+ and F+ is a frame for M+. Analogously, F− = {fi}i∈I− is a frame for M−. Finally, since F is a frame for H, H = R(T ) = R(T+) + R(T−), which proves the maximality of R(T±). Thus, F is a J-frame for H. 3.2 A geometrical characterization of J -frames Let F = {fi}i∈I be a J-frame for H and consider F = F+ ∪ F+ the partition of F into J-positive and J-negative vectors. Moreover, let M± be the (maximal) uniformly J-definite subspace of H generated by F±. The aim of this section is to show that it is possible to bound the correlation between vectors in F+ (resp. F−) and vectors in the cone of neutral vectors C = {n ∈ H : [ n, n ] = 0}, in a strong sense: h f, ni ≤ c± kfk knk , f ∈ M± , n ∈ C , (18) √2 2 ≤ c± < 1. In order to make these ideas precise, consider the notion of minimal for some constants angle between a subspace M and the cone C. Definition. Given a closed subspace M of the Krein space H, consider c0(M,C) = sup{h m, ni : m ∈ M, n ∈ C, knk = kmk = 1} , (19) Then, there exists a unique θ(M,C) ∈ [0, π the minimal angle between M and C. 4 ] such that cos(θ(M,C)) = c0(M,C). In this case, θ(M,C) is 9 Observe that if the subspace M contains a non trivial J-neutral vector (e.g. if M is J-indefinite or J-semidefinite) then c0(M,C) = 1, or equivalently, θ(M,C) = 0. On the other hand, it will be shown that the minimal angle between a uniformly J-positive (resp. uniformly J-negative) subspace M and C is always bounded away from 0. Proposition 3.5. Let M be a J-semidefinite subspace of H with definiteness bound α. Then, 1 c0(M,C) = √2 r 1 + α +r 1 − α In particular, M is uniformly J-definite if and only if c0(M,C) < 1. Proof. Proof Let H = H+ ⊕ H− be a fundamental decomposition of H and suppose that M is a J-nonnegative subspace of H. Let m ∈ M with kmk = 1. Then, there exist (unique) m± ∈ H± such that m = m+ + m−. In this case, (21) 2 ! . (20) and 2 α ≤ [ m, m ] = km+k2 − km−k2. 1 = kmk2 = km+k2 + km−k2 Claim: Fixed m ∈ M with kmk = 1, sup{h m, ni : n ∈ C, knk = 1} = 1√2 (km+k + km−k). Indeed, consider n ∈ C with knk = 1. Then, there exist (unique) n± ∈ H± such that n = n+ + n−. In this case, which imply that kn+k = kn−k = 1√2 0 = [ n, n ] = kn+k2 − kn−k2 . Therefore, and 1 = knk2 = kn+k2 + kn−k2, h m, ni ≤ (cid:10) m+, n+(cid:11) + (cid:10) m−, n−(cid:11) ≤ 1 √2 (km+k + km−k). On the other hand, if m− 6= 0 then let nm := 1√2 with z ∈ H−, kzk = 1. Now, it is easy to see that nm ∈ C and that h m, nm i = 1√2 which together with the previous facts prove the claim. ), otherwise consider nm = 1√2 (m + z), (km+k + km−k) ( m+ km+k + m− km−k Now, let M1 = {m = m+ + m− ∈ M : m± ∈ H±, kmk = 1}. Using the claim above it follows that c0(M,C) = 1 √2 sup m∈M1 (km+k + km−k). (22) . Thus, in this If α = 1 then M is a subspace of H+. Also, it is easy to see that c0(M,C) = 1√2 particular case, c0(M,C) = 1√2(cid:16)q 1+α On the other hand, if α < 1, let k0 ∈ N be such that 1−α of the definiteness bound, for every integer k ≥ k0 there exists mk = m+ α ≤ km+ 2 +q 1−α 2 (cid:17). k k2 − km−k k2 < α + 1 k . Then, it follows that 2 > 1 2k0 . Observe that, by the definition k + m−k ∈ M1 such that α + 1 ≤ 2km+ k k2 < α + 1 + 1 k , 2 + 1 k k <q α+1 r 1 − α 2 − or equivalently, q α+1 2 ≤ km+ 2k . Moreover, km−k k =q1 − km+ k k2 implies that < km−k k ≤r 1 − α Therefore, for every integer k ≥ k0 there exists mk ∈ M1 such that k k + km−k k <r α + 1 r 1 − α 2 − +r α + 1 < km+ 1 2k 1 2k 2 2 2 . + 1 2k +r 1 − α 2 . 10 2 +q 1−α 2 (cid:17). Thus, c0(M,C) = 1√2(cid:16)q 1+α Assume now that M is a J-nonpositive subspace of (H, [ , ]) with definiteness bound α, for 0 ≤ α ≤ 1. Then, M is a J-nonnegative subspace of the antispace (H,−[ , ]), with the same definiteness bound α. Furthermore, the cone of J-neutral vectors for the antispace is the same as for the initial Krein space (H, [ , ]). Therefore, we can apply the previous arguments and conclude that Eq.(20) also holds for J-nonpositive subspaces. Finally, the last assertion in the statement follows from the formula in Eq. (20). Let F be a J-frame for H as above. Notice that the Eq. (18) holds for some constant √2 2 ≤ c± < 1 if and only if c0(M±,C) < 1, i.e. that the minimal angles θ(M±,C) are bounded away from 0. This is intimately related with the fact that the aperture between the subspaces M+ (resp. M−) and H+ (resp. H−) is bounded away from π Remark 3.6. Given a Krein space H, fix a fundamental decomposition H = H+ ⊕ H−. Then, if M is a J-nonnegative subspace of H the minimal angle between M and C is related with the aperture Φ(M,H+) between the subspaces M and H+, see [1] and Exercises 3 -- 6 to [18, Ch. 1, §8]. In fact, if K ∈ L(H+,H−) is the angular operator associated to M then, by [18, Ch. 1, §8 Exercise 4], 4 , whenever H = H+ ⊕ H− is a fundamental decomposition. Φ(M,H+) = p1 + kKk2 Also, if α is the definiteness bound of M then kKk = q 1−α Φ(M,H+) = between M and H+, it is easy to see that kKk√1+kKk2 = q 1−α kKk . 1+α , see [18, Ch. 1, Lemma 8.4]. Therefore, 2 . Since Φ(M,H+) = sin ϕ(M,H+) for an angle ϕ(M,H+) ∈ [0, π 4 ] cos ϕ(M,H+) =q1 − sin2 ϕ(M,H+) =r 1 + α Therefore, if ϕ = ϕ(M,H+), √2 2 i.e. ϕ(M,H+) + θ(M,C) = π 4 . √2 r 1 + α +r 1 − α (cos ϕ + sin ϕ) = cos( π 4 − ϕ) = 1 2 . 2 2 ! = c0(M,C), The following result shows that, given a frame F = {fi}i∈I for H, the positivity of the angles θ(M±,C) characterize it as a J-frame for H. Proposition 3.7. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a frame for a Krein space H. Then, F is a J-frame for H if and only if there exists a partition I = I1 ∪ I2 such that θ(Mj ,C) > 0 for j = 1, 2, (23) where Mj = span{fi : i ∈ Ij}. Proof. Proof If we assume that F is a J-frame then, consider I± and M± as usual. Then I = I+ ∪ I− is a partition of I into disjoint sets and M± are uniformly J-definite subspaces associated to F . Hence, by Proposition 3.5, we see that Eq. (23) holds in this case. Conversely, assume that there exists a partition of I with the properties above. Notice that Proposition 3.5 implies that Mj is a uniformly J-definite subspace of H, for j = 1, 2. On the other hand, since F is a frame, H ⊆ M1 +M2. Therefore, M1 and M2 have different positivity and they are maximal uniformly J-definite subspaces. Suppose that M1 is uniformly J-positive and M2 is uniformly J-negative. If F = {fi}i∈I is a frame for H, its synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) is surjective. Therefore, Then, consider the orthogonal projection Pj ∈ L(ℓ2(I)) onto the subspace ℓ2(Ij ), for j = 1, 2. where Tj = T Pj, for j = 1, 2. Then, it is easy to see that R(Tj) = Mj for j = 1, 2 and F is a J-frame for H. R(T1) ∔ R(T2) = R(T ) = H, 11 Remark 3.8. Let (H,h , i) be a separable Hilbert space that models a signal space in which is con- sidered a linear (robust and stable) encoding-decoding scheme for certain measurements, i.e. consider a (redundant) frame G = {gi}i∈K for H. Assume that the measurements of x ∈ H are given by y1 = P x and y2 = (I − P )x, where P ∈ L(H) is an orthogonal projection (for instance, P and I − P are low pass and high pass filters, respectively). Suppose that the signals having the same energy in R(P ) and R(I − P ) = N (P ) (i.e. signals x ∈ H such that ky1k2 = ky2k2) are considered disturbances, see e.g. [5, 20]. Notice that, sampling the measurements y1, y2 with the frame G is the same as sampling y = (y1, y2) ∈ H × H with the frame F = {fi}i∈I = {(gi, 0)}i∈K ∪ {(0, gi)}i∈K for H × H. It is easy to see that, the space K = H × H with the indefinite product [ y, z ] = h y1, z1 i − h y2, z2 i is a Krein space, where y = (y1, y2), z = (z1, z2) ∈ K are the measurements of signals in H. Observe that the set of disturbances is characterized as the set of J-neutral vectors C of K. Also, notice that F is a J-frame for K. Hence, the (sampling) vectors of the frame F are away from the disturbances set C. Now, consider any (redundant) J-frame F = {fi}i∈I for (K, [ , ]). As usual, denote M+ and M− the maximal uniformly J-definite subspaces generated by F . Since M± is uniformly J-definite, Proposition 3.5 shows that c0(M±,C) < 1, which is a bound for the correlation between the sampling vectors in F and the distrubances of C because h fi, ni ≤ c0(M±,C)kfik knk whenever i ∈ I± and n ∈ C. (24) That is, J-frames provide a class of frames for K with the desired properties. Moreover, later in Propo- sition 5.3, it will be shown that the J-frame F admits a (canonical) dual J-frame that induces a linear (indefinite) stable and redundant encoding-decoding scheme in which the correlation between both the sampling and reconstructing vectors and the cone of neutral vectors is bounded from above. These re- marks provide a quantitative measure of the advantage of considering J-frames with respect to usual frames in this setting. 4 On the synthesis operator of a J -frame If F is a J-frame with synthesis operator T , then QT = T+ = T P+, where Q = PM+//M− . Therefore, Q = QT T † = T P+T †. So, given a surjective operator T : ℓ2(I) → H, the idempotency of T P+T † is a necessary condition for T to be the synthesis operator of a J-frame. Lemma 4.1. Let T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) be surjective. Suppose that PS is the orthogonal projection onto a closed subspace S of ℓ2(I) such that c(S, N (T )⊥) < 1. Then, T PST † is a projection if and only if N (T ) = S ∩ N (T ) ⊕ S⊥ ∩ N (T ). Proof. Proof Suppose that Q = T PST † is a projection. Then, if P = PN (T )⊥ , E = P PS P is an orthogonal projection because it is selfadjoint and E2 = (P PSP )2 = P PS P PSP = T †(T PST †)2T = T †(T PST †)T = P PSP = E. Therefore, (P PS )k = Ek−1PS = EPS = (P PS )2 for every k ≥ 2. So, by [10, Lemma 18], P PS = PS ∧ P = PS P. Then, since PS and P commute, it follows that N (T ) = S ∩ N (T ) ⊕ S⊥ ∩ N (T ) (see [10, Lemma 9]). Conversely, suppose that N (T ) = S ∩ N (T ) ⊕ S⊥ ∩ N (T ). Then, PS and P commute and (T PST †)2 = T PS(T †T )PST † = T PSP PST † = T P PST † = T PST †. 12 Hereafter consider the set of possible decompositions of H as a (direct) sum of a pair of maximal uniformly definite subspaces, or equivalently, the associated set of projections: Q = {Q ∈ L(H) : Q2 = Q, R(Q) is uniformly J-positive and N (Q) is uniformly J-negative}. Proposition 4.2. Let T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) be surjective. Then, T is the synthesis operator of a J-frame if and only if there exists I+ ⊂ I such that ℓ2(I+) (as a subspace of ℓ2(I)) satisfies c(N (T )⊥, ℓ2(I+)) < 1 and T P+T † ∈ Q, where P+ ∈ L(ℓ2(I)) is the orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(I+). Proof. Proof If T is the synthesis operator of a J-frame, the existence of such a subset I+ has already been discussed before. Conversely, suppose that there exists such a subset I+ of I. Then, since c(N (T )⊥, ℓ2(I+)) < 1 and Q = T P+T † ∈ Q, it follows from Lemma 4.1 that P+ and P = PN (T )⊥ commute. Therefore, QT = T P+P = T P P+ = T P+, and (I−Q)T = T (I−P+). Hence, R(T P+) = R(Q) is (maximal) uniformly J-positive and R(T (I−P+)) = N (Q) is (maximal) uniformly J-negative. Therefore F = {T ei}i∈I is by definition a J-frame for H. Theorem 4.3. Given a surjective operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H), the following conditions are equivalent: 1. There exists U ∈ U(ℓ2(I)) such that T U is the synthesis operator of a J-frame. 2. There exists Q ∈ Q such that QT T ∗(I − Q)∗ = 0. (25) 3. There exist closed range operators T1, T2 ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) such that T = T1 + T2, R(T1) is uniformly J-positive, R(T2) is uniformly J-negative and T1T ∗2 = T2T ∗1 = 0. Proof. Proof 1. ⇒ 2.: Suppose that there exists U ∈ U(ℓ2(I)) such that V = T U is the synthesis operator of a J-frame. If I± = {i ∈ I : ±[ V ei, V ei ] > 0} and P± ∈ L(ℓ2(I)) is the orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(I±), define V± = V P±. Then, V = V+ + V− and M± = R(V±) is a maximal uniformly J-definite subspace. So, considering Q = PM+//M− ∈ Q, it is easy to see that QV = V+, (I − Q)V = V− and QT T ∗(I − Q)∗ = QV V ∗(I − Q)∗ = V+V ∗ − = V P+P−V ∗ = 0. 2. ⇒ 3.: Suppose that there exists Q ∈ Q such that QT T ∗(I − Q)∗ = 0. Defining T1 = QT and T2 = (I − Q)T , it follows that T = T1 + T2, R(T1) = R(Q) is uniformly J-positive, R(T2) = N (Q) is uniformly J-negative and T1T ∗2 = T2T ∗1 = 0, If there exist closed range operators T1, T2 ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) satisfying the conditions of item 3., Consider the projection Q = PR(T1)//R(T2) ∈ Q and notice that QT = T1 and (I − Q)T = T2. If i = T ui. because Eq. (25) says that R(T ∗2 ) = R(T ∗(I − Q)∗) ⊆ N (QT ) = N (T1). 3. ⇒ 1.: notice that T1T ∗2 = 0 implies that N (T2)⊥ ⊆ N (T1), or equivalently, N (T1)⊥ ⊆ N (T2). B1 = {ui}i∈I1 is an orthonormal basis of N (T1)⊥, consider the family {f + But, if i ∈ I1, f + i = QT ui + (I − Q)T ui = T1ui ∈ R(T1), i }i∈I1 in H given by f + because ui ∈ N (T1)⊥ ⊆ N (T2). Therefore, {f + i }i∈I1 ⊆ R(T1). Since T1 is an isomorphism between N (T1)⊥ and R(T1), it follows that R(T1) = span{f−i }i∈I1 . Analogously, if B2 = {bi}i∈I2 is an orthonormal basis of N (T1), the family {f−i }i∈I2 defined by f−i = T bi (i ∈ I2) lies in R(T2). Since T2 is an isomorphism between N (T2)⊥ and R(T2), it follows that R(T2) = T2(N (T1)) ⊆ span{f−i }i∈I2 ⊆ R(T2). 13 Finally, consider U ∈ U(ℓ2(I)) which turns the standard orthonormal basis {ei}i∈I into B1 ∪ B2. Then, if V = T U and F = {V ei}i∈I = {f + i }i∈I1 ∪ {f−i }i∈I2, it is easy to see that I+ = {i ∈ I : [ V ei, V ei ] > 0} = I1 and I− = {i ∈ I : [ V ei, V ei ] < 0} = I2. So, R(V+) = R(T1) is maximal uniformly J-positive and R(V−) = R(T2) is maximal uniformly J-negative. Therefore, F is a J-frame for H with synthesis operator V = T U . 5 The J -frame operator Definition. Given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I , the J-frame operator S : H → H is defined by Sf =Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]fi, for every f ∈ H, where σi = sgn([ fi, fi ]). The following proposition compiles some basic properties of the J-frame operator. Proposition 5.1. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a J-frame with synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H). Then, its J-frame operator S ∈ L(H) satisfies: 1. S = T T #; 2. S = S+ − S−, where S+ := T+T # 3. S is an invertible J-selfadjoint operator; + and S− := −T−T # − are J-positive operators; 4. ind±(S) = dimH±, where ind±(S) are the indices of S. Proof. Proof If F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame with synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H), then T #f = Pi∈I σi[ f, fi ]ei for f ∈ H. So, T T #f = T Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]ei! =Xi∈I for every f ∈ H. σi[ f, fi ]fi = Sf, Furthermore, if I± = {i ∈ I : ±[ fi, fi ] > 0}, consider T± = T P± as usual. Then, because T+T # operator because − = T−T # T T # = (T+ + T−)(T+ + T−)# = T+T # − = T+T # + = 0. Therefore, S = S+ − S− if S± := ±T±T # ±J = T±T ∗ ±J. ± = ±T±J2T ∗ S± = ±T±T # + + T−T # + − (−T−T # − ), ± . Notice that S± is a J-positive + ∔ M[⊥] + ) + S+(M[⊥] ± ⊆ N (S±). So, S(M[⊥] − . But it is easy to see that M[⊥] ± ) = S∓(M[⊥] − ) = R(S−) + R(S+) = M+ + M− = H. Therefore, S is invertible. To prove the invertibility of S observe that, if Sf = 0 then S+f = S−f . But R(S+) ∩ R(S−) ⊆ − ) because ± ) and R(S) = R(T+) ∩ R(T−) = {0}. Thus, S is injective. On the other hand, R(S) = S(M[⊥] H = M[⊥] S−(M[⊥] Finally, the identities ind±(S) = dimH± follow from the indices definition. Recall that if A ∈ L(H) is a J-selfadjoint operator, ind+(A) is the supremum of all positive integers r such that there exists a positive invertible matrix of the form ([ Axj , xk ])j,k=1,...,r, where x1, . . . , xr ∈ H (if no such r exists, ind−(A) = 0). Similarly, ind−(A) = ind+(−A) is the supremum of all positive integers m such that there exists a negative invertible matrix of the form ([ Ayj, yk ])j,k=1,...,m, where y1, . . . , ym ∈ H, see [13]. Corollary 5.2. Let F = {fi}i∈I be a J-frame for H with J-frame operator S ∈ L(H). Then, R(S±) = M± and N (S±) = M[⊥] ± . Furthermore, if Q = PM+//M−, + ) + S(M[⊥] S+ = QSQ# and S− = −(I − Q)S(I − Q)#. (26) 14 Proof. Proof Recall that S+ := T+T # + = T+(J2T ∗+J) = T+T ∗+J. Then, R(S+) = R(T+T ∗+J) = R(T+T ∗+) = R(T+) = M+ because R(T+) is closed. Since S+ is J-selfadjoint, it follows that N (S+) = R(S+)[⊥] = M[⊥] + . Analogously, R(S−) = M− and N (S−) = M[⊥] − . Since S = S+ − S−, if Q = PM+//M− then QS = Q(S+ − S−) = S+, by the characterization of the range and nullspace of S+. Therefore, SQ# = QS = QSQ#. Analogously, S(I − Q)# = (I − Q)S = (I − Q)S(I − Q)#. The above corollary states that S is the diagonal block operator matrix S = (cid:18) S+ according to the (oblique) decompositions H = M[⊥] − 0 −S− (cid:19) , ∔ M[⊥] 0 codomain of S, respectively. (27) + and H = M+ ∔ M− of the domain and 5.1 The indefinite reconstruction formula associated to a J -frame Given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I with synthesis operator T , there is a duality between F and the frame G = {gi}i∈I given by gi = S−1fi: if f ∈ H, f = SS−1f = T T #(S−1f ) = T Xi∈I σi[ S−1f, fi ]ei! =Xi∈I σi[ S−1f, fi ]fi =Xi∈I σi[ f, S−1fi ]fi. Analogously, f = S−1Sf = S−1(T T #f ) = S−1 Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]fi! =Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]S−1fi. Therefore, for every f ∈ H, there is an indefinite reconstruction formula associated to F : f =Xi∈I σi[ f, gi ]fi =Xi∈I σi[ f, fi ]gi. (28) The following question arises naturally: is G = {S−1fi}i∈I also a J-frame for H? Proposition 5.3. If F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame for a Krein space H with J-frame operator S, then G = {S−1fi}i∈I is also a J-frame for H. Proof. Proof Given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I for H with J-frame operator S, observe that the synthesis operator of G = {S−1fi}i∈I is V := S−1T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H). Furthermore, by Corollary 5.2, S(M[⊥] ∓ ) = M±. Then, S−1(M±) = M[⊥] ∓ and it follows that [ S−1fi, S−1fi ] > 0 if and only if [ fi, fi ] > 0. Thus, V± = V P± = S−1T± and R(V+) (resp. R(V−)) is a maximal uniformly J-positive (resp. J- negative) subspace of H. So, G is a J-frame for H. If F = {fi}i∈I is a frame for a Hilbert space H with synthesis operator T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H), then the family {(T T ∗)−1fi}i∈I is called the canonical dual frame because it is a dual frame for F (see Eq. (10)) and it has the following optimal property: Given f ∈ H, Xi∈I (cid:10) f, (T T ∗)−1fi(cid:11)2 ≤Xi∈I ci2, whenever cifi, f =Xi∈I (29) for a family (ci)i∈I ∈ ℓ2(I). In other words, the above representation has the smallest ℓ2-norm among the admissible frame coefficients representing f (see [12]). 15 Remark 5.4. If F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame for H then F± = {fi}i∈I± is a frame for the Hilbert space (M±,±[ , ]). Furthermore, the frame operator associated to F+ is S+ = T+T # + and its canonical dual + fi}i∈I+ . Analogously, the frame operator associated to F− is S− = −T−T # frame is given by G+ = {S−1 − and its canonical dual frame is given by G− = {S−1 Then, since H = M+ ∔M−, H can be seen as the (outer) direct sum of the Hilbert spaces (M+, [ , ]) and (M−,−[ , ]), i.e. the inner product given by − fi}i∈I−. h f, g iF = [ f+, g+ ] − [ f−, g− ], ) into a Hilbert space and the projection Q = PM+//M− is selfadjoint in this Hilbert f+, g+ ∈ M+, f−, g− ∈ M−, f = f+ + f−, g = g+ + g−, [ (I − Q)f, S−1 + fi ]2 + Xi∈I− [ Qf, S−1 i 2 + Xi∈I− c+ [ f, S−1fi ]2 = Xi∈I+ ≤ Xi∈I+ i fi and f− = (I − Q)f = Pi∈I− c−i fi, for families (c±i )i∈I± ∈ ℓ2(I±). − fi ]2 ≤ c−i 2, c+ whenever f+ = Qf = Pi∈I+ Therefore, turns (H,h , iF space. So, if f ∈ H, Xi∈I Xi∈I [ f, S−1fi ]2 ≤Xi∈I ci2, whenever f = Pi∈I cifi for some (ci)i∈I ∈ ℓ2(I). In other words, the J-frame G = {S−1fi}i∈I is the canonical dual frame of F in the Hilbert space (H,h , iF ). 5.2 Characterizing the J -frame operators In a Hilbert space H, it is well known that every positive invertible operator S ∈ L(H) can be realized as the frame operator of a frame F = {fi}i∈I for H, see [16]. Indeed, if B = {xi}i∈I is an orthonormal basis of H, consider T : ℓ2(I) → H given by T ei = S1/2xi for i ∈ I. Then, for every f ∈ H, T T ∗f =Xi∈I D f, S1/2xiE S1/2xi = S1/2 Xi∈I D S1/2f, xiE xi! = Sf Therefore, F = {S1/2xi}i∈I is a frame for H and its frame operator is given by S. The following paragraphs are devoted to characterize the set of J-frame operators. Theorem 5.5. Let S ∈ GL(H) be a J-selfadjoint operator acting on a Krein space H with fundamental symmetry J. Then, the following conditions are equivalent: 1. S is a J-frame operator, i.e. there exists a J-frame F with synthesis operator T such that S = T T #. 2. There exists a projection Q ∈ Q such that QS is J-positive and (I − Q)S is J-negative. 3. There exist J-positive operators S1, S2 ∈ L(H) such that S = S1 − S2 and R(S1) (resp. R(S2)) is a uniformly J-positive (resp. J-negative) subspace of H. Proof. Proof 1. → 2. follows from Proposition 5.1 and Corollary 5.2. 2. → 3.: If there exists a projection Q ∈ Q such that QS is J-positive and (I − Q)S is J-negative, consider the J-positive operators S1 = QS and S2 = −(I − Q)S. Then, S = S1 − S2 and, by hypothesis, R(S1) = R(Q) is uniformly J-positive and R(S2) = R(I − Q) = N (Q) is uniformly J-negative. 3. → 1.: Suppose that there exist J-positive operators S1, S2 ∈ L(H) such that S = S1 − S2 and R(S1) (resp. R(S2)) is a uniformly J-positive (resp. J-negative) subspace of H. Denoting Kj = R(Sj) for j = 1, 2, observe that Aj = SjJKj ∈ GL(Kj)+. Therefore, there exists a frame Fj = {fi}i∈Ij ⊂ Kj for Kj such that Aj = TjT ∗j if Tj ∈ L(ℓ2(I1),Kj ) is the synthesis operator of Fj, for j = 1, 2. 16 Then, consider ℓ2(I) := ℓ2(I1) ⊕ ℓ2(I2) and T ∈ L(ℓ2(I),H) given by T x = T1x1 + T2x2, if x ∈ ℓ2(I), x = x1 + x2, xj ∈ ℓ2(Ij ) for j = 1, 2. It is easy to see that T is the synthesis operator of the frame F = F1 ∪ F2. Furthermore F is a J-frame such that I+ = I1 and I− = I2. Finally, endow ℓ2(I) with the indefinite inner product defined by the diagonal operator J2 ∈ L(ℓ2(I)) given by J2 ei = σi ei, where σi = 1 if i ∈ I1 and σi = −1 if i ∈ I2. Notice that T1J2 = T1 and T2J2 = −T2. Furthermore, T1T ∗2 = T2T ∗1 = 0 because R(T ∗2 ) = N (T2)⊥ ⊆ ℓ2(I1)⊥ = ℓ2(I2) ⊆ N (T1). Thus, T T # = T J2T ∗J = (T1 + T2)(T ∗1 − T ∗2 )J = T1T ∗1 J − T2T ∗2 J = A1J − A2J = S1 − S2 = S. that Given a J-frame F = {fi}i∈I for H with J-frame operator S ∈ L(H), it follows from Corollary 5.2 (30) S(M[⊥] − ) = M+ and S(M[⊥] + ) = M−. i.e. S maps a maximal uniformly J-positive (resp. J-negative) subspace into another maximal uniformly J-positive (resp. J-negative) subspace. The next proposition shows under which hypotheses the converse holds. Proposition 5.6. Let S ∈ GL(H) be a J-selfadjoint operator. Then, S is a J-frame operator if and only if the following conditions hold: 1. there exists a maximal uniformly J-positive subspace T of H such that S(T ) is also maximal uni- formly J-positive; 2. [ Sf, f ] ≥ 0 for every f ∈ T ; 3. [ Sg, g ] ≤ 0 for every g ∈ S(T )[⊥]. Proof. Proof If S is a J-frame operator, consider T = M[⊥] subspace T of H. Then, S(T ) = M+ is also maximal uniformly J-positive. Furthermore, [ Sf, f ] = [ SQ#f, Q#f ] = [ QSQ#f, f ] = [ S+f, f ] ≥ 0 for every f ∈ T , − which is a maximal uniformly J-positive + = N (Q#) = R((I − Q)#). So, where Q = PM+//M−. Also, S(T )[⊥] = M[⊥] [ Sg, g ] = [ S(I − Q)#g, (I − Q)#g ] = [ (I − Q)S(I − Q)#g, g ] = [−S−g, g ] ≤ 0 for every g ∈ S(T )[⊥]. Conversely, suppose that there exists a maximal uniformly J-positive subspace T satisfying the hy- pothesis. Let M = S(T ), which is maximal uniformly J-positive. Then, consider Q = PM//T [⊥]. It is well defined because T [⊥] is maximal uniformly J-negative, see [2, Corollary 1.5.2]. Moreover, Q ∈ Q. Notice that R(S(I − Q)#) = S(M[⊥]) = S(S(T )[⊥]) = S(S−1(T [⊥])) = T [⊥]. Therefore, QS(I − Q)# = 0 and QS = QSQ# + QS(I − Q)# = QSQ#. Furthermore, if [ Sf, f ] ≥ 0 for every f ∈ T then QS is J-positive. Analogously, if [ Sg, g ] ≤ 0 for every g ∈ S(T )[⊥] then (I − Q)S is J-negative. Then, by Theorem 5.5, S is a J-frame operator. As it was proved in Proposition 5.1, if an operator S ∈ L(H) is a J-frame operator then it is an invertible J-selfadjoint operator satisfying ind±(S) = dim(H±). Unfortunatelly, the converse is not true. Example 4. Consider the Krein space obtained by endowing C2 with the sesquilinear form and the invertible J-selfadjoint operator S, whose matrix in the standard orthonormal basis is given by [(x1, x2), (y1, y2)] = x1y1 − x2y2, Then, S satisfies ind±(S) = dim(H±), but it maps each J-positive vector into a J-negative vector. Then, by Proposition 5.6, S cannot be a J-frame operator. S = (cid:18) 0 i i 0 (cid:19) . 17 6 Final remarks The following are some simple consequences of the material studied in the previous sections. Nevertheless, they are not going to be thoroughly developed in this notes. Synthesis operators of J -frames as sums of plus and minus operators If F = {fi}i∈I is a J-frame for the Krein space (H, [ , ]), it is easy to see that T+ and T # + are plus operators (considering ℓ2(I) as a Krein space with the fundamental symmetry J2 defined in (12)). Furthermore, T # + is strict, and, T+ is a strict plus operator if and only if N (T ) ∩ ℓ2(I+) = {0}. analogously that T− and T # if and only if N (T ) ∩ ℓ2(I−) = {0} (see [18, Ch. 2] for the terminology). − . Indeed, it follows − is always strict, and, T− is a strict minus operator Also, these conditions have a natural counterpart for the operators T− and T # − are minus operators; T # Frames for regular subspaces of a Krein space Given a Krein space (H, [ , ]), recall that a subspace S of H is regular if there exists a (unique) J- selfadjoint projection onto S. Since a regular subspace S, endowed with the restriction of the indefinite inner product [ , ] to S, is a Krein space (see [18, Ch. 1,Theorem 7.16]) the definition of J-frames applies for regular subspaces of H too. Therefore, it is easy to infer a notion of "J-frames for regular subspaces" of a Krein space. References [1] N. I. Akhiezer and I. M. Glazman, Theory of Linear operators in Hilbert space, Dover Publ. Inc., 1993. [2] T. Ando, Linear operators on Krein spaces, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, 1979. [3] B.G. Bodmann and V.I. Paulsen, Frames, graphs and erasures, Linear Algebra Appl. 404 (2005) 118-146. [4] J. Bogn´ar, Indefinite Inner Product Spaces, Springer-Verlag, 1974. [5] A. Buades, B. Coll and J.-M. Morel, Nonlocal image and movie denoising, Int. J. Comput. Vis. 76 (2008), no. 2, 123 -- 140. [6] P. G. Casazza, The art of frame theory, Taiwanese J. Math. 4 (2000), no. 2, 129-201. [7] P. G. Casazza and O. Christensen, Frames containing a Riesz basis and preservation of this property under perturbations, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 29 (1998), no. 1, 266-278. [8] O. Christensen, An introduction to frames and Riesz bases, Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis, Birkhauser, Boston, 2003. [9] O. Christensen, Recent Developments in Frame Theory, Modern Mathematical Models, Methods and Algorithms for Real World Systems. A.H. Siddiqi, I.S. Duff and O. Chris- tensen (Editors), 2006, Anamaya Publishers, New Delhi, India. [10] F. Deutsch, The angle between subspaces of a Hilbert space, Approximation theory, wavelets and applications (Maratea, 1994), 107 -- 130, NATO Adv. Sci. Inst. Ser. C Math. Phys. Sci., 454, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1995. [11] R. G. Douglas, On majorization, factorization and range inclusion of operators in Hilbert space, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 17 (1966), 413-416. [12] R. J. Duffin and A. C. Schaeffer, A class of nonharmonic Fourier series, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 72 (1952), 341-366. 18 [13] M. A. Dritschel and J. Rovnyak, Operators on indefinite inner product spaces, Fields Insti- tute Monographs no. 3, Amer. Math. Soc. Edited by Peter Lancaster 1996, 3, 141-232. [14] K. Esmeral Garc´ıa and E. Wagner, Frames in Krein spaces, preprint. [15] A. Grod, S. Kuzhel and V. Sudilovskaya, On operators of transition in Krein spaces, Opuscula Math. 31 (2010), no. 1, 49-59. [16] D. Han and D. R. Larson, Frames, bases and group representations, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 147 (2000), no. 697. [17] R.B. Holmes and V.I. Paulsen, Optimal frames for erasures, Linear Algebra Appl. 377 (2004), 31-51. [18] I. S. Iokhvidov and T. Ya. Azizov, Linear Operators in spaces with an indefinite metric, John Wiley and sons, 1989. [19] T. Kato, Perturbation theory for linear operators, Springer, New York, 1966. [20] M.A.S. Masoum, S. Jamali and N. Ghaffarzadeh, Detection and classification of power quality disturbances using discrete wavelet transform and wavelet networks, IET Sci. Meas. Technol. 4 (2010), 193 -- 205. [21] I. Peng and S. Waldron, Signed frames and Hadamard products of Gram matrices, Linear Algebra Appl. 347 (2002), no. 1-3, 131-157. [22] T. Strohmer and R.W Heath Jr., Grassmannian frames with applications to coding and communication, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 14, (2003) 257-275. Juan I. Giribet [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, FI-UBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina and IAM-CONICET. Alejandra Maestripieri [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, FI-UBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina and IAM-CONICET. Francisco Mart´ınez Per´ıa [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, FCE-UNLP, La Plata, Argentina and IAM-CONICET. Pedro G. Massey [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, FCE-UNLP, La Plata, Argentina and IAM-CONICET, Saavedra 15, Piso 3, (1083) Buenos Aires, Argentina. 19
1902.09206	1	1902	2019-02-25T11:45:55	Extended Gevrey regularity via the short-time Fourier transform	[ "math.FA" ]	We study the regularity of smooth functions whose derivatives are dominated by sequences of the form $M_p^{\tau,\s}=p^{\tau p^{\s}}$, $\tau>0$, $\s\geq1$. We show that such functions can be characterized through the decay properties of their short-time Fourier transforms (STFT), and recover \cite[Theorem 3.1]{CNR} as the special case when $ \t>1$ and $\s = 1$, i.e. when the Gevrey type regularity is considered. These estimates lead to a Paley-Wiener type theorem for extended Gevrey classes. In contrast to the related result from \cite{PTT-05, PTT-04}, here we relax the assumption on compact support of the observed functions. Moreover, we introduce the corresponding wave front set, recover it in terms of the STFT, and discuss local regularity in such context.	math.FA	math	EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY VIA THE SHORT-TIME FOURIER TRANSFORM NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C σ Abstract. We study the regularity of smooth functions whose derivatives are dominated by sequences of the form M τ,σ , p = pτ p τ > 0, σ ≥ 1. We show that such functions can be characterized through the decay properties of their short-time Fourier transforms (STFT), and recover [5, Theorem 3.1] as the special case when τ > 1 and σ = 1, i.e. when the Gevrey type regularity is considered. These estimates lead to a Paley-Wiener type theorem for extended Gevrey classes. In contrast to the related result from [24, 25], here we relax the assumption on compact support of the observed functions. Moreover, we introduce the corresponding wave front set, recover it in terms of the STFT, and discuss local regularity in such context. 1. Introduction Classes of extended Gevrey functions and the corresponding wave front sets are introduced and investigated in [21, 22, 23, 32]. Such classes consist of smooth function, and they are larger than any Gevrey class. This turned out to be important e.g. in the study of strictly hyperbolic equations, see [1]. Paley-Wiener type theorem for compactly supported extended Gevrey regular functions is given in [24, 25], and it turns out that the Fourier-Laplace transform of such functions have certain logarithmic decay at infinity which can be expressed in terms of Lambert W function. This fact is used to resolve the wave front sets in the context of extended Gevrey regularity. We refer to [22, 23] for related theorems on propagation of singularities. The aim of this paper is twofold. Firstly, we give another version of the Paley-Wiener theorem for extended Gevrey regularity and formu- late the result in terms of the short time Fourier transform (STFT) (cf. [12]). More precisely, we prove a generalization of [5, Theorem 3.1], where the STFT estimates are related to Gevrey type regularity, and 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46E10, 35A18, Secondary 46F05, 42B10. Key words and phrases. Gevrey classes, Paley-Wiener theorem, modulation spaces, Wave front sets, ultradistributions. 1 2 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C obtain the Paley-Wiener type result as its corollary. Secondly, we give a description of (micro)local regularity related to the extended Gevrey regularity by the means of the STFT. This result is inspired by recent characterization of the C ∞ wave front sets via the STFT, given in [19]. The paper is organized as follows: In subsection 1.1 we fix some notation and in Section 2 we collect the main notions and tools for our analysis: Subsection 2.1 contains basic facts concerning the ex- tended Gevrey classes. In Subsection 2.2 we introduce the notion of extended associated function which appears in the formulation of our main results. The correct asymptotic behavior of the extended asso- ciated function is given by the means of the Lambert W function, see Theorem 2.1. In subsection 2.3 we introduce the short-time Fourier transform and modulation spaces defined by the means of decay and integrability conditions of the STFT of ultradistributions. We also recall some basic properties of modulation spaces. In Section 3 we prove Theorem 3.1. It is a generalization of [5, Theorem 3.1] which turned out to be important for the properties of pseudodifferential operators with symbols of Gevrey, analytic and ultra-analytic regularity, see [5] for details. As a corrolary of Theorem 3.1 we obtain a Paley-Wiener type theorem for element of modulation spaces related to the extended Gevrey classes. This result extends [25, Theorem 3.1] in the sense that the condition on compact support is replaced by appropriate decay property given by a modulation space norm, when the Fourier-Laplace transform is replaced by the STFT. In Section 4 we recall the notion of wave front sets related to ex- tended Gevrey regularity. We prove that such wave front sets can be characterized by the decay properties of the STFT of a distribution with respect to a suitably chosen window function, Theorem 4.1. As a consequence we derive a result on local extended Gevrey regularity, Theorem 4.1. Our results are proved for the so-called Roumieu case, and we note that proofs for the Beurling case are similar and therefore omitted. 1.1. Basic notions and notation. We denote by N, Z+, R, C the sets of nonnegative integers, positive integers, real numbers and com- plex numbers, respectively. For x ∈ Rd we put hxi = (1 +x2)1/2. The integer parts (the floor and the ceiling functions) of x ∈ R+ are denoted by ⌊x⌋ := max{m ∈ N : m ≤ x} and ⌈x⌉ := min{m ∈ N : m ≥ x}. For a multi-index α = (α1, . . . , αd) ∈ Nd we write ∂α = ∂α1 . . . ∂αd, Dα = (−i)α∂α, and α = α1 + . . .αd. Open ball of radius r > 0 centered at x0 is denoted by Br(x0). As usual, C ∞(Rd) is the space of smooth functions, the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 3 is denoted by S(Rd), and S ′(Rd) denotes its dual space of tempered distributions. Lebesgue spaces over an open set Ω ⊆ Rd are denoted by Lp(Ω), 1 ≤ p < ∞, and the norm of f ∈ Lp(Ω) is denoted by kfkLp. The Fourier transform is normalized to be f (ω) = F f (ω) =Z f (t)e−2πitωdt. hf, gi = R f (t)g(t)dt on L2(Rd) to the dual pairing between a test We use the brackets hf, gi to denote the extension of the inner product function space A and its dual A′: h·,·i = A′h·,·iA. acting on f ∈ L2(Rd) are defined by Translation and modulation operators, T and M respectively, when Txf (·) = f (· − x) and Mxf (·) = e2πix·f (·), x ∈ Rd. Then for f, g ∈ L2(Rd) the following relations hold: MyTx = e2πix·yTxMy, (Txf )= M−x f , (Mxf )= Tx f , x, y ∈ Rd. These operators are extended to other spaces of functions and distri- butions in a natural way. Throughout the paper, A . B denotes A ≤ cB for a suitable con- stant c > 0, whereas A ≍ B means that c−1A ≤ B ≤ cA for some c ≥ 1. The symbol B1 ֒→ B2 denotes the continuous and dense embedding of the topological vector space B1 into B2. 2. Preliminaries In this section we collect the main tools and auxiliary results which will be used in the sequel. More precisely, we introduce the test function p = pτ pσ, p ∈ Z+, for a spaces related to the sequences of the form M τ,σ given τ > 0 and σ > 1. Notice that, when τ > 1 and σ = 1 M τ,1 p = pτ p, p ∈ Z+ is (equivalent to) the Gevrey sequence. Then we discuss associated functions to such sequences, which are the main tool of our analysis. To describe precise asymptotic behavior of those associated functions at infinity appears to be a nontrivial problem, which can be resolved by the use of Lambert's W functions. Finally, we recall the definition and some elementary properties of the STFT and modulation spaces defined by mixed weighted Lebesgue norm conditions on the STFT. 2.1. Extended Gevrey regularity. In this section we introduce ex- tended Gevrey classes and discuss their basic properties. We employ Komatsu's approach [17] to spaces of ultradifferentiable functions, and p = pτ pσ, p ∈ N, depending consider defining sequences of the form M τ,σ on parameters τ > 0 and σ > 1, [22]. 4 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C Essential properties of the defining sequences are listed in the fol- lowing lemma. We refer to [21] for the proof. In the general theory of ultradistributions (see [17] different properties of defining sequences give rise to particular structural properties of the corresponding spaces of ultradifferentiable functions, see [26] for a detalied survey. p = pτ pσ , p ∈ Z+, M τ,σ Lemma 2.1. Let τ > 0, σ > 1 and M τ,σ 0 = 1. Then there exists an increasing sequence of positive numbers Cq, q ∈ N, and a constant C > 0 such that: (M.1) (M τ,σ p (M.2) M τ,σ (M.2)′ M τ,σ p+1, p ∈ Z+ )2 ≤ M τ,σ , p, q ∈ N, p−1M τ,σ M τ 2σ−1,σ q p q M τ,σ p+q ≤ C pσ+qσ M τ 2σ−1,σ p+q ≤ C pσ ∞Xp=1 M τ,σ p−1 M τ,σ , p, q ∈ N, < ∞. Moreover, p p (M.3)′ M τ,σ p−1 M τ,σ p ≤ 1 (2p)τ (p−1)σ−1 , p ∈ N. Let τ, h > 0, σ > 1 and let K ⊂⊂ Rd be a regular compact set. By Eτ,σ,h(K) we denote the Banach space of functions φ ∈ C ∞(K) such that kφkEτ,σ,h(K) = sup α∈Nd sup x∈K ∂αφ(x) hασM τ,σ α < ∞. (2.1) The set of functions φ ∈ Eτ,σ,h(K) whose support is contained in K is denoted by DK Let U be an open set Rd and K ⊂⊂ U. We define families of spaces by introducing the following projective and inductive limit topologies: τ,σ,h. lim−→h→∞Eτ,σ,h(K), lim←−h→0Eτ,σ,h(K), E{τ,σ}(U) = lim←−K⊂⊂U E(τ,σ)(U) = lim←−K⊂⊂U D{τ,σ}(U) = lim−→K⊂⊂U DK D(τ,σ)(U) = lim−→K⊂⊂U DK τ,σ,h). τ,σ,h) , {τ,σ} = lim−→K⊂⊂U (τ,σ) = lim−→K⊂⊂U ( lim−→h→∞DK (lim←−h→0DK We will use abbreviated notation τ, σ for {τ, σ} (the Roumieu case) or (τ, σ) (the Beurling case) . The spaces Eτ,σ(U), DK τ,σ and Dτ,σ(U) are nuclear, cf. [21]. We refer to [21, 22, 23, 31, 32, 35] for other properties of those spaces. Remark 2.1. If τ > 1 and σ = 1, then E{τ,1}(U) = E{τ }(U) is the Gevrey class, and D{τ,1}(U) = D{τ }(U) is its subspace of compactly supported functions in E{τ }(U). EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 5 In particular, lim−→t→∞E{t}(U) ֒→ Eτ,σ(U) ֒→ C ∞(U), τ > 0, σ > 1, so that the regularity in Eτ,σ(U) can be thought of as an extended Gevrey regularity. In particular, Dτ,1(U) = {0} when 0 < τ ≤ 1, and E{1,1}(U) = E{1}(U) is the space of analytic functions on U. If 0 < τ ≤ 1, then Eτ,1(U) consists of quasianalytic functions. 0 ≤ φ ≤ 1 andRRd φ dx = 1, see [21] for a construction of a compactly The non-quasianalyticity condition (M.3)′ provides the existence of partitions of unity in E{τ,σ}(U), i.e. for any given τ > 0 and σ > 1, there exists a compactly supported function φ ∈ E{τ,σ}(U) such that supported φ ∈ D{τ,σ}(U) \ D{t}(U), t > 1. Note that the additional exponent σ, which appears in the power of term h in (2.1), makes the definition of Eτ,σ(U) different from the definition of Carleman classes, cf. [16]. This difference appears to be essential in many calculations, and in particular when dealing with the operators of "infinite order", cf. [22]. 2.2. The associated function to the sequence M τ,σ . In this subsection we recall the definition and asymptotic proeprties of p = pτ pσ , p ∈ N, extended associated function to the sequence M τ,σ τ > 0, σ > 1, cf. [25]. We also recall the Paley-Wiener theorem related to the extended Gevrey regularity. p = pτ pσ Definition 2.1. Let τ > 0, σ > 1 and M τ,σ The extended associated function related to the sequence M τ,σ by p = pτ pσ, p ∈ Z+, M τ,σ 0 = 1. , is given p hpσkp M τ,σ where ln+ A = max{0, ln A}, for A > 0. Tτ,σ,h(k) = sup p∈N ln+ p , h, k > 0, Obviously Tτ,σ,h(k), τ, h > 0, σ > 1, is positive for sufficiently large k > 0. In fact, for any sequence of positive numbers Mp, p ∈ N, such that is bounded from below and M0 = 1, its associated function is p M 1/p defined to be T (k) = sup p∈N ln kp Mp , k > 0. Therefore, for τ > 0 and σ = 1, Tτ,1,h(k) := Tτ (hk) is the associated function to the Gevrey sequence pτ p, p ∈ N (we may assume h = 1 without loosing generality). 6 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C It is well known (cf. [11, 27]) that Ak1/τ − B ≤ Tτ (k) ≤ Ak1/τ , k > 0, (2.2) for suitable A, B > 0. In particular, the growth of eTτ (k) for τ > 1 is subexponential. Moreover, for any t, τ > 0 and σ > 1, by [25, Lemma 2.3] it follows that there is a constant C > 0 such that Tτ,σ,1(k) < Ck1/t, k > 0. Therefore the function eTτ,σ,h(k) has a less rapid growth at infinity than any subexponential function. The precise asymptotic behavior of Tτ,σ,h(k) at infinity is a chal- lenging problem. We use an auxiliary special function to resolve that problem. The Lambert W function is defined as the inverse function of zez, z ∈ C, wherefrom the following property holds: x ≥ 0. x = W (x)eW (x), We denote its principal (real) branch by W (x), x ≥ 0 (see [6]). It is a continuous, increasing and concave function on [0,∞), W (0) = 0, W (e) = 1, and W (x) > 0, x > 0. It can be shown that W can be represented in the form of the abso- lutely convergent series W (x) = ln x − ln(ln x) + ∞Xk=0 ∞Xm=1 ckm (ln(ln x))m (ln x)k+m , x ≥ x0 > e, with suitable constants ckm and x0, wherefrom the following estimates hold: ln x − ln(ln x) ≤ W (x) ≤ ln x − 1 2 ln(ln x), x ≥ e. (2.3) The equality in (2.3) holds if and only if x = e. We refer to [15, 6] for more details about the Lambert W function. Theorem 2.1. ([25]) Let there be given τ, h > 0, σ > 1 and let Cτ,σ,h = h− σ−1 τ e σ−1 σ σ−1 τ σ . Then σ−1(cid:16) σ − 1 expn(2σ−1τ )− 1 σ (cid:17) σ τ σ (cid:17) 1 . expn(cid:16)σ − 1 σ−1 σ−1 W − 1 σ−1 (Cτ,σ,h ln k) ln W − 1 σ−1 (Cτ,σ,h ln k) ln σ σ−1 ko . eTτ,σ,h(k) k > e. (2.4) σ σ−1 ko, EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 7 If, moreover 1 < σ < 2, then we have the precise asymptotic formula τ σ (cid:17) 1 eTτ,σ,h(k) ≍ expn(cid:16)σ − 1 σ−1 W − 1 σ−1 (Cτ,σ,h ln k) ln k > e. σ σ−1 ko, The hidden constants in (2.4) and (2.1) depend on τ, σ and h. Remark 2.2. Note that, in the view of (2.3) we have W − 1 σ−1 (C ln k) ln σ σ−1 k ≍ ln σ σ−1 k ln σ−1 (C ln k) ≍ 1 σ σ−1 k ln ln 1 σ−1 (ln k) , k → ∞, (2.5) for any given σ > 1, and the last behavior follows from ln(C ln k) ≍ ln(ln k), k → ∞, for any given C > 0. Since limk→∞(ln k)1/(σ−1)(ln(C ln k))−1/(σ−1) = ∞, for every C > 0, (2.5) implies that for every M > 0 there exists B > 0 (depending on h and M) such that W − 1 σ−1 (C ln k)) ln σ σ−1 k > M ln k, k > B. Next we recall the Paley-Wiener theorem for DK τ,σ when 1 < σ < 2. For the proof we refer to [24], and a more general case when σ ≥ 2 is proved in [25]. Theorem 2.1. Let τ > 0, 1 < σ < 2, U be open set in Rd and K ⊂⊂ U. If ϕ ∈ DK (τ,σ)) then its Fourier-Laplace transform is an entire function and there exists constants A, B > 0 (resp. for every B > 0 there exists A > 0) such that {τ,σ} (resp. ϕ ∈ DK τ σ (cid:17) 1 bϕ(η) ≤ A expn−(cid:16) σ − 1 where HK(η) = sup y∈K Im(y · η). σ−1 W − 1 σ−1(cid:16)B ln(e + η)(cid:17)ln σ σ−1 (e+η)+HK(η)o h > 0, η ∈ Cd, (2.6) Conversely, if there exists A, B > 0 (resp. for every B > 0 there exists A > 0) such that an entire function bϕ(η) satisfies (2.6) then bϕ(η) is the Fourier-Laplace transform of ϕ ∈ DK The following corollary is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1 {2σ−1τ,σ} (resp. DK (2σ−1τ,σ)). and (2.5). Corollary 2.1. Let 1 < σ < 2, U be open set in Rd and K ⊂⊂ U. of Then the entire function bϕ(η), η ∈ Cd, is the Fourier-Laplace transform τ,σ) ϕ ∈ lim−→τ →∞DK τ,σ (resp. ϕ ∈ lim←−τ →0DK 8 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C if and only if there exist constant A, B > 0 (resp. there exists A > 0) such that for every B > 0 bϕ(η) ≤ A exp(−B ln Im(x · η). where HK(η) = sup x∈K σ 1 σ−1 (e + η) ln σ−1 (ln(e + η)) + HK(η)) , η ∈ Cd, 2.3. Modulation Spaces. The modulation spaces were initially (and systematically) introduced in [7]. See also[12, Ch. 11-13] and the orig- inal literature quoted there for various properties and applications of the so called standard modulation spaces. It is usually sufficient to ob- serve weighted modulation spaces with weights which may grow at most polynomially at infinity. However, for the study of ultra-distributions a more general approach which includes weights of exponential or even superexponential growth is needed, cf. [4, 34]. We refer to [8, 9] for re- lated but even more general constructions, based on the general theory of coorbit spaces. For our purposes it is sufficient to consider weights of exponential growth. Therefore we begin with the Gelfand-Shilov space of analytic functions S (1)(Rd) given by f ∈ S (1)(Rd) ⇐⇒ sup x∈Rd f (x)eh·x < ∞ and sup ω∈Rd f (ω)eh·ω < ∞, for every h > 0. Any f ∈ S (1)(Rd) can be extended to a holomorphic function f (x + iy) in the strip {x + iy ∈ Cd : y < T} some T > 0, [11, 18]. The dual space of S (1)(Rd) will be denoted by S (1)′(Rd). In fact, S (1)(Rd) is isomorphic to the Sato test function space for the space of Fourier hyperfunctions S (1)′(Rd), see [2]. Let there be given f, g ∈ L2(Rd). The short-time Fourier transform (STFT) of f with respect to the window g is given by Vgf (x, ω) =Z e−2πitωf (t)g(t − x)dt, x, ω ∈ Rd. (2.7) It restricts to a mapping from S (1)(Rd) × S (1)(Rd) to S (1)(R2d), which is proved in the next Lemma. Lemma 2.1. Let f, g ∈ S (1)(Rd), and let the short-time Fourier trans- form (STFT) of f with respect to g be given by (2.7). Then Vgf (x, ω) ∈ S (1)(R2d), that is Vgf (x, ω) < Ce−sk(x,ω)k, x, ω ∈ Rd, for every s > 0. Proof. The proof is standard, see e.g. [12] for the proof in the context of S(Rd). We use the arguments based on the structure of S (1)(Rd) as follows. Let f ⊗ g be the tensor product f ⊗ g(x, t) = f (x) · g(t), let EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 9 T denote the asymmetric coordinate transform T F (x, t) = F (t, t− x), and let F2 be the partial Fourier transform F (x, t)e−2πitωdt, x, ω ∈ Rd, F2F (x, ω) =ZRd of a function F on R2d. Then Vgf (x, ω) = F2T (f ⊗ g)(x, ω), (x, ω) ∈ R2d. Since S (1)(R2d) ∼= S (1)(Rd) ⊗S (1)(Rd) (see e.g. [30] for the kernel the- orem in Gelfand-Shilov spaces) and since S (1)(R2d) is invariant under the action of T and F2, we conclude that Vgf (x, ω) < Ce−sk(x,ω)k, x, ω ∈ Rd, for every s > 0. (cid:3) Weight Functions. In the sequel v will always be a continuous, positive, even, submultiplicative function (submultiplicative weight), i.e., v(0) = 1, v(z) = v(−z), and v(z1 + z2) ≤ v(z1)v(z2), for all z, z1, z2 ∈ R2d. Moreover, v is assumed to be even in each group of co- ordinates, that is, v(x, ω) = v(−ω, x) = v(−x, ω), for any (x, ω) ∈ R2d. Submultipliciativity implies that v(z) is dominated by an exponential function, i.e. ∃ C, k > 0 such that (2.8) and kzk is the Euclidean norm of z ∈ R2d. For example, every weight of the form v(z) ≤ Cekkzk, z ∈ R2d, v(z) = eskzkb (1 + kzk)a logr(e + kzk) for parameters a, r, s ≥ 0, 0 ≤ b ≤ 1 satisfies the above conditions. Associated to every submultiplicative weight we consider the class of so-called v-moderate weights Mv. A positive, even weight function m on R2d belongs to Mv if it satisfies the condition m(z1 + z2) ≤ Cv(z1)m(z2) ∀z1, z2 ∈ R2d . We note that this definition implies that 1 v . m . v, m 6= 0 everywhere, and that 1/m ∈ Mv. The widest class of weights allowing to define modulation spaces is the weight class N . A weight function m on R2d belongs to N if it is a continuous, positive function such that m(z) = o(ecz2 ), for z → ∞, ∀c > 0, with z ∈ R2d. For instance, every function m(z) = eszb, with s > 0 and 0 ≤ b < 2, is in N . Thus, the weight m may grow faster than exponentially at infinity. For example, the choice m ∈ N \ Mv is related to the spaces of quasianalytic functions, [3]. We notice that there is a limit in enlarging the weight class for modulation spaces, 10 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C imposed by Hardy's theorem: if m(z) ≥ Cecz2 , for some c > π/2, then the corresponding modulation spaces are trivial [14]. We refer to [13] for a survey on the most important types of weights commonly used in time-frequency analysis. Definition 2.1. Let v be a submultiplicative weight v, m ∈ Mv, and let g be a non-zero window function in S (1)(Rd). For 1 ≤ p, q ≤ ∞ m (Rd) consists of all f ∈ S (1)′ (Rd) such that the modulation space M p,q Vgf ∈ Lp,q m (Rd) is m (Rd) (weighted mixed-norm spaces). The norm on M p,q kfkM p,q m = kVgfkLp,q m = ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vgf (x, ω)pm(x, ω)p dx(cid:19)q/p dω!1/q (with obvious changes if either p = ∞ or q = ∞). If p, q < ∞, the modulation space M p,q m (Rd) is the norm completion of S (1)(Rd) in the M p,q m (Rd) is the completion of S (1)(Rd) in the weak∗ topology. m -norm. If p = ∞ or q = ∞, then M p,q Note that for f, g ∈ S (1)(Rd) the above integral is convergent so that m (Rd). Namely, in view of (2.8), for a given m ∈ Mv S (1)(Rd) ⊂ M p,q there exist l > 0 such that m(x, ω) ≤ Celk(x,ω)k and therefore ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vgf (x, ω)pm(x, ω)p dx(cid:19)q/p ≤ C(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vgf (x, ω)pelpk(x,ω)k dx(cid:19)q/p dω(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞, If p = q, we write M p we write M p,q and M p for M p,q m instead of M p,p m and M p,p In the next proposition we show that M p,q since by Lemma 2.1 it follows that Vgf (x, ω) < Ce−sk(x,ω)k for every s > 0. m , and if m(z) ≡ 1 on R2d, then m , and so on. m (Rd) are Banach spaces whose definition is independent of the choice of the window g ∈ M 1 v (Rd)\ {0}. In order to do so, we need the adjoint of the short-time Fourier transform. m (R2d) For a given window g ∈ S (1)(Rd) and a function F (x, ξ) ∈ Lp,q we define V ∗ g F by whenever the duality is well defined. hV ∗ g F, fi := hF, Vgfi, Then [12, Proposition 11.3.2] (see also [4]) can be rewritten as fol- lows. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dω(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 11 Proposition 2.1. Fix m ∈ Mv and g, ψ ∈ S (1), with hg, ψi 6= 0. Then (1) V ∗ g : Lp,q m (Rd), and m ≤ CkVψgkL1 (2) The inversion formula holds: IM p,q m (R2d) → M p,q g FkM p,q kV ∗ stands for the identity operator. vkFkLp,q m . m = hg, ψi−1V ∗ g Vψ, where IM p,q m (3) M p,q m (Rd) are Banach spaces whose definition is independent on the choice of g ∈ S (1) \ {0}. to M 1 v (Rd). (4) The space of admissible windows can be extended from S (1)(Rd) When m is a polynomial weight of the form m(x, ω) = hxithωis we s,t (Rd) for the modulation spaces which consists will use the notation M p,q of all f ∈ (S (1))′(Rd) such that s,t ≡ ZRd(cid:18)ZRd Vφf (x, ω)hxithωisp dx(cid:19)q/p dω!1/q < ∞ kfkM p,q (with obvious interpretation of the integrals when p = ∞ or q = ∞). The following theorem lists some basic properties of modulation spaces. We refer to [7, 12, 20, 29, 33] for its proof. Theorem 2.2. Let p, q, pj, qj ∈ [1,∞] and s, t, sj, tj ∈ R, j = 1, 2. Then: s,t (Rd) are Banach spaces, independent of the choice of φ ∈ (1) M p,q S(Rd) \ 0; (2) if p1 ≤ p2, q1 ≤ q2, s2 ≤ s1 and t2 ≤ t1, then (3) ∩s,tM p,q (4) Let 1 ≤ p, q ≤ ∞, and let ws(z) = ws(x, ω) = esk(x,ω)k, z = s2,t2 (Rd) ⊆ S ′(Rd); s,t (Rd) = S ′(Rd); (x, ω) ∈ R2d. Then S(Rd) ⊆ M p1,q1 s1,t1 (Rd) ⊆ M p2,q2 s,t (Rd) = S(Rd), ∪s,tM p,q S (1)(Rd) =\s≥0 (Rd) =[s≥0 S (1)′ ws (Rd) = \m∈∩Mws (Rd) = [m∈∩Mws (5) For p, q ∈ [1,∞), the dual of M p,q M p,q 1/ws M p,q 1 p + 1 p′ = 1 q + 1 q′ = 1. M p,q m (Rd), M p,q 1/m(Rd); s,t (Rd) is M p′,q′ −s,−t(Rd), where Modulation spaces include the following well-know function spaces: (1) M 2(Rd) = L2(Rd), and M 2 t,0(Rd) = L2 t (Rd); 12 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C (2) The Feichtinger algebra: M 1(Rd) = S0(Rd); (3) Sobolev spaces: M 2 (4) Shubin spaces: M 2 0,s(Rd) = H 2 s (Rd) = L2 s (Rd) = {f f (ω)hωis ∈ L2(Rd)}; s (Rd) = Qs(Rd), cf. [28]. s(Rd) ∩ H 2 3. Decay properties of the STFT In this section we characterize certain regularity properties related to the classes Eτ,σ, τ > 0, σ ≥ 1, by the rate of decay of the STFT. In particular, we extend [5, Theorem 3.1], which is formulated in terms of Gevrey sequences and the corresponding spaces of test functions. In the proof of Theorem 3.1 in several occasions we will use the following simple inequalities: ασ + βσ ≤ α + βσ ≤ 2σ−1(ασ + βσ), α, β ∈ Nd, σ > 1, (3.1) and (1/√d)ξα ≤ ξα ≤ ξα, α ∈ Nd, ξ ∈ Rd. (3.2) Theorem 3.1. Let τ > 0, σ ≥ 1, let v be a submultiplicative weight, m ∈ Mv, and let g ∈ M 1,1 k∂αgkL1 v⊗1(Rd)\{0} such that for some Cg > 0, v(Rd) . C ασ , α ∈ Nd. (3.3) g ατ ασ For a smooth function f the following conditions are equivalent: i) There exists a constant Cf > 0 such that ατ ασ k∂αfkL∞(Rd) . m(x)C ασ f , α ∈ Nd; (3.4) ii) There exists a constant Cf,g > 0 such that ξαVgf (x, ξ) . m(x)C ασ f,g ατ ασ , x, ξ ∈ Rd, α ∈ Nd; iii) There exists a constant C > 0 such that Vgf (x, ξ) . m(x)e−Tτ,σ,C (ξ), x, ξ ∈ Rd. Proof. When σ = 1 we obtain [5, Theorem 3.1], where the function Cx1/τ appears instead of Tτ,σ,C(ξ). However, this makes no differ- ence, since from Tτ,1,C(ξ) := Tτ (Cξ) (see also (2.2)) it follows that iii) is equivalent to Vgf (x, ξ) . m(x)e−Cξ1/τ , x, ξ ∈ Rd, for some C > 0. Note also that due to (3.2) the condition (ii) on ξαVgf (x, ξ) given by (38) in [5] is equivalent to ii). modifications, since we consider a more general situation. Let σ > 1. We follow the proof of [5, Theorem 3.1], with necessary EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 13 i) ⇒ ii) Since Vgf (x, ξ) = F (f Txg)(ξ), we can formally write ξαVgf (x, ξ) = (2πi)αF f (∂α(f Txg))(ξ) 1 = 1 (2πi)αXβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)F (∂α−βf ∂β(Txg))(ξ), x, ξ ∈ Rd (where we used the Leibnitz formula), and the formalism can be justi- fied as follows. ξαVgf (x, ξ) . 1 (2π)αXβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)kF (∂α−βf Tx(∂βg))kL∞ (2π)αXβ≤α(cid:18)α . 1 β(cid:19)k∂α−βf Tx(∂βg)kL1. Since m is a positive v−moderate weight, from (3.3), (3.4), and Holder's inequality we obtain k∂α−βf Tx(∂βg)kL1 ≤ k∂α−βfkL∞ α − βτ α−βσ . C α−βσ f 1/mkm(x)(∂βTxg)kL1 m(x)kv(· − x)∂βg(· − x)kL1 f . m(x)C α−βσ α − βτ α−βσ βτ βσ . m(x) C ασ where we used the fact that the sequence Mp = pτ pσ satisfies p, q ∈ N, q ≤ M τ,σ (M.1)′ : M τ,σ · C βσ q ≤ p, p−qM τ,σ , p g which follows from (M.1), see Lemma 2.1, and also [17]. Thus f,g ατ ασ , ξαVgf (x, ξ) . (√d)αξαVgf (x, ξ) m(x)Xβ≤α(cid:18)α . √d 2π!α m(x)ατ ασ C ασ π !α . √d ii) ⇒ i) Note that (3.4) means that f ∈ M ∞,1 where we used (3.2), and ii) follows. f,g = C ασ β(cid:19) C ασ f,g ατ ασ , f,g ατ ασ may use the inversion formula for STFT (cf. Proposition 11.3.2. m−1⊗1(Rd). Hence we in x, ξ ∈ Rd, α ∈ Nd, 14 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C [12]), and since f is a smooth function, we may assume that it holds everywhere. So we formally write ∂αf (t) = Vgf (x, ξ)∂α(MξTxg)(t) dxdξ 1 kgk2 1 kgk2 L2ZR2d L2Xβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)ZR2d = Vgf (x, ξ)(2πiξ)βMξTx(∂α−βg)(t) dxdξ, α ∈ Nd, t ∈ Rd, where we used the Leibnitz formula. The estimates be- low also justify the exchange of the order of derivation and integration. Therefore, ∂αf (t) . 1 kgk2 L2Xβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)(2π)βZR2d Vgf (x, ξ)ξβTx(∂α−βg)(t) dxdξ, . 1 kgk2 L2Xβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)(2π)βIα,β(t), t ∈ Rd, where we put Iα,β(t) =ZR2d Vgf (x, ξ)ξβTx(∂α−βg)(t) dxdξ, t ∈ Rd. We note that ii) is equivalent with hξiαVgf (x, ξ) . m(x)C ασ f,g ατ ασ , x, ξ ∈ Rd, α ∈ Nd, and estimate Iα,β(t) as follows: Iα,β(t) ≤ZR2dhξiβVgf (x, ξ)hξid+1 .ZR2d Vgf (x, ξ)hξiβ+d+1 β + d + 1τ β+d+1σZR2d m(t)ZRd . C · C βσ f,g βτ βσ = C · C βσ . C β+d+1σ m(x) f,g hξid+1g(α−β)(t − x) dxdξ m(x) 1 hξid+1g(α−β)(t − x) dxdξ hξid+1 m(x)g(α−β)(t − x) dxdξ v(t − x)g(α−β)(t − x) dx t ∈ Rd, where C depends on τ, σ and d, and we used (M.2)′ property of the sequence pτ pσ, p ∈ N, τ > 0, σ > 1, cf. Lemma 2.1. m(t)kg(α−β)kL1 v, f,g βτ βσ EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 15 Therefore, by (3.3) we obtain ∂αf (t) . . C m(t) kgk2 m(t) kgk2 L2Xβ≤α(cid:18)α L2Xβ≤α(cid:18)α β(cid:19)(2π)β C · C βσ β(cid:19)(2π)βC βσ f,g βτ βσ f,g βτ βσ kg(α−β)kL1 v, C α−βσ g α − βτ α−βσ , . C m(t) kgk2 L2 C ασ f,g ατ ασ , t ∈ Rd, which gives (3.4). Here above we used (3.1) in several occasions. The equivalence between ii) and iii) follows immediately from Defi- (cid:3) nition 2.1. Details are left for the reader. Note that the condition (3.3) is weaker than the corresponding con- dition in [5, Theorem 3.1], so by [5, Proposition 3.2] one can choose elements from Gelfand-Shilov spaces as window functions (both in Roumieu and Beurling case). We note that if f ∈ DK τ,σ, τ > 1, σ ≥ 1, then it obviously satisfies the condition i) in Theorem 3.1, i.e. ∂αf (x) . m(x)C ασατ ασ , α ∈ Nd, so that Theorem 3.1 gives the decay properties of the STFT of elements from DK τ,σ. We use this remark to extend Theorem 3.1. Recall the Paley-Wiener type result for f ∈ DK τ,σ describes the decay properties of the Fourier- Laplace transform in the context of the extended Gevrey regularity. The role of compact support in Paley-Wiener type theorems is essential. In the following Corollary we weaken the assumptions from [25] (see also [24, Corollary 3.2]) and allow the global growth condition given by (3.4). Then, instead of cut-off functions, which are usually used in localization procedures, we take a window in M 1,1 v⊗1(Rd)\{0}, and give a Paley-Wiener type result by using the STFT. Corollary 3.1. Let τ > 0, 1 < σ < 2, let v be a submultiplicative weight, m ∈ Mv, and let g ∈ M 1,1 v⊗1(Rd)\{0} such that (3.3) holds for some Cg > 0. Then a smooth function f satisfies (3.4) if and only if Vgf (x, ξ) . m(x) expn−(cid:16)σ − 1 τ σ (cid:17) 1 σ−1 (ln(e + ξ))o, σ−1 (e + ξ) x, ξ ∈ Rd. ln ln 1 σ σ−1 The proof is an immediate consequence of Theorems 2.1 and 3.1, and Remark 2.2. 16 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C We finish this section with a version of Theorem 3.1 and Corollary 3.1 in the context of Beurling type ultradifferentiable functions. The proofs are left as an exercise. Theorem 3.2. Let τ > 0, σ ≥ 1, let v be a submultiplicative weight, m ∈ Mv, and let g ∈ M 1,1 v⊗1(Rd)\{0} such that for some C > 0, v(Rd) ≤ C ασ+1ατ ασ , α ∈ Nd. k∂αgkL1 For a smooth function f the following conditions are equivalent: i) For every h > 0 there exists A > 0 such that k∂αfkL∞(Rd) ≤ m(x)Ahασ ατ ασ , α ∈ Nd; ii) For every h > 0 there exists A > 0 such that (3.5) ξαVgf (x, ξ) ≤ m(x)Ahασ ατ ασ , x, ξ ∈ Rd, α ∈ Nd; iii) For every h > 0 there exists A > 0 such that Vgf (x, ξ) ≤ m(x)Ae−Tτ,σ,h(ξ), x, ξ ∈ Rd. Corollary 3.2. Let τ > 0, 1 < σ < 2, and let g ∈ M 1,1(Rd)\{0} satisfies condition (3.3). Then a smooth function f satisfies (3.5) if and only if for every H > 0 there exists A > 0 such that σ−1 (e + ξ) Vgf (x, ξ) ≤ m(x)A expn−(cid:16) σ − 1 τ σ (cid:17) 1 σ−1 (H ln(e + ξ))o, x, ξ ∈ Rd. W ln σ−1 σ 1 Remark 3.1. A more general versions of Corollaries 3.1 and 3.2 when σ ≥ 2 can be proved by using the asymptotic formulas (2.4) from Theorem 2.1. This will give different necessary and sufficient conditions for f in terms of the decay properties of the STFT. We leave details for the reader. 4. Wave front sets WFτ,σ and STFT In this section we characterize wave front sets related to the classes introduced in Subsection 2.1, by the means of the STFT and extended associated function from Subsection 2.2. We start with the following definition of the wave front set WFτ,σ(u) of a distribution u with respect to the extended Gevrey regularity, see also [22, 23, 25, 24, 32] for details. Definition 4.1. Let U ⊆ Rd be open, τ > 0, σ > 1 or τ > 1 and σ = 1, u ∈ D′(U), and let (x0, ξ0) ∈ Rd × Rd\{0}. Then (x0, ξ0) 6∈ WF{τ,σ}(u) (resp. (x0, ξ0) 6∈ WF(τ,σ)(u)) if and only if there exists a conic neighborhood Γ of ξ0, a compact neighborhood K of x0, and φ ∈ DK (τ,σ) ) such that φ = 1 on some neighborhood of {τ,σ} (resp. φ ∈ DK EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 17 x0, and there exists A, h > 0 (for every h > 0 there exists A > 0 such that) cφu(ξ) ≤ A hN σ N τ N σ ξN , N ∈ N , ξ ∈ Γ . τ,σ, see [25]. By using the Paley-Wiener theorem for DK τ,σ it can be proved that Definition 4.1 does not depend on the choice of the cut-off function φ ∈ DK Note that when τ > 1 and σ = 1 we have WF{τ,1}(u) = WFτ (u), where WFτ (u) denotes Gevrey wave front set, cf. [27]. We refer to [22] for a relation between WFτ,σ(u) from Definition 4.1 and classical, analytic and Gevrey wave front sets. By using the ideas presented in [19] we resolve WFτ,σ(u) of a distri- bution u via decay estimates of its STFT as follows. Theorem 4.1. Let u ∈ D′(Rd), τ > 0, σ > 1. The following assertions are equivalent: i) (x0, ξ0) 6∈ WF{τ,σ}(u) (resp. (x0, ξ0) 6∈ WF(τ,σ)(u)) . ii) There exists a conic neighborhood Γ of ξ0, a compact neighbor- hood K of x0 such that for every φ ∈ DK (τ,σ) ) there exists A, h > 0 (resp. for every h > 0 there exists A > 0) such that {τ,σ} (resp. φ ∈ DK cφu(ξ) ≤ A hN σ N τ N σ ξN , N ∈ N, ξ ∈ Γ ; (4.1) iii) There exists a conic neighborhood Γ of ξ0, a compact neigh- (resp. φ ∈ for every h > 0 there borhood K of x0 such that for every φ ∈ DK−{x0} DK−{x0} exists A > 0) such that ) there exists A, h > 0 (resp. {τ,σ} (τ,σ) Vφu(x, ξ) ≤ Ae−Tτ,σ,h(ξ), x ∈ K, ξ ∈ Γ, (4.2) where K − {x0} = {y ∈ Rd y + x0 ∈ K}. Proof. We give the proof for the Roumieu case and leave the Beurling case to the reader. The equivalence i) ⇔ ii) is proved in Theorem 4.2. in [25]. ii) ⇒ iii) Without loss of generality we may assume that there exists a conic neighborhood Γ of ξ0, compact neighborhood K1 = Br(x0), r > 0, such that for every φ ∈ DK1 DK−{x0} and x ∈ K, then Txφ(t) is a function in DK1 τ,σ. Set K = Br/2(x0) and note that if φ(t) is an arbitrary function τ,σ (4.1) holds. τ,σ 18 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C Using the definition of STFT and (4.1) we have that Vφu(x, ξ) = F (uTxφ) ≤ A inf N ∈N = Ae−Tτ,σ,1/h(ξ), hN σ N τ N σ ξN x ∈ K, ξ ∈ Γ, for some constant A > 0, and iii) follows. iii) ⇒ i) Since u ∈ D′(Rd), we may choose the window function φ ∈ Dτ,σ(Rd) in iii) to be centered near any point in Rd. Let φ be centered near 0, then clearly ψ = Tx0φ is centered near x0 and (4.2) implies cψu(ξ) = Vφu(x0, ξ) . e−Tτ,σ,h(ξ) . inf for some h > 0 and the proof is finished. N ∈N (1/h)N σN τ N σ ξN , ξ ∈ Γ, (cid:3) Next we discuss local extended Gevrey regularity via the STFT. To that end we introduce the singular support as follows (cf. [31]). Definition 4.2. Let there be given x0 ∈ Rd, u ∈ D′(U), τ > 0 and σ > 1. Then x0 6∈ singsuppτ,σ(u) if and only if there exists open neighborhood Ω ⊂ U of x0 such that u ∈ Eτ,σ(Ω). The local regularity is related to the wave front set as follows. Proposition 4.1. Let τ > 0 and σ > 1, u ∈ D′(U). Let π1 : U × Rd\{0} → U be the standard projection given by π1(x, ξ) = x. Then singsuppτ,σ(u) = π1(WFτ,σ(u)) . We refer to [31] for the proof, see also [22, Theorem 3.1] and [10, Proposition 11.1.1]. Theorem 4.2. Let there be given x0 ∈ Rd, u ∈ D′(U), τ > 0 and σ > 1. Then x0 6∈ singsuppτ,σ(u) if and only if there exists a compact neighborhood K of x0 such that for every φ ∈ DK−{x0} (resp. φ ∈ DK−{x0} for every h > 0 there exists A > 0) such that ) there exists A, h > 0 (resp. {τ,σ} (τ,σ) Vφu(x, ξ) ≤ Ae−Tτ,σ,h(ξ), x ∈ K, ξ ∈ Rd\{0}, (4.3) where K − {x0} = {y ∈ Rd y + x0 ∈ K}. Proof. We give the proof for the Roumieu case only. If x0 6∈ singsupp{τ,σ}(u) then by Proposition 4.1 it follows that (x0, ξ) 6∈ WF{τ,σ}(u) for any ξ ∈ Rd\{0}, so that (4.3) follows from Theorem 4.1 iii). Now assume that (4.3) holds, then it holds for any cone Γ. By Theorem 4.1 we conclude that (x0, ξ) 6∈ WF{τ,σ}(u) for any ξ ∈ Rd\{0}. Now Proposition 4.1 implies that x0 6∈ singsupp{τ,σ}(u), and the proof is completed. (cid:3) EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 19 Acknowledgement This work is supported by MPNTR through Project 174024. References [1] M. Cicognani, D. Lorenz, Strictly hyperbolic equations with coefficients low- regular win time and smooth in space, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl., 9 (2018), 643 -- 675. [2] J. Chung, S.-Y., Chung, D., Kim, A characterization for Fourier hyperfunctions, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 30 (1994), 203 -- 208 [3] E. Cordero, S., Pilipovi´c, L., Rodino, N., Teofanov, Localization operators and exponential weights for modulation spaces, Mediterranean Journal of Mathe- matics 2 (2005) , 381 -- 394 [4] E. Cordero, S., Pilipovi´c, L., Rodino, N., Teofanov, Quasianalytic Gelfand- Shilov spaces with application to localization operators, Rocky Mountain Jour- nal of Mathematics, 40 (2010), 1123-1147 [5] E. Cordero, F. Nicola, L. Rodino, Gabor representations of evolution operators, Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 367 (2015), 7639-7663. [6] R.M. Corless, G.H. Gonnet, D.E.G. Hare, D.J. Jeffrey, D.E. Knuth, On the Lambert W function, Adv. Comput. Math., 5 (1996), 329 -- 359. [7] H. G., Feichtinger, Modulation spaces on locally compact abelian groups, Tech- nical Report, University Vienna, 1983. and also in M. Krishna, R. Radha, S. Thangavelu (eds.), Wavelets and Their Applications, Allied Publishers, 99 -- 140 (2003) [8] H. G.,Feichtinger, K. Grochenig, Banach spaces related to integrable group representations and their atomic decompositions I, J. Funct. Anal., 86 (1989), 307 -- 340 [9] H. G.,Feichtinger, K. Grochenig, Banach spaces related to integrable group rep- resentations and their atomic decompositions II. Monatsh. f. Math. 108 (1989), 129 -- 148 [10] G. Friedlander, M. Joshi, The Theory of Distributions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998. [11] I.M. Gelfand, G.E. Shilov, Generalized Functions II, Academic Press, New York, 1968. [12] K. Grochenig, Foundations of Time-frequency analysis, Birkhauser, Boston, 2001. [13] K. Grochenig, Weight functions in time-frequency analysis, in: L. Rodino, B.-W., Schulze, , M. W. Wong (eds.) Pseudodifferential Operators: Partial Differential Equations and Time-Frequency Analysis, Fields Institute Comm., 52 (2007), 343 -- 366 [14] K. Grochenig, G., Zimmermann, Hardy's theorem and the short-time Fourier transform of Schwartz functions, J. London Math. Soc., 63 (2001), 205 -- 214 [15] A. Hoorfar, M. Hassani, Inequalities on the Lambert W function and hyper- power function, J. Inequalities in Pure and Applied Math., 9 (2008), 5pp. [16] L. Hormander, The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential Operators. Vol. I: Distribution Theory and Fourier Analysis, Springer-Verlag, 1983. 20 NENAD TEOFANOV, FILIP TOMI ´C [17] H. Komatsu, Ultradistributions, I: Structure theorems and a characterization. J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo, Sect. IA Math., 20 (1973), 25 -- 105. [18] F. Nicola, L. Rodino, Global Pseudo-differential calculus on Euclidean spaces, Pseudo-Differential Operators. Theory and Applications 4, Birkhauser Verlag, 2010. [19] S. Pilipovi´c, B. Prangoski, On the characterizations of wave front sets via short-time Fourier transform, preprint (arXiv:1801.05999). [20] S. Pilipovi´c, N., Teofanov, Wilson bases and ultra-modulation spaces, Math. Nachr., 242 (2002), 179 -- 196 [21] S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, and F. Tomi´c, On a class of ultradifferentiable func- tions, Novi Sad Journal of Mathematics, 45 (2015), 125 -- 142. [22] S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, F. Tomi´c, Beyond Gevrey regularity, J. Pseudo- Differ. Oper. Appl., 7 (2016), 113 -- 140. [23] S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, and F. Tomi´c, Superposition and propagation of singularities for extended Gevrey regularity, Filomat, 32 (2018), 2763 -- 2782. [24] S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, and F. Tomi´c, Regularities for a new class of spaces between distributions and ultradistributions, Sarajevo Journal of Mathematics, 14 (2) (2018), 251264. [25] S. Pilipovi´c, N. Teofanov, and F. Tomi´c, A Paley-Wiener theorem in extended Gevrey regularity, submitted (arXiv:1901.00698). [26] A. Rainer, G. Schindl, Composition in ultradifferentiable classes, Studia Math, 224 (2) (2014), 97 -- 131. [27] L. Rodino, Linear Partial Differential Operators in Gevrey Spaces, World Sci- entific, 1993. [28] M. A., Shubin, Pseudodifferential Operators and Spectral Theory, Springer- Verlag, Berlin, second edition (2001) [29] N. Teofanov, Modulation spaces, Gelfand-Shilov spaces and pseudodifferential operators, Sampl. Theory Signal Image Process, 5 (2006), 225 -- 242 [30] N. Teofanov, Gelfand-Shilov spaces and localization operators, Funct. Anal. Approx. Comput. 7 (2015), 135-158 [31] N. Teofanov, F. Tomi´c, Inverse closedness and singular support in extended Gevrey regularity, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl., 8 (3) (2017), 411 -- 421. [32] N. Teofanov, F. Tomi´c, Ultradifferentiable functions of class M τ,σ and microlo- cal regularity, in: Oberguggenberger M., Toft J., Vindas J., Wahlberg P. (eds) Generalized Functions and Fourier Analysis. Operator Theory: Advances and Applications, vol 260. Birkhuser, Cham (2017), 193 -- 213. p [33] J. Toft, The Bargmann transform on modulation and Gelfand-Shilov spaces, with applications to Toeplitz and pseudo-differential operators, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl., 3 (2012), 145-227 [34] J. Toft, Images of function and distribution spaces under the Bargmann trans- form, J. Pseudo-Differ. Oper. Appl. 8 (2017), 83 -- 139 [35] F. Tomi´c, A microlocal property of PDOs in E(τ,σ)(U ), in The Second Con- ference on Mathematics in Engineering: Theory and Applications, Novi Sad, (2017), 7 -- 12. EXTENDED GEVREY REGULARITY ... 21 Nenad Teofanov, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, De- partment of Mathematics and Informatics, Trg Dositeja Obradovi´ca 4, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail address: [email protected] Filip Tomi´c, University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Department of Fundamental Sciences, Trg Dositeja Obradovi´ca 6, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia E-mail address: [email protected]
1703.04773	2	1703	2017-07-28T17:36:54	Hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on $H(\mathbb C)$	[ "math.FA" ]	It is known that homogeneous polynomials on Banach spaces cannot be hypercyclic, but there are examples of hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on some non-normable Fr\'echet spaces. We show the existence of hypercyclic polynomials on $H(\mathbb C)$, by exhibiting a concrete polynomial which is also the first example of a frequently hypercyclic homogeneous polynomial on any $F$-space. We prove that the homogeneous polynomial on $ H(\mathbb C)$ defined as the product of a translation operator and the evaluation at 0 is mixing, frequently hypercyclic and chaotic. We prove, in contrast, that some natural related polynomials fail to be hypercyclic.	math.FA	math	HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO Abstract. It is known that homogeneous polynomials on Banach spaces cannot be hypercyclic, but there are examples of hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on some non-normable Fr´echet spaces. We show the existence of hypercyclic polynomials on H(C), by exhibiting a concrete polynomial which is also the first example of a frequently hypercyclic homogeneous polynomial on any F -space. We prove that the homogeneous polynomial on H(C) defined as the product of a translation operator and the evaluation at 0 is mixing, frequently hypercyclic and chaotic. We prove, in contrast, that some natural related polynomials fail to be hypercyclic. 1. Introduction Let X be an F -space. A function T : X → X is said to be hypercyclic if there exists x ∈ X such that its orbit, OrbT (x) := {T n(x) : n ∈ N}, is dense in X. In this case, x is called a hypercyclic vector. The space H(C) of entire functions, with the compact open topology, was of crucial importance since the beginnings of the theory of hypercyclic linear operators. Indeed, the first example of a hypercyclic operator was found by Birkhoff in [11]. There, he showed that there exists an entire function g ∈ H(C) whose translations by natural numbers approximate uniformly on compact sets any other entire function, i.e. the translation operator τ1f (z) = f (z +1) acting on the space of entire functions H(C) is hypercyclic. Later, MacLane [19] exhibited the second example of a hypercyclic operator, also on H(C), proving that the differentiation operator Df (z) = f′(z) is also hypercyclic. At the beginning of the 1990 decade, the theory of hypercyclic operators began to have a great development. An article that inspired much of the subsequent work was the seminal paper of Godefroy and Shapiro [14], where the authors proved (among other things) an important generalization of the results of Birkhoff and MacLane. More recently, the concept of frequently hypercyclic operator was introduced in [4], and shortly after, the operators considered by Birkhoff, MacLane, Godefroy and Shapiro were shown to be also frequently hypercyclic [5, 12]. For a systematic treatment of hypercyclic operators and related topics see the recent books [16, 6] and the references therein. As a natural extension of the linear theory, one may study orbits of (non-linear) polynomial operators on F -spaces. The first results were obtained by Bernardes in [8], in the context of homogeneous poly- nomials acting on Banach spaces. Maybe surprisingly, he showed that no homogeneous polynomial, of 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47H60 37F10, 47A16, 30D20, 30K99 . Key words and phrases. frequently hypercyclic operators, homogeneous polynomials, entire functions, universal functions. Partially supported by ANPCyT PICT 2015-2224, UBACyT 20020130200052BA and CONICET. 1 2 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO degree ≥ 2, acting on a Banach space can be hypercyclic. In contrast, if the F -space is not normable, it may support hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials. The first to realize this fact was Peris [23, 24]. As it is natural, the space where he sought a homogeneous hypercyclic polynomial was H(C). Unfortu- nately, the example he gave was not well defined. However, he was able to construct another example, this time on the space CN, the Fr´echet space of all complex sequences. He showed that the polynomial (an) 7→ (a2 n+1) is not only hypercyclic but also chaotic on CN. After the example of Peris, some other hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials were presented, on some Kothe echelon spaces (including the space H(D), see [21]) and on some spaces of differentiable functions on the real line [3]. But there are, up to our knowledge, no examples of hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on H(C). There are also no examples of frequently hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on any F -space. Given the key role of H(C) in the theory of linear dynamics, we believe it is desirable to exhibit examples of hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials on H(C). There are also some other articles investigating the dynamics of non-homogeneous polynomials ([7, 9, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25]) and of multilinear mappings ([10, 15]) on infinite dimensional spaces. For example, in the recent paper [9], the existence of hypercyclic (non-homogeneous) polynomials of arbitrary positive degree is shown on any infinite dimensional Fr´echet space. In this note we show that the 2-homogeneous polynomial P (f ) = f (0) · τ1f defined on H(C) is mixing, chaotic and frequently hypercyclic. In contrast, we prove that the polynomial P (f ) = f (0) · f′ is not hypercyclic on H(C). 2. A hypercyclic polynomial on H(C) In this section we prove Theorem 2.1, our main result, which states that there is a very natural hypercyclic homogeneous polynomial on H(C). Let us first recall some definitions. If T is a mapping acting on a topological space X, T is said to be transitive if for each nonempty open sets U, V ⊂ X there exists n ∈ N such that T n(U ) ∩ V 6= ∅. If there exists n0 such that T n(U ) ∩ V 6= ∅ for every n ≥ n0, the mapping is said to be mixing. Clearly a mixing map is transitive and by Birkhoff's Transitivity Theorem, if the map is continuous and the underlying space is a complete separable metric space without isolated points, then the map is transitive if and only if it is hypercyclic. A set A ⊆ N is said to have positive lower density if lim inf n #{x ∈ A : 0 ≤ x ≤ n} n > 0, where # denotes the cardinality of the set. We say that a map T is frequently hypercyclic if there exists some x ∈ X such that for every nonempty open set U , the set {n ∈ N : T n(x) ∈ U } has positive lower density. Finally T is said to be chaotic if it is hypercyclic and has a dense set of periodic vectors. HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 3 Let X be an F -space. A mapping P : X → X is said to be a d-homogeneous polynomial, P ∈ P(dX), if P is the restriction to the diagonal of some d-multilinear map L ∈ L(dX; X), that is, d P (x) = L( x, ..., x). z } { We will be dealing with homogeneous polynomials acting on the space H(C) of entire functions, which endowed with the compact open topology is a Fr´echet space. The seminorms kf kK := sup z∈K f (z), where K is a compact set, define the topology in H(C). Thus, the sets Uǫ,f,R = {h ∈ H(C) : kh − f kB(0,R) < ǫ}, with ǫ, R > 0 form a basis of open neighborhoods of f ∈ H(C). Theorem 2.1. The polynomial P ∈ P(2H(C)) defined by P (f )(z) = f (0) · f (z + 1) is mixing, chaotic and frequently hypercyclic. Observe that P n(f )(z) = cn(f )f (z + n) where (1) cn(f ) = f (0)2n−1 · f (1)2n−2 · . . . · f (n − 1). Proof that P is mixing. Let U and V be open sets. We can suppose that U = Uǫ,f,R and V = Uǫ,g,R. Also we may suppose that R /∈ N and that f and g do not have zeros in Z. By Runge's Theorem we can find, for n large enough, a polynomial p such that p ∈ U and p(·+n) ∈ V . We assert that a more careful application of Runge's Theorem allows us to obtain a polynomial p that also satisfies cn(p) ∼ 1. Let n0 ∈ N such that n0 > 2R + 2, and fix n ≥ n0. This implies that B(0, R) ∩ B(n, R) = ∅ and that we can define open balls B1, B2 ⊆ C such that {B(0, R), B1, B2, B(n, R)} are pairwise disjoint and such that ⌊R⌋ + 1 ∈ B1, and ⌊R⌋ + 2, . . . , n − ⌊R⌋ − 1 ∈ B2, where ⌊R⌋ denotes the integer part of R. See Fig. 1. Define g(z) = g(z − n) and α any 2n−⌊R⌋−2th-root of the number f (0)2n−1 · . . . · f (⌊R⌋)2n−⌊R⌋−1 · 12n−⌊R⌋−3 · . . . · 12⌊R⌋ · g(n − ⌊R⌋)2⌊R⌋−1 · . . . · g(n − 1). 4 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO 0 R ⌊R⌋ + 1 ⌊R⌋ + 2 n − ⌊R⌋ − 1 n − R n B1 B(0, R) B(n, R) B2 Figure 1. The open sets B(0, R), B1, B2 and B(n, R). Also consider the perturbed open sets in H(C), Uk =nh ∈ H(C) : kf − hkB(0,R) < Vk =nh ∈ H(C) : kg − hkB(n,R) < z∈B1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) α(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k =(cid:26)h ∈ H(C) : sup k =(cid:26)h ∈ H(C) : sup h(z) − z∈B2 1 h(z) − 1 < W 1 W 2 ǫ ǫ ko , ko , k(cid:27) and k(cid:27) . 1 1 < By Runge's Theorem we can find, for each k, a polynomial pk in Uk ∩ W 1 k ∩ W 2 k ∩ Vk. Observe that for j ∈ N, we have pk(j) → f (j) if j ≤ ⌊R⌋; 1 α 1 if j = ⌊R⌋ + 1; if ⌊R⌋ + 1 < j ≤ n − ⌊R⌋ − 1; g(j) if n − ⌊R⌋ − 1 < j ≤ n − 1,   as k → ∞. Also, by definition of α, cn(pk) → 1 as k → ∞. Thus, for large k we have kcn(pk)pk − gkB(n,R) ≤ ǫ 2 + cn(pk) − 1kpkkB(n,R) ≤ ǫ 2 + cn(pk) − 1(cid:16) ǫ 2 + kgkB(n,R)(cid:17) < ǫ. Therefore, we can find a polynomial pk with kf − pkkB(0,R) < ǫ and kg − P n(pk)kB(0,R) = kg − cn(pk)pkkB(n,R) < ǫ. This proves that P is mixing. Proof that P is chaotic. Observe that a periodic vector for P is a quasiperiodic function, that is, there exist α ∈ C and n ∈ N such that f (z + n) = αf (z). If this happens, then the homogeneity of P HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 5 forces (2) 2n−1 cn(f )α(cid:19) 1 (cid:18) 1 f to be an n-periodic vector for P . Note also that if f is a periodic vector for P , then λf is not necessarily a periodic vector for P . show that the set of periodic functions satisfying that (cid:16) 1 It is known that the set of periodic functions is dense in H(C). To prove that P is chaotic we will 2n−1 ∼ 1 is also dense in H(C). So, it will be useful to have a good characterization of the periodic functions. Define an infinite segment L, beginning at zero, so that L ∩ T is not a root of the unity and θ = arg(L) 4 , 3 4 ), and define z maps any band Ω = C − L (so that a branch of the logarithm may be defined on Ω). Then, since e cn(f )(cid:17) 1 ∈ ( 1 2π 2πi n (n(θ + k), n(1 + θ + k)) × iR to Ω, we have the following. Lemma 2.2. If an entire function f is n-periodic then there exist g holomorphic on Ω such that for all z belonging to any band of the form (n(θ + k), n(1 + θ + k)) × iR. Reciprocally, if f (z) = g(cid:16)e for all z ∈ C, then f is n-periodic. 2πi n z(cid:17) f (z) = g(e 2πi n z) We now begin with our proof of the chaoticity of P . Let U = {h ∈ H(C) : kh − gkB(0,R) < ǫ} be a nonempty open set of H(C) with R 6∈ N. Our goal is −1 2n−1 f ∈ U . By (2), this implies to find, for some n ∈ N, an n-periodic function f ∈ U so that also cn(f ) that cn(f ) −1 2n−1 f is a periodic vector for P and therefore, the set of periodic vectors is dense in H(C). Take n0 ∈ N so that n0 > 4R. Since the periodic functions with period greater than n0 are dense in H(C) [2, Sublemma 7] , there exists, for some n > n0, an n-periodic function f with kf − gkB(0,R) < ǫ 2 . We may also suppose that f (j) 6= 0 for every j ∈ Z. Now take k ∈ Z such that B(0, R) is contained in the band (θ + k, n + θ + k) × iR. Thus, by the previous Lemma, f (z) = h(e 2πiz n ) for every z ∈ B(0, R) for an appropriate holomorphic function h on Ω. Instead of applying Runge's Theorem to the function f we will apply it to h. The function e n maps N0 to Gn, the n-th roots of the unity, which we will denote ω0, . . . , ωn−1. Thus, h(ωj) 6= 0 for every ωj ∈ Gn and 2πiz P n(h ◦ e 2πiz n ) = cn(h) · h ◦ e 2πiz n , 2πiz n ). Consider B1 = {e . . . h(ωn−1) = cn(h ◦ e where cn(h) := h(ω0)2n−1 that ω0, ω1, . . . , ω⌊R⌋, and ωn−⌊R⌋, . . . ωn−1 are all in B while ω⌊R⌋+1, . . . , ωn−⌊R⌋−1 are in (B1 ). Also, 4 ), B1 ⊆ Ω and h is holomorphic on B1. Runge's Theorem allows us to find h since n > 4R and θ ∈ ( 1 such that h is close to h on B1 and at the same time cn(h) is close to 1. Indeed, choose B2 and B3 open sets so that ω⌊R⌋+1 ∈ B2, ω⌊R⌋+2, . . . , ωn−⌊R⌋−1 are in B3 and B1, B2, B3 are pairwise disjoint. See Fig. 2. : z ∈ B(0, R)} and observe 4 , 3 c 2πiz n 6 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO B2 ω⌊R⌋+2 ω⌊R⌋+1 ω⌊R⌋ B3 ω0 B1 ω−⌊R⌋ ω−⌊R⌋−1 Lθ Figure 2. Shape and location of the sets B1, B2, B3, Lθ and Gn. Now define U l 1, U l 2, U l 3 open sets in H(C) as U l U l U l 1 =ng ∈ H(C) : kg − hkB1 < z∈B2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 =(cid:26)g ∈ H(C) : sup 3 =(cid:26)g ∈ H(C) : sup g(z) − z∈B3 ǫ 1 lo , α(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < g(z) − 1 < ǫ l(cid:27) , l(cid:27) ; ǫ where α is any 2n−⌊R⌋−2 th-root of the number h(ω0)2n−1 · . . . · h(ω⌊R⌋)2n−⌊R⌋−1 · 12n−⌊R⌋−3 · . . . · 12⌊R⌋ · h(ωn−⌊R⌋)2⌊R⌋−1 · . . . · h(ωn). By Runge's Theorem we can find, for every l, a polynomial hl ∈ U l 1 ∩ U l 2 ∩ U l 3. By the choice of hl and α, cn(hl) → 1 and khl − hkB1 → 0 as l tends to infinity. Thus, kcn(hl ◦ e 2πiz n ) −1 2n−1 hl ◦ e 2πiz n − f kB(0,R) = kcn(hl) −1 2n−1 hl ◦ e 2πiz n − h ◦ e 2πiz n kB(0,R) → 0. Therefore, for large enough l, cn(hl ◦ e n-periodic and by (2) cn(hl ◦ e n ) −1 2n−1 hl ◦ e n ) 2πiz 2πiz n is a periodic vector for P . 2πiz −1 2n−1 hl ◦ e 2πiz n ∈ U . Finally by Lemma 2.2, hl ◦ e 2πiz n is Proof that P is frequently hypercyclic. To prove the existence of frequently hypercyclic vectors we will use the following result [13, Lemma 2.5]. Lemma 2.3. There exist pairwise disjoint subsets An,m of N, each having positive lower density such that for any k ∈ An,m, k′ ∈ An′,m′ we have k > m, and k − k′ > m + m′ if k 6= k′. We will now prove that P supports a frequently hypercyclic vector. Our proof follows Example 9.6 in [16] together with a careful use of Runge's theorem. HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 7 Let An,m be the subsets given by the above lemma and consider (kj)j ⊆ N the increasing sequence m is a non natural radius. It follows from the above lemma that the Bj are pairwise disjoint. Let (pn)n be a dense sequence in H(C) such that pn(l) 6= 0 for every l ∈ Z, n ∈ N. formed byS An,m. If kj ∈ An,m we define Bj = B(kj, rj), where rj = m 2 + 1 Applying Runge's Theorem recursively we will find (fj)j ⊆ H(C) such that fj approximates pj(z) := pn(z − kj) on Bj, where n is the only natural number such that kj ∈ An,m, such that ckj (f ) is close to 1, and such that fj(l) 6= 0 for every l ∈ Z. To achieve this, let (ǫj)j ∈ ℓ1 be a sequence of positive numbers such that ǫj < 1 m whenever kj ∈ An,m. We will define inductively a sequence of entire functions (fj)j ⊂ H(C) and a sequence of positive numbers (δj)j satisfying (a) kfj+1 − fjkB(0,kj + 1 kj (b) kckj+1(fj+1)fj+1 − pj+1kBj+1 < δj, (c) δj+1 < min{ǫj+1, ǫj+2/2, γj+1}, ) < δj, (d) δj+1 < γl0 −Pj (e) fj+1 has no zero in Z, l=l0 δl, for l0 = 1, . . . , j and where γj is a positive number that depends on fj as follows. For any g ∈ H(C) and j ∈ N, let Φj : Ckj → C defined as Thus, if we set Φj(cid:0)x0, . . . , xkj−1(cid:1) := x2kj −1 0 · . . . · xkj−1. Kg,j = sup g(z), z<kj+1 we have that Φj is uniformly continuous on the product of the closed discs Π and kj l=1B(0, Kg,j + kǫk1) ⊂ Ckj ckj (g) = Φj(xg,j), ǫj where xg,j is the vector (g(0), . . . , g(kj − 1)). Since Φj is uniformly continuous, given the number 2(Kg,j +kǫk1) > 0 there exists γg,j > 0 such that for every x, y ∈ B(0, Kg,j + kǫk1) × · · · × B(0, Kg,j + kǫk1) we have that (3) if kx − yk∞ < γg,j then Φj(x) − Φj(y) < ǫj 2(Kg,j + kǫk1) . Once fixed the function fj, γj will be defined as γj := γfj ,j. We start setting f1(z) = p1(z) (thus we have defined γ1 := γf1,1). We define δ1 > 0 such that δ1 < min{ǫ1, ǫ2/2, γ1}. Suppose now that f1, . . . fj ∈ H(C) and δ1, . . . , δj ∈ R>0 have been constructed and satisfy (a)-(e). We will now define fj+1 and δj+1. Consider B1 j+1 and B2 j+1 disjoint open sets so that kj +1 ∈ B1 j+1, {kj +2, . . . , kj+1 −⌊rj+1⌋−1} ⊆ B2 j+1, and such that {z < kj + 1 kj }, B1 j+1, B2 j+1, Bj+1 are all disjoint. See Fig. 3. 8 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO B(0, kj + 1 kj ) B1 j+1 B2 j+1 Bj+1 kj + 1 kj kj + 1 kj + 2 kj+1 − ⌊rj+1⌋ − 1 kj+1 − ⌊rj+1⌋ kj+1 Figure 3. The open sets B(0, kj + 1 kj ), B1 j+1, B2 j+1 and Bj+1. Now by Runge's Theorem we can find auxiliary entire functions gl satisfying (i) kgl − fjkB(0,kj + 1 kj (ii) supz∈B1 (iii) supz∈B2 (iv) kgl − pj+1kBj+1 < ǫj (v) gl has no zero in Z; ) < ǫj l , gl(z) − dj < ǫj l , gl(z) − 1 < ǫj l , l and j+1 j+1 where 1/dj is a (2kj+1−kj−2)-th root of the number fj(0)2kj+1 −1 · . . . · fj(kj )2kj+1−kj −1 · 12kj+1−kj −3 · . . . · 12⌊rj+1⌋ · pj+1(kj+1 − ⌊rj+1⌋)2⌊rj+1⌋−1 · . . . · pj+1(kj+1 − 1), so that ckj+1(gl) approaches to 1 as l → ∞. Take now l large enough so that ǫj+1 l < δj and such that kckj+1(gl)gl − pj+1kBj+1 ≤ ckj+1(gl) − 1 · kglkBj+1 + kgl − pj+1kBj+1 ≤ ckj+1(gl) − 1 ·(cid:16)kpj+1kBj+1 + ǫj l (cid:17) + ǫj l < δj. For such an l, we set fj+1 := gl, hence determining as above the number γj+1 > 0. Finally we set δj+1 > 0 such that δj+1 < min(ǫj+1, ǫj+2 2 , γj+1, γj − δj, γj−1 − δj − δj−1, . . . , γ1 − δl) . j Xl=1 This concludes the construction of (fj)j and (δj)j satisfying (a)-(e). Now we define f as Note that (d) implies that f := f1 + (fj+1 − fj). ∞Xj=1 and in particular, the sequence (δj)j ∈ ℓ1. Thus, (a) and the fact that kj + 1 kj entire function and that f = limj→∞ fj. Moreover, δn ≤ γj, Xn≥j ckj (f ) = Φ(xf,j), → ∞ imply that f is an HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 9 where xf,j =(cid:16)fj(0) +Pn≥j(fn+1(0) − fn(0)), . . . , fj(kj − 1) +Pn≥j(fn+1(kj − 1) − fn(kj − 1))(cid:17) . Also, by (a) and (c), both xf,j and xfj ,j belong to B(0, Kfj ,j + kǫk1) × · · · × B(0, Kfj ,j + kǫk1) and since kxf,j − xfj ,jk∞ ≤ sup z<kj−1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xn≥j fn+1(z) − fn(z)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) δn ≤ γj, ≤Xn≥j by (3) we obtain (4) ckj (f ) − ckj (fj) = Φj(xf,j) − Φj(xfj ,j) ≤ ǫj 2(Kj + kǫk1) . Let z ∈ Bj, then using (a),(b),(c),(4), ckj (f )f (z) − pn(z − kj) ≤ ckj (fj)f (z) − pn(z − kj) + (cid:0)ckj (f ) − ckj (fj)(cid:1) f (z) ǫj f (z) ≤ δj−1 + 2(Kj + kǫk1) ≤ ≤ ǫj 2 ǫj 2 + + ǫj 2(Kj + kǫk1) ǫj 2(Kj + kǫk1) Therefore, for kj ∈ An,m, fn+1(z) − fn(z)) (fj(z) +Xn≥j (Kj +Xn≥j ǫn) ≤ ǫj. sup z< m 2 + 1 m P kj f (z) − pn(z) = sup z∈Bj−kj P kj f (z) − pn(z) = sup z∈Bj ckj (f )f (z) − pn(z − kj) ≤ ǫj < 1 m . Note that the sets Un,m :=(h ∈ H(C) : h(z) − pn(z) < 1 m) , sup z< m 2 + 1 m with n, m ∈ N, form a basis of open sets of H(C). Finally since for k ∈ An,m, P k(f ) ∈ Un,m and each An,m has positive lower density, we conclude that f is a frequently hypercyclic vector for P . 3. Examples of non-hypercyclic polynomials on H(C) The purpose of this section is to show that many natural homogeneous polynomials on H(C) fail to be hypercyclic. In view of what we have proved in the previous section, and the fact that translation and differentiation operators on H(C) share many dynamical properties, a natural candidate to be hypercyclic is the homogeneous polynomial P (f ) := f (0) · f′. Another favorable motivation comes from the study of bilinear hypercyclic operators on H(C). B`es and Conejero considered in [10, Section 4] the bilinear operator M (f, g) = f (0)g′, and showed that it is hypercyclic (in the sense defined by the authors). Since M (f, f ) = P (f ) it is reasonable to expect that P is also hypercyclic. Surprisingly, the polynomial fails to be hypercyclic. Proposition 3.1. The homogeneous polynomial P (f ) := f (0)f′(z) is not hypercyclic. 10 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO Proof. The iterates of a function f are of the form P n(f ) = cn(f )f (n), with cn(f ) = f (0)2n−1 f′(0)2n−2 . . . f (n−1)(0). This fact can be easily proven by induction. Also the functions cn(f ) can be constructed recursively as c1(f ) = f (0); cn(f ) = cn−1(f )2f (n−1)(0).   Let us define X ⊆ H(C) as X := {f ∈ H(C) : lim sup cn(f )(n!)2Rn = ∞, for some R > 1}. The proof of the proposition will be divided in three steps: (1) X is P -invariant. (2) 0 is not in the closure of X. (3) If f /∈ X then f is not a hypercyclic vector for P . If we prove (1), (2) and (3) it clearly follows that P is not hypercyclic. Proof of (1). Note that ck+1(f ) = f (0)ck(P (f )). Take f ∈ X and let R > 1 such that lim sup cn(f )(n!)2Rn = ∞. Then P f ∈ X, because lim sup(cid:12)(cid:12)cn(P f )(n!)2(R + 1)n(cid:12)(cid:12) = lim sup(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) cn+1(f )((n + 1)!)2Rn+1 (R + 1)n f (0)(n + 1)2Rn+1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = ∞. Proof of (2). Suppose that (fk)k ⊆ X is a null sequence. Since cn is continuous, there exists (kn)n ⊆ N with cn(fkn) < 1 22n . Taking a subsequence, we may suppose that cn(fn) < 1 22n . We claim that for each n, there exists j ≥ 0 such that f (j+n) n (0) > (j + n)j+n. Indeed, if f (j+n) n (0) ≤ (j + n)j+n for every j ≥ 0 then we show by induction that cj+n(fn) < 1 22 n+ already know it for j = 0. Suppose it is true for some j. Note that for every n, j, we have for every j ≥ 0. We j 2 Thus 2(n+j) log2(n+j) 2(√2−1)2n+ 1+j 2 ≤ 1. cn+j+1(fn) = c2 n+j(fn)f (j+n) n (0) ≤ 1 22n+1+ j 2 f (j+n) n (0) ≤ 1 22n+1+ j 2 2(n+j) log2(n+j) 2(n+j) log2(n+j) 2 2(√2−1)2n+ This implies that fn is not in X, which is a contradiction. 22n+ = + 1 j 2 j 2 ≤ + 1 2 1 22n+ . j+1 2 HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 11 Therefore f (j+n) n (0) > (j + n)j+n for some j ≥ 0. Recall that the seminorms given by kf kk = sup f (j)(0) j kj j! , define the topology of H(C) (see for example [22, Example 27.27] or [23]). For each n, let jn ≥ 0 be such that f (jn+n) n (0) > (jn + n)jn+n. Thus, kfnkk = sup j f (j) n (0) kj j! > f (jn+n) n (0) kjn+n (n + jn)! > 1. This contradicts the fact that fn → 0. Proof of (3). Suppose that cn(f )(n!)2 ≤ L < ∞ for every n ≥ 0. Then, by the Cauchy inequalities, we have for some M, r > 0, δ0(P n+1f ) = cn+1(f )f (n+1)(0) ≤ L (n!)2 M (n + 1)! rn+1 → 0. Therefore f is not a hypercyclic vector. (cid:3) Aron and Miralles [3] showed that the polynomial P ∈ P(2C k(R)) defined as P (f )(z) = f (z + 1)2 is hypercyclic. However, if we consider the analogous map, but in H(C), the polynomial fails resound- ingly to be hypercyclic. The rigidity of the holomorphic functions obstructs our search of hypercyclic homogeneous polynomials. In particular, Hurwitz's Theorem impose several restrictions to this kind of problem. This was already noted in [1], as the authors were looking for algebras of hypercyclic vectors. Proposition 3.2. Let a, b ∈ C and let P ∈ P(2H(C)) be the polynomial defined by If f is an accumulation point of an orbit of P then either f is identically zero or f (z) 6= 0 for every P (g)(z) = g(z + a)g(z + b). z ∈ C. In particular, P is not hypercyclic. Proof. Note that if g ∈ H(C), then (5) P k(g)(z) = k Yj=0 g(z + ja + (k − j)b)(k j). Let f ∈ H(C) and suppose that f has a zero of order m ≥ 1 at z0. If P kl(g) converges uniformly to f on B(z0, 2(a + b)), by Hurwitz's Theorem, for each sufficiently small δ > 0, there is some l0 such that for l ≥ l0 the number of zeros of P kl(g) in B(z0, δ) is exactly m. Thus for each l ≥ l0 there is some jl ≤ kl such that g(· + jla + (kl − jl)b) has a zero of positive order in B(z0, δ). But this implies, by (5), that P kl(g) must have another zero of order ≥ kl in B(z0 + a − b, δ) (or in B(z0 − a + b, δ) if jl = kl), and therefore f must be identically zero. (cid:3) 12 RODRIGO CARDECCIA, SANTIAGO MURO It was proved in [1] that, in contrast with the translation operator, the differentiation operator does admit an algebra of hypercyclic vectors. However, Hurwitz's Theorem also prevents powers of the differentiation operator to be hypercyclic. Proposition 3.3. Let P ∈ P(2H(C)) be one of the following polynomials (i) P (g)(z) = g′(z)2, (ii) P (g)(z) = g(z)g′(z). Then, P is not hypercyclic. Proof. We only prove (i), the proof of (ii) is analogous. Note that if g′(z0) = 0 then (P (g))′(z0) = 0. Suppose that P nk (g) → z2. Then P nk (g)′ → 2z. By Hurwitz's Theorem, there exists k0 such that for every k ≥ k0, P nk (g)′ has a zero of order 1 in B(0, 1). Thus P n(g)′ has a zero of order at least 1 in B(0, 1) for every n ≥ nk0. Therefore g is not hypercyclic for P . (cid:3) References [1] R. M. Aron, J. A. Conejero, A. Peris, and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda. Powers of hypercyclic functions for some classical hypercyclic operators. Integral Equations and Operator Theory, 58(4):591 -- 596, 2007. [2] R. M. Aron and D. Markose. On universal functions. J. Korean Math. Soc., 41(1):65 -- 76, 2004. Satellite Conference on Infinite Dimensional Function Theory. [3] R. M. Aron and A. Miralles. Chaotic polynomials in spaces of continuous and differentiable functions. Glasg. Math. J., 50(2):319 -- 323, 2008. [4] F. Bayart and S. Grivaux. Hypercyclicity: the role of the unimodular point spectrum. (Hypercyclicit´e : Le role du spectre ponctuel unimodulaire.). C. R., Math., Acad. Sci. Paris, 338(9):703 -- 708, 2004. [5] F. Bayart and S. Grivaux. Frequently hypercyclic operators. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 358(11):5083 -- 5117 (electronic), 2006. [6] F. Bayart and E. Matheron. Dynamics of linear operators. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics 179. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. xiv, 337 p., 2009. [7] L. Bernal-Gonz´alez. Backward φ-shifts and universality. Journal of mathematical analysis and applications, 306(1):180 -- 196, 2005. [8] N. C. Bernardes. On orbits of polynomial maps in Banach spaces. Quaest. Math., 21(3-4):311 -- 318, 1998. [9] N. C. Bernardes and A. Peris. On the existence of polynomials with chaotic behaviour. Journal of Function Spaces and Applications, 2013, 2013. [10] J. B`es and J. A. Conejero. An extension of hypercyclicity for N -linear operators. In Abstract and Applied Analysis, volume 2014. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, 2014. [11] G. D. Birkhoff. D´emonstration d'un th´eor`eme ´el´ementaire sur les fonctions enti`eres. C. R Acad. Sci. Paris, 189:473 -- 475, 1929. [12] A. Bonilla and K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann. On a theorem of Godefroy and Shapiro. Integral Equations Operator Theory, 56(2):151 -- 162, 2006. [13] A. Bonilla and K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann. Frequently hypercyclic operators and vectors. Ergodic Theory Dyn. Syst., 27(2):383 -- 404, 2007. [14] G. Godefroy and J. H. Shapiro. Operators with dense, invariant, cyclic vector manifolds. J. Funct. Anal., 98(2):229 -- 269, 1991. HYPERCYCLIC HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS ON H(C). 13 [15] K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann and S. G. Kim. Bihypercyclic bilinear mappings. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Appli- cations, 399(2):701 -- 708, 2013. [16] K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann and A. Peris Manguillot. Linear chaos. Universitext. Berlin: Springer. xii, 386 p. EUR 53.45 , 2011. [17] A. Jung. Mixing, simultaneous universal and disjoint universal backward φ-shifts. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 452(1):246 -- 257, 2017. [18] S. G. Kim, A. Peris, and H. G. Song. Numerically hypercyclic polynomials. Archiv der Mathematik, pages 1 -- 10, 2012. [19] G. R. MacLane. Sequences of derivatives and normal families. J. Analyse Math., 2:72 -- 87, 1952. [20] F. Mart´ınez-Gim´enez and A. Peris. Existence of hypercyclic polynomials on complex fr´echet spaces. Topology and its Applications, 156(18):3007 -- 3010, 2009. [21] F. Mart´ınez-Gim´enez and A. Peris. Chaotic polynomials on sequence and function spaces. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 20(09):2861 -- 2867, 2010. [22] R. Meise and D. Vogt. Introduction to functional analysis. Clarendon Press, 1997. [23] A. Peris. Chaotic polynomials on Fr´echet spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 127(12):3601 -- 3603, 1999. [24] A. Peris. Erratum to: "Chaotic polynomials on Fr´echet spaces". Proc. Am. Math. Soc., 129(12):3759 -- 3760, 2001. [25] A. Peris. Chaotic polynomials on banach spaces. Journal of mathematical analysis and applications, 287(2):487 -- 493, 2003. DEPARTAMENTO DE MATEM ´ATICA - PAB I, FACULTAD DE CS. EXACTAS Y NATURALES, UNIVER- SIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES, (1428) BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA AND CONICET E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected]
1504.01263	2	1504	2015-12-22T19:22:52	Uniqueness of Banach space valued graphons	[ "math.FA", "math.CO", "math.PR" ]	A Banach space valued graphon is a function $W:(\Omega, \mathcal{A},\pi)^2\to\mathcal{Z}$ from a probability space to a Banach space with a separable predual, measurable in a suitable sense, and lying in appropriate $L^p$-spaces. As such we may consider $W(x,y)$ as a two-variable random element of the Banach space. A two-dimensional analogue of moments can be defined with the help of graphs and weak-* evaluations, and a natural question that then arises is whether these generalized moments determine the function $W$ uniquely -- up to measure preserving transformations. The main motivation comes from the theory of multigraph limits, where these graphons arise as the natural limit objects for convergence in a generalized homomorphism sense. Our main result is that this holds true under some Carleman-type condition, but fails in general even with $\mathcal{Z}=\mathbb{R}$, for reasons related to the classical moment-problem. In particular, limits of multigraph sequences are uniquely determined - up to measure preserving transformations - whenever the tails of the edge-distributions stay small enough.	math.FA	math	Uniqueness of Banach space valued graphons MTA Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics, Budapest, Hungary∗ Dávid Kunszenti-Kovács Mathematics Subject Classification: 46G10, and 28B05, 05C60 July 30, 2018 Abstract A Banach space valued graphon is a function W : (Ω, A, π)2 → Z from a probability space to a Banach space with a separable predual, measurable in a suitable sense, and lying in appropriate Lp-spaces. As such we may consider W (x, y) as a two-variable random element of the Banach space. A two-dimensional analogue of moments can be defined with the help of graphs and weak-* evaluations, and a natural question that then arises is whether these generalized moments determine the function W uniquely -- up to measure preserving transformations. The main motivation comes from the theory of multigraph limits, where these graphons arise as the natural limit objects for convergence in a generalized homomorphism sense. Our main result is that this holds true under some Carleman-type condition, but fails in general even with Z = R, for reasons related to the classical moment-problem. In partic- ular, limits of multigraph sequences are uniquely determined - up to measure preserving transformations - whenever the tails of the edge-distributions stay small enough. 1 Introduction Moment determinacy deals with the question of whether a given type of probability measure is uniquely determined by its moments. In the classical settings, the theory is rich and well understood. For instance, if the probability measure lives on a bounded interval (Hausdorff problem), then knowledge of the moments is enough to recover the measure. The same holds true for the vector-valued version, where the measure is supported in a bounded domain of Rk for some finite k. The notion of moments has to be slightly adapted though: to guarantee , where Xj is the j-th uniqueness, we need mixed moments, i.e., the expectations of Qk coordinate of the random vector (1 ≤ j ≤ k), and the αj-s are nonnegative integers. However, if the support is unbounded (cf. Stieltjes and Hamburger problems), there is no general positive or negative answer to moment determinacy, and additional conditions (Car- leman, Krein, etc.) are needed to prove or disprove uniqueness, see e.g. the monograph [1] by j=1 X αj j ∗The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the ◦617747, and European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) / ERC grant agreement n from the MTA Rényi Institute Lendület Limits of Structures Research Group. 1 Akhiezer. In a somewhat more general setting, given a measurable function f : [0, 1] → R, we have an induced probability measure on R. Knowing the moments of this probability measure, we may wish to recover f itself. Clearly this is not possible, but if the measure is moment determinate, we may still recover a great deal of information about f . For instance, we may find a canonical monotone increasing representation f ′ : [0, 1] → R, where f ′ is determined up to a null-set. Also, we may find measure preserving transformations of [0, 1] that transform f and f ′ into a.e. equal functions. A similar result holds for f and f ′ taking its values in Rk, where the monotone reordering is extended to the lexicographic ordering. In a recent paper by Borgs, Chayes and Lovász ([3]), the authors considered a variant of the above Hausdorff question, involving an extra dimension in the domain of f . Namely, they investigated bounded symmetric measurable functions f : [0, 1]2 → R. Such two-variable func- tions also induce a probability measure on [0, 1], but the structure of the domain means that there is an added spatial correlation in the function values. They proved that with an ap- propriate notion of generalized moments that are adapted to the extra spatial dimension, all such functions are uniquely determined by their generalized moments, up to measure preserv- ing transformation of the variables. Note however, that there unfortunately is no canonical reordering of the interval that would yield a "monotone" function in this two-variable setting. The motivation for studying such functions comes from the theory of limits of simple dense graphs, developed by Borgs, Chayes, Lovász, Sós and Vesztergombi [4, 5] and Lovász and Szegedy [12]. Symmetric measurable functions W : [0, 1]2 → [0, 1] represent limit objects for graph sequences under a combinatorial/probabilistic notion of convergence connected to homo- morphism densities. The deep connection between analysis and limit theories of combinatorial objects is further highlighted in the paper [13] by Lovász and Szegedy, where Szemerédi's Regularity Lemma is reformulated and given analytic interpretations. We also note that the question of uniqueness in the limit theory for hypergraphs was treated by Elek and Szegedy in [6], but their methods were of a fundamentally different nature, making use of ultraproducts. Further developments in this field have led to the investigation of limits of multigraphs with no bound on the number of multiple edges between nodes, and more generally to limits of dec- orated graphs. For the multigraph setting, this at a first glance simply corresponds to passing from bounded to unbounded functions. But it turns out that for combinatorial reasons one expects the limit functions to take measures as their values rather than simply a real number. In [9], Lovász, Szegedy and the author developed a general functional analytic framework that allows one to handle the various possible combinatorial interpretations opened up by the multi- graph/decorated graph setting and compare the corresponding convergence notions. The limit objects/graphons this generalized setting leads to are symmetric, weak-* measurable functions W : [0, 1]2 → Z, where Z is a Banach space with separable predual (typically a space of measures that depends on the specific combinatorial interpretation(s) studied). As such they are two-variable random elements of said Banach space. The homomorphism densities that are used to define convergence are integrals of products of weak-* evaluations of the graphon (cf. Definition 10). These will be the two-dimensional generalizations of moments that are adapted to the added structure of the domain of the graphons. For technical reasons, we shall not restrict ourselves to graphons W with domain [0, 1]2, but rather more generally consider domains that are the product of a probability measure space with itself, (Ω, A, π)2. After one defines a class of objects that is rich enough to capture the whole limit theory, an 2 important question still remains, namely whether the class is too big or not. This was partly answered in [9], where it was shown that every graphon is a limit of a sequence of decorated graphs. Our aim is to address the remaining part of the question: how much redundancy is there in the space of graphons? In other words, given two graphons, under what conditions do they represent the same limit? The paper follows the approach of [3], building on and refining its ideas and proofs and combining them with functional analytic methods related to weak-* integrable functions to extend the results to a much more general setting that also includes limits of multigraphs with unbounded edge multiplicities. We show that if the generalized moments of a graphon satisfy a Carleman-type condition, then, similarly to the one-variable case, the graphon is uniquely determined, up to measure preserving transformations of the underlying space (Ω, A, π), see (Theorem 11). In particular, bounded Banach space valued graphons are always moment determinate. However, as for the classical moment problems, one may not forgo some type of bounds on the moments to guarantee uniqueness, and using moment indeterminate measures on N, one can construct graphons the are not isomorphic in any sense, but have identical generalized moments (cf. Section 7). 2 Preliminaries As mentioned in the introduction, we are interested in functions in two variables taking values in a Banach space Z, and a corresponding notion of moments. This involves taking integrals, but there is no unique "natural" integral notion in Banach spaces. The Bochner, or strong integral, corresponds to integrability "in norm", and is defined as a limit of integrals of simple functions. The Pettis integral, or weak integral, uses duality to reduce integrability of a Z-valued function to that of real valued ones through weak evalua- tions. Finally, if Z possesses a predual, weak-* integrability can also be defined in a similar way, as shall be done below. Of the three integral notions, weak-* integrability is the weak- est property (provided it exists), and Bochner integrability the strongest, though some or all properties coincide under certain conditions on the Banach space Z (e.g. separability). In this paper we are interested in the largest class, that of weak-* integrable functions, as these are the ones that arise naturally as limits of multigraph sequences (see [9]). After introducing this class of functions and some of its properties, we shall turn our attention to the combi- natorial structures that allow us to define a notion of moments adapted to the two-variable setting and the added geometric structure that comes with it. 2.1 Weak-* integrable functions Let Φ be a separable Banach space, and let Z denote its dual. The elements of Φ act on Z as bounded linear functionals in the canonical way. Let further Ψ ⊂ Φ be a countable dense subset. Definition 1. Let (Ω, A, π) be a probability space. A function W : (Ω, A, π) → Z is called weak-* measurable if for any ϕ ∈ Φ, the function hϕ, W i is measurable. The weak-* measurable function W is called weak-* scalarly integrable, if for any ϕ ∈ Φ, the 3 function hϕ, W i lies in L1(π). The weak-* measurable function W is called weak-* integrable (or Gelfand integrable), if there exists a mapping µW : A → Z such that for any A ∈ A and ϕ ∈ Φ we have ZA hϕ, W i = ϕ(µ(A)). Remark 2. Note that the standard definition of weak-* measurability only requires that the weak-* evaluations be measurable with respect to the completion of the measure π. In this paper, however, we shall need to differentiate between functions that are measurable with respect to a measure, and those that are measurable only with respect to its completion. Clearly a weak-* integrable function is also weak-* scalarly integrable. The following classi- cal result shows that the converse is also true. We include its proof for the readers' conve- nience. Proposition 3. Each weak-* scalarly integrable function W : (Ω, A, π) → Z is weak-* inte- grable. Proof. For a given A ∈ A, consider the linear map WA : Φ → L1(Ω, A, π) given by WA(ϕ) := 1A · hϕ, W i. Note that this map has a closed graph. Indeed, given any convergent sequence ϕn → ϕ ∈ Φ with WA(ϕn) → f ∈ L1(Ω, A, π), we can find a subsequence such that WA(ϕnk ) converges almost everywhere to f . But pointwise WA(ϕn) converges to WA(ϕ), and so f = WA(ϕ) in L1(Ω, A, π). Thus by the Closed Graph Theorem WA is bounded, and so (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZA hϕ, W i dπ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ZA hϕ, W i dπ = kWA(ϕ)k ≤ kWAk · kϕk, which means that the map ϕ 7→RAhϕ, W i dπ is a continuous linear functional on Φ. Therefore there exists a representing element µW (A) ∈ Z, completing the proof. The next result shows that the existence of a Radon-Nikodym derivative extends to the setting of weak-* integrals, and it is a variant of a theorem due to Rybakov ([16, Thm. 2]). In his paper Rybakov assumes the underlying measure space to be complete, as the proof makes use of lifting on L∞(Ω, A). In our setting, however, the predual Φ is separable, and therefore lifting can be avoided through a different approach, and the assertion holds even when the measure space is not complete. Proposition 4. Let (Ω, A, π) be a probability space, and suppose that the vector-valued mea- sure µ : A → Z is of σ-finite variation, and µ ≪ π. Then there exists a weak-* integrable function W : Ω → Z such that hϕ, µ(A)i =ZA hϕ, W i dπ for every ϕ ∈ Φ and A ∈ A. Proof. First, assume that there exists a c > 0 such that kν(A)k ≤ cµ(A), for every A ∈ A. According to the classical Radon-Nikodym theorem for each ϕ ∈ Φ there exists a function w′ ϕ ∈ L1(Ω, A, π) such that for all A ∈ A we have 4 hϕ, µ(A)i =ZA w′ ϕ dπ Clearly w′ ϕ ≤ ckϕk a.e., for each ϕ separately. In the general case, this is the point where a lifting on L∞(Ω, A, π) would be used to assemble all these derivatives into a single Z-valued function. Instead, now let Ψ′ := linQ Ψ, and consider an enumeration ψ0, ψ1, ψ2, . . . of the countable set Ψ′, where ψ0 = 0. Let us recursively do the following. Let wψ0 ≡ 0 and wψ1 := w′ , and for ψ1 each n ≥ 2, if ψn is not in the linear hull of the previous ψi-s, then let wψn := w′ . If on the ψn i=1 aiwψi. Since i=1 aiψi for some a1, a2, . . . , an−1 ∈ R, then let wψn :=Pn−1 other hand ψn =Pn−1 Radon-Nikodym derivation is linear, this is well-defined, and hψn, µ(A)i =ZA wψn dπ for all A ∈ A and 1 ≤ n. Also, this can be linearly extended to all ψ ∈ linR Ψ =: Ψ′′. Since Ψ′ ⊂ Φ is countable, there exists a set N ∈ A with π(N ) = 0 such that wψ ≤ ckψk for all ω ∈ Ω\N and ψ ∈ Ψ′, and then by construction actually for all ψ ∈ Ψ′′. For each ω ∈ Ω\N define the functional W ′ ω : Ψ′′ → R by W ′ ω(ψ) := wψ(ω). Clearly W ′ Wω ∈ Z to Φ. Now we can define a function W : (Ω, A, π) → Z through ω is linear and bounded by c on Ψ′′, and hence has a unique bounded extension W (ω) :=(cid:26) Wω 0 if ω ∈ Ω\N ; otherwise. Notice that W is automatically A-measurable, and we have kW (ω)k ≤ c for all ω ∈ Ω. Using again that Ψ′′ = Φ, we may thus conclude that hϕ, µ(A)i =ZA hϕ, W i dπ for every ϕ ∈ Φ and A ∈ A. To finish the proof in the general case, we need that Ω can be written as the union of a set of measure zero, and sets An ∈ A (n ∈ N+) such that for each n, we have kµ(A)k ≤ nπ(A) for all An ⊃ A ∈ A. Since µ is of σ-finite variation, the Radon-Nikodym theorem still applies to the measures ϕ ◦ µ, ϕ ∈ Φ. Define the functions wψ (ψ ∈ Ψ′) as above. For n ∈ N+, let on Z, each An is measurable and satisfies kµ(A)k ≤ nπ(A) for all An ⊃ A ∈ A. It thus only remains to be shown that Ω\ ∪n∈N+ An =: S is a set of measure zero. An :=nω ∈ Ω(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)wψ(ω) ≤ nkψk ∀ψ ∈ Ψ′o. Then, since Ψ′ is countable and generates the norm Since µ is of σ-finite variation, we can write S = S∞ the variation of µ on Sk, and q := (cid:4) s i=1 Si with Si ∈ A, and µ being of finite variation on each Si. Suppose that there exists an Sk with d := π(Sk) > 0, and let then s be k,j ∈ A d(cid:5) + 1. For j ≥ 1, define the sets S+ k,j ∈ A and S− through S+ k,j :=nω ∈ Sk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)wψa(ω) < qkψak ∀ 1 ≤ a < j, and wψj (ω) ≥ qkψjko , 5 and S− Then kµ(S± s ≥ k,j)k ≥ qπ(S± k,j :=nω ∈ Sk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)wψa(ω) < qkψak ∀ 1 ≤ a < j, and wψj (ω) ≤ −qkψjko . ∞Xj=1 k,j)j∈N+ form a partition of Sk, hence k,j), and the sets (S± k,j) + π(S− k,j)k ≥ q kµ(S+ k,j)k + ∞Xj=1 ∞Xj=1 π(S+ kµ(S− k,j) = qπ(Sk) = qd > s, leading to a contradiction. Thus S is the countable union of sets of measure zero, and the proof is complete. The following lemma is an easy corollary. Lemma 5. Let (Ω, A, π) be a probability space, and W : (Ω, A, π) → Z a weak-* integrable function with kW k ∈ L1(π). Let further A′ ⊂ A be a sub-σ-algebra. Then there exists a weak-* integrable function W ′ : (Ω, A′, πA′ ) → Z such that hϕ, µ(A′)i =ZA′ hϕ, W i dπ for every ϕ ∈ Φ and A′ ∈ A′. If W ′ everywhere with respect to πA′. If for some 1 ≤ p < ∞ we have kW k ∈ Lp, then also kW ′k ∈ Lp with kW kp ≥ kW ′kp. 2 are two such functions, then W ′ 1 and W ′ 1 = W ′ 2 almost Proof. Let the vector-valued measure µ : A′ → Z be defined through the weak-* inte- gral µ(A′) := RA′ W . Then µ is clearly absolutely continuous with respect to πA′ and has σ-finite variation. Hence by Proposition 4, there exists a weak-* integrable function W ′ : (Ω, A′, πA′ ) → Z satisfying the required equality. If W ′ 2 are two such func- tions, then for each ψ ∈ Ψ we have 1 and W ′ hψ, W ′ 1i = E(hψ, W i(cid:12)(cid:12)A′ ) = hψ, W ′ 2i πA′-almost everywhere. Since Ψ is countable and separates Z, the assertion follows. The inequality between the norms follows from the fact that hϕ, W (·)i ≤ kW (·)k · kϕk, and Radon-Nikodym derivation is order-preserving, hence a contraction on every Lp space. This allows us to extend the notion of conditional expectation to weak-* integrable functions with values in Z. Definition 6. Let (Ω, A, π) be a probability space, and W : (Ω, A, π) → Z a weak-* inte- grable function. Let further A′ ⊂ A be a sub-σ-algebra. Then the πA′ -almost everywhere unique function W ′ given in Lemma 5 is called the conditional expectation of W with respect to the σ-algebra A′, and will be denoted by E(W A′ ). The function W is said to be almost A′-measurable, if W = E(W A′ ) holds π-almost every- where. Definition 7. A symmetric function W : (Ω, A, π)2 → Z is called a Z-graphon if it is weak-* measurable with respect to the completion A × A of the underlying σ-algebra, and the function (x, y) 7→ kW (x, y)kZ lies in L(Ω,A,π) := T1≤p<∞ Lp(cid:16)(Ω, A, π)2(cid:17). Note that this function is 6 measurable with respect to the completed σ-algebra, since Φ is separable, and for a countable dense subset Ψ ⊂ Φ we have kW (x, y)kZ = sup ψ∈Ψ\{0} hf, W (x, y)i kψkΦ . Let the space of Z-graphons on (Ω, A, π)2 be denoted by W(Ω,A,π). We set (i.e., we take the Z-norm of W (x, y) for every x, y ∈ [0, 1], and then take the Lp-norm of the resulting function). kW kp :=(cid:13)(cid:13)kW (., .)kZ(cid:13)(cid:13)p. The following notions are related to how "nice" a graphon and the underlying measure space are. Definition 8. A graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is called strong if it is also measurable with respect to the σ-algebra A × A. A graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is called Lebesguian if the measure space (A, π) is a standard (or Lebesgue) measure space (for a definition of standard probability spaces see e.g. [15, Section 2.2]). The graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is complete if (A, π) is a complete measure space, and the com- pletion of a graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is the complete graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) obtained through completing the measure space (A, π). Two points x1, x2 ∈ Ω are called twins with respect to the graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) if W (x1, y) = W (x2, y) for almost all y. The graphon W is called almost twin-free if there exists a null-set N ⊂ Ω such that no two points in Ω\N are twins. For a ϕ ∈ Φ and a W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) let the function Wϕ : Ω2 → R be defined by Note that we always have Wϕ ∈ L(Ω,A,π). Wϕ (x, y) := ϕ(W (x, y)). The following lemma lets us prove weak-* measurability using only a countable dense subset of Φ. Lemma 9. Let Ψ ⊂ Φ be a countable dense subset, and let W : (Ω, A, π) → Z be a function such that Wψ is measurable for each ψ ∈ Ψ. Then W is weak-* measurable. Proof. Since Ψ is countable and dense in Φ, for any ϕ ∈ Φ there exists a sequence (ψn) ⊂ Ψ that converges to ϕ in norm. But then Wϕ is the pointwise limit of the measurable functions Wψn , and hence itself measurable. 2.2 Decorated graphs and graph densities We now turn our attention to decorated graphs, and the "moments" they induce for Banach space valued graphons. If X is any set, an X -decorated graph is a graph where every edge ij is decorated by an element Xij ∈ X . An X -decorated graph will be denoted by (G, g), where G is a simple graph, and g : E(G) → X . 7 Definition 10. For a Φ-decorated graph F = (F, f ) on k vertices and a Z-graphon W , let Z x1,...,xk∈(Ω,A,π) Yij∈E(F ) t(F, W ) := Wfij (xi, xj)dx1 . . . xk. Note that since kW kZ lies in all Lp spaces for 1 ≤ p < ∞, this integral is always finite. Our aim is to investigate to what degree graph densities determine a Z-graphon. Just as in the real valued case, there is an inherent indeterminacy related to the choice of the underlying measure space. We therefore recall some further definitions from measure theory, and from the extension of these notions to graphons (cf. [3, Section 2]). Given a graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π), we may obtain a graphon with the exact same graph densities by deleting a null-set from Ω. To this type of indeterminacy corresponds an equivalence relation between measure spaces. Let (Ω, A, π) and (Ω′, A′, π′) be two probability spaces. They are called isomorphic mod 0 if there exist null-sets N ⊂ Ω and N ′ ⊂ Ω′ and a bijection µ : Ω\N → Ω′\N ′ such that both µ and µ−1 are measure preserving. The map µ itself is called an isomorphism mod 0. Another way of obtaining a new graphon with the same graph densities is by applying a "pull-back" using a measure preserving map. Let η : (Ω′′, A′′, π′′) → (Ω, A, π) be a measure preserving map. The pull-back W ′′ := (W )η ∈ W(Ω′′,A′′,π′′) of the graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) under η is defined through (W )η(x, y) := W (η(x), η(y)). Then W ′′ again clearly has the same graph densities as W . Let U ∈ W(Ω1,A1,π1) and V ∈ W(Ω2,A2,π2) be two graphons, and suppose that we have a map η : Ω1 → Ω2 that is measure preserving from the completion A1 into A2 and satisfies V η = U almost everywhere. Then we say that η is a weak isomorphism from U to V . These isomorphism notions can be extended to the graphons themselves. We say that the graphons W1 ∈ W(Ω1,A1,π1) and W2 ∈ W(Ω2,A2,π2) are isomorphic mod 0 if there exists an isomorphism mod 0 µ : Ω1 → Ω2 such that (W2)µ = W1 almost everywhere. As a short-hand notation we write W1 ∼= W2. We say that W1 and W2 are weakly isomorphic if there exists a graphon W3 ∈ W(Ω3,A3,π3) and weak isomorphisms from each of W1 and W2 into W3. Note that it is not immediately clear that being weakly isomorphic is an equivalence relation. 2.3 Main result Using the notations and definitions introduced above, the main result of this paper can be formulated as follows. Theorem 11. (i) Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′) be almost twin-free strong Lebesguian graphons. Further assume that the p-norms of W satisfy: for all k ∈ N+. Then ∞Xn=1 kW k−k 2nk = ∞ t(F, W ) = t(F, W ′) 8 for every Ψ-decorated simple graph F if and only if W and W ′ are isomorphic mod 0. (ii) Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′) be general graphons. Further assume that the p-norms of W satisfy: for all k ∈ N+. Then ∞Xn=1 kW k−k 2nk = ∞ t(F, W ) = t(F, W ′) for every Ψ-decorated simple graph F if and only if W and W ′ are weakly isomorphic. Here we note that the family of Carleman-type conditions required can be viewed as requiring that not only the function/random variable kW (·, ·)k, but all of its powers should satisfy the Carleman condition in order to obtain a moment determinacy result. This may seem super- fluous, but the bounds are actually used for determinacy of new random variables induced by partially decorated graphs (see Section 5). These moments do not correspond to expectations of simple powers of the same random variable. In addition, random variables whose moments are bounded from above by (or even equal to) the moments of a power of a moment determi- nate random variable need not be moment determinate themselves, even for the most common distributions we know (see, e.g., the papers [2] by Berg, and [10] by Lin and Huang, or the monograph [17] by Stoyanov). The above theorem is a generalization of [3, Theorem 2.1], since in the case of bounded real valued functions W , the Carleman conditions are automatically satisfied. 3 Graphon constructions To prove the second part of our main theorem, we shall - following Borgs, Chayes and Lovász [3] - be transforming our original graphon by changing the underlying measure space in several steps until we end up with a standard Lebesguian space, thereby reducing the problem to part (i). This will be achieved mainly through manipulating the corresponding σ-algebra and adapting the graphon to these successive changes. We therefore briefly recall the necessary notions from measure theory. A set S of subsets of Ω induces a partition P[S] of Ω through the natural equivalence relation ω1 ∼ ω2 ⇔ [∀S ∈ S : (ω1 ∈ S ∧ ω2 ∈ S) ∨ (ω1 6∈ S ∧ ω2 6∈ S)]. This is the finest partition for which S separates the classes. A graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is said to be separating if A separates Ω, or in other words if W = W/P[A]. A σ-algebra A is said to be countably generated if there is a countable set S ⊂ A such that the generated σ-algebra satisfies σ(S) = A. A set S ⊂ A is said to be a basis of the measure space (Ω, A, π) if σ(S) is dense in A, that is, if for every A1 ∈ A there exists an A2 ∈ σ(S) such that π(A1△A2) = 0. A graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) is said to be countably generated if A itself is. A probability space (Ω′, A′, π′) is said to be a full subspace of the probability space (Ω, A, π) if Ω′ ⊂ Ω has outer measure 1 (it need not be measurable) and (A′, π′) is the restriction of 9 (A, π) to Ω′, i.e., A′ = {A ∩ Ω′A ∈ A} and π′(A ∩ Ω′) = π(A) for all A ∈ A. A measure preserving map µ : (Ω, A, π) → (Ω′, A′, π′) between two probability spaces is called an embedding of (Ω, A, π) into (Ω′, A′π′) if it is an isomorphism between the former and a full subspace of the latter. Given two graphons W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′), the embedding µ is said to be an embedding of W into W ′ if in addition (W ′)µ = W almost everywhere. Let us start with the following Lemma, that allows us to change the σ-algebra we work with to a countably generated one one, without losing measurability. Lemma 12. Let (Ω, A) and (Ω′, A′) be measurable spaces, and let W : Ω × Ω′ → Z be a weak-* measurable function with respect to the σ-algebra (A × A′). Then there exist countably 0 ⊂ A′ such that W is weak-* measurable with respect to generated σ-algebras A0 ⊂ A and A′ (A0 × A′ 0). Proof. Choose a dense countable subset Ψ ⊂ Φ. For each ψ ∈ Ψ we can find countable sets ψ ⊂ A′ such that ψ ◦ W is measurable w.r.t. the generated σ-algebra (cf. Sψ ⊂ A and S ′ [3, Lemma 3.4], boundedness is actually not needed, since we can compose with the arctan function to reduce to the bounded case). Thus taking A0 and A′ 0 to be the sub-σ-algebras generated by (Sψ)ψ∈Ψ and (S ′ ψ)ψ∈Ψ, respectively, Lemma 9 ensures the required measurability of W . Next we shall introduce two further constructions that given a graphon allow us to create a new graphon, preserving some of its essential properties. Remark 13. For ease of notation, using Proposition 4, the integrals we write from here on are to be understood in the weak-* sense rather than the strong/Bochner sense. Lemma 14. Let (Ω, A, π) and (Ω′, A′, π′) be probability spaces, let τ : Ω → Ω′ be a measure preserving map, and let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π). (i) There exists a strong graphon W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′) that satisfies ZA′ Wτ (x′, y′)dπ′(x′)dπ′(y′) =Zτ −1(A′ 1)×τ −1(A′ 2) for all A′ 1, A′ 1×A′ 2 2 ∈ A′. (ii) If τ is an embedding, then (Wτ )τ = W almost everywhere. W (x, y)dπ(x)dπ(y) (1) Proof. First let A′ Then define a measure µ on A′ τ := τ −1(A′) ⊂ A and define fW := E(W A′ τ through τ × A′ τ × A′ τ ). Also let πτ := πA′ τ . µ(A1 × A2) =ZA1×A2 W (x, y)dπ(x)dπ(y) for all A1, A2 ∈ A′ τ . Since kW k lies in L1, we have that µ ≪ π × π. Let µτ be the push- forward of µ. Since ϕ is measure-preserving, µϕ is a Z-valued measure on A′ that is absolutely continuous with respect to π′ × π′. By Lemma 5, there exists a weak-* integrable function Wτ : Ω′ × Ω′ → Z such that for all A′ 1, A′ 2 ∈ A′, µ(A′ 1 × A′ 2) =ZA′ 1×A′ 2 W ′(x, y)dπ′(x)dπ′(y). 10 This W ′ then clearly satisfies equation 1, and since the push-forward µ′ of the symmetric measure µ is itself symmetric, it follows that W ′ is too. By the norm inequality in Lemma 5, we actually have that W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′), completing the proof of part (i). By construction (Wτ )τ = fW = E(W A′ A′ τ . τ × A′ τ ), so part (ii) follows from the definition of Definition 15. The function Wτ defined in 14 is called the push-forward of W under τ . Given a graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and a partition P of Ω, we can use the push-forward con- struction to define the factor graphon W/P of W under P. Consider the surjection µ : ω 7→ [ω] from Ω to Ω/P, where [ω] denotes the partition class of ω. Define the measure space (Ω/P, A/P, π/P) as the push-forward of (Ω, A, π) under µ. Then µ is automatically measure preserving, and we let W/P := Wµ ∈ W(Ω/P,A/P,π/P). Note that push-forwards being a type of conditional expectations, the moments of a graphon are usually not preserved. However, if the underlying measure space is carefully manipulated, this problem can be avoided, as illustrated by the next theorem, which sums up the different steps that will allow us to pass from part (i) to part (ii) of Theorem 11. Theorem 16. Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) be a graphon. (i) One can change the value of W on a set of π × π-measure 0 to get a strong Z1-valued graphon. (ii) Suppose that W is a strong graphon. Then there exists a countably generated σ-algebra A′ ⊂ A such that W is weak-* measurable with respect to (A′ × A′). (iii) The graphon W/P[A] is separating. If W is countably generated, then so is W/P[A]. (iv) Suppose that W is a separating graphon on a probability space with a countable basis. Then the completion of W can be embedded in a Lebesguian graphon. (v) Suppose that W is a strong graphon, and let P be the partition into the twin-classes of W . Then W/P is almost twin-free. If W is Lebesguian, then W/P is Lebesguian as well. Furthermore the projection W → W/P is a weak isomorphism. For part (i), consider the conditional expectation W ′ := E(W A × A ). Since W and the underlying σ-algebra both are symmetric, we may assume that so is W ′. By construction, W ′ is measurable with respect to A × A, so it is enough to show that W = W ′ almost everywhere. (W ′ − W ) = 0 for all A1, A2 ∈ A, and therefore also for all To this end note that RA1×A2 S ∈ A × A we have RS(W ′ − W ) = 0, implying W ′ − W = 0 almost everywhere. Part (ii) is an easy consequence of Lemma 12. For part (iii), note that by identifying elements in the came class of the partition P[A], we obtain a σ-algebra that is isomorphic to A under the natural map. For part (iv), let S be a countable set generating A. Since any separating complete probability space with a countable basis can be embedded into a Lebesgue space (see e.g. [15, Section 2.2]) and S is a countable basis for (A, π), there exists an embedding η : (Ω, A, π) → (Ω′, A′, π′) where (Ω′, A′, π′) is a Lebesgue space. Consider the push-forward W ′ := Wη. By Lemma 14(ii), the mapping η is an embedding of the completion W of W into the Lebesguian graphon W ′. 11 For part (v), we may by part (ii) assume that A is countably generated, since the relation of being twins is the same for any underlying σ-algebra B × B that leaves W weak-measurable (and hence weak- integrable). Let AP denote the sub-σ-algebra of A consisting of the sets that do not separate any pair of twins. Note that by the construction in Lemma 14, we then have that (W/P)τ = E(W AP × AP ) ∈ W(Ω,AP ,π). Thus the projection W → W/P is a weak isomorphism if W = E(W AP × AP ) almost everywhere. Let cW := E(W AP × AP ). Since Ψ ⊂ Φ is countable and dense, hence separates elements in Z, it is sufficient to show that for any A, B ∈ A and ψ ∈ Ψ we have ZA×B Wψ (x, y)dπ(x)dπ(y) =ZA×B cWψ (x, y)dπ(x)dπ(y). This, and the fact that W/P is twin-free, can easily be proven, and we refer to [3, Section 3.3.5] for the details. We now wish to show that W/P is Lebesguian under the assumption that W itself is. By [15, Section 3.2] the measure space (Ω/P, A/P, π/P) is a Lebesgue space if there exists a countable set S ⊂ A that separates points if and only if they are from different partition classes. Let T be a countable set generating A, closed under finite intersections. For each A ∈ A and x ∈ Ω, let µx(A) =ZA W (x, y)dπ(y). Since W is weak-* integrable with respect to A × A, the mapping A 7→ µx(A) is a Z-valued measure for all x ∈ Ω, and x 7→ µx(A) is an A-measurable function on Ω for each A ∈ A. Note that then x, x′ are twins if and only if µx(A) = µx′(A) for all A ∈ A, and since each measure µx(·) is uniquely determined by the values taken on T , x and x′ are twins if and only if µx(T ) = µx′(T ) for all T ∈ T . Let Ψ ⊂ Φ be a countable dense set, and for every ψ ∈ Ψ, T ∈ T and rational number r let Sψ,T,r := {x ∈ Ω : ψ(µx(T )) ≥ r}. These are countably many and clearly do not separate twins. If however x and x′ are not twins, then for some T ∈ T we have µx(T ) 6= µx′(T ). Since Ψ separates Z, we can then find ψ ∈ Ψ and r ∈ Q such that Sψ,T,r separates x and x′. Corollary 17. Every graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) has a weak isomorphism into an almost twin-free strong Lebesguian Z-valued graphon fW . In addition kW kp =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)fW(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)p Proof. First let us change the graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) on a null-set to obtain a strong graphon W1 applying (i) of the previous theorem. Then the identity map on the underlying probability space (Ω, A, π) will be a A−A-measurable weak isomorphism τ1 from W to W1. Now by points (ii)-(iv) the completion of the graphon W1 has an embedding τ2 into a Lebesguian graphon W3, which in turn by point (v) can be projected onto its almost twin-free Lebesguian form fW ∈ W( eΩ, eA,eπ) through a weak isomorphism τ3. Since the composition τ := τ3 ◦ τ2 ◦ τ1 is a A − eA-measurable mapping between (Ω, A, π) and the Lebesgue space (eΩ, eA,eπ), it is indeed a weak isomorphism from W into fW . Concerning the last assertion, note that none of the transformations in the previous theorem actually changed the norm of the graphon. for all 1 ≤ p < ∞. 12 4 Anchored graphons As mentioned in the introduction, two-variables functions on a product measure space Ω × Ω lack a canonical form, or a canonical reordering of the underlying product space. To counter this, Borgs, Chayes and Lovász made in [3] use of countable sequences of random elements of Ω and defined what they called canonical ensembles. In essence this means that instead of having a single well-defined canonical form, one rather has a whole family of functions, together with a probability measure on said family. This pair contains all the relevant information on the original function, and is easier to handle than the original single function. In addition these new functions all live on the same σ-algebra, independently of the measure space of the original graphon, making it possible to compare these random representations. First we shall need a few results that guarantee that with probability 1, the randomness we wish to introduce does not interfere with measurability. Lemma 18. Let (Ω, A, π) and (Ω′, A′, π′) be probability spaces, and let W : Ω × Ω′ → Z be a weak-* measurable function with respect to A × A′ such that kW k ∈ L2(Ω × Ω′). Let further Y1, Y2, . . . be independent random points from Ω′, and A0 ⊆ A the random σ-algebra generated by the functions W (·, Yk). Then with probability 1, W is almost weak-* measurable with respect to A0 × A′. Proof. By Lemma 12, we may assume that both A and A′ are countably generated. Let A1 ⊂ A2 ⊂ . . . and A′ 2 ⊂ . . . be sequences of finite σ-algebras such that σ(∪nAn) = A and σ(∪nA′ n. For each y ∈ S ∈ P ′ n denote the partition of Ω′ into the atoms of A′ n) = A′, and let P ′ n with π′(S) > 0 let 1 ⊂ A′ Un,m(x, y) := 1 mπ′(S) Xj≤m Yj∈S W (x, Yj), whilst Un,m(x, y) := 0 whenever π′(S) = 0. Let Ψ ⊂ Φ be a countable dense subset of the predual of Z. We first wish to prove that for every ψ ∈ Ψ, n ≥ 1, every A ∈ ∪nAn and A′ ∈ A′ with probability 1 that n we have ZA×A′ Uψ n,m dπdπ′ m→∞ −−−−→ZA×A′ Wψ dπdπ′. (2) n is atomic, it is enough to show this for sets A′ = S ∈ P ′ n with π′(S) > 0. For every Since A′ y0 ∈ S we then have ZA Uψ n,m(x, y0) dπ(x) = 1 mπ′(S) Xj≤m Yj∈S ZA Wψ (x, Yj)dπ(x). Since kW k lies in L2 ⊂ L1, the function Wψ Numbers to obtain lies in L1, hence we may apply the Law of Large ZA Uψ n,m(x, y0) dπ(x) m→∞ −−−−→ 1 π′(S)ZA×S Wψ dπdπ′. 13 Since both sides are independent of the choice of y0 ∈ S, we may integrate it out over S to obtain equation (2). We have a countable number of choices for ψ ∈ Ψ, n ∈ N+, A′ ∈ A′ and A ∈ ∪kAk, hence with probability 1 equation (2) holds for all ψ ∈ Ψ, all n ∈ N+, A′ ∈ A′ n and A ∈ ∪kAk. Also, note that whence by AM-QM, kUn,m(x, y)k ≤ kUn,m(x, y)k2 ≤ 1 mπ′(S) Xj≤m Yj ∈S 1 mπ′(S)2 Xj≤m Yj ∈S kW (x, Yj)k, kW (x, Yj)k2. For each y0 ∈ S ∈ P ′ n with π′(S) > 0 we then have ZΩ kUn,m(x, y0)k2 dπ(x) ≤ 1 π′(S)2 1 m Xj≤m Yj∈S ZΩ kW (x, Yj)k2dπ(x). (3) Again inequality (3) is independent of the choice of y0 ∈ S, so we may integrate over it to obtain ZΩ×S kUn,m(x, y0)k2 dπ(x)dπ′(y0) ≤ 1 π′(S) 1 m Xj≤m Yj∈S ZΩ kW (x, Yj)k2dπ(x). Since by assumption kW k lies in L2, we may again apply the Law of Large Numbers to the right hand side to obtain that with probability 1 1 π′(S) 1 m Xj≤m Yj∈S ZΩ kW (x, Yj)k2dπ(x) m→∞ −−−−→ 1 π′(S)ZΩ×S kW k2dπdπ′ < ∞. Since there are finitely many S ∈ P ′ probability 1, the sequence (Un,m)m∈N+ is uniformly bounded in L2-norm for each n ∈ N+. n with π′(S) > 0, summing over all such S yields that with From now on assume that the choice of the Yj is such that equation (2) holds for all ψ ∈ Ψ, all n ∈ N+, A′ ∈ A′ n and A ∈ ∪nAn, and that the sequence (Un,m)m∈N+ is uniformly bounded in L2-norm for each n ∈ N+. For a fixed n, by compactness and since there are countably many elements in Ψ, we may by a diagonal argument choose a subsequence (mk)k∈N+ ⊂ N+ such that for each ψ ∈ Ψ the sequence ( Uψ n, R). Denote the weak limits by Un,ψ. Since by construction each Uψ n-measurable, the same is true for the weak limits Un,ψ. n,mk )k∈N+ converges weakly in L2(A × A′ n,mk is A0 × A′ By equation (2) we have that for each n ≥ 1 and ψ ∈ Ψ, ZA×A′ Un,ψ dπdπ′ = lim k→∞ZA×A′ Uψ n,mk dπdπ′ =ZA×A′ Wψ dπdπ′ = ZA×A′ E( Wψ A × A′ n) dπdπ′ 14 n) lie in L2(A × n, R), and since ∪nAn is dense in A, the above equality is in fact true for all A ∈ A. This n) represent the same element in L2(A × for all A ∈ ∪nAn and A′ ∈ A′ A′ means that the functions Un,ψ and E( Wψ A′ n. But both functions Un,ψ and E( Wψ A × A′ n, R). Since Un,ψ is A0 × A′ n-measurable, this in turn means that for every ψ ∈ Ψ A × A′ E( Wψ A0 × A′ n) = E( Wψ A × A′ n) (4) in L2(A × A′ to E( Wψ for each ψ ∈ Ψ we have that n, R). By Levy's Upward Theorem, however, the left hand side of (4) tends a.e. A × A′). Thus A0 × A′) as n → ∞, whilst the right hand side tends a.e. to E( Wψ E( Wψ A0 × A′) = E( Wψ A × A′) = Wψ in L2(A × A′, R), meaning that Wψ is almost A0 × A′-measurable for all ψ ∈ Ψ. By Lemma 9, and since Ψ is countable, it then follows that W is almost weak-* measurable with respect to A × A′. The following is an immediate consequence of the previous theorem. Corollary 19. Let (Ω, A, π) and (Ω′, A′, π′) be probability spaces, and let W : Ω × Ω′ → Z be a weak-* measurable function with respect to A × A′ with kW k ∈ L2. Let further A0 ⊂ A be a sub-σ-algebra. If W (·, y) is weak-* measurable with respect to A0 for almost all x ∈ Ω, then W is almost weak-* measurable with respect to A0 × A′. Applying the previous corollary twice, we obtain the following result, which is the key element in our randomization. Corollary 20. Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) be a strong graphon, and let X1, X2, . . . be independent ran- dom points from Ω. Let A0 ⊂ A be the random σ-algebra generated by the functions W (·, Xk), k ∈ N+. Then with probability 1, W is almost weak-* measurable with respect to A0 × A0. Proof. The proof of [3, Corollary 4.3] works also in this more general setting, with minor natural modifications. Let now W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) be a strong graphon and α = (α1, α2, . . .) an infinite sequence of points in Ω. Consider the map x 7→ Γα(x) defined by Γα(x) := (( Wψ (x, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ =: R. (5) (x, α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . .) ∈(cid:0)RΨ(cid:1)N+ Since each Wψ (·, αj ) is measurable by assumption, Γα is a measurable map from Ω into R with respect to the standard Borel σ-algebra K on the product space, and thereby defines a push-forward measure κα on K through κα(S) = π(Γ−1 α (S)), (6) for S ∈ K. Denote by L the completion of K with respect to κα, and λα the extension of κα to L. Let further WΓα be the push-forward of W under Γα, and denote by Wα ∈ W(R,L,λα) its completion. 15 Definition 21. The graphon Wα is called the anchored graphon with respect to the anchor sequence α. An anchor sequence α is called regular if W = (WΓα)Γα almost everywhere. Remark 22. Since it is the product of countably many copies of R, R itself is a complete Polish space, hence Wα is always a Lebesguian graphon. Lemma 23. Almost all α ∈ ΩN+ are regular. Proof. Let Aα denote the pullback of the σ-algebra K under the map Γα. Since Γα is mea- surable, we have Aα ⊂ A. Also, by construction Aα is the smallest σ-algebra such that all of the functions Wψ (·, αj) (ψ ∈ Ψ, 1 ≤ j) are measurable. We may thus apply Lemma 18 to obtain that for almost all α, W is almost weak-* measurable with respect to Aα × Aα. But by the construction given in the proof of Lemma 14 it immediately follows that W = (WΓα)Γα a.e.. 5 Densities and coupling of anchored graphons Now that we have introduced random canonical forms for graphons, our aim is to show that on the one hand two weakly isomorphic graphons have essentially the same random canonical form, and on the other hand that this random canonical form is determined by the moment functions. The main helping tool here are densities stemming from so-called partially labeled graphs. These provide the necessary randomness that will act as a bridge between the usual deterministic densities and the random anchored graphons, and allow us to find appropriate couplings between the anchors. We present the necessary notions and properties necessary in the context of decorated graphs, and refer to [11] for futher properties and applications of partial labeling. Let F = (F, f ) be a decorated graph. A partial labeling of F is an injective map from a subset of the vertices of F into the set N+ of positive integers. If the injective map has as image the set {1, 2, . . . , k}, the partially labeled decorated graph is called k-labeled. To simplify notation, the case k = 0 corresponds to unlabeled decorated graphs. Two partially labeled decorated graphs F1 and F2 are isomorphic if there exists a graph isomorphism between F1 and F2 that preserves both the labels and the decorations. The product F1F2 of two partially labeled decorated graphs F1 and F2 is itself a partially labeled decorated graph, defined as follows: take the disjoint union of F1 and F2, then merge the vertices that have identical labels, whilst keeping the labels and decorations as well as any multiple edges that may arise. Next, we define marginals induced by partial labelings. Supose F = (F, f ) is a partially labeled Φ-decorated graph with vertex set V (F ) = {v1, . . . , vk}, where the vertices v1, . . . , vr are labeled by the positive integers ℓ1, . . . , ℓr, and the remaining vertices are unlabeled. Given a graphon W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and an infinite sequence β = (β1, β2, . . .) in Ω, for 1 ≤ j ≤ r set Xj := βℓj , and let Xr+1, . . . , Xk be independent random points of Ω from the distribution π. Then we may define the marginal tβ(F, W ) := E  Yvivj ∈E(F ) Wfvivj (Xi, Xj )  . 16 This marginal only depends on the finitely many elements of β whose index appears as label, so it will be convenient to sometimes omit the tail of β containing no labels. If F1 and F2 are two k-labeled graphs, it can easily be seen that t(F1F2) =ZΩk tx1...xk (F1, W )tx1...xk (F2, W )dπ(x1) . . . dπ(xk). We shall show how anchor sequences can be used to prove almost everywhere equality of appropriate graphons. Having to involve densities of labeled multigraphs is a technical necessity of the approach introduced in [3], as we wish to prove equality of measures through equality of moments, and higher mixed moments in this context naturally correspond to densities of multigraphs rather than those of simple graphs. As we shall later see, this is not going to be a hindrance. Given a countably generated dense subspace Ψ ∈ Φ of decorations, let F ∗ k denote the set of k-labeled Ψ-decorated multigraphs with no edge between labeled vertices, and let F ∗ := ∪n=0F ∗ k . Lemma 24. Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′) be two strong graphons, and let α and β be regular anchor sequences in Ω for W and Ω′ for W ′, respectively. Suppose that for every partially labeled Φ-decorated multigraph F ∈ F ∗, we have tα(F, W ) = tβ(F, W ′). Further suppose that for some countable dense subset Ψ ⊂ Φ the p-norms of W and of its αj-sections satisfy: ∞Xn=1 k Wψ (X, αj )k−1 2n = ∞ and ∞Xn=1 k Wψ k−1 2n = ∞ (7) for all j ∈ N+ and ψ ∈ Ψ. Then the anchored graphons Wα ∈ W(R,L,λα) and W ′ satisfy λα = λ′ β almost everywhere with respect to the common measure. β, and Wα = W ′ β ∈ W(R,L,λ′ β) Proof. Let us first show that λα = λ′ β. Recall that λα is the distribution measure of the (Y, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ (X, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ point with distribution π, whilst λα is the distribution measure of the random variable sequence random variable vector (cid:0)( Wψ (cid:0)( Wψ (X, α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . .(cid:1), where X ∈ Ω is a random (Y, α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . .(cid:1), where Y ∈ Ω′ is a random point with distribution π′. Each of these random variables is real-valued, and we shall first show that their mixed mo- ments are all equal. Let therefore (kn,ψ)n∈N+,ψ∈Ψ be a double-indexed sequence of nonnegative integers, with only finitely many non-zero elements. Let m ∈ N+ be such that kn,ψ = 0 for all n > m, and construct the partially labeled Ψ-decorated multigraph F ∈ F ∗ on m + 1 vertices as follows. First label all but one vertex with the help of the labels 1, . . . , m. Then for each 1 ≤ j ≤ m and ψ ∈ Ψ consider the vertex j and the unlabeled vertex, and add kj,ψ edges decorated by ψ between them. Then by construction E  Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ Wψ (X, αn)knψ  = tα(F, W ). 17 Similarly E  Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ Wψ ′(Y, βn)kn,ψ  = tβ(F, W ′). These two are by assumption equal, so all mixed moments are indeed the same. If these were all bounded variables, it would immediately follow that they are equal, as the mixed moments would uniquely determine their joint distribution. In the unbounded case, however, we need an extra property to guarantee uniqueness. By [8, Cor. 3a], it is enough that the variables pertaining to W each separately satisfy the Carleman condition, i.e., the family of conditions (7). Hence λα = λ′ β. Now we proceed to show that Wα(x, y) = W ′ β(x, y) almost everywhere. To this end we wish to show that the random variables U1 = (X, Y, Wα(X, Y )) and U2 = (X, Y, W ′ β(X, Y )) have the same distribution, where X and Y are independent random points in (R, λα). By definition of the distributions on (R, λα) we can generate X and Y by taking the random independent points X ′, Y ′ from (Ω, π) and letting X := Γα(X ′) and Y := Γα(Y ′). Since α is regular for W , we have with probability 1 that Wα(X, Y ) = W (X ′, Y ′), and hence U1 = (( Wψ ( Wψ W (X ′, Y ′)). (X ′, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ (Y ′, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ (X ′, α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , (Y ′α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , For W ′ we correspondingly take X ′′ and Y ′′ from (Ω′, π′) instead, and obtain with probability 1 that U2 = (( Wψ ( Wψ W ′(X ′′, Y ′′)). ′(X ′′, β1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ ′(Y ′′, β1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ ′(X ′′, β2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , ′(Y ′′β2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , To compare these two vectors, however, we have to replace their last coordinate with a sequence of real-valued variables with the help of the elements of Ψ. Let therefore and bU1 := (( Wψ ( Wψ ( Wψ (X ′, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ (Y ′, α1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ (X ′, Y ′))ψ∈Ψ) (X ′, α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , (Y ′α2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , bU2 := (( Wψ ( Wψ ( Wψ ′(X ′′, β1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ ′(Y ′′, β1))ψ∈Ψ, ( Wψ ′(X ′′, Y ′′))ψ∈Ψ). ′(X ′′, β2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , ′(Y ′′β2))ψ∈Ψ, . . . , Each mixed moment is determined by nonnegative integers (an,ψ)n∈N+,ψ∈Ψ, (bn,ψ)n∈N+,ψ∈Ψ and (cψ)ψ∈Ψ, such that only a finite number of them is non-zero. Assume for instance that 18 an,ψ = bn,ψ = 0 for all n > m for some appropriate integer m. Let us define a partially labeled Ψ-decorated multigraph F ∈ F ∗ on m + 2 vertices as follows. First label all but two vertices with the labels 1, . . . , m, and denote the remaining two by vx and vy. Then for each ψ ∈ Ψ add cψ parallel edges between vx and vy, decorating them with ψ. Finally for each 1 ≤ n ≤ m and ψ ∈ Ψ add an,ψ parallel edges decorated with ψ between vx and the vertex with label n, and bn,ψ parallel edges decorated with ψ between vy and the vertex with label n. Then we have E  Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ = tα(F, W ), Wψ (X ′, αn)an,ψ · Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ Wψ (Y ′, αn)bn,ψ · Yψ∈Ψ Wψ and E  Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ = tβ(F, W ′), Wψ ′(X ′′, βn)an,ψ · Yn∈N+,ψ∈Ψ Wψ ′(Y ′′, βn)bn,ψ · Yψ∈Ψ Wψ (X ′, Y ′)cψ  ′(X ′′, Y ′′)cψ  which are by assumption equal, and using the conditions in (7), we are done. Remark 25. Note that in condition (7), the second part implies the first for almost all sequences α. Indeed, for 0 < c let Sc ⊂ Ω be the set of points y ∈ Ω such that ∞Xn=1 k Wψ (·, y)k−1 2n ≤ c. Suppose that π(Sc) > 0. We then for n ≥ 1 have by the Hölder inequality that k Wψ k2n ≥ (cid:18)ZSc(cid:18)ZΩ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Wψ 1 ≥ ≥ = Thus by convexity dπ(y) dπ(y) 2n 2n dπ(x)(cid:19) dπ(y)(cid:19)1/2n (x, y)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dπ(x)(cid:19)1/2n π(Sc)1−1/2n ZSc(cid:18)ZΩ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Wψ (x, y)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dπ(x)(cid:19)1/2n π(Sc)1/2 ZSc(cid:18)ZΩ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Wψ (x, y)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) π(Sc)1/2 ZSc(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Wψ (·, y)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2n pπ(Sc) dπ(y). ≤ 1 1 k Wψ (·, y)k2n dπ(y) 2n 1 (·, y)k2n k Wψ dπ(y), 1 k Wψ k2n RSc ≤ pπ(Sc)ZSc 19 and so for all N ∈ N NXn=1 1 k Wψ k2n ZSc NXn=1 1 (·, y)k2n 1 (·, y)k2n k Wψ k Wψ dπ(y) dπ(y) NXn=1 ≤ pπ(Sc) = pπ(Sc) ZSc ≤ cpπ(Sc) 3 , leading to a contradiction. But if π(Sc) = 0 for all c = 0, then the sum ∞Xn=1 k Wψ (·, y)k−1 2n is infinite for almost all y ∈ Ω, and therefore also for almost every infinite sequence α. Our next lemma shows that under a Carleman-type set of conditions, equality of multigraph homomorphism densities, the random canonical forms can be coupled in such a way as to have the corresponding marginals all equal. The reason for us not wanting to have edges between labeled vertices in the test-graphs involved in the coupling is that their absence significantly simplifies and improves the upper bounds on the mixed moments, and thus weaker Carleman-type conditions will suffice. Luckily this is not a restriction here, as the multigraph constructions arising from the mixed moments preserve this property. Lemma 26. Let W ∈ W(Ω,A,π) and W ′ ∈ W(Ω′,A′,π′) be two strong Lebesguian graphons such that t(F, W ) = t(F, W ′) for every unlabeled Ψ-decorated multigraph F. Further suppose that the p-norms of W satisfy the Carleman type conditions: ∞Xn=1 kW k−k 2nk = ∞ for all k ∈ N+. Then we can couple sequences α ∈ ΩN+ (α, β) is taken from the joint distribution, then with probability 1 with sequences β ∈ Ω′N+ such that if for every partially labeled Ψ-decorated multigraph F ∈ F ∗. tα(F, W ) = tβ(F, W ′) Proof. We shall recursively define a coupling of sequences γ ∈ Ωk and δ ∈ Ω′k such that almost k have that tγ(F, W ) = tδ(F, W ′). This is trivial to do for k = 0. Let surely we for all F ∈ F ∗ us now assume we have such a coupling for sequences of length k, and let (γ1, . . . , γk) and (δ1, . . . , δk) be chosen from this coupled distribution. Let further X be a random point from (Ω, π), and Y a random point from (Ω′, π′), and define the random variables C := (tγ1...γkX(F, W ))F∈F ∗ k+1 20 and D := (tδ1...δkY (F, W ′))F∈F ∗ k+1 with values in RF ∗ k+1. Our aim is to show that they have the same distribution. To prove that the joint distributions are equal, we first show that their mixed moments coin- cide, and then prove that the coordinates of C satisfy the Carleman condition. Let m ∈ N+, F1, . . . , Fm ∈ F ∗ j ≤ m define F defined as the product Fq1 Then we have that the corresponding moment of C satisfies 1 . . . Fqm k+1 as the qj-fold product of Fj with itself. Let further F ∈ F ∗ k+1, and let q1, . . . , qm be non-negative integers. Then for 1 ≤ k be m with label k + 1 removed from the corresponding vertex. qj j ∈ F ∗ tγ1...γkX (Fj, W )qj E  mYj=1  = E (tγ1...γkX(Fq1 1 . . . Fqm m , W )) = tγ1...γk (F, W ). Similar arguments yield that the corresponding mixed moment of D is tδ1...δk (F, W ′), which by hypothesis is the same. We now have to show that each coordinate of C satisfies the Carleman condition. Let F ∗ k+1 ∋ F = (F, f ) and consider CF(X) := tγ1...γkX(F, W ). Since F does not have any edges between labeled vertices, we have  CF(X) = Z V (F )Ya=k+2  Y1≤j≤k k+2≤a≤V (F ) mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 f(vk+1va)i W  mult(vj va)Yi=1  f(vj va)i f(vavb)i (X, xa)  (γj, xa) W  V (F )Ya,b=k+2 mult(vavb)Yi=1   dxk+2 . . . dxV (F ) W (xa, xb)  For almost all anchor sequences γ we have thatRΩ W (γj, x)dx is finite for all j. By the Hölder inequality (using that π(Ω) = 1) we thus have CF(X) ≤ C V (F )Ya=k+2 mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 (cid:18)ZΩ kW (X, xa)kE(F ) dxa(cid:19) 1 E(F ) , where C is a finite constant depending on W , F and γ1, . . . , γk. Consequently, by further 21 applications of Hölder's inequality we have kCFkn ≤ C n (cid:18)ZΩ n ≤ C nZΩ mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 V (F )Ya=k+2  ZΩ(cid:18)ZΩ mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 V (F )Ya=k+2 (cid:18)ZΩ(cid:18)ZΩ mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 V (F )Ya=k+2 (cid:18)ZΩZΩ mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 V (F )Ya=k+2 mult(vk+1va)Yi=1 V (F )Ya=k+2 ≤ C n = C n = C n 1 E(F ) dX E(F ) E(F ) kW (X, xa)kE(F ) dxa(cid:19) n kW (X, xa)kE(F ) dxa(cid:19) nE(F ) kW (X, xa)kE(F ) dxa(cid:19)n kW (X, xa)knE(F ) dxa dX(cid:19) 1 dX  dX(cid:19) 1 E(F ) E(F ) kW kn nE(F ) ≤ C n kW knE(F ) nE(F ) . Therefore with K := E(F ) we have ∞Xn=1 kCFk−1 2n ≥ 1 C ∞Xn=1 kW k−K 2nK = ∞, and so the Carleman condition is indeed satisfied. Thus C and D have the same distribution, and by [3, Lemma 6.2] we can then couple X and Y so that with probability 1 we have C = D. Thus there exist random variables X ′ from (Ω, π) and Y ′ from (Ω′, π′) such that the joint distribution of (X ′, Y ′) ∈ (Ω, Ω′) satisfies with probability 1 that tγ1...γkX ′(F, W ) = tδ1...δkY ′(F, W ′) for every F ∈ Fk+1. This extends our coupling to one between Ωk+1 and Ω′k+1. Iterating, we obtain the desired coupling between ΩN+ and Ω′N+ . Our final lemma is to show that graphons having equal simple graph densities also have equal multigraph densities, and hence no generality was lost in the assumptions of the previous results. Note that labeled graphs play in the below proof a different role than above, and as such it is not an issue that we here allow (multiple) edges between labeled vertices. Lemma 27. Let W1 ∈ W(Ω1,A1,π1) and W2 ∈ W(Ω2,A2,π2) be two countably generated graphons, and assume that t(F, W1) = t(F, W2) for every simple Φ-decorated graph F. Then t(F, W1) = t(F, W2) for every Φ-decorated multigraph F = (F, f ). Proof. We shall proceed by induction on the number of parallel edges in F . The base case is given by the assumption. Let vi and vj be two vertices connected by more than one edge, and let ϕ ∈ Φ be the decoration on one of them. Denote by F′ the decorated multigraph obtained by deleting one ϕ-decorated edge between vi and vj. Let further Fk denote the decorated multigraph obtained by adding a path of length k between vi and vj in F′, decorating each edge in the path with ϕ. Thus F1 = F, but for each k > 1 the multigraph Fk has fewer 22 parallel edges than F. Hence by the inductive assumption we have that t(Fk, W1) = t(Fk, W2) for each k > 1. Let us now label all the multigraphs Fk and F′ such that vi receives the label 1 whilst vj receives the label 2. Then Fk is the product of F′ with the path Pk+1 of length (k + 1) with its two endpoints labeled 1 and 2 respectively and each edge decorated with ϕ, and we may write t(F, W1) =ZΩ2 t(Fk, W1) =ZΩ2 1 and Note that W (x, y)txy(F′, W1)dπ1(x)dπ1(y), txy(Pk+1, W )txy(F′, W1)dπ1(x)dπ1(y). 1 txy(Pk+1, W ) =ZΩk−1 1 Wϕ (x, x1) · · · Wϕ (xk−1, y)dπ(x1) . . . dπ(xk−1). Since Wϕ and thus has a spectral decomposition 1 ∈ L2(Ω2 1, R), it is a self-adjoint Hilbert-Schmidt integral operator on L2(Ω1, C), Wϕ 1(x, y) = ∞Xn,m=1 λn,mζn(x)ζm(y) in the L2 sense, where (ζn) is an orthonormal system in L2(Ω1, C). Then we obtain by induction on k that for every k > 1, txy(Pk+1, W1) = ∞Xn,m=0 λk n,mζn(x)ζm(y) in L2, whereby t(Fk, W1) = ∞Xn,m=1 nZΩ2 λk ζn(x)ζm(y)txy(F′, W1)dπ1(x)dπ1(y), since txy(F′, W1) lies in L2 by the assumption on W1. Similarly, with the spectral decomposition Wϕ 2(x, y) = ∞Xn,m=1 µn,mηn(x)ηm(y), we obtain 0 = t(Fk, W1) − t(Fk, W2) = ∞Xn,m=1 for every k ≥ 2, where the parameters an,mλk n,m − bn,mµk n,m (8) an,m :=ZΩ2 1 ζn(x)ζm(y)txy(F′, W1)dπ1(x)dπ1(y) 23 and bn,m :=ZΩ2 2 are independent of k. ηn(x)ηm(y)txy(F′, W2)dπ2(x)dπ2(y) Since each non-zero eigenvalue has finite multiplicity and the only possible accumulation point is 0, the asymptotic behaviour of the right hand side in (8) dictates that all the terms have to cancel, i.e., for each c ∈ R\{0} we have that Xλn,m=c an,m = Xµn,m=c bn,m. Then t(F, W1) = ∞Xn,m=1 λn,mZΩ2 similarly ζn(x)ζm(y)txy(F′, W1)dπ1(x)dπ1(y) = ∞Xn,m=1 an,mλn,m, t(F, W2) = ∞Xn,m=1 bn,mµn,m, and the claim follows. Remark 28. By Lemma 12, countable generation is not actually needed. 6 Proof of main theorem Having extended the intermediate steps of [3] to the significantly more general context of our investigations, we are now ready to bring together the elements of the previous sections to prove our main result. Proof of Theorem 11. Part (i): By Lemma 27, equality of simple graph densities implies equality of multigraph densities, and thus we may apply Lemma 26 to our two graphons. If we choose the anchor sequences α ∈ ΩN+ from the joint distribution given by Lemma 26, almost all such choices satisfy and β ∈ Ω′N+ tα(F, W ) = tβ(F, W ′) for every partially labeled Ψ-decorated multigraph F ∈ F ∗, and but for a further null-set they yield anchor sequences that are regular (Lemma 23). Hence, taking into consideration Remark 25, we can choose sequences α and β that satisfy the conditions of Lemma 24. Consequently the anchored graphons Wα and W ′ β are isomorphic mod 0 through the identity map. If we now could show that Γα is an isomorphism mod 0 between W and Wα, and that similarly Γβ is an isomorphism mod 0 between W ′ and W ′ β, our proof would be complete. Due to symmetry we shall only show the first isomorphism. 24 First note that since (Ω, A, π) is a Lebesgue space, the mapping Γα is not only measurable and measure preserving as a mapping (Ω, A, π) → (R, K, κα), but also as a mapping (Ω, A, π) → (R, L, λα). Let S := {x ∈ Ω : Wα(Γα(x), Γα(y)) = W (x, y) for almost all y}. Since α is a regular anchor sequence, we have π(S) = 1. Also, because W is almost twin- free, we can find a null-set N ⊂ Ω such that each twin-class of W has at most one point in T := S\N . Let Γ′ α be the restriction of Γα to T . Then it can easily be seen that T is injective. By [15, Section 2.5], injective measure preserving maps between Lebesgue spaces have an almost everywhere defined measurable inverse. Thus Γ′ α is an isomorphism mod 0, and then so is Γα. Part (ii): First, by Corollary 17 we can find two almost twin-free strong Lebesguian graphons U ∈ W(O,B,ρ) and U ′ ∈ W(O′,B′,ρ′) and corresponding weak isomorphisms γ and γ′ from W and W ′ to U and U ′, respectively. By part (i) we then have that U and U ′ are isomorphic mod 0, hence for some measure preserving map η : O → O′ we have U = (U ′)η. Now let µ : Ω → O′ be defined through µ(x) := η(γ(x)). Then clearly W = (U ′)µ almost everywhere, and the maps µ and γ′ are measure preserving from the completions of W and W ′, respectively, into U ′. 7 A moment-indeterminate graphon In this last section we wish to provide an example of two real-valued graphons that possess the same homomorphism densities, but are not weakly isomorphic. In fact, in our example they are not inducing the same probability measure on R, so they are even distinguishable when forgetting about the geometry coming from the underlying product space. Let σ and τ be two probability distributions on N with finite moments and having the same moments (such distributions exist, see e.g. [14, Cor. 3.4]). Denote their n-th moments by Mn (n ≥ 0). Let further {Si}i∈N and {Tj}j∈N be two partitions of [0, 1] into measurable sets such that λ(Si) = σ({i}) and λ(Tj) = τ ({j}) for all i, j ∈ N. Consider the functions fσ, fτ : [0, 1] → R defined by fσ(x) := nx whenever fτ (x) := mx whenever x ∈ Snx, x ∈ Tmx, respectively, and let Wσ, Wτ : [0, 1]2 → R be defined by Wσ(x, y) := fσ(x)fσ(y) and Wτ (x, y) = fτ (x)fτ (y), respectively. Let F be an R-decorated graph with each edge decorated with 1. By linearity, it is enough to show that t(F, Wσ) = t(F, Wτ ) for every such F. Let the elements of V (F ) be denoted by v1, v2, . . . , vk, and let di denote the degree of vertex vi. It can then easily be seen that we 25 have t(F, Wσ) = Z x1,...,xk∈[0,1] Yvivj ∈E(F ) Z x1,...,xk∈[0,1] Yvivj ∈E(F ) Z[0,1] kYi=1 Similar calculations yield t(F, Wσ) =Qk exact same generalized moments. = = W (xi, xj)dx1 . . . xk fσ(xi)fσ(xj)dx1 . . . xk fσ(xi)didxi = kYi=1 Mdi. i=1 Mdi, and so the two graphons do indeed have the It remains to be shown that Wσ and Wτ yield different probability measures on R, but this easily follows from their product form, and the fact that σ 6= τ . References [1] N.I. Akhiezer, The Classical Moment Problem and Some Related Questions in Analysis, Oliver & Boyd (1965). [2] C. Berg, The cube of a normal distribution is indeterminate, Ann. Probab. 16 (1988), 910 -- 913. [3] C. Borgs, J. Chayes, L. Lovász, Moments of Two-Variable Functions and the Uniqueness of Graph Limits, Geom. funct. anal. 19 (2010) 1597 -- 1619. [4] C. Borgs, J.T. Chayes, L. Lovász, V.T. Sós and K. Vesztergombi: Convergent Graph Sequences I: Subgraph frequencies, metric properties, and testing, Advances in Math. 219 (2008), 1801 -- 1851. [5] C. Borgs, J.T. Chayes, L. Lovász, V.T. Sós and K. Vesztergombi: Convergent Graph Sequences II: Multiway Cuts and Statistical Physics, Annals of Math. 176 (2012), 151 -- 219. [6] G. Elek and B. Szegedy: A measure-theoretic approach to the theory of dense hyper- graphs, Adv. in Math. 231 (2012), 1731 -- 1772. [7] P. R. Halmos: Measure Theory, Graduate texts in Mathematics 18, Springer, New York, Heidelberg, Berlin (1991). [8] C. Kleiber, J. Stoyanov, Multivariate distributions and the moment problem, Journal of Multivariate Analysis 113 (2013) 7 -- 18 [9] D. K.-K., L. Lovász, B. Szegedy, Multigraph limits, unbounded kernels, and Banach space decorated graphs. Submitted, http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.7846 [10] G. Lin and J. Huang, The cube of the logistic distribution is indeterminate, Austral. J. Statist. 39 (1997), 247 -- 252. 26 [11] L. Lovász, Large graphs, graph homomorphisms and graph limits, AMS (2012). [12] L. Lovász and B. Szegedy: Limits of dense graph sequences, J. Combin. Theory B 96 (2006), 933 -- 957. [13] L. Lovász and B. Szegedy: Szemerédi's Lemma for the analyst, Geom. funct. anal. 17 (2007), 252 -- 270. [14] H. L. Pedersen: On Krein's Theorem for Indeterminacy of the Classical Moment Problem J. Approx. Theory 95 (1998), 90 -- 100. [15] V. A. Rohlin, On the fundamental ideas of measure theory, Translations of the American Mathematical Society, Series 1, Vol. 10 (1962) 1 -- 54 (Russian original in Math Sb. 25 (1949) 107 -- 150). [16] V. I. Rybakov, Vector-valued measures (in Russian), Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Mat. 12 (1968), 92 -- 101. [17] J. Stoyanov, Counterexamples in Probability. Wiley & Sons, 2nd ed. (1997) 27
1304.0157	1	1304	2013-03-31T05:54:14	Operator inequalities of Jensen type	[ "math.FA", "math.OA" ]	We present some generalized Jensen type operator inequalities involving sequences of self-adjoint operators. Among other things, we prove that if $f:[0,\infty) \to \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous convex function with $f(0)\leq 0$, then {equation} \sum_{i=1}^{n} f(C_i) \leq f(\sum_{i=1}^{n}C_i)-\delta_f\sum_{i=1}^{n}\widetilde{C}_i\leq f(\sum_{i=1}^{n}C_i) {equation} for all operators $C_i$ such that $0 \leq C_i\leq M \leq \sum_{i=1}^{n} C_i $ \ $(i=1,...,n)$ for some scalar $M\geq0$, where $ \widetilde{C_i} = 1/2 - \|\frac{C_i}{M}- 1/2 \|$ and $\delta_f = f(0)+f(M) - 2 f(\frac{M}{2})$.	math.FA	math	OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE M. S. MOSLEHIAN1, J. MI ´CI ´C2 AND M. KIAN3 Abstract. We present some generalized Jensen type operator inequalities involving sequences of self-adjoint operators. Among other things, we prove that if f : [0, ∞) → R is a continuous convex function with f (0) ≤ 0, then nXi=1 f (Ci) ≤ f nXi=1 2 −(cid:12)(cid:12) Ci Ci! nXi=1 eCi ≤ f nXi=1 Ci! − δf 2(cid:12)(cid:12) and δf = f (0) + f (M ) − 2f(cid:0) M 2(cid:1). for all operators Ci such that 0 ≤ Ci ≤ M ≤Pn scalar M ≥ 0, wherefCi = 1 M − 1 i=1 Ci (i = 1, . . . , n) for some 1. Introduction and Preliminaries Let B(H ) be the C ∗-algebra of all bounded linear operators on a complex Hilbert space H and I denote the identity operator. If dim H = n, then we identify B(H ) with the C ∗-algebra Mn(C) of all n × n matrices with complex entries. Let us endow the real space Bh(H ) of all self-adjoint operators in B(H ) with the usual operator order ≤ defined by the cone of positive operators of B(H ). If T ∈ Bh(H ), then m = inf{hT x, xi : kxk = 1} and M = sup{hT x, xi : kxk = 1} are called the bounds of T . We denote by σ(J) the set of all self- adjoint operators on H with spectra contained in J. All real-valued functions are assumed to be continuous in this paper. A real valued function f defined on an interval J is said to be operator convex if f (λA+(1−λ)B) ≤ λf (A)+(1−λ)f (B) for all A, B ∈ σ(J) and all λ ∈ [0, 1]. If the function f is operator convex, then the so-called Jensen operator inequality f (Φ(A)) ≤ Φ(f (A)) holds for any unital positive linear map Φ on B(H ) and any A ∈ σ(J). The reader is referred to [3, 4, 8] for more information about operator convex functions and other versions of the Jensen operator inequality. It should be remarked that if f is a real convex function, but not operator convex, then the Jensen operator inequality may not hold. To see this, consider the convex (but not operator convex) function f (t) = t4 defined on [0, ∞) and the positive mapping Φ : M3(C) → M2(C) defined by 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47A63, 47A64, 15A60. Key words and phrases. convex function, positive linear map, Jensen -- Mercer operator in- equality, Petrovi´c operator inequality. 1 2 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Φ((aij)1≤i,j≤3) = (aij)1≤i,j≤2 for any A = (aij)1≤i,j≤3 ∈ M3(C). If A = 46 59 ! f (Φ(A)) = 36 46 then there is no relationship between 2 2 0 2 3 1 0 1 3 and  , 48 68 ! Φ(f (A)) = 36 48 in the usual operator order. Recently, in [6] a version of the Jensen operator inequality was given without operator convexity as follows: Theorem A. [6, Theorem 1] Let (A1, . . . , An) be an n-tuple of operators Ai ∈ Bh(H ) with bounds mi and Mi, mi ≤ Mi, and let (Φ1, . . . , Φn) be an n-tuple of positive linear mappings Φi on B(H ) such thatPn (mC, MC) ∩ [mi, Mi] = Ø i=1 Φi(I) = I. If (1.1) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n, where mC and MC with mC ≤ MC are bounds of the self-adjoint operator C =Pn i=1 Φi(Ai), then f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! ≤ nXi=1 Φi (f (Ai)) (1.2) holds for every convex function f : J → R provided that the interval J contains all mi, Mi; see also [7]. Another variant of the Jesnen operator inequality is the so-called Jensen -- Mercer operator inequality [5] asserting that if f is a real convex function on an interval [m, M], then f M + m − nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! ≤ f (M) + f (m) − nXi=1 where Φ1, · · · , Φn are positive linear maps on B(H ) with Pn A1, · · · , An ∈ σ([m, M]). Φi(f (Ai)), i=1 Φi(I) = I and Recently, in [9] an extension of the Jensen -- Mercer operator inequality was presented as follows: Theorem B.[9, Corollary 2.3] Let f be a convex function on an interval J. Let Ai, Bi, Ci, Di ∈ σ(J) (i = 1, · · · , n) such that Ai + Di = Bi + Ci and Ai ≤ m ≤ Bi, Ci ≤ M ≤ Di. Let Φ1, · · · , Φn be positive linear maps on B(H ) with OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 3 i=1 Φi(I) = I. Then Pn f nXi=1 Φi(Bi)! + f nXi=1 Φi(Ci)! ≤ nXi=1 Φi(f (Ai)) + nXi=1 Φi(f (Di)). (1.3) The authors of [9] used inequality (1.3) to obtain some operator inequalities. In particular, they gave a generalization of the Petrovi´c operator inequality as follows: Theorem C.[9, Corollary 2.5] Let A, D, Bi ∈ σ(J) (i = 1, · · · , n) such that i=1 Bi and A ≤ m ≤ Bi ≤ M ≤ D (i = 1, · · · , n) for two real numbers m < M. If f is convex on J, then A + D = Pn f (Bi) ≤ (n − 1)f(cid:18) 1 n − 1 A(cid:19) + f (D). nXi=1 If f : [0, ∞) → R is a convex function such that f (0) = 0, then f (a) + f (b) ≤ f (a + b) (1.4) for all scalars a, b ≥ 0. However, if the scalars a, b are replaced by two positive operators, this inequality may not hold. For example if f (t) = t2 and A, B are the following two positive matrices A = 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 2  and B = 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 2  , then a straightforward computation reveals that there is no relationship between A2 + B2 and (A + B)2 under the operator order. Many authors tried to obtain some operator extensions of (1.4). In [10], it was shown that f (A + B) ≤ f (A) + f (B) for all non-negative operator monotone functions f : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) if and only if AB + BA is positive. Another operator extension of (1.4) was established in [9] Theorem D. [9, Corollary 2.9] If f : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a convex function with f (0) ≤ 0, then f (A) + f (B) ≤ f (A + B) for all invertible positive operators A, B such that A ≤ MI ≤ A + B and B ≤ MI ≤ A + B for some scalar M ≥ 0. Some other operator extensions of (1.4) can be found in [1, 2, 11]. In this paper, as a continuation of [9], we extend inequality (1.3), refine (1.3) and improve some 4 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN of our results in [9]. Some applications such as further refinements of the Petrovi´c operator inequality and the Jensen -- Mercer operator inequality are presented as well. 2. Results To presenting our results, we introduce the abbreviation: δf = f (m) + f (M) − 2f(cid:18)m + M 2 (cid:19) for f : [m, M] → R, m < M. We need the following lemma may be found in [7, Lemma 2]. We give a proof for the sake of completeness. Lemma 2.1. Let A ∈ σ([m, M]), for some scalars m < M . Then f (A) ≤ M − A M − m f (m) + A − m M − m (2.1) holds for every convex function f : [m, M] → R, where f (M) − δfeA (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . 2 m + M 1 2 eA = 1 − M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)A − + (1 − 2λ)b(cid:19) 2 (cid:19) + (1 − 2λ)f (b) 2 If f is concave on [m, M], then inequality (2.1) is reversed. Proof. First assume that a, b ∈ [m, M] and λ ∈ [0, 1/2] so that λ ≤ 1 − λ. Then f (λa + (1 − λ)b) = f(cid:18)2λ a + b ≤ 2λf(cid:18)a + b = λf (a) + (1 − λ)f (b) − λ(cid:18)f (a) + f (b) − 2f(cid:18)a + b 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) . It follows that f (λa + (1 − λ)b) ≤ λf (a) + (1 − λ)f (b) − min{λ, 1 − λ}(cid:18)f (a) + f (b) − 2f(cid:18)a + b 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) (2.2) OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 5 for all a, b ∈ [m, M] and all λ ∈ [0, 1]. If t ∈ [m, M], then by using (2.2) with λ = M −t M −m, a = m and b = M we obtain M − t M − m f (m) + t − m M − m f (M) f (t) = f(cid:18) M − t M − m m + M(cid:19) ≤ t − m M − m t − m − min(cid:26) M − t M − m , f (t) ≤ (2.3) that for any t ∈ [m, M]. Since min(cid:8) M −t M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)t − −(cid:18)1 t − m M − m M − t M − m f (m) + − 2 1 (2.3) 2 − 1 M −m, t−m M − m(cid:27)(cid:18)f (m) + f (M) − 2f(cid:18) m + M 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) (cid:12)(cid:12), we have from M −m(cid:12)(cid:12)t − m+M M −m(cid:9) = 1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19)(cid:18)f (m) + f (M) − 2f(cid:18) m + M 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) , m + M f (M) (2.4) 2 2 for all t ∈ [m, M]. Now if A ∈ σ([m, M]), then by utilizing the functional calculus (cid:3) to (2.4) we obtain (2.1). In the next theorem we present a generalization of [9, Theorem 2.1]. Pn1 i=1 Φi(I) = α I, Pn2 Theorem 2.2. Let Φi, Φi, Ψi, Ψi be positive linear mappings on B(H ) such that i=1 Ψi(I) = δ I for some real numbers α, β, γ, δ > 0. Let Ai (i = 1, . . . , n1), Di (i = 1, . . . , n2), Ci (i = 1, . . . , n3) and Bi (i = 1, . . . , n4) be operators in σ(J) such that Ai ≤ m ≤ Bi, Ci ≤ M ≤ Di for two real numbers m < M . If i=1 Ψi(I) = γ I, Pn4 i=1 Φi(I) = β I, Pn3 1 α Φi(Ai) + n1Xi=1 Ψi(Ci)! + f 1 β n3Xi=1 1 δ Φi(Di) = n2Xi=1 Ψi(Bi)! ≤ n4Xi=1 ≤ then f 1 γ Ψi(Ci) + 1 β n4Xi=1 Ψi(Bi), (2.5) Φi (f (Ai)) + Φi (f (Ai)) + 1 δ 1 δ n2Xi=1 n2Xi=1 Φi (f (Di)) − δf eX Φi (f (Di)) (2.6) holds for every convex function f : J → R, where 1 γ 1 α 1 α n3Xi=1 n1Xi=1 n1Xi=1 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 β n4Xi=1 Ψi(Bi) − m + M 2 1 γ n3Xi=1 Ψi(Ci) − m + M 2 If f is concave, then the reverse inequalities are valid in (2.6). eX = 1 − 1 M − m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ! . 6 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Proof. We prove only the case when f is convex. Let [m, M] ⊆ J. It follows from the convexity of f on J that f (t) ≥ M − t M − m f (m) + t − m M − m f (M) (2.7) for all t ∈ J \ [m, M]. Hence, by Ai ≤ m and Di ≥ M we have f (Ai) ≥ M − Ai M − m f (m) + Ai − m M − m f (M) (i = 1, · · · , n1) (2.8) and similarly f (Di) ≥ M − Di M − m f (m) + Di − m M − m f (M) (i = 1, · · · , n2). (2.9) Applying the positive linear mappings Φi and Φi, respectively, to both sides of (2.8) and (2.9) and summing we get 1 αPn1 i=1 Φi(Ai) − m M − m f (M) (2.10) Φi(f (Ai)) ≥ 1 α n1Xi=1 and 1 δ n2Xi=1 Φi(f (Di)) ≥ M − 1 i=1 Φi(Ai) αPn1 M − m f (m) + M − 1 i=1 Φi(Di) δPn2 M − m f (m) + On the other hand, taking into account that m ≤ 1 and using Lemma 2.1 we obtain f 1 β n4Xi=1 Ψi(Bi)! ≤ and M − 1 i=1 Ψi(Bi) βPn4 M − m f (m) + 1 δPn2 βPn4 βPn4 1 i=1 Φi(Di) − m M − m f (M). (2.11) i=1 Ψi(Bi), 1 i=1 Ψi(Ci) ≤ M γPn3 f (M ) − δfeB (2.12) i=1 Ψi(Bi) − m M − m γ 2 − 1 f 1 n3Xi=1 where eB = 1 eX = 1 − Ψi(Ci)! ≤ M −m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 βPn4 M − m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 M − 1 i=1 Ψi(Ci) γPn3 M − m i=1 Ψi(Bi) − m+M 2 1 β Ψi(Bi) − n4Xi=1 1 i=1 Ψi(Ci) − m f (m) + M − m 2 − 1 γPn3 M −m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) and eC = 1 γPn3 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n3Xi=1 Ψi(Ci) − 1 γ 2 m + M f (M ) − δfeC, (2.13) i=1 Ψi(Ci) − m+M 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12). m + M 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ! Adding two inequalities (2.12) and (2.13) and putting OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 7 we obtain f 1 β n4Xi=1 Ψi(Bi)! + f 1 βPn4 M − m i=1 Ψi(Bi) − 1 Ψi(Ci)! n3Xi=1 γPn3 γ i=1 Ψi(Ci) i=1 Ψi(Bi) + 1 i=1 Ψi(Ci) − 2m γPn3 δPn2 M − m i=1 Φi(Ai) − 1 M − m αPn1 i=1 Φi(Di) i=1 Φi(Ai) + 1 i=1 Φi(Di) − 2m f (m) f (M ) − δf eX f (m) 2M − 1 + 1 βPn4 2M − 1 ≤ = 1 + 1 α αPn1 n1Xi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ M −m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n4Xi=1 1 β 2 M − m δPn2 n2Xi=1 1 δ f (M ) − δf eX (by (2.5)) (by (2.10) and (2.11)) ≤ Φi(f (Ai)) + Φi(f (Di)) − δf eX, γPn3 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n3Xi=1 1 γ which is the first inequality in (2.6). βPn4 i=1 Ψi(Bi), 1 Furthermore, m ≤ 1 i=1 Ψi(Ci) ≤ M . The numerical inequality 2 (m ≤ t ≤ M ) yields that (cid:12)(cid:12)t − m+M Therefore eX ≥ 0. Moreover, f is convex on [m, M ]. Hence δf ≥ 0. So the second inequality in (2.6) holds. ≤ M − m. Ψi(Bi) − Ψi(Ci) − m + M m + M (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:3) 2 2 Remark 2.3. We can conclude some other versions of inequality (2.6). In fact, under the assumptions in Theorem 2.2 the following inequalities hold true: (1) 1 γ n3Xi=1 Ψi(f (Ci)) + 1 β n4Xi=1 (2) f 1 γ n3Xi=1 Ψi(Ci)! + 1 β in which eX2 = 1 − eX3 = 1 − γ 1 M − m" 1 M − m"(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 1 γ δ δ α α α 1 δ n4Xi=1 Φi(Di)! − δf eX2 Ψi(f (Bi)) ≤ f 1 Φi(Ai)! + f 1 n2Xi=1 n1Xi=1 Φi(Di)! ; ≤ f 1 Φi(Ai)! + f 1 n2Xi=1 n1Xi=1 Ψi(f (Bi)) ≤ f 1 Φi(Ai)! + n2Xi=1 n1Xi=1 Φi(f (Di)) − δf eX3 ≤ f 1 Φi(Ai)! + n1Xi=1 n2Xi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) + Ψi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi − n4Xi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Ψi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi − n4Xi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19)# , (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19)# . Ψi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Ci − n3Xi=1 n3Xi=1 Φi(f (Di)), Ψi(Ci) − M + m M + m M + m M + m 1 β 1 β 1 δ + α 2 2 2 2 8 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Before giving an example, we present some special cases of Theorem 2.2 which are useful in our applications. The next corollary provides a refinement of [9, Theorem 2.1]. Corollary 2.4. Let f be a convex function on an interval J . Let A, B, C, D ∈ σ(J) such that A + D = B + C and A ≤ m ≤ B, C ≤ M ≤ D for two real numbers m < M . If Φ is a unital positive linear map on B(H ), then where In particular, 1 ≤ Φ(f (A)) + Φ(f (D)), f (Φ(B)) + f (Φ(C)) ≤ Φ(f (A)) + Φ(f (D)) − δfeX M − m(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Φ(B) − eX = 1 − f (B) + f (C) ≤ f (A) + f (D) − δfeX ≤ f (A) + f (D). (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Φ(C) − m + M m + M 2 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) . (2.14) (2.15) If f is concave on J , then inequalities (2.14) and (2.15) are reversed. Another special case of Theorem 2.2 leads to a refinement of [9, Corollary 2.3]. Corollary 2.5. Let f be a convex function on an interval J . Let Ai, Bi, Ci, Di ∈ σ(J) (i = 1, · · · , n) such that Ai + Di = Bi + Ci and Ai ≤ m ≤ Bi, Ci ≤ M ≤ (i = 1, · · · , n). Let Φ1, · · · , Φn be positive linear mappings on B(H ) with Di i=1 Φi(I) = I. Then Pn (1) f nXi=1 Φi(Bi)! + f nXi=1 (2) (3) nXi=1 nXi=1 Φi(f (Bi)) + nXi=1 Φi(f (Bi)) + f nXi=1 ≤ Φi(Ci)! ≤ Φi(f (Ai)) + Φi(f (Ai)) + nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 Φi(f (Ci)) ≤ f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! + f nXi=1 ≤ f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! + f nXi=1 Φi(Ci)! ≤ f nXi=1 Φi(Di)! + nXi=1 ≤ f nXi=1 Φi(Di)! + nXi=1 Φi(f (Di)); Φi(f (Di)) − δfeX1 Φi(Di)! − δfeX2 Φi(Di)! ; Φi(f (Ai)) − δfeX3 Φi(f (Ai)); OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 9 where eX1 = 1 − eX2 = 1 − eX3 = 1 − 1 1 Φi(Bi) − M − m"(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 M − m" nXi=1 Φi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi − M − m" nXi=1 Φi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi − 1 m + M 2 m + M 2 2 m + M Φi(Ci) − (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) + Φi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Ci − nXi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 Φi(Ci) − m + M 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 # , (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19)# , (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) # . m + M m + M 2 Now we give an example to show that how Theorem 2.2 works. Example 2.6. Let ni = 1 for i = 1, 2, 3, 4 and let f (t) = t4. The function f is convex but not operator convex[3]. Let Φ, Ψ, Ψ = Φ in which Φ : M3(C) → M2(C), Φ((aij)1≤i,j≤3) = (aij)1≤i,j≤2. If then Φ(A) + Φ(D) = Φ(C) + Φ(B) and A ≤ 2.2I ≤ C, B ≤ 8I ≤ D. Also 1 2 15 9 1 1 10 2 1 1 1 −1 2 −1 1 2 −5 1  , C =  , D = A = 0.345 0.655 !, whence δf = 2766.4 and eX = 0.655 0.345 (Φ(C))4 + (Φ(B))4 = 1891 −859 3022 ! 5281 5318 6202 6239 8758 ! = (Φ(A))4 + (Φ(D))4 − δf eX (cid:8) 7093 8867 ! = Φ(A4) + (Φ(D))4 − δf eX (cid:8) 7130 12263 ! = (Φ(A))4 + Φ(D4) − δf eX (cid:8) 8014 12372 ! = Φ(A4) + Φ(D4) − δf eX (cid:8) 8051 4373.5 2576.5 4311.5 2514.5 4373.5 2514.5 2576.5 4311.5 −859 (cid:8)  This shows that inequalities in (2.6) can be strict. 4 1 2 1 4 1 2 1 5  , B = 6 −1 1 −1 1 5 1 7 1  , 3531 3469 3469 10570 ! = (Φ(A))4 + (Φ(D))4 3531 10679 ! = Φ(A4) + (Φ(D))4 5266 14075 ! = (Φ(A))4 + Φ(D4) 5328 14184 ! = Φ(A4) + Φ(D4) 5328 5266 10 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Moreover, (Φ(A))4 + Φ(B4) − Φ(A4) − (Φ(B))4 = 884 (Φ(A))4 + Φ(B4) − Φ(A)4 − (Φ(B))4 = 921 Φ(A4) + Φ(B4) − (Φ(A))4 − Φ(B4) = 921 1735 3396 ! 6T 0 1797 3505 ! 6T 0 1797 3505 ! 6T 0. 1797 1735 1797 Hence there is no relationship between the right hand sides of inequalities in Corol- lary 2.5. Corollary 2.7. Let f be a convex function on an interval J . Let Ai, Bi, Ci, Di, i = 1, . . . , n, be operators in σ(J). If Ai ≤ m ≤ Ci, Bi ≤ M ≤ Di, i = 1, . . . , n, for two real numbers m < M and then and (Ai + Di) = (Ci + Bi), f nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 Di! − δf,neXn, Ai! + f nXi=1 Bi! ≤ f nXi=1 Ci! + f nXi=1 ≤ f nXi=1 Ai! + f nXi=1 Di! f (Di) − δf nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1 (cid:1) and in which δf,n = f (nm) + f (nM) − 2f(cid:0) nm+nM +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 nM − nm"(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) If f is concave, then inequalities (2.17) and (2.18) are reversed. eXn = 1 − (eCi + eBi)! nXi=1 nXi=1 f (Ci) + f (Bi) ≤ f (Ai) + f (Di) # . (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nM + nm Ci − nXi=1 nM + nm Bi − 2 f (Ai) + (2.16) (2.17) (2.18) ≤ 1 2 2 Proof. We prove only inequality (2.17) in the convex case. It follows from Ai ≤ m ≤ Ci, Bi ≤ M ≤ Di, (i = 1, . . . , n) that Ai ≤ mnI ≤ nXi=1 Ci, nXi=1 nXi=1 Bi ≤ MnI ≤ Di. nXi=1 OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 11 Using the same reasoning as in the proof of Theorem 2.2 we get ≤ = i=1(Ci + Bi) Mn − mn i=1(Ai + Di) i=1(Ci + Bi) − 2mn Mn − mn Ci! + f nXi=1 f nXi=1 2Mn −Pn 2Mn −Pn ≤ f nXi=1 which give the first inequality in (2.17). It is easy to see that δf,neXn ≥ 0, whence Bi! f (mn) +Pn f (mn) +Pn Di! − δf,neXn, f (Mn) − δf,neXn f (Mn) − δf,neXn Mn − mn Ai! + f nXi=1 the second inequality derived. i=1(Ai + Di) − 2mn Mn − mn (cid:3) (by (2.16)) 3. Applications Using the results in Section 2, we provide some applications which are refine- ments of some well-known operator inequalities. As the first, we give a refinement of the operator Jensen -- Mercer inequality. Corollary 3.1. Let Φ1, · · · , Φn be positive linear maps on B(H ) withPn I and B1, · · · , Bn ∈ σ([m, M]) for two scalars m < M . If f is a convex function on [m, M], then i=1 Φi(I) = f m + M − nXi=1 Φi(Bi)! ≤ f (m) + f (M) − ≤ f (m) + f (M) − Φi(f (Bi)) − δfeB Φi(f (Bi)), Φi(Bi) − m + M 2 nXi=1 nXi=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 # . (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) where eB = 1 − 1 M − m" nXi=1 Φi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Bi − m + M 2 Proof. Clearly m ≤ Bi ≤ M (i = 1, · · · , n). Set Ci = M + m − Bi (i = 1, · · · , n). Then m ≤ Ci ≤ M and Bi + Ci = m + M (i = 1, · · · , n). Applying inequality (3) of Corollary 2.5 when Ai = mI and Di = MI we obtain the desired (cid:3) inequalities. The next result provides a refinement of the Petrovi´c inequality for operators. 12 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Corollary 3.2. If f : [0, ∞) → R is a convex function and B1, · · · , Bn are i=1 Bi = MI for some scalar M > 0, then positive operators such thatPn Bi! + (n − 1)f (0) − δfeB ≤ f nXi=1 f (Bi) ≤ f nXi=1 nXi=1 nXi=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . where eB = Proof. It follows from 0 ≤ Bi ≤ M that Bi M n 2 − − 1 f (Bi) ≤ M − Bi M − 0 f (0) + Bi − 0 M − 0 Summing above inequalities over i we get f (M) − δffBi Bi! + (n − 1)f (0), (i = 1, · · · , n). f (Bi) ≤ nXi=1 f (M) − δf i=1 Bi M nXi=1fBi Bi! − δfeB (byPn Bi! (by δfeB ≥ 0). M i=1 Bi f (0) +Pn nM −Pn = (n − 1)f (0) + f nXi=1 ≤ (n − 1)f (0) + f nXi=1 nXi=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . Bi M − 1 i=1 Bi = M ) (cid:3) n 2 − where eB = As another consequence of Theorem 2.2, we present a refinement of the Jensen operator inequality for real convex functions. The authors of [9] introduce a subset Ω of Bh(H ) × Bh(H ) defined by 2 A + B ≤ M ≤ B, We have the following result. Corollary 3.3. Let f be a convex function on an interval J containing m, M . i=1 Φi(I) = I. for some m, M ∈ R(cid:27) . Ω =(cid:26)(A, B)(cid:12)(cid:12) A ≤ m ≤ Let Φi, i = 1, . . . , n, be positive linear mappings on B(H ) withPn (cid:19) − δfeX (cid:19) , Φi(cid:18) f (Ai) + f (Di) Φi(cid:18) f (Ai) + f (Di) Φi(cid:18)Ai + Di If (Ai, Di) ∈ Ω, i = 1, . . . , n, then f nXi=1 (cid:19)! ≤ (3.1) ≤ 2 2 2 nXi=1 nXi=1 OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 13 where 1 2 − eX = 1 M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 Φi(cid:18) Ai + Di 2 (cid:19) − m + M 2 . (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) If f is concave, then inequalities in (3.1) are reversed. Proof. Putting Bi = Ci = Ai+Di conclude the desired result. 2 and using inequality (1) of Corollary 2.5, we (cid:3) Note that utilizing Corollary 2.5, we even be able to obtain a converse of the Jensen operator inequality. For this end, under the assumptions in the Corol- lary 3.3 we have where Φi(cid:18)f(cid:18) Ai + Di 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) ≤ nXi=1 1 1 2"f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! + f nXi=1 2"f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! + f nXi=1 Φi(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) nXi=1 Ai + Di − 2 2 Φi(Di)!# − δfeX Φi(Di)!# , (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) . m + M ≤ 1 (3.2) 1 2 − M − m eX = Note that the function f need not to be operator convex. Let us give an example to illustrate these inequalities. Example 3.4. Let n = 1 and the unital positive linear map Φ : M3(C) → M2(C) be defined by Φ((aij)1≤i,j≤3) = (aij)1≤i,j≤2 for each A = (aij)1≤i,j≤3 ∈ M3(C). Consider the convex function f (t) = et on [0, ∞). If 7 −1 0 −1 0 7 0 6 0  , 1 0 1 −1 0 −1 0 1 0 A = 2 (cid:19)(cid:19) = 79.8 −50.5 −50.5  D = 54.6 ! (cid:8) 759.2 −399 (cid:8) 768.2 −408 −399 −408 then 0 ≤ A ≤ 2I ≤ A+D that f(cid:18)Φ(cid:18) A + D 344 ! = Φ(cid:18) f (A) + f (D) 362 ! = Φ(cid:18) f (A) + f (D) 2 2 (cid:19) − δf eX (cid:19) , 2 ≤ 5I ≤ D, i.e., (A, D) ∈ Ω. Hence it follows from (3.1) 14 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN in which δf = 89.6 and eX = 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 !. It should be mentioned that in the case when f is operator convex, under the assumptions in Corollary 3.3 we have even more: f nXi=1 Φi(cid:18)Ai + Di 2 (cid:19)! ≤ ≤ ≤ 1 2 Φi(cid:18)f(cid:18) Ai + Di (cid:19)(cid:19) (by the Jensen inequality) nXi=1 2"f nXi=1 Φi(Ai)! + f nXi=1 Φi(Di)!# − δfeX (by (3.2)) 2" nXi=1 Φi(f (Ai) + f (Di))# − δfeX (by the Jensen inequality) Φi(cid:18)f (Ai) + f (Di) nXi=1 2 1 Corollary 3.5. If f is a convex function on an interval J containing m, M , then ≤ (cid:19) (since δf eX ≥ 0). f (λA + (1 − λ)D) ≤ λf (A) + (1 − λ)f (D) − δfeX M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ λf (A) + (1 − λ)f (D) 1 2 If f is concave, then inequality (3.3) is reversed. for all (A, D) ∈ Ω and all λ ∈ [0, 1], where eX = − 1 2 Proof. Put n = 1 and let Φ be the identity map in Corollary 3.3 to get A + D − M − m f(cid:18)A + D 2 (cid:19) ≤ f (A) + f (D) 2 f (A) + f (D) 2 − δf eX ≤ for any (A, D) ∈ Ω, which implies (3.3) by the continuity of f . (3.3) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . (cid:3) Regarding to obtain an operator version of (3.4), it is shown in [9] that if f : [0, ∞) → [0, ∞) is a convex function with f (0) ≤ 0, then f (A) + f (B) ≤ f (A + B) (3.4) for all strictly positive operators A, B for which A ≤ M ≤ A + B and B ≤ M ≤ A + B for some scalar M. We give a refined extension of this result as follows. Theorem 3.6. If f : [0, ∞) → R is a convex function with f (0) ≤ 0 then f (Ci) ≤ f nXi=1 nXi=1 Ci! − δf nXi=1 eCi ≤ f nXi=1 Ci! (3.5) OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 15 for all positive operators Ci such that Ci ≤ M ≤Pn scalar M ≥ 0. If f is concave, then the reverse inequality is valid in (3.5). i=1 Ci (i = 1, . . . , n) for some In particular, if f is convex, then for all positive operators A, B such that A ≤ MI ≤ A + B and B ≤ MI ≤ A + B Proof. Without loss of generality let M > 0. Lemma 2.1 implies that for some scalar M ≥ 0, where eX = 1 −(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f (Ci) ≤ MI − Ci M − 0 1 − 1 − B M A M f (A) + f (B) ≤ f (A + B) − δfeX ≤ f (A + B) 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) −(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . f (M) − δfeCi f (M) − δfeCi = nXi=1 eCi. f (Ci) ≤ Pn i=1 Ci M f (M) − δf f (0) + M − 0 Ci M Ci since f (0) ≤ 0. Summing the above inequalities over i we get nXi=1 Since the spectrum ofPn f nXi=1 MI −Pn ≥ Pn Ci! ≥ i=1 Ci M M − 0 i=1 Ci f (M) f (M) i=1 Ci M − 0 f (0) +Pn (since MI ≤Pn (i = 1, . . . , n) (3.6) i=1 Ci is contained in [M, ∞) ⊂ [0, ∞) \ [0, M), we have i=1 Ci and f (0) ≤ 0). (3.7) Combining two inequalities (3.6) and (3.7), we reach to the desired inequality (cid:3) (3.5). Theorem 3.7. Let A, B, C, D ∈ σ(J) such that A ≤ m ≤ B, C ≤ M ≤ D for two real numbers m < M . If f is a convex function on J and any one of the following conditions (i) B + C ≤ A + D and f (m) ≤ f (M) (ii) A + D ≤ B + C and f (M) ≤ f (m) is satisfied, then 1 f (B) + f (C) ≤ f (A) + f (D) − δfeX ≤ f (A) + f (D), (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) . M − m(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)B − (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)C − (iii) B + C ≤ A + D and f (M) ≤ f (m) M + m M + m 2 2 If f is concave and any one of the following conditions where eX = 1 − (iv) A + D ≤ B + C and f (m) ≤ f (M) is satisfied, then inequality (3.8) is reversed. (3.8) 16 M.S. MOSLEHIAN, J. MI ´CI ´C, M. KIAN Proof. Let f be convex and (i) is valid. It follows from Lemma 2.1 that f (B) ≤ and f (C) ≤ f (M) − f (m) M − m B + f (m)M − f (M)m M − m f (M) − f (m) M − m C + f (m)M − f (M)m M − m Summing above inequalities we get 2 − δf(cid:18)1 −δf(cid:18)1 2 − 1 − 2 2 1 M + m M + m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) . M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)B − M − m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)C − − δf eX − δf eX (by (i)) f (B) + f (C) ≤ ≤ = f (M) − f (m) M − m f (M) − f (m) M − m f (M) − f (m) M − m (B + C) + 2 (A + D) + 2 f (m)M − f (M)m f (m)M − f (M)m M − m M − m A + f (m)M − f (M)m M − m f (m)M − f (M)m M − m − δf eX (by (2.8) and (2.9)) (by δfeX ≥ 0 ) + f (M) − f (m) M − m D + ≤ f (A) + f (D) − δfeX ≤ f (A) + f (D) The other cases can be verified similarly. (cid:3) Applying the above theorem to the power functions we get Corollary 3.8. Let A, B, C, D ∈ Bh(H ) be such that I ≤ A ≤ m ≤ B, C ≤ M ≤ D for two real numbers m < M . If one of the following conditions (i) B + C ≤ A + D and p ≥ 1 (ii) A + D ≤ B + C and p ≤ 0 is satisfied, then Proof. Let (i) be valid. Applying Theorem 3.7 for f (t) = tp, it follows for each q ≥ p, where Bp + C p ≤ Aq + Dq − δpeX ≤ Aq + Dq M − m(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)B − δp = mp+M p−2(cid:18) m + M 2 (cid:19)p Bp + C p ≤ Ap + Dp − δpeX ≤ Aq + Dq − δpeX , eX = 1− ≤ Aq + Dq 1 The other cases may be verified similarly. (by q ≥ p) (by δpeX ≥ 0 ) M + m 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)C − M + m 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) . (cid:3) OPERATOR INEQUALITIES OF JENSEN TYPE 17 Acknowledgement. The third author would like to thank the Tusi Mathe- matical Research Group (TMRG), Mashhad, Iran. References 1. T. Ando and X. Zhan, Norm inequalities related to operator monotone functions, Math. Ann. 315 (1999), 771 -- 780. 2. K. M.R. Audenaert and J.S. Aujla On norm sub-additivity and super-additivity inequalities for concave and convex functions , arXiv:1012.2254v2. 3. T. Furuta, J. Mi´ci´c Hot, J. Pecari´c and Y. Seo, Mond -- Pecari´c Method in Operator Inequal- ities, Zagreb, Element, 2005. 4. M. Kian and M.S. Moslehian, Operator inequalities related to Q-class functions, Math. Slovaca, (to appear). 5. A. Matkovi´c, J. Pecari´c and I. Peri´c, A variant of Jensen's inequality of Mercer's type for operators with applications, Linear Algebra Appl. 418 (2006), 551 -- 564. 6. J. Mi´ci´c, Z. Pavi´c and J. Pecari´c, Jensen's inequality for operators without operator convex- ity, Linear Algebra Appl. 434 (2011), 1228 -- 1237. 7. J. Mi´ci´c, J. Pecari´c and J. Peri´c, Refined Jensen's operator inequality with condition on spectra, Oper. Matrices 7 (2013), 293 -- 308. 8. M.S. Moslehian, Operator extensions of Hua's inequality, Linear Algebra Appl. 430 (2009), no. 4, 1131-1139. 9. M.S. Moslehian, J. Mi´ci´c and M. Kian, An operator inequality and its consequences, Linear Algebra Appl. (2012), . 10. M.S. Moslehian and H. Najafi. Around operator monotone functions, Integral Equations Operator Theory 71 (2011), 575 -- 582. 11. M. Uchiyama, Subadditivity of eigenvalue sums, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 134 (2006), 1405 -- 1412. 1 Department of Pure Mathematics, Center of Excellence in Analysis on Al- gebraic Structures (CEAAS), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, P.O. Box 1159, Mashhad 91775, Iran E-mail address: [email protected] and [email protected] 2 Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, University of Zagreb, Ivana Luci´ca 5, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia E-mail address: [email protected] 3 Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Basic Sciences, University of Bo- jnord, Bojnord, Iran E-mail address: [email protected]
1104.5195	1	1104	2011-04-27T17:20:32	A hyponormal weighted shift on a directed tree whose square has trivial domain	[ "math.FA" ]	It is proved that, up to isomorphism, there are only two directed trees that admit a hyponormal weighted shift with nonzero weights whose square has trivial domain. These are precisely those enumerable directed trees, one with root, the other without, whose every vertex has enumerable set of successors.	math.FA	math	A hyponormal weighted shift on a directed tree whose square has trivial domain Zenon Jan Jab lo´nski, Il Bong Jung, and Jan Stochel Abstract. It is proved that, up to isomorphism, there are only two directed trees that admit a hyponormal weighted shift with nonzero weights whose square has trivial domain. These are precisely those enumerable directed trees, one with root, the other without, whose every vertex has enumerable set of successors. 1. Introduction In a recent paper [4] a question of subnormality of unbounded weighted shifts on directed trees has been investigated. A criterion for subnormality of such operators whose C∞-vectors are dense in the underlying Hilbert space has been established (cf. [4, Theorem 5.2.1]). It has been written in terms of consistent systems of Borel probability measures. The assumption that the operator in question has a dense set of C∞-vectors diminishes the class of weighted shifts on directed trees to which this criterion can be applied (note that the set of all C∞-vectors of a classical, unilateral or bilateral, weighted shift is always dense in the underlying Hilbert space). Unfor- tunately, there is no general criterion for subnormality of densely defined operators that have small set of C∞-vectors. The known characterizations of subnormality of unbounded Hilbert space operators require the existence of additional objects (like semispectral measures, elementary spectral measures or sequences of unbounded operators) that have to satisfy appropriate, more or less complicated, conditions (cf. [3, 7, 20, 21]). Among subnormal operators having small set of C∞-vectors, the symmetric ones (which are always subnormal, see [1, Theorem 1 in Appen- dix I.2]) play an essential role. According to [13] (see also [5]) there are closed symmetric operators whose squares have trivial domain. Unfortunately, symmetric weighted shifts on directed trees are automatically bounded; the same is true for formally normal weighted shifts on directed trees (cf. [9, Proposition 3.1]). The above discussion leads to the following problem. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47B37, 47B20; Secondary 47A05. Key words and phrases. Directed tree, weighted shift on a directed tree, hyponormal opera- tor, trivial domain of square. Research of the first and the third authors was supported by the MNiSzW (Ministry of Science and Higher Education) grant NN201 546438 (2010-2013). The second author was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MEST) (No. R01-2008-000-20088-0). 1 2 Z. J. JAB LO ´NSKI, I. B. JUNG, AND J. STOCHEL Question. Does there exist a subnormal weighted shift on a directed tree with nonzero weights whose square has trivial domain? At present, this question is unanswered (the reason for this is explained partially in the previous paragraph). However, as is shown in Theorem 4.2, there are injective hyponormal weighted shifts on directed trees with nonzero weights whose squares have trivial domain. What is more, it is proved in Theorem 3.1 that the only directed trees admitting densely defined weighted shifts with nonzero weights whose squares have trivial domain are those enumerable directed trees whose every vertex has enumerable set of successors (children). 2. Preliminaries In what follows, C stands for the set of all complex numbers. Let A be an operator in a complex Hilbert space H (all operators considered in this paper are linear). Denote by D(A) and A∗ the domain and the adjoint of A (in case it exists). A closed densely defined operator N in H is called normal if N∗N = N N∗. A densely defined operator S in H is said to be subnormal if there exists a complex Hilbert space K and a normal operator N in K such that H ⊆ K (isometric embedding) and Sh = N h for all h ∈ D(S). Finally, a densely defined operator S in H is called hyponormal if D(S) ⊆ D(S∗) and kS∗fk 6 kSfk for all f ∈ D(S). It is well-known that subnormal operators are hyponormal (but not conversely) and that hyponormal operators are closable and their closures are hyponormal (subnormal operators have an analogous property). We refer the reader to [2, 22] for basic facts on unbounded operators, [6, 16, 17, 18, 19] for the foundations of the theory of (bounded and unbounded) subnormal operators and [14, 10, 11, 12, 15] for elements of the theory of unbounded hyponormal operators. Let T = (V, E) be a directed tree (V and E always stand for the sets of vertices and edges of T , respectively). If T has a root, which will always be denoted by root, then we write V ◦ := V \ {root}; otherwise, we put V ◦ = V . Set Chi(u) = {v ∈ V : (u, v) ∈ E} for u ∈ V . If for a given vertex u ∈ V there exists a unique vertex v ∈ V such that (v, u) ∈ E, then we denote it by par(u). The correspondence u 7→ par(u) is a partial function from V to V . For an integer n > 1, the n-fold composition of the partial function par with itself will be denoted by parn. Let par0 stand for the identity map on V . We call T leafless if V = {u ∈ V : Chi(u) 6= ∅}. If W ⊆ V , we put Chi(W ) = Sv∈W Chi(v) and Des(W ) = S∞n=0 Chihni(W ), where Chih0i(W ) = W and Chihn+1i(W ) = Chi(Chihni(W )) for all integers n > 0. For u ∈ V , we set Chihni(u) = Chihni({u}) and Des(u) = Des({u}). Combining equalities (2.1.3), (6.1.3) and (2.1.10) of [8] with [8, Corollary 2.1.5], we obtain (2.1) (2.2) (2.3) (2.4) (2.5) Chi(u), V ◦ = Gu∈V Chihn+1i(u) = Gv∈Chihni(u) Chi(v), u ∈ V, n = 0, 1, 2, . . . , ∞ Des(u) = Gn=0 Des(u1) ∩ Des(u2) = ∅, Chihni(u), u ∈ V, u1, u2 ∈ Chi(u), u1 6= u2, u ∈ V, V = Des(root) provided that T has a root, A HYPONORMAL WEIGHTED SHIFT WHOSE SQUARE HAS TRIVIAL DOMAIN 3 where the symbol F is reserved to denote pairwise disjoint union of sets. Let ℓ2(V ) be the Hilbert space of all square summable complex functions on V equipped with the standard inner product. For u ∈ V , we define eu ∈ ℓ2(V ) to be the characteristic function of the one point set {u}. The family {eu}u∈V is an orthonormal basis of ℓ2(V ). Denote by EV the linear span of {eu : u ∈ V }. Given λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ ⊆ C, we define the operator Sλ in ℓ2(V ) by D(Sλ) = {f ∈ ℓ2(V ) : ΛT f ∈ ℓ2(V )}, Sλf = ΛT f, where ΛT is the map defined on functions f : V → C via (2.6) f ∈ D(Sλ), (ΛT f )(v) =(λv · f(cid:0) par(v)(cid:1) 0 if v ∈ V ◦, if v = root . Sλ is called a weighted shift on the directed tree T with weights {λv}v∈V ◦ . Note that any weighted shift Sλ on T is a closed operator (cf. [8, Proposition 3.1.2]). Combining Propositions 3.1.3, 3.1.7 and 3.1.10 of [8], we get the following fact (hereafter we adopt the convention that Pv∈∅ xv = 0). Proposition 2.1. Let Sλ be a weighted shift on a directed tree T with weights λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ . Then the following assertions hold: (i) eu is in D(Sλ) if and only if Pv∈Chi(u) λv2 < ∞; if eu ∈ D(Sλ), then (2.7) λvev Sλeu = Xv∈Chi(u) and kSλeuk2 = Xv∈Chi(u) λv2, (ii) Sλ is densely defined if and only if EV ⊆ D(Sλ), (iii) Sλ is injective if and only if T is leafless and Pv∈Chi(u) λv2 > 0 for (iv) if D(Sλ) = ℓ2(V ) and λv 6= 0 for all v ∈ V ◦, then V is at most countable. every u ∈ V , 3. Directed trees admitting Sλ's with D(S2 λ) = {0} The proof of Theorem 3.1 below contains a method of constructing densely defined weighted shifts Sλ on directed trees with nonzero weights such that D(S2 λ) = {0}. By imposing carefully tailored restrictions on weights, we will show in Theorem 4.2 below how to use this method to construct hyponormal weighted shifts on directed trees with the aforesaid properties. Theorem 3.1. Let T be a directed tree. Then the following assertions are equiv- alent: D(Sλ) = ℓ2(V ) and D(S2 (i) there exists a family λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ of nonzero complex numbers such that λ) = {0}, (ii) card(Chi(u)) = ℵ0 for every u ∈ V . Moreover, if Sλ is as in (i), then Sλ is injective. Proof. Fix λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ ⊆ C. We show that (†) a complex function f on V belongs to D(S2 λ) if and only if1 (3.1) Xu∈V (cid:16)1 + ζ2 u + Xv∈Chi(u) ζ2 vλv2(cid:17)f (u)2 < ∞, 1 with the convention that 0 · ∞ = 0 4 Z. J. JAB LO ´NSKI, I. B. JUNG, AND J. STOCHEL where ζu :=qPv∈Chi(u) λv2 for u ∈ V . if and only if f ∈ ℓ2(V ) and Pu∈V ζ2 Pu∈V ζ2 tion f on V belongs to D(S2 Indeed, by [8, Proposition 3.1.3], a complex function f on V belongs to D(Sλ) uf (u)2 < ∞. Hence a complex func- u)f (u)2 < ∞ and u (Sλf )(u)2 < ∞. Since the following equalities hold for f ∈ D(Sλ), λ) if and only if Pu∈V (1 + ζ2 ζ2 u λu2f (par(u))2 u (Sλf )(u)2 (2.6) ζ2 Xu∈V (2.1) = Xu∈V ◦ = Xu∈V Xv∈Chi(u) = Xu∈V (cid:16) Xv∈Chi(u) vλv2f (par(v)2 ζ2 vλv2(cid:17)f (u)2, ζ2 we see that a complex function f on V belongs to D(S2 λ) if and only if (3.1) holds. (i)⇒(ii) Let Sλ be as in (i). By Proposition 2.1(iv), V is countable. Thus each Chi(u) is countable. Suppose that, contrary to our claim, (ii) does not hold. Then there exists u0 ∈ V such that Chi(u0) is finite. Since Sλ is densely defined, we infer from assertions (i) and (ii) of Proposition 2.1 that ζv < ∞ for all v ∈ V . Hence 1 + ζ2 u0 + Xv∈Chi(u0) ζ2 vλv2 < ∞. This, combined with (†), implies that f = eu0 ∈ D(S2 λ), which contradicts (i). (ii)⇒(i) First, we show that (‡) for each (ϑ, u) ∈ (0,∞) × V there exists {λv}v∈Des(u) ⊆ (0,∞) such that (3.2) (3.3) (cid:16) Xw∈Chi(v) λ2 u = ϑ, v = 1, λ2 w(cid:17)λ2 v ∈ Des(u). To do so, we fix u ∈ V and set Xn = Chih0i(u) ⊔ ··· ⊔ Chihni(u) for n > 1, and X0 = Chih0i(u). Since, by (2.3), Des(u) = S∞n=1 Xn, we can construct the required family inductively. For n = 1, we put λu = √ϑ and choose a family {λv}v∈Chi(u) ⊆ (0,∞) such that(cid:0)Pv∈Chi(u) λ2 v(cid:1)ϑ = 1 (this is possible because Chi(u) is nonempty and countable). Fix n > 1, and assume that we already have a family {λv}v∈Xn ⊆ (0,∞) such that λ2 v = 1 for all v ∈ Xn−1. Then for every v ∈ Chihni(u) we can choose a family {λw}w∈Chi(v) ⊆ (0,∞) such that (cid:0)Pw∈Chi(v) λ2 v = 1. In view of (2.2), this gives us the family {λv}v∈Chihn+1i(u) such that (cid:0)Pw∈Chi(v) λ2 v = 1 for all v ∈ Xn. Now by induction we are done. u = ϑ and (cid:0)Pw∈Chi(v) λ2 does the job (the number λroot can be chosen arbitrarily). If T has a root, then combining (†) and (‡) with (2.5) and Proposition 2.1(i) Suppose now that T is rootless. Take u1 ∈ V and set u2 = par(u1). By , which sat- In the next step we construct a new fam- such that the extended family (‡), there exists a family {λv}v∈Des(u1) ⊆ (0,∞) with λu1 = 1√2 isfies (3.3) with u1 in place of u. ily {λv}v∈Des(u2)\Des(u1) ⊆ (0,∞) with λu2 = 1√2 w(cid:1)λ2 w(cid:1)λ2 w(cid:1)λ2 A HYPONORMAL WEIGHTED SHIFT WHOSE SQUARE HAS TRIVIAL DOMAIN 5 {λv}v∈Des(u2) satisfies (3.3) with u2 in place of u. For this, note that (3.4) Des(u). (2.4) Des(u2) \ Des(u1) = {u2} ⊔ Gu∈Chi(u2)\{u1} Set λu2 = 1√2 and choose a family {ϑu}u∈Chi(u2)\{u1} ⊆ (0,∞) such that (3.5) (cid:16) Xu∈Chi(u2)\{u1} ϑu + λ2 u2 = 1. u1(cid:17)λ2 Applying (‡) to u ∈ Chi(u2) \ {u1} and ϑ = ϑu, we get the family {λv}v∈Des(u) ⊆ (0,∞) satisfying (3.2) and (3.3) with ϑ = ϑu. This, together with (3.5), leads to (cid:0)Pu∈Chi(u2) λ2 u2 = 1. In view of (3.4), our construction is complete. Ap- plying an induction argument (with λun = 1√2 for n > 2) and using the fact that V = S∞k=0 Des(park(u1)) (cf. [8, Proposition 2.1.6]), we construct a family λ = {λv}v∈V ⊆ (0,∞) such that ζ2 v = 1 for all v ∈ V . This, combined with (†) and Proposition 2.1(i), gives (i). u(cid:1)λ2 v λ2 The "moreover" part follows from (ii) and Proposition 2.1(iii). (cid:3) Our method enables us to construct Sλ with the additional property that D(Sλ) * D(S∗λ), which is opposite to what happens in Theorem 4.2 below. Theorem 3.2. If T is a directed tree such that card(Chi(u)) = ℵ0 for every u ∈ V , then there exists a family λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ of nonzero complex numbers such that Sλ is injective and densely defined, D(Sλ) * D(S∗λ) and D(S2 λ) = {0}. Proof. To achieve this, we proceed as in the proof of implication (ii)⇒(i) of Theorem 3.1 with one exception, namely, we strengthen (‡) by requiring, in addition to (3.2) and (3.3), that (3.6) sup v∈Chi(u) Xw∈Chi(v) λ4 w 1 + λ2 w = ∞. This in turn can be deduced from the following fact: (3.7) n = α2. for every real number α > 0, there exists a sequence {λn}∞n=1 ⊆ (0,∞) such that λ1 − α < 1 and P∞n=1 λ2 v(cid:1)ϑ = 1. Then evidently supv∈Chi(u) 1/λ2 Indeed, arguing as in the proof of (‡), we find a family {λv}v∈Chi(u) ⊆ (0,∞) such that (cid:0)Pv∈Chi(u) λ2 v = ∞. In the next step, using (3.7), we construct a family {λw}w∈Chih2i(u) such that(cid:0)Pw∈Chi(v) λ2 w(cid:1) = 1/λ2 for every v ∈ Chi(u) and supw∈Chih2i(u) λ2 w = ∞. This, combined with (2.2), implies (3.6). The rest of the proof goes through as for (‡), with hardly any changes. It follows from (2.7) and (3.3) that kSλewk2 = 1/λ2 w for all w ∈ Des(u), which λw2 together with (3.6) implies that supv∈V Pw∈Chi(v) 1+kSλewk2 = ∞. By applying [8, Theorem 4.1.1], we deduce that D(Sλ) * D(S∗λ). Obviously, such Sλ is never hyponormal. (cid:3) v 4. Hyponormal weighted shifts Sλ with D(S2 λ) = {0} Let us recall a characterization of hyponormality of weighted shifts on directed trees with nonzero weights (in view of [4, Proposition 5.3.1], there is no loss of generality in assuming that underlying directed trees are leafless). 6 Z. J. JAB LO ´NSKI, I. B. JUNG, AND J. STOCHEL Theorem 4.1 ([8, Theorem 5.1.2 and Remark 5.1.5]). Let Sλ be a densely defined weighted shift on a leafless directed tree T with nonzero weights λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ . Then Sλ is hyponormal if and only if Xv∈Chi(u) λv2 kSλevk2 6 1, u ∈ V. Now we show that there are hyponormal weighted shifts Sλ with D(S2 λ) = {0}. Theorem 4.2. If T is a directed tree such that card(Chi(u)) = ℵ0 for every u ∈ V , then there exists a family λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ of nonzero complex numbers such that Sλ is injective and hyponormal, and D(S2 λ) = {0}. 1 λ2 Proof. We modify the proof of implication (ii)⇒(i) of Theorem 3.1. First we note that for each positive real number r, there exists a sequence {rn}∞n=1 ⊆ (0, 1) such that (P∞j=1 rj) r = 1 and P∞j=1 r2 rn for 1 6 j 6 n − 1, and 6 1). This fact, when rj = incorporated to the proof of (‡), leads to rn2j−n+1 for j > n, where n > 2 is chosen so that j 6 1 (e.g., rj = 1 1 (‡‡) for each (ϑ, u) ∈ (0,∞) × V there exists {λv}v∈Des(u) ⊆ (0, 1) such that w(cid:1)λ2 u = ϑ, (cid:0)Pw∈Chi(v) λ2 w 6 1 for all v ∈ Des(u). If T has a root, then applying (‡‡) to u = root and ϑ = 1 we get a family λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ ⊆ (0, 1) such that w(cid:1)λ2 (4.1) v = 1 and Pw∈Chi(v) λ4 v = 1 and Xw∈Chi(v) λ4 w 6 1 for all v ∈ V . (cid:0) Xw∈Chi(v) λ2 r2n Suppose now that T is rootless. It is easily seen that for every r ∈ (0, 1), there exists a sequence {rj}∞j=1 ⊆ (0, 1) such that r +P∞j=1 rj = 2 and r2 +P∞j=1 r2 j 6 1. This fact combined with the proof of Theorem 3.1 (use (‡‡) in place of (‡)) enables us to construct a family λ = {λv}v∈V ⊆ (0, 1) that satisfies (4.1). Since card(Chi(u)) = ℵ0 for all u ∈ V , we infer from assertions (i) and (iii) of Proposition 2.1, (4.1) and (†) that Sλ is injective and densely defined, and λ) = {0}. It follows from (2.7) and the equality in (4.1) that λ2 D(S2 v = kSλevk−2 for all v ∈ V ◦, and thus Xv∈Chi(u) kSλevk2 = Xv∈Chi(u) u ∈ V, (4.1) 6 1, λ4 v λ2 v which in view of Theorem 4.1 completes the proof. (cid:3) Remark 4.3. In view of Theorems 3.2 and 4.2, the weighted shift Sλ constructed in the proof of implication (ii)⇒(i) of Theorem 3.1 may satisfy either of the following two conditions: D(Sλ) * D(S∗λ) or D(Sλ) ⊆ D(S∗λ). It turns out that this general construction always guarantees that D(S∗λ) * D(Sλ). Indeed, since for a fixed u ∈ V , kSλevk2 = 1/λ2 v < ∞, we deduce that the function φ : Chi(u) ∋ v 7→ kSλevk ∈ C is unbounded, and thus the operator Mu in ℓ2(Chi(u)) of multiplication by φ is unbounded (note that the function λu : Chi(u) ∋ v 7→ λv ∈ C does not belong to D(Mu), and so the definition [8, (4.2.2)] makes no sense). Applying [8, Theorem 4.2.2], we conclude that D(S∗λ) * D(Sλ). v for all v ∈ Des(u) (cf. (3.3)) and Pv∈Chi(u) λ2 A HYPONORMAL WEIGHTED SHIFT WHOSE SQUARE HAS TRIVIAL DOMAIN 7 Remark 4.4. It is worth pointing out that if T is a directed tree such that card(Chi(u)) = ℵ0 for every u ∈ V , Sλ is a densely defined weighted shifts on T with nonzero weights λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ such that D(S2 λ) = {0} (cf. Theorem 3.1) and v0 ∈ V ◦, then the weighted shift S λ on T with nonzero weights λ = {λv}v∈V ◦ given by λv =(λv p1 + kSλevk2 for v 6= v0, for v = v0, is densely defined, D(Sλ) = D(S λ) (use [8, Proposition 3.1.3(i)]), D(S∗λ) = D(S∗λ) (use [8, Proposition 3.4.1(iv)]), S λ is not hyponormal (use Theorem 4.1) and D(S2 λ) = {0} (use (3.1)). Hence, if Sλ is constructed as in the proof of Theo- rem 4.2, then by Remark 4.3 we have D(S λ) D(S∗λ). Acknowledgement. The substantial part of this paper was written while the first and the third authors visited Kyungpook National University during the autumn of 2010 and the spring of 2011. They wish to thank the faculty and the administration of this unit for their warm hospitality. References [1] N. I. Akhiezer, I. M. Glazman, Theory of linear operators in Hilbert space, Vol. II, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1993. [2] M. Sh. Birman, M. Z. Solomjak, Spectral theory of selfadjoint operators in Hilbert space, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, 1987. [3] E. Bishop, Spectral theory for operators on a Banach space, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 86 (1957), 414-445. [4] P. Budzy´nski, Z. Jab lo´nski, I. B. Jung, J. Stochel, Unbounded subnormal weighted shifts on directed trees, preprint 2011. [5] P. R. Chernoff, A semibounded closed symmetric operator whose square has trivial domain, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 89 (1983), 289-290. [6] J. B. Conway, The theory of subnormal operators, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, Providence, Rhode Island, 1991. [7] C. Foia¸s, D´ecompositions en op´erateurs et vecteurs propres. I., ´Etudes de ces d`ecompositions et leurs rapports avec les prolongements des op´erateurs, Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl. 7 (1962), 241-282. [8] Z. J. Jab lo´nski, I. B. Jung, J. Stochel, Weighted shifts on directed trees, to appear in Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. [9] Z. J. Jab lo´nski, I. B. Jung, J. Stochel, Normal extensions escape from the class of weighted shifts on directed trees, preprint 2011. [10] J. Janas, On unbounded hyponormal operators, Ark. Mat. 27 (1989), 273-281. [11] J. Janas, On unbounded hyponormal operators. II, Integr. Equat. Oper. Th. 15 (1992), 470- 478. [12] J. Janas, On unbounded hyponormal operators. III, Studia Math. 112 (1994), 75-82. [13] M. Naimark, On the square of a closed symmetric operator, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 26 (1940), 866-870; ibid. 28 (1940), 207-208. [14] S. Ota, K. Schmudgen, On some classes of unbounded operators, Integr. Equat. Oper. Th. 12 (1989), 211-226. [15] J. Stochel, An asymmetric Putnam-Fuglede theorem for unbounded operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), 2261-2271. [16] J. Stochel, F. H. Szafraniec, On normal extensions of unbounded operators. I, J. Operator Theory 14 (1985), 31-55. [17] J. Stochel and F. H. Szafraniec, On normal extensions of unbounded operators. II, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 53 (1989), 153-177. [18] J. Stochel, F. H. Szafraniec, On normal extensions of unbounded operators. III, Spectral properties, Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ. 25 (1989), 105-139. 8 Z. J. JAB LO ´NSKI, I. B. JUNG, AND J. STOCHEL [19] J. Stochel, F. H. Szafraniec, The complex moment problem and subnormality: a polar de- composition approach, J. Funct. Anal. 159(1998), 432-491. [20] F. H. Szafraniec, Sesquilinear selection of elementary spectral measures and subnormality, Elementary operators and applications (Blaubeuren, 1991), 243-248, World Sci. Publ., River Edge, NJ, 1992. [21] F. H. Szafraniec, On normal extensions of unbounded operators. IV. A matrix construction, Operator theory and indefinite inner product spaces, 337-350, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., 163, Birkhauser, Basel, 2006. [22] J. Weidmann, Linear operators in Hilbert spaces, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1980. Instytut Matematyki, Uniwersytet Jagiello´nski, ul. Lojasiewicza 6, PL-30348 Kra- k´ow, Poland E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 702-701, Ko- rea E-mail address: [email protected] Instytut Matematyki, Uniwersytet Jagiello´nski, ul. Lojasiewicza 6, PL-30348 Kra- k´ow, Poland E-mail address: [email protected]
1806.10321	1	1806	2018-06-27T07:20:00	On unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts	[ "math.FA" ]	We establish a characterization of unitary equivalence of two bilateral operator valued weighted shifts with quasi-invertible weights by an operator of diagonal form. We also present an example of unitary equivalence between shifts defined on $\mathbb{C}^2$ which cannot be given by any unitary operator of diagonal form. The paper is concluded with investigation of unitary operators than can give unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts.	math.FA	math	ON UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL OPERATOR VALUED WEIGHTED SHIFTS JAKUB KO´SMIDER Abstract. We establish a characterization of unitary equivalence of two bi- lateral operator valued weighted shifts with quasi-invertible weights by an operator of diagonal form. We also present an example of unitary equivalence between shifts defined on C2 which cannot be given by any unitary operator of diagonal form. The paper is concluded with investigation of unitary operators than can give unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts. 1. Introduction and preliminaries Classical weighted shift operators and their properties have already been studied for a long time by many authors (see, e.g., [15, 2, 14, 5]). By classical weighted shifts we understand both unilateral and bilateral weighted shifts defined on C. There are many papers devoted to problems of weighted shifts in more general context in which these operators are defined on arbitrary Hilbert spaces (see [11, 6, 8, 12, 3, 9]). In some of them authors give or use results concerning unitary equivalence (see [11, 6, 13, 12, 9]). Jab lo´nski, Jung and Stochel introduced in [10] the class of weighted shifts on directed trees, which generalizes unilateral and bilateral shifts with classical weights. Unitary equivalence of unilateral operator valued weighted shifts with invertible weights defined on arbitrary Hilbert space was characterized by Lambert in [11, Corollary 3.3]. Orovcanec provided in [13, Theorem 1] characterization in case shifts have quasi-invertible weights. This result was later proved with weaker as- sumptions, namely, for unilateral shifts with weights having dense ranges by Anand, Chavan, Jab lo´nski, Stochel in [1, Theorem 2.3]. Jab lo´nski proved in [9, Proposi- ton 2.2] that unilateral operator valued weighted shift with invertible weights is uni- tarily equivalent to unilateral operator valued weighted shift with weights {Tn}∞n=0 such that product Tn . . . T0 is a positive operator for all n ∈ N. The are some partial results regarding unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts. Li, Ji and Sun proved that each bilateral operator val- ued weighted shift with invertible weights defined on Cm for m ≥ 2 is unitarily equivalent to a shift with upper triangular weights (see [12, Theorem 2.1]). Shields provided in [15] characterization of unitary equivalence in case of classical bilateral shifts. Guyker proved in [6] a result regarding unitary equivalence of bilateral oper- ator valued weighted shift with the one having positive weights. The proof required additional assumption i.e., normality and commutativity of weights. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47B37; Secondary 47A62. Key words and phrases. unitary equivalence, bilateral shift, partial isometry, quasi-invertible weights. 1 2 JAKUB KO´SMIDER In what follows, we denote by N, N+, Z, R, R+ and C the sets of non-negative integers, positive integers, integers, real numbers, non-negative real numbers and complex numbers, respectively. Throughout the paper by H we denote a nonzero complex Hilbert space. The symbol B(H) stands for the C∗-algebra of all bounded operators defined on H. All operators considered in this paper are assumed to be linear. By R(A), N (A) and σ(A) we understand the range, the kernel and the spectrum of operator A ∈ B(H), respectively. As usual, I ∈ B(H) stands for the identity operator. Unitary equivalence of operators A and B ∈ B(H) will be denoted by A ∼= B. We also write A ∼=U B to emphasize that unitary equivalence is given by U . For a closed subspace M of H, by M⊥ we denote its orthogonal complement. If M and N are two closed subspaces of H, which are orthogonal, then we write M ⊥ N . We say that an operator A ∈ B(H) is quasi-invertible, if A is injective and R(A) = H. The reader can verify that, if A ∈ B(H) is quasi- invertible, then so is A∗. For a positive operator A ∈ B(H) we denote by A 2 the (positive) square root of A. Operator A ∈ B(H) is called a partial isometry if Ax = x for all x ∈ N (A)⊥. The following result is well known and it can be found in [4, Exercise VIII.3.15]. Lemma 1.1. Let A ∈ B(H). Then the following are equivalent: 1 (i) A is a partial isometry, (ii) A∗ is a partial isometry, (iii) A∗A is the orthogonal projection onto N (A)⊥, (iv) AA∗ is the orthogonal projection onto R(A), (v) AA∗A = A, (vi) A∗AA∗ = A∗. Despite of the fact that the following lemma is definitely folklore, we will state it for the reader's convenience, as we will refer to it later. Lemma 1.2. Assume that S, T ∈ B(H) have dense ranges. If Sx = T x for all x ∈ H, then there exists unitary operator V on H such that V S = T . We define a Hilbert space ℓ2(Z,H) as the space ⊕n∈ZH equipped with the inner product defined by hx, yi =P∞i=−∞hxi, yiiH for x, y ∈ ℓ2(Z,H). This space consists of all vectors x = (. . . , x−1, x0 , x1, . . . ) satisfying P∞n=−∞ xn2 < ∞, where · denotes the 0th element of x. Operator U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) can be expressed as infinite matrix [Ui,j]i,j∈Z, where Ui,j ∈ B(H) for all i, j ∈ Z. We say that S ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is a diagonal operator if there exists a two-sided sequence of operators {Sn}n∈Z ⊆ B(H) such that {Sn}n∈Z is bounded and x ∈ ℓ2(Z,H). S(. . . , x−1, x0 , x1, . . . ) = (. . . , S−1x−1, S0x0 , S1x1, . . . ), Let {Sn}n∈Z ⊆ B(H) be a two-sided sequence of nonzero operators such that H {Sn}n∈Z is bounded. We define S ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) by S(..., x−1, x0 , x1, ...) = (..., S−1x−2, S0x−1 , S1x0, ...), x ∈ ℓ2(Z,H). Operator S is called a bilateral operator valued weighted shift on H with operator weights {Sn}n∈Z and it will be denoted by S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z. Denote by F the unitary bilateral operator valued weighted shift with all weights being identity operators on H. We say that an operator S ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is of diagonal form if there exist k ∈ Z and a diagonal operator T ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) such that S = F kT . UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 3 Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z. We can represent S by the following infinite matrix S = . . . . . . . . . S0 . . . 0 . . . . . . 0 . . .   . . . . . . 0 S1 0 . . . 0 0 S2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   where · to [11], we do not assume that weights of S are invertible. indicates the element indexed by (0, 0). It is worth noting that, as opposed In this paper we focus on the problem of unitary equivalence of bilateral oper- ator valued weighted shifts with quasi-invertible weights. The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we investigate unitary equivalence given by operators of diagonal form. Corollary 2.4 establishes the characterization of unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts with quasi-invertible weights given by an operator of diagonal form. In Theorem 2.5 we prove that each bilateral operator valued weighted shift with quasi-invertible weights is unitarily equivalent to a bilat- eral weighted shift having positive weights. We conclude this section with proving that bilateral operator valued weighted shift having normal and commuting weights defined on Cm for m ≥ 2 is unitarily equivalent to a bilateral weighted shift with weights being diagonal operators (see Proposition 2.9). Section 3 is devoted to the problem of unitary equivalence given by operators that are not of diagonal form and to investigation of unitary operators on ℓ2(Z,H) that can give unitary equivalence of weighted shifts. We begin it with Example 3.1 that shows two bilateral operator valued weighted shifts defined on C2 which are unitarily equivalent, but the unitary equivalence is not given by any operator of diagonal form. Proposition 3.2 states that, if U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) contains exactly two nonzero diagonals and all other elements of U are zero operators, then the operators on these diagonals are partial isometries. We also investigate unitary operators that give unitary equivalence of bilateral weighted shifts defined on Cm for m ≥ 2. Proposition 3.6 states that under some additional assumptions, if U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z, C2)) is unitary and all elements of U except for three diagonals are zero operators, then one of the diagonals contains only zero operators. Finally, Section 4 contains final remarks and concludes some open problems related to unitary equivalence of bilateral weighted shifts. 2. Unitary equivalence given by an operator of diagonal form In this section we present results related to unitary equivalence of bilateral oper- ator valued weighted shifts given by an operator of diagonal form. It contains also some general facts which usage is not limited to this section. We will begin with stating the following key lemma required for further refer- ences, which is a two-sided counterpart of [13, Lemma] (see also [11, Lemma 2.1] and [15, Proposition 5 (a)]). Its proof is left to the reader. Lemma 2.1. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z and Sn, Tn be quasi-invertible for each n ∈ Z. Assume that A ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)). Then the following are equivalent: (i) AS = T A, 4 JAKUB KO´SMIDER (ii) Ai+1,j+1Sj = TiAi,j for each i, j ∈ Z. There is a significant difference between [13, Lemma] and the one presented above. In the case of unilateral weighted shifts every vector in the range of a shift has the zero as the first element. Hence, each operator intertwining two unilateral weighted shifts has a triangular matrix. In the case of bilateral weighted shifts equality AS = T A does not imply triangularity of A (see Example 3.1 below). Lemma 2.1 gives the following important result. Corollary 2.2. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z and Sn, Tn be quasi-invertible for each n ∈ Z. Assume that A ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) be such that AS = T A. If Ai,j 6= 0 for some i, j ∈ Z, then Ai+n,j+n 6= 0 for all n ∈ Z. It follows from Corollary 2.2 that the unitary operator   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 0 0 0 0 . . . I I 0 1√2 0 1√2 0 . . . 0 I I 0 0 1√2 0 0 − 1√2 0 0 . . . . . . I 0 0 0 0 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   does not give unitary equivalence between any two bilateral operator valued weight- ed shifts with quasi-invertible weights. The following theorem gives a necessary and sufficient condition for two bilateral operator valued weighted shifts with quasi-invertible weights to be unitarily equiv- alent by an operator of diagonal form. Proof of this fact is based on the proof of similar result for unilateral operator valued weighted shifts from [1, Theorem 2.3] (see also [13, Theorem 1]). Theorem 2.3. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z and m ∈ Z be such that Sm+n, Tn, S∗m−n−1 and T ∗ −n−1 have dense ranges for n ∈ N. Then the following are equivalent (i) there exists U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) of diagonal form such that S ∼=U T and U0,m 6= 0, (ii) there exists unitary operator U0,m ∈ B(H) such that the following hold: (a) Sm+n−1 . . . Smx = Tn−1 . . . T0U0,mx for all x ∈ H and n ∈ N+, (b) S∗m−n . . . S∗m−1x = T ∗ −1U0,mx for all x ∈ H and n ∈ N+. Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii). Assume that S ∼=U T , where U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is of diagonal form. Let n ∈ N+. Then, by Lemma 2.1, −n . . . T ∗ Un,m+nSm+n−1 . . . Sm = Tn−1 . . . T0U0,m. which implies (a). Let us now check that (b) also holds. Let n ∈ N+. Again, by Lemma 2.1, U0,mSm−1 . . . Sm−n = T−1 . . . T−nU−n,m−n which is equivalent to the following Sm−1 . . . Sm−nU∗ −n,m−n = U∗0,mT−1 . . . T−n. UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 5 After taking adjoints we get that for all x ∈ H and n ∈ N+ it is true that S∗m−n . . . S∗m−1x = T ∗ −n . . . T ∗ −1U0,mx, which proves (b). (ii) ⇒ (i). We will construct U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) of diagonal form with unitary Un+1,m+n+1Sm+n = TnUn,m+n, n ∈ Z. operators Un,m+n ∈ B(H) on its diagonal, which satisfy the following (2.1) In order to simplify formulas we introduce notation Vn := Un,m+n for n ∈ Z. We will begin with constructing operators Vn for n ∈ N+. Since Sm and T0V0 have dense ranges and (a) holds with n = 1, then, by Lemma 1.2, there exists unitary V1 such that V1Sm = T0V0. Now, assume that n > 1 and unitary operators V1, . . . , Vn are already defined to be such that Vi+1Sm+i = TiVi for i ∈ {1, . . . , n−1}. Again, we use Lemma 1.2 for operators Sm+n . . . Sm and Tn . . . T0V0, which have dense ranges and get that there exists a unitary operator Vn+1 such that By the above we see that Vn+1Sm+n . . . Sm = Tn . . . T0V0. (Vn+1Sm+n − TnVn)Sm+n−1 . . . Sm = Vn+1Sm+n . . . Sm − Tn . . . T0U0 = 0. (2.2) Since Sm+n−1 . . . Sm has dense range, (2.2) implies that Vn+1Sm+n = TnVn. We will now focus on finding operators V−n for n ∈ N+. We begin with definition of V−1. Since S∗m−1 and T ∗ −1U0,m have dense ranges and (b) holds for n = 1, by Lemma 1.2, there exists a unitary V−1 such that V−1S∗m−1 = T ∗ −1U0. This implies that V0Sm−1 = T−1V−1. Let n > 1. Assume that V−1, . . . , V−n+1 are already defined unitary operators on H such that V−i+1Sm−i = T−iV−i for i ∈ {1, . . . , n−1}. We will construct V−n such that V−n+1Sm−n = T−nV−n. It is enough to find V−n so that the following holds V−nS∗m−n . . . S∗m−1 = T ∗ because then we will get the following equality −n . . . T ∗ −1V0, V0Sm−1 . . . Sm−n = T−1 . . . T−nV−n. We get V−n by using Lemma 1.2 for operators S∗m−n . . . S∗m−1 and T ∗ −1V0 with dense ranges. Now, we only need to show that V−n+1Sm−n = T−nV−n. We will do this by proving that V−nS∗m−n = T ∗ −nV−n+1, which is an equivalent condition. Let us consider the following: (V−nS∗m−n−T ∗ Since S∗m−n+1 . . . S∗m−1 has dense range, V−nS∗m−n = T ∗ We constructed sequence {Un,m+n}n∈Z of unitary operators such that (2.1) holds. By Lemma 2.1 it is true that S ∼=U T , where U is of diagonal form. This completes the proof. −nV−n+1)S∗m−n+1 . . . S∗m−1 = V−nS∗m−n . . . S∗m−1−T ∗ −nV−n+1. −n . . . T ∗ −1V0 = 0. −n . . . T ∗ (cid:3) It is worth noting that, if we additionally assume that S and T have quasi- invertible weights in Theorem 2.3, then we can choose any other operator Uk,m+k instead of U0,m for k ∈ Z and modify the statement. In this way we get the following result. Corollary 2.4. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z have quasi-invertible weights and let m ∈ Z. Then the following are equivalent 6 JAKUB KO´SMIDER (i) there exists U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) of diagonal form such that S ∼=U T and U0,m 6= 0, (ii) there exist k ∈ Z and unitary operator Uk,m+k ∈ B(H) such that the following hold: (a) Sm+n+k−1 . . . Sm+kx = Tn+k−1 . . . TkUk,m+kx for all x ∈ H and (b) S∗m−n+k . . . S∗m−1+kx = T ∗ −1+kUk,m+kx for all x ∈ H −n+k . . . T ∗ n ∈ N+, and n ∈ N+. Next result that we will prove is the unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shift with the one having positive weights. Shields proved in [15] that each bilateral weighted shift with weights {an}n∈Z ⊆ C is unitarily equiva- lent to the shift with weights {an}n∈Z. This fact follows from [15, Theorem 1]. Pietrzycki used it to prove that each bounded injective classical bilateral weighted shift S satisfying S∗nSn = (S∗S)n for any n ≥ 2 is quasinormal (see [14, Theo- rem 3.3]). Jab lo´nski, Jung and Stochel generalized Shields' result to the class of weighted shifts on directed trees (see [10, Theorem 3.2.1]). In the case of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts the situation is more complicated. Guyker proved in [6, Theorem 1] that, if S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z has weights that are commuting and normal operators, then S is unitarily equivalent to the bilateral operator valued weighted shift with weights of the form (S∗nSn) 2 . This result is similar to the one of Shields for shifts with classical weights. Ivanovski mentioned in [8] that, without loss of generality, we can assume that each bilateral operator valued weighted shift can be assumed to have positive weights. He referenced [11]. However, in [11] there is only a proof of unitary equivalence of shifts with those of positive weights for unilateral operator valued weighted shifts with invertible weights. 1 We will now prove the fact that each bilateral operator valued weighted shift is unitarily equivalent to a bilateral shift with positive weights. We use argument which is based on similar results from [13, 11] for unilateral operator valued weighted shifts. Theorem 2.5. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z and Sn be quasi-invertible for all n ∈ Z. Then S ∼= T , where T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z and each Tn is positive. Proof. It follows from the polar decomposition that for each n ∈ Z there exist unitary Un and positive Pn such that Sn = UnPn. Let P and U be diagonal operators on ℓ2(Z,H) such that Pn = Pn+1 and Un = Un+1 for all n ∈ Z. Simple calculation can prove that S = F U P . It is easy to verify that condition (ii) from Theorem 2.3 is satisfied as F and F U have unitary weights. Thus there exists a diagonal operator V ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) such that V F = F U V . It is true that S = F U P = V V ∗F U P = V F V ∗ P = V (F V ∗ P V )V ∗. Observe that V ∗ P V is a diagonal operator. This implies that F V ∗ P V is a bilateral operator valued weighted shift. Since unitary equivalence preserves positivity and elements of V ∗ P V are unitarily equivalent to elements of P , the proof is completed. (cid:3) Now we will state a useful fact which gives necessary conditions of unitary equiv- alence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts given by operator of diagonal form. UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 7 Lemma 2.6. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z have quasi-invertible weights. Sup- pose that S ∼=U T , where U is of diagonal form and U0,k 6= 0 for some k ∈ Z. Then Sn+k = Tn for each n ∈ Z. Proof. Define Vn = Un,n+k for all n ∈ Z. By Lemma 2.1, Vn+1Sn+k = TnVn for each n ∈ Z, where operators Un are unitary. Therefore, we see that Tn = Vn+1Sn+kV ∗n and Sn+k = V ∗n+1TnVn for each n ∈ Z. This completes the proof. (cid:3) In the following proposition we provide necessary condition of unitary equiva- lence given by a diagonal operator for H = C2. Proposition 2.7. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z be defined on C2 and have normal weights. Assume that S ∼=U T where U is a diagonal operator. Then the modulus of eigenvalues of corresponding weights are equal. Proof. Since all weights are normal matrices, then they are diagonalizable. There- fore, it is easy to see that we can diagonalize (using unitary operator) one of the weights in each shifts. Let n ∈ Z. By the above we can assume that Sn and Tn are diagonal matrices. By Corollary 2.4 there exists unitary V ∈ B(C2) such that Snx = TnV x for all x ∈ C2. Let us now assume that V =(cid:20)v1 Sn =(cid:20)s1 Tn =(cid:20)t1 s2(cid:21) , t2(cid:21) , v2 v4(cid:21) Taking x = (1, 0) and y = (0, 1), by the previous property, we get the following v3 0 0 0 0 system of equations: s12 = v1t12 + v3t22, s22 = v2t12 + v4t22. We see that both equations are convex combinations. Also, by Lemma 2.6, it is true that max{s1,s2} = max{t1,t2}. Since V is unitary, it must be true that (s1 = t1 s2 = t2 or (s1 = t2 s2 = t1 which is exactly our claim. (cid:3) We can now use the above result to determine whether two bilateral operator valued weighted shifts on C2 are unitarily equivalent by a diagonal operator. First, we use Theorem 2.5 to transform both shifts to their forms with positive weights. Then we compare the eigenvalues of the corresponding weights and check whether their modulus are equal. It there is at least one pair of two corresponding weights with at least one different eigenvalue, then it means that eventual unitary equiva- lence of the shifts cannot be given by a diagonal operator. It is important to note that moving to form with positive weights is achieved by using a diagonal operator and, therefore, the argument presented above is correct. Unfortunately, there is no clear dependency between spectra of weights of original shift and the one with positive weights. Another problem is that the condition provided in Proposition 2.7 is not sufficient. To see this let us consider the following Example 2.8. Let H = C2. We will set Sn = Tn = I to be identity operators on H for n ∈ Z \ {0, 1}. For n ∈ {0, 1} we define Sn =(cid:20)s1,n 0 0 s2,n(cid:21) , Tn =(cid:20)t1,n 0 0 t2,n(cid:21) . 8 JAKUB KO´SMIDER Let us fix s1,0 = t2,0 and s2,0 = t1,0 and s1,0 > s2,0 > 0. For S1 and T1 we choose s1,1 = t1,1 and s2,1 = t2,1 and s1,1 > s2,1 > 1. Now, by Theorem 2.3, for S and T to be unitarily equivalent by a diagonal operator we need a unitary operator U ∈ B(H) such that: S0x =T0U x, S1S0x =T1T0U x, x ∈ H. But the above cannot be true as first equation determines that U must be equal where u = 1 and v = 1. In this case, the second equation is not satisfied. U =(cid:20)0 u 0(cid:21) , v ♦ Li, Ji and Sun proved in [12, Theorem 2.1] that bilateral weighted shift defined on H = Ck is unitarily equivalent to the one with upper triangular weights. We will see that, under some additional assumptions, it is possible to prove that some bilateral operator valued weighted shifts are unitarily equivalent to the ones with diagonal weights. Proposition 2.9. Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z be a shift in ℓ2(Z, Ck) for k ≥ 2 with normal and commuting weights. Then there is a D ∼ {Dn}n∈Z such that S ∼= D and Dn is a diagonal operator for each n ∈ Z. Proof. It is a well-known fact that any set of normal matrices {Ta}a∈A which com- mutes with each other can be simultaneously diagonalized i.e. there exists a unitary matrix V such that V TaV ∗ is diagonal for each a ∈ A (see [7, Theorem 1.3.19]). Now, we see that a diagonal operator consisting of operators V on its diagonal gives unitary equivalence between S and D ∼ {Dn}n∈Z where each Dn is diagonal for every n ∈ Z. (cid:3) 3. Unitary equivalence - the non-diagonal case In this section we focus on investigation of unitary operators that can give unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts. Most of the results concern only finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces. In [15, Theorem 1] one can find a proof of the fact that in case of bilateral shifts on ℓ2(Z, C) unitary equivalence is always given by an operator of diagonal form. We will now see that there are bilateral operator valued weighted shifts which are unitarily equivalent, but the unitary equivalence is not given by any operator of diagonal form. Example 3.1. Assume H = C2, w = 1 sn =(1, 1 n , otherwise. 2 i and define 2 − 1 if n = 0, (3.1) Let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z have weights Sn :=(cid:20) sn −sn sn sn(cid:21) , Tn :=(cid:20) sn−1w + sn+1 ¯w sn−1 ¯w + sn+1w −sn−1 ¯w − sn+1w sn−1w + sn+1 ¯w(cid:21) for n ∈ Z. It is easy to see that weights of S and T are invertible, bounded and normal. We construct unitary operator with two nonzero diagonals which gives UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 9 unitary equivalence of S and T . Let us define the following operators A = 1 2(cid:20)1 −i 1(cid:21) , B = i i 1 2(cid:20) 1 −i 1(cid:21) . Both A and B are orthogonal projections onto one-dimensional subspaces. More- over, AB = BA = 0 and A + B = I. Define . . . . . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The reader can check that U is unitary and U S = T U . . . . . . . 0 . . . B . . . . . .  0 . . . 0 . . . B . . . U = A A 0 0   Now, we show that it is not possible to find unitary operator of diagonal form which would give unitary equivalence of S and T . First, one can easily verify that Sn = √2sn for each n ∈ Z. Let us now compute the norms of operators Tn. We find the eigenvalues of T ∗n Tn using the characteristic polynomial The roots of W are 2s2 Now, it follows from (3.1) that W (λ) = λ2 − 2λ(s2 n+1 and 2s2 n+1) + 4s2 n−1 + s2 n−1, hence Tn = max{√2sn−1,√2sn+1}. n−1s2 n+1. (3.2) ( Si = 1 if and only if i ∈ {−1, 0, 1}, Ti = 1 if and only if i ∈ {−2,−1, 0, 1, 2}. Suppose that, contrary to our claim, S and T are unitarily equivalent by an operator of diagonal form. By Lemma 2.6, there exists k ∈ Z that Sn+k = Tn for all n ∈ Z. This contradicts (3.2). ♦ We presented the example of two bilateral operator valued weighted shifts that are unitarily equivalent by an operator that is not of diagonal form. We also proved that there is no operator of diagonal form that would give this unitary equivalence. Let us note that, by Proposition 2.9, this example can be significantly simplified if we diagonalize all weights before performing any computations. We leave the details to the reader. Example 3.1 shows even more. Let us first recall some known results. Shields showed in [15, Theorem 1] that, if two bilateral shifts with complex weights are unitarily equivalent, then there exists k ∈ Z such that sn = tn+k for each n ∈ Z. Moreover, it follows from [13, Theorem 1] that, if two unilateral shifts S ∼ {Sn}n∈N, T ∼ {Tn}n∈N with quasi-invertible weights are unitarily equivalent, then the unitary equivalence is given by a diagonal operator. It follows from similar argument as in Lemma 2.6 that Sn = Tn for each n ∈ N. This is not true for bilateral operator valued weighted shifts defined on a Hilbert space of dimension greater then one. We will now investigate unitary operators on ℓ2(Z,H) that can give unitary equivalence of bilateral weighted shifts defined on H. Note that, as in the case of finite-dimensional Hilbert space quasi-invertibility is the same property as in- vertibility, Corollary 2.2 already gives us the information that, if any element in a matrix representation of a unitary operator is nonzero, then the entire diagonal 10 JAKUB KO´SMIDER containing this element is nonzero. Therefore, we will focus only on number of nonzero diagonals in unitary operators. Let U be a unitary operator acting on ℓ2(Z,H) with two nonzero diagonals. Then there exist k1, k2 ∈ Z such that k1 6= k2 and operators Un,n+k1 , Un,n+k2 are nonzero elements from these diagonals for all n ∈ Z. From now we identify nonzero diagonals of such operators with k1 and k2 and denote U (1) := Un,n+k1, U (2) := Un,n+k2 for all n ∈ Z. Without loss of generality we can assume that k2 > k1. We generalize this notation to an arbitrary number of diagonals in U . Next proposition states that, if there are exactly two nonzero diagonals in a n n unitary operator, then both diagonals contain only partial isometries. Proposition 3.2. Suppose that U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is a unitary operator that has exactly two nonzero diagonals and all other elements are zero operators. Then the elements on these diagonals are partial isometries such that elements in each row of U have orthogonal ranges. n (3.3c) (3.3a) (3.3b) Proof. Let us fix k = k2 − k1 > 0. For simplicity let us set An := U (1) n , Bn := U (2) for all n ∈ Z. Both {An}n∈Z and {Bn}n∈Z are sequences of bounded operators. Note that U is unitary if and only if conditions I = AnA∗n + BnB∗n, I = A∗n+kAn+k + B∗nBn, 0 = An+kB∗n, 0 = A∗nBn, (3.3d) hold for all n ∈ Z. Now, we can multiply (3.3a) by An from the right and get (3.4) Now, by (3.3d) and (3.4), we see that BnB∗nAn = 0 and thus, by Lemma 1.1, An is a partial isometry for all n ∈ Z. It is clear that operators Bn are also partial isometries. From (3.3d) we deduce that R(An) is orthogonal to R(Bn) for all n ∈ Z. This completes the proof. An = AnA∗nAn + BnB∗nAn. (cid:3) It is worth noting that, using the property (3.3c), we can deduce that R(B∗n) ⊥ Next example shows that sequences {An}n∈Z, {Bn}n∈Z do not need to be se- R(A∗n+k) for all n ∈ Z. quences of orthogonal projections. Example 3.3. Let H = C2. We define the following 0(cid:21) , Bn =(cid:20) 0 An =(cid:20)0 an bn 0 0 0(cid:21) , where an = bn = 1 for all n ∈ Z. The reader can verify that these operators satisfy conditions (3.3a) - (3.3d) from the proof of Proposition 3.2 and form a unitary operator U with k1 = −1 and k2 = 1. Now we define S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z in the following way Sn =(cid:20)s1,n 0 0 s2,n(cid:21) , It is easy to check that U SU∗ is a bilateral where s1,ns2,n 6= 0 for all n ∈ Z. operator valued weighted shift and neither An nor Bn are orthogonal projections for any n ∈ Z. ♦ UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 11 Now we will prove useful lemma that we will use later in the paper. We provide more general version than we need, which is true for an arbitrary nonzero Hilbert space. Lemma 3.4. Let H be a Hilbert space and n ∈ N+. Assume that Ai ∈ B(H) are positive operators for i ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that (3.5) and dim R(C) = 1. Then Ai = aiC, where ai ∈ R+ for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n} and Pn Proof. Let M := R(C) = lin{¯e} for some normalized ¯e ∈ H. Set B to be an orthonormal basis of H containing ¯e. Then, by (3.5), we know that C := A1 + ··· + An i=1 ai = 1. hAie, ei = 0, e ∈ B \ {¯e}, i ∈ {1 . . . , n}. This, Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the square root theorem imply that hAie, e′i2 = hA 2 i e, A 2 i e′i2 1 1 ≤ hAie, eihAie′, e′i = 0, e, e′ ∈ B(H), (e, e′) 6= (¯e, ¯e). Thus Aie = 0 for all i ∈ {1 . . . , n} and e ∈ B \ {¯e}. Hence for all i ∈ {1 . . . , n}, Ai = aiC for some ai ∈ R+. Now, it follows from (3.5) that Pn We will state another lemma which gives an equivalent condition for an operator U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) with three nonzero diagonals to be a unitary operator. It is worth noting that this result can be generalized to arbitrary diagonals, but then it is significantly more complicated. Thus we present it only for the case in which the three diagonals are located next to each other in the center of the matrix of U (see (3.6) below). We leave its proof to the reader. Lemma 3.5. Assume that U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is an operator of the form i=1 ai = 1. (cid:3) (3.6) U = . . . . . . . . . . . . B−1 C−1 . . . A0 . . . . . . 0 . . . B0   A1 B1 . . . . . . . . . 0 C0 , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   where {An}n∈Z, {Bn}n∈Z, {Cn}n∈Z ⊆ B(H). Then U is unitary if and only if the following (3.7a) (3.7b) (3.7c) (3.7d) (3.7e) (3.7f) hold for all n ∈ Z. I = AnA∗n + BnB∗n + CnC∗n, 0 = CnA∗n+2, 0 = An+1B∗n + Bn+1C∗n, I = A∗n+2An+2 + B∗n+1Bn+1 + C∗nCn, 0 = A∗nCn, 0 = C∗nBn + B∗n+1An+1, 12 JAKUB KO´SMIDER The next proposition states that, under some additional assumptions, a unitary operator U defined by (3.6) may consist of at most two nonzero diagonals. Proposition 3.6. Assume that H is two-dimensional, U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is a uni- tary operator of the form (3.6) and 1 ∈ σ(CkC∗k ) ∩ σ(Ck+1C∗k+1) for some k ∈ Z. Let S and U SU∗ be bilateral operator valued weighted shifts with invertible weights. Then at least one of the sequences {An}n∈Z, {Bn}n∈Z or {Cn}n∈Z consists of zero operators only. Proof. Note that, by Corollary 2.2, if any element of any of the three sequences is the zero operator, then all the operators in this sequence are zero operators. First, we assume that Cn 6= 0 for all n ∈ Z. Otherwise, the proof is completed. Now, let dim R(Cn) = 2 for some n ∈ Z. Since Cn is invertible, then, by (3.7e), we get that A∗n = 0 which means that An = 0. Now assume that dimR(Cn) = 1 for all n ∈ Z. Let n ∈ {k, k + 1}. Since 1 ∈ σ(CnC∗n), then Zn := I − CnC∗n is not invertible positive operator. Then, by (3.7a), we see that AnA∗n + BnB∗n = Zn so, by Lemma 3.4, we have AnA∗n = anZn and BnB∗n = bnZn, where an + bn = 1. If anbn = 0 for any n ∈ {k, k + 1}, then the proof is completed. Otherwise, by (3.7e), for n ∈ {k, k + 1}, (3.8) Hence (3.7f) with n = k implies 0 = B∗k+1Ak+1 which, together with (3.8) for n = k + 1 and the fact that R(Ak+1) 6= {0}, lead to contradiction. (cid:3) R(Cn) ⊥ R(An) = R(AnA∗n) = R(BnB∗n) = R(Bn). Observe that Proposition 3.6 remains true, if we replace the assumption that 1 ∈ σ(CkC∗k ) ∩ σ(Ck+1C∗k+1) by the assumption that 1 ∈ σ(A∗kAk) ∩ σ(A∗k+1Ak+1) for some k ∈ Z. Proposition 3.7. Let H be two-dimensional Hilbert space and U be a unitary operator defined as in (3.6). Assume that S and U SU∗ are bilateral operator valued weighted shifts with invertible weights and dimR(Bn) ≤ 1 for any n ∈ Z. Then for all n ∈ Z either An or Cn is a partial isometry. Proof. Note that the same argument as in Proposition 3.6 can be used to cover the case when dimR(Cn) 6= 1 for any n ∈ Z. Let us now assume that dim R(Cn) = 1 for all n ∈ Z. Fix n ∈ Z. By the above it us true that dimR(BnB∗nCn) is equal to 0 or 1. If it is equal to 1, then we see that R(BnB∗nCn) = R(BnB∗n), as dimR(BnB∗n) ≤ 1. Therefore A∗nBnB∗n = 0. Hence An is a partial isometry. Now assume dimR(BnB∗nCn) = 0. This implies that Cn is a partial isometry. (cid:3) The next result states that there cannot be more then m nonzero diagonals which contain partial isometries in unitary operator giving unitary equivalence of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts defined on m-dimensional Hilbert space for m ≥ 2. Proposition 3.8. Let H be a m-dimensional Hilbert space for m ≥ 2 and let S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z have quasi-invertible weights. Assume U ∈ B(ℓ2(Z,H)) is unitary and its matrix representation consists of partial isometries only. If U S = T U , then U has at most m nonzero diagonals and all other elements of U are zero operators. UNITARY EQUIVALENCE OF BILATERAL SHIFTS 13 It follows from the Lemma 1.1 that P (j) Proof. By the fact that U U∗ = I we get that Pj∈Z U (j) for all j ∈ Z. It is a well-known fact that, if Pj∈Z P (j) then R(P (i) from the fact that H is m-dimensional and from Corollary 2.2. n )∗ = I for all n ∈ Z. n )∗ is an orthogonal projection is an orthogonal projection, n ) for all i,j ∈ Z such that i 6= j. The rest follows directly n ) ⊥ R(P (j) n (U (j) n := U (j) n (U (j) (cid:3) n The next example shows that it is possible to find unitary operator with three nonzero diagonals that give unitary equivalence between bilateral operator valued weighted shifts defined on C2. Example 3.9. Assume H = C2. First, let us define unitary operator U of the form (3.6) with three nonzero diagonals, where 1√2# , Cn+1 = −An, A2n =(cid:20) 1√2 for all n ∈ Z. It can be verified that conditions (3.7a) - (3.7f) are satisfied. Hence U is a unitary operator. Let us now define S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z in the following way 0 − 1√2(cid:21) , Bn =" 1√2 0(cid:21) , A2n+1 =(cid:20)0 0 0 0 0 0 Sn =(cid:20) 0 (−1)n The reader can check that U S = SU . (−1)n 0 (cid:21) , n ∈ Z. ♦ 4. Further remarks Example 3.9 shows that it is possible to find unitary operator with three nonzero diagonals, which gives unitary equivalence of bilateral weighted shifts defined on C2, however, this unitary equivalence can be given by the identity operator. It is an open question, whether for S ∼ {Sn}n∈Z, T ∼ {Tn}n∈Z, where H is a two- dimensional Hilbert space, S ∼= T implies that there exists U that has at most two nonzero diagonals with all other elements of U being zero operators such that S ∼=U T . If one proves that any unitary equivalence of bilateral shifts defined on finite-dimensional Hilbert space can be given by an operator consisting only of partial isometries, then Proposition 3.8 gives the positive answer. Another interesting problem for further investigation, which comes up naturally, is the problem of characterization of unitary equivalence of bilateral shifts defined on finite-dimensional Hilbert space. Corollary 2.4 gives characterization of unitary equivalence given only by an operator of diagonal form. Example 3.1 shows that there is a rich class of unitary operators in ℓ2(Z, Ck) which are not of diagonal form and can give unitary equivalence of bilateral weighted shifts. Clearly, we see that the problem of complete characterization is more complicated than in case of unilateral operator valued weighted shifts and bilateral weighted shifts having classical weights. Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Zenon Jab lo´nski for insightful discussions con- cerning the subject of the paper. 14 JAKUB KO´SMIDER References [1] A. Anand, S. Chavan, Z. J. Jab lo´nski, J. Stochel, Complete systems of unitary invariants for some classes of 2-isometries, https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.03229 [2] A. Athavale, On completely hyperexpansive operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 124 (1996), 3745-3752. [3] A. Bourhim, C. E. Chidume, The single-valued extension property for bilateral operator weighted shifts, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 133 (2004), 485-491. [4] J. B. Conway, A Course in Functional Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, Inc., 1990. [5] G. P. Geh´er, Bilateral weighted shift operators similar to normal operators, Oper. Matrices, 10(2), 2016. [6] J. Guyker, On reducing subspaces of normally weighted bilateral shifts, Houston J. Math., Vol. 11, No. 4, 1985. [7] R. A. Horn, C. R. Johnson, Matrix analysis, Cambridge University Press, 1990. [8] N. Ivanovski, Similiarity and quasisimiliarity of bilateral operator valued weighted shifts, Mat. Bilten, 17, 1993, 33-37. [9] Z. J. Jab lo´nski, Hyperexpansive operator valued unilateral weighted shifts, Glasg. Math. J., 46 (2004) 405-416. [10] Z. J. Jab lo´nski, I. B. Jung, J. Stochel, Weighted Shifts on Directed Trees, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 1017, 107 (2012). [11] A. Lambert, Unitary equivalence and reducibility of invertibly weighted shifts, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc., 5 (1971), 157-173. [12] J. X. Li, Y. Q. Ji, S. L. Sun, The essential spectrum and Banach reducibility of operator weighted shifts, Acta Math. Sin., English Series, Vol. 17, 3 (2001) 413-424. [13] M. Orovcanec, Unitary equivalence of unilateral operator valued weighted shifts with quasi- invertible weights, Mat. Bilten, 17, 1993, 45-50. [14] P. Pietrzycki, The single equality A∗nAn = (A∗A)n does not imply the quasinormality of weighted shifts on rootless directed trees, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 435, (2016), 338-348. [15] A. Shields, Weighted shift operators, analytic function theory, Math. Surveys, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1974, 49-128. Instytut Matematyki, Uniwersytet Jagiello´nski, ul. Lojasiewicza 6, PL-30348 Kra- k´ow, Poland E-mail address: [email protected]
1808.09711	2	1808	2018-09-21T10:09:28	Fine properties of functions with bounded variation in Carnot-Carath\'eodory spaces	[ "math.FA", "math.MG" ]	We study properties of functions with bounded variation in Carnot-Ca\-ra\-th\'eo\-do\-ry spaces. We prove their almost everywhere approximate differentiability and we examine their approximate discontinuity set and the decomposition of their distributional derivatives. Under an additional assumption on the space, called property $\mathcal R$, we show that almost all approximate discontinuities are of jump type and we study a representation formula for the jump part of the derivative.	math.FA	math	FINE PROPERTIES OF FUNCTIONS WITH BOUNDED VARIATION IN CARNOT-CARATHÉODORY SPACES SEBASTIANO DON AND DAVIDE VITTONE Abstract. We study properties of functions with bounded variation in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. We prove their almost everywhere approximate differentiability and we examine their approximate discontinuity set and the decomposition of their distributional derivatives. Under an additional assumption on the space, called property R, we show that almost all approximate discontinuities are of jump type and we study a representation formula for the jump part of the derivative. 1. Introduction A lot of effort was devoted in the last decades to the development of Analysis and Geometry in general metric spaces and, in particular, to the study of functions with bounded variation (BV ). Carnot-Carathéodory (CC) spaces are among the most fruitful settings where BV functions have been introduced ([10, 20]), see also [8, 12, 19, 22, 23, 24] and the more recent [3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 15, 31, 35, 44]. The aim of this paper is to give some contributions to this research lines by establishing "fine" properties of BV functions in CC spaces. A non-trivial part of our work consists in fixing the appropriate language in a consistent and robust manner. A CC space is the space Rn endowed with the Carnot-Carathéodory distance d (see (1)) arising from a fixed family X = (X1, . . . , Xm) of smooth, linearly independent vector fields (called horizontal) in Rn satisfying the Hörmander condition, see (2). As customary in the literature, we always assume that metric balls are bounded with respect to the Euclidean topology. Moreover, we work in equiregular CC spaces, where a homogeneous dimension Q, usually larger than the topological dimension n, can be defined; recall that any CC space can be lifted to an equiregular one, see e.g. [42]. The space BVX of function with bounded X-variation consists of those functions u whose derivatives X1u, . . . , Xmu in the sense of distributions are represented by a vector-valued mea- sure DX u with finite total variation DXu. These functions have been extensively studied in the literature and important properties have been proved, like coarea formulae, approximation theorems, Poincaré inequalities. We now describe some of the results we prove in this paper. The first one, Theorem 1.1 below, concerns the almost everywhere approximate X-differentiability (see Section 2.3) of BVX functions; its classical counterpart is very well-known, see e.g. [2, Theorem 3.83]. As customary, we denote by Da Xu, respectively, the absolutely continuous and singular part of DX u with respect to the Lebesgue measure L n. Xu and Ds Date: September 24, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 26B30, 53C17, 49Q15, 28A75. Key words and phrases. Functions with bounded variation, Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. The authors are supported by the University of Padova Project Networking and STARS Project "Sub- Riemannian Geometry and Geometric Measure Theory Issues: Old and New" (SUGGESTION), and by GNAMPA of INdAM (Italy) project "Campi vettoriali, superfici e perimetri in geometrie singolari". The second named author wishes to ackowledge the support and hospitality of FBK-CIRM (Trento), where part of this paper was written. 1 2 DON AND VITTONE Theorem 1.1. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set and let u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk). Then u is approximately X-differentiable at L n-almost every point of Ω. Moreover, the approximate X-gradient coincides L n-almost everywhere with the density of Da X u with respect to L n. The proof of Theorem 1.1 is based on Lemma 3.12, that is, on a suitable extension to CC spaces of the inequality B(p,r) u(q) − u(p) q − p dL n(q) ≤ C 1 0 Du(B(p, tr)) tn dt valid for a classical BV function u on Rn. Lemma 3.12 answers an open problem stated in [5] and it is new even in Carnot groups. We only recall that Carnot groups are connected, simply connected and nilpotent Lie groups whose Lie algebra is stratified, and we refer to [18, 38, 31, 30] for more detailed introduction to the subject. Carnot groups possess a canonical CC structure obtained by fixing a basis X1, . . . , Xm of the first layer of the Lie algebra of left-invariant vector fields; their importance in the theory stems from the fact that they constitute the infinitesimal models of equiregular CC spaces, a fact that we heavily use in this paper. Theorem 1.1 was proved in the setting of Carnot groups in [5] together with the following result, which we also extend to our more general setting. We denote by H Q−1 the Hausdorff measure of dimension Q − 1 and by Su the set of points where a function u does not possess an approximate limit in the sense of Definition 2.19. Theorem 1.2. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set and let u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk). Then Su is contained in a countable union of sets with finite H Q−1 measure. In the classical theory, an important object associated with a BV function u is its jump set: roughly speaking, this is the set of points p for which there exist u+(p) 6= u−(p) and a unit direction νu(p) such that, for small r > 0, u is approximately equal to u+(p) on half of B(p, r) and to u−(p) on the complementary half of B(p, r), the two halves being separated by an hyperplane orthogonal to νu(p). In this paper we introduce the notion of approximate X-jumps, see Definition 2.24: this requires a certain amount of preliminary work, expecially about "fine" local properties of hypersurfaces with intrinsic C 1 regularity (C 1 We denote by Ju ⊆ Su the set of X-jump points of u and by (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) the X). approximate X-jump triple (see Definition 2.24) at a point p ∈ Ju. The measures Dj X u := Ds Xu Ju, Dc X u := Ds Xu (Ω \ Ju), are called, respectively, jump part and Cantor part of DXu. We want to study some further properties of DXu and its decomposition DXu = Da Xu + Ds Xu = Da Xu + Dc Xu + Dj Xu. We state some of them in the following result, which is a consequence of Theorem 3.16 and Proposition 3.3. Theorem 1.3. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and consider an open set Ω ⊆ Rn, a function u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk) and a Borel set B ⊆ Ω. Then the following facts hold: (i) there exists λ : Rn → (0, +∞) (not depending on Ω nor u) locally bounded away from 0 such that DXu ≥ λu+ − u−S Q−1 Ju; (ii) if H Q−1(B) = 0, then DXu(B) = 0; (iii) if H Q−1(B) < +∞ and B ∩ Su = ∅, then DXu(B) = 0; (iv) Da Xu = DXu (Ω \ S) and Ds Xu = DXu S, where DXu(B(p, r)) S :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim r→0 = +∞(cid:27) ; rQ FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 3 (v) Ju ⊆ Θu, where Θu ⊆ S is defined by Θu :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim inf r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 > 0(cid:27) . However, for classical BV functions much stronger results than Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 are indeed known: some of them are proved in the present paper also for BVX functions under the additional assumption that the space (Rn, X) satisfies the following natural condition. Definition 1.4 (Property R). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space with homogeneous dimension Q. We say that (Rn, X) satisfies the property R if, for every open set Ω ⊆ Rn and every E ⊆ Rn with locally finite X-perimeter in Ω, the essential boundary ∂∗E ∩ Ω of E is countably X-rectifiable, i.e., there exists a countable family (Si)i∈N of C 1 X hypersurfaces such that H Q−1(∂∗E ∩ Ω \ ∪i∈NSi) = 0. Recall that a measurable set E ⊆ Rn has locally finite X-perimeter in Ω if its characteristic function χE has locally bounded X-variation in Ω, while we refer to Definition 2.21 for the essential boundary ∂∗E. It was proved in the fundamental paper [1] that the X-perimeter measure DXχE of E can be represented as θH Q−1 ∂∗E for a suitable positive function θ that is locally bounded away from 0, see Theorem 2.39. The validity of property R ("rectifiability") for general equiregular CC spaces is an interesting open question even in Carnot groups (see [4] for a partial result). However, property R is satisfied, besides in Euclidean spaces ([13]), in several interesting situations like Heisenberg groups [22], Carnot groups of step 2 [23] and Carnot groups of type ⋆ [35]: in particular, Theorems 1.5, 1.6 and 1.7 below hold is such classes. We conjecture that property R holds also in all CC spaces of step 2, see [3]. Building on the results of [14], we prove in Section 4 the validity of the weaker property LR ("Lipschitz rectifiability", see Definition 3.4) in all Carnot groups satisfying the algebraic property (47) below; in particular, a weaker version of Theorem 1.5 holds in such groups, see Theorem 3.5. The first result we are able to prove assuming property R is a refinement of Theorem 1.2 and, roughly speaking, it states that H Q−1-almost all singularities of a BVX function are of jump type. Theorem 1.5. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space satisfying property R, let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set and let u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk). Then Su is countably X-rectifiable and H Q−1(Su \ Ju) = 0. Assuming property R, also Theorem 1.3 can be refined as follows. Theorem 1.6. Under the assumption and notation of Theorem 1.3, assume that (Rn, X) sat- isfies property R. Then (i) H Q−1(Θu \ Ju) = 0 and Dj (ii) Dc (iii) if B ⊆ Ω is such that H Q−1 B is σ-finite, then Dc Xu = DXu (S \ Θu); X u = DXu Θu; Xu(B) = Da Xu(B) = 0. Theorem 1.6 is part of Theorem 3.16. We also mention that, assuming property R, one can define a precise representative up of u (see (45)) and prove that the convergence of the mean values fflB(p,r) u dL n to up(p) holds, as r → 0, for H Q−1-almost every p. See Theorem 3.14. Eventually, a further natural assumption, property D ("density", see Definition 3.8), concern- ing the local behavior of the spherical Hausdorff measure S Q−1 of C 1 X hypersurfaces, allows to obtain a stronger result about the jump part Dju, see Theorem 1.7. Property D is satisfied in Riemannian manifolds (trivially), Heisenberg groups, Carnot groups of step 2 and Carnot groups of type ⋆, see section 4; its validity in more general settings is an interesting open prob- lem that will be object of future investigations. Theorem 1.7 follows from the more general 4 DON AND VITTONE Theorem 3.10, which deals with a representation of the restriction of DXu to any countably X-rectifiable set R. Theorem 1.7. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space satisfying properties R and D; then, there exists a function σ : Rn × Sm−1 → (0, +∞) such that, for every open set Ω ⊆ Rn and every u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk), one has Dj Xu = σ(·, νu)(u+ − u−) ⊗ νu S Q−1 Ju. The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the preliminary material about CC spaces and their nilpotent approximation (Section 2.1), C 1 X hypersurfaces and X- rectifiable sets (Section 2.2), approximate X-jumps and X-differentiability (Section 2.3) and BVX functions (Section 2.4). Most of the material in Sections 2.2 and 2.3 is original. Section 3 contains the proof of our results, while in Section 4 we discuss some classes of Carnot groups satisfying properties R, LR and/or D. Eventually, we collected in Appendix A some useful result from Geometric Measure Theory in metric spaces and in Appendix B the proofs of some (new but) technical results (Borel regularity, etc.) about the approximate X-jump and the approximate X-differentiability sets. Acknowledgements. It is a pleasure to thank V. Magnani, R. Monti, D. Morbidelli and D. Pallara for their interest in this paper and for several stimulating discussions. 2. Preliminaries 2.1. Carnot-Carathéodory spaces and nilpotent approximation. In what follows Ω will denote an open set in Rn and X = (X1, . . . , Xm) an m-tuple (m ≤ n) of smooth and linearly independent vector fields on Rn, with 2 ≤ m ≤ n. We say that an absolutely continuous curve γ : [0, T ] → Rn is an X-subunit path joining p and q if γ(0) = p, γ(T ) = q and there exist j=1 h2 j ≤ 1 and for almost every t ∈ [0, T ] one has h1, . . . , hm ∈ L∞([0, T ]; R) such thatPm For every p, q ∈ Rn, we define the quantity γ(t) = h(t)Xj(γ(t)). mXj=1 d(p, q) := inf {T > 0 : ∃ a X-subunit path γ joining p and q} , (1) where we agree that inf ∅ = +∞. A sufficient condition that makes d a metric on Rn is the following Theorem 2.1 (Chow-Rashevsky). Suppose that ∀ p ∈ Rn Lie{X1, . . . , Xm}(p) = TpRn ∼= Rn, (2) where Lie{X1, . . . , Xm}(p) denotes the linear span of all iterated commutators of the vector fields X1, . . . , Xm computed at p. Then d is a distance. We will refer to (2) as Hörmander condition. When (2) holds, the couple (Rn, X) is said to be a Carnot-Carathéodory space of rank m. We denote by B(p, r) the d-ball of center p ∈ Rn and radius r > 0. For every p ∈ Rn and for every i ∈ N we denote by Li(p) the linear span of all the commutators of X1, . . . , Xm up to order i computed at p. Notice that Lie{X1, . . . , Xm}(p) =Si∈N Li(p). We say that (Rn, X) is equiregular if there exist natural numbers n0, n1, . . . , ns such that 0 = n0 < n1 < · · · < ns = n and ∀ p ∈ Rn dim Li(p) = ni. The natural number s is called step of the Carnot-Carathéodory space. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 5 In the following theorem we resume some well-known facts about the geometry of equiregular CC spaces, see e.g. [41, 36]. Recall that a Radon measure µ on a metric space (M, d) is doubling if there exists C > 0 such that µ(B(x, 2r)) ≤ Cµ(x, r) for every x ∈ M and every r > 0. Theorem 2.2. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of step s. Then the following facts hold. (i) For every compact set K ⊆ Rn there exists M ≥ 1 such that 1 M p − q ≤ d(p, q) ≤ Mp − q 1 s for any p, q ∈ K. (ii) The Hausdorff dimension of the metric space (Rn, d) is Q :=Ps (iii) The metric measure space (Rn, d, L n) is locally Ahlfors Q-regular, i.e., for every com- pact set K ⊆ Rn there exist R > 0 and C > 1 such that for every p ∈ K and for every r ∈ (0, R) i=1 i(ni − ni−1). In particular, (Rn, d, L n) is locally doubling. 1 C rQ ≤ L n(B(p, r)) ≤ CrQ. (3) As customary, we assume from now on that the metric balls B(p, r) are bounded with respect to the Euclidean metric in Rn; this implies that the CC space (Rn, X) is geodesic, i.e., that for every p, q ∈ Rn there exists a X-subunit curve realizing the infimum in (1). The existence of length minimizing curves implies that, for every p ∈ Rn and for every r > 0, one has L n(∂B(p, r)) = 0; see Proposition A.9. Definition 2.3 (Adapted exponential coordinates). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let p ∈ Rn be fixed; choose an open neighborhood V ⊆ Rn of p and smooth vector fields Y1, . . . , Yn such that • Yi = Xi for any i = 1, . . . , m; • for every k = 1, . . . , s the vector fields Ynk−1+1, . . . , Ynk are chosen among the k-order commutators of X1, . . . , Xm; • for every q ∈ V and every k = 1, . . . , s the set {Y1(q), . . . , Ynk(q)} is a basis of Lk(q). Then there exists a neighborhood U of 0 in Rn for which the map F : U → Rn x 7→ exp(x1Y1 + · · · + xnYn)(p) (4) is well defined. We say that (x1, . . . , xn) are adapted exponential coordinates around p. The definition of F depends on the point p; when confusion may arise, we underline this dependence by using the notation Fp to denote (for any x ∈ Rn for which it is defined) the map Fp(x) := exp(x1Y1 + · · · + xnYn)(p). When needed, we will also write F (p, x) to denote exp(x1Y1 + · · · + xnYn)(p); notice that, for every bounded set V ⊆ Rn, one can find an open neighborhood U of 0 in Rn such that F is well defined in V × U. For every p ∈ Rn and every j = 1, . . . , m we define p (Xj ◦ Fp). eXj := dF −1 It is readily seen that if X satisfies the Hörmander condition, then also eX does and we denote by ed the CC distance in (a suitable open subset of) Rn associated with the m-tuple of vector fields eX = (eX1, . . . , eXm), and by eB(x, r) the metric balls associated with ed. Again, when confusion may arise we shall use the notation eBp(x, r) to specify that the metric ball is induced 6 DON AND VITTONE it is easy to verify that for every p ∈ Rn and every sufficiently small r > 0 one has by the map Fp. Since dFp(0)ej = Yj(p), we have eXj(0) = ej for every j = 1, . . . , m. Moreover in particular, Fp(eB(x, r)) = B(Fp(x), r). d(Fp(x1), Fp(x2)) = ed(x1, x2) p )#L n, i.e., the measure defined for every Borel set A ∀ x1, x2 ∈ eB(0, r); Remark 2.4. Let us consider µp := (F −1 in Rn by µp(A) = L n (Fp(A)) = A det ∇Fp dL n. It is easy to see that, whenever 0 < ε < det ∇Fp(0), there exists an open neighborhood U of 0 such that (det ∇Fp(0) − ε) L n U ≤ µp U ≤ (det ∇Fp(0) + ε) L n U. (5) Definition 2.5 (Degree, dilations and pseudo-norm). If (Rn, X) is an equiregular CC space and p, Y1, . . . , Yn are as in Definition 2.3, we define the degree wj of the coordinate j by Yj(p) ∈ Lwj (p) \ Lwj−1(p) or, equivalently, by nwj−1 < j ≤ nwj . For every r > 0, the anisotropic dilation δr : Rn → Rn is defined by δr(x) := (x1, . . . , rwixi, . . . , rsxn) . (6) We say that a function f : Rn → R is δ-homogeneous of degree w ∈ N if for every p ∈ Rn and every λ > 0 one has f (δλp) = λwf (p). We also introduce the pseudo-norm kxk := nXj=1 xj1/wj , x ∈ Rn and the pseudo-balls A(r) := {x ∈ Rn : kxk ≤ r} . (7) Clearly, δr (A(1)) = A(r). The following result is proved in [41]. Theorem 2.6. Let K ⊆ Rn be a compact set in an equiregular CC space (Rn, X) and let U be a neighborhood of 0 such that, for every p ∈ K, the map Fp is well-defined in U. Then there exists C > 1 such that for every x ∈ U and every p ∈ K we have The following theorem is classical, see e.g. [7] or [39]. For an introduction to Carnot groups (also known as stratified groups) see for instance [18, 38, 31, 30]. 1 C kxk ≤ edp(0, x) ≤ Ckxk. Theorem 2.7. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let p ∈ Rn be fixed; then, there exists a family bX := (bX1, . . . , bXm) of polynomial vector fields in Rn such that (i) for every j = 1, . . . , m, bXj is 1-homogeneous, i.e. (dδr)[bXj] = rbXj ◦ δr for all r > 0; (ii) for every j = 1, . . . , m we have r(dδr−1)[eXj ◦ δr] → bXj in C ∞ (iii) the couple (Rn, bX) is associated with a Carnot group structure on Rn; (iv) ([39, Remark 2.6]) bX can be completed to a basis bX1, . . . , bXn of the Lie algebra of the Carnot group in such a way that x = exp(Pn j=1 xjbXj)(0) for any x ∈ Rn. loc(Rn); FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 7 on the point p. The vector fields bX1, . . . , bXm introduced in Theorem 2.7 are known in the literature as the nilpotent approximation of X1, . . . , Xm at the point p; we will say that the structure (Rn, bX) is tangent to (Rn, X) at p. We shall denote by bd the Carnot-Carathéodory distance associated with bX and by bB the corresponding balls; recall that bd(δrx, δry) = rbd(x, y) for any r > 0 and x, y ∈ Rn. When confusion may arise, we shall use the notation bBp,bdp to specify the dependence By the Carnot group structure there exists bC = bCp > 0 such that The constant bC depends on p; however, given a compact set K ⊆ Rn, there exists M > 0 such that 1/M ≤ bCp ≤ M for any p ∈ K. See Remark 2.10 below. L n(bBp(x, r)) = bCrQ Proposition 2.8. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, and let r > 0. Then for every p ∈ Rn one has We will need later the following simple result. ∀ x ∈ Rn, r > 0. (8) Proof. By well-known properties of Carnot groups and Theorem 2.7 (iv) we have −x = exp − x ∈ bBp(0, r) ⇐⇒ −x ∈ bBp(0, r). xjbXj! (0) ="exp nXj=1 nXj=1 xjbXj! (0)#−1 bd(0, −x) = bd(0, x−1) = bd(x · 0, x · x−1) = bd(x, 0). which combined with the left invariance of bd with respect to the group operation implies This concludes the proof. = x−1, We recall for future references the following well-known result, for which we refer e.g. to [7, 36]. (cid:3) (9) Theorem 2.9. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let p ∈ Rn be fixed; then lim r→0 sup(edp(x, y) −bdp(x, y) r : x, y ∈ eBp(0, r))! = 0. In particular, for any ε > 0, there exists R > 0 such that Remark 2.10. Let K ⊆ Rn be a compact set; then there exists M ≥ 1 such that the constant bBp(0, (1 − ε)r) ⊆ eBp (0, r) ⊆ bBp(0, (1 + ε)r) for any r ∈ (0, R). bC = bCp appearing in (8) satisfies 1 M ≤ bCp ≤ M ∀ p ∈ K. This follows because, by Theorem 2.9, for any p ∈ K r→0 bCp = lim = L n(bBp(0, r)) rQ 1 det ∇Fp(0) lim r→0 = lim r→0 L n(B(p, r)) L n(eBp(0, r)) rQ rQ = lim r→0 L n(F −1 p (B(p, r))) rQ and one can conclude by using Theorem 2.2 (iii) and the smoothness of F (p, x). 8 DON AND VITTONE 2.2. Hypersurfaces of class C 1 X. This section is devoted to the study of hypersurfaces with intrinsic C 1 regularity; we work in a fixed equiregular CC space (Rn, X). As customary, given an open set Ω ⊆ Rn we denote by C 1 X(Ω) the space of continuous functions f : Ω → R such that the derivatives X1f, . . . , Xmf are represented, in the sense of distributions, by continuous functions. Definition 2.11 (Hypersurface of class C 1 every p ∈ S there exist R > 0 and f ∈ C 1 X). We say that S ⊆ Rn is a C 1 X hypersurface if for X(B(p, R)) such that the following facts hold (i) S ∩ B(p, R) = {q ∈ B(p, R) : f (q) = 0}; (ii) Xf 6= 0 on B(p, R). In this case, for every p in S we define the horizontal normal νS(p) ∈ Sm−1 to S at p letting νS(p) := Xf (p) Xf (p) . The horizontal normal is well-defined up to a sign and, in particular, it does not depend on the choice of f : this is a consequence, for instance, of Corollary 2.14, below. We will also use the notion of intrinsic Lipschitz regularity for hypersurfaces introduced in [46]. In the next definition, the Lipschitz continuity of f is understood with respect to the CC distance; recall that f : Ω → R is locally Lipschitz on an open set Ω ⊆ Rn if and only if it is continuous and its distributional derivatives X1f, . . . , Xmf belong to L∞ loc(Ω); see [21, 25]. Definition 2.12 (X-Lipschitz hypersurface). We say that S ⊆ Rn is an X-Lipschitz hyper- surface if for every p ∈ S there exist R > 0 and a Lipschitz map f : B(p, R) → R such that (i) B(p, R) ∩ S = {q ∈ B(p, R) : f (q) = 0}; (ii) there exist C > 0 and 1 ≤ j ≤ m such that Xjf ≥ C L n-a.e. on B(p, R). Hypersurfaces with X-Lipschitz or C 1 X regularity have locally finite (Q − 1)-dimensional Hausdorff measure, see [46]. Given ν ∈ Rm we define eLν : Rn → R letting eLν(x) := νixi. mXi=1 (10) This notation will be extensively used throughout the paper. The following proposition shows Proposition 2.13. Let p ∈ Rn, R > 0 and f ∈ C 1 that the maps eLν provide a sort of first-order "linear" approximation for C 1 : x ∈ eB(0, r))! = 0. r→0 sup(f (Fp(x)) − f (p) −eLXf (p)(x) X(B(p, R)) be fixed; then lim r X functions. Proof. It is not restrictive to assume that f (p) = 0. Let r ≤ R and take x ∈ eB(0, r). Set d := ed(x, 0) and take a geodesic γ ∈ Lip([0, d]; Rn) such that γ(0) = 0, γ(d) = x and there exists h : [0, d] → Rm such that for L 1-a.e. t ∈ [0, d] we have h(t) = 1 and γ(t) = mXj=1 hj(t)eXj(γ(t)). FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 9 0 0 0 0 Notice that eXj(0) = ej, hence there exists C > 0 such that eXj(y) − ej ≤ Cr for every y ∈ eB(0, r) and every j = 1, . . . , m. Therefore, for every k = 1, . . . , m mXj=1 d dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) hk(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) γ(t)dt(cid:19)k − d hj(t)(cid:16)eXj(γ(t))(cid:17)k d hj(t)(cid:16)eXj(γ(t)) − ej(cid:17)k d hk(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) : x ∈ eB(0, r), k = 1, . . . , m(cid:27)(cid:19) = 0. Hence, if for every x ∈ eB(0, r) we set d := ed(x, 0) and we denote by h a control associated with hj(t) (ej)k dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)xk − d hk(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:18) d =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) mXj=1 =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) mXj=1 r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)xk − d Notice also that for every x ∈ eB(0, r) r→0(cid:18)sup(cid:26) 1 the geodesic γ joining 0 and x, we have f (Fp(x)) = f (Fp(x)) − f (Fp(0)) ≤ mCrd ≤ mCr2. dt − (11) lim 0 0 0 = f (Fp(γ(d))) − f (Fp(γ(0))) = d Xjf (Fp(γ(t)))hj(t)dt. Let ε > 0 be fixed. By (11) and the continuity of Xf we can choose r0 ∈ (0, R) such that 0 mXj=1 h(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) : x ∈ eB(0, r)(cid:27) < ∀ r ∈ (0, r0) ∀ x ∈ eB(0, r0). ε 0 ε 2 2Xf (p) Xf (Fp(x)) − Xf (p) < r(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(x1, . . . , xm) − d sup(cid:26)1 For any r ∈ (0, r0) and x ∈ eB(0, r) we have f (Fp(x)) −eLXf (p)(x) = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xjf (p)xj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) mXj=1 d h(t)Xf (Fp(γ(t))) − Xf (p)dt + Xf (p)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(x1, . . . , xm) − d ≤ d h(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . + Xf (p)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(x1, . . . , xm) − d The result follows dividing both sides by r and taking into account that d ≤ r. hh(t), Xf (Fp(γ(t)))i dt − 0 ε 2 < d 0 0 0 h(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) An immediate consequence of Proposition 2.13 is Corollary 2.14, where we start using the following very convenient notation: given t ∈ R and a function f : I → R defined on some set I, we denote by {f > t}, {f = t}, etc. the sets {x ∈ I : f (x) > t}, {x ∈ I : f (x) = t}, etc. This notation will be extensively used in the paper. Corollary 2.14. Let p ∈ Rn and f ∈ C 1 Xf 6= 0 in B(p, R) and consider the C 1 every ε > 0, there exists r0 > 0 such that, for every r ∈ (0, r0) X(B(p, R)) for some R > 0; suppose that f (p) = 0, X hypersurface S := {q ∈ B(p, R) : f (q) = 0}. Then, for F −1 p (S) ∩ eB(0, r) ⊆ {x ∈ eB(0, r) : −εr ≤eLXf (p)(x) ≤ εr}. (12) (cid:3) 10 Moreover lim r→0 DON AND VITTONE L n({x ∈ eB(0, r) : f (Fp(x))eLXf (p)(x) < 0}) rQ = 0. (13) Proof. Fix ε > 0 and apply Proposition 2.13 to get r0 > 0 such that for every 0 < r < r0 and for 2εr}, we also get every x ∈ eB(0, r) we have f (Fp(x)) −eLXf (p)(x) ≤ εr. Then, if we take x ∈ eB(0, r) ∩ {eLXf (p) ≥ Reasoning in the same way with the set {eLXf (p) ≤ −2εr} we readily get (12). The previous argument shows that for any ε > 0 there exists r0 > 0 such that for any r ∈ (0, r0) we have f (Fp(x)) ≥ εr. The proof of (13) follows by noticing that, by Theorem 2.6 eB(0, r) ∩ {(f ◦ Fp)eLXf (p) ≤ 0} ⊆ eB(0, r) ∩ {−εr ≤eLXf (p) ≤ εr}. for a suitable constant C independent of r. L n(eB(0, r) ∩ {−εr ≤eLXf (p) ≤ εr}) ≤ CεrQ, We point out for future references the following observation. Remark 2.15. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, p ∈ Rn, R > 0 and suppose that f1, f2 ∈ C 1 X(B(p, R)) are such that f1(p) = f2(p) = 0 and Xf1(p) = Xf2(p); then one has Indeed, taking into account (12) we observe that lim r→0 1 rQ L n(B(p, r) ∩ {f1f2 ≤ 0}) = 0. lim r→0 1 rQ L n({ξ ∈ B(p, r) : f1(ξ)f2(ξ) = 0}) = 0. On the other hand, since eLXf1(p) =eLXf2(p) the set B(p, r) ∩ {f1f2 < 0} is contained in p ≤ 0}(cid:17), B(p, r) ∩(cid:16){f1f2 < 0 and eLXf1(p) ◦ F −1 p > 0} ∪ {f1f2 < 0 and eLXf1(p) ◦ F −1 that combined with (13) completes the proof. We can now introduce the notion of intrinsic rectifiability in equiregular CC spaces. We denote by H k and S k, respectively, the k-dimensional Hausdorff and spherical Hausdorff measures in (Rn, d), see e.g. Definition A.3. Definition 2.16 (X-rectifiability). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of homogeneous dimension Q ∈ N and let R ⊆ Rn. We say that R is countably X-rectifiable (respectively, countably X-Lipschitz rectifiable) if there exists a family {Sh : h ∈ N} of C 1 X hypersurfaces (resp., X-Lipschitz hypersurfaces) such that (cid:3) (14) H Q−1 R \ Sh! = 0. ∞[h=0 Moreover we say that R is X-rectifiable (resp., X-Lipschitz rectifiable) if R is countably X- rectifiable (resp., countably X-Lipschitz rectifiable) and H Q−1(R) < +∞. Definition 2.17 (Horizontal normal). Let R ⊆ Rn be countably X-rectifiable and let (Sh) be C 1 X hypersurfaces such that (14) holds. Then the horizontal normal νR : R → Sm−1 to R is defined by νR(p) := νSh(p) if p ∈ R ∩ Sh \[k<h Sk . FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 11 The horizontal normal νR is well-defined, up to a sign, H Q−1-almost everywhere on R: this is a standard consequence of the following result. Proposition 2.18. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let S1, S2 ⊆ Rn be two hyper- surfaces of class C 1 X. Then the set E := {p ∈ S1 ∩ S2 : νS1(p) /∈ {±νS2(p)}} is H Q−1-negligible. Proof. By a localization argument we can suppose without loss of generality that S1 is bounded in Rn and that H Q−1(E) ≤ H Q−1(S1) < +∞. For every δ > 0 define Eδ := {p ∈ E : hνS1(p), νS2(p)i ≤ 1 − δ}. Then we have E =S{Eδ : δ ∈ (0, +∞) ∩ Q}. the following three properties hold for every r ≤ 2R Fix ε ∈ (0, 1/4) and define for every R > 0 the set Eδ,R of all the points p of Eδ such that (a) if C > 0 is the constant appearing in Theorem 2.6, for every x ∈ A(Cr) we have (b) for i = 1, 2 we have F −1 bBp(x, εr) ⊆ eBp(x, 2εr); (c) diam B(p, r) = diameBp(0, r) ≥ r. By Theorems 2.9 and 2.14 and the fact1 that diambBp(0, r) = 2r we deduce that Eδ,R ր Eδ as p (Si ∩ B(p, 2r)) ⊆ {eLνSi (p) < εr}; 2 ). Then there exist a sequence (qh) in Rn and a sequence (rh) in (0, η) such Fix now η ∈ (0, R R → 0. that We can suppose without loss of generality that for every h ∈ N there exists ph ∈ B(qh, rh)∩Eδ,R. Therefore for every h ∈ N one has B(qh, rh) ⊆ B(ph, 2rh) and consequently Taking into account Theorem 2.6, we can find C > 0 such that for every h ∈ N one has Eδ,R ⊆ B(ph, 2rh). ∞[h=0 F −1 ph (Eδ,R ∩ B(ph, 2rh)) ⊆ Ah where We prove now that L n(Ah) ≤ Cδε2rQ hνS1(ph), νS2(ph)i ≤ 1 − δ, we have (up to an orthogonal change of coordinates) Ah :=nx ∈ Rn : kxk ≤ Crh and eLνSi (ph)(x) ≤ εrh, for i = 1, 2o . nx ∈ Rn : eLνSi (ph)(x) < εrh for i = 1, 2o ⊆ Q2(0, Cδεrh) × Rn−2, h for some Cδ > 0 depending on δ. is well-known to experts, even though the only reference we are aware of is [45, Proposizione 7.4]. 1This is an easy consequence of the fact that the curve t 7→ exp(tbX1) is globally length minimizing. This fact In fact, since Eδ,R ⊆ B(qh, rh) and ∞[h=0 (rh)Q−1 ≤ (diam B(qh, rh))Q−1 ≤ S Q−1 η (Eδ,R) + 1. ∞Xh=0 ∞Xh=0 12 DON AND VITTONE where the notation Q2(z, s) denotes a 2-dimensional cube of center z and size s. Hence Ah ⊆ Q2(0, Cδεrh) ∩(x ∈ Rm : xj ≤ Crh)! ×(x ∈ Rn−m : mXj=1 1 dj ≤ Crh) nXj=m+1 xj and consequently L n(Ah) ≤ Cδε2rQ h . For every h ∈ N, combining Theorem A.2 and the fact that Ah is compact, we can find Nh ∈ N and a family {xh,j : j = 1, . . . , Nh} of points of Ah such that {bBph(xh,j, εrh) : j = 1, . . . , Nh} covers Ah and {bBph(xh,j, ε rh 5 ) : j = 1, . . . , Nh} is pairwise disjoint. Reasoning as above, it is easy to see that Therefore we can estimate h . εrh L n(cid:16)nx ∈ Rn : bdph(x, Ah) < 5 o(cid:17) ≤ eCδε2rQ 5 o(cid:17) L n(cid:16)nx ∈ Rn : bdph(x, Ah) < εrh ≤ bCδε2−Q 5 )(cid:17) L n(cid:16)bBph(xh,j, εrh Nh ≤ for some bCδ > 0 that, by Remark 2.10, depends only on δ. By property (a) we have also bBph(xh,j, εrh) ⊆ eBph(xh,j, 2εrh), hence the family {eBph(xh,j, 2εrh) : j = 1, . . . , Nh} is a covering of Ah, that is also a covering of F −1 ph (Eδ,R ∩ B(ph, rh)). Hence the family {B(F −1 j ∈ N} is a covering of Eδ,R ∩ B(ph, 2rh) In particular, since ε ∈ (0, 1/4) we have ph (xh,j), 2εrh) : S Q−1 η (Eδ,R) ≤ S Q−1 4εη (Eδ,R ∩ B(ph, 2rh)) ≤ ≤ S Q−1 4εη (Eδ,R) ≤ ∞Xh=0 NhXj=1(cid:0)diam B(F −1 ∞Xh=0 ph (xh,j), 2εrh)(cid:1)Q−1 ≤ ∞Xh=0 bCδεrQ−1 S Q−1(Eδ) ≤ bCδε(S Q−1(Eδ) + 1). h ≤ bCδε(S Q−1 (Eδ,R) + 1). η Nh(4εrh)Q−1 ∞Xh=0 Letting η → 0 we get S Q−1(Eδ,R) ≤ bCδε(S Q−1(Eδ,R) + 1), which gives, letting R → 0 Letting now ε → 0 we get, for any δ > 0, that S Q−1(Eδ) = 0 , i.e., S Q−1(E) = 0. This concludes the proof. (cid:3) 2.3. Approximate notions of continuity, X-jumps and X-differentiability. In this sec- tion we introduce the notions of approximate continuity, approximate X-jumps and approxi- mate X-differentiability; we keep on working in a fixed equiregular CC space (Rn, X). We use the notation and, in what follows, we denote by Ω an open subset of Rn. A u dL n := 1 L n(A) A u dL n Definition 2.19 (Approximate Limit). Let u ∈ L1 z ∈ Rk is the approximate limit of u at p if loc(Ω; Rk), z ∈ Rk and p ∈ Ω. We say that lim r→0 B(p,r) u − zdL n = 0. We denote by u⋆(p) the approximate limit of u at p and by Su the set of points in Ω where u does not admit an approximate limit. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 13 If the approximate limit of u at a point p exists, it is also unique. By the generalized Lebesgue's differentiation theorem (see e.g. [28, Section 2.7]), we have L n(Su) = 0 and u⋆ = u a.e. on Ω. Moreover it can be easily proved (adapting e.g. [2, Proposition 3.64]) that Su is a Borel set and that u⋆ : Ω \ Su → Rk is a Borel map. Remark 2.20. Let Ω, u, z and p be as in Definition 2.19. Then u has approximate limit z at p if and only if, working in adapted exponential coordinates Fp around p, as r → 0 the functions u ◦ Fp ◦ δr converge in L1 loc(Rn; Rk) to the constant function z. This is an easy exercise left to the reader; alternatively, it is enough to follow the proof of Proposition 2.26 below with a = b = z. Definition 2.21 (Essential boundary). Given a measurable set E ⊆ Rn and t ∈ [0, 1] we denote by Et the set of points with density t for E, i.e., the set of all p ∈ Rn satisfying L n(E ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) lim r→0 = t. The essential boundary of E is ∂∗E := Rn \ (E0 ∪ E1). The following proposition is standard; for the reader's convenience we prove it later in Propo- sition A.1. Proposition 2.22. Let u ∈ L1 loc(Ω), p ∈ Ω \ Su and t 6= u⋆(p); then p /∈ ∂∗{u > t}. We now introduce the notion of X-jump points; this requires a certain amount of work, one of the reasons being that there is no canonical way of separating a CC ball B(p, r) into complementary "half-balls" B+ ν (p, r). We will use as separating sets an arbitrary hy- persurface S of class C 1 X such that νS(p) = ν, and one of the issues (Remark 2.27 below) is proving well-posedness of our definition independently of the choice of S. ν (p, r), B− For any fixed p ∈ Rn, ν ∈ Sm−1 and r > 0 we introduce the notation B+ ν (p, r) X (B(p, R)) such that2 f (p) = 0 and Xf (p)/Xf (p) = ν, we ν (p, r) and B− as follows. Given R > 0 and f ∈ C 1 set for r ∈ (0, R) B+ ν (p, r) := B(p, r) ∩ {f > 0} and B− ν (p, r) := B(p, r) ∩ {f < 0}. (15) These objects are well-defined only if r is small enough. Moreover, there is a clear abuse of notation, since B± ν (p, r) depend on the choice of f . However, this will not effect the validity of our results. Before introducing the notion of approximate X-jumps we state some properties of the "half- balls" B± ν (p, r). Proposition 2.23 is used in the proof of Theorem 3.14. Proposition 2.23. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set. Then, for any p ∈ Ω and ν ∈ Sm−1. L n (B+ ν (p, r)) L n (B(p, r)) lim r→0 = lim r→0 L n (B− ν (p, r)) L n (B(p, r)) = 1 2 Proof. Let U be a neighborhood of p and let f ∈ C 1 X (U) be such that f (p) = 0 and Xf (p) = ν. Choose ε ∈ (0, 1). By Proposition 2.13 and Theorem 2.9 we can suppose without loss of F −1 p (B+ Analogously generality that for every small enough r one has Fp(eB(0, r)) = B(p, r) and bB(0, (1 − ε)r) ∩ {eLν ≥ εr} ⊆ eB(0, r) ∩ {f ◦ Fp > 0} = F −1 ν (p, r)) = eB(0, r) ∩ {f ◦ Fp > 0} ⊆ bB(0, (1 + ε)r) ∩ {eLν ≥ −εr}. 2One can consider for instance f =eLν ◦ Fp. p (B+ ν (p, r)). (16) (17) 14 DON AND VITTONE Applying δ1/r to both sides of (16) and evaluating the Lebesgue measure we get p (B+ L n(cid:0)F −1 rQ ν (p, r))(cid:1) Taking the lim sup as r → 0 and letting ε → 0 we infer p (B+ L n(cid:0)F −1 rQ ν (p, r))(cid:1) lim sup r→0 where the last equality follows from Proposition 2.8. With the same argument, from (17) we get L n(bB(0, 1)), (18) (19) p (B+ ν (p, r))(cid:1)(cid:1) = L n(cid:0)δ1/r(cid:0)F −1 ≤ L n(cid:16)bB(0, 1 + ε) ∩ {eLν ≥ −ε}(cid:17) . ≤ L n(cid:16)bB(0, 1) ∩ {eLν ≥ 0}(cid:17) = ν (p, r))(cid:1) L n(bB(0, 1)), ν (p, r))(cid:1) L n(bB(0, 1)). 1 2 1 2 1 2 rQ rQ ≥ = p (B+ p (B+ = lim r→0 L n(δ1/r(eB(0, r))) = L n(bB(0, 1)), L n(cid:0)F −1 ν (p, r))(cid:1) L n(eB(0, r)) (B+ 1 2 = . p lim r→0 hence By Theorem 2.9 lim r→0 r→0 lim inf L n(cid:0)F −1 L n(cid:0)F −1 L n(eB(0, r)) lim r→0 rQ and combining (18) and (19) we get If c := det ∇F (0) > 0, using (5) we notice that for every 0 < ε < c and every sufficiently small r > 0 we have p (B+ (c − ε) L n(cid:0)F −1 ν (p, r))(cid:1) (c + ε) L n(eB(0, r)) ≤ L n (B+ ν (p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) ≤ p (B+ (c + ε)L n(cid:0)F −1 ν (p, r))(cid:1) (c − ε)L n(eB(0, r)) . The result follows passing to the limit as r → 0, letting ε → 0 and, eventually, using a similar argument for B− ν . (cid:3) We can now introduce the notion of X-jump points. Definition 2.24 (Approximate X-jumps). Let u ∈ L1 an approximate X-jump at p if there exist a, b ∈ Rk with a 6= b and ν ∈ Sm−1 such that loc(Ω; Rk) and p ∈ Ω. We say that u has lim r→0 B+ ν (p,r) u − adL n = lim r→0 B− ν (p,r) u − bdL n = 0. (20) In this case we say that (a, b, ν) is an approximate X-jump triple of u at p. We shall denote by Ju the set of approximate X-jump points of u and by (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) the approximate X-jump triple for u at p ∈ Ju. Remark 2.25. Using e.g. Proposition 2.23 one easily proves that Ju ⊆ Su. Notice that, if u has an approximate X-jump at p associated with (a, b, ν), then it is also associated with the triple (b, a, −ν). For this reason, it will be sometimes convenient to consider the space of triples endowed with the equivalence relation (a, b, ν) ≡ (a′, b′, ν′) if and only if (a, b, ν) = (a′, b′, ν′) or (a, b, ν) = (b′, a′, −ν′). The following Proposition 2.26 shows that the FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 15 X-jump triple (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) is unique up to equivalence, for the map Rk × Rk × Sm−1 ∋ (a, b, ν) → wa,b,ν ∈ L1 loc(Rn; Rk) defined by (21) below satisfies wa,b,ν = wa′,b′,ν ′ ⇐⇒ (a, b, ν) ≡ (a′, b′, ν′). In the theory of classical BV functions a jump point can be detected, via a blow-up procedure, in terms of L1 loc-convergence to a function taking two different values on complementary half- spaces; this is the content of the next statement, which also gives an equivalent definition of approximate X-jump points. Proposition 2.26. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω an open set, u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk), p ∈ Ω and let a, b ∈ Rk with a 6= b and ν ∈ Sm−1 be fixed. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) p ∈ Ju and (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) ≡ (a, b, ν); (ii) working in adapted exponential coordinates Fp around p, as r → 0 the functions eur := u ◦ Fp ◦ δr converge in L1 loc(Rn; Rk) to (21) wa,b,ν(y) :=(a b if eLν(y) > 0 if eLν(y) < 0. Proof. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1. We prove the implication (i)⇒(ii); we can assume that (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) = (a, b, ν) and, writing w := wa,b,ν, we prove that for any fixed R > 0 one has lim r→0 bB(0,R) u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − w dL n = 0. By a change of variables, this is equivalent to proving that lim r→0 1 rQ bB(0,r) u ◦ Fp − w dL n = 0. (22) Let f be the real function of class C 1 the half-balls B± ν (p, r) appearing in (20); we set for brevity X defined on a neighborhood of p used to define, as in (15), By Theorem 2.9 there exists an increasing function ω : (0, +∞) → (0, +∞) such that bB+ ν (0, r) := bB(0, r) ∩ {eLν > 0}, eB+ ν (0, r) := eB(0, r) ∩ {f ◦ Fp > 0}, lim r→0 ω(r) r = 0 and for any sufficiently small r. Therefore bB− ν (0, r) := bB(0, r) ∩ {eLν < 0} eB− ν (0, r) := eB(0, r) ∩ {f ◦ Fp < 0}. bB(0, r) ⊆ eB(0, r + ω(r)) = ≤ 1 1 rQ bB(0,r) rQ(cid:18) bB+ rQ(cid:18) eB+ + eB− 1 ν (0,r) u ◦ Fp − w dL n u ◦ Fp − a dL n + bB− ν (0,r) u ◦ Fp − b dL n(cid:19) ν (0,r+ω(r)) ν (0,r+ω(r)) u ◦ Fp − a dL n + bB+ u ◦ Fp − b dL n + bB− ν (0,r)\ eB+ ν (0,r)\ eB− ν (0,r+ω(r))(cid:0)u ◦ Fp − b + a − b(cid:1) dL n ν (0,r+ω(r))(cid:0)u ◦ Fp − a + a − b(cid:1) dL n(cid:19) 16 DON AND VITTONE 1 ≤ ν (0, r) \ eB± ν (0, r + ω(r)) ⊆ eB(0, r + ω(r)) \ eB± and using bB± rQ(cid:18)2 eB+ u ◦ Fp − a dL n + 2 eB− + a − bL n(cid:0)eB(0, r + ω(r)) ∩ {(f ◦ Fp)eLν ≤ 0}(cid:1)(cid:19) ν (0,r+ω(r)) ν (0,r+ω(r)) ν (0, r + ω(r)) ⊆ eB∓ u ◦ Fp − b dL n ν (0, r + ω(r)) and (22) follows from (20) and Corollary 2.14 taking also Theorem 2.2 into account. For the converse implication one has to prove that, if (ii) holds and f is a C 1 X real function on a neighborhood of p such that f (p) = 0 and Xf (p)/Xf (p) = ν, then (20) holds with B± ν (p, r) defined (see (15)) in terms of f . By Theorem 2.2 and a change of variables, proving (20) amounts to proving that lim r→0 1 rQ eB+ ν (0,r) u ◦ Fp − a dL n = lim r→0 1 rQ eB− ν (0,r) u ◦ Fp − b dL n = 0 and this can be done by a boring adaptation, that we omit, of the previous argument. Remark 2.27. The proof of Proposition 2.26 implicitly shows that the validity of (20) does not depend on the choice of the function f used in (15) to define B± (cid:3) ν (p, r). The proof of the following result is standard and we postpone it to the Appendix B. Proposition 2.28. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω be an open set and let u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk). Then the following facts hold: (i) Ju is a Borel set and, up to a choice of a representative for X-jump triples, the function Ju → Rk × Rk × Sm−1 p 7→ (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) is Borel; (ii) for every f ∈ Lip(Rk; Rh) and p ∈ Ju we have p ∈ Jf ◦u ⇐⇒ f (u+(p)) 6= f (u−(p)) and in this case ((f ◦ u)+(p), (f ◦ u)−(p), νf ◦u(p)) ≡ (f (u+(p)), f (u−(p)), νu(p)). Other- wise, p /∈ Sf ◦u and (f ◦ u)⋆(p) = f (u+(p)) = f (u−(p)). We now pass to he introduction of approximate X-differentiability. Definition 2.29 (Approximate X-differentiability). Let u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk) and p ∈ Ω \ Su. We say that u is approximately X-differentiable at p if there exist a neighborhood U of p and f ∈ C 1 X(U; Rk) such that f (p) = 0 and r→0 B(p,r) lim u − u⋆(p) − f r dL n = 0. (23) The subset of points of Ω in which u is approximately X-differentiable is denoted by Du. If f is as in Definition 2.29 we will call Xf (p) ∈ Rk×m the approximate X-gradient of u at p. By the following proposition the approximate X-gradient of u at p is uniquely determined, and we denote it by Dap Proposition 2.30 (Uniqueness of approximate X-gradient). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω ⊆ Rn an open set, u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk) and p ∈ Ω \ Su. Let R > 0 and f1, f2 ∈ X (B(p, R); Rk); suppose that formula (23) holds for both f = f1 and f = f2. Then p ∈ Du, C 1 f1(p) = f2(p) = 0 and Xf1(p) = Xf2(p). X u(p). Conversely, if f1(p) = f2(p) = 0 and Xf1(p) = Xf2(p), then formula (23) holds for f = f1 if and only if it holds for f = f2. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 17 Proof. It is not restrictive to assume that k = 1. Define for i = 1, 2 the functions Li :=eLXfi(p). Suppose first that both f1, f2 satisfy (23). Fix ε > 0 and by Proposition 2.13 choose r > 0 such that for every ∈ (0, r) fi ◦ Fp − Li < ε 2 Then for such values of we have on eB(0, ). eB(0,) L1 − L2 f1 ◦ Fp − f2 ◦ Fp dL n + ε f1 − f2 dL n + ε dL n ≤ eB(0,) ≤ C B(p,) ≤ C B(p,) u − u⋆(p) − f1 + u − u⋆(p) − f2 dL n + ε. It follows that lim →0 eB(0,) L1 − L2 dL n = 0. If Xf1(p) 6= Xf2(p), by Theorem 2.6 one would get, for some C1 > 0 eB(0,) L1 − L2 dL n = ≥ 1 L n(eB(0, )) eB(0,) L n (A(C1)) A(/C1) 1 L1 − L2 dL n L1 − L2dL n = C Q+1 Q = C, a contradiction. This proves the first part of the statement. Suppose now that Xf1(p) = Xf2(p) and that f1 satisfies (23). Then we have L1 = L2 and B(p,) ≤ B(p,) u − u⋆(p) − f2 dL n f1 − L1 ◦ F −1 p + u(y) − u⋆(p) − f1 + f2 − L2 ◦ F −1 p dL n. By Proposition 2.13 this completes the proof. (cid:3) As for X-jump points, also approximate X-differentiability points can be detected by a blow- up procedure. Proposition 2.31. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω be an open subset of Rn, u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk) and let p ∈ Ω \ Su. Then u is approximate X-differentiable at p if and only if there exists z = (z1, . . . , zk) ∈ Rk×m such that u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − u⋆(p) r In this case we have Dap X u(p) = z. → (eLz1, . . . ,eLzk) in L1 loc(Rn; Rk) as r → 0. 18 DON AND VITTONE Proof. We assume without loss of generality that k = 1. Assume first that p ∈ Du and let f be as in (23); set z := Dap X u(p) ∈ Rm. Given R > 0, by Theorem 2.9 one has for small enough r r r r 1 C u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − u⋆(p) −eLz(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dL n bB(0,R)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) rQ bB(0,rR)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLz rQ B(p,2rR)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) u − u⋆(p) −eLz ◦ F −1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) B(p,r)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) u − u⋆(p) −eLz ◦ F −1 rQ bB(0,2r)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLz dL n ≤ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) C r r p = ≤ ≤ which allows to conclude. (we used Proposition 2.30), which proves the first part of the statement. Conversely, for any small enough r > 0 we have dL n ≤ 1 rQ eB(0,2rR)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p dL n → 0 as r → 0, u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLz r dL n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) C rQ eB(0,r)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dL n = C bB(0,2)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLz u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − u⋆(p) r r dL n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) −eLz(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dL n, (cid:3) The proofs of the following two results are postponed to Appendix B. Proposition 2.32 (Properties of approximate differentiability points). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω be an open set in Rn and let u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk). Then Du is a Borel set and the map Dap Proposition 2.33 (Locality). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω an open set in Rn and u, v ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk). Suppose that p ∈ Ω is of density 1 for the set {q ∈ Ω : u(q) = v(q)}. Then the following facts hold. X u : Du → Rm×k is a Borel map. (i) If p ∈ Ω \ (Su ∪ Sv), then u⋆(p) = v⋆(p). (ii) If p ∈ Ju ∩ Jv, then (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) ≡ (v+(p), v−(p), νv(p)). (iii) If p ∈ Du ∩ Dv then Dap X u(p) = Dap X v(p). 2.4. Functions with bounded X-variation. In this section we review the definition and basic properties of BVX functions. We keep on working in a fixed equiregular CC space (Rn, X), while Ω denotes a fixed open subset of Rn. Definition 2.34 (Functions with bounded X-variation). We say that u ∈ L1 loc(Ω) is a function of locally bounded X-variation in Ω, and we write u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω), if there exists a Rm-valued Radon measure DXu = (DX1u, . . . , DXmu) in Ω such that for every open set A ⋐ Ω and for every ϕ ∈ C 1 c (A) we have ∀ i = 1, . . . , m A ϕ d(DXiu) = −A uX ∗ i ϕ dL n, (24) where X ∗ i denotes the formal adjoint of Xi. If u ∈ L1(Ω), we say that u has bounded X-variation in Ω, and we write u ∈ BVX(Ω), if, moreover, the total variation DXu of DXu is finite on Ω. As customary, we write BVX(Ω; Rk) := (BVX(Ω))k, and similarly for BVX,loc(Ω; Rk). It can be useful to observe that if u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk), the following inequalities hold max 1≤i≤k DXui(Ω) ≤ DXu(Ω) ≤ kXi=1 DXui(Ω). (25) FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 19 The following approximation result is proved in [20, 24]. Theorem 2.35. Let u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk). Then there exists a sequence (uh) in C ∞(Ω; Rk) such that lim h kuh − ukL1(Ω;Rk) = 0 and lim h DXuh(Ω) = DXu(Ω). We now state and prove a simple but useful result. Let also X1, . . . , Xm be vector fields on Ω and define for every i = 1, . . . , m the vector fields Proposition 2.36. Let Ω,eΩ be two open sets in Rn and let G : Ω → eΩ be a diffeomorphism. Yi := dG(Xi) on eΩ. Then (26) More precisely, for every open set U ⋐ Ω and setting V := G(U), one has for every u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω) that u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω) ⇐⇒ v := u ◦ G−1 ∈ BVY,loc(eΩ). mDXu(U) ≤ DY v(V ) ≤ MDXu(U) (27) for m := inf U det ∇G and M := supU det ∇G. Proof. We claim that, for any open set U ⋐ Ω and any u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω), one has v := u ◦ G−1 ∈ BVY (V ) and DY v(V ) ≤ MDX u(U). This would be enough to conclude: indeed, the claim would imply both the ⇒ implication in (26) and the second inequality in (27), while the ⇐ implication in (26) and the first inequality in (27) simply follow by replacing X, U, u, G with (respectively) Y, V, v, G−1 and noticing that m = (supV det ∇(G−1))−1. Let us prove the claim. First we assume that u ∈ C ∞(U), so that also v is smooth on V . For every ϕ ∈ C 1 c (V ; Rm) with ϕ ≤ 1, by a change of variable we have that V hY v, ϕidL n = U hXu, (ϕ ◦ G)i det ∇GdL n, which gives In case u ∈ BVX(U) is not smooth, consider a sequence (uh) in C ∞(U) that converges to u in L1(U) and such that DY v(V ) ≤ MDX u(U). lim h DXuh(U) = DXu(U). Defining vh := uh ◦ G−1, we easily get that vh converges to v in L1(V ) as h → +∞. Therefore DY v(V ) ≤ lim inf h DY vh(V ) ≤ M lim inf h DXuh(U) = MDX u(U) and the proof is accomplished. (cid:3) Definition 2.37 (Sets with finite X-perimeter). A measurable set E ⊆ Rn has locally finite X-perimeter (resp., finite X-perimeter) in Ω if χE ∈ BVX,loc(Ω) (resp., χE ∈ BVX (Ω)). In such a case we define the X-perimeter measure P E X of E by P E X := DXχE. It will sometimes be useful to write PX(E, ·) instead of P E X . Definition 2.38 (Measure theoretic horizontal normal). If E is a set with locally finite X- perimeter, then by Riesz representation theorem there exists a P E X -measurable function νE : Rn → Sm−1 such that We call νE the measure theoretic horizontal normal to E. DXχE = νEP E X . The following result is proved in [1] and it will be of capital importance in the following. 20 DON AND VITTONE Theorem 2.39. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of homogeneous dimension Q; let E ⊆ Rn be a set with finite X-perimeter in an open set Ω ⊆ Rn. Then X Ω = θH Q−1 (Ω ∩ ∂∗E) P E (28) for a suitable positive function θ that is locally bounded away from 0. Moreover lim sup r→0 P E X (B(p, 2r)) P E X (B(p, r)) < ∞ for P E X -a.e. p ∈ Ω ∩ ∂∗E. The proofs of the following well-known result can be found, for instance, in [20]. Theorem 2.40 (Coarea Formula for BVX functions). Let (Rn, X) be a CC space, let Ω be an open set in Rn and let u ∈ BVX (Ω). Then, if we define Es := {p ∈ Ω : u(p) > s}, we have DX u(Ω) = +∞ −∞ PX(Es; Ω)ds. The next result is essentially [10, Theorem 1.2]; note, however, that the dimension Q appear- ing in [10, Theorem 1.2] is slightly different from the homogeneous dimension we are considering. See also [29]. Theorem 2.41. Let Ω be an open subset of an equiregular CC space (Rn, X) of homogeneous dimension Q and let K ⊆ Ω be compact. Then there exist C > 0 and R > 0 such that, for every p ∈ K, r ∈ (0, R) and u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω; Rk), the inequality (cid:18) B(p,r) u − up,r Q Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 Q ≤ C rQ−1 DXu(B(p, r)), where up,r := fflB(p,r) u dL n, holds. Proof. It is clearly enough to consider the case k = 1. The proof then easily follows by [27, Theorem 5.1] on taking into account Theorem 2.2, [10, Theorem 1.1], [27, Corollary 9.8 and Theorem 10.3] and Theorem 2.35. (cid:3) An easy consequence of Theorem 2.41 is the following isoperimetric inequality. Theorem 2.42 (Isoperimetric inequality in CC spaces). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let K ⊆ Rn be a compact set. Then there exist C > 0 and R > 0 such that, for every p ∈ K, r ∈ (0, R) and every L n-measurable set E ⊆ Rn, one has min {L n(E ∩ B(p, r)), L n(B(p, r) \ E)} Q−1 Q ≤ CPX(E, B(p, r)). We conclude this section with some auxiliary results. The first one is proved in [16]. Theorem 2.43. Let X = (X1, . . . , Xm) and X j = (X j m), j ∈ N, be m-tuples of linearly independent smooth vector fields on Rn such that X satisfies the Hörmander condition and its CC balls are bounded in Rn; assume that, for every i = 1, . . . , m, X j loc(Rn) as j → ∞. Let uj ∈ BVX j ,loc(Rn) be a sequence of functions that is locally uniformly bounded in BVX j , i.e., such that for any compact set K ⊆ Rn there exists M > 0 such that i → Xi in C ∞ 1, . . . , X j ∀j ∈ N kujkL1(K) + DX j uj(K) ≤ M < ∞. Then, there exist u ∈ BVX,loc(Rn) and a subsequence (ujh) of (uj) such that ujh → u in L1 as h → ∞. Moreover, for any bounded open set Ω ⊆ Rn one has loc(Rn) DXu(Ω) ≤ lim inf j→∞ DX j uj(Ω). FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 21 The proof of Theorem 2.43 given in [16] implicitly contains also the following result's proof, that we however provide for the sake of completeness. Proposition 2.44. Let X = (X1, . . . , Xm) and X j = (X j linearly independent smooth vector fields on Rn such that, for every i = 1, . . . , m, X j C ∞ for any open bounded set Ω ⊆ Rn one has loc(Rn) be a sequence converging in L1 loc(Rn) as j → ∞. Let (uj) ⊆ L1 m), j ∈ N, be m-tuples of i → Xi in loc(Rn) to some u; then, 1, . . . , X j Proof. For any i = 1, . . . , m and any j ∈ N we write DXu(Ω) ≤ lim inf j→∞ DX j uj(Ω) Xi(x) = ai,k(x)∂k and X j aj i,k(x)∂k i (x) = nXk=1 mXi=1 j→∞Ω uj i,k. Then, for any test function ϕ ∈ C 1 c (Ω; Rm) we have ∂k(ai,kϕi) dL n = lim ∂k(aj i,kϕi) dL n nXk=1 (29) for suitable smooth functions ai,k, aj Ω i ϕi dL n =Ω X ∗ u mXi=1 nXk=1 mXi=1 j→∞Ω u nXk=1 mXi=1 = lim uj ∗ X j i ϕi dL n ≤ kϕkL∞(Ω) lim inf j→∞ DX j uj(Ω). The proof is accomplished. Remark 2.45. Let X, X j, uj, u be as in Proposition 2.44 and assume that DX j uj are locally uniformly bounded in Rn, i.e., for any compact set K ⊆ Rn there exists CK < ∞ such that DX j uj(K) < CK for all j. Then DX j uj weakly∗ converges to DX u in Rn. (cid:3) Indeed, one can reason as in (29) to show that for any test function ϕ ∈ C 1 c (Rn) and any i = 1, . . . , m and the density of C 1 c in C 0 lim j→∞ ϕ dDX j c allows to conclude. i uj = ϕ dDXiu 3. Fine properties of BV functions This section is devoted to the proof of our main results. Lemma 3.1. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, let Ω ⊆ Rn be open and let (Eh) be a sequence of measurable sets in Ω such that L n(Eh) = 0 PX(Eh; Ω) = 0. lim h and lim h Then for every α ∈ (0, 1) we have Proof. Set H Q−1 ∞\h=1(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup h :=(cid:26)q ∈ Ω : lim sup Eα r→0 r→0 L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) L n(Eh ∩ B(q, r)) L n(B(q, r)) ≥ α(cid:27)! = 0. ≥ α(cid:27) , and suppose without loss of generality that L n(Eh) > 0 for every h ∈ N. Let K ⋐ Ω. By Theorem 2.2 there exist C > 1 and R > 0 such that for every q ∈ K, for every 0 < r < 2R we have 1 C rQ ≤ L n(B(q, r)) ≤ CrQ. 22 DON AND VITTONE For any sufficiently large h ∈ N we have Fix now p ∈ Eα (cid:18)2CL n(Eh) (cid:19) < RQ. (cid:17)1/Q h ∩ K and define δh =(cid:16) 4CL n(Eh) ; then α α L n(Eh ∩ B(p, δh)) CL n(Eh) L n(B(p, δh)) ≤ δQ h = α 4 . On the other hand, by definition of Eα h we can find arbitrarily small radii r > 0 such that L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) ≥ α 2 . Taking into account Proposition A.9, a continuity argument allows us to find 0 < ≤ δh such that L n(Eh ∩ B(x, )) = L n(B(x, )). α 2 By the 5r-covering Lemma, we can find a family {B(pj, j) : j ∈ N} of pairwise disjoint balls in Ω such that, for every j ∈ N, pj ∈ Eα h ∩ K L n(Eh ∩ B(pj, j)) = α 2 L n(B(pj, j)) Eα h ∩ K ⊆ B(pj, 5j). (30) ∞[j=0 Since L n(Eh) is finite, by Theorem 2.42 we get M > 0 such that α 2C Q j ≤ α 2 L n(B(pj, j)) = L n(Eh ∩ B(pj, j)) ≤(cid:0)M PX (Eh; B(pj, j))(cid:1) Q Q−1 . Therefore we have that for every j ∈ N Finally H Q−1 10δh (cid:16)K ∩ Taking the limit for h → ∞ we get PX(Eh; B(pj, j)). Q 10δh Eα Q−1 (K ∩ Eα h ) α (cid:19) Q−1 j ≤ M(cid:18) 2C i(cid:17) ≤ H Q−1 ∞\i=0 ≤ ωQ−15Q−1M(cid:18)2C ≤ ωQ−15Q−1M(cid:18)2C H Q−1 K ∩ ∞\i=0 Eα ∞Xj=0 Q Q α (cid:19) Q−1 α (cid:19) Q−1 i! = 0. (30) ≤ ωQ−15Q−1 Q−1 j ∞Xj=0 PX(Eh; B(pj, j)) PX(Eh; Ω). By the arbitrariness of K, the proof is complete. (cid:3) FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 23 Before passing to the next result, we introduce some notation that we are going to use fre- quently in what follows. Let p ∈ Rn be fixed and let Fp denote adapted exponential coordinates as in (4), for a fixed choice of a basis Y1, . . . , Yn as in (4). Given r > 0 and i ∈ {1, . . . , m}, define If edr,eBr(x, ) denote, respectively, distance and balls with respect to the metric induced by the vector fields (eX r m), it is easy to see that the dilations δr satisfy 1, . . . , eX r 1 By Theorem 2.9, the convergence i := r(dδr−1)[eXi ◦ δr]. eX r red(δrξ, δrη). edr(ξ, η) = r→0eBr(0, ) = bB(0, ) lim (31) (32) p. Moreover, given u ∈ BVX,loc(Rn; Rk) we set holds in the Gromov-Hausdorff sense, bB(0, ) denoting a ball in the tangent Carnot group at notice that D eX reur(eBr(0, )) = r1−QD eXeu(eB(0, r)). Lemma 3.2. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, let Ω ⊆ Rn be open and consider u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk). Then eur :=eu ◦ δr; eu := u ◦ Fp We can now prove the following lemma. (33) and H Q−1(cid:18)(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup r→0 B(p,r) u Q Q−1 dL n = +∞(cid:27)(cid:19) = 0. Proof. We can suppose without loss of generality that k = 1. Possibly considering u instead of u, we can suppose that u ≥ 0; we also assume without loss of generality that Ω is bounded in Rn. Define the set By Proposition A.4 we have that H Q−1(D) = 0. For every h ∈ N we can find th ∈ (h, h + 1) such that D =(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 = +∞(cid:27) . PX({u > th}, Ω) ≤ h+1 h PX({u > t}, Ω)dt. Define Eh = {u > th}. Since u ∈ L1(Ω) we have that limh L n(Eh) = 0 and applying the Coarea Formula of Theorem 2.40 we get PX (Eh, Ω) ≤ +∞ 0 PX ({u > t}, Ω)dt = DXu(Ω) < +∞, ∞Xh=0 and therefore limh PX(Eh, Ω) = 0. We are in a position to apply Lemma 3.1. Defining for every h ∈ N Fh =(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup r→0 L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) ≥ α(cid:27) , where α > 0 will be chosen later depending on Ω only, we have that H Q−1 (T∞ is then sufficient to prove the inclusion L :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup r→0 B(p,r) u Q Q−1 dL n = +∞(cid:27) ⊆ D ∪ Fh. ∞\h=0 h=0 Fh) = 0. It 24 DON AND VITTONE Applying Theorem 2.41 we get C > 0 and R > 0 such that for every q ∈ Ω and all 0 < r < R h=0 Fh and we prove that p /∈ L. Define up,r := fflB(p,r) udL n. To this aim, we fix p /∈ D ∪T∞ B(q,r) u(y) − uq,r Q Q−1 dL n(y) ≤ C(cid:18)DXu(B(q, r)) rQ−1 Q−1 (cid:19) Q . (34) It is enough to prove that lim supr→0 up,r < +∞: in this case, in fact, inequality (34) and the definition of D would imply that p /∈ L. By contradiction we find an infinitesimal sequence (rj) such that limj up,rj = +∞. Define DXu(B(p, rj)) is uniformly bounded with Since p /∈ D, for any > 0 the sequence r1−Q respect to j ∈ N; by Proposition 2.36, the same is true for the sequence eu,eurj as in (33) (with r = rj) andevj :=eurj − up,rj; set also eX j := (eX j 1, . . . , eX j D eXeu(eB(0, rj)), i := eX rj eX j D eX jevj(eBj(0, )) = r1−Q and m). j j i where eBj(0, ) := eBrj (0, ) according to the notation introduced after (31). Taking also (32) into account, this proves that, for any compact set K ⊆ Rn, the sequence D eX jevj(K) is bounded; by (34), also kevjkL1(K) is bounded. By Theorem 2.43 (recalling also Theorem 2.7) there exists w ∈ L1(bB(0, 1)) such that, possibly extracting a subsequence, evj → w in L1(bB(0, 1)). Consequently, for almost every x ∈ bB(0, 1) u(Fp(δrj x)) = +∞ we have lim j and then, for every h ∈ N, L n(bB(0, 1)) = lim = lim j j = lim j r−Q j L n({x ∈ eBj(0, 1) : u(Fp(δrj x)) > th}) L n({x ∈ eB(0, rj) : u(Fp(x)) > th}) B(p,rj)∩Eh det ∇F −1 dL n 1 rQ j p ≤ det ∇F −1 p (p) lim sup r→0 L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) rQ ≤ C det ∇Fp(0) lim sup r→0 L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) where C > 0 is given by Theorem 2.2 with K = Ω. Notice that L n(bB(0, 1)) depends on p. Using (32) we obtain lim sup r→0 L n(Eh ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) det ∇Fp(0) C det ∇Fp(0) C L n(bB(0, 1)) = lim r→0 1 rQ det ∇Fp(0) C lim r→0 L n(eBr(0, 1)) rQ B(p,r) lim r→0 1 det ∇Fp(0) C L n(eB(0, r)) = ≥ 1 C 2 . rQ h=0 Fh for α := 1/C 2, a contradiction. ≥ = ≥ L n(B(p, r)) 1 C lim inf r→0 This proves that p ∈T∞ det ∇F −1 p dL n (cid:3) FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 25 The following proposition contains some of the first "fine" properties of BVX functions we are interested in. Proposition 3.3. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space. Then there exists λ : Rn → (0, +∞) locally bounded away from 0 such that, for every open set Ω ⊆ Rn and every u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk) DXu ≥ λu+ − u−S Q−1 Ju and for every Borel set B ⊆ Ω the following implications hold: H Q−1(B) = 0 ⇒ DXu(B) = 0; H Q−1(B) < +∞ and B ∩ Su = ∅ ⇒ DXu(B) = 0. (35) (36) Proof. Let us prove the first part of the statement; we assume without loss of generality that k = 1. Consider p ∈ Ju. By Proposition 2.26 the sequence eur := u ◦ Fp ◦ δr converges in L1(bB(0, 1)) as r → 0 to the function Defining eX r i as in (31) and using Propositions 2.44 and 2.36 we obtain for any positive ε that if eLν(p)(y) ≥ 0 if eLν(p)(y) < 0. wp(y) :=(u+(p) ≥ det ∇Fp(0) lim inf DX u(B(p, r)) u−(p) lim inf r→0 rQ−1 r r ≥ det ∇Fp(0) lim inf D eX reur(eBr(0, 1)) D eX reur(bB(0, 1 − ε)) ≥ det ∇Fp(0) D bXwp(bB(0, 1 − ε)), ≥ det ∇Fp(0) D bXwp(bB(0, 1)) ≥ det ∇Fp(0)u+(p) − u−(p)H n−1 e (37) (ν⊥ ∩ bB(0, 1)) whence lim inf r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 where ν := (ν1, . . . , νm, 0, . . . , 0) ∈ Rn and H n−1 denotes the Euclidean Hausdorff measure in Rn. It is easily seen that, for any p ∈ Rn, there exist c > 0 and a neighborhood U of p such that the function λ(q) := det ∇Fq(0)H n−1 A.5, this proves the first part of the statement. (ν⊥ ∩ bBq(0, 1)) is such that λ ≥ c on U. By Corollary By Theorem 2.39, the implication (35) is true in case k = 1 and u = χE for some E ⊆ Rn with finite X-perimeter. If k = 1 and u ∈ BVX (Ω), we define Es := {u > s} and we apply Theorem 2.40 (and, again, Theorem 2.39) to get e e DXu(B) = +∞ −∞ PX(Es; B)ds = +∞ −∞ (cid:18)B∩∂∗Es θsdH Q−1(cid:19) ds for suitable positive functions θs. This allows to infer (35). In the general case k ≥ 1, it is sufficient to recall inequality (25). In order to prove (36) we consider u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk) and a Borel subset B of Ω such that B ∩ Su = ∅. If k = 1, by Theorem 2.40 we obtain again DXu(B) = +∞ −∞ (cid:18)B∩∂∗Es θs dH Q−1(cid:19) ds = B R θs(p)χ∂∗Es(p) ds dH Q−1(p) = 0, the last equality following from Proposition 2.22. In the case u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk) with k ≥ 2, it is sufficient to notice that B ∩ Su = ∅ implies B ∩ Suα = ∅ for every α = 1, . . . , k, and one concludes using inequality (25). (cid:3) 26 DON AND VITTONE We now prove some of our main results. Proof of Theorems 1.2 and 1.5. It is not restrictive to suppose k = 1. We first prove Theorem 1.2. By the Coarea Formula we get a countable and dense set D ⊆ R such that for every t ∈ D the level set {u > t} has finite X-perimeter. We prove that Su \ L ⊆ [t∈D ∂∗{u > t} (38) where, as in Lemma 3.2, L denotes the H Q−1-negligible set (cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup r→0 B(p,r) u Q Q−1 dL n = +∞(cid:27) . Theorem 1.2 is immediately implied by formula (38). In order to prove the latter, take p /∈ L and suppose that p /∈St∈D ∂∗{u > t}; we will prove that p /∈ Su. By definition, p is either a point of density 1 or a point of density 0 in {u > t} for every t ∈ D. Notice that for every t ∈ D ∩ (0, +∞) one has L n ({u > t} ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) ≤ 1 t B(p,r) udL n ≤ 1 t(cid:18) B(p,r) u Q Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 Q and therefore, if t ∈ D ∩ (0, +∞) is large enough, p is a point of density 0 for {u > t}. Analogously, if t ∈ D ∩ (−∞, 0) and −t is large enough, p is a point of density 1 for {u > t}. Hence we can find a real number z = z(p) := sup {t ∈ D : {u > t} has density 1 at p} . By the density of D in R we get that, for every t > z, {u > t} has density 0 at p and, for every t < z, {u > t} has density 1 at p. We prove now that z is the approximate limit of u at p. To this end define Eε := {u − z > ε} and estimate 1 rQ B(p,r) u − zdL n ≤ εC + ≤ εC + 1 1 u − zdL n rQ Eε∩B(p,r) rQ (L n(Eε ∩ B(p, r)))1/Q(cid:18)B(p,r) rQ B(p,r) (cid:19)1/Q(cid:18) 1 = εC +(cid:18) L n(Eε ∩ B(p, r)) rQ u − z u − z Q Q Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 Q Q . Since both {u > z + ε} and {u < z − ε} have density 0 at p, one has and, since p /∈ L, we get L n(Eε ∩ B(p, r)) rQ lim r→0 = 0 lim sup r→0 1 rQ B(p,r) u − zdL n ≤ Cε, from which we deduce that p /∈ Su, as desired. We now prove Theorem 1.5. When property R holds, the countable X-rectifiability of Su immediately follows from (38). We have to prove that H Q−1(Su \ Ju) = 0. Let ν = νSu be the FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 27 horizontal normal to Su and recall the notation B± 3.7 below, for H Q−1-almost every p ∈ Su there exist u+(p) and u−(p) in Rk such that ν (p, r) introduced in (15). By Proposition lim r→0 1 rQ B+ ν(p)(p,r) u − u+(p)dL n = lim r→0 1 rQ B− ν(p)(p,r) u − u−(p)dL n = 0. Notice that u+(p) 6= u−(p), for otherwise u would have an approximate limit at p. This implies that p is an approximate X-jump point associated with the triple (u+(p), u−(p), ν(p)), and this concludes the proof. (cid:3) A milder version of Theorem 1.5 holds when (Rn, X) satisfies the weaker property LR, that we now introduce. Definition 3.4 (Property LR). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space with homogeneous dimension Q ∈ N. We say that (Rn, X) satisfies the property LR if, for every open set Ω ⊆ Rn and every E ⊆ Rn with locally finite X-perimeter in Ω, the essential boundary ∂∗E ∩ Ω is countably X-Lipschitz rectifiable. The proof of the following result is an immediate consequence of (38). Theorem 3.5. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space satisfying property LR and let u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk). Then Su is countably X-Lipschitz rectifiable. Before proving Proposition 3.7, that we used in the proof of Theorem 1.5, we state the following theorem, which is a consequence of some results contained in [46]. We use the notation B± f (p, r) := {q ∈ B(p, r) : ±f (q) > 0}. X(Ω) be such that Xf 6= 0 on Ω; let S be the C 1 Theorem 3.6. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set and let f ∈ C 1 X hypersurface S := {p ∈ Ω : f (p) = 0}. Then there exist linear operators T +, T − : BVX,loc(Ω; Rk) → L1 loc(S, H Q−1) such that, for any u ∈ BVX,loc(Ω; Rk), one has for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ S lim r→0 1 rQ B+ f (p,r) u − T +u(p)dL n = lim r→0 1 rQ B− f (p,r) u − T −u(p)dL n = 0. In particular, for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ S T ±u(p) = lim r→0 1 rQ B± f (p,r) u dL n. We can now prove the following proposition, where we implicitly use Remark 2.27. Proposition 3.7. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space and let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open set. Let R ⊆ Ω be a countably X-rectifiable set with horizontal normal νR. Then, for every u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk) and for H Q−1-almost every p ∈ R there exists a couple (u+ R(p)) ∈ Rk × Rk such that R(p), u− lim r→0 1 rQ Ω∩B+ u − u+ R(p)dL n = lim r→0 1 rQ Ω∩B− νR(p)(p,r) νR (p)(p,r) 3, then (u+ Moreover, if (Rn, X) satisfies property R and R = Ju approximate X-jump triple for u at p in the sense of Definition 2.24. 3The jump set Ju is countably X-rectifiable by Theorem 1.5 and Remark 2.25. u − u− R(p)dL n = 0. (39) Ju(p), u− Ju(p), νJu(p)) is an 28 DON AND VITTONE Proof. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1. Let u ∈ BVX(Ω) be fixed. By definition of countable X-rectifiability we can find a family {Si : i ∈ N} of C 1 X hypersurfaces in Rn such that H Q−1 R \ Si! = 0. ∞[i=0 For every i ∈ N we can write, at least locally, Si = {fi = 0} and we can suppose that Xfi 6= 0 on Si. Formula (39) easily follows (with u± R(p) = T ±u(p)) from Theorem 3.6 for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R such that #{i ∈ N : p ∈ Si} = 1. It is then enough to show that, for any fixed couple i, j ∈ N with i 6= j and for H Q−1-almost every p ∈ Si ∩ Sj, the equivalence (T + i u(p), T − i u(p), νSi(p)) ≡ (T + j u(p), T − j u(p), νSj (p)) (40) holds. Here, T ± i , T ± j are the trace operators provided by Theorem 3.6 with f = fi, fj. Fix a point p ∈ Si ∩ Sj where νSi(p) = ±νSj (p); recall that this fact occurs at H Q−1-a.e. Xfj(p) ; by Theorem 3.6 we have for p ∈ Si ∩ Sj. Assume that νSi(p) = νSj (p), i.e., Xfi(p) H Q−1-a.e. such p that Xfi(p) = Xfj (p) T ± i (p) − T ± j (p) = lim r→0 ≤ lim r→0 ≤ lim r→0 1 1 u dL n −{±fj>0}∩B(p,r) rQ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) {±fi>0}∩B(p,r) rQ {fifj≤0}∩B(p,r) L n({fifj ≤ 0} ∩ B(p, r))1/Q(cid:18)B(p,r) udL n 1 rQ udL n(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 Q Q u . By Remark 2.15 we have lim r→0 1 rQ L n({fifj ≤ 0} ∩ B(p, r)) = 0, while by Lemma 3.2 we also have that for H Q−1-almost every p ∈ Ω lim sup r→0 1 rQ B(p,r) u Q Q−1 dL n < +∞. This proves that T ± argument shows that T ± This proves (40), while the last statement of the proposition follows from Theorem 3.6. j (p) for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Si ∩ Sj such that νSi(p) = νSj (p). A similar j (p) holds for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Si ∩ Sj with νSi(p) = −νSj (p). (cid:3) i (p) = T ∓ i (p) = T ± The problem of studying "intrinsic" measures of submanifolds of a CC space goes back to M. Gromov [26, 0.6.b]: the interested reader might consult [32, 33, 34, 40] and the references therein. Since we do not intend to dwell on such questions, we follow a different ("axiomatic") path; this is based on the following definition, where we chose to work with the spherical Hausdorff measure S Q−1, rather than the standard one, because the results mentioned above (as well as [22, 23]) suggest S Q−1 to be more natural than the standard measure H Q−1. Definition 3.8 (Property D). Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space with homogeneous dimension Q ∈ N. We say that (Rn, X) satisfies the property D if there exists a function ζ : R × Sm−1 → (0, +∞) such that, for every C 1 X hypersurface S ⊆ Rn and every p ∈ S, one has S Q−1(S ∩ B(p, r)) = ζ(p, νS(p)). lim r→0 rQ−1 FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 29 Remark 3.9. If (Rn, X) is an equiregular CC space satisfying property D and R ⊆ Rn is X-rectifiable, then we have S Q−1(R ∩ B(p, r)) lim r→0 rQ−1 where ζ is as in Definition 3.8. = ζ(p, νR(p)) for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R, Let us prove this fact. Let Si, i ∈ N, be a family of C 1 X hypersurfaces such that S Q−1(R \ ∪i∈NSi) = 0; it is enough to show that, for any fixed i ∈ N, we have S Q−1(R ∩ B(p, r)) rQ−1 lim r→0 = ζ(p, νR(p)) for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R ∩ Si. Setting R∆Si := (R \ Si) ∪ (Si \ R), by Remark A.6 (applied with µ := S Q−1 (R∆Si)) we obtain S Q−1((R∆Si) ∩ B(p, r)) rQ−1 lim r→0 = 0 for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R ∩ Si, which gives for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R ∩ Si S Q−1(R ∩ B(p, r)) rQ−1 = lim r→0 S Q−1(Si ∩ B(p, r)) rQ−1 lim r→0 = ζ(p, νSi(p)) = ζ(p, νR(p)) as desired. Assuming properties R and D we are able to prove the following result, where we use the notation u+ R, u− R of Proposition 3.7. Theorem 3.10. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space satisfying properties R and D; then, there exists a function σ : Rn × Sm−1 → (0, +∞) such that the following holds. For every open set Ω ⊆ Rn, u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk) and every countably X-rectifiable set R ⊆ Rn one has DXu R = σ(·, νR)(u+ R − u− R) ⊗ νR S Q−1 R. In particular, Dj X u = σ(·, νu)(u+ − u−) ⊗ νu S Q−1 Ju. Proof. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1 and S Q−1(R) < ∞. By Theorem 1.5 and Proposition 3.3 we can also assume that R ⊆ Ju. Given p ∈ Rn we work in adapted exponential coordinates Fp around p and we define σ(p, ν) := det ∇Fp(0)H n−1 ζ(p, ν) e (ν⊥ ∩ bBp(0, 1)) where ζ is as in Definition 3.8 and, as in the proof of Proposition 3.3, H n−1 Euclidean Hausdorff measure in Rn. e denotes the Let µR := DXu R; by Proposition 3.3 we have µR ≪ S Q−1 R. By Remark 3.9 we can use [17, Theorem 2.9.8] (joint with [17, Theorem 2.8.17]) and it is enough to prove that for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R lim r→0 µR(B(p, r)) S Q−1(R ∩ B(p, r)) = σ(p, νR(p))(u+ R(p) − u− R(p))νR(p); notice that the limit above exists S Q−1-almost everywhere. Taking into account Remark 3.9 and the fact that (by Remark A.6) lim r→0 DXu − µR(B(p, r)) rQ−1 = 0 for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R, 30 DON AND VITTONE it suffices to prove that, for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R, there exists an infinitesimal sequence (ri) such that lim i→+∞ DXu(B(p, ri)) rQ−1 i = det ∇Fp(0)H n−1 e (ν ⊥ ∩ bBp(0, 1))(u+ R(p) − u− R(p))νR(p). We prove that such a sequence exists at all points where lim supr→0 holds for S Q−1-a.e. p ∈ R due to Remark A.6. DX u(B(p,r)) rQ−1 < ∞, which L1 loc(Rn) to Let then such a p ∈ R be fixed; since R ⊆ Ju, the functions eur := u ◦ Fp ◦ δr converge in wp(y) :=(u+(p) u−(p) if eLνR(p)(y) ≥ 0 if eLνR(p)(y) < 0, where we used the fact that νR = νJu = νu S Q−1-a.e. on R. Let eu := u ◦ Fp; since (recall notation (31)) D eX reur(eBr(0, )) = D eXeu(eB(0, r))/rQ−1 is bounded as r → 0 for any positive , by Remark 2.45 the sequence D eX reur weakly∗ converges in Rn to D bX wp as r → 0. Let si be an infinitesimal sequence such that D eX sieusi weakly∗ to some measure λ in Rn; let ∈ (0, 1) be such that λ(∂bBp(0, )) = 0 (which holds for all except at most countably many ) and define ri := si. Proposition 2.36 gives DX u(B(p, ri)) lim i→∞ rQ−1 i = det ∇Fp(0) = det ∇Fp(0) lim i→∞ lim i→∞ rQ−1 i D eXeu(eB(0, ri)) D eX sieusi(eBsi(0, )) Q−1 . We prove in a moment that lim i→∞ assuming this to be true, we have D eX sieusi(eBsi(0, )) Q−1 = D bXwp(bBp(0, )) Q−1 ; lim i→∞ DXu(B(p, ri)) rQ−1 i = det ∇Fp(0) D bX wp(bBp(0, )) Q−1 = det ∇Fp(0)H n−1 e R(p) − u− R(p))νR(p). (41) (42) and the proof would be concluded. Let us prove (41). Defining µi := D eX sieusi µi ∗⇀ µ eBsi(0, ), and and taking into account [2, Proposition 1.62 (b)], it will suffice to show that (ν⊥ ∩ bBp(0, 1))(u+ µ := D bX wp bBp(0, ) µi ∗⇀ λ bBp(0, ). Concerning the first statement in (42), fix a test function ϕ ∈ C 0 c (Rn); then lim i→∞ ϕ dµi = lim i→∞ bBp(0,) i→∞ bBp(0,) i→∞ eBsi (0,) ϕ dD eX sieusi ϕ dD eX sieusi + eBsi (0,)\ bBp(0,) ϕ dD bXwp, = lim = lim ϕ dD eX sieusi − bBp(0,)\ eBsi (0,) ϕ dD eX sieusi FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 31 that (denoting by ∆ the symmetric difference of sets) where the last equality follows from the weak∗ convergence of D eX sieusi to D bXwp and the fact that, in turn, can be proved as follows. For any ε > 0 there exists δ ∈ (0, ) such that lim i→∞ D eX sieusi(eBsi(0, )∆bBp(0, )) = 0 λ(cid:0)bBp(0, + δ) \ bBp(0, − δ)(cid:1) < ε; by Theorem 2.9 we obtain lim sup i→∞ D eX sieusi(eBsi(0, )∆bBp(0, )) ≤ lim sup i→∞ D eX sieusi(cid:0)bBp(0, + δ) \ bBp(0, − δ)(cid:1) ≤λ(cid:0)bBp(0, + δ) \ bBp(0, − δ)(cid:1) < ε, where we used [2, Proposition 1.62 (a)]. The first statement in (42) is proved; we are left with the second one, which can be easily (cid:3) proved by the very same argument taking into account that µi = D eX sieusi eBsi(0, ). Let us recall once more the notation up,r := fflB(p,r) u dL n. Lemma 3.11. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of homogeneous dimension Q and let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open bounded set. Then there exist C = C(Ω) > 0 and R = R(Ω) > 0 such that, for every p ∈ Ω, every u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk) and every 0 < r < min{R, 1 2d(p, ∂Ω)}, one has up,2r − up,r ≤ Cr1−QDXu(B(p, 2r)). Proof. We use Theorems 2.2 and 2.41 to estimate up,2r − up,r =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) B(p,r) ≤C(cid:18) B(p,2r) (u − up,2r) dL n(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ C B(p,2r) Q−1 dL n(cid:19) Q−1 u − up,2r Q Q u − up,2r dL n ≤ Cr1−QDXu(B(p, 2r)). As mentioned in the Introduction, the next lemma possesses its own interest and it is the key tool in the proof of Theorem 1.1. (cid:3) Lemma 3.12. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of homogeneous dimension Q and let Ω ⊆ Rn be an open bounded set. Then there exist C = C(Ω) > 0 and R = R(Ω) > 0 such that the following holds: for every u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk), p ∈ Ω \ Su and 0 < r < min{R, 1 2 d(p, ∂Ω)} one has B(p,r) u(q) − u⋆(p) d(p, q) In particular dL n(q) ≤ C(cid:18)DXu(B(p, r)) + 1 0 DXu(B(p, tr)) tQ dt(cid:19) . B(p,r) u(q) − u⋆(p) d(p, q) dL n(q) ≤ C 2 0 DX u(B(p, tr)) tQ dt. 32 DON AND VITTONE Proof. Let u, p, r be as in the statement; we introduce the compact notation ui := up,2−ir, i ∈ N. Since ui → u⋆(p) as i → ∞ we estimate and use Lemma 3.11 and Theorem 2.41 to get ≤ ≤ 2i 2i u(q) − u⋆(p) 2−ir d(p, q) dL n(q) dL n(q) u(q) − u⋆(p) ∞Xj=i−1 B(p,r) ∞Xi=1 B(p,2−i+1r)\B(p,2−ir) r B(p,2−i+1r)\B(p,2−ir)(cid:18)u(q) − ui−1 + uj − uj+1(cid:19)dL n(q) ∞Xi=1 r 2−irDXu(B(p, 21−ir)) + ∞Xi=1 ∞Xj=i−1(cid:0)21−ir(cid:1)Q(cid:0)2−(j+1)r(cid:1)1−Q ∞Xi=1 DXu(B(p, 21−ir)) + 2(j−i+1)(Q−1)DXu(B(p, 2−jr))! ∞Xj=i−1 ∞Xk=0(cid:16)1 + 1 + 2Q−1 + (2Q−1)2 + · · · + (2Q−1)k(cid:17)DXu(B(p, 2−kr)) ∞Xk=0 DXu(B(p, 2−kr)). 2(k+1)(Q−1) − 1 2Q−1 − 1 ≤C ≤C =C ≤C Since Q ≥ 2 we have 2Q−1 − 1 ≥ 2Q−1 2 , hence DXu(B(p, 2−jr))! B(p,r) u(q) − u⋆(p) d(p, q) as desired. dL n(q) ≤ C 2k(Q−1)DXu(B(p, 2−kr)) ∞Xk=0 = C DXu(B(p, r)) + ∞Xk=1 = C DXu(B(p, r)) + ∞Xk=1 ≤ C DXu(B(p, r)) + ∞Xk=1 = C(cid:18)DXu(B(p, r)) + 1 0 2k(Q−1)DXu(B(p, 2−kr))! 21−k 21−k 2kQDXu(B(p, 2−kr))dt! DXu(B(p, tr)) dt! tQ 2−k 2−k DXu(B(p, tr)) tQ dt(cid:19) , (cid:3) We can now prove one of our main results; recall that we denote by Dap X u(p) the approximate X-gradient of u at p. Proof of Theorem 1.1. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1. Suppose that DX u = vL n + Ds Xu is the Radon-Nykodým decomposition of the measure DX u with respect to L n. By the Radon-Nykodým Theorem in doubling metric spaces (see e.g. [43, Theorem 4.7 and Remark 4.5]), at L n-almost every p ∈ Ω we have X u(B(p, r)) Ds (43) lim r→0 rQ = 0. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 33 It is sufficient to prove that, for every p ∈ Ω \ (Su ∪ Sv) for which (43) holds, u is approximately X-differentiable at p with Dap X u(p) = v⋆(p). Let R > 0 and f ∈ C 1(B(p, R)) be such that f (p) = 0 and Xf (p) = v⋆(p) and define w(q) := u(q) − u⋆(p) − f (q) Then w ∈ BVX(B(p, R)), p /∈ Sw and w⋆(p) = 0. We are in a position to apply Lemma 3.12 to the function w and get C > 0 so that, for small enough r, 1 rQ B(p,r) u(q) − u⋆(p) − f (q) d(p, q) dL n(q) ≤ C rQ 2 0 DXw(B(p, tr)) tQ dt ≤ C sup t∈(0,2) DXw(B(p, tr)) (tr)Q . It is then enough to show that limr→0 r−QDXw(B(p, r)) = 0. Taking into account that DX w = (v − Xf )L n + Ds Xu and (43), it suffices to check that lim r→0 1 rQ B(p,r) v − Xf dL n = 0, which follows by the generalized Lebesgue's differentiation theorem (see e.g. [28, Section 2.7]) and the inequality v − Xf ≤ v − v⋆(p) + v⋆(p) − Xf . (cid:3) As for classical BV functions (see e.g. [2, pag. 177], the (approximate) convergence of u ∈ BVX to u⋆(p) at points p /∈ Su can be improved in a L1∗ -sense, as we now state. Proposition 3.13. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space, Ω ⊆ Rn an open set and let u ∈ BVX(Ω). Then lim r→0 B(p,r) u − u⋆(p) Q Q−1 dL n = 0 for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Ω \ Su. Proof. We first prove that lim r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 = 0 for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Ω \ Su. (44) Let t > 0 be fixed and consider the set Et :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω \ Su : lim sup r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 > t(cid:27) . By Proposition A.4 one has H Q−1(Et) < ∞; Proposition 3.3 then implies that DXu(Et) = 0 and again Proposition A.4 gives H Q−1(Et) = 0. Since this is true for all positive t, formula (44) immediately follows. Combining Theorem 2.41 and (44) we immediately get that for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Ω lim r→0 B(p,r) u − up,r Q Q−1 dL n = 0. The conclusion follows by u − u⋆(p) Q Q−1 ≤ 2 together with u⋆(p) = limr→0 up,r. 1 Q−1(cid:16)up,r − u⋆(p) Q Q−1 + u − up,r Q Q−1(cid:17) . (cid:3) 34 DON AND VITTONE When (Rn, X) satisfies property R, Ω ⊆ Rn is open and u ∈ BVX(Ω, Rk), by Theorem 1.5 the precise representative up if p ∈ Ω \ Su if p ∈ Ju (45) up(p) := u⋆(p) u+(p) + u−(p) 2 is defined H Q−1-a.e. on Ω. We have the following result. Theorem 3.14. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space satisfying property R, Ω ⊆ Rn an open set and let u ∈ BVX(Ω; Rk). Then lim r→0 B(p,r) u dL n = up(p) for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Ω. Proof. The statement easily follows for H Q−1-a.e. p ∈ Ω\ Su by Proposition 3.13. By Theorem 1.5 it suffices to prove the statement for all p ∈ Ju, which directly follows from Proposition 2.23 and Definition 2.24. (cid:3) Remark 3.15. When (Rn, X) satisfies property R, then Dc is enough to combine Proposition 3.3 and Theorem 1.5. Xu = Ds Xu (Ω \ Su): to see this, it We now want to study the properties of the decomposition DXu = Da Xu + Dc Xu + Dj Xu; recall that H 1 e denotes the Euclidean Hausdorff measure in Rn. Theorem 3.16 (Properties of Cantor part and jump part). Let u ∈ BVX (Ω; Rk). Then the following facts hold: (a) Da Xu = DXu (Ω \ S) and Ds Xu = DXu S, where S :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ = +∞(cid:27) . Moreover, if E ⊆ Rk is such that H 1 e (E) = 0, then Dap X u = 0 L n-a.e. in (u⋆)−1(E). (b) Let Θu ⊆ S be defined by Θu :=(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : L(p) := lim inf r→0 DXu(B(p, r)) rQ−1 > 0(cid:27) . Then Ju ⊆ Θu. Moreover, if (Rn, X) satisfies property R, then (c) H Q−1(Θu \ Ju) = 0 and Dj Xu = DXu Θu. More generally, for every Borel set Σ containing Ju and σ-finite with respect to H Q−1 we have Dj Xu = DX u Σ. Xu = DXu (S \ Θu). (d) Dc (e) if B ⊆ Ω is such that either H Q−1 B is σ-finite or B = (u⋆) −1(E) for some H 1 e - negligible set E ⊆ Rk, then Dc Xu(B) = 0. Proof. In order to prove the first part of statement (a) it is sufficient to apply Radon-Nykodým Theorem in doubling metric spaces (see e.g. [43, Theorem 4.7 and Remark 4.5]). Concerning the second part, assume first that k = 1 and let B := (u⋆)−1(E). By Proposition 2.22, for any t /∈ E we have B ∩ ∂∗{u > t} = ∅. By Theorems 2.40 and 2.39 we obtain DXu(B) = R PX({u > t} ∩ B) dt = 0 = R\E ∂∗{u>t}∩B θtdH Q−1 dt = 0, FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 35 where θt denote suitable positive functions. When k ≥ 1 and j = 1, . . . , k we set Ej := {t ∈ R : t = zj for some z ∈ E}; the set Ej is such that L 1(Ej) = 0 and by (25) DXu(B) ≤ DXuj(B) ≤ kXj=1 kXj=1 DXuj(((uj)⋆)−1(Ej)) = 0. We then conclude by Theorem 1.1. By (37) in the proof of Proposition 3.3 we have Ju ⊆ Θu, and statement (b) follows. We now prove (c). Applying Proposition A.4 we get that for every h ∈ N \ {0} DXu {L ≥ 1 h } ≥ 1 h ωQ−1H Q−1 {L ≥ 1 h}, (46) where L is defined in statement (b). In particular H Q−1(cid:0){L ≥ 1 h }(cid:1) < +∞. By (36) DXu(cid:0){L ≥ 1 h} \ Su(cid:1) = 0 and consequently (by (46)) also H Q−1({L ≥ 1 h } ր Θu, on passing to the limit for h → +∞ we get H Q−1(Θu \ Su) = 0. Taking Theorem 1.5 into account, we conclude that H Q−1(Θu \ Ju) = 0. Let now Σ be as in statement (c). Then, taking into account Proposition 3.3 and the fact that H Q−1(Su \ Ju) = 0, we have h} \ Su) = 0. Since {L ≥ 1 DX u Σ = DXu Ju + DXu (Σ \ Ju) = Dj = Dj Xu + DXu (Σ \ Su) + DX u (Σ ∩ Su \ Ju) Xu + DXu (Σ \ Su). Since Σ is σ-finite with respect to H Q−1, using (36) we get that DXu (Σ \ Su) = 0, and so DX u Σ = Dj X u. Statement (d) follows from (a), (b), (c) and the decomposition DXu = Da Xu + Dc Xu + Dj X u, which immediately give that Dc Xu = DXu (S \ Θu). We prove (e) in case H Q−1 B is σ-finite; we can assume (see e.g. [2, Theorem 1.43]) that B is a Borel set. Using Proposition 3.3 and Theorem 1.5 we get that DXu(B \ Ju) = 0, which gives (Da Concerning the second part of statement (e), suppose first that k = 1 and let B = (u⋆) −1(E) with L 1(E) = 0. By Proposition 2.22 we know that ∂∗{u > t} ∩ B = ∅ for every t /∈ E. Applying the Coarea Formula of Theorem 2.40 we get X u) B = 0. X u + Dc DXu(B) = E ∂∗{u>t}∩B θtdH Q−1dt = 0 In the general case k ≥ 2 define for every α = 1, . . . , k the sets for suitable functions θt. Eα := πα(E), where πα denotes the canonical projection πα(x1, . . . , xk) = xα. Noticing that L 1(Eα) ≤ H 1 e (E) = 0, we can use (25) to estimate DXu((u⋆) −1(E)) ≤ kXα=1 DXuα((u⋆) −1(E)) ≤ kXα=1 DXuα(((uα)⋆) −1(Eα)) = 0. (cid:3) 36 DON AND VITTONE 4. Applications to some classes of Carnot groups Some of the main results of this paper rely on properties R, LR or D; in this section we show how they can be in some meaningful CC spaces and, in particular, in some large classes of Carnot groups. We start by introducing the reduced boundary FXE of a set E with finite X-perimeter. Recall that the reduced boundary was the object originally considered by E. De Giorgi in the seminal paper [13] about the rectifiability of sets with finite (Euclidean) perimeter in Rn. Definition 4.1 (Reduced boundary). Let E ⊆ Rn be a set with locally finite X-perimeter. The X-reduced boundary FXE of E is the set of points p ∈ Rn such that PX (E, B(p, r)) > 0 for any r > 0 and the limit DX χE(B(p, r)) DXχE(B(p, r)) r→0 eνE(p) := lim exists with eνE(p) = 1. For sets with finite (Euclidean) perimeter in Rn the symmetric difference between the essential boundary and the reduced one is H n−1 -negligible, see e.g. [2, Theorem 3.61]. In our setting we have the following result, which is a known consequence of Theorem 2.39, see e.g. [22, Theorem 7.3] for the Heisenberg group case and [23, Lemma 2.26] for step 2 Carnot groups. e Theorem 4.2. Let (Rn, X) be an equiregular CC space of homogeneous dimension Q and let E ⊆ Rn be a set of locally finite X-perimeter. Then H Q−1(∂∗E \ FXE) = 0. Proof. By Theorem 2.39 we have DXχE = θνEH Q−1 ∂∗E for a suitable positive function θ. Therefore it is enough to prove that, for H Q−1-almost every p ∈ ∂∗E, one has lim r→0 DX χE(B(p, r)) DχE(B(p, r)) = νE(p). This fact directly follows from [17, Theorem 2.9.8] taking into account Theorem 2.39 and [17, Theorem 2.8.17]. (cid:3) The proof of Theorem 4.2 also shows thateνE = νE H Q−1-a.e. on FXE. The papers [22, 23, 35] prove the countable X-rectifiability of the reduced boundary of sets with locally finite X-perimeter in, respectively, Heisenberg groups, Carnot groups of step 2, and Carnot groups of type ⋆. These results, in conjunction with Theorem 4.2, show that property R is satisfied in these settings. Actually, Theorem 4.2 and the results about blow-up and representation of the X-perimeter available in Heisenberg groups ([22, Theorems 4.1 and 7.1]), step 2 Carnot groups ([23, Theo- rems 3.1 and 3.9]) and Carnot groups of type ⋆ [35, Theorems 4.12 and 4.13] imply that also property D is satisfied in these settings. Using also the left-invariance of the structure we can conclude what follows. Theorem 4.3. Heisenberg groups, Carnot groups of step 2 and Carnot groups of type ⋆ satisfy properties R and D. In particular, Theorems 1.5, 1.6, 1.7 and 3.14 hold in these settings. Moreover, the function σ(p, ν) appearing in 1.7 and 3.14 does not depend on the point p ∈ Rn. In the paper [14] the class of Carnot groups G satisfying the following assumption (see e.g. [37] for the notion of abnormal curve) there exists at least one direction V in the first layer of the stratified Lie algebra of G such that t 7→ exp(tV ) is not an abnormal curve (47) is considered. This class includes, for instance, the Engel group, which is the simplest example where the rectifiability problem for sets with finite X-perimeter is open. One of the main FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 37 results of [14] is the following one: for any set E with finite X-perimeter in a Carnot group G satisfying (47), the reduced boundary FXE is countably X-Lipschitz rectifiable. Together with Theorem 4.2, this gives the following result. Theorem 4.4. The property LR is satisfied in all Carnot groups G such that (47) holds; in particular, Theorem 3.5 holds in such groups. Appendix A. Some tools from Geometric Measure Theory in metric spaces. Proposition A.1. Let u ∈ L1 loc(Ω; Rk). If p ∈ Ω \ Su, then, for any ε > 0, the set Eε := {q ∈ Ω : u(q) − u⋆(p) > ε} has density 0 at p. Conversely, if u ∈ L∞ set loc(Ω; Rk) and z ∈ Rk are such that, for any ε > 0, the has density 0 at p, then p ∈ Ω \ Su and z = u⋆(p). In particular, if k = 1 and p ∈ Ω \ Su and t 6= u⋆(p), then p /∈ ∂∗{q ∈ Ω : u(q) > t}. Eε := {q ∈ Ω : u(q) − z > ε} Proof. Suppose p ∈ Ω \ Su. By Chebychev inequality we have ε L n(Eε ∩ B(p, r)) L n(B(p, r)) ≤ B(p,r) u − u⋆(p)dL n → 0 as r → 0. Conversely, suppose that u and z are as in the statement. Then we have for any r ∈ (0, 1) B(p,r) u − zdL n ≤ (kukL∞(B(p,1);Rk) + z) L n(B(p, r) ∩ Eε)) L n(B(p, r)) + ε L n(B(p, r) \ Eε)) L n(B(p, r)) , which is infinitesimal as r → 0. Finally, consider p ∈ Ω \ Su and let t 6= u⋆(p). We already know that both {u > u⋆(p) + ε} and {u < u⋆(p) − ε} have density 0 at p for every ε > 0. If t > u⋆(p), then choosing ε = t − u⋆(p) we have that {u > t} has density 0 at p. If t < u⋆(p) then choose η > 0 such that ε = u⋆(p) − t − η > 0 to infer that {u < t + η} has density 0 at p, and consequently {u ≥ t + η} has density 1 at p. This implies that also {u > t} has density 1 at p. (cid:3) The following result is classical, see e.g. [43] or [28]. Theorem A.2 (5r-Covering Lemma). Let (M, d) be a separable metric space and let B a family of closed balls in M such that sup {diam B : B ∈ B} < +∞. Denote by 5B the closed metric ball with same center as B and radius 5 times larger than that of B. Then there exists a countable and pairwise disjoint subfamily F ⊆ B such that [ B ⊆ [B∈F 5B. Definition A.3 (Hausdorff measures). Let (M, d) be a metric space and k ≥ 0. For any δ > 0 and any E ⊆ M we define H k δ (E) := S k δ (E) := ωk ωk 2k inf( ∞Xh=0 2k inf( ∞Xh=0 (diam Eh)k : E ⊆ (diam Bh)k : E ⊆ Eh, diam Eh < δ) ∞[h=0 Bh, Bh balls with diam Bh < δ) , ∞[h=0 38 DON AND VITTONE where ωα := πα/2Γ(1+α/2)−1 and Γ(t) := ´ +∞ measure H k(E) and the spherical Hausdorff measure S k(E) of E are 0 st−1e−sds is the Euler Γ function. The Hausdorff H k(E) := sup δ>0 S k(E) := sup δ>0 S k δ (E) = lim δ→0 H k δ (E) = lim δ→0 H k δ (E) S k δ (E). The useful inequalities H k ≤ S k ≤ 2kH k are classical. If (M, d, µ) is a metric measure space, k ≥ 0 and x ∈ M, we define the upper k-density k(µ, x) and the lower k-density Θ∗k(µ, x) of µ at x as Θ∗ Θ∗ k(µ, x) := lim sup r→0 µ(B(x, r)) ωkrk , Θ∗k(µ, x) := lim inf r→0 µ(B(x, r)) ωkrk . k(H k E, x) and Θ∗k(E, x) := For every Borel set E ⊆ Rn we will also write Θ∗ Θ∗k(H k E, x). If Θ∗ k(µ, x) = Θ∗k(µ, x), then the common value is denoted by Θk(µ, x) and it will be called k-density of µ at x. Hausdorff measures and densities are linked by Propositions A.4 and A.5 below. A proof of Proposition A.4 can be found for instance in [43, Theorem 3.2]; in the latter reference, statement (i) below is stated with H k in place of S k, but the careful reader will notice that the proof is indeed provided for this stronger version. k(E, x) := Θ∗ Proposition A.4. Let (M, d) be a separable metric space, let µ be a Borel regular Radon measure on M, let E ⊆ M be a Borel set and let t > 0. Then the following facts hold. (i) If Θ∗ (ii) If Θ∗ k(µ, x) ≥ t for every x ∈ E, then µ ≥ tS k E. k(µ, x) ≤ t for every x ∈ E, then µ ≤ 2ktH k E. In particular, for H k-almost every x ∈ Rn we have Θ∗ k(µ, x) < +∞. Corollary A.5. Let (M, d) be a separable metric space, let µ be a Borel regular Radon measure on M, let E ⊆ M be a Borel set and let f : E → R be a strictly positive function. Then the following facts hold. (i) If Θ∗ (ii) If Θ∗ k(µ, x) ≥ f (x) for every x ∈ E , then µ ≥ f S k E. k(µ, x) ≤ f (x) for every x ∈ E , then µ ≤ 2kf H k E. Proof. (i) Let ε > 0 and define for every j ∈ Z the set Ej := {x ∈ E : (1 + ε)j < f (x) ≤ (1 + ε)j+1}. Suppose that Θ∗ k(µ, x) ≥ f (x) for every x ∈ E. Then, using (i) of Proposition A.4 we get µ =Xj∈Z µ Ej ≥Xj∈Z (1 + ε)jS k Ej ≥Xj∈Z f 1 + ε S k Ej = f 1 + ε S k E. The statement follows by the arbitrariness of ε. (ii) Using (ii) of Proposition A.4 we have µ Ej ≤Xj∈Z µ =Xj∈Z ≤Xj∈Z 2k(1 + ε)j+1H k Ej 2k(1 + ε)f S k Ej = 2k(1 + ε)f S k E. The statement follows by the arbitrariness of ε. (cid:3) As a consequence of the Corollary A.5 we have the following remark. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 39 Remark A.6. Under the same assumptions of Corollary A.5, for H k-almost every x ∈ Rn we have Θ∗ k(µ, x) < +∞ and for any Borel set B ⊆ Rn the implication µ(B) = 0 =⇒ Θk(µ, x) = 0 for H k-a.e. x ∈ B holds. In particular, if µ = gH k E we have Θk(µ, x) = 0 for H k-almost every x ∈ Rn \ E. Definition A.7 (Porous sets). Let (M, d) be a metric space and let E ⊆ M be a Borel set. Then E is said to be porous if there esist α ∈ (0, 1) and R > 0 such that for every x ∈ M and every r ∈ (0, R) there exists y ∈ M such that B(y, αr) ⊆ B(x, r) \ E. Proposition A.8. Let (M, d) be a locally compact and separable metric space, µ a doubling Radon measure on M and let E ⊆ M be a porous set. Then E has no points of density 1 and, in particular, µ(E) = 0. Proof. Let α and R be as in Definition A.7. Suppose by contradiction there exists x ∈ E1. For every r ∈ (0, R) there exists y ∈ M such that B(y, αr) ⊆ B(x, r) \ E. This implies that µ(B(x, r) \ E) µ(B(x, r)) ≥ µ(B(y, αr)) µ(B(x, r)) ≥ C, where C > 0 depends on α and the doubling constant of µ. Letting r → 0 and taking into account that x ∈ (M \ E)0, we get a contradiction. The last part of the statement follows from the generalized Lebesgue Theorem, see e.g. [28, Theorem 1.8]. (cid:3) Proposition A.9. Let (Rn, X) be a geodesic equiregular CC space; then, for every p ∈ Rn and for every r > 0 one has L n(∂B(p, r)) = 0. Proof. By Proposition A.8 it is sufficient to prove that ∂B(p, r) is a porous set. Take q ∈ ∂B(p, r) and consider a length minimizing absolutely continuous path γ : [0, r] → Rn such that γ(0) = p, γ(r) = q and for every t ∈ [0, r] one has d(p, γ(t)) = t. Consider ε ∈ (0, 2r] and set y := γ(r − ε 2) ∩ ∂B(p, r) = ∅, i.e., ∂B(p, r) is porous. (cid:3) 2) ⊆ B(q, ε), hence B(y, ε 2 ) ∈ B(p, r). Then B(y, ε Appendix B. Proofs of some results about jumps and approximate differentiability points Proof of Proposition 2.28. (i) We can without loss of generality assume that k = 1. Consider a countable dense subset {(ah, bh, νh) : h ∈ N} of R × R × Sm−1 and, for every h ∈ N, define wh : Rn → R by bh wh(y) :=(ah ∞[h=0(cid:26)p ∈ Ω : lim sup if eLνh(y) ≥ 0, if eLνh(y) < 0. r→0 A(r) ∞\ℓ=1 1 ℓ(cid:27) . (48) We first prove that (recalling the notation (7)) (Ω \ Su) ∪ Ju = u ◦ Fp − whdL n < The inclusion ⊆ in (48) is straightforward by Remark 2.20 and Proposition 2.26. In order to prove the opposite inclusion, consider p ∈ Ω such that for every ℓ ∈ N \ {0} there exists whℓ such that lim sup r→0 A(r) u ◦ Fp − whℓdL n < 1 ℓ . 40 DON AND VITTONE We prove that, possibly passing to a subsequence, there exist a, b and ν such that (whℓ) is convergent in L1(A(1)) to Up to subsequences we can suppose that (νhℓ) converges to some ν. Define C := L n (A(1)) and let ℓ ∈ N be such that for every ℓ, k ≥ ℓ the set A+(1) :=ny ∈ A(1) :eLνhℓ (y) > 0o is such that L n(A+(1)) ≥ 1 4 C. By a change of variables, for such h and k one has b w(y) :=(a if eLν(y) ≥ 0, if eLν(y) < 0. (y) > 0 and eLνhk C A+(1) CrQ A(r) whℓ − whkdL n = u ◦ Fp − whℓdL n + 4 A(r) ahℓ − ahkdL n ≤ 4 4 whℓ − whkdL n whℓ − whkdL n u ◦ Fp − whkdL n. ahℓ − ahk = A+(1) C A(1) ≤ 4 A(r) ≤ 4 Passing to the lim sup as r → 0 we get that (ahℓ) is Cauchy and therefore convergent to some a ∈ R. Using the same technique we also get that (bhℓ) is convergent to some b ∈ R, and whℓ converges in L1(A(1)) to w. Now, for sufficiently large ℓ ∈ N and for sufficiently small r > 0, from A(r) u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − wdL n ≤ A(r) u ◦ Fp ◦ δr − whℓdL n +A(1) whℓ − wdL n we deduce the remaining inclusion ⊇ in (48). Notice that the right-hand side of (48) is a Borel set if, for any h ∈ N, and any small enough r, the function p 7−→ A(r) u ◦ Fp − whdL n (49) is continuous. This is clearly true if u is of class C ∞. For general u, fix p ∈ Ω, r > 0 and ε > 0 and consider v ∈ C ∞(Ω) such that ku − vkL1(B(p,C1r)) < ε, where C1 is such that Fp(A(r)) ⋐ B(p, C1r). Applying the triangular inequality, we find u ◦ Fp − u ◦ FqdL n A(r) ≤ A(r)(cid:0)u ◦ Fp − v ◦ Fp + v ◦ Fp − v ◦ Fq + v ◦ Fq − u ◦ Fq(cid:1)dL n < Cε, for some C > 0, for every sufficiently small r and for every q sufficiently close to p. This proves that the function in (49) is continuous. It follows that (Ω \ Su) ∪ Ju is a Borel set: then, also Ju is a Borel set, for Ω \ Su is Borel and it is disjoint from Ju. Select now for any p ∈ Ju an X-jump triple (u+(p), u−(p), ν(p)) according to Definition 2.24. Define φ : Ju → Rm by φ(p) := (u+(p) − u−(p))ν(p). We prove that φ is Borel, so that also ν is Borel up to re-defining it as ν(p) = φ(p)/φ(p). Set wp(y) :=(u+(p) u−(p) if eLν(p)(y) > 0; if eLν(p)(y) < 0, FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 41 and eA(r) :=(y ∈ Rn : (y1, . . . , ym) + nXj=m+1 1 wj ≤ r) . yj Notice that the sets eA(r) are invariant under rotations of the first m coordinates. By Proposition 2.26 we have that for every ψ ∈ C ∞ eA(1) wp∂iψdL n = lim c (eA(1)) and every i = 1, . . . , n ε→0 eA(1) (u ◦ Fp ◦ δε)∂iψdL n = lim ε→0 1 εQ eA(ε) u(Fp(y))∂iψ(δε−1(y))dL n(y). Hence, for every ψ ∈ C ∞ c (eA(1)) and for every i = 1, . . . , n the function wp∂iψdL n p 7−→ eA(1) is Borel. Fix p ∈ Ju and consider a sequence (ψh) in C ∞ the (Euclidean) measure derivative of wp we obtain that for every i = 1, . . . , n (cid:0)eA(1) ∩ {eLν(p) = 0}(cid:1) h eA(1) ψhdDiwp = − lim φi(p)H n−1 e = Diwp(eA(1)) = lim c (eA(1)) converging to χ eA(1). Computing h eA(1) wp∂iψhdL n. e Since H n−1 is a Borel function, and therefore ν is Borel. (eA(1) ∩ {eLν(p) = 0}) does not depend on p we deduce by the previous step that φ Finally, by Proposition 2.26 we have u+(p) = lim ε→0 1 εQ A(ε) χ{ eLν(p)>0}u ◦ FpdL n and this concludes the proof. The proof of (ii) is completely analogous to the Euclidean case, see [2]. (cid:3) Proof of Proposition 2.32. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1. Consider a dense subset {zi : i ∈ N} of Rm. Reasoning as in the proof of Proposition 2.28 one can prove that Du = ∞\h=1 ∞[i=0(cid:26)p ∈ Ω \ Su : lim sup →0 which implies that Du is a Borel set. We now prove that Dap 1 rQ+1 A(r)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLzi(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dL n < 1 h(cid:27) X u is Borel. Using Theorem 2.6, for any p ∈ Du one has lim ε→0 1 εQ+1 δεP(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p) −eLDap X u(p)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dL n = 0, where for every n-tuple of positive real numbers (ℓ1, . . . , ℓn) P = P (ℓ1, . . . , ℓn) := {ξ ∈ Rn : 0 ≤ ξ1/dj j ≤ ℓj for any j = 1, . . . , n} is the anisotropic box with axis that are parallel to the coordinate ones (e1, . . . , en). By a change of variables we get 1 L n(P ) P eLDap X u(p)dL n = 1 L n(P ) lim ε→0 1 εQ+1 δεP (u ◦ Fp − u⋆(p)) dL n. 42 DON AND VITTONE From this we deduce that, for any n-tuple (ℓ1, . . . , ℓn) the function is Borel. Now, for every i = 1, . . . , m and every h ∈ N \ {0} define the rectangles P i P (1/h, . . . , 1/h, 1, 1/h, . . . , 1/h). A simple computation shows that h := X u(p)dL n (50) p 7−→ 1 L n(P ) P eLDap h) P i X u(p)dL n = heLDap lim h which completes the proof. 1 L n(P i 1 2 (Dap X u(p))i , (cid:3) Proof of Proposition 2.33. We can assume without loss of generality that k = 1. (i) By Remark 2.20, the functionseur := u ◦ Fp ◦ δr andevr := u ◦ Fp ◦ δr converge, respectively, loc(Rn) as r → 0. In particular, as r → 0 the families (eur) and (evr) to u⋆(p) and v⋆(p) in L1 converge (locally) in measure to u⋆(p) and v⋆(p) respectively. By a change of variables we have for any R > 0 It follows that (eur) and (evr) have the same measure limit, hence u⋆(p) = v⋆(p). (ii) Using Proposition 2.26 and the same argument used in (i) we obtain that the functions r→0 lim r→0 L n(bB(0, R) ∩ {evr 6=eur}) = lim if eLνu(p)(y) > 0 if eLνu(p)(y) < 0 u−(p) U(y) :=(u+(p) r−QL n(bB(0, rR) ∩ {u ◦ Fp 6= v ◦ Fp}) = 0. if eLνv(p)(y) > 0 if eLνv(p)(y) < 0 V (y) :=(v+(p) v−(p) and coincide for L n-almost every y, hence (u+(p), u−(p), νu(p)) ≡ (v+(p), v−(p), νv(p)). (iii) By point (i) we already know that u⋆(p) = v⋆(p). Since u(Fp(δr(y))) − u⋆(p) r 6= v(Fp(δr(y))) − v⋆(p) r ⇐⇒ u(Fp(δr(y))) 6= v(Fp(δr(y))), the statement follows using Proposition 2.31 and an argument similar to part (i) above. (cid:3) References [1] Ambrosio, L. Some fine properties of sets of finite perimeter in Ahlfors regular metric measure spaces. Adv. Math. 159, 1 (2001), 51 -- 67. [2] Ambrosio, L., Fusco, N., and Pallara, D. Functions of bounded variation and free discontinuity problems. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000. [3] Ambrosio, L., Ghezzi, R., and Magnani, V. BV functions and sets of finite perimeter in sub- Riemannian manifolds. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire 32, 3 (2015), 489 -- 517. [4] Ambrosio, L., Kleiner, B., and Le Donne, E. Rectifiability of sets of finite perimeter in Carnot groups: existence of a tangent hyperplane. J. Geom. Anal. 19, 3 (2009), 509 -- 540. [5] Ambrosio, L., and Magnani, V. Weak differentiability of BV functions on stratified groups. Math. Z. 245, 1 (2003), 123 -- 153. [6] Ambrosio, L., and Scienza, M. Locality of the perimeter in Carnot groups and chain rule. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 189, 4 (2010), 661 -- 678. [7] Bellaïche, A. The tangent space in sub-Riemannian geometry. In Sub-Riemannian geometry, vol. 144 of Progr. Math. Birkhäuser, Basel, 1996, pp. 1 -- 78. [8] Biroli, M., and Mosco, U. Sobolev and isoperimetric inequalities for Dirichlet forms on homogeneous spaces. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. Rend. Lincei (9) Mat. Appl. 6, 1 (1995), 37 -- 44. [9] Bramanti, M., Miranda, Jr., M., and Pallara, D. Two characterization of BV functions on Carnot groups via the heat semigroup. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, 17 (2012), 3845 -- 3876. [10] Capogna, L., Danielli, D., and Garofalo, N. The geometric Sobolev embedding for vector fields and the isoperimetric inequality. Comm. Anal. Geom. 2, 2 (1994), 203 -- 215. FINE PROPERTIES OF BV FUNCTIONS IN CC SPACES 43 [11] Comi, G. E., and Magnani, V. The Gauss-Green theorem in stratified groups. Preprint 2018, arXiv:1806.04011. [12] Danielli, D., Garofalo, N., and Nhieu, D.-M. Trace inequalities for Carnot-Carathéodory spaces and applications. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. (4) 27, 2 (1998), 195 -- 252 (1999). [13] De Giorgi, E. Nuovi teoremi relativi alle misure (r − 1)-dimensionali in uno spazio ad r dimensioni. Ricerche Mat. 4 (1955), 95 -- 113. [14] Don, S., Le Donne, E., Moisala, T., and Vittone, D. In preparation. [15] Don, S., Massaccesi, A., and Vittone, D. Rank-one theorem and subgraphs of BV functions in Carnot groups. Preprint 2017, arXiv:1712.02242. [16] Don, S., and Vittone, D. A compactness result for BV functions in metric spaces. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., to appear. arXiv:1803.07545. [17] Federer, H. Geometric measure theory. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 153. Springer-Verlag New York Inc., New York, 1969. [18] Folland, G. B., and Stein, E. M. Hardy spaces on homogeneous groups, vol. 28 of Mathematical Notes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1982. [19] Franchi, B., Gallot, S., and Wheeden, R. L. Sobolev and isoperimetric inequalities for degenerate metrics. Math. Ann. 300, 4 (1994), 557 -- 571. [20] Franchi, B., Serapioni, R., and Serra Cassano, F. Meyers-Serrin type theorems and relaxation of variational integrals depending on vector fields. Houston J. Math. 22, 4 (1996), 859 -- 890. [21] Franchi, B., Serapioni, R., and Serra Cassano, F. Approximation and imbedding theorems for weighted Sobolev spaces associated with Lipschitz continuous vector fields. Boll. Un. Mat. Ital. B (7) 11, 1 (1997), 83 -- 117. [22] Franchi, B., Serapioni, R., and Serra Cassano, F. Rectifiability and perimeter in the Heisenberg group. Math. Ann. 321, 3 (2001), 479 -- 531. [23] Franchi, B., Serapioni, R., and Serra Cassano, F. On the structure of finite perimeter sets in step 2 Carnot groups. J. Geom. Anal. 13, 3 (2003), 421 -- 466. [24] Garofalo, N., and Nhieu, D.-M. Isoperimetric and Sobolev inequalities for Carnot-Carathéodory spaces and the existence of minimal surfaces. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 49, 10 (1996), 1081 -- 1144. [25] Garofalo, N., and Nhieu, D.-M. Lipschitz continuity, global smooth approximations and extension theorems for Sobolev functions in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. J. Anal. Math. 74 (1998), 67 -- 97. [26] Gromov, M. Carnot-Carathéodory spaces seen from within. In Sub-Riemannian geometry, vol. 144 of Progr. Math. Birkhäuser, Basel, 1996, pp. 79 -- 323. [27] Hajłasz, P., and Koskela, P. Sobolev met Poincaré. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 145, 688 (2000), x+101. [28] Heinonen, J. Lectures on analysis on metric spaces. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001. [29] Jerison, D. The Poincaré inequality for vector fields satisfying Hörmander's condition. Duke Math. J. 53, 2 (1986), 503 -- 523. [30] Le Donne, E. Lecture notes on sub-Riemannian geometry. sites.google.com/site/enricoledonne/, 2017. [31] Magnani, V. Elements of geometric measure theory on sub-Riemannian groups. Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, 2002. [32] Magnani, V. Characteristic points, rectifiability and perimeter measure on stratified groups. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 8, 4 (2006), 585 -- 609. [33] Magnani, V., Tyson, J. T., and Vittone, D. On transversal submanifolds and their measure. J. Anal. Math. 125 (2015), 319 -- 351. [34] Magnani, V., and Vittone, D. An intrinsic measure for submanifolds in stratified groups. J. Reine Angew. Math. 619 (2008), 203 -- 232. [35] Marchi, M. Regularity of sets with constant intrinsic normal in a class of Carnot groups. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 64, 2 (2014), 429 -- 455. [36] Mitchell, J. On Carnot-Carathéodory metrics. J. Differential Geom. 21, 1 (1985), 35 -- 45. [37] Montgomery, R. A tour of subriemannian geometries, their geodesics and applications, vol. 91 of Math- ematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2002. [38] Monti, R. Distances, boundaries and surface measures in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces, 2001. PhD thesis, cvgmt.sns.it/paper/3706/. [39] Monti, R., Pigati, A., and Vittone, D. On tangent cones to length minimizers in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. SIAM J. Control Optim., to appear. cvgmt.sns.it/paper/3529/. [40] Monti, R., and Serra Cassano, F. Surface measures in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 13, 3 (2001), 339 -- 376. 44 DON AND VITTONE [41] Nagel, A., Stein, E. M., and Wainger, S. Balls and metrics defined by vector fields. I. Basic properties. Acta Math. 155, 1-2 (1985), 103 -- 147. [42] Rothschild, L. P., and Stein, E. M. Hypoelliptic differential operators and nilpotent groups. Acta Math. 137, 3-4 (1976), 247 -- 320. [43] Simon, L. Lectures on geometric measure theory, vol. 3 of Proceedings of the Centre for Mathematical Analysis, Australian National University. Australian National University, Centre for Mathematical Analy- sis, Canberra, 1983. [44] Song, Y. Q., and Yang, X. P. BV functions in the Heisenberg group H n. Chinese Ann. Math. Ser. A 24, 5 (2003), 541 -- 554. [45] Vittone, D. Regolarità delle geodetiche nei gruppi di Carnot. Master thesis, 2003. Available at cvgmt.sns.it/paper/972/. [46] Vittone, D. Lipschitz surfaces, perimeter and trace theorems for BV functions in Carnot-Carathéodory spaces. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 11, 4 (2012), 939 -- 998. (Don and Vittone) Università di Padova, Dipartimento di Matematica "T. Levi-Civita", via Tri- este 63, 35121 Padova, Italy E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected]
1302.0597	1	1302	2013-02-04T06:57:10	Decompositions of Weighted Conditional Expectation Type Operators	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper we investigate boundedness, polar decomposition and spectral decomposition of weighted conditional expectation type operators on L^2(\Sigma).	math.FA	math	DECOMPOSITIONS OF WEIGHTED CONDITIONAL EXPECTATION TYPE OPERATORS Y. ESTAREMI Abstract. In this paper we investigate boundedness, polar decomposition and spectral decomposition of weighted conditional expectation type operators on L2(Σ). 1. Introduction and Preliminaries Let (X, Σ, µ) be a complete σ-finite measure space. For any sub-σ-finite algebra A ⊆ Σ with 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, the Lp-space Lp(X, A, µA) is abbreviated by Lp(A), and its norm is denoted by k.kp. All comparisons between two functions or two sets are to be interpreted as holding up to a µ-null set. The support of a measurable function f is defined as S(f ) = {x ∈ X; f (x) 6= 0}. We denote the vector space of all equivalence classes of almost everywhere finite valued measurable functions on X by L0(Σ). For a sub-σ-finite algebra A ⊆ Σ, the conditional expectation operator associated with A is the mapping f → EAf , defined for all non-negative, measurable function f as well as for all f ∈ Lp(Σ), 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, where EAf , by the Radon-Nikodym theorem, is the unique A-measurable function satisfying ZA f dµ =ZA EAf dµ, ∀A ∈ A. As an operator on Lp(Σ), EA is idempotent and EA(Lp(Σ)) = Lp(A). If there is no possibility of confusion, we write E(f ) in place of EA(f ). This operator will play a major role in our work and we list here some of its useful properties: • If g is A-measurable, then E(f g) = E(f )g. • E(f )p ≤ E(f p). • If f ≥ 0, then E(f ) ≥ 0; if f > 0, then E(f ) > 0. • E(f g) ≤ E(f p) • For each f ≥ 0, S(f ) ⊆ S(E(f )). q , where 1 p E(gq) p + 1 1 1 q = 1 (Holder inequality). A detailed discussion and verification of most of these properties may be found in [11]. We recall that an A-atom of the measure µ is an element A ∈ A with µ(A) > 0 such that for each F ∈ A, if F ⊆ A, then either µ(F ) = 0 or µ(F ) = µ(A). A measure space (X, Σ, µ) with no atoms is called a non-atomic measure space. It is well-known fact that every σ-finite measure space (X, A, µA ) can be partitioned 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47B47. Key words and phrases. Conditional expectation, Polar decomposition, Spectral decomposi- tion, Aluthge transformation. 1 2 Y. ESTAREMI uniquely as X =(cid:0)Sn∈N An(cid:1)∪B, where {An}n∈N is a countable collection of pairwise disjoint A-atoms and B, being disjoint from each An, is non-atomic (see [12]). Combinations of conditional expectation operators and multiplication opera- tors appear often in the study of other operators such as multiplication operators, weighted composition operators and integral operators. Specifically, in [9], S.-T. C. Moy characterized all operators on Lp of the form f → E(f g) for g in Lq with E(g) bounded. Eleven years later, R. G. Douglas, [6], analyzed positive projections on L1 and many of his characterizations are in terms of combinations of multiplications and conditional expectations. More recently, P.G. Dodds, C.B. Huijsmans and B. De Pagter, [3], extended these characterizations to the setting of function ideals and vector lattices. J. Herron presented some assertions about the operator EMu on Lp spaces in [7, 8]. In [4, 5] we investigated some classic properties of multiplication conditional ex- pectation operators MwEMu on Lp spaces. Let f ∈ L0(Σ), then f is said to be conditionable with respect to E if f ∈ D(E) := {g ∈ L0(Σ) : E(g) ∈ L0(A)}. Throughout this paper we take u and w in D(E). In this paper we present some results on the boundedness, polar decomposition and spectral decomposition of this operators in L2(Σ), using different methods than those employed in [5]. 2. Polar decomposition Theorem 2.1. The operator T = MwEMu : L2(Σ) → L2(Σ) is bounded if and only if (E(w2) 1 2 )(E(u2) 1 2 ) ∈ L∞(A) and in this case kT k = k(E(w2) 1 2 )(E(u2) 1 2 )k∞. Proof Suppose that (E(w2) 1 2 )(E(u2) 1 2 ) ∈ L∞(A). Let f ∈ L2(Σ). Then kT (f )k2 2 =ZX wE(uf )2dµ =ZX E(w2)E(uf )2dµ ≤ZX Since E(uf ) ≤ (E(u2) 1 2 (E(f 2) 1 2 . Thus E(w2)E(u2)E(f 2)dµ. kT k ≤ kE(w2) 1 2 (E(u2)) 1 2 k∞. To prove the converse, let T be bounded on L2(Σ) and consider the case that µ(X) < ∞. Then for all f ∈ L2(Σ) we have kT (f )k2 2 =ZX wE(uf )2dµ =ZX ≤ kT k2ZX f 2dµ. E(w2)E(uf )2dµ For each n ∈ N, define En = {x ∈ X : u(x)(E(w2)) 1 2 (x) ≤ n}. Each En is Σ-measurable and En ↑ X. Define Gn = En ∩ S for each n ∈ N, where S = S(u(E(w2)) 2 ). Let A ∈ A and define 1 fn = ¯u(E(w2)) 1 2 χGn∩A WEIGHTED CONDITIONAL EXPECTATION TYPE OPERATORS 3 for each n ∈ N. It is clear that fn ∈ L∞(Σ) for all n (which in our case implies fn ∈ L2(Σ)). For each n, kT (fn)k2 E(w2)E(ufn)2dµ 2 =ZX =ZX =ZA ≤ kT k2ZX = kT k2ZA (E(w2))2(E(u2χGn.χA))2dµ [E(w2)E(u2χGn )]2dµ fn2dµ E(u2χGn)E(w2)dµ. Since A is an arbitrary A-measurable set and the integrands are both A-measurable functions, we have [E(w2)E(u2χGn )]2 ≤ kT k2E(u2χGn )E(w2) almost everywhere. That is [E(((E(w2)) 1 2 uχEn)2χS)]2 ≤ kT k2E((uχEn (E(w2)) 1 2 )qχS). Since and we have Thus S = σ(u(E(w2)) 1 2 ) = σu2E(w2) u2E(w2)χS = u2E(w2), E(((E(w2)) 1 2 uχEn)2χS) ≤ kT k2. This implies that (Ew2) 1 (Ew2) 2 (Eu2χEn ) 1 2 (Eu2χEn ) 1 2 ≤ kT k. 1 2 ∈ L∞(A) and k(Ew2) 1 2 (Eu2) 1 2 k∞ ≤ kT k. Moreover, since Em ↑ X, the conditional expectation version of the monotone convergence theorem implies k(E(w2)) ✷ 2 (E(u2)) 2 k∞ ≤ kT k. 1 1 proposition 2.2. Let g ∈ L∞(A) and let T = MwEMu : L2(Σ) → L2(Σ) be bounded. If MgT = 0, then g = 0 on σ(E(w2)E(u2)). Proof. Let f ∈ L2(Σ). Then gwE(uf ) = MgT (f ) = 0. Now, by Theorem 2.1 0 = kMgT k2 = kg2E(w2)E(u2)k∞, which implies that g2E(w2)E(u2) = 0, and so g = 0 on σ(E(w2)E(u2)). ✷ Theorem 2.3. The bounded operator T = MwEMu is a partial isometry if and only if E(w2)E(u2) = χA for some A ∈ A. Proof. Suppose T is partial isometry. Then T T ∗T = T , that is T f = E(w2)E(u2)T f , and hence (E(w2)E(u2) − 1)T f = 0 for all f ∈ L2(Σ). Put S = S(E(u2)) and 4 Y. ESTAREMI G = S(E(w2)). By Proposition 2.2. we get that E(w2)E(u2) = 1 on S ∩ G, which implies that E(w2)E(u2) = χA, where A = S ∩ G. Conversely, suppose that E(w2)E(u2) = χA for some A ∈ A. It follows that A = S ∩ G, and we have T T ∗T (f ) = E(w2)E(u2)T f = χS∩GwE(uf ) = wE(uf ), where we have used the fact that S(T f ) = S(T f 2) ⊆ S ∩ G, which this is a consequence of Holder's inequality for conditional expectation E. ✷ The spectrum of an operator A is the set σ(A) = {λ ∈ C : A − λI is not invertible}. It is well known that any bounded operator A on a Hilbert space H can be expressed in terms of its polar decomposition: A = U P , where U is a partial isometry and P is a positive operator. (An operator is positive if hP f, f i ≥ 0, for all f ∈ H.) This representation is unique under the condition that kerU = kerP = kerA. Moreover, P = A = (A∗A) 1 2 . Let q(z) be a polynomial with complex coefficients: q(z) = PN α0I +PN If T is a bounded operator on L2(Σ), then the operator q(T ) is defined by q(z) = n=1 αnT n. Let Mϕ be a bounded multiplication operator on L2(Σ), then q(Mϕ) is also bounded and q(Mϕ) = Mq◦ϕ. By the continuous functional calculus, for any f ∈ C(σ(Mϕ)), we have g(Mϕ) = Mg◦ϕ. n=0 αnzn. Proposition 2.4. Let S = S(E(u2)) and G = S(E(w2)). If f ∈ C(σ(ME(u2))) and g ∈ C(σ(ME(w2))), Then and f (T ∗T ) = f (0)I + M(E(u2))−1.χS(cid:0)Mf ◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − f (0)I(cid:1) M¯uEMu g(T T ∗) = g(0)I + M(E(w2))−1.χG(cid:0)Mg◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − g(0)I(cid:1) MwEM ¯w. Proof. For all f ∈ L2(Σ), T ∗T (f ) = ¯uE(w2)E(uf ) and T T ∗(f ) = wE(u2)E( ¯wf ). By induction, for each n ∈ N, (T ∗T )n(f ) = ¯u(E(w2))n(E(u2))n−1E(uf ), (T T ∗)n(f ) = w(E(u2))n(E(w2))n−1E( ¯wf ). q(T ∗T ) = q(0)I + M(E(u2))−1.χS(cid:0)Mq◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − q(0)I(cid:1) M¯uEMu q(T T ∗) = q(0)I + M(E(w2))−1.χG(cid:0)Mq◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − q(0)I(cid:1) MwEM ¯w. By the Weierstrass approximation theorem we conclude that, for every f ∈ C(σ(ME(u2))) and g ∈ C(σ(ME(w2))), So and and f (T ∗T ) = f (0)I + M(E(u2))−1.χS(cid:0)Mf ◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − f (0)I(cid:1) M¯uEMu g(T T ∗) = g(0)I + M(E(w2))−1.χG(cid:0)Mg◦(E(u2)E(w2)) − g(0)I(cid:1) MwEM ¯w. Theorem 2.5. The unique polar decomposition of T = MwEMu is U T , where WEIGHTED CONDITIONAL EXPECTATION TYPE OPERATORS 5 E(u2)(cid:19) 1 T (f ) =(cid:18) E(w2) 2 χS ¯uE(uf ), U (f ) =(cid:18) for all f ∈ L2(Σ). Proof. By Proposition 2.4 we have E(w2)E(u2)(cid:19) 1 χS∩G 2 wE(uf ), T (f ) = (T ∗T ) 1 2 (f ) =(cid:18) E(w2) E(u2)(cid:19) 1 2 χS ¯uE(uf ). Define a linear operator U whose action is given by U (f ) =(cid:18) E(w2)E(u2)(cid:19) 1 χS∩G 2 wE(uf ), f ∈ L2(Σ). Then T = U T and by Theorem 2.3, U is a partial isometry. Also, it is easy to see that N (T ) = N (U ). Since for all f ∈ L2(Σ), kT f k2 = k T f k2, hence N (T ) = N (U ) and so this decomposition is unique. ✷ Theorem 2.6. The Aluthge transformation of T = MwEMu is χSE(uw) E(u2) ¯uE(uf ), bT (f ) = f ∈ L2(Σ). Proof. Define operator V on L2(Σ) as V f =(cid:18) E(w2) (E(u2))3(cid:19) 1 4 χS ¯uE(uf ), f ∈ L2(Σ). Then we have V 2 = T and so by direct computation we obtain bT (f ) = T 1 2 U T 1 2 (f ) = χSE(uw) E(u2) ¯uE(uf ). ✷ 3. Spectral decomposition The normal operators form one of the best understood and most tractable of classes of operators. The principal reason for this is the spectral theorem, a powerful structure theorem that answers many (not all) questions about these operators. In this section we explore spectral measure and spectral decomposition corresponding to a normal weighted conditional expectation operator EMu on L2(Σ). Definition 3.1. If X is a set, Σ a σ-algebra of subsets of X and H a Hilbert space, a spectral measure for (X, Σ, H) is a function E : Σ → B(H) having the following properties. (a) E(S) is a projection. (b) E(∅) = 0 and E(X) = I. (c) If S1, S2 ∈ Σ. E(S1 ∩ S2) = E(S1)E(S2). (d) If {Sn}∞ n=0 is a sequence of pairwise disjoint sets in Σ, then E(∪∞ n=0Sn) = Σ∞ n=0E(Sn). 6 Y. ESTAREMI The spectral theorem says that: For every normal operator T on a Hilbert space H, there is a unique spectral measure E relative to (σ(T ), H) such that T =Rσ(T ) zdE, where z is the inclusion map of σ(T ) in C. J. Herron showed that σ(EMu) = ess range(Eu) ∪ {0}, [8]. Also, He has proved If T = EMu is normal, then that: EMu is normal if and only if u ∈ L∞(A). T n = MunE and (T ∗)n = M¯un E. So (T ∗)nT m = M(¯u)num E and αn,mT m(T ∗)n = N,MXn,m=0 αn,m ¯unumE = P (u, ¯u)E = EP (u, ¯u). P (T, T ∗) = N,MXn,m=0 Where p(z, t) =PN,M n,m=0 αn,mzmtn. If q(z) =PN n=0 αnzn, then q(T ) =PN Hence by the Weierstrass approximation theorem we have f (T ) = Mf (u)E, for all f ∈ C(σ(EMu)). Thus φ : C(σ(EMu)) → C∗(EMu, I), by φ(f ) = Mf (u)E, is a unital ∗-homomorphism. Moreover, by Theorem 2.1.13 of [10], φ is also a uniqe ∗-isomorphism such that φ(z) = EMu, where z : σ(EMu) → C is the inclusion map. n=0 αnunE. If EMu is normal and compact, then σ(EMu) = {0} ∪ {λn}n∈N where λn 6= 0 for all n ∈ N. So, for each n ∈ N En = {0 6= f ∈ L2(Σ) : E(uf ) = λnf } = {0 6= f ∈ L2(A) : uf = λnf } = L2(An, An, µn), where An = {x ∈ X : u(x) = λn}, E0 = {f ∈ L2(Σ) : E(uf ) = 0}, An = {An ∩ B : B ∈ A} and µn ≡ µ An . It is clear that for all n, m ∈ N ∪ {0}, En ∩ Em = ∅. This implies that the spectral decomposition of EMu is as follows: EMu = ∞Xn=0 λnPEn , where PEn is the orthogonal projection onto En. Since EMu is normal, then σ(EMu) = ess range(u) ∪ {0}. So {λn}∞ n=0 is a resolution of the identity on X. Suppose that W = {u ∈ L0(Σ) : E(u2) ∈ L∞(A)}. If we set kuk = k(E(u2)) then W is a complete ∗-subalgebra of L∞(Σ). 1 2 k∞, In the sequel we assume that, ϕ : X → X is nonsingular transformation i.e, the measure µ ◦ ϕ−1 is absolutely continuous with respect to the measure µ, and ϕ−1(Σ) is a sub-σ-finite algebra of Σ. Put h = dµ ◦ ϕ−1/dµ and Eϕ = Eϕ−1(Σ). For S ∈ Σ, let E(S) : L2(Σ) → L2(Σ) be defined by E(S)(f ) = EϕMχϕ−1 (S) (f ), i.e, E(S) = EϕMχϕ−1 (S) . E defines a spectral measure for (X, Σ, L2(µ)). If EϕMu is normal on L2(Σ), then by Theorem 2.5.5 of [10], E is the unique spectral measure corresponding to ∗- homomorphism φ that is defined as follows: φ : C(σ(EϕMu)) → C∗(EMu, I), φ(f ) = EϕMf (u). WEIGHTED CONDITIONAL EXPECTATION TYPE OPERATORS 7 So, for all f ∈ C(σ(EϕMu)) we have φ(f ) =ZX f dE. In [1] it is explored that which sub-σ-algebras of Σ are of the form ϕ−1(Σ) for some nonsingular transformation ϕ : X → X. These observations establish the following theorem. Theorem 3.2. Let (X, Σ, µ) be a σ-finite measure space, ϕ : X → X be a nonsingular transformation and let u be in L∞(ϕ−1(Σ)). Consider the operator EϕMu on L2(Σ). Then the set function E that is defined as: E(S) = EϕMχϕ−1(S) for S ∈ Σ, is a spectral measure. Also, E has compact support and EϕMu =Z zdE. References [1] J. T. Campbell, A. Lambert and B. M. Weinstock, Localizing Sets and the Structure of Sigma-Algebras, Indiana University Mathematics Journal 47 (1998) 913-938. [2] P.G. Dodds, C.B. Huijsmans and B. De Pagter, characterizations of conditional expectation-type operators, Pacific J. Math 141 (1990) 55-77. [3] P.G. Dodds, C.B. Huijsmans and B. De Pagter, characterizations of conditional expectation- type operators, Pacific J. Math. 141(1) (1990), 55-77. [4] Y. Estaremi, Essential norm of weighted conditional type operators on Lp-spaces, to appear in positivity. [5] Y. Estaremi and M.R. Jabbarzadeh, Weighted lambert type operators on Lp-spaces, Oper. Matrices 1 (2013), 101-116.. [6] R. G. Douglas, Contractive projections on an L1 space, Pacific J. Math. 15 (1965), 443-462. [7] J. Herron, Weighted conditional expectation operators on Lp spaces, UNC Charlotte Doctoral Dissertation, 2004. [8] J. Herron, Weighted conditional expectation operators, Oper. Matrices 1 (2011), 107-118. [9] Shu-Teh Chen, Moy, Characterizations of conditional expectation as a transformation on function spaces, Pacific J. Math. 4 (1954), 47-63 [10] G. J. Murphy, C ∗-algebras and operator theory, Academic Press, Boston San Diego, 1990. [11] M. M. Rao, Conditional measure and applications, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1993. [12] A. C. Zaanen, Integration, 2nd ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1967. Y. Estaremi E-mail address: [email protected] - [email protected] Department of Mathematics, University of Payame noor, p. o. box: 19395-3697, Tehran, Iran.
1207.3818	2	1207	2012-10-30T13:11:40	Large structures made of nowhere $L^p$ functions	[ "math.FA" ]	We say that a real-valued function $f$ defined on a positive Borel measure space $(X,\mu)$ is nowhere $q$-integrable if, for each nonvoid open subset $U$ of $X$, the restriction $f\|_U$ is not in $L^q(U)$. When $(X,\mu)$ satisfies some natural properties, we show that certain sets of functions defined in $X$ which are $p$-integrable for some $p$'s but nowhere $q$-integrable for some other $q$'s ($0<p,q<\infty$) admit a variety of large linear and algebraic structures within them. The presented results answer a question from Bernal-Gonz\'alez, improve and complement recent spaceability and algebrability results from several authors and motivates new research directions in the field of spaceability.	math.FA	math	LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS SZYMON G LA¸ B, PEDRO L. KAUFMANN, AND LEONARDO PELLEGRINI Abstract. We say that a real-valued function f defined on a positive Borel measure space (X, µ) is nowhere q-integrable if, for each nonvoid open subset U of X, the restriction f U is not in Lq(U ). When (X, µ) satisfies some natural properties, we show that certain sets of functions defined in X which are p-integrable for some p's but nowhere q-integrable for some other q's (0 < p, q < ∞) admit a variety of large linear and algebraic structures within them. The presented results answer a question from Bernal-Gonz´alez, improve and complement recent spaceability and algebrability results from several authors and motivates new research directions in the field of spaceability. 2 1 0 2 t c O 0 3 ] . A F h t a m [ 2 v 8 1 8 3 . 7 0 2 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction This work is a contribution to the study of large linear and algebraic structures within essentially nonlinear sets of functions which satisfy special properties; the presence of such structures is often described using the terminology lineable, algebrable and spaceable. Recall that a subset S of a topological vector space V is said to be lineable (respectively, spaceable) if S ∪ {0} contains an infinite dimensional vector subspace (respectively, a closed infinite dimensional vector subspace) of V . Though results in this field date back to the sixties1, this terminology was not introduced until recently: it first appeared in unpublished notes by Enflo and Gurariy and was firstly published in [1]. We should mention that Enflo's and Gurariy's unpublished notes were completed in collaboration with Seoane-Sep´ulveda and will finally be published in [10]. It is current to say also that S is dense-lineable if S ∪ {0} contains an dense infinite dimensional vector subspace of V . The adjective maximal is often added to dense-lineable or spaceable when the corresponding space contained in S ∪ {0} has the same dimension of V . We propose in Section 3 a notion of spaceability which is more restrictive than the "maximal" spaceability in terms of dimension. For this reason, we choose to use the notation maximal-dimension spaceable, maximal-dimension lineable and so on when the maximality concerns dimension of the subspace found in S ∪ {0}. The term algebrability was introduced later in [2]; if V is a linear algebra, S is said to be κ-algebrable if S ∪ {0} contains an infinitely generated algebra, with a minimal set of 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 46G12, 15A03. Key words and phrases. nowhere Lq functions, spaceability, algebrability. The first named author was supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education Grant No. N N201 414939 (2010-2013). The second named author was supported by CAPES, Research Grant PNPD 2256-2009, and by the Institut de Math´ematiques de Jussieu. 1In [14], Gurariy showed that there exists in C([0, 1]) a closed infinite-dimensional subspace consisting, except for the null function, only on nowhere differentiable functions - see also [15] for a version in english. 1 2 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI generators of cardinality κ (see [2] for details). We shall work with a strenghtened notion of κ-algebrability, namely, strong κ-algebrability. The definition follows: Definition 1.1. We say that a subset S of an algebra A is strongly κ-algebrable, where κ is a cardinal number, if there exists a κ-generated free algebra B contained in S ∪ {0}. We recall that, for a cardinal number κ, to say that an algebra A is a κ-generated free algebra, means that there exists a subset Z = {zα : α < κ} ⊂ A such that any function f from Z into some algebra A′ can be uniquely extended to a homomorphism from A into A′. The set Z is called a set of free generators of the algebra A. If Z is a set of free generators of some subalgebra B ⊂ A, we say that Z is a set of free generators in the subalgebra A. If A is commutative, a subset Z = {zα : α < κ} ⊂ A is a set of free generators in A if for each polynomial P and for any zα1, zα2, . . . , zαn ∈ Z we have P (zα1, zα2, . . . , zαn) = 0 if and only if P = 0. The definition of strong κ-algebrability was introduced in [3], though in several papers, sets which are shown to be algebrable are in fact strongly algebrable, and that is seen clearly by the proofs. See [2], [4] and [12], among others. Strong algebrability is in effect a stronger condition than algebrability: for example, c00 is ω-algebrable in c0 but it is not strongly 1-algebrable (see [3]). 1.1. Results on large structures of non-integrable functions: recent and new. Our object of study will be the quasi-Banach spaces Lp(X, M, µ). For a clear notation, when there cannot be any confusion or ambiguity, we shall write Lp, Lp(X, µ) or Lp(X) instead of Lp(X, M, µ). Our main focus will be on functions which are p-integrable but not q-integrable, for some 0 < p, q ≤ ∞, and specially on functions which are p-integrable but nowhere q-integrable. The notion of nowhere-q-integrability we consider is connected to open sets: Definition 1.2. Let 0 < q ≤ ∞. A scalar-valued function f defined on a Borel measure space X is said to be nowhere q-integrable (or nowhere Lq) if, for each nonvoid open subset U of X, the restriction f U is not in Lq(U). In our context it would be pointless to substitute "for each nonvoid open subset U of X" by "for each Borel subset U of positive measure of X" in the definition above; the reason is that, if 0 < p, q ≤ ∞ and f ∈ Lp(X), there is always a Borel subset of X with positive measure and on which f is q-integrable. This follows from a simple argument (see e.g. the final remarks in [5]). Of course, not all Borel measure spaces (X, µ) admit Lp-nowhere-Lq functions, but there is a large class of such spaces which admit plenty of such functions, as we will see. Let us start by mentioning some recent results and open questions on large structures within sets of functions which are p-integrable but not q-integrable. For a survey on the evolution of the results in this direction, we recommend [7]. LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 3 Theorem 1.3 (Bernal-Gonz´alez, Ord´onez Cabrera [6]). Let (X, M, µ) be a measure space, and consider the conditions (α) inf{µ(A) : A ∈ M, µ(A) > 0} = 0, and (β) sup{µ(A) : A ∈ M, µ(A) < ∞} = ∞. Then the following assertions hold: (1) if 1 ≤ p < ∞, then Lp \ ∪q>pLq is spaceable if and only if (α) holds; (2) if 1 < p ≤ ∞, then Lp \ ∪q<pLq is spaceable if and only if (β) holds; (3) if 1 < p < ∞, then Lp \ ∪q6=pLq is spaceable if and only if both (α) and (β) hold; (4) if 1 < p < ∞ and Lp is separable, then Lp \ ∪q<pLq is maximal-dimension dense- lineable if and only if (β) holds. Note that any of the conditions (α), or (β), or (α) and (β) is enough to guarantee the existence of nowhere q-integrable functions in Lp (just note that, if X contains an open singleton {x} of positive measure, then each function from Lp(x) is q-integrable in {x}, for all q). Bernal-Gonz´alez et. al. use the convenient terminology '(left, right) strict order integrability' when a function is p-integrable but not q-integrable for q 6= p (q < p, q > p). We refer to [7] for improvements on item (2) of Theorem (1.3) above. And in [9] there is a version of that same item which includes quasi-Banach spaces: Theorem 1.4 (Botelho, F´avaro, Pellegrino, Seoane-Sep´ulveda [9]). Lp[0, 1] \ ∪q>pLq[0, 1] is spaceable for every p > 0. When it comes to nowhere integrable functions, Bernal-Gonz´alez gave the first initial result: Theorem 1.5 (Bernal-Gonz´alez [5]). Let (X, M, µ) be a measure space such that X is a Hausdorff first-countable separable locally compact perfect topological space and that µ is a positive Borel measure which is continuous, regular and has full support. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞.Then the set {f ∈ Lp : f is nowhere q-integrable, for each q > p} (1.1) is dense in Lp. It is clear that µ having full support (that is, µ(U) > 0 for every nonvoid open subset U ⊂ X) is a necessary condition for the existence of nowhere q-integrable functions. Based on the above result, Bernal-Gonz´alez rose the following question: Problem 1. Is the set (1.1) lineable/maximal-dimension lineable/dense-lineable? It is quite natural to seek for other large structures within (1.1). The authors of this work have also presented some results on large structures of nowhere integrable functions, and among them we mention the following: Theorem 1.6 (G l¸ab, Kaufmann, Pellegrini [11]). The set of nowhere essentially bounded functions in L1[0, 1] is 4 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI (1) spaceable and (2) strongly c-algebrable. In this landscape, we present a few new results which solve Problem 1 and, under quite mild conditions on the measure space where our functions are defined, comple- ment/generalize the results mentioned above. We summarize these results in Theorem 1.7 below. Theorem 1.7. Suppose that X is a topological space admitting a countable π-base (that is, a family (Un)n of nonvoid open subsets of X such that, for each nonvoid open subset A of X, Uj ⊂ A for some j) and that µ a positive Borel measure on X. Let 0 < p < ∞ and consider the sets Sp(X) . = Sp . = {f ∈ Lp : f is nowhere Lq, for each p < q ≤ ∞}, . = Sp \ ∪0<q<pLq, and S′ p G . =(f ∈ \0<q<∞ Lq : f is nowhere L∞) . Then we have the following: (a) if µ is atomless, outer regular and has full support, then Sp∪{0} contains a ℓp-isometric subspace of Lp, which is in addition complemented if p ≥ 1; (b) if µ infinite and σ-finite, then Lp \ ∪0<q<pLq contains a ℓp-isometric subspace of Lp, which is in addition complemented if p ≥ 1; (c) if µ is atomless, infinite, outer regular and has full support, then S′ p ∪ {0} contains a ℓp-isometric subspace of Lp, which is in addition complemented if p ≥ 1; (d) if µ is atomless, outer regular and has full support, then Sp is maximal-dimension dense-lineable; (e) if µ is atomless, outer regular and has full support, then G is strongly c-algebrable. See Section 6 for comments on the choice of working with π-bases instead of the more usual bases of open sets. In addition to Theorem 1.7 we also prove that, for a special classes of positive Borel measure spaces, Sp contains an isomorphic copy of ℓ2 (see Theorems 3.5 and 3.6, and Corollary 3.7). This motivates a new investigation direction concerning space- ability (see Section 3). Remark 1. Referring to items (a) -- (c), it is worth recalling that for p < 1, Lp contains no complemented copy of ℓp. This is easily seen if one recalls that, for p < 1, ℓp admits nontrivial continuous linear forms (e.g. the evaluation functionals), while every nontrivial linear form on Lp is discontinuous. Remark 2. In any measurable space which admits a set of strictly positive finite measure (in particular for (X, µ) under the conditions in (e)) and 0 < p < q < ∞, the set of Lp functions which are not Lq is not algebrable; to see this, just note that if f is p- integrable but not q-integrable on some set of finite measure U, then f n is not p-integrable LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 5 if we choose a large enough power n. There is therefore no hope in looking for algebraic structures of strict-order integrable functions in many cases. One exception is given by: Theorem 1.8 (Garc´ıa-Pacheco, P´erez-Eslava, Seoane-Sep´ulveda [13]). If (X, M, µ) is a measure space in which there exists and infinite family of pairwise disjoint measurable sets An satisfying µ(An) ≥ ǫ for some ǫ > 0, then is spaceable in L∞ and algebrable. L∞ \ ∩∞ p=1Lp Note that Theorem 1.7(e) complements, in some sense, the algebrability part of Theorem 1.8. Remark 3. Theorem 1.7 relates to what was mentioned previously in the following way: • (a) generalizes Theorem 1.4, Theorem 1.6(1) and, under our assumptions, also Theorem 1.3(1); • it is not hard to adapt Theorem 1.3(2) for p < 1 and to see that the space guar- anteeing the spaceability can be isometric to ℓp and complemented in case p ≥ 1; since condition (β) from Theorem 1.3 is milder that the conditions in (b), it follows that (b) does not really add much. But the construction in the proof we present is used to prove also (c), thus we include (b) for completeness and clearness; • under our assumptions, (c) improves Theorem 1.3(3); • (d) improves Theorem 1.5 and gives a positive answer to Bernal-Gonz´alez's Problem 1; • (e) improves Theorem 1.6(2). The remaining sections will be organized as follows. In Section 2 we will prove The- orem 1.7(a) -- (c), that is, its spaceability part. In Section 3, we introduce the notion of V -spaceability (see Definition 3.1) and provide the results on ℓ2-spaceability. Section 4 contains the proof of the dense-lineability result (Theorem 1.7(d)), and Section 5 is on the algebrability result (Theorem 1.7(e)). In Section 6 we briefly discuss conditions on positive Borel measure spaces under which there exist, or not, functions p-nowhere-q integrable in the corresponding Lp spaces. We include related open problems throughout the text. 2. Spaceability: proof of Theorem 1.7(a) -- (c) Recall the following standard result from functional analysis on Banach spaces: Theorem 2.1. Suppose that (X, µ) is a Borel measure space. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞, and suppose that (fn) is a sequence of norm-one, disjointly supported functions in Lp(µ). Then (fn) is a complemented basic sequence isometrically equivalent to the canonical basis of ℓp. It is not hard to see that the same holds for 0 < p < 1, though the complementability is lost, as we previously pointed out. Our strategy to prove Theorem 1.7(a) -- (c) will be 6 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI to find sequences of norm-one, disjointly supported functions in Sp, Lp \ ∪0<q<pLq and S′ p, under the corresponding assumptions. Lemma 2.2. Let X be a topological space with a countable π-base. Suppose that µ is an atomless and outer-regular positive Borel measure on X with full support. Let U be an open set such that µ(U) > 0 and let ε ∈ (0, 1). Then there is a nowhere-dense Borel subset N of U such that µ(N) > µ(U)ε. Proof. Let (Un) be a π-base of U. Since µ is atomless, there are Borel sets Bn ⊂ Un such that µ(Bn) < εµ(U)/2n. Since µ is outer-regular, there are open set V ′ n ⊃ Bn with µ(V ′ dense open subset of U. Therefore N = U \ V is nowhere dense subset of U with measure greater than µ(U)ε. (cid:3) n ∩ U and put V =Sn Vn. Then µ(V ) < εµ(U) and V is a n) < εµ(U)/2n. Let Vn = V ′ Lemma 2.3. Suppose that µ is an atomless positive Borel measure on X with full support. Let A be a measurable set in X such that µ(A) > 0 and let (an) be a sequence in (0, +∞). Then there is a sequence (An) of pairwise disjoint measurable subsets of A such that 0 < µ(An) < ∞ and µ(An+1) ≤ anµ(An). Proof. We may assume that an ≤ 1/2 for all n. Since µ is atomless, there is a Borel set A1 ⊂ A such that 1 2 Likewise, there is Borel set A2 ⊂ A \ A1 such that 0 < µ(A1) < µ(A). 0 < µ(A2) < a1µ(A1) ≤ 1 2 µ(A1). 1 2 µ(An−1); 0 < µ(An) < an−1µ(An−1) ≤ Proceeding this way, we can find inductively An ⊂ A \Sk<n Ak such that this is possible since µ(A \Sk<n Ak) > 0. function hA in Lp \Sq>p Lq. Lemma 2.4. Suppose that µ is an atomless positive Borel measure on X with full support. Then for any given Borel set A in X such that µ(A) > 0 there is a norm-one, A-supported Proof. Let A ⊂ X be measurable and µ(A) > 0; by Lemma 2.3 there exists a family {An,m : n, m ∈ N} of pairwise disjoint subsets of A of positive measure such that µ(An,m+1) ≤ 1 2µ(An,m). Let (rn) be a strictly decreasing sequence of real numbers tending to p. Put (cid:3) where arn n,mµ(An,m) = 1/m. Then hnrn = ∞ and hn = an,mχAn,m, ∞ Xm=1 hnpdµ = ZX ∞ Xm=1 ap n,mµ(An,m) = 1 arn−p n,m m . ∞ Xm=1 LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 7 Since lim sup m→∞ 1 arn−p n,m+1(m+1) 1 arn−p n,m m = lim sup µ(An,m) (cid:19) m→∞ (cid:18)µ(An,m+1) rn−p rn 2(cid:19) ≤(cid:18) 1 rn−p rn < 1, then by the ratio test for series we obtain that hn ∈ Lp. Put hA = hn hn2n . ∞ Xn=1 (cid:3) Then hA ∈ Lp \Sq>p Lq and khAk = 1. Proof of Theorem 1.7(a). Let (Un) be a π-base of X. Since µ is atomless and outer- regular, we may assume that µ(Un) < ∞ for each n. (Indeed, suppose that µ(Un) = ∞. Hence Un 6= ∅ and there is x ∈ Un. Since µ is atomless, then µ({x}) = 0. By the outer- regularity of µ, there is an open neighborhood V of x with arbitrarily small µ-measure. Since µ does not vanish on open sets, then 0 < µ(V ∩ Un) < ∞. We may replace Un ∩ V with Un.) By Lemma 2.2, there is a nowhere dense Borel set N1 ⊂ U1 with 0 < µ(N1) < 1 2. Since N1 is nowhere dense we can find a nonempty open set U ⊂ U2 \ N1, and again by Lemma 2.2 there is a nowhere dense Borel set N2 ⊂ U ⊂ U2 with 0 < µ(N2) < 1 22 . We can then inductively define a pairwise disjoint sequence of nowhere dense Borel sets (Nn) such that Nn ⊂ Un and 0 < µ(Nn) < 1/2n. Decompose each Nn into µ-positive and pairwise disjoint Borel sets Nn,m. For each n, m there exists, by Lemma 2.4, a norm-one, Nn,m-supported function hNn,m in Lp \Sq>p Lq. If we put fm = hNn,m 2n , ∞ Xn=1 then (fm) will form a norm-one basic sequence of elements from Sp with pairwise disjoint supports, and by Theorem 2.1 our proof is concluded. (cid:3) Lemma 2.5. Suppose that µ is an infinite and σ-finite positive Borel measure on X. Then for any given Borel set B ⊂ X of infinite measure, there exists a function gB ∈ Lp \Sq<p Lq which is zero outside of B. Proof. Let B ⊂ X be Borel of infinite measure, and let {Bn,m : n, m ∈ N} be a family of pairwise disjoint subsets of B of positive finite measure such that 2µ(Bn,m) ≤ µ(Bn,m+1). Let (rn) be a strictly increasing sequence of (strictly positive) real numbers tending to p. Put ∞ where brn n,mµ(Bn,m) = 1/m. Then bn,mχBn,m, gn = Xm=1 gnpdµ = ZX ∞ Xm=1 bp n,mµ(Bn,m) = bp−rn n,m m , ∞ Xm=1 8 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI and since lim sup m→∞ bp−rn n,m+1 (m+1) bp−rn n,m m = lim sup µ(Bn,m+1)(cid:19) m→∞ (cid:18) µ(Bn,m) p−rn rn 2(cid:19) ≤(cid:18)1 p−rn rn < 1, by ratio test for series we obtain that gn ∈ Lp. Letting . = gB gn kgnk2n , ∞ Xn=1 we have that gB ∈ Lp. It suffices to show now that gB 6∈ Lq for any q < p. Fix such q; for a large enough n, rn > q, and then (kgnk2n)qZ gBq ≥Z gnq =Xm (cid:18) q rn 1 m.µ(Bn,m)(cid:19) µ(Bn,m) q rn m(cid:19) =Xm (cid:18) 1 µ(Bn,m) rn−q rn = µ(Bn,1) q rn = ∞. rn−q m(cid:19) rn Xm (cid:18) 1 (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 1.7(b). Since µ is infinite and σ-finite, then each Borel set of infinite measure D can be written as an infinite disjoint union of Borel sets of infinite measure. To see this it is enough to verify that D contains an infinite disjoint union of Borel sets of infinite measure Dn. In effect, we can define inductively Borel sets Ck ⊂ D such that 1 ≤ µ(Ck) < ∞; let (Mn) be a pairwise disjoint family of infinite subsets of N. Then Dn result then follows from Lemma 2.5 and the same argument that was used in the proof of Theorem 1.7(a). (cid:3) = Sk∈Mn Ck is a family of Borel sets satisfying the desired properties. The desired . The proof of Theorem 1.7(c) is a combination of the constructions from the proofs of parts (a) and (b): Proof of Theorem 1.7(c). Consider Un, Nn and fm as in the proof of Theorem 1.7(a). of infinite measure Dm. Then by Lemma 2.5, for each m there is a norm-one function Since µ(X \Sn Nn) = ∞, X \ Sn Nn can be written as a disjoint union of Borel sets gDm ∈ Lp \Sq<p Lq which is zero outside of Dm. Then the norm-one functions fm + gDm , m ∈ N are in S′ p and have almost disjoint supports. 2 (cid:3) We have shown that, under special circumstances, the sets Sp, Lp \ ∪0<q<pLq and S′ p, united to {0}, admit copies of ℓp. This suggests the following definition: 3. V -spaceability LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 9 Definition 3.1. Let V be a topological vector space and S be a subset of V . Given a subspace W of V , we say that S is W -spaceable if S ∪ {0} contains a W -isomorphic subspace of V . There are plenty of examples where V -spaceability (of a subset of a topological vector space V ) is a strictly more restrictive condition than maximal-dimension spaceability; for instance, L1[0, 1] admits a subspace isomorphic to ℓ2, which turns to be maximal-dimension spaceable but not L1[0, 1]-spaceable. As usual, we can add adjectives like "isometrically", "complementably" and so on to "W -spaceable", depending on how nicely placed in V is the copy of W we have found in S ∪ {0}. For example, Theorem 1.7(a) says that, under our assumptions, Sp is isometrically (and complementably, if p ≥ 1) ℓp-spaceable. Note that, given a topological vector space V , the notion of V -spaceability of some subset S of V is quite strong; in particular, it implies that S is maximal-dimension spaceable, and that S ∪ {0} contains copies of all subspaces of V . We have this phenomenon occurring, for example, for the set of nowhere differentiable functions in C([0, 1]). The main theorem from [21] can be reformulated as follows: Theorem 3.2 (Rodr´ıguez-Piazza [21]). In C([0, 1]), the set of nowhere differentiable func- tions is isometrically C([0, 1])-spaceable. One step further is due to Hencl: Theorem 3.3 (Hencl [16]). In C([0, 1]), the set of nowhere approximatively differentiable and nowhere Holder functions is isometrically C([0, 1])-spaceable. Another example derives from Theorem 1.7(b): Corollary 3.4. In ℓp, the set ℓp \ ∪0<q<pℓq is isometrically ℓp-spaceable, and if p ≥ 1, it is isometrically and complementably ℓp-spaceable. To see this, just notice that the positive integers with the counting measure satisfy the conditions in Theorem 1.7(b). This example is less interesting than the two previous ones, since all closed infinite-dimensional subspaces of ℓp are isomorphic to ℓp, while C([0, 1]) contains isometric copies of all separable Banach spaces. This remarks naturally motivate new directions of investigation concerning spaceability. In our context of nowhere p-integrable functions, we can pose the following: Problem 2. Under appropriate assumptions, for which subspaces V of Lp, is Sp (or Lp \ ∪0<q<pLq, or S′ p) (isometrically, complementably...) V -spaceable? The same could be asked when studying the spaceability of any other subset of a topo- logical vector space. In the remaining of this section, we present some initial results in the direction of solving this problem (Theorems 3.5 and 3.6, and Corollary 3.7): Theorem 3.5. Suppose that 1 ≤ p < ∞ and that (X, µ) is a positive Borel measure space such that Sp(X) is nonvoid. Then Sp(X × [0, 1]) is ℓ2-spaceable in Lp(X × [0, 1]). Theorem 3.6. Sp([0, 1]) is ℓ2-spaceable in Lp[0, 1], for each 1 ≤ p < ∞. 10 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI Corollary 3.7. Sp([0, 1]n) is ℓ2-spaceable in Lp([0, 1]n), for each 1 ≤ p < ∞ and each n ∈ N. Note that Corollary 3.7 follows easily by induction from Theorems 3.5 and 3.6. Note also that Theorem 3.6 is another improvement of Theorem 1.4 (for the p ≥ 1 case), in a different direction if we compare to the improvement provided by Theorem 1.7(a). To prove Theorem 3.5, we shall need some auxiliary results. The first one is a corollary from the following: Theorem 3.8 (Kitson, Timoney [18], Theorem 3.3). Let (En) be a sequence of Banach spaces and F be a Fr´echet space. Let Tn : En → F be continuous linear operators and W . = span{Sn Tn(En)}. If W is not closed in F , then F \ W is spaceable. Corollary 3.9. Let E be an infinite-dimensional Banach space and V be the linear span of a sequence of elements of E. Then E \ V is spaceable. In particular, if E is a sequence space, the set of elements x = (xn) of E such that xn 6= 0 for infinitely many n is spaceable. Proof. Note that, for the first part, it suffices to show that E \ V is spaceable in the case where E is the closed linear span of (xn) and V is the linear span of (xn), for some linearly independent sequence (xn) in E. But in this case, defining Tn : Rn → E by Tn(λ1, . . . , λn) E, we can apply Theorem 3.8 and conclude the proof of the first part. j=1 λjxj, we have that V = span{Sn Tn(Rn)}. Since V is not closed in For the second part, just apply the first part to V = span{en : N}, where {en : N} is the (cid:3) =Pn . canonical basis of E. The sequence space we will be interested in will be ℓ2. Recall that, Rademacher functions defined on [0, 1] by rn(t) (rn), as a sequence in Lp[0, 1], is equivalent to the canonical basis of ℓ2. if rn are the . = sign(sin(2nπt)) and 0 < p < ∞, then Lemma 3.10. Let (an) be an element of ℓ2 having infinitely many nonzero an's. Then for all open ∅ 6= U ⊂ [0, 1] we have that (Panrn)U 6≡ 0, where Panrn is a series in Lp[0, 1] (0 < p < ∞). Proof. Let (an) be an element of ℓ2 having infinitely many nonzero an's, and let U be a nonempty open subset of [0, 1]. Let us denote anrn, f<j . = anrn, and f≥j . = anrn. . = f ∞ Xn=1 j−1 Xn=1 ∞ Xn=j U contains an interval of the form I = [ k 2N ], for some N ∈ N and k = 0, . . . , N −1. Note that f<N is constant in I, but since we have infinitely nonzero an's, f≥N is not constant in I. Thus f cannot be constant in I. (cid:3) 2N , k+1 Proof of Theorem 3.5. By Corollary 3.9, there is a closed infinite-dimensional subspace n=1 anrn from F , we have F of span{rn : n ∈ N} such that, for each nonzero element P∞ LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 11 that infinitely many elements from (an) are nonzero. By Lemma 3.10, for each nonzero element h of F and each nonvoid open subset U from [0, 1], we have hU 6≡ 0. Note that, as a closed infinite-dimensional subspace of a space isomorphic to ℓ2, F is isomorphic to ℓ2. Let f be a norm-one element from Sp(X), and define Φ : F → Lp(X × [0, 1]) by ∞ Note that the support of Φ(h) is σ-finite for each h ∈ F , and Φ is clearly an isometric isomorphism onto its range. By Fubini's theorem, p p ∞ f (x) anrn(t). p dt dx . = f (x) anrn! (x, t) Φ ∞ Xn=1 anrn!(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Φ ∞ Xn=1 Xn=1 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) anrn(t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =ZXZ 1 Xn=1 anrn(t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f (x)p dx(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =Z 1 0 (cid:18)ZX Xn=1 anrn(t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) anrn(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) dt =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =Z 1 Xn=1 Xn=1 for allP∞ It remains to show that Φ(F ) ⊂ Sp(X ×[0, 1])∪{0}. LetP∞ anrn(t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) anrn!(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) a (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =Z b dtZU ZU ×(a,b)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Φ ∞ Xn=1 ∞ Xn=1 p ∞ q q ∞ ∞ p dt p p , f (x)qdx n=1 anrn ∈ F . It follows that Φ(F ) is a ℓ2-isomorphic subspace from Lp(X ×[0, 1]). n=1 anrn be a nonzero element from F , U × (a, b) be a nonvoid basic open subset of X × [0, 1], and p ≤ q < ∞. Then converges if q = p (by Khinchine's inequality and since f is p-integrable), and does not converge if q > p (since the first factor is strictly positive by Lemma 3.10 and f is not q-integrable). This concludes our proof. (cid:3) Before proceeding to the proof of Theorem 3.6, we point out that it is not hard to prove, using Theorem 3.5, that Lp[0, 1] \Sq>p Lq[0, 1] is ℓ2-spaceable in Lp[0, 1], for 1 ≤ p < ∞. In effect, recall that there exists a measure-preserving Borel isomorphism ψ from [0, 1]2 onto [0, 1], which in turn induces an isometric isomorphism Ψ from Lp([0, 1]2) onto Lp[0, 1], . = f ◦ ψ−1. It is easy to verify that, for each f ∈ Lp([0, 1]2) and each defined by Ψ(f ) q > p, f is q-integrable if and only if Ψ(f ) is q-integrable; in particular, all functions in Ψ(Sp([0, 1]2)) are not q-integrable for q > p, and the claim follows. But the nowhere part is lost, since ψ is not an homeomorphism. We need thus to provide a finer construction. Proof of Theorem 3.6. Let µ be the Lebesgue measure on [0, 1], that is, the unique Borel measure such that µ([k/2n, (k + 1)/2n]) = 1/2n for every n ∈ N and k = 0, 1, . . . , 2n − 1. By λ denote the Lebesgue measure on {0, 1}N, that is, the unique Borel measure such that 12 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI λ(hsi) = 1/2s for every finite sequence s of zeros and ones where s is the length of s and hsi stands for the set of all x ∈ {0, 1}N such that x(k) = s(k) for k = 1, 2, . . . , s. 2n . Note that g−1(k/2n) consists of two elements x, y such that x is a binary representation of k/2n with x(m) = 0 for m > n, and y is a binary representation of k/2n with x(m) = 1 for m > n. Moreover g−1(t) is a singleton if t is not of the form k/2n. Let g : {0, 1}N → [0, 1] be given by g(x) =P∞ x(n) n=1 Claim 1. µ(A) = λ(g−1(A)) for every Borel set A in [0, 1] and λ(B) = µ(g(B)) for every Borel set B in {0, 1}N. It is enough to show this for A = [k/2n, (k + 1)/2n] and B = hsi. Let s be a finite sequence of zeros and ones which is a binary representation of the number k/2n. Then s = n and g−1(A) = hsi. Thus λ(g−1(A)) = λ(hsi) = 1/2n = µ(A). Let n = s and define k = s(n) + 2s(n − 1) + 22s(n − 2) + · · · + 2n−1s(1). Then g(B) = g(hsi) = [k/2n, (k + 1)/2n]. Thus µ(g(B)) = µ([k/2n, (k + 1)/2n]) = 1/2n = 1/2s = λ(B). Claim 1 is then proved. Claim 2. F : Lp[0, 1] → Lp({0, 1}N) given by F (f ) between Lp[0, 1] and Lp({0, 1}N), with inverse L : Lp({0, 1}N) → Lp[0, 1] given by . = f ◦ g is an isometric isomorphism L(h)(t) . =(cid:26) h(g−1(t)), if t ∈ [0, 1] is not of the form k/2n; h(x), if t = k/2n and x is the binary representation of t with x(m) = 0, m > n. Moreover, F Lq[0,1] = Lq({0, 1}N) for each q > p. If A is a Borel set in [0, 1] and f = χA is the characteristic function of a set A, then by Claim 1 we have It is easily seen that (3.1) also holds if f is a step function, and it follows that χg−1(A)dλ =Z{0,1}N f ◦ gdλ. (3.1) Z[0,1] f dµ = µ(A) = λ(g−1(A)) =Z{0,1}N f dµ =Z{0,1}N Z[0,1] f ◦ gdλ. holds for each f ∈ L1[0, 1]. It follows easily that kf kp = kf ◦ gkp, for f ∈ Lp[0, 1]. This shows that F is norm-preserving and that F Lq[0,1] = Lq({0, 1}N) for each q > p. It is clear that L is a left inverse for F . Note that, for a given h ∈ Lp({0, 1}N), F (L(h)) eventually differs from h on a countable set of elements x ∈ {0, 1}N with x(m) = 1 for almost every m. Since λ is a continuous measure, then λ({x ∈ {0, 1}N : h(x) 6= F (L(h))(x)}) = 0. This means that h and F (L(h)) are the same element of Lp({0, 1}N). Thus Claim 2 is proved. Claim 3. F (Sp([0, 1])) = Sp({0, 1}N) and L(Sp({0, 1}N)) = Sp([0, 1]). Let f ∈ Sp([0, 1]) and fix a basic set hsi in {0, 1}N. Note that there exists a positive integer k such that g(hsi) = [k/2n, (k + 1)/2n], where n = s. Since F (f )χhsi = (f ◦ g)χhsi = (f χ[k/2n,(k+1)/2n]) ◦ g = F (f χ[k/2n,(k+1)/2n]) LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 13 and f χ[k/2n,(k+1)/2n 6∈ Lq[0, 1], it follows by the previous claim that F (f )χhsi 6∈ Lq({0, 1}N). That means that F (f ) is nowhere Lq. We have then proved that F (Sp([0, 1])) ⊂ Sp({0, 1}N) and, using the previous Claim, that L(Sp({0, 1}N)) ⊃ Sp([0, 1]). Now let h ∈ Sp({0, 1}N) and fix a set [k/2n, (k + 1)/2n]. Let s be a finite set which is a binary representation of k/2n. Since hχhsi is not in Lq for q > p, then L(hχhsi) = (h ◦ g−1)χ[k/2n,(k+1)/2n] = L(h)χ[k/2n,(k+1)/2n]. Thus L(h) is nowhere Lq and the proof of Claim 3 is complete. Given two positive Borel measure spaces X and Y and 0 < p < ∞, we shall say that an application ϕ : Lp(X) → Lp(Y ) preserves Sp if ϕ(Sp(X)) ⊂ Sp(Y ). Claim 3 asserts in particular that both F and L preserve Sp. Claim 4. There is an isometric isomorphism G from Lp({0, 1}N) onto Lp({0, 1}N×{0, 1}N) which preserves Sp. Let ϕ : {0, 1}N × {0, 1}N → {0, 1}N be defined by ϕ((x(1), x(2), x(3), . . . ), (y(1), y(2), y(3), . . . )) . = (x(1), y(1), x(2), y(2), x(3), y(3), . . . ). It is well known that ϕ is a homeomorphism of {0, 1}N × {0, 1}N and {0, 1}N. Fix two finite sequences s and s′ of zeros and ones. Note that and 1 2s 1 2s′ = λ(hsi)λ(hs′i) = λ × λ(hsi × hs′i) λ(ϕ(hsi × hs′i)) = 1 2s+s′ . The last equality follows from the fact that the set ϕ(hsi × hs′i) is a subset of {0, 1}N such that exactly s + s′ of its coordinates are fixed. Using this we obtain that λ×λ(A) = λ(ϕ(A)) for any Borel subset A of {0, 1}N ×{0, 1}N. . Then G : Lp({0, 1}N × {0, 1}N) → Lp({0, 1}N) defined by G(f ) = f ◦ ϕ has inverse given by G−1(h) = h ◦ ϕ−1 and satisfies the desired properties. This completes the proof of Claim 4. Mimicking the reasoning used to prove Claims 1 -- 3, we can show that T : Lp({0, 1}N × [0, 1]) → Lp({0, 1}N × {0, 1}N) defined by T (f )(x, y) . = f (x, g(y)) is an onto isometric isomorphism which preserves Sp. Hence, we have built the following chain of Sp-preserving isometric isomorphisms: Lp({0, 1}N×[0, 1]) T−→ Lp({0, 1}N×{0, 1}N) G−→ Lp({0, 1}N) L−→ Lp[0, 1]. Theorem 1.7 implies that Sp({0, 1}N) is nonempty, and from Theorem 3.5 we then ob- tain that Sp({0, 1}N × [0, 1]) is ℓ2-spaceable in Lp({0, 1}N × [0, 1]). The conclusion follows immediately. (cid:3) 14 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI 4. Dense-lineability: proof of Theorem 1.7(d) We start by establishing some notation before proceeding to the proof of Theorem 1.7(d), which will also be via Lemma 2.3. First, recall that a family {Ai : i ∈ I} of infinite subsets of N is said to be almost disjoint if Ai ∩ Aj is finite for any distinct i, j ∈ I. It is well known that there is a family of almost disjoint subsets of N of cardinality continuum. Let {A′ α : α < c} be such family. Fix a sequence of integers 1 = n0 < n1 < n2 < n3 < . . . such that and consider Mk Note that {Aα : α < c} is an almost disjoint family and that . = {nk, nk+1, . . . , nk+1−1}. Define, for each α < c, Aα nk+1−1 Xi=nk 1 i ≥ 1, . =S{Mk : k ∈ A′ α}. 1 i = ∞ Xi∈Aα for each α < c. We shall fix the family {Aα : α < c} and use it in the following. Proof of Theorem 1.7(d). For a fixed Borel set A of positive finite measure and α < c we define a function hα A as follows. Let {An,m : n, m ∈ N} be a family of pairwise disjoint subsets of A of positive measure such that µ(An,m) ≥ 2µ(An,m+1), and let (rn) be a strictly decreasing sequence of reals tending to p. Put hα n . = Xm∈Aα am,nχAn,m, (4.1) where arn that the A-supported, norm-one function m,nµ(An,m) = 1/m. Then a similar argument as used in Lemma 2.4 leads us to . = hα A hα n khα nk2n ∞ Xn=1 (4.2) is in Lp \Sq>p Lq. As in the proof of Theorem 2.2, fix a basis (Un) for X, and let Nn ⊂ Un be a sequence of pairwise disjoint nowhere dense Borel sets satisfying 0 < µ(Nn) < 1/2n. For each α < c, by defining hα Nn as in (4.2) and putting f α . = we obtain that f α ∈ Sp and has norm one. hα Nn 2n , ∞ Xn=1 Note that any ordinal number α < c is of the form β + n, where β is a limit ordinal and n = 0, 1, 2, . . . . Let {Bβ : β < c} be an indexation of all Borel subsets of X. Then the set {(Bβ, n) : β < c, n ∈ N} has cardinality c, thus there is a bijection (Bβ, n) 7→ α(β, n) onto all ordinals less than c. LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 15 Consider, for β < c and n ∈ N, the functions gβ,n . = gα(β,n) . = χBβ + 1 n f α(β,n). (4.3) By our construction, the linear span of {gα(β,n) : β < c, n ∈ N} is dense in the set of all simple functions on X, and therefore it is also dense in Lp. We will show show that any nontrivial linear combination of functions of the form (4.3) is in Sp. Let (β1, n1), . . . , (βk, nk) be distinct and consider b1, . . . , bk ∈ R which are not all zero, and write . = b1gβ1,n1 + · · · + bkgβk,nk = (b1χBβ1 g + · · · + bkχBβk ) + b1 n1 f α(β1,n1) + · · · + bk nk f α(βk,nk). Consider αi then write . = α(βi, ni), and note that α1, . . . , αk are distinct ordinal numbers. We can g = (b1χBβ1 + · · · + bkχBβk ) + = (b1χBβ1 + · · · + bkχBβk ) + b1 n1 b1 n1 f α1 + · · · + bk nk f αk hα1 Nn 2n + · · · + bk nk ∞ Xn=1 hαk Nn 2n . ∞ Xn=1 Consider the family {Al,m : l, m ∈ N} of pairwise disjoint subsets of Nn of positive Nn as in (4.1), using these sets and . = . = Aαk \ {1, 2, . . . , N} are disjoint; this is possible since {Aα : measure such that µ(Al,m) ≥ 2µ(Al,m+1), and construct hαi the corresponding al,m. Consider N ∈ N such that the sets C1 Aα2 \ {1, 2, . . . , N}, . . . , Ck α < c} is almost disjoint. Then we have . = Aα1 \ {1, 2, . . . , N}, C2 hαi l = Xm∈Aαi amχAl,m = Xm∈Aαi T{1,...,N } amχAl,m + Xm∈Ci amχAl,m, ∞ 1 hαi Xl=1 l 2l  hαi l l 2l = hαi l 2l Xm∈Aαi T{1,...,N } 1 hαi  Xm∈Aαi T{1,...,N } Xl=1 amχAl,m + ∞ amχAl,m + Xm∈Ci l 2l Xm∈Ci 1 hαi amχAl,m. amχAl,m  amχAl,m for each i = 1, . . . , k, by our construction we and thus ∞ hαi Nn = = Writing wi ∞ Xl=1 Xl=1 = P∞ . l=1 h 1 αi l 2l Pm∈Ci =SmSl∈Ci . have that each wi is in Lp \Sq>p Lq and w1, . . . , wk have disjoint supports; more precisely, the support of each wi is N i n} ⊂ Sp. The fact n that g ∈ Sp follows then from the fact that adding a simple function to a function from Sp results in a function from Sp. Al,m. Note that span{f αiχSn N i Since Lp(X, µ) is separable, it has dimension c, as does span{gα(β,n) : β < c, n ∈ N}, (cid:3) which concludes our proof. 16 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI 5. Algebrability: proof of Theorem 1.7(e) Proof of Theorem 1.7(e) Let (Un) be a basis for X. Similarly to the construction held at the beginning of the Proof of Theorem 1.7(a), one can find pairwise disjoint nowhere dense Borel sets Nn such that Nn ⊂ Un and 0 < µ(Nn) < 1 2n . Using Lemma 2.3, we can find for each n a pairwise disjoint family (Nn,j)j of Borel subsets of Nn satisfying µ(Nn,j+1) ≤ 1 j + 1 µ(Nn,j). Note that, for each n, j, we have µ(Nn,j) ≤ 1 open subsets of X intercept each Bj in non-null sets, and by the other hand µ(Bj) = = Sn Nn,j. Then all nonvoid j!2n . Let Bj . Let {θα : α < c} be a set of real numbers strictly greater than 1 such that the set {ln(θα) : α < c} is linearly independent over the rational numbers. For each α < c, define Pn µ(Nn,j) ≤ 1 j!. . = gα θj αχBj . ∞ Xj=1 θpj j! converges, thus each gα ∈ Lp, for each α < c and each α For each α the series Pj 0 < p < ∞. Let us show that {gα : α < c} is a set of free generators, and the algebra generated by this set is contained in G ∪ {0}. It suffices to show that, for every m and n positive integers, for every matrix (kil : i = 1, . . . , m, l = 1, . . . , n) of non-negative integers with non-zero and distinct rows, for every α1, . . . , αn < c and for every β1, . . . , βm ∈ R which do not vanish simultaneously, the function . = β1gk11 α1 . . . gk1n αn + · · · + βmgkm1 α1 g . . . gkmn αn ∞ (β1(θk11 α1 . . . θk1n αn )j + · · · + βm(θkm1 α1 . . . θkmn αn )j)χBj = Xj=1 is in G. First, let us show that it is in T0<p<∞ Lp. Fix p and put, for each i = 1, . . . , m, α1 · · · θkin αn . Then . = θki1 θi Z gp ≤Z " ∞ Xj=1 (β1θj 1 + · · · + βmθj m)pχBj# ≤ Q(θj 1, . . . , θj m) j! ∞ Xj=1 , (5.1) where Q : (x1, . . . , xm) 7→ (β1θj such that Q(θj 1, . . . , θj converges and g ∈ Lp. m)p. It is straightforward to find C, b > 0 m) < C + bj for all j. Thus the sum on the right handside of (5.1) 1 + · · · + βmθj Since ln(θi) = ln(θki1 αn ) = ki1 ln θα1 + · · · + kin ln θαn and ln θα1, . . . , ln θαn are Q-linearly independent, the numbers ln(θ1), . . . , ln(θm) are distinct. Then by the strict monotonicity of the logarithmic function we may assume that α1 · · · θkin θ1 > · · · > θm; (5.2) LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 17 we also may assume β1 6= 0. Then we can write ∞ From (5.2) and since β1 is assumed to be nonzero, we can find j0 ∈ N such that g = (β1θj 1 + · · · + βmθj m)χBj . Xj=1 β2θj 2 + · · · + βmθj m < 1 2 β1θj 1 for all j ≥ j0. Then for those j 1 + · · · + βmθj β1θj m ≥ β1θj 2 + · · · + βmθj ≥ β1θj 2 + ... + βmθj 1 −(cid:12)(cid:12)β2θj 1 −(cid:0)β2θj m(cid:12)(cid:12) m(cid:1) > 1 2 β1θj 1. Since each nonvoid open subset of X intercepts all Bj in non-null sets, the inequality above shows that g is nowhere essentially bounded. (cid:3) 5.1. Comments and open problems. As a Corollary from Theorem 1.7(e) we have the following: Corollary 5.1. If µ is an atomless and outer regular positive Borel measure on X with full support and 0 < p < ∞, then . = {f ∈ Lp(µ) : f is nowhere L∞(µ)} Gp is strongly c-algebrable. It is a straightforward exercise for the reader to show, using a construction similar to the one used to prove Theorem 1.7(a), that Gp is spaceable in Lp. To finish this section we pose the following problem: Problem 3. Does Gp ∪ {0} admit dense or closed subalgebras of Lp? 6. When are there nowhere q-integrable functions in Lp? We conclude this work with a couple of remarks and questions on necessary/sufficient conditions on a positive Borel measure space (X, µ), so that there exist nowhere q-integrable Borel functions in Lp(X). An obvious necessary condition is that µ has full support, so we will always assume that. It is not hard to see that it is also necessary that X has the countable chain condition, as Proposition 6.1 below shows. Recall that X is said to have the countable chain condition (or ccc, in short) if any family consisting of open non-empty pairwise disjoint subsets of X is countable. Proposition 6.1. Let X be a topological space without the ccc, assume that µ positive Borel measure on X with full support, fix 0 < q < ∞ and let f : X → R be a Borel function. If f U is not in Lq(U) for any nonvoid open set U, then f is not in Lp(X) for any 0 < p < ∞. 18 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI Proof. Let (Us)s∈S be an uncountable family of pairwise disjoint non-empty open sets. Since f Us is not in Lq(Us) for any Us, then f does not vanish on Us. Thus for each 0 < p < ∞ and each s ∈ S, kf Uskp > 0. Fix 0 < p < ∞. Since S is uncountable, then at least one of the sets Sn . =(cid:26)s ∈ S :ZUs is uncountable. Hence RX f pdµ = ∞. The next natural step is pose the following: f pdµ ≥ 1 n(cid:27) (cid:3) Problem 4. Suppose that X has the ccc, and that µ is a positive Borel measure on X with full support. Given 0 < p < ∞, does there exist a Borel p-integrable function f : X → R which is nowhere q-integrable for q > p? We provide a partial answer to the problem above, through a consistency result. Recall first that the product of two spaces with the ccc do not need to have the ccc, however this statement is independent of ZFC. Under Martin's axiom, the product of two ccc spaces has the ccc, but in some models of ZFC there exists a topological space called Suslin line, which has the ccc but its square does not have the ccc (cf. [19]). Theorem 6.2. It is consistent with ZFC that there is a topological space X satisfying the ccc such that, for any positive Borel measure µ on X with full support and any 0 < p < ∞, there is no Borel function f : X → R in Lp(µ) but nowhere Lq(µ) for q > p. Proof. It is consistent with ZFC that there exists a Suslin line X. Suppose that there is a Borel function f : X → R in Lp(µ) but nowhere Lq(µ) for q > p. Let f : X 2 → R be defined by f (x, y) = f (x)f (y). Clearly f is Borel, and since supp f is σ-finite, so is supp f = (supp f )2. Fubini's theorem then implies that and for any two nonvoid open sets U, V ⊂ X and q > p we have that f qZV f q = ∞. fpd(µ×µ) = kf k2p p , ZX 2 fqd(µ×µ) =ZU ZU ×V Hence f is a Borel function in Lp(µ × µ) but nowhere Lq(µ × µ) for q > p and µ × µ is a positive Borel measure with full support. Since X 2 does not have the ccc, we get a contradiction. (cid:3) Finally we turn our attention to the presence of countable π-bases. First, note that there exist topological spaces X with countable π-bases but admitting no countable bases, and with positive Borel measures with full support defined on them: take for example the Sorgenfrey line (the set of real numbers with the topology generated by intervals of the form [a, b)) with the Lebesgue measure. The Sorgenfrey line RS has a countable π-basis LARGE STRUCTURES MADE OF NOWHERE Lq FUNCTIONS 19 thus we can apply Theorem 1.7 to show that Sp(RS) is ℓp-spaceable, but any basis of the Sorgenfrey line has cardinality c. It turns out that the presence of a countable π-basis in X is also not necessary for the existence of nowhere q-integrable functions in Lp(X). In fact, we have more. Theorem 6.3. Let X be a topological space with a countable π-basis. Suppose that µ is an atomless and outer-regular Borel probability measure with full support. Assume that κ is an uncountable cardinal number. Let Y = X κ be the Tychonoff product of κ many copies of X, and let λ = µκ be the product of κ many copies of µ. Then the Sp(Y ) is spaceable in Y . Proof. Let (Un) be a countable π-base in X. By a construction used to prove Theorem 1.7(a) applied to X and µ, there is a norm-one basic sequence f1, f2, . . . of elements of k=1 akχAk where Ak are . Borel subsets of X. For (xα)α<κ ∈ X κ, put fi((xα)α<κ) = fi(x0). Then ( fi) is a norm-one basic sequence with pairwise disjoint supports. We need to show that each of them is in Sp(X) with pairwise disjoint supports, and each fi is of the formP∞ Sp(Y ). Note that fi is of the form P∞ Let V be an nonempty open subset of Y . We may assume that V is of the formQα<κ Wα if α ∈ κ \ F . Let F0 = F \ {0}. We have V = W0 ×Q1≤α<κ Wα and ZV where Wα are nonempty open subsets of X and there is finite set F ⊂ κ such that Wα = X = Ak ×Q1≤α<κ X. akqλ( Ak ∩ V ) , where Ak k=1 akχ Ak ∞ ∞ . ∞ = dλ = Xk=1 akqχ Ak fiqdλ =ZV Xk=1 akqλ (Ak ∩ W0) × Y1≤α<κ Xk=1 µ(Wα)ZW0 = Yα∈F0 ZY fipdλ =ZX fiqdµ = ∞. Similarly we get that and our proof is concluded. Wα! = ∞ Xk=1 akqµ(Ak ∩ W0) Yα∈F0 µ(Wα) f pdµ < ∞, (cid:3) Acknowledgement: we would like to thank prof. Gilles Godefroy for several comments that lead to improvements of this work. References [1] R. Aron, V. I. Gurariy, J. B. Seoane, Lineability and spaceability of set of functions on R, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 133 (2005), 795 -- 803. [2] R. Aron, J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Algebrability of the set of everywhere surjective functions on C, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin, 14 (2007), 25 -- 31. [3] A. Bartoszewicz and Sz. G l¸ab, Strong algebrability of sets of sequences and functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., DOI:10.1090/S0002-9939-2012-11377-2 [4] F. Bayart and L. Quarta, Algebras in sets of queer functions. Israel J. Math. 158 (2007), 285 -- 296. 20 SZ. G LA¸ B, P. L. KAUFMANN, AND L. PELLEGRINI [5] L. Bernal-Gonz´alez, Algebraic genericity and strict-order integrability, Studia Math. 199(3) (2010), 279 -- 293. [6] L. Bernal-Gonz´alez, M. Ord´onez Cabrera, Spaceability of strict order integrability, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 385 (2012), 303 -- 309. [7] G. Botelho, D. Cariello, V. F´avaro, D. Pellegrino, and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Subspaces of maximal [8] G. Botelho, D. Diniz, V. F´avaro, and D. Pellegrino, Spaceability in Banach and quasi-Banach sequence dimension contained in Lp(Ω) −Sq<p Lq(Ω), preprint, 2012. spaces, Linear Algebra Appl. 434 (2011), no. 5, 1255 -- 1260. [9] G. Botelho, V. F´avaro, D. Pellegrino, and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Lp[0, 1] \Sq>p Lq[0, 1] is spaceable for every p > 0, Linear Algebra Appl. 436 (2012), no. 9, 2963 -- 2965. [10] P. Enflo, V. I. Gurariy, J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, On lineability and spaceability of sets in function spaces, Trans. Amer.Math. Soc., to appear. [11] Sz. G l¸ab, P. L. Kaufmann, and L. Pellegrini, Spaceability and algebrability of sets of nowhere integrable functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., to appear. [12] F. J. Garc´ıa-Pacheco, N. Palmberg and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Lineability and algebrability of patho- logical phenomena in analysis, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 326 (2007), 929 -- 939. [13] F. J. Garc´ıa-Pacheco, C. P´erez-Eslava and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Moduleability, algebraic structures and nonlinear properties J. Math. Anal. Appl., 370 (2010), 159 -- 167. [14] V. I. Gurariy, Subspaces and bases in spaces of continuous functions (Russian), Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 167 (1966), 971 -- 973. [15] V. I. Gurariy, Linear spaces composed of nondifferentiable functions, C. R. Acad. Bulgare Sci. 44 (1991), 4 13 -- 16. [16] V. Hencl, Isometrical embeddings of separable Banach spaces into the set of nowhere approximatively and nowhere Holder functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 128 (2000), no. 12, 3505 -- 3511. [17] N. J. Kalton, Compact and strictly singular operators on Orlicz spaces, Israel J. Math. 26 (1977), 126 -- 136. [18] D. Kitson and R. M. Timoney, Operator ranges and spaceability, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 378 (2011), 680 -- 686. [19] K. Kunen, Set theory. An introduction to independence proofs, vol. 102, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1983. [20] G. A. Munoz-Fern´andez, N. Palmberg, D. Puglisi, and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Lineability in subsets of measure and function spaces, Linear Algebra Appl. 428 (2008), 2805 -- 2812. [21] L. Rodr´ıguez-Piazza, Every separable Banach space is isometric to a space of nowhere differentiable functions, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), no. 12, 3649 -- 3654. Institute of Mathematics, Technical University of L´od´z, W´olcza´nska 215, 93-005 L´od´z, Poland E-mail address: [email protected] Instituto de matem´atica e estat´ıstica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Rua do Matao, 1010, CEP 05508-900, Sao Paulo, Brazil E-mail address: [email protected] Instituto de matem´atica e estat´ıstica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Rua do Matao, 1010, CEP 05508-900, Sao Paulo, Brazil E-mail address: [email protected]
1605.06389	1	1605	2016-05-20T14:59:41	On horizontal Hardy, Rellich, Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg and $p$-sub-Laplacian inequalities on stratified groups	[ "math.FA", "math.AP" ]	In this paper, we present a version of horizontal weighted Hardy-Rellich type and Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on stratified groups and study some of their consequences. Our results reflect on many results previously known in special cases. Moreover, a new simple proof of the Badiale-Tarantello conjecture [2] on the best constant of a Hardy type inequality is provided. We also show a family of Poincar\'e inequalities as well as inequalities involving the weighted and unweighted $p$-sub-Laplacians.	math.FA	math	ON HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH, CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG AND p-SUB-LAPLACIAN INEQUALITIES ON STRATIFIED GROUPS MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN Abstract. In this paper, we present a version of horizontal weighted Hardy- Rellich type and Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on stratified groups and study some of their consequences. Our results reflect on many results previ- ously known in special cases. Moreover, a new simple proof of the Badiale-Tarantello conjecture [2] on the best constant of a Hardy type inequality is provided. We also show a family of Poincar´e inequalities as well as inequalities involving the weighted and unweighted p-sub-Laplacians. 1. Introduction Consider the following inequality (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f (x) kxk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) ≤ p n − p k∇f kLp(Rn) , 1 ≤ p < n, (1.1) p 0 (Rn\{0}), kxk = px2 where ∇ is the standard gradient in Rn, f ∈ C ∞ 1 + ... + x2 n, n−p is known to be sharp. The one-dimensional version of (1.1) and the constant for p = 2 was first discovered by Hardy in [28], and then for other p in [29], see also [29] for the story behind these inequalities. Since then the inequality (1.1) has been widely analysed in many different settings (see e.g. [1]-[10], [12], [13], [16], [17], [20], [30], [31]). Nowadays there is vast literature on this subject, for example, the MathSciNet search shows about 5000 research works related to this topic. On homogeneous Carnot groups (or stratified groups) inequalities of this type have been also intensively investigated (see e.g. [14], [25], [26], [27], [33], [34], [35], [36], [38]). In this case inequality (1.1) takes the form (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f (x) d(x)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) ≤ p Q − p k∇Hf kLp(G) , Q ≥ 3, 1 < p < Q, (1.2) where Q is the homogeneous dimension of the stratified group G, ∇H is the horizontal gradient, and d(x) is the so-called L-gauge, which is a particular homogeneous quasi- norm obtained from the fundamental solution of the sub-Laplacian, that is, d(x)2−Q is a constant multiple of Folland's [22] (see also [23]) fundamental solution of the sub-Laplacian on G. For a short review in this direction and some further discussions 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 22E30, 43A80. Key words and phrases. Hardy inequality, Rellich inequality, Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequal- ity, p-sub-Laplacian, horizontal estimate, stratified group. The authors were supported in parts by the EPSRC grant EP/K039407/1 and by the Leverhulme Grant RPG-2014-02, as well as by the MESRK grant 5127/GF4. 1 2 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN we refer to our recent papers [40, 41, 42, 43, 44] and [39] as well as to references therein. The main aim of this paper is to give analogues of Hardy type inequalities on stratified groups with horizontal gradients and weights. Actually we obtain more than that, i.e., we prove general (horizontal) weighted Hardy, Rellich and Caffarelli-Kohn- Nirenberg type inequalities on stratified groups. Our results extend known Hardy type inequalities on abelian and Heisenberg groups, for example (see e.g. [2] and [11]). For the convenience of the reader let us now briefly recapture the main results of this paper. Let G be a homogeneous stratified group of homogeneous dimension Q, and let X1, . . . , XN be left-invariant vector fields giving the first stratum of the Lie algebra of G, ∇H = (X1, . . . , XN ), with the sub-Laplacian L = X 2 k . NXk=1 Denote the variables on G by x = (x′, x′′) ∈ G, where x′ corresponds to the first stratum. For precise definitions we refer to Section 2. Thus, to summarise briefly, in this paper we establish the following results: • (Hardy inequalities) Let G be a stratified group with N being the dimen- sion of the first stratum, and let α, β ∈ R. Then for all complex-valued 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) and 1 < p < ∞, we have the following functions f ∈ C ∞ Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequality 1 x′α ∇Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p−1 f β p−1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′ Lp(G) , (1.3) where γ = α + β + 1 and · is the Euclidean norm on RN . If γ 6= N then the constant N −γ is sharp. In the special case of α = 0, β = p − 1 and γ = p, inequality (1.3) implies p ≤ k∇Hf kLp(G) , 1 < p < ∞, (1.4) γ p Lp(G) p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) N − γ p f x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − p p 1 x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) 1 x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) where the constant N −p is sharp for p 6= N. One novelty of this is that we do not require that p < N. In turn, for 1 < p < N, the inequality (1.4) gives a stratified group version of Lp-Hardy inequality p ≤ p N − p k∇Hf kLp(G) , 1 < p < N, (1.5) again with p N −p being the best constant. • (Badiale-Tarantello conjecture) Let x = (x′, x′′) ∈ RN × Rn−N . In [2] Badiale and Tarantello proved that for 2 ≤ N ≤ n and 1 ≤ p < N there exists a constant Cn,N,p such that 1 x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) ≤ Cn,N,p k∇f kLp(Rn) , (1.6) HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 3 where ∇ is the standard Euclidean gradient. Clearly, for N = n this gives the classical Hardy's inequality with the best constant Cn,p = p n − p . It was conjectured in [2, Remark 2.3] that the best constant in (1.6) is given by CN,p = . (1.7) p N − p This conjecture was proved in [45]. As a consequence of our techniques, we give a new proof of the Badiale-Tarantello conjecture. • (Critical Hardy inequality) For p = N, the inequality (1.5) fails. In this case the Hardy inequality (1.1) is replaced by a logarithmic version, an analogue of which we establish on stratified groups as well. For a bounded domain Ω ⊂ G with 0 ∈ Ω and f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Ω\{x′ = 0}) we have (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f x′log R ≤ x′(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)LN (Ω) where R = sup x∈Ω x′ x′ N N − 1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇Hf (x)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)LN (Ω) x′. In the abelian case of G = Rn being the Euclidean space, , N ≥ 2, (1.8) inequality (1.8) reduces to the logarithmic Hardy inequality of Edmunds and Triebel [19]. • (p-sub-Laplacian) Let G be a stratified group with N being the dimension q = 1 and α, β ∈ R be such of the first stratum, and let 1 < p < ∞ with 1 that p−N p−1 ≤ γ := α + β + 1 ≤ 0. Then for all f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) we have p + 1 N + γ(p − 1) − p p ∇Hf x′ γ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(G) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′α Lpf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ∇Hf x′β(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(G) where · is the Euclidean norm on RN and Lp is the p-sub-Laplacian operator defined in (2.3). • (Higher order Hardy-Rellich inequalities) Let 1 < p < ∞. For any , (1.9) k, m ∈ N we have γ p f p 1 Lp(G) x′ N − γ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ eAα,meAβ,k(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) such thatQm−1 eAα,m := pm"m−1Yj=0 x′α−m ∇m+1 j=0 N − p(α − j) 6= 0, and x′ H f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − p(α − j)#−1 , 1 β p−1 −k ∇k p−1 , Lp(G) Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) for any real-valued function f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}), γ = α + β + 1, and α ∈ R 4 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN as well as β ∈ R such thatQk−1 j=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)N − p( β eAβ,k := pk(p−1)"k−1Yj=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)N − p(cid:18) β p−1 − j)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 6= 0, and #−(p−1) − j(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p − 1 . [46]) for the horizontal gradient is proved: • (LN -Poincar´e inequality) The following LN -Poincar´e inequality (see e.g. kf kLN (Ω) ≤ R k∇Hf kLN (Ω) , where R = sup x∈Ω x′, for f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G) and any bounded domain Ω ⊂ G. Note that the inequality (1.4) implies N − p Rp kf kLp(Ω) ≤ k∇H f kLp(Ω) , 1 < p < ∞, (1.10) for f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Ω\{x′ = 0}) and R = sup x∈Ω inequality when N = p. x′. However, (1.10) gives a trivial • (Weighted p-sub-Laplacian) Let 0 ≤ F ∈ C ∞(G) and 0 ≤ η ∈ L1 loc(G) be such that ηF p−1 ≤ −Lp,ρF, a.e. in G, (1.11) where Lp,ρ is a weighted p-sub-Laplacian defined in (5.8). Then we have for all real-valued functions f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G) and 2 ≤ p < ∞. Here Cp is a positive constant. For 1 < p < 2 the inequality (1.12) is replaced by an analogous one while for p = 2 it becomes an identity, see Remark 5.6 and Remark 5.5, respectively. In Section 2 we very briefly recall the main concepts of stratified groups and fix the notation. In Section 3 we derive versions of Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on stratified groups and discuss their consequences including higher order cases as well as a new proof of the Badiale-Tarantello conjecture. An analogue of the critical Hardy inequality is proved in Section 4. Hardy-Rellich type inequalities and their weighted versions on stratified groups are presented and analysed in Section 5. 2. Preliminaries A Lie group G = (Rn, ◦) is called a stratified group (or a homogeneous Carnot group) if it satisfies the following conditions: (a) For some natural numbers N + N2 + ... + Nr = n, that is N = N1, the decomposition Rn = RN × ... × RNr is valid, and for every λ > 0 the dilation δλ : Rn → Rn given by δλ(x) ≡ δλ(x′, x(2), ..., x(r)) := (λx′, λ2x(2), ..., λrx(r)) is an automorphism of the group G. Here x′ ≡ x(1) ∈ RN and x(k) ∈ RNk for k = 2, ..., r. kη 1 p f kp 1 p F ∇H Lp(G) + Cp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)ρ f F(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p Lp(G) ≤ kρ 1 p ∇Hf kp Lp(G), (1.12) HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 5 (b) Let N be as in (a) and let X1, ..., XN be the left invariant vector fields on G such that Xk(0) = ∂ ∂xk 0 for k = 1, ..., N. Then rank(Lie{X1, ..., XN }) = n, for every x ∈ Rn, i.e. the iterated commutators of X1, ..., XN span the Lie algebra of G. That is, we say that the triple G = (Rn, ◦, δλ) is a stratified group. See also e.g. [21] for discussions from the Lie algebra point of view. Here r is called a step of G and the left invariant vector fields X1, ..., XN are called the (Jacobian) generators of G. The number is called the homogeneous dimension of G. The second order differential operator Q = kNk, N1 = N, rXk=1 L = X 2 k , (2.1) NXk=1 is called the (canonical) sub-Laplacian on G. The sub-Laplacian L is a left invariant homogeneous hypoelliptic differential operator and it is known that L is elliptic if and only if the step of G is equal to 1. We also recall that the standard Lebesque measure dx on Rn is the Haar measure for G (see, e.g. [21, Proposition 1.6.6]). The left invariant vector field Xj has an explicit form and satisfies the divergence theorem, see e.g. [40] for the derivation of the exact formula: more precisely, we can write Xk = ∂ ∂x′ k + rXl=2 NlXm=1 a(l) k,m(x′, ..., x(l−1)) ∂ ∂x(l) m , (2.2) see also [21, Section 3.1.5] for a general presentation. We will also use the following notations for the horizontal gradient, for the horizontal divergence, ∇H := (X1, . . . , XN ) divHv := ∇H · v Lpf := divH(∇Hf p−2∇Hf ), 1 < p < ∞, (2.3) for the horizontal p-Laplacian (or p-sub-Laplacian), and for the Euclidean norm on RN . x′ =qx′2 1 + . . . + x′2 N The explicit representation (2.2) allows us to have the identities ∇Hx′γ = γx′γ−1, and divH(cid:18) x′ x′γ(cid:19) = PN for all γ ∈ R, x′ 6= 0. j=1 x′γXjx′ j=1 x′ jγx′γ−1Xjx′ j −PN x′2γ (2.4) (2.5) = N − γ x′γ 6 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN 3. Horizontal Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities and consequences In this section and in the sequel we adopt all the notation introduced in Section 2 concerning stratified groups and the horizontal operators. 3.1. Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequalities. In this section we establish the fol- lowing horizontal Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on the stratified group G and then discuss their consequences and proofs. The proof is analogous to [39] in the case of homogeneous groups, but here we rely on the divergence theo- rem rather on the polar decomposition which is less suitable for the stratified setting. We refer e.g. to [6] and [7] for Euclidean settings of Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg in- equalities. Theorem 3.1. Let G be a homogeneous stratified group with N being the dimension of the first stratum, and let α, β ∈ R. Then for any f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}), and all 1 < p < ∞, we have N − γ p f x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p γ p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(G) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′α ∇Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p−1 f β p−1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′ Lp(G) where γ = α + β + 1 and · is the Euclidean norm on RN . If γ 6= N then the constant N −γ is sharp. p , (3.1) In the abelian case G = (Rn, +), we have N = n, ∇H = ∇ = (∂x1, . . . , ∂xn), so (3.1) implies the Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequality (see e.g. [10] and [18]) for G ≡ Rn with the sharp constant: p−1 Lp(Rn) f kxk β p−1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) n. In the case , (3.2) for all f ∈ C ∞ N − p(α + 1) f p p 1 1 Lp(Rn) f γ kxk n − γ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 + . . . + x2 p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kxkα ∇f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 0 (Rn\{0}), and kxk =px2 p(cid:19) , β = γ(cid:18)1 − ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′α ∇Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) x′α+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) and all α ∈ R. 1 x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − p ≤ 1 p p that is, taking β = (α + 1)(p − 1) and γ = p(α + 1), the inequality (3.1) implies that , 1 < p < ∞, (3.3) for any f ∈ C ∞ When α = 0 and 1 < p < N, the inequality (3.3) gives the following stratified group version of Lp-Hardy inequality k∇Hf kLp(G) , 1 < p < N, (3.4) p N −p being the best constant (see [11] and [47] for the version on the again with Heisenberg group). In the abelian case G = (Rn, +), n ≥ 3, (3.4) implies the classical HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 7 Hardy inequality for G ≡ Rn: for all f ∈ C ∞ 1 + . . . + x2 n. The inequality (3.4) implies the following Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl type uncertainly [9], [42], [40] and [39] for different settings): principle on stratified groups (see e.g. For each f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}), using Holder's inequality and (3.4), we have p n − p k∇f kLp(Rn) , f ≤ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kxk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) 0 (Rn\{0}), and kxk =px2 f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) kx′f k L 1 x′ p−1 (G) ≤ p p N − p kf k2 L2(G) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) k∇Hf kLp(G) kx′f k p p−1 (G) , 1 < p < N, (3.5) L that is, kf k2 L2(G) ≤ p N − p k∇H f kLp(G) kx′f k L p p−1 (G) , 1 < p < N. (3.6) In the abelian case G = (Rn, +), taking N = n, we obtain that (3.6) with p = 2 0 (Rn\{0}), we implies the classical uncertainty principle for G ≡ Rn: for all f ∈ C ∞ have (cid:18)ZRn f (x)2dx(cid:19)2 ≤(cid:18) 2 n − 2(cid:19)2ZRn ∇f (x)2dxZRn kxk2f (x)2dx, which is the Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl uncertainly principle on Rn. On the other hand, directly from the inequality (3.1), using the Holder inequality, we can obtain a number of Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl type uncertainly inequalities which have various consequences and applications. For instance, when αp = α + β + 1, we get and if 0 = α + β + 1 and α = −p, then N − αp p (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 p f Lp(G) ∇H f ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′α(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′α(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)x′ p−1 −αf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(G) ≤ kx′p∇Hf kLp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(G) p−1 f , N p kf kp p−1 Lp(G) , (3.7) (3.8) both with sharp constants. Proof of Theorem 3.1. We may assume that γ 6= N since for γ = N the inequality (3.1) is trivial. By using the identity (2.5), the divergence theorem and Schwarz's 8 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN inequality one calculates ZG f (x)p x′γ dx = pf (x)f (x)p−2 x′ · ∇Hf dx x′γ x′ · ∇Hf dx x′γ(cid:19) dx p p 1 1 x′γ = − N − γ f (x)p−1 f (x)pdivH(cid:18) x′ N − γZG ReZG ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZG N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZG ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:18)ZG dx ≤(cid:18)ZG f (x)p−1 x′α+β ∇Hf (x)p ∇Hf (x)p x′αp x′αp p ∇Hf (x) dx p ZG dx(cid:19) 1 p ZG dx(cid:19) 1 f (x)p βp p−1 x′ p dx! p−1 dx! p−1 . p f (x)p βp p−1 x′ . (3.9) Here we have used Holder's inequality in the last line. Thus, we arrive at (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ p f (x)p x′γ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZG This proves (3.1). Now it remains to show the sharpness of the constant. Let us examine the equality condition in above Holder's inequality as in the abelian case (see [18]). For this we consider the function (3.10) (3.11) p−1 + 1 6= 0, 1 , λ x′λ x′C , α − β λ := α − β p−1 + 1 = 0, g(x) =( e− C (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) and γ 6= N. Then it can be checked that (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x′αp = p ∇Hg(x)p g(x)p x′ βp p−1 p , p where C =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −γ p (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) is sharp. C =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −γ which satisfies the equality condition in Holder's inequality. It shows that the constant (cid:3) 3.2. Badiale-Tarantello conjecture. The proof of Theorem 3.1 gives the following similar statement in Rn. Proposition 3.2. Let x = (x′, x′′) ∈ RN × Rn−N , 1 ≤ N ≤ n, and α, β ∈ R. Then for any f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Rn\{x′ = 0}), and all 1 < p < ∞, we have N − γ p f x′ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p γ p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(Rn) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′α ∇f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f β p−1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′ p−1 Lp(Rn) , (3.12) where γ = α + β + 1 and x′ is the Euclidean norm on RN . If γ 6= N then the constant N −γ is sharp. p The proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 3.1. However, for the sake of com- pleteness here we give the details. pf (x)f (x)p−2 x′ · ∇N f dx x′γ x′γ(cid:19) dx x′ · ∇N f dx 0 · ∇f dx ∇f (x) dx p p p 1 1 x′ x′γ x′γ = − N − γ f (x)p−1 f (x)p−1 f (x)pdivN(cid:18) x′ N − γZRn ReZRn N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZRn ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZRn =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZRn N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:18)ZRn ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dx ≤(cid:18)ZRn f (x)p−1 x′α+β ∇f (x)p ∇f (x)p x′αp x′αp p p ZRn dx(cid:19) 1 f (x)p βp p−1 x′ p dx! p−1 , p ZRn dx(cid:19) 1 f (x)p βp p−1 x′ p dx! p−1 . (3.13) 0 = (x′, 0) ∈ Rn, that is x′ where x′ 0 = x′, ∇N is the standard gradient on RN , as well as ∇ is the gradient on Rn. Here we have used Holder's inequality in the last line. Thus, we arrive at (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N − γ p f (x)p x′γ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZRn This proves (3.12). Now it remains to show the sharpness of the constant. Let us examine the equality condition in above Holder's inequality. Consider HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 9 Proof of Proposition 3.2. We may assume that γ 6= N since for γ = N the inequality (3.12) is trivial. By using the identity divN x′ x′γ = N − γ x′γ , for all γ ∈ R and x′ ∈ RN with x′ 6= 0, where divN is the standard divergence on RN , the divergence theorem and Schwarz's inequality one calculates ZRn f (x)p x′γ dx = p−1 + 1 6= 0, p 1 , λ x′λ x′C , α − β λ := α − β p−1 + 1 = 0, g(x) =( e− C where C =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −γ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) and γ 6= N. Then it can be checked that N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x′αp =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) is sharp. C =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −γ N − γ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p ∇N g(x)p p ∇g(x)p p p x′αp = that N − p(α + 1) p (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f x′α+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′α ∇f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) g(x)p βp p−1 x′ , which satisfies the equality condition in Holder's inequality. It shows that the constant (cid:3) As above, taking β = (α + 1)(p − 1) and γ = p(α + 1) the inequality (3.12) implies (3.14) (3.15) , 1 < p < ∞, (3.16) 10 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN for any f ∈ C ∞ α = 0 and 1 < p < N, 2 ≤ N ≤ n, the inequality (3.16) implies that 0 (Rn\{x′ = 0}) and for all α ∈ R with the sharp constant. When (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′ f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) ≤ p N − p k∇f kLp(Rn) , (3.17) again with p N −p being the best constant. This proves the Badiale-Tarantello conjec- ture, which is stated in the introduction (see also [2, Remark 2.3] for the original statement). 3.3. Horizontal higher order versions. In this subsection we show how by it- erating the established Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities one can get inequalities of higher order. Putting ∇Hf instead of f and α − 1 instead of α in (3.3) we consequently have , x′α−1 ∇2 Hf = ∇H∇Hf , that is, ∇m Hf = for each α ∈ R such that α 6= N p − 1 and α 6= N p . This iteration process gives for α 6= N ∇H∇m−1 H f , m ∈ N. Combining it with (3.3) we get Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) 1 x′α−1 ∇2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f f 1 p p p 1 ≤ ≤ N − p(α + 1) x′θ+1−k ∇k ∇Hf x′α(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) p . Here and after we understand ∇2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − pα(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − pα)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′α+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) x′θ+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) and all θ ∈ R such thatQk−1 N − p(θ + 1 − j)#−1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) x′ϑ+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) H f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G) 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) and all ϑ ∈ R such thatQm−1 N − p(ϑ + 1 − j)#−1 ≤ Aθ,k(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Aθ,k := pk"k−1Yj=0 ≤ Aϑ,m(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Aϑ,m := pm"m−1Yj=0 x′ϑ+1−m ∇m+1 ∇Hf 1 . . for any f ∈ C ∞ and Similarly, we have for any f ∈ C ∞ and , (3.18) , 1 < p < ∞, (3.19) j=0 N − p(θ + 1 − j) 6= 0, , 1 < p < ∞, (3.20) j=0 N − p(ϑ + 1 − j) 6= 0, Now putting ϑ + 1 = α and θ + 1 = β (3.1) we obtain p−1 into (3.20) and (3.19), respectively, from HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 11 Proposition 3.3. Let 1 < p < ∞. For any k, m ∈ N we have ∇k Hf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p−1 , Lp(G) (3.21) j=0 N − p(α − j) 6= N − γ p for any f ∈ C ∞ 0, and (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p γ f 1 x′ p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 0 (G\{x′ = 0}), γ = α+β+1, and α ∈ R such thatQm−1 x′α−m ∇m+1 1 β p−1 −k Lp(G) x′ ≤ eAα,meAβ,k(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) eAα,m := pm"m−1Yj=0 j=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)N − p( β eAβ,k := pk(p−1)"k−1Yj=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)N − p(cid:18) β H f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) N − p(α − j)#−1 p−1 − j)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 6= 0, and #−(p−1) − j(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p − 1 4. Horizontal critical Hardy type inequality . , as well as β ∈ R such thatQk−1 For p = N the inequality (3.4) fails for any constant (see, e.g., [19] and [32] for discussions in Euclidean cases). However, we state the following theorem for the (critical) case p = N. Theorem 4.1. For a bounded domain Ω ⊂ G with 0 ∈ Ω and all f ∈ C ∞ we have 0 (Ω\{x′ = 0}) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f (x) x′log R x′(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)LN (Ω) ≤ x′ x′ N N − 1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) · ∇Hf (x)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)LN (Ω) where R = sup x∈Ω x′. , 1 < N < ∞, (4.1) Note that below we give the proof of (4.1) for real-valued functions, the same inequality follows for all complex-valued functions by using the identity (cf. Davies [15, p. 176]) ∀z ∈ C : zp =(cid:18)Z π −π cos θpdθ(cid:19)−1Z π −π Re(z) cos θ + Im(z) sin θp dθ, (4.2) which follows from the representation z = r(cos φ+i sin φ) by some manipulations. To prove (4.1) we follow the Euclidean setting from [46]. First let us prove the following more abstract theorem, and then the proof of Theorem 4.1 will follow easily from this. Theorem 4.2. Let 0 ∈ Ω ⊂ G be a bounded domain. Let g : (1, ∞) → R be a C 2-function such that for all t > 1 and g′(t) < 0, g′′(t) > 0 (−g′(t))2(N −1) (g′′(t))N −1 ≤ C < ∞, ∀t > 1. (4.3) (4.4) 12 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN Then we have (cid:18) N − 1 N (cid:19)NZΩ f (x)N x′N (cid:18)−g′(cid:18)log Re Re x′(cid:19)(cid:19)N −2 ≤ZΩ(cid:16)−g′(cid:16)log Re (cid:16)g′′(cid:16)log Re g′′(cid:18)log x′(cid:17)(cid:17)2(N −1) x′(cid:17)(cid:17)N −1 x′(cid:19) dx (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x′ x′ x′. N · ∇H f (x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dx, (4.5) for all f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Ω\{x′ = 0}). Here R = sup x∈Ω Proof of Theorem 4.1. If we take g(t) = −log(t − 1), for t > 1, then we see that this function satisfies all assumptions of Theorem 4.2. That is, g′(t) = − 1 t − 1 < 0, g′′(t) = 1 (t − 1)2 > 0, (−g′(t))2(N −1) (g′′(t))N −1 = 1, ∀t > 1. (cid:3) . and Therefore, putting and in (4.5) we obtain (4.1). Remark 4.3. Taking in (4.5) we obtain g′(cid:18)log g′′(cid:18)log 1 Re log R x′ x′(cid:19) = − x′(cid:19) = (cid:16)log R x′(cid:17)2 Re 1 g(t) = e N t 1−N , t > 1, kf kLN (Ω) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)x′ x′ x′ · ∇H f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)LN (Ω) x′ using Schwarz's inequality we get Since R = sup x∈Ω which is LN -Poincare inequality for the horizontal gradient. kf kLN (Ω) ≤ R k∇Hf kLN (Ω) , Proof of Theorem 4.2. Let us introduce notations Rǫ := sup Fǫ(x) := log x∈Ωpx′2 + 2ǫ2, px′2 + ǫ2 Rǫe , HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 13 and Gǫ(x) = g(Fǫ(x)), for, say, ǫ > 0. Then a direct calculation shows ∇HGǫ(x)N −2∇HGǫ(x) = (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −1(cid:18) x′N −2x′ (x′2 + ǫ2)N −1(cid:19) and since g′(t) < 0, with LN as in (2.3), LN Gǫ(x) = divH(∇HGǫ(x)N −2∇H Gǫ(x)) = (N − 1) (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N (x′2 + ǫ2)N +(N − 1) (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −1 2ǫ2x′N −2 (x′2 + ǫ2)N . The divergence theorem gives ZΩ f N LN Gǫ(x)dx =ZΩ Now on the one hand, f N divH(∇HGǫ(x)N −2∇HGǫ(x))dx = −ZΩ ∇Hf N · (∇HGǫ(x)N −2∇HGǫ(x))dx. (4.6) ZΩ f N LN Gǫ(x)dx = (N − 1)ZΩ + (N − 1)ZΩ ≥ (N − 1)ZΩ f N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N (x′2 + ǫ2)N dx f N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −1 2ǫ2x′N −2 (x′2 + ǫ2)N dx f N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N (x′2 + ǫ2)N dx. (4.7) 14 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN On the other hand, using (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)−ZΩ ∇Hf N · (∇HGǫ(x)N −2∇H Gǫ(x))dx(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f f N −2∇Hf · (∇HFǫ(x)N −2∇HFǫ(x))dx(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)NZΩ (x′2 + ǫ2)N −1 (cid:19) dx(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)NZΩ f (x)N −2f (x) (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −1(cid:18) x′N −2x′ · ∇Hf f (x)N −1 (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −1(cid:18) x′N −2 x′ · ∇Hf (x′2 + ǫ2)N −1 (cid:19) dx = NZΩ ≤ N(cid:18)ZΩ dx(cid:19) N −1 ZΩ · ∇Hf(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (−g′(Fǫ(x)))2(N −1) (g′′(Fǫ(x)))−(N −1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N f (x)N (x′2 + ǫ2)N x′ x′ N N Combining all (4.6), (4.7) and (4.8) we arrive at (N − 1)ZΩ f N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N (x′2 + ǫ2)N dx x′N f (x)N (x′2 + ǫ2)N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) ≤ N(cid:18)ZΩ ZΩ (−g′(Fǫ(x)))2(N −1) (g′′(Fǫ(x)))−(N −1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:18) N − 1 N (cid:19)NZΩ f N (−g′(Fǫ(x)))N −2 g′′(Fǫ(x)) x′N that is, (x′2 + ǫ2)N dx. N dx(cid:19) N −1 · ∇Hf(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N x′ x′ N dx! 1 . (4.8) N dx! 1 , (4.9) ≤ZΩ (−g′(Fǫ(x)))2(N −1) (g′′(Fǫ(x)))−(N −1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x′ x′ N · ∇Hf(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dx, (4.10) (cid:3) Now letting ǫ → 0 we obtain (4.5). 5. Horizontal Hardy-Rellich type inequalities and weighted versions 5.1. Hardy-Rellich type inequalities. We prove the following Hardy-Rellich type inequalities on the stratified group G: Theorem 5.1. Let G be a stratified group with N being the dimension of the first stratum, and let 1 < p < N with 1 q = 1 and α, β ∈ R be such that p + 1 p − N p − 1 ≤ γ := α + β + 1 ≤ 0. HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 15 Then for all f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) we have N + γ(p − 1) − p p ∇Hf x′ γ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Lp(G) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 x′α Lpf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(G)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ∇Hf x′β(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(G) where · is the Euclidean norm on RN and Lp is the p-sub-Laplacian operator defined by (2.3). , (5.1) Corollary 5.2. When β = 0, α = −1 and q = p stratified group Rellich type inequality for Lp: p−1, the inequality (5.1) gives a k∇Hf kLp(G) ≤ p N − p kx′Lpf kLp(G) , 1 < p < N, (5.2) for all f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}). Corollary 5.3. When α = 0, β = −1, the inequality (5.1) implies the following Heisenberg-Pauli-Weyl type uncertainly principle for Lp, 1 < p < N: for each f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G\{x′ = 0}) we have k∇Hf kp Lp(G) ≤ p N − p kLpf kLp(G) kx′∇Hf kLq(G) , 1 p + 1 q = 1. (5.3) Proof of Theorem 5.1. As in the proof of Theorem 3.1 we have ZG ∇Hf (x)p x′γ dx = 1 N − γZG N − γZG 1 p 2 = − ∇Hf (x)pdivH(cid:18) x′ x′γ(cid:19) dx ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇H∇Hf (x)2 dx x′γ = We also have p 2(γ − N)ZG ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇H ∇Hf (x)2 x′γ dx. (5.4) ZG Lpf x′γ x′ · ∇H f (x)dx =ZG = −ZG ∇Hf (x)p−2 ∇Hf (x)2 x′γ divH(∇Hf (x)p−2∇Hf (x)) x′ · ∇H f (x)dx x′γ ∇Hf (x)p−2∇H f (x) · ∇H(cid:18) x′ · ∇H f (x) x′γ + x′ · ∇H∇Hf (x)2 2x′γ − γ x′ · ∇Hf (x)2 x′γ+2 (cid:19) dx ! dx, = −ZG that is, ∇Hf (x)p−2 ZG ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇Hf (x)2 x′γ x′γ+2 = 2γZG x′ · ∇H ∇Hf (x)2dx dx − 2ZG ∇Hf (x)p x′γ dx −2ZG Lpf x′γ x′ · ∇H f (x)dx. 16 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN Putting this in the right hand side of (5.4) we obtain ZG − ∇Hf (x)p x′γ p γ − N ZG dx = pγ γ − N ZG ∇Hf (x)p x′γ dx − ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇Hf (x)2 γ − N ZG Lpf x′γ x′γ+2 x′ · ∇Hf (x)dx. p dx Thus, ZG Lpf x′γ ZG Lpf x′γ = x′ · ∇H f (x)dx = N − p − γ p x′ · ∇H f (x)dx ZG ∇Hf (x)p x′γ dx + γZG ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇H f (x)2 x′γ+2 dx. (5.5) Since γ ≤ 0, using Schwarz's inequality to the last integrants we get N − p − γ ∇Hf (x)p ZG p p ≥ x′γ ZG N − p − γ ∇Hf (x)p dx + γZG x′γ = ∇Hf (x)p−2 x′ · ∇Hf (x)2 dx + γZG ∇Hf (x)p x′γ+2 x′γ dx N + γ(p − 1) − p ∇Hf (x)p dx p dx. (5.6) x′γ ZG On the other hand, again using Schwarz's inequality and Holder's inequality we have ZG Lpf x′γ x′ · ∇H f (x)dx ≤ZG Lpf x′γ−1 ∇Hf (x) dx Lpf p ≤(cid:18)ZG(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) x′α(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p(cid:18)ZG(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dx(cid:19) 1 ∇H f x′β(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) q q dx(cid:19) 1 . (5.7) (cid:3) Combining it with (5.6) we prove Theorem 5.1. 5.2. Weighted versions. To give an idea for obtaining more general improved weighted Hardy type inequalities let us conclude this paper with the following very short discussion of techniques from [47] (see also [24] and [42]), now in the setting of stratified groups. Consider the following weighted p-sub-Laplacian where 0 ≤ ρ ∈ C 1(G). Lp,ρf = divH(cid:0)ρ(x)∇H f p−2∇Hf(cid:1) , 1 < p < ∞, (5.8) Theorem 5.4. Let 2 ≤ p < ∞. Let 0 ≤ F ∈ C ∞(G) and 0 ≤ η ∈ L1 that loc(G) be such ηF p−1 ≤ −Lp,ρF, a.e. in G. Then we have kη 1 p f kp Lp(G) + Cp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)ρ 1 p F ∇H p Lp(G) ≤ kρ f F(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 p ∇Hf kp Lp(G), (5.9) (5.10) HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 17 for all real-valued functions f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G). Here Cp is a positive constant. Proof of Theorem 5.4. For all x, y ∈ Rn there exists a positive number Cp such that (5.11) xp + Cpyp + pxp−2x · y ≤ x + yp, 2 ≤ p < ∞. Thus, gp∇HF p + CpF p∇Hgp + F ∇HF p−2∇HF · ∇Hgp ≤ g∇HF + F ∇Hgp = ∇Hf p, (5.12) where g = f F . It follows that ρ(x)∇H F (x)pg(x)pdx ρ(x)∇Hg(x)pF (x)pdx Using (5.9) this implies that ZG ρ(x)∇Hf (x)pdx ≥ZG + CpZG −ZG ≥ CpZG +ZG η(x)g(x)pF (x)pdx + CpZG Lp(G) + Cp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)ρ F(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) F we arrive at (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)ρ 2 F ∇H p f kp L2(G) kη f 2 1 1 ZG Since g = f proving (5.10). divH (ρ(x)F (x)∇HF (x)p−2∇HF (x))g(x)pdx ρ(x)∇H g(x)pF (x)pdx −divH(ρ(x)∇H F (x)p−2∇H F (x))F (x)g(x)pdx. ρ(x)∇Hg(x)pF (x)pdx ≤ZG ρ(x)∇Hf (x)pdx. 1 p F ∇H p Lp(G) ≤ kρ f F(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 p ∇Hf kp Lp(G), (5.13) (5.14) (cid:3) Remark 5.5. For p = 2 there is equality in (5.11) with C2 = 1, that is, the above proof gives the following remainder formula = kρ 1 2 ∇Hf k2 L2(G) − kη 1 2 f k2 L2(G). (5.15) Remark 5.6. For 1 < p < 2 the inequality (5.11) can be stated as for all x, y ∈ Rn there exists a positive number Cp (see e.g. [37, Lemma 4.2]) such that xp + Cp yp (x + y)2−p + pxp−2x · y ≤ x + yp, 1 < p < 2. (5.16) In turn, from the proof it follows that kη 1 p f kp Lp(G) + Cp(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ρ f F 1 2(cid:18)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∇HF(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) + F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)∇H 2 f F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:19) p−2 F ∇H ≤ kρ 2 L2(G) f F(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 p ∇Hf kp Lp(G) (5.17) 18 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN for all real-valued f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G). Proposition 5.7. For f ∈ C ∞ 0 (G) we have ≤ p θ − p − 2 k∇H f kLp , 1 < p < θ − 2, θ ≤ 2 + N, θ ∈ R. (5.18) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) f x′(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp , 2p p−2∇Hx′ n + ǫ)2(cid:1)− θ−p−2 p (cid:17) − θ + 2 + N(cid:19) x′ (−θ + 2 + N)! x′ ǫ− θ−p−2 p−2 ǫ− (θ−p−2)(p−1) p −p ǫ− (θ−p−2)(p−1) p −p. Proof of Proposition 5.7. In Theorem 5.4 taking ρ = 1 and for a given ǫ > 0, using the identity (2.4) we get 1 + ǫ)2 + . . . + (x′ p p p p p = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) θ − p − 2 θ − p − 2 θ − p − 2 Fǫ = x′ ǫ− θ−p−2 ǫ− θ−p−2 p =(cid:0)(x′ − Lp,1Fǫ = −divH(cid:0)∇HFǫp−2∇H Fǫ(cid:1) = −divH(cid:16)∇Hx′ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p−2(cid:18) θ − p − 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) − Lp,1Fǫ ≥(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) η(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) θ − p − 2 θ − p − 2 + p p p p p (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) If 1 < p < θ − 2 and θ ≤ 2 + N, then (5.19) gives p It shows that (5.10) (and (5.17)) implies (5.18). θ − p − 2 1 x′ ǫp F p−1 ǫ , θ − p − 2 p 1 x′ ǫp . that is, according to the assumption in Theorem 5.4, we can put (5.19) (5.20) (cid:3) Note that in the case of the Heisenberg group (5.18) was proved by D'Ambrosio in [11]. Here it is worth to recall that on the Heisenberg group we have Q = 2 + N. References [1] Adimurthi and A. Sekar. Role of the fundamental solution in Hardy-Sobolev-type inequalities. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, 136(6):1111 -- 1130, 2006. [2] N. Badiale and G. Tarantello. A Sobolev-Hardy inequality with applications to a nonlinear elliptic equation arising in astrophysics. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 163:259 -- 293, 2002. [3] H. Brezis and E. Lieb. Inequalities with remainder terms. J. Funct. Anal., 62:73 -- 86, 1985. [4] H. Brezis and L. Nirenberg. Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 36:437 -- 477, 1983. [5] H. Brezis and M. Marcus. Hardy's inequalities revisited. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci., 25(4):217 -- 237, 1997. [6] L. Caffarelli, R. Kohn, and L. Nirenberg. First order interpolation inequalities with weights. Compositio Mathematica, 53:259 -- 275, 1984. [7] F. Catrina and Z. Q. Wang. On the Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequalities: sharp constants, existence (and non existence), and symmetry of extremals functions. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 54:229 -- 258, 2001. HORIZONTAL HARDY, RELLICH AND CAFFARELLI-KOHN-NIRENBERG INEQUALITIES 19 [8] J. Chern and C. Lin. Minimizers of Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequalities with the singularity on the boundary. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 197:401 -- 432, 2010. [9] P. Ciatti, M. G. Cowling, and F. Ricci. Hardy and uncertainty inequalities on stratified Lie groups. Adv. Math., 227:365 -- 387, 2015. [10] D. G. Costa. Some new and short proofs for a class of Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequal- ities. J. Math. Anal. Appl., 337:311 -- 317, 2008. [11] L. D'Ambrosio. Some Hardy inequalities on the Heisenberg group. Differential Equations, 40(4):552 -- 564, 2004. [12] L. D'Ambrosio. Hardy-type inequalities related to degenerate elliptic differential operators. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5), 4(3):451 -- 486, 2005. [13] L. D'Ambrosio and S. Dipierro. Hardy inequalities on Riemannian manifolds and applications. Ann. Inst. H. Poincar´e Anal. Non Lin´eaire, 31(3):449 -- 475, 2014. [14] D. Danielli, N. Garofalo, and N. C. Phuc. Hardy-Sobolev type inequalities with sharp constants in Carnot-Carath´eodory spaces. Potential Anal., 34(3):223 -- 242, 2011. [15] E. B. Davies. One-parameter semigroups, volume 15 of London Mathematical Society Mono- graphs. Academic Press, Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], London-New York, 1980. [16] E. B. Davies. A review of Hardy inequalities. In The Maz'ya anniversary collection, Vol. 2 (Rostock, 1998), volume 110 of Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., pages 55 -- 67. Birkhauser, Basel, 1999. [17] E. B. Davies and A. M. Hinz. Explicit constants for Rellich inequalities in Lp(Ω). Math. Z., 227(3):511 -- 523, 1998. [18] Y. Di, L. Jiang, S.Shen, and Y. Jin. A note on a class of Hardy-Rellich type inequalities. J. Inequal. Appl., 84:1 -- 6, 2013. [19] D. E. Edmunds and H. Triebel. Sharp Sobolev embeddings and related Hardy inequalities: the critical case. Math. Nachr., 207:79 -- 92, 1999. [20] T. Ekholm, H. Kovar´ık, and A. Laptev. Hardy inequalities for p-Laplacians with Robin bound- ary conditions. Nonlinear Anal., 128:365 -- 379, 2015. [21] V. Fischer and M. Ruzhansky. Quantization on nilpotent Lie groups, volume 314 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkhauser, 2016. [22] G. B. Folland. Subelliptic estimates and function spaces on nilpotent Lie groups. Ark. Mat., 13(2):161 -- 207, 1975. [23] G. B. Folland and E. M. Stein. Hardy spaces on homogeneous groups, volume 28 of Mathematical Notes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.; University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo, 1982. [24] R. Frank and R. Seiringer. Non-linear ground state representations and sharp Hardy inequali- ties. J. Funct. Anal., 225(12):3407 -- 3430, 2008. [25] N. Garofalo and E. Lanconelli. Frequency functions on the Heisenberg group, the uncertainty principle and unique continuation. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 40(2):313 -- 356, 1990. [26] J. A. Goldstein and I. Kombe. The Hardy inequality and nonlinear parabolic equations on Carnot groups. Nonlinear Anal., 69(12):4643 -- 4653, 2008. [27] G. Grillo. Hardy and Rellich-type inequalities for metrics defined by vector fields. Potential Anal., 18(3):187 -- 217, 2003. [28] G. H. Hardy. Notes on some points in the integral calculus. Messenger Math., 48:107 -- 112, 1919. [29] G. H. Hardy. Note on a theorem of Hilbert. Math. Z., 6(3-4):314 -- 317, 1920. [30] M. Hoffmann-Ostenhof, T. Hoffmann-Ostenhof, A. Laptev, and J. Tidblom. Many-particle Hardy inequalities. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2), 77(1):99 -- 114, 2008. [31] T. Hoffmann-Ostenhof and A. Laptev. Hardy inequalities with homogeneous weights. J. Funct. Anal., 268(11):3278 -- 3289, 2015. [32] N. Ioku, M. Ishiwata, and T. Ozawa. Sharp remainder of a critical Hardy inequality. Arch. Math. (Basel), 106(1):65 -- 71, 2016. [33] Y. Jin and S. Shen. Weighted Hardy and Rellich inequality on Carnot groups. Arch. Math. (Basel), 96(3):263 -- 271, 2011. [34] A. E. Kogoj and S. Sonner. Hardy type inequalities for ∆λ-Laplacians. Complex Var. Elliptic Equ., 61(3):422 -- 442, 2016. 20 MICHAEL RUZHANSKY AND DURVUDKHAN SURAGAN [35] I. Kombe and M. Ozaydin. Hardy-Poincar´e, Rellich and uncertainty principle inequalities on Riemannian manifolds. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 365(10):5035 -- 5050, 2013. [36] B. Lian. Some sharp Rellich type inequalities on nilpotent groups and application. Acta Math. Sci. Ser. B Engl. Ed., 33(1):59 -- 74, 2013. [37] P. Lindqvist. On the equation div(∇up−2∇u)+λup−2u = 0, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 109:157 -- 164, 1990. [38] P. Niu, H. Zhang, and Y. Wang. Hardy type and Rellich type inequalities on the Heisenberg group. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 129(12):3623 -- 3630, 2001. [39] T. Ozawa, M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Lp-Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on homogeneous groups. arXiv:1605.02520, 2016. [40] M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Layer potentials, Kac's problem, and refined Hardy inequality on homogeneous Carnot groups. arXiv:1512.02547, 2015. [41] M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Critical Hardy inequality on homogeneous groups. arXiv: 1602.04809, 2016. [42] M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Local Hardy and Rellich inequalities for sums of squares of vector fields. arXiv: 1601.06157, 2016. [43] M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Hardy and Rellich inequalities, identities, and sharp remainders on homogeneous groups. arXiv:1603.06239, 2016. [44] M. Ruzhansky and D. Suragan. Uncertainty relations on nilpotent Lie groups. arXiv:1604.06702, 2016. [45] S. Secchi, D. Smets and M. Willen. Remarks on a Hardy-Sobolev inequality. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. I, 336:811 -- 815, 2003. [46] F. Takahashi. A simple proof of Hardy's inequality in a limiting case. Arch. Math. (Basel), 104:77 -- 82, 2015. [47] A. Yener. Weighted Hardy type inequalities on the Heisenberg group Hn. Math. Ineq. Appl., 19(2):671 -- 683, 2016. Michael Ruzhansky: Department of Mathematics Imperial College London 180 Queen's Gate, London SW7 2AZ United Kingdom E-mail address [email protected] Durvudkhan Suragan: Institute of Mathematics and Mathematical Modelling 125 Pushkin str. 050010 Almaty Kazakhstan and Department of Mathematics Imperial College London 180 Queen's Gate, London SW7 2AZ United Kingdom E-mail address [email protected]
1608.06720	2	1608	2016-10-13T07:10:46	Orthogonal projectors onto spaces of periodic splines	[ "math.FA" ]	The main result of this paper is a proof that for any integrable function $f$ on the torus, any sequence of its orthogonal projections $(\widetilde{P}_n f)$ onto periodic spline spaces with arbitrary knots $\widetilde{\Delta}_n$ and arbitrary polynomial degree converges to $f$ almost everywhere with respect to the Lebesgue measure, provided the mesh diameter $\|\widetilde{\Delta}_n\|$ tends to zero. We also give a proof of the fact that the operators $\widetilde{P}_n$ are bounded on $L^\infty$ independently of the knots $\widetilde{\Delta}_n$.	math.FA	math	ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES MARKUS PASSENBRUNNER Abstract. The main result of this paper is a proof that for any integrable gree converges to f almost everywhere with respect to the Lebesgue measure, function f on the torus, any sequence of its orthogonal projections (ePnf ) onto periodic spline spaces with arbitrary knots e∆n and arbitrary polynomial de- provided the mesh diameter e∆n tends to zero. We also give a proof of the fact that the operators ePn are bounded on L∞ independently of the knots e∆n. 1. Introduction 1.1. Splines on an interval. In this article we prove some results about the periodic spline orthoprojector. In order to achieve this, we rely on existing results for the non-periodic spline orthoprojector on a compact interval, so we first de- scribe some of those results for the latter operator. Let k ∈ N and ∆ = (ti)r+k i=ℓ a knot sequence satisfying ti < ti+k, ti ≤ ti+1, tℓ = · · · = tℓ+k−1, tr+1 = · · · = tr+k. Associated to this knot sequence, we define (Ni)r normalized B-spline functions of order k on ∆ that have the properties i=ℓ as the sequence of L∞- supp Ni = [ti, ti+k], Ni ≥ 0, Ni ≡ 1. rXi=ℓ We write ∆ = maxℓ≤j≤r(tj+1−tj) for the maximal mesh width of the partition ∆. Then, define the space Sk(∆) as the set of polynomial splines of order k (or at most degree k−1) with knots ∆, which is the linear span of the B-spline functions (Ni)r i=ℓ. Moreover, let P∆ be the orthogonal projection operator onto the space f (x)g(x) dx, Sk(∆) with respect to the ordinary (real) inner product hf, gi =R tr+1 i.e., tℓ The operator P∆ is also given by the formula hP∆f, si = hf, si for all s ∈ Sk(∆). (1.1) P∆f = rXi=ℓ hf, NiiN ∗ i , Date: May 11, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 40A05, 41A15, 46E30. Key words and phrases. Periodic splines, Almost everywhere convergence. The author is supported by the FWF, project number P27723. 1 2 M. PASSENBRUNNER i )r i=ℓ denotes the dual basis to (Ni) defined by the relations hN ∗ where (N ∗ i , Nji = 0 when j 6= i and hN ∗ i , Nii = 1 for all i = ℓ, . . . , r. A famous theorem by A. Shadrin states that the L∞ norm of this projection operator is bounded independently of the knot sequence ∆: Theorem 1.1 ([8]). There exists a constant ck depending only on the spline order k such that for all knot sequences ∆ = (ti)r+k i=ℓ as above, kP∆ : L∞[tℓ, tr+1] → L∞[tℓ, tr+1]k ≤ ck. We are also interested in the following equivalent formulation of this theorem, which is proved in [1]: for a knot sequence ∆, let (aij) be the matrix (hN ∗ j i), which is the inverse of the banded matrix (hNi, Nji). Then, the assertion of The- orem 1.1 is equivalent to the existence of two constants K0 > 0 and γ0 ∈ (0, 1) only depending on the spline order k such that i , N ∗ (1.2) aij ≤ , ℓ ≤ i, j ≤ r, 0 K0γi−j max{κi, κj} where κi denotes the length of supp Ni. The proof of this equivalence uses Demko's theorem [4] on the geometric decay of inverses of band matrices and de Boor's stability (see [2] or [5, Chapter 5, Theorem 4.2]) which states that for 0 < p ≤ ∞, the Lp norm of a B-spline series is equivalent to a weighted ℓp norm of its coefficients, i.e. there exists a constant Dk only depending on the spline order k such that: Dkk−1/p(cid:16)Xj cjpκj(cid:17)1/p ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xj cjNj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp ≤(cid:16)Xj cjpκj(cid:17)1/p . In fact, for aij, we actually have the following improvement of (1.2) (see [6]): There exist two constants K > 0 and γ ∈ (0, 1) that depend only on the spline order k such that (1.3) aij ≤ Kγi−j hij , ℓ ≤ i, j ≤ r, where hij denotes the length of the convex hull of supp Ni∪supp Nj. This inequal- ity can be used to obtain almost everywhere convergence for spline projections of L1 functions: Theorem 1.2 ([6]). For all f ∈ L1[tℓ, tr+1] there exists a subset A ⊂ [tℓ, tr+1] of full Lebesgue measure such that for all sequences (∆n) of partitions of [tℓ, tr+1] such that ∆n → 0, we have lim n→∞ P∆nf (x) = f (x), x ∈ A. Our aim in this article is to prove an analogue of Theorem 1.2 for orthopro- jectors on periodic spline spaces. In this case, we do not have a periodic version of (1.3) at our disposal, since the proof of this inequality does not carry over to the periodic setting. However, by comparing orthogonal projections onto periodic spline spaces to suitable non-periodic projections, we are able to obtain a periodic version of Theorem 1.2. In the course of the proof of the periodic version of Theorem 1.2, we also need a periodic version of Theorem 1.1, which can be proved by first establishing the ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES 3 same assertion for infinite point sequences and then by viewing periodic functions as defined on the whole real line [A. Shadrin, private communication]. The proof of Theorem 1.1 for infinite point sequences is announced in [8] and carried out [3]. In this article we give a different proof of the periodic version of Shadrin's theorem by employing a similar comparison of periodic and non-periodic projection operators as in the proof of the periodic version of Theorem 1.2. This proof directly passes from the interval case to the periodic result without recourse to infinite point sequences. 1.2. Periodic splines. Let n ≥ k be a natural number and e∆ = (sj)n−1 j=0 be a sequence of distinct points on the torus T = R/Z identified canonically with [0, 1), such that for all j we have and we extend (sj)n−1 sj ≤ sj+1, j=0 periodically by sj < sj+k, srn+j = r + sj for r ∈ Z \ {0} and 0 ≤ j ≤ n − 1. Now, the main result of this article reads as follows: 0, we have lim n→∞ePnf (x) = f (x), x ∈ eA, In order to prove this result, we also need a periodic version of Theorem 1.1: Theorem 1.3. For all functions f ∈ L1(T) there exists a set eA of full Lebesgue measure such that for all sequences of partitions (e∆n) on T as above with e∆n → where ePn denotes the orthogonal projection operator onto the periodic spline space of order k with knots e∆n. k such that for all knot sequences e∆ = (sj)n−1 projection operator eP satisfies the inequality between the periodic projection operator eP and the non-periodic projection op- erator P for certain non-periodic point sequences associated to e∆ = (si)n−1 Theorem 1.4. There exists a constant ck depending only on the spline order j=0 on T, the associated orthogonal The article is organized as follows. In Section 2, we prove a simple lemma on the growth behaviour of linear combinations of non-periodic B-spline functions which is frequently needed later in the proofs of both Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 1.4. Section 3 is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.4, which is needed for the proof of Theorem 1.3 in Section 4. Finally, in Section 5, we also apply our method of proof to recover Shadrin's theorem for infinite point sequences (see [3, 8]). keP : L∞(T) → L∞(T)k ≤ ck. The idea of the proofs of Theorems 1.3 and 1.4 is to estimate the difference i=0 . 4 M. PASSENBRUNNER 2. A simple upper estimate for B-spline sums Let A be a subset of [tℓ, tr+1]. Then, define the set of indices i(A) whose B- spline supports intersect with A as i(A) := {i : A ∩ supp Ni 6= ∅}. We also write i(x) for i({x}). If we have two subsets U, V of indices, we write d(U, V ) for the distance between U and V induced by the metric d(i, j) = i− j. We will use the notation A(t) . B(t) to indicate the existence of a constant C that depends only on the spline order k such that for all t we have A(t) ≤ CB(t), where t denotes all explicit or implicit dependencies that the expressions A and B might have. The fact that B-spline functions are localized, so a fortiori the set i(x) is localized for any x ∈ [tℓ, tr+1], can be used to derive the following lemma: Lemma 2.1. Let J be a subset of the index set {ℓ, ℓ + 1, . . . , r − 1, r}, f = j and p ∈ [1,∞]. Then, for all x ∈ [tℓ, tr+1], we have the estimate Pj∈Jhh, NjiN ∗ κ1/p′ j hjm m∈i(x),j∈J f (x) . γd(i(x),J)khkp max ≤ γd(i(x),J)khkp max ≤ γd(i(x),J)khkp · I(x)−1/p, m∈i(x),j∈J(cid:0) max{κm, κj}(cid:1)−1/p 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, where γ ∈ (0, 1) is the constant appearing in (1.3), I(x) is the interval I = [ti, ti+1) containing the point x and the exponent p′ is such that 1/p + 1/p′ = 1. Proof. Since N ∗ j =Pm ajmNm, This implies f (x) =Xj∈J Xm∈i(x) m∈i(x)(cid:16)Xj∈J f (x) . max ajmhh, NjiNm(x). γj−m hjm khkpkNjkp′(cid:17), where we used inequality (1.3) for ajm, Holder's inequality with the conjugate exponent p′ = p/(p − 1) to p and the fact that the B-spline functions Nm form a partition of unity. Using again the uniform boundedness of Nj, we obtain f (x) . max m∈i(x)(cid:16)Xj∈J j (cid:17). γj−m hjm khkpκ1/p′ Summing the geometric series now yields the first estimate. The second and the third estimate are direct consequences of the first one. (cid:3) Remark 2.2. We note that we directly obtain the second estimate in the above lemma if we use the weaker inequality (1.2) instead of (1.3). ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES 5 3. The periodic spline orthoprojector is uniformly bounded on L∞ In this section, we give a direct proof of Theorem 1.4 on the boundedness of periodic spline projectors without recourse to infinite knot sequences. Here, we will only use the geometric decay of the matrix (ajm) defined above for splines on an interval. A vital tool in the proofs of both Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2 are B-spline functions. We will also make extensive use of them and introduce their periodic version, cf. [7]. Associated to the periodic point sequence (sj)n−1 j=0 and its periodic extension as in Section 1.2 we define the non-periodic point sequence tj = sj, for j = −k + 1, . . . , n + k − 1 and denote the corresponding non-periodic B-spline functions by (Nj)n−1 supp Nj = [tj, tj+k]. Then we define for x ∈ [0, 1) j=−k+1 with if we canonically identify T with [0, 1). Moreover, for j = n − k + 1, . . . , n − 1, eNj(x) = Nj(x), eNj(x) =(Nj−n(x), Nj(x), j = 0, . . . , n − k, if x ∈ [0, sj], if x ∈ (sj, 1). splines of order k with knots (sj)n−1 We denote by eP the orthogonal projection operator onto the space of periodic functions (eNj)n−1 j=0 and similarly to the non-periodic case we define j=0 , which is the linear span of the B-spline A ⊂ T. Lemma 3.1. Let fi be a function on T with supp fi ⊂ [si, si+1] for some index i in the range 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. Then, for any x ∈ T, i(A) = {0 ≤ j ≤ n − 1 : A ∩ supp eNj 6= ∅}, ed(i(x),i(supp fi))kfik∞, eP fi(x) . γ where ed is the distance function induced by the canonical metric in Z/nZ and γ ∈ (0, 1) is the constant appearing in inequality (1.3). Proof. We assume that the index i is chosen such that si < si+1, since if si = si+1, the function fi is identically zero in L∞. Given a function f on T, we associate a non-periodic function T f defined on [si, si+n+1] given by T f (t) = f (π(t)), t ∈ [si, si+n+1], where π(t) is the quotient mapping from R to T. We observe that T is a linear oper- ator, kT : L2(T) → L2([si, si+n+1])k = √2 and kT : L∞(T) → L∞([si, si+n+1])k = 1. Moreover, for x ∈ T, let r(x) be the representative of x in the interval [si, si+n). We want to estimate eP fi(x). In order to do this, we first decompose eP fi(x) = TeP fi(r(x)) = P T fi(r(x)) + (TeP fi − P T fi)(r(x)), (3.1) 6 M. PASSENBRUNNER where P is the orthogonal projection operator onto the space of splines of order k corresponding to the point sequence ∆ = (tj)n+k j=−k+1 associated to the non- periodic grid points in the interval [si, si+n+1], i.e., tj = si+j, j = 0, . . . , n + 1, t−k+1 = · · · = t−1 = si, i=−k+1 be the L∞-normalized B-spline basis corresponding to this tn+2 = · · · = tn+k = si+n+1. Also, let (Nj)n point sequence. We estimate the first term P T fi(r(x)) from the decomposition in (3.1) of eP fi(x). Since P is a projection operator onto splines on an interval, we use rep- resentation (1.1) to get P T fi(r(x)) = hT fi, NjiN ∗ j (r(x)), nXj=−k+1 and, since supp T fi ⊂ [si, si+1]∪ [si+n, si+n+1] = [t0, t1]∪ [tn, tn+1] by definition of fi and T and supp Nj ⊂ [tj, tj+k] for all j = −k + 1, . . . , n, j (r(x)), P T fi(r(x)) =Xj∈J1 hT fi, NjiN ∗ with J1 = {−k + 1, . . . , 0} ∪ {n − k + 1, . . . , n}. Employing now Lemma 2.1 with p = ∞ to this sum, we obtain (3.2) P T fi(r(x)) . γd(i(r(x)),J1)kT fik∞ . γ ed(i(x),i(supp fi))kfik∞. Now we turn to the second term on the right hand side of (3.1). Let g := (TeP − P T )fi. Observe that g ∈ Sk(∆) since the range of both TeP and P is contained in Sk(∆). Moreover, h(TeP − T )fi, Nji = heP fi − fi, eNj+ii, where we take the latter subindex j + i to be modulo n. This equation is true in the given range of the parameter j, since in this case, the functions Nj and eNj+i coincide on their supports. The fact that eP is an orthogonal projection onto the span of the functions (eNj)n−1 j=0 then implies j = 0, . . . , n − k + 1. hTeP fi − T fi, Nji = heP fi − fi, eNj+ii = 0, Combining this with the fact j = 0, . . . , n − k + 1, hP T fi − T fi, Nji = 0, j = −k + 1, . . . , n, since P is an orthogonal projection onto a spline space as well, we obtain that Therefore, we can expand g as a B-spline sum hg, Nji = 0, j = 0, . . . n − k + 1. g =Xj∈J2 hg, NjiN ∗ j , ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES 7 with J2 = {−k + 1, . . . ,−1}∪ {n− k + 2, . . . , n}. Now, we employ Lemma 2.1 on the function g with the parameter p = 2 to get for the point y = r(x) g(y) . γd(i(y),J2)kgk2 max j∈J2 supp Nj−1/2. get Since g = (TeP − P T )fi and the operator TeP − P T has norm ≤ 2√2 on L2, we [si+n, si+n+1] = [tn, tn+1] for j ∈ J2. Since d(i(y), J2) ≥ ed(i(x), i(supp fi)) and where we also used the fact that supp Nj ⊃ [si, si+1] = [t0, t1] or supp Nj ⊃ kfik2 ≤ kfik∞ supp fi1/2, we finally get g(y) . γd(i(y),J2)kfik2 supp fi−1/2, g(y) . γ ed(i(x),i(supp fi))kfik∞. Looking at (3.1) and combining the latter estimate with (3.2), the proof is com- pleted. (cid:3) This lemma can be used directly to prove Theorem 1.4 on the uniform bound- edness of periodic orthogonal spline projection operators on L∞: after summation of a geometric series. i=0 f · 1[si,si+1) (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 1.4. We just decompose the function f as f =Pn−1 and apply Lemma 3.1 to each summand and the assertion keP fk∞ . kfk∞ follows Remark 3.2. (i) Since eP is a selfadjoint operator, Theorem 1.4 also implies that eP is bounded as an operator from L1(T) to L1(T) by the same constant ck as in the above theorem. Moreover, by interpolation, eP is also bounded by ck as an operator from Lp(T) to Lp(T) for any p ∈ [1,∞]. (ii) In the proof of Lemma 3.1, we only use the second inequality of Lemma 2.1 which follows from inequality (1.2) on the inverse of the B-spline Gram matrix and does not need its stronger form (1.3). Similarly to the equivalence of Shadrin's theorem and (1.2) in the non-periodic case, we can derive the equivalence of Theorem 1.4 and the estimate eaij ≤ , 0 ≤ i, j ≤ n − 1, ed(i,j) Kγ max(eκi,eκj) where (eaij) denotes the inverse of the Gram matrix (heNi, eNji), K > 0 and γ ∈ (0, 1) are constants only depending on the spline order k, eκi denotes the length of the support of eNi and ed is the canonical distance in Z/nZ. The proof of this equivalence uses the same tools as the proof in the non-periodic case: a periodic version of both Demko's theorem and de Boor's stability. 4. Almost everywhere convergence In this section we prove Theorem 1.3 on the a.e. convergence of periodic spline projections. 8 M. PASSENBRUNNER Proof of Theorem 1.3. Without loss of generality, we assume thate∆n has n points. Let e∆n = (s(n) tions. Associated to it, define the non-periodic point sequence ∆n = (t(n) with the boundary points 0 and 1 as )n−1 j=0 be the corresponding periodic B-spline func- j )n+k−1 j=0 and (eN (n) j )n−1 j=−m j j , t(n) j = s(n) t(n) −m = · · · = t(n) −1 = 0, j = 0, . . . , n − 1, n = · · · = t(n) t(n) n+k−1 = 1. We choose the integer m such that the multiplicity of the point 0 in ∆n is k and denote by (N (n) )n−1 j=−m the non-periodic B-spline functions corresponding to this point sequence and by Pn the orthogonal projection operator onto the span of (N (n) j )n−1 j=−m. j We will show that ePnf (x) → f (x) for all x in the set A from Theorem 1.2 of full Lebesgue measure such that lim PnT f (x) = T f (x) for all x ∈ A, where T is just the operator that canonically identifies a function defined on T with the corresponding function defined on [0, 1) and we write x for a point in T as well as for its representative in the interval [0, 1). (4.1) So, choose an arbitrary (non-zero) point x ∈ A and decompose ePnf (x): ePnf (x) = TePnf (x) = PnT f (x) +(cid:0)TePnf (x) − PnT f (x)(cid:1). For the first term of (4.1), PnT f (x), we have that limn→∞ PnT f (x) = T f (x) = Moreover, It remains to estimate the second term gn(x) = TePnf (x) − PnT f (x) = TePnf (x) − T f (x) + T f (x) − PnT f (x) of (4.1). First, note that gn ∈ Sk(∆n). hTePnf − T f, N (n) since ePn is the projection operator onto the span of the B-spline functions (eN (n) i = hePnf − f, eN (n) j = 0, . . . , n − k − 1, i = 0, and ), j j j hT f − PnT f, N (n) j i = 0, j = −m, . . . , n − 1, since Pn is the projection operator onto the span of the functions (N (n) fore, gn ∈ Sk(∆n) can be written as j ). There- f (x) since x ∈ A. gn =Xj∈Jn hgn, N (n) j iN (n)∗ j , with Jn = {−m, . . . ,−1}∪{n− k, . . . , n− 1} and (N (n)∗ (N (n) ). We now apply Lemma 2.1 with p = 1 to gn and get j j ) being the dual basis to gn(x) . γd(in(x),Jn)kgnk1 max ℓ∈in(x),j∈Jn ℓj denotes the length of the convex hull of supp N (n) where h(n) is the set of indices i such that x is in the support of N (n) i , 1 h(n) ℓj ℓ ∪supp N (n) and in(x) . Since for ℓ ∈ in(x), the j ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES 9 point x is contained in supp N (n) is contained in supp N (n) ℓ j , we can further estimate and for j ∈ Jn either the point 0 or the point 1 gn(x) . γd(in(x),Jn)kgnk1 1 . min(x, 1 − x) Now, kgnk1 = k(TePn − PnT )fk1 . kfk1, since the operator T has norm one on L1 and ePn and Pn are both bounded on L1 uniformly in n by Theorem 1.4 (cf. Remark 3.2) and Theorem 1.1, respectively. Since e∆n tends to zero, and point x and decomposition (4.1), limePnf (x) = f (x). Since x ∈ A was arbitrary a fortiori the same is true for ∆n, we have that d(in(x), Jn) tends to infinity as n → ∞. This implies limn→∞ gn(x) = 0, and therefore, by the choice of the and A is a set of full Lebesgue measure, we obtain lim n→∞ePnf (y) = 0, for a.e. y ∈ T, and the proof is completed. (cid:3) 5. The case of infinite point sequences In this last section, we use the methods introduced in the previous sections to recover Shadrin's theorem for infinite point sequences (see [8, 3]). Let (si)i∈Z be a biinfinite point sequence in R satisfying si ≤ si+1, si < si+k, with the corresponding B-spline functions (eNi)i∈Z satisfying supp eNi = [si, si+k]. Furthermore, we denote by eP the orthogonal projection operator onto the closed linear span of the functions (eNi)i∈Z . Lemma 5.1. Let f be a function on (inf si, sup si) with compact support. Then, for any x ∈ (inf si, sup si), eP f (x) . γd(i(x),i(supp f ))kfk∞, where γ ∈ (0, 1) is the constant appearing in inequality (1.3). Proof. For notational simplicity, we assume in this proof that the sequence (si) is strictly increasing. Let x ∈ (inf si, sup si) and let I(x) be the interval I = [si, si+1) containing x. Since f has compact support and the sequence (si) is biinfinite, we can choose the indices ℓ and r such that {x} ∪ supp f ⊂ [sℓ, sr+1) and with J = {ℓ − k + 1, . . . , ℓ − 1} ∪ {r − k + 2, . . . , r}, the inequality γd(i(x),J) supp f1/2I(x)−1/2 ≤ γd(i(x),i(supp f )) is true. Next, define the point sequence ∆ = (ti)r+k i = ℓ, . . . , r + 1, ti = si, i=ℓ−k+1 by a = tℓ−k+1 = · · · = tℓ = sℓ, b = tr+k = · · · = tr+1 = sr+1, and let the collection (Ni)r i=ℓ−k+1 be the corresponding B-spline functions and P the associated orthogonal projector. Let T be the operator that restricts a 10 M. PASSENBRUNNER (5.1) we decompose function defined on (inf si, sup si) to the interval [a, b]. In order to estimate eP f (x), Observe that P T f = Pn∈Fhf, NniN ∗ eP f (x) = TeP f (x) = P T f (x) +(cid:0)TeP f (x) − P T f (x)(cid:1). supp Ni 6= ∅}. Applying Lemma 2.1 with the exponent p = ∞, we obtain n, where F = i(supp f ) = {i : supp f ∩ P T f (x) . γd(i(x),F )kfk∞. We now consider the second part of the decomposition (5.1), the function moreover, g = (TeP − P T )f = (TeP − T + T − P T )f . We observe that g ∈ Sk(∆) and, hTeP f − T f, Nji = heP f − f, eNji = 0, by definition of the projection operator eP , and, hT f − P T f, Nji = 0, j = ℓ, . . . , r − k + 1, j = ℓ − k + 1, . . . , r, by definition of the projection operator P . Therefore, we can write the function g as g =Xj∈J hg, NjiN ∗ j with J = {ℓ − k + 1, . . . , ℓ − 1} ∪ {r − k + 2, . . . , r} as defined above. Now, by Lemma 2.1 with the exponent p = 2, we get g(x) . γd(i(x),J)kgk2 · I(x)−1/2 . γd(i(x),J)kfk2 · I(x)−1/2 ≤ γd(i(x),J) supp f1/2I(x)−1/2kfk∞. Finally, due to the choice of ℓ and r, γd(i(x),J) supp f1/2I(x)−1/2 ≤ γd(i(x),i(supp f )), which proves the lemma. (cid:3) We can now use this lemma to define eP f for functions f ∈ L∞(inf si, sup si) that are not necessarily in L2(inf si, sup si) if inf si = −∞ or sup si = +∞. If we let fi := f 1[si,si+1), then fi has compact support and the above lemma implies that the series eP f (x) :=Xi∈Z eP fi(x), x ∈ (inf si, sup si), is absolutely convergent and, moreover, there exists a constant C only depending on the spline order k such that This operator enjoys the characteristic property of an orthogonal projection: Remark 5.2. One can combine the proofs of Lemma 5.1 and Lemma 3.1 to also obtain the uniform boundedness of the spline orthoprojector on L∞ for one-sided infinite point sequences. keP fk∞ ≤ Ckfk∞. heP f − f, eNii = 0, i ∈ Z. ORTHOGONAL PROJECTORS ONTO SPACES OF PERIODIC SPLINES 11 References [1] Z. Ciesielski. Orthogonal projections onto spline spaces with arbitrary knots. In Function spaces (Pozna´n, 1998), volume 213 of Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., pages 133 -- 140. Dekker, New York, 2000. [2] C. de Boor. The quasi-interpolant as a tool in elementary polynomial spline theory. In Approximation theory (Proc. Internat. Sympos., Univ. Texas, Austin, Tex., 1973), pages 269 -- 276. Academic Press, New York, 1973. [3] C. de Boor. On the (bi)infinite case of Shadrin's theorem concerning the L∞-boundedness of the L2-spline projector. Proc. Steklov Inst. Math., 277:s73 -- s78, 2012. [4] S. Demko. Inverses of band matrices and local convergence of spline projections. SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 14(4):616 -- 619, 1977. [5] R. A. DeVore and G. G. Lorentz. Constructive approximation, volume 303 of Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993. [6] M. Passenbrunner and A. Shadrin. On almost everywhere convergence of orthogonal spline projections with arbitrary knots. J. Approx. Theory, 180:77 -- 89, 2014. [7] L. L. Schumaker. Spline functions: basic theory. Cambridge Mathematical Library. Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, third edition, 2007. [8] A. Shadrin. The L∞-norm of the L2-spline projector is bounded independently of the knot sequence: a proof of de Boor's conjecture. Acta Math., 187(1):59 -- 137, 2001. Institute of Analysis, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria, 4040 Linz, Altenberger Strasse 69 E-mail address: [email protected]
1010.0461	3	1010	2011-07-31T14:14:42	New upper bounds for the constants in the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality	[ "math.FA" ]	A classical inequality due to Bohnenblust and Hille states that for every positive integer $m$ there is a constant $C_{m}>0$ so that $$(\sum\limits_{i_{1},...,i_{m}=1}^{N}\|U(e_{i_{^{1}}},...,e_{i_{m}})\| ^{\frac{2m}{m+1}}) ^{\frac{m+1}{2m}}\leq C_{m}\| U\|$$ for every positive integer $N$ and every $m$-linear mapping $U:\ell_{\infty}^{N}\times...\times\ell_{\infty}^{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{C}$, where $C_{m}=m^{\frac{m+1}{2m}}2^{\frac{m-1}{2}}.$ The value of $C_{m}$ was improved to $C_{m}=2^{\frac{m-1}{2}}$ by S. Kaijser and more recently H. Qu\'{e}ffelec and A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris remarked that $C_{m}=(\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}})^{m-1}$ also works. The Bohnenblust--Hille inequality also holds for real Banach spaces with the constants $C_{m}=2^{\frac{m-1}{2}}$. In this note we show that a recent new proof of the Bohnenblust--Hille inequality (due to Defant, Popa and Schwarting) provides, in fact, quite better estimates for $C_{m}$ for all values of $m \in \mathbb{N}$. In particular, we will also show that, for real scalars, if $m$ is even with $2\leq m\leq 24$, then $$C_{\mathbb{R},m}=2^{1/2}C_{\mathbb{R},m/2}.$$ We will mainly work on a paper by Defant, Popa and Schwarting, giving some remarks about their work and explaining how to, numerically, improve the previously mentioned constants.	math.FA	math	IMPROVING THE CONSTANTS FOR THE REAL AND COMPLEX BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY DANIEL PELLEGRINO AND JUAN B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA* Abstract. A classical inequality due to Bohnenblust and Hille states that for every N ∈ N and every m-linear mapping U : ℓN ∞ × · · · × ℓN ∞ → C we have   N X i1,...,im=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U (ei1 , ..., eim )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2m m+1   m+1 2m ≤ Cm kU k , m−1 2 m−1 (in fact a recent remark of A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris indicates that ). Bohnenblust-Hille inequality is also true for real Banach spaces with the where Cm = 2 √π(cid:17)m−1 Cm ≤ (cid:16) 2 . In this note we show that an adequate use of a recent new proof of constants Cm = 2 Bohnenblust-Hille inequality, due to Defant, Popa and Schwarting, combined with the optimal constants of Khinchine's inequality (due to Haagerup) provides quite better estimates for the constants involved in both real and complex Bohnenblust-Hille inequalities. For instance, in the real case, for 2 ≤ m ≤ 14, we show that the constants Cm = 2 can be replaced by m−1 2 2 m2+6m−8 m2+6m−7 8m 2 of Cm. In both complex and real cases, the new constants are asymptotically better. if m is odd, improving, in this way, the known values if m is even and by 2 8m In 1931, Bohnenblust and Hille ([2], or the more recent [8, 9]) asserted that for every positive 1. Preliminaries and background integer N and every m-linear mapping U : ℓN   N Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)U (ei1 , ..., eim)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∞ → C we have m+1 2m ≤ Cm kUk , ∞ × ··· × ℓN m+1  2m m−1 2 where Cm = 2 (actually this result also holds for real Banach spaces). The case m = 2 is a famous result known as Littlewood's 4/3-inequality. It seems that the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality was overlooked and was only re-discovered several decades later by Davie [6] and Kaijser [13]. While the exponent is not. Very recently, Defant and Sevilla-Peris [8, Section 4] indicated that by using Sawa's estimate for the constant of the complex 2m m+1 is optimal, the constant Cm = 2 m−1 2 Khinchine's inequality in Steinhaus variables (see [16]) it is possible to prove that Cm ≤(cid:16) 2 in the complex case (this is a strong improvement on the previous constants and it seems that these are the best known estimates for the complex case). √π(cid:17)m−1 The (complex and real) Bohnenblust-Hille inequality can be re-written in the context of multiple summing multilinear operators, as we will see next. Multiple summing multilinear mappings between Banach spaces is a recent, very important and useful nonlinear generalization of the concept of absolutely summing linear operators. This class was introduced, independently, by Matos [15] (under the terminology fully summing multilinear mappings) and Bombal, P´erez-Garc´ıa and Villanueva [3]. The interested reader can also refer to [5, 4] for other Bohnenblust-Hille type results. Throughout this paper X1, . . . , Xm and Y will stand for Banach spaces over K = R or C, and X′ stands for the dual of X. By L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) we denote the Banach space of all continuous Supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, grant MTM2009-07848. 1 2 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA m-linear mappings from X1 × ··· × Xm to Y with the usual sup norm. For x1, ..., xn in X, let k(xj )n j=1kw,1 := sup{k(ϕ(xj))n j=1k1 : ϕ ∈ X′,kϕk ≤ 1}. If 1 ≤ p < ∞, an m-linear mapping U ∈ L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) is multiple (p; 1)-summing (denoted Π(p;1)(X1, . . . , Xm; Y )) if there exists a constant Lm ≥ 0 such that (1.1) U (x(1) j1 , . . . , x(m)   N Xj1,...,jm=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 p ≤ Lm p  jm )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) m Yk=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (x(k) j )N j=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)w,1 for every N ∈ N and any x(k) jk ∈ Xk, jk = 1, . . . , N , k = 1, . . . , m. The infimum of the constants satisfying (1.1) is denoted by kUkπ(p;1). For m = 1 we have the classical concept of absolutely (p; 1)-summing operators (see, e.g. [7, 10]). A simple reformulation of Bohnenblust-Hille inequality asserts that every continuous m-linear (or Lm = m+1 ; 1)-summing with Lm = Cm = 2 m−1 2 form T : X1 × ··· × Xm → K is multiple ( 2m √π(cid:17)m−1 (cid:16) 2 the real case the best constants known seem to be Cm = 2 m−1 2 . for the complex case, using the estimates of Defant and Sevilla-Peris, [8]). However, in The main goal of this paper is to obtain better constants for the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality in the real and complex case. For this task we will use a recent proof of a general vector-valued version of Bohnenblust-Hille inequality ([9, Theorem 5.1]). The Bohnenblust-Hille inequality is stated in [9, Corollary 2] as a consequence of [9, Theorem 5.1]. The procedure of the proof of [9, Corollary 2] allows us to obtain much better values than Cm = 2 . However, in this note we explore the ideas of [9] in a different way, in order to obtain even better estimates for the constants that can be derived from [9, Corollary 2]. The constants we obtain here can be derived from [9, Theorem 5.1] via an adequate choice of variables. m−1 2 Let us recall some results that we will need in this note. The first result is a well-known inequality due to Khinchine (see [10]): Theorem 1.1 (Khinchine's inequality). For all 0 < p < ∞, there exist constants Ap and Bp such that (1.2) Ap N Xn=1 1 2 an2! N 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Z 1 Xn=1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p 1 p dt! ≤ Bp N Xn=1 1 2 an2! for every positive integer N and scalars a1, ..., an (here, rn denotes the n-Rademacher function). Above, it is clear that B2 = 1. From (1.2) it follows that (1.3) N 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Z 1 Xn=1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p 1 p dt! ≤ BpA−1 N Xn=1 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) r Z 1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) r 1 r dt! and the product of the constants BpA−1 r will appear later on in Theorem 1.3. The notation Ap and Bp will be kept along the paper. Next, let us recall a variation of an inequality due to Blei (see [9, Lemma 3.1]). Theorem 1.2 (Blei, Defant et al.). Let A and B be two finite non-void index sets, and (aij)(i,j)∈A×B a scalar matrix with positive entries, and denote its columns by αj = (aij )i∈A and its rows by βi = (aij )j∈B. Then, for q, s1, s2 ≥ 1 with q > max(s1, s2) we have s1  Xj∈B   X(i,j)∈A×B q  kαjks2  ≤ Xi∈A q ! kβiks1 aw(s1,s2) ij   w(s1 ,s2) f (s2 ,s1) f (s1 ,s2) s2 , 1 ON THE CONSTANTS FOR THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 3 with w : [1, q)2 → [0,∞), w(x, y) := f : [1, q)2 → [0,∞), f (x, y) := q2(x + y) − 2qxy q2 − xy q2x − qxy q2(x + y) − 2qxy , . The following theorem is a particular case of [9, Lemma 2.2] for Y = K using that the cotype 2 constant of K is 1, i.e., C2(K) = 1 (following the notation from [9]): Theorem 1.3 (Defant et al). Let 1 ≤ r ≤ 2, and let (yi1,...,im)N  Xi1,...,im=1  yi1...im2  ≤ (A2,r)m Xi1,...,im=1 1/2 N N where Z[0,1]m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ri1 (t1)...rim (tm)yi1...im(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) A2,r ≤ A−1 r B2 = A−1 r (since B2 = 1). 1/r , r dt1...dtm  i1,...,im=1 be a matrix in K. Then The meaning of A2,r, w and f from the above theorems will also be kept in the next section and KG will denote the complex Grothendieck constant. 2. Improved constants for the Bohnenblust-Hille theorem: The real case The main results from [9], Theorem 5.1 and Corollary 5.2, are very interesting vector-valued generalizations of the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. In this note we explore the proof of [9, Theorem 5.1] in such a way that the constants obtained are better than those that can be derived from [9, Corollary 5.2]. We will use here a modification of the proof of [9, Corollary 5.2] for the particular case of the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality applying some changes, partly inspired by [9, Theorem 5.1], improving the constants. By doing this, we will avoid some technicalities from the arguments from [9, Theorem 5.1] that are not needed here. As we said, following the proof of [9, Corollary 5.2] and using the optimal values for the constants of Khinchine's inequality (due to Haagerup), the following estimates can be calculated for Cm: (2.1) (2.2) CR,2 = √2, CR,m = 2 m−1 2m CR,m−1 A 2m−2 m !1− 1 m for m ≥ 3. In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 13, (2.3) CR,m ≤ 2 m2+m−2 4m . Remark 2.1. It is worth mentioning that the above constants are not explicitly calculated in [9]. Since our procedure below will provide better constants, we will not give much detail on the above estimates. A different approach on some of the ideas from [9] can give better estimates for the real case, as we see in the following result. Theorem 2.2. For every positive integer m and real Banach spaces X1, ..., Xm, Π( 2m m+1 ;1)(X1, ..., Xm; R) = L(X1, ..., Xm; R) and k.kπ( 2m m+1 ;1) ≤ CR,m k.k with (2.4) In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 14, (2.5) CR,2 = 2 1 2 and CR,3 = 2 5 6 , CR,m ≤ 2 m−2 m CR,m−2 A2 2m−4 m−1 1 2     for m > 3. CR,m ≤ 2 m2+6m−8 8m if m is even, and 4 (2.6) D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA CR,m ≤ 2 m2+6m−7 8m if m is odd. Proof. The case m = 2 is Littlewood's 4/3-inequality. For m = 3 we have CR,3 = 2 6 from (2.3). We proceed by induction, but the case m is obtained as a combination of the cases 2 with m − 2 instead of 1 and m − 1 as in [9, Corollary 5.2]. Suppose that the result is true for m−2 and let us prove for m. Let U ∈ L(X1, ..., Xm; R) and N be a positive integer. For each 1 ≤ k ≤ m consider x(k) 1 , ..., x(k) (x(k) )N j 5 N ∈ Xk so that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) j=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)w,1 ≤ 1, k = 1, .., m. Consider, in the notation of Theorem 1.2, q = 2, s1 = 4 3 , and s2 = 2(m − 2) (m − 2) + 1 = 2m − 4 m − 1 . Thus, and, from Theorem 1.2, we have w(s1, s2) = 2m m + 1 (m+1)/2m N N 2m ≤ U (x(1) i1 , ..., x(m)  Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  ≤ Xi1,...,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  ≤ Xim−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  m+1  im−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N i1 , ..., x(m) 2 i1....,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) )(cid:17)N  , ..., x(m) im i1 N 4 3 2   . f ( 4 3 ,s2) 2(m−2) (m−2)+1 f (s2, 4 3 )/ 2(m−2) (m−2)+1 Now we need to estimate the two factors above. We will write dt := dt1...dtm−2. For each im−1, im fixed, we have (from Theorem 1.3), ri1 (t1)...rim−2 (tm−2)U (x(1) i1 , ..., x(m) 4 3 dt im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N Xim−2=1 rim−2 (tm−2)x(m−2) im−2 , x(m−1) 4 3 dt. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) im  im−1 , x(m)  4 3 N N 2, 4 2, 4 2 ≤ i1 , ..., ri1 (t1)x(1) i1 , ..., x(m) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) 3 (cid:17)4/3 ≤(cid:16)Am−2 3 (cid:17)4/3 =(cid:16)Am−2 Summing over all im−1,im = 1, ..., N we obtain i1....,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N [0,1]m−2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xi1,...,im−2=1 R [0,1]m−2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U Xi1=1 R  i1....,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U Xi1=1 Xim−1,im=1  Xim−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) 3 (cid:17)4/3 (cid:16)Am−2 R i1 , ..., x(m) ri1 (t1)x(1) 2 ≤ [0,1]m−2 2, 4 N N N 4 3 i1 , ... N Xim−2=1 rim−2 (tm−2)x(m−2) im−1 , x(m−1) im dt. , x(m) im   4 3 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ON THE CONSTANTS FOR THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 5 Using the case m = 2 we thus have 4 3 2 ≤ i1 , ... N Xim−2=1 rim−1 (tm−2)x(m−2) 4 3 dt π( 4 3 ;1) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im−2 , ., .  Next we obtain the other estimate. For each i1, ..., im−2 fixed, and dt := dtm−1dtm, we have 3 4 ≤ Am−2 3 kUk 2, 4 √2. i1....,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) )(cid:17)N 4 3 2  N N N N i1 4 3 . 2, 4 2, 4 2, 4 4 3 4 3 4 Hence 4 3 dt ≤ A2 , ..., x(m) im ri1 (t1)x(1) i1 , ..., x(m) (from Theorem 1.3): Xim−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) i1....,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N [0,1]m−2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U 3 (cid:17) ≤(cid:16)Am−2 Xi1=1 R  √2(cid:17) ≤(cid:16)Am−2 3 (cid:17) [0,1]m−2(cid:16)kUk R √2(cid:17) 3 (cid:16)kUk =(cid:16)Am−2 3 (cid:17)  Xim−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) im−1,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ≤ im )(cid:17)N i1 , ..., x(m)  R[0,1]2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2,s2 Xim−1,im=1  R[0,1]2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2,s2 U x(1) Xi1,...,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) Xi1,...,im−2=1 2,s2 R[0,1]2 Xim−1=1 Summing over all i1, ...., im−2 = 1, ..., N we get: im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N i1 , ..., x(m) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U x(1) Xi1,...,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) 2,s2(cid:1)s2 ≤ R[0,1](cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤(cid:0)A2 2,s2(cid:1)s2 R[0,1] ≤(cid:0)A2 im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) )(cid:17)N U ., ..., Xim−1=1 R,m−2 kUks2 dt =(cid:0)A2 We thus have, by the induction step, i1 , ..., x(m−2) im−2 , i1 , ..., x(m−2) im−2 , ≤ A2s2 , ..., x(m) im 2 ≤ 2 ≤ = A2 Cs2 s2 s2 i1 N N N N N and so rim−1 (tm−1)rim (tm)U (x(1) i1 , ..., x(m) s2 1/s2 im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt  Xim=1 N rim−1 (tm−1)x(m−1) im−1 , rim (tm)x(m) 1/s2 . s2 dt  (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) im   N Xim−1=1 rim−1 (tm−1)x(m−1) im−1 , N Xim=1 rim (tm)x(m) im   s2 dt. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) , im−1 rim−1 (tm−1)x(m−1) 2,s2(cid:1)s2 Cs2 Xim=1 R,m−2 kUks2 N rim (tm)x(m) s2 im !(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) dt π(s2;1) N  Xi1,...,im−2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  i1 , ..., x(m) s2 2  im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N  1/s2 ≤(cid:0)A2 2,s2(cid:1) CR,m−2 kUk . Hence, combining both estimates, we obtain (m+1)/2m N  Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  Also, U (x(1) 3 ,s2) 2,s2(cid:1) CR,m−2 kUk(cid:3)f (s2, 4 (cid:2)(cid:0)A2 3 ) . 6 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA 2 m , = 1 − 2 m , = f ( 2, 4 3 4 3 4 3 ) = 2m m+1  f (s2, , s2) = i1 , ..., x(m) im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤hAm−2 4(cid:16) 4 4(cid:0) 2m−2 4(cid:0)1 + 2m−2 √2kUkif ( 4 m−1 (cid:17) 3(cid:16) 2m−4 4 4 3 − 2 4 3(cid:16) 2m−4 m−1 (cid:17) − 4 4 m−1 (cid:17) 3 + 2m−4 m (cid:1) − 2(cid:0) 2m−2 m (cid:1) m (cid:1) − 4(cid:0) 2m−2 m (cid:1) √2kUki ≤hAm−2 √2i =hAm−2 m (cid:16)A2 √2i m (cid:16)A2 =hAm−2 m−1 (cid:17) m (cid:16)A2, 4 p whenever p ≤ 1.847. So, for 2 ≤ m ≤ 14 we have m+1  im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) i1 , ..., x(m) A2, 2m−4 (m+1)/2m = 2 2, 4 3 2, 4 3 2, 4 3 2m 2 3 1 2 2 U (x(1) A 2m−4 m−1 = 2 1 2 − m−1 2m−4 . and, therefore N  Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  1 2 − 1 that Ap = 2 (2.7) m−1 (cid:17) CR,m−2 kUki1− 2 m m 1− 2 C R,m−2 kUk 2, 2m−4 m h(cid:16)A2 m−1 (cid:17)1− 2 2, 2m−4 m m CR,m−2(cid:17)1− 2 m−2 kUk 2, 2m−4 m−1 2m−4 m (CR,m−2) m kUk . Now let us estimate the constants CR,m. We know that B2 = 1 and, from [11], we also know Hence, from (1.3) and using the best constants of Khinchine's inequality from [11], we have and 1 m (cid:16)(cid:16)2 4 − 1 obtaining that, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 14, CR,m ≤ 2 3 2(cid:17)(cid:16)2 (CR,m−2)1− 2 m = 2 m+2 2m (CR,m−2)1− 2 m 2m−4 m−1 m 4 3 m−1 2m−4 2m−4 − 1 3 ≤ A−1 A2, 4 m−1 ≤ A−1 A2, 2m−4 2(cid:17)(cid:17) CR,m ≤ 2 CR,m ≤ 2 8m 8m m2+6m−7 m2+6m−8 = 2 3 4 − 1 2 , m−1 2m−4 − 1 2 , = 2 if m is even, if m is odd. In general we easily get The numerical values of CR,m, for m > 14, can be easily calculated by using the exact values of CR,m ≤ 2 CR,m−2 A2 2m−4 m−1 1 2   m−2 m .   A 2m−4 m−1 (see [11]): A 2m−4 m−1 2 (cid:19) Γ(cid:18) 2m−4 m−1 +1 √π = √2    (m−1)/(2m−4) In the below table we compare the first constants Cm = 2 derived from [9, Cor. 5.2] with the new constants CR,m: . m−1 2 and the constants that can be (cid:3) ON THE CONSTANTS FOR THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 7 18 36 40 54 48 64 84 104 m CR,m (using (2.5) and (2.6)) Constants from [9, Cor. 5.2]) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 220/24 ≈ 1.782 232/32 = 2 2 40 ≈ 2.298 48 ≈ 2.520 2 56 ≈ 2.828 2 2 64 ≈ 3.084 72 ≈ 3.429 2 2 80 ≈ 3.732 88 ≈ 4.128 2 96 ≈ 4.490 2 2 104 ≈ 4.951 112 ≈ 5.383 25/6 ≈ 1.782 2 16 ≈ 2.18 2 20 ≈ 2.639 2 24 ≈ 3.17 28 ≈ 3.807 2 2 32 ≈ 4.555 36 ≈ 5.443 2 2 40 ≈ 6.498 44 ≈ 7.752 2 48 ≈ 9.243 2 2 52 ≈ 11.016 14 (cid:19)1− 1 28 (cid:18) 2 ≈ 13.126 180 52 A 26 14 128 152 180 70 88 208 272 13 2 240 108 130 154 180 2 14 Cm = 2 m−1 2 22 = 4 22/2 = 2 23/2 ≈ 2.828 25/2 ≈ 5.656 26/2 = 8 27/2 ≈ 11.313 28/2 = 16 29/2 ≈ 22.627 210/2 = 32 211/2 ≈ 45.254 212/2 = 64 213/2 ≈ 90.509 In the column at the center of the previous table we have used equations (2.7) and (2.2) for 3 ≤ m ≤ 13. In the last line of this same column (m = 14) we have used equation (2.2) together 14/26 with the fact that that A 26 14 ≈ 0.9736. = √2  14 +1 √π  Γ(cid:18) 26 2 (cid:19)  Remark 2.3. In this section we have actually shown that the new constants obtained present a better asymptotic behavior than the previous ones (including those derived from [9, Cor. 5.2]). Indeed, we have previously seen that CR,m ≤ 2 CR,m−2 A2 2m−4 m−1 1 2   m−2 m .   As m → ∞ we know that A2, 2m−4 m−1 increases to 1. So, For the original constants Cm = 2 m−1 2 we have lim sup CR,m (CR,m−2) m−2 m ≤ 2 1 2 . and thus Cm (Cm−2) m−2 m lim Cm (Cm−2) 2m−3 m = 2 = 4. m−2 m 2 is replaced by 2 Also, for the constants from [9, Cor. 5.2], a similar calculation shows us that 2 in (2.3). To summarize, these new constants, although smaller than the "old ones", have the best asymptotic behavior. 1 3. Improved constants for the Bohnenblust-Hille theorem: The complex case As in the real case, following the proof of [9, Corollary 5.2] and using the optimal values for the constants of Khinchine's inequality (due to Haagerup) and using that KG = CC,2 (see [1]), the following estimates can be calculated for Cm: CC,2 = KG ≤ 1.4049 < √2, m !1− 1 2m CC,m−1 A 2m−2 CC,m = 2 m−1 m for m ≥ 3, 8 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 13, The above estimates are much better than CC,m = 2 CC,m ≤ 2 m2+m−6 4m K 2/m G m−1 2 but worst than the constants CC,m = obtained by Defant and Sevilla-Peris [8]. However, our approach will provide even better √π(cid:17)m−1 (cid:16) 2 constants. The following lemma is essentially the main result from the previous section which comes from [9], although now we will obtain different constants, since we will be dealing with the complex case. Lemma 3.1. For every positive integer m and complex Banach spaces X1, . . . , Xm, m+1 ;1) ≤ CC,m k.k m+1 ;1)(X1, ..., Xm; C) = L(X1, ..., Xm; C) and k.kπ( 2m Π( 2m with √π(cid:19)m−1 π1/m   In particular, if 4 ≤ m ≤ 14 we have CC,m =(cid:18) 2 CC,m ≤ A2 m+2 2 2m for m = 2, 3, m−2 m 1 2m−4 m−1   π1/m(cid:19) 2 (CC,m−2) m−2 m for m ≥ 4. m+4 2m (CC,m−2) m−2 m . CC,m ≤(cid:18) 1 The proof of this result is essentially in the same spirit as that of Theorem 2.2. The cases of CC,2 and CC,3 are already known and the proof is (also) done by induction, using the cases m − 2 and 2 in order to achieve the case m. By proceeding in this way one obtains, at the end, that CC,m ≤ and for 2 ≤ m ≤ 14 we have 2 m+2 2m π1/m   m−2 m 1 A2 2m−4 m−1   (CC,m−2) m−2 m , A 2m−4 m−1 = 2 1 2 − m−1 2m−4 = 2 −1 2m−4 , which leads to CC,m ≤ m+2 2 2m π1/m (cid:16)2 1 m−2(cid:17) m−2 m (CC,m−2) m−2 m =(cid:18) 1 π1/m(cid:19) 2 m+4 2m (CC,m−2) m−2 m for 4 ≤ m ≤ 14. 3.1. Comparing the "first" constants. The first constants Dm =(cid:16) 2 than the constants that we have obtained in the previous lemma. However √π(cid:17)m−1 from [8] are better lim Dm (Dm−2) =(cid:18) 2 √π(cid:19)4 m−2 m ≈ 1.621 > √2 = lim sup CC,m (CC,m−2) . m−2 m So, our constants are asymptotically better, and from a certain level m, they will be better than Dm =(cid:16) 2 √π(cid:17)m−1 Below we compare the first constants: For the case m = 4, notice that we have . We will show that this happens when m ≥ 8. CC,4 ≤ 2 π1/4 (CC,2) √π(cid:17)3 but this constant is worst than (cid:16) 2 √π(cid:17)3 it would be better to consider (cid:16) 2 1 2 = 1 2 2 √π(cid:19) π1/4 (cid:18) 2 = 23/2 π1/2 ≈ 1.5957 ≈ 1.437. So, in order to improve the constants that follow, instead of 2 for the value of CC,4. 2 π1/4 (CC,2) 1 ON THE CONSTANTS FOR THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 9 For instance, for m = 8 the situation is different. We have Similarly, for the cases 5 ≤ m ≤ 7 we also have that CC,m is slightly worst than (2/√π)m−1 but, for m ≥ 8 our constants are better than the old ones. 16 (cid:18) 2 π1/8(cid:19) 2 ≈ 2.329. Also, as we announced, for m > 8 our 236/8 π2 ≈ 2.293 √π(cid:19)5! π1/8(cid:19) 2 CC,8 ≤(cid:18) 1 8 =(cid:18) 1 √π(cid:17)7 and now this constant is better than (cid:16) 2 constants are better. 16 (CC,6) = 6 8 12 12 6 In the next section we state the previous lemma using the previous information 3.2. Comparing the "remaining" constants (m > 8). Now it is time to state the last lemma adding the better constants: Theorem 3.2. For every positive integer m and every complex Banach spaces X1, ..., Xm, Π( 2m m+1 ;1)(X1, ..., Xm; C) = L(X1, ..., Xm; C) and k.kπ( 2m m+1 ;1) ≤ CC,m k.k with √π(cid:19)m−1 π1/m   In particular, for 8 ≤ m ≤ 14 we have CC,m =(cid:18) 2 CC,m ≤ A2 m+2 2 2m for m = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, m−2 m 1 2m−4 m−1   π1/m(cid:19) 2 (CC,m−2) m−2 m for m ≥ 8. m+4 2m (CC,m−2) m−2 m . CC,m ≤(cid:18) 1 Keeping in mind that for m > 14, the evaluation of the precise values of Ap need the use of Gamma function (see [11]) we have that (assuming some slight rounding error, for high values of m, due to computer calculus): m New Constants CC,m =(cid:16) 2 (from [8]) 2 (cid:1)√π !1/p , Ap = √2 Γ(cid:0) p+1 √π(cid:17)m−1 ≈ 2.329 ≈ 2.628 ≈ 2.965 ≈ 3.346 ≈ 3.775 ≈ 4.260 ≈ 4.807 ≈ 5.425 ≈ 6.121 ≈ 372 ≈ 155, 973 m−1 2 32 16 Cm = 2 ≈ 11.313 ≈ 22.627 ≈ 45.425 ≈ 90.509 ≈ 181.019 ≈ 23, 726, 566 128 64 ≈ 7.96131459 · 1014 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 50 100 ≈ 2.293 ≈ 2.552 ≈ 2.814 ≈ 3.059 ≈ 3.417 ≈ 3.711 ≈ 4.125 ≈ 4.479 ≈ 4.963 ≈ 100 ≈ 7, 761 Acknowledgements. The authors thank A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris for important remarks on the complex case. References [1] O. Blasco, G. Botelho, D. Pellegrino and P. Rueda, Summability of multilinear mappings: Littlewood, Orlicz and beyond, Monatshefte fur Mathematik, to appear. [2] H. F. Bohnenblust and E. Hille, On the absolute convergence of Dirichlet series, Ann. of Math. 32 (1931), 600-622. 10 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA [3] F. Bombal, D. P´erez-Garc´ıa and I. Villanueva, Multilinear extensions of Grothendieck's theorem, Q. J. Math. 55 (2004), 441-450. [4] G. Botelho, H.-A. Braunss, H. Junek, D. Pellegrino, Inclusions and coincidences for multiple summing multi- linear mappings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137 (2009), no. 3, 991 -- 1000. [5] G. Botelho, C. Michels and D. Pellegrino, Complex interpolation and summability properties of multilinear operators, Rev. Mat. Complut. 23 (2010), no. 1, 139 -- 161. [6] A. M. Davie, Quotient algebras of uniform algebras, J. London Math. Soc. 7 (1973), 31-40. [7] A. Defant and K. Floret, Tensor norms and operator ideals, North Holland Math. stud., vol 176, 1993. [8] A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris, A new multilinear insight on Littlewood's 4/3-inequality, J. Funct. Anal. 256 (2009), 1642-1664. [9] A. Defant. D. Popa, U. Schwarting, Coordinatewise multiple summing operators in Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 259 (2010), 220-242. [10] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow and A. Tonge, Absolutely summing operators, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. [11] U. Haagerup, The best constants in Khinchine inequality, Studia Math. 70 (1982), 231-283. [12] U. Haagerup, A new upper bound for the complex Grothendieck constant, Israel J. Math. 60 (1987), 199-224. [13] S. Kaijser, Some results in the metric theory of tensor products, Studia Math. 63 (1978), 157-170. [14] J. Lindenstrauss and A. Pelczynski, Absolutely summing operators in Lp-spaces and their applications, Studia Math. 29 (1968), 275-325. [15] M. C. Matos. Fully absolutely summing and Hilbert-Schmidt multilinear mappings, Collectanea Math. 54 (2003), 111-136. [16] J. Sawa, The best constant in the Khinchine inequality for complex Steinhaus variables, the case p = 1, Studia Math. 81 (1985), 107-126. Departamento de An´alisis Matem´atico, Facultad de Ciencias Matem´aticas, Plaza de Ciencias 3, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, 28040, Spain. E-mail address: [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, Universidade Federal da Para´ıba, 58.051-900 - Joao Pessoa, Brazil. E-mail address: [email protected] 1 1 0 2 l u J 1 3 ] . A F h t a m [ 3 v 1 6 4 0 . 0 1 0 1 : v i X r a NEW UPPER BOUNDS FOR THE CONSTANTS IN THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY DANIEL PELLEGRINO AND JUAN B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA Abstract. A classical inequality due to Bohnenblust and Hille states that for every positive integer m there is a constant Cm > 0 so that   N X i1,...,im=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U (ei1 , . . . , eim )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) m+1 2m 2m m+1   ≤ Cm kU k for every positive integer N and every m-linear mapping U : ℓN ∞ m−1 m−1 . The value of Cm was improved to Cm = 2 2 m+1 2m 2 m 2 × · · · × ℓN ∞ → C, where Cm = by S. Kaijser and more recently H. Qu´effelec and A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris remarked that Cm = (cid:16) 2 . Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality also holds for real Banach spaces with the constants Cm = 2 In this note we show that a recent new proof of the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality (due to Defant, Popa and Schwarting) provides, in fact, quite better estimates for Cm for all values of m ∈ N. In particular, we will also show that, for real scalars, if m is even with 2 ≤ m ≤ 24, then also works. The m−1 2 √π(cid:17)m−1 We will mainly work on a paper by Defant, Popa and Schwarting, giving some remarks about their work and explaining how to, numerically, improve the previously mentioned constants. CR,m = 2 1 2 CR,m/2. In 1930, Littlewood proved that 1. Preliminaries and background 3 4 4 N U (ei, ej)  Xi,j=1  ∞ × ℓN ∞ → C and every positive integer N. This is the well-known One year later, in 1931, Bohnenblust and Hille ([2]) improved this result to multilinear forms (see also [8, 9] for recent approaches). More precisely, the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality asserts that for every positive integer m there is a Cm > 0 so that for every bilinear form U : ℓN Littlewood's 4/3 inequality [16]. √2kUk 3  ≤   N Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)U (ei1 , . . . , eim)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2m m+1  m+1 2m ≤ Cm kUk m+1 m−1 2m 2 ∞ × ··· × ℓN for every m-linear mapping U : ℓN ∞ → C and every positive integer N (for polynomial versions of Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality we refer to [10]). The original upper estimate for Cm , but several improvements have been obtained since then. For instance, as an is m illustration for the complex case we compare, below, and for some values of m, the original constants with the improvements obtained by S. Kaijser [14] and H. Qu´effelec [18], Defant, P. Sevilla-Peris [8]: 2 Key words and phrases. Absolutely summing operators, Bohnenblust -- Hille Theorem. 2010 Mathematicss Subject Classification: 46G25, 47L22, 47H60. Supported by CNPq Grant 620108/2008-8 (Edital Casadinho). **Supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, grant MTM2009-07848. 1 2 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA ([18, 8], 1995) Cm = 2 ([14], 1978) Cm = m ([2],1931) m Cm =(cid:16) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 50 100 √π(cid:17)m−1 ≈ 1.273 ≈ 1.437 ≈ 1.621 ≈ 1.829 ≈ 2.064 ≈ 2.330 ≈ 2.628 ≈ 2.965 ≈ 5.425 ≈ 372 ≈ 155, 973 m−1 2 2 8 4 ≈ 2.828 ≈ 5.657 ≈ 11.314 ≈ 22.627 16 128 ≈ 23, 726, 566 ≈ 7.96131459 · 1014 m+1 m−1 2 2m 2 ≈ 4.160 ≈ 6.726 ≈ 10.506 ≈ 16.088 ≈ 24.322 ≈ 36.442 ≈ 54.232 ≈ 80.283 ≈ 542.574 ≈ 174, 465, 512 ≈ 8.14675743 · 1015 The Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality also holds for real Banach spaces but sharper estimates for Cm, in this case, seem to be Cm = 2 m−1 2 . The aim of this paper is show that improved values for Cm are essentially contained in [9] for both real and complex cases. The (complex and real) Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality can be re-written in the context of multiple summing multilinear operators, as we will see next. Multiple summing multilinear mappings between Banach spaces is a recent, very important and useful nonlinear generalization of the concept of absolutely summing linear operators. This class was introduced, independently, by Matos [17] (under the terminology fully summing multilinear mappings) and Bombal, P´erez-Garc´ıa and Villanueva [3]. The interested reader can also refer to [4, 5] for other Bohnenblust -- Hille type results. Throughout this paper X1, . . . , Xm and Y will stand for Banach spaces over K = R or C, and X′ stands for the dual of X. By L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) we denote the Banach space of all continuous m-linear mappings from X1 × ··· × Xm to Y with the usual sup norm. For x1,··· , xn in X, let k(xj )n j=1kw,1 := sup{k(ϕ(xj))n j=1k1 : ϕ ∈ X′,kϕk ≤ 1}. If 1 ≤ p < ∞, an m-linear mapping U ∈ L(X1, . . . , Xm; Y ) is multiple (p; 1)-summing (denoted Π(p;1)(X1, . . . , Xm; Y )) if there exists a constant Lm ≥ 0 such that (1.1)   N Xj1,...,jm=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U (x(1) j1 , . . . , x(m) ≤ Lm 1 p p  jm )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) m Yk=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (x(k) j )N j=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)w,1 for every N ∈ N and any x(k) jk ∈ Xk, jk = 1, . . . , N , k = 1, . . . , m. The infimum of the constants satisfying (1.1) is denoted by kUkπ(p;1). For m = 1 we have the classical concept of absolutely (p; 1)-summing operators (see, e.g. [7, 11]). A simple reformulation of the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality asserts that every continuous m- m−1 linear form T : X1 × ··· × Xm → K is multiple ( 2m (or Lm = (cid:16) 2 √π(cid:17)m−1 although in the real case the best known constants seem to be Cm = 2 m−1 2 . for the complex case, using the estimates of Defant and Sevilla-Peris, [8]), m+1 ; 1)-summing with Lm = Cm = 2 2 The main goal of this paper is to calculate better constants for the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality in the real and complex case (which are derived from [9]). For this task we will explore the proof of a general vector-valued version of Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality ([9, Theorem 5.1]). Let us recall some results that we will need in this note. The first one is a well-known inequality due to Khinchine (see [11]): Theorem 1.1 (Khinchine's inequality). For all 0 < p < ∞, there exist constants Ap and Bp such that (1.2) Ap N Xn=1 1 2 an2! N 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Z 1 Xn=1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p 1 p dt! ≤ Bp N Xn=1 1 2 an2! NEW UPPER BOUNDS FOR THE CONSTANTS IN THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 3 for every positive integer N and scalars a1, . . . , an (here, rn denotes the n − th Rademacher function). Above, it is clear that B2 = 1. From (1.2) it follows that (1.3) N 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Z 1 Xn=1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p 1 p dt! ≤ BpA−1 N Xn=1 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) r Z 1 anrn (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) r 1 r dt! and the product of the constants BpA−1 r will appear later on in Theorem 1.3. The notation Ap and Bp will be kept along the paper. Next, let us recall a variation of an inequality due to Blei (see [9, Lemma 3.1]). Theorem 1.2 (Blei, Defant et al.). Let A and B be two finite non-void index sets, and (aij)(i,j)∈A×B a scalar matrix with positive entries, and denote its columns by αj = (aij )i∈A and its rows by βi = (aij )j∈B. Then, for q, s1, s2 ≥ 1 with q > max(s1, s2) we have s1  Xj∈B   X(i,j)∈A×B q  kαjks2  ≤ Xi∈A q ! kβiks1 aw(s1,s2) ij   w(s1 ,s2) f (s2 ,s1) f (s1 ,s2) s2 , 1 with w : [1, q)2 → [0,∞), w(x, y) := f : [1, q)2 → [0,∞), f (x, y) := q2(x + y) − 2qxy q2 − xy q2x − qxy q2(x + y) − 2qxy , . The following theorem is a particular case of [9, Lemma 2.2] for Y = K using that the cotype 2 constant of K is 1, i.e., C2(K) = 1 (following the notation from [9]): Theorem 1.3 (Defant et al). Let 1 ≤ r ≤ 2, and let (yi1,...,im )N  Xi1,...,im=1  yi1,...,im2  ≤ (A2,r)m Xi1,...,im=1 1/2 N N where Z[0,1]m(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ri1 (t1) . . . rim (tm)yi1...im(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) A2,r ≤ A−1 r B2 = A−1 r (since B2 = 1). i1,...,im=1 be a matrix in K. Then 1/r r dt1 . . . dtm  , The meaning of A2,r, w and f from the above theorems will also be kept in the next section and KG will denote the complex Grothendieck constant. Also, and throughout the paper, CK,m will denote our estimates on the constants for the real or complex case (K = R or C respectively). 2. Improved constants for the Bohnenblust -- Hille theorem: The real case From the proof of [9, Corollary 5.2] and using the optimal values for the constants of Khinchine's inequality (due to Haagerup), the following estimates can be calculated for Cm: (2.1) (2.2) CR,2 = √2, CR,m = 2 m−1 2m CR,m−1 A 2m−2 m !1− 1 m for m ≥ 3. In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 13, (2.3) If we change a little bit the induction process by obtaining the case m from the cases m − 2 and 2 we obtain even smaller constants. For example, m2+m−2 4m . CR,m = 2 (2.4) CR,m = 2 m−2 m CR,m−2 A2 2m−4 m−1 1 2     for m > 3. 4 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 14 a careful calculation gives us (2.5) CR,m = 2 m2+6m−8 8m if m is even, and (2.6) CR,m = 2 m2+6m−7 8m if m is odd. However, in the next theorem a different induction approach leads us to even smaller (and, thus, sharper) constants. Remark 2.1. It is worth mentioning that the values for the above constants are not explicitly calculated in [9] but, of course, are derived from [9]. Since our procedure below will improve the constants, we will not give much detail on the above estimates. The paper [9] provides, in fact, a family of constants Cm for Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality. In this sense the following result is essentially contained in [9]. However, for the sake of completeness we prefer to sketch the proof from [9]. Our particular approach is chosen to obtain sharper constants: Theorem 2.2. For every positive integer m and real Banach spaces X1, . . . , Xm, Π( 2m m+1 ;1)(X1, . . . , Xm; R) = L(X1, ..., Xm; R) and k.kπ( 2m m+1 ;1) ≤ CR,m k.k with CR,2 = 2 1 2 and CR,3 = 2 5 6 , CR,m = CR,m/2 Am/2 2m m+2 for m even and CR,m =  for m odd. In particular, CR, m−1 2 m+1 A 2 2m−2 m+1 f ( 2m−2 m+1 , 2m+2 m+3 )   .  CR, m+1 2 m−1 A 2 2m+2 m+3 CR,m = 2 1 2 CR,m/2 f ( 2m+2 m+3 , 2m−2 m+1 )   if m is even and 2 ≤ m ≤ 24. Proof. We start with the case m even. The cases m = 2 (Littlewood's 4/3-inequality) and m = 3 are known. We proceed by induction, obtaining the case m as a combination of the cases m/2 and m/2 (instead of 1 and m − 1 as in [9, Corollary 5.2]). Suppose that the result is true for m/2 and let us prove for m. Let U ∈ L(X1, . . . , Xm; R) and N be a positive integer. For each 1 ≤ k ≤ m consider x(k) 1 , . . . , x(k) (x(k) )N j N ∈ Xk so that (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) j=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)w,1 ≤ 1, k = 1, .., m. Consider, following the notation of Theorem 1.2, Thus, q = 2, s1 = s2 = 2 · ( m 2 ) m 2 + 1 = 2m m + 2 . w(s1, s2) = 2m m + 1 NEW UPPER BOUNDS FOR THE CONSTANTS IN THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 5 and, from Theorem 1.2, we have (m+1)/2m N N 2m ≤ U (x(1) i1 , . . . , x(m) im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  ≤ Xi1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)   Xi(m/2)+1,...,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  m+1  2  i(m/2)+1,...,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N i1 , . . . , x(m)  2  i1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N  i1 , . . . , x(m) s1 s2 N f (s2,s1)/s2 f (s1,s2)/s1 . Now we need to estimate the two factors above. We will write dt := dt1 . . . dtm/2. For each i(m/2)+1, ..., im fixed, we have (from Theorem 1.3), ri1 (t1) . . . rim/2 (tm/2)U (x(1) i1 , . . . , x(m) dt ri1 (t1)x(1) i1 , . . . , rim/2 (tm/2)x(m/2) im/2 , x(m/2)+1 i(m/2)+1 s1 im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . . . , x(m−1) im  im−1 , x(m)  s1 dt. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N Xim/2=1 rim/2 (tm/2)x(m/2) im/2 , . . . , x(m−1) im s1 dt. , x(m) im   (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) rim/2 (tm/2)x(m/2) im/2 , . . .  dt s1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) π(s1;1) Summing over all i(m/2)+1, . . . , im = 1, . . . , N we obtain N Xim/2=1 s1 2 ≤ N i1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U Xi1=1  ri1 (t1)x(1) i1 , . . . , s1 2 ≤ i1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N Xim/2=1 ri1 (t1)x(1) i1 , . . . , N s1 2 ≤ N N i1 , . . . , x(m) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) 2,s1(cid:17)s1 ≤(cid:16)Am/2 2,s1(cid:17)s1 =(cid:16)Am/2 i1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Z[0,1]m/2 Xi1,...,im/2=1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U Z[0,1]m/2 Xi1=1  Xi(m/2)+1,...,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) 2,s1(cid:17)s1 (cid:16)Am/2 Xi(m/2)+1,...,im=1 Z[0,1]m/2 i1 , . . . , x(m) N N Using the case m/2 we thus have Hence N N Xi(m/2)+1,...,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1) i1 , . . . , x(m) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) U 2,s1(cid:17)s1 Z[0,1]m/2 ≤(cid:16)Am/2 Xi1=1  2,s1(cid:17)s1 ≤(cid:16)Am/2 (cid:0)kUk CR,m/2(cid:1)s1 .  Xi(m/2)+1,...,im=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)U (x(1)  m+1 im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  i1 , . . . , x(m) U (x(1) 2m N N  Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  The other estimate is exactly the same. Hence, combining both estimates, we obtain 2,s1 kUk CR,m/2. i1 , . . . , x(m) 1 s1 s1 ≤ Am/2 2  i1,...,im/2=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) im )(cid:17)N  2,s1 kUk CR,m/2i1/2hAm/2 ≤hAm/2 (m+1)/2m 2,s1 kUk CR,m/2i1/2 . 6 and Hence   D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA N Xi1,...,im=1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) U (x(1) i1 , . . . , x(m) (m+1)/2m 2m m+1  im )(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2,s1 kUk CR,m/2 ≤ Am/2 = Am/2 2, 2m m+2 kUk CR,m/2. Now let us estimate the constants CR,m. We know that B2 = 1 and, from [12], we also know CR,m = Am/2 2, 2m m+2 CR,m/2. that Ap = 2 (2.7) 1 2 − 1 p whenever p ≤ 1.847. So, for 2 ≤ m ≤ 24 we have A 2m m+2 = 2 1 2 − m+2 2m = 2 −1 m . Hence, from (1.3) and using the best constants of Khinchine's inequality from [12], we have and A2, 2m m+2 ≤ A−1 2m m+2 1 m = 2 CR,m ≤(cid:16)2 1 m(cid:17)m/2 CR,m/2 = 2 1 2 CR,m/2 for m even, 2 ≤ m ≤ 24. The numerical values of CR,m, for m > 24, can be easily calculated by using the exact values of A 2m m+2 (see [12]): A 2m m+2 = √2  Γ(cid:16) 2m m+2 +1 √π 2 (cid:17) (m+2)/2m .   For the case m odd we proceed by induction, but the case m is obtained as a combination of the cases m−1 2 with m+1 2 instead of 1 and m − 1 as in [9, Corollary 5.2]. Consider, in the notation of Theorem 1.2, q = 2, s1 = Thus, and a similar proof gives us 2(cid:0) m−1 2 (cid:1) 2 + 1 m−1 = 2m − 2 m + 1 and s2 = w(s1, s2) = 2m m + 1 2(cid:0) m+1 2 (cid:1) 2 + 1 m+1 = 2m + 2 m + 3 . m+1 2 2, 2m−2 m+1 CR, m−1 CR,m =(cid:18)A ≤  CR, m−1 2 m+1 2 2m−2 m+1 A   f ( 2m−2 m+1 , 2m+2 m+3 ) m+1 , 2m+2 m+3 ) 2 (cid:19)f ( 2m−2 .  .(cid:18)A   2 CR, m+1 2 m−1 A 2m+2 m+3 m+3 , 2m−2 m+1 ) m−1 2 2, 2m+2 m+3 CR, m+1 f ( 2m+2 m+3 , 2m−2 m+1 ) 2 (cid:19)f ( 2m+2 (cid:3) In the below table we compare the first constants Cm = 2 derived from [9, Cor. 5.2] with the new constants CR,m: m−1 2 and the constants that can be NEW UPPER BOUNDS FOR THE CONSTANTS IN THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 7 m−1 2 ([14], 1978) 18 28 40 2 ≈ 1.782 m New constants - CR,m Cm derived from ([9, Corollary 5.2], 2010) Cm = 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 25/6 ≈ 1.782 2 16 ≈ 2.18 2 20 ≈ 2.639 2 24 ≈ 3.17 28 ≈ 3.807 2 2 32 ≈ 4.555 36 ≈ 5.443 2 2 40 ≈ 6.498 44 ≈ 7.752 2 48 ≈ 9.243 2 ≈ 2.298 ≈ 2.520 ≈ 2.6918 ≈ 2.8284 ≈ 3.055 ≈ 3.249 ≈ 3.4174 ≈ 3.563 22/2 = 2 23/2 ≈ 2.828 25/2 ≈ 5.656 26/2 = 8 27/2 ≈ 11.313 28/2 = 16 29/2 ≈ 22.627 210/2 = 32 211/2 ≈ 45.254 22 = 4 108 130 154 54 70 88 3. Improved constants for the Bohnenblust -- Hille theorem: The complex case As in the real case, following the proof of [9, Corollary 5.2] and using the optimal values for the constants of Khinchine's inequality (due to Haagerup) and using that KG = CC,2 (see [1]), the following estimates can be calculated for Cm: CC,2 = KG ≤ 1.4049 < √2, m !1− 1 2m CC,m−1 A 2m−2 CC,m = 2 m−1 m for m ≥ 3, In particular, if 2 ≤ m ≤ 13, CC,m ≤ 2 m2+m−6 4m K 2/m G . The above estimates improve the values CC,m = 2 m−1 2 but are worst than the constants CC,m = obtained by Defant and Sevilla-Peris [8]. However, our approach will provide even better √π(cid:17)m−1 (cid:16) 2 constants. The following lemma is essentially the main result from the previous section which comes from [9], although now we will obtain different constants, since we will be dealing with the complex case. Lemma 3.1. For every positive integer m and complex Banach spaces X1, . . . , Xm, Π( 2m m+1 ;1)(X1, . . . , Xm; C) = L(X1, . . . , Xm; C) and k.kπ( 2m m+1 ;1) ≤ CC,m k.k with CC,m =(cid:18) 2 √π(cid:19)m−1 for m = 2, 3, CC,m = CC,m/2 Am/2 2m m+2 for m even and for m odd. CC,m =  CC, m−1 2 m+1 A 2 2m−2 m+1   f ( 2m−2 m+1 , 2m+2 m+3 )  f ( 2m+2 m+3 , 2m−2 m+1 ) CC, m+1 2 m−1 A 2 2m+2 m+3   The proof of this result is essentially in the same spirit as that of Theorem 2.2. The cases of CC,2 and CC,3 are already known and the proof is (also) done by induction. 8 D. PELLEGRINO AND J. B. SEOANE-SEP ´ULVEDA from [8] are better than the constants that we have obtained in the previous lemma. However our constants present a 3.1. Comparing the "first" constants. The first constants Dm =(cid:16) 2 smaller asymptotical growth and, from a certain level m on, they are better than Dm =(cid:16) 2 As we see next, this occurs when m ≥ 7. Here below we compare the first constants. For the case m = 4, notice that we have √π(cid:17)m−1 √π(cid:17)m−1 . CC,4 = 21/2 · CC,2 = 21/2 ·(cid:18) 2 √π(cid:19) ≈ 1.5957 but, for m = 7 we have ≈ 1.437. So, in order to improve the constants that follow, instead of 21/2 · CC,2 for the value of CC,4. √π(cid:17)3 but this constant is worst than (cid:16) 2 √π(cid:17)3 it would be better to consider (cid:16) 2 Similarly, for the cases 5 ≤ m ≤ 6 we also have that CC,m is slightly worst than (2/√π)m−1 √π(cid:17)2 12(cid:17)4 (cid:16) 2  (cid:16)2 1 √π(cid:17)3 16(cid:17)3 (cid:16) 2  (cid:16)2 1 CC,7 =  = 1.9293 <(cid:18) 2 and our constants are better than the old ones. Also, as we announced, for m ≥ 7 our constants also improve the old ones. √π(cid:19)6 ·  2 − 10 2 − 8 3/7 4/7 In the next section we state the previous lemma using the information we just obtained. 3.2. Comparing the "remaining" constants (m > 7). Now it is time to state the last lemma adding the better constants: Theorem 3.2. For every positive integer m and every complex Banach spaces X1, . . . , Xm, Π( 2m m+1 ;1)(X1, . . . , Xm; C) = L(X1, . . . , Xm; C) and k.kπ( 2m m+1 ;1) ≤ CC,m k.k with for m ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5, 6}, for m > 6 even, and √π(cid:19)m−1 CC,m/2 Am/2 2m m+2 • CC,m =(cid:18) 2 • CC,m = • CC,m =  A CC, m−1 2 m+1 2 2m−2 m+1   f ( 2m−2 m+1 , 2m+2 m+3 ) f ( 2m+2 m+3 , 2m−2 m+1 ) for m > 5 odd. The following table compares these new constants with the previous ones: CC, m+1 2 m−1 A 2 2m+2 m+3   ([18, 8], 1995) ·  √π(cid:17)m−1 ≈ 2.329 ≈ 2.628 ≈ 2.965 ≈ 3.346 ≈ 3.775 ≈ 4.260 ≈ 4.807 ≈ 5.425 ≈ 6.121 m New Constants - CC,m (cid:16) 2 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ≈ 2.031 ≈ 2.172 ≈ 2.292 ≈ 2.449 ≈ 2.587 ≈ 2.662 ≈ 2.728 ≈ 2.805 ≈ 2.873 m−1 2 2 ([14],1978) m 32 16 ≈ 11.313 ≈ 22.627 ≈ 45.425 ≈ 90.509 ≈ 181.019 128 64 ([2],1931) m+1 m−1 2 2m 2 ≈ 36.442 ≈ 54.232 ≈ 80.283 ≈ 118.354 ≈ 173.869 ≈ 254.680 ≈ 372.128 ≈ 542.574 ≈ 789.612 NEW UPPER BOUNDS FOR THE CONSTANTS IN THE BOHNENBLUST-HILLE INEQUALITY 9 Acknowledgements. The authors thank A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris for important remarks on the complex case. The authors are also very grateful to the referee, whose thorough analysis and insightful remarks helped to obtain even sharper constants. References [1] O. Blasco, G. Botelho, D. Pellegrino and P. Rueda, Summability of multilinear mappings: Littlewood, Orlicz and beyond, Monatsh. Math. 163 (2011), 131-147. [2] H.F. Bohnenblust and E. Hille, On the absolute convergence of Dirichlet series, Ann. of Math. 32 (1931), 600-622. [3] F. Bombal, D. P´erez-Garc´ıa and I. Villanueva, Multilinear extensions of Grothendieck's theorem, Q. J. Math. 55 (2004), 441-450. [4] G. Botelho, H.A. Braunss, H. Junek, D. Pellegrino, Inclusions and coincidences for multiple summing multilinear mappings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137 (2009), 991 -- 1000. [5] G. Botelho, C. Michels and D. Pellegrino, Complex interpolation and summability properties of multilinear operators, Rev. Mat. Complut. 23 (2010), no, 139 -- 161. [6] A.M. Davie, Quotient algebras of uniform algebras, J. London Math. Soc. 7 (1973), 31-40. [7] A. Defant and K. Floret, Tensor norms and operator ideals, North Holland Math. stud., vol. 176, 1993. [8] A. Defant and P. Sevilla-Peris, A new multilinear insight on Littlewood's 4/3-inequality, J. Funct. Anal. 256 (2009), 1642-1664. [9] A. Defant. D. Popa, U. Schwarting, Coordinatewise multiple summing operators in Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 259 (2010), 220-242. [10] A. Defant, L. Frerick, J. Ortega-Cerd´a, M. Ounaıes, K. Seip, The Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality for homogeneous polynomials is hypercontractive, to appear in Ann. Math (2). [11] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow and A. Tonge, Absolutely summing operators, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. [12] U. Haagerup, The best constants in Khinchine inequality, Studia Math. 70 (1982), 231-283. [13] U. Haagerup, A new upper bound for the complex Grothendieck constant, Israel J. Math. 60 (1987), 199-224. [14] S. Kaijser, Some results in the metric theory of tensor products, Studia Math. 63 (1978), 157-170. [15] J. Lindenstrauss and A. Pe lczy´nski, Absolutely summing operators in Lp-spaces and their applications, Studia Math. 29 (1968), 275-325. [16] J.E. Littlewood, On bounded bilinear forms in an infinite number of variables, Q. J. Math. 1 (1930), 164-174. [17] M.C. Matos. Fully absolutely summing and Hilbert-Schmidt multilinear mappings, Collectanea Math. 54 (2003), 111-136. [18] H. Queff´elec, H. Bohr's vision of ordinary Dirichlet series: old and new results, Journal of Analysis 3 (1995), 43-60. [19] J. Sawa, The best constant in the Khinchine inequality for complex Steinhaus variables, the case p = 1, Studia Math. 81 (1985), 107-126. Departamento de An´alisis Matem´atico, Facultad de Ciencias Matem´aticas, Plaza de Ciencias 3, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, 28040, Spain. E-mail address: [email protected] Departamento de Matem´atica, Universidade Federal da Para´ıba, 58.051-900 - Joao Pessoa, Brazil. E-mail address: [email protected]
1901.03853	1	1901	2019-01-12T11:48:24	Caristi-Kirk and Oettli-Th\'era Ball Spaces and applications	[ "math.FA" ]	Based on the theory of ball spaces introduced by Kuhlmann and Kuhlmann we introduce and study Caristi-Kirk and Oettli-Th\'era ball spaces. We show that if the underlying metric space is complete, then these have a very strong property: every ball contains a singleton ball. This fact provides quick proofs for several results which are equivalent to the Caristi-Kirk Fixed Point Theorem, namely Ekeland's Variational Principles, the Oettli-Th\'era Theorem, Takahashi's Theorem and the Flower Petal Theorem.	math.FA	math	CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES AND APPLICATIONS PIOTR BŁASZKIEWICZ, HANNA ĆMIEL, ALESSANDRO LINZI, PIOTR SZEWCZYK Abstract. Based on the theory of ball spaces introduced by Kuhlmann and Kuhlmann we introduce and study Caristi -- Kirk and Oettli -- Théra ball spaces. We show that if the underlying metric space is complete, then these have a very strong property: every ball contains a single- ton ball. This fact provides quick proofs for several results which are equivalent to the Caristi -- Kirk Fixed Point Theorem, namely Ekeland's Variational Principles, the Oettli -- Théra Theorem, Takahashi's Theorem and the Flower Petal Theorem. 9 1 0 2 n a J 2 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 3 5 8 3 0 . 1 0 9 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction 1.1. General setting. The literature on complete metric spaces contains remarkable results such as the Theorem of Caristi and Kirk ([2] and [4]), Ekeland's Principle ([3]), Takahashi's Theorem ([12]) and the Flower Petal Theorem ([11]). These theorems are known to be equivalent (see, e.g., [11], [10]). Their statements can be found in Section 4. The concept of a ball space was first introduced by F.-V. and K. Kuhlmann in [6],[7]. In [8] they connected it with the Caristi -- Kirk Fixed Point Theo- rem (FPT) by providing a way to prove it using ball spaces techniques. In this paper we further develop this connection by proving Theorem 2 which provides a generic method to obtain simple proofs of all the results men- tioned in the previous paragraph and, possibly, related ones in the future. In [10], Oettli and Théra introduced an alternative approach to the Caristi -- Kirk Theorem and showed it to be equivalent to what was later (in publica- tions such as [9]) called Oettli -- Théra Theorem. Our method can be applied to easily prove this theorem as well as the theorems equivalent to it, which are stated in [10] (see Section 3). 1.2. Ball spaces. As in [8], by a ball space we mean a pair (X, B), where X is a nonempty set and B ⊆ P(X) is a nonempty family of nonempty subsets of X. An element B ∈ B is called a ball. If no confusion arises, we will write B in place of (X, B) when speaking of a ball space. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 54H25; Secondary 47H09, 47H10. Key words and phrases. metric space, ball space, Caristi -- Kirk Fixed Point Theorem, Ekeland's Variational Principle, Oettli -- Théra Theorem, Takahashi's Theorem, Flower Petal Theorem. 1 2 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK A nest of balls in a ball space B is a nonempty family N of balls from B which is totally ordered by inclusion. We say that a ball space B is spherically complete if for every nest of balls N ⊆ B we have T N 6= ∅. Further details about ball spaces may be found in [5]. Definition 1. A ball space (X, B) is strongly contractive if there is a func- tion that associates to every x ∈ X some ball Bx ∈ B such that, for every x, y ∈ X, the following conditions hold: (1) x ∈ Bx; (2) if y ∈ Bx then By ⊆ Bx; (3) if y ∈ Bx \ {x} then By ( Bx. This particular type of ball spaces has a remarkable property, stated in the following theorem. Theorem 2. In every spherically complete, strongly contractive ball space every ball Bx contains a singleton ball. In other words, there exists a ∈ Bx such that Ba = {a}. Proof. Let B be a strongly contractive, spherically complete ball space and Bx ∈ B any ball. Consider the family A = {N ⊆ P(Bx) N is a nest of balls in B}. This family is partially ordered by inclusion and nonempty since {Bx} ∈ A. If we have a chain of nests in A, the union of that chain is again a nest of balls in A, hence an upper bound of the chain. By Zorn's Lemma we obtain the existence of a maximal nest M ∈ A. Since the space is spherically by condition (2) of Definition 1 also Ba ⊆ B for every B ∈ M and so complete, there exists an element a ∈T M. Since a ∈ B for every B ∈ M, Ba ⊆ T M. This means that M ∪ {Ba} is a nest of balls in A which contains M. By maximality of M we get that M ∪ {Ba} = M, i.e., Ba ∈ M. Now we wish to show that Ba is a singleton. Suppose that there exists an element b ∈ Ba \ {a}. Then Bb ( Ba (in particular, Ba 6⊆ Bb) and so Bb /∈ M. But this means that M ∪ {Bb} is a nest of balls that properly contains M, which contradicts the maximality of M. Therefore, Ba = {a}. (cid:3) 2. Caristi -- Kirk and Oettli -- Théra ball spaces In this section, we will be working with a nonempty metric space (X, d). 2.1. Caristi -- Kirk ball spaces. Consider a function ϕ : X → R, a point x ∈ X and the following set: Bϕ x = {y ∈ X d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)}. x ), we may think of this set as a ball and x 6= ∅ (because x ∈ Bϕ Since Bϕ consider the ball space (X, Bϕ) where Bϕ := {Bϕ x x ∈ X} . CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 3 We will call the function ϕ a Caristi -- Kirk function on X if it is lower semicontinuous, that is, ∀ y∈X lim inf x→y ϕ(x) ≥ ϕ(y), and bounded from below, that is, inf x∈X ϕ(x) > −∞. The corresponding balls Bϕ x have been introduced in [8] as the Caristi -- Kirk balls and Bϕ is the induced Caristi -- Kirk ball space. For brevity, we will write CK in place of Caristi -- Kirk. A number of remarkable properties of the balls defined above, given in the following lemma, can be found in [8]. Lemma 3. Take a metric space (X, d) and any function ϕ : X → R. Then the following assertions hold. (1) For every x ∈ X, x ∈ Bϕ x . (2) If y ∈ Bϕ y ⊆ Bϕ x ; if in addition x 6= y, then Bϕ x then Bϕ y ( Bϕ x and ϕ(y) < ϕ(x). (3) If ϕ is lower semicontinuous, then all CK balls Bx are closed in the topology induced by the metric. Lemma 3 immediately yields the following result. Corollary 4. The CK ball space Bϕ is strongly contractive. Another important fact about CK ball spaces may also be found in [8]: Proposition 5. Let (X, d) be a metric space. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) The metric space (X, d) is complete. (ii) Every CK ball space (X, Bϕ) is spherically complete. (iii) For every continuous function ϕ : X → R bounded from below, the CK ball space (X, Bϕ) is spherically complete. 2.2. Oettli -- Théra ball spaces. Definition 6. A function φ : X × X → (−∞, +∞] is an Oettli -- Théra function on X if the following properties hold: (a) φ(x, ·) : X → (−∞, +∞] is lower semicontinous for all x ∈ X; (b) φ(x, x) = 0 for all x ∈ X; (c) φ(x, y) ≤ φ(x, z) + φ(z, y) for all x, y, z ∈ X; φ(x0, x) > −∞. there exists x0 ∈ X s.t. (d) inf x∈X If an element x0 ∈ X satisfies property (d), we will call it an Oettli -- Théra element for φ in X. If it is clear which space is considered, we will say that 4 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK φ is an Oettli -- Théra function and that x0 is an Oettli -- Théra element for φ. For brevity, we will write OT in place of Oettli -- Théra. Definition 7. Let φ be an OT function on X. (i) The OT ball of x ∈ X is: Bφ x := {y ∈ X d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y)}. If no confusion arises as to which OT function is considered, we will x . This gives rise to a ball space (X, Bφ), write Bx in place of Bφ where Bφ := {Bx x ∈ X}. (ii) The OT ball space generated by an OT element x0 is (Bx0, Bφ x0) where Bφ x0 := {Bx x ∈ Bx0}. In this subsection, if an OT element x0 ∈ X has been fixed, we will write for brevity B0 in place of Bx0. It is worth noting that if we are given a CK function ϕ, we may define φ by: (1) φ(x, y) := ϕ(y) − ϕ(x). The following fact is straightforward to prove. Fact 8. If ϕ is a CK function, then the function φ : X × X → R defined in (1) is an OT function. Moreover, every x ∈ X is an OT element for φ. As we know from Corollary 4, the CK ball space is strongly contractive. A similar result can be shown for the OT ball space. Lemma 9. Take a metric space (X, d) and φ : X × X → R a function satisfying (b) and (c) in Definition 6. Then the following assertions hold, for every x ∈ X. (1) x ∈ Bx. (2) If y ∈ Bx then By ⊆ Bx. (3) If y ∈ Bx \ {x} then By ( Bx and φ(x, y) < φ(y, x). Proof. (1): Indeed, d(x, x) = −φ(x, x) = 0. (2): Take y ∈ Bx, i.e., Take any z ∈ By, then d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y). d(y, z) ≤ −φ(y, z). By condition (c) for an OT function we get d(x, z) ≤ d(x, y) + d(y, z) ≤ −φ(x, y) − φ(y, z) ≤ −φ(x, z), so z ∈ Bx and, as a result, By ⊆ Bx. (3): Let y ∈ Bx and y 6= x. We wish to show that x /∈ By. Suppose that CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 5 x ∈ By. Then d(y, x) ≤ −φ(y, x) and by conditions (b) and (c) for an OT function we get 0 < d(y, x) + d(x, y) ≤ −φ(y, x) − φ(x, y) ≤ −φ(y, y) = 0, contradiction. Thus x /∈ By and so By ( Bx. Clearly, this also implies −φ(y, x) < d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y). (cid:3) Lemma 9 instantly yields the following corollary. Corollary 10. For an OT function φ on X, the ball space Bφ is strongly contractive. Furthermore, for a fixed OT element x0 for φ in X the OT ball space Bφ x0 is also strongly contractive and all of its balls are contained in B0. As stated in Fact 8, for the OT function φ defined in (1) every x ∈ X is an OT element. While this doesn't have to be true in general for any OT function φ, this property turns out to be 'hereditary' in the following sense. Lemma 11. Let φ be an OT function. If x0 ∈ X is an OT element for φ in X and x ∈ B0 then also x is an OT element for φ in X. Proof. Let r ∈ R be such that inf y∈X φ(x0, y) ≥ r. Take any x ∈ B0. Note that 0 ≤ d(x0, x) ≤ −φ(x0, x). For every y ∈ X we have r ≤ φ(x0, y) ≤ φ(x0, x) + φ(x, y), so In particular, φ(x, y) ≥ r − φ(x0, x). inf y∈X φ(x, y) ≥ r − φ(x0, x) ≥ r. (cid:3) As stated in Proposition 5, there is an equivalence between complete- ness of a metric space and spherical completeness of the respective CK ball spaces. A similar result can be shown for the OT ball spaces. For that we will need to state an auxiliary lemma first. Lemma 12. Let (X, d) be a metric space, φ an OT function on X and x0 an OT element for φ in X. Moreover, let N ⊆ Bφ x0 be a nest of balls and write N = {Bx x ∈ A} for some set A ⊆ B0. Then for every x, y ∈ A we have (2) d(x, y) ≤ φ(x0, x) − φ(x0, y). Moreover, the following statements are equivalent for every x, y ∈ A: (i) y ∈ Bx, 6 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK (ii) φ(x, y) ≤ φ(y, x), (iii) φ(x0, y) ≤ φ(x0, x). Proof. For every x, y ∈ A either x ∈ By or y ∈ Bx since N is a nest, so (3) d(x, y) ≤ max{−φ(x, y), −φ(y, x)}. If the above maximum is equal to −φ(x, y), we have d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y) ≤ φ(x0, x) − φ(x0, y) ≤ φ(x0, x) − φ(x0, y). Similarly, if the maximum is equal to −φ(y, x), we have d(x, y) ≤ −φ(y, x) ≤ φ(x0, y) − φ(x0, x) ≤ φ(x0, x) − φ(x0, y). Either way, we deduce (2). To prove (i) ⇔ (ii) assume y ∈ Bx. If y = x then (ii) is trivial. If y 6= x then, by assertion (3) of Lemma 9 we have −φ(y, x) < −φ(x, y). Hence (ii) follows. Conversely, if y /∈ Bx (in particular, y 6= x) then x ∈ By \ {y}. As a result, again by assertion (3) of Lemma 9, −φ(x, y) < −φ(y, x). To prove (i) ⇔ (iii) we proceed as follows. If y ∈ Bx then 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y) ≤ −φ(x0, y) + φ(x0, x), thus φ(x0, x) ≥ φ(x0, y). For the converse, if y /∈ Bx then x ∈ By and so 0 < d(x, y) ≤ −φ(y, x) ≤ −φ(x0, x) + φ(x0, y), hence φ(x0, x) < φ(x0, y). (cid:3) Proposition 13. A metric space (X, d) is complete if and only if the OT ball space (Bφ x0) is spherically complete for every OT function φ on X and every OT element x0 for φ in X. x0, Bφ Proof. Suppose that for every OT function φ and every OT element x0 for φ in X the ball space (B0, Bφ x0) is spherically complete. We wish to show that the ball space (X, Bϕ) is spherically complete for every CK function ϕ on X, which by Proposition 5 will yield the completeness of the space X. Take any CK function ϕ on X, consider the ball space (X, Bϕ) and fix any nest of balls N in Bϕ. Pick some Bϕ x0 ∈ N and consider the nest N0 = {B ∈ N B ⊆ Bϕ x0}. By Fact 8 x0 is an OT element for the OT function φ defined as in (1). x ⊆ Bϕ Moreover, for every x ∈ X such that Bϕ x , hence x0, Bφ N0 is a nest in the OT ball space (Bφ x0). By assumption we then obtain x0, we have Bϕ x = Bφ that ∅ 6=T N0 =T N . For the converse, assume that X is complete. Fix any OT function φ on X and any OT element x0 for φ in X. Take a nest of balls N in the ball CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 7 space Bφ on x0 there exists x0 and write N = {Bx x ∈ A} for some set A ⊆ B0. By assumption Let (xn)n∈N be a sequence of elements in A such that r := inf x∈A φ(x0, x) ∈ R. lim n→∞ φ(x0, xn) = r. Then (φ(x0, xn))n∈N is a Cauchy sequence because it converges to r. By Lemma 12 the sequence (xn)n∈N is also Cauchy. Since X is complete, (xn)n∈N converges to an element z ∈ X. We want to show that z ∈ T N or, equivalently, that z ∈ Bx for every x ∈ A. Fix an arbitrary element x ∈ A. If φ(x0, x) = r (in particular, the infimum is achieved) then by Lemma 12 we get that x = z, because d(xn, x) ≤ φ(x0, xn) − φ(x0, x) = φ(x0, xn) − r → 0, showing that x is a limit of (xn)n∈N. Hence in this case we obtain that z ∈ Bx trivially. Therefore we may assume that φ(x0, x) > r. Then from the definition of (xn)n∈N we obtain the existence of N ∈ N such that, for every n ≥ N, we have φ(x0, xn) ≤ φ(x0, x). This, by Lemma 12, is equivalent to φ(x, xn) ≤ φ(xn, x). Therefore, for every n ≥ N, d(x, xn) ≤ max{−φ(x, xn), −φ(xn, x)} = −φ(x, xn), where the first inequality is deduced similarly to (3). Taking lim sup on both sides we get d(x, z) ≤ lim sup −φ(x, xn) ≤ −φ(x, z), n→∞ claimed. (cid:3) so that z ∈ Bx. Since x ∈ A was an arbitrary element, we get z ∈ T N as Remark 14. Proposition 13 does in general not hold for the ball space Bφ in place of Bφ x0. Take the complete metric space R, where d(x, y) = x − y, and consider φ : R × R → R defined as: φ(x, y) =(x − y 0 if x 6= 0 if x = 0 . This is an OT function and yields balls of the form Bx = {y ∈ X x − y ≤ y − x} = [x, ∞). In the corresponding ball space we have a nest of balls with empty intersec- tion, namely, {[n, +∞) n ∈ N}. Armed with the theory introduced so far, we can prove an important property of OT (and as a result, also CK) ball spaces in a complete metric space. 8 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK Proposition 15. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space. (1) If φ is an OT function on X then for every OT element x0 for φ in X there exists an element a ∈ B0 such that Bφ a = {a}. (2) If ϕ is a CK function on X then for every x ∈ X there exists a ∈ Bϕ x such that Bϕ a = {a}. Proof. Assertion (2) follows from assertion (1) by Fact 8. To prove assertion (1) let φ, x0 and B0 be as in the assumption of the Proposition. By Propo- sition 13 the OT ball space Bφ x0 is spherically complete, and by Corollary 10 it is strongly contractive. Theorem 2 yields the result. (cid:3) 2.3. Generalized Caristi -- Kirk ball spaces. Consider a function ϕ : X → (−∞, +∞] which is lower semicontinuous, bounded from below and not constantly equal to +∞. We will call such ϕ a CK ∞ function on X. In this setting we may define the CK ∞ balls as follows: B ϕ x := {x ∈ X ϕ(y) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x)}. If an element x0 ∈ X satisfies ϕ(x) < +∞, we will call it a CK element for ϕ in X (or simply a CK element). An easy observation is that every CK function is a CK∞ function. How- ever, for a CK∞ function ϕ, setting (4) φ(x, y) := ϕ(y) − ϕ(x) as we did in the CK case (1), may not make sense. ϕ(x) = +∞ = ϕ(y) there is no natural choice for the value of φ(x, y). Indeed, in the case In this subsection, if a CK element x0 is fixed, we will write B0 in place of B ϕ x0. For a CK element x0 we define the CK∞ ball space generated by x0 as the ball space (B0, B ϕ x0), where: B ϕ x0 := {B ϕ x x ∈ B0}. Note that in general the ball space {B ϕ x x ∈ X} is not strongly contractive. Indeed, if x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, satisfy ϕ(x) = ϕ(y) = +∞, then B ϕ x = X = B ϕ y . However, if we work inside a CK∞ ball space, strong contractiveness holds, as stated in the following lemma. Lemma 16. Take a metric space (X, d), any function ϕ : X → (−∞, +∞]. Then the following assertions hold for every x ∈ X. (1) x ∈ B ϕ x . (2) If y ∈ B ϕ (3) Let x ∈ X be such that ϕ(x) < +∞ and let y ∈ B ϕ x and ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x). x then B ϕ y ⊆ B ϕ x \ {x}. Then B ϕ y ( B ϕ x and ϕ(y) < +∞. Proof. (1): Indeed, ϕ(x) + d(x, x) = ϕ(x). (2): If ϕ(x) = +∞ then B ϕ x = X and B ϕ y ⊆ B ϕ x as well as ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x) CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 9 trivially. Now assume that ϕ(x) < +∞ and y ∈ B ϕ because x . Then also ϕ(y) < +∞ ϕ(y) ≤ ϕ(x) − d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) < +∞. Take any z ∈ B ϕ ϕ(z) < +∞ and therefore we may write y . Through the same reasoning as above, we can see that d(x, z) ≤ d(x, y) + d(y, z) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y) + ϕ(y) − ϕ(z) = ϕ(x) − ϕ(z), y ⊆ B ϕ x . x . Since z ∈ B ϕ which shows that z ∈ B ϕ B ϕ (3): Assume that ϕ(x) < +∞ and y ∈ B ϕ lemma we know that ϕ(y) < +∞ and B ϕ that case y was arbitrary, we deduce that x \ {x}. From assertion (2) of our y ⊆ B ϕ y . In x . Suppose that x ∈ B ϕ and ϕ(y) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) ϕ(x) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(y). Adding up these inequalities, taking into account that ϕ(x) < +∞ and ϕ(y) < +∞, we obtain 0 < 2d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y) + ϕ(y) − ϕ(x) = 0, contradiction. So we must have x /∈ B ϕ y , hence B ϕ y ( B ϕ x . (cid:3) From assertion (3) of Lemma 16, we obtain: Corollary 17. Let x0 be a CK element for a CK∞ function ϕ. Then for every y ∈ B0, y is also a CK element for ϕ. Further, ϕB0 is a CK function and (B0, B ϕ x0) is a CK ball space in the sense of Section 2.1. Before we state another property of CK∞ balls, it is worth noting that the proofs of Lemma 16 and Lemma 18 are similar (or, at times, identical) to the original proof of Lemma 3, which can be found in [8]. This comes from the fact that for a CK element x0, the set ϕ(B0) does not contain infinity, so these balls keep the properties of the 'original' CK balls. Lemma 18. For every x ∈ X and every CK∞ function ϕ, the ball B ϕ closed in the topology induced by the metric. x is Proof. The complement {y ∈ X d(x, y) + ϕ(y) > ϕ(x)} of B ϕ x is the preimage of the final segment ( ϕ(x), +∞] of (−∞, +∞], which is open in the Scott topology, under the function X ∋ y ψ 7−→ d(x, y) + ϕ(y). Whenever ϕ is lower semicontinuous, then so is ψ and this preimage is open in X. (cid:3) 10 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK We are now ready to prove a result analogous to Propositions 5 and 15. Proposition 19. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and ϕ be a CK∞ function on X. If x0 ∈ X then there exists a ∈ B ϕ x0 such that B ϕ a = {a}. Proof. Consider a complete metric space (X, d), fix any element x0 ∈ X and consider the ball B0 := B ϕ x0. Assume first that x0 is a CK element for ϕ in X. As we know from Lemma 18, B0 is closed, hence complete. Moreover, the function ϕ := ϕB0 is a CK function. Note that for every x ∈ B0 we have x = {y ∈ B0 d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)} Bϕ ⊆ B ϕ x = {y ∈ X ϕ(y) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x)}. We wish to show that the above sets are equal. By assertion (2) of Lemma 16 we know that B ϕ x ⊆ B0. On B0 we have ϕ = ϕ so that the values of ϕ are finite and ϕ(y) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) is equivalent to d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y). This yields B ϕ x ⊆ Bϕ x . Since ϕ is a CK function on a complete metric space B0, we may apply x0), to acquire assertion (2) of Proposition 15 to the CK ball space (B0, Bϕ a ∈ B0 such that {a} = Bϕ a = B ϕ a . Assume now that x0 ∈ X is not a CK element for ϕ. Then we obtain that B0 = X. Inside the ball B0 we may thus find a CK element x1 for ϕ. From what we have proved above there exists a ∈ B ϕ x1 ⊆ X = B0 such that B ϕ (cid:3) a = {a}. 3. Applications of Proposition 15 In this section we give simple proofs for a number of known theorems, in versions that involve OT functions, by applying Proposition 15. Note that the multivalued Caristi -- Kirk FPT, Ekeland's Principle and Takahashi's Theorem have already been proved in the OT form in [10] using the Oettli -- Théra Theorem. The original versions of these theorems are listed in Sec- tion 4. Theorem 20 (Caristi -- Kirk FPT, OT form). Let (X, d) be a complete met- ric space and φ an OT function on X. If a function f : X → X satisfies: (5) ∀ x∈X d(x, f (x)) ≤ −φ(x, f (x)), then f has a fixed point on X, i.e., there exists an element a ∈ X such that f (a) = a. Proof. Condition (5) implies that for every x ∈ X we have Proposition 15 gives us the existence of a ∈ X such that Ba = {a}. particular, since f (a) ∈ Ba, we have f (a) = a. In (cid:3) f (x) ∈ Bx. CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 11 Theorem 21 (Caristi -- Kirk FPT, multivalued version, OT form). Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and φ an OT function on X. If a function F : X → P(X) satisfies: (6) ∀ x∈X ∃ y∈F (x) d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y), then F has a fixed point on X, i.e., there exists a ∈ X such that a ∈ F (a). Proof. Condition (6) means that for every x ∈ X there exists y ∈ F (x)∩Bx. In particular, for x = a with a ∈ X given by Proposition 15 we obtain y ∈ F (a) ∩ Ba ⊆ {a}, whence a = y ∈ F (a). (cid:3) Theorem 22 (Basic Ekeland's Principle, OT form). Let (X, d) be a com- plete metric space and φ an OT function on X. There exists a ∈ X such that (7) ∀ x∈X\{a} − φ(a, x) < d(a, x). Proof. Property (7) is equivalent to Ba = {a} and the existence of such a ∈ X follows from Proposition 15. (cid:3) Theorem 23 (Altered Ekeland's Principle, OT form). Let (X, d) be a com- plete metric space and φ an OT function on X. For any γ > 0 and any OT element x0 for φ in X there exists a ∈ X such that (8) and (9) ∀ x∈X\{a} − φ(a, x) < γd(a, x) − φ(x0, a) ≥ γd(x0, a). Proof. Since γ > 0, the function ψ := γ −1φ is an OT function on X, so we can work with ψ and the respective ball space Bψ. We apply Proposition 15 to the given complete metric space X, the func- x0. This gives us the existence of an element tion ψ and the ball B0 := Bψ a ∈ B0 such that Bψ a = {a}. Now, the assertion a ∈ B0 means that d(x0, a) ≤ −ψ(x0, a) = −γ −1φ(x0, a), which is equivalent to property (9). Similarly, Bψ a = {a} implies ∀ x∈X\{a} d(a, x) > −ψ(a, x) = −γ −1φ(a, x), which is equivalent to property (8). (cid:3) 12 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK Theorem 24 (Ekeland's Usual Variational Theorem, OT form). Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and φ an OT function on X. Fix ε ≥ 0 and x0 ∈ X such that −ε ≤ inf x∈X φ(x0, x). Then for any γ > 0 and δ ≥ 0 with γδ ≥ ε there exists a ∈ X such that d(a, x0) ≤ δ and a is the strict minimum point of the function φγ : X → (−∞, +∞] defined as φγ(x) = φ(a, x) + γd(x, a). Proof. Take ε ≥ 0 and x0 as in the assumptions of the theorem, and fix arbitrary real numbers γ > 0 and δ ≥ 0 such that γδ ≥ ε. The function ψ := γ −1φ : X × X → (−∞, +∞] is an OT function on X, so we can apply Proposition 15 with the function ψ and B0 := Bψ x0 (note that x0 is an OT element for ψ in X). We deduce the existence of a ∈ B0 such that Bψ a = {a}. Now, the property a ∈ B0 means that or in other words: d(x0, a) ≤ −ψ(x0, a), γd(x0, a) ≤ −φ(x0, a) ≤ − inf x∈X φ(x0, x) ≤ ε ≤ γδ. Thus, d(a, x0) = d(x0, a) ≤ δ. The property Ba = {a} means that for every x ∈ X \ {a} we have that d(x, a) > −ψ(a, x) = −γ −1φ(a, x). From this we obtain that φγ(x) = φ(a, x) + γd(x, a) > 0 = φγ(a), which means that a is the strict minimum point of the function φγ. (cid:3) Definition 25. Let (X, d) be a metric space. Take γ ∈ (0, ∞) and a, b ∈ X. The petal associated with γ and a, b is the subset Pγ(a, b) of X defined as follows: Pγ(a, b) = {y ∈ X γd(y, a) + d(y, b) ≤ d(a, b)}. Theorem 26 (Flower Petal Theorem). Let M be a complete subset of a metric space (X, d). Take x0 ∈ M and b ∈ X \ M. Then for each γ > 0 there exists a ∈ Pγ(x0, b) ∩ M such that Pγ(a, b) ∩ M = {a}. Proof. We use the notation from the assertion of the theorem. As γ > 0, the function ϕ : M → R given by ϕ(x) := γ −1d(x, b) is a CK function on M. In this setting we have, for every x ∈ M, Pγ(x, b) ∩ M = {y ∈ M d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) − ϕ(y)} = Bϕ x . CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 13 To conclude we use assertion (2) of Proposition 15 with M in place of X and x := x0, which yields the existence of a ∈ Bϕ x0 = Pγ(x0, b) ∩ M such that {a} = Bϕ a = Pγ(a, b) ∩ M. (cid:3) Theorem 27 (Takahashi, OT form). Let (X, d) be a complete metric space, φ an OT function on X and x0 ∈ X an OT element for φ in X. Assume that for every u ∈ Bx0 with inf x∈X φ(u, x) < 0 there exists v ∈ X such that v 6= u and d(u, v) ≤ −φ(u, v). Then there exists a ∈ Bx0 such that inf x∈X φ(a, x) = 0. Proof. Proposition 15 gives us the existence of a ∈ Bx0 such that Ba = {a}. If inf x∈X φ(a, x) < 0, then by assumption there would exist v ∈ X \ {a} such that d(a, v) ≤ −φ(a, v), which would mean that Ba is not a singleton, contradiction. So inf x∈X φ(a, x) ≥ 0, but φ(a, a) = 0 which proves the claim. (cid:3) Theorem 28 (Oettli-Théra). Let (X, d) be a complete metric space, φ an OT function on X and x0 ∈ X an OT element for φ in X. Let Ψ ⊆ X have the property that (10) ∀ x∈Bx0 \Ψ ∃ y∈X\{x} d(x, y) ≤ −φ(x, y). Then there exists a ∈ Bx0 ∩ Ψ. Proof. From Proposition 15 there exists a ∈ Bx0 such that Ba = {a}. If a /∈ Ψ then, by assumption, Ba would contain another element y 6= a, which would mean that Ba is not a singleton, contradiction. (cid:3) 4. Applications of Proposition 19 Many of the theorems mentioned in the previous section have been orig- inally stated and proved using the CK function ϕ. By Fact 8, proving the version involving φ, through (1), will also automatically prove the version involving ϕ. However, many sources (e.g., [11], [1]) cite the theorems in a CK∞ form. As already remarked, we cannot directly define an OT function from a CK∞ function. Nevertheless, we can use Proposition 19 to prove these versions in the same way we did in the previous section using Propo- sition 15. Since the proofs are analogous to the ones stated in Section 3, we will leave them to the reader. Note that here we do not include the Oettli-Théra Theorem (since it has originally been stated in the OT form) nor the Flower Petal Theorem (since it does not include either of the functions). For the following theorems, fix a complete metric space (X, d) and a CK∞ function ϕ on X. 14 BŁASZKIEWICZ, ĆMIEL, LINZI, SZEWCZYK Theorem 29 (Caristi-Kirk FPT, CK∞ form). If a function f : X → X satisfies ∀ x∈X ϕ(f (x)) + d(x, f (x)) ≤ ϕ(x) then f has a fixed point on X, i.e., there exists an element a ∈ X such that f (a) = a. Theorem 30 (Caristi-Kirk FPT, multivalued version, CK∞ form). If a function F : X → P(X) satisfies (11) ∀ x∈X ∃ y∈F (x) ϕ(y) + d(x, y) ≤ ϕ(x) then F has a fixed point on X, i.e., there exists a ∈ X such that a ∈ F (a). Theorem 31 (Basic Ekeland's Principle, CK∞ form). There exists a ∈ X such that ∀ x∈X\{a} ϕ(a) < ϕ(x) + d(a, x). Theorem 32 (Altered Ekeland's Principle, CK∞ form). For all γ > 0 and any x0 ∈ X there exists a ∈ X such that and ∀ x∈X\{a} ϕ(a) < ϕ(x) + γd(a, x) ϕ(a) ≤ ϕ(x0) − γd(a, x0). Theorem 33 (Ekeland's Usual Variational Theorem, CK∞ form). Let ε ≥ 0 and x0 ∈ X be such that ϕ(x0) ≤ inf ϕ(X) + ε. Then for any γ > 0 and δ ≥ 0 with γδ ≥ ε there exists a ∈ X such that d(a, x0) ≤ δ and a is the strict minimum point of the function ϕγ(x) = ϕ(x) + γd(x, a). Theorem 34 (Takahashi, CK∞ form). Suppose that for each u ∈ X with inf x∈X ϕ(x) < ϕ(u) there exists v ∈ X such that v 6= u and ϕ(v) + d(u, v) ≤ ϕ(u). Then there exists a ∈ X such that inf x∈X ϕ(x) = ϕ(a). CARISTI -- KIRK AND OETTLI -- THÉRA BALL SPACES 15 References [1] Y. Araya, On generalizing Takahashi's nonconvex minimization theorem, Appl. Math. Lett., 22 (2009), pp. 501 -- 504. [2] J. Caristi, Fixed point theorems for mappings satisfying inwardness conditions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 215 (1976), pp. 241 -- 251. [3] I. Ekeland, On the variational principle, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 47 (1974), pp. 324 -- 353. [4] W. A. Kirk, Caristi's fixed point theorem and metric convexity, Colloq. Math., 36 (1976), pp. 81 -- 86. [5] F.-V. Kuhlmann and K. Kuhlmann, Ball spaces -- a basic framework for fixed point theorems: ball spaces and spherical completeness, in preparation. [6] [7] , A common generalization of metric and ultrametric fixed point theorems, Fo- rum Math., 27 (2015), pp. 303 -- 327. , Correction to "a common generalization of metric, ultrametric and topological fixed point theorems", Forum Math., 27 (2015), pp. 329 -- 330. [8] F.-V. Kuhlmann, K. Kuhlmann, and M. Paulsen, The Caristi-Kirk fixed point theorem from the point of view of ball spaces, J. Fixed Point Theory Appl., 20 (2018), pp. Art. 107, 9. [9] I. Meghea, Ekeland variational principle, Old City Publishing, Philadelphia, PA; Éditions des Archives Contemporaires, Paris, 2009. [10] W. Oettli and M. Théra, Equivalents of Ekeland's principle, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., 48 (1993), pp. 385 -- 392. [11] J.-P. Penot, The drop theorem, the petal theorem and Ekeland's variational prin- ciple, Nonlinear Anal., 10 (1986), pp. 813 -- 822. [12] W. Takahashi, Existence theorems generalizing fixed point theorems for multival- ued mappings, in Fixed point theory and applications (Marseille, 1989), vol. 252 of Pitman Res. Notes Math. Ser., Longman Sci. Tech., Harlow, 1991, pp. 397 -- 406. Institute of Mathematics, University of Szczecin ul. Wielkopolska 15, 70-451 Szczecin, Poland E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
1704.01825	1	1704	2017-04-06T13:16:46	On the mean summability of series by nonlinear basis	[ "math.FA" ]	The nonlinear signal processing has achieved a rapid process in the recent years. A family of nonlinear Fourier bases, as a typical family of mono-component signals, has been constructed and applied to signal processing. In this paper, the approximation properties of the partial sums and Ces?aro summability of series by the nonlinear Fourier basis are investigated in the Lp(T). Furthermore, these results are applied to the prove of Bernstein's inequalities for nonlinear trigonometric polynomials.	math.FA	math	ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN family typical of mono-component Abstract. The nonlinear signal processing has achieved a rapid process in the recent years. A family of nonlinear Fourier bases, as a has been constructed and applied to signal processing. In this paper, the approximation properties of the partial sums and Ces`aro summability of series by the nonlinear Fourier basis are investigated in the Lp(T). Furthermore, these results are applied to the prove of Bernstein's inequalities for nonlinear trigonometric polynomials. signals, 1. Introduction Let 0 < p < ∞ and T := R/2πZ. Let f is a periodic function on T, then we denote Lp(T) the set of Lebesgue measurable functions f : T → R (or C)) such that (cid:18) 1 2π ZT f (x) p dx(cid:19)1/p < ∞ where the integral is a Lebesgue integral, and we identify functions that differ on a a set of measure zero. We define Lp-norm of f by k f kp=(cid:18) 1 2πZT f (x) p dx(cid:19)1/p . For p = ∞ the space L∞(T) consists of the Lebesgue measurable functions f : T → R (or C) that are essentially bounded on T, meaning that f is bounded on a subset of T whose complement has measure zero. The norm on is essential supremum k f k∞= inf{M f (x) ≤ M a.e. in T}. Note that k f kp may take the value ∞. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 41A25, 41A10, 41E30. Key words and phrases. Nonlinear Fourier basis, Partial sum, Ces`aro mean, Bernstein inequality . 1 2 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN The another important concept is the modulus of smoothness is defined by ω (f ; t)p := sup 0≤h≤t k f (. + h) − f (.) kp If p = ∞, then it is called modulus of contiunity. And this nondecreasing continuous function on the interval [0, 2π] having properties: ω(0) = 0, ω(t1 + t2) ≤ ω(t1) + ω(t2). A family of nonlinear Fourier bases as the extension of the classical Fourier basis, have been constructed and applied to signal processing [1, 2, 7, 9, 8]. For any complex number a = a eita, a < 1, the nonlinear phase function θa(t) is defined by the radical boundary value of the Mobuis transformation τa = z − a 1 − az that is, eiθa(t) := τa(eit) = eit − a 1 − aeit It is easily seen that (1.1) θa(t + 2π) = θa(t) + 2π and its derivative is the Poisson kernel θ′ a(t) = pa(t) = 1 − a2 1 − 2 a cos(t − ta) + a2 which satisfies (1.2) 0 < 1 − a 1 + a ≤ θ′ a(t) ≤ 1 + a 1 − a Hence, θa(t) is a strictly monotonic increasing function, which makes cosθa(t) be a special mono-component signal [7, 8]. It has been shown that for any sequence {ck}k∈Z of finite nonzero terms, there holds ck 2= ckeikθa(x) 2 dx = 1 2πZTXk∈Z 1 2πZTXk∈Z ckeikθa(t) 2 pa(t)dt which combining with (1.2) implies that the so-called nonlinear Fourier Xk∈Z basis (cid:8)einθa(t)(cid:9)n∈Z forms a Riesz basis for L2(T) with the upper bound q 1+a 1−a and the lower bound q 1−a 1+a . When a = 0, (cid:8)einθa(t)(cid:9)n∈Z is simply the Fourier basis {eint}n∈Z. ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS3 Let τ a n be the space of all the nonlinear trigonometric polynomials of degree less than or equal to n, that is, The approximation error of f ∈ Lp(T), τ a n := span(cid:8)eikθa(t) : k ≤ n(cid:9) . Ea n(f )p = inf T ∈τ a n k f − T kLp(T) . Let us recall some known lemmas (see [5]) which will be used in the sequel of paper. Lemma 1. Let f ∈ C(T). We have Ea n(f )∞ ≤ 24 1− a ω(cid:18)f, 1 n(cid:19)∞ . Lemma 2. Let f ∈ C(T). We have 1− a 2 ω(f, t)∞ ≤ ω(f ◦ θ−1 a , t)∞ ≤ 2 1− a ω(f, t)∞. In the present paper first we deal with some properties of nonlinear Fourier series. Then we discuss n-th partial sums and Ces`aro sum of nonlinear Fourier series. Also we prove the necessary and sufficient condition for nonlinear Fourier series which governs the (C, 1) summability in Lp(T) for arbitrary function f from Lp(T). This result is applied to the prove of Bernstein's inequality for nonlinear trigonometric polynomials. 2. Convergence of Nonlinear Fourier Series Let f ∈ L1(T). Then 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ by nonlinear basis denoted by ∞ be its series by nonlinear Fourier basis where f (x) ∼ ckeikθa(x) Xk=−∞ ck = ck(f ) = f (t)e−ikθa(t)pa(t)dt, k ∈ Z. 1 2πZ π −π For simplicity throughtout the present paper we write nonlinear Fourier series as series by nonlinear Fourier basis. Now we can begin to give some properties of nonlinear Fourier series: Assume f, g ∈ L1(T) and f (x) ∼ ∞ Xk=−∞ ckeikθa(x), g(x) ∼ dkeikθa(x). ∞ Xk=−∞ 4 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN For linearity and convolution we have the following properties respectively. ∞ (Af + Bg)(x) ∼ (f ∗ g)(x) ∼ (Ack + Bdk)eikθa(x) Xk=−∞ 1− a (cid:19) (ckdk)eikθa(x) Xk=−∞(cid:18) 1+ a ∞ Furthermore remember Sobolev space i.e. W p r (T) =(cid:8)f ∈ X p(T) : f, ..., f (r−1) ∈ AC(T), f (r) ∈ X p(T)(cid:9) . 1 (T). It can be easily seen that property i.e. Assume that f ∈ W p f ′(x) ∼ holds. ∞ Xk=−∞(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19) (ikck)eikθa(x) We wish to examine the convergence of nonlinear Fourier series. To discuss the convergence, pointwise or uniform, of nonlinear Fourier series, we need to discuss the convergence of the sequence {Sa n} of partial sums. We have n where ck = ck(f ) = f (t)e−ikθa(t)pa(t)dt. Sa n(f )(x) = ckeikθa(x) Xk=−n 2πZ π −π 1 Proposition 1. Let Sa n(f ) be the sequence of partial sums of the nonlinear Fourier series of f . Let f ∈ L1(T) which is 2π-periodic. Then (2.1) Sa n(f )(x) = (2.2) = −π 1 2πZ π 2π Z π −π 1 f (t)Dn(θa(x) − θa(t))pa(t)dt. F (θa(x) + t)Dn(t)dt, (2.3) = {F (θa(x) − t) + F (θa(x) + t)} Dn(t)dt. 1 2π Z π 0 Proof. By the expression for the ck and considering the equality Sa n(f )(x) = Sn(F )(θa(x)) where F = f ◦θ−1 a we have already established (2.1). By a change of variable u − θa(x) = y and the (1.1) equality of θa(x) phase function's 2π-periodicity, it follows that the integral does ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS5 not change as long as the length of the interval of integration is 2π we get Sa n(f )(x) = F (θa(x) + y)Dn(y)dy. 1 2πZ π −π This proves (2.2). Finally, we split the integral in (2.2) as the sum of integrals over [−π, 0] and [0, π]. Now Z 0 −π F (θa(x) + t)Dn(t)dt =Z π 0 F (θa(x) + t)Dn(t)dt, using the change of variable y = −t and the evenness of Dn. This proves (2.3). (cid:3) We can begin with properties of the operators Sa n of partial sums of nonlinear Fourier series. For this first we need following lemmas. Lemma 3. Let F := f ◦ θ−1 a . Then we have k F kp≤( k f kp, 1−a(cid:17)1/p (cid:16) 1+a p = 1, ∞, f ∈ C(T) if p = ∞; k f kp 0 < p < ∞; Proof. Let f ∈ C(T) ve F := f ◦ θ−1 a . Therefore for p = 1, ∞ we have k f k∞:= supx∈T f (x) = supθa(x)∈T F (θa(x)) = kF k∞. And for 0 < p < ∞ the following inequality holds. k f kp:=(cid:18) 1 2π ZT f (t) p dt(cid:19)1/p . By change of variable θa(t) = u and using phase function's property which is giving in (1.2), we have the following equality. k f kp≥(cid:18)1 − a 1 + a(cid:19)1/p(cid:18) 1 2πZT F (u) p du(cid:19)1/p =(cid:18)1 − a 1 + a(cid:19)1/p Therefore we have result that we wanted. kF kp. (cid:3) For the spaces L1(T), C(T), one can evaluate the norms k Sa n k by direct computation. Theorem 1. One has k Sa n(f ) k∞≤ Λn k f k∞ . 6 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN Proof. Let consider Sa n be an operator C(T) to C(T). By using Lemma 2.1 and equality (2.2), we see that each of the norms (2.2) is equal to Sa n(f )(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2πZ π ≤ −π 1 ≤ 1 2πZ π −π F (θa(x) + t) Dn(t) dt 1 2πZ π −π F (θa(x) + t)Dn(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2πZ π −π 1 k F k∞ Dn(t) dt = k f k∞ Dn(t) dt From the Lebesgue constant's definition (see in [4]) k Sa n(f ) k∞≤ Λn k f k∞ holds. Theorem 2. For all f ∈ C(T), (cid:3) k f − Sa n(f ) k∞≤ c log nEa n(f ) holds. Proof. Let f ∈ C(T). Consider linear operator Sa n = 0, 1, .... The best approximation by t ∈ τ a n is n : C(T) → C(T), Thus we can write the following equality. Ea n(f ) =k f − t k∞ . k f − Sa n(f ) k∞=k f − t + t − Sa n(f ) k∞=k f − t + Sa n(f )(t − f ) k∞ ≤k f − t k∞ + k Sa n(f )(t − f ) k∞= Ea n(f )+ k Sa n(f ) k∞k f − t k∞ holds. Therefore from Theorem 2.1 k f − Sa n(f ) k∞≤ (1 + Λn)Ea n(f ) holds. Hence by using theorem for Lebesgue constant (see in [4]) we have k Sa n(f ) − f k∞≤ c log nEa n(f ). This completes the proof. (cid:3) Theorem 3. Let consider Sa sequence, where n = 0, 1, ... and 1 ≤ p < ∞. Then n : Lp(T) → Lp(T) linear operator k Sa n(f ) kp≤(cid:18) 1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)2/p Λn k f kp holds. ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS7 Proof. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. Consider operator Sa n = 0, 1, .... Thus if we consider the inequality (2.2) n : Lp(T) → Lp(T), holds. Hence by using Minkowski integration inequality (see in [10]), we have k Sa =(cid:18) 1 k Sa n(f ) kp≤ 1 p 1 −π −π Sa n(f )(x) p dx(cid:19)1/p 2πZ π n(f ) kp=(cid:18) 1 dx(cid:19)1/p 2πZ π 2πZ π −π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) F (θa(x) − t)Dn(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2πZ π 2πZ π −π(cid:18) 1 × Dn(t) (cid:18) 1 2πZ π 2πZ π 1 − a(cid:19)1/p 1 ≤(cid:18) 1 + a F (θa(x) + t) p pa(x)dx(cid:19) pa(x)(cid:19)1/p F (θa(x) + t) p pa(x)dx) k F kp Dn(t) dt. 2π Z π −π dt 1 ( −π −π −π 1 p ≤(cid:18) 1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)1/p 1 1 p Dn(t) dt Therefore considering Lemma 2.2 and Dirichlet kernel's definition (see in [3]) is giving result that we wanted. (cid:3) Now let examine the convergence of partial sum of the nonlinear Fourier series in Lp(T) space. Theorem 4. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞. Then for all f ∈ Lp(T) (2.4) k f − Sa n(f ) kp→ 0, n → ∞ holds if and only if, there exist a M > 0 constant that only depend on p such that (2.5) k Sa n(f ) kp≤ M a p k f kp . Proof. For necessity let f ∈ Lp(T) and k f − Sa n(f ) kp→ 0, n → ∞. Thus {Sa n(f )} is bounded since it converges in Lp(T) norm space for f ∈ Lp(T). Therefore there exists Mf > 0 for all f ∈ Lp(T). Such that k Sa n(f ) kp< Mf . Thus considering uniform bounded principle (e.g. [6]) we have sup {k Sa n k: n = 0, 1, 2, ...} < ∞. If we consider Theorem 2.3 and choose M = sup {k Sa n k: n = 0, 1, 2, ...} < ∞ 8 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN for f ∈ Lp(T), then we can write for (2.5) inequality. For sufficiency let k Sa n(f ) kp≤ M a Ea n(f )p =k f − ta p k f kp. For n kp where f ∈ Lp(T) and n = 0, 1, 2, ... . Therefore we can prove (2.4) with the help of the nonlinear polynomials ta n of best approximation of the function: k f − Sa n(f ) kp=k f − ta n(f − ta n kp + k Sa n + ta n + Sa n) kp≤ (M a n(f )(x) kp p + 1)Ea n(f )p. ≤k f − ta Since Ea n(f )p → 0, n → ∞, this completes the proof. (cid:3) Corollary 1. The norms of the operators Sa space f ∈ Lp(T), 1 < p < ∞. n(f ) are bounded in each From Theorem 2.2, Theorem 2.3 and Theorem 2.4 we now derive k Sa n(f )−f kp≤( C log nEa 1−a(cid:17)2/p Cp(cid:16) 1+a n(f )p, p = 1, ∞, f ∈ C(T), if p = ∞; Ea n(f )p, 1 < p < ∞. We see that the partial sums Sa n approximate almost as well as its polynomial of best approximation. This is true even for f ∈ C(T), if the factor log n is not essential for the problem considered. For the partial sums Sa n(f ) → f in C(T) n of the Fourier series of f we do not have Sa But we do have fast convergence of Sa n for smooth functions f . Actually, the convergence k Sa n(f ) − f k∞→ 0 can be arbitrarily fast for some f (that are not trigonometric polynomials): The following theorems shows that it is k=0[akcos(kθa(x)) + bksin(kθa(x))], where for each f . ak, bk converge to zero sufficiently fast without being zero. sufficient to take f (t) = P∞ Theorem 5. For f ∈ L1(T) ca n(f ) = lim n→−∞ lim n→∞ ca n(f ) = 0 holds. Proof. Let ε > 0. In this case there exists a t ∈ τ a n such that In this inequality let t has degree N. Therefore we can write k f − t k< ε2π. ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS9 m=N t(x) = dmeimθa(x) Xm=−N 2πZ π −π 1 Thus for k > N, ca k(f ) = f (x)e−ikθa(x)dx 1 2π Z π −π t(x)e−ikθa(x)dx = 1 2πZ π −π f (x)e−ikθa(x)dx − = 1 2πZ π −π [f (x) − t(x)]e−ikθa(x)dx holds. Hence we obtain the result from following inequality. ca k(f ) ≤k f (x) − t(x) k1< ε. Corollary 2. Let f ∈ L1(T). Then for all f , lim n→∞ aa n(f ) = lim n→−∞ ba n(f ) = 0 holds. Proof. By writing aa Theorem 2.5, we can complete the proof. n(f ) = ca n(f ) + ca −n(f ) ve ba n(f ) = ca n(f )+ca −n(f ) i Theorem 6. Let f ∈ L1(T). If (cid:3) in (cid:3) F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) t dt < ∞ then for n → ∞, Sa n(f )(x) → f (x) holds. Proof. Let assume f ∈ L1(T). By using (2.3) equality, we can write Z π 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 2πZ π 0 Sa n(f )(x)−f (x) = {F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x)} Dn(t)dt. Therefore considering Dirichlet kernel's property (see in [10]), we obtain the following. Sa n(f )(x) − f (x) = 1 0 (F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) 2πZ π × sin(cid:18)(cid:18)2n + 1 2 (cid:19) t(cid:19) dt sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) ) 10 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN Now let think the φa x(t) as following. φa x(t) = F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x). In this case the last equality written as Sa n(f )(x) − f (x) = From hypothesis φa x(t) ∈ L1(T). Hence sin(cid:18)2n + 1 2 (cid:19) t) dt. holds and by using Jordan inequality (see [10]), we obtain 1 2(cid:19) t(cid:19) dt 1 0 0 φa x(t) x(t) dt < ∞ dt < ∞. Z π φa x(t) t 0 ( φa 2πZ π sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) Z π (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) 0 ( φa 2πZ π sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) ) sin(nt) cos(cid:18) t 0 ( φa sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) 0 ( φa ) cos(nt) sin(cid:18) t sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) x(t) =( φa sin(cid:0) t 2(cid:1) ) cos(cid:18) t 2(cid:19) . x(t) x(t) x(t) x(t) 1 ) sin(cid:18)(cid:18)n + 2(cid:19) dt 2(cid:19) dt = + 1 2πZ π 2πZ π 1 ga Therefore Sa n(f )(x) − f (x) = holds. Here if we say that We find that ga equalities x(t) ∈ L1(T). In this case, considering the following bn (ga x(t)) = an (φa x(t)) = we see that −π 1 2πZ π 2πZ π 1 −π ga x(t) sin(nt)dt φa x(t) cos(nt)dt ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS11 Sa n(f ) − f (x) = (bn (ga x(t))) + an (φa x(t)) 1 4 holds. Thus by considering Corollary 2.2 and Riemann-Lebesgue Lemma (see in [10]) for n → ∞, we have So we obtain Sa x(t)) → 0 and an (φa bn (ga n(f )(x) → f (x) as n → ∞. This completes the proof. (cid:3) x(t)) → 0. Corollary 3. Let f ∈ L1(T). If F (x) − F (y) ≤ M x − y α, then we have Sa n(f )(x) → f (x), n → ∞. Proof. Let assume that f ∈ L1(T). Therefore F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) t F (θa(x) + t) − f (x) + F (θa(x) − t) − f (x) ≤ ≤ 2Mtα t = 2Mtα−1 t 0 tα−1dt = πα (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) holds. Thus if we consider R π following by using comparison test. α equality, we have the 1 2πZ π 0 F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) t dt < ∞ Therefore from Theorem 2.6, we obtain Sa n(f )(x) → f (x), n → ∞. (cid:3) Corollary 4. Let f ∈ L1(T). If f is differentable and F := f ◦ θ−1 all x ∈ T, then we have a for Sa n(f )(x) → f (x), n → ∞. Proof. Let f ∈ L1(T). Hence F ′(θa(x)) = lim t→0 F (θa(x) + t) − F (θa(x)) t holds. For ∃ δ > 0 ∋ 0 < t < δ holds. Thus we have F (θa(x) + t) − F (θa(x)) t (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < 1 − F ′(θa(x))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 12 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN F (θa(x) + t) − F (θa(x)) t < F ′(θa(x)) . Therefore F (θa(x) + t) − F (θa(x)) t < F (θa(x) + t) − F (θa(x)) δ holds for t > δ. Hence we have the following inequality. F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) F (θa(x) + t) − f (x) F (θa(x) − t) − f (x) F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) t t t F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt +Z0<t<δ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) t F ′(θa(x))dt +Z0<t<δ t F (θa(x) + t) + F (θa(x) − t) − 2f (x) t F ′(θa(x))dt t t δ ≤Z0<t<δ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 0 Z π (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =Z0<t<δ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +Zδ≤t≤π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +Zδ≤t≤π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤Z0<t<δ +Zδ≤t≤π(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt dt dt dt (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:3) So by considering Theorem 2.6, we obtain Sa n(f )(x) → f (x), n → ∞. 3. Boundness and Ces`aro Mean Summability for Nonlinear Fourier Series Precisely, we prove the necessary and sufficient condition for non- linear Fourier series which governs the (C, 1) summability in Lp for arbitrary function f from Lp. This result is applied to the prove of Bernsteins inequality for nonlinear trigonometric polynomials. Let f ∈ L1(T) and Sa n(f ) is partial sum of nonlinear Fourier series. Define n-th Fej´er (Ces`aro) for nonlinear Fourier series defined by σa n(f )(x) := 1 n + 1 n Xk=0 Sa k (f )(x). ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS13 Now let find new expressions for Ces`aro mean which are very useful. Proposition 2. Let σa n(f ) be the sequence of partial sums of the nonlinear Fourier series of f . Let f ∈ L1(T) which is 2π-periodic. Then (3.1) σa n(f )(x) = (3.2) = −π 1 2π Z π 2π Z π −π 1 f (t)Kn(θa(x) − θa(t))pa(t)dt, F (θa(x) + t)Kn(t)dt, (3.3) = {F (θa(x) − t) + F (θa(x) + t)} Kn(t)dt. 1 2π Z π 0 := n(f )(x) Proof. By the expression for the ck, phase function θa(x) and considering σa k(f )(x), we have already established (3.1). By a change of variable y = θa(t) − θa(x) and the (1.1) equality of θa(x)'s 2π-periodicity, it follows that the integral does not change as long as the length of the interval of integration is 2π we get n+1Pn k=1 σa 1 σa n(f )(x) = F (θa(x) + y)Dn(y)dy. 1 2πZ π −π This proves (3.2). Finally, we split the integral in (3.2) as the sum of integrals over [−π, 0] and [0, π]. Now Z 0 −π F (θa(x) + t)Kn(t)dt =Z π 0 F (θa(x) + t)Dn(t)dt, using the change of variable y = −t and the evenness of Kn. This proves (3.3). (cid:3) Theorem 7. Let σa sequence. Then we have n : C(T) → C(T) for n = 0, 1, ... be linear operator for all f ∈ C(T). k σa n(f ) k∞≤k f k∞ Proof. Let consider σa n : C(T) → C(T) as a linear operator for n = 0, 1, .... Thus by using (3.2) inequality and Fej´er kernel's positivity (see in [3]), we have σa n(f )(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2π Z π ≤ −π 1 1 2πZ π −π F (θa(x) − t)Kn(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) F (θa(x) − t) Kn(t) dt, 14 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN ≤ 1 2πZ π −π k F k∞ Kn(t)dt. If we consider Lemma 2.1 for last equality, we obtain that σa n(f )(x) = k f k∞ Kn(t)dt. 1 2πZ π −π Finally by using Fej´er kernel's property (see in [10]) we obtain the result. k σa n(f ) k∞≤k f k∞ (cid:3) Theorem 8. Let f ∈ C(T). Then k f − σa n(f ) k∞→ 0, n → ∞. Proof. Let σa n : C(T) → C(T), n = 0, 1, .... Then we have f (x) − σa 1 n(f )(x) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2π Zt<δ 2πZδ≤t≤π 1 ≤ + 1 2πZ π −π [f (x) − F (θa(x) + t)]Kn(t)dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f (x) − F (θa(x) + t) Kn(t)dt f (x) − F (θa(x) + t) Kn(t)dt by (3.2) equality. Therefore since f ∈ C(T) and θa continuous, we can write f (x) − σa n(f )(x) ≤ 1 2π Zt<δ ε 2 Kn(t)dt f (x) − F (θa(x) + t) Kn(t)dt ≤ ε 4πZt<δ + 1 2πZδ≤t≤π Kn(t)dt + 1 2πZδ≤t≤π 2πZδ≤t≤π 1 ≤ ε 4π + f (x) + F (θa(x) + t) Kn(t)dt [k f k∞ + k F k∞]Kn(t)dt. Now if we use Lemma 2.1 and Fej´er kernel's property (see in [10]), we have f (x) − σa n(f )(x) ≤ ε 4π + 1 2π 2 k f k∞ Zδ≤t≤π Kn(t)dt ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS15 ≤ ε 4π + 1 π ≤ + ε 2 k f k∞ Zδ≤t≤π k f k∞ 1 1 n + 1 sin2 δ 2 dt 2 Zδ≤t≤π dt π(n + 1)sin2 δ ε 2 Since there exists ∃N ∈ N : ≤ + 2 k f k∞ . π(n + 1)sin2 δ 2 n ≥ N 2 k f k∞ → 0 as n → ∞, we obtain π(n + 1)sin2 δ 2 2 k f k∞ π(n + 1)sin2 δ 2 < ε 2 . Therefore f (x) − σa n(f )(x) < ε 2 ε 2 + = ε holds for ∃N ∈ N : n ≥ N ve ∀x ∈ T. Thus σa n → ∞ n(f ) → f uniformly as (cid:3) Theorem 9. Let consider σa n = 0, 1, ... linear operator sequence. Then n : Lp(T) → Lp(T), 1 ≤ p < ∞ and k σa n(f ) kp≤(cid:18) 1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)2/p holds for all f ∈ Lp(T). k f kp Proof. Let consider σa linear operator sequence. Then we have n : Lp(T) → Lp(T),1 ≤ p < ∞ and n = 0, 1, ... Now by using Minkowski integral inequality (see in [10]), σa n(f )(x) p dx(cid:19)1/p . . F (θa(x) − t)Kn(t)dt p dx(cid:19)1/p F (θa(x) − t) p dx(cid:19)1/p Kn(t)dt k F kp Kn(t)dt Hence by (3.2) equality, we have k σa n(f ) kp= k σa n(f ) kp= k σa −π 1 −π(cid:18) 1 2πZ π n(f ) kp=(cid:18) 1 2πZ π 2πZ π 2πZ π 2πZ π −π(cid:18) 1 2πZ π = −π −π −π 1 1 16 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN holds. Therefore we obtain the following result by using Lemma 2.1. k σa n(f ) kp≤(cid:18) 1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)2/p k f kp (cid:3) Theorem 10. Let 1 ≤ p < ∞.Then we have k f − σa n(f ) kp→ 0, n → ∞ for all f ∈ Lp(T). Proof. Let σa Lp(T). Take ε > 0.Then there exists ∃ g ∈ C(T) such that n : Lp(T) → Lp(T), n = 0, 1, ... linear operator and f ∈ k f − g kp< ε 3 . Let g ∈ C(T). Then for n → ∞, we have σa n(g) → g converges uniformly by Theorem 3.2. Thus by using the Lusin Theorem (see in [3]), there exists ∃ n ≥ N such that k σa k f − σa n(f ) kp=k f − g + g − σa n(g) − g kp< ε 3. n(g) − σa n(f ) kp n(g) + σa ≤k f − g kp + k g − σa Therefore by Theorem 3.3, we have n(g) kp + k σa n(f − g) kp k f − σa n(f ) kp≤k f − g kp + k g − σa n(g) kp +(cid:18)1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)1/p k f − g kp ≤ (cid:18) 1 + a 1 − a(cid:19)2/p + 1! k f − g kp + ε 3 < ε. This completes the proof. (cid:3) 4. Bernstein's inequality for Nonlinear Fourier Series Applying the inequalities for the Ces`aro means of nonlinear trigonometric series derived in the previous section, we can prove the nonlinear version of the well-known Bernstein's inequality. For any trigonometric polynomial tn(x) of order ≤ n, for every 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, we have (cid:18)Z π −π t′ n(x) p dx(cid:19)1/p ≤ cn(cid:18)Z π −π tn(x) p dx(cid:19)1/p . (4.1) The last inequality is known as integral Bernstein's inequality. The following extension of (4.1) is true. ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS17 Theorem 11. Let 1 < p < ∞ and assume that ta ∈ τ a inequality n . Then the Z π −π (4.2) holds. t′ n,a(x) p dx ≤ C(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19)2(1+1/p)Z π −π tn,a(x) p dx Proof. It is well known from the (2.1) equality that 1 π Z π −π where tn,a(u) p Dn(θa(u) − θa(x))pa(u)du Dn(u) = 1 2 + cos ku n Xk=1 is the Dirichlet's kernel of order n. Let T = tn,a◦θ−1 we obtain a . By the derivation, t′ n,a(x) = tn,a(u) p D′ n(θa(u) − θa(x))(−pa(x))pa(u)du 1 −π π Z π πZ π 1 −π = pa(x) = pa(x) Tn,a(θa(u))D′ n(θa(u) − θa(x))pa(u)du n(y)dy 1 −π Tn,a(y + θa(x))D′ π Z π Tn,a(θa(x) + y) n Xk=1 1 πZ π −π = pa(x) = pa(x) = pa(x) (k sin ky) + 1 −π π Z π π Z π 1 −π Tn,a(θa(x) + y) n Xk=1 Tn,a(θa(x) + y)2n sin ny 1 2 + n−1 k sin ky! dy (k sin(2n − k)y)! dy Xk=1 cos ky(cid:19)! dy Xk=1(cid:18)1 − k n n−1 = pa(x) Tn,a(θa(x) + y)2n sin nyKn−1(y)dy 1 π Z π −π where Kn−1 is the Fej´er's kernel of order n − 1. By taking the absolute values, we get T ′ n,a ≤(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19) 2n sin ny πZ π 1− a (cid:19) 2n ≤(cid:18) 1+ a −π 1 1 πZ π −π Tn,a(θa(x) + y)Kn−1(y)dy Tn,a(θa(x) + y)Kn−1(y)dy 18 HATICE ASLAN AND ALI GUVEN If we use Theorem 3.3, we get that 1 2π(cid:18)Z π −π t′ 1 ≤ −π ≤(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19) 2nσa a(x) p dx(cid:19)1/p 2π(cid:18)Z π 2πZ π ≤(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19) 2n(cid:18) 1 1− a (cid:19) 2nσa ≤(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19) 2n(cid:18) 1+ a 1− a (cid:19)2+1/p ≤ 2n(cid:18)1+ a n,a kp≤ cn(cid:18) 1+ a ≤(cid:18) 1+ a k t′ n−1(tn,a, x). n−1(tn,a, x) p dx(cid:19)1/p −π 1− a (cid:19) 2nσa (cid:18) 1+ a n−1(tn,a, x) p dx(cid:19)1/p σa n−1(tn,a, x) kp 1− a (cid:19)2/p k tn,a kp k tn,a kp From this we obtain and this completes the proof. 1− a (cid:19)2+1/p k ta kp (cid:3) References [1] Chen Q. H.,Li L. Q., Qian T., Stability of frames generated by nonlinear fourier atoms, Int J Wavelets Multiresolut Inf Process, 3 (2005) 465-476. [2] Chen Q. H. and Li L. Q.,Qian T., Two families of unit analytic signals with nonlinear phase, Phys D, 221 (2006) 1-12. [3] DeVore, R. A., Lorentz G. G.,Constructive Approximation, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993. [4] Giuseppe M., Gradimir V. M., Interpolation Process Basic Theory and Applications, Springer, Berlin, 2008. [5] Huang, C., Yang, L H., Approximation by the nonlinear Fourier basis, Sci China Math, 54 (2011) 1207-1214. [6] Reed M., Simon B., Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, Academic Press, New York, 1972. [7] Qian T., Analytic signals and harmonic measures,Math Anal Appl,314 (2006)526-536. [8] Qian T., Analytic unit quadrature signals with nonlinear phase, Phys D,(303)(2005)80-87. [9] Qian T., Chen Q H. , Characterization of analytic phase signals, Comp. Math Appl., 51(2006) 1471-1482. [10] Zygmund A., Trigonometric series, 2nd ed.,Cambridge Univ. Press.,New York, 1959. ON THE MEAN SUMMABILITY OF SERIES BY NONLINEAR FOURIER BASIS19 Department of Mathematics, Firat University, Faculty of Science, 23119, Elazig, Turkey E-mail address: [email protected] (Corresponding author) Department of Mathematics Faculty of Art and Science Balikesir University 10145, Balikesir Turkey E-mail address: [email protected]
1302.2422	2	1302	2013-02-12T08:05:47	Operator theoretic differences between Hardy and Dirichlet-type spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	For $0<p<\infty $, the Dirichlet-type space $\Dp$ consists of those analytic functions $f$ in the unit disc $\D$ such that $\int_\D\|f'(z)\|\sp p(1-\|z\|)^{p-1}\,dA(z)<\infty$. Motivated by operator theoretic differences between the Hardy space $H^p$ and $\Dp$, the integral operator {displaymath} T_g(f)(z)=\int_{0}^{z}f(\zeta)\,g'(\zeta)\,d\zeta,\quad z\in\D, {displaymath} acting from one of these spaces to another is studied. In particular, it is shown, on one hand, that $T_g:\Dp\to H^p$ is bounded if and only if $g\in\BMOA$ when $0<p\le 2$, and, on the other hand, that this equivalence is very far from being true if $p>2$. Those symbols $g$ such that $T_g:\Dp\to H^q$ is bounded (or compact) when $p<q$ are also characterized. Moreover, the best known sufficient $L^\infty$-type condition for a positive Borel measure $\mu$ on $\D$ to be a $p$-Carleson measures for $\Dp$, $p>2$, is significantly relaxed, and the established result is shown to be sharp in a very strong sense.	math.FA	math	OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HARDY AND DIRICHLET-TYPE SPACES JOS´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A Abstract. For 0 < p < ∞, the Dirichlet-type space Dp p−1 consists of those analytic functions f in the unit disc D such that RD f ′(z)p(1 − z)p−1 dA(z) < ∞. Motivated by operator theoretic differences between the Hardy space H p and Dp p−1, the integral operator Tg(f )(z) =Z z 0 f (ζ) g ′(ζ) dζ, z ∈ D, In particular, it acting from one of these spaces to another is studied. is shown, on one hand, that Tg : Dp p−1 → H p is bounded if and only if g ∈ BMOA when 0 < p ≤ 2, and, on the other hand, that this equivalence is very far from being true if p > 2. Those symbols g such that Tg : Dp p−1 → H q is bounded (or compact) when p < q are also characterized. Moreover, the best known sufficient L∞-type condition for a positive Borel measure µ on D to be a p-Carleson measures for Dp p−1, p > 2, is significantly relaxed, and the established result is shown to be sharp in a very strong sense. 1. Introduction and main results Let H(D) denote the algebra of all analytic functions in the unit disc D = {z : z < 1} of the complex plane C. Let T be the boundary of D. The Carleson square associated with an interval I ⊂ T is the set S(I) = {reit : eit ∈ I, 1 − I ≤ r < 1}, where E denotes the normalized Lebesgue measure of the set E ⊂ T. For our purposes it is also convenient to define for each a ∈ D \ {0} the interval Ia = (cid:8)eiθ : arg(ae−iθ) ≤ π(1 − a)(cid:9), and denote S(a) = S(Ia). For 0 < p ≤ ∞, the Hardy space H p consists of those f ∈ H(D) for which kf kH p = lim r→1− Mp(r, f ) < ∞, Date: October 3, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47G10; Secondary 30H10. Key words and phrases. Operator theoretic differences, Hardy spaces, Spaces of Dirichlet type, Integral operators, Carleson measures. This research was supported in part by the Ram´on y Cajal program of MICINN (Spain), Ministerio de Educaci´on y Ciencia, Spain, (MTM2011-25502), from La Junta de Andaluc´ıa, (FQM210) and (P09-FQM-4468), MICINN- Spain ref. MTM2011-26538. 2 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A where and Mp(r, f ) =(cid:18) 1 2πZ 2π 0 1 p f (reiθ)p dθ(cid:19) , 0 < p < ∞, M∞(r, f ) = max 0≤θ≤2π f (reiθ). For the theory of the Hardy spaces, see [9, 11]. For 0 < p < ∞ and −1 < α < ∞, the Dirichlet space Dp α consists of those f ∈ H(D) such that kf kp Dp α where dA(z) = dx dy π f ′(z)p(1 − z2)α dA(z) + f (0)p < ∞, =ZD is the normalized Lebesgue area measure on D. The purpose of this study is to underscore operator theoretic differences between the closely related spaces Dp p−1 and H p. Before going to that, it is appropriate to recall inclusion relations between these spaces. The classical Littlewood-Paley formula implies D2 1 = H 2. Moreover, it is well known [10, 17] that (1.1) and Dp p−1 ( H p, 0 < p < 2, (1.2) It is also worth mentioning that there are no inclusion relations between Dp and Dq 2 < p < ∞. q−1 when p 6= q [13]. p−1, p−1 H p ( Dp A natural way to illustrate differences between two given spaces is to consider classical operators acting on them. For example, if 0 < p < 2, then the behavior of the composition operator Cϕ(f ) = f ◦ ϕ reveals that Dp p−1 is in a sense a much smaller space than H p. Namely, it follows from Littlewood's subordination theorem that Cϕ : H p → H p is bounded for each 0 < p < ∞ and all analytic self-maps ϕ of D, but in contrast to this, there are symbols ϕ which induce unbounded operators Cϕ : Dp p−1 when 0 < p < 2 [8, Theorem 1.1(b)]. As in the case of Hardy spaces, any composition operator Cϕ : Dp p−1 is bounded when 2 ≤ p < ∞. p−1 → Dp p−1 → Dp There are operators which do not distinguish between Dp p−1 and H p. For a given g ∈ H(D), the generalized Hilbert operator Hg is defined by (1.3) Hg(f )(z) =Z 1 0 f (t)g′(tz) dt, p−1 → Dp for any f ∈ H(D) such that R 1 If 1 < p < ∞, then Hg : Dp p−1 is bounded (compact) by [12]. Moreover, the same condition, depending on g and p, describes the boundedness (compactness) of the operators Hg : Dp p−1 → H p p−1 is bounded (compact) if and only if Hg : H p → Dp 0 f (t) dt < ∞. OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 3 and Hg : H p → H p when 1 < p ≤ 2. As far as we known, the problem of characterizing those symbols g for which Hg : Dp p−1 → H p and Hg : H p → H p are bounded when 2 < p < ∞ remains unsolved. We will next study operator theoretic differences between Dp p−1 and H p by considering the integral operator Tg(f )(z) =Z z 0 f (ζ) g′(ζ) dζ, z ∈ D. The bilinear operator (f, g) →R f g′ was introduced by Calder´on in harmonic analysis in the 60's [5]. After his research on commutators of singular integral operators, this bilinear form and its different variations, usually called "para- products", have been extensively studied and they have become a fundamental tool in harmonic analysis. Pommerenke was probably one of the first complex function theorists to consider the operator Tg. He used it in late 70's to study the space BMOA, which consists of those functions in the Hardy space H 1 that have bounded mean oscillation on the boundary T [20]. The space BMOA can be equipped with several different equivalent norms [11], here we will use the one given by kgk2 BMOA = sup a∈D RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) 1 − a + g(0)2. Two decades later, in late 90's, the pioneering works by Aleman and Siskakis [2, 3] lead to an abundant research activity on the operator Tg. In particular, those analytic symbols g such that Tg : H p → H q is bounded were characterized by Aleman, Cima and Siskakis [1, 2]. Their result in the case p = q says that Tg : H p → H p is bounded if and only if g ∈ BMOA. Our first result shows that whenever 0 < p ≤ 2, the domain space H p can be replaced by Dp p−1. Theorem 1. Let 0 < p ≤ 2 and g ∈ H(D). Then the following are equivalent: p−1 → H p is bounded; (i) Tg : Dp (ii) Tg : H p → H p is bounded; (iii) g ∈ BMOA. The implication (ii)⇒(i) is a direct consequence of (1.1), so our contribution here consists of showing (i)⇒(iii). The proof of the implication (ii)⇒(iii) in [1, 2] relies on several powerful properties of BMOA and H p such as the conformal invariance of BMOA. Our proof is based on a circle of ideas developed in [19, Chapter 4], and does not rely on these properties. Instead, the Fefferman-Stein formula [22], which states that (1.4) kf kp H p ≍ZT Sp f (ζ) dζ + f (0)p, plays an important role in the reasoning. Here, dζ denotes the arclength measure on T, Sf denotes the usual square function, also called the Lusin area 4 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A function, (1.5) Sf (ζ) =(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) f ′(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19)1/2 , ζ ∈ T, where Γσ(ζ) denotes a nontangential approach region (a Stolz angle) with vertex at ζ and of aperture σ. We also show that the statement in Theorem 1 drastically fails for p > 2. In order to give the precise statement, we will need to fix the notation. The disc algebra A is the space of all analytic functions on D which are continuous on the boundary T. For 0 < α ≤ 1, the Lipschitz space Λ(α) consists of those g ∈ H(D), having a non-tangential limit g(eiθ) almost everywhere on T, such that sup θ∈[0,2π], 0<t<1 tα g(ei(θ+t)) − g(eiθ) < ∞. The "little oh"counterpart of this space is denoted by λ(α). The following chain of strict inclusions is known: λ(α) ( Λ(α) ( A ( H ∞ ( BMOA ( B, 0 < α ≤ 1. Here, as usual, B stands for the Bloch space which consists of those f ∈ H(D) such that kf kB = supz∈D f ′(z)(1 − z2) + f (0) < ∞. Theorem 2. Let 2 < p < ∞ and g ∈ H(D). (i) If Tg : Dp (ii) There exist g ∈ A and f ∈ Dp p−1 → H p is bounded, then g ∈ BMOA. p−1 such that Tg(f ) /∈ H p. Part (ii) shows that Dp p−1 is in a sense a much larger space than H p when p > 2. This is true because we may choose the inducing symbol g to be as smooth as continuous on the boundary, but still a suitably chosen f ∈ Dp p−1 establishes Tg(f ) /∈ H p. In contrast to this, when the inducing index of the domain space is strictly smaller than the one of the target space, that is p < q, then Tg does not distinguish between Dp p−1 and H p. Theorem 3. Let 0 < p < q < ∞ and g ∈ H(D). q ≤ 1, then the following are equivalent: (a) If 1 p − 1 (i) Tg : Dp (ii) Tg : H p → H q is bounded; (iii) g ∈ Λ( 1 p−1 → H q is bounded; p − 1 q ). (b) If 1 p − 1 constant. q > 1, then Tg : Dp p−1 → H q is bounded if and only if g is Part (a) allows us to deduce a strengthened version of the classical result of Hardy-Littlewood which states that a primitive of each function f ∈ H p, 0 < p < 1, belongs to H 1−p . p OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 5 + 1 p2 1 Proposition 4. Let p, p1 and p2 be positive numbers such that p < 1 < p2 and p = 1 1 p1−1 and f2 ∈ H(D) p1 p 1−p . . If f ∈ H(D) such that f = f1 · f2 where f1 ∈ Dp1 (1−z)1/p2(cid:17), then f is the derivative of a function in H satisfies f2(z) = O(cid:16) The statement in Proposition 4 with H p1 in place of Dp1 p1−1 was proved by Aleman and Cima [1, p. 158]. The strict inclusions (1.1) and (1.2) show that their result is better when p1 < 2 meanwhile the situation is another way round when p1 > 2. An important ingredient in the proofs of both Theorems 1 and 3 is the following result on a Hormander-type maximal function M(ϕ)(z) = sup I: z∈S(I) 1 IZI ϕ(ζ) dζ 2π , z ∈ D, defined for each 2π-periodic function ϕ(eiθ) ∈ L1(T) Theorem A. Let 0 < p ≤ q < ∞ and 0 < α < ∞ such that pα > 1. Let µ be α )]α : Lp(T) → Lq(µ) is bounded a positive Borel measure on D. Then [M((·) q if and only if there exists a constant C > 0 such that µ(S(I)) ≤ CI p for all I ⊂ T Moreover, 1 k[M((·) 1 α )]αkq ≍ sup I⊂T µ (S(I)) q p I . q p are known as q This result follows by the well-known works by Carleson [6, 7], and hence p -Carleson measures. the measures µ for which µ(S(I)) ≤ CI For more recent references, see either [9, Section 9.5], or the proof of [19, Theorem 2.1] for a similar result. Theorem A has been used to characterize so-called q-Carleson measures for Hardy spaces. Recall that, for a given Banach space (or a complete metric space) X of analytic functions on D, a positive Borel measure µ on D is called a q-Carleson measure for X if the identity operator Id : X → Lq(µ) is bounded. In nowadays these measures are a standard tool in the operator theory in spaces of analytic functions in D. p−1 to Dp Let us now turn back to the two remaining cases that are not covered by Theorems 1 and 2. They are the ones in which the operator Tg acts from either H p or Dp p−1. It is easy to see that, in terms of the language of the previous paragraph, Tg : H p → Dq q−1 is bounded if and only if µg,q = g′(z)q(1− z2)q−1 dA(z) is a q-Carleson measure for H p. Therefore, in this case the symbols g that induce bounded operators get characterized by [9, Theorem 9.5], when q ≥ p, and [18] if q < p. Analogously, it follows that Tg : Dp q−1 bounded if and only if µg,q is a q-Carleson measure for Dp p−1. Unfortunately, as far as we know, the existing literature does not offer a characterization of these measures for the full range of parameter values in terms of a condition depending on µ only. It is known that they coincide with q-Carleson measures p−1 → Dq 6 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A for H p and can therefore be described by the condition (1.6) µ (S(I)) Iq/p < ∞, sup I⊂T provided q > p [16, Theorem 1(a)]. This statement remains valid also in the diagonal case q = p, if p ≤ 2, but fails for p > 2 [15, 21]. In more general terms, the p-Carleson measures for Dp α are known excepting the case α = p − 1 for p > 2 [4, 21]. This corresponds to the diagonal case q = p > 2 which interests us in particular. What is known with respect to this case, is that µ being a 1-Carleson measure is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for µ to be a p-Carleson measure for Dp p−1 [15], and that the more restrictive condition sup I⊂T µ (S(I)) I(cid:16)log e I(cid:17)−p/2 < ∞ is a sufficient condition for Id : Dp p−1 → Lp(µ) to be bounded [14]. Our next result shows that this best known sufficient condition can be relaxed by one logarithmic term. Theorem 5. Let 2 < p < ∞, and let µ be a positive Borel measure on D. If (1.7) sup I⊂T then µ is a p-Carleson measure for Dp p−1. µ (S(I)) I(cid:16)log e I(cid:17)−p/2+1 < ∞, We will see in Proposition 12 that the statement in Theorem 5 is sharp in a very strong sense. The remaining part of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we state and prove some preliminary results. Theorems 1 and 3 and their ex- pected analogues for compact operators as well as Proposition 4 are proved in Section 3. In Section 4 we will deal with the growth of integral means of functions f ∈ Dp p−1, p > 2, and we will prove Theorem 2. Before proceeding further, a word about notation to be used. We will write kT k(X,Y ) for the norm of an operator T : X → Y , and if no confusion arises with regards to X and Y , we will simply write kT k. Moreover, for two real- valued functions E1, E2 we write E1 ≍ E2 or E1 . E2, if there exists a positive constant k, independent of the argument, such that 1 k E1 ≤ E2 ≤ kE1 or E1 ≤ kE2, respectively. 2. Preliminaries We begin with a straightforward but useful estimate that will be used in proofs of Theorems 1 and 3. OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 7 Lemma 6. Let 0 < q, p < ∞ and g ∈ H(D). If Tg : Dp then p−1 → H q is bounded, (2.1) M∞(r, g′) . Proof. The functions kTgk(Dp (1 − r)1− 1 p−1,H q) p + 1 q , 0 ≤ r < 1. Fa,p,γ(z) =(cid:18) 1 − a2 1 − az (cid:19) 1+γ p , 0 < γ < ∞, a ∈ D, satisfy (2.2) Fa,p,γ(z) ≍ 1, z ∈ S(a), and a calculation shows that shows that kFa,p,γkp Dp p−1 ≍ (1 − a), a ∈ D. Since Tg : Dp p−1 → H q is bounded by the assumption, the well known relations M∞(r, f ) . Mq(cid:0) 1+r 2 , f(cid:1) (1 − r)− 1 for all f ∈ H(D) (see [9, Chapter 5]), yield 2 , f(cid:1) (1 − r)−1, valid g′(a) = (Tg(Fa,p,γ))′(a) . q and Mq(r, f ′) . Mq(cid:0) 1+r , (Tg(Fa,p,γ))′(cid:17) Mq(cid:16) 1+a 2 1 q (1 − a) Mq(cid:16) 3+a 4 , Tg(Fa,p,γ)(cid:17) (1 − a)1+ 1 q . kTgk(Dp p−1,H q)kFa,p,γkDp (1 − a)1+ 1 q p−1 . . q kTg(Fa,p,γ)kH q (1 − a)1+ 1 kTgk(Dp (1 − a)1+ 1 . p−1,H q) q − 1 p , a ∈ D, and the assertion follows. (cid:3) We next recall some suitable reformulations of Lipschitz spaces Λ(α) [9]. Lemma B. Let 0 < α ≤ 1. Then the following are equivalent: (i) g ∈ Λ(α); (ii) M∞(r, g′) = O(cid:16) 1 (1−r)1−α(cid:17) , r → 1−; (iii) dµg(z) = g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) satisfies sup I⊂T µg (S(I)) I2α+1 < ∞. We will also need the following result [16, Theorem 1(i)]. Theorem C. Let 0 < p < q < ∞ and µ be a positive Borel measure on D. Then µ is a q-Carleson measure for Dp p -Carleson p−1 if and only if µ is a q 8 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A measure. Moreover, kId(Dp p−1,Lq(µ))kq ≍ sup I⊂T µ (S(I)) q p I . 3. Integral operators from Hardy to Dirichlet type spaces Dq q−1 Proof of Theorem 1. It is known that Tg : H p → H p is bounded if and only if g ∈ BMOA [1], and therefore (ii) and (iii) are equivalent. Moreover, since Dp p−1 ⊂ H p for 0 < p ≤ 2, (ii) implies (i). To complete the proof we will show that g ∈ BMOA, whenever Tg : Dp p−1 → H p is bounded. To see this, note first that kgkB . kTgk(Dp p−1,H p) by Lemma 6, and thus g ∈ B. Let now 1 < α, β < ∞ such that β/α = p/2 < 1, and let α′ and β′ be the conjugate indexes of α and β. Assume for a moment that g′ is continuous on D. Then (2.2), Fubini's theorem and Holder's inequality yield g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) ZS(a) ≍ZT(cid:18)ZS(a)∩Γσ (ζ) ≤ ZT(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) · ZT(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ)∩S(a) ≍ kTg(Fa,p,γ)k p β g′(z)2Fa,p,γ(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19) g′(z)2Fa,p,γ(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19) β α dζ 1 β 1 α + 1 α′ dζ! 1 β′ β′ α′ g′(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19) dζ  a ∈ D, H pkSg(χS(a))k 1 α′ β′ α′ (T) L , (3.1) where Sg(ϕ)(ζ) =ZΓσ(ζ) ϕ(z)2g′(z)2 dA(z), ζ ∈ T, α′(cid:17)′ for any bounded function ϕ on D. Now (cid:16) β′ ≤1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZT kSg(χS(a))k β′ α′ (T) (3.2) α−β (T) sup β(α−1) = L khk L = β(α−1) α−β > 1, and hence h(ζ)Sg(χS(a))(ζ) dζ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) by the duality. To estimate the right hand side, we shall write I(z) for the arc {ζ ∈ T : z ∈ Γσ(ζ)} with I(z) ≍ 1 − z. Then Fubini's theorem, Holder's OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 9 inequality and Theorem A yield (3.3) h(ζ)ZΓσ(ζ)∩S(a) g′(z)2 dA(z) dζ h(ζ) dζ(cid:19) dA(z) g′(z)2(1 − z2)M(h)(z) dA(z) h(ζ)Sg(χS(a))(ζ) dζ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZT ≤ZT g′(z)2(1 − z2)(cid:18) 1 1 − z2 ZI(z) ≍ZS(a) .ZS(a) ≤(cid:18)ZS(a) ·(cid:18)ZD g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19) .(cid:18)ZS(a) a∈D RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) · sup g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19) α′ (cid:17)′ M(h)(cid:16) β′ 1 − a α′ β′ α′ β′ g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19)1− α′ β′ β′ !1− α′ khk L( β′ α′ )′ (T) . Since any dilated function gr(z) = g(rz), 0 < r < 1, is analytic on D(cid:0)0, 1 r(cid:1), by replacing g by gr in (3.1) -- (3.3), we deduce ZS(a) g′ r(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) (3.4) . kTgr (Fa,p,γ)k p β H p(cid:18)ZS(a) g′ r(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19) a∈D RS(a) g′ · sup 1 − a r(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) 1 α′ (cid:16)1− α′ β′ (cid:17) . ! 1 β′ We claim that there exists γ and a constant C = C(p, γ) > 0 such that (3.5) sup 0<r<1 kTgr(Fa,p,γ)kp H p ≤ CkTgkp (Dp p−1,H p)(1 − a), a ∈ D, the proof of which is postponed for a moment. Now this combined with (3.4) and Fatou's lemma yield sup a∈D RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) 1 − a and so g ∈ BMOA. . kTgk2 (Dp p−1,H p), 10 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A It remains to prove (3.5). To see this fix γ > p. Recall that kTgr(Fa,p,γ)kp H p ≍ZT(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) r2g′(rz))2Fa,p,γ(z)2dA(z)(cid:19)p/2 dζ. If a < 1 2, then kTgr(Fa,p,γ)kp H p . (1 − a)γ+1ZT(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) r2g′(rz)2dA(z)(cid:19) p 2 dζ ≍ (1 − a)γ+1kgr − g(0)kp = (1 − a)kTg(1)kp H p ≤ (1 − a)kg − g(0)kp H p H p . (1 − a)kTgkp (Dp p−1,H p). Let now 1 2 ≤ a < 1 kTgr(Fa,p,γ)kp 2−r . Then 1 − arz ≤ 21 − az for all z ∈ D, and hence H p . k(Tg(Fa,p,γ))rkp ≤ kTgkp p−1,H p)kFa,p,γkp (Dp Dp p−1 H p ≤ kTg(Fa,p,γ)kp H p ≍ kTgkp (Dp p−1,H p)(1 − a). In the remaining case 1 hence 2−r ≤ a < 1 we have r ≤ 2 − 1 a ≤ a. Now γ > p, and kTgr(Fa)kp H p . M p p !p/2 2(γ+1) dζ dA(z) . M p ∞(r, g′)(1 − a)γ+1ZT ZΓσ(ζ) ∞(a, g′)(1 − a)γ+1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 1 (1 − az) ≍ (M∞(a, g′)(1 − a))p (1 − a) ≤ kgkp . kTgkp p−1,H p)(1 − a). (Dp 1 − az p γ+1 p −1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) H p B(1 − a) By combining these three separate cases we deduce (3.5). (cid:3) Next, we will prove Theorem 3 by using similar ideas that were employed in the proof of Theorem 1. Proof of Theorem 3. It is known that (ii) and (iii) are equivalent [1]. Further, Lemma 6 and Lemma B give (i)⇒(iii) and (b). Moreover, if 0 < p ≤ 2, then Dp p−1 ⊂ H p and hence, in this case, (ii) implies (i). To complete the proof, we show that (iii) implies (i) when 2 < p < ∞. Since q > 2, Lq/2(T) can be identified with the dual of L . Therefore, Tg : Dp p−1 → H q is bounded if and only if q−2 (T)(cid:17)⋆ q q q−2 (T), that is, Lq/2(T) =(cid:16)L f (z)2g′(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19) dζ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . khk h(ζ)(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZT q q−2 (T) kf k2 Dp p−1 L OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 11 q q−2 (T) and f ∈ Dp p−1. To see this, we use first Fubini's theorem for all h ∈ L to obtain h(ζ)(cid:18)ZΓσ(ζ) f (z)2g′(z)2(cid:18)ZI(z) f (z)2g′(z)2 dA(z)(cid:19) dζ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) h(ζ) dζ(cid:19) dA(z) f (z)2M(h)(z)g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z). (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZT ≤ZD .ZD Since g′(z)2(1−z2) dA(z) is a(cid:16)2(cid:16) 1 q(cid:17) + 1(cid:17)-Carleson measure by Lemma B, q )/p, we may estimate the last integral upwards and 2( 1 by Holder's inequality, Theorem C and Theorem A to q ) + 1 = (2 + p − 2p p − 1 p − 1 f (z)2+p− 2p q g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19) 2q (2+p)q−2p (M(h)(z))1+ 2q p(q−2) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:19) 1 2q p(q−2) 1+ (cid:18)ZD ·(cid:18)ZD . kf k2 Dp khk q q−2 (T) L . p−1 These estimates give the desired inequality for all h ∈ L and thus Tg : Dp p−1 → H q is bounded. We now prove Proposition 4. q q−2 (T) and f ∈ Dp p−1, (cid:3) Proof of Proposition 4. Let F2 be such that F ′ 2 = f2. Then F ′ 2(z) = ) by Lemma B. 1 O(cid:16) R z (1−z)1/p2(cid:17) by the assumption, and hence F2 ∈ Λ(1 − 1 2(ζ)f1(ζ) dζ =R z Now Theorem 3 implies that the integral operator TF2 : Dp1 bounded, and since f1 ∈ Dp1 0 F ′ We finish this section by proving the expected versions of Theorems 1 and 3 for compact operators. The next auxiliary result is standard, and therefore its proof is omitted. 1−p is p1−1 by the assumption, we deduce TF2(f1)(z) = (cid:3) 1−p , which gives the assertion. 0 f (ζ) dζ ∈ H p1−1 → H p2 p p Lemma 7. Let 0 < p, q < ∞ and g ∈ H(D). Then the following are equivalent: (i) Tg : Dp (ii) For any sequence of analytic functions {fn}∞ p−1 → H q is compact; uniformly to 0 on compact subsets of D and satisfies supn∈N kfnkDp ∞, we have limn→∞ kTg(fn)kH q = 0. p−1 n=1 on D that converges < Obviously the statement in this lemma remains valid if H p is replaced by Dp p−1. 12 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A The space VMOA consists of those functions in the Hardy space H 1 that have vanishing mean oscillation on the boundary T. It is known that this space is the closure of polynomials in BMOA and is characterized by the condition a→1− RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) 1 − a lim = 0. Theorem 8. Let 0 < p ≤ 2 and g ∈ H(D). Then the following are equivalent: p−1 → H p is compact; (i) Tg : Dp (ii) Tg : H p → H p is compact; (iii) g ∈ VMOA. Proof. It is known that (ii) and (iii) are equivalent by [1]. Moreover, by bearing in mind Lemma 7 and (1.1), we see that (ii) implies (i). It remains to show that g ∈ VMOA, whenever Tg : Dp p−1 → H p is compact. Since the proof of this implication is similar to its counterpart in the proof of Theorem 1, we only show in detail those steps that are significantly different. First observe, that g ∈ BMOA by Theorem 1. Let fa,p,γ = Fa,p,γ (1−a)1/p , where γ > 0 and Fa,p,γ are those functions defined in the proof of Lemma 6. It is clear that ≍ 1 and fa,p → 0, as a → 1−, uniformly in compact subsets kfa,p,γkDp of D. Therefore kTg(fa,p,γ)kH p → 0, as a → 1−, by Lemma 7. Now, let 1 < α, β < ∞ such that β/α = p/2 < 1. Arguing as in (3.1), we deduce p−1 1 2 p ZS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) . kTg(fa,p,γ)k H pkSg(χS(a)fa,p,γ)k (1 − a) for all a ∈ D. Following the reasoning in the proof of Theorem 1 and bearing in mind that g ∈ BMOA, we obtain L p β 1 α′ β′ α′ (T) RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) (1 − a) 2 p . kTg(fa,p,γ)k p β H p(cid:16)RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z)(cid:17) (1 − a) p · 1 α′ 2 which is equivalent to RS(a) g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) (1 − a) . kTg(fa,p,γ)kp H p. Therefore g ∈ VMOA. α′ β′ · 1 α′ , (cid:3) It is known that the "little oh"analogue of Lemma B is valid. This together with appropriate modifications in the proofs of Lemma 6 and Theorem 3 give the next result. Theorem 9. Let 0 < p < q < ∞, 1 are equivalent: (i) Tg : Dp (ii) Tg : H p → H q is compact; p−1 → H q is compact; p − 1 q ≤ 1, and g ∈ H(D). The following OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 13 (iii) g ∈ λ( 1 p − 1 q ). 4. Growth of integral means of functions in Dp p−1. In this section we will prove sharp estimates for the growth of Mp(r, f ) p−1 and 0 < p < 2, then Mp(r, f ) is p−1 and 2 < p < ∞. If f ∈ Dp when f ∈ Dp uniformly bounded due to (1.1). Lemma 10. Let 2 < p < ∞ and Φ : [0, 1) → (1, ∞) be a differentiable increasing unbounded function such that Φ′(r) Φ(r) (1 − r) is decreasing. Then the following hold: (i) For any f ∈ Dp (ii) there exists f ∈ Dp (4.1) Mq(r, f ) &(cid:18)log 1 2 − 1 p(cid:17) , p−1 such that p−1, Mp(r, f ) = o(cid:16)(cid:0)log e 1−r(cid:1) (1 − r)(cid:19) 2 (cid:18) Φ′(r) e 1 − r(cid:19) Φ2(r) 1 r → 1−; 1 p , 0 < r < 1, for any fixed 0 < q < ∞. Part (i) is essentially known, but we include a proof for the sake of com- pleteness. Part (ii), apart from showing that (i) is sharp in a very strong, will be used to prove Theorem 2(ii) and the sharpness of Theorem 5. It is also worth noticing that each function (4.2) ΦN,α(r) =(cid:18)logN expN 2 1 − r (cid:19)α , N ∈ N = {1, 2, . . .}, 0 < α < ∞, satisfies both hypotheses on the auxiliary function Φ in Lemma 10. Here, as usual, logn x = log(logn−1 x), log1 x = log x, expn x = exp(expn−1 x) and exp1 x = ex. Proof of Lemma 10. (i) First observe that [14, Theorem 1.4] yields (4.3) where Ap v p 2 Dp p−1 ⊂ Ap v p 2 , kf kp Dp p−1 & kf kp Ap v p 2 , f ∈ H(D), denotes the weighted Bergman space induced by the rapidly increas- ing weight v p 2 (z) = 1 (1−z)(log , p 2 e 1−z ) z ∈ D, see [19, Section 1.2]. Therefore, kf kp Dp p−1 & kf kp Ap v p 2 r ≥Z 1 p (r, f )(cid:18)log sM p p (s, f )v p 2 2 e 1 − r(cid:19)1− p ≍ M p (s) ds ≥ M p p (r, f )Z 1 r sv p 2 (s) ds , 0 < r < 1, and (i) follows. 14 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A (ii) Let Φ be as in the lemma. Consider the lacunary series (4.4) f (z) = ∞ Xk=1(cid:18) h(rk) − h(rk−1) Φ(rk) 1 p (cid:19) z2k , rk = 1 − 2−k, k ∈ N, where h(r) = log Φ(r) is a positive function such that h′(r)(1 − r) is decreasing by the assumptions. By [15, Proposition 3.2], kf kp Dp p−1 . = and thus f ∈ Dp p−1. On the other hand ∞ Φ(rk) Xk=1(cid:18) h(rk) − h(rk−1) (cid:19) Xk=1 R rk ≤Z 1 h′(t) dt Φ(rk) rk−1 ∞ 0 h′(t) Φ(t) dt = Φ(0)−1 < 1, 2 p 2 p (cid:19) (cid:19) r2k+1 N r2k+1 N ∞ N Φ(rk) Φ(rk) Xk=1(cid:18)h(rk) − h(rk−1) Xk=1(cid:18)h(rk) − h(rk−1) Xk=1 Z rk Xk=1 (Φ(rN )) r2N+1 N (Φ(rN )) r2N+1 N (log 2) rk−1 N N 2 p 2 p 2 p M 2 2 (rN , f ) = ≥ ≥ ≥ & h′(s)(1 − s) (h′(rk)(1 − rk)) 2 p ds 1 − s! 2 p 1 (Φ(rN )) 2 p (h′(rN )(1 − rN )) 2 p N Let r ∈ [ 1 [22, Theorem 8.20 in p. 215 Vol I] yields 2, 1) be given, and choose N ∈ N such that rN ≤ r < rN +1. Then M 2 q (r, f ) ≍ M 2 2 (r, f ) ≥ M 2 2 (rN , f ) & 1 (Φ(rN )) 2 p (h′(rN )(1 − rN )) 2 p N & 1 (Φ(r)) 2 p (h′(r)(1 − r)) 2 p log e 1 − r ≍(cid:18)log e 1 − r(cid:19)(cid:18) Φ′(r) Φ2(r) 2 p , (1 − r)(cid:19) which finishes the proof. (cid:3) With these preparations we are ready to prove Theorem 2. OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 15 Proof of Theorem 2 (i) If Tg : Dp bounded because H p ( Dp p−1 → H p is bounded, then Tg : H p → H p is p−1 for 2 < p < ∞ by (1.2), and hence g ∈ BMOA. (ii) In this part we use ideas from the proof of [15, Theorem 2.1]. Take a function Φ as in Lemma 10 and let f ∈ Dp p−1 the lacunary series associated to Φ via (4.4). By using [22, Theorem 8.25, Chap. V , Vol. I], we find two constants A > 0 and B > 0 such that for every r ∈ (0, 1) the set (4.5) Er = {t ∈ [0, 2π] : f (reit) > BM2(r, f )} has the Lebesgue measure greater than or equal to A. Let now g be a lacunary series. By using [22, Lemma 6.5, Chap. V, Vol. I] we find a constant C1 > 0 such that (4.6) ZEr g′(reit)2 dt ≥ C1AM 2 2 (r, g′) = C2M 2 2 (r, g′), 0 < r < 1, where C2 = C1A. Bearing in mind the definition (4.5) of the sets Er and using (4.6), we obtain kTg(f )k2 H p ≥ kTg(f )k2 f (z)2g′(z)2(1 − z2) dA(z) (4.7) r(1 − r)M 2 g′(reit)2 dt dr f (reit)2g′(reit)2 dt dr H 2 &ZD 2 (r, f )ZEr r(1 − r)M 2 2 (r, f )M 2 2 (r, g′) dr r(1 − r)ZEr 0 0 ≥Z 1 ≥ B2Z 1 ≥ B2C2Z 1 ≥ B2C2CZ 1 0 0 Choose now Φ(r) =(cid:0)log e (cid:18)log e 1 − r(cid:19)(cid:18) Φ′(r) Φ2(r) e Φ2(r) 1 − r(cid:19)(cid:18) Φ′(r) r(1 − r)(cid:18)log 1−r(cid:1)ε, where 0 < ε < p ≍(cid:18)log (1 − r)(cid:19) 2 p 2 − 1, so that e 1 − r(cid:19)1− 2 p (1+ε) . 2 p (1 − r)(cid:19) M 2 2 (r, g′) dr. Further, let g(z) = ∞ Xj=0 1 (j + 1) (log j + 1)α z22j , 1 < α < ∞. Then clearly g ∈ A. Moreover, since ω(r) = (1 − r)(cid:0)log e so-called regular weight, we deduce 1−r(cid:1)1− 2 p (1+ε) is a r2n+1ω(r) ≍ n−1ω(1 − n−1), n ∈ N, Z 1 0 16 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A by [19, Lemma 1.3 and (1.1)]. This together with (4.7) yields 2 (r, g′) dr e M 2 p (1+ε) 1 − r(cid:19)1− 2 r22j +1−1(1 − r)(cid:18)log 0 22j+1 H p &Z 1 r(1 − r)(cid:18)log (j + 1)2 (log j + 1)2α Z 1 (j + 1)2 (log j + 1)2α = ∞, 2(j+1)(1− 2 p (1+ε)) 0 kTg(f )k2 ≍ ≍ ∞ ∞ Xj=1 Xj=1 and finishes the proof. p (1+ε) e 1 − r(cid:19)1− 2 dr! (cid:3) 5. Carleson measures for the Dirichlet space Dp p−1 The statement in Theorem 5 follows directly by (4.3) and [19, Theorem 2.1] with ω = vp/2. We next show that this result is sharp in a very strong sense. For this purpose, the following lemma is needed. Lemma 11. Let 2 < p < ∞, and let Φ : [0, 1) → (0, ∞) be a differentiable increasing function such that p 2 −1 → 0, r → 1−, Φ(r) (cid:0)log e 1−r(cid:1) m = − lim inf r→1− Φ′(r) Φ(r) (1 − r) log e 1 − r > 1 − p 2 . (5.1) and (5.2) Then Proof. By the Bernouilli-l'Hopital theorem, Z 1 r Φ(s) ds (1 − s)(cid:0)log e 1−s(cid:1) r→1− R 1 Φ(s) ds (1−s)(log e r lim sup 1−r ) Φ(r) 1−r ) (log e p 2 −1 . p 2 Φ(r) (cid:0)log e 1−r(cid:1) , p 2 −1 r ∈ (0, 1). p 2 ≤(cid:16)m + p 2 − 1(cid:17)−1 ∈ (0, ∞), and the assertion follows. (cid:3) If Φc(r) =(cid:0)log e 1−r(cid:1)c and c > 0, then e Φ′ c(r) Φc(r) (1 − r) log = c, 0 < r < 1, 1 − r OPERATOR THEORETIC DIFFERENCES 17 and thus Φc satisfies both (5.1) and (5.2) if c < p Φn(r) = logn , n ∈ N, satisfies expn(2) 1−r 2 − 1. Further, each function Φ′ n(r) Φn(r) (1 − r) log e 1 − r → 0, r → 1, and hence satisfies all hypotheses of the next result. Proposition 12. Let 2 < p < ∞, and let Φ : [0, 1) → (1, ∞) be a differentiable increasing unbounded function such that Φ′(r) Φ(r) (1−r) is decreasing and (5.1) and (5.2) are satisfied. Then there exists a positive Borel measure µ on D such that (5.3) sup I⊂T µ (S(I)) I(cid:16)log e I(cid:17)−p/2+1 Φ(1 − I) but µ is not a p-Carleson measure for Dp p−1. < ∞, z ∈ D. Proof. The radial measure dµ(z) = Φ(z) dA(z) (1 − z)(cid:16)log e 1−z(cid:17)p/2 , satisfies (5.3) by Lemma 11. To see that µ is not a p-Carleson measure for Dp p−1, consider the lacunary series associated to Φ via (4.4). By Lemma 10, f ∈ Dp p−1 and kf kp 0 Lp(µ) =Z 1 &Z 1 0 M p p (r, f )Φ(r) 1−r(cid:1)p/2 r dr (1 − r)(cid:0)log e rΦ′(r) Φ(r) dr & lim t→1− log Φ(t) = ∞, (cid:3) which finishes the proof. References [1] A. Aleman, J. A. Cima, An integral operator on H p and Hardy's inequality, J. Anal. Math. 85 (2001), 157 -- 176. [2] A. Aleman, A. Siskakis, An integral operator on H p, Complex Variables 28 (1995), 149 -- 158. [3] A. Aleman, A. Siskakis, Integration operators on Bergman spaces, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 46 (1997), 337 -- 356. [4] N. Arcozzi, R. Rochberg and E. Sawyer, Carleson measures for analytic Besov spaces, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 18 (2002), 443 -- 510. [5] A. Calder´on, Commutators of singular integral operators, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 53, (1965) 1092 -- 1099. [6] L. Carleson, An interpolation problem for bounded analytic functions, Amer. J. Math. 80 (1958), 921 -- 930. 18 JOS ´E ´ANGEL PEL ´AEZ, F. P´EREZ-GONZ ´ALEZ, AND JOUNI R ATTY A [7] L. Carleson, Interpolations by bounded functions and the corona problem, Ann. of Math. 76 (1962), 547 -- 559. [8] B. R. Choe, H. Koo and W. Smith, Composition operators acting on Sobolev holomor- phic spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc (2003), 355, n.7, 2829 -- 2855. [9] P. Duren, Theory of H p Spaces, Academic Press, New York-London 1970. [10] T. M. Flett, The dual of an inequality of Hardy and Littlewood and some related inequalities, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 38 (1972), 756 -- 765. [11] J. Garnett, Bounded analytic functions, Academic Press, New York, 1981. [12] P. Galanopoulos, D. Girela, J. A. Pel´aez and A. Siskakis, Generalized Hilbert operators on classical spaces of analytic functions, preprint (submitted). [13] D. Girela and J. A. Pel´aez, Growth properties and sequences of zeros of analytic func- tions in spaces of Dirichlet type, J. Australian Math. Soc. 80 (2006), 397 -- 418. [14] D. Girela, M. Pavlovi´c and J. A. Pel´aez, Spaces of analytic functions of Hardy-Bloch type, J. Anal. Math. 100 (2006), 53 -- 81. [15] D. Girela and J. A. Pel´aez, Carleson measures for spaces of Dirichlet type, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 55 (2006), n. 3, 415 -- 427. [16] D. Girela and J. A. Pel´aez, Carleson measures, multipliers and integration operators for spaces of Dirichlet type, J. Funct. Analysis 241 (2006), n. 1, 334 -- 358. [17] J. E. Littlewood and R. E. A. C. Paley, Theorems on Fourier series and power series. II, Proc. London Math. Soc. 42 (1936), 52 -- 89. [18] D. H. Luecking, Embedding derivatives of Hardy spaces into Lebesgue spaces. Proc. London Math. Soc. 63 (1991), 565 -- 619. [19] J. A. Pel´aez and J. Rattya, Weighted Bergman spaces induced by rapidly increasing weights, Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. (to appear). [20] C. Pommerenke, Schlichte funktionen und analytische funktionen von beschrankter mit- tlerer oszillation, Comment. Math. Helv. 52 (1977), 591 -- 602. [21] Z. Wu, Carleson measures and multipliers for Dirichlet spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 169 (1999), 148 -- 163. [22] Zygmund A., Trigonometric Series, Cambridge University Press, London, 1959. Departamento de Analisis Matematico, Universidad de Malaga, Campus de Teatinos, 29071 Malaga, Spain E-mail address: [email protected] Departamento de An´alisis Matem´atico, Universidad de La Laguna, 38271 La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain E-mail address: [email protected] University of Eastern Finland, P.O.Box 111, 80101 Joensuu, Finland E-mail address: [email protected]
1604.06323	2	1604	2016-07-18T18:09:52	Optimal constants for a mixed Littlewood type inequality	[ "math.FA" ]	For $p\in\lbrack2,\infty]$ a mixed Littlewood-type inequality asserts that there is a constant $C_{(m),p}\geq1$ such that \[ \left( \sum_{i_{1}=1}^{\infty}\left( \sum_{i_{2},...,i_{m}=1}^{\infty }\|T(e_{i_{1}},...,e_{i_{m}})\|^{2}\right) ^{\frac{1}{2}\frac{p}{p-1}}\right) ^{\frac{p-1}{p}}\leq C_{(m),p}\Vert T\Vert \] for all continuous real-valued $m$-linear forms on $\ell_{p}\times c_{0} \times\dots\times c_{0}$ (when $p=\infty$, $\ell_{p}$ is replaced by $c_{0})$. We prove that for $p>2.18006$ the optimal constants $C_{(m),p}$ are $\left( 2^{\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{p}}\right) ^{m-1}.$ When $p=\infty,$ we recover the best constants of the mixed $\left( \ell_{1},\ell_{2}\right) $-Littlewood inequality.	math.FA	math	OPTIMAL CONSTANTS FOR A MIXED LITTLEWOOD TYPE INEQUALITY TONY NOGUEIRA, DANIEL N ´U NEZ-ALARC ´ON, AND DANIEL PELLEGRINO Abstract. For p ∈ [2, ∞] a mixed Littlewood-type inequality asserts that there is a constant C(m),p ≥ 1 such that  ∞(cid:88)  ∞(cid:88) i1=1 i2,...,im=1 T (ei1 , ..., eim )2 ≤ C(m),p(cid:107)T(cid:107)  p−1 p p p−1 2  1 (cid:17)m−1 (cid:16) for all continuous real-valued m-linear forms on (cid:96)p × c0 × · · · × c0 (when p = ∞, (cid:96)p is replaced by c0). We prove . When p = ∞, we recover the best constants of that for p > 2.18006 the optimal constants C(m),p are the mixed ((cid:96)1, (cid:96)2)-Littlewood inequality. 2 − 1 2 p 1 The Hardy -- Littlewood inequality ([17], 1934) is a continuation of famous works of Littlewood ([18], 1930) and 1. Introduction Bohnenblust and Hille ([9], 1931) and can be stated as follows: • [17, Theorems 2 and 4] If p, q ≥ 2 are such that 1 p 1 2 then there is a constant Cp,q ≥ 1 such that < + < 1 1 q  pq−q−p pq A(ej, ek) pq pq−p−q ≤ Cp,q (cid:107)A(cid:107) 6 1 0 2 l u J 8 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 2 v 3 2 3 6 0 . 4 0 6 1 : v i X r a (1) (2) (3)  ∞(cid:88) j,k=1  ∞(cid:88) for all continuous bilinear forms A : (cid:96)p × (cid:96)q → R (or C). Moreover the exponent • [17, Theorems 1 and 4] If p, q ≥ 2 are such that pq pq−p−q is optimal. then there is a constant Cp,q ≥ 1 such that 1 p + 1 q ≤ 1 2  3pq−2p−2q 4pq A(ej, ek) 4pq 3pq−2p−2q ≤ Cp,q (cid:107)A(cid:107) for all continuous bilinear forms A : (cid:96)p × (cid:96)q → R (or C). Moreover the exponent 4pq 3pq−2p−2q is optimal. j,k=1 Above and henceforth, as usual in this field, when p and/or q is infinity, we consider c0 instead of (cid:96)p and/or (cid:96)q. As mentioned in [20, Theorem 1] an unified version of the above two results of Hardy and Littlewood asserts that there is a constant Cp,q ≥ 1 such that  ∞(cid:88) (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) 2 1 (cid:33) λ λ A(ej, ek)2 ≤ Cp,q (cid:107)A(cid:107) pq−p−q , for all continuous bilinear forms A : (cid:96)p × (cid:96)q → R (in fact, in [20, Theorem 1] just the complex with λ = pq case is considered, but for a general approach including the real case we refer to [11]; moreover the exponents are optimal). The recent years witnessed an increasing interest in the study of summability of multilinear operators j=1 k=1 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 11Y60, 46G25. Key words and phrases. Absolutely summing operators; Hardy -- Littlewood inequality; Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality; Multiple sum- ming operators. T. Nogueira was supported by Capes, D. N´unez-Alarc´on was supported by Capes, Grant 000785/2015-06, and D. Pellegrino was supported by CNPq. 1 2 T. NOGUEIRA, D. N ´U NEZ, AND D. PELLEGRINO (see, for instance, [10, 23, 24]) and in estimating constants of the multilinear and polynomial Hardy -- Littlewood and related inequalities (see [2, 3, 4, 6, 14, 15, 26]). Perhaps the main motivations are potential applications (see, for instance, [19] for applications of the real-valued case of the estimates of the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality and [7, 12] for applications of the complex-valued case). One of the most for reaching generalizations of the Hardy -- Littlewood inequality is the following theorem (see (cid:21) also [25]): Theorem 1.1. (See Albuquerque, Araujo, N´unez, Pellegrino and Rueda [1]) Let m ≥ 2 be a positive integer, (cid:17) , 2 1 ≤ k ≤ m and n1, . . . , nk ≥ 1 be positive integers such that n1 + ··· + nk = m. If q1, ..., qk ∈ and 0 ≤ 1 2 , then the following assertions are equivalent: + ··· + 1 1−(cid:16) 1 1 +···+ 1 ≤ 1 (cid:20) pm p1 pm p1 (a) There is a constant Ck = C(k, p1, ..., pm, q1, ..., qk) such that  ∞(cid:88) i1=1 ... (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) ik=1 T (en1 i1 , ..., enk ik )qk ... for all continuous m-linear forms T : (cid:96)p1 × ··· × (cid:96)pm → R. (b) The numbers q1, ..., qk satisfy 1 q1 + ··· + 1 qk ≤ k + 1 2 − + ··· + 1 pm q1 q2 1  q1 (cid:19) ≤ Ck(cid:107)T(cid:107) . (cid:33) qk−1 qk (cid:18) 1 p1 Above, the notation enj j represents the nj-tuple (ej, ..., ej). The optimal constants of the previous inequalities are essentially unknown. Recent works have shown that in general these constants have a sublinear growth (see [5, 6, 7], and references therein). One of the few cases in which the optimal constants are known for all m is the case of mixed ((cid:96)1, (cid:96)2)-Littlewood inequality (see [21]): • The optimal constants C(m),∞ satisfying ∞(cid:88)  ∞(cid:88)  1 2 T (ei1 , ..., eim)2 ≤ C(m),∞(cid:107)T(cid:107) i1=1 i2,...,im=1 for all continuous real m-linear forms T : c0 × ··· × c0 → R are 2 m−1 2 . From now on p0 ≈ 1.84742 is the unique real number satisfying √ π 2 = Γ 2 (cid:18) p0 + 1 (cid:19) . (5) (4) (6) Our main result provides the optimal constants of a Hardy -- Littlewood-type inequality that encompasses (4); as far as we know this is the first time in which a Hardy -- Littlewood type inequality (except for the case of mixed ((cid:96)1, (cid:96)2)-Littlewood inequality) is proved to have optimal constants with exponential growth: Theorem 1.2. Let m ≥ 2 be a positive integer and p ≥ p0 p0−1 ≈ 2.18006. The optimal constant C(m),p such that  ∞(cid:88)  ∞(cid:88) i1=1 i2,...,im=1 T (ei1, ..., eim)2 ≤ C(m),p(cid:107)T(cid:107), 2 p p p−1 p−1  1 (cid:17)m−1 (cid:16) 1 2− 1 p 2 . for all continuous m-linear forms T : (cid:96)p × c0 × ··· × c0 → R is Note that the above Hardy -- Littlewood type inequality holds for p ≥ 2 (see Theorem 1.1). When p = 2 it is simple to prove that the optimal constants are C(m),p = 1. As a consequence of the arguments of our proof of Theorem 1.2 we remark that for 2 < p < p0 p0−1 the optimal constants still have exponential growth; so an eventual decrease on the order of the growth when p → 2 does not happen. Moreover, for 2 < p < p0 p0−1 ≈ 2.18006, the difference between the bases in the exponential upper and lower estimates of C(m),p is not bigger than 4 · 10−4 (see the figures 1 and 2). OPTIMAL CONSTANTS FOR A MIXED LITTLEWOOD TYPE INEQUALITY 3 In the final section we also provide upper and lower estimates for the sharp constants Cp,∞ of the real case of (2), showing that 2 1 2− 1 p ≤ Cp,∞ ≤ 2 1 2− 1 2p for all p ≥ p0 the Littlewood's 4/3 inequality obtained in [15]. p0−1 ≈ 2.18006. This result recovers, in particular, the optimality of the constant √ 2 of the real case of 2. The proof of Theorem 1.2 The Khinchine inequality (see [13]) asserts that, for any 0 < q < ∞, there are positive constants Aq, Bq such that regardless of the scalar sequence (aj)n j=1 we have Aq aj2 ≤ ajrj(t) dt ≤ Bq aj2  1 q (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)q  n(cid:88) j=1  1 2 ,  n(cid:88) j=1  1 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n(cid:88) (cid:33) 1 (cid:1) j=1 q (cid:90) 1 Γ(cid:0) q+1 0 √ 2 π (cid:32) where rj are the Rademacher functions. For real scalars, U. Haagerup [16] proved that if p0 is the number defined in (5) then √ 2 Aq = and for 1.84742 ≈ p0 < q < 2 , Let T : (cid:96)p × c0 × ··· × c0 → R be a continuous m-linear form. By the Khinchine inequality for multiple sums (see [22]) we know that Aq = 2 1 2− 1 q , for 1 ≤ q ≤ p0 ≈ 1.84742.  ∞(cid:88)  ∞(cid:88) i1=1 i2,...,im=1 ≤ (A−1 p−1 p )m−1 = (A−1 p−1 p )m−1 ≤ (A−1 p p−1 ≤ (A−1 p p−1 )m−1 )m−1 T (ei1 , ..., eim )2 [0,1]m−1 (cid:90) i1=1  ∞(cid:88) (cid:90) (cid:90) [0,1]m−1 [0,1]m−1 2 p p i2,...,im p−1 p−1  1 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ∞(cid:88) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)T (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) ei1, i1=1 i2=1 i2=1 ·, ·, i2=1 ri2(t2)··· rim (tm)T (ei1 , ..., eim ) ∞(cid:88) ∞(cid:88) ri2 (t2)ei2, ..., rim (tm)eim ri2(t2)ei2, ..., im=1 rim (tm)eim ∞(cid:88) ∞(cid:88) im=1 im=1 ri2(t2)ei2, ..., rim(tm)eim p  p−1  p−1 p p p−1 dt2 ··· dtm (cid:33)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p p−1 dt2 ··· dtm  p−1 p p−1 dt2 ··· dtm (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:33)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p (cid:33)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) sup t2,...,tm∈[0,1] 2− 1 1 p p−1 )m−1(cid:107)T(cid:107) = (2 ≤ (A−1 p0−1 ≈ 2.18006. Now let us show that (2 p )m−1(cid:107)T(cid:107) whenever p ≥ p0 and T x2 2 : (cid:96)2 p → R be given by (7) and for each x2 ∈ (cid:96)2∞. Observe that (8) T2 (x1, x2) =(cid:0)x1 2 + x2 2 (cid:1) x1 1 +(cid:0)x1 2 − x2 2 (cid:1) x2 1, T x2 2 (x1) = T2 (x1, x2) , (cid:110)(cid:107)T x2 (cid:111) 2 (cid:107) : (cid:107)x2(cid:107)(cid:96)2∞ = 1 . (cid:107)T2(cid:107) = sup 1 2− 1 p )m−1 is the best possible constant. Let T2 : (cid:96)2 p × (cid:96)2∞ → R 4 T. NOGUEIRA, D. N ´U NEZ, AND D. PELLEGRINO Let us estimate (8). Since ((cid:96)p) (9) ∗ = (cid:96) p p−1 (cid:107)T2(cid:107) = sup  (x1) : (cid:107)x2(cid:107)(cid:96)2∞ = 1  (cid:12)(cid:12) : (cid:107)x2(cid:107)(cid:96)2∞ = 1 (cid:1) x2 (cid:1) x1 1 +(cid:0)x1 2 − x2 (cid:111) 2, 0, 0, ...(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:13) p (cid:27) (cid:17) 1 : (cid:107)x2(cid:107)(cid:96)2∞ = 1 p−1 p−1 : x ∈ [−1, 1] 2 − x2 = 2. 2 1 p = sup = sup = sup = sup p p 2 T x2 2 + x2 2 x1∈B(cid:96)2 x1∈B(cid:96)2 , we have (cid:111) 2 (cid:107) : (cid:107)x2(cid:107)(cid:96)2∞ = 1 (cid:110)(cid:107)T x2  sup  sup (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:0)x1 (cid:110)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)x1 (cid:26)(cid:16)1 + x p (cid:26)(cid:16)1 + x1 + 1 − x1(cid:17)1 (cid:27) (cid:17) p−1 2, x1 p−1 + 1 − x p p−1 2 + x2 ; x ∈ [−1, 1] p sup for p ∈ [2,∞) , we have (cid:107)·(cid:107)(cid:96) p p−1 ≤ sup . Therefore, for p ∈ [2,∞) we have (cid:27) = 2, ; x ∈ [−1, 1] ≤ (cid:107)·(cid:107)(cid:96)1 (cid:26)(cid:16)1 + x1 + 1 − x1(cid:17)1 ≥(cid:16)1 + 1 p p−1 + 1 − 1 p p−1 (cid:27) ; x ∈ [−1, 1] = 2. (cid:17) p−1 p = 2. In order to verify the last equality, note that since by the norm inclusion (cid:96)1 ⊂ (cid:96) p p−1 (cid:26)(cid:16)1 + x p sup p−1 + 1 − x p p−1 On the other hand, it is obvious that (cid:26)(cid:16)1 + x p (cid:16) 1 2− 1 p sup p−1 + 1 − x p p−1 (cid:17)m−1 (cid:17) p−1 p (cid:27) ; x ∈ [−1, 1] In order to show that 2 is the best possible constant satisfying (6), let T2 be as in (7) and define for all m ≥ 3 the m-linear operator Tm : (cid:96)2m−1 m + x2 Tm(x1, ...., xm) =(x1 p × (cid:96)2m−1∞ × ··· × (cid:96)2m−1∞ → R by m)Tm−1(x1, ..., xm−1) + (x1 m − x2 m)Tm−1(S2m−2 p (x1), S2m−2 0 (x2), S2m−3 0 (x3)..., S2 0 (xm−1)), where x1 ∈ (cid:96)2m−1 induction on m ≥ 2 we shall show that p , xk ∈ (cid:96)2m−1∞ for all k = 2, ..., m, and Sp : (cid:96)p → (cid:96)p and S0 : c0 → c0 are the backward shifts. By (cid:107)Tm(cid:107) = 2m−1. The case m = 2 is already done in (9). Let us suppose that (cid:107)Tm−1(cid:107) = 2(m−1)−1. Therefore, Tm(x1, . . . , xm) ≤x1 mTm−1(x1, . . . , xm−1) m + x2 + x1 m − x2 ≤2m−2[x1 mTm−1(S2m−2 m(cid:107)x1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1 p m + x2 p (x1), S2m−2 ···(cid:107)xm−1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ 0 (x2), S2m−3 0 (x3)..., S2 0 (xm−1)) + x1 m − x2 ≤2m−2[x1 m + x2 =2m−1(cid:107)x1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1 ≤2m−1(cid:107)x1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1 p p p (x1)(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1 m − x2 m(cid:107)S2m−2 m + x1 ···(cid:107)xm−1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ ···(cid:107)xm(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ . 0 (cid:107)S2m−2 m](cid:107)x1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1 max{x1 (cid:107)S2m−3 (x2)(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ ···(cid:107)xm−1(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ m,x2 m} 0 p (x3)(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ ···(cid:107)S2 0 (xm−1)(cid:107)(cid:96)2m−1∞ ] We thus have (cid:107)Tm(cid:107) ≤ 2m−1. Now consider am = e1 + e2 and note that p (cid:110)Tm (x1, . . . , xm−1, am) : x1 ∈ B(cid:96)2m−1 p (cid:107)Tm(cid:107) ≥ sup , x2 ∈ B(cid:96)2m−1∞ , ..., xm−1 ∈ B(cid:96)2m−1∞ (cid:111) = 2(cid:107)Tm−1(cid:107) = 2m−1 and hence (cid:107)Tm(cid:107) = 2m−1. Since the proof is done. OPTIMAL CONSTANTS FOR A MIXED LITTLEWOOD TYPE INEQUALITY 5 (cid:18)(cid:80) (cid:16)(cid:80) i2,...,im i1 Tm(ei1,...,eim)2(cid:17) 1 2 (cid:107)Tm(cid:107) p−1(cid:19) p−1 p p (cid:18) = 2 − 1 p 1 2 (cid:19)m−1 , 3. Final remarks The same argument used in the proof of Theorem 1.2 shows that for 2 < p < p0 p0−1 ≈ 2.18006 the optimal constants also have exponential growth; curiously, for p = 2 the situation is quite different and the optimal constants are 1. In fact, note that the second part of the proof (the optimality proof) holds for all p ≥ 2. Moreover, the first part p0−1 ≈ 2.18006, the following of the proof gives us the estimate C(m),p ≤(cid:16) . We thus have, for 2 ≤ p < p0 A−1 p−1 (cid:17)m−1  1√ (cid:17)m−1 ≤ C(m),p ≤ p 2 (cid:16) 1 2− 1 p 2  Γ (cid:16) 2p−1 2p−2 √ π (cid:17)  1−p p m−1 . inequalities Figure 1. Plots of the functions A−1 x−1 x Figure 2. Plot of the function (cid:16) A−1 x−1 x and 2 1 2− 1 x , for x ∈ [2, p0 p0−1 ] (cid:17) , for x ∈ [2, p0 p0−1 ] − 2 1 2− 1 x 6 T. NOGUEIRA, D. N ´U NEZ, AND D. PELLEGRINO For p ≥ 2, we know that (10)  ∞(cid:88) j=1 (cid:32) ∞(cid:88) λ 2 1 (cid:33) 1 2 √ ≤ 2(cid:107)A(cid:107) A(ej, ek)λ p−1 , for all continuous bilinear forms A : (cid:96)p× c0 → R (see, for instance, [2, Theorem 1.2 and Remark 5.1]). with λ = p By interpolating (10) and the result of Theorem 1.2 for m = 2 in the sense of [2] or using the Holder inequality for mixed sums ([8]) we obtain, for p ≥ p0 p0−1 ≈ 2.18006, 2p (cid:107)A(cid:107)(cid:17)1/2 p−2 2 1 2− 1 2p (cid:107)A(cid:107) . = 2  ∞(cid:88) j,k=1 A(ej, ek) 4p 3p−2 k=1 4p  3p−2 (cid:32) 2(cid:80) ≤(cid:16)√ 2(cid:107)A(cid:107)(cid:17)1/2(cid:16) (cid:33) 3p−2 4p T2(ej, ek) 4p 3p−2 (cid:107)T2(cid:107) 1 2− 1 p ≤ Cp,∞ ≤ 2 1 2− 1 2p . 2 Using the approach of the previous section we obtain the lower estimate Cp,∞ ≥ j,k=1 and thus 3p−2 4p 4 2 = = 2 1 2− 1 p When p = ∞ we recover the well known optimal estimate of the famous Littlewood's 4/3 that can be found in [15]. Acknowledgement. The authors are indebted to the two anonymous referees for their important contributions to the final version of this paper. References [1] N. Albuquerque, G. Ara´ujo, D. N´unez-Alarc´on, D. Pellegrino, and P. Rueda, Bohnenblust -- Hille and Hardy -- Littlewood inequalities by blocks, arXiv:1409.6769v6 [math.FA]. [2] N. Albuquerque, F. Bayart, D. Pellegrino, J. Seoane-Sepulveda, Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequal- ity, J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014), no. 6, 3726 -- 3740. [3] N. Albuquerque, F. Bayart, D. Pellegrino and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Optimal Hardy-Littlewood type inequalities for polynomials and multilinear operators, Isr. J. Math. 211 (2016), 197 -- 220. [4] G. Ara´ujo, D. Pellegrino, Lower bounds for the constants of the Hardy-Littlewood inequalities, Linear Algebra Appl. 463 (2014), 10 -- 15. [5] G. Ara´ujo, D. Pellegrino, On the constants of the Bohnenblust -- Hille and Hardy -- Littlewood inequalities, to appear in Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. [6] G. Ara´ujo, D. Pellegrino, D. Diniz P. Silva e Silva, On the upper bounds for the constants of the Hardy-Littlewood inequality, J. [7] F. Bayart, D. Pellegrino and J. B. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, The Bohr radius of the n -- dimensional polydisk is equivalent to(cid:112)(log n)/n, Funct. Anal. 267 (2014), no. 6, 1878 -- 1888. Adv. Math. 264 (2014), 726 -- 746. [8] A. Benedek, R. Panzone, The space Lp, with mixed norm, Duke Math. J. 28 1961 301 -- 324. [9] H. F. Bohnenblust, E. Hille, On the absolute convergence of Dirichlet series, Ann. of Math. 32 (1931), 600 -- 622. [10] G. Botelho, J. Santos, A Pietsch domination theorem for ((cid:96)s [11] W. Cavalcante, D. N´unez-Alarc´on, Remarks on the Hardy -- Littlewood inequality for m-homogeneous polynomials and m-linear p, (cid:96)p)-summing operators, Arch. Math. (Basel) 104 (2015), 47 -- 52. forms, to appear in Quaest. Math. [12] A. Defant, L. Frerick, J. Ortega-Cerd´a, M. Ounaıes, K. Seip, The Bohnenblust-Hille inequality for homogeneous polynomials is hypercontractive, Ann. of Math. (2), 174 (2011), 485 -- 497. [13] J. Diestel, H. Jarchow, A. Tonge, Absolutely summing operators, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. [14] V. Dimant and P. Sevilla -- Peris, Summation of coefficients of polynomials on (cid:96)p spaces, Publ. Mat. 60 (2016), 289 -- 310. [15] D. Diniz, G. Munoz-Fern´andez, D. Pellegrino, J. Seoane-Sep´ulveda, Lower bounds for the constants in the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality: the case of real scalars, Proc. Amer. math. Soc. 142 (2014), 575 -- 580. [16] U. Haagerup, The best constants in the Khinchine inequality, Studia Math. 70 (1982) 231 -- 283. [17] G. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, Bilinear forms bounded in space [p, q], Quart. J. Math. 5 (1934), 241 -- 254. [18] J. E. Littlewood, On bounded bilinear forms in an infinite number of variables, Quart. J. Math. 1 (1930), 164 -- 174. [19] A. Montanaro, Some applications of hypercontractive inequalities in quantum information theory. J. Math. Phys. 53 (2012), no. 12, 122206, 15 pp. [20] B. Osikiewicz, A. Tonge, An interpolation approach to Hardy -- Littlewood inequalities for norms of operators on sequence spaces, Linear Algebra Appl. 331 (2001), 1 -- 9. [21] D. Pellegrino, The optimal constants of the mixed ((cid:96)1, (cid:96)2)-Littlewood inequality, J. Number Theory 160 (2016), 11 -- 18. [22] D. Popa, Multiple Rademacher means and their applications, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 386 (2012), 699 -- 708. [23] D. Popa, Multiple summing operators on (cid:96)p-spaces, Studia Math. 225 (2014), no. 1, 9 -- 28. [24] P. Rueda, E.A. S´anchez-P´erez, Factorization of p-dominated polynomials through Lp-spaces, Michigan Math. J. 63 (2014), no. 2, 345 -- 353. OPTIMAL CONSTANTS FOR A MIXED LITTLEWOOD TYPE INEQUALITY 7 [25] J. Santos and T. Velanga, A note on the Bohnenblust -- Hille inequality for multilinear forms, arXiv:1604.00040v2 [math.FA]. [26] D. M. Serrano-Rodr´ıguez, Improving the closed formula for subpolynomial constants in the multilinear Bohnenblust -- Hille inequal- ities, Linear Algebra Appl. 438 (2013) 3124 -- 3138. (T. Nogueira) Departamento de Matem´atica, E-mail address: [email protected] Universidade Federal da Para´ıba, 58.051-900 - Joao Pessoa, Brazil. (D. N´unez-Alarc´on) Departamento de Matem´atica, & Department of Mathematical Sciences, Brazil, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, 50.740-560 - Recife, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242, USA E-mail address: [email protected] (D. Pellegrino) Departamento de Matem´atica, Universidade Federal da Para´ıba, 58.051-900 - Joao Pessoa, Brazil. E-mail address: [email protected] and [email protected]
1609.01049	2	1609	2017-01-01T15:43:38	Noncommutative probability of type D	[ "math.FA" ]	We construct a deformed Fock space and a Brownian motion coming from Coxeter groups of type D. The construction is analogous to that of the $q$-Fock space (of type A) and the $(\alpha,q)$-Fock space (of type B).	math.FA	math	Noncommutative probability of type D Marek Bożejko∗, Wiktor Ejsmont†and Takahiro Hasebe‡ Abstract We construct a deformed Fock space and a Brownian motion coming from Coxeter groups of type D. The construction is analogous to that of the q-Fock space (of type A) and the (α, q)-Fock space (of type B). 1 Introduction Several deformations of boson, fermion and full Fock spaces and Brownian motion have been proposed so far. Bożejko and Speicher used Coxeter groups of type A to construct a deformed Fock space and Brownian motion [BSp91, BSp94]. Bożejko and Speicher also considered general (mainly finite) Coxeter groups in [BSp94]. We followed this idea in [BEH15] and constructed an (α, q)-Brownian motion on an (α, q)-Fock space using Coxeter groups of type B. The com- mutation relation satisfied by the creation and annihilation operators on the (α, q)-Fock space reads bα,q(x)b∗α,q(y) − qb∗α,q(y)bα,q(x) = hx, yiI + αhx, yi q2N (1.1) where α, q ∈ [−1, 1], N is the number operator, x, y are vectors in an underlying Hilbert space H and y 7→ y is a selfadjoint involution on H. The orthogonal polynomials associated to the distribution of the (α, q)-Gaussian operator bα,q(x) + b∗α,q(x) are called q-Meixner-Pollaczek polynomials satisfying the recurrence relation tP (α,q) n (t) = P (α,q) n+1 (t) + [n]q(1 + αqn−1)P (α,q) n−1 (t), n = 0, 1, 2, . . . (1.2) (t) = 0, P (α,q) where P (α,q) (t) = 1. When α = 0 then we get q-Hermite orthogonal polynomials and when q = 0 then we get the orthogonal polynomials associated to a symmetric free Meixner distribution [BB06]. The moments of the Brownian motion of type B are given by −1 0 hΩ, (bα,q(x1) + b∗α,q(x1))· · · (bα,q(x2n) + b∗α,q(x2n))Ωiα,q αnp(π,f )qcr(π)+2cnp(π,f ) Y{i<j}∈π = X(π,f )∈PB 2 (2n) f ({i<j})=1 hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈π f ({i<j})=−1 hxi, xji, (1.3) where PB 2 (2n) is the set of pair partitions of type B, np(π, f ) is the number of negative pairs, cr(π) denotes the number of the crossings of π and cnp(π, f ) is the number of covered negative pairs of π. For further information the reader is referred to [BEH15] and the references therein. ∗Instytut Matematyczny, Polska Akademia Nauk, Ulica Śniadeckich 8, 00-956 Warszawa, Poland. Email: [email protected] †Department of Mathematics and Cybernetics, Wrocław University of Economics, ul. Komandorska 118/12 53-345 Wrocław, Poland. Email: [email protected] ‡Department of Mathematics, Hokkaido University, North 10 West 8, Kita-ku, Sapporo 060-0810 Japan. Email: [email protected] 1 The goal of this paper is to introduce a new deformation of the full Fock space, creation and annihilation operators and Brownian motion in terms of Coxeter groups of type D. Our strategy is to replace the Coxeter groups of type A or B in the previous works [BSp91, BEH15] by Coxeter groups of type D. Given this background, it seems natural to try to extend this theory to Coxeter groups of type C. But it is known that Coxeter groups of type B and type C are isomorphic, and one can check that for Coxeter groups of type C we get the orthogonal polynomials (1.2) (i.e. we get the same probability measure as in the type B). This also follows ℓ denotes the length function on the Coxeter groups. from the fact thatPσ∈B(n) qℓ(σ) =Pσ∈C(n) qℓ(σ) (see Carter [Car89, Proposition 10.2.5]), where The plan of the paper is following. First we define a q-Fock space, a creation operator d∗q(x) and an annihilation operator dq(x) of type D in Section 2. Next, natural properties of creation and annihilation operators, including norm estimates and the commutation rela- tions, are presented in Section 3. The probability distribution of a Brownian motion of type D, Gq(x) = dq(x) + d∗q(x), x ∈ H, is studied in the Section 4.1. The associated orthogonal polynomials satisfy the recurrence relation n (t) = P (q) tP (q) P (q) 0 (t) = 1, P (q) n+1(t) + [n]q(1 + qn−1)P (q) 1 (t) = t, P (q) 2 (t) = t2 − 1, n−1(t), n = 2, 3, 4, . . . , (1.4) n (t), but they are different since P (α,q) which is not known in the literature to the authors' knowledge. This polynomial P (q) n (t) looks like P (1,q) (t) = t2 − (1 + α) from (1.2). This is because the first Jacobi parameter for P (q) (t). This difference of first Jacobi parameter comes from the fact that the Coxeter group of type D can be realized as a subgroup of the Coxeter group of type B with index 2. The main theorem is placed in Section 4.4 where we show a Wick formula of type D n (t) is different from that for P (1,q) 2 n hΩ, Gq(x1)· · · Gq(x2n)Ωiq = X(π,f )∈PD 2 (2n) qcr(π)+2cnp(π,f ) Y{i<j}∈π f ({i<j})=1 hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈π f ({i<j})=−1 hxi, xji. (1.5) It is described by pair partitions of type D which are introduced and studied in Sections 4.2 and 4.3. It turns out that our Wick formula of type D generalizes the t-transformed classical Wick formula for t = 2 (q = 1) as well as the free Wick formula (q = 0). Using this formula we show that the vacuum vector is not tracial with respect to the von Neumann algebra generated by our Brownian motion Gq(x), where x runs over a real Hilbert space. Our deformed Fock space (both of type B and type D) raises natural interesting questions. Studying the von Neumann algebra generated by the Brownian motions of type D is one direction. In the case of type A, the q-deformed von Neumann algebra shares many properties with the free group factor (e.g. factoriality [Ric05]), and it is even isomorphic to the free group factor for sufficiently small q [GS14]. The von Neumann algebra of type B contains the so- called t-deformed von Neumann algebra, which is well investigated by Wysoczanski [Wys06] and Ricard [Ric06]. For further information see references in [BEH15]. In our von Neumann algebra of type D, the vacuum state is not a trace (Proposition 4.18). The first basic question would be asking if it is cyclic separating. Factoriality of the von Neumann algebra is also a natural question. Another possible future direction is to search for a connection between our pair partitions of type D and noncrossing partitions of type D, the latter of which has been developed in the literature, e.g. in [Rei97, AR04]. Note that our pair partitions of type D are related to Coxeter groups of type D in a natural way (see Remark 4.6). Yet another direction is classical probability. It is known that q-Brownian motion of type A has a classical Markov process realization [BKS97], and its probabilistic properties and extensions have been studied by several 2 authors (see e.g. [BW05, BW14]). It is natural to ask if such a realization also exists in the type B and type D cases. Combining [BSp91, BEH15] and the present paper, we have constructed deformations of a full Fock space by the natural three families of finite Coxeter groups, of type A,B and D (type C is isomorphic to type B as already mentioned). We wonder if a similar construction exists for infinite Coxeter groups, e.g. affine Coxeter groups. The above questions are also listed in the end of this paper as open problems, together with some other problems. 2 Type D deformation of full Fock space 2.1 Full Fock space Let H be a complex Hilbert space with inner product h·,·i linear on the right component and anti-linear on the left. Let Ffin(H) be the algebraic full Fock space over H Ffin(H) := H⊗n (2.1) ∞Mn=0 with convention that H⊗0 = CΩ is a one-dimensional normed space along a unit vector Ω. Note that elements of Ffin(H) are finite linear combinations of the elements from H⊗n, n ∈ N ∪ {0} and we do not take the completion. We equip Ffin(H) with the inner product hx1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xm, y1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ yni0 = δm,n hΩ, y1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ yni0 = hx1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xm, Ωi0 = 0, hΩ, Ωi0 = 1, hxi, yii, nYi=1 (2.2) (2.3) (2.4) where m, n ≥ 1 and xi, yi ∈ H. by [Voi85] For x ∈ H the free left creation and annihilation operators l∗(x), l(x) on Ffin(H) are defined l∗(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) := x ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn, l∗(x)Ω = x, l(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) := hx, x1i x2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn, l(x)x1 := hx, x1i Ω, l(x)Ω = 0. (2.5) (2.6) (2.7) (2.8) (2.9) It then holds that l∗(x)∗ = l(x) and l∗ : H → B(Ffin(H)) is linear, but l : H → B(Ffin(H)) is anti-linear. n ≥ 2, n ≥ 1 2.2 Coxeter groups of type D Let S(±n) be the group of all permutations of the 2n numbers ±1,· · · ,±n. The Coxeter group of type B, denoted by B(n), is the set of permutations σ in S(±n) such that σ(−k) = −σ(k), k = 1, . . . , n. The Coxeter group B(n) is a subgroup of S(±n) generated by {π1, . . . , πn−1, πn}, where πn = (n,−n), πi = (i, i+1)(−i,−i−1), i = 1, . . . , n−1. Our strategy is to define a Coxeter group of type D(n) as a subgroup of the Coxeter group B(n) of index 2. This is well studied in the literature (see [Bou02]). First we define D(1) = {e} ⊂ B(1) = grp{π1}. Next we define, Note that D(2) is isomorphic to Z2 ⊕ Z2. We define D(3) by the Coxeter-Dynkin diagram as subgroup of B(2) with index 2, D(2) = grp{π1,bπ1} ⊂ B(2), where bπ1 = π2π1π2 = (1,−2). 3 π1 bπ2 π2 where bπ2 = π3π2π3 so that the group D(3) is isomorphic to the permutation group S(4). We define D(n) for n ≥ 4 as a subgroup of B(n) generated by π1, . . . , πn−1,bπn−1 where bπn−1 = (πn−2bπn−1)3 = (πiπi+1)3 = e, 1 ≤ i < n − 1 and (πiπj)2 = (πkbπn−1)2 = e if 1 ≤ i, j, k ≤ πnπn−1πn. The Coxeter-Dynkin diagram for D(n), n ≥ 4 is described in Fig. 1, which says that the generators satisfy the generalized braid relations π2 n−1 = e, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, n − 1,i − j ≥ 2, k 6= n − 2. Note that {πi i = 1, . . . , n − 1} generates the symmetric group S(n). i = bπ2 π1 π2 . . . πn−2 bπn−1 πn−1 Fig. 1: Coxeter-Dynkin diagram for D(n). 2.3 Fock space of type D We deform the full Fock space Ffin(H) and creation l∗(x) and annihilation operators l(x) on it. A selfadjoint involution on H is a selfadjoint linear bounded operator on H such that the double application of it becomes the identity operator (see Example 2.2 below). Suppose that x 7→ x, x ∈ H is a selfadjoint involution. We then define an action of D(n) on H⊗n by πi(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xi−1 ⊗ xi+1 ⊗ xi ⊗ xi+2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn, bπn−1(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = x1 ⊗ x2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−2 ⊗ xn ⊗ xn−1, action of (the left version of) πn defined in [BEH15] is Remark 2.1. The action ofbπn−1 is defined in the above way since bπn−1 = πnπn−1πn and the n ≥ 2, n ≥ 2. (2.10) (2.11) πn(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = x1 ⊗ x2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−1 ⊗ xn, n ≥ 1. (2.12) A second way to define a subgroup of B(2) with index 2 is grp{π2π1π2π1}, but in this situation we have π2π1π2π1(x1 ⊗ x2) = x1 ⊗ x2, which is not compatible with D(n) for n ≥ 3. coincide. Example 2.2. (1) The identity involution x 7→ x on H. Then the actions of bπn−1 and πn−1 (2) If H is spanned by an orthonormal basis {ei}i∈{±1,...,±n} (or {ei}i∈Z\{0} in the infinite- dimensional case), then the map extends to an involution on H. ei = e−i, i ∈ {±1, . . . ,±n} 4 Let ℓ be the length function on the Coxeter groups: ℓ(σ) is the minimal number k such that σ can be written as the product of k generators, allowing multiple use of each generator. For q ∈ [−1, 1] we define the symmetrizer of type D on H⊗n, q = Xσ∈D(n) bP (n) bP (0) q = IH ⊗0 q qℓ(σ) σ, n ≥ 1, (2.13) (2.14) is a special case of the operator defined in [BSz03]. 0 = IH ⊗n. Moreover let with convention 00 = 1. Our operator bP (n) Note that we have bP (n) bPq = be the symmetrizer of type D on the algebraic full Fock space Ffin(H). From Bożejko and ∞Mn=0 bP (n) Speicher [BSp94, Theorem 2.2], the operator bP (n) and hence bPq is positive for −1 ≤ q ≤ 1. If q < 1 then bP (n) hf, giq := hf,bPqgi0, is a strictly positive operator meaning that it is positive and Ker(bP (n) which is a semi-inner product from the positivity of bPq for q ∈ [−1, 1]. We restrict the pa- rameters to the case q ∈ (−1, 1) so that the deformed semi-inner product becomes an inner product. The symmetrizer of type D allows us to define the deformation f, g ∈ Ffin(H), ) = {0}. (2.15) q q q q Definition 2.3. For q ∈ (−1, 1), the algebraic full Fock space Ffin(H) equipped with the inner product h·,·iq is called the (q-) Fock space of type D and is denoted by F(q) fin (H). Let d∗q(x) := l∗(x) and dq(x) be its adjoint in F(q) fin (H). The operators d∗q(x) and dq(x) are called (q-) creation and annihilation operators of type D, respectively. More precisely, one can show that d∗q(x) is a bounded operator from H⊗n to H⊗(n+1) for each n ≥ 0, and so dq(x) : H⊗(n+1) → H⊗n is defined to be its adjoint. They can then be extended to linear operators on F(q) fin (H) by direct sum. We see in Proposition 3.8 that they are in fact bounded operators for q ∈ (−1, 1) on F(q) fin (H)) is linear and dq : H → B(F(q) Since bP0 is identity, our q-Fock space of type D is the full Fock space when q = 0, and d∗0(x) = l∗(x) and d0(x) = l(x). fin (H). One can check that d∗q : H → B(F(q) fin (H)) is anti-linear, similarly to the free case l∗, l on Ffin(H). Remark 2.4. In the type B case [BEH15] we defined the symmetrizer with two parameters α, q ∈ [−1, 1] by (2.16) P (n) α,q = Xσ∈B(n) αℓ1(σ)qℓ2(σ)σ, where ℓ1(σ) is the number of πn that appear in an irreducible form of σ and ℓ2(σ) = ℓ(σ)−ℓ1(σ). However, in the type D case the number ofbπn−1 in an irreducible form of σ ∈ D(n) is not well defined since πn−2bπn−1πn−2 =bπn−1πn−2bπn−1. Therefore, we introduce only one parameter q in the type D case. 5 3 Creation and annihilation operators of type D 3.1 Recursive formula for symmetrizer of type D is defined by A natural embedding of D(n− 1) = grphπ1, . . . , πn−2,bπn−2i into D(n) = grphπ1, . . . , πn−1,bπn−1i k = 1, 2, . . . , n − 2, πk 7→ πk+1, bπn−2 7→bπn−1. (3.1) (3.2) . This decom- Corresponding to the quotient D(n − 1)\D(n), we decompose the operator bP (n) position is important throughout the paper. q Proposition 3.1. We have the decomposition q q )∗(I ⊗ bP (n−1) ), n ≥ 2, (3.3) n−1Xk=1 qkπn−1 · · · πn−k! , n ≥ 3, (3.4) n = 2, n = 1. is a bounded linear operator on H⊗n defined by q where bR(n) q q , I + q = (bR(n) )bR(n) q = (I ⊗ bP (n−1) bP (n) bP (1) q = bR(1) n−1Xk=1 +qn−1π1 · · · πn−2bπn−1 I + I + qπ1 + qbπ1(I + qπ1), qkπ1 · · · πk q = bR(n) I,  w(k) = Proof. Let n ≥ 2. It is known that there exist unique left coset representatives {w(k) 0 ≤ k ≤ 2n − 1} for D(n − 1)\D(n) with minimal lengths [Hum90, p. 19]. Due to Stumbo [Stu00, Theorem 4], these coset representatives are given by π1 · · · πk π1 · · · πn−2bπn−1 π1 · · · πn−2bπn−1πn−1 . . . π2n−k if 0 ≤ k ≤ n − 1, if k = n, if n + 1 ≤ k ≤ 2n − 1. (3.5) Therefore every σ ∈ D(n) decomposes into σ = σ′w(k) for some unique σ′ ∈ D(n − 1) and unique k, and in this case it is known that ℓ(σ) = ℓ(σ′) + ℓ(w(k)) (see [Hum90, p. 19]). Since q q = qℓ(w(k))w(k), 2n−1Xk=0 bR(n) is written in the form bR(n) we have the first identity (3.3). The second identity follows by the selfadjointness of bP (n) The operator bR(n) operator in terms of bR(n) πk. Lemma 3.2. For x ∈ H and n ≥ 2 we have the following relations on H⊗n: plays a central role in this paper. Firstly we compute the annihilation . For this purpose we need a commutation relation between l∗(x) and (3.6) . q q q This implies l∗(x)bP (n) q = (I ⊗ bP (n) q l∗(x)πk = πk+1l∗(x), l∗(x)bπn−1 =bπnl∗(x). )l∗(x) for n ≥ 1. 6 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1, Proof. Let n ≥ 2 and f = x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn ∈ H⊗n. For 1 ≤ k < n we have l∗(x)πkf = x ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xk+1 ⊗ xk ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn = πk+1l∗(x)f and l∗(x)bπn−1f = x ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn ⊗ xn−1 =bπnl∗(x)f. 3.2 Formula for annihilation operator Now we are ready to compute the annihilation operator in terms of bR(n) Proposition 3.3. For n ≥ 1, we have q . dq(x) = l(x)bR(n) q on H⊗n. (3.7) q )l∗(x) (see Lemma 3.2) we get Proof. Let f ∈ H⊗(n−1), g ∈ H⊗n. Recalling that l∗(x)bP (n−1) = (I ⊗ bP (n−1) hf, dq(x)giq = hd∗q(x)f, giq = hl∗(x)f, giq = hbP (n) l∗(x)f, gi0 = hl∗(x)f, (I ⊗ bP (n−1) q gi0 = h(I ⊗ bP (n−1) )bR(n) )l∗(x)f,bR(n) = hl∗(x)bP (n−1) f,bR(n) q gi0 = hbP (n−1) f, l(x)bR(n) = hf, l(x)bR(n) the conclusion. q giq, q gi0 q q q q q q q gi0 (3.8) We compute the annihilator dq(x) more explicitly. Let N be the number operator on F(q) fin (H) defined by N(f ) = nf, and let J be the operator 0 ⊕L∞n=1 πn on F(q) f ∈ H⊗n, n ∈ N ∪ {0} fin (H), that is, J(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−1 ⊗ xn, J(Ω) = 0. (3.9) (3.10) (3.11) n ≥ 1, The operator J is in fact a selfadjoint involution on F(q) fin (H), which is proved in Corollary 3.7. Let lq and rq be left and right q-derivatives respectively: for x, x1, . . . , xn ∈ H, n ≥ 1, lq(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = rq(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = lq(x)(Ω) = rq(x)(Ω) = 0, nXk=1 nXk=1 qk−1hx, xki x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xk ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn, qk−1hx, xn−k+1i x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−k+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn, (3.12) (3.13) (3.14) where xk means that xk is removed from the tensor, e.g. x ⊗ y ⊗ z = x ⊗ z. Theorem 3.4. For x ∈ H we have dq(x) = lq(x) + qN Jrq(x) = lq(x) + Jrq(x)qN−1. (3.15) Note that d0(x) = l0(x) = l(x) is the free left annihilation operator. 7 Proof. Let n ≥ 2. From Propositions 3.1 and 3.3 we have q (x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = L + R, where dq(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = l(x)bR(n) qkπ1 · · · πk! (x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn), n−1Xk=1 L = l(x) I + R = qn−1l(x)π1 · · · πn−2bπn−1 I + n−1Xk=1 After some computations, we get qkπn−1 · · · πn−k! (x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn). (3.16) (3.17) (3.18) (3.19) (3.20) (3.21) (3.22) L = lq(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn), R = qn−1 nXk=1 qk−1hx, xn−k+1i J(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−k+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn). By the selfadjointness of the involution we have hx, xn−k+1i = hx, xn−k+1i, and hence we get the conclusion (3.15) on H⊗n for n ≥ 2. For n = 0, 1 we can directly check the formula. 3.3 Commutation relations and norm estimate The commutation relations on the one particle space H⊗1 and on the other spaces H⊗n, n 6= 1 look different. Proposition 3.5. For x, y ∈ H we have the commutation relation dq(x)d∗q(y) − qd∗q(y)dq(x) = hx, yiI + hx, yi q2nJ on H⊗n, n = 0, 2, 3, 4, . . . Remark 3.6. For n = 1, the commutation relation has the form dq(x)d∗q(y)z − qd∗q(y)dq(x)z = hx, yiz + qhx, ziy + q2hx, yi z for z ∈ H. The commutation relation for n 6= 1 looks similar to the type B case [BEH15] bα,q(x)b∗α,q(y) − qb∗α,q(y)bα,q(x) = hx, yiI + αhx, yi q2N , while n = 1 case appears quite different. Proof. Let n ≥ 2. From Theorem 3.4, it holds that dq(x)d∗q(y)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = and qd∗q(y)dq(x)(x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) = and the conclusion follows. qkhx, xki y ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xk ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn nXk=1 nXk=1 + hx, yi x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn + q2nhx, yi x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn nXk=1 nXk=1 qkhx, xki y ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xk · · · ⊗ xn + + qn+k−1hx, xn−k+1i J(y ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−k+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn) qn+k−1hx, xn−k+1i J(y ⊗ x1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn−k+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn), 8 Corollary 3.7. The operator J is a selfadjoint involution on (the completion of ) F(q) particular, kJkq = 1. Proof. The operator J is an involution since so is πn. When q = 0, the Fock space of type D is the full Fock space and the selfadjointness of πn implies the selfadjointness of J. When q 6= 0, take x ∈ H such that kxk = 1, x = ±x. The commutation relation (3.21) for y = x reads fin (H). In J = ±q−2n(dq(x)d∗q(x) − qd∗q(x)dq(x) − 1) on H⊗n, n = 0, 2, 3, . . . , (3.23) so J is selfadjoint on (H⊗n,k · kq), n 6= 1. Finally, since JH ⊗1 = π1H ⊗1, the restriction of J to Any selfadjoint involution A on a Hilbert space has the operator norm 1 since kAk2 = H⊗1 is selfadjoint. Note that bP (1) q = I and so the inner product is not deformed on H⊗1. kA∗Ak = kA2k = kAk. We study the norm of the creation operator of type D. Let [n]q be the q-number [n]q := 1 + q + · · · + qn−1, n ≥ 1. (3.24) Proposition 3.8. Suppose that x ∈ H. (1) For −1 < q < 1, we have kxk√1−q ≤ kd∗q(x)kq; (2) For 0 ≤ q < 1, we have kd∗q(x)kq ≤q 2 (3) For −1 < q < 0, we have kd∗q(x)kq ≤p1 + q + q2kxk. kx⊗nk2 Proof. (1) Lower bound. For n ≥ 2 it follows that 1−qkxk; q q = hx⊗n,bP (n) q x⊗ni0 )x⊗n,bR(n) = h(I ⊗ bP (n−1) q x⊗ni0 = [n]qh(I ⊗ bP (n−1) )x⊗n, x⊗ni0 + qn−1[n]qh(I ⊗ bP (n−1) x⊗n−1, x⊗(n−1)i0 + hx, xi qn−1[n]qhbP (n−1) = [n]qkxk2hbP (n−1) = [n]qkxk2kx⊗(n−1)k2 q + hx, xi qn−1[n]qhx⊗(n−1), x⊗(n−2) ⊗ xiq, q q q q )x⊗n, x ⊗ x⊗(n−2) ⊗ xi0 x⊗(n−1), x⊗(n−2) ⊗ xi0 and so kd∗q(x)x⊗(n−1)k2 q q = kx⊗nk2 = [n]qkxk2kx⊗(n−1)k2 q + hx, xi qn−1[n]qhx⊗(n−1), x⊗(n−2) ⊗ xiq. (3.25) The limit n → ∞ gives the lower bound. (2) Upper bound for 0 ≤ q < 1. The proof follows the line of [BSp91, Lemma 4]. As al- q is positive, so q ready noted, [BSp94, Theorem 2.2] guarantees that the operator bP (n) q )(bR(n) q )∗(I ⊗ bP (n−1) )∗(I ⊗ bP (n−1) )2 = (bP (n) )∗bP (n) )∗(bR(n) = (I ⊗ bP (n−1) 0(I ⊗ bP (n−1) ≤ kbR(n) q k2 = kbR(n) 0(I ⊗ (bP (n−1) q k2 (bP (n) )2). ) q q q q q q q ) (3.26) 9 q k0 ≤ (1 + qn−1)[n]q, for n ≥ 1. By taking q ) ) q the square root of operators one gets the inequality ≤ Therefore we have for f ∈ H⊗n that q ≤ kbR(n) bP (n) ≤ (1 + qn−1)[n]q(I ⊗ bP (n−1) Since kπik0 = 1 and kbπik0 = 1 for all i, we have kbR(n) q k0(I ⊗ bP (n−1) I ⊗ bP (n−1) hd∗q(x)f, d∗q(x)fiq = hbP (n+1) 1 − qhx ⊗ (bP (n) 1 − qhbP (n) q f, fi0hx, xi qkxk2. 1 − qkfk2 2 1 − q q 2 2 2 ≤ = = q . (x ⊗ f ), x ⊗ fi0 q f ), x ⊗ fi0 (3.27) (3.28) This inequality holds true for f in F(q) fin (H) which is the direct sum of H⊗n. Thus we obtain kd∗q(x)fk ≤q 2 1−qkfkqkxk for any f ∈ F(q) fin (H). (3) Upper bound for −1 < q < 0. The operators dq(x)d∗q(x) and −qd∗q(x)dq(x) are positive and map H⊗n into itself for n ≥ 0. So for ξ ∈ H⊗n,kξkq = 1, n ≥ 2, kd∗q(x)ξk2 q = hξ, dq(x)d∗q(x)ξiq ≤ hξ, dq(x)d∗q(x)ξ − qd∗q(x)dq(x)ξiq ≤ kxk2 + hx, xiq2nkJkq ≤ (1 + q2)kxk2, where we used the commutation relation (3.21) and kJkq = 1,kxk = kxk on the second line. For ξ ∈ H,kξkq = kξk = 1, a similar estimate shows that kd∗q(x)ξk2 q ≤ hξ, dq(x)d∗q(x)ξ − qd∗q(x)dq(x)ξiq ≤ kxk2 + qkxk2 + q2kxk2, where we used equation (3.22). Finally for Ω ∈ H⊗0 we have kd∗q(x)Ωk2 estimates prove the conclusion. q = kxk2. These Remark 3.9. For q = 1, our operators dq(x) are unbounded. 4 Gaussian operator of type D 4.1 Orthogonal polynomials Definition 4.1. The bounded selfadjoint operator Gq(x) = dq(x) + d∗q(x), x ∈ H (4.1) on F(q) the (q-) Brownian motion of type D. fin (H) is called the (q-) Gaussian operator of type D. The family {Gq(x) x ∈ H} is called 10 In this section we study the probability distribution of the Gaussian operator of type D with respect to the vacuum state. Let µ be a probability measure on R with finite moments of all orders. The Gram-Schmidt method applied to the sequence 1, t, t2, t3, . . . in the Hilbert space L2(R, µ) yields a sequence of orthogonal polynomials P0(t), P1(t), P2(t), . . . with deg Pn(t) = n. We take the normalization of Pn(t) such that it becomes monic, i.e., the coefficient of tn is 1. It is known that they satisfy a recurrence relation tPn(t) = Pn+1(t) + βnPn(t) + γn−1Pn−1(t), n = 0, 1, 2, . . . (4.2) with the convention that P−1(t) = 0. The coefficients βn and γn are called Jacobi parameters and they satisfy βn ∈ R, γn ≥ 0 and γ0 · · · γn−1 =ZR Pn(t)2µ(dt), n ≥ 1. (4.3) Conversely, given a sequence βn ∈ R and γn ≥ 0, n = 0, 1, 2, . . . , there exists a probability measure µ with finite moments such that it associates orthogonal polynomials determined by the recursion (4.2). More details are found in [HO07]. Let (P (q) n (t))∞n=0 be polynomials determined by the recursion relation n (t) = P (q) tP (q) P (q) 0 (t) = 1, P (q) n+1(t) + [n]q(1 + qn−1)P (q) 1 (t) = t, P (q) 2 (t) = t2 − 1. n−1(t), n = 2, 3, 4, . . . , (4.4) This recursion means that βn = 0 for n ≥ 0 and γ0 = 1, γn−1 = [n]q(1 + qn−1) for n ≥ 2. There exists a probability measure µq which associates the orthogonal polynomials P (q) n (t). The distribution of the q-Gaussian operator of type D coincides with µq. Theorem 4.2. Suppose that q ∈ (−1, 1) and x ∈ H,kxk = 1, x = ±x. The probability distribution of Gq(x) with respect to the vacuum state is given by µq. Remark 4.3. We do not know what is the distribution of Gq(x) when x is not an eigenvector of the involution ¯. Proof. Using the formula dq(x) = l(x)bR(n) q on H⊗n, we have Gq(x)Ω = x, Gq(x)x = x⊗2 + Ω and, using x = ±x, Gq(x)x⊗n = x⊗(n+1) + [n]qx⊗(n−1) + qn−1[n]qhx, xi x⊗(n−2) ⊗ x = x⊗(n+1) + [n]q(1 + qn−1)x⊗(n−1), n ≥ 2. These formulas are of the same form as (4.4). Let P (q) n (t) be the orthogonal polynomials as above. We next show by induction that n (Gq(x))Ω = x⊗n, P (q) n ≥ 0. (4.5) (4.6) (4.7) This is true for n = 1, 2 since P (q) induction hypothesis for n − 1, n, (4.4) and (4.6) shows that, for n ≥ 2, 1 (Gq(x))Ω = Gq(x)Ω = x and P (q) 2 (Gq(x))Ω = x⊗2. Using the P (q) n+1(Gq(x))Ω = Gq(x)P (q) n (Gq(x))Ω − [n]q(1 + qn−1)P (q) n−1(Gq(x))Ω = x⊗(n+1). 11 Since P (q) n (t) and P (q) 0 (t) = 1 are orthogonal in L2(R, µq) for n ≥ 1, we get hΩ, P (q) n (t) dµq(t). P (q) n (Gq(x))Ωiq = δ0,n =ZR hΩ, Gq(x)nΩiq =ZR 0 (t), . . . , P (q) tn dµq(t). (4.8) (4.9) Writing tn as the linear combination of P (q) n (t), we obtain by induction on n that Since the operator Gq(x) is bounded, its vacuum distribution is compactly supported. Hence the moment problem is determinate and we conclude that Gq(x) has the distribution µq. Remark 4.4. (1) The t-transformation (or Boolean convolution power by t) of a probability measure [BW01] changes only the first Jacobi parameters (β0, γ0) into (tβ0, tγ0) and keep the other Jacobi parameters unchanged. This shows that µq is the 1/2-transformation of the Gaussian distribution of type B when α = 1, cf. (1.2). (2) Expanding P (q) m (t)P (q) n (t) as the linear combination of tk, k = 0, 1, . . . , m + n and using (4.9) show that hΩ, P (q) m (Gq(x))P (q) n (Gq(x))Ωiq =ZR P (q) m (t)P (q) n (t) dµq(t), (4.10) which generalizes (4.8). The left hand side is equal to hP (q) hx⊗m, x⊗niq by selfadjointness of P (q) m (Gq(x))Ω, P (q) n (Gq(x))Ωiq = n (Gq(x)). In particular, we obtain from (4.3) that kx⊗nk2 q = γ0γ1 · · · γn−1, (4.11) where γ0 = 1 and γn−1 = [n]q(1 + qn−1) for n ≥ 2. Since kx⊗nk2 equation (4.11) is equivalent to q q = hx⊗n,bP (n) (x⊗n)i0, the (4.12) Xσ∈D(n) qℓ(σ) = γ0γ1 · · · γn−1, n ≥ 1, which equals [2]q[4]q . . . [2n−2]q[n]q. This is exactly a formula in the book of Carter [Car89, Theorem 10.2.3 and Proposition 10.2.5] and confirms our good choice of D(2). (3) In the limit q → 1 we get the t-transformed normal distribution N(0, 2) with t = 1/2. (4) If q = 0 then we get the standard semicircle law (1/2π)√4 − t21(−2,2)(t) dt. The orthogonal polynomials P (0) n (t) are Chebyshev polynomials of the second kind. 4.2 Set partitions and partition statistics From now on we study Wick's formula, that is, a formula for correlation functions of Brownian motion, or more generally, creation and annihilation operators. Combinatorics of set partitions is needed to describe that formula. Let [n] be the set {1, . . . , n}. A pair (or a pair block) V of a set partition is a block with cardinality 2 and a singleton of a set partition is a block with cardinality 1. The set of partitions of [n] whose blocks have cardinality 1 or 2 is denoted by P1,2(n). When n is even, a set partition of [n] is called a pair partition if every block is a pair. The set of pair partitions of [n] is denoted by P2(n). For subsets A, B of [n], we say that A is on the left of B or B is on the right of A if min A < min B. We say that A is on the strict left of B or B is on the strict right of A if max A < min B. 12 Fig. 2: {2, 4} is on the right of {1, 3}, but not in the strict sense. Fig. 3: {3, 4} is on the strict right of {1, 2}. For two subsets A, B of [n], we say that A covers B if there are i, j ∈ A such that i < k < j for any k ∈ B. We introduce several statistics of set partitions π. Let Pair(π) be the set of pair blocks and Sing(π) be the set of singletons of π. When writing pairs we sometimes simplify the notation into {i < j} ∈ Pair(π) instead of {i, j} ∈ Pair(π), i < j. Let cover(V ) be the number of blocks of π which cover V : Let cs(π) be the number of covered singletons, counting multiplicity of covers: cover(V ) = #{W ∈ π W covers V }. cs(π) = #{(S, W ) ∈ Sing(π) × π W covers S}. The number of singletons on the right of V ∈ π is denoted by sr(V ), sr(V ) = #{S ∈ Sing(π) S is on the right of V }. Similarly, the number of singletons on the strict right of V ∈ π is denoted by ssr(V ), ssr(V ) = #{S ∈ Sing(π) S is on the strict right of V }. The number of left crossings of V ∈ π is defined by lcr(V ) = #{W ∈ π ∃i, j ∈ V,∃k, l ∈ W, k < i < l < j}. Let cr(π) be the number of all crossings of π defined by cr(π) =XV ∈π lcr(V ). We then define connected components, in particular outer connected components of a parti- tion π of [n]. Given two blocks V, W of a partition we write V cr∼ W when V and W cross. Then we write V ∼ W when V = W or there exist blocks V0 = V, V1, . . . , Vk−1, Vk = W of π such that cr∼ Vi+1 for all i = 0, 1, . . . , k − 1. The equivalence relation ∼ splits the partition π, regarded Vi as a set, into equivalence classes π1, . . . , πm. Then Ck := SV ∈πk V (k = 1, . . . , m) is called a connected component of π. By definition, two blocks which cross each other are contained in the same connected component. For example, the partition π = {{1, 3, 7},{2, 8},{4, 5, 6}} has two connected components {1, 2, 3, 7, 8} and {4, 5, 6}. Given two connected components, either one is on the strict right of the other, or one covers the other. A connected component is said to be outer if it is not covered by any other connected components. In the partition π = {{1, 3, 7},{2, 8},{4, 5, 6}} the connected component {1, 2, 3, 7, 8} is outer. We want to exclude singletons: the number of outer connected components which are not singletons is denoted by out(π). Moreover, out\sr(π) denotes the number of connected com- ponents which are not singletons and which do not have singletons of π on the right. In the partition π = {{1, 3, 6},{2, 5},{4},{7, 8}} the outer connected component {1, 2, 3, 5, 6} has a singleton {4} on the right, so it is not counted into out\sr(π). The other outer connected component {7, 8} is counted, so out\sr(π) = 1. 13 4.3 Set partitions of type D and colored partition statistics A pair (π, f ) is called a colored set partition if π is a set partition and f : π → {±1} is a map, which means a coloring of the blocks of π [BEH15]. A block colored by −1 is called a negative block and a block colored by 1 is called a positive block. Sometimes we want to think of partitions which are partially colored. When at least the pairs of π are colored, namely a map f : Pair(π) → {±1} is given, we denote the set of negative pairs by NPair(π, f ), and by np(π, f ) its cardinality, NPair(π, f ) = {W ∈ Pair(π) : f (W ) = −1}, np(π, f ) = #NPair(π, f ). For simplicity we often drop the dependency on the coloring f from the notation, like np(π). The number of negative pairs on the right of V ∈ π is denoted by npr(V ): npr(V ) = #{W ∈ NPair(π) : W is on the right of V }. Let cnp(π, f ) be the number of covered negative pairs counting multiplicity of covers: cnp(π, f ) = #{(V, W ) ∈ NPair(π) × Pair(π) W covers V }. Let npssr(π, f ) be the number of pairs formed by a negative pair and a singleton on the strict right: npssr(π, f ) = #{(V, S) ∈ NPair(π) × Sing(π) S is on the strict right of V }. Definition 4.5. Suppose that π ∈ P1,2(n) and f is a coloring of π. A colored set partition (π, f ) is called a partition of type D if f satisfies the following conditions (A) and (B). (A) Coloring of pair blocks V ∈ Pair(π) should start from the rightmost pair (= the pair having the largest left leg) and then go to left ones. (1) If sr(V ) = lcr(V ) = cover(V ) = 0, then V must be colored by (−1)npr(V ). For example take π = {{1, 3},{2, 4}}. If the block {2, 4} has color −1, then V = {1, 3} must be If the block V = {2, 4} has color 1 then the block {1, 3} must be colored by −1. colored by 1. (2) Otherwise, V can be colored by any of −1 and 1. For example, for π = {{1, 3},{2}} the block {1, 3} has a singleton {2} on the right and so it can be colored by any of −1 and 1. (B) After coloring all pairs, we assign a unique color to each singleton S as follows. (1) If S is the rightmost singleton, then S must be colored by (−1)np(π). For example take π = {{1, 3},{2}}. If {1, 3} is colored by −1 then S = {2} must be colored by −1. If {1, 3} is colored by 1 then S = {2} must be colored by 1. (2) Otherwise S must be colored by 1. We denote by PD 1,2(n) the set of all partitions of type D in P1,2(n). We call (π, f ) ∈ PD 1,2(n) a pair partition of [n] of type D if π is a pair partition. The set of pair partitions of [n] of 2 (n). Below we need colored partitions of a finite totally ordered set T , type D is denoted by PD denoted e.g. by PD 1,2(T ), which is defined naturally from the unique isomorphism T ≃ [n] for some n. 14 Remark 4.6. (1) The set of type B partitions PB that π ∈ P1,2(n) and the singletons of π must be colored by 1 (see [BEH15]). definition, PD singleton. 1,2(n) consists of colored partitions (π, f ) such In our 1,2(n) since a partition of type D may have a negative 1,2(n) is not a subset of PB (2) About pair partitions, PD 2 (n) which is now the set of all colored pair partitions. The relationship between them can be written as follows. Take π ∈ P2(n). Let C1, . . . , Ck be the outer connected components of π and let 2 (n) is a subset of PB πi = {V ∈ π min(Ci) ≤ min(V ) < max(V ) ≤ max(Ci)}, (4.13) which is the set of pairs contained in or covered by the outer connected component Ci of π. Then π =Si∈[k] πi. The leftmost block Li of πi satisfies lcr(Li) = cover(Li) = 0, and the other blocks V of πi satisfy lcr(V ) 6= 0 or cover(V ) 6= 0. Hence, when we construct a coloring of π of type D, we can choose arbitrary colors ±1 of the blocks in πi \ {Li} for each i, and we must choose a unique color of Li. The definition (A1) of type D colorings says that this unique color of L is determined so that the number of negative blocks of πi becomes even (cf. Proposition 4.9(1)). This argument gives, with the notation (4.13), a characterization of pair partitions of type D: PD 2 (n) = {(π, f ) ∈ PB 2 (n) np(πi, fπi) is even for every i}. (4.14) (3) In some sense, the above observation is also compatible with the relation between the Coxeter groups of type B and D. The Coxeter group of type B can be written as B(n) = ⋊S(n) and hence it can be defined as all signed permutations of the numbers ±1, . . . ,±n. Zn 2 The group D(n) is a subgroup of B(n) consisting of all signed permutations having an even number of negative entries in their window notation. Thus we can assign arbitrary signs ±1 to the points 2, . . . , n and then we must assign a unique sign to the first element 1 depending on the signs of the other points 2, . . . , n. The construction of colorings of type D on each πi in (4.14) is exactly the above construction of D(n) ⊂ B(n). Example 4.7. Let π = {{1},{2, 5},{3},{4, 6}} ∈ P1,2(6). Then the rightmost pair is {4, 6}, which has the left crossing {2, 5}, so it can be painted by any of ±1. Then the next rightmost pair is {2, 5} which has the singleton {3} on the right, so it can also be painted by ±1. So there are four possible colorings of π. The singleton {1} must be painted by 1, and {3} must be painted by either 1 or −1 depending on np(π). Example 4.8. There are five pair partitions of {1, 2, 3, 4} of type D. For example if π = {{1, 4},{2, 3}}, then in our terminology V = {2, 3} is on the right of W = {1, 4} and cover(V ) = 1. According to (A2), V can be painted by any of 1 and −1. If V is positive then (A1) says that W must be colored by 1, and if V is negative then W must be colored by −1. 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Fig. 4: PD 2 (4). The colors of blocks of type D partitions must satisfy some properties. Proposition 4.9. Suppose that π ∈ PD 1,2(n). 15 (1) If π is a pair partition of type D, then np(π) is even (maybe zero). (2) If π contains the singleton {1}, then {1} has color 1. Proof. The proofs can be given by contradiction. (1) This is a statement weaker than (4.14), but we give an independent proof. Suppose that the number of negative pairs is odd and consider the leftmost pair V = {1, i} for some i ∈ [n]. Then lcr(V ) = 0, cover(V ) = 0, and the other pairs are on the right of V . If V has color 1 then npr(V ) = np(π) is odd, which contradicts (A1) in the definition of partitions of type D. Otherwise, V has color −1, then npr(V ) = np(π) − 1 is even, so we again get contradiction with the definition of partitions of type D. (2) Suppose that {1} is colored by −1. The condition (B) shows that {1} must be the rightmost singleton, and so it is the unique singleton of π. The restriction π{2,...,n} is also a (pair) partition of type D since removing the singleton {1} does not matter in the condition (A) for pairs. Then, what we have proved in (1) says that π{2,...,n} has an even number of negative pairs, which contradicts the assumption and (B1). Type D partitions behave nicely with respect to the restriction of partitions on {2, . . . , n}. In fact they can be characterized by some recursion. Lemma 4.10. Suppose that (π, f ) ∈ PD from one of the following procedures. 1,2({2, . . . , n}). We get new partitions (π, f ) ∈ PD 1,2(n) (1) Add the singleton {1} to (π, f ) and color it by 1. (2) If π has singletons, choose a singleton {i} of π, create a pair {1, i}, color it and, if necessary, recolor the rightmost singleton of π\{i} so that we obtain a partition of [n] of type D. More precisely: (i) If π has at least two singletons then {1, i} can be painted by any of ±1. After choosing a color of {1, i}, the rightmost singleton of π \ {i} must be repainted by (−1)np(π); (ii) If π has the unique singleton {i} then {1, i} must be colored by (−1)np(π). When (π, f ) runs over PD above procedures. 1,2({2, . . . , n}), every partition in PD 1,2(n) appears exactly once in the Proof. We first prove that a resulting partition (π, f ) is indeed a partition of type D. In the procedure (1), since the leftmost singleton does not matter in coloring the other pairs and singletons, so (π, f ) is a partition of type D. In the procedure (2), suppose that π has a singleton at i (≥ 2), pairs V1, . . . , Vt on the left of i and pairs W1, . . . , Wu on the strict right of i. Suppose that we take i and create a pair {1, i}. The new pair {1, i} is a left crossing or a covering of V1, . . . , Vt, but not of W1, . . . , Wu. Hence the old colors of W1, . . . , Wu given in (π, f ) satisfy the conditions (A2),(A1) in the new partition (π, f ) too. For V1, . . . , Vt, they have the left crossing or covering {1, i} and then according to (A2) any color is allowed, so the old colors are valid. Thus the old colors of all pairs V1, . . . , Vt, W1, . . . , Wu satisfy the required conditions (A) on blocks of the type D partition (π, f ). For singletons, the color of the rightmost singleton of π is uniquely determined according to (B2). The other singletons of π may keep the old colors unchanged. The above discussions show that (π, f ) is a partition of type D. One can check that all the partitions (π, f ) appearing in the above are distinct. Thus we only need to show that all partitions in PD 1,2(n), the first case is that 1 is a singleton of σ. Note then that {1} has color 1 by Proposition 4.9. In this case the restriction (π, f ) := (σ \ {1}, gπ) is a partition of {2, . . . , n} of type D, and then 1,2(n) appear. Given a partition (σ, g) ∈ PD 16 after procedure (1) we get (π, f ) = (σ, g). The second case is that {1, i} is a pair in σ for some point i. The block {1, i} may cover or cross (from the left) other pairs, say V1, . . . , Vt. Let π be the restriction of σ to {2, . . . , n}, namely only {1, i} is replaced by {i}. Then V1, . . . , Vt ∈ π have the singleton i on the right, so the original colors of them satisfy the conditions for type D partitions of {2, . . . , n}. Keep the original colors of the other pairs too, and (re)color the rightmost singleton (if any) uniquely to get a partition (π, f ) of type D. Now we can revert this procedure from (π, f ) to (π, f ) = (σ, g). 4.4 Wick's formula of type D Given ε = (ε(1), . . . , ε(n)) ∈ {1,∗}n, a set partition π ∈ P1,2(n), written in the form π = {{i1 < j1}, . . . ,{ik < jk},{s1}, . . . ,{sm}}, k, m ∈ N ∪ {0}, is said to be ε-compatible if ε(ip) = 1 and ε(jp) = ∗ for all 1 ≤ p ≤ k and ε(sp) = ∗ for all 1 ≤ p ≤ m. The set of ε-compatible partitions in P1,2(n) is denoted by P1,2;ε(n). We also let P2;ε(n) := P1,2;ε(n) ∩ P2(n). Let PD 1,2(n) such that π is ε-compatible, and similarly PD 1,2;ε(n) be the set of type D partitions (π, f ) ∈ PD 2;ε(n) be defined. Note that Lemma 4.10 can be extended to PD 1,2;ε(n). More precisely, given ε = (ε(2), . . . , ε(n)) ∈ {1,∗}n−1 and (π, f ) ∈ PD partition (π, f ) ∈ PD Similarly, the procedure (2) yields a colored partition in PD in PD ({2, . . . , n}), the procedure (1) in Lemma 4.10 yields a colored 1,2;(∗,ε)(n) appears in this way. 1,2;(1,ε)(n) and every colored partition 1,2;(∗,ε)(n), and every colored partition of PD 1,2;ε{2,...,n} 1,2;(1,ε)(n) appears in this way. We establish a vector-version of Wick's formula. Theorem 4.11. For any x1, . . . , xn ∈ H and any ε = (ε(1), . . . , ε(n)) ∈ {1,∗}n, we have dε(1) q (xn)Ω q (x1)· · · dε(n) = X(π,f )∈PD × Y{i<j}∈Pair(π) 1,2;ε(n) f ({i<j})=1 qcr(π)+cs(π)+2cnp(π,f )+2npssr(π,f ) hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈Pair(π) f ({i<j})=−1 hxi, xji Oi∈Sing(π,f ) xi, does not have a negative singleton, and xv1 ⊗· · ·⊗ xvm if the rightmost singleton vm is negative. whereNi∈Sing(π,f ) xi denotes the tensor product xv1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xvm if Sing(π, f ) = {v1 < · · · < vm} In the above formula, we use the conventionNi∈∅ Remark 4.12. (1) Usually people working on Fock spaces take x1, . . . , xn from a real Hilbert subspace of H, and then the order i < j does not matter since hxi, xji = hxj, xii. Our version is more general in this sense. xi = Ω. (2) If #{i ∈ {j, j + 1, . . . , n} ε(i) = 1} > #{i ∈ {j, j + 1, . . . , n} ε(i) = ∗} for some (xn)Ω = 0. This case is also covered by Theorem 4.11 if we j ∈ [n], then dε(1) understand the sum over the empty set is 0 since PD (x1)· · · dε(n) q q 1,2;ε(n) = ∅ in this case. Proof. The proof is given by induction and is based on Lemma 4.10. When n = 1, dq(x1)Ω = 0 and d∗q(x1)Ω = x1 and hence the formula is true. Suppose that the formula is true for n − 1. 17 Then for any (ε(2),· · · , ε(n)) ∈ {1,∗}n−1, we get dε(2) q (xn)Ω q (x2)· · · dε(n) X(π,f )∈PD = × Y{i<j}∈Pair(π) 1,2;ε({2,...,n}) qcr(π)+cs(π)+2cnp(π,f )+2npssr(π,f ) hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈Pair(π) f ({i<j})=−1 hxi, xji Ok∈Sing(π,f ) (4.15) xk, q We apply the operator dε(1) ε(1) = 1 from Theorem 3.4. 1,2;ε({2, . . . , n}), to yield the new type D partition (π, f ) ∈ PD f ({i<j})=1 (x1), which equals d∗q(x1) if ε(1) = ∗ and lq(x1) + Jrq(x1)qN−1 if Case I: ε(1) = ∗. The operator d∗q(x1) creates a tensor component x1 on the left. In terms of partitions, this corresponds to procedure (1) in Lemma 4.10: to add the singleton {1} (with 1,2;ε(n). This color 1) to (π, f ) ∈ PD map (π, f ) 7→ (π, f ) does not change the numbers cr, cnp, npssr or cs, which is compatible with the fact that the action of d∗q(x1) does not change the coefficient. Note that if ε(1) = ∗, then any partition in PD 1,2;ε(n) has the singleton {1}. Hence Theorem 4.11 holds for n and ε(1) = ∗. 1,2;ε({2,· · · , n}) and suppose that π has singletons k1 < · · · < kp < i < m1 < · · · < mr, negative pair blocks V1, . . . , Vt on the strict left of i and pair blocks W1, . . . , Wu which cover i. There may be pair blocks on the strict right of i or positive pair blocks on the strict left of i, but they do not matter. Then we discuss three cases separately: (i) (p, r) 6= (0, 0), (ii) (p, r) = (0, 0) and (iii) π does not have a singleton. Case II: ε(1) = 1. Fix (π, f ) ∈ PD Case II(i): (p, r) 6= (0, 0). In this situation we have at least one singleton other than the singleton i. In equation (4.15) we have two situations Ok∈Sing(π,f ) xk = xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr and xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr , and discuss these two cases separately. Case II(i)1: Suppose that np(π) is even, or equivalently, all singletons are colored by 1 (see (B) in the definition of partitions of type D). In this case Ok∈Sing(π,f ) xk = xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xkp ⊗ xi ⊗ xm1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr . We discuss the left and right annihilation operators separately. Case II(i)1(a): The left action. The q-derivative lq(x1) creates new p + r + 1 terms. In the ith term the inner product hx1, xii appears with coefficient qp. In terms of partitions this corresponds to a case of Lemma 4.10(2i): to get a set partition (π, f ) ∈ PD 1,2;ε(n) by adding the pair {1, i} with color 1 to π \ {i}. This pair crosses the blocks W1, . . . , Wu and so increases the crossing number by u but decreases the number of covered singletons by u. The new covered singletons {k1}, . . . ,{kp} and new inner negative blocks V1, . . . , Vt appear. Because i is not a singleton in (π, f ), the number of singletons on the strict right of negative blocks decreases by t. Altogether we have: cr(π) = cr(π) + u, cs(π) = cs(π) − u + p, cnp(π, f ) = cnp(π, f ) + t and npssr(π, f ) = npssr(π, f ) − t. So the exponent of q increases by p. This factor qp is exactly the factor appearing in the q-derivative formula (3.12) when lq(x1) acts on xi, see Figure 5. Case II(i)1(b). When Jrq(x1)qN−1 acts on the tensor, then new p + r + 1 terms appear by using the right q-derivative formula (3.20). The ith term has the coefficient qr+(p+r)hx1, xii. In terms of partitions, this corresponds to a case of Lemma 4.10(2i): to create the new pair {1, i} with color −1 and repaint the rightmost singleton mr or kp by −1 because now the number of 18 {1, i} colored by 1 - - - - 1-th ∗ k1-th . . . ∗ kp-th ∗ ∗ i-th 1 ∗ ∗ ∗ . . . m1-th mr-th ∗ ∗ Fig. 5: The visualization of the action lq(x1) on the tensor product xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr. {1, i} colored by -1 - - - - 1-th ∗ k1-th . . . ∗ kp-th ∗ ∗ i-th -1 ∗ ∗ ∗ . . . m1-th mr-th ∗ ∗ Fig. 6: The visualization of the action rq(x1) on the tensor product xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr . negative pairs of the new partition π is odd – see Figure 6. Similarly to Step 1(a), we count the change of numbers and get cr(π) = cr(π) + u, cs(π) = cs(π) − u + p, cnp(π, f ) = cnp(π, f ) + t and npssr(π, f ) = npssr(π, f ) − t + r. Altogether, when moving from (π, f ) to (π, f ), a new factor q2r+phx1, xii appears, which coincides with the coefficient appearing in the action of Jrq(x1)qN−1. Case II(i)2: Suppose that np(π) is odd, or equivalently, the rightmost singleton is negative. This means that Ok∈Sing(π,f ) xk = xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xkp ⊗ xi ⊗ xm1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xmr . Case II(i)2(a): The left action. The action of lq(x1) creates p + r + 1 terms. Two situations are possible. • If r > 0 then we have a situation similar to Step 1(a) i.e. the ith term has the new coefficient qphx1, xii. In terms of partitions this corresponds to a case of Lemma 4.10(2i): we create the positive pair {1, i} and then np(π) is still odd so mr is still colored by −1. • If r = 0 then the ith term creates the new factor qphx1, xii. In terms of partitions this corresponds to a case of Lemma 4.10(2i): we create the negative pair {1, i}, so now np(π) is even – see Figure 7(a). The rightmost singleton kp of π still has color 1. In both situations the new partition (π, f ) ∈ PD 1,2;ε(n) satisfies cr(π) = cr(π) + u, cs(π) = cs(π) − u + p, cnp(π, f ) = cnp(π, f ) + t and npssr(π, f ) = npssr(π, f ) − t, so the exponent of q increases by p. Case II(i)2(b): The right action. The operator Jrq(x1)qN−1 acting on the tensor product creates new p + r + 1 terms. We have two situations. • If r > 0 then the ith term creates the new factor qr+(p+r)hx1, xii. Pictorially this corre- sponds to Lemma 4.10(2i): the new negative pair {1, i} is created and the singleton mr is repainted by 1 because now np(π) is even. 19 (a) (b) Color -1 Color 1 Color 1 Color -1 - - . . . 1-th ∗ ∗ ∗ i-th - - . . . 1-th ∗ kp-th ∗ i-th ∗ Fig. 7: The main structure of (π, f ) in Steps 2(a) and 2(b) when r = 0. • If r = 0 then the ith term has the new coefficient qphx1, xii = qphx1, xii. In terms of partitions the new pair {1, i} is created with color 1, so the number of negative pairs is still odd and we must repaint the singleton kp by −1 – see Figure 7(b). This is compatible with the fact that under this action we obtain xk1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xkp. Altogether, when moving from (π, f ) to (π, f ), the exponent of q increases by 2r + p, which coincides with the coefficient appearing in the action of Jrq(x1)qN−1, creating the inner product hx1, xii if r > 0 and hx1, xii if r = 0. Similarly to Case II(ii)1(b), we get cr(π) = cr(π) + u, cs(π) = cs(π) − u + p, cnp(π, f ) = cnp(π, f ) + t and npssr(π, f ) = npssr(π, f ) − t + r. and hence Nk∈Sing(π,f ) xk = xi or xi, according to the color of the singleton. We recall that Jrq(x1)xi = Jrq(x1)xi = 0, and so we only need to discuss the left q-derivative lq(x1). The action creates the pair {1, i}. We have two situations. Case II(ii): ε(1) = 1 and p = r = 0. In this case the partition (π, f ) has a unique singleton, • If (π, f ) has the unique positive singleton i, then we have an even number of negative pairs. The ith term of lq(x1)xi is hx1, xii. In terms of partitions, this corresponds to Lemma 4.10(2ii): we create the pair {1, i} with color 1 to get a new pair partition (π, f ). • If (π, f ) has the unique negative singleton i, then we have an odd number of negative pairs. The ith term of lq(x1)xi is hx1, xii. In terms of partitions, this corresponds to Lemma 4.10(2ii): we create the negative pair {1, i} to get a new pair partition (π, f ). We emphasize that the number of negative pairs in this new partition is even, which is compatible with Proposition 4.9 part (1). Altogether, this pair creates a new partition (π, f ) but it does not change the number cr + cs + 2cnp + 2npssr by the same argument as in Case II(i)1(a). This is compatible with the fact that the action lq(x1) does not change the exponent of q. Case II(iii): π does not have an singleton. Then the action of dq(x1) on the vacuum gives zero. This is compatible with the observation that this situation does not appear in Lemma 4.10, i.e. we cannot pass from PD 1,2(n) by creating a new pair. 2 ({2, . . . , n}) (= vacuum vector) to PD Through Case II(i) – Case II(iii) and by (the ε-compatible version of) Lemma 4.10, we 1,2;ε(n) with the desired coefficients. (x1) yields all partitions in PD conclude that the action of dε(1) q Hence we complete the proof. 20 Example 4.13. We have the formula dq(x1)dq(x2)d∗q(x3)d∗q(x4)Ω = qhx1, x3ihx2, x4i + qhx1, x3ihx2, x4i + hx1, x4ihx2, x3i + q2hx1, x4ihx2, x3i, which corresponds to the colored partitions in Figure 8. 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Fig. 8: Pair partitions of type D – PD 1 2 3 4 2;(1,1,∗,∗)(4). When the involution is identity, our vector-version of Wick's formula can be written in terms of set partitions (of type A). Proposition 4.14. Suppose that xi = xi ∈ H, i = 1, 2, . . . , n. Then q dε(1) q (xn)Ω 2−out\sr(π)qcr(π)+cs(π) Y{i<j}∈Pair(π)(cid:0)(cid:0)1 + q2cover({i<j})+2ssr({i<j})(cid:1)hxi, xji(cid:1) Oi∈Sing(π) (x1)· · · dε(n) = Xπ∈P1,2;ε(n) whereNi∈Sing(π) xi denotes xi1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xik when Sing(π) = {i1 < · · · < ik}. Proof. Since we have xi = xi, coloring of singletons is not important. Take π ∈ P1,2;ε(n) and suppose that Pair(π) = {V1, . . . , Vk}. Then xi, kYi=1(cid:0)1 + q2(cover(Vi)+ssr(Vi))(cid:1) = X(n1,...,nk)∈{1,−1}k = X(n1,...,nk)∈{1,−1}k = 2#{V ∈Pair(π) lcr(V ) = cover(V ) = sr(V ) = 0}Xf kYi=1(cid:0)q2(cover(Vi)+ssr(Vi))(cid:1)δni ,−1 i=1(cover(Vi)+ssr(Vi))δni ,−1 q2 Pk q2cnp(π,f )+2npssr(π,f ), (4.16) where f runs over all possible type D colorings of Pair(π). The last formula follows from the observation that a pair block V ∈ π must be painted by a unique color (1 or −1) if and only if (4.17) lcr(V ) = cover(V ) = sr(V ) = 0 by the definition of partitions of type D. So the sum X(n1,...,nk)∈{1,−1}k q2 Pk i=1(cover(Vi)+ssr(Vi))δni ,−1 (4.18) counts the colorings of V twice as many as the type D colorings of V whenever V satisfies (4.17). From Theorem 4.11 it is sufficient to show that the number of pairs V which satisfy condition (4.17) is equal to out\sr(π), the number of outer connected components with size at least 2 without singletons on the right. This follows from the fact that each connected component C ∈ out\sr(π) with size ≥ 2 contains a unique block of π which does not have a left crossing or a covering. In fact it is the block of π having the minimal point of C. 21 The main theorem is the Wick formula of type D, which is similar to the type B case when α = 1, cf. (1.1), but now we use completely different partitions. q (x1)· · · dε(n) q Theorem 4.15. Suppose that x1, . . . , xn ∈ H and ε ∈ {1,∗}n. (xn)Ωiq = X(π,f )∈PD (1) hΩ, dε(1) (2) hΩ, Gq(x1)· · · Gq(xn)Ωiq = X(π,f )∈PD qcr(π)+2cnp(π,f ) Y{i<j}∈π qcr(π)+2cnp(π,f ) Y{i<j}∈π 2;ε(n) 2 (n) f ({i<j})=1 hxi, xji. hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈π hxi, xji Y{i<j}∈π f ({i<j})=−1 f ({i<j})=−1 hxi, xji. f ({i<j})=1 Proof. (1) is clear from Theorem 4.11 and (2) follows from (1) by taking the sum over all ε. Corollary 4.16. Assume that xi = xi ∈ H for i = 1, . . . , 2m. In the limit q → 1, we recover the t-transformed classical Brownian motion [BW01, Theorem 9.2] with t = 2: hΩ, G1(x1)· · · G1(x2m)Ωi1 = Xπ∈P2(2m) 2m−#out(π) Y{i<j}∈π hxi, xji. Proof. The formula follows from Proposition 4.14 and taking the sum over ε. Corollary 4.17. Assume that xi ∈ H for i = 1, . . . , 2m. When q = 0 we recover the moments for a semicircular system hΩ, G0(x1)· · · G0(x2m)Ωi0 = Xπ∈NC2(2m) Y{i<j}∈π hxi, xji, where NC2(2m) := {π ∈ P2(2m) cr(π) = 0}. Note that the involution − does not appear in the formula. Proof. The formula follows from Corollary 4.15(2). Note that 0cr(π)+2cnp(π,f ) gives a nonzero value (=1) only when cr(π) + 2cnp(π, f ) = 0, which implies that all blocks are positive by the definition of type D partitions. 4.5 Traciality of the vacuum state In the context of the von Neumann algebra generated by a free Brownian motion (q = 0 case), it is common to consider a Brownian motion indexed by a real Hilbert subspace; otherwise the vacuum state would not be a trace. We follow this strategy and assume that HR is a real Hilbert subspace of H such that H = HR ⊕ iHR. When considering elements in HR, it holds true that hx, yi = hy, xi. Let vN(Gq(HR)) be the von Neumann algebra generated by {Gq(x) x ∈ HR} acting on the completion of F(q) fin (H). Proposition 4.18. Let q ∈ (−1, 1). Suppose that dim(HR) ≥ 2. Then the vacuum state is a trace on vN(Gq(HR)) if and only if q = 0. Proof. Corollary 4.15(2) for n = 4 reads (see Example 4.8) hΩ, Gq(x1)Gq(x2)Gq(x3)Gq(x4)Ωiq = hx1, x2ihx3, x4i + qhx1, x3ihx2, x4i + qhx1, x3ihx2, x4i + hx1, x4ihx2, x3i + q2hx1, x4ihx2, x3i (4.19) 22 and by permuting x1, x2, x3, x4, hΩ, Gq(x2)Gq(x3)Gq(x4)Gq(x1)Ωiq = hx2, x3ihx1, x4i + qhx2, x4ihx1, x3i + qhx2, x4ihx1, x3i + hx1, x2ihx3, x4i + q2hx1, x2ihx3, x4i, where the assumption x1, . . . , x4 ∈ HR was used. Hence hΩ, Gq(x1)Gq(x2)Gq(x3)Gq(x4)Ωiq − hΩ, Gq(x2)Gq(x3)Gq(x4)Gq(x1)Ωiq = q2(hx1, x4ihx2, x3i − hx1, x2ihx3, x4i). (4.20) (4.21) Therefore the vacuum state is not a trace when q 6= 0, because when dim(HR) ≥ 2 there are two orthogonal unit eigenvectors e1, e2 of the involution −, and we take x1 = x2 = e1 and x3 = x4 = e2. When q = 0, the von Neumann algebra becomes the free von Neumann algebra and the traciality of the vacuum state is well known. It actually follows from the free Wick formula Corollary 4.17. Open problems (1) Study the von Neumann algebra vN(Gq(HR)), in particular, injectivity, completely bounded approximation property, cyclic separating property of the vacuum, factoriality and type. (2) Prove the existence of a classical Markov process realization of the Brownian motion of type D (see [BKS97] for the type A case). (3) Find a connection between noncrossing partitions of type D in [AR04, Rei97] and our pair partitions of type D. This problem may be related to the problem of finding a "free probability of type D" in the spirit of Biane, Goodman and Nica [BGN03]. (4) Construct a Fock space deformed by affine Coxeter groups which are infinite groups. (5) Compute the explicit form of µq, the distribution of the Gaussian operator of type D. Is it absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure? (6) Describe the distribution of Gq(x) when x is not an eigenvector of the involution. (7) Find the exact values of the norms of creation and the Gaussian operators of type D. Acknowledgments The work was supported by the MAESTRO grant DEC-2011/02/A/ ST1/00119 (M. Boże- jko), Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Project No P 25510-N26 (W. Ejsmont), grant number 2014/15/B/ST1/00064 from the Narodowe Centrum Nauki (W. Ejsmont), Wymianę osobową z Austrią Project No DWM.ZWB.183.1.2016 (M. Bożejko, W. Ejsmont) and JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) 15K17549 (T. Hasebe). References [AR04] C.A. Athanasiadis and V. Reiner, Noncrossing partitions for the group Dn, SIAM J. Discrete Math. 18, No. 2 (2004), 397–417. [BGN03] P. Biane, F. Goodman and A. Nica, Non-crossing cumulants of type B, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), 2263–2303. 23 [Bou02] N. Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras, Chapters 4-6, Springer, New York, 2002. [BB06] M. Bożejko, and W. Bryc, On a class of free Lévy laws related to a regression problem, J. Funct. Anal. 236(1) (2006), 59–77. [BEH15] M. Bożejko, W. Ejsmont and T. Hasebe, Fock space associated to Coxeter groups of type B, J. Funct. Anal. 269(6) (2015), 1769–1795. [BKS97] M. Bożejko, B. Kümmerer and R. Speicher, q-Gaussian processes: non-commutative and classical aspects, Comm. Math. Phys., 185(1), (1997), 129–154. [BSp91] M. Bożejko and R. Speicher, An example of a generalized Brownian motion, Com- mun. Math. Phys. 137 (1991), 519–531. [BSp94] M. Bożejko and R. Speicher, Completely positive maps on Coxeter groups, deformed commutation relations, and operator spaces, Math. Ann. 300 (1994), 97–120. [BSz03] M. Bożejko and R. Szwarc, Algebraic length and Poincaré series on reflection groups with applications to representations theory, in Asymptotic Combinatorics with Ap- plications to Mathematical Physics, Lecture Notes in Math. 1815 (2003), 201–221. [BW01] M. Bożejko and J. Wysoczański, Remarks on t-transformations of measures and convolutions, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré-PR 37(6) (2001), 737–761. [BW05] W. Bryc and J. Wesołowski, Conditional moments of q-Meixner processes, Probab. Theory Related Fields 131 (2005), no. 3, 415–441. [BW14] W. Bryc and J. Wesołowski, Infinitesimal generators of q-Meixner processess, Stochastic Process. Appl. 124 (2014), no. 1, 915–926. [Car89] [GS14] [HO07] R.W. Carter, Simple Groups of Lie Type, John Wiley & Sons, London-New York- Sydney, 1989. A. Guionnet and D. Shlyakhtenko, Free monotone transport, Invent. Math. 196 (2014), 613–661. A. Hora and N. Obata, Quantum Probability and Spectral Analysis of Graphs, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, Springer, Berlin, 2007. xviii+371 pp. [Hum90] J.E. Humphreys, Reflection Groups and Coxeter Groups, Cambridge studies in advances math. 29, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. [Rei97] [Ric05] [Ric06] [Stu00] [Wys06] V. Reiner, Non-crossing partitions for classical reflection groups, Discrete Math. 177 (1997), 195–222. É. Ricard, Factoriality of q-Gaussian von Neumann Algebras, Comm. Math. Phys. 257 (2005),659–665. É. Ricard, The von Neumann algebras generated by t-Gaussians, Ann. Inst. Fourier 56 (2006), no. 2, 475–498. F. Stumbo, Minimal length coset representatives for quotients of parabolic sub- groups in Coxeter groups, Bul. Un. Math. Ital. Serie 8, 3-B (2000), No. 3, 699–715. J. Wysoczański, The von Neumann algebra associated with an infinite number of t-free noncommutative Gaussian random variables, Quantum probability, 435–438, Banach Center Publ. 73, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2006. 24 [Voi85] D. Voiculescu, Symmetries of some reduced free product C∗ algebras, Operator algebras and their connections with topology and ergodic theory, Lect. Notes in Math. 1132, Springer, Berlin (1985), 556–588. 25
1609.02534	1	1609	2016-09-08T19:04:45	Joint functional calculus in algebra of polynomial tempered distributions	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper we develop a functional calculus for a countable system of generators of contraction strongly continuous semigroups. As a symbol class of such calculus we use the algebra of polynomial tempered distributions. We prove a differential property of constructed calculus and describe its image with the help of the commutant of polynomial shift semigroup. As an application, we consider a function of countable set of second derivative operators.	math.FA	math	Methods of Functional Analysis and Topology Vol. 22 (2016), no. 1, pp. 62 -- 73 JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL TEMPERED DISTRIBUTIONS 6 1 0 2 p e S 8 ] S. V. SHARYN Abstract. In this paper we develop a functional calculus for a countable system of generators of contraction strongly continuous semigroups. As a symbol class of such calculus we use the algebra of polynomial tempered distributions. We prove a differential property of constructed calculus and describe its image with the help of the commutant of polynomial shift semigroup. As an application, we consider a function of countable set of second derivative operators. . A F h t a m [ 1 v 4 3 5 2 0 . 9 0 6 1 : v i X r a Introduction A functional calculus is a theory that studies how to construct functions depending on operators (roughly speaking, how to "substitute" an operator instead of the variable in a function). Also it is said that the functional calculus for some (not necessary bounded) operator A on a Banach space is a method of associating an operator f (A) to a function f belonging to a topological algebra A of functions. If we have such a method then, actually, we have a continuous homomorphism from the algebra A to a topological algebra of operators. So, in this terminology the functional calculus can be identified with the above-mentioned homomorphism (but as a theory the functional calculus studies such homomorphisms). There are many different approaches to construct a functional calculus for one ope- rator acting on a Banach space. For Riesz-Dunford functional calculus, based on the Cauchy formula, we refer the reader to the book [11]. Such a functional calculus has applications, in particular, in the spectral theory of elliptic differential equations and maximal regularity of parabolic evolution equations (see e.g. [14, 18]). Another method, based on the Laplace transformation, was developed in [13]. This method is known as the Hille-Phillips functional calculus. It has many helpful applications, in particular, in hydrology (see [2] and the references given there). Such type of calculus is the main object of investigation in this article. The Hille-Phillips functional calculus for functions of several variables is well developed (see e.g. [19, 21]). The case of functions of infinitely many variables is less studied. We mention the book [23] that is devoted to spectral questions (among them there is a functional calculus) of countable families of self-adjoint operators on a Hilbert space. The main goal of this article is the construction of Hille-Phillips type functional calculus for countable set of generators of contraction strongly continuous semigroups, acting on a Banach space. The Borchers-Uhlmann algebra, i.e. the tensor algebra over the space of rapidly de- creasing functions with tensor product as a multiplication was effectively used in quan- tum field theory (see e.g. [6, 7, 27]). Such algebras have an equivalent structure of 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46H30; Secondary 47A60, 46F05. Key words and phrases. Functional calculus for generators of operator semigroups, polynomials on locally convex spaces, infinite parameter operator semigroups. 62 JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 63 polynomials with pointwise multiplication [9]. It was an incitement to research the prob- lems connected with the polynomially extended cross-correlation of (ultra)distributions, differentiations and the corresponding functional calculus [20]. Elements of the Borchers- Uhlmann algebra can be treated as functionals on spaces of smooth functions of infinite many variables. So, we can understand this algebra as space of polynomial distributions with tensor structure. In this paper we would like to consider this structure for a special case. A Fr´echet-Schwartz space (briefly, (F S) space) is one that is Fr´echet and Schwartz simultaneously (see [29]). Let S+ be the space of rapidly decreasing functions on [0, +∞) and S ′ + be its dual. It is known (see e.g. [16, 26]) that these spaces are nuclear Fr´echet- Schwartz and dual Fr´echet-Schwartz spaces ((DF S) for short), respectively. These facts are crucial for our investigation. The main objects of investigation are the algebras P(S ′ +) of polynomial test and generalized functions, which have the tensor +) and P ′(S ′ structures of the forms Lfin S ⊗n + and ××× S ′ ⊗n + , respectively. Using the Grothendieck technique [10], we introduce the polynomial extension of cross- correlation and prove the Theorem 1.3 about isomorphic representation of the algebra of polynomial distributions onto the commutant of polynomial shift semigroup (see (3)) in + . In Proposition 1.4 we prove the differential property of polynomial cross-correlation, which is essentially used in main Theorem 3.2. the space of linear continuous operators on Lfin S ⊗n In the section 2 we extend the generalized Fourier transformation onto the spaces of polynomial test and generalized functions. Images of this map we understand as functions and functionals of infinite many variables (see Remarks 2.1 and 2.2), respectively. The constructed polynomial test and generalized functions we apply to an operator semigroup with infinitely many parameters. Namely, we construct the functional calculus for countable system of generators of contraction C0-semigroups and prove its properties (see Remark 3.1 and Theorem 3.2). This calculus is an infinite-dimensional analogue of the one constructed in [19]. As an example we consider the infinite-dimensional Gaussian semigroup, which is generated by a countable set of second derivative operators. Finally we note that there are other known and widely used infinite-dimensional ge- neralizations of classical spaces of distributions [3, 4]. For example, white noise analysis is based on an infinite dimensional analogue of the Schwartz distribution theory (see e.g. [12, 15, 17, 22]). 1. Background on polynomial tempered distributions In what follows L(X, Y ) denotes the space of all continuous linear operators from a locally convex space X into another such space Y , endowed with the topology of uniform convergence on bounded subsets of X. Let L(X) := L(X, X) and IX denotes the identity operator in L(X). The dual space X ′ := L(X, C) is endowed with strong topology. The pairing between elements of X ′ and X we denote by h · , · i. Let X ⊗n, n ∈ N, be the symmetric nth tensor degree of X, completed in the projective ∈ X ⊗n, n ∈ N. Set tensor topology. For any x ∈ X we denote x⊗n := x ⊗ · · · ⊗ x {z n } X ⊗0 := C, x⊗0 := 1 ∈ C. For any A ∈ L(X) its tensor power A⊗n ∈ L(X ⊗n), n ∈ N, is defined as a linear continuous extension of the map x⊗n 7−→ (Ax)⊗n, where x ∈ X. It follows from results of [5] that such an extension exists if X is a projective or inductive limit of separable Hilbert spaces. In this article we consider only such spaces. Let S+ be the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions on R+ := [0, +∞) and S ′ + be its dual space of tempered distributions supported by R+. Note that strong topology 64 S. V. SHARYN on S ′ + coincides with the Mackey topology and topology of inductive limit (see [24, IV.4, IV.5]). Let δt be the Dirac delta functional concentrated at a point t ∈ R+. It is known [28] that S ′ + is a topological algebra with the unit δ := δ0 under the convolution, defined as hf ∗ g, ϕi = hf (s), hg(t), ϕ(s + t)ii, f, g ∈ S ′ +, ϕ ∈ S+. Note that here and everywhere the notation f (t) shows that a functional f acts on a test function in the variable t. From the duality theory as well as from the theory of nuclear spaces it follows that S+ is a nuclear (F S) space, and S ′ + is a nuclear (DF S) space. To define the locally convex space P(nS ′ +) of n-homogeneous polynomials on S ′ + we use the canonical topological linear isomorphism P(nS ′ +) ≃ (S ′ ⊗n + )′ described in [9]. Namely, given a functional pn ∈ (S ′ ⊗n polynomial Pn ∈ P(nS ′ +) by Pn(f ) := pn(f ⊗n), f ∈ S ′ locally convex topology b of uniform convergence on bounded sets in S ′ C. The space P(S ′ linear span of all P(nS ′ strong dual of P(S ′ + )′, we define an n-homogeneous +) with the +) := + is defined to be the complex +) mean the +), n ∈ Z+, endowed with the topology b. Let P ′(S ′ +) of all continuous polynomials on S ′ +. We equip P(nS ′ +. Set P(0S ′ +) and Γ(S+) :=Mfin n∈Z+ S ⊗n + ⊂ Mn∈Z+ S ⊗n + and Γ(S ′ +) := ××× S ′ ⊗n + . n∈Z+ Note that we consider only the case when elements of the direct sum consist of a finite but not fixed number of terms. For simplicity of notation we write Γ(S+) instead of commonly used Γfin(S+). We have the following assertion (see also [20, Proposition 2.1]). Proposition 1.1. There exist linear topological isomorphisms Υ : P(S ′ +) −→ Γ(S+), Ψ : P ′(S ′ +) −→ Γ(S ′ +). Elements of the spaces P(S ′ +) we call the polynomial test functions and polynomial distributions, respectively. In what follows elements of the spaces Γ(S+) and Γ(S ′ +) and P ′(S ′ +) will be written as and ××× n∈Z+ fn = (f0, f1, . . . , fn, . . . ) ∈ Γ(S ′ +) for all n ∈ Z+. To simplify, we write for elements from the total subset (1) of the space Γ(S ′ space by linearity and continuity. It is obvious that Γ(S ′ +) and extend it to the whole +) is an algebra relative to embedded into Γ(S ′ space Γ(S+) becomes an algebra with respect to ⊛. the operation ⊛ with the unit element (cid:0)δ⊗n(cid:1). Since Γ(S+) is continuously and densely For any K ∈ L(S+) let us define an operator K ⊗ ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) as follows: +) (see [20]) and the space S+ is a convolution algebra (see [28]), the K ⊗ :=(cid:0)K ⊗n(cid:1) : p = (pn) 7−→ K ⊗p :=(cid:0)K ⊗npn(cid:1), (2) pn = (p0, p1, . . . , pm, 0, . . . ) ∈ Γ(S+) mMn=0 (cid:0)pn(cid:1) and (cid:0)fn(cid:1) instead of Lm for some m ∈ N, where pn ∈ S ⊗n Note that the following systems of elements + and fn ∈ S ′ ⊗n + (1) are total in Γ(S+) and Γ(S ′ Let us define the operation n=0 pn and ×××n∈Z+ fn, respectively. +), respectively. (cid:8)(cid:0)ϕ⊗n(cid:1) : ϕ ∈ S+(cid:9), +(cid:9) (cid:8)(cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1) : f ∈ S ′ (cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1) ⊛(cid:0)g⊗n(cid:1) :=(cid:0)(f ∗ g)⊗n(cid:1) JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 65 where K ⊗0 := IC and each operator K ⊗n ∈ L(S ⊗n extension of the map ϕ⊗n 7−→ (Kϕ)⊗n, with ϕ ∈ S+, n ∈ N. + ) is defined as a linear continuous Consider the one-parameter C0-semigroup of shifts, T : R+ ∋ s 7−→ Ts ∈ L(S+), Tsϕ(t) := ϕ(t + s), t ∈ R+, ϕ ∈ S+. Hence, the map T ⊗n : R+ ∋ s 7−→ T ⊗n T ⊗n is a one-parameter semigroup of operators. Denote T ⊗ s mapping s ∈ L(S ⊗n + ) is well defined. It easy to check that := (cid:0)T ⊗n s (cid:1), s ∈ R+. The (3) T ⊗ : R+ ∋ s 7−→ T ⊗ s ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) is called the polynomial shift semigroup. The cross-correlation of a distribution f ∈ S ′ + and a function ϕ ∈ S+ is defined to be the function (f ⋆ ϕ)(s) := hf, Tsϕi = hf (t), ϕ(t + s)i. Similarly to [25] it is easy to prove that (4) f ⋆ ϕ ∈ S+, f ⋆ Tsϕ = Ts(f ⋆ ϕ) and (f ∗ g) ⋆ ϕ = f ⋆ (g ⋆ ϕ) for any s ∈ R+, f, g ∈ S ′ defined by + and ϕ ∈ S+. It follows that the cross-correlation operator belongs to L(S+) for any f ∈ S ′ +. From (2) it follows that Kf : ϕ 7−→ f ⋆ ϕ (5) where f := (fn) ∈ Γ(S ′ K ⊗ f :=(cid:0)K ⊗n +) with fn ∈ S ′ ⊗n fn (cid:1) ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) + , n ∈ Z+. and K ⊗n fn ∈ L(S ⊗n + ), The cross-correlation of a polynomial distribution f = (fn) ∈ Γ(S ′ +) and a polynomial test function p = (pn) ∈ Γ(S+) is given by f ⋆ p := K ⊗ f p =(cid:0)K ⊗n fn pn(cid:1). Proposition 1.2. For any f ∈ Γ(S ′ polynomial test function belonging to Γ(S+). +) and p ∈ Γ(S+) the cross-correlation f ⋆ p is a +) and p = (pn) ∈ Γ(S+). Since f ⋆ p = (cid:0)K ⊗n Proof. Let f = (fn) ∈ Γ(S ′ definition, we only need to check that K ⊗n fn this is obvious. (4)). Consider the case n > 1. Since the operators K ⊗n fn sufficient to prove the statement for fn = f ⊗n and pn = ϕ⊗n with f ∈ S ′ Then the function + for all n ∈ Z+. In the case n = 0 If n = 1 we obtain that hf1, Tsp1i = (f1 ⋆ p1)(s) belongs to S+ (see are linear and continuous, it is + and ϕ ∈ S+. pn(cid:1) by pn ∈ S ⊗n fn belongs to S ⊗n + as the n-th tensor power of a function from S+. K ⊗n fn pn =(cid:10)f ⊗n, T ⊗n s ϕ⊗n(cid:11) =(cid:10)f ⊗n, (Tsϕ)⊗n(cid:11) =(cid:10)f, Tsϕ(cid:11)⊗n ⊂ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) of the polynomial shift semigroup T ⊗ is defined = (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗n (cid:3) The commutant (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c to be the set (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c :=(cid:8)K ⊗ ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) : K ⊗ ◦ T ⊗ s = T ⊗ s ◦ K ⊗, ∀ s ∈ R+(cid:9), where K ⊗ is defined by (2). Theorem 1.3. The mapping Γ(S ′ +) ∋ f 7−→ K ⊗ f ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) 66 S. V. SHARYN is an algebraic isomorphism from the algebra (cid:8)Γ(S ′ the semigroup T ⊗ in the algebra (cid:8)L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1), ◦(cid:9). holds: +), ⊛(cid:9) onto the commutant (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c of In particular, the following relation K ⊗ f ⊛g = K ⊗ f ◦ K ⊗ g , f , g ∈ Γ(S ′ +). Proof. Since the operator K ⊗ f is linear and continuous, it is sufficient to consider only elements from the total subsets (1). Let p = (ϕ⊗n) ∈ Γ(S+) with ϕ ∈ S+ and f = (f ⊗n), g = (g⊗n) ∈ Γ(S ′ + be given. From definitions of operations ⊛ and ⋆, as well as from (4), we obtain +) with f, g ∈ S ′ K ⊗ f ⊛gp =(cid:16)(cid:10)(f ∗ g)⊗n, T ⊗n s ϕ⊗n(cid:11)(cid:17) =(cid:16)(cid:0)(f ∗ g) ⋆ ϕ(cid:1)⊗n(cid:17) =(cid:16)(cid:0)f ⋆ (g ⋆ ϕ)(cid:1)⊗n(cid:17) =(cid:16)(cid:10)f, Ts(g ⋆ ϕ)(cid:11)⊗n(cid:17) =(cid:16)(cid:10)f ⊗n, T ⊗n s (g ⋆ ϕ)⊗n(cid:11)(cid:17) = K ⊗ f K ⊗ g p. Using (4), we obtain K ⊗ f T ⊗ s p =(cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1) ⋆(cid:0)T ⊗n s ϕ⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1) ⋆(cid:0)(Tsϕ)⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)(f ⋆ Tsϕ)⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)(Ts(f ⋆ ϕ))⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)T ⊗n ϕ⊗n(cid:1) = T ⊗ =(cid:0)T ⊗n s K ⊗n fn s K ⊗ f p s (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗n(cid:1) for all s ∈ R+. Hence, the operator K ⊗ Conversely, let K ∈ L(S+) be an operator such that K ⊗ ∈ (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c . Let us show that h . Such an element is h := (1, h, . . . , h⊗n, . . . ), + is defined by the relation hh, ϕi := (Kϕ)(0), ϕ ∈ S+. Since there exists h ∈ Γ(S ′ where the distribution h ∈ S ′ (h ⋆ ϕ)(s) = hh, Tsϕi = (KTsϕ)(0) = (Kϕ)(s), we obtain +) such that K ⊗ = K ⊗ for all f ∈ Γ(S ′ +). f belongs to (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c K ⊗ h p =(cid:0)(h ⋆ ϕ)⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)(Kϕ)⊗n(cid:1) =(cid:0)K ⊗nϕ⊗n(cid:1) = K ⊗p. Thus, K ⊗ = K ⊗ h . So, the range of the mapping Γ(S ′ +) ∋ f 7−→ K ⊗ coincides with the commutant (cid:2)T ⊗(cid:3)c . f ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S+)(cid:1) (cid:3) Let D mean the differential operator on S+. We use the same letter D to denote the operator of generalized differentiation on S ′ Let us define the operator D ∈ L(cid:0)Γ(S ′ +, i.e. hDf, ϕi = −hf, Dϕi. D : Γ(S ′ +) (1, f, . . . , f ⊗n, . . . ) −→ +)(cid:1) as follows 7−→ (cid:16)0, Df, . . . , nXj=1 Γ(S ′ +) f ⊗(j−1) ⊗ Df ⊗ f ⊗(n−j), . . .(cid:17). Its restriction onto Γ(S+) acts as D : Γ(S+) (1, ϕ, . . . , ϕ⊗n, . . . ) −→ 7−→ (cid:16)0, Dϕ, . . . , nXj=1 Γ(S+) ϕ⊗(j−1) ⊗ Dϕ ⊗ ϕ⊗(n−j), . . .(cid:17). Analogically as in [20] it is easy to prove that D is a continuous derivative. Proposition 1.4. For any f ∈ Γ(S ′ +) and p ∈ Γ(S+) the following equality holds: (Df ) ⋆ p = −f ⋆ (Dp). JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 67 we have +) with f ∈ S ′ + and p = (cid:0)ϕ⊗n(cid:1) ∈ Γ(S+) with ϕ ∈ S+ Proof. For any f = (cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1) ∈ Γ(S ′ (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗(j−1) ⊗ (Df ⋆ ϕ) ⊗ (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗(n−j), . . .(cid:17) (Df ) ⋆ p =(cid:16)0, Df ⋆ ϕ, . . . , nXj=1 = −(cid:16)0, f ⋆ Dϕ, . . . , (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗(j−1) ⊗ (f ⋆ Dϕ) ⊗ (f ⋆ ϕ)⊗(n−j), . . .(cid:17) nXj=1 (Tsϕ)⊗(j−1) ⊗ (TsDϕ) ⊗ (Tsϕ)⊗(n−j)(cid:11), . . .(cid:17) = −(cid:16)0,(cid:10)f, TsDϕ(cid:11), . . . ,(cid:10)f ⊗n, nXj=1 = −(cid:16)0,(cid:10)f, TsDϕ(cid:11), . . . ,(cid:10)f ⊗n, T ⊗n nXj=1 ϕ⊗(j−1) ⊗ Dϕ ⊗ ϕ⊗(n−j)(cid:11), . . .(cid:17) s = − f ⋆ (Dp). The proposition is proved. (cid:3) 2. Fourier transform of polynomial tempered distributions Since each element of the space S+ may be considered as a function ϕ ∈ L1(0, ∞) ∩ L2(0, ∞), we define the Fourier transform and its inverse, as follows: F+ : S+ ∋ ϕ 7−→ bϕ(ξ) :=ZR+ 2π ZR + : bϕ 7−→ ϕ(t) = F −1 1 eitξbϕ(ξ) dξ, e−itξϕ(t) dt, ξ ∈ R, t ∈ R+. +. The space bS ′ + is a Let bS+ := F+[S+] stand for the range of S+ under the map F+. that bS+ ⊂ L2(R). Using the injectivity of F+, we endow the space bS+ with a topology induced by the topology in S+. Therefore, bS+ is a nuclear (F ) space (see [24]). For the strong duals the appropriate adjoint transform (F −1 mapping + is well defined. The It is known [1] + )′ : S ′ + 7−→ bS ′ is called the generalized Fourier transform of distributions from S ′ F ′ + := 2π(F −1 + )′ : S ′ + ∋ f 7−→ bf ∈ bS ′ + Since delta functional is a unit element in the convolution algebra S ′ nuclear (DF S) space as a strong dual of the nuclear (F S) space bS+ (see [24]). obtain [δ ∗ f = bf = [f ∗ δ and the space bS ′ the unit bδ with respect to the multiplication bf · bh := [f ∗ h, f, h ∈ S ′ + (see [28]), we + is a commutative multiplicative algebra with +. The following bilinear form hF ′ +f, F+ϕi = h2π(F −1 + )′f, F+ϕi = 2πhf, F −1 + F+ϕi = 2πhf, ϕi, +, ϕ ∈ S+, defines the new duality hbS ′ +) := ××× with f ∈ S ′ + and Γ(bS ′ +) with f, h ∈ S ′ n∈Z+ bS ⊗n Denote Γ(bS+) := Lfin bh =(cid:0)bh⊗n(cid:1) ∈ Γ(bS ′ and extend it to the whole space Γ(bS ′ Γ(bS ′ + we define the operation +, bS+i. + . For any elements bf = (cid:0)bf ⊗n(cid:1), n∈Z+ bS ′ ⊗n bf b⊛bh :=(cid:0)(bf · bh)⊗n(cid:1) +) by linearity and continuity. It is obvious, that +) is an algebra relative to the operation b⊛. Similarly as above, we can induce this 68 S. V. SHARYN operation on the space Γ(bS+) that becomes an algebra too. From [20, Proposition 2.1] it follows that there exist the linear topological isomorphisms of algebras bΥ : P(bS ′ +) −→ Γ(bS+) and bΨ : P ′(bS ′ +) −→ Γ(bS ′ +). Using Proposition 1.1 we can extend the map F+ onto the space Γ(S+) as follows. + by the relations + with ϕ ∈ S+ we define the operation F ⊗n First of all, for any ϕ⊗n ∈ S ⊗n F ⊗n + : ϕ⊗n 7−→ bϕ⊗n and F ⊗0 + := IC. F ⊗ + to the whole space S ⊗n + by linearity and continuity, Next, we extend the mapping F ⊗n so F ⊗n + is defined to be the mapping + , bS ⊗n + =(cid:0)F ⊗n + (cid:1). Finally, F ⊗ + (cid:1) : Γ(S+) ∋ p =(cid:0)pn(cid:1) + ∈ L(cid:0)S ⊗n where bpn := F ⊗n Remark 2.1. Note that bϕ⊗n for any n ∈ N may be treated as a function of n variables Rn ∋ (ξ1, . . . , ξn) 7−→ bϕ(ξ1) · . . . · bϕ(ξn) ∈ C and may be written in the following way: 7−→ bp :=(cid:0)bpn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(bS+), + is a homomorphism of the corresponding + pn. It is easy to check that F ⊗ algebras. e−i(t,ξ)n ϕ(t1) · . . . · ϕ(tn) dt, bϕ⊗n(ξ1, . . . , ξn) =ZRn + (6) as functions of infinitely many variables where (t, ξ)n := t1ξ1+· · ·+tnξn, dt := dt1 . . . dtn. So, elements of Γ(bS+) can be considered bp : (ξ1, . . . , ξn, . . . ) 7−→(cid:0)bp0,bp1(ξ1),bp2(ξ2, ξ3), . . . ,bpn(ξbn , . . . , ξen ), . . .(cid:1), . But we note that actually eachbp ∈ Γ(bS+) depends on a finite (depending on bp) number of variables, because for each bp the sequence in the 2 + 1, en := n(n+1) right-hand side of (6) is finite. where bn := n(n−1) 2 Define the operator F ′⊗ + as follows F ′⊗ + ) : Γ(S ′ + := (F ′⊗n +) ∋ f =(cid:0)fn(cid:1) + fn ∈ bS ′ ⊗n +), : S ′ ⊗n n ∈ N, is defined as a linear and continuous extension of the map f ⊗n 7−→ (F ′ f ∈ S ′ where bfn := F ′⊗n Remark 2.2. From Remark 2.1 it follows that bfn ∈ bS ′ ⊗n + ≃ (bS ⊗n := IC, and each operator F ′⊗n 7−→ bf :=(cid:0)bfn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(bS ′ + , F ′⊗0 "variables" +. + + + −→ bS ′ ⊗n + , +f )⊗n with + )′ is a functional of n "variables" in the following sense (cf. (6)): with bpn ∈ bS ⊗n bf : +) we consider as a functional of infinitely many bpn(ξ1, . . . , ξn) 7−→ hbfn,bpni := hbfn(ξ1, . . . , ξn),bpn(ξ1, . . . , ξn)i ∈ C + . So, any bf =(cid:0)bfn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(bS ′ bp(ξ1, . . . , ξn, . . . ) =(cid:0)bpn(ξbn , . . . , ξen )(cid:1) 7−→ hbf ,bpi := Xn∈Z+ Γ(bS+) −→ C hbfn,bpni. 3. Infinite parameter operator semigroups Let E be a complex Banach space. Let A := (A1, A2, . . . , An, . . . ) be a countable It is convenient for us to rewrite this system as system of operators, acting on E. follows. Denote An := (Abn , . . . , Aen ), where bn := n(n−1) . Let by definition A0 := ∅. Then the countable system of operators A can be represented as 2 + 1, en := n(n+1) 2 A = (A0, A1, A2, . . . , An, . . . ) or A =(cid:0)An(cid:1) for short. JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 69 For any t ∈ Rn (see [8, 13]) of n-parameter C0-semigroup Rn condition + let us denote t · An := t1Abn + · · · + tnAen . Let An be a generator + ∋ t 7−→ e−it·An ∈ L(E), satisfying the (7) ke−it·AnkL(E) ≤ 1. sup t∈Rn + In what follows we assume that operators of the set An for all n ∈ N commute with each other. Note that in this case the semigroup can be represented (see [8, 13]) as a composition of commuting one-parameter marginal semigroups e−it·An = e−it1Abn ◦ · · · ◦ e−itnAen . Let G be the set of countable systems of such generators. For all n ∈ N let Gn be a set of collections of some n generators of one-parameter C0-semigroups satisfying the condition (7), and let G0 := {∅} by definition. Define the mapping (8) (9) where eS :=Pn∈Z+ eSn. Here each eSn, n ∈ Z+, is defined to be the space of functions e−it·An pn(t) dt ∈ L(E) L := (Ln) : Γ(S+) ∋ p =(cid:0)pn(cid:1) epn : Gn ∋ An 7−→ epn(An) :=ZRn + 7−→ ep := Xn∈Z+epn ∈ eS, in the sense of Bochner. for n ∈ N, and ep0 : G0 ∋ A0 7−→ ep0(A0) := p0IE ∈ L(E), where the integral is understood If the assumption (7) holds, then all the mappings Ln : pn 7−→ epn, n ∈ Z+, are Indeed, the semigroups {e−i(λ,t)IE : + satisfy the condition (7). Therefore, their generators isomorphisms by virtue of [13, Theorem 15.2.1]. t ∈ Rn (−iλ1IE, . . . , −iλnIE) belong to Gn. Note that +} with − Im λ ∈ int Rn epn(−iλ1IE , . . . , −iλnIE) =ZRn + e−λ·tpn(t) dt and an algebra of operator valued functions defined on G. On the other hand, the map F ⊗ is the Laplace transform of a function pn ∈ S ⊗n then pn ≡ 0, i.e., Ker Ln = {0}, n ∈ N. Hence, Ker L = {0} and the map L is an isomorphism. + . Particularly, it follows that if epn ≡ 0, Remark 3.1. The mapping L : Γ(S+) −→ eS is a homomorphism of the algebra(cid:8)Γ(S+), ⊛(cid:9) + : Γ(S+) −→ Γ(bS+) is a homomorphism too. So, we can treat the mapping ep(A) = Pn∈Z+ epn(An) ∈ L(E) as a "value" of a function bp of infinitely many vari- s ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) on the space eS, Consider the one-parameter semigroup eT ⊗ : R+ ∋ s 7−→ eT ⊗ ables (see (6)) at a countable system A := (A1, A2, . . . , An, . . . ) ∈ G of generators of contraction C0-semigroups. + )−1 : Γ(bS+) −→ eS In other words, we understand the operator as an "elementary" functional calculus. L ◦ (F ⊗ where s (cid:1) : ep = Xn∈Z+epn s :=(cid:0)eT ⊗n eT ⊗ 7−→ eT ⊗ s epn ∈ eSn is defined to be the map The function eT ⊗n s epn(An) :=ZRn s epn : An 7−→ eT ⊗n eT ⊗n + s ep := Xn∈Z+ eT ⊗n s epn. e−it·Anpn(t + s) dt. 70 S. V. SHARYN Γ(S+) with pn = ϕ⊗n ∈ S ⊗n Here the function epn of operator argument is defined by (9). Using Bochner's integral properties (see [13, 3.7]), we obtain that for any p =(cid:0)pn(cid:1) ∈ s p(A) = L(cid:2)(cid:0)T ⊗n gT ⊗ + , ϕ ∈ S+, the following equalities e−it·Anϕ(t1 + s) · . . . · ϕ(tn + s) dt s pn(cid:1)(cid:3)(A) = L(cid:2)(cid:0)(Tsϕ)⊗n(cid:1)(cid:3)(A) = IE +Xn∈N = ep0(A0) +Xn∈N eT ⊗n ZRn + s epn(An) = eT ⊗ s ep(A) where fn := f ⊗n ∈ S ′ ⊗n Define the mapping (10) Φ :=(cid:0)Φn(cid:1) : Γ(S ′ s = L ◦ T ⊗ s ◦ L−1. Continuity of the mappings T ⊗ hold for all s ∈ R+ and A :=(cid:0)An(cid:1) ∈ G. s can be represented as follows: eT ⊗ Hence, the operator eT ⊗ s ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) has the C0-property. s 7−→ eT ⊗ We define commutant of the semigroup eT ⊗ to be the set s and L as well as openness of L imply that the semigroup eT ⊗ : R+ ∋ (cid:2)eT ⊗(cid:3)c :=(cid:8)eT ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) : eT ◦ eT ⊗ +) ∋ f =(cid:0)fn(cid:1) +. Here Φfn ∈ L(cid:0)eSn(cid:1), n ∈ Z+, is defined by the following s = eT ⊗ 7−→ Φf := Xn∈Z+ s ◦ eT , ∀s ∈ R+(cid:9). Φfn ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1), + , f ∈ S ′ e−it·AnK ⊗n defined by (2) and (5). f pn(t) dt, n ∈ N. formulas: (Φf0ep0)(A0) := IE and Φfn : epn 7−→ eqn := Φfnepn, where eqn(An) :=ZRn Here the function epn of operator argument is defined by (9), and the operator K ⊗n (cid:8)Γ(S ′ of operators of the form eK ⊗ = L ◦ K ⊗ ◦ L−1 ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1), where K ∈ L(S+). In particular, the equality Φf ⊛g = Φf ◦ Φg +), ⊛(cid:9) and the subalgebra in the commutant (cid:2)eT ⊗(cid:3)c Theorem 3.2. The map Φ defined by (10) is an algebraic isomorphism of the algebra +) and Φδ is the identity in L(cid:0)eS(cid:1), where δ =(cid:0)δ⊗n(cid:1). Moreover, differential the property holds for all f , g ∈ Γ(S ′ is f + ΦDfep = −ΦffDp (11) holds for any f ∈ Γ(S ′ +) and p ∈ Γ(S+). the equalities Proof. For any f =(cid:0)fn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(S ′ (Φfep)(A) = Xn∈Z+ (12) +), where fn := f ⊗n with f ∈ S ′ +, and p =(cid:0)pn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(S+) (Φfnepn)(An) = IE +Xn∈N = L(cid:2)(cid:0)K ⊗n ZRn + e−it·AnK ⊗n f pn(t) dt f pn(cid:1)(cid:3)(A) = ] K ⊗ f p(A) are valid for all A := (cid:0)An(cid:1) ∈ G. It follows that the map Φ can be represented in the f ◦ L−1. Continuity of the mappings K ⊗ f and L as well as openness of form Φf = L ◦ K ⊗ JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 71 +). It follows that the equalities L imply that Φf ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) for all f ∈ Γ(S ′ + + s K ⊗n f T ⊗n s pn(t) dt e−it·AnT ⊗n e−it·AnK ⊗n (Φf eT ⊗ (ΦfneT ⊗n s ep)(A) = Xn∈Z+ ZRn s epn)(An) = IE +Xn∈N ZRn = IE +Xn∈N s ZRn = IE +Xn∈N eT ⊗n = Xn∈Z+ s Φfnepn)(An) = (eT ⊗ (eT ⊗n s Φfep)(A) hold for all s ∈ R+, ep = Pn∈Z+ epn ∈ eS and A := (cid:0)An(cid:1) ∈ G. Hence, for all f ∈ Γ(S ′ the operator Φf belongs to the commutant (cid:2)eT ⊗(cid:3)c Conversely, let eK ⊗ = L ◦ K ⊗ ◦ L−1 ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) with K ∈ L(S+) belong to the commutant (cid:2)eT ⊗(cid:3)c e−it·AnK ⊗n f pn(t) dt f pn(t) dt s ◦ L−1 =L ◦ K ⊗ ◦ L−1 ◦ L ◦ T ⊗ L ◦ K ⊗ ◦ T ⊗ . Then +) . + =L ◦ T ⊗ s ◦ L−1 ◦ L ◦ K ⊗ ◦ L−1 = L ◦ T ⊗ s ◦ L−1 = eK ⊗ ◦ eT ⊗ s = eT ⊗ s ◦ eK ⊗ s ◦ K ⊗ ◦ L−1, therefore the operator K ⊗ belongs to the commutant of the semigroup T ⊗ proof of Theorem 1.3 it follows that there exists a unique f ∈ S ′ K ⊗ = K ⊗ s . From the + such that K = Kf and f with f =(cid:0)f ⊗n(cid:1). Hence, eK ⊗ = eK ⊗ f . The proved above property, Kf ⊛g = Kf ◦ Kg, implies the equality K ⊗ f ⊛g = K ⊗ f ◦ K ⊗ g . Therefore, Φf ⊛g = L ◦ K ⊗ f ⊛g ◦ L−1 = L ◦ K ⊗ = L ◦ K ⊗ g ◦ L−1 f ◦ K ⊗ f ◦ L−1 ◦ L ◦ K ⊗ g ◦ L−1 = Φf ◦ Φg. As a consequence, we obtain the equalities Φδ ◦ Φf = Φδ⊛f = Φf = Φf ⊛δ = Φf ◦ Φδ, so, Φδ ∈ L(cid:0)eS(cid:1) acts as the identity operator. It remains to prove the differential property (11). From (12) it follows Φfep = ]f ⋆ p. So, using the Proposition 1.4, we obtain Thus, the theorem is proved. ΦDfep = ^(Df ) ⋆ p = − ^f ⋆ (Dp) = −ΦffDp. (cid:3) Remark 3.3. For any fixed p ∈ Γ(S+) the map Γ(S ′ on G. Therefore we can treat this map as a functional calculus in the algebra of polyno- +) ∋ f 7−→ Φfep ∈ eS is a homomor- +), ⊛(cid:9) and the algebra of operator-valued functions defined phism of the algebra (cid:8)Γ(S ′ mial tempered distributions. It is easy to see that a function Φfep of operator argument can be represented as Φfep = ]f ⋆ p (see (8)). From (12) it follows that the operator Φfep(A) = ]f ⋆ p(A) ∈ L(E) can be understood as a "value" of a function [f ⋆ p of infi- nite many variables at a countable system A := (A1, A2, . . . , An, . . . ) ∈ G of generators of contraction C0-semigroups. sym(Rn) ≃ L2(R) Example. Let us consider the case of a countable set of second derivative operators. Let ⊗n, n ∈ N, be the space of complex valued square integrable Hn := L2 symmetric functions y(ξ) = y(ξ1, . . . , ξn). Set H0 := C. It is known that the symmetric 2 + 1, Hn is a Hilbert space (see e.g. [22]). As above, let bn = n(n−1) Fock space H := Mn∈Z+ 72 S. V. SHARYN en = n(n+1) 2 . Define the operators D2 n,m : H −→ H, n ∈ N, bn ≤ m ≤ en, as follows D2 n,m := 0H0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ 0Hn−1 ⊗ ∂2 ∂ξ2 m ⊗ 0Hn+1 ⊗ . . . , where 0Hn , n ∈ Z+, denote zero operators of the corresponding spaces. Let us define an "elementary" functional calculus in the algebra of polynomial test functions for the countable set of operators D2 := (D2 1,1, D2 2,1, D2 2,2, . . . , D2 n,bn . . . ). , . . . , D2 n, n ∈ N, generates the semigroup n,en Let D2 n := (D2 n,bn , . . . , D2 n,en ). It is easy to see that D2 + ∋ t = (t1, . . . , tn) 7−→ e−it·D2 Rn n ∈ L(H), where e−it·D2 n := IH0 ⊗ . . . ⊗ IHbn−1 ⊗ e −it1 ∂2 ∂ξ2 bn ◦ . . . ◦ e −itn ∂2 ∂ξ2 en ⊗ IHen +1 ⊗ . . . Denote gn(t, ζ) := nYj=1 ζ2 j 4tj . − e 1 p4πtj From [19, Example 2] it follows that the semigroup e−it·D2 n acts as e−it·D2 n y =(cid:0)y0, . . . , yn−1, gn(−it, · ) ∗ yn, yn+1, . . .(cid:1) for any y = (y0, y1, . . . , yn, . . . ) ∈ H. Let p =(cid:0)pn(cid:1) ∈ Γ(S+) be given. If we "substitute" the countable set D2 of operators instead of variables of a function bp (see (6)) we obtain the operator acting as n)yn(ξbn , . . . , ξen) ep(D2)y(ξ1, ξ2, . . . ) =y0 +Xn∈Nepn(D2 ZRn =y0 +Xn∈N + (gn(−it, · ) ∗ yn)(ξbn , . . . , ξen )pn(t) dt, where y(ξ1, ξ2, . . . ) =(cid:0)y0, y1(ξ1), y2(ξ2, ξ3), . . . , yn(ξbn , . . . , ξen ), . . .(cid:1) ∈ H is a function of infinite many variables. Acknowledgments. The author would like to thank the referee for valuable comments which helped to improve the manuscript. References 1. N. I. Akhiezer, Lectures on Integral Transforms, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, vol. 70, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1988. (Russian edition: Vishcha Shkola, Khar'kov, 1984) 2. B. Baeumer, M. Haase, M. Kov´acs, Unbounded functional calculus for bounded groups with applications, J. Evol. Eqv. 9 (2009), no. 1, 171 -- 195. doi:10.1007/s00028-009-0012-z 3. Yu. M. Berezansky, Yu. G. Kondratiev, Spectral Methods in Infinite-Dimensional Analysis, Vols. 1, 2, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht -- Boston -- London, 1995. (Russian edition: Naukova Dumka, Kiev, 1988) 4. Yu. M. Berezansky, Yu. S. Samoilenko, Nuclear spaces of functions of infinitely many variables, Ukrain. Mat. Zh. 25 (1973), no. 6, 723 -- 737. (Russian); English transl. Ukrainian Math. J. 25 (1973), no. 6, 599 -- 609. 5. Yu. M. Berezansky, Z. G. Sheftel, G. F. Us, Functional Analysis, Vol. 2, Birkhauser Verlag, Basel -- Boston -- Berlin, 1996; 3rd ed., Institute of Mathematics NAS of Ukraine, Kyiv, 2010. (Russian edition: Vyshcha Shkola, Kiev, 1990) 6. H. Borchers, Algebras of unbounded operators in quantum fields theory, Physica 124A (1984), 127-144. 7. H. Borchers, On structure of the algebra of field operators, Nuovo Cimento 24 (1962), 1418 -- 1440. JOINT FUNCTIONAL CALCULUS IN ALGEBRA OF POLYNOMIAL DISTRIBUTIONS 73 8. P. L. Butzer, H. Berens, Semi-groups of Operators and Approximation, Springer-Verlag, New- York, 1967. 9. S. Dineen, Complex Analysis on Infinite Dimensional Spaces, Springer-Verlag, Berlin -- Gottingen -- Heidelberg, 1999. 10. A. Grothendieck, Produits tensoriels topologues et espases nucl´eaire, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (1955), no. 11, 1 -- 140. 11. M. Haase, The Functional Calculus for Sectorial Operators, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications, vol. 169, Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, 2006. 12. T. Hida, H. H. Kuo, J. Potthoff, L. Streit, White Noise: an Infinite Dimensional Calculus, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1993. 13. E. Hille, R. Phillips, Functional Analysis and Semi-groups, Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ., vol. 31, Providence, RI, 1957. 14. N. Kalton, P. Kunstmann, L. Weis, Perturbation and interpolation theorems for the H∞- calculus with applications to differential operators, Math. Ann. 336 (2006), no. 4, 747 -- 801. 15. N. A. Kachanovsky, Elements of a non-gaussian analysis on the spaces of functions of infinitely many variables, Ukrain. Mat. Zh. 62 (2010), no. 9, 1220 -- 1246. English transl. Ukrainian Math. J. 62 (2011), no. 9, 1420 -- 1448. 16. H. Komatsu, An Introduction to the Theory of Generalized Functions, University Publ., Tokyo, 2000. 17. Y. G. Kondratiev, L. Streit, W. Westerkamp, J. Yan, Generalized functions in infinite dimen- sional analysis, Hiroshima Math. J. 28 (1998), no. 2, 213 -- 260. 18. C. Kriegler, Functional calculus and dilation for C0-groups of polynomial growth, Semigroup Forum 84 (2012), 393 -- 433. 19. O. V. Lopushansky, S. V. Sharyn, Generalized Hille-Phillips type functional calculus for mul- tiparameter semigroups, Siberian Math. J. 55 (2014), no. 1, 105 -- 117. 20. O. V. Lopushansky, S. V. Sharyn, Polynomial ultradistributions on cone Rd +, Topology 48 (2009), no. 2 -- 4, 80 -- 90. 21. A. R. Mirotin, On some properties of the multidimensional Bochner-Phillips functional calcu- lus, Siberian Math. J. 52 (2011), no. 6, 1032 -- 1041. 22. N. Obata, White Noise Calculus and Fock Space, Lect. Notes in Math., vol. 1577, Springer- Verlag, New-York, 1994. 23. Yu. S. Samoilenko, Spectral Theory of Families of Self-Adjoint Operators, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht -- Boston -- London, 1991. (Russian edition: Naukova Dumka, Kiev, 1984) 24. H. Schaefer, Topological Vector Spaces, Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1971. 25. S. V. Sharyn, The cross-correlation operation of Schwartz distributions, J. Math. Sci. 107 (2001), no. 1, 3604 -- 3609. 26. A. G. Smirnov, On topological tensor products of functional Frechet and DF spaces, Integral Transforms Spec. Funct. 20 (2009), no. 3 -- 4, 309 -- 318. 27. A. Uhlmann, Uber die definition der quantenfelder nach Wightman und Haag, Wiss. Zeitschr. Karl-Marx Univ., Leipzig 11 (1962), 213 -- 217. 28. V. S. Vladimirov, Generalized Functions in Mathematical Physics, Mir, Moscow, 1979. (Rus- sian edition: Nauka, Moscow, 1976) 29. V. V. Zharinov, Compact families of locally convex topological vector spaces, Fr´echet-Schwartz and dual Fr´echet-Schwartz spaces, Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 34 (1979), no. 4, 97 -- 131. (Russian); English transl. Russian Math. Surveys 34 (1979), no. 4, 105 -- 143. Department of Mathematics and Computer Sciences, Precarpathian National University, 57 Shevchenka str., Ivano-Frankivsk, 76018, Ukraine E-mail address: [email protected] Received 29/12/2014; Revised 21/04/2015
1810.13208	1	1810	2018-10-31T10:49:14	Spectrum of composition operators on ${\mathcal S}({\mathbb R})$ with polynomial symbols	[ "math.FA" ]	We study the spectrum of operators in the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions which associate each function with its composition with a polynomial. In the case where this operator is mean ergodic we prove that its spectrum reduces to 0, while the spectrum of any non mean ergodic composition operator with a polynomial always contains the closed unit disc except perhaps the origen. We obtain a complete description of the spectrum of the composition operator with a quadratic polynomial or a cubic polynomial with positive leading coefficient.	math.FA	math	Spectrum of composition operators on S(R) with polynomial symbols Carmen Fern´andez, Antonio Galbis, Enrique Jord´a∗ November 1, 2018 Abstract We study the spectrum of operators in the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions which associate each function with its composition with a polynomial. In the case where this operator is mean ergodic we prove that its spectrum reduces to {0}, while the spectrum of any non mean ergodic composition operator with a poly- nomial always contains the closed unit disc except perhaps the origen. We obtain a complete description of the spectrum of the composi- tion operator with a quadratic polynomial or a cubic polynomial with positive leading coefficient. 1 Introduction Composition operators on Fr´echet spaces of smooth functions on the reals have attracted the attention of several authors recently ([7, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11]) but to our knowledge very little is known about the spectra of composition operators in this setting. See for instance [3] or [2], where the spectrum of composition operators and other classical operators on spaces of real smooth functions is investigated. This contrasts with the large number of existing ar- ticles studying spectral properties of composition operators in Banach spaces of analytic functions on the unit disc. We study the spectrum of composition operators defined in the Schwartz space S(R) of smooth rapidly decreasing functions, Cϕ : S(R) → S(R), f 7→ ∗The present research was partially supported by the projects MTM2016-76647-P, ACOMP/2015/186 (Spain). The third author was partially supported by GVA, Project AICO/2016/054. 1 f ◦ ϕ, in the case that ϕ is a non constant polynomial. A smooth function ϕ : R → R is said to be a symbol for S(R) if Cϕ maps S(R) continuously into itself. The symbols for S(R) were completely characterized in [5, Theorem 2.3]. It follows from that characterization that any non constant polynomial ϕ is a symbol for S(R). The results of the present paper complement our study in [7] where we investigate dynamics and the spectrum of some particular composition operators. Concrete examples were given where the spectrum coincides with the open unit disc, the unit circle or C \ {0}. In particular, the spectrum of translation and dilation operators was analyzed in [7, Examples 5-6]: Example 1.1. (a) Let ϕ(x) = x + 1. Then σ (Cϕ) = {λ ∈ C : λ = 1}. (b) Let ϕ(x) = ax where a 6= 0 and a 6= 1. Then σ (Cϕ) = C \ {0}. However, in [7] we did not obtain any result concerning the spectrum of the composition operator with a polynomial of degree greater than one. This is precisely the objective of this work. It turns out that some dynamical properties of the composition operator are characterized by the spectrum of the operator. For example, the spectrum of a mean ergodic composition op- erator is always contained in the closed unit disk ([7, Corollary 4.5]). This result can be improved when the symbol is a polynomial. As we prove in Theorem 2.5, the spectrum of a composition operator which is mean ergodic and whose symbol is a polynomial with degree greater than one coincides with {0} while the behavior of non mean ergodic composition operators with polynomial symbols is different (Theorem 2.8). For strictly decreasing sym- bols, not necessarily polynomials, the containment of ∂D in the spectrum of the operator is equivalent to its mean ergodicity. In [3] the spectrum of composition operators on A(R), the space of all real analytic functions, is investigated for the case that the symbol is a quadratic polynomial. For quadratic polynomials, we have a complete characterization of the spectrum of the corresponding composition operator depending on the number of fixed points of the polynomial. As expected, the spectrum of the operator depends on the space where it is considered. To give an example, when ϕ is a quadratic polynomial without fixed points then σA(R)(Cϕ) = C, whereas σS(R)(Cϕ) = {0}. Theorem 4.1 contains a complete description of the spectrum of a com- position operator with a polynomial of degree three whose leading coefficient is positive. For polynomials with negative leading coefficient some partial results are available but we lack a complete characterization. 2 The final section contains some results concerning the spectra of compo- sition operators with (non polynomial) monotone symbols. We recall that given an operator T : X → X on a Fr´echet space X, σ(T ), the spectrum of T, is the set of all λ ∈ C such that T − λI : X → X does not admit a continuous linear inverse. T is said to be power bounded if {T n(x) : n ∈ N} is bounded for each x ∈ X. A closely related concept to power boundedness is that of mean ergodicity. Given T ∈ L(X), the k=1 T k/n. T is said to be mean ergodic when T[n] converges to an operator P , which is always a projection, in the strong operator topology, i.e. if (T[n](x)) is convergent to P (x) for each x ∈ X. Ces`aro means of T are defined as T[n] = Pn From now on ϕn = ϕ ◦ . . . ◦ ϕ denotes the n-th iteration of ϕ. The following results will be used in what follows. Lemma 1.2. [7, 3.10] Let ϕ be a polynomial of even degree without fixed points. Then there is N ∈ N such that ψ = ϕN has neither zeros nor fixed points. Moreover, for every K > 0 there is m0 ∈ N such that ψm+1(t) ≥ K (ψm(t))2 ∀m ≥ m0, ∀t ∈ R. Theorem 1.3. [7, 3.11] Let ϕ be a polynomial with degree greater than or equal to two. Then, the following are equivalent: (1) Cϕ is power bounded. (2) Cϕ is mean ergodic. (3) The degree of ϕ is even and it has no fixed points. 2 Polynomial symbols Two polynomials ϕ, ψ ∈ R[x] are linearly equivalent if there exists ℓ(x) = ax + b with a, b ∈ R and a 6= 0 such that ψ = ℓ−1 ◦ ϕ ◦ ℓ. Then, for every λ ∈ C, Cϕ − λI = C−1 ℓ ◦ (Cψ − λI) ◦ Cℓ, from where it follows that σ (Cψ) = σ (Cϕ) . The first result follows immediately from this observation and [7, Exam- ples 5-6] as each polynomial of degree one other than the identity is linearly equivalent to a translation or to a dilation. 3 Proposition 2.1. Let ϕ(x) = ax + b a polynomial with a, b ∈ R and a 6= 0. Then (a) For a 6= 1, ϕ is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = ax. Hence σ (Cϕ) = C\{0} for a 6= ±1 while σ (Cϕ) = {−1, 1} for a = −1. (b) For a = 1 and b 6= 0, ϕ is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = x + 1. Hence σ (Cϕ) = {λ ∈ C : λ = 1} . From now on we will consider only polynomials of degree greater than one. We observe that the following version of the spectral theorem holds in our setting. Proposition 2.2. For every symbol ϕ and N ∈ N, Proof. For every µ ∈ C \ {0} let λ1, . . . , λN denote its N-roots. Then σ(CϕN ) =(cid:8)λN ∈ C : λ ∈ σ(Cϕ)(cid:9) . CϕN − µI = C N ϕ − µI = (Cϕ − λ1I) · · · (Cϕ − λnI) , from where the conclusion follows. We also recall the following elementary properties, which will be used in what follows. Proposition 2.3. Let ϕ be a symbol for S(R). (a) If ϕ admits fixed points then 1 ∈ σ(Cϕ). (b) If a is a fixed point of ϕ then ϕ′(a) ∈ σ(Cϕ). (c) If ϕ is a polynomial then 0 ∈ σ(Cϕ) if and only if ϕ′ vanishes at some point. Proof. (a) All the functions in the range of Cϕ − I vanish at fixed points of ϕ, hence the conclusion. (b) In fact, the derivative of any function in the range of Cϕ − ϕ′(a)I vanishes at point a, hence Cϕ − ϕ′(a)I is not surjective. (c) If ϕ′ does not vanish then inf x∈R ϕ′(x) > 0 and Cϕ is surjective by [5, 4.2]. Moreover Cϕ is injective as ϕ(R) = R. Conversely, if ϕ′(x0) = 0 then the derivative of any function in the range of Cϕ vanishes at point x0. Hence 0 ∈ σ(Cϕ). 4 We observe that an arbitrary symbol ϕ for S(R) satisfies conditions (i) and (ii) in the next lemma with r = 1 if, and only if, Cϕ is power bounded. This is the content of [7, Proposition 3.9]. Lemma 2.4. Let ϕ be a polynomial of degree ≥ 2. Assume that for all r > 1, n ∈ N there exist C > 0, q ∈ N such that the following conditions hold for each x ∈ R and m ∈ N: (i) ϕ(n) m (x) ≤ Crm(1 + ϕm(x))q (ii) x ≤ (1 + ϕm(x))q. Then the series µmf ◦ ϕm Xm is convergent in S(R) for each µ < 1. If in addition we assume that (i) happens with r = 1 then the series is convergent for each µ ∈ C. Proof. For each n, m ∈ N0, by Fa´a de Bruno formula (f ◦ ϕm)(n)(x) = n Xj=1 f (j)(ϕm(x))Bn,j(cid:0)ϕ′m(x) . . . ϕ(n−j+1) m (x)(cid:1) , where Bn,j are the Bell polynomials. Thus, from (i) and (ii), given f ∈ S(R), n ∈ N0, r > 1 and a polynomial P we find another polynomial P such that n Xj=1 f (j)(ϕm(x))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . (1) P (ϕm(x)) (cid:12)(cid:12)P (x)(f ◦ ϕm)(n)(x)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ rm(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) convergence in S(R) of P µmf ◦ ϕm follows. Since f ∈ S(R) there is M > 0 such that (1) can be estimated by Mrm. Therefore, given µ ∈ D we choose r > 1 such that rµ < 1 and the If in addition (i) is satisfied with r = 1 then Cϕ is power bounded [7, Proposition 3.9] and we have the estimate (1) with r = 1. By [7, Theorem 3.1] ϕ has even degree and lacks fixed points. First we assume that (a) ϕ(x) > x2 for every x ∈ R and (b) inf {ϕ(x) : x ∈ R} = a > 1. 5 This implies that ϕm(x) > a2m−1 and the series µm ϕm(x) Xm converges absolutely and uniformly in R for every µ ∈ C. Using (1) with r = 1 we immediately have, for every polynomial P and n ∈ N, that (cid:12)(cid:12)µmP (x)(f ◦ ϕm)(n)(x)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ M for some M > 0. Consequently µm 1 + ϕm(x) (1 + ϕm(x)) P (ϕm(x)) n Xj=1 f (j)(ϕm(x))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) µm 1 + ϕm(x) µmf ◦ ϕm Xm converges in S(R) for each µ ∈ C and f ∈ S(R). In the general case, we may find N ∈ N such that ϕN satisfies conditions (a) and (b) ([7, Lemma 3.10]). Hence µmf ◦ ϕm = Xm N−1 Xj=0 µj Xm (cid:0)µN(cid:1)m (f ◦ ϕj) ◦ ϕN m! converges in S(R). Theorem 2.5. Let ϕ be a polynomial with even degree and without fixed points. Then σ(Cϕ) = {0}. Proof. From Lemma 1.2 we find N ∈ N such that if ψ = ϕN , min{ψ(x) : x ∈ R} = a > 1 and ψm+1(x) ≥ (ψm(x))2 ∀m, ∀x ∈ R. In particular, this gives for all x and every m. ψm(x) > a2m−1 , (2) 6 Since the range of ϕ is a proper (unbounded) interval then Cϕ is not injective and 0 ∈ σ(Cϕ). To finish the proof it suffices to show that σ(Cψ) ⊂ {0}. To this end, we fix λ ∈ C, λ 6= 0, and check that Cψ − λI is a bijection, hence a topological isomorphism by the open mapping theorem. (i) Injectivity. Let us assume Cψf = λf for some f ∈ S(R). Then, for every m ∈ N, Since f (x) = λ−mf (ψm(x)) = ψm(x)f (ψm(x)) λmψm(x). λmψm(x) ≥ λm · a2m−1 → ∞ then f (x) = 0 for all x ∈ R. (ii) Surjectivity. From [7, Theorem 3.11 and Proposition 3.9] Cϕ is power bounded and the hypothesis in Lemma 2.4 are satisfied with r = 1. Then, for every g ∈ S(R) and λ 6= 0 the series f = − 1 λk+1 g ◦ ψk ∞ Xk=0 (3) converges in S(R) and clearly Cψf − λf = g. According to Proposition 2.3 the behavior of composition operators with polynomials having fixed points is different. In order to obtain more infor- mation we first we need an auxiliary result. Lemma 2.6. Let ϕ be a polynomial with degree greater than one. Then, there is M > 0 such that for each x > M, lim n 1 λn f (ϕn(x)) = 0, for 0 < λ ≤ 1 and every f ∈ S(R). Proof. We fix 2 > p > 1 and take M > 1 such that ϕ(x) > xp whenever x > M. Then x > M implies Finally ϕn(x) > M pn ∀n ∈ N. lim n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 λn f (ϕn(x))(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ lim n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ϕn(x)f (ϕn(x)) λnM pn = 0. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 7 Lemma 2.7. Let ϕ be a polynomial with odd degree greater than one such that ϕ(x) = −∞. Let a be a fixed point of ϕ. If a is the largest fixed point of ϕ2 then ϕ′(a) ≤ −1. lim x→+∞ Proof. We first observe that x > a we get lim x→+∞ ϕ2(x) = +∞. From ϕ2(x) > x for every (ϕ′(a))2 = ϕ′2(a) = lim x→a ϕ2(x) − a x − a ≥ 1. Since a is also the largest fixed point of ϕ then ϕ(x) < x for all x > a, from where it follows ϕ′(a) = lim x→a ϕ(x) − a x − a ≤ 1. Consequently ϕ′(a) ≤ −1 or ϕ′(a) = 1. Finally we check that ϕ′(a) ≤ 0. Otherwise there is δ > 0 such that ϕ is strictly increasing on [a, a + δ]. Since a < ϕ(a+ δ) ≤ a+ δ then ϕ ([a, a + δ]) ⊂ [a, a+ δ]. This is a contradiction. In fact, for every x > a the sequence (ϕ2n(x))n is increasing and unbounded. Theorem 2.8. Let ϕ be a polynomial with degree greater than one and having fixed points. Then, D \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). Proof. (a) First we consider the case that ϕ(x) = +∞. We fix λ ∈ lim x→+∞ D \ {0} and assume that λ /∈ σ(Cϕ), hence λ 6= 1. Let a ∈ R be given with the property that ϕ(a) = a and ϕ(x) > x for x > a. Since ϕ′(a) ≥ 1 then ϕ is strictly increasing in some interval [a, a + δ]. Let ψ : [a, ϕ(a + δ)] → [a, a + δ] be the inverse of ϕ : [a, a + δ] → [a, ϕ(a + δ)]. Since ϕ(a + δ) > a + δ then ψk, the k-th iterate of ψ, is well defined for every k ∈ N. We fix x0 ∈ (a, a + δ) and define xk = ψk(x0). Then (xk)k is a decreasing sequence converging to a. Let J0 be a closed interval contained in (x1, x0) and take a smooth function g whose support is contained in (x1, x0) and satisfying g(x) = 1 for all x ∈ J0. Then, there is a unique f ∈ S(R) such that f (ϕ(x)) − λf (x) = g(x), x ∈ R. After iterating this identity we obtain f (ϕn(x)) = λnf (x) + λn−1−kg (ϕk(x)) . n−1 Xk=0 (4) (5) 8 Let M > 0 be as in Lemma 2.6. For each x > a the sequence (ϕn(x))n diverges to infinity, so there is m ∈ N with ϕn(x) > M and it easily follows that lim n 1 λn f (ϕn(x)) = 0. We conclude f (x) = − 1 λk+1 g(ϕk(x)) (6) ∞ Xk=0 for all x > a. Finally, we fix y0 ∈ J0 and define yk = ψk(y0) ∈ (xk+1, xk). We have ϕm(ym) = y0 ∈ J0, while ϕk(ym) = ϕk−m(y0) > x0 for k > m and ϕk(ym) = ψm−k(y0) < x1 for k < m. Consequently f (ym) = −λ−m−1 while f (a) = 0. The last identity follows from (4) using λ 6= 1. Since lim m f (ym) 6= f (a) we get a contradiction. (b) To deal with the case that ϕ(x) = −∞ we have to consider two lim x→+∞ possibilities, depending on whether the degree of the polynomial is even or odd. (i) First case: the degree of ϕ is even. Since ϕ is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = −ϕ(−x) and lim x→+∞ ψ(x) = +∞ then D \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cψ) = σ(Cϕ) and we are done. (ii) Second case: the degree of ϕ is odd. Then lim x→+∞ ϕ2(x) = +∞. As above, ϕ2 is strictly increasing in some interval [a, a + δ], where a is the greatest fixed point of ϕ2. Moreover, we can take δ small enough so that ϕ(x) < a for every x ∈ (a, a + δ]. This is obvious in the case that ϕ(a) < a. Otherwise, ϕ(a) = a and ϕ′(a) < 0 (Lemma 2.7) and we can take δ so that ϕ is decreasing on [a, a + δ], hence ϕ(x) < ϕ(a) = a for every x ∈ (a, a + δ]. Now, we denote by ψ the inverse of ϕ2 : [a, a + δ] → [a, ϕ2(a + δ)]. Proceeding as in (a), we fix x0 ∈ (a, a + δ) and define xk = ψk(x0). Let J0 be a closed interval contained in (x1, x0) and take a compactly sup- ported smooth function g whose support is contained in (x1, x0) and satisfy- ing g(x) = 1 for all x ∈ J0. As in (a), there is f ∈ S(R) such that equation (6) holds for x > a. Finally, we fix y0 ∈ J0 and define yk = ψk(y0) ∈ (xk+1, xk). 9 We have ϕ2m(ym) = y0 ∈ J0, ϕ2k(ym) > x0 for k > m, ϕ2k(ym) < x1 for k < m. Moreover ϕ2k+1(ym) /∈ (a, a + δ] since otherwise ϕ2k+2(ym) < a, which is a contradiction. Consequently f (ym) = −λ−2m−1 while f (a) = 0. The same argument as in case (a) gives a contradiction. Corollary 2.9. Let ϕ be a polynomial of degree greater than one. Then Cϕ is mean ergodic if and only if σ(Cϕ) = {0}. Proof. Apply [7, Theorem 3.11] and Theorems 2.5 and 2.8. Theorem 2.10. Let ϕ be a polynomial of degree greater than one and having a fixed point a such that ϕ′(a) > 1 and ϕ(n)(a) ≥ 0 for all n ≥ 2. Then C \ {0} ⊂ σ (Cϕ) . Proof. Since ϕ(x) = a + ϕ(n)(a) n! (x − a)n ∞ Xn=1 then ϕ and all its derivatives are increasing in [a, +∞). An inductive ar- gument using Fa`a di Bruno formula implies that also ϕ(n) is increasing in [a, +∞) for every k, n ∈ N0. We observe that ϕ(x) > a + ϕ′(a)(x − a) > x for any x > a. Hence a is the largest fixed point of ϕ. k We already know that D \ {0} ⊂ σ (Cϕ) . We now fix λ > 1 and assume that λ /∈ σ(Cϕ). We fix x0 > a and define xk+1 = ψ(xk), where ψ stands for the inverse of ϕ : [a, +∞) → [a, +∞). Then (xk)k is a decreasing sequence converging to a. We put Ik = (xk+1, xk) , so that Ik = ψk(I0), and let J0 be a closed subinterval of I0 and Jk := ψk(J0). Finally, we consider a compactly supported smooth function g whose support is contained in I0 and such that g(x) = x for every x ∈ J0. Then there is f ∈ S(R) satisfying Cϕf − λf = g. Hence f (ϕn(x)) = λnf (x) + n−1 Xk=0 λn−1−kg (ϕk(x)) ∀n ∈ N, x ∈ R. Since λ > 1 and (f (ϕn(x)))n is a bounded sequence then f (x) = − 1 λ ∞ Xj=0 λ−jg (ϕj(x)) ∀x ∈ R. 10 For every x ∈ Jk we have ϕk(x) ∈ J0 while ϕn(x) /∈ I0 for every n 6= k. Consequently f (x) = −λ−k−1g (ϕk(x)) = − ϕk(x) λk+1 ∀x ∈ Jk. In order to obtain a contradiction we proceed as follows. Our hypothesis and Fa`a di Bruno formula permit to conclude ϕ(n) m+1(a) ≥ ϕ(n) m (a) · ϕ′(a)n. (7) We select n0 ∈ N so that ϕ′(a)n0 > λ. We can find n > n0 and m ∈ N such that ϕ(n) m (a) 6= 0. Otherwise, every iterate ϕm would have degree less than or equal n0, which is a contradiction. From (7) we get ϕ(n) k+m(a) ≥ ϕ(n) m (a) · ϕ′(a)kn ∀k ∈ N. Finally, for every x ∈ Jk+m we obtain, with C = ϕ (n) m (a) λ1+m , (cid:12)(cid:12)f (n)(x)(cid:12)(cid:12) = ϕ(n) k+m(a) λk+m+1 ϕ(n) k+m(x) λk+m+1 ≥ λ (cid:19)k ≥ C(cid:18)ϕ′(a)n . We conclude that f (n) is not a bounded function, which is a contradiction. The following result will be useful in the proof of Proposition 4.2. Proposition 2.11. Let η be a polynomial with odd degree and negative leading coefficient such that ϕ = η ◦ η satisfies the hypothesis in Theorem 2.10. Then C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cη). Proof. Since η has odd degree then it has fixed points and we can apply Theorem 2.8 to get D \ {0} ⊂ σ (Cη) . We now fix λ > 1 and assume that λ /∈ σ(Cη). We observe that a is the largest fixed point of ϕ. From Lemma 2.7 we get δ > 0 such that η(x) < a for all x ∈ (a, a + δ). Now we fix x0 ∈ (a, a + δ) and define g as in the proof of Theorem 2.10. Then there is f ∈ S(R) such that f (x) = − 1 λ ∞ Xn=0 λ−ng (ηn(x)) ∀x ∈ R. 11 f (x) = − 1 λ λ−2jg (ϕj(x)) ∀x ≥ a. ∞ Xj=0 We observe that η2j = ϕj and g (η2j+1(x)) = 0 for all j ∈ N0 and x ≥ a (otherwise η2j+1(x) ∈ (a, a + δ) and η2j+2(x) < a, which is a contradiction). Then Now we proceed as in Theorem 2.10 to get a contradiction. As an application of Theorem 2.10 and Proposition 2.3 we have the fol- lowing. Example 2.12. Let ϕ(x) = xp, p ≥ 2. Then σ(Cϕ) = C. Example 2.13. Let ϕ be a polynomial of degree N > 1 with positive leading coefficient and complex fixed points z1, . . . , zN such that 1. zN ∈ R and the multiplicity of zN as a fixed point is 1. 2. Re(zk) ≤ zN for k < N. Then C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). In fact, we can apply Theorem 2.10 taking a = zN . 3 Quadratic polynomials Next we apply the previous results to discuss the spectrum of Cϕ in the case that ϕ is a quadratic polynomial. Such a polynomial ϕ(x) = a0 + a1x + a2x2 2 − a2 (a2 6= 0) is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = x2 + c where c = a0a2 + a1 4 . In fact, take ℓ(x) = ax + b where a = a2, b = a1 2 . It is routine to check that ϕ = ℓ−1 ◦ ψ ◦ ℓ. We observe that 0 ∈ σ(Cψ) = σ(Cϕ) since the range of Cψ consists of even functions. 1 c > 1 4 implies that ϕ and ψ lack fixed points, hence σ(Cϕ) = {0} (Theorem 2.5). In the case c < 1 4 we have that ϕ (and also ψ) has two different fixed points and we can apply Theorem 2.10 (see also Example 2.13) to conclude that σ(Cϕ) = C. Our next aim is to discuss the case c = 1 4. Lemma 3.1. Let ϕ(x) = x2 + 1 C > 0 and p ∈ N such that 4 be given. Then, for every r > 1 there exist ϕ′m(x) ≤ Crm (1 + ϕm(x))p . 12 Proof. We first observe that ϕ′(x) ≤ 2ϕ(x) with equality for x = ± 1 also 2 and Proceeding by recurrence we conclude ϕ′m+1(x) = 2ϕm(x)ϕ′m(x). ϕ′m(x) = 2m ϕj(x), m−1 Yj=0 (8) (9) where ϕ0(x) = x. Since every ϕm (m ≥ 1) is even and ϕ′m is odd we only need to consider the case x ≥ 0. Now we proceed in several steps. (i) For 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 2 we have ϕm(x) ≤ ϕm( 1 2 ) = 1 2 . An induction argument gives ϕ′m(x) ≤ ϕ′m( 1 2 ) = 1. (ii) For x ≥ x0 := 1 + √3 2 we have ϕ′(x) ≤ ϕ(x). Since ϕ(x) > x then also 2ϕm(x) ≤ ϕm+1(x) for every m ∈ N. We check that ϕ′m(x) ≤ ϕ2 m(x) ∀m ∈ N, x ≥ x0. In fact, this inequality is obvious for m = 1 and assuming that it is true for m we obtain ϕ′m+1(x) = 2ϕm(x)ϕ′m(x) ≤ ϕm+1(x)ϕ2 m(x) ≤ ϕ2 m+1(x). (iii) Take m0 ∈ N such that ϕm0( r 2) ≥ x0. Then, for every x ≥ r 2 and m ≥ m0 we put where ϕm0(x) ≥ x0. Hence ϕm(x) = ϕm−m0 (ϕm0(x)) , ϕ′m(x) = ϕ′m−m0 (ϕm0(x)) · ϕ′m0(x) ≤ (1 + ϕm−m0 (ϕm0(x)))2 · ϕ′m0(x). From (9) we obtain ϕ′m0(x) ≤ 2m0 (1 + ϕm(x))m0 . Finally, for p = m0 + 2 we conclude ϕ′m(x) ≤ 2m0 (1 + ϕm(x))p ∀m ≥ m0, x ≥ Hence we can find C > 0 such that r 2 . ϕ′m(x) ≤ C (1 + ϕm(x))p ∀m ∈ N, x ≥ r 2 . 13 (iv) We now consider 1 2 ≤ x < r 2 and select nx ≥ 1 with the property that ϕj(x) ≥ r 2 whenever j ≥ nx while ϕj(x) < r 2 for 0 ≤ j < nx. If m < nx+1 then, from (9), we get ϕ′m(x) ≤ rm. Otherwise we decompose ϕ′m(x) = (2ϕj(x)) · nx−1 Yj=0 (2ϕj(x)) m−1 Yj=nx The first factor is dominated by rnx ≤ rm, while the second one coincides with 2m−nx ϕk (ϕnx(x)) = ϕ′m−nx (ϕnx(x)) . m−1−nx Yk=0 Since ϕnx(x) ≥ r 2 we can use the estimates in (iii) to conclude ϕ′m(x) ≤ Crm (1 + ϕm−nx (ϕnx(x)))p = Crm (1 + ϕm(x))p . Lemma 3.2. Let ϕ(x) = x2 + 1 there exist C > 0 and p ∈ N such that 4 be given. Then, for every r > 1 and n ∈ N m (x)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Crm (1 + ϕm(x))p . (cid:12)(cid:12)ϕ(n) Proof. It is enough to consider x ≥ 0. The case n = 1 is the content of the previous Lemma. Let us now consider n = 2. From (9) we obtain, for every x ≥ 1 2, ϕ′′m(x) = Hence m−1 Xj=0 2ϕi(x) = ϕ′m(x) 2ϕ′j(x)Yi6=j ϕ′j(x) ϕj(x) . (10) m−1 Xj=0 ϕ′′m(x) ≤ ϕ′m(x) 2ϕ′j(x). m−1 Xj=0 We now fix r > 1 and take C > 0 and p ∈ N such that Then, for every x ≥ 1 2, (cid:12)(cid:12)ϕ′j(x)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Crj (1 + ϕj(x))p ∀j ∈ N0, x ∈ R. ϕ′′m(x) ≤ 2C 2rm (1 + ϕm(x))2p rj m−1 Xj=0 ≤ 2 C 2 r − 1 r2m (1 + ϕm(x))2p . 14 Now, an application of Leibnitz rule and Fa`a di Bruno formula permits to proceed by induction in order to prove the desired result for x ≥ 1 2 . On the other hand, as ϕ(n) m is increasing in [0, +∞) then for all x ∈ [0, 1 2] we have 0 ≤ ϕ(n) m (x) ≤ ϕ(n) m ( 1 2 ) ≤ Crm(cid:18)1 + ϕm( 1 2 )(cid:19)p Since r > 1 is arbitrary we conclude that for every r > 1 there exist C > 0 and q ∈ N such that ϕ′′m(x) ≤ Crm (1 + ϕm(x))q whenever x ≥ 1 2. For n > 2 we apply (10) to get m (x)(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)ϕ(n) (ϕ′′m)(n−2) (x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ n−2 Xk=0(cid:18)n − 2 k (cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)ϕ(k+1) m (x)(cid:12)(cid:12) m−1 Xj=0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ϕj(cid:19)(n−2−k) (cid:18)ϕ′j . (x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) for some p and C > 0 which only depend on n. Since ϕm( 1 done. 2) = 1 2 we are Theorem 3.3. Let ϕ(x) = x2 + 1 4 be given. Then σ (Cϕ) = D. Proof. Since ϕ admits a fixed point and Cϕ is not injective then D is contained in σ (Cϕ) by Theorem 2.8. To finish we show that Cϕ − λI is invertible for every λ > 1. (a) Cϕ − λI is injective for λ > 1. In fact, Cϕ(f ) = λf implies f (ϕn(x)) = λnf (x) for every x ∈ R and n ∈ N. Since the left hand side is bounded and λ > 1 then f (x) = 0 for every x ∈ R. (b) Cϕ − λI is surjective for λ > 1. It suffices to show that f ◦ ϕm λm ∞ Xm=0 converges in S(R) for every f ∈ S(R) and λ ∈ C with λ > 1. Obviously x ≤ 1 + ϕm(x) for all x ∈ R and m ∈ N. By Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, ϕ satisfies the hypothesis in Lemma 2.4 and we conclude. Summarizing, we get the following. Theorem 3.4. Let ϕ(x) = a0 + a1x + a2x2 be a quadratic polynomial with real coefficients and take c = a0a2 + a1 1 2 − a2 4 . (a) c > 1 4 implies σ (Cϕ) = {0} . (b) c = 1 4 implies σ (Cϕ) = D. (c) c < 1 4 implies σ (Cϕ) = C. 15 4 Cubic polynomials Let us now consider polynomials ϕ of degree 3 with lim x→+∞ ϕ(x) = +∞. Theorem 4.1. Let ϕ be a polynomial of degree 3 with positive leading coefficient. Then C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cϕ) unless ϕ has a fixed point of multiplicity 3 in which case σ(Cϕ) = D \ {0}. Proof. According to its fixed points the following cases can occur: (i) ϕ has three different real fixed points, (ii) ϕ has two different real fixed points, one with multiplicity two and the other is simple, (iii) ϕ has only one real fixed point, the other two being complex conjugate numbers, (iv) ϕ has one real fixed point of multiplicity 3. In the first three cases, using that ϕ is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = −ϕ(−x) if necessary, we may apply Theorem 2.10 (see Example 2.13) to conclude that C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). In the forth case, ϕ is linearly equivalent to ψ(x) = x + x3. So, to complete the proof we discuss the spectrum of ϕ(x) = x + x3. From Theorem 2.8 and Proposition 2.3 we already know that σ(Cϕ) ⊃ D \ {0} and that 0 /∈ σ(Cϕ). We will show that given n ≥ 1 and R > 1 there are C > 0 and q ∈ R such that ϕ(n) m (x) ≤ CRm(1 + ϕm(x))q (11) for each x ∈ R and each m ∈ N. Since ϕ is an odd function, it suffices to consider x ≥ 0. First, we check the inequality (11) for the first derivative. Observe that ϕ′m+1(x) = ϕ′m(x)ϕ′(ϕm(x)). Then, ϕ′m(x) = m−1 Yk=0 ϕ′(ϕk(x)). For x = 0 we have the inequality with q = C = 1. We will proceed by induction on m. For m = 1 we clearly have the inequality for some C > 0 and q = 1. Also, we have ϕ′(x) = 1 + 3x2 ≥ 1. We take x0 > 0 such that for x ≥ x0, we have ϕ′(x) < ϕ(x). Observe that this implies x0 > 1 therefore 1 + 3x2 < (1 + x2)2. As ϕ(x) > x for x > 0, we also have 1 + 3ϕm(x)2 <(cid:0)1 + ϕm(x)2(cid:1)2 16 for x ≥ x0. Hence, if we assume that for x ≥ x0 we have ϕ′m(x) ≤ (ϕm(x))2, we obtain ϕ′m+1(x) (ϕm+1(x))2 = ϕ′m(x) (ϕm(x))2 · 1 + 3ϕm(x)2 (1 + ϕm(x)2)2 ≤ 1. Consequently ϕ′m(x) ≤ (ϕm(x))2 ∀m ∈ N, x ≥ x0. We now claim that for each K > 0 there is q ∈ N such that ϕ′m(x) ≤ (1 + ϕm(x))q, whenever x > K. In fact, for each K > 0 we take ℓ ∈ N such that ϕℓ(K) > x0. Then, for x ≥ K and m > ℓ we have ϕ′m(x) = ϕ′m−ℓ (ϕℓ(x)) · ϕ′ℓ(x) ℓ−1 ≤ (ϕm−ℓ (ϕℓ(x)))2 · Yj=0(cid:0)1 + 3ϕj(x)2(cid:1) ≤ 3ℓ (ϕm(x))2 · (1 + ϕm(x))2ℓ . We take p ∈ N such that 3ℓ ≤ (1 + ϕ(K))p and put q = 2ℓ + p + 2. Then ϕ′m(x) ≤ (1 + ϕm(x))q for all x > K. The claim is proved. To finish the proof of (11) for n = 1 we fix R > 0 and take K > 0 such that x > 0 and ϕ′(x) > R imply x > K. For any x > 0 let nx ∈ N be the first n ∈ N with the property that ϕn(x) > K. Then m ≤ nx implies ϕ′m(x) = m−1 Yj=0 ϕ′ (ϕj(x)) ≤ Rm, while for m > nx we have ϕ′m(x) = nx−1 Yj=0 ϕ′ (ϕj(x)) · ϕ′ (ϕj(x)) m−1 Yj=nx ≤ Rnx m−1−nx Yj=0 ϕ′ (ϕj(ϕnx(x))) = Rnxϕ′m−nx (ϕnx(x)) ≤ Rm (1 + ϕm(x))q . 17 For the second derivative we have, ϕ′′m(x) = m−1 Xk=0 6ϕk(x)2ϕ′(x)Yj6=k ϕ′(ϕj(x)) = ϕ′m(x)Xk ϕ′k(x) 6ϕk(x)2 1 + 3ϕk(x)2 . From here, we argue as in the case of p(x) = x2 + 1 4 to conclude. We observe that each polynomial ϕ of degree 3 is linearly equivalent to some polynomial of the form ψ(x) = ± x3 + Ax + B. For ϕ(x) = x3 + Ax + B the spectrum of Cϕ is already discussed in Theorem 4.1. Next we include some partial results concerning the spectrum of Cϕ for ϕ(x) = −x3 + Ax + B. In the special case that B = 0 we have a complete characterization. Proposition 4.2. Let η(x) = −x3 + Ax be given. Then (a) A = −1 implies σ(Cη) = D \ {0}. (b) A < 0, A 6= −1, implies σ(Cη) = C \ {0}. (c) A ≥ 0 implies σ(Cη) = C. Proof. Since η has fixed points we can apply Theorem 2.8 to conclude that D \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cη). From the fact that η is an odd function we have η2 = ω2 where ω(x) = −η(x) = x3 − Ax. (a) In the case A = −1 we have ω(x) = x3 + x and σ(Cη2) = σ(Cω2) = D \ {0}. The last identity follows from Theorem 4.1 and spectral theorem. Conse- quently σ(Cη) ⊂ D \ {0}. By Proposition 2.3, in order to show (b) and (c) it suffices to check that C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cη) for A 6= −1. We first consider the case A > −1. Then ω admits a fixed point a > 0 such that ω′(a) > 1 and ω(n)(a) ≥ 0. Hence, ϕ = η◦η = ω ◦ω satisfies the hypothesis of Theorem 2.10. Since η(x) < 0 < a for all x ≥ a we can apply Proposition 2.11 to conclude C \ {0} ⊂ σ(Cη). In the case A < −1 the fixed point a = 0 satisfies ω′(a) > 1 and ω(n)(a) ≥ 0. Hence we can proceed as before. 18 For polynomials ϕ(x) = −x3 + Ax + B with B 6= 0 we can provide some examples. Proposition 4.3. Let ψ(x) = x3 + Ax+ B be given with B 6= 0 and consider ϕ(x) = −x3 −Ax−B. We assume the ψ has three different (real) fixed points. Then C \ {0} ⊂ σ (Cϕ) . Proof. We first assume that B > 0. We have ϕ2(x) = ψ2(x) − 2B for every x ∈ R. Let x = α be the greatest fixed point of ψ. Then ψ′(α) > 1 and ψ′′(x) ≥ 0 for every x ≥ α. Then x = α is a fixed point of ψ2 and it satisfies ψ′2(α) > 1 and ψ(n) 2 (x) ≥ 0 for every x ≥ α. Since B > 0 then the equation ϕ2(x) = x, equivalently ψ2(x) = x + 2B admits a solution β > α. Then while Consequently ϕ′2(β) = ψ′2(β) ≥ ψ′2(α) > 1, ϕ(n) 2 (x) = ψ(n) 2 (x) ≥ 0 ∀x ≥ β. C \ {0} ⊂ σ (Cϕ2) , from where the conclusion follows after applying Proposition 2.11. We now consider the case that B < 0. We put ϕ(x) = −ϕ(−x) and ψ(x) = −ψ(−x). Then ψ(x) = x3 + Ax − B and ϕ(x) = − ψ(x). Since also ψ admits three different fixed points and ψ(0) > 0 we conclude C \ {0} ⊂ σ (C ϕ) = σ (Cϕ) . Remark 4.4. Let ψ(x) = x3 + Ax + B be given with B > 0. If ψ has a unique real fixed point then where c < 0 < α. ψ(x) = x +(cid:0)(x − α)2 + β2(cid:1) (x − c), This means that we cannot adapt the previous argument to the case that there is a unique fixed point. Nor can we adapt the argument in the case where there is a simple fixed point and a double fixed point (the condition B > 0 forces that the double fixed point is the greatest). 19 Remark 4.5. If X is a locally convex space and T ∈ L(X), the Waellbrock spectrum σ∗(T ) is defined as the smallest set containing σ(T ) such that the resolvent mapping R(·, T ) : C\σ∗(T ) → Lb(X), z 7→ R(z, T ) = (zI −T )−1 is holomorphic (see [13]). Here Lb(X) stands for the space of continuous linear operators on X endowed with the topology of convergence on bounded sets. If X is a Fr´echet space and U ⊂ C is open then F : U → Lb(X) is holomorphic if and only if the map U → C, z 7→ hu, F (z)(x)i is holomorphic for every u ∈ X′, x ∈ X (see [6, Theorem 1], [4, corollary 10, Remark 11]). Hence, from Lemma 2.4 we can get easily that the resolvent map z 7→ R(·, Cϕ) is holomorphic in C \ {0} when ϕ does not have fixed points (Theorem 2.5), and also in C \ D when ϕ is a polynomial of degree 2 or 3 with a unique fixed point (Theorem 3.4, Theorem 4.1 and Propoposition 4.2 a)). In all cases then we have σ∗(Cϕ) = σ(Cϕ). Contrary to what happens for operators in Banach spaces, where the Waellbrock spectrum equals the spectrum which is always closed, this is not always true for operators defined on Fr´echet spaces, even when the spectrum is bounded as one can check in [1, Remark 3.5 (vi)]. 5 Monotone symbols We recall that the symbols for S(R) were completely characterized in [5, The- orem 2.3]. The aim of this section is to provide some information regarding the spectrum of composition operators defined by monotone symbols. Then, let us assume that the symbol ϕ is strictly monotone and let us denote by ψ its inverse and by ψn its n-th iterate. For λ 6= 0, and f, g ∈ S(R), the relation Cϕf − λf = g implies that (5) holds for every n, that is f (ϕn(x)) = λnf (x) + λn−1−kg (ϕk(x)) , n−1 Xk=0 which implies f (x) = λnf (ψn(x)) + = λnf (ψn(x)) + n−1 Xk=0 Xj=1 n λn−1−kg (ψn−k(x)) λj−1g (ψj(x)) . (12) Proposition 5.1. Let ϕ be a strictly increasing symbol other than the iden- tity. Then σ(Cϕ) always contains {λ ∈ C : λ = 1}. 20 Proof. Let λ satisfies λ = 1 and assume that λ /∈ σ(Cϕ). Then, for every g ∈ S(R) there is a unique f ∈ S(R) such that (4), (5) and (12) hold. Now we discuss the following possibilities, covering all possible cases (1) ϕ lacks fixed points. (2) There exist a < b such that ϕ(a) = a, ϕ(b) = b and ϕ(x) 6= x for every x ∈ (a, b) . (3) There exists a ∈ R such that ϕ(a) = a and ϕ(x) 6= x for every x ∈ (a, +∞) . (4) There exists a ∈ R such that ϕ(a) = a and ϕ(x) 6= x for every x ∈ (−∞, a) . (1) Since, for every x ∈ R, the sequences (ϕn(x))n and (ψn(x))n diverge, we obtain from (5) and (12), f (x) = − 1 λ ∞ Xk=0 λ−kg (ϕk(x)) = λkg (ψk(x)) . 1 λ ∞ Xk=1 This implies that λ−kg(ϕk(x)) + ∞ Xk=0 ∞ Xk=1 λkg(ψk(x)) = 0 for each x ∈ R. This cannot happen if g is a smooth function whose support contains 0 and is contained in the open interval determined by ϕ(0) and ψ(0). In the case that the symbol admits some fixed point then 1 ∈ σ(Cϕ), so we will take in what follows λ 6= 1. (2) Either ϕn(x) ↓ a, ψn(x) ↑ b ∀x ∈ (a, b) (if ϕ(x) < x) or ϕn(x) ↑ b, ψn(x) ↓ a ∀x ∈ (a, b) (if ϕ(x) > x). We fix x0 ∈ (a, b) and define xk+1 = ϕ(xk). Let I0 denote the open interval with extremes (x0, x1) and let J0 be a closed interval contained in I0 and g a smooth function with support contained in I0 such that g(x) = 1 for x ∈ J0. The identity (4) implies that f (a) = f (b) = 0. Then (12) gives f (x) = ∞ Xj=1 λj−1g (ψj(x)) ∀x ∈ (a, b). 21 Finally we fix y0 ∈ J0, define yk = ϕk(y0) and put c = limk→∞ yk (c = a or c = b). Then f (yk) = λk−1g (ψk(yk)) = λk−1 and f (yk) 6= f (c) , lim k→∞ which is a contradiction. (3) In the case ϕ(x) < x for every x > a we have ϕn(x) ↓ a ∀x > a and we can proceed as in (2) to get a contradiction. We will discuss the case that ϕ(x) > x for every x > a. Then ψn(x) ↓ a while ϕn(x) ↑ +∞ ∀x > a. From (5) we obtain f (x) = − ∞ Xk=0 λ−k−1g (ϕk(x)) ∀x > a. We fix x0 > a and define xk+1 = ψ(xk). Let I0 denote the open interval (x1, x0) and let J0 be a closed interval contained in I0 and g a smooth function with support contained in I0 such that g(x) = 1 for x ∈ J0. Finally we fix y0 ∈ J0, define yk = ψk(y0). Then f (yk) = −λ−k−1g (ϕk(yk)) = −λ−k−1 and we can proceed as in case (2) to get a contradiction. (4) is analogous to (3). For ϕ(x) = x + e−x2, the composition operator Cϕ is not power bounded but we do not know whether it is mean ergodic or not (see [7, Remark 1]). According to Proposition 5.1, the spectrum of Cϕ contains the unit circle. We recall that a fixed point a of ϕ is said to be attracting if ϕ′(a) < 1 and repelling if ϕ′(a) > 1. Proposition 5.2. Let us assume that a is an attracting fixed point of the strictly increasing symbol ϕ. Then {λ ∈ C : ϕ′(a) < λ < 1} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). Proof. Let us denote by ψ the inverse of the bijection ϕ : [a, +∞) → [a, +∞). Given λ ∈ D, and f, g ∈ S(R), the relation Cϕf − λf = g, implies that f (x) = ∞ Xj=1 λj−1g (ψj(x)) , ∀x > a. (13) 22 We take ϕ′(a) < ε < λ and choose 0 < δ so that ϕ′(x) < ε on (a, a + δ). For every x ∈ (a, a + δ), by the mean value theorem, we have ϕ(x) < x hence the sequence (ϕn(x))n decreases to a. In fact, ϕn(x) − a ≤ εnx − a. (14) We fix a < b < a + δ and let J be a closed interval contained in (ϕ(b), b). We consider a smooth function g whose support is contained in (ϕ(b), b) and such that g(x) = 1 for every x ∈ J. We check that g cannot be in the range of Cϕ − λI. We proceed by contradiction and assume that there is is f ∈ S(R) such that Cϕf − λf = g. We take y0 ∈ J and yk := ϕk(y0). Then ψj(yk) ∈ (ϕ(b), b) if and only if k = j. Hence, by (13), f (yk) = λk−1. Finally, using (14), f (yk) − f (a) yk − a ≥ λk−1 y0 − aεk , (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) which goes to ∞ as k → ∞. This is a contradiction since (yk)k decreases to a. Corollary 5.3. Let us assume ϕ(a) = a, ϕ′(a) = 0, ϕ strictly increasing. Then {λ ∈ C : λ ≤ 1} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). With obvious modifications, one can show Proposition 5.4. Let us assume that a is a repelling fixed point of ϕ and ϕ strictly increasing. Then {λ ∈ C : 1 ≤ λ < ϕ′(a)} ⊂ σ(Cϕ). Proposition 5.5. Let ϕ be a strictly decreasing symbol. Then {λ ∈ C : λ = 1} ⊂ σ(Cϕ) if and only if ϕ ◦ ϕ 6= I. Proof. Let us assume ϕ ◦ ϕ 6= I and let a denote the unique fixed point of ϕ. We proceed by contradiction, so we assume there is λ /∈ σ(Cϕ) with λ = 1. Several possibilities can occur. (1) There exist a ≤ b < c such that ϕ2(b) = b, ϕ2(c) = c and ϕ2(x) 6= x for every x ∈ (b, c). For every smooth function g whose support is contained in (b, c) there is f ∈ S(R) with f (ϕ(x)) − λf (x) = g(x). Then f (x) = λ2nf (ψ2n(x)) + λj−1g (ψj(x)) . 2n Xj=1 23 Since ψ ([b, c]) ⊂ ψ ([a, +∞)) = (−∞, a] and ψ2k ([b, c]) ⊂ [b, c] we obtain ψ2k+1 ([b, c]) ⊂ (−∞, a]. Hence f (x) = λ2nf (ψ2n(x)) + n Xj=1 λ2j−1g (ψ2j(x)) ∀x ∈ (b, c). Now we can argue as in the proof of Proposition 5.1 (case (2)) to get a contradiction. (2) There exists b ≥ a such that ϕ2(b) = b and ϕ2(x) 6= x for every x > b. Since ψ ([b, +∞)) ⊂ ψ ([a, +∞)) ⊂ (−∞, a] and ψ2k ([b, +∞)) ⊂ [b, +∞) we obtain ψ2k+1 ([b, +∞)) ⊂ (−∞, a]. Hence f (x) = λ2nf (ψ2n(x)) + n Xj=1 λ2j−1g (ψ2j(x)) ∀x > b. Now we can argue as in the proof of Proposition 5.1 (case (3)) to get a contradiction. The other possibilities can be treated as (1) or (2). Finally, let us assume that the unit circle is contained in σ(Cϕ). Since ϕ) ⊃ (σ(Cϕ))2 then the unit circle is contained in σ(C 2 ϕ), which implies σ(C 2 ϕ ◦ ϕ 6= I. If ϕ ◦ ϕ = I then σ(Cϕ) = {−1, 1}. According to [7, Proposition 3.7] and λ = 1} ⊂ σ(Cϕ) characterizes the Proposition 5.5, the condition {λ ∈ C : decreasing symbols ϕ such that Cϕ is mean ergodic. References [1] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, W. J. Ricker, Montel resolvents and uniformly mean ergodic semigroups of linear operators. Quaest. Math. 36 (2013), 2, 253 -- 290. [2] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, W. J. Ricker, Dynamics and spectrum of the Ces`aro operator on C∞(R+). Monatsh. Math. 181 (2016), 267 -- 283. [3] J. Bonet, P. Doma´nski, A note on the spectrum of composition operators on spaces of real analytic functions. Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 11 (2017), 161 -- 174. [4] J. Bonet, L. Frerick, E. Jord´a, Extension of vector-valued holomorphic and harmonic functions. Studia Math. 183 (2007), no. 3, 225 -- 248. 24 [5] A. Galbis, E. Jord´a, Composition operators on the Schwartz space. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 34 (2018), 397 -- 412. [6] K. G. Grosse-Erdmann, A weak criterion for vector-valued holomorphy. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 136 (2004), no. 2, 399 -- 411. [7] C. Fern´andez, A. Galbis, E. Jord´a, Dynamics and spectra of composition operators on the Schwartz space. J. Funct. Anal. 274 (2018), 3503 -- 3530. [8] N. Kenessey, J. Wengenroth, Composition operators with closed range for smooth injective symbols R → Rd. J. Funct. Anal. 260 (2011), 2997 -- 3006. [9] A. Przestacki, Composition operators with closed range for one- dimensional smooth symbols. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 399 (2013), 225 -- 228. [10] A. Przestacki, Characterization of composition operators with closed range for one-dimensional smooth symbols. J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014), 5847 -- 5857. [11] A. Przestacki, Corrigendum to "Characterization of composition oper- ators with closed range for one-dimensional smooth symbols" J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014) 5847 -- 5857]. J. Funct. Anal. 269 (2015), 2665 -- 2667. [12] A. Przestacki, Dynamical properties of weighted composition operators on the space of smooth functions. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 445 (2017), 1097 -- 1113. [13] F. H Vasilescu, Analytic functional calculus and spectral decompositions. Translated from the Romanian. Mathematics and its Applications (East European Series), 1. D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht (1982). 25
1811.06865	2	1811	2019-05-30T10:08:10	When are full representations of algebras of operators on Banach spaces automatically faithful?	[ "math.FA" ]	We examine the phenomenon when surjective algebra homomorphisms between algebras of operators on Banach spaces are automatically injective. In the first part of the paper we shall show that for certain Banach spaces $X$ the following property holds: For every non-zero Banach space $Y$ every surjective algebra homomorphism $\psi: \, \mathcal{B}(X) \rightarrow \mathcal{B}(Y)$ is automatically injective. In the second part of the paper we consider the question in the opposite direction: Building on the work of Kania, Koszmider and Laustsen \textit{(Trans. London Math. Soc., 2014)} we show that for every separable, reflexive Banach space $X$ there is a Banach space $Y_X$ and a surjective but not injective algebra homomorphism $\psi: \, \mathcal{B}(Y_X) \rightarrow \mathcal{B}(X)$.	math.FA	math	WHEN ARE FULL REPRESENTATIONS OF ALGEBRAS OF OPERATORS ON BANACH SPACES AUTOMATICALLY FAITHFUL? BENCE HORVÁTH Abstract. We examine the phenomenon when surjective algebra ho- momorphisms between algebras of operators on Banach spaces are au- tomatically injective. In the first part of the paper we shall show that for certain Banach spaces X the following property holds: For every non-zero Banach space Y every surjective algebra homomorphism ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) is automatically injective. In the second part of the pa- per we consider the question in the opposite direction: Building on the work of Kania, Koszmider, and Laustsen (Trans. London Math. Soc., 2014) we show that for every separable, reflexive Banach space X there is a Banach space YX and a surjective but not injective algebra homo- morphism ψ : B(YX ) → B(X). 1. Introduction and preliminaries 1.1. Introduction. A classical result of Eidelheit (see for example [11, The- orem 2.5.7]) asserts that if X, Y are Banach spaces then they are isomorphic if and only if their algebras of operators B(X) and B(Y ) are isomorphic as Banach algebras, in the sense that there exists a continuous bijective al- gebra homomorphism ψ : B(X) → B(Y ). It is natural to ask whether for some class of Banach spaces X this theorem can be strengthened in the following sense: If Y is a non-zero Banach space and ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) is a continuous, surjective algebra homomorphism, is ψ automatically injective? It is easy find an example of a Banach space with this property. Indeed, let X be a finite-dimensional Banach space, let Y be a non-zero Banach space and let ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) be a surjective algebra homomorphism. Since B(X) ≃ Mn(C) for some n ∈ N, simplicity of Mn(C) implies that Ker(ψ) = {0}. One can also obtain an infinite-dimensional example: If H be a separable, infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, Y is a non-zero Banach space, and let ψ : B(H) → B(Y ) is a surjective algebra homomorphism, then ψ is automatically injective; see the paragraph before the proof of 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46H10, 47L10; Secondary 46B03, 46B07, 46B10, 46B26, 47L20. Key words and phrases. Banach space, Semadeni space, bounded linear operator, ideal, semisimple, algebra homomorphism, automatically injective, SHAI property. 1 2 B. HORVÁTH Theorem 1.3. These simple observations ensure that the following definition is not vacuous. Definition 1.1. A Banach space X has the SHAI property (Surjective Ho- momorphisms Are Injective) if for every non-zero Banach space Y every surjective algebra homomorphism ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) is automatically in- jective. The purpose of this paper is to initiate the study of this property. The paper is structured as follows. In the second part of Section 1 we establish our notations and introduce the necessary background. We begin Section 2 by giving a list of examples of Banach spaces which lack the SHAI property, see Example 2.4. We continue by extending our list of examples of Banach spaces with the SHAI property. Since ℓ2 possesses this property, it is therefore natural to ask the same question for other classical sequence spaces. We obtain the following result: Proposition 1.2. Suppose X is one of the Banach spaces c0 or ℓp for 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Then X has the SHAI property. Another way of generalising the ℓ2-case is to ask whether all, not neces- sarily separable Hilbert spaces have the SHAI property. As we will demon- strate, the answer is affirmative: Theorem 1.3. A Hilbert space of arbitrary density character has the SHAI property. We shall also provide more "exotic" examples of Banach spaces with the SHAI property, including Schlumprecht's arbitrarily distortable Banach space S, constructed in [42]: Theorem 1.4. Let X be a complementably minimal Banach space such that it has a complemented subspace isomorphic to X ⊕X. Then X has the SHAI property. In particular, Schlumprecht's arbitrarily distortable Banach space S has the SHAI property. When studying the SHAI property of a Banach space X, understand- ing the complemented subspaces of X and the lattice of closed two-sided ideals of B(X) appears to be immensely helpful. For the Banach space 2 )Y , where Y is c0 or ℓ1, the complemented subspace structure was studied by Bourgain, Casazza, Lindenstrauss, and Tzafriri in [6] and the ideal lattice of B(X) by Laustsen, Loy, and Read in [27] and later by Laustsen, Schlumprecht, and Zsák in [28]. Their results allow us to show the following: X = (Ln∈N ℓn SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 3 Theorem 1.5. Let X := (Ln∈N ℓn SHAI property. 2 )Y , where Y is c0 or ℓ1. Then X has the Finally, in Section 2 we establish a permanence property: Proposition 1.6. Let E be a Banach space and let F, G be closed subspaces of E with E = F ⊕ G. If both F and G have the SHAI property then E has the SHAI property. We remark in passing that the stability of the SHAI property under finite sums is of interest to us since B(F ⊕G) can have a very complicated lattice of closed two-sided ideals even if B(F ) and B(G) themselves have the simplest possible ideal structure, we refer the reader to [14] and [44]. We do not know however if Lp[0, 1] possesses the SHAI property for p ∈ [1, ∞)\{2}. Section 3 is devoted entirely to construct Banach spaces which fail the SHAI property in a rather non-trivial manner; for every separable, reflexive Banach space X we find a Banach space YX and a surjective but not injective algebra homomorphism Θ : B(YX) → B(X). More precisely, we prove the following: Theorem 1.7. Let X be a non-zero, separable, reflexive Banach space. For every S ∈ B(YX) there exists a unique Θ(S) ∈ B(X) and there exists a club subset D ⊆ [0, ω1) such that for all α ∈ D and all ψ ∈ X ∗: (1.1) S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ) = δα ⊗ Θ(S)∗ψ. Moreover, the map Θ : B(YX) → B(X); S 7→ Θ(S) is a non-injective alge- bra homomorphism of norm one; and there exists an algebra homomorphism Λ : B(X) → B(YX) of norm one with Θ ◦ Λ = idB(X). In particular Θ is surjective. All necessary terminology and notation will be explained in the subse- quent sections. 1.2. Preliminaries. Our notations and terminology are standard. The set of natural numbers not including zero will be denoted by N, and N0 := N ∪ {0}. The fields of real and complex numbers are denoted by R and C, respectively. 1.2.1. Banach spaces, their algebras of operators and ideals thereof, Banach algebras. In what follows, all Banach spaces and Banach algebras are as- sumed to be over the complex scalar field C. Most of our results extend however verbatim to Banach spaces over the real scalar field R. Whenever 4 B. HORVÁTH an argument of ours holds only in the complex case, we emphasize the im- portance of the choice of the scalar field. If X is a Banach space then its dual space is X ∗ and h· , ·i is the duality bracket between X and X ∗. The symbol IX is the identity operator on X. The symbol B(X, Y ) stands for the Banach space of bounded linear operators between the Banach spaces X and Y , we let B(X) := B(X, X). For T ∈ B(X, Y ) its adjoint is T ∗ ∈ B(Y ∗, X ∗). If W, Z are closed linear subspaces of X and Y , respectively, then for a T ∈ B(X, Y ) we denote the restriction of T to W by T W , clearly T W ∈ B(W, Y ). If Ran(T ) ⊆ Z then T Z denotes T considered as a bounded linear operator between X and Z, that is, T Z ∈ B(X, Z). The direct sum of Banach spaces X and Y will be denoted by X ⊕ Y . Two Banach spaces X and Y are said to be isomorphic if there is a linear homeomorphism between X and Y , it will be denoted by X ≃ Y . If X ≃ X ⊕ X we say that X is isomorphic to its square. Throughout this paper, whenever two Banach spaces are isometrically isomorphic we shall identify them when it does not cause any confusion. By an isomorphism of Banach algebras A and B we understand that there is an algebra homomorphism between A and B which is also a homeomorphism. This will also be denoted by A ≃ B. The symbols A(X), K(X), S(X), E(X), W(X) and X (X) stand for the closed two-sided ideals of operators which are approximable, compact, strictly singular, inessential, weakly compact and have separable range, re- spectively. We recall that T ∈ B(X) is an inessential operator (see [34, page 489]) if for every S ∈ B(X) it follows that dim(Ker(IX + ST )) < ∞ and codimX (Ran(IX + ST )) < ∞; this is equivalent to saying that IX + ST is a Fredholm operator for every S ∈ B(X). It is well-known that A(X) ⊆ K(X) ⊆ S(X) ⊆ E(X) and K(X) ⊆ W(X) ∩ X (X) hold, see for example [8]. A character on a unital Banach algebra A is a unit-preserving algebra homomorphism from A to C. Any such character is necessarily of norm at most 1 and therefore continuous. 1.2.2. Idempotents, projections. Let R be a ring. We say that p ∈ R is an idempotent if p2 = p. If p, q ∈ R are idempotents then we say that they are mutually orthogonal and write p ⊥ q if pq = 0 = qp. For p, q ∈ R idempotents we write p ∼ q if there exist a, b ∈ R such that p = ab and q = ba, in this case we say that p and q are equivalent. If p, q ∈ R are idempotents, then we write q ≤ p whenever pq = q and qp = q hold. This is SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 5 a partial order on the set of idempotents of R. We say that an idempotent p ∈ R is minimal if it is minimal in the set of non-zero idempotents of R with respect to this partial order. We write q < p if both q ≤ p and q 6= p hold. In a C ∗-algebra A an idempotent p ∈ A is called a projection if it is self-adjoint. A projection is minimal if it is minimal in the set of non-zero projections of A with respect to the partial order ≤. 1.2.3. Simple and semisimple algebras. We say that a unital algebra A is simple if the only non-trivial two-sided ideal in A is A. If A is a unital algebra, the Jacobson radical of A, denoted by rad(A), is the intersection of all maximal left ideals in A, and it is a two-sided ideal in A. If there are no proper left ideals in A we put rad(A) := A. A unital algebra is semisimple if its Jacobson radical is trivial. For any Banach space X, the Banach algebra B(X) is well-known to be semisimple but it is not simple whenever X is infinite-dimensional, since A(X) is a proper non-trivial closed two-sided ideal in B(X). 2. When surjective algebra homomorphisms are automatically injective A classical deep result of B. E. Johnson asserts the following. Theorem 2.1 (Johnson). If A, B are Banach algebras such that B is semisim- ple, then every surjective algebra homomorphism ψ : A → B is automati- cally continuous. For a modern discussion of this result we refer the reader to [11, The- orem 5.1.5]. In what follows we shall use this fundamental result without explicitly mentioning it. We first observe that there is a large class of Banach spaces which obvi- ously lack the SHAI property. Lemma 2.2. Let X be an infinite-dimensional Banach space such that Mn(C) is a quotient of B(X) for some n ∈ N. Then X does not have the SHAI property. Proof. Let ϕ : B(X) → Mn(C) be a surjective algebra homomorphism. Since B(Cn) ≃ Mn(C) we immediately obtain that that there is a surjective algebra homomorphism ψ : B(X) → B(Cn) which cannot be injective, since X is infinite-dimensional. (cid:3) 6 B. HORVÁTH Remark 2.3. For any n ∈ N one can easily find an infinite-dimensional Banach space X such that it satisfies the conditions of Lemma 2.2, that is, Mn(C) is a quotient of B(X). Indeed, let E be an infinite-dimensional Banach space such that B(E) has a character ϕ : B(E) → C. (Examples of i=1 E, then there is an isomorphism between the Banach algebras B(X) and Mn(B(E)), this latter being the Banach algebra of (n × n)-matrices with entries in B(E). Since every element A ∈ B(E) can be written uniquely as A = λIE + T for some λ ∈ C and T ∈ Ker(ϕ), it is straightforward to check that such spaces are given below in Example 2.4.) Let X :=Ln (2.1) ψ : Mn(B(E)) → Mn(C); (λi,jIE + Ti,j)n i,j=1 7→ (λi,j)n i,j=1 defines surjective algebra homomorphism. So in particular Mn(C) is a quo- tient of B(X). In fact, something much stronger can be said then the above: It was observed by Kania and Laustsen in [23, page 1022] that every complex, semisimple, finite-dimensional, unital algebra is isomorphic to B(X)/K(X) for a suitable Banach space X. We recall that an infinite-dimensional Banach space X is indecomposable, if there are no closed, infinite-dimensional subspaces Y, Z of X such that X ≃ Y ⊕Z. A Banach space X is hereditarily indecomposable if every closed, infinite-dimensional subspace of X is indecomposable. The next example collects a variety of examples from the literature where B(X) is known to have a character, so X does not have the SHAI property by Lemma 2.2. In examples (1) -- (3) this character is shown explicitly and in examples (4) -- (7) the character is obtained from a commutative quotient on B(X). It is not intended to be an exhaustive list. Example 2.4. None of the following spaces X have the SHAI property: (1) X is a complex hereditarily indecomposable Banach space, since by [17, Theorem 18] B(X) has a character whose kernel is S(X), (2) X = Jp where 1 < p < ∞ and Jp is the pth James space, since by [13, Paragraph 8], B(X) has a character whose kernel is W(X), see also [24, Theorem 4.16], (3) X = C[0, ω1], where ω1 is the first uncountable ordinal, since by [13, Paragraph 9] B(X) has a character, see also [30, Proposition 3.1], (4) X = C[0, ωη], where η is a regular cardinal, and ωη is the small- est ordinal of cardinality ℵη, since by [32, Section 4] B(X) has a character, SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 7 (5) X = X∞, where X∞ is the indecomposable but not hereditarily inde- composable Banach space constructed by Tarbard in [46, Chapter 4], since B(X)/K(X) ≃ ℓ1(N0), where the right-hand side is endowed with the convolution product, (6) X = XK, where K is a countable compact Hausdorff space and XK is the Banach space construced by Motakis, Puglisi, and Zisimopoulou in [31, Theorem B], since B(X)/K(X) ≃ C(K), (7) X = C(K0), where is K0 is the compact Hausdorff connected "Koszmider" space constructed by Plebanek in [35, Theorem 1.3], since B(X)/W(X) ≃ C(K0), as shown in [41, Proposition 3.3], and it also follows from [12, Theorem 6.5(i)], (8) X = G, where G is the Banach space constructed by Gowers in [16], since B(X)/S(X) ≃ ℓ∞/c0, as shown in [24, Corollary 8.3]. The purpose of the following lemma is to show for a certain "nice" class of Banach spaces, when studying the SHAI property it is enough to restrict our attention to infinite-dimensional spaces Y . Lemma 2.5. Let X be a Banach space such that X contains a comple- mented subspace isomorphic to X ⊕ X. Then the following are equivalent: (1) X has the SHAI property, (2) for any Y infinite-dimensional Banach space any surjective algebra homomorphism ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) is automatically injective. Proof. Let Y be a non-zero Banach space and let ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) be a surjective algebra homomorphism, we show that Y must be infinite- dimensional. For assume towards a contradiction it is not; then clearly B(Y ) is finite-dimensional, thus by B(X)/ Ker(ψ) ≃ B(Y ) we have that Ker(ψ) is finite-codimensional in B(X). But X has a complemented sub- space isomorphic to X ⊕ X therefore by successively applying [25, Proposi- tions 1.9 and 2.3] and [11, Proposition 1.3.34] it follows that B(X) has no proper ideals of finite codimension, a contradiction. (cid:3) We recall that if A, B are unital algebras and θ : A → B is a surjective algebra homomorphism then θ[rad(A)] ⊆ rad(B). Lemma 2.6. Let X be a Banach space, let B be a unital Banach algebra and let ψ : B(X) → B be a continuous, surjective, non-injective algebra homomorphism. Then ψ[E(X)] ⊆ rad(B). In particular, if B is semisimple then E(X) ⊆ Ker(ψ). 8 B. HORVÁTH Proof. Since ψ is not injective A(X) ⊆ Ker(ψ) holds and therefore there exists a unique surjective algebra homomorphism θ : B(X)/A(X) → B with θ ◦ π = ψ and kψk = kθk, where π : B(X) → B(X)/A(X) is the quotient map. Thus θ[rad(B(X)/A(X))] ⊆ rad(B), which by Kleinecke's theorem [8, Theorem 5.5.9] is equivalent to θ[π[E(X)]] ⊆ rad(B). This is equivalent to ψ[E(X)] ⊆ rad(B), as required. (cid:3) Lemma 2.7. Let X be a Banach space such that E(X) is a maximal ideal in B(X) and X has a complemented subspace isomorphic to X ⊕ X. Then X has the SHAI property. Proof. Let Y be an infinite-dimensional Banach space and let ψ : B(X) → B(Y ) be a surjective algebra homomorphism. Assume towards a contradic- tion that ψ in not injective. Since B(Y ) is semisimple in view of Lemma 2.6 it follows that E(X) ⊆ Ker(ψ) must hold. Since ψ is surjective, Ker(ψ) is a proper ideal thus by maximality of E(X) in B(X) it follows that Ker(ψ) = E(X). Thus B(X)/E(X) ≃ B(Y ), where the right-hand side is simple, due to maximality of E(X) in B(X), which is a contradiction. Therefore ψ must be injective thus by Lemma 2.5 the claim is proven. (cid:3) Remark 2.8. We observe that the condition "X has a complemented sub- space isomorphic to X ⊕ X" in the previous lemma cannot be dropped in general. Indeed, let X be a hereditarily indecomposable Banach space, then E(X) = S(X) is a maximal ideal in B(X) but by Example 2.4 (1) the space X does not have the SHAI property. Proof of Proposition 1.2. Let X be c0 or ℓp for 1 ≤ p < ∞. Gohberg, Markus, and Feldman showed in [15] that A(ℓp) = K(ℓp) = S(ℓp) = E(ℓp) is the only closed, non-trivial, proper, two-sided ideal in B(ℓp). In [26, page 253], Loy and Laustsen deduced that W(ℓ∞) = X (ℓ∞) = S(ℓ∞) = E(ℓ∞) is the unique maximal ideal in B(ℓ∞). Thus in both cases the result follows from Lemma 2.7. (cid:3) We remark in passing that it was recently shown by W. B. Johnson, G. Pisier and G. Schechtman in [20, Theorem 4.2] that B(ℓ∞) has continuum many distinct closed two-sided ideals, thus the use of Lemma 2.7 in the proof of Proposition 1.2 is essential. We recall that a Banach space X is called complementably minimal if every closed, infinite-dimensional subspace of X contains a subspace which is complemented in X and isomorphic to X. Proof of Theorem 1.4. Since X is complementably minimal, it follows from [47, Theorem 6.2] that S(X) is the largest proper two-sided ideal in B(X). SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 9 In particlar E(X) = S(X) is maximal in B(X), thus Lemma 2.7 yields the claim. We recall that Schlumprecht's space S is isomorphic to it is square and it is complementably minimal, as shown, for example, in [43], thus the first part of the theorem applies. (cid:3) In the following we show that for a Hilbert space H of arbitrary density character, the projections lift from any quotient of B(H). In what follows, if (X, µ) is a measure space and f ∈ L∞(X, µ) then (2.2) Mf : L2(X, µ) → L2(X, µ); g 7→ f g is called the multiplication operator by f and is clearly a bounded linear operator. Lemma 2.9. Let H be a Hilbert space and let J be a closed, two-sided ideal in B(H). For any projection p ∈ B(H)/J there exists a projection P ∈ B(H) such that p = π(P ), where π : B(H) → B(H)/J denotes the quotient map. Proof. Let p ∈ B(H)/J be a projection. There exists a self-adjoint A ∈ B(H) such that p = π(A). By the spectral theorem for bounded self-adjoint operators [10, Chapter IX., Theorem 4.6] there exists a measure space (X, µ), a µ-almost everywhere bounded, real-valued function f on X and an isometric isomorphism U : H → L2(X, µ) such that A = U −1 ◦ Mf ◦ U. Consequently (2.3) π(U −1 ◦ Mf ◦ U) = π(A) = p = p2 = π(A2) = π(U −1 ◦ Mf 2 ◦ U), which is equivalent to (2.4) U −1 ◦ Mf −f 2 ◦ U = U −1 ◦ (Mf − Mf 2) ◦ U ∈ J . Let f be a representative of the class f and let h be the class of 1 [ f ≥1/2], the indicator function of the set [ f ≥ 1/2] := {x ∈ X : f (x) ≥ 1/2}. Clearly h ∈ L∞(X, µ) is well-defined and P := U −1 ◦ Mh ◦ U ∈ B(H) is a projection. We show that p = π(P ), which is equivalent to showing that U −1 ◦ Mf −h ◦ U ∈ J . We first observe that it is enough to find g ∈ L∞(X, µ) such that g(f − f 2) = h − f. Indeed, if such a function g were to exist then Mg ◦ Mf −f 2 = Mh−f and consequently U −1 ◦ Mh−f ◦ U = U −1 ◦ Mg ◦ Mf −f 2 ◦ U (2.5) = (U −1 ◦ Mg ◦ U) ◦ (U −1 ◦ Mf −f 2 ◦ U) ∈ J holds by Equation (2.4) and the fact that J is an ideal in B(H). 10 B. HORVÁTH Thus let g : X → R be the following function: (2.6) g(x) :=(cid:26) 1/( f (x) − 1) 1/ f (x) if f (x) < 1/2 otherwise. Let g be the class of g, clearly g is µ-almost everywhere bounded by 2. A simple calculation shows that (2.7) g(x)( f (x) − f 2(x)) =(cid:26) ( f (x) − f 2(x)/( f (x) − 1) so g(x)( f (x) − f 2(x)) = 1 quently g(f − f 2) = h − f, which proves the claim. ( f (x) − f 2(x)/ f (x) [ f ≥1/2](x) − f (x) holds for every x ∈ X. Conse- (cid:3) if f (x) < 1/2 otherwise, We recall that in a ring R if I E R is a two-sided ideal and p, q ∈ R are idempotents with p ∼ q then p ∈ I if and only if q ∈ I. In a C ∗-algebra A an idempotent e ∈ A is a projection if and only if kek ≤ 1. The following lemma is straightforward, we omit its proof. Lemma 2.10. (1) Let X be a Banach space and suppose Q ∈ B(X) is an idempotent such that Ran(Q) is isomorphic to its square. Then there exist mu- tually orthogonal idempotents Q1, Q2 ∈ B(X) with Q1, Q2 ∼ Q and Q1 + Q2 = Q. (2) Let H be a Hilbert space and suppose Q ∈ B(H) is a projection with infinite-dimensional range. Then there exist mutually orthogo- nal projections Q1, Q2 ∈ B(H) with Q1, Q2 ∼ Q and Q1 + Q2 = Q. Corollary 2.11. (1) Let X be a Banach space and let J E B(X) be a closed, two-sided ideal. Suppose Q ∈ B(X) is an idempotent such that Ran(Q) is isomorphic to its square and Q /∈ J . Then there exist mutually orthogonal idempotents Q1, Q2 ∈ B(X) with Q1, Q2 /∈ J such that π(Q1), π(Q2) < π(Q), where π : B(X) → B(X)/J is the quotient map. (2) Let H be a Hilbert space and let J E B(H) be a closed, two-sided ideal. Suppose Q ∈ B(H) projection such that Q /∈ J . Then there exist mutually orthogonal projections Q1, Q2 ∈ B(H) with Q1, Q2 /∈ J such that π(Q1), π(Q2) < π(Q), where π : B(H) → B(H)/J is the quotient map. Proof. (1) By Lemma 2.10 (1) there exist mutually orthogonal idempotents Q1, Q2 ∈ B(X) with Q1 + Q2 = Q and Q1, Q2 ∼ Q. For i ∈ {1, 2} we SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 11 immediately get Qi ≤ Q and thus π(Qi) ≤ π(Q). Since Qi ∼ Q, the con- dition Q /∈ J is equivalent to Qi /∈ J . Also, for i, j ∈ {1, 2} if i 6= j then Qj = Q − Qi thus π(Qi) 6= π(Q). (2) Immediate from the first part of this corollary and Lemma 2.10 (2). (cid:3) We recall a folklore lifting result for "Calkin" algebras of Banach spaces, this will be essential in the proof of Theorem 1.5. A convenient reference for the proof of this lemma is [4, Lemma 2.6]. It also follows from the much more general result [2, Theorem C]. Lemma 2.12. Let X be a Banach space and let p ∈ B(X)/K(X) be an idempotent. Then there exists an idempotent P ∈ B(X) with p = π(P ) where π : B(X) → B(X)/K(X) is the quotient map. Proposition 2.13. (1) Let X be a Banach space such that every infinite-dimensional com- plemented subspace of X is isomorphic to its square. Then B(X)/K(X) does not have minimal idempotents. (2) Let H be a Hilbert space and let J E B(H) a non-zero, closed, two-sided ideal. Then B(H)/J does not have minimal projections. Proof. (1) Let p ∈ B(X)/K(X) be a non-zero idempotent. By Lemma 2.12 there exists an idempotent P ∈ B(X) with p = π(P ), where π : B(X) → B(X)/K(X) is the quotient map. Clearly P /∈ K(X), equivalently Ran(P ) is infinite-dimensional. Thus by the hypothesis it is isomorphic to its square, consequently Corollary 2.11 (1) implies that there exists an idempotent Q ∈ B(X) such that Q /∈ I and π(Q) < π(P ). (2) Let p ∈ B(H)/J be a non-zero projection. By Lemma 2.9 there exists a projection P ∈ B(H) with p = π(P ), where π : B(H) → B(H)/J is the quotient map. Clearly P /∈ J thus by Corollary 2.11 (2) there exists a projection Q ∈ B(H) such that Q /∈ J and π(Q) < π(P ). (cid:3) We show that Proposition 2.13 (2) can be strengthened with the aid of the following simple observation. It is certainly well known among experts, however, we could not locate its proof in the literature, thus we include it here for the convenience of the reader. Lemma 2.14. If a C ∗-algebra has minimal idempotents then it has minimal projections. Proof. Let A be a C ∗-algebra and suppose e ∈ A is a minimal idempotent. By [40, Exercise 3.11(i)] there exists a projection p ∈ A with p ∼ e. Thus 12 B. HORVÁTH there exist a, b ∈ A such that ab = p and ba = e, consequently ae = pa and bp = eb. We show that p ∈ A is a minimal projection. Since e 6= 0 it is clear that p 6= 0. Let q ∈ A be a non-zero projection with q ≤ p, this is, pq = q and qp = q. We define f := bqa, and observe that f ∈ A is a non-zero idempotent. Indeed, f 2 = bqabqa = bqpqa = bqa = f and f 6= 0 otherwise 0 = af b = abqab = pqp = q which is impossible. Let us observe that f ≤ e. Indeed, ef = ebqa = bpqa = bqa = f and similarly f e = f holds. Since e ∈ A is a minimal idempotent it follows that e = f and consequently aeb = af b holds, equivalently pab = abqab equivalently p = pqp which is just p = q. This shows that p ∈ A is a minimal projection. (cid:3) Corollary 2.15. Let H be a Hilbert space and let J E B(H) be a non-zero, closed, two-sided ideal. Then B(H)/J does not have minimal idempotents. Before we prove Theorem 1.3, let us remark here that the case where H is separable immediately follows from well-known facts. Indeed, let Y be a non-zero Banach space and let ψ : B(H) → B(Y ) be a continuous, surjective algebra homomorphism. Since Ker(ψ) is a non-trivial, closed, two- sided ideal in B(H), by the ideal classification result due to Calkin ([7]), Ker(ψ) = {0} or Ker(ψ) = K(H) must hold. In the latter case, Cal(H) := B(H)/K(H) ≃ B(Y ). (We remark in passing that the ideal of compact operators K(H) coincides with the operator norm-closure of the ideal of finite-rank operators on H, since H has a Schauder basis.) Clearly Cal(H) is simple and infinite-dimensional. If Y is infinite-dimensional, then B(Y ) is not simple, which is impossible; if Y is finite-dimensional then so is B(Y ), a contradiction. Thus ψ must be injective. Proof of Theorem 1.3. Let H be a Hilbert space. Let Y be a Banach space and assume towards a contradiction that there exists a surjective, non- injective algebra homomorphism ψ : B(H) → B(Y ). Then Ker(ψ) is non- zero and B(H)/ Ker(ψ) is isomorphic to B(Y ). This is a contradiction since B(H)/ Ker(ψ) has no minimal idempotents by Corollary 2.15, whereas B(Y ) clearly does. (cid:3) Remark 2.16. In the proof of Theorem 1.3 the spectral theorem played a key role, hence the use of complex Hilbert spaces was essential. We show now that the theorem remains true for real Hilbert spaces. In order to to this, we shall need the notion of the complexification of real Banach and Hilbert spaces, and real Banach algebras. We refer the interested reader to [5, Section 13] and [36, Chapter I, Section 3] for the necessary background information. SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 13 Let H be a real Hilbert space of arbitrary density character, we show that H has the SHAI property. Assume towards a contradiction that there is a non-zero real Banach space Y and a surjective, non-injective homomorphism ϕ : B(H) → B(Y ) of real Banach algebras. Let \B(H) and [B(Y ) denote the complexifications of the real Banach algebras B(H) and B(Y ), respectively. We define the map (2.8) ψ : \B(H) → [B(Y ); (T, S) 7→ (ϕ(T ), ϕ(S)), this is easily seen to be a surjective homomorphism of complex Banach algebras. Since ϕ is not injective, there is a non-zero S ∈ B(H) with ϕ(S) = 0. Thus ψ(S, S) = (ϕ(S), ϕ(S)) = (0, 0), hence ψ is not injective. However, \B(H) ≃ B( H) and [B(Y ) ≃ B( Y ) as complex Banach algebras, thus there is a surjective, non-injective algebra homomorphism θ : B( H) → B( Y ) of complex Banach algebras. Since H is a complex Hibert space this is impossible in view of Theorem 1.3. Therefore H has the SHAI property, as required. We recall the following piece of notation: If ℓn 2 denotes the n-dimensional Banach space Cn with the ℓ2-norm, then (2.9) ℓn 2!ℓ1 Mn∈N :=((xn)n∈N : (∀n ∈ N)(xn ∈ ℓn is a Banach space with the norm k(xn)n∈Nk := Pn∈N :=n(xn)n∈N : (∀n ∈ N)(xn ∈ ℓn ℓn 2!c0 Mn∈N Similarly, (2.10) is a Banach space with the norm k(xn)n∈Nk := sup n∈N kxnk. kxnk < ∞) 2 ), Xn∈N kxnk. 2 ), lim n→∞ kxnk = 0o Example 2.17. For the following (non-Hilbertian) Banach spaces X every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of X is isomorphic to its square therefore by Proposition 2.13 (1) the Calkin algebra B(X)/K(X) does not have minimal idempotents: (1) X = c0(λ), where λ is an infinite cardinal, since by [1, Proposi- tion 2.8] every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of c0(λ) is isomorphic to c0(κ) for some infinite cardinal κ ≤ λ, and c0(κ) ≃ c0(κ) ⊕ c0(κ), (2) X = ℓp where p ∈ [1, ∞)\{2}, since by Pełczyński's theorem ([33]) every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of ℓp is isomor- phic to ℓp and ℓp ≃ ℓp ⊕ ℓp, 14 B. HORVÁTH (3) X = ℓ∞, since every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of ℓ∞ is isomorphic to ℓ∞ by Lindenstrauss' theorem ([29]) and ℓ∞ ≃ ℓ∞ ⊕ ℓ∞, (4) X = ℓc ∞(λ), where λ is an infinite cardinal, since by [19, Theo- ∞(λ) ∞(κ) for some infinite cardinal κ ≤ λ, and rem 1.4] every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of ℓc is isomorphic to ℓ∞ or ℓc ∞(κ), ℓc ∞(κ) ≃ ℓc ∞(κ) ⊕ ℓc (5) X = C[0, ωω], where ω is the first infinite ordinal, since by [3, Theo- rem 3] every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of C[0, ωω] is isomorphic to c0 or C[0, ωω] and C[0, ωω] ≃ C[0, ωω] ⊕ C[0, ωω] by [37, Remark 2.25 and Lemma 2.26], (6) X = (Ln∈N ℓn 2 )Y where Y is c0 or ℓ1, since by [6, Corollary 8.4 and Theorem 8.3] every infinite-dimensional complemented subspace of X is isomorphic to Y or X and X ≃ X ⊕ X by [9, Corollary 7(i)]. Before we recall two important results of Laustsen -- Loy -- Read and Laustsen -- Schlumprecht -- Zsák, let us remind the reader of the following terminology. For Banach spaces X and Y the symbol G Y (X) denotes the closed, two- sided ideal of operators on X which factor through Y approximately, that is, the closed linear span of the set {ST : S ∈ B(Y, X), T ∈ B(X, Y )}. Theorem 2.18. [27, Corollary 5.6], [28, Theorem 2.12] Let X = (Ln∈N ℓn 2 )Y where Y is c0 or ℓ1. Then the lattice of closed, two-sided ideals in B(X) is given by (2.11) {0} ( K(X) ( G Y (X) ( B(X). Proof of Theorem 1.5. Let Z be a Banach space and let ψ : B(X) → B(Z) be a surjective algebra homomorphism. Since X ≃ X ⊕X, by Lemma 2.5 we may suppose that Z is infinite-dimensional. Since B(X)/ Ker(ψ) ≃ B(Z), by Theorem 2.18 it is enough to show that neither Ker(ψ) = K(X) nor Ker(ψ) = G Y (X) can hold. The case Ker(ψ) = G Y (X) is not possible, since G Y (X) is a maximal two-sided ideal in B(X) by Theorem 2.18 and therefore B(X)/G Y (X) is simple as a Banach algebra whereas B(Z) is not, since Z is infinite-dimensional. To see that Ker(ψ) = K(X) cannot hold we observe that B(X)/K(X) does not have minimal idempotents by Example 2.17 (6) whereas B(Z) has continuum many. Consequently Ker(ψ) = {0} must hold, thus proving the claim. (cid:3) Finally in this section we shall establish some permanence properties of Banach spaces with the SHAI property. We recall a trivial observation: SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 15 Remark 2.19. If X is an infinite-dimensional Banach space and J is a closed, two-sided ideal of B(X) such that A2 = 0 for all A ∈ J then J = {0}. This follows from the fact that A(X) is the smallest non-trivial, closed, two-sided ideal in B(X) and A(X) has an abundance of non-zero rank-one idempotents. Proof of Proposition 1.6. Let P, Q ∈ B(E) be idempotents with F = Ran(P ) and G = Ran(Q). Then P + Q = IE and P Q = 0 = QP . Now let X be a non-zero Banach space and let ψ : B(E) → B(X) be a surjective algebra homomorphism. Then Y := Ran(ψ(P )) and Z := Ran(ψ(Q)) are closed (complemented) subspaces of X. Let us fix T ∈ B(F ), we observe that ψ(P F ◦ T ◦ P F )Y ∈ B(Y ) holds. The only thing we need to check is that the range of ψ(P F ◦ T ◦ P F )Y is contained in Y which is clearly true since ψ(P ) ◦ ψ(P F ◦ T ◦ P F ) ◦ ψ(P ) = ψ(P F ◦ T ◦ P F ). Consequently the map (2.12) ϕ : B(F ) → B(Y ); T 7→ ψ(P F ◦ T ◦ P F )Y is well-defined. It is immediate to see that ϕ is a linear map. To see that it is multiplicative, it is enough to observe that P F ◦ P F = IF thus by multiplicativity of ψ, for any T, S ∈ B(F ) we obtain ϕ(T )◦ϕ(S) = ϕ(T ◦S). We show that ϕ is surjective. To see this we fix an R ∈ B(Y ). Then ψ(P )Y ◦ R ◦ ψ(P )Y ∈ B(X) so by surjectivity of ψ it follows that there exists A ∈ B(E) such that ψ(A) = ψ(P )Y ◦ R ◦ ψ(P )Y . Consequently ψ(P ◦ A ◦ P ) = ψ(P ) ◦ ψ(A) ◦ ψ(P ) = ψ(P )Y ◦ R ◦ ψ(P )Y and thus by the definition of ϕ we obtain ϕ(P F ◦ A ◦ P F ) = ψ(P F ◦ P F ◦ A ◦ P F ◦ P F )Y = ψ(P ◦ A ◦ P )Y (2.13) This proves that ϕ is a surjective algebra homomorphism. Similarly we can show that =(cid:0)ψ(P )Y ◦ R ◦ ψ(P )Y(cid:1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Y = R. (2.14) θ : B(G) → B(Z); T 7→ ψ(QG ◦ T ◦ QG)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z is a well-defined, surjective algebra homomorphism. Assume first that Y and Z are both non-trivial subspaces of X. Since both F and G have the SHAI property it follows that ϕ and θ are injective. Now let A ∈ Ker(ψ) be arbitrary. Then ψ(A) = 0 implies ϕ(P F ◦ A ◦ P F ) = ψ(P F ◦ P F ◦ A ◦ P F ◦ P F )(cid:12)(cid:12)Y = ψ(P ◦ A ◦ P )Y = ψ(P ) ◦ ψ(A) ◦ ψ(P )Y = 0. (2.15) Since ϕ is injective it follows that P F ◦ A ◦ P F = 0. Using the injectivity of θ a similar argument shows that QG ◦A◦QG = 0. We recall that E ≃ F ⊕G 16 B. HORVÁTH and thus every A ∈ B(E) can be represented as the (2 × 2)-matrix (cid:20)P F ◦ A ◦ P F P F ◦ A ◦ QG QG ◦ A ◦ P F QG ◦ A ◦ QG(cid:21) . From the previous we obtain that whenever A ∈ Ker(ψ) then A has the off-diagonal matrix form (2.16) (2.17) 0 0 A =(cid:20) QG ◦ A ◦ P F P F ◦ A ◦ QG 0 (cid:21) . On the one hand, since Ker(ψ) is an ideal in B(X), we obviously have that A2 ∈ Ker(ψ) whenever A ∈ Ker(ψ), thus A2 also has the off-diagonal form (2.18) A2 =(cid:20) QG ◦ A2 ◦ P F P F ◦ A2 ◦ QG 0 (cid:21) . On the other hand, the product of two (2 × 2) off-diagonal matrices is diagonal and therefore by Equation (2.17) (2.19) P F ◦ A2 ◦ QG = 0, QG ◦ A2 ◦ P F = 0 must also hold. Consequently A2 = 0, thus by Remark 2.19 the equality Ker(ψ) = {0} must hold, equivalently, ψ is injective. Let us observe that both Y = {0} and Z = {0} cannot hold. Indeed, if both ψ(Q) and ψ(P ) were zero, then we had 0 = ψ(P + Q) = ψ(IE) = IX, contradicting that X is non-zero. Thus without loss of generality we may assume Y = {0} and Z 6= {0}. Hence ψ(P ) = 0, thus ψ(Q) = ψ(P )+ψ(Q) = ψ(P + Q) = ψ(IE) = IX. This is equivalent to Z = Ran(ψ(Q)) = X, and thus B(Z) = B(X). Therefore θ : B(G) → B(X), defined in Equation (2.14) is a surjective algebra homomorphism. Since G has the SHAI property and X is non-zero, it follows that θ is injective. Let A ∈ B(E) be such that A ∈ Ker(ψ). Then θ(QG ◦ A ◦ QG) = ψ(QG ◦ QG ◦ A ◦ QG ◦ QG) (2.20) = ψ(Q ◦ A ◦ Q) = ψ(Q) ◦ ψ(A) ◦ ψ(Q) = 0. Since θ is injective, this is equivalent to QG ◦ A ◦ QG = 0 which in turn is equivalent to Q ◦ A ◦ Q = 0. We observe that Q 6= 0, otherwise IX = ψ(Q) = 0 which contradicts the fact that X is non-zero. Hence we can choose x ∈ Ran(Q) and ξ ∈ E ∗ norm one vectors with hx, ξi = 1. Assume towards a contradiction that ψ is not injective. Then in particular x ⊗ ξ ∈ F (E) ⊆ Ker(ψ), consequently Q ◦ (x ⊗ ξ) ◦ Q = 0. Thus 0 = (Q ◦ (x ⊗ ξ) ◦ Q)x = hQx, ξiQx = hx, ξix = x, a contradiction. Hence ψ is injective, and therefore we conclude that E has the SHAI property. (cid:3) SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 17 From Proposition 1.6 we immediately obtain the following corollary. Corollary 2.20. If N ∈ N and {Ei}N i=1 is set of Banach spaces with the SHAI property then LN i=1 Ei has the SHAI property. 3. Constructing surjective, non-injective homomorphisms 3.1. First remarks. from B(YX) to B(X) 3.1.1. Ordinals as topological spaces and spaces of continuous functions thereof. If α is an ordinal, then α+ denotes its ordinal successor. Equipped with the order topology, α and α+ are locally compact and compact Hausdorff spaces, respectively. It is well-known that the one-point (or Alexandroff) compact- ification of α is α+. In line with the general convention, we let [0, α) := α and [0, α] := α+. We recall that the first uncountable ordinal is denoted by ω1. If K is a compact Hausdorff space then C(K) denotes Banach space of complex-valued functions on K, with respect to the supremum norm. The Banach space C[0, ω1] is called the Semadeni space, since he showed in [45] that C[0, ω1] is not isomorphic to its square. If L is a locally compact Hausdorff space, and L := L ∪ {∞} is its one-point compactification, then we introduce C0(L) := {g ∈ C( L) : g(∞) = 0}, the Banach space of continuous functions vanishing at infinity, with respect to the supremum norm. In this notation (3.1) C0[0, ω1) = {g ∈ C[0, ω1] : g(ω1) = 0}. For a countable ordinal α let 1[0,α] denote indicator function of the interval [0, α]. Since [0, α] is clopen, it follows that 1[0,α] ∈ C0[0, ω1). Also, by a the- orem of Rudin [38, Theorem 6], the Banach space C[0, ω1]∗ is isometrically isomorphic to the Banach space (3.2) ℓ1(ω+ 1 ) =(f : [0, ω1] → C : Xα≤ω1 f (α) < ∞) . The following definition is essential for our purposes: A subset D ⊆ [0, ω1) is called a club subset if D is a closed and unbounded subset of [0, ω1). The following elementary lemma plays a crucial role in the main theorem of this section, it can be found for example in [18, Lemma 3.4]. Lemma 3.1. A countable intersection of club subsets is a club subset. 18 B. HORVÁTH We recall that for Banach spaces X and Y , whenever u ∈ E ⊗ F (3.3) n kukǫ := sup((cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Xi=1 hxi, ϕiyi(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) : u = n Xi=1 xi ⊗ yi, ϕ ∈ X ∗, kϕk ≤ 1) denotes the injective tensor norm on X⊗Y . The vector space X⊗Y endowed with the norm k · kǫ is denoted by X ⊗ǫ Y . The completion of X ⊗ǫ Y with respect to k · kǫ is called the injective tensor product of X and Y and it is denoted by X ⊗ǫY . It is well-known (see e.g. [39, Proposition 3.2]) that for Banach spaces X, Y , W , Z if S ∈ B(X, W ) and T ∈ B(Y, Z) then there exists a unique S ⊗ǫ T ∈ B(X ⊗ǫY, W ⊗ǫZ) such that for every x ∈ X, y ∈ Y the identity (S ⊗ǫ T )(x ⊗ y) = (Sx) ⊗ (T y) holds. Then kS ⊗ǫ T k = kSkkT k. It follows from [39, Section 3.2] that for any Banach space X the Banach space C([0, ω1]; X) of continuous functions on [0, ω1] with values in X is isometrically isomorphic to the Banach space C[0, ω1] ⊗ǫX. The isometric isomorphism (3.4) is given by J : C[0, ω1] ⊗ǫX → C([0, ω1]; X) (3.5) (J(f ⊗ x))(α) = f (α)x (f ∈ C[0, ω1], x ∈ X, α ∈ [0, ω1]). Definition 3.2. Let X be a non-zero Banach space. We define (3.6) YX := {F ∈ C([0, ω1]; X) : F (ω1) = 0}. Although we shall not need this, we remark in passing that it follows from the Hahn -- Banach Separation Theorem that C0[0, ω1) ⊗ǫX and YX are isometrically isomorphic. Lemma 3.3. Let X be a non-zero Banach space. Then YX is a comple- mented subspace of C([0, ω1]; X). Proof. For a fixed x0 ∈ X let us define the constant function (3.7) cx0 : [0, ω1] → X; α 7→ x0, obviously cx0 ∈ C([0, ω1]; X). Thus we can define the map (3.8) Q : C([0, ω1]; X) → C([0, ω1]; X); F 7→ F − cF (ω1). It is clear that Q is a bounded linear map with kQ(F )k ≤ 2kF k. Now we observe that for any F ∈ C([0, ω1]; X) we clearly have Q(F )(ω1) = 0, showing that Q(F ) ∈ YX. Also, for any F ∈ YX and any α ∈ [0, ω1] we have (Q(F ))(α) = F (α), consequently Q is an idempotent with Ran(Q) = YX thus proving the claim. (cid:3) SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 19 With the notations of the proof of Lemma 3.3, we define (3.9) P : C[0, ω1] → C[0, ω1], g 7→ g − cg(ω1). In particular, Ran(P ) = C0[0, ω1). Remark 3.4. Clearly for any g ∈ C[0, ω1], x ∈ X and α ∈ [0, ω1] we have (Q(g ⊗ x))(α) = (P g ⊗ x)(α). From this it follows that (P ⊗ǫ IX )Q(g ⊗ x) = P g ⊗ x = Q(g ⊗ x), thus by linearity and continuity we obtain (3.10) IYX = (P ⊗ǫ IX )YX . Lemma 3.5. Let X be a non-zero Banach space and suppose µ, ξ ∈ (YX)∗ satisfy hf ⊗ x, ξi = hf ⊗ x, µi for all f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and x ∈ X. Then ξ = µ. Proof. The definition of P and the hypothesis of the lemma ensure that for any x ∈ X and g ∈ C[0, ω1] the equality hP g ⊗ x, ξi = hP g ⊗ x, µi holds. By Remark 3.4 we have hQ(g ⊗ x), ξi = hQ(g ⊗ x), µi, equivalently, hg ⊗ x, (QYX )∗ξi = hg ⊗ x, (QYX )∗µi and thus by linearity and continuity of (QYX )∗µ and (QYX )∗ξ we obtain that for all u ∈ C([0, ω1]; X) the identity hu, (QYX )∗ξi = hu, (QYX )∗µi holds. Thus for any u ∈ C([0, ω1]; X) we have hQu, ξi = hQu, µi consequently by Lemma 3.3 for all v ∈ YX we have that hv, ξi = hv, µi, proving the claim. (cid:3) Remark 3.6. Let X be a non-zero Banach space. It is easy to see that YX is not separable. Indeed, let x0 ∈ X be such that kx0k = 1 and let us define the map (3.11) ι : C0[0, ω1) → YX; f 7→ f ⊗ x0. This is clearly a linear isometry, thus, since separability passes to subsets it follows that YX cannot be separable. In the following, if α ≤ ω1 is an ordinal, then δα ∈ C[0, ω1]∗ denotes the Dirac measure centred at α; that is, the bounded linear functional defined by δα(g) := g(α) for g ∈ C[0, ω1]. Remark 3.7. Let X be a non-zero Banach space and let α ∈ [0, ω1] and ψ ∈ X ∗ be fixed. We can define a map by (3.12) δα ⊗ ψ : C([0, ω1]; X) → C; u 7→ hu(α), ψi, clearly δα ⊗ ψ ∈ C([0, ω1]; X)∗. Let us observe that C[0, ω1] has the approximation property. By [38, The- orem 6] we know that C[0, ω1]∗ is isometrically isomorphic to ℓ1(ω+ 1 ), which has the Radon-Nikodým property, consequently by [39, Theorem 5.33], the Banach space (C[0, ω1] ⊗ǫX)∗ is isometrically isomorphic to C[0, ω1]∗ ⊗πX ∗, 20 B. HORVÁTH the projective tensor product of C[0, ω1]∗ and X ∗ (see for example [39, Sec- tion 2.1]). Equivalently, C([0, ω1]; X)∗ is isometrically isomorphic to ℓ1(ω+ 1 with entries in the Banach space of summable transfinite sequences on ω+ X ∗. This justifies the tensor notation in the definition of the functional δα ⊗ ψ. 1 ; X ∗), 3.2. The construction. Our main theorem relies on the following result of Kania, Koszmider, and Laustsen: Theorem 3.8. [21, Theorem 1.5] For every T ∈ B(C0[0, ω1)) there exists a unique ϕ(T ) ∈ C such that there exists a club subset D ⊆ [0, ω1) such that for all f ∈ C[0, ω1) and α ∈ D: (3.13) (T f )(α) = ϕ(T )f (α). Moreover, ϕ : B(C0[0, ω1)) → C; T 7→ ϕ(T ) is a character. In [21] the character ϕ : B(C0[0, ω1)) → C of the previous theorem is termed the Alspach -- Benyamini character and its kernel the Loy -- Willis ideal of B(C0[0, ω1)), and is denoted by MLW . Partial structure of the lat- tice of closed two-sided ideals of B(C0[0, ω1)) is given in [22], in particular E(C0[0, ω1)) = K(C0[0, ω1)) ( MLW . Proof of Theorem 1.7. Fix S ∈ B(YX), x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗. For any f ∈ C0[0, ω1) we can define the map (3.14) [0, ω1] → C; α 7→ h(S(f ⊗ x))(α), ψi. x f : x f is a continuous map, moreover by S(f ⊗ x) ∈ YX we x f ∈ C0[0, ω1). This allows us to x f )(ω1) = 0, consequently Sψ Sψ It is clear that Sψ also have (Sψ define the map (3.15) Sψ x : C0[0, ω1) → C0[0, ω1); x is a linear map with kSψ f 7→ Sψ x f. x k ≤ kSkkxkkψk. Consequently, It is clear that Sψ by Theorem 3.8 there exists a club subset Dx,ψ ⊆ [0, ω1) such that for all α ∈ Dx,ψ the equality (3.16) x )∗δα = ϕ(Sψ x )δα (Sψ holds. We also have ϕ(Sψ to define the map x ) ≤ kSkkxkkψk, since kϕk = 1. This allows us ΘS : X × X ∗ → C; (3.17) and we have for any x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ that ΘS(x, ψ) ≤ kSkkxkkψk. Now we show that ΘS is bilinear. We only check that it is linear in the first (x, ψ) 7→ ϕ(Sψ x ), SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 21 variable, linearity in the second variable follows by an analogous argument. Let x, y ∈ X, ψ ∈ X ∗ and λ ∈ C be arbitrary. Fix f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and α ∈ [0, ω1], then using linearity of the tensor product in the second variable, of S and of the functional ψ it follows that (Sψ x+λyf )(α) = h(S(f ⊗ (x + λy)))(α), ψi (3.18) = h(S(f ⊗ x))(α), ψi + λh(S(f ⊗ y))(α), ψi = (Sψ x f )(α) + λ(Sψ y . Since ϕ is linear, ΘS(x + λy, ψ) = ϕ(Sψ y f )(α), x ) + λϕ(Sψ x+λy = Sx + λSψ proving Sψ x+λy) = y ) = ΘS(x, ψ) + λ ΘS(y, ψ) readily follows, proving linearity ϕ(Sψ of ΘS in the first variable. Consequently ΘS is a bounded bilinear form on X × X ∗. If κX : X → X ∗∗ denotes the canonical embedding then by reflexivity of X the map (3.19) ΘS : X → X; x 7→ κ−1 X ( ΘS(x, ·)) defines a bounded linear operator on X with kΘSk = k ΘSk and hΘS(x), ψi = ΘS(x, ψ) = ϕ(Sψ (3.20) x ) for all x ∈ X, ψ ∈ X ∗. Thus we can define the map Θ : B(YX ) → B(X); S 7→ ΘS. Since X is separable and reflexive it follows that X ∗ is separable too. Let Q ⊆ X and R ⊆ X ∗ be countable dense subsets. Let us fix S ∈ B(YX ), x,ψ ⊆ [0, ω1) such x ∈ Q and ψ ∈ R. As above, there exists a club subset DS that for any α ∈ DS x )f (α) and hence x,ψ and any f ∈ C0[0, ω1): (Sψ x f )(α) = ϕ(Sψ hS(f ⊗ x), δα ⊗ ψi = h(S(f ⊗ x))(α), ψi = (Sψ = f (α)ϕ(Sψ x f )(α) x ) = hf (α)Θ(S)x, ψi (3.21) = hf ⊗ (Θ(S)x), δα ⊗ ψi. By Lemma 3.1 it follows that (3.22) DS := \(x,ψ)∈Q×R DS x,ψ is a club subset of [0, ω1). Consequently for any α ∈ DS, any f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and any x ∈ Q, ψ ∈ R, Equation (3.21) holds. It is clear that for a fixed S ∈ B(YX ), f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and α ∈ DS the maps X × X ∗ → C; (x, ψ) 7→ hS(f ⊗ x), δα ⊗ ψi, (3.23) X × X ∗ → C; (x, ψ) 7→ hf ⊗ (Θ(S)x), δα ⊗ ψi are continuous functions between metric spaces and thus by density of Q×R in X × X ∗, Equation (3.21) holds everywhere on X × X ∗. In other words, 22 B. HORVÁTH for any S ∈ B(YX ) there exists a club subset DS ⊆ [0, ω1) such that for any α ∈ DS, f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and x ∈ X, ψ ∈ X ∗ (3.24) hf ⊗ x, S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ)i = hf ⊗ x, δα ⊗ (Θ(S)∗ψ)i holds. Therefore by Lemma 3.5 we obtain that for all α ∈ DS and ψ ∈ X ∗: (3.25) S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ) = δα ⊗ (Θ(S)∗ψ). We show that for any S ∈ B(YX) the operator Θ(S) is determined by this property. Indeed, suppose Θ1(S), Θ2(S) ∈ B(X) are such that there exist club subsets DS i and all ψ ∈ X ∗ 2 ⊆ [0, ω1) such that for i ∈ {1, 2}, all α ∈ DS 1 , DS (3.26) S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ) = δα ⊗ (Θi(S)∗ψ). Let α ∈ DS 1 ∩ DS 2 , x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ be fixed. Then hΘ1(S)x, ψi = h1[0,α] ⊗ x, δα ⊗ (Θ1(S)∗ψ)i = h1[0,α] ⊗ x, S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ)i = h1[0,α] ⊗ x, δα ⊗ (Θ2(S)∗ψ)i (3.27) = hΘ2(S)x, ψi and thus Θ1(S) = Θ2(S). We are now prepared to prove that Θ is an algebra homomorphism. To see this let S, T ∈ B(YX) be fixed. Let DT , DS, DT S ⊆ [0, ω1) be club subsets satisfying Equation (3.25). To see multiplicativity, let α ∈ DT ∩ DS ∩ DT S, x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ be arbitrary. Then we obtain: δα ⊗ (Θ(T S)∗ψ) = (T S)∗(δα ⊗ ψ) = S ∗T ∗(δα ⊗ ψ) (3.28) = S ∗(δα ⊗ (Θ(T )∗ψ)) = δα ⊗ (Θ(S)∗Θ(T )∗ψ) = δα ⊗ ((Θ(T )Θ(S))∗ψ), hence Θ(T S)∗ψ = (Θ(T )Θ(S))∗ψ, so Θ(T S)∗ = (Θ(T )Θ(S))∗, equivalently Θ(T S) = Θ(T )Θ(S). Linearity can be shown with analogous reasoning. For any S ∈ B(YX ) we have kΘ(S)k = k ΘSk ≤ kSk, thus kΘk ≤ 1. We now show that Θ has a right inverse. Let P ∈ B(C[0, ω1]) be the idem- potent operator as in Equation (3.9). Let us fix an A ∈ B(X). We observe that S := (P ⊗ǫ A)YX belongs to B(YX ). Indeed, for any g ∈ C[0, ω1] and x ∈ X the identity ((P ⊗ǫ A)(g ⊗ x))(ω1) = (P g)(ω1)Ax = 0 holds plainly because P g ∈ C0[0, ω1); thus by linearity and continuity of P ⊗ǫ A in fact ((P ⊗ǫ A)u)(ω1) = 0 for all u ∈ C[0, ω1] ⊗ǫX. This shows that S ∈ B(YX) and therefore there exists a club subset DS ⊆ [0, ω1) such that Equation SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 23 (3.25) is satisfied for all α ∈ DS and all ψ ∈ X ∗. Fix α ∈ DS. For any x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ hAx, ψi = h1[0,α] ⊗ (Ax), δα ⊗ ψi = h(P ⊗ǫ A)(1[0,α] ⊗ x), δα ⊗ ψi = h1[0,α] ⊗ x, S ∗(δα ⊗ ψ)i = h1[0,α] ⊗ x, δα ⊗ (Θ(S)∗ψ)i = hx, Θ(S)∗ψi (3.29) = hΘ(S)x, ψi, and thus Θ(S) = A. In particular, we obtain Θ(IYX ) = IX, with kΘk ≤ 1 this yields kΘk = 1. Also, the above shows that the map (3.30) Λ : B(X) → B(YX ); A 7→ (P ⊗ǫ A)YX satisfies Θ ◦ Λ = idB(X). It is immediate that Λ is linear with kΛk ≤ 1. Also, Λ(IX) = IYX holds by Equation (3.10), consequently kΛk = 1. The map Λ is an algebra homomorphism plainly because P ∈ B(C0[0, ω1)) is an idempotent, therefore (P ⊗ǫ A)(P ⊗ǫ B) = P ⊗ǫ (AB) for every A, B ∈ B(X). It remains to prove that Θ is not injective. For assume towards a con- tradiction it is; then B(YX) and B(X) are isomorphic as Banach algebras. By Eidelheit's Theorem this is equivalent to saying that YX and X are iso- morphic as Banach spaces. This is clearly nonsense, since for example, X is separable whereas by Remark 3.6 the Banach space YX is not. (cid:3) Remark 3.9. With the notations established in the proof of Theorem 1.7 we clearly have in fact (3.31) Ker(Θ) = {S ∈ B(YX ) : (∀x ∈ X)(∀ψ ∈ X ∗)(Sψ x ∈ MLW )}, where Sψ x is defined by (3.14). If X is an infinite-dimensional Banach space then Ker(Θ) is of course not maximal in B(YX ), however, it is not the smallest possible ideal in B(YX ). To see this, we need some preliminary observations. In the following, let P ∈ B(C[0, ω1]) be as in Equation (3.9). If X is a non-zero Banach space, we fix x0 ∈ X and ξ ∈ X ∗ such that kx0k = kξk = hx0, ξi = 1 and consider the linear isometry (3.32) ι : C0[0, ω1) → YX; f 7→ f ⊗ x0. We also consider the norm one linear map (3.33) ρ : C[0, ω1] ⊗ǫX → C[0, ω1] 24 B. HORVÁTH which is unique with the property that for any g ∈ C[0, ω1] and x ∈ X the identity ρ(g ⊗ x) = hx, ξig holds. With this we obtain the following: Lemma 3.10. Let X be a non-zero Banach space. Then (3.34) Ξ : B(C0[0, ω1)) → B(YX); S 7→(cid:0)(P C0[0,ω1) ◦ S ◦ P C0[0,ω1)) ⊗ǫ IX(cid:1)YX (3.35) Υ : B(YX) → B(C0[0, ω1)); T 7→ P C0[0,ω1) ◦ ρYX ◦ T ◦ ι define norm one linear maps with Υ ◦ Ξ = idB(C0[0,ω1)). Moreover, Ξ is an algebra homomorphism such that (Ξ(S))ψ x = hx, ψiS for every x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗. Proof. It is clear that (cid:0)(P C0[0,ω1) ◦ S ◦ P C0[0,ω1)) ⊗ǫ IX(cid:1)YX ∈ B(YX) holds for any S ∈ B(C0[0, ω1)), thus Ξ is well-defined. It is easy to see that Ξ is linear with kΞk ≤ 1. From Equation (3.10) it follows that Ξ(IC0[0,ω1)) = IYX , thus kΞk = 1. The map Ξ is multiplicative simply by the defining property of injective tensor products of operators. Let S ∈ B(C0[0, ω1)), x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ be fixed. Then for any f ∈ C0[0, ω1) and α ≤ ω1 ordinal (3.36) (cid:0)(Ξ(S))ψ thus (Ξ(S))ψ x f(cid:1)(α) = h(Ξ(S)(f ⊗ x))(α), ψi = h(Sf )(α)x, ψi = (Sf )(α)hx, ψi, x = hx, ψiS indeed. Linearity of Υ is immediate, so is kΥk ≤ 1. Since Υ(IYX ) = IC0[0,ω1) follows from the definition of Υ, we obtain kΥk = 1 as required. It remains to show that Υ ◦ Ξ = idB(C0[0,ω1)). For any S ∈ B(C0[0, ω1)) and f ∈ C0[0, ω1) Υ(Ξ(S))f = (P C0[0,ω1) ◦ ρYX ◦ Ξ(S) ◦ ι)f = (P C0[0,ω1) ◦ ρYX ◦ Ξ(S))(f ⊗ x0) = (P C0[0,ω1) ◦ ρYX )(Sf ⊗ x0) = P C0[0,ω1)(hx0, ξiSf ) (3.37) = Sf, consequently Υ(Ξ(S)) = S, which proves the claim. (cid:3) Corollary 3.11. The containment E(YX) ( Ker(Θ) holds. Proof. By Lemma 2.6 it follows that E(YX) ⊆ Ker(Θ), we show that the containment is proper. For assume towards a contradiction that Ker(Θ) = E(YX). If S ∈ MLW then by Lemma 3.10 for all x ∈ X and ψ ∈ X ∗ in fact (Ξ(S))ψ x = hx, ψiS ∈ MLW , thus by Remark 3.9 then Ξ(S) ∈ Ker(Θ) SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 25 follows. Thus Ξ(S) ∈ E(YX) by the indirect assumption and since E is an operator ideal in the sense of Pietsch, it follows from Lemma 3.10 that (3.38) S = Υ(Ξ(S)) = P C0[0,ω1) ◦ ρYX ◦ Ξ(S) ◦ ι ∈ E(C0[0, ω1)). This yields MLW = E(C0[0, ω1)), which is a contradiction. (cid:3) Acknowledgements. The majority of the research presented herein was carried out during the author's Ph.D. studies, he is grateful to his supervi- sors Dr Yemon Choi and Dr Niels J. Laustsen (Lancaster) for their invalu- able advice during the preparation of this paper. He is indebted to Dr Saeed Ghasemi (Prague), Dr György Pál Gehér (Reading), Professor Lajos Molnár (Szeged), Dr Tamás Titkos, and Dr Zsigmond Tarcsay (Budapest) for many enlightening conversations. We would like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her many insightful comments, which helped to improve the presen- tation of the paper a great deal, and for drawing our attention to [41]. The author acknowledges the financial support from the Lancaster University Faculty of Science and Technology and acknowledges with thanks the par- tial funding received from GAČR project 19-07129Y; RVO 67985840 (Czech Republic). References [1] S. A. Argyros, J. F. Castillo, A. S. Granero, M. Jimenéz, and J. P. Moreno, Com- plementation and embeddings of c0(I) in Banach spaces, Proc. London Math. Soc. 85 (2002), 742 -- 768. [2] B. Aupetit, E. Makai, M. Mbekhta, and J. Zemánek, Local and global liftings of analytic families of idempotents in Banach algebras, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 80 (2014), 149 -- 174. [3] Y. Benyamini, An extension theorem for separable Banach spaces, Israel. J. Math. 29 (1978), 24 -- 30. [4] M. T. Boedihardjo and W. B. Johnson, On mean ergodic convergence in the Calkin algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (2015), 2451 -- 2457. [5] F. F. Bonsall and J. Duncan, Complete Normed Algebras, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1973. [6] J. Bourgain, P. G. Casazza, J. Lindenstrauss, and L. Tzafriri, Banach spaces with a unique unconditional basis, up to permutation, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 54 (1985). [7] J. W. Calkin, Two-sided ideals and congruences in the ring of bounded operators in Hilbert space, Annals of Mathematics 42 (1941), 839 -- 873. [8] S. R. Caradus, W. E. Pfaffenberger, and B. Yood, Calkin Algebras and Algebras of Operators on Banach Spaces, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1974. 26 B. HORVÁTH [9] P. G. Casazza, C. A. Kottman, and B.-L. Lin, On some classes of primary Banach spaces, Canad. J. Math. 29 (1977), 856 -- 873. [10] J. B. Conway, A Course in Functional Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1990. [11] H. G. Dales, Banach Algebras and Automatic Continuity, Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 2000. [12] H. G. Dales, T. Kania, P. Koszmider, T. Kochanek, and N. J. Laustsen, Maximal left ideals of the Banach algebra of bounded linear operators on a Banach space, Studia Math. 218 (2013), 245 -- 286. [13] I. S. Èdel'šteın and B. S. Mitjagin, The homotopy type of linear groups of two classes of Banach spaces, Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen 4 (1970), 61 -- 72 (in Russian). [14] D. Freeman, Th. Schlumprecht, and A. Zsák, Closed ideals of operators between classical sequence spaces, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 49 (2017), 859 -- 876. [15] I. C. Gohberg, A. S. Markus, and I. A. Feldman, Normally solvable operators and ideals associated with them, American Math. Soc. Translat. 61 (1967), 63 -- 84. [16] W. T. Gowers, A solution to Banach's hyperplane problem, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 26 (1994), 523 -- 530. [17] W. T. Gowers and B. Maurey, The unconditional basic sequence problem, J. Amer. Math. Soc. (1993), 851 -- 874. [18] K. Hrbacek and T. Jech, An introduction to Set Theory, 3rd ed., Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1999. [19] W. B. Johnson, T. Kania, and G. Schechtman, Closed ideals of operators on and complemented subspaces of Banach spaces of functions with countable support, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 144 (2016), 4471 -- 4485. [20] W. B. Johnson, G. Pisier, and G. Schechtman, Ideals in L(L1), arXiv:1811.06571 (2018) [21] T. Kania, P. Koszmider, and N. J. Laustsen, A weak∗-topological dichotomy with applications in operator theory, Trans. London Math. Soc. 1 (2014), 1 -- 28. [22] T. Kania and N. J. Laustsen, Operators on two Banach spaces of continuous func- tions on locally compact spaces of ordinals, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (2015), 2585 -- 2596. [23] T. Kania and N. J. Laustsen, Ideal structure of the algebra of bounded operators acting on a Banach space, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 66 (2017), 1019 -- 1043. [24] N. J. Laustsen, Maximal ideals in the algebra of operators on certain Banach spaces, Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 45 (2002), 523 -- 546. [25] N. J. Laustsen, On ring-theoretic (in)finiteness of Banach algebras of operators on Banach spaces, Glasgow Math. J. 45 (2003), 11 -- 19. SURJECTIVE REPRESENTATIONS OF B(X) 27 [26] N. J. Laustsen and R. J. Loy, Closed ideals in the Banach algebra of operators on a Banach space, in: Topological algebras, their applications, and related topics, 245 -- 264, Banach Center Publ. 67, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2005. [27] N. J. Laustsen, R. J. Loy, and C. J. Read, The lattice of closed ideals in the Banach algebra of operators on certain Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 214 (2004), 106 -- 131. [28] N. J. Laustsen, Th. Schlumprecht, and A. Zsák, The lattice of closed ideals in the Banach algebra of operators on a certain dual Banach space, J. Operator Theory 56 (2006), 391 -- 402. [29] J. Lindenstrauss, On complemented subspaces of m, Israel J. Math. 5 (1957) 153 -- 156. [30] R. J. Loy and G. A. Willis, Continuity of derivations on B(E) for certain Banach spaces E, J. London Math. Soc. 40 (1989), 327 -- 346. [31] P. Motakis, D. Puglisi, and D. Zisimopoulou, A hierarchy of Banach spaces with C(K) Calkin algebras, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 65 (2016), 39 -- 67. [32] C. P. Ogden, Homomorphisms from B(C(ωη)), J. London Math. Soc. 54 (1996), 346 -- 358. [33] A. Pełczyński, Projections in certain Banach spaces, Studia Math. 19 (1960) 206 -- 228. [34] A. Pietsch, Inessential operators in Banach spaces, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 1 (1978), 589 -- 591. [35] G. Plebanek, A construction of a Banach space C(K) with few operators, Topology and its Applications 143 (2004), 217 -- 239. [36] C. E. Rickart, General Theory of Banach Algebras, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Co., Inc., New York, 1960. [37] H. P. Rosenthal, The Banach Spaces C(K) (Handbook of the Geometry of Banach Spaces, Vol.2), North Holland, Amsterdam, 2003. [38] W. Rudin, Continuous functions on compact spaces without perfect subsets, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 8 (1957) 39 -- 42. [39] R. A. Ryan, Introduction to Tensor Products of Banach Spaces, Springer-Verlag, London, 2002. [40] M. Rørdam, F. Larsen, and N. J. Laustsen, An Introduction to K-theory for C ∗- algebras, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000. [41] I. Schlackow, Centripetal operators an Koszmider spaces, Topology Appl. 155 (2008) 1227 -- 1236. [42] Th. Schlumprecht, An arbitrarily distortable Banach space, Israel J. Math. 76 (1991), 81 -- 95. [43] Th. Schlumprecht, A complementably minimal Banach space not containing c0 or ℓp, in: Seminar Notes in Functional Analysis and Partial Differential Equations, Baton Rouge, LA, 1992. 28 B. HORVÁTH [44] Th. Schlumprecht and A. Zsák, The algebra of bounded linear operators on ℓp ⊕ ℓq has infinitely many closed ideals, J. Reine Angew. Math. 735 (2018), 225 -- 247. [45] Z. Semadeni, Banach spaces non-isomorphic to their Cartesian squares, II. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. Astr. Phys. 8 (1960) 81 -- 84. [46] M. Tarbard, Operators on Banach Spaces of Bourgain-Delbaen Type, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oxford, 2013. [47] R. J. Whitley, Strictly singular operators and their conjugates, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 113 (1964) 252 -- 261. Institute of Mathematics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Žitná 25, 115 67 Prague 1, Czech Republic E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected]
1210.1944	1	1210	2012-10-06T11:56:06	Hyperbolic wavelet transform: an efficient tool for multifractal analysis of anisotropic textures	[ "math.FA" ]	Global and local regularities of functions are analyzed in anisotropic function spaces, under a common framework, that of hyperbolic wavelet bases. Local and directional regularity features are characterized by means of global quantities constructed upon the coefficients of hyperbolic wavelet decompositions. A multifractal analysis is introduced, that jointly accounts for scale invariance and anisotropy. Its properties are studied in depth.	math.FA	math	Hyperbolic wavelet transform: an efficient tool for multifractal analysis of anisotropic textures∗ P. Abry†, M. Clausel‡, S. Jaffard§, S.G. Roux†and B.Vedel¶ Abstract Global and local regularities of functions are analyzed in anisotropic function spaces, under a common framework, that of hyperbolic wavelet bases. Local and directional regularity features are characterized by means of global quantities constructed upon the coefficients of hyperbolic wavelet decompositions. A multifractal analysis is introduced, that jointly accounts for scale invariance and anisotropy. Its properties are studied in depth. Keywords : Hyperbolic wavelet analysis, Anisotropic Besov Spaces, Pointwise Holder Reg- ularity, Anisotropic Multifractal Analysis. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification : 42C40, 46E35. 1 Introduction Natural images often display various forms of anisotropy. For a wide range of applications, anisotropy has been quantified through regularity characteristics and features that strongly differ when measured in different directions. This is, for instance, the case in medical imaging (osteoporosis, muscular tissues, mammographies,...), cf. e.g. [15, 14], hydrology [44], fracture surfaces analysis [22],. . . . For such images, a key issue consists first in describing, within a suitable framework, the anisotropy of the texture, and then in defining regularity anisotropy parameters that can actually and efficiently be measured via numerical procedures and fur- ther involved into e.g., classification schemes. This requires the design of a mathematical framework that allows to define and estimate these parameters. Such a program can be split into several questions, some of them having already been either solved or, at least, patially addressed. A first issue lies in introducing global and local notions of anisotropic regularity, which emcompass and extend (isotropic) regularity spaces, such as Sobolev or Besov spaces, and the classical notion of pointwise Holder regularity. To model anisotropy, the particular set- ting of an anisotropic self–similar field driven by two parameters (an anisotropy matrix and a self–similarity index) has been introduced and studied in [14], where it is used as a relevant ∗This work has been supported by the ANR grant AMATIS (ANR2011 BS01 011 02) and the CNRS, Groupe de Recherche Analyse Multifractale. †Physics Dept., ENS Lyon, CNRS, UMR5672, Lyon, France. ‡University of Grenoble, CNRS, Laboratoire Jean Kuntzmann UMR 5224, Saint Martin d'H`eres, France. §Universit´e Paris Est, LAMA, UMR 8050, Cr´eteil, France. ¶LMBA, Universit´e de Bretagne Sud, European University of Bretagne, Vannes, France. 1 model to describe osteoporosis. In [21], the question of defining in a proper way the concept of anisotropy of an image in relation to its global regularity has been addressed. It has no- tably been shown that these two parameters can be recovered without a–priori knowledge of the characteristics of the model, by studying the global smoothness properties of the process. Furthermore, some of the properties characterizing anisotropy are revealed by the regular- ity of the sample paths when analyzed with functional spaces well-adapted to anisotropy: Anisotropic Besov spaces. This preliminary study thus showed the central role that such spaces should play in the mathematical modeling of random anisotropic textures. The introduction of these spaces traces back to the study of some PDEs, cf. e.g. [51], for the study of semi-elliptic pseudo- differential operators whose symbols have different degrees of smoothness along different di- rections, the reader is also referred to [2], and references therein, for a recent use of such spaces for optimal regularity results for the heat equation. Other types of directional function spaces have also been considered, cf. e.g. [16] for the variant supplied by Hardy directional spaces. A second crucial issue consists in obtaining a simple characterization of these spaces on a "dictionary". Indeed, the challenge is to measure the critical exponent of any image in anisotropic Besov spaces for different anisotropies using the same analysis tool. Wavelet analysis is well–known to be an efficient tool for measuring smoothness in a large range of functional spaces (cf. [39] for details). Here, however, the main point is that the anisotropy of the analyzing spaces must not be set a priori to a fixed value but instead be allowed to vary. Specific bases are thus looked for, which would serve as a common dictionary for anisotropic Besov spaces with different anisotropies. It is natural that one should use some form of anisotropic wavelets such as curvelets, bandelets, contourlets, shearlets, ridgelets, or wedgelets (see e.g. [34] for an thorough review of these representation systems and a comparison of their properties for image processing); natural criteria of choice being, on the mathematical side, that these variations on isotropic wavelets supply bases for the corresponding anisotropic spaces, and, on the applied side, that practically tractable procedure can be devised and implemented to permit the characterization of real-world data according to these function spaces. Many authors addressed this problem, and proposed different solutions, depending on the precise definition of anisotropic space they started with, as well as on the anisotropic basis they used, cf. e.g. [23, 33, 32, 38, 52] and also the recent papers [28] by G. Garrig´os and A. Tabacco, and [31] by D. Haroske and E. Tam´asi, which contain numerous references on the subject. Note also that, in several cases, a particular type of anisotropy was considered: Parabolic anisotropy (where a contraction by λ in one direction is associated with a contrac- tion by λ2 along the orthogonal direction, [37, 46, 42], and references therein, in particular for applications to directional regularity), the corresponding dictionaries being in that case curvelets or contourlets (corresponding to the Hart–Smith decomposition in the continuous setting, see [49]). This particular choice of anisotropy was motivated from application to PDEs (see e.g., [29, 20] where curvelets and ridgelets are used for the study of Fourier inte- gral operators, with applications to the wave equation) but is no longer justified when dealing with images, where no particular form of anisotropy can be postulated a priori. To the op- posite, figuring out the precise form of anisotropy present in data is part of the issue. This argument also implies that one should not restrict analysis to tools that match one specific type of anisotropy, but rather that to tools embracing all of them simultaneously, in order to be able to detect that that suits data. From now on, two possible solutions for this problem will be focused on: 2 • One is supplied by anisotropic Triebel bases, see [52], that are constructed from the stan- dard wavelet case through a multiresolution procedure, tailored to a specific anisotropy. The collection of these bases does not constitute a frame. However, for a fixed anisotropy, simple characterizations of anisotropic Besov spaces have been supplied within this sys- tem. Such characterizations can thus be used as a building step to construct a multi- fractal formalism [?]. This is further detailed in Section 3. Triebel bases provide a powerful tool to deduce results on anisotropic Besov spaces, for a fixed anisotropy. In particular, it enables to show that these spaces are isomorphic to the corresponding isotropic Besov spaces. Further, some results such as embeddings or profiles of Besov characteristics can be obtained, via the transference method proposed by H. Triebel. However, when it comes to understand the link between different forms of anisotropy - in term of function spaces by example - this tool remains of limited interest. Indeed, the knowledge of the expansion of a function in one basis gives a priori neither information about its expansion in an other basis nor about its belonging to all anisotropic Besov spaces. • Another possible decomposition system is supplied by hyperbolic wavelets, introduced in various settings under different denominations (standard, rectangular or hyperbolic wavelet analysis) notably in image coding (see [54]), numerical analysis (see [13], [12]) and in [23],[33] for the purpose of approximation theory. They are simply defined as tensor products of 1D wavelets, yet allowing different dilations factors along different directions, as opposed to the classical discrete wavelet transform that relies on a single isotropic fixation factor. This key difference enables the study of anisotropy. Hyperbolic wavelet basis form a non–redundant system by construction, and contain all possible anisotropies. Hyperbolic wavelet bases have thus been used in statistics for the purpose of adaptive estimation of multidimensional curves. Notably, it has been proven in two seminal articles [41] and [40] that nonlinear thresholding of noisy hyperbolic wavelet coefficients leads to (near)–optimal minimax rates of convergence over a wide range of anisotropic smoothness classes. The reader is also referred to the recent work of F. Autin, G. Claeskens, J.M. Freyermuth [3] where this problem is considered from the maxiset point of view. Other interesting applications of hyperbolic analysis can also be founded in [5],[4],[8],[6] and [7] where hyperbolic wavelet decompositions of Fractional Brownian Sheets and Linear Fractional Stable Sheets are given and are used to prove many sample paths properties of these random fields (smoothness properties, Hausdorff dimension of the graph). The key feature of hyperbolic wavelet bases is that they provide a common dictionary for anisotropic Besov spaces. This result is stated in Theorem 2.2 of Section 2: The critical exponent in anisotropic Besov spaces will be related to some ℓp norms of the hyperbolic wavelet coefficients. These mathematical results yield an efficient method for the detection of anisotropy, as detailed in a companion article, where numerical investigations are conducted, [45] . In the present article, it has been chosen to explore the possibilities supplied by the hyper- bolic wavelet transform to investigate directional regularity, both in global (anisotropic Besov spaces) and local (directional pointwise regularity) forms. The underlying motivation is to develop a multifractal formalism relating these two notions (just as the standard multifractal formalism relates the usual Besov spaces with the notion of (anisotropic) Holder pointwise 3 smoothness, see [35] and references therein). It also aims at obtaining a numerically stable procedure that thus permits to extract the anisotropic features existing in natural images as well as information related to the size (fractional dimensions) of the corresponding geometrical sets. Before proceeding further, let us motivate the choice of hyperbolic wavelets against Triebel bases. For a fixed anisotropy, one can argue that Triebel bases display slightly better mathe- matical advantages: An exact characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces, as shown in [52], and a characterization of pointwise smoothness as sharp as in the isotropic case, as shown by H. Ben Braiek and M. Ben Slimane in [10]. However, a first purpose of the present con- tribution is to show that these two important properties hold almost as well for hyperbolic wavelets: In Section 2, "almost characterizations" (i.e., necessary and sufficient conditions that differ by a logarithmic correction) of anisotropic Besov spaces are obtained. Further- more, if one is not only interested in analysis, but also in simulation, this slight disadvantage (a logarithmic loss, which in applications can not be detected) is overcompensated by the advantage of using a basis instead of an overcomplete system. Indeed, generating a random field with prescribed regularity properties requires the use of a basis (using an overcomplete system cannot guarantee a priori that the simulated field with coefficients of specific sizes has the expected properties, since nontrivial linear combinations of the building blocks may van- ish). A contrario, with the hyperbolic wavelet basis, one can easily provide toy examples with different multifractal spectra depending on the anisotropy. Our being jointly motivated by analysis and synthesis motivates the choice of a system that permits an interesting trade-off among directional wavelets, in terms of mathematical efficiency and numerical simplicity and robustness, both on the analysis and synthesis sides. The practical relevance of the mathe- matical tools introduced and studied here are assessed in a companion paper [45]. Let us now further compare Triebel and hyperbolic wavelet bases in terms of pointwise directional smoothness. First, note that this notion has been the subject of few investigations so far: To our knowledge, the natural definition which allows for a wavelet characterization was first introduced by M. Ben Slimane in the 90s, see [11], in order to investigate the mul- tifractal properties of anisotropic selfsimilar functions. Partial results when using parabolic basis (i.e., curvelets and Hart–Smith transform) have been obtained by J. Sampo and S. Sumetkijakan see [37, 46, 42] and references therein. A generalization and implications in terms of sizes of coefficients on directional wavelets (the so-called "anisets", which are a mix- ture of of the wavelet and Gabor transform, where the wavelets can be arbitrarily shrunk in certain directions) were also worked out in [36]. Finally, an "almost " characterization of pointwise directional regularity was recently obtained by H. Ben Braiek and M. Ben Slimane in [?] on the Triebel basis coefficients, where the basis is picked so that its anisotropy pa- rameter is fitted to the type of directional regularity considered. In Section 2, we will obtain a similar result, but relying on the coefficients of the hyperbolic wavelet basis, thus paving the way to the construction of a multifractal formalism. An important difference with [?] is that, here, a single basis fits all anisotropies. Therefore, as in the case of Besov spaces, the advantage is that no a priori needs to be assumed on the particular considered anisotropy. This thus can be used as a way to detect the specific anisotropy which exists in data at hand, rather than assuming a priori its particular form beforehand. Note that other decomposition systems have also been used for the detection of local singularities, see for instance [24, 30] where shearlets and wedgelets are used for the detection of discontinuities along smooth edges. 4 Let us now come back to the anisotropic self–similar fields considered in [45, 21]. Such exactly selfsimilar models are somewhat toy examples, and, though testing regularity indices on their realizations is an important validation step, their study could prove misleadingly simple (just as, in 1D, fractional Brownian motion is too simple a model to fit the richness of situations met in real-world data). Natural images are indeed likely to consist of patchworks of different kinds of deformed pieces and therefore, can be expected to exhibit more complex scale invariance properties, and only in an approximate way. A natural setting to describe such properties, where different kinds of singularities are mixed up, is supplied by multifractal analysis. The next step is therefore to combine both anisotropy and multifractal analyses. To this end, a new form of multifractal analysis is introduced, based on the hyperbolic wavelet coefficients, and relating the global and local characterizations of regularity. It allows to take into account both scale invariance properties and local anisotropic features of an image. Thus, it provides a new tool for image classification, seen as a refinement of texture classification based on the usual isotropic multifractal analysis, as proposed for instance in [1],[35]. Section 3 is devoted to the introduction of this new framework: A new multifractal formalism, referred to as the hyperbolic multifractal formalism. It allows to relate local anisotropic regularity of the analyzed image to global quantities called hyperbolic structure functions as commonly done in multifractal analysis. Note that alternative multifractal analysis and multifractal formalism were introduced by H. Ben Braiek and M. Ben Slimane in [?], based on Triebel basis coefficients. In their approach, a particular anisotropy is picked, and the corresponding basis is used. As above, the main difference between our point of view and theirs is that we do not pick beforehand a particular anisotropy: Therefore, the approach proposed here does not rely on any a priori assumptions on data, and can thus be used when anisotropies of several types are simultaneously present in data. Finally, detailed proofs of all the results stated in Sections 2 and 3 are provided in Section 4. 2 Anisotropic global regularity and hyperbolic wavelets We first focus on the measure of anisotropic global regularity using a common analyzing dic- tionary: hyperbolic wavelet bases. Here, we start by providing the reader with a brief account of the corresponding functional spaces. Thereafter, we recall some well-known facts about hyperbolic wavelet analysis (cf. Section 2.2). The main result of the present section con- sists of Theorem 2.2, proven in Section 4.1, which allows to determine the critical directional Besov indices of data by regressions on log-log plot of quantities based on hyperbolic wavelet coefficients (see Section 2.2 for a precise statement). 2.1 Anisotropic Besov spaces Anisotropic Besov spaces generalize classical (isotropic) Besov spaces, and many results con- cerning isotropic spaces have been extended in this setting, see [18, 17] for a complete account on the results used in this section, and [16, 53] for detailed overviews on anisotropic spaces. Note in particular that these spaces are invariant by smooth diffeomorphisms on each coor- dinate, an important requirement for image processing. Anisotropic Besov spaces verify (asymptotically in the limit of small scales) norm invari- ances with respect to anisotropic scaling, we, therefore, start by recalling this notion. Let α = (α1, α2) denote a fixed couple of parameters, with α1, α2 ≥ 0 and α1 + α2 = 2. In the remainder, such couples will be referred to as admisible anisotropies. Such couples quantify 5 the degree of anisotropy of the space (α1 = α2 = 1 corresponding to the isotropic case). For any t ≥ 0 and ξ = (ξ1, ξ2) ∈ R2, we define anisotropic scaling by tαξ = (tα1ξ1, tα2ξ2). Note that, in this definition and in the following, the coordinate axes are chosen as anisotropy di- rections. This particular choice can of course be modified by the introduction of an additional rotation (as envisaged e.g., in[45]). ysis, which we now recall. Let ϕα that Anisotropic Besov spaces may be introduced using an anisotropic Littlewood Paley anal- 0 ≥ 0 belong to the Schwartz class S(R2) and be such 0 (x) = 1 if ϕα i=1,2ξi ≤ 1 , sup and For j ∈ N, we define Then, ϕα 0 (x) = 0 if i=1,22−αi ξ ≥ 1 . sup ϕα j (x) = ϕα 0 (2−(j−1)αξ) . 0 (2−jαξ) − ϕα +∞Xj=0 ϕα j ≡ 1 , and (ϕα j )j≥0 is called an anisotropic resolution of the unity. It satisfies supp (ϕα 0 ) ⊂ Rα 1 , supp (ϕα k ) ⊂ Rα j+1 \ Rα j , where For f ∈ S′(R2) let i=1,2ξℓ ≤ 2αik} . j = {ξ = (ξ1, ξ2) ∈ R2; sup Rα j f = F−1(cid:16)ϕα j bf(cid:17) . ∆α The sequence (∆α Besov spaces are then defined as follows (see [18, 17]). j f )j≥0) is called an anisotropic Littlewood–Paley analysis of f . The anisotropic Definition 2.1 The Besov space Bs,α defined by p,q, log β (R2), for 0 < p ≤ +∞, 0 < q ≤ +∞, s, β ∈ R, is Bs,α p,q, log β (R2) = {f ∈ S′(R2);Xj≥0 =Xj≥0 kfkBs,α p,q, log β j−βq2jsqk∆α j fkq 1/q < +∞} . p j−βq2jsqk∆α j fkq 1/q , p 6 This definition does not depend on the resolution of the chosen unity ϕα 0 and the quantity is a norm (resp., quasi-norm) on Bs,α p,q (R2) for 1 ≤ p, q ≤ +∞ (resp., 0 < p, q < 1). As in the isotropic case, anisotropic Besov spaces encompass a large class of classical anisotropic functional spaces (see [53] for details). For example, when p = q = 2 and (α1, α2) ∈ Q2 is an admissible anisotropy, let us consider s > 0 such that s/α1 and s/α2 are both integers, then the anisotropic Sobolev space H s,α(R2) = {f ∈ L2(R2) such that ∂s/α1f ∂x1 ∈ L2(R2) and ∂s/α2f ∂x2 ∈ L2(R2)} , coincides with the Besov space Bs,α 2,2 (R2). spaces and are denoted Cs,α In the special case where p = q = ∞, the spaces Bs,α ∞,∞(R2) are called anisotropic Holder log u(R2). These spaces also admit a finite difference characterization Let (e1, e2) denote the canonical basis of R2. For a function f : R2 → R, ℓ ∈ {1, 2} and that we now recall (see also [53] for details). t ∈ R one defines ∆1 t,ℓf (x) = f (x + teℓ) − f (x) . The difference of order M , M ≥ 2, of function f , along direction eℓ, is then iteratively defined as ∆M t,ℓf (x) = ∆t,ℓ∆M−1 t,ℓ f (x) . One then has: Proposition 2.1 Let α = (α1, α2) ∈ (R+ f : R2 → R. The function f belongs to the anisotropic Holder space Cs,α ∗ )2 such that α1 + α2 = 2, s > 0, u ∈ R and log u(R2) if kfkL∞(R2) + 2Xℓ=1 sup t>0 k∆Mℓ t,ℓ f (x)kL∞(R2) ts/αℓ log(t)u < +∞ , where for any ℓ ∈ {1, 2}, Mℓ = [s/αℓ] + 1. 2.2 Hyperbolic wavelet characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces We state our first main result which consists of an hyperbolic wavelet caracterization of anisotropic Besov spaces. We first need to recall the definition of the hyperbolic wavelet bases as tensorial products of two unidimensional wavelet bases (see [23]) and second state Theorem 2.2, further proven in Section 4.1. Definition 2.2 Let ψ denote the unidimensional Meyer wavelet and ϕ the associated scaling function. The hyperbolic wavelet basis is defined as the system {ψj1,j2,k1,k2, (j1, j2) ∈ (Z+ ∪ {−1})2, (k1, k2) ∈ Z2} where • if j1, j2 ≥ 0, ψj1,j2,k1,k2(x1, x2) = ψ(2j1x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2) . • if j1 = −1 and j2 ≥ 0 ψ−1,j2,k1,k2(x1, x2) = ϕ(x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2) . 7 • if j1 ≥ 0 and j2 = −1 ψj1,−1,k1,k2(x1, x2) = ψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ϕ(x2 − k2) . • if j1 = j2 = −1 ψ−1,−1,k1,k2(x1, x2) = ϕ(x1 − k1)ϕ(x2 − k2) . For any f ∈ S′(R2), one then defines its hyperbolic wavelet coefficients as follows: cj1,j2,k1,k2 = 2j1+j2 < f, ψj1,j2,k1,k2 > if j1, j2 ≥ 0 , cj1,−1,k1,k2 = 2j1 < f, ψj1,j2,k1,k2 > if j1 ≥ 0 and j2 = −1 , c−1,j2,k1,k2 = 2j2 < f, ψj1,j2,k1,k2 > if j1 = −1 and j2 ≥ 0 , c−1,−1,k1,k2 = < f, ψj1,j2,k1,k2 > if j1 = j2 = −1 . Remark 2.1 We chose a L1-normalization for the wavelet coefficients, known to be well- matching scale invariance. The main result of this section is an hyperbolic wavelet characterization of the spaces Bs,α p,q, log β (R2), up to a logarithmic correction. In the sequel, some notations are needed. For any j = (j1, j2) ∈ (N ∪ {−1})2, let us define: kcj1,j2,·,·kℓp = X(k1,k2)∈Z2 cj1,j2,k1,k2p 1/p . Let α = (α1, α2) be an admissible anisotropy, one also defines the following subsets of N2 Γ(HL) j Γ(LH) j Γ(HH) j and (1) (α) = {(j1, j2) ∈ N2, [(j − 1)α1] − 1 ≤ j1 ≤ [jα1] + 1 and 0 ≤ j2 ≤ [(j − 1)α2] − 1}, (α) = {(j1, j2) ∈ N2, 0 ≤ j1 ≤ [(j − 1)α1] − 1 and [(j − 1)α2] − 1 ≤ j2 ≤ [jα2] + 1}, (α) = {(j1, j2) ∈ N2, [(j − 1)α1] − 1 ≤ j1 ≤ [jα1] + 1 and [(j − 1)α2] − 1 ≤ j2 ≤ [jα2] + 1} , Γj(α) = Γ(HL) j (α) ∪ Γ(LH) j (α) ∪ Γ(HH) j (α) . Let us now state our hyperbolic wavelet characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces: Theorem 2.2 Let α = (α1, α2) be an admissible anisotropy, (s, β) ∈ R2 and (p, q) ∈ (0, +∞]2. Let f ∈ S′(R2). 1. Set β(p, q) = max(1/p − 1, 0) + max(1 − 1/q, 0). If Xj∈N0 jqβ(p,q)−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) 2− (j1+j2)q p kcj1,j2,·,·kq 1/q < +∞ , ℓp then f ∈ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2) (with usual modifications when q = ∞). 8 2. Conversely, (a) If q < ∞ and f ∈ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2) then j−βq−12jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) Xj∈N0 2− (j1+j2)q p kcj1,j2,·,·kq ℓp 1/q < +∞ . (b) If f ∈ Bs,α p,∞, log β (R2) then max j∈N0 j−β2js max (j1,j2)∈Γj (α) 2− (j1+j2) p kcj1,j2,·,·kℓp < +∞ . Proof. Theorem 2.2 is proven in Section 4.1. (cid:3) In particular, for p = q = ∞, the following "almost" characterization of anisotropic Holder spaces by means of hyperbolic wavelets holds: Proposition 2.3 Let α = (α1, α2) an admissible anisotropy, (s, β) ∈ R2 and f ∈ S′(R2). (i) If f ∈ Cs,α(R2) then there exists some C > 0 such that for all j ∈ N ∪ {−1} and any (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α), (2) kcj1,j2,·,·kℓ∞ ≤ C2−js . (ii) Conversely, assume that there exists some C > 0 such that for all j ∈ N∪{−1} and any (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α) (3) then f ∈ Cs,α(R2). kcj1,j2,·,·kℓ∞ ≤ 2−js j , In the special case where p = q = 2, that is if we consider anisotropic Sobolev spaces, there is no logarithmic correction: Theorem 2.4 Let α = (α1, α2) an admissible anisotropy, s ∈ R. Let f ∈ S′(R2). The two following assertions are equivalent: (i) f ∈ H s,α(R2) = Bs,α (ii) 2,2 (R2). Xj∈N0 22js X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) 2−(j1+j2) kcj1,j2,·,·k2 1/2 < +∞ . ℓ2 Proof. Theorem 2.4 is proven in Section 4.1. (cid:3) 9 3 Hyperbolic multifractal analysis We are now interested in the simultaneous analysis of local regularity properties and of anisotropic features of a function. To that end, we construct a new multifractal analysis, referred to as the hyperbolic multifractal analysis. Recall that in the isotropic case, the pur- pose of multifractal analysis is to provide information on the the pointwise singularities of functions. Multifractal functions are usually such that their local regularity strongly vary from point to point, so that it is not possible to estimate the regularity index (defined below) of a function at a given point. Instead, the relevant information consists of the "sizes" of the sets of points where the regularity index takes the same value. This "size" is mathematically formalized as the Hausdorff dimension. The function that associates the dimension of the set of points sharing the same regularity index with this index is referred to as the spectrum of singularities (or multifractal spectrum). The goal of a multifractal formalism is to provide a method that allows to measure the spectrum of singularities from quantities that can ac- tually be computed on real-world data. We extend this approach to the anisotropic setting. Let us first recall that, in the case where the anisotropy of the analyzing space is fixed, this has already been achieved: See [?] for anisotropic pointwise regularity analysis using Triebel bases and [?] for the corresponding anisotropic multifractal formalism. Here, we generalize these two previous works, providing a multifractal analysis which does not rely on the a priori knowledge of the regularity and takes into account all possible anisotropies. Note that for a fixed anisotropy, both formalims coincide: Indeed they are derived from wavelet characteriza- tions of the same functional spaces. Nevertheless, the formalism based on hyperbolic wavelet allows to deal simultaneously with all possible anisotropies, thus providing more useful algo- rithms for analyzing real-world data. In addition, the use of hyperbolic wavelet bases offers the possibility to define and synthesize deterministic and stochastic mathematical objects with prescribed anisotropic behavior. In Section 3.1, the different concepts related to pointwise regularity are first recalled. An hyperbolic wavelet criterion is then devised in Section 3.1.2. Our main result, Theorem 3.1, is stated in Section 3.1.2 and proven in Section 4. Hyperbolic wavelet analysis is defined in Section 3.2.2 and the validity of the proposed multifractal formalism is investigated in Theorem 3.2. 3.1 Anisotropic pointwise regularity and hyperbolic wavelet analysis 3.1.1 Definitions Let us start by recalling the usual notion of pointwise regularity (cf. [35] for a complete review). Definition 3.1 Let f be in L∞loc(R2) and s > 0. The function f belongs to the space Cs if there exist some C > 0, δ > 0 and Px0 a polynomial with degree less than s such that log β (x0) if x − x0 ≤ δ, f (x) − Px0(x) ≤ Cx − x0s · log(x − x0)β , where · is the usual Euclidean norm of R2. If β = 0, the space Cs Cs(x0). log 0(x0) is simply denoted 10 Anisotropic pointwise regularity is further defined as follows. Let P denote a polynomial of the form: P (t1, t2) = X(β1,β2)∈N2 aβ1,β2tβ1 1 tβ2 2 , and let α = (α1, α2) be an admissible anisotropy. The α–homogeneous degree of the polyno- mial P is defined as: dα(P ) = sup{α1β1 + α2β2, aβ1,β2 6= 0}; . Finally, for any t = (t1, t2) ∈ R2, the α–homogeneous norm reads: tα = t11/α1 + t21/α2 . We can now define the spaces Cs,α Definition 3.2 Let f ∈ L∞loc(R2), α = (α1, α2) such that α1 + α2 = 2, ·α, s > 0 and β ∈ R. The function f belongs to Cs,α log β (x0) if there exists some C > 0, δ > 0 and Px0 a polynomial with α–homogeneous degree less than s such that log β (x0). if x − x0α ≤ δ, f (x) − Px0(x) ≤ Cx − x0s log 0(x0) is simply denoted Cs,α(x0). If β = 0, the space Cs,α The anisotropic pointwise exponent of a locally bounded function f at x0 can be thus be defined as: α · log(x − x0α)β . (4) hf,α(x0) = sup{s, f ∈ Cs,α(x0)} . The reader is referred to [10],[36] for more details about the material of this section. 3.1.2 An hyperbolic wavelet criterion As in the usual anisotropic setting (see [35]), the anisotropic pointwise Holder regularity of a function is closely related to the decay rate of decay of its wavelet leaders. The usual definition of wavelet leaders needs to be tuned to to the hyperbolic setting: For any (j1, j2, k1, k2), let λ(j1, j2, k1, k2) denote the hyperbolic dyadic cube: (5) λ = λ(j1, j2, k1, k2) = [ k1 2j1 , k1 + 1 2j1 k2 2j2 , [×[ k2 + 1 2j2 [ , and let cλ stand for cj1,j2,k1,k2. The hyperbolic wavelet leaders dλ, associated with the hyper- bolic cube λ, can now be defined as: dλ = sup λ′⊂λcλ′ . For any x0 = (a, b) ∈ R2, let 3λj1,j2(x0) = [ [2j1 a] − 1 2j1 , [2j1a] + 2 2j1 [2j2b] − 1 2j2 , [×[ [2j2b] + 2 2j2 [ , (where [·] denotes the integer part) and dj1,j2(x0) = sup λ′⊂3λj1 ,j2 (x0)cλ′ . The hyperbolic wavelet leaders criterion for pointwise regularity can now be stated as: 11 Theorem 3.1 Let s > 0 and α = (α1, α2) ∈ (R∗+)2 such that α1 + α2 = 2. 1. Assume that f ∈ Cs,α(x0). There exists some C > 0 such that for any j1, j2 ∈ N∪{−1} one has (6) dj1,j2(x0) ≤ C2− max( j1 α1 , j2 α2 )s . 2. Conversely, assume that f is uniformly Holder and that (6) holds, then f ∈ Cs,α log 2(x0). Proofs are postponed to Section 4. 3.2 Anisotropic multifractal analysis 3.2.1 Two notions of dimension In multifractal analysis, two different notions of dimension are mainly used: the Hausdorff dimension and the packing dimension, whose definitions are now recalled. The Hausdorff dimension is defined through the Hausdorff measure (see [25] for details). The best covering of a set E ⊂ Rd with sets subordinated to a diameter ε can be estimated as follows, Hδ ε(E) = inf{ Eiδ, E ⊂ Ei,Ei ≤ ε}. ∞Xi=1 ∞[i=1 ǫ as ε goes to 0. ε is an outer measure. The Hausdorff measure is defined as the (possibly infinite Clearly, Hδ or vanishing) limit Hδ Hδ′ Definition 3.3 The Hausdorff dimension dimH(E) of a set E ⊂ Rd is defined as follows, The Hausdorff measure is decreasing as δ goes to infinity. Moreover, Hδ(E) > 0 implies (E) = ∞ if δ′ < δ. The following definition is thus meaningful. dimH(E) = sup{δ : Hδ(E) = ∞} . The box dimension (or Minkowski dimension) is simpler to define and to use than the With this definition, dimH(∅) = −∞. Hausdorff dimension. Definition 3.4 Let E ⊂ Rd. If ε > 0, let Nε(E) be the smallest number of sets of radius ε required to cover E. The upper box dimension is The lower box dimension is dimB(E) = lim sup ε→0 log Nε(E) − log ε . dimB(E) = lim inf ε→0 log Nε(E) − log ε . If these two quantities are equal, they define the box dimension dimB(E) of E. A significant limitation of box dimension is that a set and its closure have the same dimension. The packing dimension (introduced by Tricot, see [50]) has better mathematical properties (e.g., the packing dimension of a countable union of sets is the supremum of their dimensions). 12 Definition 3.5 The packing dimension dimP (E) of a set E ⊂ Rd is defined by dimP (E) = inf{sup i {dimB(Ei)} : E ⊂ ∞[i=1 Ei}. The following inequality holds for any set E ⊂ Rd, dimH(E) ≤ dimP (E). We now define the hyperbolic spectrum of singularities of a locally bounded function using the Hausdorff dimension. Definition 3.6 Let f be a locally bounded function and α = (α1, α2) ∈ (R∗+)2 such that α1 + α2 = 2. The iso–anisotropic–Holder set are defined as Ef (H, α) = {x ∈ R2, hf,α(x) = H} where the anisotropic pointwise Holder hf,α(x) has been defined in (4). The hyperbolic spectrum of singularities of f is then defined as: d : (R+ ∪ {∞}) × (0, 2) → R+ ∪ {−∞} (H, a) 7→ dimH(Ef (H, (a, 2 − a))) . 3.2.2 The hyperbolic wavelet leader multifractal formalism It is not always possible to compute theoretically the spectrum of singularities of a given func- tion. A multifractal formalism thus consists of a practical procedure that yields (a convex hull of) the function d, through the construction of structure functions and the use of the Leg- endre transform. In the classical case, these formalisms are variants of a seminal derivation, proposed by Parisi and Frisch in the context of the study of hydrodynamic turbulence [43]. The hyperbolic wavelet leader multifractal formalism described below aimed at extending the procedure to where both anisotropy and singularities are studied jointly. Let us define hyperbolic partition functions of a locally bounded function as: (7) S(j, p, α) = 2−2j X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) X(k1,k2)∈Z2 dp j1,j2,k1,k2 , where Γj(α) has already been defined in Section 2.2 with Eq. (1). From the definition of an anisotropic scaling function (or scaling exponents) (8) ωf (p, α) = lim inf j→∞ log S(j, p, α) log 2−j , let us further define the Legendre hyperbolic spectrum: (9) Lf (H, α) = inf p∈R∗{Hp − ωf (p, (α, 2 − α)) + 2} . Qualitatively, the Legendre hyperbolic spectrum and the hyperbolic spectrum of singular- ities df (H, a) are expected to coincide, while the theorem below actually provides an upper bound relationship. 13 Theorem 3.2 Let f a uniform Holder function. The following inequality holds (10) ∀(H, a) ∈ (R∗+) × (0, 2), df (H, a) ≤ Lf (H, a). Definition 3.7 Let f a uniform Holder function, H > 0 and a ∈ (0, 2). If Eq. (10) simplifies into an equality, i.e., ∀(H, a) ∈ (R∗+) × (0, 2), d(H, a) = Lf (H, α), then f satisfies the hyperbolic multifractal formalism. From an applied perspective, Eqs. (7) , (8) and (9) constitute the core of the practical procedure enabling to compute the Legendre hyperbolic spectrum from the hyperbolic wavelet leaders computed on the data to be analyzed. Practical implementation show preliminary satisfactory results, notably, for isotropic function, it is clearly observed that the measured Lf (H, α) does not depend on α. 4 Proofs 4.1 Proof of Theorem 2.2 4.1.1 Hyperbolic Littlewood-Paley characterization of Bs,α Let θ0 ∈ S(R, R+) be supported on [−2, 2] such that θ0 = 1 on [−1, 1]. For any j ∈ N, let us define p,q (R2) θj = θ0(2j·) − θ0(2j−1·) . such thatPj≥0 θj(·) = 1 is a 1–D resolution of the unity. Observe that, for any j ≥ 1, supp (θj) ⊂ {2j−1 ≤ ξ ≤ 2j+1}. Remark 4.1 In the following, the function θ0 can be chosen with an arbitrary compact sup- port. It does not change the main results even if technical details of proofs and lemmas have to be adapted. It allows to chose the Fourier transform of a Meyer scaling function for θ0. Definition 4.1 1. For any j, ℓ ≥ 0, and any ξ = (ξ1, ξ2) ∈ R2 set φj1,j2(ξ1, ξ2) = θj1(ξ1)θj2(ξ2) . For any j1, j2 ≥ 0, the function φj1,j2 belongs to S(R2) and is compactly supported on {2ℓ1 ≤ ξ1 ≤ 2ℓ1+1} × {2ℓ2 ≤ ξ2 ≤ 2ℓ2+1]. Further Pj1≥0Pj2≥0 φj1,j2 = 1 and (φj1,j2)(j1,j2)∈N2 is called an hyperbolic resolution of the unity. 2. For f ∈ S′(R2) and j1, j2 ≥ 0 set The sequence ((∆j1,j2f )j1,j2≥0) is called an hyperbolic Littlewood–Paley analysis of f . ∆j1,j2f = F−1(cid:16)φj1,j2bf(cid:17) . 14 In the remainder of the section, we are given α = (α1, α2) a fixed anisotropy satisfying j )j≥0 an anisotropic resolution of the unity. One then defines the following α1 + α2 = 2 and (ϕα functions for any j ≥ 0, (11) gα j = Xj1,j2∈Γj (α) φj1,j2 , where the sets Γj(α) have been defined in (1). Remark 4.2 Hyperbolic Littlewood–Paley analysis is used in the definition of spaces of mixed smoothness. We refer to [47] for a study of these spaces and to [48] for their link with tensor products of Besov spaces and their hyperbolic wavelet characterizations. We now provide the reader with the following hyperbolic Littlewood–Payley characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces: Theorem 4.1 Let s ∈ R and (p, q) ∈ (0, +∞]2. 1. 2. (a) If q < ∞ and (12) Xj≥0 (13) (b) If then f ∈ Bs,α jq max(1/p−1,0)+max(q−1,0) · j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) p,q, log β (R2). j≥0 (cid:18)jmax(1/p−1,0)+1 · j−β2js max p,∞, log β (R2). (a) If q < ∞ and f ∈ Bs,α then f ∈ Bs,α max k∆j1,j2(f )kq p 1/q < +∞ , (j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k∆j1,j2(f )kp(cid:19) < +∞ , (b) If f ∈ Bs,α p,∞, log β (R2) then p,q, log β (R2) then Xj≥0 j−1 · j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) j≥0 j−β2js X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) max k∆j1,j2(f )kq p 1/q < +∞ . k∆j1,j2(f )kp < +∞ . The proof of Theorem 4.1 consists of several steps, beginning with Lemma 4.1 1. For any j ≥ 0 and any (j1, j2) 6∈ Γj(α), one has (14) supp(ϕα j ) ∩ supp(φj1,j2) = ∅ . 15 2. For any j ≥ 0 and any ℓ 6∈ {j − 1, j, j + 1}, one has j ) ∩ supp(ϕα supp(gα (15) ℓ ) = ∅ . Proof. Point 1 of the lemma is first proved, that is if (ℓ1 ≥ L(1) (ℓ1 ≤ L(1) min − 1 and ℓ2 ≤ L(2) min − 1), then supp(ϕα j ), then ξ ∈ Rα j+1 \ Rα j ) ∩ supp(φj1,j2) = ∅. j . Hence, if ℓ1 ≥ L(1) Indeed, if ξ ∈ supp(ϕα max + 1, one has for i = 1, 2, 2−ℓiξi ≤ 2αi(j+1)−ℓi ≤ 2αi−1, by assumptions on ℓ1, ℓ2. Since α1 or α2 necessarily belongs to (0, 1), one has ξ 6∈ supp(φℓ1,ℓ2). Hence, φℓ1,ℓ2(ξ) = 0. The same approach leads to φℓ1,ℓ2(ξ) = 0 if ℓ1 ≤ L(1) min − 1 and Point (1) of Lemma 4.2 min − 1 and ℓ2 ≤ L(2) max + 1 and ℓ2 ≥ L(2) max + 1 and ℓ2 ≥ L(2) max + 1) or is obtained. Point (2) of Lemma 4.2 can be obtained similarly. (cid:3) From Lemma 4.2 an intermediate hyperbolic Littelwood Paley characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces is obtained. Proposition 4.2 Let (p, q) ∈ (0, +∞]2, s, β ∈ R. the two following assertions are equivalent: Let us first show that f ∈ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2) implies Inequality (16) of Proposition 4.2. To this end, Point 1 of Lemma 4.2 is used to deduce that for any j 1/q q p  < +∞ . X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) j−βq2jsq(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) φj1,j2bf = ϕα [∆j1,j2(f )](cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) j  X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) φj1,j2bf = ϕα j (cid:16)gα j bf(cid:17) , 1. f ∈ Bs,α 2. p,q, log β (R2). (16) Xj≥0 Proof of Proposition 4.2. j  X(j1,j2)∈N2 ϕα j bf = ϕα where gα j is defined by Equation (11). Observe now that replacing the usual dilation with an anisotropic one gives an anisotropic version of Equation (13) in Section 1.5.2 in [51]. More precisely assume that we are given p ∈ (0, +∞], b > 0 and M ∈ S(R2). There exists some C > 0 not depending on b nor M such that for any h ∈ Lp(R2) such that supp(bh) ⊂ {ξ ∈ R2, supi ξi ≤ bαi}, one has (17) kF−1 (MFh)kLp(R2) ≤ CkM (bα·)kH s 2 (R2)khkLp(R2) where H s 2 is the usual Bessel potential space and s > 2(1/ min(p, 1) − 1/2). Set now b = 2j, M = ϕα depending on j such that for any p ∈ (0, +∞] and any f ∈ Lp(R2) ∆j1,j2fkLp = Ck(F−1gα j andbh = gα j fkLp ≤ Ck X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k∆α j bf . Since ϕα j (2jα·) = ϕα 1 , there exists some C > 0 not j ) ∗ fkLp . 16 Then (18) kfkBs,α p,q, log β =Xj≥0 which gives Point 1 of Proposition 4.2. j−βq2jsqk∆α j fkq Lp 1/q ≤ CXj≥0 j−βq2jsqk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkq Lp 1/q , Let us now prove that if Equation (16) of Proposition 4.2 holds then f ∈ Bs,α Point 2 of Lemma 4.2 gives for any j ≥ 0 gα j (cid:0)ϕα j bf = gα j−1 + ϕα Hence, Inequality (17) applied with b = 2j, M = gα existence of some C > 0 not depending on j nor f such that for any p ∈ (0, +∞] 2k(F−1ϕα j (2jα·)kH s j+1(cid:1)bf . j andbh = (ϕα j−1 + F−1ϕα j + F−1ϕα j−1 + ϕα j + ϕα j + ϕα j+1) ∗ fkLp j+1)bf gives the p,q, log β (R2). Since k · kLp is either a norm or a quasi–norm (according to the value of p), there exists some C > 0 such that k(cid:0)F−1gα j(cid:1) ∗ fkLp ≤ ckgα j(cid:1) ∗ fkLp ≤ C kgα j (2jα·)kH s k(cid:0)F−1gα Let us first bound kgα j−1) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1ϕα 2 . To this end, observe that j ) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1ϕα j+1) ∗ fkLp(cid:1) . F[gα j (2jα·)](ξ) = 2−j(α1+α2)bgj(2−jαξ) = 2−2jbgj(2−jαξ) Since θ1 ∈ S(R), for any M > 1 there exists some C > 0 such that 2 j (2jα·)kH s (cid:0)k(F−1ϕα = X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) (1 + ξ2)s X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) (1 + ξ2)s X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) bθ1(ζ) ≤ × X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) × X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) (1 + ξ2)s (1 + ξ2)s Hence kgα j (2jα·)k2 H s 2 = ZR2 ≤ ZR2 Finally kgα j (2jα·)k2 H s 2 ≤ CMZR2 ≤ CMZR2 2j1+j2−2jbθ1(2j1−jα1 ξ1)bθ1(2j2−α2j ξ2) . 2j1+j2−2jbθ1(2j1−jα1 ξ1)bθ1(2j2−α2j ξ2) 2j1+j2−2jbθ1(2j1−jα1 ξ1)bθ1(2j2−α2j ξ2) 2 dξ 2 dξ . CM (1 + ζ)2M . 2 dξ 2j1+j2−2j (1 + 2j1−jα1 ξ1)2M · (1 + 2j2−jα2 ξ2)2M (2jα1−j1 + ξ1)2M · (2jα2−j2 + ξ2)2M 1 2 dξ . 17 By the inequality (a + b)2 ≥ a max(b, 1) , valid for any a > 1, b > 0 and applied successively with a = 2jα1−j1 and b = ξ1, a = 2jα2−j2 and b = ξ2, it comes kgα (1 + ξ2)s j (2jα·)k2 H s 2 ≤ CMZR2 × X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) 2(j1−jα1)M 2(j2−jα2)M × max(1,ξ1)M max(1,ξ2)M 1 2 dξ . With a M sufficiently large it follows that sup 2(cid:1) < +∞ . j (cid:0)kgα Going back to an upper bound of k(cid:16)F−1gα k(cid:0)F−1gα j(cid:1) ∗ fkLp ≤ Cj(cid:0)k(F−1ϕα (19) Xj≥0 Lp j ) ∗ fkq j−βq2jsqk(F−1gα j (2jα·)kH s j(cid:17) ∗ fkLp, there exists some C > 0 such that j+1) ∗ fkLp(cid:1) Lp j fkq =Xj≥0 j ) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1ϕα j−1) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1ϕα j−βq2jsqk∆α ≤ CkfkBs,α p,q, log β and 1/q 1/q the last shows that if (16) holds then f ∈ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2). , Proof of Theorem 4.1. Let us first recall that: • For any p ∈ (0, +∞], n ∈ N, and (f1,··· , fn) ∈ Lp(R2)n (20) kf1 + ··· + fnkLp ≤ nmax(1/p−1,0) (kf1k + ··· + kfnk) • For any q ∈ (0, +∞), n ∈ N, and (a1,··· , an) ∈ (R+)n (a1 + ··· + an)q ≤ nmax(q−1,0) (aq (21) 1 + ··· + aq n) . Let us now prove the first point of the theorem in the case where q 6= ∞. For this, assume p,q, log β (R2). By Inequalities (20), (21) and the that (12) holds and let us prove that f ∈ Bs,α fact that Card(Γj(α)) ≤ Cj there exists C > 0 such that Hence, (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) q Lp ≤ Cjq max(1/p−1,0)+max(q−1,0) X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) ∆j1,j2f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) j−βq2jsq(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) jq max(1/p−1,0)+max(q−1,0) · j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) ∆j1,j2f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α)  1/q Lp q X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) Xj≥0 ≤ CXj≥0 18 k∆j1,j2fkq Lp . k∆j1,j2fkq 1/q . Lp It proves that if (12) holds, one has ∆j1,j2fkq < ∞ . 1/q Lp p,q, log β (R2). jmax(1/p−1,0)j−β2js X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k∆j1,j2fkLp . Finally, by Point (1) of Proposition 4.2, it comes that f ∈ Bs,α We now deal with the case q = ∞. In this case, we have max j≥0 j−β2js(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) Hence if (16) holds, f ∈ Bs,α Xj≥0 j−βq2jsqk X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) ∆j1,j2f(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp φj1,j2bf = φj1,j2(cid:0)gα p,∞, log β (R2). ≤ C max j≥0 To prove the converse assertion, let us assume f ∈ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2). Observe that for any j ≥ 0 and any (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α), one has j−1 + gα j + gα j+1(cid:1)bf . Remark that φj1,j2(2jα·) is bounded in H s (17), there exists C > 0 not depending on j nor f such that for any (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α) k(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkLp ≤ C(cid:0)k(F−1gα 2(R2) independently of (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α). Hence, by j+1) ∗ fkLp(cid:1) . j ) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1gα Again, two cases have to be distinguished according whether q 6= ∞ or q = ∞. j−1) ∗ fkLp + k(F−1gα Let us consider the case q < ∞. Observing that Card(Γj(α)) ≤ Cj, we deduce that X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkq Lp ≤ Cj k(F−1gα l ) ∗ fkq Lp . So (22) Xj j−1j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkq j · j−1j−βq2jsqk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkq Lp . Since in addition the function f is assumed to belong to Bs,α p,q, log β (R2), one has Xj j−βq2jsqk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkq Lp =Xj j · j−1j−βq2jsqk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkq Lp < ∞ , which directly yields the required inequality using (22). In the case q = ∞, we have max (j1,j2)∈Γj (α)k(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkq Lp ≤ C which leads for some C > 0 to max ℓ=j−1,j,j+1k(F−1gα ℓ ) ∗ fkLp . j≥0 (cid:18)j−β2js max (j1,j2)∈Γj (α)k(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkLp(cid:19) ≤ C max max j≥0 (cid:16)j−β2jsk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkLp(cid:17) , 19 j+1Xl=j−1 Lp ≤Xj that is (23) j1,j2≥0(cid:18)max( max j1 α1 , j2 α2 )(cid:19)−β 2max( j1 α1 , j2 α2 Since in addition f is assumed to belong to Bs,α )sk(F−1φj1,j2) ∗ fkLp ≤ C max j≥0 p,∞, log β (R2), it comes j ) ∗ fkLp < ∞ . max j−β2jsk(F−1gα j−β2jsk(F−1gα j ) ∗ fkLp . Finally, the required conclusion is obtained by an approach similar to the one used for the previous case. 4.1.2 The special case p = 2 In that case, an exact hyperbolic Littlewood–Paley characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces is provided: 2,q, log β (R2). Proposition 4.3 Let f ∈ S′(R2), s > 0 and q ∈ (0, +∞]. The two following assertions are equivalent (i) f ∈ Bs,α (ii) Pj≥0 j−βq2jsq P(j1,j2)∈Γj (α)k∆j1,j2(f )k2 L2! q j−βq2jsq P(j1,j2)∈Γj (α)kφj1,j2bfk2 L2! q = Pj≥0 < 2 2 +∞. In particular the following exact hyperbolic Littlewood–Paley characterization of anisotropic Sobolev spaces can be stated: Theorem 4.4 Let f ∈ S′(R2), s > 0 and q ∈ (0, +∞]. The two following assertions are equivalent (i) f ∈ H s,α (ii) Pj≥0 log β (R2) = Bs,α j−2β22js P(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) kφj1,j2bfk2 j−2β22js P(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) k∆j1,j2(f )k2 To prove Proposition 4.4, let us first precise the relation between anisotropic and hyperbolic resolutions of the unity. L2 = Pj≥0 L2 < +∞. 2,2 (R2). Lemma 4.2 For any j ≥ 0, the following inequality holds on R2 (24) ϕα φj1,j2 ≤ ϕα j−1 + ϕα j + ϕα j+1 . j ≤ gj = X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) Proof. Let us first observe that ϕα j ≤ X(j1,j2)∈N2 φj1,j2 . 20 To get the left hand side of inequality (24), we just have to prove that if ξ = (ξ1, ξ2) ∈ supp(ϕα max + 1) or (ℓ1 ≤ L(1) j ), one has φj1,j2(ξ) = 0 if (j1, j2) 6∈ Γj, that is if (ℓ1 ≥ L(1) max + 1 and ℓ2 ≥ L(2) min − 1 and ℓ2 ≤ L(2) min − 1). j+1 \ Rα j ), then ξ ∈ Rα Indeed, if ξ ∈ supp(ϕα max + 1, one has for i = 1, 2, 2−ℓiξi ≤ 2αi(j+1)−ℓi ≤ 2αi−1, by assumptions on ℓ1, ℓ2. Since α1 or α2 necessarily belongs to (0, 1), one has ξ 6∈ supp(φℓ1,ℓ2). Hence, φℓ1,ℓ2(ξ) = 0. The same approach leads to φℓ1,ℓ2(ξ) = 0 if ℓ1 ≤ L(1) min − 1. The left hand side of Let us now prove that the right hand side of inequality (24) holds. It comes from the min − 1 and ℓ2 ≤ L(2) inequality (24) is obtained. max + 1 and ℓ2 ≥ L(2) j . Hence, if ℓ1 ≥ L(1) obvious equality X(j1,j2)∈Γj φj1,j2 ≤Xj≥0 ϕα j ≡ 1 . and if ξ ∈ supp(φj1,j2) for some (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α) then for any ℓ ∈ {j − 1, j, j + 1}, ϕα ℓ (ξ) = 0. (cid:3) Before proving Proposition 4.4, let us give some background about quasi–orthogonal systems. Definition 4.2 Let a Hilbert space H and h·,·i the associated scalar product. A system {fk, k ∈ Z} of H is said to be quasi-orthogonal if there exists some ℓ ∈ N such that (25) Lemma 4.3 Let H be a Hilbert space and k · k,h·,·i the associated norm and scalar product. Let {fm, m ∈ Z} a quasi–orthogonal system of H and let ℓ ∈ N satisfying (25). Then Proof. Observe that for any m′ ∈ Z, hfm, fm′i = 0 except if m′ − ℓ ≤ m ≤ m′ + ℓ. Hence (26) 2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xm∈Z fm(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2 kfmk2 . ≤ (2ℓ + 1)Xm∈Z ∀(k, k′) ∈ Z2,(cid:0)k′ − k ≥ ℓ ⇒ hfk, fk′i = 0(cid:1) . fm(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Xm∈Z ≤ Xm′∈ZXm∈Z m′+ℓXm=m′−ℓ ≤ Xm′∈Z √2ℓ + 1 m′+ℓXm=m′−ℓ ≤ Xm′∈Z √2ℓ + 1 Xm′∈Z m′+ℓXm=m′−ℓ ≤ (2ℓ + 1) Xm′∈Z kfmk2! 1 kf′mk kfmk2!! 1 kfmkkfm′k hfm, fm′i kfm′k2 . ≤ 2 21 2 . Xm′∈Z 2 kfm′k2! 1 Proof of Proposition 4.4 By Plancherel Theorem and by Lemma 4.2, one has j (ξ)2bf (ξ)2dξ ≤ C0Z gj(ξ)2bf (ξ)2dξ , k∆α L2 =ZR2 ϕα j fk2 j−1)2 + (ϕα and g2 ZR2 j )2 + (ϕα j (ξ)bf (ξ)2dξ ≤ZR2(cid:2)(ϕα j+1fk2 where gj is defined by (24). Proposition 4.4 is then a straightforward consequence of the following lemma : Lemma 4.4 There exists some C > 0 such that for any j ≥ 0, one has (27) j )2(cid:3)bf (ξ)2 ≤ k∆α L2+k∆α L2+k∆α j−1fk2 j fk2 L2 , L2 ≤ C X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) L2 . kφj1,j2bfk2 Proof. Since supp(φj1,j2) ∩ supp(φm1,m2) = ∅ if max(m1 − j1,m2 − j2) ≥ 3, the system (φj1,j2bf ) is quasi–orthogonal. Hence, by Lemma 4.3, there exists some K > 0 such that 2 X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) C−1 X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) L2 ≤ kgjbfk2 kφj1,j2bfk2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) φj1,j2bf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ K X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) For the converse inequality, observe that each term hφj1,j2bf , φj′ L2 ≤ X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) hφj1,j2bf , φj1,j2bfiL2 + kφj1,j2bfk2 = (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) φj1,j2bf(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) is positive. Hence L2 L2 2 . (cid:3) (cid:3) 1,j′ L2 . kφj1,j2bfk2 2bfi =R φj1,j2(ξ)φj′ X(j1,j2)6=(j′ 2)∈Γj (α) 1,j′ 1,j′ 2 (ξ)f (ξ)2dξ 2bfiL2 1,j′ hφj1,j2bf , φj′ 4.1.3 Proof of the hyperbolic wavelet characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces Let us first consider the general case where (p, q) ∈ (0, +∞]2,β, s ∈ R and α = (α1, α2) a fixed anisotropy. Intermediate spaces E s,α p,q, log β (R2) are defined as the collection of functions k∆j1,j2fkq p < +∞. f of S′(R2) such as Xj≥0 A norm on E s,α j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) p,q, log β (R2) is defined as follows =Xj≥0 kfkE s,α p,q, log β such that the embeddings j−βq2jsq X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) 1/q k∆j1,j2fkq p 22 • if q < ∞ E s,α p,q, log β−max(1/p−1,0)−max(1−1/q,0) (R2) ֒→ Bs,α p,q, log β (R2) ֒→ E s,α p,q, log β+1/q(R2) . • if q = ∞ E s,α p,∞, log β−max(1/p−1,0)−1(R2) ֒→ Bs,α p,∞, log β (R2) ֒→ E s,α p,q, log β (R2) . are an exact rewriting of Theorem 4.1. In the special case where p = 2, we proved in Proposition 4.4 that H s,α 2,2, log β (R2) and E s,α Bs,α In the following proposition, an hyperbolic wavelet characterization of spaces E s,α p,q (R2) is given. Combining Proposition 4.5, Theorems 4.1 and ?? directly implies Theorems 2.2 and 2.4. 2,2, log β (R2) coincide. log β (R2) = Proposition 4.5 Let (p, q) ∈ (0, +∞]2, s, β ∈ R2. The following assertions are equivalent 1. f ∈ E s,α p,q, log β (R2) 2. (cid:18)Pj≥0 j−βq2jsqP(j1,j2)∈Γj p(cid:19) 1 2−(j1+j2)q/p(cid:16)P(k1,k2)∈Z2 cj1,j2,k1,k2p(cid:17) q 3. (cid:18)P(j1,j2)∈N2 )(cid:17)−βq Let us prove Proposition 4.5. The equivalence between assertions (2) and (3) holds since for ) + 2 − 2 ≤ j ≤ max( j1 any (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α), one has max( j1 0. The α1 crucial point is the equivalence between assertions (1) and (2) . p(cid:19) 1 p (cid:17)q(cid:16)P(k1,k2)∈Z2 cj1,j2,k1,k2p(cid:17) q ) + 2 and ∪Γj = N2 0(cid:16)max( j1 2(cid:16)max( j1 < +∞. )s− j1+j2 , j2 α2 , j2 α2 , j2 α2 α1 , j2 α2 α1 α1 q q < +∞. Proof of implication (1) ⇒ (2) of Proposition 4.5 The proof of this implication relies on the following sampling lemma which is a adaptation of Lemma 2.4 of [27] in the case of rectangular support. Lemma 4.5 Let p ∈ (0, +∞] and j = (j1, j2) ∈ N2 {ξ, ξ1 ≤ 2j1+1 and ξ2 ≤ 2j2+1}. Then there exists C > 0 such that  X(k1,k2)∈Z2 2−(j1+j2)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)g(cid:18) k1 2j1 , 1/p 0. Suppose g ∈ S′(R2) and supp(bg) ⊂ p 2j2(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ CkgkLp . k2 Proof. Let ψ ∈ S(R2) be such that supp(bψ) ⊂ {ξ, max(ξ1,ξ2) ≤ π} and bψ ≡ 1 on [−2, 2]2. Set ψj(x) = 2j1+j2ψ(2j1 x1, 2j2x2). One hascψj ≡ 1 on [−2j1+1, 2j1+1] × [−2j2+1, 2j2+1]. By assumption supp(bg) ⊂ [−2j1+1, 2j1+1] × [−2j2+1, 2j2+1], so that for any x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2 and any fixed y = (y1, y2) ∈ R2 g(x + y) = (ψj ⋆ g)(x + y) = (2π)−2Z 2j1+1 ξ2=−2j2+1cψj(ξ)bg(ξ)eixξeiyξdξ . ξ1=−2j1+1Z 2j2+1 23 One has Denote bhj the periodic extension of cψj with period 2ji+1π for each variable ξi (i = 1, 2). (28) g(x + y) = (2π)−2Z 2j1+1 ξ1=−2j1+1Z 2j2+1 ξ2=−2j2+1(cid:16)bhj(ξ)eixξ(cid:17)(cid:16)bg(ξ)eiyξ(cid:17) dξ . Using an expansion of bhjeixξ in two dimensional Fourier series, it comes bhj(ξ)eixξ = X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 Z 2j1+1π = X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 Z 2j1+1π = 2−(j1+j2) X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 ξ2=−2j2 +1π bhj(ξ)eixξe−i2−j1 ℓ1ξ1e−i2−j2 ℓ2ξ2! ei2−j1 ℓ1ξ1ei2−j2 ℓ2ξ2 ξ2=−2j2 +1πcψj(ξ)eixξe−i2−j1 ℓ1ξ1e−i2−j2 ℓ2ξ2! ei2−j1 ℓ1ξ1ei2−j2 ℓ2ξ2 ξ1=−2j1+1πZ 2j2 +1π ξ1=−2j1+1πZ 2j2 +1π ψj(x − 2−jℓ)ei2−j1 ℓ1ξ1ei2−j2 ℓ2ξ2 , where for j = (j1, j2) and ℓ = (ℓ1, ℓ2), the notation 2−jℓ = (2−j1ℓ1, 2−j2ℓ2) is used. Replacing bhj(ξ)eixξ with the last sum in Equation (28) yields that for any x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2 and any fixed y = (y1, y2) ∈ R2 ψj(x − 2−jℓ)ei2−j1 ℓ1ξ1ei2−j2 ℓ2ξ2(cid:16)bg(ξ)eiyξ(cid:17) dξ! 4π2 X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 Z 2j1+1 ξ1=−2j1+1Z 2j2+1 g(2−j ℓ + y)ψj(x − 2−jℓ) . g(x + y) 2−(j1+j2) ξ2=−2j2+1 = = 2−(j1+j2) X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 Hence for all y ∈ λj1,j2,k1,k2 = [2−j1k1, 2−j1(k1 + 1)) × [2−j2k2, 2−j2 (k2 + 1)) x1≤2−j1√2,x2≤2−j2√2g(x + y) z1−2−j1 k1≤2−j1 ,z2−2−j2 k2≤2−j2 g(z) ≤ ≤ 2−(j1+j2) X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 g(2−j ℓ + y) · ≤ 2−(j1+j2) X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 g(2−j ℓ + y) · sup sup 1 (1 + ℓ)M sup max(2j1x1,2j2x2)≤√2ψj(x − 2−jℓ) where the last inequality follows from the fast decay of ψ. Take M sufficiently large and use either the p triangular inequality either the Holder inequality according whether p ∈ (0, 1) or p ∈ [1, +∞]. Hence, one has g(2−j1 k1, 2−j2k2)p ≤ z1−2−j1 k1≤2−j1 ,z2−2−j2 k2≤2−j2 g(z)p ≤ C2−(j1+j2) X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 g(2−j ℓ+y)p· sup 1 (1 + ℓ)M ′ , for some M′ > 1. An integration over y ∈ λj1,j2,k1,k2 leads to 2−(j1+j2)g(2−j1 k1, 2−j2k2)p ≤ X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 1 (1 + ℓ)M ′ Zλj1,j2,k1,k2 g(y)pdy 24 and a sum over k ∈ Z2 gives Xk 2−(j1+j2)g(2−j1 k1, 2−j2k2)p ≤Xk X(ℓ1,ℓ2)∈Z2 1 (1 + ℓ)3Zλj1,j2,k1,k2 g(y)pdy which ends the proof of Lemma 4.5. (cid:3) Now, observe that cj1,j2,k1,k2 = ∆j1,j2f (2−j1k1, 2−j2k2). By Lemma 4.5 applied to g = ∆j1,j2f ∈ S(R2), one has X(k1,k2)∈Z2 cj1,j2,k1,k2p = X(k1,k2)∈Z2 ∆j1,j2f (2−j1k1, 2−j2k2)p ≤ C2j12j2k∆j1,j2fkp p , which is the desired wavelet characterization. Proof of implication (2) ⇒ (1) of Proposition 4.5 To obtain the converse implication, the same approach as in the proof of Theorem 3.1 of [27] is followed. Since φj1,j2 and ψm1,m2,k1,k1 are both defined as a tensorial product, Lemma 3.3 of [27] can be applied: there exists some C > 0 such that for any α > 0 and for all x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2 one has (29) φj1,j2 ⋆ ψm1,m2,k1,k1(x) ≤ C where M denotes the number of vanishing moments of the wavelets. (1 + 2inf(j1,m1)x1 − 2−m1 k1)α(1 + 2inf(j2,m2)x2 − 2−m2 k2)α 2−(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3) , A lemma analogous to Lemma 3.4 of [27] is now proved: Lemma 4.6 Let p ∈ [1, +∞], ℓ1, ℓ2, m1, m2 integers such that ℓ1 ≤ m1 and ℓ2 ≤ m2. We are also given some functions gk1,k2 satisfying the following inequality for some C > 0 : ∀x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2, gk1,k2(x) ≤ (1 + 2ℓ1x1 − 2−m1 k1)2(1 + 2ℓ2x2 − 2−m2k2)2 . C F = Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 dk1,k2gk1,k2 (30) Set Then (31) Proof. By definition of the Lp–norm, one has : kFkLp ≤ C2−(m1+m2)/p2m1−ℓ12m2−ℓ2 · Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 dk1,k2p Lp = ZR2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ Xk′=(k′ Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 2)∈Z2Zλm1,m2,k′ dk1,k2gk1,k2(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 dk1,k2gk1,k2(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ,k′ 2 1 1,k′ 25 p dx kFkp 1/p . p dx , 1,k′ 2 1,k′ 2 sup x∈λm1,m2,k′ where the hyperbolic dyadic cube λm1,m2,k′ are defined in (5). Observe now that, by the usual triangular inequality and by inequality (30), there exists some C > 0 such that for any (k1, k2) ∈ Z2, (k′1, k′2) ∈ Z2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 ≤ Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 Qi=1,2(1 + 2ℓi2−mik′i − 2−miki)2 (1 + 2ℓ1−m1k′1 − k1)2(1 + 2ℓ2−m2k′2 − k2)2 dk1,k2gk1,k2(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2)∈Z2 X(k1,k2)∈Z2 Lp ≤ C2−(m1+m2) X(k′ kFkp Let us recall the usual convolution inequality, valid for any sequences s, s′ in ℓp(Z2) for p ≥ 1, dk1,k2 Hence one has dk1,k2 1,k′ p , ks ∗ s′kp ℓp(Z2) ≤ kskp ℓp(Z2)ks′kp ℓ1(Z2) . Applied to s = dk1,k2 and s′ = (1 + 2ℓ1−m1k′1 − k1)−2(1 + 2ℓ2−m2k′2 − k2)−2, it gives kFkp Lp ≤ C2−(m1+m2) X(k1,k2)∈Z2 dk1,k2p X(k′ 1,k′ 2)∈Z2 (1 + 2ℓ1−m1k′1)2(1 + 2ℓ2−m2k′2)2 1 p , Recall now the classical result : Hence 1 1,k′ 2)∈Z2 (1 + 2ℓ1−m1k′1)2(1 + 2ℓ2−m2k′2)2 ≤ C2m1−ℓ12m2−ℓ2 Xk′=(k′ Lp ≤ C2−(m1+m2)2(m1−ℓ1)p2(m2−ℓ2)p Xk=(k1,k2)∈Z2 dk1,k2p p kFkp × Xk′=(k′ 1,k′ 2)∈Z2 1 Qi=1,2(1 + 2ℓi−mik′i)2 , which directly yields the required result. It ends the proof of Lemma 4.6. Let us now go back to Implication (2) ⇒ (1) of Proposition 4.5. Two cases are considered: p ∈ (0, 1) and p ∈ [1, +∞]. Let us first assume that p ∈ (0, 1). We have to bound k∆j1,j2fkLp = kφj1,j2 ⋆ fkLp. Observe that (cid:3) φj1,j2 ⋆ f = Xm1,m2 Xk1,k2 cm1,m2,k1,k2 (φj1,j2 ⋆ ψm1,m2,k1,k2) By the p–triangular inequality, it comes ∀x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2, φj1,j2 ⋆ f (x)p ≤ Xm1,m2 Xk1,k2 26 cm1,m2,k1,k2p (φj1,j2 ⋆ ψm1,m2,k1,k2)(x)p By Inequality (29), for all x = (x1, x2) ∈ R2, one has φj1,j2⋆f (x)p ≤ Xm1,m2 Xk1,k2 cm1,m2,k1,k2p× An integration over R2 implies that : 2−p(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3) (1 + 2inf(j1,m1)x1 − 2−m1k1)pα(1 + 2inf(j2,m2)x2 − 2−m2k2)pα kφj1,j2 ⋆ f (x)kp cm1,m2,k1,k2p2−p(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3) . Hence kfkq E s,α p,q, log β Lp ≤ Xm1,m2 Xk1,k2 )(cid:19)−βq kcm1,m2,·,·kp j1 α1 j2 α2 , = Xj1,j2(cid:18)max( ≤ Xj1,j2 Xm1,m2 Set for any t ∈ R, (t)+ = max(t, 0) and α1 Lp , j2 α2 2qs max( j1 )kφj1,j2 ⋆ f (x)kq ℓp2−p(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3)(cid:18)max( sgn(t) = 1 if t > 0, 0 if t = 0, −1 if t < 0. j1 α1 , j2 α2 )(cid:19)−βp 2ps max( j1 α1 , j2 α2 )!q/p Observe now that for any integers j, m and that for any integers j1, j2, m1, m2 m − (m − j)+ ≤ j ≤ (j − m)+ + m , max( m1 α1 , m2 α1 ) max( (m1−j1)+ α1 max( m1 α1 1 − , , m2 α1 α1 ) (m2−j2)+ ≤ max( ) j1 α1 , j2 α1 ) ≤ max( m1 α1 , m2 α1 )(cid:20)1 + max( (j1 − m1)+ α1 , (j2 − m2)+ α1 )(cid:21) , (except in the case m1 = m2 = 0 which can be treated separately). Hence E s,α p,q, log β ≤Xj1,j2 Xm1,m2 )(cid:19)−βp kfkq sm1,m2 =(cid:18)max( m2 α2 m1 α1 , um1,m2vj1−m1,j2−m2·!q/p , 2ps max( m1 α1 , m2 α2 )kcm1,m2,·,·kp ℓp , with and s′j1,j2 = 2−p(j1+j2)(M +3)[1 + max( (j1)+ α1 , (j2)+ α2 )]−βp2sgn(s)ps max( (j1)+ α1 , (j2)+ α2 ) If q/p > 1 Young's inequality can be applied, which states that for any sequences s, s′, ks ∗ s′kℓq/p(Z2) ≤ kskℓq/p(Z2)ks′kℓ1(Z2) , 27 whereas if q/p ≤ 1 the usual (q/p)–triangle inequality and the usual inequality ks∗ s′kℓ1(Z2) ≤ kskℓ1(Z2)ks′kℓ1(Z2) valid for any sequence s, s′ are applied. In any case, the following inequality is obtained kfkq E s,α p,q, log β , m1 α1 m2 α2 ≤ Xm1,m2(cid:18)max( )(cid:19)−βp ×Xj1,j2 2−p(j1+j2)(M +3)(cid:18)max( p,q, log β ≤ C Xm1,m2(cid:18)max( m1 α1 E s,α , kfkq 2qs max( m1 α1 , m2 α2 j1 α1 , j2 α2 )(cid:19)−βp ℓp! )kcm1,m2,·,·p )!max(q/p,1) 2ps max( j1 , j2 α2 α1 . )(cid:19)−βp 2qs max( m1 α1 , m2 α2 )kcm1,m2,·,·p ℓp! , m2 α2 If the wavelets have sufficiently vanishing moments, we get that which is the required result. We now consider the case p ∈ [1, +∞]. In this case, observe that ∆j1,j2f = Xk1,k2 dk1,k2gk1,k2 with and gk1,k2 = 2(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3)(φj1,j2 ⋆ ψm1,m2,k1,k2) , dk1,k2 = 2−(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3)cj1,j2,k1,k2 . We set ℓ1 = inf(j1, m1) and ℓ2 = inf(j2, m2). Lemma 4.6 gives k∆j1,j2fkLp ≤ C2−p(j1−m1+j2−m2)(M +3)2−(m1+m2)/pkcm1,m2,·,·p ℓp2m1−ℓ12m2−ℓ2 Again two cases q ≤ 1 and q > 1 are distinguished and the same approach than in the case p ∈ (0, 1) is followed. It leads to the required conclusion. 4.2 Proof of Theorem 3.1 First a two–microlocal criterion is proved. Proposition 4.6 1. Assume that f ∈ Cs,α(x0). Then there exists some C > 0 such that for any (j1, j2, k1, k2) ∈ (N ∪ {−1})2 × Z2, k1 cj1,j2,k1,k2 ≤ C min(2− j1 s (32) α1 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2j1 − a(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) s α1 , 2− j2 s s α2 ) . α2 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k2 2j2 − b(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2. Conversely, assume that f is uniformly Holder and that (32) holds, then f ∈ Cs,α log 2(x0). 28 (f (x1, x2) − Px0(a, x2))ψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ψ(2j2x2 − k2)dx1dx2 (f (x1, x2) − Px0(x1, b))ψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2)dx1dx2 ψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2)dx1dx2 s/α1Z ψ(u1)ψ(u2)du1du2! . Proof. Let us first assume that f ∈ Cs,α(x0) with x0 = (a, b). Assume that j1 6= −1 and j2 6= −1. By definition of the hyperbolic wavelet coefficients one has f (x1, x2)ψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2)dx1dx2 Since ψ admits at least one vanishing moment, the two following equalities hold and (34) (33) cj1,j2,k1,k2 = 2j1+j2ZR2 cj1,j2,k1,k2 = 2j1+j2ZR2 cj1,j2,k1,k2 = 2j1+j2ZR2 Equality (33) and the assumption f ∈ Cs,α(x0) imply that cj1,j2,k1,k2 ≤ 2j1+j2Z x1 − as 2j1 − as/α1(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ 2j1+j2ZR2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)x1 − α1 ZR2 u1s/α1ψ(u1)ψ(u2)du1du2 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2j1 − a(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) α1 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2j1 − a(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) α2 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2j2 − b(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) We now set u1 = 2j1x1 − k1, u2 = 2j2x2 − k2 and deduce that cj1,j2,k1,k2 ≤ 2− j1s Hence for some C depending only on ψ, s and α one has cj1,j2,k1,k2 ≤ C(2− j2s cj1,j2,k1,k2 ≤ C(2− j1 s A similar approach yields that 2j1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k1 k2 k1 s/α1 s/α2 ) ) αψ(2j1 x1 − k1)ψ(2j2 x2 − k2)dx1dx2 k1 s/α1 k1 This shows that (32) can be read as a necessary condition for pointwise regularity of function f . Let us now prove the converse result. Assuming that (32) holds, the aim first consists in defining a polynomial approximation of f at x0. To that end, a Taylor expansion is used to investigate the differentiability of f at x0. Let us define fj as: fj = X(j1,j2)∈Γj (α) X(k1,k2)∈Z2 cj1,j2,k1,k2ψj1,j2,k1,k2 . where the notations are the same as in the proof of Proposition 2.3. One has min(2−j1s/α1 + k1 fj(x) ≤ X(j1,j2)∈Γj X(k1,k2)∈Z2 2−js + k2 (1 + 2j1x1 − k1)N (1 + 2j2x2 − k2)N +Xj2≤j 2j − x2s/α2 + x2 − bs/α2 ≤ Xj1≤j Xk1,k2 (1 + 2j1x1 − k1)N (1 + 2j2x2 − k2)N 2j1 − as/α1, 2−j2s/α2 + k2 2j2 − as/α2) 2−js + k1 2j1 − x1s/α1 + x1 − as/α2 (1 + 2j1x1 − k1)N (1 + 2j2x2 − k2)N 29 Then (35) fj(x) ≤ C(j2−js + jx1 − as/α1 + jx2 − bs/α2) . In the same way, if β = (β1, β2), one has ∂βfj ≤ X(j1,j2)∈Γj 2j1β1+j2β2 X(k1,k2)∈Z2 min(2−j1s/α1 + k1 2j1 − as/α1, 2−j2s/α2 + k2 2j2 − as/α2 ) (1 + 2j1x1 − k1)N (1 + 2j2x2 − k2)N . Then (36) ∂βfj(x) ≤ C2j(β1α1+β2α2)(2−js + x1 − as/α1 + x2 − bs/α2) . So, the function f is β–differentiable at x0 provided that β1α1 + β2α2 ≤ s. The Taylor polynomial of f at x0 is defined by and Pj,x0(x) = Xβ1α1+β2α2≤s Px0(x) =Xj (x − x0)β β! ∂βfj(x0) Pj,x0(x) . We shall now bound f (x)−Px0(x) in the neighborhood of x0. Recall that f is assumed to be uniformly Holder, namely there exists some ε∗0 > 0 such that f ∈ Cε∗ 0 (R2). The inclusions between Holder spaces with different anisotropies (see [53]) leads to the existence of ε0 such that f ∈ Cε0,α(R2). Set J1 = [αJ/ε0]. Observe that f (x) − Px0(x) ≤Xj≤J fj(x) + Xj>J1 fj(x) +Xj>J fj(x) − Pj,x0(x) + J1Xj=J+1 Pj,x0(x) . Let us now bound each term of the right hand side of this inequality. We first deal with the term corresponding to j ≤ J. In this case we shall use an anisotropic version of Taylor inequality which can be found in [19], [26] and recalled in [9]. It gives the existence of some C > 0 such that fj(x) − Pj,x0(x) ≤ C X β1+β2≤k+1, α1β1+α2β2>s x − x0α1β1+α2β2 α sup z=(z1,z2)∈R2 ∂βfj . with k = [max(s/α1, s/α2)]. The bound (36) implies that there exists some C > 0 such that fj(x)−Pj,x0(x) ≤ C X β1+β2≤k+1, α1β1+α2β2>s x−x0α1β1+α2β2 α 2j(β1α1+β2α2)(2−js+x1−as/α1+x2−bs/α2) Hence, Xj≤J fj(x)−Pj,x0(x) ≤ C X β1+β2≤k+1, α1β1+α2β2>s x−x0α1β1+α2β2 α (2J(β1α1+β2α2−s)+2J(β1α1+β2α2)x−x0s α) . 30 Since x − x0α ≤ 2−J it comes Xj≤J (37) Let us now bound the sumPJ1 J1Xj=J J1Xj=J+1 fj(x) ≤ on J, one has (38) fj(x) − Pj,x0(x) ≤ Cx − x0s α j=J+1 fj(x). By (35) and the definition of J1 which depends (j2−js + jx − x0s α) ≤ J2−Js + J 2x − x0s α . To bound the sumPj>J1 fj(x) the uniform regularity of f is used, leading to (39) Xj>J1 fj(x) ≤ C2−J1ε0 ≤ C2−Js 2j(β1α1+β2α2−s) has the last equality following from the definition of J1. β! Xj>J (x − x0)β Finally, by (36), the sumPj>J Pj,x0(x) can be bounded. Indeed, for some C > 0, one Xj>J Pj,x0(x) ≤ Xβ1α1+β2α2<s Xj>J x1 − aβ1x2 − bβ2 Since x1 − a ≤ x − x0α1 (40) Xj>J Finally, Inequalities (37), (38), (39) and (40) yield that f ∈ Cs,α α ≤ 2−Jα1 and x2 − b ≤ x − x0α2 2−J(β1α1+β2α2)Xj>J α ≤ 2−Jα2 it comes 2j(β1α1+β2α2−s) ≤ C2−Js . ∂βfj(x0) ≤ C Xβ1α1+β2α2<s Pj,x0(x) ≤ C Xβ1α1+β2α2<s log 2(x0). β! (cid:3) Theorem 3.1 is a straightforward consequence of the two–microlocal criterion and of the following lemma: Lemma 4.7 The two following properties are equivalent: (i) Inequality (32) holds. (ii) Inequality (6) holds. Proof. Assume that (32) holds. If λ′ ⊂ 3λj1,j2(x0), then j′1 ≥ j1, j′2 ≥ j2 , and Condition (32) implies k′1 1 − a ≤ 2.2−j′ 2j′ 1 and k′2 2 − b ≤ 2.2−j′ 2j′ 2 . cλ′ ≤ min(2− j1s α1 , 2− j2s α2 ) = 2− max( j1 α1 , j2 α2 )s . 31 Conversely, assume that (6) holds. Let λ′ = λ(j′1, j′2, k′1, k′2) an hyperbolic dyadic cube. Set and j1 = sup{ℓ1, 2−j′ k′1 1 − a ≤ 2−ℓ1} 2j′ k′2 2 − b ≤ 2−ℓ2} 2 + 2j′ We have λ′ ⊂ 3λj1,j2(x0). Since (6) holds one has j2 = sup{ℓ2, 2−j′ 1 + cλ′ ≤ min(2− j1 s α1 , 2− j2 s α2 ) ≤ C min(2− that is 32 holds. 4.3 Proof of Theorem 3.2 j′ 1 s α1 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k′1 2j′ 1 − a(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) s/α1 , 2− s α2 ) , j′ 2 s α2 +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k′2 2j′ 2 − b(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:3) The proof of Theorem 3.2 is based on the two following lemmas, analogous to Propositions 7 and 8 of [35]: Lemma 4.8 Set α = (a, 2 − a) and define G(H, α) = {x ∈ R2, f 6∈ CH,α log 2(x)} . Let p > 0 and s ∈ (0, ω(p, α)/p]. Then for any H ≥ s − 2/p dimH(G(H, α)) ≤ Hp − sp + 2 . If H < s − 2/p, dimH(G(H, α)) = ∅. Lemma 4.9 Set α = (a, 2 − a) and define B(H, α) = {x ∈ R2, f ∈ CH,α(x)} . Let p < 0 and s ∈ (0, ω(p, α)/p]. Then dimH(B(H, α)) ≤ dimP (B(H, α)) ≤ Hp − sp + 2 . The proof of Lemma 4.8 in the case H ≥ s−2/p is exactly the same as this of Proposition 7 of [35], except that the set Gj,H are replaced with the sets G(j, H, α) = {λ = λ(j1, j2, k1, k2), (j1, j2) ∈ Γj(α),dλ ≥ 2−jHp} . Lemma 4.8 in the case H < s − 2/p, comes from the hyperbolic wavelet characterization of anisotropic Besov spaces stated in Theorem 2.2 and the Sobolev embeddings which can be proved in the anisotropic case as in the isotropic one (see [53]). The proof of Lemma 4.9 is exactly the same as this of Proposition 8 of [35], except that the set BH are replaced with the sets B(H, α). Lemmas 4.8 and 4.9 then imply Theorem 3.2, since for any α = (α1, α2) such that α1+α2 = 2 one has E(H, α) ⊂(cid:0)∩H ′>HG(H′, α)(cid:1) ∩(cid:0)∪H ′<H B(H′, α)(cid:1) . Acknowledgements. We warmly thank Florent Autin and Jean Marc Freyermuth for many stimulating discussions about applications of non parametric statistics to the analysis of anisotropic textures as well as Laurent Duval for giving us very interesting additional references about hyperbolic wavelet analysis. 32 References [1] P. Abry, S. Jaffard, and W. Wendt, Irregularities and scaling in signal and Image processing: Multifractal analysis, "Benoit Mandelbrot: A Life in Many Dimensions" World Scientific M. Frame Ed., 2012. [2] H. Aimar and I. G´omez, Parabolic Besov regularity for the heat equation., Constr. Approx., 36 (2012), pp. 145–159. [3] F. Autin, G. Claeskens, and J.-M. Freyermuth, Hyperbolic wavelet thresholding rules: the curse of dimensionality through the maxiset approach., Submitted, (2012). [4] A. Ayache, Hausdorff dimension of the graph of the Fractional Brownian Sheet., Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 20 (2004), pp. 395–412. [5] A. Ayache, S. Leger, and M. Pontier, Les ondelettes `a la conquete du Drap Brown- ien Fractionnaire., C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 335 (2002), pp. 1063–1068. [6] A. Ayache, F. Roueff, and Y. Xiao, Local and asymptotic properties of Linear Fractional Stable Sheets., C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris, 344 (2007), pp. 389–394. [7] , Linear Fractional Stable Sheets: Wavelet expansion and sample path properties., Stochastic Processes and their Applications, 119 (2009), pp. 1168–1197. [8] A. Ayache and Y. Xiao, Asymptotic properties and Hausdorff dimensions of Fractional Brownian Sheets., J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 11 (2005), pp. 407–439. [9] H. Ben Braiek and M. Benslimane, Baire generic anisotropic multifractal formalism in criteria in anisotropic function spaces, Submitted, (2011). [10] , Directional and anisotropic regularity and irregularity criteria in triebel wavelet bases, Submitted, (2011). [11] M. Benslimane, Multifractal formalism and anisotropic selfsimilar functions, Math. Proc. Camb. Philos. Soc., 124 (1998), pp. 329–363. [12] G. Beylkin, Wavelets and fast numerical algorithms, in Proceedings of Symposia of Applied Math., vol. 47, 1993. [13] G. Beylkin, R. Coifman, and V. Rokhlin, Fast wavelet transforms and numerical algorithms I, J. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 44 (1991), pp. 141–183. [14] H. Bierm´e, M. Meerschaert, and H. Scheffler, Operator scaling stable random fields., Stoch. Proc. Appl., 117 (2009), pp. 312–332. [15] A. Bonami and A. Estrade, Anisotropic analysis of some Gaussian models., J. Fourier Analysis and Applications, 9 (2003), pp. 215–236. [16] M. Bownik, Anisotropic Hardy spaces and wavelets, Mem. AMS, 781 (2003). [17] , Atomic and molecular decomposition of anisotropic Besov spaces, Math. Z., 250 (2005), pp. 539–571. 33 [18] M. Bownik and K. P. Ho, Atomic and molecular decomposition of anisotropic Triebel– Lizorkin spaces, Trans of Amer Math Soc, 385 (2005), pp. 1469–1510. [19] A. Calder´on and A. Torchinsky, Parabolic maximal functions associted with a dis- tribution, Adv. Math., 24 (1977), pp. 101–171. [20] E. Candes and L. Demanet, The curvelet representation of wave propagators is opti- mally sparse, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 58 (2005), pp. 1472– 1508. [21] M. Clausel and B. Vedel, Two optimality results about sample paths properties of Operator Scaling Gaussian Random Fields, Submitted, (2010). [22] S. Davies and P. Hall, Fractal analysis of surface roughness by using spatial data (with discussion)., J. Roy. Statist. Soc. Ser., B 61 (1999), pp. 3–37. [23] R. A. DeVore, S. V. Konyagin, and V. N. Temlyakov, Hyperbolic wavelet approx- imation, Constr. Approx., 14 (1998), pp. 1–26. [24] D. Donoho, Wedgelets: Nearly minimax estimation of edges, Ann. Stat., 27 (1999), pp. 353–382. [25] K. Falconer, Fractal Geometry: Mathematical Foundations and Applications, Wiley and sons, 1990. [26] G. Folland and E. Stein, Hardy spaces on homogeneous groups., Mathematical Notes, 28,Princeton University Press and University of Tokyo Press, 1982. [27] M. Frazier and B. Jawerth, Decomposition of besov spaces, Indiana University Math- ematics Journal, 34 (1985), pp. 777–799. [28] G. Garrig´os and A. Tabacco, Wavelet decompositions of anisotropic Besov spaces, Math. Nachr., 239–240 (2002), pp. 80–102. [29] K. Guo and D. Labate, Representation of Fourier integral operators using shearlets, The Journal of Fourier Analysis and Applications, 14 (2008), pp. 327–370. [30] , Analysis and detection of surface discontinuities using the 3d continuous shearlet transform, Appl.Comp.Harm. Anal., 30 (2011), pp. 231–242. [31] D. Haroske and E. Tam´asi, Wavelet frames for distributions in anisotropic Besov spaces, Georg. Math. J, 12 (2005), pp. 637–658. [32] R. Hochmuth, N-term approximation in anisotropic function spaces., Math. Nachr., 244 (2002), pp. 131–149. [33] , Wavelet characterizations for Anisotropic Besov Spaces, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal., 12 (2002), pp. 179–208. [34] L. Jacques, L. Duval, C. Chaux, and G. Peyr´e, A panorama on Multiscale Geo- metric Representations, Intertwining Spatial, Directional and Frequency Selectivity, Sub- mitted, (2012). 34 [35] S. Jaffard, Wavelet techniques in multifractal analysis, fractal geometry and applica- tions, Proc. Symp. Pure Math., 72 (2004), pp. 91–151. [36] , Pointwise and directional regularity of nonharmonic Fourier series, Appl. Comp. Harm. Anal., 28 (2010), pp. 251–266. [37] P. Lakhonchai, J. Sampo, and S. Sumetkijakan, Shearlet transforms and Holder regularities, International Journal of Wavelets, Multiresolution and Information Process- ing, To appear (2012). [38] T. Long and H. Triebel, Equivalent norms and Schauder bases in anisotropic besov spaces, Proc. Roy. Soc. Endinb., 84 A (1979), pp. 177–183. [39] Y. Meyer, Ondelettes et Op´erateurs : vol. I., Paris, Hermann, 1990. [40] M. Neumann, Multivariate wavelet thresolding in anisotropic function spaces, Statistica sinica, 10 (2000), pp. 399–431. [41] M. Neumann and R. von Sachs, Wavelet thresolding in anisotropic function classes and application to adaptative estimation of evolutionary spectra, Annals of Statistics, 25 (1997), pp. 38–76. [42] K. Nualtong and S. Sumetkijakan, Analysis of Holder regularities by wavelet–like transforms with parabolic scaling,, Thai Journal of Mathematics, (2005), pp. 275–283. [43] G. Parisi and U. Frisch, On the singularity spectrum of fully developped turbulence, in Turbulence and Predictability in Geophysical Fluid Dynamics, Proceedings of the International Summer School in Physics Enrico Fermi,North Holland, (1985), pp. 84–87. [44] L. Ponson, D. Bonamy, H. Auradou, G. Mourot, S. Morel, E. Bouchaud, C. Guillot, and J. Hulin, Anisotropic self-affine properties of experimental fracture surfaces., Int.Journ. of fracture, 140 (2006), pp. 27–37. [45] S. Roux, M. Clausel, B. Vedel, S. Jaffard, and P. Abry, The Hyperbolic Wavelet Transform for self-similar anisotropic texture analysis, Submitted, (2012). [46] J. Sampo and S. Sumetkijakan, Estimations of Holder regularities and direction of singularity by hart smith and curvelet transforms, Journal of Fourier Analysis and Applications, 15 (2009), pp. 58–79. [47] H. Schmeisser and H. Triebel, Spaces of functions of mixed smoothness and their relations to approximation from hyperbolic crosses, Journal of Approximation Theory, 128 (2004), pp. 115–150. [48] W. Sickel and T. Ullrich, Tensor products of Sobolev–Besov spaces and applications to approximation from the hyperbolic cross, Journal of Approximation Theory, 161 (2009), pp. 748–786. [49] H. Smith, A Hardy space for Fourier integral operators, J. Geom. Anal., 8 (1998), pp. 629–653. [50] C. Tricot, Two definitions of fractional dimension, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 18 (1991), pp. 54–74. 35 [51] H. Triebel, Interpolation theory, function spaces, differential operators., Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1978. [52] , Wavelet bases in anisotropic function spaces., Function Spaces, Differential Opera- tors and Nonlinear Analysis, FSDONA-04. Milovy, Czech Republic., 18 (2004), pp. 529– 550. [53] , Theory of function spaces III, Birhauser,Basel, 2006. [54] P. H. Westerink, Subband coding of images, PhD thesis, Delft University of Technol- ogy, Delft, The Netherlands, 1989. 36
1905.05152	1	1905	2019-05-13T17:10:00	Characterizing compact families via the Laplace transform	[ "math.FA" ]	In 1985, Robert L. Pego characterized compact families in $L^2(\reals)$ in terms of the Fourier transform. It took nearly 30 years to realize that Pego's result can be proved in a wider setting of locally compact abelian groups (works of G\'orka and Kostrzewa). In the current paper, we argue that the Fourier transform is not the only integral transform that is efficient in characterizing compact families and suggest the Laplace transform as a possible alternative.	math.FA	math	Characterizing compact families via the Laplace transform Mateusz Krukowski Łódź University of Technology, Institute of Mathematics, Wólczańska 215, 90-924 Łódź, Poland 9 1 0 2 y a M 3 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 2 5 1 5 0 . 5 0 9 1 : v i X r a May 14, 2019 Abstract In 1985, Robert L. Pego characterized compact families in L2(R) in terms of the Fourier transform. It took nearly 30 years to realize that Pego's result can be proved in a wider setting of locally compact abelian groups (works of Górka and Kostrzewa). In the current paper, we ar- gue that the Fourier transform is not the only integral transform that is efficient in characterizing compact families and suggest the Laplace transform as a possible alternative. Keywords : Laplace transform, Pego theorem, compactness AMS Mathematics Subject Classification: 44A10 (primary), 42A38 (sec- ondary) 1 Introduction Characterizing compact families is a vital topic in function spaces' theory at least since the end of the 19-th century. Around 1883, two Italian math- ematicians Cesare Arzelà (1847-1912) and Giulio Ascoli (1843-1896) provided the necessary and sufficient conditions under which every sequence of a given 1 family of real-valued continuous functions (defined on a closed and bounded interval), has a uniformly convergent subsequence (this is called sequential com- pactness). A couple of decades later (in 1931), Andrey Kolmogorov (1903-1987) succeeded in characterizing the compact families in Lp(RN ), when 1 < p < ∞ and all the functions are supported in a common bounded set (comp. [13]). A year later, Jacob David Tamarkin (1888-1945) got rid of the second restriction (comp. [19]) and in 1933, Marcel Riesz (1886-1969), a younger brother of Frigyes Riesz, proved the general case for Lp(RN ), where 1 6 p < ∞. In 1940, a French mathematician and one of the leaders of the Bourbaki group, André Weil (1906- 1998) wrote a book 'L'intégration dans les groupes topologique' (comp. [20]), in which he proved the Kolmogorov-Riesz theorem for a locally compact Hausdorff group G instead of RN . The next major contribution came over 40 years later (1985), when Robert L. Pego characterized compact families in L2(R) via the Fourier transform. This innovative idea was the cornerstone for the works of two Polish mathematicians Przemysław Górka and Tomasz Kostrzewa. In [4] and [5], they proved that a counterpart of Pego theorem holds for locally compact abelian groups (this is reminiscent of Weil's contribution). Obviously, there are other works related to the topic, which are worth-mentioning: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] or [11] just to name a few. In the current paper, we argue that the Fourier transform is not the only one that can be used to characterize compact families. In Section 2 we introduce the basic definitions and discuss the necessary notation. We also prove the fundamental theorems, which are very well-known in the context of the Fourier transform, and probably less known in the context of the Laplace transform. In Section 3 we prove the main results. Theorem 11, which is a counterpart of the Pego's result, is the climax of the paper. 2 Preliminary results Throughout the paper, by R+ we understand the open set (0,∞) and C stands for the field of complex numbers. For a measurable, complex-valued function f : R+ −→ C and a real number x > 0 we denote fx(t) = f (t)e−xt. We say that f : R+ −→ C is a Laplace-Pego function of order x > 0 if fx ∈ L1(R+) ∩ L2(R+). 2 The norms in L1(R+) and L2(R+) are denoted by k · k1 and k · k2, respectively. Moreover, if F is a family of Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0, then we denote Let f be a Laplace-Pego function of order x > 0. The Laplace transform Fx = {fx : f ∈ F}. L{f} of the function f is defined by L{f}(z) =Z ∞ 0 f (t)e−zt dt. A natural question arises: when does the above integral exist? To answer this question, observe that if Re(z) > x, then L{f}(z) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z ∞ =Z ∞ 0 0 f (t)e−Re(z)te−iIm(z)t dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 6Z ∞ f (t)e−xte(x−Re(z))t dt 6 kfxk1 < ∞. 0 f (t)e−Re(z)t dt In other words, the Laplace transform L{f} exists in the half-plane Re(z) > x. An important special case of the Laplace transform is the Fourier transform, which we define by Let us formulate a crucial theorem regarding the Laplace transform, which we will use multiple times throughout the paper: bf (y) = L{f}(2πiy). Theorem 1. (Plancherel theorem for the Laplace transform) If f is a Laplace-Pego function of order x > 0, then 1 2π Z ∞ −∞ L{f}(x + iy)2 dy =Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt. Proof. At first, observe that (1) (2) ∀y∈R L{f}(x + iy) =Z ∞ =Z ∞ 0 0 f (t)e−xte−iyt dt f (t)e−xte−2πi y 2π t dt = cfx(cid:18) y 2π(cid:19) . By the classical Plancherel theorem (Theorem 3.5.2 in [1], p. 53 or Theorem 1.1 in [18], p. 208) we have 2 2π(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) −∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)cfx(cid:18) y Z ∞ d y 2π −∞ fx(t)2 dt =Z ∞ =Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt. 3 Upon observing that 2 2π(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) −∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)cfx(cid:18) y Z ∞ we conclude the proof. (2) = d y 2π 1 2π Z ∞ −∞ L{f}(x + iy)2 dy The theorem, which we present below, is (again) a counterpart of a well-know result in the theory of Fourier transform: Theorem 2. (Riemann-Lebesgue lemma for the Laplace transform) If f is a Laplace-Pego function of order x > 0, then lim y→±∞ L{f}(x + iy) = 0. (3) Proof. At first, let f = 1(a,b) where (a, b) ⊂ R+. Then ∀y∈R L{f}(x+iy) =Z ∞ 1(a,b)(t)e−(x+iy)t dt =Z b 0 a e−(x+iy)t dt = e−(x+iy)a − e−(x+iy)b x + iy , so (3) holds. By linearity of the Laplace transform, the result is also true for all simple functions. Finally, let f be an arbitrary Laplace-Pego function and let ε > 0. Since simple functions are dense in L1(R+) (comp. Proposition 6.7 in [3], p. 183) there exists a simple function g such that Z ∞ 0 f (t)e−xt − g(t) dt < ε. (4) Hence y→±∞ L{f}(x + iy) = lim lim 6Z ∞ f (t)e−xte−iyt dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) y→±∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z ∞ g(t)e−iyt dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) y→±∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z ∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (t)e−xt − g(t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) dt + lim 2π(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) = ε, y→±∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)bg(cid:18) y y→±∞ L{g}(iy) = ε + lim (4) < ε + lim 0 0 where the last equality follows from the classical Riemann-Lebesgue lemma for the Fourier transform (comp. Theorem 1.7 in [12], p. 136). Since ε > 0 was chosen arbitrarily, we conclude the proof. 0 4 We will now recall the prominent fact that the Laplace trasnform 'changes the convolution of two functions to multiplication'. A convolution of two Laplace- Pego functions f, g with a common order x > 0 is defined by ∀t>0 f ⋆ g(t) =Z t 0 f (s)g(t − s) ds. In order to prove that the convolution is well-defined, let us invoke a general version of Tonelli's theorem (comp. Theorem B.3.3 in [2], p. 289): Theorem 3. (Tonelli's theorem) Let (X, µX), (Y, µY ) be two measure spaces and let F : X × Y −→ C be a measurable function such that n(x, y) ∈ X × Y : F (x, y) 6= 0o is σ−finite. If one of the integrals ZX ZY F (x, y) dµX(x) dµY (y) or ZX ZY F (x, y) dµX(y) dµY (x) is finite, then ZX ZY F (x, y) dµX(x) dµY (y) =ZX ZY F (x, y) dµY (y) dµX(x). In our case, both X and Y are the space R+ and both measures µX and µY are the standard Lebesgue measure. Consequently, the assumption of n(x, y) ∈ R+ × R+ : F (x, y) 6= 0o being σ−finite becomes obsolete, since R+ × R+ is σ−finite. Theorem 4. If f, g are Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0, then (f ⋆ g)x ∈ L1(R+). In particular, it exists almost everywhere. Proof. At first, let us observe that ∀t>0 e−xtf ⋆ g(t) =Z t =Z t 0 0 e−xtf (s)g(t − s) ds e−xsf (s)e−x(t−s)g(t − s) ds. (5) 5 Furthermore, by Proposition 3.9, p. 86 in [18], we note that the function F : R+ × R+ −→ C defined by F (t, s) = e−xsf (s)e−x(t−s)g(t − s) is measurable, so we are in position to apply Tonelli's theorem. Consequently, we obtain Z ∞ 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) e−xtf ⋆ g(t) dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Tonelli's thm= 0 (5) 6Z ∞ Z ∞ 0 0 Z t Z ∞ s e−xsf(s)e−x(t−s)g(t − s) ds dt e−xsf(s)e−x(t−s)g(t − s) dt ds = kfxk1 kgxk1 < ∞, which ends the proof. Theorem 5. (convolution theorem for the Laplace transform, comp. Theorem 2.39 in [16], p. 92) If f and g are Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0, then L{f ⋆ g}(z) = L{f}(z) · L{g}(z) for Re(z) > x. Proof. By Proposition 3.9, p. 86 in [18], we note that the function F : R+ × R+ −→ C defined by is measurable, so we are in position to apply Tonelli's theorem. We have F (t, s) = f (s)g(t − s)e−zt L{f ⋆ g}(z) =Z ∞ 0 Tonelli's thm= f ⋆ g(t)e−zt dt =Z ∞ Z ∞ Z ∞ 0 0 Z t 0 f (s)g(t − s)e−zt ds dt f (s)g(t − s)e−zt dt ds = L{f}(z) · L{g}(z), s which ends the proof. 3 Main results A family F of Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0 is said to be exponentially L2−equivanishing at x, if the family Fx is L2−equivanishing, i.e. ∀ε>0 ∃T >0 ∀f ∈F Z ∞ T 6 e−2xtf (t)2 dt < ε. (6) Furthermore, we say that a family F is Laplace equicontinuous at x, if −∞ L{f}(x + iy + δ) − L{f}(x + iy)2 dy < ε. ∀ε>0 ∃δ>0 ∀f ∈F We will now relate the concepts of Laplace equicontinuity and exponential 2π Z ∞ (7) 1 L2−equivanishing. Theorem 6. Let F be a Laplace-Pego family with a common order x > 0. If F is Laplace equicontinuous at x, then it is exponentially L2−equivanishing at x. Furthermore, if Fx is L2−bounded, then the implication can be reversed. Proof. We divide the proof into two parts: Part 1. At first, we assume that F is Laplace equicontinuous at x, so for a fixed ε > 0 we may choose δ > 0 according to (7). Let T > 0 be such that Consequently, for every f ∈ F we obtain 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δT − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) > 1 2 . (8) dt 2 ε > = Z T 0 Theorem 1 = 1 1 −∞ L{f}(x + iy + δ) − L{f}(x + iy)2 dy 2π Z ∞ f (t)(cid:16)e−δt − 1(cid:17) e−(x+iy)t dt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) −∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z ∞ 2π Z ∞ e−2xtf (t)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δt − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2Z ∞ dt +Z ∞ e−2xtf (t)2 dt, e−2xtf (t)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δt − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 dy (8) > 1 T T 0 2 which ends the first part of the proof. Part 2. At this point, we assume that Fx is L2−bounded, so there exists M > 0 such that ∀f ∈F Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt < M. We will show that if F is exponentially L2−equivanishing at x, then it is Laplace equicontinuous at x. 7 Fix ε > 0 and choose T > 0 as in the definition of the exponential L2−equivanishing (6). Let δ > 0 be such that 2 ∀f ∈F (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δT − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) M < ε. (9) We have Theorem 1 = 1 2π Z ∞ Z T e−2xtf (t)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δt − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) M +Z ∞ 6 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δT − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (9) T 2 0 2 which ends the proof. −∞ L{f}(x + iy + δ) − L{f}(x + iy)2 dy dt +Z ∞ e−2xtf (t)2 dt e−2xtf (t)2(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−δt − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (6) < 2ε, T 2 dt A family F of Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0 is said to be exponentially L2−equicontinuous at x, if ∀ε>0 ∃δ>0 ∀s∈(0,δ) f ∈F (cid:18)Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt(cid:19) 1 2 < ε. (10) Furthermore, we say that a family F is Laplace equivanishing at x, if ∀ε>0 ∃T >0 ∀f ∈F ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)2 dy < ε. (11) We study the relationship between the novel notion of the exponential L2−equicontinuity of F and the classical equicontinuity of Fx in the lemma below: Lemma 7. Let F be a family of Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x > 0. If Fx is L2−bounded then F is exponentially L2−equicontinuous at x if and only if Fx is L2−equicontinuous, i.e. ∀ε>0 ∃δ>0 ∀s∈(0,δ), f ∈F Z ∞ 0 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−x(t+s)f (t + s) − e−xtf (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 dt < ε. (12) Proof. Since Fx is L2−bounded, there exists M > 0 such that ∀f ∈F (cid:18)Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 2 < M. 8 We divide the proof of the lemma into two parts: Part 1. In the first part of the proof, we assume that the family F is exponentially L2−equicontinuous at x. We fix ε > 0 and choose δ > 0 such that • (12) is satisfied, and • for every s ∈ (0, δ) we have Z s 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt < ε, which is possible due to Theorem 8 in [14], p. 148, and • for every s ∈ (0, δ) we have (13) (14) 2 0 −s −s −s 2 e−2x(t+s)f (t + s) − f (t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 +(cid:18)Z ∞ e−2x(t+s)exsf (t) − f (t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 −s 2 2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−xs − 1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) M < ε. =(cid:18)Z ∞ e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt(cid:19) 1 e−2x(t+s)f (t + s) − exsf (t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 e−2x(t+s)f (t + s)2 dt +Z ∞ e−2x(t+s)f (t)2exs − 12 dt(cid:19) 1 e−2xtf (t)2 dt +Z ∞ Consequently, for every s ∈ (0, δ) and f ∈ F we have (cid:18)Z ∞ 6(cid:18)Z ∞ 6 Z 0 +(cid:18)Z ∞ 6 Z s + e−xs − 1M Since ε > 0 was chosen arbitrarily, the above estimates end the first part of the proof. e−x(t+s)f (t + s) − e−xtf (t)2 dt! 1 e−2x(t+s)f (t + s) − exsf (t)2 dt! 1 0 (12),(13),(14) 2 + ε. 1 (2ε) 0 0 0 2 6 2 2 Part 2. In this part of the proof, we assume that Fx is L2−equicontinuous. Again, we fix ε > 0 and let δ > 0 be such that 9 • (10) is satisfied, and • for every s ∈ (0, δ) we have 1 − exs M < ε and exs 6 2. (15) 0 For every s ∈ (0, δ) and f ∈ F we have (cid:18)Z ∞ dt(cid:19) 1 6(cid:18)Z ∞ dt(cid:19) 1 6 1 − exs(cid:18)Z ∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−x(t+s)f (t + s) − e−xtf (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−xtf (t) − e−x(t−s)f (t)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) e−2xtf (t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 2 2 0 s 2 2 + exsε 2 s 2 =(cid:18)Z ∞ +(cid:18)Z ∞ s (15) 6 1 − exs M + 2ε < 3ε, (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−xtf (t) − e−x(t−s)f (t − s)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)e−x(t−s)f (t) − e−x(t−s)f (t − s)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 dt(cid:19) 1 dt(cid:19) 1 2 2 which ends the proof. We will now study the relationship between the exponential L2−equicontinuity and the Laplace equivanishing. First, let us recall the Minkowski inequality: Theorem 8. (Minkowski integral inequality, comp. [3], p. 194 or [17], p. 271) Let (X, µX), (Y, µY ) be σ−finite measure spaces, 1 6 p < ∞ and let F : X × Y −→ C be a measurable function. Then (cid:18)ZX (cid:18)ZY F (x, y) dy(cid:19)p p dx(cid:19) 1 6ZY (cid:18)ZX F (x, y)p dx(cid:19) 1 p dy. (16) Theorem 9. Let F be a Laplace-Pego family with a common order x > 0. Expo- nential L2−equicontinuity at x implies Laplace equivanishing at x. Furthermore, if Fx is L2−bounded, then the implication can be reversed. Proof. We divide the proof into two parts: Part 1. We assume that the family F is exponentially L2−equicontinuous at x, so for a fixed ε > 0 we can choose δ > 0 according to the exponential L2−equicontinuity (10). Let g be a compactly supported, continuous function on R+, satisfying the following conditions: • g is nonnegative, and 10 • supp(g) ⊂ (0, δ), and • R ∞ g(s) ds = 1. 0 Naturally, g is a Laplace-Pego function of order x. By Theorem 2, let T > 0 be such that ∀y∈[−T,T ] L{g}(x + iy) 6 1 2 . (17) Consequently, we have ∀f ∈F ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)2 dy! 1 2 (17) 6 ZR\[−T,T ] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)L{f}(x + iy)(cid:16)1 − L{g}(x + iy)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 6 ZR\[−T,T ] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)L{f}(x + iy)(cid:16)1 − L{g}(x + iy)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) + ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)L{g}(x + iy)2 dy! 1 2 ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)2 dy! 1 dy! 1 + 1 2 2 2 2 dy! 1 2 , 11 which implies ∀f ∈F ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)2 dy! 1 2 2 2 2 0 2(cid:18)ZR L{f}(x + iy) − L{f ⋆ g}(x + iy)2 dy(cid:19) 1 2√2π(cid:18)Z ∞ 6 2ZR\[−T,T ] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)L{f}(x + iy)(cid:16)1 − L{g}(x + iy)(cid:17)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) e−2xtf (t) − f ⋆ g(t)2 dt(cid:19) 1 f (t − s)g(s) ds(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) e−2xt(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)f (t) −Z ∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)Z ∞ e−xt(f (t) − f (t − s))g(s) ds(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:18)Z ∞ e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2g(s)2 dt(cid:19) 1 2√2πZ ∞ e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt(cid:19) 1 g(s)(cid:18)Z ∞ e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt(cid:19) 1 g(s)(cid:18)Z ∞ g(s) ds = 2√2πε. dt! 1 dt! 1 ds ds ds 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 Theorem 5 6 Theorem 1 = = 2√2π Z ∞ = 2√2π Z ∞ 0 0 Minkowski ineq. 6 0 = 2√2πZ ∞ = 2√2πZ δ 6 2√2πεZ δ 0 0 2 1 2 dy 2 Let us remark that the use of Minkowski inequality in hte above estimates is justified, because the function F (t, s) = e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2g(s)2 is measur- able due to Proposition 3.9, p. 86 in [18]. Since ε > 0 was chosen arbitrarily, the above estimates end the first part of the proof. Part 2. For this part of the proof, we assume that Fx is L2−bounded, so there exists M1 > 0 such that ∀f ∈F Z ∞ 0 e−2xtf (t)2 dt < M1. (18) We will show that if F is Laplace equivanishing at x then it is exponentially L2−equicontinuous at x. For convenience, we denote T−sf (t) = f (t − s). We 12 observe the following equalities f ∈F Z ∞ ∀ s>0 0 e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt =Z ∞ 0 Theorem 1 = 1 −∞ L{f − T−sf}(x + iy)2 dy e−2xtf (t) − T−sf (t)2 dt 2π Z ∞ −∞ L{f}(x + iy) − e−s(x+iy)L{f}(x + iy)2 dy −∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)1 − e−s(x+iy)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) L{f}(x + iy)2 dy. (19) 2 1 2π Z ∞ 2π Z ∞ 1 = = Fix ε > 0 and choose T > 0 according to Laplace equivanishing (11). Let δ > 0 be such that y∈R 2 . 2 < ε, and put ∀ s∈(0,δ) M2 = max s∈[0,δ], y∈[−T,T ] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)1 − e−s(x+iy)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)1 − e−s(x+iy)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Finally, for every s ∈ (0, δ) and f ∈ F , we have 2π Z T −T (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)1 − e−s(x+iy)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2π ZR\[−T,T ] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)1 − e−s(x+iy)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2π ZR\[−T,T ] L{f}(x + iy)2 dy 2π(cid:19) ε. ε 6(cid:18)M1 + −T L{f}(x + iy)2 dy+ ε Z ∞ e−2xtf (t) − f (t − s)2 dt e−2xtf (t)2 dt+ 2π Z T Theorem 1, (11) Z ∞ (20), (21) M2 2π (19) = 1 1 M2 M2 ε 6 + 0 6 0 (20) (21) 2 L{f}(x + iy)2 dy 2 L{f}(x + iy)2 dy Since ε > 0 was chosen arbitrarily, we conclude the proof. Before we present the final theorem of the paper, let us recall the celebrated Riesz-Kolmogorov theorem: Theorem 10. (Riesz-Kolmogorov theorem, comp. [10]) A family A ⊂ L2(R+) is relatively compact if and only if 13 • A is L2−bounded, and • A is L2−equicontinuous, and • A is L2−equivanishing. The final theorem, which is the climax of the paper, should be juxtaposed with Pego theorem in [4], [5] and [15]. Theorem 11. Let F be the family consisting of Laplace-Pego functions with a common order x and such that Fx is L2−bounded. The family Fx is relatively compact in L2(R+) if and only if • F is Laplace equicontinuous at x, and • F is Laplace equivanishing at x. Proof. The proof is divided into two parts: Part 1. We assume that F is Laplace equicontinuous and equivanishing at x. At first, we note that Laplace equicontinuity of F at x implies that this family is exponentially L2−equivanishing at x (Theorem 6). In other words, Fx is L2−equivanishing. Furthermore, Laplace equivanishing of F at x implies that this family is ex- ponentially L2−equicontinuous (Theorem 9). In other words, Fx is L2−equicontinuous (Lemma 7). By Theorem 10, we conclude that Fx is relatively compact in L2(R+). Part 2. For the second part of the proof, we assume that Fx is relatively com- pact in L2(R+). By Theorem 10, the family Fx is L2−equicontinuous and L2−equivanishing. L2−equicontinuity of Fx implies that F is Laplace equivanishing at x (Lemma 7 and Theorem 9). Moreover, L2−equivanishing of Fx implies that F is Laplace equicontinuous at x (Theorem 6), which ends the proof. 14 References [1] Deitmar A. : A First Course in Harmonic Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2005 [2] Deitmar A., Echterhoff S. : Principles of Harmonic Analysis, Springer, New York, 2009 [3] Folland G. B. : Real Analysis: Modern techniques and their applications, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1999 [4] Górka, P. : Pego theorem on locally compact abelian groups, Journal of Algebra and Its Applications, Vol. 14, No. 4 (2014) [5] Górka P., Kostrzewa T. : Pego everywhere, Journal of Algebra and Its Ap- plications, Vol. 15, No. 4 (2016) [6] Górka P., Macios A. : The Riesz-Kolmogorov theorem on metric spaces, Miskolc Mathematical Notes, Vol. 15 (2014) [7] Górka P., Macios A. : Almost everything you need to know about relatively compact sets in variable Lebesgue spaces, Journal of Functional Analysis, Vol. 269, No. 7 (2015) [8] Górka P., Rafeiro H. : From Arzelà-Ascoli to Riesz-Kolmogorov, Nonlinear Analysis, Vol. 144 (2016) [9] Górka P., Rafeiro H. : Light side of compactness in Lebesgue spaces: Sudakov theorem, Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae Mathematica, Vol. 42 (2017) [10] Hanche-Olsen H., Holden H. : The Kolmogorov-Riesz compactness theorem, Expositiones Mathematicae, Vol. 28, No. 4 (2010) [11] Hanche-Olsen H., Holden H., Malinnikova E. : An improvement of the Kolmogorov-Riesz compactness theorem, Expositiones Mathematicae (2018) [12] Katznelson Y. : An introduction to harmonic analysis, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, 2004 15 [13] Kolmogorov A. N. : Über Kompaktheit der Funktionenmengen bei der Kon- vergenz im Mittel, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, Vol. 9, p. 60-63 (1931) [14] Natanson I. P. : Theory of functions of a real variable, Dover Publications, New York, 2016 [15] Pego R. L. : Compactness in L2 and the Fourier transform, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 95, No. 2 (1985) [16] Schiff J. L. : The Laplace Transform. Theory and applications, Springer- Verlag, New York, 1999 [17] Stein E. : Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1970 [18] Stein E., Shakarchi R. : Real analysis: measure theory, integration and Hilbert spaces, Princeton University Press, Princeton 2005 [19] Tamarkin J. D. : On the compactness of the space Lp, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, Vol. 32, p. 79-84 (1932) [20] Weil A. : L'intégration dans les groupes topologiques et ses applications, Hermann, Paris, 1965 16
1407.4632	2	1407	2015-01-08T14:25:25	Weak factorization and Hankel forms for weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball	[ "math.FA", "math.CV" ]	We establish weak factorizations for a weighted Bergman space $A^p_{\a}$, with $1<p<\infty$, into two weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball of $\C^n$. To obtain this result, we characterize bounded Hankel forms on weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball of $\C^n$.	math.FA	math	WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL FORMS FOR WEIGHTED BERGMAN SPACES ON THE UNIT BALL JORDI PAU AND RUHAN ZHAO ABSTRACT. We establish weak factorizations for a weighted Bergman space Ap α, with 1 < p < ∞, into two weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball of Cn. To obtain this result, we characterize bounded Hankel forms on weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball of Cn. 1. INTRODUCTION A classical theorem of Riesz asserts that any function in the Hardy space H p on the unit disk can be factored as f = Bg with kf kHp = kgkHp, where B is a Blaschke product and g is an H p-function with no zeros on the unit disk. An immediate consequence of that result is that any function in the Hardy space H p admits a "strong" factorization f = f1f2 with f1 ∈ H p1, f2 ∈ H p2 and kf1kHp1 · kf2kHp2 = kf kHp, for any p1 and p2 determined by the condition 1/p = 1/p1 + 1/p2. In [12], C. Horowitz obtained strong factorizations of functions in a weighted Bergman space on the unit disk into functions of two weighted Bergman spaces with the same weight (again using Blaschke products). These strong factorization results are no longer possible to obtain [11] in the setting of Hardy and Bergman spaces in the unit ball of the complex euclidian space Cn of dimension n when n ≥ 2, but it is still possible to obtain some "weak" factorizations for functions in these spaces. For two Banach spaces of functions, A and B, defined on the same domain, the weakly factored space A ⊙ B is defined as the completion of finite sums kf kA⊙B = inf(Xk kϕkkAkψkkB : f =Xk ϕkψk) . When 0 < p ≤ 1, weak type factorizations for the Hardy spaces H p and the weighted Bergman spaces Ap α on the unit ball of Cn are well known (see [6] and [9] for Hardy spaces; and [5], [20] or [24, Corollary 2.33] for Bergman spaces). However, when 1 < p < ∞, even for unweighted Bergman spaces the problem was still open (see, for example [4]). In this paper we completely solve the above problem for Bergman spaces by establishing β, with 1 < q < ∞ and β > −1, into weak factorizations for a weighted Bergman space Aq 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 32A36, 47B35, 47B38. Key words and phrases. Weak factorization, Hankel operators, Bergman spaces. This work started when the second named author visited the University of Barcelona in 2013. He thanks the support given by the IMUB during his visit. The first author was supported by DGICYT grant MTM2011- 27932-C 02-01 (MCyT/MEC) and the grant 2014SGR289 (Generalitat de Catalunya). 1 f =Xk with the following norm: ϕkψk, {ϕk} ⊂ A, {ψk} ⊂ B, 2 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO two weighted Bergman spaces with non necessarily the same weight, on the unit ball Bn of Cn. The following is our main result. Theorem 1. Let 1 < q < ∞ and β > −1. Then Aq β(Bn) = Ap1 α1 (Bn) ⊙ Ap2 α2 (Bn) for any p1, p2 > 0 and α1, α2 > −1 satisfying (1) 1 p1 + 1 p2 = 1 q , α1 p1 + α2 p2 = β q . In this context, by "=" we mean equality of the function spaces and equivalence of the is a norms. The inclusion Ap1 direct consequence of Minkowski and Holder inequalities, so that the interesting part is the other inclusion with the corresponding estimates for the norms. β with the estimate kf kq,β . kf kA α2 ⊂ Aq α1 ⊙ Ap2 p1 α1 ⊙A p2 α2 Now we are going to recall the definition of the weighted Bergman spaces. First we need some notations. For any two points z = (z1, ..., zn) and w = (w1, ..., wn) in Cn, we use to denote the inner product of z and w, and hz, wi = z1 ¯w1 + · · · + zn ¯wn z =phz, zi =pz12 + · · · + zn2 to denote the norm of z in Cn. Let Bn = {z ∈ Cn : z < 1} be the unit ball in Cn and Sn = {z ∈ Cn : z = 1} be the unit sphere in Cn. Let H(Bn) be the space of all analytic functions on Bn. We use dv to denote the normalized volume measure on Bn and dσ to denote the normalized area measure on Sn. For −1 < α < ∞, we let dvα(z) = cα(1 − z2)α dv(z) denote the normalized weighted volume measure on Bn, where cα = Γ(n + α + 1)/[n!Γ(α + 1)]. For 0 < p < ∞ and −1 < α < ∞, let Lp(Bn, dvα) be the weighted Lebesgue space which contains measurable functions f on Bn such that kf kp p,α =ZBn f (z)p dvα(z) < ∞. Denote by Ap α = Lp(Bn, dvα) ∩ H(Bn), the weighted Bergman space on Bn, with the same norm as above. If α = 0, we simply write them as Lp(Bn, dv) and Ap respectively and kf kp for the norm of f in these spaces. It is a well-known fact that to obtain weak factorization results is equivalent to give a "good" description of the boundedness of certain Hankel forms. A Hankel form is a bilinear form B on a space of analytic functions such that for any f and g, B(f, g) is a linear function of f g. These forms have been extensively studied on Hardy spaces and on Bergman spaces. For the case of the Hardy space on the unit disk, a classical result by Nehari [18] says that the Hankel form Bb(f, g) := hf g, bi (under the usual integral pair for Hardy spaces) with an analytic symbol b is bounded on H 2 × H 2 if and only if b ∈ BM OA, the space of analytic functions of bounded mean oscillation. The proof used the fact that a function in H 1 can be factored into product of two functions in H 2. Unfortunately, such strong factorization is not possible (see [11]) for Hardy spaces in the unit ball Bn of Cn. However, Coifman, Rochberg and Weiss [6] were WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 3 able to generalize Nehari's result to the unit ball Bn by using a weak factorization of H 1. Namely, they proved that H 2(Bn) ⊙ H 2(Bn) = H 1(Bn). Our approach to the problem for weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball is the oppo- site to the one of Coifman, Rochberg and Weiss in [6]. We first characterize boundedness of the Hankel forms on weighted Bergman spaces, and with this result the weak factoriza- tion easily follows. Given α > −1 and a holomorphic symbol function b we define the associated Hankel type bilinear form T α b for polynomials f and g by T α b (f, g) = hf g, biα, where the integral pair h , iα is defined as (2) hϕ, ψiα =ZBn ϕ(z) ψ(z) dvα(z). Since the polynomials are dense in the weighted Bergman spaces, the Hankel form T α densely defined on Ap1 is bounded on Ap1 b is α2 for any p1, p2 > 0 and any α1, α2 > −1. We say that T α b α2 if there exists a positive constant C such that α1 × Ap2 α1 × Ap2 The norm of T α b is given by T α b (f, g) ≤ Ckf kp1,α1kgkp2,α2 . kT α b k = kT α b kAp1 α1 ×Ap2 α2 := sup{T α The next result characterizes boundedness of the Hankel form T α We will see in Section 3 that this implies the weak factorization in Theorem 1. b (f, g) : kf kp1,α1 = kgkp2,α2 = 1 }. b acting on Ap1 α2. α1 × Ap2 Theorem 2. Let 1 < p1, p2 < ∞, and α, α1, α2 > −1 satisfy (3) 1 p1 + 1 p2 < 1, 1 + α1 1 + α2 + < 1 + α. p1 p2 α2 if and only b ∈ Aq′ b is bounded on Ap1 Then T α satisfying (1), and q′ and β′ are determined by the condition α1 × Ap2 β ′, where q and β are real numbers (4) 1 q + 1 q′ = 1, β q + β′ q′ = α. Furthermore, we have kT α b k ≍ kbkq′,β ′ Remarks. Note that, condition (3) guarantees that q > 1 and β′ > −1. When q and β satisfy condition (1), automatically we would have β > −1 (to see this, simply add two equations in (1) together). By a general duality theorem for weighted Bergman spaces (see Theorem A in Section 2), the condition b ∈ Aq′ β ′ means that the symbol b belongs to the dual space of Aq β under the pairing given by (2). It turns out that boundedness of the Hankel form T α b is equivalent to boundedness of a (small) Hankel operator, which we are going to introduce in a moment. Let α > −1. It is well-known that, the integral operator Pαf (z) =ZBn f (w) (1 − hz, wi)n+1+α d vα(w) 4 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO is the orthogonal projection from L2(Bn, dvα) onto the weighted Bergman space A2 α. The above formula can be used to extend Pα to a linear operator from L1(Bn, dvα) into H(Bn). For 1 < p < ∞, Pα is a bounded operator from Lp(Bn, dvα) onto Ap α. Denote by Ap α the conjugate analytic functions f on Bn that are in Lp(Bn, dvα). Clearly, Ap α = {f : f ∈ Ap α}. Let Qα denote the orthogonal projection from L2(Bn, dvα) onto A2 α. Clearly one has Qαf (z) = Pαf (z) =ZBn f (w) (1 − hw, zi)n+1+α dvα(w). Given f ∈ L1(Bn, dvα) and a polynomial g, the weighted (small) Hankel operator is defined by hα f g = Qα(f g). Due to the density of polynomials, the small Hankel operator hα weighted Bergman space Ap Hankel operator with conjugate analytic symbols, that is, hα f to Ap2 f is densely defined on the α for 1 ≤ p < ∞. We will study boundedness of the small with f ∈ H(Bn), from Ap1 α1 α2 with 0 < p2 < p1 < ∞. Theorem 3. Let 1 < p2 < p1 < ∞ and α1, α2 > −1 such that (5) Let f ∈ H(Bn) and α such that (6) 1 + α1 p1 < 1 + α2 p2 . 1 + α > 1 + α2 p2 . ¯f : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 α2 is bounded if and only if f ∈ Aq β, where q and β are real numbers Then hα such that Moreover, we have khα = 1 q 1 p2 f k ≍ kf kq,β. − 1 p1 , β q = α2 p2 − α1 p1 . α1 ⊂ Ap2 Remarks. Condition (5) guarantees that β > −1. It is known that, when 0 < p2 < p1 < ∞, Ap1 α2 if and only if (5) is true (see [22, Theorem 70]). Hence the above result concerns the boundedness of hα f from a smaller space to a larger space. Also, by [24, Theorem 2.11], condition (6) means that the integral operator Pα is a bounded projection from Lp2(Bn, dvα2 ) onto Ap2 α2. If one considers the operator Sα f g = h ¯f g(z) = Pα(f g), clearly, the boundedness of hα f and the norms of hα theorem we easily obtain f and Sα is equivalent to the boundedness of Sα f are equivalent. Now, if g ∈ Ap1 α1 and h ∈ Ap2 f from Ap1 α1 to Ap2 α2, α2, by Fubini's f (g, h) = hgh, f iα = hh, Pα(f ¯g)iα = hh, Sα T α f giα. WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 5 Hence, for p2 > 1, by duality (see Theorem A in Section 2), the Hankel form T α bounded on Ap1 to Ap′ α′ α2 if and only if the small Hankel operator hα f , with equivalent norms. Here, the numbers α′ f is is bounded from Ap1 α1 α1 × Ap2 2 2 1 p2 + 1 p′ 2 = 1, α = 2 are defined by the relation 2 and p′ α′ 2 p′ 2 α2 p2 + . Comparing Theorem 2 with Theorem 3, notice that the first inequality in (3) is equivalent to condition 1 < p′ 2, con- dition (6) turns out to be equivalent to α2 > −1, and therefore is always satisfied; and the second inequality in (3) is equivalent to condition (5). Therefore, Theorem 3 implies Theorem 2. 2 < p1 < ∞. Also, when p2 and α2 are replaced by p′ 2 and α′ In the case of the same weights, that is, when α1 = α2 = β = α, all the restrictions in Theorem 3 reduces to p2 > 1. We isolate this case here, since it proves a conjecture in [4]. Corollary 4. Let α > −1, 1 < p2 < p1 < ∞ and f ∈ H(Bn). Then hα f bounded if and only if f ∈ Aq α, with q = p1p2 p1−p2 . : Ap1 α → Ap2 α is The paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we give some necessary concepts and recall some key results which are needed in our proof of the main result. In Section 3 we give in detail the connection between weak factorizations and Hankel forms. The proof of Theorem 3 is given in Section 4. In the following, the notation A . B means that there is a positive constant C such that A ≤ CB, and the notation A ≍ B means that both A . B and B . A hold. 2. PRELIMINARIES We need the following duality theorem. In this generality the result is due to Luecking [16] (see also, Theorem 2.12 in [24]). Theorem A. Suppose β, β′ > −1 and 1 < q < ∞. Then (Aq β)∗ = Aq′ β ′ (with equivalent norms) under the integral pair h , iα given by (2), where 1 q + 1 q′ = 1, α = β q + β′ q′ . We need the following well known integral estimate that can be found, for example, in [24, Theorem 1.12]. Lemma B. Let t > −1 and s > 0. There is a positive constant C such that ZBn (1 − w2)t dv(w) 1 − hz, win+1+t+s ≤ C (1 − z2)−s for all z ∈ Bn. For any a ∈ Bn with a 6= 0, we denote by ϕa(z) the Mobius transformation on Bn that exchanges 0 and a. It is known that, for any z ∈ Bn ϕa(z) = a − Pa(z) − saQa(z) 1 − hz, ai , 6 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO where sa = 1 − a2 , Pa is the orthogonal projection from Cn onto the one dimensional subspace [a] generated by a, and Qa is the orthogonal projection from Cn onto the orthog- onal complement of [a]. When a = 0, ϕa(z) = −z. ϕa has the following properties: ϕa ◦ ϕa(z) = z, and 1 − ϕa(z)2 = (1 − a2)(1 − z2) 1 − hz, ai2 . For z, w ∈ Bn, the pseudo-hyperbolic distance between z and w is defined by ρ(z, w) = ϕz(w), and the hyperbolic distance on Bn between z and w induced by the Bergman metric is given by For z ∈ Bn and r > 0, the Bergman metric ball at z is given by β(z, w) = tanh ρ(z, w). It is known that, for a fixed r > 0, the weighted volume D(z, r) = {w ∈ Bn : β(z, w) < r}. vα(D(z, r)) ≍ (1 − z2)n+1+α. We refer to [24] for all of the above facts. A sequence {ak} of points in Bn is a separated sequence (in Bergman metric) if there exists a positive constant δ > 0 such that β(zi, zj) > δ for any i 6= j. We need a well- known result on decomposition of the unit ball Bn. The following version is Theorem 2.23 in [24] Lemma C. There exists a positive integer N such that for any 0 < r < 1 we can find a sequence {ak} in Bn with the following properties: (i) Bn = ∪kD(ak, r). (ii) The sets D(ak, r/4) are mutually disjoint. (iii) Each point z ∈ Bn belongs to at most N of the sets D(ak, 4r). Any sequence {ak} satisfying the conditions of the above lemma is called a lattice (or an r-lattice if one wants to stress the dependence on r) in the Bergman metric. Obviously any r-lattice is separated. For convenience, we will denote by Dk = D(ak, r) and Dk = D(ak, 4r). Then k=1Dk and there is an positive integer N such that every Lemma C says that Bn = ∪∞ point z in Bn belongs to at most N of sets Dk. We also need the following atomic decomposition theorem for weighted Bergman spaces. This turns out to be a powerful theorem in the theory of Bergman spaces. The result is ba- sically due to Coifman and Rochberg [5], and can be found in Chapter 2 of [24]. Theorem D. Suppose p > 0, α > −1, and b > n max(cid:18)1, 1 p(cid:19) + 1 + α p . Then we have (i) For any separated sequence {ak} in Bn and any sequence λ = {λk} ∈ ℓp, the function f (z) = λk ∞Xk=1 (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α)/p (1 − hz, aki)b WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 7 belongs to Ap α and kf kp,α . kλkℓp. (ii) There is an r-lattice {ak} in Bn such that, for any f ∈ Ap α, there is a sequence λ = {λk} ∈ ℓp with and f (z) = λk ∞Xk=1 (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α)/p (1 − hz, aki)b . kλkℓp . kf kp,α. In the proof given in [24], part (i) requires that the sequence {ak} is an r-lattice for some r ∈ (0, 1], but it is well known that only the separation of the sequence {ak} is needed. 3. WEAK FACTORIZATIONS AND HANKEL FORMS It is well known to specialists, but difficult to find in the literature, that the obtention of weak factorizations is equivalent to estimates for small Hankel operators or Hankel forms (in our case, estimates with loss). The equivalence between boundedness of the b and weak factorization can be formulated as the following result. bilinear Hankel form T α Since this is the basis for our obtention of the weak factorization for Bergman spaces, for completeness, we offer the proof here of the implication that gives the factorization. Proposition 5. Let 1 < q < ∞ and α, β > −1. Let p1, p2 and α1, α2 satisfy (3) and (1), and let q′ and β′ satisfy (4). The following are equivalent: β ⊂ Ap1 (i) Aq (ii) For any analytic function b, if T α α2 with kf kAp1 α1 ⊙ Ap2 α1 ⊙Ap2 α2 . kf kq,β for f ∈ Aq β. α2, then b ∈ Aq′ α1 × Ap2 b is bounded on Ap1 β ′ with kbkq′,β ′ . kT α b k. Proof. We will prove (ii) implies (i). The other implication is easier, and the interested reader can follow the argument in [1, Corollary 1.2] for a proof. By the atomic decom- position in Theorem D, we have the inclusion Aq α2 . In order to have the corresponding estimate for the norms, we will show that, for any bounded linear functional F on Ap1 β ′ with kbF kq′,β ′ . kF k such that F (f ) = hf, bF iα for f ∈ Aq α2, there is a unique function bF ∈ Aq′ β ⊂ Ap1 α1 ⊙ Ap2 α1 ⊙ Ap2 β. This would give kf kA p1 α1 ⊙A p2 α2 F (f ) ≤ sup kF k=1 kbF kq′,β ′ · kf kq,β . kf kq,β. Thus, suppose F ∈ (Ap1 α2 )∗ with norm kF k. Then for all ϕ ∈ Ap2 α2 we have = sup kF k=1 α1 ⊙ Ap2 F (ϕ) = F (1 · ϕ) ≤ kF k · k1kp1,α1 · kϕkp2,α2 = kF k · kϕkp2,α2 . Hence F ∈ (Ap2 such that F (ϕ) = hϕ, biα for all ϕ ∈ Ap2 α2 )∗, and so, by Theorem A, there is an unique function b = bF ∈ Ap′ 2 α′ 2 2 and α′ 2 satisfy α2, where p′ α2 p2 + = 1, α′ 2 p′ 2 = α. 1 p2 + 1 p′ 2 Now, for polynomials g and h we have T α b (g, h) = hgh, biα = F (gh) ≤ kF k · kghkA ≤ kF k · kgkp1,α1 · khkp2,α2 , p1 α1 ⊙A p2 α2 8 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO b is bounded on Ap1 which shows that T α that b ∈ Aq′ linear form on Aq F (f ) = Λ(f ) = hf, biα. The proof is complete. b k ≤ kF k. Therefore, we know b k . kF k. Hence Λ(f ) = hf, biα defines a bounded β, we have (cid:3) β, and coincides with F on polynomials. Thus, for f ∈ Aq β ′ with kbkq′,β ′ . kT α α2 with kT α α1 × Ap2 4. PROOF OF THEOREM 3 In this section we prove Theorem 3, from which Theorem 2 follows. Before that, for s ≥ 0 and α > −1, let Rα,s denote the unique continuous linear operator on H(Bn) satisfying 1 (1 − hz, wi)n+1+α(cid:19) = Rα,s(cid:18) Rα,sf (z) =ZBn f (w) 1 (1 − hz, wi)n+1+α+s for all w ∈ Bn. If f ∈ A1 α, then Rα,sf is given by the following integral expression (7) (1 − hz, wi)n+1+α+s dvα(w). More properties of the "differential type" operators Rα,s can be found in [24, Section 1.4]. Now we are ready to prove Theorem 3. Proof of Theorem 3. As we noticed before, we just need to prove that Sα is bounded if and only if f ∈ Aq β. f : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 α2 Suppose first that f ∈ Aq β. We need to show Sα α1. If p2 > 1 then Pα : Lp2 (Bn, dvα2 ) → Ap2 g ∈ Ap1 inequality the result follows. Indeed, f : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 α2 is bounded. Let α2 is bounded, and then from Holder's kSα f gkp2,α2 = kPα(f ¯g)kp2,α2 ≤ Ckf gkp2,α2 ≤ Ckf kq,β · kgkp1,α1 f : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 which shows that Sα α2 is bounded with f k . kf kq,β. α2 is bounded, we are going to show that f ∈ Aq β. We begin with using an argument of Luecking (see, e.g., [17]). Let rk(t) be a sequence of Rademacher functions (see [8, Appendix A]). Let b be large enough so that kSα α1 → Ap2 Conversely, suppose Sα f : Ap1 (8) b > n + 1 + α1 p1 . Fix any r > 0, and let {ak} be an r-lattice and {Dk} be the associated sets in Lemma C. By Theorem D, we know that, for any sequence of real numbers λ = {λk} ∈ ℓp1, the function gt(z) = λkrk(t) (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α1)/p1 (1 − hz, aki)b ∞Xk=1 belongs to Ap1 α1 with kgtkp1,α1 . kλkℓp1 for almost every t in (0, 1). Denote by gk(z) = (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α1)/p1 (1 − hz, aki)b . Since Sα f : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 α2 is bounded, we get that kSα f gtkp2 λkrk(t)Sα dvα2 (z) p2,α2 = ZBn(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) . kSα ∞Xk=1 p2 f gk(z)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f kp2 · kgtkp2 p1,α1 . kSα f kp2 · kλkp2 ℓp1 WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 9 for almost every t in (0, 1). Integrating both sides with respect to t from 0 to 1, and using Fubini's Theorem and Khinchine's inequality (see [21, p.12]), we get dvα2 (z) . kSα f kp2 · kλkp2 ℓp1 . λkp2 Sα f gk(z)p2χ Dk · p2 2 p2 (z)! 2 dvα2 (z). (9) Now we estimate (10) λkp2ZDk ∞Xk=1 λk2Sα f gk(z)2!p2/2 ZBn ∞Xk=1 f gk(z)p2 dvα2 (z) =ZBn ∞Xk=1 ∞Xk=1 Sα Sα If p2 ≥ 2, then 2/p2 ≤ 1, and from (10) we have λkp2Z Dk ≤ZBn ∞Xk=1 ≤ZBn ∞Xk=1 f gk(z)p2 dvα2 (z) (z)!p2/2 dvα2 (z) λk2Sα f gk(z)2χ Dk λk2Sα f gk(z)2!p2/2 dvα2 (z). If 1 < p2 < 2, then 2/p2 > 1, from (10), by Holder's inequality we get f gk(z)p2 dvα2 (z) ∞Xk=1 Sα λkp2Z Dk ≤ZBn ∞Xk=1 ≤ N 1−p2/2ZBn ∞Xk=1 λk2Sα (z)!1−p2/2 dvα2 (z) f gk(z)2!p2/2 ∞Xk=1 f gk(z)2!p2/2 λk2Sα χ Dk dvα2 (z), since each z ∈ Bn belongs to at most N of the sets Dk. Combining the above two inequal- ities, and applying (9) we have ∞Xk=1 Sα f gk(z)p2 dvα2 (z) λkp2Z Dk ≤ min{1, N 1−p2/2}ZBn ∞Xk=1 . kSα f kp2 · kλkp2 ℓp1 . λk2Sα f gk(z)2!p2/2 dvα2 (z) By subharmonicity we know that, Sα f gk(ak)p2 . From this we obtain 1 (1 − ak2)n+1+α2 Z Dk Sα f gk(z)p2 dvα2 (z). (11) ∞Xk=1 λkp2 (1 − ak2)n+1+α2(cid:12)(cid:12)Sα f gk(ak)(cid:12)(cid:12)p2 . kSα f kp2 · kλkp2 ℓp1 . 10 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO Let Rα,b be the integral operator defined in (7). Then Sα f (w)gk(w) f gk(ak) = ZBn = ZBn = (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α1)/p1ZBn (1 − hak, wi)n+1+α dvα(w) f (w)(1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α1)/p1 (1 − hak, wi)n+1+α(1 − hak, wi)b dvα(w) = (1 − ak2)b−(n+1+α1)/p1 Rα,bf (ak). f (w) (1 − hak, wi)n+1+α+b dvα(w) Thus (11) becomes λkp2 (1 − ak2)(n+1+α2)+[b−(n+1+α1)/p1]p2 Rα,bf (ak)p2 . kSα f kp2 ·kλkp2 ℓp1 . the equation (12) is the same as n + 1 + α1 (cid:19) p2 =(cid:18)b + (n + 1 + α2) +(cid:18)b − λkp2h(1 − ak2)b+(n+1+β)/qRα,bf (ak)ip2 ∞Xk=1 p1 n + 1 + β q (cid:19) p2, . kSα f kp2 · kλkp2 ℓp1 . Since {λk} was an arbitrary sequence in ℓp1, we know that {λp2 k } is an arbitrary sequence in ℓp1/p2. Since the conjugate exponent of p1/p2 is (p1/p2)′ = p1/(p1 − p2), by duality we obtain that n(1 − ak2)b+(n+1+β)/qRα,bf (ak)o ∈ ℓp1p2/(p1−p2) = ℓq, ∞Xk=1 (12) Since (13) and (14) (1 − ak2)bq+(n+1+β)Rα,bf (ak)q . kSα f kq. ∞Xk=1 This is the discrete version of what we want. Now, we will deduce that f ∈ Aq β with f k using duality and the atomic decomposition for Bergman spaces. Indeed, kf kq,β . kSα choose β′ = q′(α − β/q) (which means α = β/q + β′/q′). Note that condition (6) implies that 1 + α > (1 + β)/q, and this guarantees that β′ > −1. Hence, by the duality result in Theorem A, (15) Observe that kf kq,β ≍ sup hh, f iα. khkq′,β′ =1 n + 1 + α + b > n + 1 + β′ q′ . Then, we can apply (14) with the r-lattice {ak} for which the atomic decomposition in Theorem D for Aq′ β ′, there exists a sequence µ = {µk} ∈ ℓq′ with kµkℓq′ . khkq′,β ′ such that β ′ holds. That is, for any h ∈ Aq′ h(z) = µk ∞Xk=1 (1 − ak2)n+1+α+b−(n+1+β ′)/q′ (1 − hz, aki)n+1+α+b . WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 11 Since n + 1 + α + b − (n + 1 + β′)/q′ = b + (n + 1 + β)/q, then (15), Holder's inequality and (14) gives kf kq,β ≍ ≤ sup ∞Xk=1 khkq′,β′ =1(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) khkq′,β′ =1(cid:13)(cid:13)µ(cid:13)(cid:13)ℓq′" ∞Xk=1 sup µk(1 − ak2)b+(n+1+β)/q Rα,bf (ak)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (1 − ak2)bq+(n+1+β)Rα,bf (ak)q#1/q . kSα f k. Hence f ∈ Aq β with This finishes the proof. kf kq,β . kSα f k. 5. FURTHER RESULTS (cid:3) : Ap1 α1 → Ap2 5.1. Compactness. Under the assumptions of Theorem 3, actually one has that the small Hankel operator hα α2 is bounded if and only if it is compact. This is from f a general result of Banach space theory. It is known that, for 0 < p2 < p1 < ∞, every bounded operator from ℓp1 to ℓp2 is compact (see, for example Theorem I.2.7, p.31 in [15]). α is isomorphic to ℓp (see, Theorem 11, p.89 in [21], Since the weighted Bergman space Ap note that the same proof there works for weighted Bergman spaces on the unit ball Bn), we get directly the above result. 5.2. Small Hankel operators with the same weights. Concerning the boundedness of α (the case when all the weights are the same) the small Hankel operator hα f for all possible choices of 0 < p1, p2 < ∞, we mention here that the case p1 = p2 > 1 is by now classical (see [13], [23] and [4]), and in this case the boundedness is equivalent to the symbol f being in the Bloch space B, that consists of those holomorphic functions f on Bn with α → Ap2 : Ap1 kf kB = f (0) + sup z∈Bn (1 − z2)Rf (z) < ∞. Here, Rf denotes the radial derivative of f , that is, Rf (z) = zk ∂f ∂zk (z), z = (z1, . . . , zn) ∈ Bn. nXk=1 The Bloch space also admits an equivalent norm in terms of the invariant gradiente∇f (z) := ∇(f ◦ ϕz)(0) as follows kf kB ≍ f (0) + sup z∈Bn e∇f (z). The case 0 < p1 ≤ p2 is completely settled in [4] (actually the results are stated for the unweighted Bergman spaces Ap, but the proofs works also for the weighted case). The description for the case p1 = p2 = 1 is that f must belong to the so called logarithmic Bloch space, a result that goes back to the one dimensional result of Attele [2]. Concerning estimates with loss, in [4] Bonami and Luo obtained a description for the case 0 < p2 < p1 with p2 < 1 (again the result in [4] is stated for the unweighted Bergman spaces). Thus, in view of Corollary 4, to complete the picture it remains to deal with the case p1 > p2 = 1 12 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO (this problem is also open for the unit disk). In that case, also in [4], some partial results are obtained (again for the unweighted case). Mainly, they provide a pointwise estimate that is necessary for the small Hankel operator to be bounded, and they show that the condition (16) f (z) log 2 1 − z ∈ Lp′ 1(Bn, dvα) is sufficient. Moreover, they conjecture that the previous condition is also necessary. We have not been able to prove the conjecture, but we are going to shed some light on that problem. Theorem 6. Let f ∈ H(Bn), α > −1 and p1 > 1. Let p′ Then hα f is bounded. 1 be the conjugate exponent of p1. α is bounded if and only if the multiplication operator Mf : B → Ap′ α α → A1 : Ap1 1 Before going to the proof we need first some preparation. First of all, recall that the α under the integral pairing h , iα (see [24, Theorem 3.17]). Bloch space is the dual of A1 We also need the following lemma, whose one dimensional analogue is essentially proved in [3]. Lemma 7. Let 1 < p < ∞, σ > −1, and n + 1 + σ < b. Then ZBn f (z) − f (a)p 1 − ha, zib dvσ(z) .ZBn dvσ(z) 1 − ha, zib e∇f (z)p for any f ∈ H(Bn) and a ∈ Bn. Proof. We are going to prove first that, for 0 ≤ t < n + 1 + σ, From [24, p.51], for β big enough, say β ≥ 1 + σ, we have (17) ZBn f (z) − f (0)p 1 − ha, zit dvσ(z) .ZBn f (z) − f (0) ≤ CZBn (1 − w2)p Rf (w)p 1 − ha, wit dvσ(w). (1 − w2) Rf (w) dvβ−1(w) . 1 − hz, win+β Take a small number ε > 0 with σ − ε max(p, p′) > −1, where p′ denotes the conjugate exponent of p, and t < n + 1 + σ − εp. An application of Holder's inequality and Lemma B yields f (z) − f (0)p . (1 − z2)−εpZBn (1 − w2)p Rf (w)p dvβ−1+εp(w) 1 − hz, win+β . This together with Fubini's theorem and [19, Lemma 2.5] gives ZBn f (z) − f (0)p 1 − ha, zit dvσ(z) .ZBn .ZBn (1 − w2)p Rf (w)p(cid:18)ZBn (1 − w2)p Rf (w)p 1 − ha, wit dvσ(w) 1 − ha, zit 1 − hz, win+β(cid:19) dvβ−1+εp(w) dvσ−εp(z) proving (17). Now, a change of variables z = ϕa(ζ) gives (see [24, Proposition 1.13]) ZBn f (z)−f (a)p 1 − ha, zib dvσ(z) =ZBn (f ◦ ϕa)(ζ)−(f ◦ ϕa)(0)p 1 −ha, ϕa(ζ)ib (1 −a2)n+1+σ 1−ha, ζi2(n+1+σ) dvσ(ζ). WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 13 From [24, Lemma 1.3] we have 1 − ha, ϕa(ζ)i = 1 − hϕa(0), ϕa(ζ)i = 1 − a2 1 − ha, ζi . Therefore we obtain ZBn f (z)−f (a)p 1 − ha, zib dvσ(z) = (1 −a2)n+1+σ−bZBn Due to our condition b > n + 1 + σ, we have (f ◦ ϕa)(ζ)−(f ◦ ϕa)(0)p 1 −ha, ζi2(n+1+σ)−b and we can apply (17) to get t = 2(n + 1 + σ) − b < n + 1 + σ ZBn f (z)−f (a)p 1 − ha, zib dvσ(z) . (1 −a2)n+1+σ−bZBn (1 − ζ2)p R(f ◦ ϕa)(ζ)p 1 − ha, ζi2(n+1+σ)−b Since another change of variables w = ϕa(ζ) finally gives (1 − ζ2) R(f ◦ ϕa)(ζ) ≤ e∇(f ◦ ϕa)(ζ) = e∇f (ϕa(ζ)), ZBn 1 − ha, zib dvσ(z) .ZBn 1 − ha, wib dvσ(w). f (z)−f (a)p e∇f (w)p completing the proof of the lemma. dvσ(ζ). dvσ(ζ). (cid:3) After these preparations, we are now ready for the proof of Theorem 6. Proof of Theorem 6. Assume first that the small Hankel operator hα f bounded. Let g ∈ Ap1 α . From the pointwise estimate for Bergman spaces, we get : Ap1 α → A1 α is hg, f iα = hα f g(0) ≤ Ckhα f gk1,α ≤ Ckhα f k · kgkp1,α. Therefore, by duality, we have that f ∈ Ap′ (18) kf kp′ α with 1,α ≤ Ckhα 1 f k. Recall that hα f f k ≍ khα f with kSα (19) α → A1 : Ap1 k. Also, since for any g ∈ Ap1 α is bounded, if and only if, Sα α and h ∈ B, f : Ap1 α → A1 α is bounded, hSα f g, hiα = hf, ghiα = hSα f h, giα we know that Sα f : B → Ap′ 1 α is bounded, and moreover, we have kSα f k B→A p′ 1 α . khα f k. For g in the Bloch space B, one has kMf gkp′ p′ (20) 1 1,α =ZBn .ZBn f (z) g(z) p′ 1 dvα(z) Sα f g(z) p′ 1 dvα(z) +ZBn f (z) g(z) − Sα f g(z)p′ 1 dvα(z). 14 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO Due to the boundedness of Sα f : B → Ap′ α , 1 (21) ZBn Sα f g(z) p′ 1 dvα(z) ≤ kSα f kp′ 1 B→A · kgkp′ 1 B . khα f kp′ 1 · kgkp′ B . 1 p′ 1 α On the other hand, by the reproducing formula for Bergman spaces and Holder's inequality, f (z) g(z) − Sα p′ 1 1 f (w)p′ f g(z)p′ f (w) (g(z) − g(w)) 1 − hw, zin+1+α dvα+εp′ 1 =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ZBn (1 − hz, wi)n+1+α dvα(w)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 (w)!(cid:18)ZBn 1 − hw, zin+1+α dvα−εp1 (w) .ZBn g(z) − g(w)p1 ≤ ZBn ZBn where ε > 0 satisfies α − ε max(p1, p′ 1) > −1. Using Lemma 7 and Lemma B we get g(z) − g(w)p1 1 − hw, zin+1+α dvα−εp1 (w)(cid:19) p′ 1 p1 , 1 − hw, zin+1+α dvα−εp1 (w) e∇g(w)p1 Therefore, this together with Fubini's theorem, Lemma B and the estimate (18) gives . kgkp1 B (1 − z2)−εp1 . ZBn (22) f (z) g(z) − Sα f g(z)p′ 1 dvα(z) ≤ Ckgkp′ f (w)p′ 1 B ZBn 1(cid:18)ZBn dvα−εp′ 1 − hw, zin+1+α(cid:19) dvα+εp′ 1 (z) 1 (w) ≤ Ckgkp′ 1 B · kf kp′ p′ 1 1,α ≤ Ckhα f kp′ 1 · kgkp′ B . 1 Putting together the estimates (20), (21) and (22) it follows that Mf : B → Ap′ with kMf k k. B→A p′ 1 α . khα f 1 α is bounded Conversely, suppose that Mf : B → Ap′ projection Pα : Lp′ and so obviously, Sα well-known that the dual space of B0 is A1 Chapter 3 of [24]), from (19) we know that Sα 1 (Bn, dvα) → Ap′ f : B0 → Ap′ α is bounded. By the boundedness of the α is also bounded, α is bounded, where B0 is the little Bloch space, and it is α under the integral pair h , iα (see, for example, (cid:3) α one deduces that Sα f : B → Ap′ α is bounded. f : Ap1 α → A1 1 1 1 1 As a consequence of Theorem 6 we can easily obtain the sufficient and necessary con- ditions given in [4] as well as another relevant necessary condition for the boundedness of hα f α. α → A1 : Ap1 Corollary 8. Let f ∈ H(Bn), α > −1 and p1 > 1. (i) If (16) holds, then hα f (ii) If hα f α → A1 α → A1 α is bounded, then : Ap1 : Ap1 α is bounded. (23) sup z∈Bn (1 − z2)(n+1+α)/p′ 1 f (z)(cid:16) log 2 1 − z2(cid:17) < ∞ WEAK FACTORIZATION AND HANKEL OPERATORS 15 and (24) ZBn f (z)p′ 1(cid:16) log 1 2 2 1 − z2(cid:17) p′ dvα(z) < ∞. Proof. Part (i) follows directly from Theorem 6 and the pointwise estimate for Bloch func- tions To prove part (ii), for each z ∈ Bn, the function g(z) ≤ kgkB log 2 1 − z2 . gz(w) = log 2 1 − hw, zi is in the Bloch space with kgzkB ≤ C with the constant C independent of the point z. Therefore, from the pointwise estimate for functions in Bergman spaces, we get (1 − z2)n+1+α(cid:16)f (z) log 1 2 1 − z2(cid:17)p′ = (1 − z2)n+1+αf (z) gz(z)p′ 1 . kf gzkp′ 1 1,α = kMf gzkp′ p′ 1 p′ 1,α ≤ kMf k B→A p′ 1 α · kgzkp′ 1 B . kMf k , p′ 1 α B→A Indeed, clearly Mf : B → Ap′ and (23) follows due to Theorem 6. The necessity of (24) is also a consequence of Theorem 6. α is bounded if and only if the measure dµf (z) = f (z)p′ 1- Carleson measure for the Bloch space (see [7, 10] for the definition); and by Proposition 1.4 in [7] (the one dimensional case appears in [10] and [14]) this implies (24), finishing the proof. (cid:3) 1 dvα(z) is a p′ 1 The established connection between Hankel operators on Bergman spaces and Carleson measures for the Bloch space makes even more interesting the problem (as far as we know, still open) of describing those measures. Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the referee for valuable comments that improved the final version of the paper. REFERENCES [1] N. Arcozzi, R. Rochberg, E. Sawyer and B. D. Wick, Bilinear forms on the Dirichlet space, Anal. PDE 3 (2010), 21 -- 47. [2] K. Attele, Toeplitz and Hankel operators on Bergman one space, Hokkaido Math. J. 21 (1992), 279 -- 293. [3] D. Blasi and J. Pau, A characterization of Besov type spaces and applications to Hankel type operators, Michigan Math. J. 56 (2008), 401-417. [4] A. Bonami and L. Luo, On Hankel operators between Bergman spaces on the unit ball, Houston J. Math. 31 (2005), 815 -- 828. [5] R. Coifman and R. Rochberg, Representation theorems for holomorphic and harmonic functions in Lp, Asterisque 77 (1980), 11-66. [6] R. Coifman, R. Rochberg and G. Weiss, Factorization theorems for Hardy spaces in several variables, Ann. of Math. (2) 103 (1976), 611 -- 635. [7] E. Doubtsov, Carleson-Sobolev measures for weighted Bloch spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 258 (2010), 2801 -- 2816. [8] P.L. Duren, 'Theory of H p Spaces', Academic Press, New York-London 1970. Reprint: Dover, Mineola, New York 2000. [9] J. Garnett and R. Latter, The atomic decomposition for Hardy spaces in several complex variables, Duke Math. J. 45 (1978), 815 -- 845. 16 J. PAU AND R. ZHAO [10] D. Girela, J. A. Pel´aez, F. P´erez-Gonz´alez and J. Rattya, Carleson measures for the Bloch space, Integral Equations and Operator Theory 61 (2008), 511 -- 547. [11] M. Gowda, Nonfactorization theorems in weighted Bergman and Hardy spaces on the unit ball of Cn, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 277 (1983), 203 -- 212. [12] C. Horowitz, Factorization theorems for functions in the Bergman spaces, Duke Math. J., 44 (1977), 201 -- 213. [13] S. Janson, J. Peetre and R. Rochberg, Hankel forms and the Fock space, Revista Mat. Iberoamericana 3 (1987), 61 -- 138. [14] T.G. Limperis, 'Embedding theorems for the Bloch space', PhD thesis, University of Arkansas, 1998. [15] J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri, 'Classical Banach Spaces', Lecture Notes in Math. 338, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1973. [16] D. H. Luecking, Representations and duality in weighted spaces of analytic functions, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 34 (1985) 319 -- 336. [17] D. H. Luecking, Embedding theorems for spaces of analytic functions via Khinchine's inequality, Michigan Math. J. 40 (1993), 333 -- 358. [18] Z. Nehari, On bounded bilinear forms, Ann. of Math. (2) 65 (1957), 153 -- 162. [19] J.M. Ortega and J. Fabrega, Pointwise multipliers and corona type decomposition in BM OA, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 46 (1996), 111 -- 137. [20] R. Rochberg, Decomposition theorems for Bergman spaces and their applications, in 'Operators and Func- tion Theory', D. Reidel, 1985, 225 -- 277. [21] P. Wojtaszczyk, 'Banach Spaces for Analysts', Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 25. Cambridge University Press, 1991. [22] R. Zhao and K. Zhu, 'Theory of Bergman spaces in the unit ball of Cn', Mem. Soc. Math. Fr. (N.S.), 115 (2008), vi+103 pp. [23] K. Zhu, Hankel operators on the Bergman spaces of bounded symmetric domains, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 324 (1991), 707 -- 730. [24] K. Zhu, 'Spaces of Holomorphic Functions in the Unit Ball', Springer-Verlag, New York, 2005. JORDI PAU, DEPARTMENT DE MATEM `ATICA APLICADA I ANALISI, UNIVERSITAT DE BARCELONA, 08007 BARCELONA, CATALONIA, SPAIN E-mail address: [email protected] RUHAN ZHAO, DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, SUNY BROCKPORT, BROCKPORT, NY 14420, USA E-mail address: [email protected]
1910.10538	1	1910	2019-10-23T12:58:33	Similarity Invariants of Essentially normal Cowen-Douglas Operators and Chern Polynomials	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper, we systematically study a class of essentially normal operators by using the geometry method from the Cowen-Douglas theory and prove a Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem in the Cowen-Douglas theory. More precisely, the Chern polynomials and the second fundamental forms are the similarity invariants (in the sense of Herrero) of this class of essentially normal operators.	math.FA	math	SIMILARITY INVARIANTS OF ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS AND CHERN POLYNOMIALS IN MEMORY OF R. G. DOUGLAS CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Abstract. In this paper, we systematically study a class of essentially normal operators by using the geometry method from the Cowen-Douglas theory and prove a Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem in the Cowen-Douglas theory. More precisely, the Chern polynomials and the second fundamental forms are the similarity invariants (in the sense of Herrero) of this class of essentially normal operators. 1. Introduction People have long sought to establish connections between operator theory on the one hand, and geometry and algebraic topology on the other. The Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theory [4] and the Cowen- Douglas operator theory [10] together provide a powerful suite of tools for building such connections. The Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem states that any two essentially normal operators are unitarily equivalent up to a compact perturbation (which is called essentially unitary equivalence) if and only if their essential spectrums and Fredholm indexes are the same. In 1991, Berg and Davidson [5] give a constructive proof of the Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem. The Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem shows that the essentially unitary invaritants of an essentially normal operators are essential spectrums and Fredholm indexes. It is highly nontrivial to obtain unitary (similarity) invariants of operators. An alternative way is to study the closure of unitary (similarity) orbits. In general, the closure of unitary orbit of a Hilbert space operator was completely determined by Hadwin [25]. The closure of similarity orbit of a Hilbert space operator was "essentially" solved by Apostol, Herrero and Voiculescu ([3], Chapter 9 of [2]). The similarity orbit of a normal operator was characterized by Fialkow [21]. In 1986, Herrero [27] introduce (U + K)-orbits between unitary orbits and similarity orbits in which the unitary operator is replaced by an invertible operator of the form "unitary operator + compact operator". Herrero [27] ask if we can find a simple characterization of the closure of (U + K)-orbit of a Hilbert space operator. In 1993, Guinand and Marcoux [23, 24] completely characterized the the closure of (U + K)-orbits of normal operators, compact operators and certain weighted shifts respectively. In 1998, the first author and Wang [42] completely characterize the closure of (U + K)- Inspired by Herrero's (U + K)-equivalence and the orbits of certain essentially normal operators. Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem, one could ask Question 1.1. What are the (U + K)-invariants for essentially normal operators? 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47C15, 47B37; Secondary 47B48, 47L40. The first and the second authors were supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11831006 and 11922108). The third author was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11771413). 1 2 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU We have not found any (partial) results to this question in any literature. Moreover, it is challenging to characterize the (U + K)-orbits or invariants of arbitrary operators. The Cowen-Douglas theory introduced geometry operators for a given open subset Ω ⊂ C and a natural number n. These operators are called Cowen-Douglas operators over Ω with index n. (The set of these operators is denoted by Bn(Ω).) Cowen and Douglas showed that each operator in Bn(Ω) gives rise a rank n Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle over Ω. The curvature of the vector bundle defines the curvature of the operator. It is an elegant and deep result that the unitary invariants of Cowen-Douglas operators are their curvatures and their covariant partial derivatives. Based on their results, it is natural to ask what the similarity invariants of Cowen-Douglas operators are. Cowen and Douglas [10] conjectured that the Cowen-Douglas operators over the open unit disk with index one are similar to each other if and only if the limit of the quotient of the two curvatures is one. The conjecture turns out to be false by Clark and Misra [12, 13]. The failure of the conjecture leads mathematicians to find similarity invariants for Cowen-Douglas operators with additional structures. In 2013, Douglas, Kwon and Treil [16] studied the similarity of hypercontractions and backward Bergman shifts. Hou, Ji and Kown [30] showed that the geometry invariant is good for similarity invariants. In 2017, the first two authors, Keshari and Misra introduced and studied a class of Cowen-Douglas operators with flag structures, denoted by FBn(Ω). Later, the first two authors and Misra [37] introduced and studied a class Cowen-Douglas operators with a little more structures. In 2019, the first two authors and Keshari [36] found that the curvatures and the second fundamental forms can completely characterize the similarity invariant for a norm dense class of Cowen-Douglas operators denoted by CFBn(Ω). Thanks to the Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theory and the Cowen-Douglas theory, problems in geom- etry and algebraic topology can be approached using techniques from operator theory. Inspired by this, Douglas, Tang and Yu [18] used operator-theoritic methods to prove an analytic Grothendieck- Riemann-Roch theorem for certain spaces with singularities. In this paper, we proceed in the reverse direction, using methods from complex geometry to find a complete set of invariants for the simi- larity problem for essentially normal operators. Besides the curvature, the Chern polynomial is also important in geometry. We partially answer Questions 1.1 for certain essentially normal Cowen- Douglas operators. (The set of these operators is denoted by NCFBn(Ω).) We also show that the set NCFBn(Ω) contains enough nontrivial operators (see Theorem 3.14). It is surprising for us to find that the Chern polynomials and the second fundamental forms can completely characterize the (U + K)-invariants for NCFBn(Ω) (see Theorem 4.8 and 5.1). This result is a version of the Brown- Douglas-Fillmore theorem in the Cowen-Douglas theory. It is important to notice that the Chern polynomials can not be taken as similarity invariants for CFBn(Ω). Our results show the Chern poly- nomial can significantly simplify the (U + K)-invariants for NCFBn(Ω). It is also worth to point out that the previous study on (U + K)-orbits requires that the spectrum of the operator has to be simply connected. However, our results do not have assumption on the spectrum. In a word, our approach offers a natural complement to that of Douglas, Tang and Yu [18]. The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we recall the definition and some properties of Cowen- Douglas operators and the subclasses FBn(Ω),CFBn(Ω) of Cowen-Douglas operators. In Section 3 we introduce the class NCFBn(Ω) of essentially normal Cowen-Douglas operators and study the structures of the operators and present some examples. In Section 4 we obtain completely the (U + K)- invariants of NCFBn(Ω). In Section 5 we obtain a complete set of unitary invariants of in NCFBn(Ω). In Section 6 we suggest some further research on (U + K)-orbits and (U + K)-homogeneous. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 3 2. Preliminaries Throughout this paper, we denote H by an infinite-dimensional separable Hilbert space, L(H) the algebra of all bounded operators on H, K(H) the algebra of all compact operators on H, and A(H) the Calkin algebra L(H)/K(H). Let Q : L(H) → A(H) be the quotient map onto the Calkin algebra. An operator T on H is essentially normal if Q(T ) is normal, i.e. T ∗T − T T ∗ ∈ K(H). We are interested in the following equivalences of operators: for any T1, T2 ∈ L(H), we say (1) T1 is unitarily equivalent to T2 if there is a unitary operator U ∈ L(H) such that T1U = U T2, (2) T1 is (U +K)-equivalent to T2 if there are a unitary operator U ∈ L(H) and a compact operator K ∈ K(H) such that U + K is invertible and T1(U + K) = (U + K)T2, denoted by T1 ∼U +K T2; (3) T1 is similar to T2 if there is an invertible operator S ∈ L(H) such that T1S = ST2, denoted denoted by T1 ∼u T2; by T1 ∼s T2; Remark 2.1. Suppose that T1, T2 ∈ L(H) are essentially unitary equivalent. Usually, we do not have T1 ∼U +K T2. Suppose that {en}n≥0 is an orthogonal normal basis of H and T1 is the shift on H, i.e. en+1, n ≥ 0. Then T1 − T2 is en+1 and T1 is not similar to T2. In T1en = en+1, n ≥ 0 and T2 is a Bergman shift such that T2en =r n a compact operator such that (T1 − T2)en = fact, if T1 ∼s T2, i.e. T1X = XT2 for some invertible operator X, we have that n + 1 hXen, eni =r n + 1 n hXT2en−1, eni =r n + 1 1 eni =r n + 1 n hXen−1, en−1i, 1 n + 1 +pn(n + 1) n hXen−1, T ∗ i.e. n→∞hXen, eni = lim lim n→∞ √n + 1hXe0, e0i = ∞. We see that X is not bounded, which leads a contradiction and T1 is not similar to T2. We now recall the setup for Cowen-Douglas operators (geometry operators) in the following. Let H be a separable infinite-dimensional Hilbert space and Gr(n,H) the set of all n-dimensional subspaces of H for any n ∈ N. Suppose Ω ⊂ C is an open bounded connected subset and n ∈ N. A map t : Ω → Gr(n,H) is a holomorphic curve if there exist n (point-wise linearly independent) holomorphic functions γ1, γ2,··· , γn on Ω taking values in H such that t(w) =W{γ1(w),··· , γn(w)}, w ∈ Ω. Each holomorphic curve t : Ω → Gr(n,H) gives rise to a rank n Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle Et over Ω, namely, Et = {(x, w) ∈ H × Ω x ∈ t(w)} and π : Et → Ω, where π(x, w) = w. The set {γ1 . . . , γn} of holomorphic functions is a holomorphic frame for t, denoted by γ. An operator T acting on H is said to be a Cowen-Douglas operator with index n associated with an open bounded subset Ω, if (1) T − w is surjective, (2) dim Ker (T − w) = n for all w ∈ Ω, Ker (T − w) = H. (3) Ww∈Ω 4 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU The set of Cowen-Douglas operators is denoted by Bn(Ω). Cowen and Douglas[10] showed that each operator T in Bn(Ω) gives also rise to a rank n Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle ET over Ω, ET = {(x, w) ∈ H × Ω x ∈ Ker (T − w)} Two holomorphic curves t and t are said to be (1) unitarily equivalent (denoted by t ∼u t), if there exists a unitary operator U ∈ L(H) such that U (w)t(w) = t(w), where U (w) := UEt(w) is the restriction of the unitary operator U to the fiber Et(w) = π−1(w). and π : ET → Ω where π(x, w) = w. (2) similar (denoted by t ∼s t) if there exists an invertible operator X ∈ L(H) such that In X(w)t(w) = t(w), where X(w) := XEt(w) is the restriction of X to the fiber Et(w). this case, we say that the vector bundles Et and Et are similar. For an open bounded connected subset Ω of C, a Cowen-Douglas operator T with index n induces a non-constant holomorphic curve t : Ω → Gr(n,H), namely, t(w) = Ker (T − w), w ∈ Ω and hence a Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle Et (here vector bundle Et is same as ET ). Unitary and similarity invariants for the operator T are obtained from the vector bundle ET . The metric of the Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle ET with respect to a holomorphic frame γ is given by the n × n matrix hγ(w) = (hγj(w), γk(w)i)n k,j=1 , w ∈ Ω. Note that {γ1(w), . . . , γn(w)} is linearly independent. The matrix hγ(w) is invertible. The curvature of the Hermitian holomorphic vector bundle ET is (2.1) ¯∂(cid:0)h−1 γ (w)∂hγ (w)(cid:1) = − ∂ ∂w(cid:18)h−1 γ (w) ∂ ∂w hγ(w)(cid:19) dw ∧ d ¯w, where ∂ is the differential operator with respect to the complex variable w and ¯∂ is with respect to the conjugation ¯w. The curvature KT of the Cowen-Douglas operator T over Ω is given by the coefficient of Equation (2.1): The total Chern form of the holomorphic bundle ET is defined to be KT (w) := − ∂ γ (w) ∂w(cid:18)h−1 CET = det(cid:18)I + CET (w) = det(cid:18)I + w i 2π ∂ ∂w hγ(w)(cid:19) . KT(cid:19) . KT(cid:19) . i 2π The Chern polynomial CET (w) of ET with respect to a complex variable w is defined to be Next, we will describe the structure of Cowen-Douglas operators in Bn(Ω). Theorem 2.2 (Upper triangular representation theorem, [42]). Let T ∈ Bn(Ω). Then there exists an orthogonal decomposition H = H1 ⊕ H2 ⊕ ··· ⊕ Hn and operators T1,1, T2,2,··· , Tn,n in B1(Ω) such ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 5 that T has the following form (2.2) T = ··· ··· T1,n T2,n T1,1 T1,2 T1,3 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ··· ... ... ... 0 0 ··· ··· 0 Tn,n ...  . Let {γ1, γ2,··· , γn} be a holomorphic frame of ET with H = W{γj(w), w ∈ Ω, 1 ≤ j ≤ n}, and tj : Ω → Gr(1,Hj) be a holomorphic frame of ETj,j , 1 ≤ j ≤ n. Then we can find certain relation between {γj}n j=1 as the following equations: j=1 and {tj}n (2.3) γ1 = t1 γ2 = φ1,2(t2) + t2 γ3 = φ1,3(t3) + φ2,3(t3) + t3 ··· = ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· γj = φ1,j(tj) + ··· + φi,j(tj) + ··· + tj ··· = ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· γn = φ1,n(tn) + ··· + φi,n(tn) + ··· + tn, where φi,j, (i, j = 1, 2,··· , n) are certain holomorphic bundle maps. In the rest of the paper, we always assume that a Cowen-Douglas operator T ∈ Bn(Ω) has a k,j=1 with respect to an orthogonal decomposition of the Hilbert space such that matrix form (Tk,j)n the diagonals are in B1(Ω). Recall that the commutant {T}′ of T on H is the set of operators in L(H) commuting with T . The operator T is strongly irreducible if there is no non trivial idempotent in {T}′. An operator T in L(H) is said to be strongly irreducible, if there is no non-trivial idempotent operator in {T}′, where {T}′ denotes the commutant of T , i.e., {T}′ = {B∈L(H) : T B = BT}. It is known that for any T ∈ B1(Ω), T is strongly irreducible. Every Cowen-Douglas operator can be written as the direct sum of finitely many strongly irreducible Cowen-Douglas operators (see [42], chapter 3). By the results in [44], the similarity of Cowen-Douglas operators can be reduced to the similarity of strongly irreducible Cowen-Douglas operators. Now, we recall some classes of Cowen-Douglas operators with additional structures. Definition 2.3. Let FBn(Ω) ⊂ Bn(Ω) be the set of T ∈ Bn(Ω) on H = H1 ⊕ ··· ⊕ Hn, having the following form T1,1 T1,2 T2,2 T = ··· T1,n ··· T2,n ... . . . Tn,n  such that (1) Tj,j ∈ B1(Ω) for 1 ≤ j ≤ n; (2) Tj,jTj,j+1 = Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 for any 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1, i.e. Tj,j+1 intertwines Tj,j and Tj+1,j+1. Definition 2.4. Let T1, T2 ∈ L(H). Then the Rosenblum operators τT1,T2 is the map from L(H) to L(H) defined by: τT1,T2(X) = T1X − XT2, X ∈ L(H). If T1 = T2 = T , we let δT = τT,T . 6 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Definition 2.5 (Property (H)). Let T1, T2 ∈ L(H). The ordered pair (T1, T2) has the Property (H) if the following condition holds: if there exists X ∈ L(H) such that (1) T1X = XT2, (2) X = T1Z − ZT2, then X = 0. for some Z ∈ L(H), Definition 2.6 (Definition 2.7 in [36]). Let CFBn(Ω) be the subset of operators T ∈ Bn(Ω) satisfies the following properties: (1) T can be written as an n × n upper-triangular matrix from with respect to a topological direct decomposition of the Hilbert space and Diag T ∈ {T}′, where Diag T is the diagonal of T . (2) For 1 ≤ k ≤ j ≤ n, Tk,j = Ck,jTk,k+1Tk+1,k+2 ··· Tj−1,j for some Ck,j ∈ {Tk,k}′ on Hk; (3) The ordered pair (Tj,j, Tj+1,j+1), 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1 satisfies the Property (H), that is, Ker τTj,j ,Tj+1,j+1 ∩ Ran τTj,j ,Tj+1,j+1 = {0}, 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1. Remark 2.7. According to 1.20 in [10], there exists a holomorphic function φk,j such that Ck,j = φk,j(Tk,k) in Definition 2.6. Lemma 2.8. [36] Let T ∈ CFBn(Ω). Then T is strongly irreducible if and only if Tj,j+1 6= 0 for any j = 1, 2··· , n − 1. In the end of this section, we recall some results for B1(Ω) and some technique lemmas. Proposition 2.9 (Proposition 4.12 in [36]). Let T,eT ∈ B1(Ω). Then T ∼U +K eT if and only if there exists X ∈ L(H) such that Q(X) = αQ(I), 0 < α < 1 and KT (w) − K eT (w) = ∂w∂w ∂2 Ψ(w), Ψ(w) = ln(cid:18)kX(t(w))k2 kt(w)k2 + (1 − α2)(cid:19) where t is a non zero section of ET . Thoughout this paper, we denoted by σ(T ) the spectrum of an operator T ∈ L(H). Lemma 2.10. [26] Let X, T ∈ L(H). If X ∈ Ker δT ∩ Ran δT , then σ(X) = {0}. Lemma 2.11. Let X, T ∈ L(H). If Q(X) ∈ Ker δQ(T ) ∩ Ran δQ(T ), then σ(Q(X)) = {0}. Proof. It follows from Lemma 2.10 directly. (cid:3) Let T ∈ FBn(Ω). For a 2× 2 block Ti,i 0 Ti,i+1 Ti+1,i+1!, if Ti,iTi,i+1 = Ti,i+1Ti+1,i+1, the corresponding second fundamental form θi,i+1, which is obtained by R. G. Douglas and G. Misra (see in [17]), is (2.4) θi,i+1(T )(w) = KTi,i(w) d ¯w (cid:0) kTi,i+1(ti+1(w))k2 kti+1(w)k2 − KTi,i(w)(cid:1)1/2 . Let T,eT have upper-triangular representation as in (1.1) and assume that Ti,i, Ti+1,i+1 and Ti,i, Ti+1,i+1 have intertwines Ti,i+1 and Ti,i+1, respectively. If KTi,i = K eTi,i θi,i+1(T )(w) = θi,i+1( T )(w) ⇔ kTi,i+1(ti+1(w))k2 , then from (1.3) it is easy to see that . kti+1(w)k2 = keTi,i+1(eti+1(w))k2 keti+1(w)k2 ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 7 3. Essentially normal Cowen-Douglas Operators In this section, we introduce certain essentially normal Cowen-Douglas operators and study their basic properties. Definition 3.1. Let EN be the set of all essentially normal operators on the Hilbert space H. For an open subset Ω in C and n ∈ N, we define NCFBn(Ω) to be a subset of EN ∩ CFBn(Ω) subject to the following condition: for any T ∈ NCFBn(Ω), there exist idempotents P1, . . . , Pn satisfying Pj = I, PkPj = 0, k 6= j and Q(Pj)∗ = Q(Pj ) for j = 1, . . . , n such that T ∈ CFBn(Ω) with respect to the topological direct decomposition Ran P1 ∔ ··· ∔ Ran Pn. Remark 3.2. In Definition 2.6, the topological direct decomposition can be perturbed by an in- vertible operator to an orthogonal decomposition. To study (U + K)-invariant, we require that the topological direct decomposition can perturbed by a (U + K)-invertible operator to an orthogonal decomposition. The additional condition in Definition 3.1 is to meet the requirement above (See the following Proposition 3.3 for a proof). nPj=1 Proposition 3.3. Suppose that H = H1 ∔ H2 ∔ ··· ∔ Hn is a topological direct decomposition of H Pj = I, PkPj = 0, k 6= j where Ran Pj = Hj. and there exist idempotents P1, P2, . . . , Pn such that If there exists a compact operator Kj such that Pj = (cid:16) IHj Kj decomposition Hj ⊕ H⊥ U + K is invertible, Qj = (U + K)Pj(U + K)−1 is an (orthogonal) projection, and I =Pn Proof. We assume that P1 has the matrix form with respect to the orthogonal decomposition H = H1 ⊕ H⊥ 0 (cid:17) with respect to the Hilbert space j . Then there exist a unitary operator U and a compact operator K such that nPj=1 j=1 Qj. 1 as 0 1 , 0 1,2 H⊥ P1 = I P (1) 0 ! H1 1,2 = −P (1) I ! = I K (1) 1,2 0 where P (1) 1,2 is a compact operator. Suppose K (1) 1,2 , then we have that 0 0 1,2 1,2 I P (1) 0 ! I K (1) I ! I 0 0 0! . I ! and Q1 = (U1 + K1)P1(U1 + K1)−1, then Pj (U1 + K1)−1. I = Q1 ⊕ (U1 + K1) Pj! (U1 + K1)−1 is a decomposition of IRan (I−Q1), repeating the argument nXj=2 Set U1 + K1 = I K (1) 1,2 0 Since (U1 + K1) nPj=2 above for (U1 + K1)P2(U1 + K1)−1, there exists U2 + K2 such that (I ⊕ (U2 + K2))(0 ⊕ (U2 + K2)P2(U2 + K2)−1)(I ⊕ (U2 + K2)−1) 8 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU is an orthogonal projection (denoted by Q2). Then we have that I = Q1 ⊕ Q2 ⊕ (I ⊕ (U2 + K2))(U1 + K1) nXi=3 = (I ⊕ (U2 + K2))(U1 + K1) nXi=1 Pi! (U1 + K1)−1(I ⊕ (U2 + K2)−1) Pi! (U1 + K1)−1(I ⊕ (U2 + K2)−1) By an inductive proof, we can find unitary operators Uj and compact operators Kj, j = 1, 2··· , n such that Q1⊕Q2⊕··· Qn = (I⊕I⊕··· (Un+Kn))··· (U1+K1) This finishes the proof of this lemma. nXj=1 Pj (U1+K1)−1 ··· (I⊕I⊕··· (Un+Kn)−1). (cid:3) For any topological direct decomposition of H, H = H1 ∔ H2 ∔ ··· ∔ Hn, if there exist n idem- k 6= j and Ran Pj = Hj. Then we can j=1 = j=1 be a set of orthogonal projections with QkQj = 0, i 6= j. Furthermore, H = (U + K)H1 ⊕ (U + K)H2 ⊕ ··· ⊕ (U + K)Hn, potents P1, P2, . . . , Pn such that find a unitary operator U and a compact operator K such that U + K is invertible and {Qj}n (cid:8)(U + K)Pj(U + K)−1(cid:9)n Pj = I, PkPj = 0, nPj=1 where (U + K)Hj = Ran Qj. 3.1. Structure. We characterize the diagonals and off-diagonals of the operators in NCFBn(Ω) in the following theorem: Theorem 3.4. Let T ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Then we have that (1) Tk,k, 1 ≤ k ≤ n are essentially normal; (2) Tj,k are compact for 1 ≤ j < k ≤ n. Proof. By the assumption that T is essentially normal, we have Q(T )Q(T ∗) = Q(T ∗)Q(T ). Expanding it in the matrix form, we obtain that Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n) ... ... Q(Tn,n) (3.1) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 1,n) Q(T ∗ 2,n) ··· Q(T ∗ Recall that T ∈ CFBn(Ω), we see that ... Q(T ∗ n,n)  = Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 2,n) ··· Q(T ∗ 1,n) Q(T ∗ ... Q(T ∗ n,n) Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n) ... ... Q(Tn,n)       . and Tk,kTk,j = Tk,jTj,j, 1 ≤ k < j ≤ n, Q(Tk,k)Q(Tk,j) = Q(Tk,j)Q(Tj,j), 1 ≤ k < j ≤ n. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 9 Without loss of generality, we can assume that Tk,j = Tk,k+1Tk+1,k+2 ··· Tj−1,j, 1 ≤ k < j ≤ n. By Equation (3.1), we have that Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,1) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 1,n), and Thus, we have that Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,2) + Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,2) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 2,n). Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,2)Q(T2,n) + Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n) + Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,2)Q(T2,n) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,n)Q(Tn,n) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,n), 2,n)Q(T2,n). This indicates that Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,n) − Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,n)Q(Tn,n). On the other hand, since Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,1) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n)Q(Tn,n) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 1,n), we have that 1,n)Q(T1,n). That means Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n) ∈ Ker δQ(Tn,n) ∩ Ran δQ(Tn,n). By Lemma 2.11, we have that Since Q(T ∗ compact operator. 1,n)Q(T1,n) is positive, it follows that Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n) = 0. Hence Q(T1,n) = 0, i.e. T1,n is a σ(cid:0)Q(T ∗ 1,n)Q(T1,n)(cid:1) = {0}. Now Equation (3.1) becomes: (3.2)  = Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· 0 Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n) ... ... Q(Tn,n) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 2,n) ··· Q(T ∗ ... Q(T ∗ 0 n,n)     Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 2,n) ··· Q(T ∗ ... Q(T ∗ 0 n,n) Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· 0 Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n) ... ... Q(Tn,n)   . By comparing the (n, 2), (n, 3)-entries in Equation (3.2), we have that Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,2) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 2,n), and Q(T ∗ 2,n)Q(T2,3) + Q(T ∗ 3,n)Q(T3,3) = Q(Tn,n)Q(T ∗ 3,n). 10 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Repeating the same argument above, we also have that Q(T2,n) = 0, i.e. T2,n is a compact operator. Similarly, we can obtain that Q(Tk,n) = 0, k < n. It follows that Equation (3.2) becomes:  =  Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n−1) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n−1) ... ... Q(Tn−1,n−1) 0 0 ... 0 Q(Tn,n) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... Q(T ∗ 1,n−1) 0 ··· 0 ... ··· Q(T ∗ 0 n−1,n−1) 0 Q(T ∗ n,n) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... Q(T ∗ 1,n−1) 0 ··· 0 ... ··· Q(T ∗ 0 n−1,n−1) 0 Q(T ∗ n,n) Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n−1) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n−1) ... ... Q(Tn−1,n−1) 0 0 ... 0 Q(Tn,n)       . Then we could focus on the (n − 1) × (n − 1)-matrix forms: 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 2,n−1) ··· Q(T ∗ 1,n−1) Q(T ∗ Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n−1) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n−1) Q(Tn−1,n−1) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ ... ... Q(T ∗ ... n−1,n−1) (3.3) Q(T ∗ Q(T ∗ 1,1) 1,2) Q(T ∗ 2,2) ... ... 2,n−1) ··· Q(T ∗ 1,n−1) Q(T ∗ ... Q(T ∗ n−1,n−1) Q(T1,1) Q(T1,2) ··· Q(T1,n−1) Q(T2,2) ··· Q(T2,n−1) ... ... Q(Tn−1,n−1)      =   . Notice that when n = 2, the conclusions holds by the same argument. Thus, by the inductive proof, we have that Q(Tk,j) = 0, for any j > k. This finishes the proof of statement (1). Furthermore, we have that Q(T ) = Q(T1,1) Q(T2,2) ... Q(Tn,n)  . Thus, Q(T )Q(T ∗) = Q(T ∗)Q(T ) implies that Q(Tk,k)Q(T ∗ finishes the proof of statement (2). k,k) = Q(T ∗ k,k)Q(Tk,k), 1 ≤ k ≤ n. This (cid:3) 3.2. Examples. In this subsection, we show that there exists a strongly irreducible operator in NCFBn(Ω) for any simply connected open subset Ω ⊂ C. Let dµ denote the normalized Lebesgue area measure on the unit disk D. For any λ > −1, the weighted Bergman space A2 λ is the space of analytic functions on D which are square-integrable with respect to the measure dµλ = (λ + 1)(1 − z2)λdµ(z) (See [45] for more details on weighted Bergman spaces). Let K(z, w) = 1 (1 − zw)λ be its positive definite kernel. Proposition 3.5. Let T be a homogenous operator in B1(D). Then T ∈ NCFB1(D). Proof. Let T ∈ B1(D) be a homogenous operator. Then there exists λ > 0 and shifts Mz on A2 λ such that T ∼u M ∗ z . By a direct computation, there exist rank-one operators K0 and K1 such that z Mz = I − K1. That means M ∗ z = I − K0, M ∗ MzM ∗ z , then T is (cid:3) also essentially normal. z is essentially normal. Since T ∼u M ∗ Definition 3.6. Let T1, T2 ∈ B1(Ω). We call T1 ≺ T2 if Ker τT1,T2 6= {0}, and Ker τT2,T1 = {0}. 0 q 1 λ1 0 0 q 2 λ1+1 . . . ··· ··· . . . T1 =  0 0 ... 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  0 q k k+λ1−1 , T2 = 0 q 1 λ2 0 0 q 2 λ2+1 . . . ··· ··· . . . 0 0 ... 0 0 q k k+λ2−1  ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  . (cid:3) ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 11 Proposition 3.7. [59] The relation "≺" is a strictly partially ordered relation for the operators in B1(Ω). Lemma 3.8. [36] Let Tj, j = 1, 2 be the adjoint of the multiplication operator M (λj ) Then T1 ≺ T2 if and only if λ1 < λ2. Lemma 3.9. [36] Let Tk = M (λk)∗ A2 λk , k = 1, 2 be the adjoint of the multiplication operator M (λk) . If λ2 − λ1 < 2, then (T1, T2) satisfies Property (H). acting on A2 λj on z z z . Proof. Suppose that there exists an non-zero operator Y such that T1Y = Y T2 and Y = T1X − XT2. Notice that By Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.3 in [37], we know that lim k→∞ xk,k+1 = ∞ in the case of λ2 − λ1 < 2. Theorem 3.10. Suppose that Ω is simply connected. Then there exists T ∈ NCFBn(Ω) such that (1) T is strongly irreducible; (2) σ(T ) = Ω, ρF (T ) ∩ σ(T ) = Ω; (3) ind(w − T ) = n, w ∈ Ω, where ρF (T ) denotes the Fredholm domain of T and ind(T ) is the Fredholm index of T . In particular, NCFBn(Ω) 6= ∅. Proof. First, we assume that Ω = D. Let Tk,k = M (λk)∗ in Lemma 3.8, and 0 < λk+1 − λk < 2, 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1. It is well known that Tk,k is a backward shift operator with , 1 ≤ k ≤ n acting on A2 λk z weighted sequence((cid:18) n 2)∞ n + λk − 1(cid:19) 1 n=1 . We define Tk,k+1, 1 ≤ k ≤ n − 1 to be Tk,k+1(e(k+1) n ) = 2 j nQj=1(cid:18) j + λk+1 − 1(cid:19) 1 nQj=1(cid:18) j + λk − 1(cid:19) 1 j 2 e(k) n , where {e(k) n }∞ n=1 be an orthogonal normal basis of the Hilbert space A2 λk . Let Tk,j = Tk,k+1Tk+1,k+2 ··· Tj−1,j, j > k, and Tk,j = 0, j < k. Then by a directly computation, we can see that Tk,kTk,k+1 = Tk,k+1Tk+1,k+1, Tk,kTk,j = Tk,jTj+1,j+1, k < j. 12 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU By Lemma 3.9, we can see that (Tk,k, Tj,j) satisfy the Property (H), for any k < j. Thus, we can see that T ∈ CFBn(D). Notice that each Tk,k+1 is non-zero. By Lemma 2.8, T is a strongly irreducible operator. Notice that Tk,kT ∗ 2 , where K (k) 1 and K (k) 2 are both rank-one operators, we can see that each Tk,k is essentially normal operator. Since k,k = IHk − K (k) 1 , and T ∗ k,kTk,k = IHk − K (k) lim n→∞ 2 j nQj=1(cid:16) j+λk+1−1(cid:17) 1 j+λk−1(cid:17) 1 nQj=1(cid:16) j 2 = 0, when λk < λk+1, then each Tk,k+1 is compact operator. Thus each Tk,j is also compact. We can see that T ∈ NCFBn(D). For simply connected region Ω ⊂ C, by Riemann mapping theorem, there exists an analytic function f : Ω → D such that f is one-to-one and f (z0) = 0, f ′(z0) > 0 for some z0 ∈ Ω. By a similar argument, we can see that when one replace f (T ) instead of T in the previous proceed, the same conclusion is also valid. In fact, let T ∈ NCFBn(D) defined above. Then we have that f (T ) = f (T1,1) f ′(T1,1)T1,2 f1,3(f (T1,1))T1,2T2,3 0 ... 0 0 f (T2,2) ... ··· ··· f ′(T2,2)T2,3 ... 0 ··· ··· ··· f1,n(f (T1,1))T1,2···Tn−1,n f2,n(f (T2,2))T2,3···Tn−1,n ... f (Tn−1,n−1) ... f ′(Tn−1,n−1)Tn−1,n 0 f (Tn,n)  , where fk,j ∈ H∞(Ω). Since T is essentially normal, that means Q(T )Q(T ∗) = Q(T ∗)Q(T ). It follows that Q(f (T ))Q(f ∗(T )) = Q(f ∗(T ))Q(f (T )). Thus, f (T ) is also essentially normal. Since each Tk,j, k < j is a compact operator, then we have that fk,j(f (Tk,k)Tk,k+1 ··· Tj−1,j is also a compact operator. Since T ∈ NCFBn(D), then it is easy to see that the condition (2) in Definition 2.6 is also satisfied. Thus, we only need to prove that f (T ) satisfies the Property (H) when 0 < λk+1 − λk < 2. Without loss of generality, we only prove that if f (T1,1)Y = Y f (T2,2) and Y = f (T1,1)X − Xf (T2,2), akzk and a0 = 0. In fact, if a0 6= 0, then we can consider then Y = 0. Suppose that f (z) = f (T1,1) − a0I and f (T2,2) − a0I. Thus, we can assume that ∞Pk=0 (3.4) f (T1,1) = 0 a1,2 a1,3 a2,3 . . . 0  ··· ··· . . . 0 a1,k a2,k ... ak−1,k 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  , f (T2,2) = b1,3 b2,3 . . . ··· ··· . . . 0 b1,k b2,k ... bk−1,k 0 0 b1,2 0  ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  , ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 13 where ak,k+1 = a1q k k+λ1−1 and bk,k+1 = a1q k k+λ2−1 . By Lemma 4.3, we have that xk+1,k = bi,i+1 = ai,i+1 n kQi=1 k+1Qi=1 i+λ2−1 . n a1q i kQi=1 a1q i k+1Qi=1 i+λ1−1 By Lemma 3.9 and Lemma 4.3 in [37], we know that lim k→∞ xk,k+1 = ∞. Thus, Y = 0. (cid:3) 3.3. (U + K)-Orbits. In [36], the first two authors and Keshari prove that CFBn(Ω) is norm dense in Bn(Ω). Since it is quite difficult to describe (U + K)-orbit of an arbitrary operator, we would be interested in obtain a similar result for essentially normal operators. But by the results in [42] and Theorem 3.10, we see that the set NCFBn(Ω) contains many nontrivial operators. Definition 3.11. Suppose Ω is simply connected. Let An(Ω) denote the class of operators S, each of which satisfies that (1) S is essentially normal; (2) σ(S) = Ω, ρF (S) ∩ σ(S) = Ω, (3) ind(S − w) = n, w ∈ Ω, dim Ker (S − w) = 0, w ∈ Ω. Remark 3.12. By the definition of the Cowen-Douglas operator, it is clear that EN ∩Bn(Ω) ⊂ An(Ω). Proposition 3.13. [42] Suppose Ω is simply connected. Let S ∈ An(Ω). Then the closure of (U + K)- orbits of S consists of all operators A satisfying (1) A is essentially normal; (2) σ(A) = Ω, ρF (A) ∩ σ(A) = Ω, (3) ind(w − A) = n, w ∈ Ω, where ρF (A) denotes the Fredholm domain of A. Theorem 3.14. Suppose that Ω is simply connected and T is essentially normal. If (1) σ(T ) = Ω, ρF (T ) ∩ σ(A) = Ω, (2) ind(w − T ) = n, w ∈ Ω, then T ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Proof. It is directly from Theorem 3.10 and Proposition 3.13. 4. Similarity Invariants (cid:3) In this section, we will study the similarity invariants of the class NCFBn(Ω) of essentially normal Cowen-Douglas operators. We begin with some technique lemmas. Lemma 4.1. Let T = (Tj,k)n there exists K ∈ K(H) such that X = I + K is invertible and XT = eT X. Proof. To find K, we need to solve the equation j,k=1, eT = (eTj,k)n j,k=1 ∈ NCFBn(Ω). If Tj,j = eTj,j, Tj,j+1 = eTj,j+1, then (4.1) (I + K)T = eT (I + K). 14 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Set X := I + K, where From Equation (4.1), we have K = 0 K1,2 K1,3 ··· K1,n 0 K2,3 ··· K2,n 0 ... ... ... ... ... 0 Kn−1,n 0 0 0 ··· 0 ··· 0 ···  .   1 K1,2 K1,3 ··· K1,n 1 K2,3 ··· K2,n 0 ... ... ... ... ... 1 Kn−1,n 0 1 0 ··· 0 ··· 0 ··· T1,1 T1,2 eT1,3 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ··· eT1,n eT2,n ... ... ... ··· ··· ··· ··· Tn,n 0 0 0  =    ··· ··· T1,n T2,n T1,1 T1,2 T1,3 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ··· ... ... ··· ··· Tn,n 0 0 ... ... 0 1 K1,2 K1,3 ··· K1,n 1 K2,3 ··· K2,n 0 ... ... ... ... ... 1 Kn−1,n 0 1 0 ··· 0 ··· 0 ···   . To find Kj,k for 1 ≤ j < k ≤ n, we need the following steps. Step I. For 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1, by equating the (j, j + 1) entry of Equation (4.2), we have Tj,j+1 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 = Tj,jKj,j+1 + Tj,j+1, i.e. Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 = Tj,jKj,j+1. For 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 2, by comparing (j, j + 2) entry of Equation (4.2), we have (4.3) Tj,j+2 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+2 + Kj,j+2Tj+2,j+2 = Tj,jKj,j+2 + Tj,j+1Kj+1,j+2 + eTj,j+2. We assume that Kj,j+2Tj+2,j+2 = Tj,jKj,j+2, 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 2. (4.2) (4.4) Then (4.5) Tj,j+2 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+2 = Tj,j+1Kj+1,j+2 + eTj,j+2. By the definition of T and eT , we have (4.6) Cj,j+2Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+2 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+2 = Tj,j+1Kj+1,j+2 + Cj,j+2Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+2. Let Kj,j+1 = C (1) Cj,j+2Tj,j+1 + Tj,j+1C (1) for Kj,j+2 in the next step. j,j+1Tj,j+1, where C (1) j+1,j+2. We also assume that Kn−1,n = Tn−1,n, i.e. C (1) j,j+1 ∈ {Tj,j}′. Then we may assume that Kj,j+1 = Cj,j+2Tj,j+1 − n−1,n = 1 and we will solve Step II. By comparing (j, j + 3)-entry of Equation (4.2), we get (4.7) We assume that (4.8) Tj,j+3 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+3 + Kj,j+2Tj+2,j+3 + Kj,j+3Tj+3,j+3 =Tj,jKj,j+3 + Tj,j+1Kj+1,j+3 + eTj,j+2Kj+2,j+3 + eTj,j+3. Tj,jKj,j+3 = Kj,j+3Tj+3,j+3, 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 3, then from Equation (4.7) we have (4.9) Tj,j+3 + Kj,j+1Tj+1,j+3 + Kj,j+2Ti+2,i+3 =Ti,i+1Ki+1,i+3 + eTi,i+2Ki+2,i+3 + eTj,j+3. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 15 Assume that Kj,j+2 = C (2) I., we can solve for Kj,j+2 and assume that Kn−2,n = Tn−2,n−1Tn−1,n. j,j+2Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+2, where C (2) j,j+2 ∈ {Tj,j}′. By using the argument in Step Iterating the arguments in Step II., we can solve for Kj,k, 1 ≤ j < k ≤ n and it is clear that Kj,k (cid:3) are compact. Lemma 4.2. [42] Let T ∈ B1(Ω). For any a0 ∈ Ω, there exists an orthogonal normal basis {en}∞ of H and r > 0 such that T admits the upper-triangular matrix representation n=0 (4.10) T = a0 a1,2 a1,3 a2,3 . . . a0  ··· ··· . . . a0 a1,k a2,k ... ak−1,k a0 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  n=0 and ak−1,k > r, for all k = 2, 3,··· . with respect to {en}∞ Lemma 4.3. Let T1 and T2 ∈ B1(Ω). Suppose T1 and T2 admit the following upper-triangular matrix representation mentioned in Lemma 4.2, (4.11) T1 = , T2 = 0 a1,2 a1,3 a2,3 . . . 0  ··· ··· . . . 0 a1,k a2,k ... ak−1,k 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  0 b1,2 0  b1,3 b2,3 . . . ··· ··· . . . 0 b1,k b2,k ... bk−1,k 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . . . . .  Suppose X, Y ∈ L(H) and admit the matrix representation X = (xk,j)∞ 0, k > j. If T1Y = Y T2 and Y = T1X − XT2 both hold, then k,j=0, Y = (yk,j)∞ k,j=0, yk,j = (4.12) xk+1,k = bℓ,ℓ+1 . aℓ,ℓ+1 n kQℓ=1 k+1Qℓ=1 Proof. Since T1Y = Y T2 and Y = (yk,j), yk,j = 0, k > j. Then we have that yk,k = T1X − XT2 = Y , then we have that xk,j = 0, k − j > 1, and kQ ℓ=1 kQ ℓ=1 bℓ,ℓ+1 aℓ,ℓ+1 y1,1. Since a1,2x2,1 = y1,1, a2,3x3,2 − x2,1b1,2 = y2,2, ··· , ak,k+1xk+1,k − xk,k−1bk−1,k = yk,k,··· . It follows that xk+1,k = n kQ l=1 bl,l+1 k+1Q l=1 al,l+1 . Lemma 4.4. Let T ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Then we have that Ker τTj,j,Tℓ,ℓ = {0}, j > ℓ. (cid:3) 16 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Proof. By Lemma 4.2, without loss of generality, we assume that 0 ∈ Ω and there exists {ek}∞ k=1 be an orthogonal normal basis of H such that Tℓ,ℓ and Tj,j have the following the matrix representations according to {ek}∞ k=1. (4.13) Tℓ,ℓ =  0 aℓ aℓ 1,k aℓ 2,k 1,2 aℓ 1,3 ··· 0 aℓ 2,3 ··· ... ... 0 aℓ ··· ··· ... ··· k−1,k ··· ... ... 0 , Tj,j =   0 aj 1,2 aj 1,3 ··· 0 aj 2,3 ··· ... ... 0 aj ··· ··· aj 1,k aj 2,k ... ··· k−1,k ··· ... ... 0 .  Furthermore, aℓ k,k+1 > r and aj k,k+1 > r for some r > 0 and any k > 2. Since Tℓ,ℓTℓ,j = Tℓ,jTj,j, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ j − 1, by comparing the elements in the matrix on both sides of the equation, we have that t1,1 t1,2 t2,2 ··· ··· . . . t1,k t2,k ... tk,k Ti,j =  ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  , aj l,l+1 aℓ l,l+1 t1,1. Without loss of generality, assume that t1,1 6= 0. By Theorem 3.4, each where tk,k = kQ l=1 kQ l=1 operator Ti,j is a compact operator. Thus, we can assume that lim k→∞ tk,k = lim k→∞ aj l,l+1 aℓ l,l+1 kQl=1 kQl=1 t1,1 = 0. Now assume there exists a bounded operator Y such that Tj,jY = Y Tℓ,ℓ, then by a similar computation, we have that Y = y1,1 y1,2 y2,2  ··· ··· . . . y1,k y2,k ... yk,k ··· ··· ··· . . . . . .  , ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 17 aℓ l,l+1 aj l,l+1 y1,1. Thus, we have that lim k→∞ yk,k = ∞. This means y1,1 = 0 and also yk,k = where yk,k = kQ l=1 kQ l=1 0, 1 ≤ k. Then we have that   0 y1,2 0 ··· ··· . . . = 0 aj 1,2 aj 1,3 ··· 0 aj 2,3 ··· ... ... 0 aj 0 y1,2 0 ··· ··· . . . y1,k y2,k ... 0 0 ··· ··· aj 1,k aj 2,k ... ··· k−1,k ··· ... ... ··· ··· ··· . . . . . . y1,k y2,k ... 0     ··· ··· ··· . . . . . . ··· ···   . 0 aℓ aℓ 1,k aℓ 2,k 1,2 aℓ 1,3 ··· 0 aℓ 2,3 ··· ... ... 0 aℓ ... ··· k−1,k ··· ... ... 0 By comparing the coefficients of matrices in both sides, we have that y2,3 = y1,2 aℓ 2,3 aj 1,2 , y3,4 = y2,3 aℓ 3,4 aj 2,3 ,··· , yk,k+1 = yk−1,k aℓ k,k+1 aj k−1,k . k−1Ql=1 k−1Ql=1 Thus, yk,k+1 = aℓ l,l+1 aj l,l+1 aℓ 1,2 ! y1,2. Since lim k,k+1 aℓ k→∞ k−1Q l=1 k−1Q l=1 aℓ l,l+1 aj l,l+1 = 0 and aℓ k,k+1 > r > 0. It follows that y1,2 = 0. Thus, we have that yk,k+1 = 0, for any k > 0. By an inductive proof, we can assume that yk,k+k′ = 0, k′ < s, k = 1, 2··· . By a similar argument, we have that yk,k+s = aℓ l,l+1 aj l,l+1 k−1Ql=1 k−1Ql=1  sQm=1 sQm=1 ai k,k+m aℓ m,m+1  y1,1+s. Then we also have that y1,1+s = 0 and yk,k+s = 0, k ≥ 1. That means Y = 0. Thus, Ker τTj,j,Tℓ,ℓ = {0}. (cid:3) Proposition 4.5. Let T,eT ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Suppose that X ∈ L(H) is invertible such that XT = eT X. Then X and X −1 are upper triangular. Proof. Let X be the invertible operator which intertwines T and T . Set Y = X −1 and X = (Xi,j)n i,j=1. Suppose that i,j=1, Y = (Yi,j)n (4.14)  X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... Xn,1 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n  T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... ... Tn,n  = T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... Tn,n ...   X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... Xn,1 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n  , 18 (4.15) CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... ... Tn,n   Y1,1 Y1,2 ··· Y1,n Y2,1 Y2,2 ··· Y2,n ... ... ... ... Yn,1 Yn,2 ··· Yn,n  = Y1,1 Y1,2 ··· Y1,n Y2,1 Y2,2 ··· Y2,n ... ... ... ... Yn,1 Yn,2 ··· Yn,n   T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... Tn,n ...  . By Equations (4.14) and (4.15), we have that Xn,1T1,1 = Tn,nXn,1, Tn,nYn,1 = Yn,1 T1,1. Then we have that Xn,1T1,nYn,1 ∈ Ker τ Tn,n, T1,1 = {0}. Since T1,1T1,n = T1,nTn,n, then we know that T1,n have dense range. Furthermore, since Xn,1 and Yn,1 intertwine two operators in B1(Ω), we know Xn,1 and Yn,1 are zero operators or the operators with dense range. Thus, we can see that Xn,1 = 0 or Yn,1 = 0. Now assume that Xn,1 = 0, Yn,1 6= 0, then we have that Ker τTn,n, T1,1 6= {0}. Since = {0}, by a similar Ker τT2,2,Tn,n 6= {0}, Ker τTn,n,T2,2 = {0} and Ker τ T1,1, Tn,n 6= {0}, Ker τ Tn,n, T1,1 argument, we have that (4.16) Ker τ Tn,n,T2,2 = {0}. Since Xn,1 = 0, then we have that (4.17)  X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n  T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... ... Tn,n  = T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... Tn,n ...   X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n  . Thus, we have that Xn,2T2,2 = Tn,nXn,2. By Equation (4.16), Xn,2 = 0. Going to the next step, we will also have Xn,i = 0, 1 ≤ i ≤ n. However, this is impossible since X is invertible. Thus, we will have Yn,1 = 0. On the other hand, we can also prove that the assumption Xn,1 6= 0, Yn,1 = 0 does not hold. By a direction calculation, Thus, we have Xn,1 = Yn,1 = 0. and X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... ... Tn,n     T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... ... Tn,n Y1,1 Y1,2 ··· Y1,n Y2,1 Y2,2 ··· Y2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Yn,2 ··· Yn,n  =  = T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... Tn,n ... Y1,1 Y1,2 ··· Y1,n Y2,1 Y2,2 ··· Y2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Yn,2 ··· Yn,n     X1,1 X1,2 ··· X1,n X2,1 X2,2 ··· X2,n ... ... ... ... 0 Xn,2 ··· Xn,n T1,1 T1,2 ··· T1,n T2,2 ··· T2,n ... Tn,n ...  ,  . Thus, we have that Xn,2T2,2 = Tn,nXn,2, Yn,2 T2,2 = Tn,nYn,2. By a proof similar to the proof mentioned above, we can also see that the statements Xn,2 = 0, Yn,2 6= 0 and Xn,2 6= 0, Yn,2 = 0 both can not hold. Thus, we also have that Xn,2 = Yn,2 = 0. Keep doing this, we will have that Xn,1 = Xn,2 = ··· = Xn,n−1 = Yn,1 = Yn,2 = ··· = Yn,n−1 = 0. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 19 ... and ... ... ... ... Y1,2 Y2,2 ... ... ... ... Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n−1 X1,1 X2,1 X1,2 X2,2 T1,n−1 T2,n−1 T1,n−1 T2,n−1 X1,1 X1,2 X2,1 X2,2 Xn−1,1 Xn−1,2 ··· Xn−1,n−1  ··· X1,n−1 ··· X2,n−1 ... ··· X1,n−1 ··· X2,n−1 ... T1,1 T1,2 ··· T2,2 ··· ... T1,1 T1,2 ··· T2,2 ··· ... Thus, Xn,nTn,n = Tn,nXn,n, Tn,nYn,n = Yn,n Tn,n. Since Xn,n and Yn,n are both non-zero operators, we know that Tn,n ∼ Tn,n. Thus, we have that Xn−1,1 Xn−1,2 ··· Xn−1,n−1 T1,1 T1,2 ··· T2,2 ··· ... T1,n−1 T2,n−1  =  =       ,   . Lemma 4.6. Let T,eT ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Suppose that T ∼U +K eT and T = (Tj,k)n j,k=1, eT = (eTj,k)n eT (U + K) = (U + K)T. Proof. Since T ∼U +K eT , there exists an invertible operator X ∈ L(H) such that XT = eT X and X Repeating this inductive proof, we can show that Xk,j = Yk,j = 0, whenever k > j. This finishes the (cid:3) proof of this lemma. j,k=1. Then there exists a diagonal unitary operator U and a compact upper triangular operator K such that is a sum of a unitary operator and a compact operator. Then Q(X) is unitary in the Calkin algebra A(H). By Proposition 4.5, X is upper-triangular operator, i.e. Yn−1,1 Yn−1,2 ··· Yn−1,n−1 T1,n−1 T2,n−1 T1,1 T1,2 ··· T2,2 ··· ... Yn−1,1 Yn−1,2 ··· Yn−1,n−1  Y1,n−1 Y2,n−1 Y1,n−1 Y2,n−1 ··· ··· ... ··· ··· ... Y1,1 Y2,1 ... Y1,2 Y2,2 ... Y1,1 Y2,1 ... Tn−1,n−1 ... ... ... ... Tn−1,n−1 X = ··· ··· X1,1 X1,2 X1,3 0 X2,2 X2,3 ... 0 Xn−1,n−1 Xn−1,n ··· X1,n X2,n ... ... Xn,n ··· ··· 0 0 ... ... 0  . It follows that Q(X1,n)Q(X ∗ n,n) is invertible, then we have Q(X1,n) = 0. Thus, we will have that Q(X1,n−1)Q(Xn−1,n−1) = 0, and then Q(X1,n−1) = 0. Repeating this arguments, we will have that Q(Xi,j) = 0, i < j. That means Q(X) is a diagonal matrix and Q(Xi,i)Q(Ti,i) = n,n) = 0. Since Q(X ∗ Q(eTj,j)Q(Xj,j eT ). Let Uj be the polar part of the polar decomposition of Xj,j. Then Q(Xj,j) = Q (UjXj,j) = Q(Uj)Q(X ∗ j,jXj,j)1/2 = Q(Uj), Let U be a diagonal matrix whose (j, j)-entry is Uj and K = X − U . Then U is unitary and K is compact and the proof is complete. (cid:3) It is then clear that Xj,j intertwines Tj,j and eTj,j and Xj,j are invertible. Notice that each Q(Xj,j) is invertible and Q(X) is unitary in A(H), we have that Q(X)Q(X ∗) = Q(X ∗)Q(X) = I, i.e.  Q(X1,1) Q(X1,2) ··· Q(X1,n) Q(X2,2) ··· Q(X2,n) ... ... Q(Xn,n) Q(X ∗ Q(X ∗ 2,2) 1,1) 1,2) Q(X ∗ ... ... 2,n) ··· Q(X ∗ 1,n) Q(X ∗ ... Q(X ∗ n,n)    = I. 20 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Lemma 4.7. Let T,eT ∈ CFBn(Ω). Suppose X ∈ L(H) is invertible and XeT = T X. We assume that j,k=1 are upper triangular. Then eT1,1 eT1,2 0 ... 0 eT2,2 eT2,3 ... ... 0 0 ··· ··· 0 ··· ··· ··· 0 0 ... ... 0 eTn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n eTn,n 0 0 ··· ··· X1,1 0 0 0 X2,2 0 ... 0 Xn−1,n−1 ··· ... ... ··· ··· 0 0 ... 0 ... 0 Xn,n   . 0 0 0 0 0 ... ... ... ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· ··· Tn,n X1,1 Xn,n ... ... ... ... T1,1 T1,2 T = (Tj,k)n j,k=1, and X = (Xj,k)n 0 0 X2,2 0 ... 0 Xn−1,n−1 ··· 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ··· j,k=1, eT = (eTj,k)n  =      Proof. By equating the entries of XeT = T X, we get Xj,jeTj,j = Tj,jXj,j, Y = From T = XeT X −1, we get Let Y := XDiag (X −1). Then 2,2 X1,3X −1 X2,3X −1 I X1,2X −1 0 ... ... ··· ··· 0 ··· 0 0 ... I 1 ≤ j ≤ n. 3,3 ··· X1,nX −1 3,3 ··· X2,nX −1 n,n n,n ... ... I Xn−1,nX −1 n,n 0 I .  i.e. (4.19) Tj,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1 = Xj,j+1X −1 T Y = T XDiag (X −1) = XeT Diag (X −1) = Y Diag (X)eT Diag (X −1),  T1,1 T1,2 T1,3 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ··· 3,3 ··· X1,nX −1 3,3 ··· X2,nX −1 2,2 X1,3X −1 X2,3X −1 I X1,2X −1 0   T1,n T2,n ... ... ... Tn,n ··· ··· ··· ··· 0 0 0 0 n,n n,n ... ... ... ... 0 I I I X1,2X −1 0 2,2 X1,3X −1 X2,3X −1 3,3 ··· X1,nX −1 3,3 ··· X2,nX −1 I n,n n,n ... 0 0 ... ··· ··· ... 0 ··· ... ... I Xn−1,nX −1 n,n 0 I which is equivalent to (4.18)  = Comparing the (j, j + 1)-entries of Equation (4.18), we obtain that Tj,j+1 + Tj,jXj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1 = Xj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1. ··· X1,1 eT1,nX −1 3,3 ··· X2,2 eT2,nX −1 n,n n,n ... Tn,n  . 0 0 ... 2,2 ··· ··· 0 ··· ... ... ... T2,2 ...  X2,2 eT2,3X −1 ... I Xn−1,nX −1 ··· n,n ··· 0 T1,1 X1,1 eT1,2X −1 0  j+1,j+1Tj+1,j+1 + Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1Tj+1,j+1 − Tj,jXj,j+1X −1 0 j+1,j+1, ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 21 denoted by Yj,j+1. Then we consider j+1,j+1) Tj,jYj,j+1 = Tj,j(Tj,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 =Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,jeTj,j+1X −1 =Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,j+1eTj+1,j+1X −1 =Tj,j+1Tj+1,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 =(Tj,j+1 − Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1)Tj+1,j+1 =Yj,j+1Tj+1,j+1, j+1,j+1 j+1,j+1 j+1,j+1Tj+1,j+1 i.e. Yj,j+1 ∈ Ker τTj,j,Tj+1,j+1 ∩ Ran τTj,j ,Tj+1,j+1. Recall that T satisfies the Property (H), we see Yj,j+1 = 0, i.e. Finally, we have the following matrix equation: Tj,j+1 = Xj,jeTj,j+1X −1 j+1,j+1,  =  X1,1 0 ··· ··· 0 0 X2,2 0 ... 0 Xn−1,n−1 ··· ... ... ··· ··· 0 0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 T1,1 T1,2 0 ··· ··· ... ... 0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 ··· ... ··· ··· 0 0 0 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1. eT1,1 eT1,2 0 ... 0 eT2,2 eT2,3 ... ... 0 0 ··· ··· 0 ··· ··· ··· ... 0 eTn−1,n−1 X1,1 0 ··· ··· 0 0 X2,2 0 ... 0 Xn−1,n−1 ··· ... ... ··· ··· 0 0 ... 0     Xn,n 0 0 ... 0 Tn,n 0 0 ... 0 eTn,n 0 0 ... 0 Xn,n   . (cid:3) Theorem 4.8. Let T,eT ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Then T ∼U +K eT if and only if the following statements hold: (w)) ⊕ A(w)], for any w ∈ Ω, λ ∈ C; 2π KEdiag T (1) Cλ(EdiagT )(w) = det[(I + iλ (2) φj φj+1 θj,j+1(T ) = θj,j+1(eT ), for any 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1, nLj=1 ∂w∂w ∂2 where A(w) = iλ 2π ln(φj(w)),and φj(w) are functions appeared in Proposition 2.9. Remark 4.9. In the main theorem above, when A(w) = 0, w ∈ Ω, then the equation in statement (1) turns out to be Cλ(EdiagT )(w) = Cλ(Ediag T )(w). In the following, we give the proof of Theorem 4.8. In this case, T ∼u T . (See in Theorem 5.1) Proof. We assume that 0 ∈ Ω. Suppose that Cλ(EdiagT ) = deth(cid:16)I + iλ w ∈ Ω, λ ∈ C. By the definition, we obtain that 2π KEdiag T (w)(cid:17) ⊕ A(w)i for any i 2π nYj=1(cid:18)1 + λ KTj,j (w)(cid:19) = where tj is a nonzero section of bundle E eTj,j j ) (See in Proposition 2.9). By the fundamental theorem of algebra, there exists a permutation Ξ on {1, 2,··· , n} such that nYj=1(cid:18)1 − λ , and φj(w) = (cid:13)(cid:13)Xj(tj(w))(cid:13)(cid:13)2 ln(φj(w)ktj (w)k2)(cid:19) , + (1− α2 ktj(w)k2 ∂w∂w i 2π ∂2 22 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU for any 1 ≤ j ≤ n, we have Note that KTj,j (w) = − ∂2 ∂w∂w ln(cid:0)φΞ(j)(w)ktΞ(j)(w)k2(cid:1) . KTj,j = − = − = − ∂2 ∂w∂w ∂2 ∂w∂w ∂2 ∂w∂w ln(cid:0)φΞ(j)(w)ktΞ(j)(w)k2(cid:1) ∂2 ln φΞ(j)(w) − ∂w∂w ln(ktΞ(j)(w)k2) ln φΞ(j)(w) + K eTΞ(j),Ξ(j) , ∂2 i.e. K eTΞ(j),Ξ(j) − KTj,j = exist invertible operators Yj = Uj + Kj such that Uj are unitary, Kj are compact and ln φΞ(j)(w). By Lemma 2.9, we have that Tj ∼U +K eTΞ(j),Ξ(j), i.e. there ∂w∂w (Uj + Kj)eTΞ(j),Ξ(j) = Tj(Uj + Kj), 1 ≤ j ≤ n. Now we will prove that Ξ(j) = j, 1 ≤ j ≤ n. We assume that Ξ(n) < n. Since (Un +Kn)eTΞ(n),Ξ(n) = Tn,n(Un + Kn), then we have that (Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),Ξ(n)eTΞ(n),n = Tn,n(Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n, (Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),neTn,n = Tn,n(Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n. (UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))eTn,n = TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n)(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n)), and Ξ−1(n) < n (Recall Ξ(n) < n). Then we have that Notice that (Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),neTn,n(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))−1 = Tn,n(Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))−1. It follows that (Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))−1TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) = Tn,n(Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))−1. Thus, Since Ξ−1(n) < n, by Lemma 4.4, we know that Ker τTn,n,TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) (Un + Kn)eTΞ(n),n(UΞ−1(n) + KΞ−1(n))−1 ∈ Ker τTn,n,TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) . = {0}. Thus we have that eTΞ(n),n = 0. This is a contradiction and Ξ(n) = n. Iterating the process, we can obtain that Ξ(j) = j for 1 ≤ j ≤ n. Moreover Let T = Y −1T Y , where Y is a diagonal matrix whose (j, j) entry is Yj = Uj + Kj. The operator T has the following form: j = 1, 2, . . . , n. Tj,j = (Uj + Kj)eTj,j(Uj + Kj)−1, T = eT1,1 Y −1 0 ... Y −1 2 T2,3Y3 eT2,2 ... 1 T1,2Y2 ... ··· ··· ... ··· ··· 0 0 0 0 ··· 0 Y −1 1 T1,nYn Y −1 2 T2,nYn ... eTn,n .  eTn−1,n−1 Y −1 n−1Tn−1,nYn It is clear that T ∼U +K T . ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 23 We define operators A, B ∈ L(H) by using matrices: A := and It is easy to see that 0 0 0 0 B := 0 0 ... eTn,n .  1 T1,2Y2 eT1,1 Y −1 0 ... eT2,2 ... 0 Y −1 2 T2,3Y3 ··· 0 ... ··· ··· ... 0 eTn−1,n−1 Y −1 n−1Tn−1,nYn ,  eT1,1 eT1,2 0 ... 0 0 ··· 0 0 eT2,2 eT2,3 ... ... ··· eTn−1,n−1 eTn−1,n eTn,n ··· ... 0 0 ... 0 0 0 θj,j+1(T ) = θj,j+1(A), θj,j+1(eT ) = θj,j+1(B), 1 ≤ j ≤ n − 1. We claim that A is unitarily equivalent to B. In fact, by Theorem 3.6 in [34], we only need to j+1(ti+1(·)) is a non zero section prove the second fundamental forms of A and B are same. Clearly Y −1 of E eTj+1,j+1 , θj,j+1(A)(w) = kY −1 j Tj,j+1Yj+1Y −1 j+1(ti+1(w))k2 = kY −1 kY −1 j+1(ti+1(w))k2 j Ti,i+1(ti+1(w))k2 kY −1 j+1(ti+1(w))k2 j+1(tj+1(w))k2 . j+1(tj+1(w))k2 θj,j+1(B)(w) = keTj,j+1Y −1 kY −1 φj(w) = kY −1 (tj(w))k2 , j ktj(w)k2 1 ≤ j ≤ n, and Since and the condition (2) is satisfied, we then have θj,j+1(B) = θj,j+1(eT ) = kY −1 φj(w) φj+1(w) = j θj,j+1(T ) (Tj,j+1(tj+1(w)))k2 = kY −1 kTj,j+1(ti+1(w))k2 j Tj,j+1(tj+1(w))k2 kY −1 = θj,j+1(A). j+1(tj+1(w))k2 ktj+1(w)k2 j+1(tj+1(w))k2 kY −1 kTj,j+1(tj+1(w))k2 ktj+1(w)k2 24 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Hence there exists a diagonal unitary operator V whose (j, j)-entry is denoted by Vj such that V ∗BV = A. Consider V Y −1T Y V ∗ = V T V ∗ =  0 ... 0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 eT1,1 eT1,2 V1 Y 0 −1 1 eT2,2 0 −1 ∗ 3 V1 Y 1 ∗ T1,4 Y4 V 4 ∗ V2X2T2,4 X4V 4 T1,3 Y3 V eT2,3 eT3,3 ... ··· 0 0 eT3,4 ... eTn−2,n−2 ··· ··· T1,n Yn V −1 V1 Y 1 −1 V2 Y 2 T2,n Yn V −1 T3,n Yn V V3 Y 3 ∗ n ∗ n ∗ n ... eTn−1,n eTn,n .  eTn−2,n−1 Vn−2 Y eTn−1,n−1 −1 n−2 Tn−2,n Yn V ∗ n ··· ··· ··· ... 0 By Lemma 4.1, there exists eK ∈ K(H) such that I + eK is invertible and (I + eK)V Y −1T Y V ∗(I + eK)−1 = eT . Thus T ∼U +K eT . On the other hand, suppose that T ∼U +K eT . Then there is a unitary operator U and compact operator K such that T (U + K) = (U + K)eT . By Proposition 4.5, U + K is upper triangular. By Lemma 4.6, we can assume that U + K = U1,1+K1,1 ··· ··· K1,2 K1,3 U2,2+K2,2 K2,3 ... 0 Un−1,n−1+Kn−1,n−1 Kn−1,n ··· K1,n K2,n ... ... ··· ··· ... 0 Un,n+Kn,n 0 ... 0 0  , where U = Diag {U1,1, U2,2,··· , Un,n}, K = (Kℓ,j)n×n, Kℓ,j = 0, ℓ > j. By Lemma 4.7, we have  0 0 0 ... ... 0 0 0 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· Tn,n ... ... T1,1 T1,2 U1,1+K1,1  0 T2,2 T2,3 ... 0 Tn−1,n−1 Tn−1,n ···  =  Tj,j(Uj,j + Kj,j) = (Uj,j + Kj,j)eTj,j, ... ··· ··· 0 0 ... U1,1+K1,1 0 0 0 ... ... 0 0 0 0 0 0 ··· ··· ··· ··· ... ... Un,n+Kn,n 0 eT1,1 eT1,2 0 ... 0 U2,2+K2,2 0 ... 0 Un−1,n−1+Kn−1,n−1 ···   (Uj,j + Kj,j)Tj,j+1 = eTj,j+1(Uj+1,j+1 + Kj+1,j+1). eTn−1,n−1 eTn−1,n eTn,n 0 eT2,2 eT2,3 ... ...   Un,n+Kn,n ... ··· ··· ··· ··· 0 ··· 0 0 0 0 ... ... 0 0 0 ··· ··· 0 U2,2+K2,2 0 ... 0 Un−1,n−1+Kn−1,n−1 ··· ... 0 . It follows that Furthermore, Uj,j + Kj,j is invertible and Uj,j is a unitary operator and Kj,j is a compact operator. Let φj(w) := k(Uj,j + Kj,j)−1(tj(w))k2 ktj(w)k2 , 1 ≤ j ≤ n. Following the same argument as in the sufficient part and from Proposition 2.9, we can conclude that KTj,j − K eTj,j = ∂2 ∂w∂w ln(φj). ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 25 Thus, we have that Cλ(EDiag T ) =det(cid:18)I − i =det(cid:20)(cid:18)I + λ 2π iλ 2π Φ(cid:19) KEdiag T (w)(cid:19) ⊕ A(w)(cid:21) , where Φ(w) = ∂2 ∂w∂w nMj=1 θj,j+1(T ) = k(Uj + Kj)Tj,j+1(tj+1)k2 ln(cid:0)φj(w)ktj (w)k2)(cid:1), tj is a non zero section of bundle E eTj,j k(Uj+1 + Kj+1)(tj+1)k2 = keTj,j+1(Uj+1 + Kj+1)(tj+1)k2 k(Uj+1 + Kj+1)(tj+1)k2 φj φj+1 . Furthermore, = θj,j+1(eT ). (cid:3) This finishes the proof of the necessary part. 5. Unitary Invariants In this section, we completely determined the unitary invariants of this class NCFBn(Ω) of essen- tially normal Cowen-Douglas operators. Theorem 5.1. Let T, T ∈ NCFBn(Ω). Suppose that Tℓ,j = φℓ,j(Tℓ,i)Tℓ,ℓ+1Tℓ+1,ℓ+2 ··· Tj−1,j and Tℓ,j = φℓ,j( Tℓ,ℓ) Tℓ,ℓ+1 Tℓ+1,ℓ+2 ··· Tj−1,j Then T ∼u eT if and only if the following statements hold: (1) Cλ(EDiag T ) = Cλ(EDiag T ) ; (2) θℓ,j(T ) = θℓ,j( T ), (3) φℓ,j = φℓ,j, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ j ≤ n. Proof. Suppose T ∼u T in NCFBn(Ω), i.e. there is a unitary operator U such that U T = T U . By Theorem 3.5 in [34], such an intertwining unitary must be diagonal, that is, U = U1 ⊕ ··· ⊕ Un, for some choice of n unitary operators U1, . . . , Un. Since UℓTℓ = TℓUℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n, and UℓTℓ,j = Tℓ,jUj, 1 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n. In particular, UℓTℓ,ℓ+1 = Tℓ,ℓ+1Uℓ+1, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n− 1. Suppose that there exists a holomorphic function φℓ such that Uℓ(tℓ) = φℓtℓ. Then we have that UℓTℓ,ℓ+1(tℓ+1) =Uℓ(tℓ) = φℓtℓ = Tℓ,ℓ+1Uℓ+1(tℓ+1) =φℓ+1tℓ. Thus, we have φℓ = φℓ+1. We then set φ := φℓ, ℓ = 1, 2··· , n. That means (5.1) Uℓ(tℓ(w)) = φ(w)tℓ(w), 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n, w ∈ Ω, where φ is some non zero holomorphic function. Thus or KTℓ = K Tℓ and ktℓ+1(w)k ktℓ+1(w)k = ktℓ(w)k ktℓ(w)k , 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n − 1. KTℓ = K Tℓ and θℓ−1,ℓ(T ) = θℓ−1,ℓ( T ) 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n. It follows that Cλ(EDiag T ) = Cλ(EDiag T ). 26 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU On the other hand, we have that Tℓ,j(tj) = φℓ,jtℓ and Tℓ,j(tj) = φℓ,j tℓ. By the equations UℓTℓ,j = Tℓ,jUj, 1 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n − 1, we have that Since ktℓ+1k ktℓ+1k = ktℓk ktℓk , 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n − 1, we also have that φℓ,j = φℓ,j, 1 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n ktjk ktjk = ktℓk ktℓk , 1 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n. Since φℓ,j = φℓ,j, then it follows that θℓ,j(T ) = kTℓ,j(tj)k ktjk = kφℓ,jtℓk ktjk = k φℓ,jtℓk ktjk = k Tℓ,j(tj)k ktjk = θℓ,j( T ), 1 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n. This finishes the proof of the necessary part. Conversely assume that T and T are operators in NCFBn(Ω) for which these invariants are the same. Since Cλ(EDiag T ) = Cλ(EDiag T ), then we have that nYk=1(cid:18)1 + λ i 2π KTk,k(cid:19) = nYk=1(cid:18)1 + λ i 2π K Tk,k(cid:19) . Thus, there exists a permutation Ξ on {1, 2,··· , n} such that KTℓ,ℓ = K TΞ(ℓ),Ξ(ℓ) , 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n. That means there exist unitary operators Uℓ such that Uℓ TΞ(ℓ),Ξ(ℓ) = TℓUℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n. Now we will prove that Ξ(ℓ) = ℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n. Otherwise, without loss of generality, we can assume that Ξ(n) < n. In fact, if Ξ(n) = n, we can assume Ξ(n − 1) < n − 1. Since Un TΞ(n),Ξ(n) = Tn,nUn, then we have that Notice that Un TΞ(n),Ξ(n) TΞ(n),n =TnUn TΞ(n),n Un TΞ(n),n Tn,n =Tn,nUn TΞ(n),n. UΞ−1(n) Tn,n = TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n)UΞ−1(n), and Ξ−1(n) < n (Recall Ξ(n) < n). Then we have that Un TΞ(n),n It follows that Tn,nU ∗ Ξ−1(n) = Tn,nUn TΞ(n),nU ∗ Ξ−1(n). Un TΞ(n),nU ∗ Ξ−1(n)TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) = Tn,nUn TΞ(n),nU ∗ Ξ−1(n). Thus, Un TΞ(n),nU ∗ Ker τTn,n,TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) that Ξ(ℓ) = ℓ, 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n, and Ξ−1(n) ∈ Ker τTn,n,TΞ−1(n),Ξ−1(n) . Since Ξ−1(n) < n, by Lemma 4.4, we know that = {0}. Thus we have that TΞ(n),n = 0. This is a contradiction. So we have Tℓ,ℓ = Uℓ Tℓ,ℓU ∗ ℓ , KTℓ,ℓ = K Tℓ,ℓ ℓ = 1, 2, . . . , n. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 27 Equality of the two curvatures KTℓ = K Tℓ together with the equality of the second fundamental ktℓk , 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n − 1 implies that there exist a non-zero holomorphic function φ defined forms ktℓ+1k on Ω (if necessary, one may choose a domain Ω0 ⊆ Ω such that φ is non zero on Ω0) such that ktℓ+1k = ktℓk ktℓ(w)k = φ(w)ktℓ(w)k, For 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n, we define Uℓ : Hℓ → eHℓ by the formula Uℓ(tℓ(w)) = φ(w)tℓ(w), w ∈ Ω. 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n. and extend to the linear span of these vectors. For 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n, kUℓ(ti(w))k = kφ(w)tℓ(w)k = φ(w)ktℓ(w)k = ktℓ(w)k. Thus each Uℓ extends to an isometry from Hℓ to eHℓ. Since Uℓ is isometric and UℓTℓ = TℓUℓ. Let Ω0 be arbitrary open connected subset of Ω. Since Ww∈Ω0{tℓ(w)} = Hℓ, then we can see each Uℓ is unitary. By a direct computation, we can see that UℓTℓ,ℓ+1 = Tℓ,ℓ+1Uℓ+1 for 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ n − 1 also. For any w ∈ Ω and 0 ≤ ℓ < j ≤ n − 2 with j − ℓ ≥ 2, we have Uℓ(Tℓ,j(tj(w))) = Uℓ(φℓ,j(w)tℓ(w)) = φℓ,j(w)φ(w)tℓ(w) = φℓ,j(w)φ(w)tℓ(w) = Tℓ,j(Uj(tj(w))) which implies that UℓTℓ,j = Tℓ,jUj. Hence setting U = U1 ⊕ ··· ⊕ Un, we see that U is unitary and U T = T U . This completes the proof of the Theorem. (cid:3) 6. Summary and Further Research In Section 3, it is critical to find an operator in NCFBn(Ω) (Theorem 3.10) to show that NCFBn(Ω) contains many nontrivial operators when Ω is simply connected. It is natural to ask the following questions: 1. Can we construct an operator in NCFBn(Ω) when Ω is connected? 2. Can we generalize Proposition 3.13 to the case Ω is (2-)connected? In 1984, Misra [50] introduced homogeneous operators. An operator T ∈ L(H) is homogeneous if σ(T ) ⊂ D and φα(T ) is unitarily equivalent to T for all M´'obius transformation φα; Misra also introduce homogeneous for similarity. An operator T ∈ L(H) is weakly homogeneous if σ(T ) ⊂ D and φα(T ) is similar to T for all M´'obius transformation φα; In the framework of Herrero, we introduce (U + K)-homogeneous between homogeneous and weakly homogeneous. Definition 6.1. An operator T ∈ L(H) with kTk ≤ 1 is (U + K)-homogenous if there exists a unitary operator Uα and a compact operator Kα such that Uα + Kα is invertible and for all Mobius transformation φα of the unit disk. (Uα + Kα)T = φα(T )(Uα + Kα), α ∈ D. In [50], Misra showed that an operator T ∈ B1(Ω) with kTk ≤ 1 is homogeneous if and only if its curvature is −λ(1 − w2)−2 for some positive number λ. 28 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU Question 6.2. Can we give a simple characterization of (U + K)-homogeneous operators? References [1] D. Alpay, A remark on the Cowen-Douglas classes Bn(Ω). Arch. Math. (Basel) 51 (1988), no. 6, 539-546. [2] C. Apostol, L. A. Fialkow, D. A. Herrero and D. Voiculescu, Approximation of Hilbert Space Operators II, Research Notes in Math. Vol. 102, Pitman Book Ltd., 1984. [3] C. Apostol, D. A. Herrero and D. Voiculescu, The closure of the similarity orbit of a Hilbert space operator Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. (New Series), 6 (1982), 421-426. [4] L. G. Brown, R. G. Douglas, P. A. Fillmore, Extensions of C∗-algebras and K-homology. Ann. of Math. (2) 105 (1977), no. 2, 265-324. [5] I. D. Berg and K. R. Davidson Almost commuting matrices and a quantitative version of the Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem. Acta Math. 166 (1991), 121-161. [6] C. Apostol, M. Martin, C ∗-algebra approach to the Cowen-Douglas theory. Topics in modern operator theory (Timioara/Herculane, 1980), pp. 45-51, Operator Theory: Adv. Appl., 2, Birkhauser, Basel-Boston, Mass., 1981. [7] M. Carlsson, On the Cowen-Douglas class for Banach space operators. Integral Equations Operator Theory 61 (2008), no. 4, 593-598. [8] J.B. Cowen, The theory of subnormal operators. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 36. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1991. [9] A. Connes, Noncommutative differential geometry, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. 62(1985), 257-360. [10] M. J. Cowen and R. G. Douglas, Complex geometry and operator theory, Acta Math. 141 (1978), 187 - 261. [11] L. Chen and R. G. Douglas, A local theory for operator tuples in the Cowen-Douglas class. Adv. Math. 307 (2017), 754-779. [12] D. N. Clark and G. Misra, On curvature and similarity, Michigan Math. J., 30 (1983), 361 - 367. [13] D. N. Clark and G. Misra, On weighted shifts, curvature and similarity, J. London Math. Soc., 31(1985), 357 - 368. [14] D. N. Clark and G. Misra, The curvature function and similarity of operators, International symposium on complex analysis and applications (Arandjelovac, 1984) Mat. Vesnik 37(1985), no. 1, 21-32. [15] R. Curto and N. Salinas, Generalized Bergman kernels and the Cowen-Douglas theory, Amer. J. Math. 106 (1984), 447 - 488. [16] R. G. Douglas, H. Kwon and S. Treil, Similarity of n-hypercontractions and backward Bergman shifts., J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 88 (2013), no. 3, 637-648. [17] R. G. Douglas and G. Misra, Equivalence of quotient Hilbert modules. II, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 360 (2008), 2229-2264. [18] R. G. Douglas, X. Tang, and G. Yu, An analytic Grothendieck Riemann Roch theorem, Adv. Math. 294(2016), 307-331. [19] J. Eschmeier and S. Langendorfer, Cowen-Douglas tuples and fiber dimensions. J. Operator Theory 78 (2017), no. 1, 21-43. [20] J. Eschmeier and S. Langend´'orfer, Cowen-Douglas operators and dominating sets. J. Operator Theory 72 (2014), no. 1, 277-290. [21] L. A. Fialkow, The similarity orbit of a normal operator, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 210(1975), 129-137. [22] S. Ghara, The orbit of a bounded operator under the Mobius group modulo similarity equivalence, arXiv:1811.05428 [23] P. Guinand and L. W. Marcoux, Between the unitary and similarity orbits of normal operators. Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 159, no. 2 (1993), 299-335. [24] P. Guinand and L. W. Marcoux, On the U + K-orbits of certain weighted shifts. Integr. Equat. Oper. Th., 17 (1993), 516-543. [25] D. W. Hadwin, An operator-valued spectrum, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 26(1977), 329-340. [26] P. R. Halmos, Ten problems in Hilbert space, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 76 (1970) 887 - 933. [27] D. A. Herrero, A trace obstruction to approximation by block-diagonal nilpotents, American Journal of Mathematics, 108, no. 2 (1986), 451-484 [28] D. A. Herrero, Spectral pictures of operators in the Cowen-Douglas class Bn(Ω) and its closure. J. Operator Theory 18 (1987), no. 2, 213-222. ESSENTIALLY NORMAL COWEN-DOUGLAS OPERATORS 29 [29] B. Hou, P. Cui and Y. Cao, Chaos for Cowen-Douglas operators. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 138 (2010), no. 3, 929-936. [30] Y. Hou, K. Ji and H. Kwon, The Trace of the Curvature determines Similarity. Studia Math., 236 (2017), No. 2, 193-200. [31] G. Ji, Generalized Cowen-Douglas operators over Hilbert C*-modules. Integral Equations Operator Theory 20 (1994), no. 4, 395-409. [32] K. Ji and J. Sarkar, Similarity of Quotient Hilbert modules in the Cowen-Douglas Class, arXiv:1212.2707 . [33] K. Ji, C. Jiang, D. K. Keshari and G. Misra, Flag structure for operators in the Cowen-Douglas class, Comptes rendus - Math´ematique, 352 (2014), 511 - 514. [34] K. Ji, C. Jiang, D. K. Keshari and G. Misra, Rigidity of the flag structure for a class of Cowen-Douglas operators, J. Func. Anal., 272 (2017), 2899 - 2932. [35] Y. Ji, J. Li, Y. Yang A characterization of bilateral operator weighted shifts being Cowen-Douglas operators. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), no. 11, 3205-3210. [36] C. Jiang, K. Ji and D. K. Keshari, Geometric similarity classification of Cowen-Douglas operators, preprint, 2019. [37] C.Jiang, K. Ji and G. Misra, Classification of quasi-homogeneous holomorphic curves and operators in the Cowen- Douglas class, J. Func. Anal., 274(2017), 2399-2445. [38] C. Jiang, Similarity, reducibility and approximation of the Cowen-Douglas operators, J. Operator Theory, 32 (1994), 77 - 89. [39] C. Jiang, Similarity classification of Cowen-Douglas operators, Canad. J. Math., 56 (2004), 742 - 775. [40] C. Jiang and K. Ji, Similarity classification of holomorphic curves, Adv. Math., 215 (2007), 446 - 468. [41] C. Jiang, X. Guo and K. Ji, K-group and similarity classification of operators, J. Funct. Anal., 225 (2005), 167 - 192. [42] C. Jiang and Z. Wang, Strongly irreducible operators on Hilbert space, Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, 389. Longman, Harlow, 1998. [43] C. Jiang and Z. Wang, Structure of Hilbert Space Operators, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2006. [44] C. Jiang and Z. Wang, The spectral picture and the closure of the similarity orbit of strongly irreducible operators, Integral Equations Operator Theory, 24 (1996), 81 - 105. [45] C. Jiang and D. Zheng, Similarity of analytic Toeplitz operator on the Bergman space. J. Funct. Anal., 258 (2010), 2961-2982 . [46] A. Koranyi and G. Misra, Homogeneous Hermitian holomorphic vector bundles and the Cowen-Douglas class over bounded symmetric domains, Comptes rendus - Math`ematique, 354 (2016), 291- 295. [47] A. Kor´anyi and G. Misra, A classification of homogeneous operators in the Cowen-Douglas class, Adv. Math., 226 (2011), 5338 - 5360. [48] A. Kor´anyi and G. Misra, Multiplicity-free homogeneous operators in the Cowen-Douglas class, Perspectives in mathematical sciences. II, 83-101, Stat. Sci. Interdiscip. Res., 8, World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ, 2009. [49] A. Kor´anyi and G. Misra, Homogeneous operators on Hilbert spaces of holomorphic functions, J. Func. Anal., 254 (2008), 2419 - 2436. [50] G. Misra, Curvature and the backward shift operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 91 (1984), 105 - 107. [51] S. Krantz and N. Salinas, Proper holomorphic mappings and the Cowen-Douglas class. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 117 (1993), no. 1, 99-105. [52] H. Kwon and S. Treil, Similarity of operators and geometry of eigenvector bundles, Publ. Mat., 53. (2009), 417 - 438. [53] Q. Lin and N. Salinas A characterization of coanalytical Toeplitz operators in Cowen-Douglas class. Analysis and partial differential equations, 519-527, Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., 122, Dekker, New York, 1990. [54] M. Martin and N. Salinas, Flag manifolds and the Cowen-Douglas theory. J. Operator Theory 38 (1997), no. 2, 329-365. [55] J. McCarthy, Boundary values and Cowen-Douglas curvature. J. Funct. Anal. 137 (1996), no. 1, 1-18. [56] P. H. Naeini and B. Yousefi, On some properties of Cowen-Douglas class of operators. J. Funct. Spaces 2018, Art. ID 6078594, 6 pp. 30 CHUNLAN JIANG, KUI JI AND JINSONG WU [57] R. Reza, Curvature inequalities for operators in the Cowen-Douglas class of a planar domain. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 67 (2018), no. 3, 1255-1279. [58] A. L. Shields, Weighted Shift Operators and Analytic Function Theory, Mathematical Survey, 13 (1974), 49-128. [59] L. Tian, W. Guo and K. Ji, A note on a subclass of Cowen-Douglas operators, To appear. [60] S. Treil and B. D. Wick, Analytic projections, corona problem and geometry of holomorphic vector bundles, Journal of the American Mathematical Society 22 (2009), no. 1, 55-76. [61] D. Voiculescu A non-commutative Weyl-von Neumann theorem, Rev. Roum. Math. Pures et Appl. 21 (1976) 97-113. [62] K. Wang and G. Zhang Curvature inequalities for operators of the Cowen-Douglas class. Israel J. Math. 222 (2017), no. 1, 279-296. [63] R. O. Wells Differential Analysis on Complex Manifolds, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer; Softcover reprint of hardcover 3rd ed. 2008. [64] D. Wilkins, Homogeneous vector bundles and Cowen-Douglas operators. Internat. J. Math. 4 (1993), no. 3, 503-520. [65] G. Yu, Reducing properties and unitary invariants of a class of operators. Chinese Science Bulletin 19 (1985). [66] K. Zhu, Operators in Cowen-Douglas classes. Illinois J. Math. 44 (2000), no. 4, 767-783. Current address, C. Jiang and K. Ji: Department of Mathematics, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050016, China Current address, J. Wu: Institute for Advanced Study in Mathematics, Harbin Institute of Technology, Heilongjiang 150001, China E-mail address, C. Jiang: [email protected] E-mail address, K. Ji: [email protected], [email protected] E-mail address, J. Wu: [email protected]
1908.01320	1	1908	2019-08-04T11:46:14	A Sharp Inequality of Hardy-Littlewood Type Via Derivatives	[ "math.FA", "math.CV" ]	In this paper we consider a generalized version of Carleman's inequality. An equivalent version of it states that $\\|f\\|_{A_\alpha^{2\alpha}}\leq\\|f\\|_{H^2}$, where $f$ is a holomorphic function and $\alpha>1$. If the norms $\\|f\\|_{A_\alpha^{2\alpha}}$ are decreasing in $\alpha$, then the inequality holds for $f$. For a dense set of functions, we calculate the derivative of the norms $\\|f\\|_{A_\alpha^{2\alpha}}$ in $\alpha$ and give sufficient conditions for this derivative to be non-positive. As an application, we prove the inequality for linear combinations of two reproducing kernels. Some numerical evidences are also provided.	math.FA	math	A Sharp Inequality of Hardy-Littlewood Type Via Derivatives Hui Dan, Kunyu Guo and Yi Wang August 6, 2019 Abstract: In this paper we consider a generalized version of Carleman's inequality. An equivalent α ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2, where f is a holomorphic function and α > 1. If version of it states that (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α the norms (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α are decreasing in α, then the inequality holds for f . For a dense set of functions, we calculate the derivative of the norms (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α in α and give sufficient conditions for this derivative to be non-positive. As an application, we prove the inequality for linear combinations of two reproducing kernels. Some numerical evidences are also provided. Keywords: Carleman's inequality, inequality of Hardy and Littlewood type 2010 AMS Subject Classification: 30H20, 30H10 1 Introduction In this paper we consider a sharp inequality concerning the weighted Bergman norms and the Hardy norm on the unit disc D. Recall that for 0 < p < ∞, the Hardy space H p consists of all holomorphic functions f on D such that 9 1 0 2 g u A 4 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 0 2 3 1 0 . 8 0 9 1 : v i X r a (cid:18)(cid:90) 2π (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p := sup 0<r<1 f (reiθ)p dθ 2π 0 (cid:19) 1 p < ∞. (cid:19) 1 p α consists of all holomorphic functions f on D such For α > 1, the weighted Bergman space Ap that (cid:18)(cid:90) α := where dµ(z) = (1−z2)−2 dxdy we are considering in this paper is the following. Conjecture 1. For any 0 < p ≤ 2 and any f ∈ H p, D π (cid:107)f(cid:107)Ap f (z)p(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) < ∞, is the Mobius invariant measure of the unit disc. The inequality (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2 2/p ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p. 1 (1.1) In the case when p = 1, (1.1) is the Carleman's inequality (cf. [14]). For p = 1/k where k is any positive integer, Burbea [9] showed that (1.1) holds true. If one releases the restriction on the controlling constants, that is, if one asks whether ≤ C(cid:107)f(cid:107)H p (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2 (1.2) 2/p for some constant C, then using interpolation techniques, Brevig, Ortega-Cerd`a, Seip and Zhao has proved that (1.2) holds for 0 < p < 1 and C as close to 1 as C = (2/(e log 2))1/2 = 1.030279 . . .. In [6], the authors also gave and discussed about several interesting related conjectures and questions. In the case when p = 1, inequality (1.1) becomes ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 1. (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2 2 This is known as the Carleman's inequality. In 1921, Carleman [10] proved this inequality and used it to give the first complex-analytic proof of the famous isoperimetric theorem. For a different purpose, in 1932, Hardy and Littlewood showed that H p ⊂ A2p (in particular, H 1 ⊂ A2 2) in [11]. See [14] for an excellent exposition of the relation between the two problems. Various generalizations were proved, for example, in [1][7][8][9][13][15]. 2 In recently years, Inequality (1.1) has regained attention because of its application in num- ber theory. Via an iterating process [2] [12], contractive inequalities like (1.1) may "lift" multi- plicatively to interesting inequalities for Hardy spaces on the infinite-dimensional torus, which in turn, by the Bohr transform, translates into inequalities of Dirichlet polynomials[3][4][5]. Next, let us go to the technical side. An immediate observation is that for Conjecture 1, it suffices to consider any outer function f , because multiplying an inner function on f does not make a difference on the right hand side of (1.1), but makes the left hand side smaller. For an outer function, one can consider its powers. By replacing f with f α where α = 2/p, it is easy to show that Conjecture 1 is equivalent to the following (cf. [6]). Conjecture 2. For any α > 1 and any f ∈ H 2, (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2. (1.3) Then Burbea's result [9] is equivalent to that (1.3) holds when α is any integer that is greater than 1. A straight-forward proof was given in [6, Corollary 3]. In the case when α is not an integer, the problem becomes very hard. The following computation may give us a clue. In the case when α > 1 is an integer, and suppose that f is an outer function, f =(cid:80)∞ n=0 anzn and a0 = 1. Then one can compute that H 2 − (cid:107)f(cid:107)2α (cid:107)f(cid:107)2α ∞(cid:88) (cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)an1 ··· ank − am1 ··· aml (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)2 (cid:1) and(cid:0)α equation (under some convergence assumption). However, the coefficients(cid:0)α This gives an alternative proof of Burbea's result. For non-integer valued α, we have the same (cid:18)N + α − 1 (cid:19)−1 N(cid:88) (cid:18)α (cid:19)(cid:18)α n1+···+nk=N,ni≥1 m1+···+ml=N,mi≥1 (cid:1) may (cid:88) . (1.4) A2α α N = 1 2 N =0 k,l=1 k l 2 k l be negative. Similar obstructions occur when one tries to extend other proofs of Burbea's result to a non-integer valued α. In [6], the authors gave several related conjectures (including the Conjectures 1 and 2 above) and questions. In particular, in [6, Question 1], they asked whether (cid:107)f(cid:107)2α is non- increasing in the parameter α, for an outer function f with (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2 = 1. A positive answer to the question above will lead to a positive answer to Conjecture 2. In this paper, we will mainly consider the following similar question, which allows us to drop the assumption "(cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2 = 1" (see Remark 2.6). Question 3. Suppose that f is an outer function. For α > 1, denote A2α α Nf (α) = (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α = f (z)2α(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) . (cid:19) 1 2α (cid:18)(cid:90) D Is it true that for all α > 1? Nf (α) ≤ 0 ∂ ∂α In Section 2, we will first show that a positive answer to Question 3 implies Conjecture ∂α Nf (α) for a dense set of functions. Based on ∂α Nf (α) to be non-positive. 2. Then we will give a discrete formula of ∂ the formula, in Section 3, we give some sufficient conditions for ∂ As an application, in Section 4, we obtain the following result. Theorem 1.1 (Theorem 4.1 ). Suppose f ∈ H 2 and f = ηF , where η is inner and F has no zeros in D. Suppose for some α > 1, and c ∈ C2, w ∈ D2. Then for any 1 ≤ β ≤ α, we have F α = c1Kw1,α + c2Kw2,α. (1.5) Equality holds if and only if F α = cKw,α for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. As a consequence, we have . β (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2α α ≤ (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2β Equality holds if and only if f = cKw,1 for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2. Some further remarks and numerical evidences are provided in Section 5. 2 A Discrete Formula It is well-known that for p > 0 and f ∈ H p [16]. Similarly, we have the following lemma. (cid:107)f(cid:107)Ap α = (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p lim α→1+ 3 (1.6) (2.1) Lemma 2.1. Let O∗ denote the set of holomorphic functions f defined in some open neigh- borhood of D such that f (z) (cid:54)= 0 for all z ∈ D. Then for any f ∈ O∗ and any p > 0, (cid:107)f(cid:107)Aαp α = (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p. lim α→1+ ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0, ∀α > 1, then (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α As a consequence, if f ∈ O∗ and ∂ Proof. Without loss of generality, we assume (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p = 1. Since f ∈ O∗, there exists C > c > 0 such that c ≤ f (z) ≤ C for z ∈ D. It is easy to find a constant M > 0 such that xα − x ≤ M (α − 1) for x ∈ [cp, C p] and α ∈ (1, 2). By (2.1), α ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2, ∀α > 1. (2.2) (cid:90) lim α→1+ D (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:90) D (cid:90) ≤ M (α − 1) = M (α − 1) → 0, α → 1 + . (α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) D f (z)p(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) = 1. On the other hand, since f (z)p ∈ [cp, C p] for all z ∈ D, we have f (z)p(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) − f (z)αp(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) (cid:90) D (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Therefore (cid:107)f(cid:107)pα Apα α → 1, α → 1 + . α = 1. The rest of the lemma is obvious. This completes the proof. So limα→1+ (cid:107)f(cid:107)Apα Remark 2.2. From Lemma 2.1, it is easy to see that a positive answer to Question 3 implies Conjecture 2. The statement that ∂ jecture 2. However, we are still optimistic enough to expect a positive answer. One of the evidences is the following. In [6], the authors proved a lemma ([6, Lemma 2]) which implies (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2kα α for any positive integer k, and used this lemma to prove (1.3) in the case when α > 1 is an integer. In Section 5, we will also provide some numerical evidences that support a positive answer to Question 3. ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0 looks like a stronger statement than Con- ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α kα Denote Logz the single-valued branch of log z on C\{z ∈ R : z ≤ 0} such that Log1 = 0. By direct computation, we have Proposition 2.3. If f ∈ O∗, then ∂ ∂α Nf (α) = α − 1 2α N 1−2α f where If (α) = (cid:90) (α) D − 2 (cid:18) f (z)2α(1 − z2)αLog(cid:0)f (z)2(1 − z2)(cid:1)dµ(z). (α − 1)2 N 2α f (α)LogNf (α) + α − 1 N 2α 1 f (α) + If (α) (cid:19) , (2.3) (2.4) 4 Suppose f is an outer function, then f α makes sense and is also an outer function. We have the equation = (cid:107)f α(cid:107)A2 α. Also, from (2.3) and (2.4), we see that the value of ∂ ∂α Nf (α) depends only on the function f α. This allows us to consider f α instead of f and take advantage of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space structure of A2 α. (cid:107)f(cid:107)α A2α α The main goal of this section is to prove the following theorem. Theorem 2.4. Suppose f ∈ O∗ and α > 1. Suppose there exists k points, w1,··· , wk in D and k numbers c1,··· , ck ∈ C such that k(cid:88) i=1 f α(z) = ci 1 (1 − wiz)α , z ∈ D. Nf (α) = 1 2α2 N 1−2α f (α)Df (α), Then where Df (α) = k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α ∂ ∂α (cid:18) log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) + αLog(1 − wiwj) − 2αLogNf (α) . (2.5) (cid:19) (2.6) For log f α(wi), we fix a holomorphic function g such that f α(z) = eg(z) and let log f α(wi) = g(wi). (since f α is outer, such function g exists.) Before proving Theorem 2.4, let us use an example to illustrate our idea. Example 2.5. It is well-known (and also implied by the proof of [6, Corollary 3]) that for integer-valued α, the equation in (1.3) holds if and only if f (z) = c w ∈ D. Indeed, if f (z) = 1 1−wz , then one can compute directly that ∂ 1−wz for some c ∈ C and ∂α Nf (α) ≡ 0. By Proposition 2.3, in order to compute ∂ the Mobius transform λ = ϕw(z) = w−z 1−wz , we get ∂α Nf (α), one needs to find out If (α). Applying If (α) = (cid:90) (cid:90) D (cid:19)α (cid:18) 1 − z2 (cid:18) 1 − λ2 (cid:19)α (cid:90) 1 − wz2 D = 1 − w2 = (1 − w2)−α D 1 − z2 1 − wz2 dµ(z) 1 − λ2 1 − w2 dµ(λ) Log Log (1 − λ2)α−2Log(1 − λ2) dm(λ) π (cid:90) −(1 − w2)−αLog(1 − w2) (1 − λ2)α−2 dm(λ) π . D Here dm denotes the Lebesgue measure. Using the polar coordinates and applying an integra- tion by parts, we have(cid:90) D (1 − λ2)α−2Log(1 − λ2) dm(λ) π = −(α − 1)−2. 5 Similar computations give and Thus (cid:90) D (1 − λ2)α−2 dm(λ) π = 1 α − 1 f (α) = (1 − w2)−α. N 2α If (α) = −(α − 1)−2(1 − w2)−α − (α − 1)−1(1 − w2)−αLog(1 − w2). From this and Proposition 2.3, it is easy to see that ∂ ∂α Nf (α) ≡ 0. By Example 2.5, ∂ α. The linear span of reproducing kernels form a dense set in A2 ∂α Nf (α) = 0 whenever f α is a constant multiple of a reproducing kernel α. This explains our of A2 reason of considering such functions in Theorem 2.4. Next, let us give the proof of Theorem 2.4. Proof of Theorem 2.4. Suppose f ∈ O∗ and k(cid:88) i=1 f α(z) = ci 1 (1 − wiz)α . As in Example 2.5, in order to calculate ∂ ∂α Nf (α), we need to find out If (α) as defined in (2.4). Compared with Example 2.5, the main difficulty here is that we can not use the Mobius transform. We will get around by applying the Stoke's Theorem and the Residue Theorem. Let and II = III = 1 α (cid:90) By (2.4), it is easy to see that (cid:90) D D f α(z)2(1 − z2)αLogf α(z)2dµ(z) f α(z)2(1 − z2)αLog(1 − z2)dµ(z). (2.7) (2.8) (2.9) Taking advantage of the fact that log f α(z) is a holomorphic function in D, we have If (α) = II + III. (cid:19) II = 2 α Re D f α(z)2(1 − z2)α log f α(z)dµ(z) 1 (1 − wjz)α f α(z) log f α(z)(α − 1)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) D (cid:18)(cid:90) (cid:90) Re cj j=1 k(cid:88) k(cid:88) k(cid:88) j=1 Re i,j=1 = = = 2 α(α − 1) 2 α(α − 1) 1 α(α − 1) (cid:19) log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) . (2.10) cjf α(wj) log f α(wj) cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α (cid:18) 6 Next, we calculate III. f α(z)2(1 − z2)αLog(1 − z2)dµ(z) (cid:90) cicjIIIij. III = = = Here cicj 1 (1 − wiz)α 1 (1 − zwj)α (1 − z2)αLog(1 − z2)dµ(z) D IIIij = 1 (1 − wiz)α D 1 (1 − zwj)α (1 − z2)αLog(1 − z2)dµ(z). For i, j = 1,··· , k, define IVij = D Vij = 1 (1 − wiz)α 1 (1 − zwj)α (1 − z2)αLog 1 − z2 1 − zwj2 dµ(z) 1 (1 − wiz)α 1 (1 − zwj)α (1 − z2)αLog1 − zwj2dµ(z). IIIij = IVij + Vij. and Then D i,j=1 (cid:90) k(cid:88) k(cid:88) (cid:90) (cid:90) (cid:90) i,j=1 D (cid:90) (cid:90) D (2.11) (2.12) (2.13) (2.14) (2.15) Since Logz = Logz, we have 1 (1 − wiz)α 1 (cid:18) Vij = 1 1 (1 − zwj)α Log(1 − zwj)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) (1 − zwj)α Log(1 − wjz)(1 − z2)αdµ(z) (cid:18) (cid:19) (cid:19) (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wj2) Log(1 − wiwj) + Log(1 − wj2) 1 + = D 1 (1 − wiz)α (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wiwj) + 1 (1 − wiwj)α It remains to calculate IVij. Let α − 1 α − 1 = 1 1 . (2.16) ϕij(z) = 1 α − 1 1 wj − z and By direct computation, we have ψij(z) = Log (1 − z2)α−1 (1 − zwj)α 1 (1 − wiz)α , 1 − z2 1 − zwj2 . z ∈ D, z (cid:54)= wj. ¯∂ϕij(z) = 1 (1 − wiz)α (1 − z2)α−2 (1 − zwj)α 7 and Therefore ¯∂ψij(z) = wj − z (1 − z2)(1 − zwj) . (cid:90) 1 π IVij = ¯∂ϕij(z)ψij(z)dxdy. (2.17) D For any ε > 0 sufficiently small, define Dε,j := {z ∈ D : z − wj > ε}. Define the one-form ω = ϕij(z)ψij(z)dz. Then dω = −( ¯∂ϕijψij + ϕij ¯∂ψij)dz ∧ d¯z = 2 Applying the Stokes's Theorem on Dε,j, we get √−1( ¯∂ϕijψij + ϕij ¯∂ψij)dx ∧ dy. ( ¯∂ϕijψij + ϕij ¯∂ψij)dx ∧ dy (cid:90) ϕijψijdz − {z:z−wj=ε} ϕijψijdz. {z:z−wj=ε} (cid:19) ϕijψijdz (cid:90) 1 π (cid:18)(cid:90) (cid:90) T Dε,j 1 = 2π √−1 √−1 = − 1 2π ¯∂ϕijψijdx ∧ dy The second equality is because ϕijψij = 0 on the unit circle T. (cid:90) (cid:18) 1 Dε,j (cid:90) Therefore IVij = lim ε→0 1 π = − lim ε→0 (cid:90) = − D − lim ε→0 = − (α − 1)2 where V Iij = − lim ε→0 1 √−1 2π (cid:90) 1 2π Dε,j π 1 (cid:90) ¯∂ψijdx ∧ dy + ϕij (1 − z2)α √−1 α − 1 (1 − wiz)α(1 − zwj)α dµ(z) √−1 1 (1 − wiwj)α + V Iij, {z:z−wj=ε} 1 wj − z α − 1 2π 1 1 1 (cid:90) {z:z−wj=ε} (cid:19) ϕijψijdz (1 − z2)α−1 (1 − zwj)α−1 1 (1 − wiz)α Log 1 − z2 1 − zwj2 dz (2.18) 1 α − 1 1 wj − z (1 − z2)α−1 (1 − zwj)α−1 1 (1 − wiz)α Log 1 − z2 1 − zwj2 dz. {z:z−wj=ε} To calculate V Iij, notice that (1 − z2)α−1 (1 − zwj)α−1 1 (1 − wiz)α Log 1 − z2 1 − zwj2 → − 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wj2), z → wj. 8 Standard estimates will give us V Iij = 1 α − 1 = − 1 α − 1 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wj2)Res( (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wj2). 1 1 wj − z , wj) By (2.18) and (2.19), we have IVij = − 1 (α − 1)2 1 (1 − wiwj)α − 1 α − 1 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wj2). By (2.15), (2.20) and (2.19), we get IIIij = − 1 (α − 1)2 1 (1 − wiwj)α + 1 α − 1 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wiwj). (2.19) (2.20) (2.21) Then combining (2.9), (2.10), (2.11) and (2.21), we have 1 α(α − 1) cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) (cid:19) (cid:18) (cid:18) 1 cicj (1 − wiwj)α (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wiwj) 1 cicj If (α) = = i,j=1 k(cid:88) k(cid:88) k(cid:88) k(cid:88) i,j=1 i,j=1 i,j=1 − 1 (α − 1)2 − 1 α − 1 1 α(α − 1) − 1 (α − 1)2 N 2α f (α). (cid:19) (2.22) (2.23) cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) − αLog(1 − wiwj) The last equality is because f (α) = (cid:107)f α(cid:107)2 N 2α A2 α = (cid:104)f α, f α(cid:105)A2 α = k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α . Finally, plugging in (2.22) and (2.23) into (2.3), we get (2.5) and (2.6). This completes the proof. Remark 2.6. In [4], the authors raised the question whether Nf (α)2α = (cid:107)f(cid:107)2α is non- increasing in α given that (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2 = 1. Using our method, we can also compute the derivative ∂α Nf (α)2α. In fact, by direct computation, we get A2α α ∂ Nf (α)2α = (α − 1)−1Nf (α)2α + (α − 1)If (α). ∂ ∂α 9 By (2.22), if f ∈ O∗ and f α(z) =(cid:80)k If (α) = Thus i=1 ci (1−wiz)α , we have 1 (cid:18) k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α 1 α(α − 1) − 1 (α − 1)2 N 2α f (α). k(cid:88) (cid:18) log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) − αLog(1 − wiwj) (cid:19) (cid:19) 1 1 α cicj Nf (α)2α = ∂ ∂α Using (2.24), one can easily check that if we drop the condition (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2 = 1, then there exists f such that Nf (α)2α is increasing. log f α(wi) + log f α(wj) − αLog(1 − wiwj) (1 − wiwj)α (2.24) i,j=1 . An immediate consequence of Theorem 2.4 is the following. Theorem 2.7. Suppose f ∈ O∗, α > 1 and f α =(cid:80)k 1 of points {w1,··· , wk} belong to a single real line, and that ci ≥ 0, i = 1··· , k. Then i=1 ci (1−wiz)α . Suppose further that set Proof. The proof simply an application of the Jensen's inequality. Note that under our assumption, cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α ≥ 0, f α(wj) = ci 1 (1 − wiwj)α ≥ 0, ∀i, j = 1,··· , k. Nf (α) ≤ 0. ∂ ∂α k(cid:88) j=1 Without loss of generality, let us assume that Nf (α) = 1. That is k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α = 1. Then by the Jensen's inequality, we have Df (α) = 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log f α(wi)f α(wj)(1 − wiwj)α k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj (cid:18) k(cid:88) (cid:18) (cid:19) ≤ Log cicjf α(wi)f α(wj) i,j=1 f (α) = LogN 4α = 0. 10 (cid:19) (2.25) The second equality is because k(cid:88) k(cid:88) ci k(cid:88) cj cif α(wi) = i=1 i=1 j=1 1 (1 − wiwj)α = N 2α f (α). By (2.23) and (2.25), we have ∂ ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0. This completes the proof. From the proof of Theorem 2.7 we know that the inequality ∂ ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0 holds true if we can "formally" apply the Jensen's inequality. However, in general, the coefficients involved are not positive, and one needs to find other ways. 3 Sufficient Conditions In this section, we give some other sufficient conditions for ∂ ∂α Nf (α) to be non-positive. We want to consider the right hand side of (2.6) under a suitable general setting. For this, let us first discuss about how Theorem 2.4 can be used to answer Question 3. In (2.6), the term log f α(wi) depends on the fact that f is an outer function: the imaginary part of log f α(wi) depends on the formula (assuming f (0) > 0) log f (z) = 1 2π eiθ + z eiθ − z Logf (eiθ)dθ. (3.1) (cid:90) π −π However, it is unclear how this formula could enter the estimates. Things are relatively easy if we are able to apply the single-valued branch Logz to all f α(wi). It turns out that such special cases are enough for our purpose (See Proposition 3.3). Before going into details, let us fix some notations. Notations:(1) In the rest of this paper, we use k to denote a positive integer. If not otherwise specified, c denotes a k-tuple of complex numbers, and w denotes a k-tuple of points in D. that is, c = (c1, c2,··· , ck), ci ∈ C, w = (w1, w2,··· , wk), wi ∈ D. Given c, w and α > 0, we use Wα to denote the k × k matrix with entry (1−wiwj )α in the i-th row and j-th column. Thinking of c as a row vector, we reserve the notation fα = (f1,α,··· , fk,α) for the row vector (1−wiwj )α . If α is specified, then we defined by fα = cWα. Denote Nα = cWαc∗ =(cid:80)k i,j=1 cicj 1 1 drop the subscription α. (2) It is well-known that for α > 0 and w ∈ D, the functions (1 − wz)α , w ∈ D define a unique reproducing kernel Hilbert space on D [1]. α = 1, it is H 2 = A2 1. In this paper, for any α > 0, we use A2 reproducing kernel Hilbert space determined by {Kw,α : w ∈ D}. We find it convenient to consider the following general setting. Kw,α(z) = 1 If α > 1, the space is A2 α; if α to denote the uniquely defined 11 Definition 3.1. (1) Let H := {z ∈ C : Rez > 0} denote the right half plane. Suppose α > 0, c ∈ Ck and w ∈ Dk satisfies fi,α ∈ H, i = 1,··· , k, where fα = (f1,α,··· , fk,α) is defined as above. Define Dα(c, w) = 1 (1 − wiwj)α Logfi,α + Logfj,α + αLog(1 − wiwj) k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj k(cid:88) i=1 (cid:18) k(cid:88) i,j=1 (cid:19) − NαLogNα (3.2) (3.3) (cid:27) = 2Re cifi,αLogfi,α + α cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wiwj) − NαLogNα. (2) For any α > 0 and 0 < ε ≤ 1, define (cid:26) Λα,ε = and (cid:26) k(cid:88) (c, w) : c ∈ Ck, w ∈ (−ε, ε)k, fi,α ∈ H, i = 1,··· , k, k is a positive integer. (cid:27) . (cid:27) . Kα,ε = ci We use Λα, Kα to denote Λα,1, Kα,1. i=1 1 (1 − wiz)α : (c, w) ∈ Λα,ε (3) Define Γ = (cid:26) (c, w) : c ∈ Rk, w ∈ (−1, 1)k, k is a positive integer For (c, w) ∈ Γ and α > 0, define Dα(c, w) = 2 cifi,αLogfi,α + k(cid:88) i=1 k(cid:88) i,j=1 cicj 1 (1 − wiwj)α Log(1 − wiwj)α − NαLogNα. (3.4) Note that since xLogx tends to 0 as x tends to 0, the definition above makes sense even if fi = 0 for some i = 1,··· , k. It is also easy to see that (3.4) coincides with (3.2) when fi,α > 0,∀i = 1,··· , k. Remark 3.2. Suppose (c, w) ∈ Γ and f α(z) =(cid:80)k it is easy to see that Df (α) = Dα(c, w). If (c, w) ∈ Λα and f α =(cid:80)k i=1 ciKw,α(z) ∈ O∗, then by (2.6) and (3.4), i=0 ciKw,α ∈ O∗, then it is not necessarily true that Df (α) = Dα(c, w). However, if one knows that {w1,··· , wk} is contained in a connected open subset Ω of D which is mapped, by f α, into H, then by standard argument, the function Logf α(z)Ω differs from the function given in (3.1), by an integer multiple of 2πi. Then from the expression of (2.6) one can see that Df (α) = Dα(c, w). We will use this fact later. It turns out that we only need to consider the case when f α ∈ Kα,ε for ε small enough. 12 Proposition 3.3. Suppose for any α > 1 there exists 0 < ε ≤ 1 such that Dα(c, w) ≤ 0 for ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0 for all f ∈ O∗. As a consequence, Conjecture 2 holds. all (c, w) ∈ Λα,ε. Then ∂ The proof is based on the following two lemmas. Lemma 3.4. Suppose α > 1 and 0 < ε ≤ 1. Then for any g ∈ O∗ such that g(0) = 1, there exists 0 < δ ≤ ε and a sequence {gn} ∈ Kα,δ such that gn converges uniformly on D to g. Moreover, gn(z) ∈ H for all n and all z ∈ D with z < δ. Proof. Since g(0) = 1, we can choose 0 < δ ≤ ε such that Reg(z) > 1 z < δ. Choose r > 1 such that g is defined on {z ∈ C : z ≤ r}. Define 2 for any z ∈ D with gr(z) = g(rz), z ∈ D. Obviously, gr ∈ A2 α. The subspace span{Kw,α : w ∈ (−δ, δ)} α. Choose a sequence {gn} ⊂ span{Kw,α : w ∈ (−δ, δ)} such that gn → gr in A2 α is dense in A2 norm. Then gn converge uniformly to gr on {z ∈ C : z ≤ 1 ), n = 1, 2,··· . gn(z) = gn( r}. Define Then gn converge uniformly to g on D. By construction, each gn is of form z r kn(cid:88) where wn,i ∈ (−δ, δ), ∀i. Therefore gn = cn,iKwn,i,α, i=1 cn,i 1 (1 − wn,i r z)α = kn(cid:88) i=1 cn,iK wn,i r ,α. kn(cid:88) i=1 gn(z) = r ∈ (−δ, δ). Also, since gn converge uniformly to g and Reg(z) > 1 Since r > 1 we have wn,i 2 if z < δ, by passing to a subsequence, we have gn(z) ∈ H for any n and any z with z < δ. In particular, gn( wn,i r ) ∈ H. Therefore gn ∈ Kα,δ for any n. This completes the proof. The following lemma is simply a consequence of the fact that, for f ∈ H 2, fr(z) := f (rz) converges to f in H 2 norm as r → 1−. Lemma 3.5. Suppose f is an outer function in H 2. Then there exists a sequence {fn} ⊂ O∗ such that fn tends to f in the Hardy norm (cid:107) · (cid:107)H 2. Proof of Proposition 3.3. Assume that for some α > 1 and 0 < ε ≤ 1 we have Dα(c, w) ≤ 0 for all (c, w) ∈ Λα,ε. For any f ∈ O∗, we want to show ∂ ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0. Without loss of generality we can assume f (0) = 1. By Lemma 3.4, there exists 0 < δ ≤ ε and a sequence {gn} in Kα,δ such that gn converges uniformly to f α on D and gn maps {z ∈ D : z < δ} 13 n . By Remark 3.2, we have ∂ to H. Also, since f α is bounded away from 0 on D, for n large enough, gn is outer and we ∂α Nfn(α) = Dα(cn, wn) ∈ Λα,δ, where gn can define fn = g1/α ∂α Nfn(α) ≤ 0 for n large enough. corresponds to (cn, wn). In particular, we have ∂ On the other hand, since f is bounded away from 0 we also have Logfn converging uniformly to Logf on D. By (2.3) and (2.4) it is easy to see that ∂ ∂α Nfn(α) → ∂ ∂α Nf (α) as Aα ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2 for all n tend to infinity. Thus ∂ f ∈ O∗. By Lemma 3.5, the inequality also holds for all outer functions. Suppose f = ηg α ≤ (cid:107)g(cid:107)H 2 = (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2. This completes where η is inner and g is outer. Then (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α the proof. ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0. Then by Lemma 2.1, we have (cid:107)f(cid:107)2α α ≤ (cid:107)g(cid:107)A2α Now we are ready to give some sufficient conditions for Dα(c, w) to be non-positive. Theorem 3.6. Suppose α > 0 and (c, w) ∈ Λα ∪ Γ satisfy the following conditions. (1) w1 < w2 < ··· < wk, where k is the number of entries in w; (2) either {c2,··· , ck} or {c1,··· , ck−1} are real and have the same sign. Then we have Dα(c, w) ≤ 0. We will need the following lemma in the proof of Theorem 3.6. Lemma 3.7. Suppose α > 0, c ∈ Ck and A = [aij] is semi-positive definite, aij > 0. Let f = cA and N = cAc∗. Then for any x1,··· , xk ≥ 0 we have k(cid:88) i,j=1 xixjaijLog fifj aijN ≤ 0. (3.5) Without loss of generality, we can also assume that(cid:80)k Proof. The proof is, again, an application of the Jenson's Inequality. If some fi equals zero then the left hand side is −∞ and the inequality always holds. Assume fi are all non-zero. i,j=1 xixjaij = 1. Applying the Jenson's Inequality, we get k(cid:88) i,j=1 (cid:18) k(cid:88) xixjaijLog fifj aijN ≤ Log xixjaij fifj aijN ≤ Log (cid:19) (cid:0)(cid:80) i xifi(cid:1)2 N . (3.6) i,j=1 (cid:1)2 (cid:0)(cid:80)k , which is less than or equal to Log(cid:80)k (cid:80)k semi-positive definite. Since xi ≥ 0 and aij > 0, we have(cid:80)k Choose ei ∈ C such that ei = 1 and eifi = fi. Then the right hand side of (3.6) becomes i,j=1 xieixjejaij by the fact that A is Log i,j=1 xixjaij = i,j=1 xieixjejaij ≤(cid:80)k i,j=1 xieicj aij i,j=1 cicj aij 1. Therefore the left hand side of (3.5) is less than or equal to 0. This completes the proof. Proof of Theorem 3.6. We will prove the theorem in the case when (c, w) ∈ Λα. The proof when (c, w) ∈ Γ is similar. First, we notice that if we let −w = (−w1,··· ,−wk), then Dα(c, w) = Dα(c,−w). From this, it is easy to see that it suffices to consider the case when w1 < w2 < ··· < wk and {c2,··· , ck} are real and have the same sign. 14 Let us further reduce the cases. Suppose w1 < w2 < ··· < wk. Let zi = −ϕw1(wi), i = 1,··· , k. Then it is easy to check that 0 = z1 < z2 < ··· < zk. Suppose (c, w) ∈ Λα. Let di = ci(1−ziw1)α (1−zizj )α ], f = cW and g = dΛ. Using the well-known formula (1−wiwj )α ], Λ = [ (1−w2 1 1 1)α/2 and consider the pair (d, z). Write W = [ (1 − za)(1 − aw) (1 − a2)(1 − zw) 1 − ϕa(z)ϕa(w) = 1 it is easy to check that g = f diag (cid:18) (1 − w2 1)α/2 (1 − ziw1)α , (cid:19) z, w, a ∈ D, . Then (d, z) ∈ Λα. From the equation above, it is also straight-forward to check that Dα(c, w) = Dα(d, z). Therefore, in order to prove Theorem 3.6, we only need to consider the case when 0 = w1 < ··· < wk and {c2,··· , ck} are real and have the same sign. Assume that (c, w) ∈ Λα, 0 = w1 < ··· < wk and ci ≥ 0,∀i = 2,··· , k. The case when c2 = ··· = ck = 0 is trivial. Thus we can assume that ci > 0 for some i = 2,··· , k. Define f and W as before. The idea is to find a non-increasing function that takes value Dα(c, w) at α and 0 at 0. (1−wiwj )t , i, j = 1,··· , k. Define Wt = [aij,t], Nt = cWtc∗ and ft = cWt. Since only c1 may have imaginary part, the signs of the imaginary part of each fi,t depend only on that of c1. Assume, without loss of generality, that Imc1 ≥ 0. Then Imfi,t ≥ 0,∀i = 1,··· , k. Define For 0 ≤ t ≤ α, define aij,t = 1 Dt = 2Re cicjaij,tLogaij,t − NtLogNt, 0 ≤ t ≤ α. k(cid:88) i=1 cifi,tLogfi,t − k(cid:88) dt fi,t =(cid:80)k i,j=1 > 0,∀i = 1,··· , k. So Notice that since w1 = 0, we have d the points t such that fi,t = 0 for some i, are isolated. Also, zLogz → 0 if z tends to 0. From this we can see that Dt is a continuous, piecewise differentiable function. (1−wiwj )t Log 1−wiwj j=2 cj 1 1 Next, we show that Dt is non-increasing. By the previous argument, it suffices to show dt Dt ≤ 0 at the points where each fi,t is non-zero. By direct computation, we get that d Logfi,t + Logfj,t − Log(aij,tNt) . (cid:19) Since w1 = 0 and ci ≥ 0,∀i = 2,··· , k, we have 1 1 Dt = cicj d dt (cid:1)(cid:18) Logfi,t + Logfj,t − Log(aij,tNt) (cid:19) dt i,j=1 cicj aij,t (cid:18) d (cid:19)(cid:18) k(cid:88) (1 − wiwj)t Log(cid:0) (cid:0) ∞(cid:88) (cid:1)Log k(cid:88) i wn j 1 n wn n=1 ciwn i cjwn j aij,tLog 1 − wiwj fi,tfj,t aij,tNt fi,tfj,t aij,tNt d dt Dt = i,j=2 k(cid:88) k(cid:88) ∞(cid:88) i,j=2 = cicjaij,t 1 n = ≤ 0. n=1 i,j=2 15 Here the last inequality is by Lemma 3.7. If {c2,··· , ck} are all non-positive, simply replace ci with −ci in the above argument. Thus in either case we have that Dt is non-increasing. It is obvious that Dα = Dα(c, w). By straight-forward computation it is also easy to show that D0 = 0. Therefore Dα(c, w) = Dα ≤ D0 = 0. This completes the proof. Theorem 3.8. Suppose α > 0, c ∈ C2, w ∈ D2 and (c, w) ∈ Λα ∪ Γ. Then Moreover, Dα(c, w) = 0 if and only if c1 = 0, or c2 = 0, or w1 = w2. Dα(c, w) ≤ 0. Proof. The proof is similar as that of Theorem 3.6. Define W = [aij] = [ For 0 ≤ t ≤ 1, define 1 (1−wiwj )α ] as before. (cid:40) aij,t = (1 − t)a11 + t a2 aij, 12 a22 , i = j = 1 otherwise. Write Wt = [aij,t], Nt = cWtc∗ and ft = cWt. It is easy to check that the following hold. (i) f1,t = (1 − t)f1 + t a12 a22 f2, f2,t ≡ f2; (ii) d dt a11,t ≤ 0; (iii) each Wt is semi-positive definite; (iv) W1 has rank 1. By (i), the paths f1,t and f2,t stay in H. Define 2(cid:88) cifi,tLogfi,t − 2(cid:88) i=1 i,j=1 Dt := 2Re cicjaij,tLogaij,t − NtLogNt, Then Dt is a differentiable function on (0, 1). From (iv) it is easy to compute that D1 = 0. By direct computation, we have (cid:19) (cid:18) d dt Dt = c12 d dt a11,t Log f1,t2 a11,tNt . Since Wt is positive definite, by Lemma 3.7, it is easy to see that d D0 ≤ D1 = 0. Equality holds if and only if d w1 (cid:54)= w2, then d dt a11,t (cid:54)= 0. Thus either c1 = 0 or f1,t2 a11,tNt dtDt ≥ 0. Thus Dα(c, w) = dt Dt ≡ 0. This always holds when w1 = w2. If ≡ 1. In particular, if c1 (cid:54)= 0, then f1,02 = cW0e∗ 12 = a11,0N0 = (e1W0e∗ 1)(cW0c∗). Here e1 = (1, 0,··· , 0). Since W0 is positive definite, this occurs only when c2 = 0. This completes the proof. In terms of ∂ ∂α Nf (α), we summarize our results as follows. 16 Theorem 3.9. Suppose f ∈ O∗, α > 1, f α =(cid:80)k i=1 ciKwi,α and (c, w) ∈ Λα ∪ Γ. Suppose one of the following holds. (1) ci ≥ 0, i = 1,··· , k. (2) w1 < ··· < wk, and either {c2,··· , ck} or {c1,··· , ck−1} are real and have the same sign. (3) k = 2. Then we have ∂ ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0. 4 Norm Inequalities for Linear Combinations of Two Reproducing Kernels ∂α Nf (α) ≤ 0,∀α > 1, for some f ∈ O∗, then Recall that in Lemma 2.1, we showed that if ∂ Conjecture 2 holds for f . In this section, we provide an alternative way of proving results on Conjecture 2, using results obtained in Section 3. As a consequence, we prove the following theorem. Theorem 4.1. Suppose f ∈ H 2 and f = ηF , where η is inner and F has no zeros in D. Suppose for some α > 1, and c ∈ C2, w ∈ D2. Then for any 1 ≤ β ≤ α, we have F α = c1Kw1,α + c2Kw2,α. (4.1) Equality holds if and only if F α = cKw,α for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. As a consequence, we have . β (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2α α ≤ (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2β Equality holds if and only if f = cKw,1 for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2α α ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H 2. (4.2) 1 The proof is based on a different way of viewing Dα(c, w). Recall that in Definition 3.1, for α > 0 and (c, w) ∈ Λα ∪ Γ, we defined Wα = [ (1−wiwj )α ] and fα = cWα. Then Dα(c, w) is defined using fα and Wα. In the case when {wi : i = 1,··· , k} are distinct points, the matrix Wα is invertible. Therefore we have c = fαW−1 α . This means we can define Dα(c, w) using fα. Definition 4.2. Suppose α > 0, k is a positive integer, and w ∈ Dk is such that {wi : i = 1,··· , k} are distinct. Define Wα as usual. Suppose either f ∈ Hk or w ∈ (−1, 1)k, f ∈ Rk. Let cα = fW−1 α . Define (cid:98)Dα(f , w) = Dα(cα, w). (4.3) 17 Definition 4.3. Suppose w ∈ Dk, {w1,··· , wk} are distinct, and α > 0. Define Kw,α = span{Kwi,α : i = 1,··· , k} ⊂ A2 α and Pw,α the orthogonal projection from A2 (f (w1),··· , f (wk)), then it is easy to compute that α onto Kw,α. For f ∈ A2 α, if we denote f (w) = (cid:107)Pw,α(f )(cid:107)2 A2 α = f (w)W−1 α f (w)∗. Proof of Theorem 4.1. It is easy to see that (4.2) follows from (4.1). Thus we only need to prove (4.1). (1) First, we prove (4.1) under the following conditions. (i) F α = c1 + c2Kw,α, w ≥ 0; (ii) There is a connected open neighborhood Ω, of {0, w}, such that F α(Ω) ⊂ H. Assume the above, then we can choose log F α such that log F αΩ = LogF αΩ. As a conse- quence, F βΩ ⊂ H for any β ∈ [1, α]. For 1 ≤ β ≤ α, consider (cid:18) Nβ := F β(w)W−1 where F β(w) = (F β(w1), F β(w2)). Then by straight-forward computation, we have = (cid:107)Pw,βF β(cid:107)2/β , A2 β β F β(w)∗(cid:19)1/β (cid:98)Dβ(F β(w), w) ≤ 0. d dβ Nβ = 1 β2 N 1−β β The last inequality is because of Theorem 3.8. Therefore we have (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2α α = (cid:107)F α(cid:107)1/α A2 α = N 1/2 α ≤ N 1/2 β = (cid:107)Pw,βF β(cid:107)1/β A2 β ≤ (cid:107)F β(cid:107)1/β A2 β = (cid:107)F(cid:107)A2β β . If we assume that w (cid:54)= 0, then by Theorem 3.8, we also know that the equality holds if and only if for each β, either c1,β = 0 or c2,β = 0. In particular, either c1 = 0 or c2 = 0. On the other hand, if either c1 = 0 or c2 = 0, then it is easy to check that the equality in (4.1) holds. This completes the proof for case (1). (2) Next, we consider the case when F α = c1 + c2Kw,α, w ∈ D, c1, c2 ∈ C. Choose θ ∈ [0, 2π] so that eiθw ≥ 0. Let Fθ(z) = F (e−iθz). Then F α θ = c1 + c2Keiθw,α. Inequality (4.1) for F follows from (4.1) for Fθ. Thus we may assume that w ≥ 0 in the beginning. Suppose F has no zeros in D and F α = c1 + c2Kw,α with w ≥ 0. We will show that after multiplying F by a non-zero constant, the condition (ii) in case (1) will be satisfied. This will lead to (4.1) for case (2). We may as well assume that F α = 1 + cKw,α with w ≥ 0. It is easy to see that F α (1−w2)α , maps the interval [0, w] onto the (complex valued) interval between 1 + c and 1 + which we denote by I. Since F has no zeros in D, 0 /∈ I. Thus I must be contained in some half plane eiθ1H. By standard trick we can find a connected open neighborhood Ω of [0, w] c 18 such that F α(Ω) ⊂ eiθ1H. Therefore(cid:0)e−iθ1/αF(cid:1)α(Ω) ⊂ H. This completes the proof for case (2). (3) In general, suppose F has no zeros in D and F α = c1Kw1,α + c2Kw2,α. Denote kw,β(z) = (1 − w2)β/2 (1 − wz)β , w ∈ D, β > 0. Let G = F ◦ ϕw1 · kw1,1. Then G also has no zeros in D and Gβ = F β ◦ ϕw1 · kw1,β. It is standard to check that (cid:107)Gβ(cid:107)A2 , ∀β ∈ [1, α]. Notice that (4.1) is equivalent to β = (cid:107)F β(cid:107)A2 (cid:107)F α(cid:107)1/α β A2 α ≤ (cid:107)F β(cid:107)1/β β ∈ [1, α]. , A2 β So it suffices to prove (cid:107)Gα(cid:107)1/α which is in turn, equivalent to (cid:107)G(cid:107)A2α we have A2 α ≤ (cid:107)Gβ(cid:107)1/β α ≤ (cid:107)G(cid:107)A2β A2 β β c1 Gα = (1 − w12)α/2 + c2 β ∈ [1, α], , , β ∈ [1, α]. By straight-forward computation (1 − w12)α/2 (1 − w2w1)α Kϕw1 (w2),α. Thus G satisfies case (2). This completes the proof of (4.1) in the general case. Tracing back to the proof of (1), we also see that the equality in (4.1) holds if and only if F α = cKw,α for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. Then (4.2) follows immediately. This completes the proof. In terms of Conjecture 1, (4.2) becomes the following. Corollary 4.4. Suppose 0 < p ≤ 2 and α = 2 and F has no zeros in D. If p. Suppose f ∈ H p, f = ηF , where η is inner F = c1Kw1,α + c2Kw2,α, then Equality holds if and only if f = cKw,α for some c ∈ C and w ∈ D. (cid:107)f(cid:107)A2 2/p ≤ (cid:107)f(cid:107)H p. 5 Remarks and Numerical Evidences 5.1 Some Further Remarks (1) In Proposition 3.3, we give a sufficient condition for Conjecture 2 to hold. In its most general form, we list the conjecture below. Conjecture 4. Suppose α > 0 and (c, w) ∈ Λα. Then Dα(c, w) defined as in (3.2) and (3.4) is non-positive. Another interesting question to ask is the following. 19 A2 α (cid:20) (cid:21) are non- Logfi + Logfj − Log(aij,αNα) Question 5. Suppose Conjecture 4 holds. Does it imply that the norms (cid:107)f α(cid:107)1/α increasing for α > 0, for some set of functions f ? (2) An immediate observation from (3.2) is that Dα(c, w) is the bi-linear form cWα◦ Bc,wc∗, and A ◦ B denotes the Hadmadard where Bc,w = product of A and B. Thus a sufficient condition of Conjecture 4 would be that −Bc,w is semi-positive definite. However, this is not true, even in the simplest case. Take, for example, c1 = c2 = 1, w1 = 0, and w2 ∈ (0, 1) such that (3) In Section 4, we also defined the function (cid:98)Dα(f , w). Then Conjecture 4 is equivalent to Conjecture 6. Suppose α > 0, w ∈ (−1, 1)k and f ∈ Hk. Then (cid:98)Dα(f , w) ≤ 0. 2)α = 1.1. the following. i,j=1,··· ,k 1 (1−w2 (4) There is , yet another way of looking at (3.2). Suppose A = [aij] is a semi-positive definite k × k matrix, aij ∈ H, and c ∈ Ck is such that each entry of f := cA belongs to H. Then we can define N (c, A) = cAc∗ and (cid:101)D(c, A) = 2Re k(cid:88) cifiLogfi − k(cid:88) cicjaijLogaij − N (c, A)LogN (c, A). i=1 i,j=1 are secretly using this definition: we let the matrix A to vary from Wα to a rank 1 matrix. Then we can ask whether (cid:101)D(c, A) ≤ 0. In the proofs of Theorem 3.6 and Theorem 3.8, we Then we used the fact that if A has rank 1, then (cid:101)D(c, A) = 0. An interesting observation is the following: if we define (cid:101)A = [(cid:101)aij] to be the block matrix and(cid:101)c = (−1, c), then (cid:101)A is semi-positive definite and (cid:101)D(c, A) = (cid:101)D((cid:101)c,(cid:101)A). Moreover, (cid:101)D((cid:101)c,(cid:101)A) (cid:20)cAc∗ f f∗ A (cid:101)A = (cid:21) , has the simple expression (cid:101)D((cid:101)c,(cid:101)A) = −(cid:88)(cid:101)ci(cid:101)cj(cid:101)aijLog(cid:101)aij. In general, we ask the following question. Question 7. Suppose A = [aij] is semi-positive definite and Reaij ≥ 0, ∀i, j = 1,··· , k. Suppose c ∈ Ck is such that cA = 0. Do we have (cid:101)D(c, A) = − k(cid:88) cicjaijLogaij ≤ 0? 5.2 Numerical Evidences i,j=1 One of the advantages that Theorem 2.4 offers is that we can now test Question 3 using numerical methods. We have tested for a wide range of values of c and w. We list a few graphs for the interested readers. 20 Figure 1: k = 4, c, w as indicated (1) In the proof of Theorem 3.6, we showed that Dα(c, w) is non-increasing in α under the given conditions. However, Figure 1 shows that this is not always true. (2) If we adopt the definition (cid:98)Dα(f , w), then by fixing f2 and f3 and let f1 vary, we get Figures 2 and 3. Figure 2: k = 3, Imf1, f2, f3 and w as indicated (3) In the special case when all entries of c are real, we can use the definition (3.4). By letting one of the coefficients vary, we get Figure 4. Acknowledgment: The first and second author is partially supported by the Natural Sci- ence Foundation of China. The third author is partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation. 21 Figure 3: k = 3, Ref1, f2, f3 and w as indicated Figure 4: k = 3, c1, c2 and w as indicated References [1] N. Aronszajn, Theory of reproducing kernels, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 68(1950), 337-404. [2] F. Bayart, Hardy spaces of Dirichlet series and their composition operators. Monatsh. Math. 136 (2002), no. 3, 203-236. [3] F. Bayart, O. Brevig, A. Haimi, J. Ortega-Cerd`a, K. Perfekt, Contractive in- equalities for Bergman spaces and multiplicative Hankel forms. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 371 (2019), no. 1, 681-707. [4] A. Bondarenko, O. Brevig, E. Saksman, K. Seip, J. Zhao, Pseudomoments of the Riemann zeta function. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 50 (2018), no. 4, 709-724. [5] A. Bondarenko, W. Heap, K. Seip, An inequality of Hardy-Littlewood type for Dirichlet polynomials. J. Number Theory 150 (2015), 191-205. 22 [6] O. Brevig, J. Ortega-Cerd`a, K. Seip, J. Zhao, Contractive inequalities for Hardy spaces. Funct. Approx. Comment. Math. 59 (2018), no. 1, 41-56. [7] J. Burbea, Inequalities for reproducing kernel spaces. Illinois J. Math. 27 (1983), no. 1, 130-137. [8] J. Burbea, Inequalities for holomorphic functions of several complex variables. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 276 (1983), no. 1, 247-266. [9] J. Burbea, Sharp inequalitites for holomorphic functions. Illinois J. Math. 31 (1987), 248-264 [10] T. Carleman, Zur theorie der minimalflachen, Math. Zeit., 9(1921) 154-160. [11] G. H. Hardy, J. E. Littlewood, Some properties of fractional integrals. II. Math. Zeit. 34 (1932), no. 1, 403-439. [12] H. Helson, Hankel forms and sums of random variables. Studia Math. 176 (2006), no. 1, 85-92. [13] M. Mateljevi´c and M. Pavlovi´c, New proofs of the isoperimetric inequality and some generalizations, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 98(1984) 25-30. [14] D. Vukoti´c, The isoperimetric inequality and a theorem of Hardy and Littlewood. Amer. Math. Monthly 110 (2003), no. 6, 532-536. [15] S. E. Warschawski, On the differentiability at the boundary in conformal map- ping. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 12 (1961), 614-620. [16] K. Zhu, Translating inequalities between Hardy and Bergman spaces. Amer. Math. Monthly 111 (2004), no. 6, 520-525. Hui Dan, School of Mathematical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200433, China, E- mail: [email protected] Kunyu Guo, School of Mathematical Sciences, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200433, China, E-mail: [email protected] Yi Wang, Department of Mathematics, SUNY Buffalo, 244 Mathematics Building Buffalo, NY 14260-2900 E-mail: [email protected] 23
1705.07792	1	1705	2017-05-22T15:02:03	Fourier multipliers in Banach function spaces with UMD concavifications	[ "math.FA", "math.CA" ]	We prove various extensions of the Coifman-Rubio de Francia-Semmes multiplier theorem to operator-valued multipliers on Banach function spaces. Our results involve a new boundedness condition on sets of operators which we call $\ell^{r}(\ell^{s})$-boundedness, which implies $\mathcal{R}$-boundedness in many cases. The proofs are based on new Littlewood-Paley-Rubio de Francia-type estimates in Banach function spaces which were recently obtained by the authors.	math.FA	math	FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES WITH UMD CONCAVIFICATIONS ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Abstract. We prove various extensions of the Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes multiplier theorem to operator-valued multipliers on Banach function spaces. Our results involve a new boundedness condition on sets of opera- tors which we call ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness, which implies R-boundedness in many cases. The proofs are based on new Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia-type estimates in Banach function spaces which were recently obtained by the au- thors. 1. Introduction In [46] Rubio de Francia proved a surprising extension of the classical Littlewood -- Paley square function estimate: for all p ∈ [2, ∞) there exists a constant Cp > 0 such that for any collection I of mutually disjoint intervals in R, the estimate (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:0)XI∈I s > (cid:12)(cid:12) 1 SI f 2(cid:1)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R) 2(cid:12)(cid:12), then every m : R → C of bounded s-variation holds for all Schwartz functions f ∈ S(R), where SI is the Fourier projection onto I. As a consequence, in [14] Coifman, Rubio de Francia, and Semmes showed that if p ∈ (1, ∞) and 1 uniformly on dyadic intervals induces a bounded Fourier multiplier Tm on Lp(R). This is analogous to the situation for the Marcinkiewicz multiplier theorem (the s = 1 case of the Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes theorem), which follows from the classical Littlewood -- Paley theorem. (1.1) ≤ Cpkf kLp(R) p − 1 Consider a Banach space X. We are interested in analogues of the results above for operator-valued multipliers on X-valued functions; that is, for multipliers m : R → Lb(X), where Lb(X) denotes the space of bounded linear operators on X, and where we consider a natural extension of the Fourier transform which acts on X-valued functions. A necessary condition for boundedness of the Fourier multi- plier Tm on some Bochner space Lp(R; X) is that the range m(R) is R-bounded (see Remark 5.9). R-boundedness is a probabilistic strengthening of uniform bounded- ness which holds automatically for bounded scalar-valued multipliers. Following the breakthrough papers [12, 51] there has been an extensive study of operator-valued multiplier theory, in which R-boundedness techniques are central. For example, 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 42B15 Secondary: 42B25; 46E30, 47A56. Key words and phrases. Fourier multipliers, UMD Banach function spaces, bounded s- variation, Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia inequalities, Muckenhoupt weights, Complex interpolation. The authors are supported by the VIDI subsidy 639.032.427 of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). 1 2 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Marcinkiewicz-type theorems were obtained in [2, 4, 7, 12, 21, 48, 51]. We refer to [22] for a more detailed historical description. An operator-valued analogue of the Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes theorem was obtained in [24]. There the Banach space X was assumed to satisfy the so- called LPRp (Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia) property, which was previously studied in [5, 19, 24, 25, 45]. This is a generalisation of the square function estimate (1.1) which may be formulated for all Banach spaces, but which may not hold. Naturally, R-boundedness assumptions play a role in the results of [24]. In [1] we proved a range of Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia-type estimates for Banach function spaces, including the LPRp property, under assumptions involving the UMD property and convexity (generalising a key result of [45]). The main goal of this paper is to prove Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes type results for such Banach function spaces. The following multiplier theorem is the fundamental result of this paper. Let ∆ = {±[2k, 2k+1), k ∈ Z} denote the standard dyadic partition of R. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces, and for a set of bounded linear operators T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) let V s(∆; T ) denote the space of functions m : R → span(T ) with bounded s-variation uniformly on dyadic intervals J ∈ ∆, measured with respect to the Minkowski norm on span(T ) (see below Definition 4.1). Denote the q-concavification of a Banach function space X by X q (see Section 2.2). Theorem 1.1. Let q ∈ (1, 2], p ∈ (q, ∞), s ∈ [1, q), and let w be a weight in the Muckenhoupt class Ap/q. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces such that X q and Y have the UMD property. Let T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) be absolutely convex and ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded, and suppose that m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then the Fourier multiplier Tm is bounded from Lp(w; X) to Lp(w; Y ). This is proven as part of Theorem 5.8. The assumptions on X imply Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia-type estimates that are used in the proof. In this theorem a condition called 'ℓ2(ℓq′ )-boundedness' appears where one would usually expect an R-boundedness condition. This is a new notion which arises naturally from the proof; it turns out to imply R-boundedness. We investigate the more general notion of ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness in Section 3. The case q = 2 and w = 1 of Theorem 1.1 was considered in [24, Theorem 2.3] for Banach spaces X = Y with the LPRp property. Our approach only works for Banach function spaces (and closed subspaces thereof), but these are currently the only known examples of Banach spaces with LPRp. As the parameter q decreases we assume less of X, but more of T and m. In Section 5 we prove Theorem 1.1, along with various other extensions and modifications of this result. In particular we obtain the following improvement of Theorem 1.1 for Lebesgue spaces. Theorem 1.2. Let s ∈ [2, ∞). Suppose that m : R → L(Lr(w)) for some r ∈ (1, ∞) and all w ∈ Ar(Rd), and that the following Holder-type condition is satisfied: sup x∈R km(x)kL(Lr(w)) + sup J∈∆ J 1 s [m]C 1/s(J;Lb(Lr(w))) ≤ φr([w]Ar ). Then the Fourier multiplier Tm is bounded on Lp(R; Lr(Rd)) in each of the following cases: (i) r ∈ [2, ∞) and 1 (ii) r ∈ (1, 2] and 1 s > max(cid:8) 1 s > max(cid:8) 1 2 − 1 p , 1 2 − 1 r , 1 p − 1 r }, r − 1 2 , 1 r − 1 2 , 1 p − 1 p }. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 3 Here φr([w]Ar ) denotes an unspecified non-decreasing function of the Mucken- houpt characteristic [w]Ar . The result follows from the combination of Proposition 5.11 and Example 5.16. The Holder assumption allows for the construction of a suitable set T as in Theorem 1.1. The condition on s becomes less restrictive as the numbers p, r, and 2 get closer. Taking p = r or r = 2 is particularly illustrative: the condition on s is then 1 theorem. However, even if p = r, the operator-valued nature of the symbol m pre- vents us from simply deducing the boundedness of Tm from the scalar-valued case by a Fubini argument. Using the same techniques, one could also deduce versions of Theorem 1.2 with Muckenhoupt weights in the R- and Rd-variables. 2(cid:12)(cid:12), as in the Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes p − 1 s > (cid:12)(cid:12) 1 In Section 5.4 we present some new Coifman -- Rubio de Francia -- Semmes-type theorems on UMD Banach spaces (not just Banach functon spaces) which are complex interpolation spaces between a Hilbert space and a UMD space. Typi- cal examples which are not Banach function spaces include the space of Schatten class operators, and more generally non-commutative Lp-spaces. Our results in this context are weaker than those that we obtain for Banach function spaces, but nonetheless they seem to be new even for scalar multipliers. Overview. • In Section 2 we present some preliminaries on Muckenhoupt weights, UMD Banach function spaces, and Rubio de Francia extrapolation. • In Section 3 the notion of ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness of a set of operators is defined and investigated. • In Section 4 we discuss the class V s of functions of bounded s-variation, and a related atomic space Rs. • In Section 5 we present our main results, which are several operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems. We cover results for Hilbert spaces, UMD Banach function spaces, 'intermediate' UMD Banach function spaces, and general 'intermediate' UMD Banach spaces. Notation. Throughout the paper we consider complex Banach spaces, but every- thing works just as well for real Banach spaces. If Ω is a measure space (we omit reference to the measure unless it is needed) and X is a Banach space, we let L0(Ω; X) denote the vector space of measurable functions modulo almost-everywhere equality, and we let Σ(Ω; X) denote the vector space of all simple functions f : Ω → X. When X = C we write L0(Ω) and Σ(Ω). For vector spaces V and W , L(V, W ) denotes the vector space of linear operators from V to W . For Banach spaces X and Y , Lb(X, Y ) denotes the bounded linear operators from X to Y and kT kL(X,Y ) the operator norm. Throughout the paper we write φa,b,... to denote a non-decreasing function [1, ∞) → [1, ∞) which depends only on the parameters a, b, . . ., and which may change from line to line. Nondecreasing dependence on the Muckenhoupt charac- teristic of weights is used in applications of extrapolation theorems. We do not obtain sharp dependence on Muckenhoupt characteristics in our results. In [1, Ap- pendix A] it is shown that monotone dependence on the Muckenhoupt characteristic can be deduced from a more general estimate in terms of the characteristic. For p, q ∈ [1, ∞] and θ ∈ [0, 1], we define the interpolation exponent [p, q]θ by 1 [p, q]θ = 1 − θ p + θ q 4 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR with the interpretation 1/0 := ∞. This lets us write interpolation results such as [Lp, Lq]θ = L[p,q]θ in a pleasing compact form. Occasionally we will work with Rd for a fixed dimension d ≥ 1. Implicit constants in estimates will depend on d, but we will not state this. 2. Preliminaries 2.1. Muckenhoupt weights. A locally integrable function w ∈ L1 loc(Rd) is called a weight if it is non-negative almost everywhere. For p ∈ [1, ∞) the space Lp(w) = Lp(Rd, w) consists of all f ∈ L0(Rd) such that kf kLp(Rd,w) :=(cid:16)Rd f (x)pw(x) dx(cid:17)1/p < ∞. The Muckenhoupt Ap class is the set of all weights w such that [w]Ap := sup B 1 B B w(x) dx ·(cid:16) 1 B B w(x)− 1 p−1(cid:17)p−1 < ∞, where the supremum is taken over all balls B ⊂ Rd, and where the second factor is replaced by kw−1kL∞(B) when p = 1. Define A∞ =Sp≥1 Ap. For 1 < p ≤ q ≤ ∞ we say that a weight w is in the αp,q class if w1−p′ ∈ Ap′/q′ , and we write [w]αp,q := [w1−p′ ]Ap′ /q′ . This class naturally arises in duality arguments. The αp,2 class is used in [26], where it is denoted by αp. We will need the following properties of the Ap classes. Proposition 2.1. (i) The Ap classes are increasing in p, with [w]Aq ≥ [w]Ap when 1 ≤ q ≤ p. (ii) For all w ∈ Ap with p ∈ (1, ∞) there is an ε > 0 such that w ∈ Ap−ε. (iii) For all w ∈ Ap with p ∈ [1, ∞) there is a δ > 0 such that w1+δ ∈ Ap. For proofs and further details on Muckenhoupt weights see [20, Chapter 9]. 2.2. The UMD property. We say that a Banach space X has the UMD property if the Hilbert transform extends to a bounded operator on Lp(R; X) for all p ∈ (1, ∞). This is equivalent to the original definition in terms of martingale differences [9, 6]. For a detailed account of the theory of UMD spaces we refer the reader to [10] the reflexive Lp spaces, Sobolev and [22]. The "classical" reflexive spaces (i.e. spaces, Besov spaces, Triebel -- Lizorkin spaces and Schatten classes) have the UMD property. The UMD property implies reflexivity, so for example L1 and L∞ do not have the UMD property. Most of our results are stated in terms of Banach function spaces that are p- convex for some p ∈ (1, ∞), and whose p-concavifications X p are also Banach function spaces, where X p = {f : f 1/p ∈ X} with norm kxkX p = kx1/pkp X . For an introduction to these notions see [1, Section 2.1]. We write 'X p ∈ UMD' as shorthand notation for 'X p is a Banach space which has the UMD property'. If p ≥ 1 this therefore includes the assumption that X is p-convex. The condition that X p ∈ UMD is open in p: in fact, if X p ∈ UMD, then there exists ε > 0 such FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 5 that X q ∈ UMD for all 0 < q < p + ε [47, Theorem 4]. In particular, X p ∈ UMD for some p > 1 if and only if X is UMD. 2.3. Extrapolation. The following Rubio de Francia-type vector-valued extrapo- lation result was obtained by the authors in [1, Theorem 3.2]. Theorem 2.2. Fix p0 ∈ (0, ∞) and let X be a Banach function space over (Ω, µ) with X p0 ∈ UMD. Suppose that F ⊂ L0 +(Rd; X) and that for all p > p0, (f, g) ∈ F , and w ∈ Ap/p0 we have +(Rd; X) × L0 kf (·, ω)kLp(w) ≤ φp,p0 ([w]Ap/p0 )kg(·, ω)kLp(w) µ-a.e. ω ∈ Ω. Then for all p > p0, (f, g) ∈ F , and w ∈ Ap/p0 we have kf kLp(w;X) ≤ φX,p,p0 ([w]Ap/p0 )kgkLp(w;X). This theorem implies the following corollary for operators, which is also proved in [1], where it is formulated more generally. For the definition of the extension eT see [1, Lemma 2.4]. Theorem 2.3. Fix p0 ∈ (0, ∞), and let T ∈ Lb(Lp(w)) for all p > p0 and w ∈ Ap/p0 , with Then for all Banach function spaces X with X p0 ∈ UMD, the operator T has an kT kL(Lp(w)) ≤ φp,p0 ([w]Ap/p0 ). extension eT on Lp(w; X) for all p > p0 and w ∈ Ap/p0 , with keT kL(Lp(w;X)) ≤ φX,p,p0 ([w]Ap/p0 ). We used these results in [1] to deduce Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia-type estimates, and we use them here to prove ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness of families of opera- tors. 3. ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness Our operator-valued multiplier theorems involve a new condition on sets of bounded operators T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ), which we call ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness. This gen- eralises the more familiar notions of R-boundedness and ℓs-boundedness. In this section we introduce and explore the concept. 3.1. Definitions and basic properties. Definition 3.1. Let X and Y be Banach spaces and T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ). • Let (εk)∞ k=1 be a Rademacher sequence on a probability space Ω. We say j=1 in that T is R-bounded if for all finite sequences (Tj)n X, j=1 in T and (xj)n nXk=1 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) εkTkxk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)L2(Ω;Y ) .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) nXk=1 εkxk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)L2(Ω;X) . The least admissible implicit constant is called the R-bound of T , and denoted [T ]R. 6 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR • Suppose that X and Y are Banach function spaces and suppose s ∈ [1, ∞]. j=1 in T and We say that T is ℓs-bounded if for all finite sequences (Tj)n (xj )n j=1 in X, (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXk=1 Tkxks(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXk=1 xks(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X . The least admissible implicit constant is called the ℓs-bound of T , and denoted [T ]ℓs. For a detailed treatment of R-boundedness we refer the reader to [23, 29], and for ℓs-boundedness see [28, 50]. Definition 3.2. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces, T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) and r, s ∈ [1, ∞]. We say that T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded if for all finite doubly-indexed sequences (Tj,k)n,m j,k=1 in T and (xj,k)n,m j,k=1 in X, (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXj=1(cid:16) mXk=1 Tj,kxj,ks(cid:17)r/s(cid:17)1/r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXj=1(cid:16) mXk=1 xj,ks(cid:17)r/s(cid:17)1/r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X . The least admissible implicit constant is called the ℓr(ℓs)-bound of T , and denoted [T ]ℓr(ℓs). For R- and ℓ2-boundedness it suffices to consider subsets of T in the defining inequality (see [12, 31]). For ℓs- and ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness with r, s 6= 2 this is not the case: one must consider sequences, allowing for repeated elements. A singleton {T } can fail to be ℓs-bounded, as the defining estimate may fail for arbitrarily long constant sequences (T, . . . , T ) (see [28, Example 2.16]). We say that an operator T ∈ Lb(X, Y ) is ℓs- or ℓr(ℓs)-bounded if the singleton {T } is. If a set T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) is R-, ℓs-, or ℓr(ℓs)-bounded, then so is its closure in the strong operator topology, and likewise its absolutely convex hull absco(T ). This was proven in [29] for R-boundedness and [28] for ℓs-boundedness; the proof generalises to ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness. It is immediate from the definition that ℓs-boundedness and ℓs(ℓs)-boundedness are equivalent. The following proposition encapsulates a few other connections be- tween R-, ℓr-, and ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness. For a thorough discussion on the connection between R and ℓ2-boundedness we refer to [31]. Proposition 3.3. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces and T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ). (i) If Y is p-concave for some p < ∞ and T is R-bounded, then T is ℓ2-bounded with [T ]ℓ2 . [T ]R. (ii) If X is p-concave for some p < ∞ and T is ℓ2-bounded, then T is R-bounded with [T ]R . [T ]ℓ2. (iii) Let p, s ∈ [1, ∞]. If X is p-concave, Y is p-convex, and T is ℓs-bounded, then T is ℓp(ℓs)-bounded with [T ]ℓp(ℓs) ≤ [T ]ℓs. (iv) Let r, s ∈ [1, ∞]. If T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded, then T is ℓr- and ℓs-bounded with [T ]ℓr ≤ [T ]ℓr(ℓs) and [T ]ℓs ≤ [T ]ℓr(ℓs). Proof. Statements (i) and (ii) follow from the Khintchine-Maurey inequalities (see [36, Theorem 1.d.6]). For (iii), consider doubly-indexed finite sequences (Tj,k)m,n j,k=1 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 7 in T and (xj,k)m,n j,k=1 in X. Then we have (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:16) nXk=1 Tj,kxj,ks(cid:17)p/s(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y p ≤(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXk=1 ≤ [T ]ℓs(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) nXk=1 ≤ [T ]ℓs(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:16) nXk=1 Tj,kxj,ks(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) X(cid:17)1/p xj,ks(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Y(cid:17)1/p xj,ks(cid:17)p/s(cid:17)1/p(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X p , so [T ]ℓp(ℓs) ≤ [T ]ℓs. Finally, (iv) follows by taking one index to be a singleton. (cid:3) Proposition 3.3 shows in particular that if T is ℓ2(ℓs)- or ℓs(ℓ2)-bounded for some s ∈ [1, ∞], then T is ℓ2-bounded, and hence R-bounded if Y is p-concave for some p < ∞. Consider the situation of Theorem 2.3. If a family of linear operators T satisfies the hypothesis of the theorem uniformly, then the family of extensions eT is auto- matically ℓr(ℓs)-bounded for r, s > p0. This observation is a convenient source of ℓr(ℓs)-bounded families. Proposition 3.4. Fix p0 ∈ (1, ∞), and suppose that T ⊂ Lb(Lp(w)) for all p ∈ (p0, ∞) and w ∈ Ap/p0 . In addition suppose that for each T ∈ T and f ∈ Lp(w), kT f kLp(w) ≤ φp0,p([w]Ap/p0 )kf kLp(w). the set of extensions obtained in Theorem 2.3. Then for all p, r, s ∈ (p0, ∞) and all Let X be a Banach function space with X p0 ∈ UMD, and let eT = {eT : T ∈ T } be w ∈ Ap/p0 , eT is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded on Lp(w; X) and Proof. Consider doubly-indexed finite sequences (Tj,k)m,n Σ(Rd; X). Let Ω be the underlying measure space of X, and define [eT ]ℓr (ℓs) ≤ φp0,p,r,s,X ([w]Ap/p0 ). j,k=1 in T and (gj,k)m,n j,k=1 in F, G : Rd × Ω × {1, . . . , m} × {1, . . . , n} → R+ by F (·, ω, j, k) = Tj,kgj,k(·, ω) and G(·, ω, j, k) = gj,k(·, ω). Then from the assumption on T we see that for all p > p0 and all w ∈ Ap/p0 , kF (·, ω, j, k)kLp(w) ≤ φp0,p([w]Ap/p0 )kG(·, ω, j, k)kLp(w). Letting Y := X(ℓr )) is UMD, with UMD constants independent of m, n ∈ N. Hence Theorem 2.2 implies that for all p ∈ (p0, ∞) and w ∈ Ap/p0 , n)), it follows from [47, p. 214] that Y p0 = X p0(ℓr/p0 m (ℓs/p0 m(ℓs n kF kLp(w;Y ) ≤ φX,p0,p,r,s([w]Ap/p0 )kGkLp(w;Y ). This, combined with [1, Lemma 2.4], implies the claimed result. (cid:3) Taking X to be the scalar field C, so that X p0 = X for any p0, we obtain the following special case. Note that in this case a more direct proof may be given as in [18, Theorem 2.3]. 8 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Proposition 3.5. Fix p0 ∈ (1, ∞), and suppose that T ⊂ Lb(Lp(w)) for all p ∈ (p0, ∞) and w ∈ Ap/p0 , and in addition suppose that for all T ∈ T and f ∈ Lp(w), kT f kLp(w) ≤ φp0,p([w]Ap/p0 )kf kLp(w). Then for all p, r, s ∈ (p0, ∞) and all w ∈ Ap/p0 , T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded on Lp(w) and [T ]ℓr (ℓs) ≤ φp0,p,r,s([w]Ap/p0 ). Duality and interpolation may be used to establish ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness, as shown in the following two propositions. Proposition 3.6. Let X, Y be Banach function spaces, and let T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ). Let r, s ∈ [1, ∞]. If T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded, then the adjoint family T ∗ = {T ∗ : T ∈ T } ⊂ Lb(Y ∗, X ∗) is ℓr′ (ℓs′ )-bounded with [T ∗]ℓr′ (ℓs′ ) = [T ]ℓr (ℓs). Proof. This follows from the duality relation X(ℓr Section 1.d]). n )) (see [36, (cid:3) m(ℓs n))∗ = X ∗(ℓr′ m(ℓs′ To exploit interpolation we must assume order continuity, which holds auto- matically for reflexive spaces and thus in particular for UMD spaces ([37, Section 2.4]). Proposition 3.7. Let X and Y be order continuous Banach function spaces and T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ). Let rk, sk ∈ [1, ∞] for k = 0, 1. If T is ℓrk (ℓsk )-bounded for k = 0, 1, then T is ℓrθ (ℓsθ )-bounded for all θ ∈ (0, 1), where rθ := [r0, r1]θ and sθ := [s0, s1]θ. Moreover we have the estimate [T ]ℓrθ (ℓsθ ) ≤ [T ]θ ℓr0 (ℓs0 )[T ]1−θ ℓr1 (ℓs1 ) ≤ max{[T ]ℓr0 (ℓs0 ), [T ]ℓr1 (ℓs1 )}. Proof. This follows from Calder´on's theory of complex interpolation for order con- tinuous vector-valued function spaces [11]. (cid:3) Combining Proposition 3.3(iv) with Proposition 3.7 we deduce the following. Corollary 3.8. Let X and Y be order continuous Banach function spaces and T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ). Fix r, s ∈ [1, ∞] and suppose that T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded. If then T is ℓu(ℓv)-bounded with [T ]ℓu(ℓv) ≤ [T ]ℓr(ℓs). r ≤ u ≤ v ≤ s or s ≤ v ≤ u ≤ r, To end this section we present a technical lemma on the ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness of the closure of a family of operators on spaces other than that in which the closure was taken. It is used in our multiplier result for intermediate spaces, where several Lebesgue spaces are used simultaneously. A similar result can be proved with general order continuous Banach function spaces in place of Lebesgue spaces. Lemma 3.9. Let (Ω, ρ, µ) be a metric measure space, and assume µ is finite on bounded sets. Let p ∈ (1, ∞) and T ⊂ L(Σ(Ω), L0(Ω)) be such that T ⊂ L(Lp(Ω)) is uniformly bounded and absolutely convex. Let T denote the closure of T in L(Lp(Ω)). Suppose q ∈ (1, ∞), and let w be a weight on Ω which is integrable on bounded sets. Suppose also that T ⊂ L(Lq(w)) is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded for some r, s ∈ [1, ∞]. Then T is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded on Lq(w) with [T ]ℓr (ℓs) = [T ]ℓr (ℓs). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 9 Note that we take the closure T of T in one space, and then establish ℓr(ℓs)- boundedness of T considered as a set of operators on a different space. m=1,n=1 in eT and (fm,n)M,N Proof. Fix (Tm,n)M,N m=1,n=1 in Lq(w). By a density argument we may assume each for each m, n that fm,n is bounded and supported on a bounded subset of Ω, which implies fm,n ∈ Lp(Ω). For each m, n choose (T (k) m,n)k≥1 in T such that T (k) m,nfm,n → Tm,nfm,n in Lp(Ω). By passing to subsequences we may suppose that for all m, n we have T (k) m,nfm,n → Tm,nfm,n, µ-a.e. Therefore, by Fatou's lemma, m,n → Tm,n in L(Lp(Ω)). Then also T (k) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) MXm=1(cid:16) NXn=1 r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(w) Tm,nfm,ns(cid:17) r s(cid:17) 1 T (k) ≤ lim inf k→∞ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) MXm=1(cid:16) NXn=1 ≤ [T ]ℓr(ℓs)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) MXm=1(cid:16) NXn=1 r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(w) s(cid:17) 1 m,nfm,ns(cid:17) r r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lq(w) s(cid:17) 1 fm,ns(cid:17) r , with the appropriate adjustment if r = ∞ or s = ∞. So T is indeed ℓr(ℓs)-bounded on Lq(w). (cid:3) 3.2. ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness of single operators. As noted before, a single operator T ∈ Lb(X, Y ) can fail to be ℓr(ℓs)-bounded. For positive operators we have the following result, which is an adaptation of [39, Lemma 4]. Proposition 3.10. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces and let P ∈ Lb(X, Y ) be a positive operator. Then P is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded for all r, s ∈ [1, ∞], and we have the ℓr(ℓs)-bound [{P }]ℓr(ℓs) ≤ kP kL(X.Y ). Proof. Let (xj,k)m,n j,k=1 be a doubly-indexed sequence in X, and note that by posi- tivity of P we may take the elements of the sequence to be positive. By positivity of P we can estimate (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:16) nXk=1 P xj,ks(cid:17)r/s(cid:17)1/r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y so [{P }]ℓr (ℓs) ≤ kP kL(X,Y ). sup k)k ≤1 bj k(aj k(bj )k sup ℓr′ m =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) mXj=1 ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)P(cid:16) mXj=1 ≤ kP kL(X,Y )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) mXj=1(cid:16) nXk=1 sup ℓr′ m k(bj )k bj ≤1 ≤1 ℓs′ n aj kP xj,k(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y nXk=1 kxj,k(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Y nXk=1 xj,ks(cid:17)r/s(cid:17)1/r(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X sup k)k aj ℓs′ n ≤1 , k(aj (cid:3) For an ℓ1-bounded operator on a Lebesgye space one has ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness for all r, s ∈ [1, ∞] (see [22, Theorem 2.7.2]). The result below actually holds with Lp(Ω) replaced by any Banach lattice X with a Levi norm (see [8] and [35, Fact 2.5]). A duality argument implies a similar result for ℓ∞-boundedness. Proposition 3.11. Let p ∈ [1, ∞) and T ∈ L(Lp(Ω)). If T is ℓ1-bounded, then {T } is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded for all r, s ∈ [1, ∞]. 10 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Remark 3.12. Even on Lp it can be quite hard to establish the ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness of a single operator. By using i.i.d. s-stable random variables ξ1, . . . , ξn : Ω → R (see [33, Section 5]), for p ∈ (0, s) one can linearise the estimate by writing (cid:16) nXj=1 T xjs(cid:17)1/s = Cp,s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T nXj=1 ξjxj(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Ω) . By using Fubini's theorem and Minkowski's inequality, one can deduce that any T ∈ L(Lp) is ℓr(ℓs)-bounded if p ≤ r ≤ s ≤ 2 or 2 ≤ s ≤ r ≤ p. Most of the remaining cases seem to be open (see [30, Problem 2] and [16, Corollary 1.44]). 3.3. Non-examples. We end this section with two examples to demonstrate that ℓr(ℓs)-boundedness is not just the conjunction of ℓr- and ℓs-boundedness. Consider the class of kernels K = {k ∈ L1(R) : k ∗ f ≤ M f a.e. for all simple f : R → R}, where M is the Hardy -- Littlewood maximal operator. For k ∈ K and f ∈ Lp(R) with p ∈ (1, ∞) define an operator Tk by Tkf (t) = R k(t − s)f (s) ds, and set T = {Tk : k ∈ K}. Example 3.13. Let p ∈ (1, ∞). The family of operators T ⊂ Lb(Lp(R)) defined above is ℓs-bounded for all s ∈ [1, ∞], but not ℓ1(ℓs)- or ℓ∞(ℓs)- bounded for any s ∈ (1, ∞). Proof. The ℓs-boundedness of T for s ∈ [1, ∞] is proved in [40, Theorem 4.7]. Since T = T ∗, Proposition 3.6 says that ℓ1(ℓs)-boundedness of T on Lp(R) implies ℓ∞(ℓs′ (R), so it suffices to show that T is not ℓ∞(ℓs)-bounded on Lp(R) for any s ∈ (1, ∞). We follow the proof of [40, Proposition 8.1]. )-boundedness on Lp′ Fix n ∈ N and for i, j ∈ N define fi,j ∈ Lp(R) by fi,j(t) = 1(0,1](t)1(2−j ,2−j+1](t − (i − 1)2−n) so that (3.1) (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) sup 1≤i≤2n(cid:16) nXj=1 fi,j(t)s(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) sup 1≤i≤2n 1(0,1](cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R) = 1. Next, for i, j ∈ N define ki,j(t) = 1 2−j+2 1(−2−j+1,2−j+1)(t) and Ti,j = Tki,j . Then Ti,j ∈ T , as for any simple function f we have Ti,jf (t) = ki,j ∗ f (t) = 1(−2−j+1,2−j+1)(t − τ )f (τ ) dτ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) f (τ ) dτ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤ M f (t). 1 1 = 2−j+2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)R 2−j+2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) t+2−j+1 2−j+2 t+2−j+1−(i−1)2−n t−2−j+1−(i−1)2−n t−2−j+1 1 Ti,jfi,j(t) = 1(2−j ,2−j+1](τ ) dτ Furthermore, for any 1 ≤ j ≤ n, t ∈ (0, 1] and 1 ≤ i ≤ 2n with t ∈ ((i−1)2−n, i2−n], FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 11 1(2−j,2−j+1](τ ) dτ = 2−j 2−j+2 = 1 4 . ≥(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) n 4s(cid:17)1/s 1(0,1](cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R) = n1/s 4 1 ≥ 2−j 2−j+2 2−j+1 Ti,jfi,j(t)s(cid:17)1/s(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(R) Therefore (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) sup 1≤i≤2n(cid:16) nXj=1 which tends to ∞ as n → ∞. Combining this with (3.1) disproves the ℓ∞(ℓs)- boundedness of T on Lp(R). (cid:3) The previous example can be modified to construct examples without ℓ2(ℓs)- boundedness, by using stochastic integral operators. For k ∈ K and f ∈ Lp(R+) with p ∈ (2, ∞), define Skf (t) := t 0 k(t − s) 1 2 f (s) dW (s), where W is a standard Brownian motion on a probability space (Ω, F , P). Define S := {Sk : k ∈ K}. Example 3.14. Let p ∈ (2, ∞). The family of operators S from Lp(R+) to Lp(R+× Ω) is ℓr-bounded for all r ∈ [2, ∞), but not ℓ2(ℓr)-bounded for any r ∈ (2, ∞). Proof. Let r ∈ [2, ∞) and X = ℓr. Take f ∈ Lp(R+; X) and k ∈ L1(R+; X) such that kj ∈ K for all j ∈ N. By [41, Corollary 2.10] and the Kahane -- Khintchine inequalities (see for example [33]), we know that (cid:16)E(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) t 0 k(t − s) 1 2 f (s) dW (s)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) p X(cid:17)1/p ≃(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) t 0 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)X k(t − s)f (s)2 ds(cid:17) 1 for any t ∈ R+. This implies that S is ℓr-bounded from Lp(R+) to Lp(R+ × Ω) if and only if T restricted to R+ is ℓr/2-bounded on Lp/2(R+), so S is ℓr-bounded for all r ∈ [2, ∞) by Example 3.13. Repeating the argument with X = ℓ2(ℓr), we also get from Example 3.13 that S is not ℓ2(ℓr)-bounded for any r ∈ (2, ∞). (cid:3) 4. The function spaces V s(J ; Y ) and Rs(J ; Y ) The multipliers we consider are members of the space of functions of bounded s-variation, which we denote by V s(J , Y ) for s ≥ 1. This space contains the class of 1/s-Holder continuous functions. In our arguments we will also use the atomic function space Rs(J , Y ), which was introduced in the scalar case in [14]. Definition 4.1. (i) Let Y be a Banach space, J = [J−, J+] ⊂ R a bounded interval and s ∈ [1, ∞). A function f : R → Y is said to be of bounded s-variation on J, or f ∈ V s(J; Y ), if kf kV s(J;Y ) := kf k∞ + [f ]Vs(J;Y ) < ∞, where [f ]Vs(J;Y ) := J−=t0<···<tN =J+(cid:16) NXi=1 sup kf (ti−1) − f (ti)ks Y(cid:17)1/s . Furthermore we define V ∞(J; Y ) = L∞(J; Y ). 12 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR (ii) When J is a collection of mutually disjoint bounded intervals in R, the space V s(J ; Y ) ⊂ L∞(R; Y ) consists of all f ∈ L∞(R; Y ) such that kf kV s(J ;Y ) := sup J∈J kf J kV s(J;Y ) < ∞. If J = (Jk)k∈N is ordered, we define V s subspace consisting of f ∈ V s(J ; Y ) with limk→∞kf Jk kV s(J;Y ) = 0. 0 (J ; Y ) ⊂ V s(J ; Y ) to be the closed Clearly V s(J ; Y ) ֒→ V t(J ; Y ) contractively when 1 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ ∞, and V s(J ; Y ) is complete when Y is complete. In our applications the space Y is usually the span of a bounded and abso- lutely convex subset B of a normed space Z (i.e. a disc in Z), equipped with the Minkowski norm kxkB := inf{λ > 0 : x λ ∈ B}, and we write V s(J ; B) := V s(J ; span B). Clearly kxkZ ≤ CBkxkB for x ∈ Y . If the Minkowski norm on span B is complete, then B is called a Banach disc. If Z is a Banach space and B is closed, then B is a Banach disc [42, Proposition 5.1.6], but this is not a necessary condition [42, Proposition 3.2.21]. Definition 4.2. (i) Let Y be a normed space, J ⊂ R a bounded interval, and s ∈ [1, ∞). Say that a function a : J → Y is an Rs(J; Y )-atom, written a ∈ Rs at(J; Y ), if there exists a set I of mutually disjoint subintervals of J and a set of vectors (cI )I∈I ⊂ Y such that a =XI∈I cI 1I and (cid:16)XI∈I kcI ks Y(cid:17)1/s ≤ 1. Define Rs(J; Y ) ⊂ L∞(J; Y ) by Rs(J; Y ) :=nf ∈ L∞(J; Y ) : f = where the series f = P∞ Rs(J; Y ) by ∞Xk=1 λkak, (λk) ∈ ℓ1, (ak) ⊂ Rs at(J; Y )o, k=1 λkak converges in L∞(J; Y ). Define a norm on kf kRs(J;Y ) := infnkλkkℓ1 : f = ∞Xk=1 λkak as aboveo. Furthermore we define R∞(J; Y ) := L∞(J; Y ). (ii) When J is a collection of mutually disjoint bounded intervals in R, the space Rs(J ; Y ) ⊂ L∞(R; Y ) consists of all f ∈ L∞(R; Y ) such that kf kRs(J ;Y ) := sup J∈J kf J kRs(J;Y ) < ∞. If J = (Jk)k∈N is ordered, we define Rs subspace consisting of f ∈ Rs(J ; Y ) with limk→∞kf JkkRs(Jk;Y ) = 0. 0(J ; Y ) ⊂ Rs(J ; Y ) to be the closed Clearly Rs(J ; Y ) ֒→ Rt(J ; Y ) contractively when 1 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ ∞, and Rs(J ; Y ) is complete when Y is complete. As with the classes V s, when B is a disc in a normed space Z, we put the Minkowski norm on the linear span of B and write Rs(J ; B) := Rs(J ; span B). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 13 For α ∈ (0, 1] and an interval J ⊂ R we let Cα(J; Y ) denote the space of α-Holder continuous functions with kf kC α(J;Y ) = max{kf k∞, [f ]C α(J;Y )}, where [f ]C α(J;Y ) := sup x,y∈J kf (x) − f (y)kY x − yα . Lemma 4.3. Let s ∈ [1, ∞), let Y be a Banach space and fix a bounded interval J ⊂ R. (i) If q ∈ (s, ∞), then Rs(J; Y ) ⊂ V s(J; Y ) ⊂ Rq(J; Y ) and for all f ∈ L∞(J; Y ) we have kf kRq(J;Y ) .q,s kf kV s(J;Y ) . kf kRs(J;Y ). (ii) We have C1/s(J; Y ) ⊂ V s(J; Y ), and for all f ∈ V s(J; Y ), kf kV s(J;Y ) ≤ kf k∞ + J1/s[f ]C 1/s(J;Y ). Proof. For part (i) we note that both Rs(J; Y ) ⊂ V s(J; Y ) and the second norm estimate follow directly from the fact that for any atom a ∈ Rs at(J; Y ) with cI 1I a =XI∈I kcI − cJ ks(cid:17)1/s ≤ 1 + 2(cid:16)XI∈I kcI ks(cid:17)1/s ≤ 3. we have by Minkowski's inequality that kakV s(J;Y ) ≤ sup I∈I kcI kY +(cid:16) XI,J∈I I6=J The embedding V s(J; Y ) ⊂ Rq(J; Y ) with the first norm estimate is shown in [14, Lemme 2] for scalar functions, and the argument extends to the general case. Part (ii) is straightforward to check. (cid:3) We end this section with complex interpolation containments for the V s- and Rs-classes. It is an open problem whether complex interpolation of the V s-classes as below can be proved with ε = 0 (see [43, Chapter 12]). It is also not clear whether converse inclusions hold, but since we don't need them we leave the question open. Theorem 4.4. Suppose 1 ≤ q0 ≤ q1 ≤ ∞, θ ∈ (0, 1), ε > 0 and let Y be a Banach space. Then for all bounded intervals J ⊂ R we have continuous inclusions (4.1) (4.2) V [q0,q1]θ −ε(J; Y ) ֒→ [V q0 (J; Y ), V q1 (J; Y )]θ, R[q0,q1]θ (J; Y ) ֒→ [Rq0 (J; Y ), Rq1 (J; Y )]θ, q1 6= ∞. Furthermore, if J = (Jk)k∈N is an ordered collection of mutually disjoint bounded intervals in R, then we have continuous inclusions (4.3) (4.4) V [q0,q1]θ−ε 0 R[q0,q1]θ 0 (J ; Y ) ֒→ [V q0 (J ; Y ) ֒→ [Rq0 0 (J ; Y ), V q1 0 (J ; Y ), Rq1 0 (J ; Y )]θ 0 (J ; Y )]θ, q1 6= ∞. Proof. For q0 = 1 and q1 = ∞ we have (4.1) by applying subsequently [43, Lemma 12.11], [3, Theorem 3.4.1], and [3, Theorem 4.7.1], V [q0,q1]θ −ε(J; Y ) ֒→(cid:0)V 1(J; Y ), L∞(J; Y )(cid:1)θε,∞ ֒→(cid:0)V 1(J; Y ), L∞(J; Y )(cid:1)θ,1 ֒→(cid:2)V 1(J; Y ), L∞(J; Y )(cid:3)θ 14 with ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR θε = 1 − 1 1 1−θ − ε < θ. The intermediate cases follow from the reiteration theorem for complex interpola- tion [3, Theorem 4.6.1]. In the remainder of the proof we will need the following notation: when Ik is a collection of intervals for each k ∈ N and I ∈ Ik, let πI,k denote the canonical projection ℓ∞(Ik; Y ) → Y . We abbreviate Banach couples (X0, X1) by X•, and use this shorthand for expressions like [ℓp•(N; X)]θ = [ℓp0 (N; X), ℓp1(N; X)]θ. We let F (X•) denote the space of bounded analytic functions from the closed strip S := {z ∈ C : ℜz ∈ [0, 1]} to the sum X0 + X1 whose restrictions to the sets {z ∈ C : ℜz = 0} and {z ∈ C : ℜz = 1} map continuously into X0 and X1 respectively, equipped with the norm kF kF (X•) := max(cid:18)sup t∈R kF (it)kX0 , sup t∈R kF (1 + it)kX1(cid:19) as in [3, §4.1]. For (4.2) let 1 ≤ q0 ≤ q1 ≤ ∞ and write qθ := [q0, q1]θ for brevity. Suppose f ∈ Rqθ (J; Y ), with atomic decomposition f = ∞Xk=1 λkak = ∞Xk=1 λk XI∈Ik 1I πI,k(ck), where ck ∈ ℓqθ (Ik; Y ) for each k ∈ N. Let ε > 0. For each k ∈ N we have ℓqθ (Ik; Y ) = [ℓq• (Ik; Y )]θ with equal norms [49, Theorem 1.18.1], hence there exists a function Ck ∈ F (ℓq• (Ik; Y )) with Ck(θ) = ck and kCkkF (ℓq• (Ik;Y )) ≤ (1 + ε)kckkℓqθ (Ik;Y ) ≤ 1 + ε. For all z ∈ S and t ∈ J, define Ak(z)(t) := XI∈Ik 1I (t)πI,k(Ck(z)), noting that for each t there is at most one non-zero term in the sum. It follows from kCkkF (ℓq• (Ij ;Y )) ≤ 1 + ε that kAkkF (Rq• (J;Y )) ≤ 1 + ε for all z ∈ S. We will show that each Ak : S → Rq0(J; Y ) + Rq1 (J; Y ) is analytic on S, using that Rq0 (J; Y ) + Rq1(J; Y ) = Rq1(J; Y ) and ℓq0 (Ik; Y ) + ℓq1(Ik; Y ) = ℓq1(Ik; Y ). Fix z0 ∈ S. Since Ck is analytic with values in ℓq1(Ik; Y ), there exists a Taylor expansion Ck(z) = ∞Xn=0 (z − z0)nβk,n for z in a neigbourhood of z0, where (βk,n)∞ Thus for such z we have n=0 ⊂ ℓq0 (Ik; Y ) is a bounded sequence. Ak(z) = XI∈Ik 1I πI,k(Ck(z)) = ∞Xn=0 (z − z0)n XI∈Ik 1I πI,k(βk,n) =: ∞Xn=0 (z − z0)nγk,n FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 15 using the mutual disjointness of Ik to interchange the sums. The functions γk,n are in Rq1 (J; Y ) as we can write kγk,nkRq1 (J;Y ) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)XI∈Ik 1IπI,k(βk,n)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Rq1 (J;Y ) Similarly we can show that each Ak : S → Rq1 (J; Y ) is continuous. ≤ kβk,nkℓq1 (Ik;Y ) < ∞. Now for z ∈ S and j ∈ N define F (z) := ∞Xk=1 λkAk(z). Since the functions Ak : S → Rq0 (J; Y ) + Rq1 (J; Y ) are bounded uniformly in k, continuous on S, and analytic on S, and since λ ∈ ℓ1(N), and each Ak maps into Rq0(J; Y ) + Rq1 (J; Y ), we find that each F ∈ F (Rq• (J; Y )). Furthermore we have F (θ) = ∞Xk=1 λkAk(θ) = ∞Xk=1 λk XI∈Ik 1I πI,k(Ck(θ)) = f and kF kF (Rq• (J;Y )) ≤ kλkkℓ1(N) sup k∈N kAkkF (Rq• (J;Y )) ≤ (1 + ε)kλkkℓ1(N). Since ε > 0 was arbitrary, taking the infimum over all atomic decompositions of f and all possible F ∈ F (Rq• (J; Y )) with F (θ) = f completes the proof. Now consider a collection J of mutually disjoint bounded intervals in R. We will only prove (4.3), as the proof of (4.4) is similar. We introduce the following if J = [J−, J+) ⊂ R is a bounded interval and f ∈ L0(J; Y ), we let notation: fJ ∈ L0([0, 1); Y ) be the function fJ (x) := f ((J+ − J−)x + J+) x ∈ [0, 1). Then for each s ∈ [1, ∞] the map τJ : V s(J; Y ) → V s([0, 1); Y ) defined by τJ (f ) := fJ is an isometry. Consequently we can write kf kV s(J ;Y ) = sup J∈J 0 (J ; Y ) → c0(J ; V s([0, 1); Y )) defined by and therefore the map Φ : V s kf J kV s(J;Y ) = sup J∈J kτJ (f J )kV s([0,1);Y ), Φ(f ) := (τJ (f J ))J∈J is an isometry. Since the intervals in J are mutually disjont, Φ is an isometric isomorphism. Thus Φ−1 induces an isometric isomorphism Φ−1 : c0(cid:0)J ; [V q• ([0, 1); Y )]θ(cid:1) =(cid:2)c0(J ; V q• ([0, 1); Y ))(cid:3)θ → [V q• using [49, Remark 3, §1.18.1]. By (4.1) we have 0 (J ; Y )]θ, V [q0,q1]θ−ε([0, 1); Y ) ֒→ [V q• ([0, 1); Y )]θ, so that Φ−1 yields an embedding c0(J ; V [q0,q1]θ −ε([0, 1); Y )) ֒→ [V q• 0 (J ; Y )]θ. Precomposing with Φ gives the bounded inclusion (J ; Y ) ֒→ [V q• V [q0,q1]θ−ε 0 0 (J ; Y )]θ and completes the proof. (cid:3) 16 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR 5. Fourier multipliers The Fourier transform and operator-valued Fourier multipliers on vector-valued functions are defined similarly to the scalar-valued case. Here we just mention that our normalisation of the Fourier transform is bf (ξ) = F f (ξ) := Rd f (t)e−2πit·ξ dt, f ∈ L1(Rd; X), ξ ∈ Rd, and that since S(Rd) ⊗ X is dense in Lp(w; X) for every p ∈ (1, ∞) and w ∈ A∞ (see [20, Ex. 9.4.1] for the scalar case), the Lp(w; X) → Lp(w; Y )-boundedness of a Fourier multiplier Tm : S(Rd) ⊗ X → S′(Rd; Y ) reduces to the estimate kTmf kLp(w;Y ) . kf kLp(w;X), f ∈ S(Rd) ⊗ X. Our goal is to find conditions on Banach function spaces X and Y which imply this estimate for m ∈ V s(∆; L(X, Y )) and w in a suitable Muckenhoupt class. We will only consider multipliers m defined on R; extensions to multipliers defined on Rd can be obtained by an induction argument as in [27, Section 4], [32] and [52], and extensions to multipliers on the torus T can be obtained by transference, see [1, Proposition 4.1]. In this case one must consider multipliers defined on T = Z, where bounded s-variation for a function on Z is defined analogously to Definition 4.1. We start with a result that is well-known in the unweighted setting (see [21, 48]). This is not so important to our main results; it will only be used in the proof of Theorem 5.18. Recall that ∆ = {±[2k, 2k+1), k ∈ Z} is the standard dyadic partition of R. Theorem 5.1 (Vector-valued Marcinkiewicz multiplier theorem). Let X and Y be UMD Banach spaces, and suppose T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) is absolutely convex and R- bounded. Suppose m ∈ V 1(∆; T ). Then for all p ∈ (1, ∞) and w ∈ Ap, kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,p([w]Ap )[T ]RkmkV 1(∆;T ). Proof. To prove the result one can repeat the argument in [21, Theorem 4.3] using weighted Littlewood -- Paley inequalities with sharp cut-off functions, which can be found for instance in [17] (see also [34]). (cid:3) Our starting point for multiplier theorems for m ∈ V s with s > 1 is an estimate of Littlewood -- Paley -- Rubio de Francia type. For an interval I ⊂ R let SI denote the Fourier projection onto I, defined by SI f := (1I f )∨ for Schwartz functions f ∈ S(R) ⊗ X. The following result was obtained in [1, Theorem 6.5]. Related results have been obtained in [27, 45]. Theorem 5.2. Suppose q ∈ [2, ∞) and let X be a Banach function space such that X q′ ∈ UMD. Let I be a collection of mutually disjoint intervals in R. Then for all p > q′, all w ∈ Ap/q′ , and all f ∈ Lp(w; X), (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)XJ∈∆(cid:16)XI∈I I⊂J SI f q(cid:17)2/q(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;X) ≤ φX,p,q([w]Ap/q′ )kf kLp(w;X). For Hilbert spaces the following variant holds (see [1, Proposition 6.6 and Remark 6.7]). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 17 Proposition 5.3. Suppose q ∈ [2, ∞) and let X be a Hilbert space. Let I be a collection of mutually disjoint intervals in R. Then for all p > q′, all w ∈ Ap/q′ and all f ∈ Lp(w; X), (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16)XJ∈∆(cid:16)XI∈I I⊂J kSI f kq X(cid:17)2/q(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w) ≤ φp,q([w]Ap/q′ )kf kLp(w;X). 5.1. Multipliers in Hilbert spaces. The first part of the following theorem is an analogue of [27, Theorem A(i)], and the second part is an unweighted analogue of [27, Theorem A(ii)]. The second part is also proved in [24, Proposition 3.3]. The exponents (p, s) for which each part of the theorem applies are pictured in Figure 1. Theorem 5.4. Let X and Y be Hilbert spaces, p, s ∈ (1, ∞), and consider a mul- tiplier m ∈ V s(∆; Lb(X, Y )). (i) If s ≤ 2 and p ≥ s, then for all w ∈ Ap/s we have kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φp,s([w]Ap/s)kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )). (ii) If 1 p − 1 kTmkL(Lp(R;X),Lp(R;Y )) .p,s kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )). s >(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 2(cid:12)(cid:12) we have Figure 1. Allowable exponents for Theorem 5.4: the weighted case (i) dark shaded, the unweighted case (ii) light shaded. 1/s 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 1/p 1 1 To prove Theorem 5.4 we use the following proposition, which is a version of the first part for R-class multipliers. The techniques used to prove this proposition are strongly related to those used in the proof of our main result for UMD Banach function spaces, Theorem 5.8. 18 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Proposition 5.5. Let X and Y be Hilbert spaces, s ∈ (1, 2], and consider a mul- tiplier m ∈ Rs(∆; Lb(X, Y )). Then for all p > s and w ∈ Ap/s we have kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φp,s([w]Ap/s )kmkRs(∆;Lb(X,Y )). Proof. We only consider the case s < 2. The case s = 2 is similar, but simpler. Fix ε > 0 and let f ∈ Lp(w; X). By approximation we may assume that the dyadic Littlewood -- Paley decomposition of f has finitely many nonzero terms and set ∆f = {J ∈ ∆ : SJ f 6= 0}. For each J ∈ ∆f let mJ = NXk=1 λkaJ k , aJ k = XI∈J J k cJ,k I 1I be an Rs(J; Lb(X, Y ))-atomic decomposition of the restriction mJ with λk inde- pendent of J and NXk=1 λk ≤ (1 + ε)kmkRσ(∆;Lb(X,Y )) as in [24, Theorem 2.3]. Note that SJ Tm = TmSJ , where we abuse notation by letting SJ denote either the X- or Y -valued Fourier projection. By the Littlewood -- Paley estimate (see [38, Proposition 3.2]), Holder's inequality, Proposition 5.3, and w ∈ Ap/s ⊂ Ap, we have kTmf kLp(w;Y ) ≤ φp([w]Ap )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f ≤ φp([w]Ap )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:16) NXk=1 ≤ φp([w]Ap ) ≤ φp([w]Ap ) ≤ φp,s([w]Ap/s) kcJ,k kTmSJ f k2 Y(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w) λk XI∈J J λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:0) XI∈J J NXk=1 λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:16) XI∈J J NXk=1 NXk=1 λk kf kLp(w;X). kcJ,k kSI f ks′ k k k I SI f kY(cid:17)2(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w) s′(cid:17) 1 s(cid:0) XI∈J J X(cid:1) 2 I ks(cid:1) 2 X(cid:17)2/s′(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w) kSI f ks′ k Since ε > 0 was arbitrary this implies kTmf kLp(w;Y ) ≤ φp,s([w]Ap/s)kmkRs(∆;Lb(X,Y ))kf kLp(w;X) for all w ∈ Ap/s and f ∈ Lp(w; X). (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 5.4. Part (i): We first consider the case s < p and s < 2. Let w ∈ Ap/s and take σ ∈ (s, 2] such that w ∈ Ap/σ, which is possible by Proposition 2.1(ii). By Lemma 4.3 we know that m ∈ Rσ(∆; Lb(X, Y )) with kmkRσ (∆;Lb(X,Y )) .s,σ kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )), so by Proposition 5.5 we obtain kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φp,s([w]Ap/s)kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 19 Next we consider the case p > s = 2. Observe that by [22, Proposition 5.3.16] it suffices to prove the result for the truncated multipliers mN := 1SN n=1 Jn m, n=1 is an arbitrary ordering of ∆. Since mN ∈ V s where ∆ = (Jn)∞ 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )) uniformly, without loss of generality we may work with an arbitrary decaying mul- tiplier m ∈ V s 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )). Fix w ∈ Ap/2. Then by Proposition 2.1(iii) there exists a δ > 0 such that w1+δ ∈ Ap/2. Take θ = p0 = (1 + δ)(1 − θ)p, and σ = 2 − θ. 2 p(cid:16)1 − 1 1 + δ(cid:17), Then θ ∈ (0, 1), σ ∈ (1, 2) and p0 = p + (p − 2)δ > p, so by the first case we have kTmkL(Lp0 (w;X),Lp0 (w;Y )) ≤ φp0,σ([w]Ap/2 )kmkV σ 0 (∆;Lb(X,Y )). Moreover by Plancherel's theorem (which is valid since X and Y are Hilbert spaces) we know that (5.1) Since kTmkL(L2(R;X),L2(R;Y )) ≤ kmkL∞(R;Lb(X,Y )). 1 [p0, 2] θ = 1 p(1 + δ) + 1 p − 1 p(1 + δ) = 1 p , we know by [49, Theorem 1.18.5] that Lp(w; X) = [Lp0(w1+δ, X), L2(R; X)]θ, and likewise with X replaced by Y . Moreover since [σ, ∞]θ = 2−θ 1−θ > 2 we have the continuous inclusions V 2(∆; Lb(X, Y )) ֒→ [V σ ֒→ [V σ 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )), V ∞ 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y ))]θ 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )), L∞(R; Lb(X, Y ))]θ by Theorem 4.4. By bilinear complex interpolation [3, §4.4] applied to the bilinear map (m, f ) 7→ Tmf we have boundedness of Tm : Lp(w; X) → Lp(w; Y ) with the required norm estimate. Finally we consider the case p = s ≥ 2; we will use another interpolation ar- gument. Fix w ∈ A1. Then by Proposition 2.1(iii) there exists a δ > 0 such that w1+δ ∈ A1. Fix p1 ∈ (s, s + (s − 1)δ). By the argument of the previous cases we have kTmkL(Lp1 (w1+δ;X),Lp1 (w1+δ;Y )) ≤ φp1,s([w]A1 )kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )). Let θ ∈ (0, 1) be such that θ(1 + δ)s = p1; such a θ exists since p1 < s + (s − 1)δ. Choose p0 ∈ (1, s) such that [p0, p1]θ = s. Such a p0 exists since p1 > s and [1, p1]θ < s. Indeed, the latter follows from s [1, p1]θ = s(1 − θ) + s θ p1 = s − p1 1 + δ + 1 1 + δ > 1. Since p0 < s ≤ 2 we have by duality with the previous cases (taking w = 1) that kTmkL(Lp0 (R;X),Lp0 (R;Y )) .p0,s kmkV s(∆;Lb(X,Y )). As before our choice of θ yields Ls(w; X) = [Lp0(R, X), Lp1(w1+δ; X)]θ, and likewise with X replaced by Y . Therefore by complex interpolation we have boundedness of Tm : Ls(w; X) → Ls(w; Y ) with the required norm estimate. Part (ii): The case p = 2 is clear from (5.1) and the embedding of the V s classes in L∞. For p > 2 we may assume without loss of generality that m ∈ 20 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR V s 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )) as in part (i). Moreover, by embedding of the V s classes, we may assume that s > 2. = p. Such a t exists Let σ ∈(cid:0)s,(cid:0) 1 since p > 2 and 2 − 1 p(cid:1)−1(cid:1) and fix t ∈ (2, ∞) such that [2, t] σ 2 1 p = 1 [2, t] σ 2 = 1 2 − 1 σ + 2 σ 1 t , which implies that 1 t = 2 s(cid:16) 1 p + 1 σ − 1 2(cid:17) > 0. Using the boundedness properties V ∞ 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )) × L2(R; X) → L2(R; Y ) V 2 0 (∆; Lb(X, Y )) × Lt(R; X) → Lt(R; Y ) and of the bilinear map (m, f ) 7→ Tmf , which follow from (5.1) and part (i) respectively, we have boundedness of Tm : Lp(w; X) → Lp(w; Y ) with the required norm estimate by bilinear complex interpolation [3, §4.4]. Here we use [49, Theorem 1.18.4] and Theorem 4.4 to identify the interpolation spaces as before. The case p < 2 follows by a duality argument. (cid:3) Remark 5.6. (1) If the multiplier is scalar-valued and X = Y , then Theorem 5.4 follows simply from the scalar case and a standard Hilbert space tensor extension argument (see [22, Theorem 2.1.9]). (2) As in [27, Theorem A], a weighted version of Theorem 5.4(ii) can be proved, but we omit it to prevent things from getting too complicated. 5.2. Multipliers in UMD Banach function spaces. We now turn to our main result (Theorem 5.8). Its proof is inspired by that of [24, Theorem 2.3], which is a generalisation of the Hilbert space result in Theorem 5.4. Besides the regularity assumption on the multiplier as in the Hilbert space case, we will need an ℓ2(ℓq)- boundedness assumption. We first prove a result for R-class multipliers, analogous to Proposition 5.5. Proposition 5.7. Let q ∈ (1, 2], p ∈ (q, ∞), and w ∈ Ap/q. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces with X q ∈ UMD and Y ∈ UMD. Let T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) be absolutely convex and ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded, and suppose m ∈ Rq(∆; T ). Then kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,p,q([w]Ap/q )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ )kmkRq(∆;T ). Proof. Fix ε > 0 and let f ∈ Lp(w; X). We begin as in the proof of Proposition 5.5, which began as in the proof of [24, Theorem 2.3]: we assume that the dyadic Littlewood -- Paley decomposition of f has finitely many nonzero terms and set ∆f = {J ∈ ∆ : SJ f 6= 0}. For each J ∈ ∆f let mJ = NXk=1 λkaJ k , aJ k = XI∈J J k cJ,k I 1I FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 21 be a Rq(J; T )-atomic decomposition of the restriction mJ with λk independent of J, with each J J k finite, and with NXk=1 λk ≤ (1 + ε)kmkRq (∆;Lb(X,Y )). As before, SJ Tm = TmSJ . By the Littlewood -- Paley theorem for UMD Banach function spaces (see [1, Proposition 6.1]), using that Y ∈ UMD and w ∈ Ap/q ⊂ Ap, we have We estimate the sum on the right hand side by k k cJ,k cJ,k TmSJ f 2(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) I SI f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) NXk=1 λk XI∈J J λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) XI∈J J I SI f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) I kT (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) T(cid:1)1/q(cid:0) XI∈J J q′(cid:17)2/q′(cid:19)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) SI f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) cJ,k I SI f kcJ,k . k 2(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) 2(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) . q′(cid:1)1/q′(cid:17)2(cid:19)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;Y ) kTmf kLp(w;Y ) ≤ φY,p([w]Ap )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f = φY,p([w]Ap )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) NXk=1 ≤ φY,p([w]Ap ) k ≤ cJ,k I SI f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) XI∈J J NXk=1 λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:18) XJ∈∆f(cid:16)(cid:0) XI∈J J NXk=1 λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:18) XJ∈∆f(cid:16) XI∈J J (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) NXk=1 ≤ k k kcJ,k I kq cJ,k I kcJ,k I kT By the definition of the Minkowski norm, the operators cJ,k so by ℓ2(ℓq′ )-boundedness of T we have I /kcJ,k I kT all lie in T , kTmf kLp(w;Y ) ≤ φY,p([w]Ap )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ ) By Theorem 5.2, NXk=1 λk(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:0) XI∈J J k SI f q′(cid:1)2/q′(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;X) . (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) XJ∈∆f(cid:0) XI∈J J k SI f q′(cid:1)2/q′(cid:17)1/2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(w;X) ≤ φX,p,q([w]Ap/q )kf kLp(w;X). k=1 λk ≤ (1 + ε)kmkRq(∆;T ) and ε > 0 was arbitrary, this finishes the (cid:3) Since PN proof. Our main multiplier theorem follows easily. Recall that w ∈ αp,q if and only if w1−p′ ∈ Ap′/q′ with [w]αp,q := [w1−p′ ]Ap′/q′ . Theorem 5.8. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces, and let T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) be absolutely convex. Let q ∈ (1, 2], s ∈ [1, q) and m ∈ V s(∆; T ). 22 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR (i) Suppose that X q ∈ UMD, Y ∈ UMD, and T is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded. Then for all p ∈ (q, ∞) and w ∈ Ap/q we have kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,p,q([w]Ap/q )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ )kmkV s(∆;T ). (ii) Suppose that X ∈ UMD, (Y ∗)q ∈ UMD, T is ℓ2(ℓq)-bounded, and m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then for all p ∈ (1, q′) and w ∈ αp,q′ we have kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,p,q([w]αp,q )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq)kmkV s(∆;T ). Proof. The first part follows directly from Proposition 5.7 and Lemma 4.3. For the second part a standard duality argument shows that kTmkL(Lp(w;X),Lp(w;Y )) ≤ kTm∗ kL(Lp′ (w1−p′ ;Y ∗),Lp′ (w1−p′ ;X ∗)), with m∗ : R → span(T ∗) defined by m∗(t) = m(t)∗ for all t ∈ R. Applying the first part to m∗, using Proposition 3.6 to show that T ∗ is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded and noting that m∗ ∈ V q(∆; T ∗), completes the proof. (cid:3) If q = 2 and w = 1 in Theorem 5.8, we recover [24, Corollary 2.5] for Banach function spaces, except for the endpoint p = 2, which is missing since we worked in the weighted setting. If the multiplier is scalar-valued and X = Y , the result was proved in [1] using vector-valued extrapolation. Remark 5.9. The ℓ2(ℓq′ )-boundedness assumption in Theorem 5.8 arises naturally from the proof. It is known that boundedness of Tm implies R-boundedness -- and thus ℓ2-boundedness if X has finite cotype -- of the image of the Lebesgue points of m (see [13] or [22, Theorem 5.3.15]). However, ℓ2(ℓq′ )-boundedness is not necessary, as may be seen by considering m = nS where n ∈ Rq(∆) is a scalar multiplier and S : X → Y is a bounded linear operator. In this case Tm will be bounded, but {S} need not be ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded for q 6= 2 (see [28, Example 2.16]). Using complex interpolation, the reverse Holder inequality, and the openness of the UMD property, we can obtain a result for the endpoint p = q = s in Theorem 5.8. Proposition 5.10. Let X and Y be Banach function spaces. Let q, r ∈ (1, 2) and suppose that X q ∈ UMD and (Y ∗)r ∈ UMD. Let T ⊂ L(X, Y ) be absolutely convex and both ℓ2(ℓq′ )- and ℓ2(ℓr)-bounded. Let s = min{q, r} and suppose that m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then for all w ∈ A1, kTmkL(Lq(w;X),Lq(w;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,q,r([w]A1 ) max{[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ ), [T ]ℓ2(ℓr)}kmkV s(∆;T ). Proof. Fix w ∈ A1, so that by Proposition 2.1(iii) there exists an δ > 0 such that w1+δ ∈ A1. By the openness of the UMD property we know that there exist q0 ∈ (q, q + (q − 1)δ) and r0 ∈ (r, ∞) such that X q0, (Y ∗)r0 ∈ UMD. By Corollary 3.8 we know that T is ℓ2(ℓq′ 0)- and T is ℓ2(ℓr′ 0)-bounded with (5.2) [T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ 0 ) ≤ [T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ ) and [T ]ℓ2(ℓr′ 0 ) ≤ [T ]ℓ2(ℓr′ ). Fix p1 ∈ (q0, q + (q − 1)δ). By Theorem 5.8(i) and (5.2) we know that kTmkL(Lp1 (w1+δ;X),Lp1 (w1+δ ;Y )) ≤ φX,Y,p1,q0 ([w]A1 )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ )kmkV s(∆;T ). FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 23 Let θ ∈ (0, 1) be such that θ(1 + δ)q = p1, and fix p0 ∈ (1, q) such that [p0, p1]θ = q. These parameters exist by the same argument as in Theorem 5.4(i). Since p0 < r′ 0, we know by Theorem 5.8(ii) and (5.2) that kTmkL(Lp0 (R;X),Lp0 (R;Y )) .X,Y,p0,r0 [T ]ℓ2(ℓr)kmkV s(∆;T ). Therefore by complex interpolation as in Theorem 5.4(i) we have boundedness of Tm : Lq(w; X) → Lq(w; Y ) with the required norm estimate. (cid:3) When dealing with operator-valued multipliers m, to check the hypotheses of our results, one needs an ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded subset T ⊂ Lb(X, Y ) whose span contains m(R), such that m has the appropriate regularity when measured with respect to the Minkowski norm induced by T . An obvious naıve choice is to assume that m(R) is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded and to take T = m(R), but m may not be sufficiently regular with respect to the T -Minkowski norm. By making T larger m becomes more regular in the T -Minkowski norm, but enlarging T may violate ℓ2(ℓq′ )-boundedness. Constructing such a set T given a general multiplier m is quite subtle (except of course in the scalar case, where the Minkowski norm on the one-dimensional span of m is equivalent to the absolute value on C). Below we give an example where these problems may be surmounted using extrapolation techniques. Proposition 5.11. Let α ∈ (0, 1]. Suppose that m : R → L(Σ(Rd), L0(Rd)) and that for some p0 ∈ (1, ∞) and all w ∈ Ap0 the following Holder-type condition is satisfied: (5.3) sup x∈R km(x)kL(Lp0 (w)) + sup J∈∆ Jα[m]C α(J;Lb(Lp0 (w))) ≤ φ([w]Ap0 ). Then there exists a subset T ⊂ L(Σ(Rd), L0(Rd)) such that m ∈ V 1/α(∆; T ) and T is ℓu(ℓv)-bounded on Lp(w) for all p, u, v ∈ (1, ∞) and w ∈ Ap, with Proof. For each J ∈ ∆ define [T ]ℓu(ℓv) ≤ φp,u,v([w]Ap ). T (J) := m(J) ∪n m(x) − m(y) x − yα Jα : x 6= y ∈ Jo, and set T := SJ∈∆ T (J). Note that m(R) ⊂ T . We will show that T has the desired properties. Since m(x) ∈ T and m(x)−m(y) Jα ∈ T for all J ∈ ∆ and all x 6= y ∈ J, by the definition of the Minkowski and Holder norms, we have km(x)kT ≤ 1 and Jα[m]C α(J;T ) ≤ 1, from which it follows directly that m ∈ V 1/α(∆; T ). x−yα By scalar extrapolation (see [15, Theorems 3.9 and Corollary 3.14]), we have (5.3) for all p ∈ (1, ∞), which implies that kT f kLp(w) ≤ φp([w]Ap )kf kLp(w) for all p ∈ (1, ∞), w ∈ Ap(Rd), f ∈ Lp(w), and T ∈ T . Thus the ℓu(ℓv)- boundedness result follows directly from Proposition 3.5. (cid:3) In the next example we specialise to the case X = Y = Lr and s ∈ (1, 2). Results for s ∈ [2, ∞) will be presented in Example 5.16. Note that the ℓ2-boundedness or ℓ2(ℓs)-boundedness assumptions can be deduced for instance from weight-uniform Holder estimates as in Proposition 5.11. 24 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Example 5.12. Let p, r ∈ (1, ∞) and let T ⊂ Lb(Lr) be absolutely convex. Let s ∈ (1, 2) and m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then Tm is bounded on Lp(w; Lr) in each of the following cases: (i) If r = 2, (a) p ∈ [s, ∞) and w ∈ Ap/s. (b) p ∈ (1, s′] and w ∈ αp,s′ . (ii) If r ∈ (2, ∞), (a) p ∈ (2, ∞), w ∈ Ap/2 and T is ℓ2-bounded. (b) p ∈ (1, r), s ∈ (1, r′), w ∈ αp,s′ and T is ℓ2(ℓs)-bounded. (iii) If r ∈ (1, 2), (a) p ∈ (1, 2), w ∈ αp,2 and T is ℓ2-bounded. (b) p ∈ (r, ∞), s ∈ (1, r), w ∈ Ap/s and T is ℓ2(ℓs′ )-bounded. Proof. The case (i)(a) follows from Theorem 5.4 and the case (i)(b) from a duality argument. The cases (ii)(a) and (iii)(a) follow from Theorem 5.8(i) and (ii) with q = 2. For (iii)(b) choose q ∈ (s, r) such that w ∈ Ap/q. By Corollary 3.8, T is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded, and therefore Theorem 5.8(i) applies. Similarly, (ii)(b) follows from Theorem 5.8(ii). (cid:3) There is some overlap between the cases (a) and (b) in Example 5.12, but the classes of weights considered are difficult to compare. For X = Lr, we can exploit that we always have either X 2 ∈ UMD or (X ∗)2 ∈ UMD. This is not possible for general UMD Banach function spaces, which restricts the class of multipliers that can be handled by our results, as shown in the following example. Example 5.13. Let p ∈ (1, ∞), r ∈ (1, 2), and let T ⊂ Lb(Lr ⊕ Lr′ ) be absolutely convex. Let s ∈ (1, r) and m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then Tm is bounded on Lp(w; Lr ⊕ Lr′ ) in each of the following cases: (i) p ∈ (r, ∞), w ∈ Ap/s and T is ℓ2(ℓs′ )-bounded. (ii) p ∈ (1, r′), w ∈ αp,s′ and T is ℓ2(ℓs)-bounded. The result follows from Theorem 5.8 in the same way as in Example 5.12. 5.3. Multipliers in intermediate UMD Banach function spaces. We can prove stronger results, allowing for multipliers of lower regularity, if we consider 'intermediate' spaces X = [Y, H]θ where Y q ∈ UMD for some q ∈ (1, 2] and H is a Hilbert space. For example, when r ∈ (2, ∞), we have Lr = [Lr0, L2]θ for some r0 ∈ (r, ∞) and θ ∈ (0, 1). In this case Y = Lr0 satisfies the conditions of Theorem 5.8(i) with q = 2 and with H = L2 we can use Theorem 5.4. In order to use interpolation methods we will need that span(T ) with the Minkow- ski norm is a Banach space, i.e. that T is a Banach disc (see below Definition 4.1). Theorem 5.14. Let p ∈ (1, ∞), q ∈ (1, 2] and θ ∈ (0, 1). Let Y and H be Banach function spaces over the same measure space, with Y q ∈ UMD, H a Hilbert space, and Y ∩ H dense in both Y and H. Let X = [Y, H]θ. Suppose T ⊂ Lb(Y ∩ H) is a Banach disc which is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded on Y and uniformly bounded on H. Let s ∈ (1, ∞) and suppose that m ∈ V s(∆; T ). (i) If s < min{p, [q, 2]θ} and s ≥ [q, 1]θ, then kTmkL(Lp(w;X)) ≤ φY,p,q,s,θ([w]Ap/s )kmkV s(∆;T )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ ) for all w ∈ Ap/s. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 25 (ii) If 1 s and p > [q, 1]θ, then > maxn 1 [q, 2]θ − 1 p , 1 − θ q , 1 p − θ 2o kTmkL(Lp(R;X)) .Y,p,q,s,θ kmkV s(∆;T )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ ). The allowable exponents (p, s) in Theorem 5.14 are shown in Figure 2. The symmetry in Figure 2 is due to the equalities θ 2 = 1 [∞, 2]θ − 0 = 1 [q, 1]θ − 1 [q, 2]θ = 1 [q, 2]θ − 1 [q, ∞]θ and 1 − θ q = 1 [q, ∞]θ − 0 = 1 [q, 2]θ − 1 [∞, 2]θ . Figure 2. Allowable exponents for Theorem 5.14: the weighted case (i) dark shaded, the unweighted case (ii) light shaded. 1/s 1 1 [q,1]θ 1 [q,2]θ 1 [q,∞]θ 0 0 1 1 [∞,2]θ [q,2]θ 1 [q,1]θ 1 1/p Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 5.4, it suffices to consider decaying multipliers m ∈ V s 0 (∆; T ). Moreover, by Lemma 4.3, Proposition 2.1(ii) and the openness of the upper bound assumptions on s, it suffices to consider m ∈ Rs 0(∆; T ). Through- out the proof we let rs,θ,q ∈ [1, ∞) be the unique number such that which exists if [q, 1]θ ≤ s < [q, ∞]θ. [q, rs,θ,q]θ = s, Part (i): First assume s 6= [q, 1]θ, so that rs,θ,q > 1. Fix a weight w ∈ A1. Take t > q and define σ = [t, rs,θ,q]θ > s. By Proposition 5.7 we have boundedness of the bilinear map Rq 0(∆; T ) × Lt(w; Y ) → Lt(w; Y ), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf 26 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR using that T is ℓ2(ℓq′ rs,θ,q ≤ 2, so we have by Theorem 5.4(i) and Lemma 4.3 that the bilinear map )-bounded on Y . Moreover, since s ≤ [q, 2]θ, we know that Rrs,θ,q 0 (∆; T ) × Lrs,θ,q (w; H) → Lrs,θ,q (w; H), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf is bounded, using (5.4) kmkRs(∆;Lb(H)) . kmkRs(∆;T ) by the uniform boundedness of T on H. We define a bilinear map 0(∆; T ) ∩ Rrs,θ,q 0 (cid:0)Rs (∆; T )(cid:1)×(cid:0)Lt(w; Y ) ∩ Lrs,θ,q (w; H)(cid:1) → Lr(w; Y ) ∩ Lrs,θ,q (w; H), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf. This is well-defined as it is the extension of the map (m, f ) 7→ Tmf defined for m ∈ Rs∧rs,θ,q (∆; T ) and f ∈ S(R; Y ∩ H). Here we use that Y ∩ H is dense in both Y and H. By bilinear complex interpolation [3, §4.4] we have boundedness of 0 [Rq 0(∆; T ), Rrs,θ,q 0 (∆; T )]θ×[Lt(w; Y ), Lrr,θ,q (w; H)]θ → [Lt(w; Y ), Lrs,θ,q (w; H)]θ, (m, f ) 7→ Tmf. Here we use that the Minkowski norm on the linear span of T is complete, i.e. that T ⊂ Lb(Y ∩ H) is a Banach disc. By Theorem 4.4 we have R[q,rs,θ,q]θ 0 (∆; T ) ֒→ [Rq 0(∆; T ), Rrs,θ,q 0 (∆; T )]θ. Using this embedding and complex interpolation of weighted Bochner spaces (see [49, Theorem 1.18.5]; note that the proof simply extends to the case X0 6= X1), we get boundedness of Rs 0(∆; T ) × Lσ(w; X) → Lσ(w; X), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf with norm estimate kkTmf kX kLσ(w) ≤ φY,q,s,t,σ,θ([w]A1 )kmkRs(∆;T )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ )kkf kX kLσ(w) for all w ∈ A1 and all simple functions f : R → X. By scalar-valued extrapolation (see [15, Theorems 3.9 and Corollary 3.14]) and density of the simple functions we deduce kTmf kLp(w;X) ≤ φY,p,q,s,t,σ,θ([w]Ap/σ )kmkRs(∆;T )[T ]ℓ2(ℓq′ )kf kLp(w;X) for all p ∈ [σ, ∞) and all w ∈ Ap/σ. Taking t arbitrarily close to q and using Proposition 2.1(ii) proves the case [q, 1]θ 6= s. Next if [q, 1]θ = s and w ∈ Ap/s, then by Proposition 2.1(ii) we can choose t ∈ (s, [q, 2]θ) such that w ∈ Ap/t. By the previous case Tm is bounded on Lp(w; X) for all m ∈ Rt(∆; T ) and hence also for m ∈ Rs(∆; T ), which completes the proof. Part (ii): Without loss of generality we may assume that s > [q, 2]θ by embed- ding of the Rs-spaces and the fact that 1 [q, 2]θ > maxn 1 [q, 2]θ − 1 p , 1 − θ q , 1 p − θ 2o for p > [q, 1]θ. Note that this implies that rs,θ,q > 2. We will consider three cases: FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 27 Case 1: p ≥ [∞, 2]θ. Since 1 1 pθ > θ(cid:16) θ 2 + 1 − θ q − 1 s(cid:17) = 1 2 − 1 rs,θ,q 2 − 1 rs,θ,q we can find a p1 > pθ ≥ 2 such that p1 < p and p1 < ( 1 know by Theorem 5.4(ii), using (5.4), that the bilinear map )−1. Therefore we Rrs,θ,q 0 (∆; T ) × Lp1(R; H) → Lp1(R; H), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf is bounded. Since p < [∞, p1]θ we can find a p0 ∈ (p, ∞) such that p = [p0, p1]θ. By Proposition 5.7 we have boundedness of the bilinear map Rq 0(∆; T ) × Lp0(R; Y ) → Lp0(R; Y ), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf, using that T is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded on Y . We can now finish the proof using bilinear complex interpolation, Theorem 4.4 and complex interpolation of Bochner spaces as in the first part. (∆; T ) ֒→ L∞(R; T ). Therefore Case 2: [q, 2]θ < p < [∞, 2]. Note that Rrs,θ,q by Plancherel's theorem and (5.4) the bilinear map (∆; T ) × L2(R; H) → L2(R; H), Rrs,θ,q 0 0 (m, f ) 7→ Tmf is bounded. Since [q, 2]θ < p < [∞, 2]θ we can find a p0 ∈ (q, ∞) such that p = [p0, 2]θ. By Proposition 5.7 we have boundedness of the bilinear map Rq 0(∆; T ) × Lp0(R; Y ) → Lp0(R; Y ), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf, using that T is ℓ2(ℓq′ )-bounded on Y . The proof can now be finished as before. Case 3: [q, 1]θ < p ≤ [q, 2]. Let p ∈ (1, 2] be such that p = [q, p]θ. Then since 1 θ(cid:16) θ 2 + < 1 p 1 − θ 1 2 2 + 1 we can find a 1 < p1 < p such that p1 > ( 1 rs,θ,q Theorem 5.4(ii), using (5.4), that the bilinear map (∆; T ) × Lp1(R; H) → Lp1(R; H), Rrs,θ,q 1 s − + q (cid:17) = 0 1 rs,θ,q )−1. Therefore we know by (m, f ) 7→ Tmf is bounded. Since p1 < p we can find a p0 ∈ (q, ∞) such that p = [p0, p1]θ. By Proposition 5.7 we have boundedness of the bilinear map Rq 0(∆; T ) × Lp0(R; Y ) → Lp0(R; Y ), (m, f ) 7→ Tmf, again using that T is ℓ2(ℓq′ before. )-bounded on Y . The proof can again be finished as (cid:3) The conditions on m in Theorem 5.14(ii) with q = 2 are less restrictive than the conditions of [24, Theorem 3.6], which allows for Banach spaces with the LPRp property. The proof of Theorem 5.14(ii) can also be used to improve the conditions of [24, Theorem 3.6] Remark 5.15. A weighted variant of part (ii) of Theorem 5.14 holds for an ap- propriate class of weights, by using a weighted variant of Theorem 5.4(ii) (see [27, Theorem A(ii)]) and limited range extrapolation (see [15, Theorem 3.31]). However this involves a reverse Holder assumption on the weight or the dual weight, so the technical details are therefore left to the interested reader. We continue with an application to X = Lr for s ∈ [2, ∞). Results for s ∈ (1, 2) have been previously covered by Example 5.12. 28 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR Example 5.16. Let (Ω, µ) be a measure space and let p, r ∈ (1, ∞). Let T ⊂ L(Σ(Ω), L0(Ω)) be absolutely convex and ℓ2-bounded on Lt(Ω) for all t ∈ (1, ∞). Let s ∈ [2, ∞) and assume m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then Tm is bounded on Lp(R; Lr(Ω)) in each of the following cases: (i) r ∈ [2, ∞) and 1 (ii) r ∈ (1, 2] and 1 s > max(cid:8) 1 s > max(cid:8) 1 p − 1 r , 1 2 − 1 p , 1 2 − 1 r }. r − 1 2 , 1 r − 1 2 , 1 p − 1 p }. Proof. It suffices to prove (i), as (ii) follows from a duality argument. Let T be the closure of T in Lb(L2(Ω)). Then T is a Banach disc. Moreover, by Lemma 3.9 we know that T ⊆ Lb(Lt(Ω)) is ℓ2-bounded for all t ∈ (1, ∞). We will check the conditions of Theorem 5.14(ii) with T , q = 2, Y = Lt(Ω) for an appropriate t > r and H = L2(Ω). Choose θ ∈ (0, 2 r ) such that 1 s > maxn 1 2 − 1 p , 1 − θ 2 , 1 p − θ 2o. Since s ≥ 2 it follows that p > [2, 1]θ. Now the result follows by choosing t > r such that r = [t, 2]θ. (cid:3) In a similar way we obtain the following from Theorem 5.14(i) and duality. This partly improves Example 5.12. s ≤ 1 r + 1 2 and w ∈ Ap/s. Example 5.17. Let (Ω, µ) be a measure space and let p, r ∈ (1, ∞). Let T ⊂ L(Σ(Ω), L0(Ω)) be absolutely convex and ℓ2-bounded on Lt(Ω) for all t ∈ [2, ∞). Let s ∈ (1, 2) and assume m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then Tm is bounded on Lp(w; Lr(Ω)) if p < 1 1 5.4. Multipliers in intermediate UMD Banach spaces. In this section we consider general UMD Banach spaces (not just Banach function spaces) and use interpolation to improve the conditions of Theorem 5.1 considerably, assuming X is an interpolation space between a UMD space and a Hilbert space, and using the same interpolation scheme as in Theorem 5.14. This result is new even for scalar- valued multipliers, and it implies sufficient conditions for Fourier multipliers on the space of Schatten class operators. Theorem 5.18. Let p ∈ (1, ∞) and θ ∈ (0, 1). Let Y and H be an interpolation couple, with Y ∈ UMD, H a Hilbert space, and Y ∩ H dense in both Y and H. Let X = [Y, H]θ. Suppose T ⊂ Lb(Y ∩ H) is a Banach disc which is R-bounded on Y and uniformly bounded on H. Let s ∈ (1, ∞) and suppose that m ∈ V s(∆; T ). (i) If 1/s > min{1/p, 1 − (θ/2)}, then kTmkL(Lp(w;X)) ≤ φY,p,s,θ([w]Ap/s )kmkV s(∆;T )[T ]R for all w ∈ Ap/s. (ii) If then 1 s > maxn1 − θ 2 − 1 p , 1 − θ, 1 p − θ 2o, kTmkL(Lp(R;X)) .Y,p,s,θ kmkV s(∆;T )[T ]R. The allowable exponents (p, s) above are shown in Figure 3. Proof. To prove the result one can argue as in Theorem 5.14 with q = 1, and using Theorem 5.1 instead of Proposition 5.7. (cid:3) FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 29 Figure 3. Allowable exponents for Theorem 5.18: the weighted case (i) dark shaded, the unweighted case (ii) light shaded. 1/s 1 1 − θ 2 1 − θ 0 0 θ 2 1 − θ 2 1/p 1 (i) r ∈ [2, ∞) and 1 s > maxn 1 s > maxn 1 p′ − 1 r − 1 r ,(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 p′ ,(cid:12)(cid:12) 1 r − 1 r − 1 p − 1 r − 1 ro. po. r′(cid:12)(cid:12), 1 r′(cid:12)(cid:12), 1 In the next example we apply Theorem 5.18 to operator-valued multipliers on the Schatten class operators C r ⊆ Lb(ℓ2) for r ∈ [1, ∞]. This is potentially useful for Schur multipliers (see [22, Theorem 5.4.3] and [44, Theorem 4]). For r ∈ (1, ∞) these spaces have the UMD property, and for p, q ∈ [1, ∞] one has C [p,q]θ = [C p, C q]θ (see [22, Propositions 5.4.2 and D.3.1]). Example 5.19. Let X = C r with p, r ∈ (1, ∞) and T ⊆ L(C t) be absolutely convex and R-bounded for all t ∈ (1, ∞). Let s ∈ (1, ∞) and assume m ∈ V s(∆; T ). Then Tm is bounded on Lp(R; C r) in each of the following cases: (ii) r ∈ (1, 2] and 1 In particular, if p ∈ [r ∧ r′, r ∨ r′] then Tm is bounded on Lp(R; C r) if r ∈ (1, ∞) and 1 s > 1 r − 1 r′ . Proof. The result follows from Theorem 5.18(ii) by arguing as in Example 5.16. A similar result can be derived on Lp(w; C r) by Theorem 5.18(i). (cid:3) References [1] A. Amenta, E. Lorist, and M. Veraar. Rescaled extrapolation for vector-valued functions. arXiv:1703.06044, 2017. [2] W. Arendt and S. Bu. The operator-valued Marcinkiewicz multiplier theorem and maximal regularity. Math. Z., 240(2):311 -- 343, 2002. [3] J. Bergh and J. Lofstrom. Interpolation spaces. An introduction. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1976. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, No. 223. [4] E. Berkson and T. A. Gillespie. Spectral decompositions and harmonic analysis on UMD spaces. Studia Math., 112(1):13 -- 49, 1994. [5] E. Berkson, T. A. Gillespie, and J. L. Torrea. Vector valued transference. In P. Liu, editor, Functional Space Theory and its applications (Wuhan, 2003), pages 1 -- 27, 2003. 30 ALEX AMENTA, EMIEL LORIST, AND MARK VERAAR [6] J. Bourgain. Some remarks on Banach spaces in which martingale difference sequences are unconditional. Ark. Mat., 21(2):163 -- 168, 1983. [7] J. Bourgain. Vector-valued singular integrals and the H 1-BMO duality. In Probability theory and harmonic analysis (Cleveland, Ohio, 1983), volume 98 of Monogr. Textbooks Pure Appl. Math., pages 1 -- 19. Dekker, New York, 1986. [8] A. V. Buhvalov. The duality of functors that are generated by spaces of vector-valued func- tions. Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat., 39(6):1284 -- 1309, 1438, 1975. [9] D. L. Burkholder. A geometric condition that implies the existence of certain singular integrals of Banach-space-valued functions. In Conference on harmonic analysis in honor of Antoni Zygmund, Vol. I, II (Chicago, Ill., 1981), Wadsworth Math. Ser., pages 270 -- 286. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, 1983. [10] D. L. Burkholder. Martingales and singular integrals in Banach spaces. In Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces, Vol. I, pages 233 -- 269. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2001. [11] A.-P. Calder´on. Intermediate spaces and interpolation, the complex method. Studia Math., 24:113 -- 190, 1964. [12] P. Cl´ement, B. de Pagter, F. Sukochev, and H. Witvliet. Schauder decompositions and mul- tiplier theorems. Studia Math., 138(2):135 -- 163, 2000. [13] P. Cl´ement and J. Pruss. An operator-valued transference principle and maximal regularity on vector-valued Lp-spaces. In Evolution equations and their applications in physical and life sciences (Bad Herrenalb, 1998), volume 215 of Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., pages 67 -- 87. Dekker, New York, 2001. [14] R. Coifman, J. L. Rubio de Francia, and S. Semmes. Multiplicateurs de Fourier de Lp(R) et estimations quadratiques. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S´er. I Math., 306(8):351 -- 354, 1988. [15] D. V. Cruz-Uribe, J. M. Martell, and C. P´erez. Weights, extrapolation and the theory of Rubio de Francia, volume 215 of Operator Theory: Advances and Applications. Birkhauser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2011. [16] H. G. Dales, N. J. Laustsen, T. Oikhberg, and V. G Troitsky. Multi-norms and banach lattices. Dissertationes Mathematicae (Rozprawy Matematyczne), 2016. [17] S. Fackler, T.P. Hytonen, and N. Lindemulder. Weighted estimates for operator-valued mul- tipliers. Preprint. [18] C. Gallarati, E. Lorist, and M. C. Veraar. On the ℓs-boundedness of a family of integral operators. Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 32(4):1277 -- 1294, 2016. [19] T. A. Gillespie and J. L. Torrea. Transference of a Littlewood-Paley-Rubio inequality and dimension free estimates. Rev. Un. Mat. Argentina, 45(1):1 -- 6 (2005), 2004. [20] L. Grafakos. Modern Fourier analysis, volume 250 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, second edition, 2009. [21] R. Haller, H. Heck, and A. Noll. Mikhlin's theorem for operator-valued Fourier multipliers in n variables. Math. Nachr., 244:110 -- 130, 2002. [22] T. P. Hytonen, J. M. A. M. van Neerven, M. C. Veraar, and L. Weis. Analysis in Banach Spaces. Volume I: Martingales and Littlewood-Paley Theory, volume 63 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. Springer International Publishing, 2016. [23] T. P. Hytonen, J. M. A. M. van Neerven, M. C. Veraar, and L. Weis. Analysis in Banach Spaces. Volume II: Probabilistic Methods and Operator Theory. In preparation., 2017. [24] T. P. Hytonen and D. Potapov. Vector-valued multiplier theorems of Coifman-Rubio de Francia-Semmes type. Arch. Math. (Basel), 87(3):245 -- 254, 2006. [25] T. P. Hytonen, J. L. Torrea, and D. V. Yakubovich. The Littlewood-Paley-Rubio de Francia property of a Banach space for the case of equal intervals. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, 139(4):819 -- 832, 2009. [26] S. V. Kislyakov. The Littlewood-Paley theorem for arbitrary intervals: weighted estimates. J. Math. Sci (N. Y.), 156(5):824 -- 833, 2009. [27] S. Kr´ol. Fourier multipliers on weighted Lp spaces. Math. Res. Lett., 21(4):807 -- 830, 2014. [28] P. Kunstmann and A. Ullmann. R s-sectorial operators and generalized Triebel-Lizorkin spaces. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 20(1):135 -- 185, 2014. [29] P. Kunstmann and L. Weis. Maximal Lp-regularity for parabolic equations, Fourier mul- tiplier theorems and H∞-functional calculus. In Functional analytic methods for evolution equations, volume 1855 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 65 -- 311. Springer, Berlin, 2004. FOURIER MULTIPLIERS IN BANACH FUNCTION SPACES 31 [30] S. Kwapie´n. On operators factorizable through Lp space. In Actes du Colloque d'Analyse Fonctionnelle de Bordeaux (Univ. de Bordeaux, 1971), pages 215 -- 225. Bull. Soc. Math. France, M´em. No. 31 -- 32. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1972. [31] S. Kwapie´n, M. C. Veraar, and L. Weis. R-boundedness versus γ-boundedness. Ark. Mat., 54(1):125 -- 145, 2016. [32] M.T. Lacey. Issues related to Rubio de Francia's Littlewood-Paley inequality, volume 2 of New York Journal of Mathematics. NYJM Monographs. State University of New York, University at Albany, Albany, NY, 2007. [33] M. Ledoux and M. Talagrand. Probability in Banach spaces, volume 23 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. Isoperimetry and processes. [34] N. Lindemulder. Parabolic initial-boundary value problems with inhomogeneous data. Mas- ter's thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands, 2014. [35] N. Lindemulder. Banach space-valued extensions of linear operators on L∞. In Ordered Struc- tures and Applications (Positivity VII, Zaanen Centennial Conference). Birkhauser Verlag, 2016. [36] J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri. Classical Banach spaces. II, volume 97 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1979. Function spaces. [37] P. Meyer-Nieberg. Banach lattices. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. [38] M. Meyries and M. C. Veraar. Pointwise multiplication on vector-valued function spaces with power weights. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 21(1):95 -- 136, 2015. [39] S. Montgomery-Smith. Stability and dichotomy of positive semigroups on Lp. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 124(8):2433 -- 2437, 1996. [40] J. M. A. M. van Neerven, M. C. Veraar, and L. Weis. On the R-boundedness of stochastic convolution operators. Positivity, 19(2):355 -- 384, 2015. [41] J. M. A. M. van Neerven and L. Weis. Stochastic integration of functions with values in a Banach space. Studia Math., 166(2):131 -- 170, 2005. [42] P. P´erez Carreras and J. Bonet. Barrelled locally convex spaces, volume 131 of North-Holland Mathematics Studies. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1987. Notas de Matem´atica [Mathematical Notes], 113. [43] G. Pisier. Martingales in Banach spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. [44] D. Potapov and F. Sukochev. Operator-Lipschitz functions in Schatten-von Neumann classes. Acta Math., 207(2):375 -- 389, 2011. [45] D. Potapov, F. Sukochev, and Q. Xu. On the vector-valued Littlewood-Paley-Rubio de Fran- cia inequality. Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 28(3):839 -- 856, 2012. [46] J. L. Rubio de Francia. A Littlewood-Paley inequality for arbitrary intervals. Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 1(2):1 -- 14, 1985. [47] J. L. Rubio de Francia. Martingale and integral transforms of Banach space valued functions. In Probability and Banach spaces (Zaragoza, 1985), volume 1221 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 195 -- 222. Springer, Berlin, 1986. [48] Z. Strkalj and L. Weis. On operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 359(8):3529 -- 3547 (electronic), 2007. [49] H. Triebel. Interpolation theory, function spaces, differential operators, volume 18 of North- Holland Mathematical Library. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York, 1978. [50] L. Weis. A new approach to maximal Lp-regularity. In Evolution equations and their appli- cations in physical and life sciences (Bad Herrenalb, 1998), volume 215 of Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., pages 195 -- 214. Dekker, New York, 2001. [51] L. Weis. Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems and maximal Lp-regularity. Math. Ann., 319(4):735 -- 758, 2001. [52] Q. Xu. Fourier multipliers for Lp(Rn) via q-variation. Pacific J. Math., 176(1):287 -- 296, 1996. Delft Institute of Applied Mathematics, Delft University of Technology, P.O. Box 5031, 2600 GA Delft, The Netherlands E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected]
1810.01260	1	1810	2018-10-02T14:01:06	H\"ormander condition for pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator	[ "math.FA", "math.AP", "math.SP" ]	In this paper we prove H\"ormander-Mihlin multiplier theorems for pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator (also called the Hermite operator). Our approach can be extended to also obtain the $L^p$-boundedness results for multilinear pseudo-multipliers. By using the Littlewood-Paley theorem associated to the harmonic oscillator we also give $L^p$-boundedness and $L^p$-compactness properties for multipliers. $(L^p,L^q)$-estimates for spectral pseudo-multipliers also are investigated.	math.FA	math	H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS ASSOCIATED TO THE HARMONIC OSCILLATOR DUV ´AN CARDONA AND MICHAEL RUZHANSKY Abstract. In this paper we prove Hormander-Mihlin multiplier theorems for pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator (also called the Hermite operator). Our approach can be extended to also obtain the Lp- boundedness results for multilinear pseudo-multipliers. By using the Littlewood- Paley theorem associated to the harmonic oscillator we also give Lp-boundedness and Lp-compactness properties for multipliers. (Lp, Lq)-estimates for spectral pseudo-multipliers also are investigated. Contents Introduction 1. 2. Boundedness of pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic (Lp, Lq)-boundedness of spectral pseudo-multipliers oscillator, Hormander condition 2.1. Hermite functions in Lp spaces 2.2. Hormander condition for pseudo-multipliers on Lp spaces 2.3. 2.4. Lower bounds for the operator norm of multipliers on Lp spaces 3. Compactness of pseudo-multipliers 3.1. L2-compactness of multipliers 3.2. Lp-compactness and Lp-boundedness for multipliers via Littlewood- Paley theory 4. Lp-boundedness for multilinear pseudo-multipliers References 1 6 7 9 16 20 21 21 22 24 32 1. Introduction In this paper we are interested in the Lp-boundedness of pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator (also called Hermite pseudo-multipliers) on Lp(Rn)-spaces. The harmonic oscillator is the fundamental operator of quantum mechanics defined by Hψ := (−∆x + x2)ψ, (1.1) Date: October 3, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 81Q10; Secondary 42C10, 35J10, 33C45. Key words and phrases. Pseudo-multiplier; Harmonic oscillator; Hermite functions; Hormander condition; Multilinear operator; Fourier multipliers. The second author was supported in parts by the FWO Odysseus Project, by the EPSRC Grant EP/R003025/1 and by the Leverhulme Research Grant RPG-2017-151. 1 2 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY i=1 x2 with x2 := Pn i . The harmonic oscillator extends to an unbounded self- adjoint operator on L2(Rn), and its spectrum consists of the discrete set λν := 2ν + n, ν ∈ Nn 0 (called Hermite functions) which provide an orthonormal basis of L2(Rn). Each Hermite function φν on Rn has the form 0 , with a set of real eigenfunctions φν, ν ∈ Nn φν := Πn j=1φνj , φνj (xj) := (2νj νj!√π)− 1 2 Hνj (xj)e− 1 2 x2 j , (1.2) where x = (x1, . . . , xn) ∈ Rn, ν = (ν1, . . . , νn) ∈ Nn 0 , and Hνj (xj) := (−1)νj ex2 j dk dxk j (e−x2 j ) denotes the Hermite polynomial of order νj. By the spectral theorem, for every f ∈ D(Rn) we have where bf (φν) is the Fourier-Hermite transform of f at ν defined by f (x)φν(x) dx. 0 Hf (x) = Xν∈Nn λνbf (φν)φν(x), (FHf )(ν) ≡ bf (φν) = (f, φν)L2(Rn) :=ZRn m(ν)bf (φν)φν(x), Tmf (x) := Xν∈Nn 0 A multiplier associated to the harmonic oscillator (or Hermite multiplier) is a linear operator Tm of the form (1.3) (1.4) (1.5) for every function f ∈ D(Rn). The discrete function m is called the symbol of the operator Tm. In particular, if m is a measurable function, the symbol of the spectral multiplier m(H) (defined by the functional calculus) is given by m(ν) := m(λν), so that the spectral multipliers are natural examples of multipli- ers associated to the harmonic oscillator. We can refer to e.g. Prugovecki [19] for the quantum mechanical aspects of the harmonic oscillators. Now, we present some historical results on the analysis of multipliers. If we denote by Pℓ the orthogonal projection to the subspace generated by the set {φν : ν = ℓ}, and m is a radial function in the sense that m(ν) = m(ν′) when ν = ν′, then the multiplier Tm can be written as Tm ≡ Tµf (x) := µ(ℓ)(Pℓf )(x), (1.6) ∞Xℓ=0 where µ(ν) = m(ν). An earlier result by G. Mauceri [16] (by using methods of Bonami-Clerc [2] and R. Strichartz [23]) states that the condition sup j 2j(k−1) X2j ≤N ≤2j+1 ∆k N µ(N) < ∞, (1.7) where 0 ≤ k ≤ n + 1, implies the boundedness of Tµ for all 1 < p < ∞. As it was pointed out in [29], the number of discrete derivatives k above can be taken in H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 3 the range 0 ≤ k ≤ [ 3n−2 [30]) states that if m satisfies the discrete Marcienkiewicz condition ] + 2. A remarkable result proved by S. Thangavelu (see 6 ∆α ν m(ν) ≤ Cα(1 + ν)−α, α ∈ Nn 0 , α ≤ [ n 2 ] + 1, (1.8) where ∆ν is the usual difference operator, then the corresponding multiplier Tm : Lp(Rn) → Lp(Rn) extends to a bounded operator for all 1 < p < ∞. This result is a discrete analogue of the result proved by Mihlin [17] for Fourier multipliers of the form a(ξ)F f (ξ)e−2πix·ξdξ, (1.9) Taf (x) =ZRn where F is the Fourier transform on Rn. The Mihlin condition states that if a is a function on Rn satisfying ξ a(ξ) ≤ Cαξ−α, ξ 6= 0, α ∈ Nn ∂α 0 , α ≤ [ n 2 ] + 1, (1.10) then Ta : Lp(Rn) → Lp(Rn) extends to a bounded operator for all 1 < p < ∞. In [14] Hormander generalised the Mihlin condition (1.10) to the condition of the form kakl.u.H s := sup r>0 ka(r·)η(·)kH s(Rn) = sup r>0 rs− n 2 ka(·)η(r−1·)kH s(Rn) < ∞, (1.11) where η ∈ D(0,∞) and s > n multiplier Ta on Lp(Rn) for all 1 < p < ∞. harmonic oscillator is quite different. In fact, for all s and ε > 0 with As it was pointed out in [3], the situation for multipliers associated to the 2 , in order to guarantee the boundedness of a Fourier n 2 < s ≤ n 2 + 1 6 − ε (1.12) we can not guarantee the Lp-boundedness of Riesz means operators satisfying (1.11), for all 1 < p < ∞. However, it was proved in [3] that there exists p0 ∈ [1, 2] such that a general operator a(H) satisfying so-called Plancherel estimates can be extended to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn) for all p0 < p < p′ 0, provided that a satisfies (1.11) for s > n+1 2 . Hormander conditions for Hermite operators were established in [24], see also [5, Theorem III.9]. An extension of Fourier multipliers is given by so-called pseudo-multipliers (see 0 the associated pseudo-multiplier Tm [1]). If m is a bounded function on Rn × Nn is the operator defined by Tmf (x) := Xν∈Nn 0 m(x, ν)bf (φν)φν(x) (1.13) for every function f ∈ D(Rn). We refer to the function m as the symbol of the operator Tm. If m(ν) = µ(ν) (as in the Maceuri result mentioned previously), it was proved among other things by S. Bagchi and S. Thangavelu [1] (see also J. Epperson [10]), that for n ≥ 2, the condition x∈Rn ∆jµ(x, k) ≤ Cj(2k + n)−j, 0 ≤ j ≤ n + 1, sup (1.14) 4 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY implies that the pseudo-multiplier Tµ is of weak type (1,1) and bounded on Lp(Rn) provided that Tµ is bounded on L2(Rn). The reference [1] provides several condi- tions for the boundedness of pseudo-multipliers including continuity in Lp-spaces with weights. From the point of view of the theory of pseudo-differential operators, pseudo- multipliers would be the special case of the symbolic calculus developed in the works of the second author and N. Tokmagambetov [20, 21]. The main result of this paper is the Hormander type condition for pseudo- multiplier operators (1.13) and for their multilinear versions. In order to classify the order of regularity in our Hormander conditions, we use the following norms, kmkl.u.,H s := sup k>0, y∈Rn 2k(s− n x ) < ∞, (1.15) 2 )khxisF [m(y,·)ψ(2−k · )](x)kL2(Rn 2 )khxisF −1 H [m(y,·)ψ(2−k · )](x)kL2(Rn 2k(s− n 1 k>0 sup y∈Rn x ) < ∞, (1.16) kmkl.u.,Hs := sup defined by the Fourier transform and the Fourier-Hermite transform, respectively, with hxi := (1 + x2) 2 . In (1.15) we consider functions m on Rn × Rn, but to these functions we associate a pseudo-multiplier with symbol {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn 0 . Our main results for pseudo-multipliers can be summarised in the following two theorems. Theorem 1.1. Let us assume that 2 ≤ p < ∞. If Tm is a pseudo-multiplier with symbol m satisfying (1.15), then under one of the following conditions, n+1 , and s > sn,p := 3n n+1 , and s > sn,p := 3n 2 + n−1 n+1 < p ≤ 2n n−2, and s > sn,p := 3n n−2 ≤ p < ∞, and s > sn,p := 3n−1 • n ≥ 2, 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, p = 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, • n = 1, 2 ≤ p < 4, s > s1,p := 3 2, • n = 1, p = 4, s > s1,4 := 2, • n = 1, 4 < p < ∞, s > s1,p := 4 2 + n−1 2(n+3) , 2 − 1 2 +n( 1 2 − 1 p), 3 + 2 3( 1 2n 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p), 2 − 1 p), 3 ( 1 6 + 2n 2 − 1 p), the operator Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn). For 1 < p ≤ 2, under one of the following conditions 2n • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, • n ≥ 2, 1 < p ≤ 2n • n = 1, 4 • n = 1, 1 < p < 4 n+5 ≤ p ≤ 2, and s > sn,p := 3n n+2 ≤ p ≤ 2(n+3) 3 ≤ p < 2, s > s1,p := 3 2, 3+ 2 3, s > s1,p := 4 n+2, and s > sn,p := 3n−1 n+5 , and s > sn,p := 3n 2 − 1 p ), 2 + n−1 2 − 1 2 +n( 1 3( 1 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p), 6 + 2n 2 − 1 3 ( 1 p), 2 − 1 p ), the operator Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn). However, in general: implies the Lp- 3 < p < 4 and every n, the condition s > 3n 2 • for every 4 boundedness of Tm. If the symbol m of the pseudo-multiplier Tm satisfies the Hormander condition (1.16), in order to guarantee the Lp-boundedness of Tm, in every case above we H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 5 can take s > sn,p − 1 boundedness of Tm for all 4 3 < p < 4. 12. Moreover, the condition s > 3n 12 implies the Lp- 2 − 1 Now we discuss some important facts concerning the results of this paper. • It is usual to assume the L2-boundedness of a pseudo-multiplier Tm in order to provide its Lp-boundedness (see [1] and [10]). Indeed, as it was pointed out in [1], the problem of finding satisfactory conditions for the L2- boundedness of pseudo-multipliers remains open. However, in our main theorem we solve such problem by considering symbols m(x, ν) satisfying the Hormander condition (1.15) of order s > 3n 2 , uniformly in y ∈ Rn, or the condition (1.16) for s > 3n • A function m belongs to the Kohn-Nirenberg class S0,ρ(Rn × Rn) if it 12 , uniformly in y ∈ Rn. 2 − 1 satisfies the symbol inequalities ξ m(x, ξ) ≤ Cα(1 + ξ)−α, ∂α (1.17) uniformly in x ∈ Rn. Symbols in the class S0,2n+1 are functions satisfying (1.15) and they provide bounded pseudo-multipliers in Lp-spaces for all 1 < p < ∞. In particular symbols in the class S0, [ 3n 2 ]+1 provide bounded pseudo-multipliers in L2(Rn). These facts will be proved in Proposition 2.11. Moreover, (see Corollary 2.12) if we assume the condition, α ≤ ρ, ∆α 0 , α ≤ ρ, ν m(x, ν) ≤ Cα(1 + ν)−α, α ∈ Nn (1.18) for ρ = [3n/2] + 1, then Tm extends to a bounded operator on L2(Rn), and for ρ = 2n + 1 we have the Lp(Rn)-boundedness of Tm for all 1 < p < ∞. • For n = 1 and by assuming the L2-boundedness of a pseudo-multiplier Tm, it was proved by Epperson [10] that (1.18) is a sufficient condition for the Lp-boundedness of Tm provided that ρ = 5. In constrast, we only require derivatives up to order ρ = 3. For spectral pseudo-multipliers m(x, H) and n ≥ 2, and newly by assuming the L2-boundedness, Bagchi and Thangavelu proved the Lp-boundedness provided that (1.18) holds true for ρ = n + 1. Although we impose for n ≥ 2, ρ = [3n/2] + 1, we do not assume the L2-boundedness for these operators. We also include general pseudo-multipliers and particularly spectral pseudo-multipliers. • The (Lp, Lq)−boundedness of pseudo-multipliers will be investigated in • By using the Littlewood-Paley theorem associated to the harmonic os- cillator, we give a Lp-multiplier theorem and a Lp-compactness theorem for multipliers (see Theorem 3.3), the sufficient condition imposed is how- ever, different from the Hormander condition. The L2-compactness of multipliers will be characterised in Theorem 3.1. Theorem 2.13 and Theorem 2.14. In this paper we introduce the notion of multilinear pseudo-multipliers, which, in analogy with the definition of multilinear Fourier multipliers, are operators of the form Tm(f1,· · · , fκ) := Xν:=(ν1,··· ,νκ)∈Nnκ 0 m(x, ν)bf1(φν1) · · ·bfκ(φνκ)φν1 · · · φνκ , x ∈ Rn, (1.19) 6 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY for all f1, f2,· · · , fκ ∈ D(Rn). In this setting, by imposing discrete multilinear Hormander conditions on the symbol m, of the type kmkl.u.,Hs := sup k>0, x∈Rn 2k(s− nκ 2 )khzisF −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)kL2(Rnκ z ) < ∞, (1.20) z ) < ∞, (1.21) kmkl.u.,H s := sup we want to guarantee the boundedness of Tm. Thus, we establish the following multilinear result. 2 )khzisF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)kL2(Rnκ 2k(s− nκ k>0, x∈Rn Theorem 1.2. Let us consider a multilinear pseudo-multiplier Tm defined on D(Rn)κ with symbol satisfying (1.20) or (1.21) for + (κ − 1)γ∞, with γ∞, defined as in (2.11). Then the operator s > sn,κ,p := max{ 2 3nκ 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)n 4 }, (1.22) extends to a bounded multilinear operator provided that 1 ≤ pj ≤ ∞, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, and 1 Tm : Lp1 × Lp2 × · · · × Lpκ−1 × Lpκ → Lp(Rn) . If m satisfies the condition (1.20) or (1.21) for p = 1 p1 pκ + · · · + 1 s > max{ 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)n 4 , 3nκ 2 + (n − 1)(κ − 1) 2 + γp}, with γp defined as in (2.11), then (1.22) holds true for all 2 ≤ p ≤ ∞ and p = 1 pκ . 1 + · · · + 1 p1 Let us note that 3nκ 2 + (κ−1)n 4 and 3nκ 2 + (n−1)(κ−1) 2 + γp cannot be compared immediately because the sign of γp depends on the values of p. This multilinear theorem for pseudo-multipliers is analogous to ones obtained in the framework of multilinear multipliers. Although the literature for the mul- tilinear analysis is extensive, we refer the reader to [11, 12, 13] and to the seminal work of R. Coifman and Y. Meyer where the multilinear harmonic analysis was originated. This paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we present the proof of our main theorem. In Section 3 we discuss the compactness properties. Finally, in Section 4 we prove the result mentioned above for multilinear pseudo-multipliers. 2. Boundedness of pseudo-multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator, Hormander condition Throughout this paper the function ψ ∈ D(0,∞) will be supported in [ 1 2 , 4] with ψ ≡ 1 on [1, 2]. In this section we will use functions in a (locally uniformly) Sobolev space of order s > 0, which consists of all functions m on Rn × Rn satisfying kmkl.u.,H s := sup k>0, y∈Rn 2k(s− n 2 )khxisF [m(y,·)ψ(2−k · )](x)kL2(Rn x ) < ∞, (2.1) H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 7 in order to establish the Lp-boundedness of Hermite pseudo-multipliers. We have denoted by F the Fourier transform on Rn defined by (F f )(ξ) =ZRn e−2πix·ξf (x)dx. (2.2) Another option that we can use in order to define (local) discrete Sobolev spaces come from the norm kmkl.u.,Hs := sup We recall that the Fourier-Hermite transform FH is defined for every f ∈ D(Rn) by the formula H [m(y,·)ψ(2−k · )](x)kL2(Rn 2 )khxisF −1 x ) < ∞. 2k(s− n sup y∈Rn (2.3) k>0 f (x)ψν(x)dx, ν ∈ Nn 0 . If we denote the inverse Fourier-Hermite transform by F −1 (FHf )(ν) :=ZRn (2.4) H which is defined by u(ν)φν(x), (2.5) where u is a function with compact support on Nn inversion formula is given by 0 , then the Fourier-Hermite (FH f )(ν)φν(x). (2.6) (F −1 H u)(x) := Xν∈Nn 0 f (x) = Xν∈Nn 0 Now, a pseudo-multiplier Tm with symbol m has, in terms of the transformation FH, the alternative representation Tmf (x) = F −1 H [m(x, ν)(FH f )](x). (2.7) For properties and basics of the Fourier-Hermite transform and Hermite expan- sions we refer the reader to Thangavelu [30]. 2.1. Hermite functions in Lp spaces. The main tool in the formulation of our results will be estimates of the Lp-norms of Hermite functions. Our starting point is the following lemma for one-dimensional Hermite functions (see Lemma 4.5.2 of Thangavelu [30]). Lemma 2.1. Let us denote by φν, ν ∈ Nn these functions satisfy the estimates 4 , 1 ≤ p < 4. 8 ln(ν). 6p − 1 0 , the Hermite functions. As ν → ∞, 2p − 1 • kφνkLp(R) ≍ ν • kφνkL4(R) ≍ ν− 1 • kφνkLp(R) ≍ ν− 1 12 , 4 < p ≤ ∞. 1 Now, we present a lemma on the behaviour of Lp(Rn)- norms of Hermite func- tions on Rn for all 1 ≤ p ≤ 2. Lemma 2.2. Let φν, ν ∈ Nn we have 0 , be Hermite functions on Rn. Then for 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 kφνkLp(Rn) . ν n 2 ( 1 p − 1 2 ). (2.8) 8 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY Proof. We will use the first equivalence in Lemma 2.1. Every Hermite function on Rn has the form φν = φν1 × · · · × φνn and as a consequence we have kφνjkLp(R). kφνkLp(Rn) =Yj νj! 1 ≤(cid:18)Pj νj 4 ≥ 0 and 2p − 1 4 Now, if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 then 1 2p − 1 kφνkLp(Rn) ≍ Yj . ν where we have used the inequality x1 × · · · × xn ≤ ( x1+···+xn n 2p − 1 4 ) n (cid:19)n( 1 n 2 ( 1 p − 1 2 ), )n for xi > 0. We now recall the following sharp lemma on the Lp-norms of Hermite functions for 2 ≤ p ≤ ∞ (see H. Koch and D. Tataru [15]). Lemma 2.3. Let us consider a Hermite function φ = φν on Rn which, as an eigenfunction of the harmonic oscillator on Rn, has the associated eigenvalue λ2 = (2ν + n). Then for n ≥ 2 we have, (2.9) (2.10) (cid:3) 2n n−2, then kφνkLp(Rn) . (2ν + n)− 1 n+1 , then kφνkLp(Rn) . (2ν + n) • if 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) • if 2(n+3) n+1 < p ≤ 2n n−2 ≤ p ≤ ∞, then kφνkLp(Rn) . (2ν + n)− 1 • if • if 2 ≤ p < 4, kφνkLp(R) . (2ν + n)− 1 • if 4 < p ≤ ∞, kφνkLp(R) . (2ν + n)− 1 2 − 1 2 ( 1 p ), p − 1 6 ( 1 6 + 1 2 + n 2 ). 1 2p − 1 4 , 6 + n 6 ( 1 2 − 1 p ), 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p ), and for n = 1, It is important to mention that in the previous lemma we denote 2n n−2 = ∞, when n = 2. We adopt this convention in the whole paper. Let us mention that, curiously, the proof of the lemma above is a consequence of some dispersive and Strichartz estimates for the corresponding Schrodinger equation for the harmonic oscillator. In our further analysis, we will need the following lemma. Lemma 2.4. Let us assume that 2 ≤ p ≤ ∞ and n ≥ 2. Then, the Hermite functions satisfy the following estimates as ν → ∞ : • if 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) n+1 , then • if 2(n+3) n+1 < p ≤ 2n • if 2n n−2 ≤ p ≤ ∞, then kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) . ν n−2, then kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) . ν− 1 n−1 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p ), 6 + 2n 3 ( 1 2 − 1 p ), kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) . ν− 1 2 +n( 1 2 − 1 p ). Let us recall that we have denoted 2n n−2 = ∞ when n = 2. For n = 1 we have • if 2 ≤ p < 4, kφνkLp(R)kφνkLp′ (R) . 1, H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 9 • if 4 < p ≤ ∞, In general: kφνkLp(R)kφνkLp′ (R) . ν− 1 6 + 2 3 ( 1 2 − 1 p ). • for every 4 3 < p < 4 and every n, kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) = O(1). Proof. Except for the last item, the proof is a straightforward computation by replacing p in Lemma 2.2 and the estimates in Lemma 2.3. The last item can be proved by using that p, p′ ∈ ( 4 3, 4) and the first estimate in Lemma 2.1, in fact kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) =Yj ≍Yj kφνjkLp(R)kφνjkLp′ (R) 2p − 1 ν j 2p′ − 1 ν j 4 4 1 1 1 2 ( 1 ν j =Yj p + 1 p′ )− 1 2 1 = 1, =Yj (cid:3) completing the proof. Remark 2.5. Because kφνjkL∞(R) . νj− 1 kφνkL∞(Rn) . ν− 1 and from the inequality ν ≤ nνi we obtain ν desired estimate. 12 . Indeed, when ν → ∞, then νi i ≤ n 12 when νj → ∞, we can estimate := max1≤j≤n νj → ∞, 12 which implies the − 1 12 1 12ν− 1 2.2. Hormander condition for pseudo-multipliers on Lp spaces. Now, we analyse the boundedness of pseudo-multipliers with symbols in (locally uniform) Sobolev spaces. We denote by γp the exponent that according to Lemma 2.4 satisfies kφνkLp(Rn)kφνkLp′ (Rn) . νγp. (2.11) Remark 2.6. Since n+1 , implies 0 ≤ γp := n−1 • n ≥ 2, 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) n+1 < p ≤ 2n • n ≥ 2, 2n n−2 ≤ p ≤ ∞, implies 1 • n = 1, 2 ≤ p < 4, implies γp = 0, • n = 1, 4 < p ≤ ∞, implies 1 n−2, implies − 1 6 + 2n 2 ≤ γp := − 1 2 − 1 4 < γp := 1 p ≤ 1 2, 2 ( 1 2 − 1 3(n+3) ≤ γp := − 1 2 + n( 1 2 − 1 p) < n−1 2(n+3) , 3 ( 1 6 + 2n p) ≤ n−1 2 , 2 − 1 p ) < 1 2, we have that γp ≥ 0, for all 2 ≤ p ≤ ∞. This lower bound will be useful in our further analysis. Proposition 2.7. Let us consider 1 < p < ∞ and s > 3n pseudo-multiplier with symbol m satisfying 2 )kh · isF −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )]kL2(Rn) < ∞, kmkl.u.Hs = sup 2 + γp − 1 12 . If Tm is a 2k(s− n (2.12) k>0,x∈Rn then Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn). Moreover, kTmkB(Lp(Rn)) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). (2.13) 10 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY Proof. In order to prove Proposition 2.7 we will decompose the symbol m as m(x, ν) = m(x, 0) + ∞Xk=0 mk(x, ν), mk(x, ν) := m(x, ν) · 1{2k≤ν<2k+1}. (2.14) Let us denote by Tm(j) the pseudo-multiplier associated to mj, for j ≥ 0, and by T0 the operator with symbol σ ≡ m(x, 0)δν,0. Then we want to show that the operator series T0 +Xk Tm(k) (2.15) converges to Tm in the strong topology on B(Lp(Rn)) and kTmkB(Lp(Rn)) ≤ kT0kB(Lp(Rn)) +Xk kTm(k)kB(Lp(Rn)). (2.16) So, we want to estimate every norm kTm(j)kB(Lp(Rn)). For this, we will use the fact that for f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Rn), kTm(j)fkLp(Rn) = sup{(Tm(j)f, g)L2(Rn) : kgkLp′ (Rn) = 1}. (2.17) In fact, for f and g as above we have (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) =ZRn Tm(k)f (x)g(x)dx =ZRn X2k≤ν<2k+1 =ZRnZRn X2k≤ν<2k+1 m(x, ν)bf (φν)φν(x)g(x)dx m(x, ν)f (y)φν(y)φν(x)g(x)dydx. For every x ∈ Rn let us denote the inverse Fourier-Hermite transform of the sequence {m(x, ν)ψ(2−kν)}ν by F −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )]. So, we have mk(x, ν) = FH(F −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k·)])(ν) =ZRn F −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k·)](z)φν(z)dz. (2.18) Consequently, we can write (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) = ZRnZRn X2k≤ν<2k+1ZRn F −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)φν(z)dz × f (y)φν(y)φν(x)g(x)dydx. H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 11 Now, we have (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) sup ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 x∈RnZRn F −1 x∈RnZRn F −1 sup H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)φν(z)dz × kfkLpkgkLp′kφνkLpkkφνkLp′ H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)φν(z)dz × kfkLpkgkLp′νγp. So, we can estimate the operator norm of Tm(k) by kTm(k)kB(Lp) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRn F −1 x∈Rn(cid:18)ZRnhzi2sF −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)φν(z)dzνγp H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)2dz(cid:19) 1 sup 2 kφν(·)h·i−skL2νγp. If we denote by θ∞ some real number satisfying kφνkL∞(Rn) . νθ∞, we can estimate if we require s > n 12 ≥ 3n s > 3n 2 + γp − 1 kφν(·)h·i−skL2 ≤ kφνkL∞kh·i−skL2 . νθ∞, 2 . By Remark 2.6, the condition s > n 2 − 1 2 holds true because 2 . Now, if additionally we consider the hypothesis 12 > n then we have sup x∈Rn(cid:18)ZRnhzi2sF −1 H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)2dz(cid:19) 1 kTm(k)kB(Lp) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 kmkl.u.Hs · 2−k(s− n 2 2 )νγp+θ∞ 2 )+kγp+kθ∞kmkl.u.Hs = 2−k(s− 3n 2 −γp−θ∞). . 2kn−k(s− n ≤ kmkl.u.Hs · 2−k(s− n 2 ), (2.19) Taking into account that kT0fkLp(Rn) . km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)kfkLp(Rn), we obtain the boundedness of T0 on Lp. It is clear that if we want to end the proof, we need to estimate I :=Pk≥0 kTm(k)kB(Lp(Rn)). As a consequence we obtain 0 ≤ I . kT0kB(Lp) + 2−k(s− 3n 2 −γp−θ∞)kmkl.u.,Hs < ∞, ∞Xk=1 for s > 3n 2 + γp + θ∞. So, we have kTmkB(Lp) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). 12 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY From Remark 2.5 we end the proof because we can take θ∞ = − 1 12 . Proposition 2.8. Let us consider 1 < p < ∞ and s > 3n function, and Tm is a pseudo-multiplier with symbol {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn 2 )kh · isF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )]kL2(Rn) < ∞, kmkl.u.H s = sup 2k(s− n k>0,x∈Rn 2 +γp. If m : R2n → C is a 0 satisfying (cid:3) then Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn). Moreover, kTmkB(Lp) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,H s + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). Proof. By following the notation in the proof of Proposition 2.7 we have (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) =ZRnZRn X2k≤ν<2k+1 m(x, ν)f (y)φν(y)φν(x)g(x)dydx. For every x ∈ Rn let us write mk(x, ν) = F −1(F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )])(ν) =ZRn So, we have F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)e2πiν·zdz. (2.22) (2.20) (2.21) (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) sup ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 x∈RnZRn F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)dz x∈RnZRn F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)dz sup × kfkLpkgkLp′kφνkLpkkφνkLp′ × kfkLpkgkLp′νγp. So, we can estimate the operator norm of Tm(k) by kTm(k)kB(Lp) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRn F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)dzνγp x∈Rn(cid:18)ZRnhzi2sF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)2dz(cid:19) 1 sup 2 kh · i−skL2νγp. By Remark 2.6 we have s > n by the hypothesis 2 , together with the estimate kh · i−skL2 < ∞, and x∈Rn(cid:18)ZRnhzi2sF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)2dz(cid:19) 1 sup 2 ≤ kmkl.u.H s · 2−k(s− n 2 ), (2.23) H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 13 we deduce that Since kTm(k)kB(Lp) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 kmkl.u.H s · 2−k(s− n 2 )νγp ≍ 2kn−k(s− n 2 )+kγp = 2−k(s− 3n 2 −γp). kT0fkLp(Rn) . km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)kfkLp(Rn), we have the boundedness of T0 on Lp. It is clear that if we want to end the proof, we need to estimate I :=Pk≥0 kTm(k)kB(Lp(Rn)). As a consequence we obtain 0 < I . kT0kB(Lp) + 2−k(s− 3n 2 −γp) sup x∈Rn kmkl.u.,H s < ∞, ∞Xk=1 for s > 3n 2 + γp. So, we have kTmkB(Lp) ≤ C(km(x,·)kl.u.,H s + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). The proof is complete. (cid:3) Now, we record explicitly the degree of regularity s considered in the proposi- tions above. Theorem 2.9. Let us assume 2 ≤ p < ∞. If Tm is a pseudo-multiplier with symbol m satisfying (2.20), then under one of the following conditions, n+1 , and s > sn,p := 3n n+1 , and s > sn,p := 3n 2 + n−1 n+1 < p ≤ 2n n−2, and s > sn,p := 3n n−2 ≤ p < ∞, and s > sn,p := 3n−1 • n ≥ 2, 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, p = 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, • n = 1, 2 ≤ p < 4, s > s1,p := 3 2, • n = 1, p = 4, s > s1,4 := 2, • n = 1, 4 < p < ∞, s > s1,p := 4 2 + n−1 2(n+3) , 2 − 1 2 +n( 1 2 − 1 p), 3 + 2 3( 1 2n 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p), 2 − 1 p), 3 ( 1 6 + 2n 2 − 1 p), the operator Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn). For 1 < p ≤ 2, under one of the following conditions 2n • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, • n ≥ 2, 1 < p ≤ 2n • n = 1, 4 • n = 1, 1 < p < 4 n+5 ≤ p ≤ 2, and s > sn,p := 3n n+2 ≤ p ≤ 2(n+3) 3 ≤ p < 2, s > s1,p := 3 2, 3, s > s1,p := 4 3+ 2 n+2, and s > sn,p := 3n−1 n+5 , and s > sn,p := 3n 2 − 1 p ), 2 + n−1 2 − 1 2 +n( 1 3( 1 2 − 1 2 ( 1 p), 6 + 2n 3 ( 1 2 − 1 p), 2 − 1 p ), the operator Tm is Lp-bounded. Moreover, in general: • for every 4 boundedness of Tm. 3 < p < 4 and every n, the condition s > 3n 2 implies the Lp- 14 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY If the symbol m of the pseudo-multiplier Tm satisfies the Hormander condition (2.12), in order to guarantee the Lp-boundedness of Tm, in every case above we can take s > sn,p − 1 12 implies the Lp-boundedness of Tm for all 4 12. However, s > 3n 2 − 1 3 < p < 4. Proof. In view of the Propositions 2.7 and 2.8 and considering the following values for γp: (according to Lemma 2.4), p), if n ≥ 2, 2 ≤ p < 2(n+3) 2 − 1 2 ( 1 • γp = n−1 n+1 , • γp = − 1 6 + 2n 3 ( 1 2 − 1 2 + n( 1 2 − 1 • γp = − 1 • γp = 0, if n ∈ N, 4 2 − 1 • γp = − 1 p), if n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) p), if n ≥ 2, 2n 3 < p < 4, p), if n = 1, 4 < p < ∞, 6 + 2 n+1 < p ≤ 2n n−2, n−2 ≤ p < ∞, 3( 1 the proof ends if we take into account that γp = γp′ and n−2 ⇒ 2n n+2 ≤ p′ ≤ 2(n+3) n+5 , • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) • n ≥ 2, 2n • 4 • 1 < p < 4 • 4 n+5 ≤ p ≤ 2 ⇒ 2 ≤ p′ < 2(n+3) n+1 , n+1 < p ≤ 2n n−2 ≤ p < ∞ ⇒ 1 < p′ ≤ 2n n+2, 3 ≤ p ≤ 2 ⇒ 2 ≤ p′ ≤ 4, 3 ⇒ 4 < p′ < ∞, 3 < p < 4 ⇔ 4 3 < p′ < 4. The proof is complete. Remark 2.10. Let us note that for n ≥ 2 and p = 2(n+3) 2 + n−1 provided that m satisfies (2.20). Indeed, from Remark 2.6, if 2 ≤ r < 2(n+3) ω ≤ 2n n+1 , the condition s > sn,p = n+1 (Rn) n+1 < 2(n+3) , implies the boundedness of a pseudo-multiplier Tm on L n−2, then 2(n+3) (cid:3) 3n lim rր 2(n+3) n+1 γr = lim ωց 2(n+3) n+1 γω = n − 1 2(n + 3) . (2.24) From the real interpolation we obtain γ 2(n+3) 2(n+3) . So, by Proposition 2.8 the condition s > sn,p = 3n 2(n+3) implies the Lp(Rn)-boundedness of Tm when p = 2(n+3) 2 and the condition s > s1,4 = 2 implies the boundedness of Tm on L4(Rn). So, this remark and Theorem 2.9 proves Theorem 1.1. n+1 . Now, if n = 1, a similar analysis shows that γ4 < 1 2 + n−1 n+1 = n−1 In the following proposition we exhibit a class of symbols providing Lp-pseudo- multipliers. Proposition 2.11. Let us consider a complex-valued function m on Rn× Rn and a pseudo-multiplier Tm with symbol {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn 0 . If m satisfies the symbol inequalities (2.25) for ρ = [3n/2] + 1, then Tm extends to a bounded operator on L2(Rn). Moreover, for ρ = 2n + 1 we have the Lp(Rn)-boundedness of Tm for all 1 < p < ∞. ξ m(x, ξ) ≤ Cα(1 + ξ)−α, ∂α α ≤ ρ, H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 15 Proof. For the proof, we will use that the Sobolev space H s(Rn) defined by those functions g satisfying kgkH s(Rn) := khzis(F g)kL2(Rn) < ∞, has the equivalent norm (2.26) H s(Rn) := Xβ≤s kgk′ k∂β ξ gkL2(Rn), when s is an integer (see, e.g. [9], p. 163). We will show that sup k>0,x∈Rn 2k(ρ− n 2 )km(x,·)ψ(2−k · )kH ρ = sup k>0,x∈Rn km(x, 2k·)ψ( · )kH ρ < ∞, (2.27) provided that ρ is an integer. From the estimate km(x, 2k·)ψ( · )kH ρ ≍ km(x, 2k·)ψ( · )k′ ξ (m(x, 2k·)ψ( · ))kL2(Rn), (2.28) we will estimate the L2-norms of the derivatives ∂β ξ (m(x, 2k·)ψ( · ))(ξ). Because the function ψ is supported in some closed interval not containing the origin, the function ψ( · ) is smooth. By the Leibniz rule we have H ρ = Xβ≤s k∂β So, we obtain ∂β ξ (m(x, 2kξ)ψ(ξ)) = Xα≤β ξ (m(x, 2k·)ψ( · ))kL2 ≤ Xα≤ρ k∂β 2kα(∂α ξ m)(x, 2kξ)∂β−α ξ ψ(ξ). Cαk∂β−α ξ ψ( · )kL2, (2.29) where we have used that (2.25) implies the estimate 2kα(∂α ξ m)(x, 2k·) ≤ Cα, for k large enough. Now, (2.27) follows by summing both sides of (2.29) over β ≤ ρ. We finish the proof by observing that every sn,p defined in Theorem 2.9, satisfies the upper bound sn,p ≤ 2n, and we can obtain the Lp-boundedness of Tm by taking ρ > sn,p with ρ = 2n + 1. A similar analysis shows that ρ = [3n/2] + 1 implies the L2−boundedness of Tm. (cid:3) Corollary 2.12. Let us consider a complex-valued function m on Rn × Zn and a 0 . If m satisfies the discrete pseudo-multiplier Tm with symbol {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn difference conditions ∆α (2.30) for ρ = [3n/2] + 1, then Tm extends to a bounded operator on L2(Rn). Moreover, for ρ = 2n + 1 we have the Lp(Rn)-boundedness of Tm for all 1 < p < ∞. Proof. Let us define for every z0 ∈ Rn, the function mz0 given by mz0(ν) = m(z0, ν). Then we have the estimates ν m(x, ν) ≤ Cα(1 + ν)−α, α ∈ Nn 0 , α ≤ ρ, ∆α ν mz0(ν) ≤ Cα(1 + ν)−α, α ∈ Nn (2.31) From Corollary 4.5.7 of [22], there exists a suitable function mz0 defined on Rn such that mz0Zn = mz0 and additionally satisfying the conditions, 0 , α ≤ ρ. ξ mz0(ξ) ≤ Cα(1 + ξ)−α, α ∈ Nn ∂α 0 , α ≤ ρ. (2.32) 16 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY The function m defined by m(z0, ξ) := mz0(ξ) satisfies (2.25), and by Proposition 2.11 we obtain the L2-boundedness of the pseudo-multiplier T m with symbol 0 , if ρ = [3n/2] + 1 (or the Lp-boundedness, for all 1 < p < ∞ { m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn if ρ = 2n + 1). We finish the proof by observing that T m = Tm in view of the equality sets { m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn (cid:3) 2.3. (Lp, Lq)-boundedness of spectral pseudo-multipliers. Let us assume n ∈ N, arbitrary but fixed. Let us define the set 2N0 + n := {2m + n : m ∈ N0}. We will consider continuous functions m(x, ξ) defined on Rn x × Rξ and we will de- note by m(x, ℓ) the restriction of m(x, ξ) to the set Rn×(2N0 + n), so that x ∈ Rn and ℓ ∈ 2N0+n. If we set F : L2(−∞,∞) → L2(−∞,∞) for the one-dimensional Fourier transform, we will consider symbols m(x, ℓ) := m(x, ξ)Rn×(2N0+n) satisfy- ing the, so called, Hormander condition of order s > 0, 0 . 0 = {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nn kmkl.u.,hs := sup x∈Rn,k>0 2k(s− n 2 ) ∞Z−∞ hti2sF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)2dt 1 2 < ∞, (2.33) where the function ψ ∈ D(0,∞) satisfies ψ(t) = 1 for all t ∈ [1, 2]. With the previous notation we want to investigate the Hormander condition for pseudo- multipliers of the form m(x, H)f (x) := m(x, ℓ)Pℓf (x), (2.34) ∞Xℓ=0 where we have denoted by Pℓ the orthogonal projection to the subspace generated by the set {φν : ν = ℓ}. For symbols m(x, ℓ) = m(ℓ) depending only on the ℓ variables we have used in (1.6) the term radial symbols. If it depends on x we can talk about them as spectral pseudo-multipliers. In the next theorem, we prove that for symbols satisfying the Hormander condition of order s, for s suitable, the corresponding spectral pseudo-multipliers are bounded operators from Lp(Rn) into Lq(Rn) when 1 p = 1. We will denote δ(p) := n 1 2 and q = p′. q + 1 p − 1 2 − 1 Theorem 2.13. Let us consider a function m satisfying (2.33). Let m(x, H) be a spectral pseudo-multiplier with symbol {m(x, ℓ)}x∈Rn,ℓ∈2N0+n. Under one of the following conditions 2n • n ≥ 2, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2n • n ≥ 2, • n = 1, 4 • n = 1, p = 4 • n = 1, 1 < p < 4 n+2 and s > n+1 2 + δ(p), n+2 < p ≤ 2 and s > 3n 2 , 3 < p ≤ 2, s > 2 − 1 p , 3, s > 1 + 1 3p , 3, s > 3 2, the operator m(x, H) extends to a bounded operator from Lp(Rn) into Lp′(Rn). Proof. In order to prove Theorem 2.13 we will split the symbol m as m(x, ℓ) = ∞Xk=0 mk(x, ℓ), mk(x, ℓ) := m(x, ℓ) · 1{2k≤ℓ<2k+1}. (2.35) H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 17 Let us denote by Tm(j) the pseudo-multiplier associated to mj, for j ≥ 0. Then the operator series T0 +Xk Tm(k) (2.36) converges to Tm in the strong topology on B(Lp(Rn), Lp′(Rn)) and km(x, H)kB(Lp(Rn),Lp′ (Rn)) ≤Xk kTm(k)kB(Lp(Rn),Lp′ (Rn)). (2.37) So, we want to estimate every norm kTm(j)kB(Lp(Rn),Lp′ (Rn)). For this, we will use the fact that for f ∈ C ∞ 0 (Rn), kTm(j)fkLp′ (Rn) = sup{(Tm(j)f, g)L2(Rn) : kgkLp(Rn) = 1}. (2.38) In fact, for f and g as above we have (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) =ZRn Tm(k)f (x)g(x)dx =ZRn X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 = X2k≤ℓ<2k+1ZRn m(x, ℓ)Pℓf (x)g(x)dx m(x, ℓ)Pℓf (x)g(x)dx. For every x ∈ Rn let us denote the one-dimensional Fourier transform of m(x,·)ψ(2−k · ) by F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )]. So, we have mk(x, ℓ) = F −1(F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )])(ℓ) = Consequently, we have ∞Z−∞ F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)ei2πℓ·tdt. (2.39) (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) ≤ X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 ∞Z−∞ sup x∈Rn F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)dt × kPℓfkLp′kgkLp. Now, let us fix n ∈ N, n ≥ 2. By taking into account the Karadzhov's estimate (see Thangavelu [31], p. 268) kPℓfkLp′ (Rn) ≤ Cpℓδ(p)− 1 2kfkLp, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2n n + 2 , n ≥ 2, (2.40) 18 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY we can estimate the operator norm of Tm(k) by kTm(k)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) if we impose s > 1 2 sup sup x∈Rn hti2sF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)2dt ∞Z−∞ . X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)dtℓδ(p)− 1 x∈Rn ∞Z−∞ . X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 hti2sF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)2dt x∈Rn ∞Z−∞ kTm(k)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) . X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 kmkl.u.,hs · 2−k(s− n sup 1 2 then we have 2 )+k(δ(p)− 1 2 ) 2. If additionally we consider the hypothesis (2.33), that is, 1 2 kh·i−skL2(−∞,∞)ℓδ(p)− 1 2 , ≤ kmkl.u.,hs · 2−k(s− n 2 ), (2.41) ≍ 2k−k(s− n As a consequence we obtain 2 )+k(δ(p)− 1 0 ≤ ∞Xk=1 kTm(k)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) . for s > n+1 2 + δ(p). So, we have 2 −δ(p))kmkl.u.,hs. 2 )kmkl.u.,hs = 2−k(s− n+1 ∞Xk=1 2−k(s− n+1 2 −δ(p))kmkl.u.,hs < ∞, 2n 2n n + 2 n+2 → L . 2n km(x, H)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) ≤ Ckmkl.u.,hs, 1 ≤ p ≤ n+2) = 1 2 , and consequently Tm : L Let us note that δ( 2n n−2 extends to a bounded operator provided that s > n+2 2 then from Theorem 2.9 we obtain the L2-boundedness of m(x, H). Thus, by the real interpolation we obtain the boundedness of m(x, H) from Lp into Lp′ for 2n n+2 ≤ p ≤ 2 provided that s > 3n 2 . Now, if n = 1, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we have for every ℓ ∈ N0 the 2 . If we assume s > 3n estimate, kPℓfkLp′ (R) = k(f, φℓ)L2(R)φℓkLp′ (R) ≤ kφℓk2 Lp′ (R)kfkLp(R). (2.42) By Thangavelu's Lemma 2.1, we can estimate the Lp′(R)-norm of the function Pℓf as follows: 2p′ − 1 kPℓfkLp′ (R) . ℓ2( 1 kPℓfkLp′ (R) . ℓ2(− 1 6p′ − 1 1 2 − 1 4 )kfkLp(R) = ℓ 12 )kfkLp(R) = ℓ− 1 pkfkLp(R), 2 + 1 3pkfkLp(R), 1 < p < < p ≤ 2, 4 3 (2.43) . (2.44) 4 3 H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 19 Recalling that for all n ∈ N we have, (Tm(k)f, g)L2(Rn) ≤ X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 ∞Z−∞ sup x∈Rn F [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](t)dt we obtain, with n = 1, kTm(k)fkLp′ (Rn) ≤ X2k≤ℓ<2k+1 × kPℓfkLp′ (Rn)kgkLp(Rn), 2−k(s− n 2 )kmkl.u.,hskPℓfkLp′ (Rn) ∞Xk=1 ∞Xk=1 ∞Xk=1 ∞Xk=1 Thus, by (2.43) and the estimate above we have, . 2−k(−1+s− n 2 )kmkl.u.,hskPℓfkLp′ (Rn). 0 ≤ km(x, H)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) ≤ = kTm(k)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) . 2−k(−1+s− n 2 − 1 2 + 1 p )kmkl.u.,hs ∞Xk=1 p )kmkl.u.,hs < ∞, 2−k(s−2+ 1 for s > 2 − 1 p, when 4 3 < p ≤ 2, and 0 ≤ km(x, H)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) ≤ = kTm(k)kB(Lp,Lp′ ) . 2−k(−1+s− n 2 + 1 2 − 1 3p )kmkl.u.,hs ∞Xk=1 3p )kmkl.u.,hs < ∞, 2−k(s−1− 1 4 3p , and 1 < p < 4 3, in view of (2.44). The (L 3 satisfying s > 2− 1 for s > 1 + 1 m(x, H) now follows by the real interpolation for s > 3 there exists p1 > 4 1 < p0 < 4 from Lp0(Rn) into Lp′ inequality p0 < 4 a bounded extension from L proof. 3 , L4)-boundedness of 2 . In fact, if we fix s > 3 2 2 . We also have the existence of p0 > 0, p1 . Thus, m(x, H) admits bounded extensions 1(Rn) respectively. By the 3 < p1 and the real interpolation we deduce that m(x, H) has 3 (Rn) into L4(Rn). Thus, we have completed the (cid:3) 0(Rn) and from Lp1(Rn) into Lp′ > 3 3 such that s > 3 2 > 1 + 1 3p0 4 Now, by the real interpolation we give the following general (Lp, Lq) bounded- ness theorem. Theorem 2.14. Let us consider a function m = m(x, ℓ) satisfying (2.33). Let m(x, H) be a spectral pseudo-multiplier with symbol {m(x, ℓ)}x∈Rn,ℓ∈2N0+n. Under one of the following conditions • n ≥ 2, 1 < p ≤ 2n • n ≥ 2, • n = 1, 4 n+2 and s > 3n−1 2 + n( 1 n+2 < p ≤ 2 and s > 3n 2 , 3 ≤ p < 2, s > 3 2, 2n 2 − 1 p), 20 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY • n = 1, 1 < p < 4 3, s > 1 + 1 3p , the operator m(x, H) extends to a bounded operator from Lp(Rn) into Lq(Rn), for all p ≤ q ≤ p′. Proof. Let us observe that δ( 2n 2 − 1 1 2.13, under one of the following conditions n+2 and that p ≤ 0 for 1 < p ≤ 2. With these inequalities in mind, from Theorems 2.9 and • n ≥ 2, 1 < p ≤ 2n n+2, 1 s > 2 − for 1 ≤ p ≤ 2n 2 ≤ δ(p) ≤ n−1 ) = max{ n+2) = 1 3n − 1 1 2 − 1 p )}, 3n − 1 2 + δ(p), n + 1 2 2 + n( 2 + n( 1 p n+5 ≤ p ≤ 2, • n ≥ 2, 2(n+3) 3n 2 s > = max{ n+2 ≤ p ≤ 2(n+3) n+5 , • n ≥ 2, 2n 3n 2 , 3n 2 + n − 1 2 ( 1 2 − 1 p )}, s > 3n 2 3 ≤ p < 2, • n = 1, 4 = max{ 3n 2 , 3n 2 − 1 6 + 2n 3 ( 1 2 − 1 p )}, s > 3 2 = max{ 3 2 , 2 − 1 p}, • n = 1, 1 < p < 4 3, s > 1 + 1 3p = max{1 + 1 3p , 4 3 + 2 3 ( 1 2 − 1 p )}, the spectral pseudo-multiplier m(x, H) extends to a bounded operator from Lp(Rn) into Lp′(Rn) and also we have its boundedness from Lp(Rn) into Lp(Rn). So, by the Riesz-Thorin interpolation theorem we deduce the boundedness of m(x, H) from Lp(Rn) into Lq(Rn) for all p ≤ q ≤ p′. So, we finish the proof. (cid:3) 2.4. Lower bounds for the operator norm of multipliers on Lp spaces. Now, we estimate from below the operator norm of multipliers associated to the harmonic oscillator. Theorem 2.15. Let 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Let us assume that Tm is a multiplier associated to the harmonic oscillator. If Tm is a bounded operator on Lp(Rn), then we have the following lower bound for the Lp-operator norm of Tm, kTmkB(Lp(Rn)) ≥ sup ν∈Nn m(ν). Proof. For the proof we can take advantage of the orthogonality properties of the Hermite functions φν, ν ∈ Nn 0 . By definition we have Tm(φν) = m(ν)φν. (2.45) H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 21 As consequence we obtain kTmkB(Lp(Rn)) ≥ kTm( φν kφνkLp )kLp(Rn) = m(ν). Thus, we end the proof. (cid:3) 3. Compactness of pseudo-multipliers 3.1. L2-compactness of multipliers. Now, we use the Fourier analysis pro- duced by the harmonic oscillator in order to characterise the L2-compactness of multipliers. The following is an analogue of a criterion very well known in other settings. Theorem 3.1. Let us assume that Tm is a bounded multiplier on L2(Rn). Then, Tm is a compact operator on L2(Rn) if and only if limν→∞ m(ν) = 0. Proof. In order to prove the theorem, let us first assume that Tm is an L2-compact operator. If f ∈ L2(Rn), by the Plancherel theorem we have L2(Rn) = Xν∈Nn kfk2 0 (f, φν)L22. (3.1) Consequently, we have (f, φν) → 0 as ν → ∞. So, we conclude that in L2(Rn), 0 converges weakly to zero. By the compactness of Tm the the sequence {φν}ν∈Nn 0 converges to zero in the L2-norm. So, sequence {T (φν)}ν∈Nn lim ν→∞kTmφνkL2(Rn) = lim ν→∞m(ν) = 0. (3.2) For the proof of the converse assertion, let us assume that the sequence {m(ν)}ν∈Nn tends to zero as ν → ∞. In order to show that Tm is compact, we will approxi- mate it with operators of finite rank. So, let us define the sequence of finite rank operators Tm(k), k ∈ N, by 0 Tm(k)f := Xν≤k m(ν)bf (φν)φν. m(ν)2(f, φν)L22 ≤ sup ν≥k m(ν)2kfk2 L2(Rn). (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) (cid:3) By the orthogonality of the Hermite functions, we have kTm(k)f − Tmfk2 L2(Rn) = Xν≥k So, we obtain k→∞kTm(k) − TmkB(L2) ≤ lim lim k→∞ ν≥k m(ν) = 0. sup With the last line we finish the proof. 22 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY 3.2. Lp-compactness and Lp-boundedness for multipliers via Littlewood- Paley theory. In the preceding subsection we have characterised the compact- ness on L2(Rn) of multipliers with the Plancherel theorem as a fundamental tool. In order to investigate the Lp-compactness of multipliers for 1 < p < ∞, but p 6= 2, we will use the Littlewood-Paley theorem (which is a partial substitute of the Plancherel theorem on Lp-spaces) associated to dyadic decompositions of the spectrum of the harmonic oscillator. The main notion in the Littlewood-Paley theory is the concept of a dyadic decomposition. Here, the sequence {ψl}l∈N0 is a dyadic decomposition, defined as follows: we choose a function ψ ∈ D(0,∞) sup- ported in [1/2, 1], ψ = 1 on [2/3, 4/5]. Denote by ψl the function ψl(t) = ψ(2−lt), t ∈ R. For some smooth compactly supported function ψ0 we have ψl(λ) = 1, for every λ > 0. (3.6) Xl∈N0 Now we present the Littlewood-Paley Theorem in the form of the following result (see Theorems 7.1 and 7.3 of [4] and Proposition 5 of [18]). Theorem 3.2. Let 1 < p < ∞ and for every l ∈ N0, let us consider the multipliers Tψl given by Then there exist constants 0 < cp, Cp < ∞ depending only on p such that Tψlf (x) := X2l≤hνi<2l+1 ψl(hνi)φν(x)bf (φν), hνi := (1 + ν2) cpkfkLp(Rn) ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) Tψlf (x)2! 1 ∞Xl=0 ≤ CpkfkLp(Rn), holds for all f ∈ Lp(Rn). 1 2 . (3.7) (3.8) The following Lp multiplier theorem provides sufficient conditions for the Lp- boundedness of multipliers (different from the Hormander-Mihlin condition) and their Lp-compactness. Theorem 3.3. Let us assume that Tm is a multiplier and let 1 < p < ∞. Let us assume that there exists a sequence {νl} satisfying: 2l ≤ νl < 2l+1, m(νl) 6= 0 for every l ∈ N0 and = K 6= 0, (3.9) for every sequence {ν′ sequences νl and ν′ • if kmkL∞(Nn l < 2l+1 (the constant K depends on the l). Then, 0 ) < ∞, then the operator Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn) and (3.10) • if m(ν) → 0 as ν → ∞, then the operator Tm extends to a compact kTmkB(Lp(Rn)) ≤ CkmkL∞(Nn 0 ). operator on Lp(Rn). lim l→∞ m(ν′ l) m(νl) l} where 2l ≤ ν′ H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 23 Proof. Let us assume that f ∈ Lp(Rn), 1 < p < ∞. By the Littlewood-Paley Theorem (see Theorem 3.2 above) we have (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)  ∞Xl=0 Taking into account both, that m is bounded and the condition (3.9) we have 1 1 . 1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) kTmfkLp(Rn) .(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) TψlTmf (x)2! 1 ∞Xl=0 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ψl(hνi)m(ν)φν(x)bf (φν)2  ∞Xl=0 X2l≤hνi<2l+1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) ψl(hνi)m(ν)φν(x)bf (φν)2 X2l≤hνi<2l+1 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn)  φν(x)bf (φν)2 ∞Xl=0 m(νl)2 X2l≤hνi<2l+1 0 )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) φν(x)bf (φν)2  ∞Xl=0 X2l≤hνi<2l+1 2(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)Lp(Rn) 0 )(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ψl(hνi)φν(x)bf (φν)2  ∞Xl=0 X2l≤hνi<2l+1 ≤ kmkL∞(Nn . kmkL∞(Nn 0 ) kfkLp(Rn) , ψl(hνi) m(ν) m(νl) ψl(hνi) m(ν) m(νl) ≍ kmkL∞(Nn 1 1 where in the last line we have used the Littlewood-Paley Theorem 3.2 again. So, we have proved the first part of the theorem. Now, if in addition m(ν) → 0 as ν → ∞, we will prove that Tm can be approximated by rank finite operators and consequently we obtain the compactness of Tm. Let us define for every k ∈ N the operator, (3.11) Tm(k)f := Xhνi≤k m(ν)bf (φν)φν. A similar argument as in the proof of the first assertion shows us that the estimate kTmf − Tm(k)fkLp(Rn) . sup hνi≥2k m(ν)kfkLp, holds true. Consequently we have the norm estimates kTm − Tm(k)kB(Lp(Rn)) . sup hνi≥2k m(ν) → 0 as ν → ∞. So, we finish the proof. (3.12) (3.13) (cid:3) 24 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY Remark 3.4. Let us note that m(ν) := (1 + ν)iτ , τ ∈ R, satisfies (3.9) and clearly it is a bounded symbol. By the preceding theorem we conclude that Tm extends to a bounded operator on Lp(Rn), 1 < p < ∞. Also, is easy to see that mκ(ν) := (1 + ν)−κ for κ > 0 satisfies (3.9) and mκ(ν) → 0 as ν → ∞. Consequently every operator Tmκ extends to a compact operator on Lp(Rn) for all 1 < p < ∞. 4. Lp-boundedness for multilinear pseudo-multipliers In this section we analyse the boundedness of multilinear pseudo-multipliers on Lebesgue spaces which are operators defined by Tm(f1,· · · , fκ)(x) := Xν∈Nnκ 0 m(x, ν)bf1(φν1) · · ·bfκ(φνκ )φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x), (4.1) 0 , and x ∈ Rn. for all (f1, f2,· · · , fκ) ∈ D(Rn)κ, where ν := (ν1,· · · , νκ), νi ∈ Nn In order to prove a general theorem on the boundedness of these operators, we establish the following proposition. Proposition 4.1. Let us consider a pseudo-multiplier Tm defined on D(Rn)κ and let m : Rn × Nnκ 0 → C be its symbol. Let us assume that for s > 0, m satisfies the condition kmkl.u.,Hs := sup and that κ ≥ 2. Then H [m(x,·)ψ(2−k·)](z)kL2(Rnκ z ) < ∞, (4.2) 2 )khzisF −1 2k(s− nκ k>0, x∈Rn 2 + (κ − 1)γ∞, the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear 1. If s > 3nκ operator from L1 × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into L1(Rn), and kTmkB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). 2. If s > 3nκ 2 + (κ−1)n 4 − 1 12 , the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from L2 × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into L2(Rn), and kTmkB(L2×(L∞)κ−1, L2) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). 3. If s > 3nκ 2 + (n−1)(κ−1) + γp, γp defined as in (2.11), the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from Lp × L∞ × · · ·× L∞ × L∞ into Lp(Rn), and 2 (4.3) (4.4) kTmkB(Lp×(L∞)κ−1, Lp) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)), for all 2 < p ≤ ∞. Proof. We proceed with the proof of the first statement. Since kTmfkL1(Rn) = sup kgkL∞ =1(Tmf, g), (4.5) (4.6) similar to the previous section we will estimate (Tmf, g) for kgkL∞ = 1. Now, for f := (f1, f2,· · · , fκ) ∈ D(Rn)κ we have (Tmf, g) ≤ (T0f, g) + (Tm(k)f, g), (4.7) ∞Xk=0 H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 25 where Tm(k) is the pseudo-multiplier associated to the symbol mk(x, ν) = m(x, ν) · 1[2k,2k+1)(ν), and T0 is the operator with symbol m(x, 0)δν,0. For zj ∈ Rn, z = (z1, z2,· · · , zκ) ∈ Rnκ, and φν(z) = φν1(z1) · · · φνκ (zκ), the inversion formula for the Fourier-Hermite transform gives (Tm(k)f, g) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)ZRn = ZRn X2K ≤ν<2k+1 ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 ZRn = X2k≤ν<2k+1 ZRnZRnκ ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup Tm(k)f (x)g(x)dx(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) mk(x, ν)bf1(φν1) · · ·bfκ(φνκ)φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)g(x)dx mk(x, ν)bf1(φν1) · · ·bfκ(φνκ)φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)g(x)dx φν(z)F −1 H [mk(x,·)](z)dz × bf1(φν1) · · ·bfκ(φνκ)φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)g(x)dx H [mk(x,·)](z)dz x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 κYj=2 × kf1kL1kφν1kL∞ kfjkL∞kφνjkL1 · kgkL∞ZRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)dx. Taking into account that κ ≥ 2 we write, ZRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)dx ≤ kφν1kL2kφν2kL2 κYj6=1,2 kφνjkL∞ . 1, (4.8) where we have used Remark 2.5 for the terms in the products. Consequently, (Tm(k)f, g) ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 H [mk(x,·)](z)dz sup x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 κYj=2 × kf1kL1kφν1kL∞ kfjkL∞kφνjkL1 · kgkL∞. 26 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY Hence we have the following estimate for the norm of Tm(k), kTm(k)kB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 x∈Rn khzisF −1 sup H [mk(x,·)]kL2(Rnκ ) H [mk(x,·)](z)dz × kφν1kL∞ κYj=2 kφνjkL1 × khzi−skL2(Rnκ )kφνkL∞ × kφν1kL∞ κYj=2 kφνjkL1. Since kφνkL∞ × kφν1kL∞ κYj=2 kφνjkL1 ≤ kφν1k2 L∞ kφνjkL1kφνjkL∞ (4.9) κYj=2 and by using the following estimate in Lemma 2.4 for p = ∞, kφνjkL1(Rn)kφνjkL∞(Rn) . νjγ∞, 2 ≤ j ≤ κ, (4.10) (γ∞ = n−1 2 for n ≥ 2 and for n = 1, γ∞ = 1/6), we obtain kφνkL∞ × kφν1kL∞ κYj=2 kφνjkL1 . kφν1k2 L∞ κYj=2 νjγ∞ . νγ∞(κ−1). (4.11) Let us note that in the last estimates we have used that Remark 2.5 implies kφν1kL∞ = O(1). Consequently we have for s > nκ 2 , kTm(k)kB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) H [mk(x,·)]kL2(Rnκ )khzi−skL2(Rnκ )ν(κ−1)γ∞ 2 )2k(κ−1)γ∞(κ−1)kmkl.u.Hs ≍ 2−k(s− nκ 2 )+k(κ−1)γ∞+knκkmkl.u.Hs x∈Rn khzisF −1 sup 2−k(s− nκ . X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 = 2−k(s− 3nκ 2 −(κ−1)γ∞)kmkl.u.Hs. So, we obtain the following upper bound for the series ∞Xk=1 kTm(k)kB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) ≤ kmkl.u.Hs × 2−k(s− 3nκ 2 −(κ−1)γ∞) ∞Xk=1 which converges provided that s > 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)γ∞. Now, it is easy to see that kT0kB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) . km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn). As a consequence we get kTmkB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 27 So, we finish the proof of the first statement. For the proof of the second state- ment, we observe that (Tm(k)f, g) ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 κYj=2 x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 × kf1kL2kφν1kL2 sup H [mk(x,·)](z)dz kfjkL∞kφνjkL1 · kgkL2 · (ZRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ(x)2dx) 1 2 . H [mk(x,·)](z)dz κYj=2 12 , × kf1kL2 kfjkL∞kφνjkL1 · kgkL2ν− 1 where we have estimated (RRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ(x)2dx) 12 . ν− 1 kφνikL∞(Rnκ ) . νi− 1 1 12 , be obtained as follows. If νi := max1≤j≤κ νj, similar to Remark 2.5 we have 2 . ν− 1 12 . This estimate can when ν is large enough. On the other hand, if k 6= i, it follows that (ZRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ(x)dx) 1 2 . kφνkkL2kφνikL∞ κYj6=i,k kφνjkL∞ . ν− 1 12 , (4.12) where we have used the crude estimate kφνjkL∞ = O(1) for j 6= k, i and that the L2−norm of the function φνk is normalised. By using this and Lemma 2.2 for p = 1 we obtain kTm(k)kB(L2×(L∞)κ−1, L2) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 x∈Rn khzisF −1 sup 2−k(s− nκ 2 )kmkl.u.Hsν H [mk(x,·)](z)dz kφνjkL1ν− 1 12 κYj=2 H [mk(x,·)]kL2(Rnκ )khzi−skL2(Rnκ ) 12 ≍ 2−k(s− 3nκ 4 (κ−1)ν− 1 n κYj=2 νj n 4 ν− 1 12 2 − n 4 (κ−1)+ 1 12 ). Now, we only need to proceed as in the first part, in order to obtain the estimate kTmkB(L2×(L∞)κ−1, L2) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)), (4.13) 28 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY 2 + n for s > 3nκ 4 (κ − 1) − 1 (Tm(k)f, g) ≤ X2k≤ν<2k+1 sup x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 H [mk(x,·)](z)dz 12 . The last statement can be proved by observing that × kf1kLpkφν1kLp′ kfjkL∞kφνjkL1kgkLp′ (ZRn φν1(x) · · · φνκ (x)pdx) 1 p κYj=2 . X2k≤ν<2k+1 x∈RnZRnκ φν(z)F −1 sup H [mk(x,·)](z)dz × kf1kLpkφν1kLp′kφν1kLp kfjkL∞kφνjkL1kgkLp′ , κYj=2 where in the last line we have used again that the L∞-norm of Hermite functions is O(1). Now, if we denote by γp the exponent that according to Lemma 2.4 satisfies (4.14) and we assume that ν1 := max1≤j≤κ νj (which can be obtained by a simple permutation of the ν′ kφν1kLpkφν1kLp′ . ν1γp, js) we obtain ν1 ≍ ν, and the estimate kφν1kLpkφνkLp′ kφνjkL1kφνjkL∞ . νγp+ (κ−1)(n−1) 2 . κYj=2 In the last line according to Lemma 2.4 we have used the estimate kφνjkL1kφνjkL∞ . ν 2 . Now, if we repeat the argument of the first part we obtain n−1 kTm(k)kB(Lp×(L∞)κ−1, Lp) . X2k≤ν<2k+1 ≍ 2−k(s− 3nκ and consequently the estimate 2−k(s− nκ 2 )kmkl.u.Hs2k (n−1)(κ−1) 2 +kγp 2 − (n−1)(κ−1) 2 −γp)kmkl.u.Hs, kTmkB(Lp×(L∞)κ−1, Lp) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)), for s > 3nκ 2 + (n−1)(κ−1) 2 + γp. Thus we conclude the proof. (cid:3) Remark 4.2. The different regularity orders s imposed to obtain the boundedness of multilinear pseudo-multipliers in Proposition 4.1 for p = 1, 2 or other values of p, lie in the slight variations that we use for the proof of every specific case. To be more precise, these differences appear as consequence of the conclusions (4.8) for p = 1, (4.12) for p = 2, (where we have used strongly that the L2-norm of every Hermite functions is normalised) and the estimate (4.14) when 2 < p < ∞. Let us mention that our main strategy in the proof of Proposition 4.5 will be to use the real interpolation for p between p0 = 1 and p1 = 2 or p between p1 = 2 and arbitrary p with 2 < p < ∞, together with the different regularity orders imposed in Proposition 4.1. With a similar proof, as in the previous result, we present the following propo- sition. H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 29 Proposition 4.3. Let us consider a pseudo-multiplier Tm defined on D(Rn)κ 0 where m : Rn × Rnκ → C satisfies the with symbol m = {m(x, ν)}x∈Rn,ν∈Nnκ condition kmkl.u.,H s := sup Then 2 )khzisF [m(x,·)ψ(2−k · )](z)kL2(Rnκ z ) < ∞. (4.15) 2k(s− nκ k>0, x∈Rn 1. If s > 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)γ∞, the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from L1 × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into L1(Rn), and kTmkB(L1×(L∞)κ−1, L1) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). (4.16) 2. If s > 3nκ 2 + (κ−1)n 4 , the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from L2 × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into L2(Rn), and kTmkB(L2×(L∞)κ−1, L2) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)). (4.17) 3. If s > 3nκ 2 + (n−1)(κ−1) +γp, γp defined as in (2.11), the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from Lp × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into Lp(Rn), and 2 kTmkB(Lp×(L∞)κ−1, Lp) ≤ C(kmkl.u.,Hs + km(·, 0)kL∞(Rn)), for all 2 < p ≤ ∞. (4.18) Let us note that the second assertion of Proposition 4.1 requires symbols with , instead of its analogue condition in (4.3) where 12 . This difference is consequence of the different regularity order s > 3nκ we only need s > 3nκ Fourier transforms that we use to classify the regularity of symbols. 2 + (κ−1)n 4 − 1 2 + (κ−1)n 4 In order to present our multilinear result, we will need the following interpo- lation theorem which is valid for general measure spaces, but for simplicity we record it on Rn. Proposition 4.4 (Riesz-Thorin Interpolation). Let us assume that a linear opera- tor T can be extended to a bounded operator T : Lpi(Rn) → Lqi(Rn) for i ∈ {0, 1}. If 0 < θ < 1 and p, q are defined by (4.19) the operator T can be extended to a bounded operator T : Lp(Rn) → Lq(Rn) with operator norm estimated by 1/p = (1 − θ)/p0 + θ/p1, 1/q = (1 − θ)/q0 + θ/q1, kTkB(Lp,Lq) ≤ kTk1−θ B(Lp0 ,Lq0 )kTkθ B(Lp1 ,Lq1 ). (4.20) Although the Riesz-Thorin Interpolation Theorem is a well known result, we will use strongly the control on the norms given in (4.20). In the following result we will consider multilinear symbols satisfying Hormander conditions of order 3nκ (κ − 1)n , + 3nκ (n − 1)(κ − 1) + s > sn,κ,p := max{ 2 2 + (κ−1)n with γp defined as in (2.11). Let us note that 3nκ +γp can be not compared immediately because the sign of γp depends on the values of p. 2 + (n−1)(κ−1) 2 and 3nκ 2 4 4 2 + γp}, 30 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY Proposition 4.5. Let 2 ≤ κ < ∞, κ ∈ N0. Let us consider a multilinear pseudo- multiplier Tm defined on D(Rn)κ with symbol satisfying (4.2) or (4.15) for s > sn,κ,p := max{ 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)γ∞, 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)n 4 }, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, with γ∞, defined as in (2.11). Then the operator (4.21) extends to a bounded multilinear operator provided that 1 ≤ pj ≤ ∞, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, and 1 Tm : Lp1 × Lp2 × · · · × Lpκ−1 × Lpκ → Lp(Rn) . If m satisfies the condition (4.2) or (4.15) for p = 1 p1 + · · · + 1 pκ s > sn,κ,p := max{ 3nκ 2 + (κ − 1)n 4 , 3nκ 2 + (n − 1)(κ − 1) 2 + γp}, 1 . pκ + · · · + 1 with γp defined as in (2.11), then (4.21) holds true for all 2 ≤ p ≤ ∞ and p = 1 p1 Proof. In order to prove the statement we will use real interpolation together with induction on κ. Let us define the set M := {κ ∈ N : κ ≥ 2, and from (4.2) or (4.15) we deduce (4.21) for s > sn,κ,p}. (4.22) First, we will prove that κ = 2 ∈ M. Then, let us assume that a bilinear operator Tm satisfies (4.2) or (4.15). By Proposition 4.1 we have that Tm ∈ B(Lr×L∞, Lr) for r = 1, 2, provided that s > sn,κ,p := max{ 2 Now, if we fix g0 ∈ L∞ and we consider the operator 2 + (κ − 1)γ∞, 3nκ 3nκ + (κ − 1)n 4 }. Tm,0 := Tm(·, g0), then Tm,0 ∈ B(Lr) for r = 1, 2, and by real interpolation for all 1 ≤ r ≤ 2. Moreover, if r is given by 1 r = 1 − θ 1 + θ 2 , for some 0 < θ < 1, and we taking into account the norm estimates kTm,0kB(L1) ≤ kTmkB(L1×L∞,L1)kg0kL∞, kTm,0kB(L2) ≤ kTmkB(L2×L∞,L2)kg0kL∞, (4.23) by application of (4.20) we have B(L1×L∞,L1)kTmkθ kTm,0kB(Lr) ≤ kTmk1−θ (4.24) Consequently we deduce the boundedness of Tm from Lp × L∞ into Lp, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2. Similarly we obtain the boundedness of Tm from L∞ × Lp into Lp. Now if we repeat the argument for every entry of Tm, i.e., first fixing the first argument and later fix the second argument, by interpolation we have the boundedness of Tm from Lp1 × Lp2 into Lp, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, with p1 and p2 satisfying the relation B(L2×L∞,L2)kg0kL∞. 1 p1 = θ p and 1 p2 = 1 − θ p (4.25) H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 31 p1 + 1 p2 for some θ ∈ [0, 1]. Clearly, 1 = 1. Now, we will assume that every integer number s less that κ belongs to M. So, let us assume now that we have a mul- tilinear operator Tm on D(Rm)κ. By Proposition 4.1 the operator Tm extends to a bounded multilinear operator from Lr × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × L∞ into Lr(Rn), for r = 1, 2. If we consider g0 ∈ L∞ and similarly, as in the bilinear case, we define Tm,0 := Tm(·,·,· · · ,·, g0), fixing the last argument of Tm we obtain a multilinear operator on D(Rm)κ−1, and by considering that κ − 1 ∈ M, we have that (4.26) extends to a bounded multilinear operator provided that 1 ≤ pj ≤ ∞, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 and 1 Tm,0 : Lp1 × Lp2 × · · · × Lpκ−1 → Lp(Rn) . As a consequence we obtain that p = 1 p1 + · · · + 1 pκ−1 Tm : Lp1 × Lp2 × · · · × Lpκ−1 × L∞ → Lp(Rn), (4.27) is bounded. Because Tm : L∞ × L∞ × · · · × L∞ × Lp → Lp(Rn) (4.28) is bounded for all 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, we can fix every argument of Tm and apply the real interpolation in order to provide the boundedness of Tm from L p1 ×L p2 ×· · ·×L pκ Lp(Rn), where θ pi = 1 pi for 1 ≤ i ≤ κ − 1, and 1 − θ p = 1 pκ , for some 0 ≤ θ ≤ 1. Now, we finish the proof of induction by observing that 1 pi = θ p + 1 − θ p = 1 p , and κ ∈ M, (4.29) κXi=1 so, we have proved that M = {κ ∈ N : κ ≥ 2}. Now, in a similar way we can use statements 2 and 3 of Proposition 4.1 and the real interpolation (by repetition of the arguments above) in order to provide the boundedness of Tm for the case when 2 ≤ p < ∞. (cid:3) Remark 4.6. Taking into account that γ∞ = n−1 for n ≥ 2 and for n = 1, 2 γ∞ = 1/6, we can compute explicitly the regularity order sn,κ,p, 1 ≤ p ≤ 2, defined in the previous proposition. Indeed, if n ≥ 2, (κ − 1)n sn,κ,p := max{ and (κ − 1)(n − 1) + (κ − 1)γ∞, } = 3nκ 3nκ 3nκ + + 2 2 2 2 4 , 3nκ 3nκ (κ − 1)n 3nκ (κ − 1)n 2 2 + +(κ − 1)γ∞, sn,κ,p := max{ 4 for n = 1. Let us note that these regularity orders cannot be applied to κ = 1, in order to recover those regularity orders given in the linear case, because our Proposition 4.5 is a consequence of Proposition 4.1 whose proof uses strongly that κ ≥ 2. } = + = + 4 4 2 3κ 2 κ − 1 , 32 D. CARDONA AND M. RUZHANSKY References 1. Bagchi, S. Thangavelu, S. On Hermite pseudo-multipliers. J. Funct. Anal. 268 (1) (2015), 140 -- 170. 2. Bonami, A., Clerc, J.L. Somes de Cesaro et multiplicaturs des developments en harmonics spheriques. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 183 (1973), 223 -- 263. 3. Blunck, S. A Hormander-type spectral multiplier theorem for operators without heat kernel. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (5) 2 (2003), no. 3, 449 -- 459. 4. Bui, T. A., Duong, X. T. Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces associated to Hermite operators. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 21 (2015), no. 2, 405 -- 448. 5. Chen, P., Ouhabaz, E. M., Sikora, A., Yan, L. Restriction estimates, sharp spectral multi- pliers and endpoint estimates for Bochner-Riesz means. J. Anal. Math. 129 (2016), 219 -- 283. 6. Coifman, R., Meyer, Y. On commutators of singular integrals and bilinear singular integrals, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 212 (1975), 315 -- 331. 7. Coifman, R., Meyer, Y. Au del`a des op´erateurs pseudo-diff´erentiels, Ast´erisque 57 (1978), 1 -- 185. 8. Coifman, R., Meyer, Y. Commutateurs dint´egrales singuli`eres et op´erateurs multilin´eaires, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 28 (1978), 177 -- 202. 9. Duoandikoetxea, J. Fourier Analysis, Amer. Math. Soc. (2001) 10. Epperson, J. Hermite multipliers and pseudo-multipliers, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 124 (1996), no. 7, 2061 -- 2068. 11. Grafakos, L., Miyachi, A., Tomita, N. On multilinear Fourier multipliers of limited smooth- ness. Canad. J. Math. 65 (2013), no. 2, 299 -- 330. 12. Grafakos, L., Nguyen, H. V. Multilinear Fourier multipliers with minimal Sobolev regularity, I. Colloq. Math. 144 (2016), no. 1, 1 -- 30. 13. Grafakos, L., Miyachi, A., Nguyen, H. V., Tomita, N. Multilinear Fourier multipliers with minimal Sobolev regularity, II. J. Math. Soc. Japan 69 (2017), no. 2, 529 -- 562. 14. Hormander, L. (1960) Estimates for translation invariant operators in Lp spaces. Acta Math., 104, 93 -- 140. 15. Koch, H., Tataru, D. Lp-eigenfunction bounds for the Hermite operator. Duke Math. J. 128 (2005), 369 -- 392. 16. Mauceri, G. The Weyl transform and bounded operators on Lp(Rn). J. Funct. Anal. 39(3), (1980), 408 -- 429. 17. Mihlin, S.G. On the multipliers of Fourier integrals. Dokl. Akad. Naulc SSSR (N. S.), 109 (1956), 701 -- 703 (Russian). 18. Petrushev, P., Xu, Y. Decomposition of spaces of distributions induced by Hermite expan- sions. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 14 (2008), no. 3, 372 -- 414. 19. Prugovecki, E. Quantum mechanics in Hilbert space. Second edition. Pure and Applied Mathematics, 92. Academic Press, Inc, New York-London, 1981. 20. Ruzhansky M., Tokmagambetov N., Nonharmonic analysis of boundary value problems, Int. Math. Res. Notices, (2016) 2016 (12), 3548 -- 3615. 21. Ruzhansky M., Tokmagambetov N., Nonharmonic analysis of boundary value problems without WZ condition, Math. Model. Nat. Phenom., 12 (2017), 115 -- 140. 22. Ruzhansky, M., Turunen, V., Pseudo-differential Operators and Symmetries: Background Analysis and Advanced Topics. Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel, (2010). 23. Strichartz, R. Multipliers for spherical harmonics expansions. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 167 (1972), 115-124. 24. Sikora, A., Yan, L., Yao, X. Sharp spectral multipliers for operators satisfying generalized Gaussian estimates. J. Funct. Anal. 266 (2014), no. 1, 368 -- 409. 25. Simon, B. Distributions and their Hermite expansions. J. Math. Phys. 12 (1971), 140 -- 148. 26. Stempak, K. Multipliers for eigenfunction expansions of some Schrdinger operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 93 (1985), 477 -- 482. H ORMANDER CONDITION FOR PSEUDO-MULTIPLIERS 33 27. Stempak, K., Torre, J.L. On g-functions for Hermite function expansions, Acta Math. Hung. 109 , 99 -- 125. 28. Stempak, K., Torre, J.L. BMO results for operators associated to Hermite expansions, Illinois J. Math. 49 (2005), 1111 -- 1132. 29. Thangavelu, S. Multipliers for Hermite expansions, Revist. Mat. Ibero. 3 (1987), 1 -- 24. 30. Thangavelu, S. Lectures on Hermite and Laguerre Expansions, Math. Notes, vol. 42, Prince- ton University Press, Princeton, 1993. 31. Thangavelu, S. Hermite and special Hermite expansions revisited, Duke Math. J., 94(2) (1998), 257 -- 278. Duv´an Cardona: Department of Mathematics Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Bogot´a Colombia E-mail address [email protected]; [email protected] Michael Ruzhansky: Department of Mathematics Ghent University, Belgium and School of Mathematics Queen Mary University of London United Kingdom E-mail address [email protected]
1604.01872	1	1604	2016-04-07T04:23:09	Contractivity and complete contractivity for finite dimensional Banach Spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	Choose an arbitrary but fixed set of $n\times n$ matrices $A_1, \ldots, A_m$ and let $\Omega_\mathbf A\subset \mathbb C^m$ be the unit ball with respect to the norm $\\|\cdot\\|_{\mathbf A},$ where $\\|(z_1,\ldots ,z_m)\\|_{\mathbf A}=\\|z_1A_1+ \cdots+z_mA_m\\|_{\rm op}.$ It is known that if $m\geq 3$ and $\mathbb B$ is any ball in $\mathbb C^m$ with respect to some norm, say $\\|\cdot\\|_{\mathbb B},$ then there exists a contractive linear map $L:(\mathbb C^m,\\|\cdot\\|^*_{\mathbb B})\to \mathcal M_k$ which is not completely contractive. The characterization of those balls in $\mathbb C^2$ for which contractive linear maps are always completely contractive thus remains open. We answer this question for balls of the form $\Omega_\mathbf A$ in $\mathbb C^2.$	math.FA	math	CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE Abstract. Choose an arbitrary but fixed set of n × n matrices A1, . . . , Am and let ΩA ⊂ Cm be the unit ball with respect to the norm k · kA, where k(z1, . . . , zm)kA = kz1A1 + · · · + zmAmkop. It is known that if m ≥ 3 and B is any ball in Cm with respect to some norm, say k · kB, then there exists a contractive linear map L : (Cm, k · k∗ B) → Mk which is not completely contractive. The characterization of those balls in C2 for which contractive linear maps are always completely contractive thus remains open. We answer this question for balls of the form ΩA in C2. 1. Introduction In 1936 von Neumann (see [17, Corollary 1.2]) proved that if T is a bounded linear operator on a separable complex Hilbert space H, then, for all complex polynomials p, if and only if kTk ≤ 1. Or, equivalently, the homomorphism ρT induced by T on the polynomial ring P [z] by the rule ρT (p) = p(T ) is contractive if and only if T is contractive. kp(T )k ≤ kpk∞,D := sup{p(z) : z < 1} The original proof of this inequality is intricate. A couple of decades later, Sz.-Nazy (see [17, Theorem 4.3]) proved that a bounded linear operator T admits a unitary (power) dilation if and only if there exists a unitary operator U on a Hilbert space K ⊇ H such that PH p(U )H = p(T ), for all polynomials p. The existence of such a dilation may be established by actually constructing a unitary operator U dilating T. This construction is due to Schaffer (cf. [14]). Clearly, the von Neumann inequality follows from the existence of a power dilation via the spectral theorem for unitary operators. Let P = ((pij)) be a k × k matrix valued polynomial in m variables. Let kPk∞,Ω = sup{k ((pij(z))) kop : z ∈ Ω}, where Ω ⊆ Cm is a bounded open and connected set. Define P (T ) to be the operator ((pij(T ))) , 1 ≤ i, j ≤ k. The homomorphism ρT is said to be completely contractive if kP (T )k ≤ kPk∞,Ω, k = 1, 2, . . . . A deep theorem due to Arveson (cf. [1]) says that T has a normal boundary dilation if and only if ρT is completely contractive. Clearly, if ρT is completely contractive, then it is contractive. The dilation theorems due to Sz.-Nazy and Ando (cf. [17]) give the non-trivial converse in the case of the disc and the bi-disc algebras. However, Parrott (cf. [15]) showed that there are three commuting contractions for which it is impossible to find commuting unitaries dilating them. In view of Arveson's theorem this naturally leads to the question of finding other algebras O(Ω) for which all contractive homomorphisms are necessarily completely contractive. At the moment, this is known to be true of the disc, bi-disc The work of G.Misra was supported, in part, through the J C Bose National Fellowship and UGC-CAS. The work of A. Pal was supported, in part, through the UGC-NET and the IFCAM Research Fellowship. The results of this paper are taken from his PhD thesis, after significant simplifications, submitted to the Indian Institute of Science in 2014. 1 2 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE (cf. [17]), symmetrized bi-disc (cf. [3]) and the annulus algebras (cf. [2]). Counter examples are [8]) and any ball in Cm, m ≥ 3, as we will explain known for domains of connectivity ≥ 2 (cf. below. Neither Ando's proof of the existence of a unitary dilation for a pair of commuting contractions, nor the counter example to such an existence theorem due to Parrott involved the notion of complete contractivity directly. In the papers [10, 11, 12], it was shown that the examples of Parrott are not even 2 -- contractive. In these papers, for any bounded, connected and open set Ω ⊂ Cm, the homomorphism ρV : O(Ω) → Mp+q, induced by an m-tuple of p × q matrices V = (V1, . . . , Vm), modeled after the examples of Parrott, was introduced. This was further studied, in depth, by V. Paulsen [18], where he showed that the question of "contractive vs completely contractive" for Parrott like homomorphisms ρV is equivalent to the question of "contractive vs completely contractive" for the linear maps LV from some finite dimensional Banach space X to Mn(C). The existence of linear maps of the form LV which are contractive but not completely contractive for m ≥ 5 were found by him. A refinement (see remark at the bottom of p. 76 in [16]) includes the case m = 3, 4, leaving the question of what happens when m = 2 open. This is Problem 1 on page 79 of [16] in the list of "Open Problems". For the normed linear space (C2,k·kA), we show, except when the pair A1, A2 is simultaneously diagonalizable, that there is a contractive linear map on (C2,k·kA) taking values in p×q matrices, which is not completely contractive. We point out that the results of Paulsen used deep ideas from geometry of finite dimensional Banach spaces. In contrast, our results are elementary in nature, although the computations, at times, are somewhat involved. 2. Preliminaries The norm kzkA = kz1A1 + ··· + zmAmkop, z ∈ Cm, is obtained from the embedding of the linear space Cm into the C∗ algebra of n × n matrices via the map PA(z) := z1A1 + ··· + zmAm. Let ΩA ⊂ Cm be the unit ball with respect to the norm k · kA. Let O(ΩA) denote the algebra of functions each of which is holomorphic on some open set containing the closed unit ball ¯ΩA. Given p × q matrices V1, . . . , Vm and a function f ∈ O(ΩA), define (2.1) i=1 ∂if (w) Vi (cid:17) for a fixed w ∈ ΩA. ρV(f ) :=(cid:16) f (w)Ip Pm 0 f (w)Iq Clearly, ρV : (O(ΩA),k · k∞) → (Mp+q(C),k · kop) defines an algebra homomorphism. At the outset we point out the interesting and useful fact that ρV is contractive on O(ΩA) if and only if it is contractive on the subset of functions which vanish at w. This is the content of the following lemma. The proof is reproduced from [18, Lemma 5.1], a direct proof appears in [10, Lemma 3.3]. Lemma 2.1. supkfk∞=1{kρV(f )kop : f ∈ O(ΩA)} ≤ 1 if and only if supkgk∞=1{kρV(g)kop : g ∈ O(ΩA), g(w) = 0} ≤ 1. Proof. The implication in one direction is obvious. To prove the converse, assume that kρV(g)k ≤ 1 for every g such that g(w) = 0 and kgk∞ = 1. For f ∈ O(ΩA) with kfk∞ = 1 let φf (w) be the Mobius map of the disc which maps f (w) to 0. We let g = φf (w) ◦ f . Then g(w) = 0,kgk∞ = 1 and, from our assumption, kρV(g)k ≤ 1. So kρV(f )k = kρV(φ−1 f (w) ◦ gk f (w)(cid:0)ρV(g)(cid:1)k since ρV is a homomorphism = kφ−1 ≤ 1. CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 3 In the last step we use the von Neumann inequality since φ−1 disc to itself. f (w) is a rational function from the (cid:3) Note: For the rest of this work, we restrict to the case where w = 0 in the definition (2.1) of ρV above. The following lemma provides a characterization of the unit ball Ω∗A with respect to the dual norm k · k∗A in Cm, that is Ω∗A = (Cm,k · k∗A)1. Lemma 2.2. The dual unit ball Ω∗A =(cid:8)(cid:0)∂1f (0), ∂2f (0),··· , ∂mf (0)(cid:1) : f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0(cid:9). Proof. Given z ∈ Cm such that kzkA = 1 and f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0, we define gz : D → ΩA by Then f ◦ gz : D → D with (f ◦ gz)(0) = 0. Applying the Schwarz Lemma to the function (f ◦ gz) we get gz(λ) = λz, λ ∈ D. 1 ≥ (f ◦ gz)′(0) = f′(gz(0)) · g′z(0) = f′(0) · g′z(0) = f′(0) · z. In the above, f′(0) · z =Pm Hence(cid:0)∂1f (0), ∂2f (0),··· , ∂mf (0)(cid:1) ∈ Ω∗A. Conversely, given w ∈ Ω∗A, we define fw(z) = w · z so that ∂ifw(0) = wi. i=1(∂if (0))zi, etc. 2.1. The Maps L(k) V : From Lemma 2.1 above it follows that (cid:3) (2.2) kρVk ≤ 1 if and only if sup kfk∞=1,f (0)=0 k ∂if (0) Vikop ≤ 1. Considering Lemma 2.2 and the equivalence (2.2) above it is natural to consider the induced linear map LV : (Cm,k · k∗A) → Mp,q(C) given by mXi=1 It follows from (2.2) above that LV(w) = w1V1 + ··· + wmVm. kρVk ≤ 1 if and only if kLVk ≤ 1. We will show now that the complete contractivity of ρV and LV are also related similarly. For a holomorphic function F : ΩA → Mk with kFk = supz∈ΩA kF (z)k, we define (2.3) ρ(k) V (F ) := (ρV(Fij))m i,j=1 =(cid:16) F (0)⊗I Pm 0 i=1(∂iF (0))⊗Vi F (0)⊗I (cid:17) . Using a method similar to that used for ρV it can be shown that kρ(k) V k ≤ 1 if and only if sup (∂iF (0)) ⊗ Vik : F ∈ Hol(ΩA, (Mk)1), F (0) = 0} ≤ 1, that is, (by repeating the argument used for ρV) we have F {k mXi=1 V k ≤ 1 if and only if kL(k) kρ(k) V k ≤ 1, where is the map L(k) V : (Cm ⊗ Mk,k · k∗A,k) → (Mk ⊗ Mp,q,k · kop) L(k) V (Θ1, Θ2,··· , Θm) = Θ1 ⊗ V1 + Θ2 ⊗ V2 + ··· + Θm ⊗ Vm for Θ1, Θ2,··· , Θm ∈ Mk. 4 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE 2.2. The polynomial PA. A very useful construct for our analysis is the matrix valued polyno- mial PA with PA(ΩA) ⊆ (Mn,k · kop)1 defined by PA(z1, z2,··· , zm) = z1A1 + z2A2 + ··· + zmAm, with the norm kPAk∞ = sup(z1,··· ,zm)∈ΩA kPA(z1,··· , zm)kop. Note that kPAk∞ = 1 by definition. The typical procedure used to show the existence of a homomorphism which is contractive but not completely contractive is to construct a contractive homomorphism ρV (by a suitable choice of V) and to then show that its evaluation on PA, that is, ρ(n) V (PA), has norm greater than 1. 2.3. Homomorphisms induced by m-vectors. We now consider the special situation when the matrices V1,··· , Vm are vectors in Cm realized as row m-vectors. For w = (w1, . . . , wm) in some bounded domain Ω ⊆ Cm, the commuting m-tuple of (m + 1)× (m + 1) matrices of the form 0 wiIm(cid:17), 1 ≤ i ≤ m, induce the homomorphism ρV via the usual functional calculus, that is, (cid:16) wi Vi ρV (f ) := f(cid:0)(cid:16) w1 V1 0 w1Im(cid:17), . . . ,(cid:16) wm Vm 0 wmIm(cid:17)(cid:1), f ∈ O(Ω), see (2.1). The localization of a commuting m - tuple T of operators in the class B1(Ω), introduced in ([5, 6]), is also a commuting m - tuple of (m + 1) × (m + 1) matrices, which is exactly of the form described above. The vectors V1, . . . , Vm appearing in such localizations are given explicitly in terms of the curvature of the holomorphic Hermitian vector bundle corresponding to T as shown in [6]. The contractivity of the homomorphism ρV then results in curvature inequalities (see [9, 11, 12, 13]). Let Vi = (cid:0)vi1 vi2 contractivity and complete contractivity in this special case, where, as before, we assume that Ω = ΩA and w = 0. vim(cid:1) , i = 1,··· , m. The propositions below are useful to study ··· Proposition 2.3. The following are equivalent: (i) ρV is contractive, (ii) supPm j=1 zj2≤1 kPm j=1 zj Bjk2 op ≤ 1, where Bj =Pm i=1 vijAi. Proof. We have shown that the homomorphisms k ρV kO(ΩA)→Mm+1(C) is contractive if and only if A)→(Cm,k · k2) is contractive (equivalently if kL∗Vk(Cm,k· k2)→(Cm,k· kA) is the linear map kLVk(Cm,k · k∗ contractive). ... ... ... v1m Hence the contractivity of L∗V is given by the condition that vm1 ... vmm(cid:19) . The matrix representation of L∗V is(cid:18) v11 j=1 zj2≤1(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) zm(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)A vm1 ... vmm(cid:19)(cid:18) z1 (cid:18) v11 From the definition of k · kA it follows that ... v1m Pm sup ... ... ... ... ... ≤ 1. kL∗Vk(Cm,k · k2)→(Cm,k · kA) ≤ 1 if and only if i=1 vijAi. where Bj =Pm In particular, if V1 =(cid:0)u 0(cid:1) and V2 =(cid:0)0 v(cid:1) , the condition (ii) above becomes sup j=1 zj2≤1kz1uA1 + z2vA2k2 ≤ 1, P2 which is equivalent to the following two conditions: sup j=1 zj2≤1k Pm mXj=1 zj Bjk2 op ≤ 1 (cid:3) CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 5 inf V (PA)k ≤ 1, ··· Proposition 2.4. The following are equivalent: 1k2 or v2 ≤ 1 (i) u2 ≤ 1 2k2 kA∗ kA∗ (ii) β∈C2,kβk=1n1 − u2kA∗1βk2 − v2kA∗2βk2 + uv2(cid:16)kA∗1βk2kA∗2βk2 − hA1A∗2β, βi 2(cid:17)o ≥ 0. (i) kρ(n) (ii) T he n × mn matrix(cid:0)B1 B2 Proof. Since PA(0) = 0, it follows from the definition (2.3) that kρ(n) For Vi =(cid:0)vi1 Thus kρ(n) In particular if V1 =(cid:0)u 0(cid:1) and V2 =(cid:0)0 v(cid:1) the condition (ii) above becomes vim(cid:1) , we have A1 ⊗ V1 + . . . + Am ⊗ Vm =(cid:0)B1 B2 ··· Bm(cid:1) is contractive, where Bj =Pm V (PA)k ≤ 1 if and only if k(cid:0)B1 B2 ··· Bm(cid:1)k ≤ 1. kA1 ⊗ V1 + . . . + Am ⊗ Vmk ≤ 1. ··· Bm(cid:1) V (PA)k ≤ 1 if and only if i=1 vijAi. β∈C2,kβk=1n1 − u2kA∗1βk2 − v2kA∗2βk2o ≥ 0. inf (cid:3) Note: For most of this paper we will restrict to the two dimensional case. That is, we consider C2 with the norm defined by a matrix pair (A1, A2). In fact, for the most part, we even restrict to the situation where A1, A2 are 2 × 2 matrices. This is adequate for our primary purpose of constructing homomorphisms of O(ΩA) which are contractive but not completely contractive. Many of the results can be adapted to higher dimensional situation. 3. Defining Function and Test Functions Recall the matrix valued polynomial PA : ΩA → (M2,k · kop)1 defined earlier by PA(z1, z2) = z1A1 + z2A2, where (M2,k · kop)1 is the matrix unit ball with respect to the operator norm. For (z1, z2) in ΩA, the norm by definition of the polynomial PA. kPAk∞ := sup (z1,z2)∈ΩA kPA(z1, z2)kop = 1 Let B2 be the unit ball in C2. For (α, β) ∈ B2 × B2, define p(α,β) A map : ΩA → D to be the linear p(α,β) A (z1, z2) = hPA(z1, z2)α, βi = z1hA1α, βi + z2hA2α, βi. A k∞, for any pair of vectors (α, β) in B2 × B2, is at most 1 by definition. Let The sup norm kp(α,β) PA denote the collection of linear functions {p(α,β) A : (α, β) ∈ B2 × B2}. The map PA which we call the 'Defining Function' of the domain and the collection of functions PA which we call a family of 'Test Functions' encode a significant amount of information relevant to our purpose about the homomorphism ρV. For instance ρV is contractive if its restriction to PA is contractive. Also the lack of complete contractivity can often be shown by evaluating ρ(2) on PA. Some of the details are outlined in the lemma below. V 6 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE Lemma 3.1. In the notation fixed in the preceding discussion, we have (i) sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k ≤ kρ(2) V (PA)k, (ii) ρV is contractive if and only if sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k ≤ 1. Proof of (i). Since by definition, it follows that ρV(p(α,β) A ) =(cid:18) 0 (∂1p(α,β) A )k = k(∂1p(α,β) 0 kρV(p(α,β) A (0)) V1 + (∂2p(α,β) A (0)) V2 0 (cid:19) A (0)) V1 + (∂2p(α,β) A (0)) V2kop = khA1α, βi V1 + hA2α, βi V2kop = sup kuk=kvk=1 hA1α, βihV1u, vi + hA2α, βihV2u, vi. Hence (3.1) sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k = = sup kαk=kβk=1 sup kαk=kβk=1 = sup kαk=kβk=1 ≤ kρ(2) V (PA)k. sup sup kuk=kvk=1 hA1α, βihV1u, vi + hA2α, βihV2u, vi kuk=kvk=1 h(A1 ⊗ V1 + A2 ⊗ V2)α ⊗ u, β ⊗ vi kuk=kvk=1 hρ(2) V (PA)α ⊗ u, β ⊗ vi sup Proof of (ii). As indicated earlier the contractivity of ρV is equivalent to the contractivity of given by the formula LV : (C2,k · k∗A) → (Mp,q,k · kop) LV(ω1, ω2) = ω1V1 + ω2V2. So we identify the conditions for the contractivity of LV : A≤1 kω1V1 + ω2V2kop k(ω1 ,ω2)k∗ sup kLVk = = sup k(ω1 ,ω2)k∗ A≤1 sup kuk=kvk=1 ω1hV1u, vi + ω2hV2u, vi. Hence, since (ω1, ω2) lies in the dual of ΩA, kLVk ≤ 1 ⇐⇒ (hV1u, vi,hV2u, vi) ∈ ΩA ∀u, v such that kuk = kvk = 1 ⇐⇒ sup ⇐⇒ sup kuk=kvk=1 khV1u, viA1 + hV2u, viA2kop ≤ 1 kαk=kβk=1 kuk=kvk=1 hA1α, βihV1u, vi + hA2α, βihV2u, vi ≤ 1 sup ⇐⇒ sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k ≤ 1 from (3.1) above. (cid:3) (cid:3) As mentioned earlier, by choosing a pair (V1, V2) such that the inequality in (i) above is strict, we can often construct a contractive homomorphism which is not completely contractive. We illustrate below choices of (V1, V2) for the Euclidean ball for which the inequality is strict. CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 7 Example 3.2. (Euclidean Ball) Choosing A = (( 1 0 clidean ball B2 in C2. Choose V1 = (v11 v12), V2 = (v21 v22). We will prove that 0 0 ) , ( 0 1 0 0 )) , we see that ΩA defines the Eu- if V1 and V2 are linearly independent. sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k < kρ(2) V (PA)kop, V (PA)kop > 1. This example of a contractive homomorphism of the ball algebra which is not completely contractive was found in [10, 11]. In fact we can choose (V1, V2) such that supkαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) Theorem 3.3. For ΩA = B2, let V1 =(cid:0)v11 v12(cid:1) , V2 =(cid:0)v21 v22(cid:1). Then A )k ≤ 1 and kρ(2) (i) sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) V (PA)k2 A )k2 = k ( v11 v12 op v21 v22 ) k2 HS (HS represents the Hilbert − Schmidt norm) (ii) kρ(2) op = k ( v11 v12 Consequently, supkαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) v21 v22 )k2 A )k < kρ(2) Proof. By the definition of ρV we have V (PA)kop if V1 and V2 are linearly independent. sup kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) A )k2 = = = sup sup sup kαk=kβk=kuk=kvk=1 hA1α, βihV1u, vi + hA2α, βihV2u, vi2 kαk=kβk=kuk=1 α1(v11u1 + v12u2) + α2(v21u1 + v22u2)2β12 kαk=kuk=1 α1(v11u1 + v12u2) + α2(v21u1 + v22u2)2 kuk=1 v11u1 + v12u22 + v21u1 + v22u22 =(cid:13)(cid:13) ( v11 v12 v21 v22 )(cid:13)(cid:13)2 = sup op. On the other hand, we have kρ(2) V (PA)k2 op = kV1k2 + kV2k2 = k ( v11 v12 v21 v22 )k2 HS. If V1 and V2 are linearly independent and we have (cid:13)(cid:13) ( v11 v12 v21 v22 )(cid:13)(cid:13)2 kαk=kβk=1 kρV(p(α,β) sup op < k ( v11 v12 v21 v22 ) k2 HS A )k < kρ(2) V (PA)kop. (cid:3) Now choose V1 =(cid:0)1 0(cid:1) and V2 =(cid:0)0 1(cid:1). From Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 3.3 it follows that ρV is contractive but kρ(2) V (PA)k = √2. 4. Unitary Equivalence and Linear Equivalence If U and W are 2 × 2 unitary matrices and eA = (U A1W, U A2W ), then k(z1, z2)kA = kz1A1 + z2A2kop = kz1(U A1W ) + z2(U A2W )kop = k(z1, z2)keA. There are, therefore, various choices of the matrix pair (A1, A2) related as above which give rise to the same norm. We use this freedom to ensure that A1 is diagonal. Consider the invertible linear transformation (z1, z2) 7→ (z1, z2) on C2 defined as follows: 8 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE For z = (z1, z2) in C2, let where p, q, r, s ∈ C. Then where eA is related to A as follows: z1 = pz1 + q z2 z2 = rz1 + sz2, k(z1, z2)kA = k(z1, z2)keA, eA1 = pA1 + rA2 eA2 = qA1 + sA2. kT zkA = kzkA(T⊗I). More concisely, if T is the linear transformation above on C2, then In particular T maps ΩeA onto ΩA. Lemma 4.1. For k = 1, 2, . . . , the contractivity of the linear maps L(k) (C2⊗ Mk,k·k∗ eA,k and conversely, where eA = A(T ⊗ I) and eV = (T ⊗ I)V. )→(Mk⊗Mp,q,k·kop) ≤ 1 ⇐⇒ kL(k) ) determine the contractivity of the linear maps L(k) eV Proof. For k = 1, 2, . . . , we have to show that V k(C2⊗Mk,k·k∗ eV k(C2⊗Mk,k·k∗ kL(k) eA,k V defined on defined on (C2⊗ Mk,k·k∗A,k) A,k)→(Mk⊗Mp,q,k·kop) ≤ 1. We prove this result for the case k = 1, that is, for the map LV. The proof for the general case is similar. Consider the bijection between the spaces {f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0} and {ef ∈ Hol(ΩeA, D),ef (0) = 0} defined as follows: f 7→ ef = f ◦ T, ef 7→ f = ef ◦ T −1 Using this bijection k LV k(C2,k·k∗ eA )→(Mp,q ,k·kop) ≤ 1 ⇐⇒ sup ⇐⇒ sup ⇐⇒ sup ⇐⇒ sup ⇐⇒ k L(T⊗I)V k(C2,k·k∗ ef {kDef (0) · Vkop : ef ∈ Hol(ΩeA, D),ef (0) = 0} ≤ 1 f {kD(f ◦ T )(0) · Vkop : f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0} ≤ 1 f {kDf (0) T · Vkop : f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0} ≤ 1 f {kDf (0) · (T ⊗ I)Vkop : f ∈ Hol(ΩA, D), f (0) = 0} ≤ 1 A)→(Mp,q ,k·kop) ≤ 1 i=1 XiYi. It follows that, in our study of the existence of contractive homomorphisms which are not In the above, Df is a row vector, T is a 2 × 2 matrix and by an expression of the form X · Y we meanP2 completely contractive, two sets of matrices A = (A1, A2) and eA = (eA1, eA2) which are related through linear combinations as above yield the same result. We can, therefore, restrict our attention to a subcollection of matrices. (cid:3) Since A1 has already been chosen to be diagonal, we consider transformations as above with r = 0 to preserve the diagonal structure of A1. By choosing the parameters p, q, s suitably we can ensure that one diagonal entry of A1 is 1 and the diagonal entries of A2 are 1 and 0. By further CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 9 conjugating with a diagonal unitary and a permutation matrix it follows that we need to consider only the following three families of matrices: Table 1. Cases modulo unitary and linear equivalence A1 A2 (cid:18) 1 0 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 1 b (cid:18) d 0 0 1 (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 1 b (cid:18) 1 0 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 0 b c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ In the above, R+ represents the set of non-negative real numbers. 4.1. Simultaneously Diagonalizable Case. For the study of contractivity and complete con- tractivity in this situation we consider two possibilities. The first when A1 and A2 are simultane- ously diagonalizable and the second when they are not. The simultaneously diagonalizable case reduces to the case of the bi-disc where we know that any contractive homomorphism is completely contractive. In all the other cases (when A1 and A2 are not simultaneously diagonalizable) we show that there exists a contractive homomorphism which is not completely contractive. Consider first the case when A1 and A2 are simultaneously diagonalizable. Based on the discussion of linear equivalence above we need to study only the following possibilities: Table 2. Simultaneously diagonalizable cases A1 A2 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 1 0 (cid:18) 1 0 0 0 (cid:19) (cid:18) d 0 0 1 (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 1 0 0 0 (cid:19) Applying linear transformations as before, both cases can be reduced to A = (( 1 0 0 1 )) which represents the bi-disc. As mentioned earlier, it is known that any contractive homomorphism is completely contractive in this case. We now study the situation when A1 and A2 are not simultaneously diagonalizable. 0 0 ) , ( 0 0 10 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE 5. Contractivity, Complete Contractivity and Operator Space Structures We recall some notions about operator spaces which are relevant to our purpose. Definition 5.1. (cf. [17, Chapter 13, 14]) An abstract operator space is a linear space X together with a family of norms k · kk defined on Mk(X), k = 1, 2, 3, . . . , where k · k1 is simply a norm on the linear space X. These norms are required to satisfy the following compatibility conditions: (1) kT ⊕ Skp+q = max{kTkp,kSkq} and (2) kASBkp ≤ kAkopkSkqkBkop for all S ∈ Mq(X), T ∈ Mp(X) and A ∈ Mp,q(C), B ∈ Mq,p(C). Two such operator spaces (X,k · kk) and (Y,k · kk) are said to be completely isometric if there is a linear bijection T : X → Y such that T ⊗ Ik : (Mk(X),k·kk) → (Mk(Y ),k·kk) is an isometry for every k ∈ N. Here we have identified Mk(X) with X ⊗ Mk in the usual manner. We note that a normed linear space (X,k · k) admits an operator space structure if and only if there is an isometric embedding of it into the algebra of operators B(H) on some Hilbert space H. This is the well-known theorem of Ruan (cf. [16]). We recall here the notions of MIN and MAX operator spaces and a measure of their distance, α(X), following [17, Chapter 14]. Definition 5.2. The MIN operator structure M IN (X) on a (finite dimensional) normed linear space X is obtained by isometrically embedding X in the C∗ algebra C(cid:0)(X∗)1(cid:1), of continuous functions on the unit ball (X∗)1 of the dual space. Thus for ((vij)) in Mk(X), we set where the norm of a scalar matrix ((f (vij))) in Mk is the operator norm. k((vij ))kM IN = k((cvij ))k = sup{k((f (vij)))k : f ∈ (X∗)1}, For an arbitrary k × k matrix over X, we simply write k((vij ))kM IN (X) to denote its norm in Mk(X). This is the minimal way in which we represent the normed space as an operator space. There is also a 'maximal' representation which is denoted M AX(X). Definition 5.3. The operator space M AX(X) is defined by setting k((vij ))kM AX = sup{k((T (vij )))k : T : X → B(H)}, and the supremum is taken over all isometries T and all Hilbert spaces H. Every operator space structure on a normed linear space X 'lies between' M IN (X) and M AX(X). The extent to which the two operator space structures M IN (X) and M AX(X) differ is characterized by the constant α(X) introduced by Paulsen (cf.[17, Chapter 14]), which we recall below. Definition 5.4. The constant α(X) is defined as α(X) = sup{k((vij ))kM AX : k((vij ))kM IN ≤ 1, ((vij)) ∈ Mk(X), k ∈ N}. Thus α(X) = 1 if and only if the identity map is a complete isometry from M IN (X) to M AX(X). Equivalently, we conclude that there exists a unique operator space structure on X whenever α(X) is 1. Therefore, those normed linear spaces for which α(X) = 1 are rather special. Unfortunately, there aren't too many of them! The familiar examples are (C2,k · k∞), and consequently C2 with the ℓ1 norm. It is pointed out in [16, pp. 76]) that α(X) > 1 for dim(X) ≥ 3, refining an earlier result of Paulsen that α(X) > 1 whenever dim(X) ≥ 5. This leaves the question open for normed linear spaces whose dimension is 2. Returning to the space (C2,k · kA) with k(z1, z2)kA = kz1A1 + z2A2kop, we show below that α(ΩA) > 1 in a large number of cases. From [18, Theorem 4.2], it therefore follows that, in all these CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 11 cases, there must exist a contractive homomorphism of O(ΩA) into the algebra B(H) which is not completely contractive. In the remaining cases, the existence of a contractive homomorphism which is not completely contractive is established by a careful study of certain extremal problems. The norm k(z1, z2)kA = kz1A1 + z2A2kop defines a natural isometric embedding into M2(C) given by (z1, z2) 7→ z1A1 + z2A2. However, note that k(z1, z2)kA = kz1A1 + z2A2kop = kz1At 1 + z2At 2kop = k(z1, z2)kAt . We, therefore, get another isometric embedding into M2(C) given by (z1, z2) 7→ z1At In a variety of cases the operator spaces determined by these two embeddings are distinct and the parameter α > 1 in these cases. Therefore, the existence of contractive homomorphisms which are not completely contractive is established in these cases. We present the details below. 1 + z2At 2. Recall the map PA defined earlier by PA(z1, z2) = z1A1 + z2A2. Let P (2) A = PA ⊗ I2. For the three families of matrices A = (A1, A2) characterized in Table 1 we show that A and At define distinct operator space structures unless d = 1 or b = c. Theorem 5.5. Let Z1 = ( 1 0 kP (2) Proof. We illustrate the proof for the case A1 =(cid:0) 1 0 0 0 ). If d 6= 1 and b 6= c then kP (2) A (Z1, Z2)kop 6= 0 0 ) and Z2 = ( 0 1 At (Z1, Z2)kop. similarly. 0 d(cid:1) , A2 =(cid:0) 1 b c 0(cid:1). The other cases can be proved 1 (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)op ¯cZ ∗ 2 ¯dZ ∗ ¯c(Z1+Z2)Z ∗ c2Z2Z ∗ 2 +b ¯dZ2Z ∗ 2 +d2Z1Z ∗ . 2 op. Using the form of (Z1, Z2) this is equivalent to For this case kP (2) A (Z1, Z2)k2 (5.1) Similarly we have (5.2) At (Z1, Z2)k2 kP (2) A (Z1, Z2)k2 op = kP (2) Assume kP (2) bZ2 cZ2 bZ ∗ 2 cZ2(Z1+Z2)∗+bdZ1Z ∗ 2 op =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) (Z1+Z2) dZ1(cid:17)(cid:16) (Z1+Z2)∗ =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) (Z1+Z2)(Z1+Z2)∗+b2Z2Z ∗ op =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) (Z1+Z2)(Z1+Z2)∗+c2Z2Z ∗ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) 2+b2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) 2+c2 c2+d2(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)op At (Z1, Z2)k2 bZ2(Z1+Z2)∗+¯cdZ1Z ∗ 2 ¯c c b 2 1 1 (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)op 1 (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)op . b(Z1+Z2)Z ∗ 2 +c ¯dZ2Z ∗ 1 b2Z2Z ∗ 2 +d2Z1Z ∗ b b2+d2(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)op i.e. (b2 − c2)(1 − d2) = 0 (note that the matrices on the left and right have the same trace), from which the result follows. (cid:3) Since α(ΩA) = 1 if and only if the two operator spaces MIN(ΩA) and MAX(ΩA) are completely isometric, it follows from the Theorem we have just proved that if d 6= 1 and b 6= c, then α(X) > 1. Consequently, there exists a contractive homomorphism of O(ΩA) into B(H), which is not completely contractive. Example 5.6. (Euclidean Ball) The Euclidean ball B2 is characterized by A1 = ( 1 0 0 0 ) , A2 = ( 0 1 0 0 ). So, in Theorem 5.5, we have d 6= 1 and b 6= c. Hence A and At give rise to distinct operator space structures and, consequently, there exists a contractive homomorphism which is not completely contractive. 6. Cases not Amenable to the Operator Space Method Theorem 5.5 shows that there is a contractive homomorphism which is not completely con- tractive for all the choices of (A1, A2) listed in Table 1 except when d = 1 or b = c. We are, therefore, left with the following families of (A1, A2) to be considered: 12 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE Table 3. Cases not covered by the operator space approach A1 A2 0 0 0 (i) (ii) 0 eiθ (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 1 b (cid:18) 1 0 eiθ (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 0 b (cid:18) 1 (iii) (cid:18) eiθ 0 1 (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 1 b (cid:18) 1 0 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) 1 0 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C (cid:18) d 0 0 1 (cid:19) d ∈ C c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ (cid:18) 1 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C (cid:18) 0 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C (cid:18) 1 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C (iv) (vi) (v) c c c These six families are not disjoint and have been classified as such on the basis of the method of proof used. 6.1. Dual norm method. We first consider a special case of type (ii) in Table 3 with A1 = ( 1 0 0 1 ) , A2 = ( 0 1 0 0 ). Although this case is covered by the more general method to be outlined later we present an alternate, interesting procedure for this example since it is possible to explicitly calculate the dual norm k · k∗A in this case. Equipped with the information about the dual norm we can directly construct a pair V = (V1, V2) such that kLVk ≤ 1 and kL(2) V (PA)k > 1. Note that in this case and the unit ball k(z1, z2)kA = z2 +pz22 + 4z12 ΩA = {(z1, z2) : z12 + z2 < 1}. 2 Lemma 6.1. Let A1 = ( 1 0 0 1 ) , A2 = ( 0 1 0 0 ). If (ω1, ω2) ∈ (C2,k · k∗A) then the dual norm if ω2 ≥ ω12 ; if ω2 ≤ ω12 . Proof. Let fω1,ω2 be the linear functional on (C2,k · kA) defined by k(ω1, ω2)k∗A =( ω12+4ω22 ω1 4ω2 fω1,ω2(z1, z2) = ω1z1 + ω2z2. CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 13 Then k(ω1, ω2)k∗A = sup sup = (z1,z2)∈ΩA fω1,ω2(z1, z2) z2≤1−z12 ω1z1 + ω2z2 z2≤1−z12 z1≤1(cid:0)ω1z1 + ω2(1 − z12)(cid:1). (ω1z1 + ω2z2) sup = = sup If ω2 ≥ ω12 the expression on the right attains its maximum at z1 = ω1 2ω2 ≤ 1 and the maximum value is ω12+4ω22 . 4ω2 If ω2 ≤ ω12 the expression on the right is monotonic in z1 and the maximum is attained at z1 = 1. The maximum value in this case is ω1. (cid:3) Theorem 6.2. Let A1 = ( 1 0 0 1 ) , A2 = ( 0 1 0(cid:17) , V2 =(cid:0)0 1(cid:1) . Then 0 0 ) and V1 =(cid:16) 1√2 V (PA)k =r 3 (i) kLVk(C2,k·k∗ (ii) kL(2) 2 . A)→(C2,k·k2) = 1 Consequently ρV, for this choice of V = (V1, V2), is contractive on O(ΩA) but not completely contractive. Proof of (i). kLVk2 (C2,k·k∗ A)→(C2,k·k2) = = We now consider two cases: sup k(ω1,ω2)k∗ sup k(ω1,ω2)k∗ 2 A=1 kω1V1 + ω2V2k2 + ω22(cid:17). A=1(cid:16)ω12 2 Case (a): ω2 ≥ ω12 and 1 = k(ω1, ω2)k∗A = ω12+4ω22 These two constraints together can be seen to be equivalent to the constraints 1 from Lemma 6.1. 4ω2 2 ≤ ω2 ≤ 1 and ω12 = 4ω2(1 − ω2). Hence the supremum above for this range of (ω1, ω2) is given by sup 2≤ω2≤1ω2(cid:0)2 − ω2(cid:1) = 1. 1 Case (b): ω2 ≤ ω12 and 1 = k(ω1, ω2)k∗A = ω1 The supremum for this range of (ω1, ω2) is given by from Lemma 6.1. sup ω2≤ 1 2(cid:0) 1 2 + ω22(cid:1) = 3 4 . Taking the larger of the supremums in Case (a) and Case (b) we get that kLVk = 1. (cid:3) 14 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE Proof of (ii). kL(2) V (PA)k2 = kA1 ⊗ V1 + A2 ⊗ V2k2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) 1√2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) 1√2 =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:18) 3 2 0 = . 3 2 2 A∗1 1√2 A1 A2(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) A1 A2(cid:17) 2(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) using the form of A1, A2 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) A∗2 0 1 (cid:3) 6.2. General cases not amenable to the operator space method. The various families of (A1, A2) listed in Table 3 require a case by case analysis to show that there is a contractive homomorpism which is not completely contractive. We first present a general outline of the method used. We choose the pair V = (V1, V2) to be of the form V1 = (cid:0)u 0(cid:1) , V2 = (cid:0)0 v(cid:1) , u, v ∈ R+. LV : (C2,k · k∗A) → (C2,k · k2) then becomes the linear map (z1, z2) 7→ (z1u, z2v). while kL(2) We show, in each case, that by a suitable choice of u and v we can ensure that LV is contractive V (PA)k > 1 although kPAk = 1 by definition. We list the contractivity conditions (see Propositions 2.3 and 2.4 for details). (a) LV is contractive if and only if the following two conditions are satisfied: (i) u ≤ 1 kA∗ 1k (ii) β∈C2,kβk=1n1 − u2kA∗1βk2 − v2kA∗2βk2 + u2v2(cid:16)kA∗1βk2kA∗2βk2 − hA1A∗2β, βi 2(cid:17)o ≥ 0. or v ≤ 1 kA∗ 2k and inf (6.1) (b) kL(2) V (PA)k ≤ 1 if and only if (6.2) β∈C2,kβk=1n1 − u2kA∗1βk2 − v2kA∗2βk2o ≥ 0. inf Note that the term in parenthesis in (6.1) is non-negative by the Schwarz inequality and that the expression (6.2) is the same as the first three terms in (6.1). We show that, in each case, we can choose (u, v) such that the infimum in (6.1) is exactly 0. Also that this infimum is attained at β = β0 such that the term in parenthesis in (6.1) is positive (that is, the Schwarz inequality referred to above is a strict inequality at β0). It then follows that the expression in braces in (6.2) is negative when β = β0 and, consequently, the infimum in (6.2) is negative. Taken together it follows that LV (and consequently ρV) is contractive but V (PA)k > 1 and, as a result, ρ(2) Let η(i), i = 1, 2, be the vectors such that A∗1η(i) and A∗2η(i) are linearly dependent. That is, kL(2) the term in parenthesis in (6.1) vanishes when β = η(i). V is not contractive. We now provide the details of the argument which proceeds in two steps. Step 1: Show that there are certain ranges of the parameters (u, v) such that the infimum in (6.1) is not attained at η(1) or η(2) for those values of (u, v). CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 15 Let gu,v(β) = 1 − u2kA∗1βk2 − v2kA∗2βk2 + u2v2(cid:16)kA∗1βk2kA∗2βk2 − hA1A∗2β, βi 2(cid:17). We need to show that there exists β such that when (u, v) take values in a range of interest. That is, we need to find β such that gu,v(β) < gu,v(η(i)), i = 1, 2, (6.3) Here (6.4) gu,v(η(i)) − gu,v(β) = ai(β)u2 + bi(β)v2 − c(β)u2v2 > 0. ai(β) = kA∗1βk2 − kA∗1η(i)k2 bi(β) = kA∗2βk2 − kA∗2η(i)k2 c(β) = kA∗1βk2kA∗2βk2 − hA1A∗2β, βi 2 ≥ 0. Consider the functions fi(u, v, β) = ai(β)u2 + bi(β)v2 − c(β)u2v2 with c(β) ≥ 0, i = 1, 2. The following result is evident from the nature of the functions fi(u, v, β). Lemma 6.3. (i) Assume ai(β) > 0 for some fixed β and i = 1, 2. Then, given any u0 > 0, there exists v0 > 0 (depending on u0) such that fi(u, v, β) > 0 in the region u < u0, v < v0 u, that is, u0 inside the triangle with vertices (0, 0), (u0, 0) and (u0, v0). (ii) Assume bi(β) > 0 for some fixed β and i = 1, 2. Then, given any v0 > 0, there exists v , that is, u0 > 0 (depending on v0) such that fi(u, v, β) > 0 in the region v < v0, u < u0 v0 inside the triangle with vertices (0, 0), (0, v0) and (u0, v0). (iii) If fi(u0, v0, β) > 0 then fi(tu0, tv0, β) > 0 for 0 < t < 1. We will show below that, in each of the six cases in Table 3, it is possible to ensure the positivity of ai(β), i = 1, 2 or bi(β), i = 1, 2 for some choice of β. Consequently, it will follow that the inequality (6.2) will be true for that vector β with (u, v) in the region characterized in Lemma 6.3 above. Hence, for (u, v) in this range, the infimum is not attained at η(i), i = 1, 2. Consider first the cases (i), (ii) and (iii). A1 A2 (i) (ii) 0 0 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C, b ∈ R+ 0 eiθ (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 1 b (cid:18) 1 0 eiθ (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 0 b (cid:18) 1 1 (cid:19) θ ∈ R (cid:18) 1 b 0 e−iθ(cid:1) so that A1 becomes the identity matrix. In case (iii) (iii) (cid:18) eiθ 0 on the left by the unitary matrix (cid:0) 1 0 0 We use the unitary equivalence described in Section 4. In cases (i) and (ii) multiply A1 and A2 16 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE multiply A1 and A2 on the left by the unitary matrix (cid:0) e−iθ 0 matrix. 1(cid:1) so that A1 becomes the identity Now conjugate A1 and A2 by the unitary which makes A2 upper triangular so that cases (i),(ii) 0 and (iii) reduce to the situation A1 = ( 1 0 0 1 ) and A2 = ( µ σ 0 ν ) with µ ≥ ν, σ 6= 0 In this case ai(β) = 0 for all β but it is possible to choose β such that bi(β) > 0. η(i) satisfies the equation (A∗2 − λiA∗1)η(i) = 0. So in this case η(i) is a (unit) eigenvector of A∗2 with eigenvalue λi. Since the eigenvalues of A∗2 are ¯µ and ¯ν it follows that kA∗2η(i)k2 = µ2 or ν2. Hence we can take β = ( 1 0 ) so that bi(β) ≥ σ2 > 0. Now consider cases (iv) and (v). A1 A2 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C,d 6= 1 (cid:18) 1 c (iv) (cid:18) 1 0 (cid:18) 1 0 0 d (cid:19) d ∈ C,d 6= 1 (cid:18) 0 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C (v) c c In cases (iv) and (v) we have, in Equation (6.4), ai(β) = β12 + d2β22 − η(i) = (β12 − η(i) = (1 − d2)(η(i) 1 2 − d2η(i) 2 2 1 2) + d2(β22 − η(i) 2 2) 2 2 − β22). If η(i) we can choose β such that β2 < η(i) ai(β) > 0 for i = 1, 2. 2 = 0 or 1 then c = 0 and it reduces to the simultaneously diagonalizable case. If η(i) 2 6= 0, 1 2 ) if d < 1 (resp. d > 1) to ensure that 2 (resp. β2 > η(i) The methods used in cases (iv) and (v) can be adapted to the last case (vi): A1 A2 (vi) (cid:18) d 0 0 1 (cid:19) d ∈ C,d 6= 1 (cid:18) 1 c 0 (cid:19) c ∈ C c Step 2: Show that, in each case, there is a choice of (u, v) in the region characterized in Lemma 6.3 for which the infimum in (6.1) is, in fact, zero. We choose β to ensure that ai( β) or bi( β) is positive as described in Step 1. Note that gu,v( β) vanishes at the two points (u, v) = ( , 0), (u, v) = (0, 1 1( β)k kA∗ 1 2( β)k kA∗ ) and also along a curve joining these two points. We now consider two cases: Case (i): ai( β) > 0 Choose (u0, v0) such that 0 < v0 < 1 kA∗ 2k using Lemma 6.3 and the above note about the vanishing of gu,v( β). , fi(u0, v0, β) > 0 and gu0,v0( β) = 0. This is possible CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 17 Let Note that x2 0 ≥ 1 1k2+λ2 kA∗ gu,λ0u(β) ≤ 0} where λ0 = x0 = inf{u : inf 2k2 . Also, from Lemma 6.3, it is clear that fi(x0, λ0x0, β) > 0. β . 0kA∗ v0 u0 We now show that inf β gx0,λ0x0(β) = 0. To prove this we first show that g(x0, λ0x0)(β) ≥ 0 for all β (with kβk2 = 1) as follows. Assume there exists β = µ such that g(x0,λ0x0)(µ) < 0. Then there exists a neighborhood U of x0 such that gu,λ0u(µ) < 0 for all u ∈ U. For any u ∈ U, inf β gu,λ0u(β) < 0, since gu,λ0u(µ) < 0 for all u ∈ U. Since U is a neighborhood of x0 there exists a u ∈ U such that u < x0. By the previous assertion, inf β gu,λ0u(β) ≤ 0 for this smaller value of u, which is a contradiction. Since inf β gx0,λ0x0(β) ≤ 0 by the definition of x0 it follows that inf β gx0,λ0x0(β) = 0. Case (ii): bi( β) > 0 The arguments in this case are similar to Case (i). This time choose (u0, v0) such that 0 < , fi(u0, v0, β) > 0 and gu0,v0( β) = 0. u0 < 1 kA∗ 1k Let y0 = inf{v : inf β gλ0v,v(β) ≤ 0} where λ0 = u0 v0 . As in Case (i) we can see that y2 0 ≥ 1 λ2 0kA∗ 1k2+A∗ 2k2 and (from Lemma 6.3) that fi(λ0y0, y0, β) > 0. Using a procedure similar to that used in Case (i) it follows that inf β gλ0y0,y0(β) = 0. We have therefore shown that for all the cases in Table 3 which were not covered by the operator space approach it is possible to choose (u, v) such that the infimum in (6.1) is zero and this infimum is attained at a vector β not equal to η(1) or η(2), so that the last term in parenthesis in (6.1) is positive at β. It follows that, in each of these cases, there exists a contractive homomorphism which is not completely contractive. 7. An Interesting Operator Space Computation In Section 5 the existence of contractive homomorphisms which are not completely contractive was shown in many cases by studying different isometric embeddings of the space (C2,k · kA) into (M2,k · kop) which led to distinct operator space structures. The two embeddings considered there were (z1, z2) 7→ z1A1 + z2A2 and (z1, z2) 7→ z1At 2. In this section we show that we can, for some choices of (A1, A2), construct large collections of isometric embeddings of the space (C2,k · kA) into various matrix spaces. Although the embeddings are into very distinct matrix spaces, we show that the operator space structures thus obtained are equivalent. A result which is very useful in this context is the following proposition due to Douglas, Muhly 1 + z2At and Pearcy (cf. [7, Prop. 2.2]). into H1 such that Proposition 7.1. For i = 1, 2, let Ti be a contraction on a Hilbert space Hi and let X be an operator mapping H2 into H1. A necessary and sufficient condition that the operator on H1 ⊕ H2 defined by the matrix (cid:16) T1 X The operator norm of the block matrix(cid:0) αIm B form(cid:16) α1Im B α2In(cid:17) , for arbitrary α1, α2 ∈ C. 0 T2(cid:17) be a contraction is that there exist a contraction C mapping H2 0 αIn(cid:1) , where B is an m × n matrix and α ∈ C, is X =p1H1 − T1T ∗1 C p1H2 − T ∗2 T2. not hard to compute (cf. [10, Lemma 2.1]). The result can be easily extended to a matrix of the 0 18 GADADHAR MISRA, AVIJIT PAL AND CHERIAN VARUGHESE Lemma 7.2. If B is an m × n matrix and α1, α2 ∈ C then Proof. Consider the following two sets and 0 0 B (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:18)α1Im α2In(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:18)α1 kBk α2 (cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13). α2In(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1(cid:9) S1 =(cid:8)(cid:0)(α1, α2); B(cid:1) :(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) α1Im B 0 α2 (cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1(cid:9). S2 =(cid:8)(cid:0)(α1, α2); B(cid:1) :(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:16) α1 kBk 0 To prove the lemma, it is sufficient to show that these unit balls are the same. From Proposition 7.1 the condition for the contractivity of the elements of S1 and S2 is the same, that is, kBk2 ≤ (1 − α12)(1 − α22) (cid:3) 0 The important observation from the lemma above is that, for fixed α1, α2, the norm of the α2In(cid:17) depends only on kBk. matrix(cid:16) α1Im B 0 0(cid:1). Given any m × n matrix Now consider the pair A = (A1, A2) with A1 =(cid:0) α1 0 B with kBk = β we have the following isometric embedding of (C2,k · kA) into (Mm+n,k · kop) (z1, z2) 7→(cid:18)z1α1Im 0 α2(cid:1) , A2 =(cid:0) 0 β z1α2In(cid:19) . For various choices of the dimensions m, n and the matrix B, this represents a large collection of isometric embeddings. z2B 0 For fixed α1, α2, we let XB represent the above embedding of (C2,k · kA) into (Mm+n,k · kop). We now show that the operator space structures determined by these embeddings depend only If VA is the space (C2,k · kA), then (XB ⊗ Ik) gives the embedding of Mk(VA) into on kBk. Mk(Mm+n(C)). An element of Mk(VA) is defined by a pair of k × k matrices Z1, Z2, and the corresponding embedding into Mk(Mm+n(C)) has the form Z2 ⊗ B It now remains to show that the operator norm of this matrix depends only on kBk. Using Proposition 7.1 it can be shown that 0 (cid:18)α1Z1 ⊗ Im α2Z1 ⊗ In(cid:19) . α2Z1 ⊗ In(cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1 if and only if (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Z2 ⊗ B (cid:18)α1Z1 ⊗ Im 0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:18)α1Z1 Z2kBk 0 α2Z1 (cid:19)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1. Hence it follows that these two norms are in fact equal. We have therefore proved the following theorem. Theorem 7.3. For all m × n matrices B with the same (operator) norm, the operator space structures on Cm+n, determined by the different embeddings (z1, z2) 7→ z1(cid:16) α1Im 0 0 α2In (cid:17) + z2(cid:16) 0 B 0 (cid:17), α1, α2 ∈ C, 0 are completely isometric irrespective of the particular choice of B. Moreover all of them are com- pletely isometric to the MIN space. Acknowledgment. The authors gratefully acknowledge the help they have received from Sayan Bagchi, Michael Dritschel and Dmitry Yakubovich. CONTRACTIVITY AND COMPLETE CONTRACTIVITY FOR FINITE DIMENSIONAL BANACH SPACES 19 References [1] W. Arveson, Subalgebras of C ∗-algebras II, Acta Math., 128 (1972), 271 - 308. [2] J. Agler, Rational dilation on an annulus, Ann. of Math., 121 (1985), 537 - 563. [3] J. Agler and N. J. Young, Operators having the symmetrized bidisc as a spectral set, Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 43 (2000), 195 - 210. [4] B. Bagchi and G. Misra, Contractive homomorphisms and tensor product norms, Integral Equations and Op- erator Theory, 21 (1995), 255 - 269. [5] M. J. Cowen and R. G. Douglas, Complex geometry and operator theory, Acta Math., 141 (1978), 187 - 261. [6] M. J. Cowen and R. G. Douglas, Operators possessing an open set of eigenvalues, Functions, series, operators, Vol. I, II (Budapest, 1980), 323 - 341, Colloq. Math. Soc. Janos Bolyai, 35, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983. [7] R. G. Douglas, P. S. Muhly and Carl Pearcy, Lifting Commuting Operators, Michigan Math. Journal, 15 (1968), 385 - 395. [8] M. Dritschel and S. McCullough, The failure of rational dilation on a triply connected domain, J. Amer. Math. Soc., 18 (2005), 873 - 918. [9] G. Misra, Curvature inequalities and extremal properties of bundle shifts, J. Operator Th., 11 (1984), 305 - 317. [10] G. Misra, Completely contractive Hilbert modules and Parrott's example, Acta Math. Hungar., 63 (1994), 291 - 303. [11] G. Misra and N. S. N. Sastry, Contractive modules, extremal problems and curvature inequalities, J. Funct. Anal., 88 (1990), 118 - 134. [12] G. Misra and N. S. N. Sastry, Completely contractive modules and associated extremal problems, J. Funct. Anal., 91 (1990), 213 - 220. [13] G. Misra and A. Pal, Contractivity, complete contractivity and curvature inequalities, to appear, Journal d'Analyse Mathematique. [14] B. Sz.-Nagy and C. Foias, Harmonic analysis of Hilbert space operators, NorthHolland, 1970. [15] S. Parrott, Unitary dilations for commuting contractions, Pac. J. Math., 34 (1970), 481 - 490. [16] G. Pisier, An Introduction to the Theory of Operator Spaces, Cambridge University Press, 2003. [17] V. Paulsen, Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras, Cambridge University Press, 2002. [18] V. Paulsen, Representations of function algebras, abstract operator Spaces and Banach space geometry, J. Funct. Anal., 109 (1992), 113 - 129. (G. Misra) Department of mathematics, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore - 560 012, India E-mail address, G. Misra: [email protected] (A. Pal) Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Science Education And Research Kolkata, Mohanpur - 741 246 E-mail address, A. Pal: [email protected] (C. Varughese) Renaissance Communications, Bangalore - 560 058 E-mail address, C. Varughese: [email protected]
1804.10349	1	1804	2018-04-27T06:00:46	Measures of Noncompactness in $\left(\bar{N}_{\Delta^{-}}^{q}\right)$ Summable Difference Sequence Spaces	[ "math.FA" ]	In the given paper we first introduce $\bar{N}_{\Delta^{-}}^{q}$ summable difference sequence spaces and prove some properties of these spaces. We then obtain the necessary and sufficient conditions for infinite matrices $A$ to map these sequence spaces on the spaces $c_0, c$ and $\ell_\infty$, the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness is then used to obtain the necessary and sufficient conditions for the compactness of the linear operators defined on these spaces.	math.FA	math	Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence Spaces Tanweer Jalal ∗ National Institute of Technology, Srinagar Ishfaq Ahmad Malik National Institute of Technology, Srinagar Abstract. In the given paper we first introduce ¯N q ∆− summable dif- ference sequence spaces and prove some properties of these spaces. We then obtain the necessary and sufficient conditions for infinite matrices A to map these sequence spaces on the spaces c0, c and ℓ∞, the Haus- dorff measure of noncompactness is then used to obtain the necessary and sufficient conditions for the compactness of the linear operators defined on these spaces. AMS Subject Classification: 40H05, 46A45, 47B07 Keywords and Phrases: Difference sequence space, BK spaces, ma- trix transformations, Measures of noncompactness 1 Introduction and Preliminaries We write w for the set of all complex sequences x = (xk)∞ k=0 and φ, c0, c and ℓ∞ for the sets of all finite, convergent sequences and se- quences convergent to zero, and bounded respectively. The sequence e is given by e = (1, 1, 1, . . .) and e(n) is the sequence with 1 as only nonzero term at the nth place for each n ∈ N, where N = {0, 1, 2, . . .}. Further by cs and ℓ1 we denote the spaces of all sequences whose series is convergent and absolutely convergent respectively. The β−dual of a subset X of w is defined by X β = {a ∈ w : ax = (akxk) ∈ cs for all x = (xk) ∈ X} If A is an infinite matrix with complex entries ank n, k ∈ N, we write An for the sequence in the nth row of A, An = (ank)∞ k=0 n ∈ N . The ∗Corresponding Author 2 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik A−transform of any x = (xk) ∈ w is given by Ax = (An(x))∞ k=0, where An(x) = ∞ Xk=0 ankxk n ∈ N the series on right must converge for each n ∈ N. If X and Y are subsets of w, we denote by (X, Y ), the class of all infinite matrices that map X into Y . So A ∈ (X, Y ) if and only if An ∈ X β , n = 0, 1, 2, . . . and Ax ∈ Y for all x ∈ X. The matrix domain of an infinite matrix A in X is defined by XA = {x ∈ w : Ax ∈ X} If X and Y are Banach Spaces, then by B(X, Y ) we denote the set of all bounded (continuous) linear operators L : X → Y , which is itself a Banach space with operator norm kLk = supx {kL(x)kY : kxk = 1} for all L ∈ B(X, Y ). The linear operator L : X → Y is said to be compact if the domain of L is all of X and every bounded sequence (xn) ∈ X , the sequence (L(xn)) has a sub-sequence which converges in Y . The op- erator L ∈ B(X, Y ) is said to be of finite rank if dim R(L) < ∞, where R(L) denotes the range space of L. A finite rank operator is clearly compact. The concept of difference sequence spaces was first introduced by Kiz- maz [1] and later several authors studeid new sequence spaces defined by using difference operators like Mursaleen and Nouman [2] and many more. In the past, several authors studied matrix transformations on sequence spaces that are the matrix domains of the difference operator, or of the matrices of the classical methods of summability in spaces such as ℓp, c0, c,ℓ∞ or others. For instance, some matrix domains of the difference operator were studied in ([1],[3] ), of the Riesz matrices in [4], and so on. In this paper, we first define a new summable difference sequence space as the matrix domains XT of arbitrary triangles ¯Nq and ∆− and obtain it basis, β dual of the new sequence spaces. We then find out the necessary and sufficient condition for the exists of matrix transfor- mations and finally obtain the results related to the compactness of the linear operators on these new sequence spaces. Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 3 2 ¯N q ∆− Summable Difference Sequence Spaces Define the difference operator as ∆−xk = xk−1 − xk , k = 0, 1, 2, . . . where x−1 = 0 (1) The ∆− = (δnk)∞ n,k=0 is a triangular matrix written as −1 1 0 k = n k = n − 1 k > n δnk =  The inverse of this matrix is S = (snk) given as snk =(cid:26)−1 0 ≤ k ≤ n k > n 0 k=0 be positive sequences and (Qn)∞ i=0 qi. The ( ¯N , q) transform of of the sequence (xk)∞ n=0 be the sequence defined k=0 is Let (qk)∞ as Qn = Pn defined as tn = 1 Qn qixi ∞ Xi=0 The matrix ¯Nq for this transformation can be written as ( ¯Nq)nk =(cid:26) qk Qn 0 0 ≤ k ≤ n k > n The inverse of this matrix is [5] ( ¯Nq)−1 nk =((−1)n−k Qk qn 0 n − 1 ≤ k ≤ n 0 ≤ k ≤ n − 2, k > n We define the ¯N q ∆− summable difference sequence spaces as ( ¯N q ( ¯N q ( ¯N q ∆−)0 = (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq =(x ∈ w : ¯Nq∆−x = 1 = (c, ∆−) ¯Nq =(x ∈ w : ¯Nq∆−x = 1 ∆−)∞ = (ℓ∞, ∆−) ¯Nq =(x ∈ w : ¯Nq∆−x = 1 ∆−) Qn Qn Qn n n Xk=0 Xk=0 Xk=0 n qk∆−xk!∞ qk∆−xk!∞ qk∆−xk!∞ n=0 n=0 n=0 ∈ c0) ∈ c) ∈ ℓ∞) 4 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik For any sequence x = (xk)∞ term given by k=0, define τ = τ (x) as the sequence with nth τn = ( ¯N q ∆−)n(x) = 1 Qn n Xk=0 qk∆−xk (n = 0, 1, 2, . . .) (2) For any two sequences x and y, the product xy = (xkyk)∞ k=0. 2.1 Basis for the new sequence spaces Proposition 2.1. [ [6], 1.4.8, p.9] Every triangle T has a unique inverse S = (snk)∞ triangle, and x = T (S(x)) = S(T (x)) for all x ∈ w. n,k=0 which is also a Proposition 2.2. [[7], Theorem 2.3] If (cid:0)b(n)(cid:1)∞ metric space (X, d), then (cid:0)S(b(n))(cid:1)∞ n=0 is a basis of the linear n=0 is a basis of Z = XT with metric dT defined by dT (z, ¯z) = d(T (z), T (¯z)) for all z, ¯z ∈ Z. Where S is the inverse of the matrix T . It is obvious that (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq = (c0) ¯Nq ·∆−, So the basis for new spaces of the elements of (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq as ∆−(cid:1) x(cid:1)k for all k ∈ N. Define the sequence are given by (cid:0) ¯Nq · ∆−(cid:1)−1(cid:0)e(n)(cid:1) = (∆−)−1 ·(cid:0) ¯Nq(cid:1)−1(cid:0)e(n)(cid:1)we have Theorem 2.3. Let λk =(cid:0)(cid:0) ¯N q n on∈N s(k) =ns(k) j=1 Qj(cid:16) 1 n = Pk  i) The sequence(cid:8)s(k)(cid:9)k∈N is a basis for the space (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq and any x ∈ (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq can be uniquely represented in the form qj(cid:17) 0 ≤ k < n for every fixed k ∈ N. Then k−1  Xj=1  , s(−1) n = k = n k > n − 1 qj+1 − Qk qk 0 sk n Xk=0 Qj(cid:18) 1 qj+1 − 1 qj(cid:19) + Qk qk   . λks(k) x =Xk Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 5 ii) The set (cid:8)e, s(k)(cid:9) is a basis for the spaces (c, ∆−) ¯Nq and any x ∈ (c, ∆−) ¯Nq has a unique representation in the form x = ls(−1) n +Xk where for all k ∈ N, l = limk→∞(cid:0)(cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1) x(cid:1)k. (λk − l)s(k) Proof. Since (X, ∆−) ¯Nq = (X) ¯Nq ·∆− for X = c0, c, ℓ∞. Now e = (e(k))∞ Now ¯Nq is a triangle and ∆− is triangle so ¯Nq · ∆− is also a triangle and k= is the standard basis for c and by ·(cid:0) ¯Nq(cid:1)−1 =  =(cid:0)∆−(cid:1)−1 (cid:0) ¯Nq · ∆−(cid:1)−1 Hence (cid:8)s(k)(cid:9)k∈N is a basis for the space (c0, ∆−) ¯Nq and the results i) and ii) are obvious to follow. Note: We consider the standard basis to find the general results related to our sequence spaces. k = n k > n (cid:3) − 1 qk(cid:17) 0 ≤ k < n Qk(cid:16) 1 qk+1 − Qn qn 0 ∆−(cid:1) and (cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1)∞ are ∆− kxk ¯N q given by BK-spaces with norm k k ¯N q ∆−(cid:1)0, (cid:0) ¯N q Theorem 2.4. The sequence spaces (cid:0) ¯N q n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) qk∆−xk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=0 x = le +Xk If Qn → ∞ (n → ∞), then ( ¯N q (xk)∞ ∆−) has unique representation k=0 ∈ ( ¯N q (λk − l)e(k) 1 Qn = sup ∆− n where l ∈ C is such that x − le ∈ ( ¯N q ∆−)0 ∆−)0 has AK, and every sequence x = (3) Proof. Since (X, ∆−) ¯Nq = X ¯Nq ·∆− for all X = c0, c, ℓ∞ and the spaces c0, c, ℓ∞ are BK spaces with respect to natural norm [[8], p.217-218] and The space ( ¯N q the matrix ¯Nq · ∆− is a triangle so by Theorem 4.3.12, [6], gives(cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1) and (cid:0) ¯N q (cid:0) ¯N q (cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1) are simply followed from Theorem 2 of [9] and [10]. ∆−(cid:1)∞ are BK spaces ∆−)0 has AK and the unique representation of elements of ∆−(cid:1)0, (cid:3) 6 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik 2.2 β dual of the new spaces In order to find the β dual we need the results of [11] which are Lemma 2.5. A ∈ (c0 : l1) if and only if Lemma 2.6. A ∈ (c0 : c) if and only if < ∞ sup ank(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) K ∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk∈K n X ank < ∞, sup ank − αk = 0. lim n→∞ Lemma 2.7. A ∈ (c0 : ℓ∞) if and only if Theorem 2.8. Let (qk)∞ a = (ak) ∈ w we define a matrix C = (cnk)∞ sup n X ank < ∞, k=0 be positive sequences, Qn = Pn n,k=0 as i=0 qi and j=k+1 aj qk(cid:17)Pn − 1 − Qkak qk 0 0 ≤ k < n k = n k > n qk+1 Qk(cid:16) 1 cnk =  cnk < ∞) n Xk cnk =Xk (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n→∞Xk = c1 ∩ c2 , (cid:2)(cid:0) ¯N q = c2 ∩ c3. lim and consider the sets c1 =(a ∈ w : sup c3 =(a ∈ w : ∆−(cid:1)0iβ Then h(cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1)∞iβ h(cid:0) ¯N q ; c2 =na ∈ w : ) ; c4 =(a ∈ w : cnk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) lim n→∞ ∆−(cid:1)(cid:3)β = c1 ∩ c2 ∩ c4 and lim n→∞ cnk exists for each k ∈ No cnk exists ) lim n→∞Xk Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 7 Proof. We prove the result for h(cid:0) ¯N q procedure can be followed. Let x ∈ (cid:0) ¯N q ∆− x. that y = ¯N q Hence for the other two same ∆−(cid:1)0iβ ∆−(cid:1)0 then there exists a y such akxk = n Xk=0 = = n n Xk=0 Xk=0 Xk=0 n yk k−1 ∆−(cid:1)−1 ak(cid:0) ¯N q ak Qj(cid:18) 1 Xj=0   Qk−1(cid:18) 1 qk − = (Cy)n qj+1 1 − qj(cid:19) yj − qk−1(cid:19) n Xj=k+1 1 aj − Qk qk yk  qk   yk Qkak ∆−(cid:1)0 if and only if Cy ∈ cs show the other two results as well. By Theorem 7.2.9, [6] we know that if X is a BK-space and a ∈ w then = c1 ∩ c2 In the same way we can (cid:3) ∞ whenever y ∈ c0. So ax = (anxn) ∈ cs whenever x ∈ (cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1)0iβ Using Lemma 2.6 we get h(cid:0) ¯N q kak∗ = sup((cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) akxk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=0 ∆−(cid:1)∞iβ ∆−(cid:1)0iβ ∆−(cid:1)(cid:3)β and h(cid:0) ¯N q Theorem 2.9. For h(cid:0) ¯N q Qk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) aj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) qk(cid:19) n qn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:18) 1 Xj=k+1 : kxk = 1) , (cid:2)(cid:0) ¯N q n   k k∗ is defined as kak∗ = sup Xk=0 Qnan qk+1 n−1 − 1 provided the term on the right side exists and is finite, which is the case whenever a ∈ X β. the norm   8 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik Proof. If x[n] denotes the nth section of the sequence x ∈(cid:0) ¯N q using (2) we have ∆−(cid:1)0 then τ [n] k = τk(x[n]) = 1 Qk k Xj=0 qj∆−x[n] j Let a ∈ h(cid:0) ¯N q sequence d[n] as ∆−(cid:1)0iβ k =  d[n] , then for any non-negative integer n define the Qk(cid:16) 1 qk+1 j=k+1 aj qk(cid:17)Pn − 1 − Qkak qk 0 0 ≤ k < n k = n k > n k=0 d[n] k (cid:17) where Π = (cid:2)(cid:0) ¯N q ∆−(cid:1)(cid:3)β. is obvious. The inequality kakΠ ≤ kak∗ Also Let kakΠ = supn kd[n]k1 = supn(cid:16)P∞ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=0 k (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) akx[n] 1 qj n−1 1 ∞ k n =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=0 ≤(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=0 ≤ sup k n − (Qjτ [n] (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) j−1) ak j − Qj−1τ [n] Xj=0   k (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) qk(cid:19) aj +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Qk(cid:18) 1  τ [n] Xj=k+1  k · qk(cid:19) n aj +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Qk(cid:18) 1 Xj=k+1 kd[n]k1 qk+1 qk+1 − 1 τ [n] = kx[n]k ¯N q = kakΠkx[n]k ¯N q ∆− ∆− τ [n] n anQn qn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  qn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  anQn Hence kak∗ ≤ kakΠ From the above inequalities we get the required conclusion. Following are some well known results (cid:3) Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 9 Proposition 2.10. (cf. [12], Theorem 7) Let X and Y be BK spaces, then (X, Y ) ⊂ B(X, Y ) that is every matrix A from X into Y defines an element LA of B(X, Y ) where LA(x) = A(x) ∀ x ∈ X Also A ∈ (X, ℓ∞) if and only if kAk∗ = sup n kAnk∗ = kLAk < ∞ k=0 is a basis of X, Y and Y1 are FK spaces with Y1 a closed If (cid:0)b(k)(cid:1)∞ subspace of Y , then A ∈ (X, Y1) if and only if A ∈ (X, Y ) and A(cid:0)b(k)(cid:1) ∈ Y1 for all k = 0, 1, 2, . . .. Proposition 2.11. (cf. [13], Proposition 3.4) Let T be a triangle (i) If X and Y are subsets of w, then A ∈ (X, YT ) if and only if B = T A ∈ (X, Y ). (ii) If X and Y are BK spaces and A ∈ (X, YT ), then kLAk = kLBk Using Proposition 2.10 and Theorem 2.9 we can easily conclude that following: Corollary 2.12. Let (qk)∞ ∆− be the difference operator as defined in (1), then k=0 be a positive sequence, Qn =Pn k=0 qk and m−1 , ℓ∞(cid:17) if and only if i) A ∈(cid:16)(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)∞ Qk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) m,n qk(cid:19) m (cid:18) 1 Xk=0 Xj=k+1  qk+1 and sup 1 − anj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Qmanm  qm (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)  < ∞ (4) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) AnQ q ∈ c0 ∀ n = 0, 1, . . . (5) 10 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik ii) A ∈(cid:0)(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) , ℓ∞(cid:1) if and only if condition (4) holds and ∈ c ∀ n = 0, 1, 2, . . . AnQ q iii) A ∈(cid:16)(cid:0)N q iv) A ∈(cid:16)(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 ∆−(cid:1)0 v) A ∈(cid:16)(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 , ℓ∞(cid:17) if and only if condition (4) holds. , c0(cid:17) if and only if condition (4) holds and lim n→∞ ank = 0 for all k = 0, 1, 2 . . . , c(cid:17) if and only if condition (4) holds and lim n→∞ ank = αk for all k = 0, 1, 2 . . . (6) (7) (8) vi) A ∈ (cid:0)(cid:0)N q and ∆−(cid:1) , c0(cid:1) if and only if conditions (4), (5) and (7) holds ∞ ank = 0 for all k = 0, 1, 2 . . . (9) lim n→∞ Xk=0 lim n→∞ Xk=0 vii) A ∈ (cid:0)(cid:0)N q and ∆−(cid:1) , c(cid:1) if and only if conditions (4), (5) and (8) holds ∞ ank = α for all k = 0, 1, 2 . . . (10) Again Using Proposition 2.11 and Theorem 2.4 we have the following corollary: 3 Hausdorff Measure of Noncompactness From Mursaleen et. al. [14] we let S and M be the subsets of a metric space (X, d) and ǫ > 0. Then S is called an ǫ−net of M in X if for every x ∈ M there exists s ∈ S such that d(x, s) < ǫ. Further, if the set S is finite, then the ǫ−net S of M is called finite ǫ−net of M . A subset of a metric space is said to be totally bounded if it has a finite ǫ−net for Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 11 every ǫ > 0. If MX denotes the collection of all bounded subsets of metric space (X, d). If Q ∈ MX then the Hausdorff Measure of Noncompactness of the set Q is defined by χ(Q) = inf {ǫ > 0 : Q has a finite ǫ − net in X} The function χ : MX → [0, ∞) is called Hausdorff Measure of Noncom- pactness [15] The basic properties of Hausdorff Measure of Noncompactness can be found in ([5], [16], [15]). Some of those properties are If Q, Q1 and Q2 are bounded subsets of a metric space (X, d), then χ(Q) = 0 ⇔ Q is totally bpunded set, χ(Q) = χ( ¯Q), Q1 ⊂ Q2 ⇒ χ(Q1) ≤ χ(Q2), χ(Q1 ∪ Q2) = max {χ(Q1), χ(Q2)} , χ(Q1 ∩ Q2) = min {χ(Q1), χ(Q2)} . Further if X is a normed space the χ has the additional properties con- nected with the linear structure. χ(Q1 + Q2) ≤ χ(Q1) + χ(Q2) χ(ηQ) = ηχ(Q) η ∈ C If X and Y are normed space, then for A ∈ B(X, Y ) the Hausdorff Measure of Noncompactness of A, is denoted by kAkχ and is defined as kAkχ = χ(AB) Where B = {x ∈ X : kxk = 1} is the unit ball in X. Also A is said to be compact if and only if kAkχ = 0 and kAkχ ≤ kAk. Proposition 3.1. ([15], Theorem 6.1.1, X = c0) Let Q ∈ Mc0 and Pr : c0 → c0 (r ∈ N be the operator defined by Pr(x) = (x0, x1, . . . , xr, 0, 0, . . .) for all x = (xk) ∈ c0. Then, we have χ(Q) = lim r→∞ sup x∈Q k(I − Pr)(x)k! 12 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik where I is the identity operator on c0. Proposition 3.2. ([15], Theorem 6.1.1) Let X be a Banach space with a Schauder basis {e1, e2, . . .}, and Q ∈ MX and Pn : X → X (n ∈ N be the projector onto the linear span of {e1, e2, . . . , en}. Then, we have 1 a lim n→∞ sup sup x∈Q k(I − Pn)(x)k! ≤ χ(Q) ≤ inf n sup x∈Q k(I − Pn)(x)k! ≤ lim n→∞ sup sup x∈Q k(I − Pn)(x)k! where a = limn→∞ sup kI − Pnk. If X = c then a = 2. (see [15], p.22). ,(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) Theorem 4.1. Consider the matrix A as in Corollary 2.12, and for any integers n,s, n > s set 4 Compact operators on the spaces(cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 and (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)∞ ani(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Qj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) m  +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (cid:18) 1 Xj=0  ∆−(cid:1)0 or (cid:0)N q If X be either (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) and A ∈ (X, c0). Then qj(cid:19) m Xi=j+1 qm (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) kAk(s) = sup n>p Qmanm qj+1 sup m−1 − 1 kLAkχ = lim s→∞ kAk(s). If X be either (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 or (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) and A ∈ (X, c). Then · lim s→∞ kAk(s) ≤ kLAkχ ≤ lim r→∞ kAk(s). 1 2   (11) (12) (13) and if X be either (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 , (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) or (cid:0)N q 0 ≤ kLAkχ ≤ lim s→∞ ∆−(cid:1)∞ and A ∈ (X, ℓ∞). Then kAk(s). (14) Proof. Let F = {x ∈ X : kxk ≤ 1} if A ∈ (X, c0) and X is one of the spaces (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)0 or (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1), then by Proposition 3.1 kLAkχ = χ(AF ) = lim s→∞(cid:20)sup x∈F k(I − Ps)Axk(cid:21) (15) Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 13 Again using Proposition 2.10 and Corollary 2.12 we have kAks = sup x∈F k(I − Ps)Axk (16) From (15) and (16) we get kLAkχ = lim s→∞ kAk(s). Since every sequence x = (xk)∞ k=0 ∈ c has a unique representation x = le + ∞ (xk − l)e(k) Xk=0 where l ∈ C is such that x − le ∈ c0 We define Ps : c → c by Ps(x) = le +Ps Then kI − Psk = 2 and using (16) and Proposition 3.2 we get k=0(xk − l)e(k), s = 0, 1, 2, . . .. 1 2 · lim s→∞ kAk(s) ≤ kLAkχ ≤ lim s→∞ kAk(s) Finally we define Ps : ℓ∞ → ℓ∞ by Ps(x) = (x0, x1, . . . , xs, 0, 0 . . .), x = (xk) ∈ ℓ∞. Clearly AF ⊂ Ps(AF ) + (I − Ps)(AF ) So using the properties of χ we get χ(AF ) ≤ χ[Ps(AF )] + χ[(I − Ps)(AF )] = χ[(I − Ps)(AF )] ≤ sup x∈F k(I − Ps)A(x)k Hence by Proposition 2.10 and and Corollary 2.12 we get 0 ≤ kLAkχ ≤ lim s→∞ kAk(s) (cid:3) A direct corollary of the above theorem is Corollary 4.2. Consider the matrix A as in Corollary 2.12, and X = ∆−(cid:1)0 or X =(cid:0)N q (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) then if A ∈ (X, c0) or A ∈ (X, c) we have LA is compact if and only if kAk(s) = 0 lim s→∞ 14 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik Further, for X = (cid:0)N q (X, ℓ∞) then we have ∆−(cid:1)0 , X = (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1) or X = (cid:0)N q ∆−(cid:1)∞, if A ∈ LA is compact if kAk(s) = 0 lim s→∞ (17) In (17) it is possible for LA to be compact although lims→∞ kAk(s) 6= 0, that is the condition is only sufficient condition for LA to be compact. For example, let the matrix A be defined as An = e(1) n = 0, 1, 2, . . . and qn = 3n , n = 0, 1, 2, . . . . Then by (4) we have 1 − + 3 1 2 (1 − 3−n)(cid:19) < 2 But Qmanm m−1 Xk=0 (cid:18) 1 qk+1 sup m,n  Qk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) qk(cid:19) m Xj=k+1  qm (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n (cid:18)2  = sup , ℓ∞(cid:17) . ∆−(cid:1)∞ anj(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) +(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Now by Corollary 2.12 we know A ∈(cid:16)(cid:0)N q (1 − 3−n)(cid:21) = ∆−(cid:1)∞, so LA is compact operator. Since A(x) = x1 for all x ∈(cid:0)N q Which gives kAk(s) = 7 n>s(cid:20) 2 3 kAk(s) = sup 2 · 3r+1 6 6= 0. + 1 2 7 6 − 1 ∀ r References [1] H Kizmaz. Certain sequence spaces. Can. Math. Bull., 24(2):169 -- 176, 1981. [2] Mohammad Mursaleen and Abdullah K Noman. On some new difference sequence spaces of non-absolute type. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 52(3-4):603 -- 617, 2010. [3] SM Sirajudeen. Matrix transformations of bv into. Indian J. pure appl. Math, 23(1):55 -- 61, 1992. [4] Bilal Altay and Feyzi Basar. On the paranormed riesz sequence spaces of non-absolute type. Southeast Asian Bull. Math, 26(5):701 -- 715, 2002. Measures of Noncompactness in (cid:0) ¯N q Spaces ∆−(cid:1) Summable Difference Sequence 15 [5] Jozef Banas and Mohammad Mursaleen. Sequence spaces and mea- sures of noncompactness with applications to differential and inte- gral equations. Springer, 2014. [6] Albert Wilansky. Summability through functional analysis, vol- ume 85. Elsevier, 2000. [7] Abdullah M Jarrah and Eberhard Malkowsky. Ordinary, absolute and strong summability and matrix transformations. Filomat, pages 59 -- 78, 2003. [8] Ivor John Maddox. Elements of functional analysis. CUP Archive, 1988. [9] AM Al-Jarrah and E Malkowsky. Bk spaces, bases and linear oper- ators. Rend. del Circ. Mat. di Palermo. Serie II. Suppl, 52:177 -- 191, 1998. [10] Eberhard Malkowsky and V Rakocevic. Measure of noncompact- ness of linear operators between spaces of sequences that are (n, q) summable or bounded. Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal, 51(3):505 -- 522, 2001. [11] Michael Stieglitz and Hubert Tietz. Matrixtransformationen von folgenraumen eine ergebnisubersicht. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 154(1):1 -- 16, 1977. [12] E Malkowsky and V Rakocevic. The measure of noncompactness of linear operators between certain sequence spaces. Acta Scientiarum Mathematicarum, 64(1):151 -- 170, 1998. [13] E Malkowsky and V Rakocevic. The measure of noncompactness of linear operators between spaces of mth-order difference sequences. Studia Scientiarum Mathematicarum Hungarica, 35(3-4):381 -- 396, 1999. [14] Mohammad Mursaleen, Vatan Karakaya, Harun Polat, and N Sim¸sek. Measure of noncompactness of matrix operators on some difference sequence spaces of weighted means. Computers & Math- ematics with Applications, 62(2):814 -- 820, 2011. 16 Tanweer Jalal , Ishfaq Ahmad Malik [15] J. Banas and K. Goebl. Measures of noncompactness in Banach spaces. Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. Number 60. 1980. [16] Eberhard Malkowsky and Vladimir Rakocevi´c. An introduction into the theory of sequence spaces and measures of noncompactness. Number 17. Matematicki institut SANU, 2000. Tanweer Jalal Department of Mathematics Associate Professor of Mathematics National Institute of Technology, Srinagar Srinagar, India E-mail: [email protected] Ishfaq Ahmad Malik Department of Mathematics Research Scholar National Institute of Technology, Srinagar Srinagar, India E-mail: ishfaq [email protected]
1312.7587	1	1312	2013-12-29T20:51:50	An embedding result	[ "math.FA" ]	In unbounded subset $\Omega$ in $R^n$ we study the operator $u\rightarrow gu$ as an operator defined in the Sobolev space $W^{r,p}(\Omega)$ and which takes values in $L^p(\Omega)$. The functions $g$ belong to wider spaces of $L^p$ connected with the Morrey type spaces. The main result is an embedding theorem from which we can deduce a Fefferman type inequality.	math.FA	math	AN EMBEDDING RESULT A. CANALE Abstract. In unbounded subset Ω in Rn we study the operator u → gu as an operator defined in the Sobolev space W r,p(Ω) and which takes values in Lp(Ω). The functions g belong to wider spaces of Lp connected with the Morrey type spaces. The main result is an embedding theorem from which we can deduce a Fefferman type inequality. AMS Subject Classifications: 35J25, 46E35 Key Words: elliptic equations, multiplication operator, embedding theorems. 1. Introduction Let Ω be an unbounded open subset in Rn. In literature there are different results about the study of multiplication operator for a suitable function g : Ω → C u −→ gu, (1.1) as an operator defined in a Sobolev space (with or without weight) and which takes values in a Lp(Ω) space. In W 1,p 0 (Ω) or in W 1,p(Ω) with Ω regular enough, reference results are some well-known inequalities which state the boundedness of (1.1): Hardy type inequalities (see H.Brezis [2], A.Kufner [11], J.Necas [12]) when g(x) is an appropriate power of the distance of x from a subset of ∂Ω, C.Fefferman inequality [10] (see, e.g. F.Chiarenza-M.Franciosi [8], F.Chiarenza-M.Frasca [9]) obtained when g belongs to a suitable Morrey space. In this paper we study the operator (1.1) in the Sobolev space W r,p(Ω), r ∈ N ,1 ≤ p ≤ +∞ when g belongs to suitable spaces Sp,s defined in Section 3. One of the aspects of our interest in this type of inequality lies in the fact that the embedding results are useful tools to prove a priori bounds when studying elliptic equations. For applications in the study of the a priori bounds see [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. The spaces considered in some of these papers are connected to the spaces Sp,s. These spaces are wider than Lp spaces, than classical Morrey space and are connected, for suitable values of s, to the well known Morrey spaces defined when Ω is an unbounded open subset in Rn. We characterize the classes of functions in Sp,s and their inclusion properties in Section 3. In Section 4 we state the main result of this paper. We prove that if g ∈ Sq,s(Ω) for an appropriate q ∈ [p, +∞[ and s ≥ 0, then (1.1) defines a bounded operator from W r,p(Ω) in Lp(Ω). We remark that our results imply that, for any function g : Ω → C such that sup x∈Ω ρ∈]0,d] ρq−nZΩ∩B(x,ρ) gq < +∞, d > 0, q ≥ p, q ≥ n, q > n se n = p > 1, 2 A. CANALE the following inequality holds kgukLp(Ω) ≤ ckgk q, s p (Ω) S k∇ukLp(Ω) ∀u ∈ W 1,p 0 (Ω). 2. Notations Let Rn be the n-dimensional real euclidean space. We set B(x, r) = {y ∈ Rn : y − x < r}, Br = B(0, r) ∀x ∈ Rn, ∀r ∈ R+. For any x ∈ Rn, we call open infinite cone having vertex at x every set of the type {x + λ(y − x) : λ ∈ R+, y − z < r}, where r ∈ R+ and z ∈ Rn are such that z − x > r. For all θ ∈]0, π/2[ and for all x ∈ Rn we denote by Cθ(x) an open infinite cone having vertex at x and opening θ. For a fixed Cθ(x), we set Cθ(x, h) = Cθ(x) ∩ B(x, h) , ∀h ∈ R+. Let Ω be an open set in Rn. We denote by Γ(Ω, θ, h) the family of open cones C ⊂⊂ Ω of opening θ and height h. We assume that the following hypothesis is satisfied: h1) There exists θ ∈]0, π/2[ such that ∀x ∈ Ω ∃Cθ(x) such that Cθ(x, ρ) ⊂ Ω. 3. Spaces Sp,s(Ω) Let (Ω(x))x∈Ω be the family of open sets in Rn defined as Ω(x) = B(x, ρ) ∩ Ω, x ∈ Ω, ρ > 0. If 1 ≤ p < +∞ and s ∈ R, we denote by Sp,s(Ω) the space of functions g ∈ Lp that loc(Ω) such kgkSp,s(Ω) = sup ρ∈]0,d](cid:16)ρs−n/p kgkLp(Ω(x))(cid:17) < +∞, x∈Ω d > 0, (3.1) with the norm defined by (3.1). We remark that L∞(Ω) ֒→ Sp,s(Ω) ∀p ∈ [1, +∞[ and ∀s ≥ 0. Indeed, if g ∈ L∞(Ω), we get kgkSp,s(Ω) = sup ρ∈]0,d](cid:16)ρs−n/p kgkLp(Ω(x))(cid:17) ≤ x∈Ω ≤ kgkL∞(Ω) sup x∈Ω ρ+∈]0,d] ρs(cid:16)ρ−n/pΩ(x)1/p(cid:17) = ckgkL∞(Ω) where c = c(n, p). (3.2) EMBEDDING RESULT The following inclusions hold Lr(Ω) ֒→ Sq,s(Ω), s ≥ n q , 1 ≤ q ≤ r ≤ +∞, and In particular Indeed Sq,s(Ω) ֒→ Sp,s(Ω) 1 ≤ p ≤ q ≤ +∞, Lp(Ω) ֒→ Sp, n p (Ω). kgkSq,s(Ω) ≤ sup x∈Ω (ρs− n q kgkLr(Ω(x))Ω(x) 1 q − 1 r ) ≤ ρ∈]0,d] ≤ c1 sup x∈Ω ρ∈]0,d] ρs− n r kgkLr(Ω(x)) ≤ c1kgkLr(Ω), where c1 is a constant independent of g. From which we deduce also that kgkSp,s(Ω) ≤ c2 sup x∈Ω ρ∈]0,d] ρs− n q kgkLq(Ω(x)), where c2 is a constant independent of g. 3 (3.3) (3.4) (3.5) (3.6) Regard to the inclusion (3.5) we note that, for example, the constant functions belong to p (Ω) and do not belong to Lp(Ω). Furthermore the function p for 1+xα belongs to Sp, n Sp, n any α > 0 but does not belong to Lp if α ∈]0, n 1 p [. Remark 3.1. When Ω = Rn the space Sp,s includes the classical Morrey spaces Lp,n−sp, 0 ≤ s ≤ n p , defined as the space of functions g ∈ Lp loc(Rn) such that kgkLp,n−sp(Rn) = sup ρ>0 (cid:16)ρs−n/p kgkLp(B(x,ρ)(cid:17) < +∞. x∈Ω 4. Embedding result Let us consider the function φ : (x, y) ∈ Ω × Ω −→(1 0 if if y ∈ Ω(x) y 6∈ Ω(x). and, for any x ∈ Ω, we set E(x) = {y ∈ Ω : x ∈ Ω(y)}. (3.7) (4.1) (4.2) Lemma 4.1. For any x ∈ Ω, E(x) is a measurable set and there exist c1, c2 ∈ R+ such that c1ρn ≤ E(x) ≤ c2ρn ∀x ∈ Ω. (4.3) 4 A. CANALE Proof. Clearly the function φ defined by (4.1) is a measurable function. Then, for any fixed y ∈ Ω, the function φy : x ∈ Ω → φ(x, y) is measurable. Since φy is the characteristic function of E(y), we have that E(y) is measurable. Now we prove that (4.3) holds. The inequality on the right is easily proved. We will prove the inequality on the left. Let us consider Cθ(x, ρ) such that Cθ(x, ρ) ⊂ Ω. We get Cθ(x, ρ) ⊂ E(x). In fact let y ∈ Cθ(x, ρ). Then there exists a cone C ∈ Γ(Ω, θ, h) such that x, y ∈ C. So Thus the inequality (4.3) is stated. x ∈ B(y, ρ) ∩ Ω =⇒ y ∈ E(x). (cid:3) Now we state a Lemma which we will use in the proof of the embedding result. Lemma 4.2. If h1) holds, then, for any s ≥ 0, we have v ∈ L1(Ω) if and only if the map x ∈ Ω → ρ−nvL1(Ω(x)) belongs to L1(Ω). Therefore there exist c1, c2 ∈ R+ such that c1kvkL1(Ω) ≤ZΩ ρ−nkvkL1(Ω(x))dx ≤ c2kvkL1(Ω) ∀v ∈ L1(Ω). (4.4) Proof. The result is a consequence of the relation ZΩ ρ−nkvkL1(Ω(x))dx =ZΩ =ZΩ ρ−nZΩ v(y)dyZE(y) and of the Lemma 4.1. v(y)φ(x, y)dxdy = ρ−ndx (4.5) (cid:3) Let r, s, p, q be real number with the condition h2) r ∈ N, s ≥ 0, 1 ≤ p ≤ q < +∞, q ≥ Let u ∈ W r,p(Ω). For any x ∈ Ω we set n r , q > n r if n r = p > 1. Ψx : y ∈ Ω → x + y − x ρ , Ω∗(x) = Ψx(Ω(x)) , u∗ = (ux)∗ : z ∈ Ω∗(x) −→ u(x + ρ(z − x)) . We note that u∗ ∈ W r,p(Ω∗(x)). We also note that, in consequence of h1) Ω∗(x) has the cone property, with the characteristic cone having height and opening independent of x. On the other hand, if τ = q/p, from h2) we get τ ≥ 1, τ > 1 if n r = p > 1, τ − 1 pτ ≥ 1 p − r n . From well-known imbedding theorems of Sobolev spaces (see, e.g., R.A. Adams [1]), we deduce that u∗ ∈ L τ −1 (Ω∗(x)) pτ EMBEDDING RESULT and the following bound holds τ −1 ,Ω∗(x) ≤ c0ku∗kW r,p(Ω∗(x)), where c0 = c0(p, q, r, n) is a constant independent of x and u∗. u∗ pτ From (4.6) easily it follows that ρ−n (τ −1) pτ u pτ τ −1 ,Ω(x) ≤ c0 Xα≤r ρα− n p ∂αup,Ω(x). 5 (4.6) (4.7) Theorem 4.3. If h1) and h2) hold, then for any g ∈ Sq, s p (Ω), s ≤ p, and for any u ∈ W r,p(Ω) we get gu ∈ Lp(Ω) and where the constant c = c(p, q, r, n) is independent of g and u. kgukLp(Ω) ≤ ckgk q, s p (Ω) S kukW r,p(Ω), (4.8) Proof. Let u ∈ W r,p(Ω) and g ∈ Sq, s p (Ω). By (4.4) and by Holder inequality it follows that ZΩ gupdx ≤ c1ZΩ ρ−nZΩ(x) gupdy dx ≤ c1ZΩ ρ−nkgkp Lpτ (Ω(x))kukp L pτ τ −1 (Ω(x)) dx ≤ (4.9) ≤ c1kgkp S q, s p (Ω) ρ−(s+n τ −1 kukp L pτ τ −1 (Ω(x)) dx. τ )ZΩ On the other hand from (4.7) and Lemma 4.2 we obtain ρ−n (τ −1) τ ZΩ kukp L pτ τ −1 (Ω(x)) ραp−nZΩ k∂αukp Lp(Ω(x))dx ≤ ραpk∂αukp Lp. dx ≤ c0 Xα≤r ≤ c1 Xα≤r From (4.9), (4.10) the inequality (4.8) follows. (4.10) (cid:3) The following theorem is a consequence of the embedding result stated in the Theorem 4.3 (see result of Fefferman [10] and also [9] for a simplified proof). Theorem 4.4. If h1) and h2) hold, then for any g ∈ Sq, s p (Ω), s ≤ p, we get kgukLp(Ω) ≤ ckgk q, s p (Ω) S k∇ukLp(Ω) ∀u ∈ W 1,p 0 (Ω). where the constant c = c(p, q, n) is independent of g and u. Proof. Taking in mind the Hardy inequality, the proof is a direct consequence of the (cid:3) Theorem 4.3 when r = 1. 6 A. CANALE References [1] R.A.Adams, Sobolev spaces, Academic Press, 1975. [2] H.Brezis, Analisi funzionale, Liguori Ed., 1990. [3] A. Canale, A priori bounds in weighted spaces, J. Math. Anal. Appl. Vol. 287 (4) (2003), 101-117. [4] A. Canale On some results in weighted spaces under Cordes type conditions, J. Interdiscip. Math., Vol. 10 (2)(2007), 245-261. [5] A. Canale, On some results in weighted spaces under Chicco type conditions, Int. J. Pure Appl. Math., Vol. 31 (2) (2006), 185-202. [6] A. Canale, Bounds in spaces of Morrey under Cordes type conditions, J. Appl. Funct. Anal., Vol. 3 (1) (2008), 11-32. [7] A. Canale, Bounds in spaces of Morrey under Chicco type conditions, Math. Ineq. and Appl., Vol. 12 (2) (2009), 265-278. [8] F.Chiarenza - M.Franciosi, A generalization of a theorem by C.Miranda, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl.,(IV) (1992), 285-297. [9] F.Chiarenza - M.Frasca, A remark on a paper by C.Fefferman, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.,(2) (108) (1990), 407-409. [10] C.Fefferman, The uncertainty principle, Bull. Am. Math. Soc., (9) (1983), 129-206. [11] A.Kufner, Weighted Sobolev spaces, Teubner Texte zur Math., Band (31) (1980). [12] J.Necas, Les m´ethodes directes en theorie des ´equations elliptiques, Masson et C.ie Editeurs, Paris, 1967. Dipartimento di Matematica, Universit`a degli Studi di Salerno, Via Giovanni Paolo II n. 132, 84084 FISCIANO (Sa), Italy. E-mail address: [email protected]
1605.03411	2	1605	2016-12-13T13:45:51	Lattice sub-tilings and frames in LCA groups	[ "math.FA" ]	Given a lattice $\Lambda$ in a locally compact abelian group $G$ and a measurable subset $\Omega$ with finite and positive measure, then the set of characters associated to the dual lattice form a frame for $L^2(\Omega)$ if and only if the distinct translates by $\Lambda$ of $\Omega$ have almost empty intersections. Some consequences of this results are the well-known Fuglede theorem for lattices, as well as a simple characterization for frames of modulates.	math.FA	math	Lattice sub-tilings and frames in LCA groups D. Barbieri∗, E. Hern´andez† and A. Mayeli‡ July 8, 2018 Abstract Given a lattice Λ in a locally compact abelian group G and a measur- able subset Ω with finite and positive measure, then the set of characters associated to the dual lattice form a frame for L2(Ω) if and only if the distinct translates by Λ of Ω have almost empty intersections. Some con- sequences of this results are the well-known Fuglede theorem for lattices, as well as a simple characterization for frames of modulates. Keywords: Tiling sets, frames of exponentials, systems of translates. MSC 2010 : 43A25, 42C15, 52C22 1 Introduction Let G denote a locally compact and second countable abelian group (LCA group). A closed subgroup Λ of G is called a lattice if it is discrete and co- compact, i.e, the quotient group G/Λ is compact. Recall that, since G is second countable, then any discrete subgroup of G is also countable (see e.g. [19, Sec- tion 12, Example 17]). Assume that G is abelian, and denote the dual group by bG. The dual lattice of Λ is defined as follows: Λ⊥ = {χ ∈ bG : hχ, λi = 1 ∀λ ∈ Λ}, (1) where hχ, λi indicates the action of character χ on the group element λ. We recall that, by the duality theorem between subgroups and quotient over, since G/Λ is compact, the dual lattice Λ⊥ is discrete. Notice also that groups (see e.g. [21, Lemma 2.1.2]), the dual lattice Λ⊥ is a subgroup of bG that is topologically isomorphic to the dual group of G/Λ, i.e., Λ⊥ ∼= dG/Λ. More- bG/Λ⊥ ∼= bΛ, which implies that Λ⊥ is co-compact, hence it is a lattice. ∗Universidad Aut´onoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid. E-mail : [email protected] †Universidad Aut´onoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid. E-mail : [email protected] ‡City University of New York, Queensborough and the Graduate Center. E-mail : [email protected] 1 Let dg denote a Haar measure on G. For a function f in L1(G), the Fourier transform of f is defined by FG(f )(χ) =ZG f (g)hχ, gi dg , χ ∈ bG, where hχ, gi denotes the action of the character χ on g. By the inversion theorem [21, Section 1.5.1], a Haar measure dχ can be chosen on bG so that the Fourier transform FG is an isometry from L2(G) onto L2(bG). More precisely, hFG(f ), FG(g)iL2( bG,dχ) = hf, giL2(G,dg) f, g ∈ L2(G) . (2) For any χ ∈ bG, we define the exponential function eχ by eχ : G → C, eχ(g) := hχ, gi. For any measurable subset Ω of G, we let Ω denote the Haar measure of Ω. Throughout this paper, we let 1Ω denote the characteristic function of the set Ω. We shall also use the addition symbol '+' for the group action, and 0 for the neutral element, since G is abelian. Definition 1 (Sub-Tiling). Let Ω ⊂ G be a measurable set with finite and positive Haar measure, and let Λ be a lattice subgroup of G. We say that (Ω, Λ) is a sub-tiling pair for G if Xλ∈Λ 1Ω(g − λ) ≤ 1 a.e. g ∈ G . (3) By replacing the inequality with an equality, the definition is that of a tiling pair. In this weaker form, it is equivalent to say that the translates of Ω by elements of Λ are a.e. disjoint, i.e. (Ω, Λ) is a sub-tiling pair for G if and only if Ω ∩ (Ω + λ) = 0 ∀ λ ∈ Λ , λ 6= 0. Observe also that any sub-tiling set is a subset of a tiling set. Our main result is the following. Recall that a cross section QΛ ⊂ G for a group G and a lattice Λ is a measurable set of representatives of G/Λ. Theorem 2 (Main Result). Let Λ be a lattice in G, let Ω ⊂ G be a set with finite and positive measure, and let QΛ ⊂ G be a cross section for G/Λ. Then the following are equivalent. 1) The pair (Ω, Λ) is sub-tiling for G. 2) For a.e. χ ∈ bG it holds Xλ∈Λ⊥ FG(1Ω)(χ + λ)2 = QΛ Ω. 2 3) The system of translates {pΩ L2(G). −1 1Ω(· − λ) : λ ∈ Λ} is orthonormal in 4) The exponential set EΛ⊥ = {eλ : λ ∈ Λ⊥} is a frame for L2(Ω). Moreover, if any of the above conditions holds, then the frame in point 4) is tight, with constant QΛ. As a first corollary we can obtain the following result, which was proved by B. Fuglede in the Euclidean setting [6], and in the present setting by S. Pedersen with a different approach ([18]). Corollary 3. A set of finite and positive measure Ω tiles G with translations by Λ if and only if the exponential set EΛ⊥ is an orthogonal basis for L2(Ω). Let us now denote with M : Λ⊥ → U(L2(Ω)) the modulations Mλf (g) = eλ(g)f (g). As a second consequence of Theorem 2 we obtain the following. Corollary 4. Conditions 1) - 4) of Theorem 2 are equivalent to 5) The system of modulates ΨΛ⊥ = {Mλψ : λ ∈ Λ⊥} is a frame for L2(Ω), with frame bounds 0 < AQΛ ≤ BQΛ < ∞, for any ψ ∈ L2(Ω) satisfying 0 < A ≤ ess inf ψ2 ≤ ess sup ψ2 ≤ B < ∞. The novelty of this paper is that relates subtilings with frames of exponen- tials. Moreover, the proof of 2) ⇒ 3) in Theorem 2 is shown by using the bracket map of a system of translates (Corollary 8) that have been introduced to study properties of translation invariant spaces (see [7] and the references therein.) The setting of LCA groups allows to prove simultaneously results for a large variety of groups, namely Rn, Zd, Tk, and all finite groups F with discrete topol- ogy, as well as the so called elementary LCA groups G = Rn × Zd × Tk × F . Observe that knowing Theorem 2 and Corollary 3 for every factor group does not immediately provide the corresponding results for G. The motivation for this paper comes from the problem of studying the re- lationship between spectrum sets and tiling pairs, whose roots dates back to a 1974 paper of B. Fuglede ([6]). There he proved that a set E ⊂ Rd, d ≥ 1, of positive Lebesgue measure, tiles Rd by translations with a lattice Λ if and only if L2(E) has an orthogonal basis of exponentials indexed by the annihilator of Λ. A more general statement in Rd, which says that if E ⊂ Rd, d ≥ 1, has positive Lebesgue measure, then L2(E) has an orthogonal basis of exponentials (not necessary indexed by a lattice) if and only if E tiles Rd by translations, has been known as the Fuglede Conjecture. A variety of results were proved establishing connections between tiling and orthogonal exponential bases. See, for example, [17], [11], [16], [12] and [13]. In 2001, I. Laba proved that the Fuglede conjecture is true for the union of two In 2003, A. Iosevich, N. Katz and T. Tao ([9]) intervals in the plane ([15]). proved that the Fuglede conjecture holds for convex planar domains. It was 3 also proved in [11] and [17] that Λ tiles Rd by the unit cube Qd if and only if Λ is a spectral set for Qd. In 2004, T. Tao ([22]) disproved the Fuglede Conjecture in dimension d = 5 and larger, by exhibiting a spectral set in R5 which does not tile the space by translations. In [14], M. Kolountzakis and M. Matolcsi also disproved the reverse implication of the Fuglede Conjecture for dimensions d = 4 and higher. In [4] and [3], the dimension of counter-examples was further reduced. In fact, B. Farkas, M. Matolcsi and P. Mora show in [3] that the Fuglede conjecture is false in R3. The general feeling in the field is that sooner or later the counter-examples of both implications will cover all dimensions. However, in [10] the authors showed that the Fuglede Conjecture holds in two- dimensional vector spaces over prime fields. Then, in [2] the authors prove that tiling implies spectral in Z3 p, p prime, and Fuglede conjecture is true for Z3 2 and Z3 3. Very recently, important developments in LCA groups, with crucial implications on sampling theory, have been developed by E. Agora, J. Antezana and C. Cabrelli in [1], where the authors could obtain a full characterization of Riesz bases for multi-tiling sets in LCA groups. Acknowledgements: D. Barbieri was supported by a Marie Curie Intra Euro- pean Fellowship (626055) within the 7th European Community Framework Pro- gramme. D. Barbieri and E. Hern´andez were supported by Grant MTM2013- 40945-P (Ministerio de Econom´ıa y Competitividad, Spain). A. Mayeli was supported by PSC-CUNY-TRADB-45-446, and by the Postgraduate Program of Excellence in Mathematics at Universidad Aut´onoma de Madrid from June 19 to July 17, 2014, when this paper was started. The authors wish to thank Alex Iosevich for several interesting conversations regarding this paper and his expository paper on the Fuglede conjecture for lattices [8]. 2 Notations and Preliminaries Let Λ be a lattice in an LCA group G. Denote by QΛ ⊂ G a measurable cross section of G/Λ. By definition, a cross section is a set of representatives of all cosets in G/Λ, so that the intersection of QΛ with any coset g + Λ has only one element. The existence of a Borel measurable cross section is guaranteed by [5, Theorem 1]. Moreover, it is evident that (QΛ, Λ) is a tiling pair for G, while any tiling set Ω differs from a cross section at most for a zero measure set. Let d g be a normalized Haar measure for G/Λ. Then the relation between Haar measure on G and Haar measure for G/Λ is given by Weil's formula: for g ∈ G/Λ any function f ∈ L1(G), the periodization map Φ( g) =Pλ∈Λ f (g +λ), is well defined almost everywhere in G/Λ, belongs to L1(G/Λ), and ZG f (g)dg = QΛZG/ΛXλ∈Λ f (g + λ)d g. (4) This formula is a special case of [20, Theorem 3.4.6]. The constant QΛ, called the lattice size, appears in (4) because G/Λ is equipped with the normalized Haar measure d g. 4 Definition 5 (Dual integrable representations ([7])). Let G be an LCA group, and let π be a unitary representation of G on a Hilbert space H. We say π is dual integrable if there exists a sesquilinear map [·, ·]π : H × H → L1(bG), called bracket map for π, such that hφ, π(g)ψiH =Z bG [φ, ψ]π(χ)e−g(χ)dχ ∀ g ∈ G , ∀ φ, ψ ∈ H. Example 6. Let Λ be a lattice in an LCA group G. For any λ ∈ Λ, define us denote with QΛ⊥ a cross section for the annihilator lattice Λ⊥. Thus, by Plancherel formula (2) and Weil's formula (4) we have Tλφ(g) = φ(g − λ) on φ ∈ L2(G) and Mλh(χ) = eλ(χ)h(χ) on h ∈ L2(bG). Let hφ, TλψiL2(G) = hFG(φ), MλFG(ψ)iL2( bG) =Z bG FG(φ)(χ)FG(ψ)(χ)e−λ(χ)dχ = QΛ⊥Z bG/Λ⊥ Xλ∈Λ⊥ = QΛ⊥Z bG/Λ⊥ Xλ∈Λ⊥ FG(φ)( χ + λ)FG(ψ)( χ + λ)e−λ( χ + λ)d χ FG(φ)( χ + λ)FG(ψ)( χ + λ)e−λ( χ)d χ. Since FG(φ)FG(ψ) ∈ L1(bG), we have that [φ, ψ]T ( χ) := QΛ⊥ Xλ∈Λ⊥ χ ∈ bG/Λ⊥ defines a sesquilinear map [·, ·]T : L2(G) × L2(G) → L1(bG/Λ⊥), so T is a dual integrable representation of Λ on H = L2(G). FG(φ)( χ + λ)FG(ψ)( χ + λ) a.e. A relevant application of dual integrable representations is the possibility to characterize bases of unitary orbits in terms of their associated bracket maps. The following result has been proved in [7, Proposition 5.1]. Theorem 7. Let G be a countable abelian group, let π be a dual integrable representation of G on a Hilbert space H, and let φ ∈ H. The system {π(g)φ : g ∈ G} is orthonormal in H if and only if [φ, φ]π(χ) = 1 for almost every χ ∈ bG. As a consequence of Theorem 7 and Example 6, and of the basic fact QΛQΛ⊥ = 1 (for completeness, we have provided a proof in the appendix), we have the following result. Corollary 8. Let T and Λ be as in Example 6, and let φ ∈ L2(G). Then the system of translates {Tλφ : λ ∈ Λ} is an orthonormal system in L2(G) if and only if Xλ∈Λ⊥ FG(φ)(χ + λ)2 = QΛ a.e. χ ∈ bG . 5 3 Proof of Theorem 2 In this section we shall prove Theorem 2 and its corollaries. Proof of Theorem 2. 1) ⇒ 4) It is well-known ([21]) that, for any cross section QΛ, the exponential set EΛ⊥ is an orthogonal basis for L2(QΛ). Thus, for all f ∈ L2(QΛ), Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf, 1 pQΛ eλiL2(QΛ)2 = kf k2 L2(QΛ) . (5) Since condition (1) says that Ω is contained in some cross section QΛ, then the previous identity still holds for all f ∈ L2(Ω). Hence EΛ⊥ is a tight frame for L2(Ω) with constant QΛ. 4) ⇒ 1) Suppose, by contradiction, that Ω is not a subtiling set. Then we claim that for all cross section QΛ there exist λ1, λ2 ∈ Λ, λ2 6= 0, such that (QΛ + λ1) ∩ Ω ∩ (Ω + λ2) > 0. (6) If this is true, then let Ω1 = (QΛ + λ1) ∩ Ω ∩ (Ω + λ2), and Ω2 = Ω1 − λ2. Both are subsets of Ω with positive measure and, since λ2 6= 0, they are disjoint because Ω1 ⊂ QΛ + λ1 and Ω2 ⊂ Qλ + λ1 − λ2. Therefore, the function f = 1Ω1 − 1Ω2 is nonzero and belongs to L2(Ω). Then, for all λ ∈ Λ⊥ we have hf, eλiL2(Ω) =ZΩ1 eλ(g)dg −ZΩ2 eλ(g)dg =ZΩ1(cid:0)eλ(g) − eλ(g − λ2)(cid:1)dg = 0. This implies that the system EΛ⊥ can not be a frame for L2(Ω). In order to prove (6), let us proceed by contradiction and suppose that for all λ ∈ Λ and all λ∗ ∈ Λ, λ∗ 6= 0 we have Now take λ′ ∈ Λ, λ′ 6= 0. By definition of cross section, we have (QΛ + λ) ∩ Ω ∩ (Ω + λ∗) = 0. Ω ∩ (Ω + λ′) = Gλ∈Λ (QΛ + λ) ∩ Ω ∩ (Ω + λ′) which implies that Ω ∩ (Ω + λ′) = 0. Hence, Ω would be a subtiling set of G by Λ, which is a contradiction. 1) ⇒ 2) Since (5) holds, we can obtain 2) by choosing f = eχ 1Ω. 2) ⇒ 3) This follows as an application of Corollary 8. 3) ⇒ 1) By orthogonality, we have that for all λ ∈ Λ, λ 6= 0 0 = h1Ω, 1Ω(· − λ)iL2(G) = Ω ∩ (Ω + λ) so Ω is sub-tiling. 6 Proof of Corollary 3. If (Ω, Λ) is a tiling pair then it is well-known that EΛ⊥ is an orthogonal basis for L2(Ω). To prove the converse, assume by contradiction that Ω is not tiling. Then one of the following cases holds i. Ω is a strictly sub-tiling set, i.e. there exists a cross section QΛ such that Ω ⊂ QΛ and QΛ \ Ω > 0. ii. Ω is not a sub-tiling set, so that (6) holds. For case i., observe that the assumption of EΛ⊥ being an orthogonal basis for L2(Ω) implies Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf, 1 pΩ eλiL2(Ω)2 = kf k2 L2(Ω) ∀ f ∈ L2(Ω). On the other hand, since EΛ⊥ is an orthogonal basis for L2(QΛ), we have Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf 1Ω, 1 pQΛ eλiL2(QΛ)2 = kf 1Ωk2 L2(QΛ) ∀ f ∈ L2(Ω) so that Ω = QΛ, which contradicts i. For case ii., in Theorem 2 we already proved that EΛ⊥ can not even be a frame. Proof of Corollary 4. Assume 4) holds, i.e. that EΛ⊥ is a tight frame for L2(Ω) with constant QΛ. Then Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf, MλψiL2(Ω)2 = Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf ψ, eλiL2(Ω)2 = QΛ kf ψk2 L2(Ω) ∀ f ∈ L2(Ω) . Since Akf k2 5) holds. Then, since A > 0, for all f ∈ L2(Ω) we can write L2(Ω) ≤ Bkf k2 L2(Ω) ≤ kf ψk2 L2(Ω), this proves 5). Conversely, assume Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf, eλiL2(Ω)2 = Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf /ψ, MλψiL2(Ω)2 , so that, by the hypotheses on ψ, we get A B QΛ kf k2 L2(Ω) ≤ Xλ∈Λ⊥ hf, eλiL2(Ω)2 ≤ B A QΛ kf k2 L2(Ω) ∀ f ∈ L2(Ω). Thus EΛ⊥ is a frame, hence proving 4). Observe that, by Theorem 2, this implies that EΛ⊥ is a tight frame with constant QΛ, hence improving the inequalities above. 7 4 Comments on related work The statement of Theorem 2 relating sutilings pairs (Ω, Λ) for a lattice Λ and frames of exponentials for L2(Ω) is new. However, the proof has similarities with existing proofs of the similar statement for tiling sets by lattices and orthonormal bases of exponentials. The result in Corollary 3 is proved by B. Fuglede ([6], Lemma 6) for G = Rn and by S. Pedersen ([18], Theorem 3.6) for LCA groups. In both papers, [6] and [18], as well as in the present work, the implication 1) ⇒ 4) is done in the same way by observing that EΛ⊥ is an orthogonal basis of exponentials of L2(QΛ). As for the implication 4) ⇒ 1) both papers give a direct proof of the fact that Ω ∩ (Ω + λ) have measure zero for all λ ∈ Λ and (Ω + λ) has measure zero. In the present paper we give that also the set G \ [λ∈Λ an argument by contradiction assuming that 1) does not hold and exhibiting a non-zero function in L2(Ω) which is perpendicular to all eλ, λ ∈ Λ⊥. The manuscript [8] by A. Iosevich gives a proof of the equivalence of 1) and 2) in Theorem 2 for a tiling set Ω ∈ Rn by a lattice Λ. It is then stated without proof that 2) and 4) are equivalent by a density argument. The proof of 1) ⇔ 2) in [8] goes as follows. Consider the functions f (x) ≡ Xλ∈Λ 1Ω(x + λ) , x ∈ Rn and H(ξ) ≡ Xλ∈Λ⊥ FRn (1Ω)(ξ + λ)2 . Using Fourier Analysis it can be shown that, as a periodic function in L2(QΛ⊥ ), the Fourier coefficients of H are Ω ∩ (Ω + λ) QΛ⊥ , λ ∈ Λ , bH(λ) = and the Fourier coefficients of f , as a periodic function in L2(QΛ), are FRn(1Ω)(λ) QΛ , λ ∈ Λ . bf (λ) = (7) (8) Assuming that 1) of Theorem 2 holds for a tiling set Ω, equation (7) shows, using the Fourier inversion theorem, that H is constant with value Ω QΛ a.e., since QΛ QΛ⊥ = 1. This shows 2) of Theorem 2. Conversely, assuming 2) of Theorem 2 holds, equation (7) shows that Ω is a subtiling set of Rn by Λ. Equation (8) is then used to show that f (x) = 1 a. e., which shows 1). A proof along the lines described above can be designed for LCA groups and subtiles. In the proof given in the present work, we have proved the equivalence of 1), 2) and 3) in Theorem 2 by using the notion of bracket map (see [7] and the references therein) and the characterization of frame sequences of translates of a single function along lattices stated in Theorem 7 and Corollary 8. As in [8] our paper also uses Fourier Analysis to compute Fourier coefficients (see Example 6). 8 A Appendix We provide here a self-contained proof of the following basic result. transform be an isometry, i.e. Lemma 9. Let G be an LCA group, let bG be its dual group, and let the Haar measures dg on G and dχ on bG be chosen in such a way that the group Fourier subgroup of G, and denote with QΛ ⊂ G a cross section for G/Λ, let Λ⊥ ⊂ bG be the dual lattice of Λ, and denote with QΛ⊥ ⊂ bG a cross section for bG/Λ⊥. such that (2) holds. Let Λ ⊂ G be a lattice Then QΛQΛ⊥ = 1 i.e. the product of the size of the lattice times the size of the dual lattice, com- puted with respect to Haar measures satisfying (2), is 1. Proof. Observe first that, by (2), we have QΛ =ZG 1QΛ(g)2dg =Z bG FG(1QΛ )(χ)2dχ =ZQΛ⊥ Xλ∈Λ⊥ FG(1QΛ )(χ + λ)2dχ (9) where the last identity is due to the fact that (QΛ⊥ , Λ⊥) is a tiling pair for bG by definition of cross-section. We can thus apply the same argument used to prove point 2) of Theorem 2: since {eλ : λ ∈ Λ⊥} is an orthogonal basis of L2(QΛ), then it satisfies (5), so by choosing f = eχ1QΛ we get Xλ∈Λ⊥ FG(1QΛ)(χ + λ)2 = QΛ2 a.e. χ ∈ bG. The claim then follows by inserting this identity in (9). References [1] E. Agora, J. Antezana, C. Cabrelli, Multi-tiling sets, Riesz bases, and sam- pling near the critical density in LCA groups. Adv. Math. 285 (2015) 454- 477. [2] C. Aten et al, Tiling sets and spectral sets over finite fields. Preprint, arxiv.org/abs/1509.01090. [3] B. Farkas, M. Matolcsi and P. M´ora, On Fuglede's conjecture and the exis- tence of universal spectra. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 12 (2006), 483-494. [4] B. Farkas and S. Revesz, Tiles with no spectra in dimension 4. Math. Scand. 98 (2006), 44-52. 9 [5] J. Feldman and F. P. Greenleaf, Existence of Borel transversals in groups. Pacific J. Math. 25 (1968), 455-461. [6] B. Fuglede: Commuting self-adjoint partial differential operators and a group theoretic problem. J. Funct. Anal. 16 (1974), 101-121. [7] E. Hern´andez, H. Sikic, G. Weiss, E. Wilson, Cyclic subspaces for unitary representation of LCA groups: generalized Zak transforms. Colloq. Math. 118 (2010), 313 - 332. [8] A. Iosevich, Fuglede Conjecture for Lattices. Preprint available at www.math.rochester.edu/people/faculty/iosevich/expository/FugledeLattice.pdf [9] A. Iosevich, N. Katz and T. Tao, The Fuglede spectral conjecture holds for convex planar domains. Math. Res. Lett. 10 (2003), no. 5-6, 559-569. [10] A. Iosevich, A. Mayeli, J. Pakianathan, The Fuglede Conjecture holds in Zp × Zp. To appear on Anal. PDE. [11] A. Iosevich and S. Pedersen, Spectral and tiling properties of the unit cube. Internat. Math. Res. Notices (1998), no. 16, 819-828. [12] S. Konyagin and I. Laba, Spectra of certain types of polynomials and tiling of integers with translates of finite sets. J. Number Theory 103 (2003), no. 2, 267-280. [13] M. Kolountzakis and I. Laba, Tiling and spectral properties of near-cubic domains. Studia Math. 160 (2004), no. 3, 287-299. [14] M. Kolountzakis and M. Matolcsi, Tiles with no spectra. Forum Math. 18 (2006), 519-528. [15] I. Laba, Fuglede's conjecture for a union of two intervals. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), 2965-2972. [16] I. Laba, The spectral set conjecture and multiplicative properties of roots of polynomials. J. London Math. Soc. 65 (2002), 661-671. [17] J. Lagarias, J. Reed and Y. Wang, Orthonormal bases of exponentials for the n-cube. Duke Math. J. 103 (2000), 25-37. [18] S. Pedersen, Spectral Theory of Commuting Self-Adjoint Partial Differential Operators. Journal of Functional Analysis 73 (1987), 122-134 . [19] L.S. Pontryagin, Topological Groups. Princeton Univ. Press (1946) [20] H. Reiter, J.D. Stegeman, Classical Harmonic Analysis on Locally Compact groups. Clarendon Press, Oxford (2000). [21] W. Rudin, Fourier Analysis on Groups. John Wiley & Sons, 1990. [22] T. Tao, Fuglede's conjecture is false in 5 and higher dimensions. Math. Res. Lett. 11 (2004), 251-258. 10
1704.01768	1	1704	2017-04-06T10:05:35	$\Gamma$-flatness and Bishop-Phelps-Bollob\'as type theorems for operators	[ "math.FA" ]	The Bishop-Phelps-Bollob\'{a}s property deals with simultaneous approximation of an operator $T$ and a vector $x$ at which $T$ nearly attains its norm by an operator $T_0$ and a vector $x_0$, respectively, such that $T_0$ attains its norm at $x_0$. In this note we extend the already known results about {the} Bishop-Phelps-Bollob\'{a}s property for Asplund operators to a wider class of Banach spaces and to a wider class of operators. Instead of proving a BPB-type theorem for each space separately we isolate two main notions: $\Gamma$-flat operators and Banach spaces with ACK$_\rho$ structure. In particular, we prove a general BPB-type theorem for $\Gamma$-flat operators acting to a space with ACK$_\rho$ structure and show that uniform algebras and spaces with the property $\beta$ have ACK$_\rho$ structure. We also study the stability of the ACK$_\rho$ structure under some natural Banach space theory operations. As a consequence, we discover many new examples of spaces $Y$ such that the Bishop-Phelps-Bollob\'{a}s property for Asplund operators is valid for all pairs of the form ($X,Y$).	math.FA	math	Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS FOR OPERATORS BERNARDO CASCALES, ANTONIO J. GUIRAO, VLADIMIR KADETS, AND MARIIA SOLOVIOVA ABSTRACT. The Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property deals with simulta- neous approximation of an operator T and a vector x at which T nearly attains its norm by an operator T0 and a vector x0, respectively, such that T0 attains its norm at x0. In this note we extend the already known results about the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for Asplund operators to a wider class of Banach spaces and to a wider class of operators. Instead of proving a BPB-type theorem for each space separately we isolate two main notions: Γ-flat operators and Banach spaces with ACKρ structure. In particular, we prove a general BPB-type theorem for Γ-flat operators acting to a space with ACKρ structure and show that uniform algebras and spaces with the property β have ACKρ structure. We also study the stability of the ACKρ structure under some natural Banach space the- ory operations. As a consequence, we discover many new examples of spaces Y such that the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for Asplund operators is valid for all pairs of the form (X, Y ). 1. INTRODUCTION In this paper X, Y are Banach spaces (real or complex), K stands for the field of scalars R or C, L(X, Y ) is the space of all bounded linear operators T : X → Y , L(X) = L(X, X), BX and SX denote the closed unit ball and the unit sphere of X, respectively and acoA stands for the absolute convex hull of the set A. According to [1], a pair (X, Y ) has the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property (BPB property) for operators if for every ε > 0 there exists δ(ε) > 0 such that for every operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) of norm 1, if x0 ∈ SX is such that (cid:107)T (x0)(cid:107) > 1 − δ(ε), then there exist u0 ∈ SX and S ∈ SL(X,Y ) satisfying (cid:107)S(u0)(cid:107) = 1, (cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) < ε, and (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < ε. 7 1 0 2 r p A 6 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 8 6 7 1 0 . 4 0 7 1 : v i X r a Date: VERSION: 31 December, 2016. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 46B20, 46E25 Secondary: 47B07, Key words and phrases. Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as, Asplund operators, norm attaining, 47B48. uniform algebra. The research of first, second and third authors was partially supported by MINECO grant MTM2014-57838-C2-1-P and Fundaci´on S´eneca, Regi´on de Murcia grant 19368/PI/14. The research of the third author is done in frames of Ukranian Ministry of Science and Education Research Program 0115U000481. The research of fourth author has been partially performed during her stay in University of Murcia in frames of Erasmus+ program. 1 2 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA If an analogous definition is valid for operators T , S from a subspace I ⊂ L(X, Y ), then we say that (X, Y ) has the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for operators from I. With this terminology, the original Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as theorem [8] says that for every X, the pair (X, K) has the BPB property for operators. Also, thanks to Acosta, Aron, Garc´ıa, and Maestre [1, Theorem 2.2], if Y has the Lindenstrauss' property β (Definition 4.8), then for every Banach space X the pair (X, Y ) has the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for op- erators. In 2011 Aron, Cascales, and Kozhushkina [4, Theorem 2.4] showed that for every X and every compact Hausdorff space K the pair (X, C(K)) has the BPB property for Asplund operators (Definition 2.2). In 2013 Cascales, Guirao and Kadets [9] extended this result to uniform algebras A ⊂ C(K). The exact statement of the last result is given below. Theorem 1.1 ([9, Theorem 3.6]). Let A ⊂ C(K) be a uniform algebra and T : X → A be an Asplund operator with (cid:107)T(cid:107) = 1. Suppose that 2 . Then there exist 0 < ε < u0 ∈ SX and an Asplund operator S ∈ SL(X,A) satisfying that: 2 and x0 ∈ SX are such that (cid:107)T x0(cid:107) > 1 − ε2 √ (cid:107)Su0(cid:107) = 1, (cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) ≤ ε and (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < 2ε. In the same vein, Acosta, Becerra Guerrero, Garc´ıa, Kim, and Maestre [2] generalized [4, Theorem 2.4] to some spaces of continuous vector-valued functions (see Theorem 4.13 below). The aim of this paper is to extend all these results to a wider class of Ba- nach spaces and to a wider class of operators. The main difference of our approach is that instead of proving a Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as kind theorem for each space separately (and thus repeating essential parts of the proof many times), we introduce a new Banach space property (called ACKρ structure) which extracts all the useful technicalities for the BPB type of approximation. We prove a general Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as type theorem for Γ-flat operators (see Definition 2.8) acting to a space with ACKρ struc- ture and show that uniform algebras and spaces with the property β have ACKρ structure. After that, we study the stability of the ACKρ structure under some natural Banach space theory operations which as a consequence gives us a wide collection of examples of pairs (X, Y ) possessing the BPB property for Asplund operators. The structure of the paper is as follows. In section 2 we collect the nec- essary definitions (in particular that of Asplund operators and of Γ-flat op- erators) and prove an important Basic Lemma. In section 3 we introduce the central concept of ACKρ structure and prove a general BPB type the- orem for this class of Banach spaces. Finally, in section 4 we perform the announced study of spaces with ACKρ structure which, on the one hand, gives a unified proof of several results from [1, 2, 4] and [9], and on the other hand, leads to new BPB type theorems in concrete spaces. For the non-defined notions used through this article, we refer to [12]. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 3 2. Γ-FLAT OPERATORS AND THE BASIC LEMMA Let (B, τ ) be a topological space, ρ be a metric on B (possibly, not re- lated with τ). B is said to be fragmented by ρ, if for every non-empty subset A ⊂ B and for every ε > 0 there exists a τ-open U such that U ∩ A (cid:54)= ∅ and diam(U∩A) < ε. Some important examples of fragmented topological spaces come from Banach space theory. For instance, every weakly com- pact subset of a Banach space is fragmented by the norm (i.e., by the metric ρ(x, y) = (cid:107)x − y(cid:107)), see [16]. A Banach space X is called an Asplund space if, whenever f is a convex continuous function defined on an open subset U of X, the set of all points of U where f is Fr´echet differentiable is a dense Gδ-subset of U. This def- inition is due to Asplund [3] under the name strong differentiability space. This concept has multiple characterizations via topology or measure theory, as in the following: Theorem 2.1 ([17, 21, 22]). Let X be a Banach space. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i) X is an Asplund space; (ii) every w∗-compact subset of (X, w∗) is fragmented by the norm; (iii) each separable subspace of X has separable dual; (iv) X∗ has the Radon-Nikod´ym property. According to the above, every reflexive space and every separable space whose dual is separable is an Asplund space. Classical example of Asplund spaces are Lp and (cid:96)p with 1 < p < ∞, and also c0; examples of spaces that are not Asplund are C[0, 1], (cid:96)1, (cid:96)∞, L1[0, 1] and L∞[0, 1], see for in- stance [11]. Definition 2.2 ([23]). An operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) is said to be an Asplund operator if it factors through an Asplund space, i.e., there exist an Asplund Banach space Z and operators T1 ∈ L(X, Z), T2 ∈ L(Z, Y ) such that T = T2 ◦ T1. Compact and weakly compact operators are Asplund operators (every weakly compact operator factorizes through a reflexive space). Theorem 2.1 yields the following result: Remark 2.3 ([23]). If T is an Asplund operator, then its adjoint T ∗ sends the unit ball of Y ∗ into a w∗-compact subset of (X, w∗) that is norm frag- mented. Definition 2.4. Let Y be a Banach space. Y is said to have the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for Asplund operators (A-BPBp for short) if for every ε > 0 there exists δ(ε) > 0, such that for every Banach space X and every Asplund operator T ∈ SL(X,Y ), if x0 ∈ SX is such that (cid:107)T (x0)(cid:107) > 1 − δ(ε), then there exist u0 ∈ SX and S ∈ SL(X,Y ) satisfying (cid:107)S(u0)(cid:107) = 1,(cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) < ε and (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < ε. 4 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA Definition 2.5 ([13]). Let A and B be topological spaces. A function f : A → B is said to be quasi-continuous, if for every non-empty open sub- set U ⊂ A, every z ∈ U and every neighborhood V of f (z) there exists a non-empty open subset W ⊂ U such that f (W ) ⊂ V . Let us introduce some new terminology. Note that a similar concept of fragmentability of maps was introduced in [14]. Definition 2.6. Let A be a topological space and (M, d) be a metric space. A function f : A → M is said to be openly fragmented, if for every non- empty open subset U ⊂ A and every ε > 0 there exists a non-empty open subset V ⊂ U with d-diam(f (V )) < ε. Every continuous or quasi-continuous function f : A → M is openly fragmented. In particular, if A is a discrete topological space then every f : A → M is openly fragmented. For every metric space M, every left- continuous f : [0, 1] → M and every right-continuous function f : [0, 1] → M are openly fragmented. Every f : A → M with a dense set of continuity points is openly fragmented. Every separately continuous function of two variables f : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → M is quasi-continuous [6] and, consequently, openly fragmented. Some other easy but useful examples are given in the following theorem: Theorem 2.7. Let A, B be topological spaces, ρ be a metric on B (possibly, not related with the original topology), and f : A → B be a function. (i) If B is fragmented by ρ, and f is continuous in the original topolo- gies, then f : A → (B, ρ) is openly fragmented. (ii) If A is fragmented by some metric ρ1 and f : (A, ρ1) → (B, ρ) is uniformly continuous, then f : A → (B, ρ) is openly fragmented. Let, moreover, (B,(cid:107)·(cid:107)) be a Banach space. Then (iii) If f, g : A → (B,(cid:107)·(cid:107)) are openly fragmented then f + g : A → (iv) If f : A → (B,(cid:107)·(cid:107)) and g : A → K are openly fragmented then (B,(cid:107)·(cid:107)) is openly fragmented. gf : A → (B,(cid:107)·(cid:107)) is openly fragmented. The statements (ii), (iii) and (iv) are routine. Proof. (i) For a given non-empty open subset U ⊂ A consider f (U ) ⊂ B. By ρ-fragmentability of B, for every ε > 0 there exits an open subset W of B with f (U ) ∩ W (cid:54)= ∅ and diam(f (U ) ∩ W ) < ε. By continuity of f the set f−1(W ) is open and V := f−1(W ) ∩ U will be the non-empty open subset V ⊂ U we need. (cid:3) Definition 2.8. Let X, Y be Banach spaces and Γ ⊂ Y ∗. An operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) is said to be Γ-flat, if T ∗Γ : (Γ, w∗) → (X∗,(cid:107)·(cid:107)X∗) is openly fragmented. In other words, for every w∗-open subset U ⊂ Y ∗ with U∩Γ (cid:54)= ∅ and every ε > 0 there exists a w∗-open subset V ⊂ U with V ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅ such that diam(T ∗(V ∩ Γ)) < ε. The set of all Γ-flat operators in L(X, Y ) will be denoted by FlΓ(X, Y ). Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 5 Statements (iii) and (iv) of the previous theorem imply that FlΓ(X, Y ) is a linear subspace of L(X, Y ). Let us list some examples of Γ-flat operators. Example A. Every Asplund operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) is Γ-flat for every Γ ⊂ BY ∗. This follows from Remark 2.3 and Theorem 2.7, (i). Example B. If (Γ, w∗) ⊂ Y ∗ is norm fragmented, then every bounded op- erator in L(X, Y ) is Γ-flat (Theorem 2.7, (ii)). In particular, we have the next concrete example. Example C. If (Γ, w∗) ⊂ Y ∗ is discrete, then every operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) is Γ-flat. ε The notion of Γ-flat generalizes the property of Asplund operators that allowed to prove [4, Lemma 2.3]. The immediate generalization of that lemma is the following result: Lemma 2.9 (Basic Lemma). Let X, Y be Banach spaces, Γ ⊂ BY ∗ be a 1-norming set, T ∈ FlΓ(X, Y ) be a Γ-flat operator with (cid:107)T(cid:107) = 1 , 0 < ε < 2/3, and x0 ∈ SX be such that (cid:107)T x0(cid:107) > 1 − ε. Then for every r > 0 and for every k ∈ [ (i) a w∗-open set Ur ⊂ Y ∗ with Ur ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅, and (ii) points x∗ (cid:107)x0 − ur(cid:107) ≤ ε k 2(1−ε), 1) there exist: r ∈ SX∗ and ur ∈ SX with x∗ and (cid:107)T ∗z∗ − x∗ r(cid:107) ≤ r+2k for every z∗ ∈ Ur∩Γ. (2.1) The proof of this fact is a modification of that of [4, Lemma 2.3]. First, r(ur) = 1 such that we use the following fact: Proposition 2.10 ([19, Corollary 2.2]). Let X be a real Banach space, z∗ ∈ SX∗, z ∈ SX, η > 0 and z∗(z) ≥ 1 − η. Then for every k ∈ (0, 1) there exist y∗ ∈ SX∗ and u ∈ SX such that y∗(u) = 1, (cid:107)z − u(cid:107) ≤ η k , (cid:107)z∗ − y∗(cid:107) ≤ 2k. In the next proposition, we relax the condition z∗ ∈ SX allowing (cid:107)z∗(cid:107) to be smaller than 1. Note that x∗ plays the role of z∗. Proposition 2.11. Let X be a Banach space, ε ∈ (0, 2/3), x ∈ SX, x∗ ∈ 2(1−ε) , 1) there exist y∗ ∈ BX∗ and x∗(x) ≥ 1 − ε. Then, for every k ∈ [ SX∗ and u ∈ SX such that ε y∗(u) = 1, (cid:107)x − u(cid:107) ≤ ε k , (cid:107)x∗ − y∗(cid:107) ≤ 2k. Proof. Without loss of generality we can assume that x∗(x) ≥ 1 − ε. Then (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) ≥ 1 − ε. Set z∗ := x∗/(cid:107)x∗(cid:107) , z := x. Then z∗(z) ≥ 1 − η for η = 1 − (1 − ε)(cid:107)x∗(cid:107)−1 ∈ [0, ε]. If η = 0, then z∗(z) = 1, so we can take y∗ = z∗ and u = x, which satisfy the inequalities we want. So we may 6 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA assume that 0 < η ≤ ε. Set k0 := kη 2.10, there exist y∗ ∈ SX∗ and u ∈ SX such that ε ∈ (0, 1). So, according to Proposition y∗(u) = 1, (cid:107)z − u(cid:107) ≤ η k0 , Therefore, (cid:107)x − u(cid:107) ≤ η/k0 = ε/k. Also, we have (cid:107)x∗ − y∗(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)x∗ − z∗(cid:107) + (cid:107)z∗ − y∗(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)z∗ − y∗(cid:107) ≤ 2k0. (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 2k0 (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)x∗ − x∗ (cid:18) (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) 1 − 1 − ε (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) ε (1 − 1−ε (cid:19) . 0, ε (cid:19) (cid:18) . So, if k ≥ ε (cid:113) 2k(1−ε) = 1 − (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) + 2k0 = 1 − (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) + 2k ε t ) is increasing when 2(1−ε), we have ψ((cid:107)x∗(cid:107)) ≤ ψ(1) = 2k. In (cid:3) 0 ∈ Γ such Observe that the function ψ(t) = 1 − t + 2k t ∈ this case, we get our conclusion. Proof of Lemma 2.9. Use that Γ ⊂ BY ∗ is 1-norming and pick y∗ that 0 ∈ U ∩ Γ ⊂ BY ∗. Set U := {y∗ ∈ Y ∗ : T ∗y∗(x0) > 1− ε}. We have that y∗ Since U is w∗-open in Y ∗ and U ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅, according to Definition 2.8, for every r > 0 there exists a w∗-open subset Ur ⊂ U with Ur ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅ such that diam(T ∗(Ur ∩ Γ)) < r. 1(x0) > Fix some y∗ 1 − ε which, by applying Proposition 2.11 to any 2(1−ε) ≤ k < 1, gives r ∈ SX∗ and ur ∈ SX with x∗ x∗ (cid:107)x0 − ur(cid:107) ≤ ε k r(ur) = 1 and such that 1 ∈ Ur ∩ Γ and set x∗ 0)(x0) = y∗ 0(T x0) > 1 − ε. 1. Then, 1 ≥ (cid:107)x∗ 1(cid:107) ≥ x∗ 1 − x∗ r(cid:107) ≤ 2k. 1 = T ∗y∗ T ∗(y∗ (cid:107)x∗ and ε Finally, let z∗ ∈ Ur ∩ Γ be arbitrary. Then, (cid:107)T ∗z∗ − x∗ r(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)T ∗z∗ − x∗ 1(cid:107) + (cid:107)x∗ 1 − x∗ r(cid:107) ≤ r + 2k, (cid:3) which finishes the proof. 3. THE ACK STRUCTURE In the definition below we extract the structural properties of C(K) and its uniform subalgebras that were essential in the proof of [9, Th. 3.6]. The name "ACK structure" comes from the words "Asplund" and "C(K)". Definition 3.1. Let X be a Banach space and O be a non-emtpy subset of L(X). We will say that X has O-ACK structure with parameter ρ, for some ρ ∈ [0, 1) (X ∈ O-ACKρ, for short) whenever there exists a 1-norming set Γ ⊂ BX∗ such that for every ε > 0 and every non-empty relatively w∗-open subset U ⊂ Γ there exist a non-empty subset V ⊂ U, vectors x∗ 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SX and an operator F ∈ O with the following properties: (I) (cid:107)F e(cid:107) = (cid:107)F(cid:107) = 1; (II) x∗ 1(F e) = 1; Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 7 1 = x∗ 1; then v∗(F e) ≤ ρ for every x∗ ∈ Γ \ V1; (III) F ∗x∗ (IV) denoting V1 = {x∗ ∈ Γ : (cid:107)F ∗x∗(cid:107)+(1−ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗)(cid:107) ≤ 1}, (V) dist(F ∗x∗, aco{0, V }) < ε for every x∗ ∈ Γ; and (VI) v∗(e) − 1 ≤ ε for every v∗ ∈ V . The Banach space X is said to have simple O-ACK structure (X ∈ O- ACK) if V1 = Γ. In other words, for X ∈ O-ACK the above definition holds true with the following modification: the property (IV) becomes (IV)' (cid:107)F ∗x∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗)(cid:107) ≤ 1 for every x∗ ∈ Γ. In case of O = L(X), we will simply say ACKρ (and simple ACK) struc- ture. Remark 3.2. If X belongs to the class ACKρ, then X also belongs to ACKσ for every σ ∈ [ρ, 1). Moreover, ACK ⊂ ACKρ for every ρ ∈ [0, 1). Definition 3.3. A linear subspace I ⊂ L(X, Y ) is said to be a Γ-flat ideal, if all elements of I are Γ-flat operators, I contains all operators of finite rank, and for every T ∈ I and every F ∈ L(Y ) their composition F ◦ T belongs to I. Observe that the subspace of Asplund operators in L(X, Y ) is an example of Γ-flat ideal. The theorem below motivates the above definition. Theorem 3.4. Let X be a Banach space, Y ∈ ACKρ , Γ ⊂ Y ∗ be the corresponding 1-norming set from Defintion 3.1 and T ∈ L(X, Y ) be a Γ- flat operator with (cid:107)T(cid:107) = 1. Let 0 < ε ≤ 1/2 and let x0 ∈ SX be such that (cid:107)T x0(cid:107) > 1 − ε. Then there exist u0 ∈ SX and an operator S ∈ SL(X,Y ) with (cid:107)Su0(cid:107) = 1 such that max{(cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) ,(cid:107)T − S(cid:107)} < √ 2 1 − ρ + 2ε Moreover, if Y ∈ ACK then the estimate can be improved to √ 1 + 2ε max{(cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) ,(cid:107)T − S(cid:107)} < 2ε. Additionally, S can be chosen from I whenever T belongs to a Γ-flat ideal I. In particular, every Y ∈ ACKρ (ACK) has the A-BPBp. Before proving the theorem, we need a preliminary result. Lemma 3.5. Under the conditions of Theorem 3.4 above, for every k ∈ (ε/(2(1 − ε)), 1) and for every (cid:18) √ (cid:19) . (cid:18) (cid:19) ν > 2k 1 + 2 1 − ρ + 2k , there exist u0 ∈ SX and S ∈ SL(X,Y ) satisfying (cid:107)Su0(cid:107) = 1, (cid:107)x0 − u0(cid:107) ≤ ε and (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < ν. In the case of Y ∈ ACK the same is true for every ν > 2k. If, moreover, T belongs to a Γ-flat ideal I, then S can be chosen from I k as well. 8 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA Proof. First, consider the more involved case of Y ∈ ACKρ. Fix r > 0 and 0 < ε(cid:48) < 2/3. Now, we can apply Lemma 2.9 with Y , Γ, r and ε > 0. We r ∈ SX∗ and produce a w∗-open set Ur ⊂ Y ∗ with Ur ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅, and points x∗ ur ∈ SX with x∗ Since Ur ∩ Γ (cid:54)= ∅, we can apply Definition 3.1 to U = Ur ∩ Γ and ε(cid:48) 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SY , F ∈ L(Y ) and V1 ⊂ Γ and obtain a non-empty V ⊂ U, y∗ which satisfy properties (I) -- (VI). In particular, for every z∗ ∈ V ⊂ Ur ∩ Γ according to (2.1) we have r(ur) = 1 such that (2.1) holds true. (cid:107)T ∗z∗ − x∗ r(cid:107) ≤ r + 2k. (3.1) Define now the linear operator S : X → Y by the formula r(x)F e + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(IY − F )T x, S(x) := x∗ where the value of(cid:101)ε ∈ [ε(cid:48), 1) will be specified below in such a way that (cid:107)S(cid:107) ≤ 1. In order to do this, bearing in mind the fact that Γ is 1-norming, we can write (3.2) (cid:107)S(cid:107) = (cid:107)S∗(cid:107) = sup{(cid:107)S∗y∗(cid:107) : y∗ ∈ Γ} . So our first goal is to estimate r + (1 −(cid:101)ε)T ∗(IY ∗ − F ∗)(y∗)(cid:107) (cid:107)S∗y∗(cid:107) = (cid:107)y∗(F e)x∗ (3.3) from above for all y∗ ∈ Γ. For y∗ ∈ V1, the sought estimate (cid:107)S∗y∗(cid:107) ≤ 1 follows immediately from the definition of V1 (see property (IV)). So, it remains to consider the case y∗ ∈ Γ \ V1. Thanks to (V), for every y∗ ∈ Γ, k=1 λkv∗ k with (cid:107)F ∗y∗ − v∗(cid:107) < ε(cid:48) (3.4) k=1 λk ≤ 1. According to (3.1) we have there exists an element v∗ =(cid:80)n k=1 ⊂ V , and(cid:80)n r − T ∗v∗(cid:107) ≤ n(cid:88) k}n r(cid:107) ≤ r + 2k, consequently λk(cid:107)v∗ n(cid:88) such that {v∗ (cid:107)T ∗v∗ k − x∗ (cid:107)v∗(e)x∗ k=1 (VI)≤ ε(cid:48) + k(e)x∗ r − T ∗v∗ k(cid:107) λk(cid:107)x∗ r − T ∗v∗ k(cid:107) ≤ ε(cid:48) + r + 2k. (3.5) k=1 Now, for every y∗ ∈ Γ \ V1 (cid:107)S∗y∗(cid:107) ≤(cid:101)εy∗(F e) + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(cid:107)y∗(F e)x∗ r + T ∗y∗ − T ∗F ∗y∗(cid:107) (IV)≤ (cid:101)ερ + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(cid:107)T ∗y∗(cid:107) + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(cid:107)(F ∗y∗)(e)x∗ (3.4)≤ (cid:101)ερ + (1 −(cid:101)ε) + 2ε(cid:48)(1 −(cid:101)ε) + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(cid:107)v∗(e)x∗ (3.5)≤ (cid:101)ερ + (1 −(cid:101)ε) + 2ε(cid:48)(1 −(cid:101)ε) + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(ε(cid:48) + r + 2k) ≤(cid:101)ερ + (1 −(cid:101)ε)(1 + 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k). r − T ∗F ∗y∗(cid:107) r − T ∗v∗(cid:107) (cid:107)S − T(cid:107) = (cid:107)S∗ − T ∗(cid:107) = sup y∗∈Γ ≤ sup y∗∈Γ (cid:107)y∗(F e)x∗ (cid:107)S∗y∗ − T ∗y∗(cid:107) r − T ∗F ∗y∗(cid:107) + 2(cid:101)ε. (3.6) Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS This means, that if we choose(cid:101)ε = (3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k)/(1− ρ + 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k), 9 then we have (cid:107)S(cid:107) ≤ 1. In this case, 1 = x∗ r(ur) (II) = y∗ 1(x∗ r(ur)F e) (III) = y∗ 1(S(ur)) ≤ (cid:107)S(ur)(cid:107) ≤ 1. Therefore, (cid:107)S(cid:107) = 1 and S attains the norm at the point u0 := ur ∈ SX for which by (2.1) we already had that (cid:107)u0 − x0(cid:107) ≤ ε k. Now, let us estimate For every y∗ ∈ Γ we can proceed the same way as before. Namely, that (cid:107)(F ∗y∗)(e)x∗ r − T ∗F ∗y∗(cid:107) (3.4)≤ 2ε(cid:48) + (cid:107)v∗(e)x∗ (3.5)≤ 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k. r − T ∗v∗(cid:107) Combining this with the inequalities (3.6) and the value of(cid:101)ε we conclude 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k . (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) ≤ 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k + 2 (3.7) Since r > 0 and 0 < ε(cid:48) < 2/3 are arbitrary, for suitable values we will To finish the proof in the case of Y ∈ ACKρ we observe that if T belongs have the desired estimate (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < ν. to a Γ-flat ideal I then S ∈ I. 1 − ρ + 3ε(cid:48) + r + 2k Now the simpler case of Y ∈ ACK. In this case (cid:107)S∗y∗(cid:107) ≤ 1 for all y∗ ∈ Γ thanks to (IV)'. So, (cid:107)S(cid:107) ≤ 1 for all values of(cid:101)ε ∈ [ε(cid:48), 1) and we can simply take(cid:101)ε = ε(cid:48). With such a choice of(cid:101)ε the estimate (3.7) changes to ε0 instead of ε and substitute k = (cid:112)ε0/2. In the case of Y ∈ ACKρ we take ν ∈(cid:16)√ (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) ≤ 5ε(cid:48) + r + 2k, which again for small values of r and ε(cid:48) gives us (cid:107)T − S(cid:107) < ν for the ν which corresponds to this case. (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 3.4. First, select ε0 ∈ (0, ε) in such a way that the in- equality (cid:107)T x0(cid:107) > 1 − ε0 is still valid. Now we apply Lemma 3.5 with , and in the case of Y ∈ ACK we take ν ∈ ( (cid:3) Remark 3.6. The statements of Lemma 3.5 and Theorem 3.4 remain correct if in the definition of ACKρ and ACK the property (IV) is substituted by the following weaker one, in which V1 is larger than in the original definition: Denote V1 = {y∗ ∈ Γ : y∗(F e)+(1−ε(cid:48))(cid:107)(IY ∗ − F ∗)(y∗)(cid:107) ≤ 1}. Then v∗(F e) ≤ ρ for every v∗ ∈ Γ \ V1. Also, a look at the proof of Lemma 2.9 shows that the condition of T being Γ-flat can be weaken in the following way: for every y ∈ BY and every δ > 0 if the w∗-slice S(Γ, x, δ) := {y∗ ∈ Γ : Re y∗(y) > 1 − δ} is √ 2 √ 1−ρ+ 2ε0 2ε0, , √ 2ε). (cid:17)(cid:17) 2 1−ρ+ (cid:16) (cid:16) (cid:17) 1 + √ 2ε0 1 + √ 2ε 2ε CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA 10 not empty, then for every ε > 0 there exists a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset V ⊂ S(Γ, x, δ) such that diam(T ∗(V )) < ε. There are two reasons why we have selected the more restrictive variants. Firstly, with the restrictive definition of (IV) we are able to prove a nice stability result (Theorem 4.12 below), and secondly, all the examples with "relaxed" versions of (IV) and of Γ-flatness that we have in hand, satisfy the restrictive variant of (IV) and of Γ-flatness. 4. BANACH SPACES WITH ACK STRUCTURE The aim of this section is presenting those natural examples of Banach spaces having ACK structure as well as showing the stability of the ACK structure under some operations, such us (cid:96)∞-sums or injective tensor prod- ucts. First of all, let us introduce the first natural class of Banach spaces with ACK structure. As commented above, Definition 3.1, comes from an anal- ysis of the proofs in [9]. We shall show next that, indeed, every uniform algebra A has simple ACK structure. The key tool is Lemma 4.2, that was proved in [9, Lemma 2.5 and Lemma 2.7], and is about the existence of peak functions f ∈ SA whose range is contained in the Stolz's region Stε = {z ∈ C : z + (1 − ε)1 − z ≤ 1}. For a topological space (T, τ ), we denote by Cb(T ) the space of bounded continuous functions f : T → K equipped with the sup-norm. Definition 4.1. Let (T, τ ) be a topological space. A subalgebra A ⊂ Cb(T ) is said to be an ACK-subalgebra, if for every non-empty open set W ⊂ T and 0 < ε < 1, there exist f ∈ A and t0 ∈ W such that f (t0) = (cid:107)f(cid:107)∞ = 1, f (t) < ε for every t ∈ T \ W and f (T ) ⊂ Stε. Lemma 4.2. Let A ⊂ C(K) be a uniform algebra. Then there exists a topological space ΓA such that A is isometric to an ACK-subalgebra of Cb(ΓA). In the case of K being the space of multiplicative functionals on A the corresponding ΓA can be selected as a topological subspace of K. We will use the following elementary property of Stε. Lemma 4.3. If z belongs to the Stolz region Stε, then zn ∈ Stε. Proof. For every z ∈ Stε it holds zn + (1 − ε)1 − zn = zn + (1 − ε)1 − z1 + z + . . . + zn−1 ≤ zn + (1 − z)1 + z + . . . + zn−1 ≤ zn + (1 − z)(1 + z + . . . + zn−1) = zn + (1 − zn) = 1, which finishes the proof. (cid:3) The following simple lemma gives an essential property that turns uni- form algebras into Banach spaces with simple ACK structure. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 11 Lemma 4.4. Let A ⊂ Cb(ΓA) be an ACK-subalgebra. Then, for every non-empty open set W ⊂ ΓA and 0 < ε < 1, there exist a non-emtpy subset W0 ⊂ W , functions f, e ∈ A, and t0 ∈ W0 such that f (t0) = (cid:107)f(cid:107) = 1, e(t0) = (cid:107)e(cid:107) = 1, f (t) < ε for every t ∈ ΓA \ W0, 1 − e(t) < ε for every t ∈ W0 and f (ΓA) ⊂ Stε. Proof. By using Definition 4.1 for the open set W ⊂ ΓA and ε, we get a function e ∈ A and t0 ∈ W such that e(t0) = (cid:107)e(cid:107) = 1, e(t) < ε for every t ∈ ΓA \ W and e(ΓA) ⊂ Stε. Let W0 := {t ∈ W : 1 − e(t) < ε}. Define the function fn : ΓA → K by fn(t) := (e(t))n whose range, by Lemma 4.3, is contained in Stε. From the very definition of W0 and the fact that e(ΓA) ⊂ Stε, we deduce that e(t) ≤ 1 − ε(1 − ε) < 1 for every t ∈ ΓA \ W0. Thus, taking a suitable n0 ∈ N, we can assume that fn0(t) = e(t)n0 < ε on ΓA \ W0. Therefore, f := fn0 ∈ A gives the (cid:3) conclusions of the lemma. Theorem 4.5. Let A ⊂ Cb(ΓA) be an ACK-subalgebra, and let X be a subspace A ⊂ X ⊂ Cb(ΓA) that has the following property: f x ∈ X for every x ∈ X and f ∈ A. Then X ∈ ACK with the corresponding 1-norming subset of BX∗ being Γ = {δt : t ∈ ΓA}. Proof. Fix ε > 0 and a non-emtpy relatively w∗-open subset U = {δt : t ∈ W ⊂ ΓA} ⊂ Γ. Observe that W ⊂ ΓA is open. Now, by applying Lemma 4.4 to W with ε we obtain the corresponding W0 ⊂ ΓA, t0 ∈ W0, f, eA ∈ A. Let us define V ⊂ U, x∗ 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SX and F ∈ L(X) as follows: V := {δt : t ∈ W0}, x∗ 1 := δt0, e := eA, F x := f x, for x ∈ X. Then, F ∗x∗ = f (t)x∗ for every x∗ = δt ∈ Γ. We shall show that properties (I) -- (VI) are satisfied. First, (cid:107)F(cid:107) ≤ 1 and (cid:107)F e(cid:107) = e(t0)f (t0) = 1, which proves (I). Property (II) is straightforward from x∗ 1(f e) = e(t0)f (t0) = 1. From (F ∗x∗ 1(x) we deduce 1, which is (III). To show (IV)', take x∗ = δt ∈ Γ and estimate that F ∗x∗ (cid:107)F ∗x∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗)(cid:107) 1)(x) = x(t0)f (t0) = x(t0) = x∗ 1(F e) = x∗ 1 = x∗ ≤ f (t) + (1 − ε)1 − f (t) ≤ 1. Let us show now (V). Take x∗ = δt ∈ Γ. In case t belongs to ΓA \ W0, then (cid:107)F ∗x∗(cid:107) = f (t) < ε. Otherwise, t ∈ W0 (that is, x∗ ∈ V ), using that F ∗x∗ = f (t)x∗ and that f ∈ SX, we deduce that f (t)x∗ ∈ aco{0, V }. Hence, in both cases dist(F ∗x∗, aco{0, V }) < ε. Finally, for every v∗ ∈ V we have that v∗(e) = e(t) for some t ∈ W0. So, v∗(e) − 1 = e(t) − 1 ≤ ε, which shows (VI) and finishes the proof. (cid:3) 12 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA From Lemma 4.2 and Theorem 4.5 taking X = A we obtain the promised example. Corollary 4.6. Every uniform algebra A has simple ACK structure. i.e., A(T) is the closure in C(T) of the set {(cid:80)m of the set {(cid:80)m Theorem 4.5 gives more examples of spaces with simple ACK structure. For instance, let T be the unit disk in C, A(T) ⊂ C(T) be the disc-algebra, k=0 akzk : ak ∈ C, m ∈ N} of all polynomials. For a given n ∈ N denote An(T) the closure in C(T) k=−n akzk : ak ∈ C, m ∈ N}. Then A(T) and X = An(T) satisfy all the conditions of Theorem 4.5, so An(T) ∈ ACK, but An(T) is not an algebra. Another example: let c0 ⊂ X ⊂ (cid:96)∞. Then X ∈ ACK. The first example is of illustrative character, because the space An(T) is isometric to the algebra A(T). In contrast, the second example gives a big variety of mutually non-isomorphic spaces with ACK structure. Observe that the simple ACK structure of those X such that c0 ⊂ X ⊂ (cid:96)∞ can be also deduced from Theorem 4.9 below. Remark 4.7. In general, it is not clear whether for a given T ∈ FlΓ(X, Y ) the formula (3.2) gives a Γ-flat operator S. But, under the conditions of Theorem 4.5, we have an additional property F ∗x∗ = f (t)x∗. Combining this property with (iv) of Theorem 2.7, we get S ∈ FlΓ(X, Y ). In particular, in the case of uniform algebras the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as type approxi- mation of Γ-flat operators can be made by operators that are Γ-flat as well. Now we show that Banach spaces with Lindenstrauss' property β (see for instance [18]) have ACK structure. Definition 4.8. A Banach space X is said to have the property β if there α : α ∈ Λ} ⊂ SX∗ and ρ ∈ [0, 1) exist two sets {xα : α ∈ Λ} ⊂ SX, {x∗ such that the following conditions hold: α(xα) = 1; α(xγ) ≤ ρ < 1 if α (cid:54)= γ; and (i) x∗ (ii) x∗ (iii) (cid:107)x(cid:107) = sup{x∗ α(x) : α ∈ Λ}, for all x ∈ X. Theorem 4.9. Let X have the property β. Then X ∈ ACKρ with the same value of ρ as in Definition 4.8 and with Γ = {x∗ α : α ∈ Λ} from that definition. Moreover, if X has property β with ρ = 0, then X ∈ ACK. Proof. Since X has property β, the set Γ = {x∗ α : α ∈ Λ} is a 1-norming subset of BX∗. Observe that property β implies that (Γ, w∗) is a discrete topological space. Fix ε > 0 and a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset U ⊂ Γ. Take x∗ 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SX, and F ∈ L(X) as follows: 1 := x∗ x∗ α0, α0 for every x∗ ∈ X∗. We shall show that It is clear that F ∗x∗ = x∗(xα0)x∗ properties (I) -- (VI) of Definition 3.1 hold true. Properties (I) -- (III) are α0 ∈ U. Let us define the corresponding V , x∗ α0} ⊂ U, e := xα0, F (x) := x∗ V := {x∗ α0(x)xα0. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 13 routine. To show (IV) observe first that (cid:13)(cid:13)F ∗x∗ α0 (cid:13)(cid:13) + (1 − ε)(cid:13)(cid:13)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗ α0)(cid:13)(cid:13) =(cid:13)(cid:13)x∗ that is, x∗ and thus v∗(F e) = x∗ α0 ∈ V1. Consequently, whenever v∗ = x∗ α(xα0) ≤ ρ. In case that ρ = 0, we have that F ∗x∗ (cid:107)F ∗x∗ α(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)x∗ α = 0 for every α (cid:54)= α0, so α(cid:107) < 1, α(cid:107) = (1 − ε)(cid:107)x∗ (cid:13)(cid:13) = 1, α0(xα0)x∗ α ∈ Γ \ V1, then α (cid:54)= α0 α0 α(xα0)x∗ α ∈ Γ, because F ∗x∗ = x∗ α0, so v∗(e) − 1 = 0 ≤ ε. i.e., V1 = Γ. Property (V) is a consequence of the fact that F ∗x∗ ∈ aco{0, V } for every x∗ = x∗ α0. Finally, property (VI) and in turn our conclusions are consequence of the fact that the unique v∗ ∈ V is v∗ = x∗ (cid:3) Corollary 4.10 ([1, Theorem 2.2]). Let Y have property β. Then, for every Banach space X, the pair (X, Y ) has the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for operators. Proof. In the proof of Theorem 4.9, (Γ, w∗) is a discrete topological space. Therefore every operator T ∈ L(X, Y ) is Γ-flat (Example C after Definition (cid:3) 2.8). Now the application of Theorem 3.4 completes the proof. Now we show the stability of the ACK structure with respect to the oper- ations of (cid:96)∞-sum and injective tensor product of two spaces (Theorem 4.11 and Theorem 4.12) Theorem 4.11. Let X, Y be Banach spaces having ACK structure with ρ = max{ρX, ρY }. Moreover, Z ∈ ACK whenever X, Y ∈ ACK. Proof. Observe that both X and Y have ACK structure with parameter ρ. Let ΓX ⊂ BX∗ and ΓY ⊂ BY ∗ be the corresponding 1-norming subsets in Definition 3.1. Then, the set parameters ρX and ρY respectively. Then Z := X(cid:76)∞ Y ∈ ACKρ with Γ := {(x∗, 0) : x∗ ∈ ΓX} ∪ {(0, y∗) : y∗ ∈ ΓY } is a 1-norming subset of BZ∗. Take a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset U ⊂ Γ. Then, there exist relatively w∗-open subsets UX ⊂ ΓX and UY ⊂ ΓY that are not both empty and such that (UX × {0}) ∪ ({0} × UY ) ⊂ U. Without loss of generality we may assume that UX (cid:54)= ∅. empty subset VX ⊂ UX, x∗ erties (I) -- (VI). Thus, we can define the corresponding V ⊂ U, z∗ e ∈ SZ and F ∈ L(Z) as follows: Fix ε > 0. By using Definition 3.1 for X, ε, and UX we obtain a non- 1 ∈ VX, eX ∈ SX, FX ∈ L(X) with the prop- 1 ∈ V , V := {(x∗, 0) : x∗ ∈ VX} ⊂ U, 1 := (x∗ z∗ 1, 0), e := (eX, 0), and for (x, y) ∈ Z, Let us check the required properties. It is clear that (cid:107)F(cid:107) = 1 and that (cid:107)F e(cid:107) = (cid:107)FX(eX)(cid:107) = 1, which shows (I). (II) follows easily; z∗(F e) = F (x, y) := (FX(x), 0). CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA 14 x∗ 1(FXeX) = 1. Due to the fact that (FXx∗ F ∗z∗ x∗ ∈ VX,1 we have 1 = z∗ 1, 0), we deduce that 1, showing that (III) holds. Now, for every z∗ = (x∗, 0) ∈ V with 1, 0) = (x∗ (cid:107)F ∗z∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IZ∗ − F ∗)(z∗)(cid:107) Xx∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗ X)(x∗)(cid:107) = (cid:107)F ∗ ≤ 1, which can be easily deduced from F ∗z∗ = (F ∗ Xx∗, 0). Consequently, for every x∗ ∈ VX,1 we have z∗ = (x∗, 0) ∈ V1. (Observe that in the case of simple ACK structure we have already proved (IV)'). Let v∗ ∈ Γ\ V1. Then, either v∗ = (0, y∗), or v∗ = (x∗, 0) with x∗ ∈ ΓX \ VX,1. On the one hand, when v∗ = (0, y∗), we have v∗(F e) = 0 ≤ ρ. On the other hand, whenever v∗ = (x∗, 0) with x∗ ∈ ΓX \ VX,1, then v∗(F e) = x∗(FXeX) ≤ ρ, which proves (IV). Now, let z∗ ∈ Γ. Whenever z∗ = (0, y∗) we have F ∗z∗ = 0. Xx∗, aco{0, VX}) < ε. Thus, Otherwise, z∗ = (x∗, 0) and we have dist(F ∗ in both cases dist(F ∗z∗, aco{0, V }) < ε. Finally, for every v∗ = (x∗, 0) ∈ V we have v∗(e)− 1 = x∗(eX)− 1 ≤ ε, (cid:3) which proves (VI) and concludes our proof. Recall, that given two normed spaces X and Y , one can define their injective tensor product X ⊗ε Y , as the completion of (X ⊗ Y,(cid:107)·(cid:107)ε), where (cid:107)z(cid:107)ε := sup{(cid:104)x∗ ⊗ y∗, z(cid:105) : x∗ ∈ BX∗, y∗ ∈ BY ∗}, for every z ∈ X ⊗ Y and (cid:104)x∗ ⊗ y∗, x⊗ y(cid:105) := x∗(x) y∗(y), for every x⊗ y ∈ X ⊗ Y and for every x∗ ∈ X∗ and y∗ ∈ Y ∗. An important example of such a product is the Banach space C(K) ⊗ε Y , which can be naturally identified with C(K, Y ), that is, the Banach space of continuous (Y,(cid:107)·(cid:107))-valued functions defined on K, endowed with the supremum norm (cid:107)f(cid:107) = sup{(cid:107)f (t)(cid:107) : t ∈ K}. Note that it follows from the definition of the injective norm that if X0 ⊂ BX∗ and Y0 ⊂ BY ∗ are 1-norming, then for every z ∈ X ⊗ε Y the following equality holds: (cid:107)z(cid:107)ε = sup{(cid:104)x∗ ⊗ y∗, z(cid:105) : x∗ ∈ X0, y∗ ∈ Y0}. Recall also that (cid:107)x∗ ⊗ y∗(cid:107)(X ⊗εY )∗ = (cid:107)x∗(cid:107) · (cid:107)y∗(cid:107) for every x∗ ∈ X∗ and y∗ ∈ Y ∗. This is all the information about tensor products that will be used in The- orem 4.12 below. We refer to Ryan's book [20] for tensor products theory in general and the above definitions and statements in particular. Theorem 4.12. Let X and Y be Banach spaces both of which have ACK (resp. ACKρ) structure. Then, X ⊗ε Y has ACK (resp. ACKρ) structure. Proof. Since X and Y have ACK (resp. ACKρ) structure, there exist 1- norming sets ΓX ⊂ SX∗ and ΓY ⊂ SY ∗ satisfying Definition 3.1. Define the Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 15 First, we shall show that the map φ is continuous. Let {(x∗ map φ : (BX∗, w∗) × (BY ∗, w∗) → (B(X ⊗εY )∗, w∗) by φ(x∗, y∗) = x∗ ⊗ y∗, for every x∗ ∈ BX∗ and for every y∗ ∈ BY ∗. α)}α∈Λ be a convergent net to (x∗, y∗) ∈ BX∗ × BY ∗. Then, for every x⊗ y ∈ X ⊗ Y , we can estimate α, y∗ α) − φ(x∗, y∗), x ⊗ y(cid:105) = x∗ α(x)y∗ (cid:104)φ(x∗ α, y∗ α(y) − x∗(x)y∗(y) α(y) − y∗(y)) ≤ (x∗ ≤ x∗ ≤ x∗ α(x) − x∗(x))y∗ α(x) − x∗(x)(cid:107)y∗ α(x) − x∗(x)(cid:107)y(cid:107) + (cid:107)x(cid:107)y∗ α(y) + x∗(x)(y∗ α(cid:107)(cid:107)y(cid:107) + (cid:107)x∗(x)(cid:107)y∗ α(y) − y∗(y), α(y) − y∗(y) which tends to zero. This argument extends easily to every element in X⊗Y and, in turn, to every z ∈ X ⊗ε Y (due to the boundedness of the range of the map φ). The 1-norming set Γ that we need for our theorem can be introduced as follows: Γ := {x∗ ⊗ y∗ : x∗ ∈ ΓX, y∗ ∈ ΓY } = φ(ΓX × ΓY ). 0, y∗ 0 ∈ WX, y∗ 1 ∈ VX and y∗ 0 ∈ ΓY be such that φ(x∗ 0 ∈ WY and φ(WX × WY ) ⊂ U. Let ε > 0 and U be a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset of Γ. Let 0 ∈ ΓX and y∗ 0) ∈ U. The continuity of φ x∗ ensures that there exist non-empty relatively w∗-open subsets WX ⊂ ΓX, WY ⊂ ΓY such that x∗ We can apply Definition 3.1 to X and Y , to the former with ε/2 and WX and to the latter with ε/2 and WY , to find two non-empty sets VX ⊂ WX 1 ∈ VY , two points eX ∈ SX and VY ⊂ WY , two functionals x∗ and eY ∈ SY and finally, two operators FX ∈ L(X) and FY ∈ L(Y ), satisfying respectively the properties (I) -- (VI), or with their corresponding modifications for the the simple ACK structure. Denote also by VX,1 and VY,1 the corresponding variants for X and Y of the set V1 from property (IV) of Definition 3.1. 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SX⊗εY , F ∈ L(X ⊗ε Y ) as follows: V := φ(VX × VY ) ⊂ U, z∗ 1 := 1, e := eX ⊗ eY , and F (x ⊗ y) := FX(x) ⊗ FY (y) for φ(x∗ every x ⊗ y ∈ X ⊗ Y . It remains to check the properties (I) -- (VI). First, observe that F ∗(x∗ ⊗ y∗) = F ∗ Y y∗ for every x∗ ∈ X∗ and y∗ ∈ Y ∗. (I) Let z belong to BX ⊗εY , then (cid:107)F z(cid:107)ε = sup x∗∈ΓX = sup x∗∈ΓX ≤ (cid:107)F ∗ Now, define the non-emtpy set V ⊂ U and corresponding z∗ 1, y∗ (cid:104)x∗ ⊗ y∗, F z(cid:105) = sup sup y∗∈ΓY x∗∈ΓX (cid:104)F ∗ sup y∗∈ΓY X(cid:107)(cid:107)F ∗ Y (cid:107) ≤ 1, (cid:104)F ∗(x∗ ⊗ y∗), z(cid:105) Xx∗(cid:107)(cid:107)F ∗ sup y∗∈ΓY Y y∗, z(cid:105) ≤ sup x∗∈ΓX Xx∗ ⊗ F ∗ Xx∗ ⊗ F ∗ 1) = x∗ 1 ⊗ y∗ Y y∗(cid:107) sup y∗∈ΓY (cid:107)F ∗ which implies that (cid:107)F(cid:107) = 1, since (cid:107)F e(cid:107) = (cid:107)FXeX ⊗ FY eY (cid:107) = (cid:107)FXeX(cid:107)(cid:107)FY eY (cid:107) = 1. (II) z∗ 1(F e) = (x∗ 1 ⊗ y∗ 1)(FXeX ⊗ FY eY ) = x∗ 1(FXeX)y∗ 1(FY eY ) = 1. CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA 16 (III) F ∗z∗ (F ∗z∗ 1 ⊗ y∗ 1 = z∗ 1)(x ⊗ y) = (x∗ 1, since for every x ⊗ y ∈ X ⊗ Y we have 1)(FXx ⊗ FY y) = (F ∗ Xx∗ 1)(x)(F ∗ 1(y) = z∗ 1(x)y∗ 1)(x ⊗ y) = x∗ which, in turn, implies that (F ∗z∗ (IV) For (x∗, y∗) ∈ ΓX × ΓY , denote z∗ = x∗ ⊗ y∗. Firstly, let us show that for every x∗ ∈ VX,1 and y∗ ∈ VY,1 the functional z∗ belongs to V1, i.e., that (cid:107)F ∗z∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:13)(cid:13)(I(X ⊗εY )∗ − F ∗)(z∗)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ 1. Y y∗ 1)(y), 1(x ⊗ y). First of all, observe that (cid:107)x∗ ⊗ y∗ − F ∗ Xx∗ ⊗ F ∗ = (cid:107)x∗ ⊗ (y∗ − F ∗ ≤ (cid:107)y∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) = Y y∗) − (x∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) + (cid:107)F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107)(cid:107)(x∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) Xx∗) ⊗ F ∗ Xx∗)(cid:107) . Xx∗ ⊗ F ∗ Xx∗(cid:107) (cid:107)F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107)(cid:0)(cid:107)F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)x∗ ⊗ y∗ − F ∗ Xx∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(x∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) ≤ 1. Therefore, (cid:107)F ∗ = (cid:107)F ∗ ≤ (cid:107)F ∗ This implies that for every z∗ = x∗ ⊗ y∗ ∈ Γ\ V1 we have two possibilities: either x∗ /∈ VX,1 or y∗ /∈ VY,1. By symmetry, it is sufficient to consider x∗ /∈ VX,1. In this case x∗(FXeX) ≤ ρ, so Xx∗)(cid:107)(cid:1) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)y∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)y∗ − F ∗ Y y∗(cid:107) Y y∗(cid:107) z∗(F e) = x∗(FXeX)y∗(FY eY ) ≤ x∗(FXeX) ≤ ρ. (V) We shall show that dist(F ∗z∗, aco{0, V }) < ε for every z∗ = x∗ ⊗ Xx∗, aco{0, VX}) < ε/2 and that y∗ ∈ Γ. Due to the facts that dist(F ∗ Y ∈ dist(F ∗ Y (cid:107) < ε/2. Then aco{0, VY } such that (cid:107)F ∗ v∗ := v∗ Y y∗, aco{0, VY }) < ε/2, there exist v∗ X ⊗ v∗ X ∈ aco{0, VX} and v∗ X(cid:107) < ε/2 and (cid:107)F ∗ Xx∗ − v∗ Y y∗ − v∗ Y belongs to aco{0, V } and X) ⊗ F ∗ X(cid:107)(cid:107)F ∗ (VI) For every v∗ = x∗ ⊗ y∗ ∈ V we get (cid:107)F ∗z∗ − v∗(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)(F ∗ ≤ (cid:107)F ∗ Xx∗ − v∗ Xx∗ − v∗ Y y∗(cid:107) + (cid:107)v∗ Y y∗(cid:107) + (cid:107)v∗ X ⊗ (F ∗ X(cid:107)(cid:107)F ∗ Y y∗ − v∗ Y y∗ − v∗ Y )(cid:107) Y (cid:107) ≤ ε. v∗(e) − 1 = x∗(eX)y∗(eY ) − 1 ≤ x∗(eX)y∗(eY ) − y∗(eY ) + y∗(eY ) − 1 ≤ ε 2 y∗(eY ) + ≤ ε. ε 2 This finishes the proof. (cid:3) 4.1. Sup-normed spaces of vector-valued functions. As we mentioned in the introduction, Acosta, Becerra Guerrero, Garc´ıa, Kim, and Maestre considered A-BPBp in spaces of continuous vector-valued functions. Let us recall their result explicitly. Here, as usual, σ(Z, ∆) denotes the weakest topology on Z in which all elements of ∆ ⊂ Z∗ are continuous. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 17 Theorem 4.13 ([2, Theorem 3.1]). Let X, Z be Banach spaces, K be a com- pact Hausdorff topological space. Let Z satisfy property β for the subset of α : α ∈ ∆}. Let τ ⊇ σ(Z, ∆) be a linear topology on functionals ∆ = {z∗ Z dominated by the norm topology. Then for every closed operator ideal I contained in the ideal of Asplund operators, we have that (X, C(K, (Z, τ ))) has the Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for operators from I. The next proposition together with Theorem 3.4 generalize Theorem 4.13 for the case of Z endowed with its strong topology. Proposition 4.14. Let K be a compact Hausdorff topological space. Then, (Y ∈ ACKρ) ⇒ (C(K, Y ) ∈ ACKρ); (Y ∈ ACK) ⇒ (C(K, Y ) ∈ ACK). Proof. Bearing in mind Corollary 4.6 and Theorem 4.12, the fact that the space C(K) ⊗ε Y is isometric to C(K, Y ) concludes the proof. (cid:3) Our aim now is showing a generalization of Theorem 4.13 in the spirit of the ACK structure, that covers all topologies τ from that theorem. In order to do this we need some terminology. For a topological space T and a Banach space Z denote by Cbof(T, Z) the space of all bounded openly fragmented (see Definiton 2.6) functions f : T → Z equipped with the sup-norm. For a topology τ on Z denote by Cb(T, (Z, τ )) the space of bounded τ-continuous functions f : T → Z equipped with the sup-norm. Definition 4.15. Let Z ∈ ACKρ and let Γ ⊂ BZ∗ be the corresponding 1-norming set. A linear topology τ on Z is said to be Γ-acceptable, if it is dominated by the norm topology and dominates σ(Z, Γ). The following result simultaneously generalizes our Theorem 4.5 and Theorem 4.13. We state the result in the most general settings, which makes the statement bulky. Some "elegant" partial cases will be given as corollar- ies. Theorem 4.16. Let A ⊂ Cb(ΓA) be an ACK-subalgebra. Let Z be a Ba- nach space and O ⊂ L(Z) such that Z ∈ O-ACKρ (Z ∈ O-ACK) with ΓZ ⊂ BZ∗ being the corresponding 1-norming set. Finally, let τ be a ΓZ- acceptable topology on Z. Let X ⊂ Cb(ΓA, (Z, τ )) be a Banach space satisfying the following properties: (i) For every x ∈ X and f ∈ A the function f x belongs to X. (ii) X contains all functions of the form f ⊗ z, f ∈ A, z ∈ Z. (iii) F ◦ x ∈ X for every x ∈ X and F ∈ O. (iv) For every finite collection {xk}n k=1 ⊂ X the corresponding func- tion of two variables ϕ : ΓA×(ΓZ, w∗) → Kn, defined by ϕ(t, z∗) = (z∗(xk(t)))n k=1, is quasi-continuous. 18 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA Then X ∈ ACKρ (X ∈ ACK, respectively) with the corresponding 1- norming subset of BX∗ being Γ = {δt ⊗ z∗ : t ∈ ΓA, z∗ ∈ ΓZ}, where the functional δt ⊗ z∗ ∈ X∗ acts as follows: (δt ⊗ z∗)(x) = z∗(x(t)). Proof. Fix ε > 0 and a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset U ⊂ Γ. Let 0 ∈ U. Since U is relatively t0 ∈ ΓA and z∗ k=1 ⊂ X such that δt ⊗ z∗ ∈ Γ belongs to U w∗-open, there exist {xk}n whenever 0 ∈ ΓZ be such that δt0 ⊗ z∗ (cid:104)(δt0 ⊗ z∗ Consider the non-emtpty open set max 1≤k≤n 0) − (δt ⊗ z∗), xk(cid:105) < 1. max 1≤k≤n 0(xk(t)) − z∗ B := {t ∈ ΓA : z∗ 0(xk(t0)) < 1 for 1 ≤ k ≤ n}, and define the following non-empty relatively w∗-open subset of ΓZ: 0(xk(t0)) < 1 for 1 ≤ k ≤ n}. D := {z∗ ∈ ΓZ : z∗(xk(t0)) − z∗ Using property (iv) for {xk}n k=1 ⊂ X we can find a non-empty open subset B1 ⊂ B and a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset D1 ⊂ D such that for every t ∈ B1 and every z∗ ∈ D1 it holds z∗(xk(t)) − z∗ 0(xk(t0)) < 1. Define the non-empty subset W := {δt ⊗ z∗ : t ∈ B1, z∗ ∈ D1} ⊂ Γ. It is clear that W ⊂ U. By applying Definition 3.1 to Z, ΓZ, D1 and (ε/2), we get VZ ⊂ D1, 1 ∈ VZ, eZ ∈ SZ and FZ ∈ O satisfying (I) -- (VI). Denote also VZ,1 ⊂ ΓZ, z∗ the subset that appears in property (IV) (in the case of Z ∈ ACK we have VZ,1 = ΓZ). By applying Lemma 4.4 to A, ΓA, the non-empty open set B1 and (ε/2), we find a non-empty subset B2 ⊂ B1, functions f0, eA (both belonging to A) and s0 ∈ B2, satisfying its conclusions. Finally, let us define the requested non-empty subset V ⊂ U and corre- sponding x∗ 1 ∈ V , e ∈ SX, F ∈ L(X) as follows: V := {δt ⊗ z∗ : t ∈ B2, z∗ ∈ VZ} ⊂ W ⊂ U, 1 := δs0 ⊗ z∗ x∗ 1, e(t) := eA(t)eZ, for every t ∈ ΓA (condition (ii) implies e ∈ X), and (F x)(t) := f0(t)FZ(x(t)), for every x ∈ X and for every t ∈ ΓA. Conditions (i) and (iii) ensure that F (x) ∈ X. Observe that for every x∗ = δt ⊗ z∗ ∈ Γ Zz∗) . F ∗x∗ = f0(t) (δt ⊗ F ∗ It remains to check the properties (I) -- (VI). (I) It is clear that (cid:107)F(cid:107) = (cid:107)FZ(cid:107) = 1 and (cid:107)F e(cid:107) = (cid:107)f0eA(cid:107)(cid:107)FZ(eZ)(cid:107) = 1. (II) x∗ (III) F ∗x∗ (F ∗x∗ 1(f0(s0)eA(s0)FZ(eZ)) = 1. 1, since for every x ∈ X we have 1 (f0(s0)FZx(s0)) = (F ∗ 1(F e) = z∗ 1 = x∗ 1)(x) = z∗ 1)(x(s0)) = z∗ 1(x(s0)) = x∗ Zz∗ 1(x). Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 19 (IV) For every x∗ ∈ Γ, we have x∗ = δt ⊗ z∗, t ∈ ΓA and z∗ ∈ ΓZ. First, consider the case z∗ ∈ VZ,1 and observe that Zz∗(cid:107) (cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗)(cid:107) = (cid:107)z∗ − f0(t)F ∗ ≤ 1 − f0(t)(cid:107)z∗(cid:107) + f0(t) · (cid:107)(IZ∗ − F ∗ Z)(z∗)(cid:107) + 1 − f0(t). = f0(t) · (cid:107)(IZ∗ − F ∗ Z)(z∗)(cid:107) Therefore, in this case (cid:107)F ∗x∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IX∗ − F ∗)(x∗)(cid:107) = f0(t) · (cid:107)F ∗ Zz∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)z∗ − f0(t)F ∗ Zz∗(cid:107) + (1 − ε)(cid:107)(IZ∗ − F ∗ ≤ f0(t)(cid:0)(cid:107)F ∗ Zz∗(cid:107) Z)(z∗)(cid:107)(cid:1) + (1 − ε)1 − f0(t) ≤ f0(t) + (1 − ε)1 − f0(t) ≤ 1. Whenever Z ∈ ACK, then VZ,1 = ΓZ, so the above inequality holds for every z∗ ∈ ΓZ. Thus, we have proved (IV)'. If Z ∈ ACKρ we still must consider those x∗ belonging to Γ \ V1. The above inequality implies that z∗ /∈ VZ,1 and, consequently, z∗(FZeZ) ≤ ρ which, in turn, implies that x∗(F e) = f0(t)eA(t)z∗(FZeZ) ≤ ρ. (V) Let x∗ = δt ⊗ z∗ ∈ Γ. Recall that F ∗x∗ = f0(t)δt ⊗ F ∗ Zz∗. Set VA := {δt : t ∈ B2}. In the proof of Theorem 4.5 it was proved that for every t ∈ ΓA it holds Thus, there exist a∗ ∈ aco{0, VA} and b∗ ∈ aco{0, VZ} such that (cid:107)f (t)δt − a∗(cid:107) < and (cid:107)F ∗ Zz∗ − b∗(cid:107) < ε 2 ε 2 . In particular, since a∗ ⊗ b∗ belongs to aco{0, V }, we can deduce that dist(F ∗x∗, aco{0, V }) ≤ (cid:107)f0(t)δt ⊗ F ∗ ≤ (cid:107)f0(t)δt ⊗ F ∗ + (cid:107)f0(t)δt ⊗ b∗ − a∗ ⊗ b∗(cid:107) ≤ (cid:107)F ∗ Zz∗ − a∗ ⊗ b∗(cid:107) Zz∗ − f0(t)δt ⊗ b∗(cid:107) + Zz∗ − b∗(cid:107) + (cid:107)f0(t)δt − a∗(cid:107) < ε. 2 and z∗(eZ) − 1 ≤ ε (VI) For every x∗ = δt⊗z∗ ∈ V we have t ∈ B2 and z∗ ∈ VZ. Consequently, eA(t) − 1 ≤ ε x∗(e) − 1 = eA(t)z∗(eZ) − 1 = eA(t)(z∗(eZ) − 1) + (eA(t) − 1) ≤ ε, (cid:3) which completes the proof. 2. From this we get On the other hand, by our construction, we deduce that dist(f (t)δt, aco{0, VA}) < dist (F ∗ Zz∗, aco{0, VZ}) < ε 2 . ε 2 . CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA 20 Remark 4.17. Under the hypothesis of the previous theorem, given F ∈ L(Z) and f ∈ A we can consider the operators CF : X → X and Pf : X → X defined, respectively, by CF (x) = F ◦ x and Pf (x) = f x, for every x ∈ X. Then, if we set O(cid:48) := {CF ◦ Pf : F ∈ O, f ∈ A}, then X has O(cid:48)-ACKρ (resp. O(cid:48)-ACK) structure. Conditions (i) -- (iii) in Theorem 4.16 are easily verified in concrete ex- amples. In contrast, condition (iv) looks technical. So, in order to make Theorem 4.16 more applicable, we shall present easy-to-verify sufficient conditions for (iv). Before passing to these sufficient conditions, observe that the function of two variables ϕ : ΓA × (ΓZ, w∗) → Kn from condition (iv) is separately continuous. Therefore, the role of sufficient condition for (iv) can be played by any theorem about quasi-continuity of a separately continuous function f : U × V → W . There is a number of such theorems (see Encyclopedia of Mathematics article "Separate and joint continuity" or the introduction to [7]). For example, according to Namioka's theorem [15] this (and a much stronger result) occurs for U being a regular, strongly countably complete topological space, V being a locally compact σ-compact space and W being a pseudo-metric space. The results of the kind "separate continuity implies quasi-continuity" that we list and apply below do not pretend to be new. Proposition 4.18. Let U, V , W be topological spaces, V be discrete and f : U × V → W be separately continuous. Then, f is continuous (and consequently quasi-continuous). If Z has property β, the corresponding (ΓZ, w∗) is a discrete topolog- ical space. Thus, the above proposition guaranties the validity of (iv) of Theorem 4.16 in this case. Corollary 4.19. Under the conditions of Theorem 4.13, C(K, (Z, τ )) ∈ ACKρ, where ρ is the parameter from the property β of Z. If β = 0, then C(K, (Z, τ )) ∈ ACK. In particular, this implies the conclusion of Theorem 4.13. Proposition 4.18 also guaranties (iv) of Theorem 4.16 in the case of ΓA = N (just change the roles of U and V in Proposition 4.18). If we apply Theorem 4.16 with A = c0 ⊂ Cb(N) = (cid:96)∞, this leads to the following result: Corollary 4.20. Let Z ∈ ACKρ (Z ∈ ACK), c0(Z) ⊂ X ⊂ (cid:96)∞(Z), and X has the following property: (F z1, F z2, . . .) ∈ X for every x = (z1, z2, . . .) ∈ X and F ∈ L(Z). Then X ∈ ACKρ (X ∈ ACK respec- tively). This corollary is applicable to c0(Z) and (cid:96)∞(Z) themselves and also for some intermediate spaces like c0(Z, w) of weakly null sequences in Z. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 21 Proposition 4.21. Let Z be a Banach space, (ΓA, τ ) be a topological space, ΓZ ⊂ (BZ∗, w∗), and xk : ΓA → Z for k ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n} be τ-σ(Z, ΓZ)- continuous and τ-(cid:107)·(cid:107)-openly fragmented functions. Then, the function ϕ : (ΓA, τ ) × (ΓZ, w∗) → Kn given by ϕ(t, z∗) = (z∗(xk(t)))n k=1 is quasi- continuous. 0) ∈ ΓA × ΓZ. Let UA ⊂ ΓA, UZ ⊂ ΓZ be open and Proof. Fix (t0, z∗ 0 respectively. Set U := UA × UZ. We w∗-open neighborhoods of t0 and z∗ have to show that, for a given ε > 0, there exist a non-empty open subset WA ⊂ UA and a non-empty relatively w∗-open subset WZ ⊂ UZ such that for every t ∈ WA and every z∗ ∈ WZ z∗(xk(t)) − z∗ 0(xk(t0)) < ε. max 1≤k≤n Fix δ < ε/4 and define (cid:26) (4.1) (cid:27) . VA := t ∈ UA : max 1≤k≤n 0(xk(t)) − z∗ z∗ 0(xk(t0)) < δ The set VA ⊂ UA is a non-emtpy open neighborhood of t0 because of the 0 ◦ xk is a K-valued τ-continuous τ-σ(Z, ΓZ) continuity of xk (the map z∗ function). Applying inductively the definition of openly fragmented func- tion, we define a non-empty open set WA ⊂ (VA, τ ) in such a way that for all k = 1, . . . , n it holds diam(xk(WA)) < δ. (cid:26) (cid:27) Fix a t1 ∈ WA and define the non-empty relatively w∗-open subset WZ ⊂ UZ as follows: WZ := z∗ ∈ UZ : max 1≤k≤n z∗(xk(t1)) − z∗ 0(xk(t1)) < δ . Let us show, for every t ∈ WA and every z∗ ∈ WZ, the validity of inequality (4.1): z∗ 0(xk(t0)) − z∗(xk(t)) ≤ z∗ 0(xk(t)) 0(xk(t0)) − z∗ 0(xk(t)) − z∗ 0(xk(t1)) + z∗ + z∗ 0(xk(t1)) − z∗(xk(t1)) + z∗(xk(t1)) − z∗(xk(t)). The first summand in the right-hand side of the previous inequality does not exceed δ since t ∈ VA. Accordingly, the second and fourth summands 0, z∗ ∈ BZ∗ and (cid:107)xk(t) − xk(t1)(cid:107) < δ since are both bounded by δ since z∗ t, t1 ∈ WA and diam(xk(WA)) < δ. Finally, the corresponding third sum- mand is bounded by δ since z∗ ∈ WZ. Therefore, z∗ 0(xk(t0)) − z∗(xk(t)) ≤ 4δ < ε, which completes the proof of (4.1) and that of the proposition. (cid:3) 22 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA As an application of the previous proposition we get the following corol- laries which contain as a particular case the space Cw(K, Z) of Z-valued weakly continuous functions for Z ∈ ACKρ (or Z ∈ ACK). Corollary 4.22. Let Z ∈ O-ACKρ (or Z ∈ O-ACK) and A ⊂ C(K) be a uniform algebra with K being the space of multiplicative functionals on A. Fix ΓZ ⊂ H ⊂ Z∗, where ΓZ is the 1-norming set given by the ACK structure of Z. Denote by Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) the following subspace of C(K, (Z, σ(Z, H))): Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) =(cid:8)f ∈ Z K : z∗ ◦ f ∈ A for all z∗ ∈ H(cid:9) . Let us assume that (i) F ∗H ⊂ H for every F ∈ O. (ii) (f (K), σ(Z, H)) is fragmented by the norm for every f belonging to Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z). Then, Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) ∈ ACKρ (resp. Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) ∈ ACK). Sketch of the proof: It relays on the use of Theorem 4.16. Let ΓA ⊂ K be the corresponding subset from Lemma 4.2. Then, restrictions of ele- ments of A to ΓA form an ACK-subalgebra Cb(ΓA) isometric to A (that we identify with A) and restrictions of elements of Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) to ΓA form a subspace X ⊂ Cb(ΓA, (Z, σ(Z, H))) isometric to Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z). The conditions (i) and (ii) of Theorem 4.16 follow from the definition of Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z). The condition (iii) of Theorem 4.16 is reduced to the present condition (i). And, finally, the condition (iv) of Theorem 4.16 is reduced to (cid:3) the present (ii) by using Proposition 4.21. The condition (i) above could be quite demanding, for instance, when O = L(Z) in which case H is forced to be Z∗. However, in all concrete examples that we know of ACK structure, the family O can be taken really small. Thus, for concrete examples of Z, the condition (i) could be easily satisfied for every election of H. By using the results from [5] it can be shown that condition (ii) above is satisfied for every H whenever (Z, w) is Lindelof. Indeed, given f be- longing to Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z), f (K) ⊂ Z is σ(Z, H)-compact, thus, it is also Lindelof. A straightforward application of [5, Corollary E] ensures that (f (K), σ(Z, H)) is norm-fragmented. Hence, in this case, Corollary 4.22 can be simplified as follows: Corollary 4.23. Let Z ∈ O-ACKρ (or Z ∈ O-ACK) such that (Z, w) is Lindelof and A ⊂ C(K) be a uniform algebra with K being the space of multiplicative functionals on A. Fix ΓZ ⊂ H ⊂ Z∗ such that F ∗H ⊂ H for every F ∈ O, where ΓZ is the 1-norming set given by the ACK structure of Z. Then, Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) ∈ ACKρ (resp. Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) ∈ ACK). Observe that when Z has property β, the set O coincides with the set α(·) xα : α ∈ Λ}. Therefore, in this case, F ∗H ⊂ H for every H and for {x∗ every F ∈ O. Thus, we have proved the following corollary. Γ-FLATNESS AND BISHOP -- PHELPS -- BOLLOB ´AS TYPE THEOREMS 23 Corollary 4.24. Let Z be a Banach space with property β such that (Z, w) is Lindelof and A ⊂ C(K) be a uniform algebra with K being the space of α : α ∈ multiplicative functionals on A. Fix ΓZ ⊂ H ⊂ Z∗, where ΓZ = {x∗ Λ}. Then, Aσ(Z,H)(K, Z) ∈ ACKρ. However, this technique can not fully generalize Theorem 4.13 by Acosta et al. to the case of vector-valued uniform algebras, since here the Lindelof property is essential and property β does not imply in general weak Lin- delof. Observe that nevertheless the original statement of Theorem 4.13 is covered completely by our Corollary 4.19. REFERENCES [1] M.D. Acosta, R.M. Aron, D. Garc´ıa, and M. Maestre, The Bishop-Phelps-Bollob´as theorem for operators, J. Funct. Anal. 254 (2008), no. 11, 2780 -- 2799. [2] M.D. Acosta, J. Becerra Guerrero, D. Garc´ıa, S.K. Kim, and M. Maestre, Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as property for certain spaces of operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 414 (2014), No. 2, 532 -- 545. [3] E. Asplund, Fr´echet differentiability of convex functions, Acta Math. 121 (1968), 31 -- [4] R.M. Aron, B. Cascales, and O. Kozhushkina, The Bishop-Phelps-Bollob´as theorem and Asplund operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 139 (2011), no. 10, 3553 -- 3560. [5] B. Cascales, I. Namioka, and G. Vera, The Lindelof property and fragmentability, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 128 (2000), 3301 -- 3309. [6] R. Baire, Sur les functions des variables reelles, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 3 (1899), 47. 1 -- 122. [7] T. Banakh, Quasicontinuous and separately continuous functions with values in Maslyuchenko spaces, arXiv:1506.01661v4 [math.GN]. [8] B. Bollob´as, An extension to the theorem of Bishop and Phelps, Bull. London Math. Soc. 2 (1970), 181 -- 182. [9] B. Cascales, A.J. Guirao, and V. Kadets, A Bishop -- Phelps -- Bollob´as type theorem for uniform algebras, Advances in Mathematics 240 (2013), 370 -- 382. [10] B. Cascales, I. Namioka, and J. Orihuela, The Lindelof property in Banach spaces, Studia Mathematica 150 (2003), 165 -- 192. [11] J. Diestel and J.J. Uhl, Vector measures, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1977. [12] M. Fabian, P. Habala, P. H´ajek, V. Montesinos, and V. Zizler, Banach space theory. The basis for linear and nonlinear analysis, CMS Books in Mathematics/Ouvrages de Math´ematiques de la SMC, Springer, New York, 2011. [13] S. Kempisty, Sur les fonctions quasi-continues, Fund. Math. 19 (1932), 184 -- 197. [14] G. Koumoullis, A generalization of functions of the first class, Topology and its Ap- plications 50, no. 3 (1993), 217 -- 239. [15] I. Namioka, Separate and joint continuity Pacific J. Math. , 51 (1974) pp. 515 -- 531. [16] I. Namioka, Radon-Nikod´ym compact spaces and fragmentability, Mathematika 34 [17] I. Namioka and R.R. Phelps, Banach spaces which are Asplund spaces, Duke Math. [18] J. Lindenstrauss, On operators which attain their norm, Israel J. Math. 1 (1963), [19] R.R. Phelps, Support Cones in Banach Spaces and Their Applications, Adv. Math. no. 2 (1987), 258 -- 281. J. 42 no. 4, (1975), 735 -- 750. 139 -- 148. 13 (1974), 1 -- 19. 24 CASCALES, GUIRAO, KADETS, AND SOLOVIOVA [20] R.A. Ryan, Introduction to tensor products of Banach spaces, Springer Monographs in Mathematics. London: Springer, xiv, 225 p. (2002). [21] Ch. Stegall, The Radon-Nikod´ym property in conjugate Banach spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 206 (1975), 213 -- 223. [22] Ch. Stegall, The duality between Asplund spaces and spaces with the Radon-Nikod´ym property, Israel J. Math. 29 no. 4, (1978), 408 -- 412. [23] Ch. Stegall, The Radon-Nikod´ym property in conjugate Banach spaces. II, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 264 no. 2 (1981), 507 -- 519. DEPTO DE MATEM ´ATICAS, UNIVERSIDAD DE MURCIA, 30100 ESPINARDO, MUR- CIA, SPAIN E-mail address: [email protected] IUMPA, UNIVERSITAT POLIT `ECTNICA DE VAL `ENCIA, 46022, VALENCIA, SPAIN E-mail address: [email protected] DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS AND INFORMATICS, V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, 61022 KHARKIV, UKRAINE E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected]
1510.01653	3	1510	2017-02-11T23:54:40	Frame Scalings: A Condition Number Approach	[ "math.FA" ]	Scaling frame vectors is a simple and noninvasive way to construct tight frames. However, not all frames can be modifed to tight frames in this fashion, so in this case we explore the problem of finding the best conditioned frame by scaling, which is crucial for applications like signal processing. We conclude that this problem is equivalent to solving a convex optimization problem involving the operator norm, which is unconventional since this problem was only studied in the perspective of Frobenious norm before. We also further study the Frobenious norm case in relation to the condition number of the frame operator, and the convexity of optimal scalings.	math.FA	math	FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN Abstract. Scaling frame vectors is a simple and noninvasive way to construct tight frames. How- ever, not all frames can be modifed to tight frames in this fashion, so in this case we explore the problem of finding the best conditioned frame by scaling, which is crucial for applications like signal processing. We conclude that this problem is equivalent to solving a convex optimization problem involving the operator norm, which is unconventional since this problem was only studied in the perspective of Frobenius norm before. We also further study the Frobenius norm case in relation to the condition number of the frame operator, and the convexity of optimal scalings. Keywords: Scalable frames, Condition number, Tight frame AMS subject classification: 15B48, 42C15, 65F35 1. Introduction A family of vectors Φ = {ϕi}M i=1 is a frame in an N -dimensional Hilbert space HN if there are constants 0 < A ≤ B < ∞ so that for all x ∈ HN , Akxk2 ≤ hx, ϕii2 ≤ Bkxk2. N Xi=1 The largest A and smallest B satisfying these inequalities are called lower and upper frame bounds, respectively. One often also writes Φ for the N × M matrix whose ith column is the vector ϕi. When A = B, the frame is called an A-tight frame. Furthermore, A = B = 1 produces a Parseval frame. In the sequel, the set of frames with M vectors in HN will be denoted by F(M, N ). It is well known that Φ is A-tight if and only if (1) S := ΦΦ∗ = ϕiϕ∗i = AIN , M Xi=1 where IN is the identity matrix in HN , and S is the frame operator of the frame. We refer to [15] for an introduction to frame theory and to [8] for an overview of the current research in the field. Frames have traditionally played a significant role in the theory of signal processing, but today they have found application to packet based network communication [7, 18], wireless sensor networks [9, 10, 11, 12], distributed processing [7], quantum information theory, bio-medical engineering [2, 25], compressed sensing [3, 14], fingerprinting [26], spectral theory [6, 19, 20], and much more. Some of the applications of frames result from their ability to deliver redundant, yet stable expansions. The redundancy of a frame is typically utilized by applications which may require robustness of the frame coefficients to noise, erasures, quantization, etc. In this setting tight frames can give fast convergence and recovery. It is known that unit norm tight frames are characterized in terms of the frame potential [1]. There have been various works on constructions of tight frames [4, 6, 10, 11, 24, 27]. However, it is desirable to construct tight frames by just scaling each frame vector as it is noninvasive, and frame properties such as erasure resilience or sparse expansions are left untouched by this modification. The authors were supported by NSF DMS 1307685; NSF ATD 1321779. 1 2 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN This procedure is called frame scaling. To be specific, a frame Φ = {ϕi}M i=1 for HN is called scalable if there exist scalars {si}M i=1 is a tight frame for HN . By the nature of scaling, if a frame is scalable, there exist scalars such that the scaled frame is a Parseval frame. So by (1), a frame is scalable if and only if there exists ci ≥ 0 such that i=1 such that {siϕi}M IN = ciϕiϕ∗i . M Xi=1 The ci here corresponds to each scalar as ci = si2 ≥ 0. The notion of a scalable frame was first introduced in [22]. In [22], characterizations of scalable frames, both of functional analytic and geometric type were derived in the infinite as well as finite dimensional settings. The work [5] considers the complex case as well, and it was shown that the set of all possible sequences of scalars is the convex hull of minimal scalars. The paper [16] focuses on the numerical algorithms to find different scalings with different purposes. Recently, the work [13] studies the case when a frame is not scalable by measuring (2) min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i kF using the minimal ellipsoid of the convex hull of the frame vectors, where k · kF is the Frobenius norm. The theory of frame scalings has also been extended to matrices with Laurent polynomials (with applications to construct tight wavelet filter banks) [21], and probabilistic frames [23]. When a frame is not scalable, we wish to find scalars such that {siϕi}M i=1 is as tight as possible. This should naturally mean that {siϕi}M i=1 is the best conditioned in the sense that the ratio of upper and lower frame bounds is the closest to 1. However, it is not clear whether solving (2) gives the best conditioned frame. In this note, we study the scalability of frames by si so that {siϕi}M a given square matrix T , we define i=1 is best conditioned. For cond(T ) := biggest singular value of T smallest singular value of T . We include the singular case where condition number is ∞. We wish to solve (3) min ci≥0 cond M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i! , i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i(cid:17) is exactly the ratio of the upper and lower frame bounds of the scaled i=1. For convenience of discussion, we include "frames" that do not span, whose The first contribution of this paper is to establish an equivalence between (3) and the following where cond(cid:16)PM frame {siϕi}M condition number is ∞. problem: (4) min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2, where k · k2 is the operator norm of a matrix. We prove this equivalence in Theorem 6 of Section 3. This means that rather than solving the scalability problem with the Frobenius norm, using the operator norm is more efficient if one wants to find the best conditioned frame by scaling, which is the original goal of scaling. Moreover, it is not very clear how one can solve problem (3) at first glance. With Theorem 6, we have converted it to a convex programming Problem. Some properties of the minimizer of (4) are also established in Section 3. FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH 3 The second contribution of the paper is to study how solving (2) is related to solving (3). Unfortunately, we show in Section 4.1 that the best scaled "frame" from (2) may not even span the space (hence is not a frame). Theorem 17 lists a sufficient condition for when the best scaling corresponds to a frame in HN . In the end, we further study the convexity of all the optimal scalings (a polytope), and show that the vertices of this polytope are the so called minimal optimal scalings. This is interesting in its own right. 2. Notations and convexity of optimal scalings Given Φ = {ϕi}M frame of the outer products {ϕiϕ∗i}M squared. i=1 ∈ F(M, N ), we define F = (cid:0)hϕi, ϕji2(cid:1), which is the Gram matrix of the i=1. Let g = (kϕ1k2,kϕ2k2,··· ,kϕMk2) be the vector of norms Some of the notations are common for both (2) and (4), so k · k could be either the operator norm or the Frobenius norm in the following. Let M M min Xi=1 ci≥0 kIN − c′iϕiϕ∗i k = kIN − TΦk. i=1 : minci≥0 kIN −PM We call (c′i)M {(c′i)M we define (c′i)M span TΦ with nonnegative coefficients. Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k = kIN − i=1 an optimal scaling and TΦ = PM i=1 c′iϕiϕ∗i an optimal operator. We call OΦ = i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k = kIN −PM i=1 c′iϕiϕ∗i k} the set of optimal scalings. Moreover, i=1 ∈ OΦ to be a minimal optimal scaling if no proper subset of {ϕiϕ∗i : c′i > 0} can TΦ is not necessarily unique for the operator norm (See Example 2), in which case TΦ will mean the set of optimal operators. So in the definition of minimal optimal scaling above, "span TΦ" means span any operator in TΦ. In fact, the concept of minimal optimal scaling is much more meaningful in the Frobenius norm case as we will see in Section 4.3. The following theorem states that OΦ is a convex set. But for the Frobenius case, we can actually say much more, see Section 4.3. Theorem 1. With either operator norm or Frobenius norm, the set of optimal scalings OΦ is a convex set. Proof. Let (c′i)M be the corresponding optimal operators. For any a, b ≥ 0, a + b = 1, we can prove (ac′i + bd′i)M an optimal scaling too since i=1 ∈ OΦ be two optimal scalings, and T1 =PM i=1 c′iϕiϕ∗i , T2 =PM i=1, (d′i)M i=1 d′iϕiϕ∗i i=1 is M kIN − Xi=1 (ac′i + bd′i)ϕiϕ∗i k = kIN − (aT1 + bT2)k ≤akIN − T1k + bkIN − T2k = min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k. (cid:3) 3. Minimizing with the operator norm This section focuses on problem (4), which uses the operator norm for the scaling problem. Once again, let (5) min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 The optimal operator TΦ does not need to be unique here. ciϕiϕ∗i k2 = kIN − TΦk2. 4 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN , 0), ϕ2 = ( 1√2 Example 2. Let ϕ1 = (1, 1√2 i=1 is a frame of R3. For i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i . One can obtain, without much effort, that (5) is minimized when c1 = c2 = 2/3, and c3 takes on i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i have eigenvalues any ci ≥ 0, it is straightforward to calculate the eigenvalues of the operator P3 any value in [1 − 2√2/3, 1 + 2√2/3]. With such selection of c′is, P3 1 − 2√2/3, c3, 1 + 2√2/3, which result in different operators with different c3. , 1, 0), ϕ3 = (0, 0, 1), so {ϕi}3 The following proposition is obvious. Proposition 3. If a positive semi-definite matrix T has eigenvalues λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ ··· ≥ λN ≥ 0, then kIN − Tk2 = max{1 − λ1,1 − λN}. The next proposition is essential in proving that solving (4) optimizes the condition number. It essentially says that the optimal operator comes to a balance when the largest and the smallest eigenvalue have equal distance to 1. Proposition 4. Let Φ = {ϕi}M eigenvalues λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ ··· ≥ λN ≥ 0 and c = 2 i=1 ∈ F(M, N ) be a frame for HN . If T = PM i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i has λ1+λN , then Moreover, if T = TΦ then and consequently λ1 + λN = 2. Proof. We check and Also, kI − cTk2 = cλ1 − 1 = 1 − cλN . kIN − Tk2 = λ1 − 1 = 1 − λN , cλN = 2 λ1 + λN λN = 2 + 1 ≤ 1, λ1 λN cλ1 = 2 λ1 + λN λ1 = 2 1 + λN λ1 ≥ 1, cλ1 + cλN = c(λ1 + λN ) = 2, so that cλ1 − 1 = 1 − cλN . Now, kIN − cTk2 = max{1 − cλ1,1 − cλN} = cλ1 − 1 = 1 − cλN . Now assume T = TΦ and we check two cases. Case 1: λ1 + λN > 2. In this case, c < 1 and λ1 > 1. So kIN − cTk2 = cλ1 − 1 < λ1 − 1 ≤ kIN − Tk2, which is a contradiction to (5). Case 2: λ1 + λN < 2. In this case, c > 1 and λN < 1. So kIN − cTk2 = 1 − cλN < 1 − λN ≤ kIN − Tk2, which is a contradiction to (5). So we must have c = 1 and therefore λ1 ≥ 1 ≥ λN . The proof of Proposition 4 immediately implies (cid:3) FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH 5 Corollary 5. If T has eigenvalues λ1 ≥ ··· ≥ λN ≥ 0, let c = 2 λ1+λN , then and equality holds if and only if c = 1. kIN − cTk2 ≤ kIN − Tk2, Now we are ready to prove the main theorem. Theorem 6. Problem (3) and Problem (4) are equivalent in the sense that (a) Solving (4) gives the minimal condition number among {PM (b) If {di}M i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i(cid:17), then the scalars {cdi}M i=1 = arg minci≥0 cond(cid:16)PM mum in (4) for some c > 0. i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i : ci ≥ 0}. i=1 achieves the mini- As a consequence of (a), if min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2 = kIN − TΦk2, then TΦ has the smallest condition number among {PM of the optimal operator has an upper bound as i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i : ci ≥ 0}, and the condition number cond(TΦ) ≤ cond(ΦΦ∗). Proof. (a) Assume TΦ has eigenvalues λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ ··· ≥ λN ≥ 0. By Proposition 4, λ1 ≥ 1 ≥ λN and λ1−1 = 1−λN . For arbitrary ci ≥ 0, let R =PM i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i have eigenvalues µ1 ≥ µ2 ≥ ··· ≥ µN ≥ 0. Letting c = 2 , we have by Proposition 4, µ1+µN Now, kIN − cRk2 = cµ1 − 1 = 1 − cµN . Hence, 1 ≤ λ1 ≤ cµ1. Similarly, λ1 − 1 = kIN − TΦk2 ≤ kIN − cRk2 = cµ1 − 1. 1 − λN = kIN − TΦk2 ≤ kIN − cRk2 = 1 − cµN , and hence 1 ≥ λN ≥ cµN . It follows immediately that cµ1 cµN λ1 λN ≤ cond(TΦ) = = cond(R). This shows that solving (4) gives the minimal condition number among all scalings ci. (b) Suppose T = PM eigenvalues λ1 ≥ ··· ≥ λN > 0. For arbitrary ci ≥ 0, let R = PM µ1 ≥ µ2 ≥ ··· ≥ µN ≥ 0, and let c = 2 i=1 diϕiϕ∗i has the smallest condition number after solving (3), and T has i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i have eigenvalues , d = 2 . So µ1+µN λ1+λN cond(cT ) ≤ cond(dR) cλ1 cλN ≤ dµ1 dµN ⇒ 2 − cλN cλN ≤ ⇒ ⇒1 − cλN ≤ 1 − dµN ⇒ kIN − cTk2 ≤ kIN − dRk2. dµN 2 − dµN By Corollary 5, kIN − cTk2 ≤ kIN − dRk2 ≤ kIN − Rk2. (cid:3) Remark 7. From the proof of Proposition 4, Corollary 5 and Theorem 6, Theorem 6 also holds for the case when Φ is not a frame (do not span HN ). 6 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN If we do start with an actual frame Φ, since the condition number of TΦ has a finite upper bound, we immediately have Corollary 8. Given Φ ∈ F(M, N ), using the operator norm, any optimal operator TΦ, as in minci≥0 kIN −PM of kIN − TΦk2 as Being invertible means that the smallest eigenvalue λN > 0, so we can easily get an upper bound i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2 = kIN − TΦk2, is invertible. kIN − TΦk2 = 1 − λN < 1. The following theorem shows that this upper bound is tight. Theorem 9. For any fixed M, N , and any Φ ∈ F(M, N ), min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2 = kIN − TΦk2 < 1. Moreover, given an arbitrary ǫ > 0, there exists a frame Ψ = {ψi}M ci≥0 kIN −X ciψiψ∗i k2 = 1 − ǫ. min To prove the tightness part of this theorem, we need a few lemmas first. i=1 such that Lemma 10. Given M ≥ N , there is a universal constant K > 0 so that whenever {ϕi}M unit norm frame in HN and i=1 is a M kIN − Xi=1 then c′i ≤ K for all i = 1, 2, . . . , M. Proof. Assume the optimal operator TΦ has eigenvalues λ1 ≥ ··· ≥ λN . By Proposition 4, ci≥0 kIN −X ciϕiϕ∗i k2, c′iϕiϕ∗i k2 = min Therefore c′i ≤ M Xi=1 c′i = M Xi=1 Lemma 11. The function λ1 ≤ λ1 + λN = 2. 2 = Tr M Xi=1 c′ikϕik2 c′iϕiϕ∗i! = N Xi=1 λi ≤ 2N, (cid:3) f (Φ) = f (ϕ1, ϕ2, . . . , ϕM ) = min ci≥0 kIN −X ciϕiϕ∗i k2, defined on N × M matrices with unit norm columns, is continuous with respect to Φ. Proof. Given a sequence of N × M matrices with unit norm columns Φ(n) = {ϕi(n)}M i=1 such that Φ(n) = Φ, lim n→∞ we need to prove limn→∞ f (Φ(n)) = f (Φ). i=1 so that Choose {di(n)}M Xi=1 kIN − M di(n)ϕi(n)ϕi(n)∗k2 = min ci≥0 kIN − ciϕi(n)ϕi(n)∗k2 = f (Φ(n)). M Xi=1 Since the {di(n)} are uniformly bounded by the previous Lemma, by switching to a subsequence we may assume di(n) = di for all i = 1, 2, . . . , M. lim n→∞ FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH 7 Now, if (6) we are done. For any scalar ci ≥ 0, kIN − M Xi=1 diϕiϕ∗i k2 = f (Φ), kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2 = lim n→∞kIN − ciϕi(n)ϕi(n)∗k2 di(n)ϕi(n)ϕi(n)∗k2 M M Xi=1 Xi=1 diϕiϕ∗i k2, ≥ lim n→∞kIN − Xi=1 M = kIN − which means that the scalars (di)M i=1 achieves the minimum, hence (6). (cid:3) Proof of Theorem 9. Let f (Φ) be as defined in Lemma 11. Let e1 = [1, 0,··· , 0] ∈ HN , and Φ1 := {e1,··· , e1}, which is M copies of e1. Then f (Φ1) = 1. Choose Ψ that is close enough to Φ1 but spans HN (a frame), then we have f (Ψ) is close to f (Φ1) = 1. (cid:3) 4. Minimizing with Frobenius norm This section focuses on Problem (2). Notice for the Frobenius norm, the optimal operator TΦ is i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i : ci ≥ 0}. Since CΦ is closed and convex, the projection of IN onto the cone CΦ = {PM we have the uniqueness of TΦ. To remind the reader of the notation, let min ci≥0 kIN − M Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i kF = kIN − TΦkF . 4.1. Invertibility of TΦ. We are still interested in the condition number of the optimal operator TΦ. Surprisingly, TΦ does not need to be invertible, or equivalently, TΦ may not be a frame operator. We need some basic facts to set up counterexamples. ciϕiϕ∗i kF = kIN − PΦkF . Notice we allow ci to be negative here, so PΦ is the projection of IN onto the subspace spanned by {ϕiϕ∗i }M Observe that Let (7) M min Xi=1 i=1. Therefore PΦ 6= TΦ in general. ci∈RkIN − (8) (9) M Xi=1 h(c) =(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ciϕiϕ∗i − IN(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Taking the partial derivative with respect to ci, we get ciϕiϕ∗i + I  M Xi=1 cikϕik2 2 + N. 2 F M M = cicjϕiϕ∗i ϕjϕ∗j − 2 Xi=1 = tr Xi,j=1  Xi,j=1 cicjhϕi, ϕji2 − 2 = 2Xj cjhϕi, ϕji2 − 2kϕik2 M 2 ∂h ∂ci 8 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i , then the scalars should satisfy Therefore if PΦ =PM (10) 2,··· ,kϕNk2 where F is as defined in Section 2 as F (i, j) = hϕi, ϕji2, and g = (kϕ1k2 2)∗. Since F is i=1, F is strictly positive definite if {ϕiϕ∗i }M the Gram matrix of {ϕiϕ∗i }M i=1 is linearly independent, in which case c = F −1g is the global minimum of (7). Furthermore, if it so happens that the coordinates of c = F −1g are all nonnegative, then naturally PΦ = TΦ. F c = g, Equation (10) is not a necessary condition for c to be an optimal scaling because we are mini- mizing h(c) over the first orthant (rather than over the whole space). But given an optimal scaling, we still have ∂h = 0 for i ∈ {j : cj > 0} since it does not sit on the boundary of the first orthant. ∂ci To summarize, Proposition 12. Given Φ ∈ F(M, N ), (1) If {ϕiϕ∗i }M (2) If c = (ci)M i=1 is linearly independent, then c = F −1g is the unique solution of (7). If further c = F −1g ≥ 0 (component wise), c is the unique solution of both (2) and (7), and PΦ = TΦ. i=1 is an optimal scaling, then (11) and cjhϕi, ϕji2 = kϕik2 2, ∀i ∈ {j : cj > 0} M Xj=1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Example 13. For Φ =   , the optimal operator TΦ is not invertible. Because if TΦ is invertible, the optimal scaling must have ci > 0, i = 1, 2, 3. By Proposition 12(2), it must hold that the solution of (10) is all positive. However, solving (10) gives c = (−1, 1, 1). Example 14. In RN (N ≥ 3) we define ϕ1 = (1, 0, . . . , 0), ϕ2 = (a, b, 0, . . . , 0) where a2 + b2 = 1 and a < b, ϕi = (c, c, 0, . . . ,p1 − 2c2 , 0, . . . , 0), where c2 + c2(a + b)2 = 1 + a2, i ≥ 3. {z } i=1 is a frame of RN . We display the first two columns ith It is easy to check that 2c2 < 1. Now, {ϕi}N of F :  1 a2  c2 ... c2 F = a2 1 c2(a + b)2 ... c2(a + b)2 ··· ··· ··· ... ···   Once again, if TΦ were invertible, we require ci > 0, and F c = g. However, the solution of F c = g is a contradiction. c = ( 1 1 + a2 , 1 1 + a2 , 0, . . . , 0), Remark 15. The example above can be generalized to arbitrarily many frame vectors. Indeed, de- i=1 ciϕiϕ∗i : fine ϕi, i = 1, 2,··· , N as in Example 14, and add in ϕN +1,··· , ϕM such that ϕiϕ∗i ∈ {PN ci ≥ 0}, i = N + 1,··· , M . The following proposition shows that in R2, the optimal operator is always invertible. FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH 9 Proposition 16. Given any frame Φ ∈ F(M, 2), the optimal operator TΦ for the Frobenius norm is invertible. Proof. Suppose the eigenvalues of TΦ are λ1 ≥ λ2, then kIN − TΦk2 order to prove λ2 > 0, it suffices to show that kIN − TΦkF < 1. F = (1 − λ1)2 + (1 − λ2)2. In Pick two independent vectors, say ϕ1, ϕ2 from the frame. It suffices to show that min ci≥0 kIN − c1ϕiϕ∗i − c2ϕ2ϕ∗2kF < 1, since kIN − TΦkF ≤ minci≥0 kIN − c1ϕiϕ∗i − c2ϕ2ϕ∗2kF . that With rotation and adding a negative sign to the vectors, we can assume without loss of generality We can further assume that they are both unit norm as a2 + b2 = 1 and a ≥ b. A direct calculation shows that the eigenvalues of the frame operator S of {ϕ1, ϕ2} are {2a2, 2b2}. ϕ1 = (a, b) and ϕ2 = (a,−b). minkI − 2 Xi=1 Taking c = 1 2a2 , we get ciϕiϕ∗i k2 F ≤ min c≥0 kI − cSk2 F = min c≥0 (cid:0)(1 − 2ca2)2 + (1 − 2cb2)2(cid:1) minkI − 2 Xi=1 ciϕiϕ∗i k2 F ≤ (1 − b2/a2)2 < 1. (cid:3) 4.2. When is TΦ invertible? It is not easy to find a condition on the frame so that its optimal operator is guaranteed to be at least invertible. But the situation can be simplified when the frame Φ is full spark (every N frame vectors from Φ span HN ), and the outer products {ϕiϕ∗i }M i=1 are linearly independent. In this case, if the solution c = F −1g happens to be ci ≥ 0, and #(supp(c)) ≥ N, then we are guaranteed to have an invertible TΦ because the scaled frame {√ciϕi} will for sure span. Moreover, the condition that both Φ is full spark and {ϕiϕ∗i } is independent is not harsh when M is no greater than the real dimension of the N × N symmetric matrices (N 2 for C, and N (N + 1)/2 for R). In fact, such sets of frames are generic. The following theorem also provides a sufficient condition for the invertibility of TΦ, when the outer products are independent. Moreover, the advantage of this sufficient condition is that it is directly on the frame. Theorem 17. Let {ϕi}M Let fi be the ith column of F =(cid:0)hϕi, ϕji2(cid:1). If i=1 be a unit norm frame for HN and let {ϕiϕ∗i }M i=1 be linearly independent. kfik1 − kfjk1 < λ ∀i, j = 1, 2, . . . , M, where λ is the smallest singular value of the the matrix F , then TΦ = PΦ = M Xi=1 aiφiφ∗i where ai > 0, for all i = 1, 2, . . . , M. Proof. By Proposition 12, it suffices to show that the solution of F a = g has positive coordinates. This is equivalent to showing that det Fi > 0, where Fi denotes the matrix F with its ith column replaced by g, since det F > 0. 10 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN First note that if δ = then Let D =(cid:16)PM j=1 fj(cid:17) − δg, then 1 2(cid:18) max 1≤i≤M kfik1 + min 1≤i≤M kfik1(cid:19) , kfik1 − δ < λ. (12) (13) (14) det F = det(f1, f2, . . . , fi−1, fj, fi+1, . . . , fM ) M Xj=1 = det(f1, . . . , fi−1, δg, fi+1, . . . , fM ) + det(f1, . . . , fi−1, D, fi+1, . . . , fM ) = δ · det Fi + det(f1, . . . , fi−1, D, fi+1, . . . , fM ). Note that if D = (d1, d2, . . . , dM )T , then di =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj hϕi, ϕji2 − δ(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < λ, for all i = 1, 2, . . . , M. Let Mij be the determinant of the matrix obtained by deleting the ith row and jth column of F . For fixed i, let D(i) = (d(i) 1 , x(i) Let x(i) = (x(i) 1 , d(i) 2 , . . . , x(i) (det F )x(i) i (15) (16) (17) (18) 2 , . . . , d(i) M )T where d(i) j (−1)i+jMij = djMij for all j = 1, 2, . . . , N. M )T = F −1D(i) and by Cramer's rule = det(f1, f2, . . . , fi−1, D(i), fi+1, . . . , fM ) N Xj=1 djMji M j Mji = M = Xj=1 (−1)j+id(i) (−1)j+idjMji(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≥ (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xj=1 On the other hand, since λ is the smallest singular value of F , = det(f1, . . . , fi−1, D, fi+1, . . . , fN ) (19) x(i) i = (F −1D(i))i ≤ kF −1D(i)k∞ ≤ kF −1kkD(i)k∞ < 1 λ λ By (14), (18) and (19), δ · det Fi = det F − det(f1,··· , fi−1, D,··· , fM ) ≥ det F − (det F )x(i) i > det F − det F · 1 = 0 (cid:3) 4.3. Convexity of OΦ revisited. The convexity of optimal scalings with the Frobenius norm is thoroughly studied in [5], in the case when frames are scalable. We wish to generalize it to any frames. Minimal optimal scalings play an important role in the structure of OΦ, so we make some important observations of minimal optimal scalings first, which are missing in [5]. Proposition 18. Given Φ ∈ F(M, N ), {ϕiϕ∗i : ci > 0}, are linearly independent. (a) If {ci}M (b) Different minimal optimal scalings have different supports. i=1 is a minimal optimal scaling, then the outer products associated with it, i.e., FRAME SCALINGS: A CONDITION NUMBER APPROACH 11 Proof. (a) Let I = {i : ci > 0}. {ϕiϕ∗i }i∈I is linearly independent if and only if there is only one point in the set SS = {(xi)i∈I : Pi∈I xiϕiϕ∗i = TΦ, xi ∈ R}. Suppose to the contrary that SS is a nontrivial affine subspace (more than one point). If we call {(xi)i∈I : xi ≥ 0} the positive orthant, then the affine subspace SS intersects the positive orthant since we have a scaling to begin with. Therefore, it will also intersect the boundary of the positive orthant, providing a solution of {(xi)i∈I :Pi∈I xiϕiϕ∗i = TΦ, xi ≥ 0} with at least one xi to be 0, which contradicts to the fact that {ci}M i=1 is minimal. (b) If they have the same support I, then having two minimal scalings means that {ϕiϕ∗i }i∈I is linearly dependent, which is not true by (a). (cid:3) We already know that OΦ is convex. But for the Frobenius norm, it is a polytope, with minimal optimal scalings as its vertices. The proof is similar to that of [5]. Theorem 19. With Frobenius norm, the set of optimal scalings OΦ is a polytope. Moreover, OΦ is the convex hull of the minimal optimal scalings, i.e., the vertices of OΦ are minimal optimal scalings. i=1 : P xiϕiϕ∗i = Proof. OΦ is a polytope because it is an intersection of half planes: OΦ = {(xi)M TΦ, xi ≥ 0}. To prove the vertices part, we first show any vertex must be a minimal optimal scaling of OΦ. Let u ∈ OΦ be a vertex, and assume to the contrary that u is not minimal. Then there exists v ∈ OΦ whose support is a proper subset of u's. Let w(t) = v + t(u − v). We observe that w(t) ∈ OΦ if and only if every component of w(t), w(t)i ≥ 0. Pick t0 =(cid:26) 2, min{ vi vi−ui If for every i, vi ≤ ui . : vi > ui}, otherwise We observe that t0 > 1 and w(t0)i ≥ 0, so w(t0) ∈ OΦ, which indicates that u lies on the line segment with endpoints v and w(t0), hence not a vertex. This is a contradiction. Now suppose we are given a minimal scaling w which is not a vertex of OΦ. Then we can write w as a convex combination of vertices, say w =P tivi, where we know at least two ti's are nonzero, say t1 and t2. Since both t1 and t2 are positive and all the entries of v1 and v2 are nonnegative, it follows that supp(v1) ∪ supp(v2) ⊆ supp(w). Moreover, supp(v1) 6= supp(v2) by Proposition 18(b). This contradicts to the fact the w is a minimal scaling. (cid:3) The theorem above does not work for the operator norm case because the optimal operator is not necessarily unique. We would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments and thorough review, especially on the remark to allow condition number to be infinity. Acknowledgements References [1] J. J. Benedetto and M. Fickus, Finite Normalized Tight Frames, Adv. Comput. Math., 18(2003), 357 -- 385. [2] R. Bhagavatula, M. T. McCann, M. Fickus, C. A. Castro, J. A. Ozolek, J. Kovacevic, A vocabulary for the identification of teratoma tissues in H&E-stained samples, J. Pathol. Inform. 19.5 (2014). [3] B. Bodmann, J. Cahill and P.G. Casazza, Fusion frames and the restricted isometry property, In Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimnization, Special Issue on Operator Algebras and Representation Theory: Frames, Wavelets, Fractals, P. G. Casazza, P.E.T. Jorgensen, K.A. Kornelson, G. Kutynoik, D.R. larson, P. Massopust, G. Olegsson, J.A. Packer, S. Silvertor and Q. Sun Eds. 33 No. 7-9 (2012) [4] H. Broome, and S. Waldron. On the construction of highly symmetric tight frames and complex polytopes. Linear Algebra and its Applications 439.12 (2013): 4135-4151. [5] J. Cahill and X. Chen, A note on scalable frames, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Sampling Theory and Applications, pp. 93 -- 96. 12 PETER CASAZZA AND XUEMEI CHEN [6] J. Cahill, M. Fickus, D.G. Mixon, M.J. Poteet and N.K. Strawn, Constructing finite frames of a given sprectrum and set of lengths, Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 35.1 (2013) 52-73. [7] R. Calderbank, P.G. Casazza, A Heinecke, G. Kutyniok and A. Pezeshki, Sparse fusion frames: existence and construction, Advances in Computational Mathematics, 35.1 (2011) 1-31. [8] P. G. Casazza and G. Kutyniok, Finite Frame Theory, Eds., Birkhauser, Boston (2012). [9] P.G. Casazza, M. Fickus, A. Heinecke, Y. Wang and Z. Zhou, Spectral tetris fusion frame constructions, Journal of Fourier Analysis and Applications 18.4 (2012) 828-851. [10] P.G. Casazza, M. Fickus, D. Mixon, Y. Wang and Z. Zhou, Constructing tight fusion frames, Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 30.2 (2011) 175-187. [11] P.G. Casazza, A. Heinecke, K. Kornelson, Y. Wang and Z. Zhou, Necessary and sufficient conditions to perform spectral tetris, Linear Algebra and Applications 438.5 (2013) 2239-2255. [12] P.G. Casazza and J. Peterson, Weighted Fusion Frame Construction Via Spectral Tetris, Adv. Comput. Math 40.2 (2014) 335-351.. [13] X. Chen, G. Kutyniok, K. A. Okoudjou, F. Philipp, R. Wang, Measures of scalability, IEEE transactions on information theory, 8(2015): 4410-4423 [14] X. Chen, H. Wang, and R. Wang. A null space analysis of the ℓ1-synthesis method in dictionary-based com- pressed sensing Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis 37.3 (2014): 492-515. [15] O. Christensen, An introduction to frames and Riesz bases, Applied and Numerical Harmonic Analysis. Birkhauser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2003. [16] C.A. Clark, and K. A. Okoudjou. On optimal frame conditioners. Sampling Theory and Applications (SampTA), 2015 International Conference on. IEEE, 2015. [17] M. Copenhaver, Y. Kim, C. Logan, K. Mayfield, S. K. Narayan, M. J. Petro, and J. Sheperd, Diagram vectors and tight frame scaling in finite dimensions, Operators and Matrices, 8 (2014), 78-88. [18] M. Fickus, D. G. Mixon, Numerically erasure-robust frames, Linear Algebra and Appl. 437.6 (2012) 1394-1407. [19] M. Fickus, D. G. Mixon, M. J. Poteet, N. Strawn, Constructing all self-adjoint matrices with prescribed spectrum and diagonal, Adv. Comput. Math. 39.3 (2013) 585-609. [20] M. Fickus, D. G. Mixon, M. J. Poteet, Constructing finite frames with a given spectrum, in: "Finite Frames: Theory and Applications", P. G. Casazza and G. Kutyniok eds., Birkhauser (2013). [21] Y. Hur, K. A. Okoudjou. Scaling Laplacian Pyramids, SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications 36.1 (2015): 348-365. [22] G. Kutyniok, K. A. Okoudjou, F. Philipp, and E. K. Tuley, Scalable frames, Linear Algebra and its Applications 438 (2013), 2225 -- 2238. [23] C. W. Lau and K. A. Okoudjou. Scalable probabilistic frames. arXiv preprint arXiv:1501.07321 (2015). [24] J. Leng, D. Han, and T. Huang. Probability modelled optimal frames for erasures. Linear Algebra and its Applications 438.11 (2013): 4222-4236. [25] M. T. McCann, R. Bhagavatula, M. Fickus, J. A. Ozolek, J. Kovacevic, Automated colities detection from en- doscopic biopsies as a tissue screening tool in diagnostic pathology, 19th IEEE conference on Image Processing (ICIP) (2012) 2809-2812. [26] D. G. Mixon, C. J. Quinn, N. Kiyavash, M. Fickus, Fingerprinting with equiangular tight frames, IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 59.3 (2013) 1855-1865. [27] R. Vale, and S. Waldron. Tight frames generated by finite nonabelian groups. Numerical Algorithms 48.1-3 (2008): 11-27. Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri, Columbia E-mail address: [email protected] Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of San Francisco E-mail address: [email protected]
1702.02689	3	1702	2017-12-23T21:00:06	Supercharacters and the discrete Fourier, cosine, and sine transforms	[ "math.FA" ]	Using supercharacter theory, we identify the matrices that are diagonalized by the discrete cosine and discrete sine transforms, respectively. Our method affords a combinatorial interpretation for the matrix entries.	math.FA	math	SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DISCRETE FOURIER, COSINE, AND SINE TRANSFORMS STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH Abstract. Using supercharacter theory, we identify the matrices that are diagonalized by the discrete cosine and discrete sine transforms, respectively. Our method affords a combinatorial interpretation for the matrix entries. 1. Introduction The theory of supercharacters was introduced by P. Diaconis and I.M. Isaacs in 2008 [14], generalizing earlier seminal work of C. Andr´e [2–4]. The original aim of supercharacter theory was to provide new tools for handling the character theory of intractable groups, such as the unipotent matrix groups Un(q). Since then, supercharacters have appeared in the study of combinatorial Hopf algebras [1], Schur rings [26, 29] and their combinatorial properties [15, 35, 36], and exponential sums from number theory [9, 18, 20]. Supercharacter techniques permit us to identify the algebra of matrices that are diagonalized by the discrete Fourier transform (DFT) and discrete cosine transform (DCT), respectively. A natural modification handles the discrete sine transform (DST). Although the matrices that are diagonalized by the DCT or DST have been studied previously [7, 17, 31, 32], we further this discussion in several ways. For the DCT, we produce a novel combinatorial description of the matrix entries and obtain a basis for the algebra that has a simple combinatorial interpretation. In addition to recapturing results presented from [31], we are also able to treat the case in which the underlying cyclic group has odd order. A similar approach for the DST runs into complications, but we can still charac- terize the diagonalized matrices by considering the "orthocomplement" of the DCT supercharacter theory. In special cases, the diagonalized matrices are T -class ma- trices [7], which first arose in the spectral theory of Toeplitz matrices and have since garnered significant interest because of their computational advantages [8,11,25,28]. For cyclic groups of even order, we recover results on [7]. However, our approach also works if the underlying cyclic group has odd order. This is not as well studied as the even order case. In addition, we produce a second natural basis equipped with a novel combinatorial interpretation for the matrix entries. For all of our results, we provide explicit formulas for the matrix entries of the most general matrix diagonalized by the DCT or DST, respectively. We hope that it will interest the supercharacter community to see that its tech- niques are relevant to the study of matrix transforms that are traditionally the Partially supported by a David L. Hirsch III and Susan H. Hirsch Research Initiation Grant. First author partially supported by National Science Foundation Grant DMS-1265973. 1 2 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH province of engineers, computer scientists, and applied mathematicians. Conse- quently, this paper contains a significant amount of exposition since we mean to bridge a gap between communities that do not often interact. We thank the anony- mous referee for suggesting several crucial improvements to our exposition. 2. Preliminaries The main ingredients in this work are the theory of supercharacters and the discrete Fourier transform (DFT), along with its offspring (the DCT and DST). In this section, we briefly survey some relevant definitions and ideas. 2.1. Supercharacters. The theory of supercharacters, which extends the classical character theory of finite groups, was developed axiomatically by Diaconis–Isaacs [14], building upon earlier important work of Andr´e [2–4]. It has since become an industry in and of itself. We make no attempt to conduct a proper survey of the literature on this topic. Definition 1 (Diaconis–Isaacs [14]). Let G be a finite group, let X be a partition of the set Irr G of irreducible characters of G, and let K be a partition of G. We call the ordered pair (X ,K) a supercharacter theory if (i) K contains {0}, where 0 denotes the identity element of G, (ii) X = K, (iii) For each X ∈ X , the function σX =(cid:80) χ∈X χ(0)χ is constant on each K ∈ K. The functions σX are supercharacters and the elements K of K are superclasses. While introduced primarily to study the representation theory of non-abelian groups whose classical character theory is largely intractable, recent work has re- vealed that it is profitable to apply supercharacter theory to the most elementary groups imaginable: finite abelian groups [5, 9, 10, 16, 18, 20, 21, 27]. We outline the approach developed in [9]. Although it is the "one-dimensional" case that interests us here, there is no harm in discussing things in more general terms. Let ζ = exp(−2πi/n), which is a primitive nth root of unity. Classical character theory tells us that the set of irreducible characters of G = (Z/nZ)d is Irr G = {ψx : x ∈ G}, in which Here we write ψx(y) = ζ x·y. d(cid:88) x · y := xiyi, i=1 in which x = (x1, x2, . . . , xd) and y = (y1, y2, . . . , yd) are typical elements of G. Since x · y is computed modulo n it causes no ambiguity in the expression that defines ψx. We henceforth identify the character ψx with x. Although this identi- fication is not canonical (it depends upon the choice of ζ), this potential ambiguity disappears when we construct certain supercharacter theories on G. Let Γ be a subgroup of GLd(Z/nZ) that is closed under the matrix transpose operation. If d = 1, then Γ can be any subgroup of the unit group (Z/nZ)×. The action of Γ partitions G into Γ-orbits; we collect these orbits in the set K = {K1, K2, . . . , KN}. SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 3 For i = 1, 2, . . . , N , we define σi := (cid:88) x∈Ki ψx. The hypothesis that Γ is closed under the transpose operation ensures that σi is constant on each Ki [9, p. 154] (this condition is automatically satisfied if d = 1). For i = 1, 2, . . . , N , let Xi = {ψx : x ∈ Ki}. Then X = {X1, X2, . . . , XN} is a partition of Irr G and the pair (X ,K) is a supercharacter theory on G. As an abuse of notation, we identify both the supercharacter and superclass partitions as {X1, X2, . . . , XN} (such an identification is not always possible with general supercharacter theories). Since the value of each supercharacter σi is con- stant on each superclass Xj, we denote this common value by σi(Xj). Maintaining the preceding notation and conventions, the following theorem links supercharacter theory on certain abelian groups and combinatorial-flavored matrix theory [9, Thm. 2]. Theorem 1 (Brumbaugh, et. al., [9]). For each fixed z in Xk, let ci,j,k denote the number of solutions (xi, yj) ∈ Xi × Xj to x + y = z; this is independent of the representative z in Xk which is chosen. (a) For 1 ≤ i, j, k, (cid:96) ≤ N , we have (b) The matrix U = 1√ nd is unitary (U∗ = U−1) and U 4 = I. (c) The matrices T1, T2, . . . , TN , whose entries are given by each satisfy TiU = U Di, in which [Ti]j,k = , Di = diag(cid:0)σi(X1), σi(X2), . . . , σi(XN )(cid:1). (d) Each Ti is normal (T ∗ for the algebra A of all N × N matrices T such that U∗T U is diagonal. i Ti = TiT ∗ i ) and the set {T1, T2, . . . , TN} forms a basis The quantities cijk are combinatorial in nature and are nonnegative integers that relate the values of the supercharacters to each other. Of greater interest to us is the unitary matrix U defined in (2). It is a normalized "supercharacter table" of sorts. As in classical character theory, a suitable normalization of the rows and columns of a character table yields a unitary matrix. This suggests that U encodes an interesting "transform" of some type. Theorem 1 describes, in a combinatorial manner, the algebra of matrices that are diagonalized by U . This is the motivation for our work: we can select G and Γ appropriately so that U is either the discrete Fourier or discrete cosine transform matrix. Conse- quently, we can describe the algebra of matrices that are diagonalized by these σi(X(cid:96))σj(X(cid:96)) = ci,j,kσk(X(cid:96)). (cid:34) k=1 N(cid:88) σi(Xj)(cid:112)Xj (cid:112)Xi (cid:112)Xk (cid:112)Xj ci,j,k (cid:35)N i,j=1 (2) (3) 4 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH transforms. The discrete sine transform can be obtained as a sort of "complement" to the supercharacter theory corresponding to the DCT. To our knowledge, such complementary supercharacter theories have not yet been explored in the literature. 2.2. The discrete Fourier transform. It is hallmark of an important theory that even the simplest applications should be of wide interest. This occurs with the theory of supercharacters, for its most immediate byproduct is the discrete Fourier transform (DFT), a staple in engineering and discrete mathematics. A few words about the discrete Fourier transform are in order. As before, let G = Z/nZ and ζ = exp(−2πi/n). Let L2(G) denote the complex Hilbert space of all functions f : G → C, endowed with the inner product The space L2(G) hosts two familiar orthonormal bases. First of all, there is the standard basis {δ0, δ1, . . . , δn−1}, which consists of the functions n−1(cid:88) j=0 (cid:40) (cid:104)f, g(cid:105) = f (j)g(j). δj(k) = 1 0 if j = k, if j (cid:54)= k. We work here modulo n, which explains our preference for the indices 0, 1, . . . , n − 1. A second orthonormal basis of L2(G) is furnished by the exponential basis {0, 1, . . . , n−1}, in which The discrete Fourier transform of f ∈ L2(G) is the function (cid:98)f ∈ L2(G) defined by j(ξ) = n . e2πijξ/n√ n−1(cid:88) (cid:98)f (ξ) = 1√ n f (j)e−2πijξ/n = (cid:104)f, ξ(cid:105) . n so that the map f (cid:55)→ (cid:98)f is a unitary operator from L2(G) to itself. Indeed, √ The choice of normalization varies from field to field. We have selected the constant 1/ the unitarity of the DFT follows from the fact that j=0 That is, the DFT is norm-preserving since it sends one orthonormal basis to another. The matrix representation of the DFT with respect to the standard basis is (cid:98)j = δj,  1 1 1 ... 1 j = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1. 1 ζ ζ 2 ... ζ n−1 1 ζ 2 ζ 4 ... ζ 2(n−1) ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· 1 ζ n−1 ζ 2(n−1) ... ζ (n−1)2  . Fn = 1√ n (4) This is the DFT matrix of order n (also called the Fourier matrix of order n). basis, then a short exercise with finite geometric series reveals that (cid:98)δj = j. A little If we regard elements of L2(G) as column vectors, with respect to the standard more work confirms that F 2 n = I. Thus, the eigenvalues of Fn are among 1,−1, i,−i; the exact multiplicities can be deduced from the evaluation of the quadratic Gauss sum, which is the trace of n = −I and hence F 4 √ nFn [6]. SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 5 There are many compelling reasons why the discrete Fourier transform arises in both pure and applied mathematics. It would take us too far afield to go into details, so we content ourselves with mentioning that the DFT arises in signal processing, number theory (e.g., arithmetic functions), data compression, partial differential equations, and numerical analysis (e.g., fast integer multiplication). A particularly fast implementation of the DFT, the fast Fourier transform (FFT), was named one of the Top 10 algorithms of the 20th century [34]. Although often credited to Cooley–Tukey (1965) [12], the FFT was originally discovered by Gauss in 1805 [24]. A valuable reference for all things Fourier-related is [30]. The recent text of Stein and Shakarchi [33] is a new classic on the subject of Fourier analysis and it highly recommended for its friendly and understandable approach. How does the DFT relate to supercharacter theory? Consider the following example, which was first worked out in [9]. Example 5 (Discrete Fourier transform). Let G = Z/nZ and let Γ = {1}, the triv- ial subgroup of (Z/nZ)×, act upon G by multiplication. Then the Γ-orbits in G are singletons: Xj = {j} for j = 0, 1, 2, . . . , n − 1. The corresponding supercharacters are classical exponential characters: (cid:88) x∈Xj σj(k) = ζ xk = ζ jk and hence the unitary matrix U from (2) is the DFT matrix. That is, U = Fn. Theorem 1 permits us to identify the matrices that are diagonalized by U . With a little work, one can show that the matrices (3) are (cid:40) 0 1 if k − j (cid:54)= i, if k − j = i, [Ti]j,k = and they satisfy TiU = U Di, in which The algebra A generated by the Ti is the algebra of all N × N circulant matrices Di = diag(1, ζ i, ζ 2i, . . . , ζ (n−1)i).  c0 c1 ... cN−2 cN−1 cN−1 c0 c1 cN−2 ··· cN−1 c0 . . . ··· c2 . . . . . . c1 c1 c2 ... cN−1 c0  . More information about circulant matrices and their properties can be found in [19, Sect. 12.5]. The preceding example shows that the discrete Fourier transform arises as the simplest possible application of supercharacter theory. If the action of the trivial group {1} on Z/nZ already produces items of great interest, it should be fruitful to consider actions of slightly-less trivial groups as well. This motivates our exploration of the discrete cosine transform. 6 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH 3. Discrete cosine transform As before, we fix a positive integer n and let G = Z/nZ. Let +(G) = {f ∈ L2(G) : f (x) = f (−x) ∀x ∈ G} L2 and L2−(G) = {f ∈ L2(G) : f (x) = −f (−x) ∀x ∈ G} n−1(cid:88) n−1(cid:88) denote the subspaces of even and odd functions in L2(G), respectively. Observe that L2 +(G) is invariant under the DFT, since, if f is even, (cid:98)f (ξ) = (cid:104)f, ξ(cid:105) = f (−k)e2πikξ/n = (cid:104)f, −ξ(cid:105) = (cid:98)f (−ξ), and hence (cid:98)f is even as well. Since L2(G) is finite dimensional and the DFT is f (j)e−2πijξ/n = 1√ n j=0 1√ n k=0 unitary, it follows that L2−(G) = L2 we have the orthogonal decomposition +(G)⊥ is invariant under the DFT. Consequently, L2(G) = L2 +(G) ⊕ L2−(G), in which both subspaces on the right-hand side are DFT-invariant. The discrete cosine transform (DCT) is the restriction of the DFT to L2 +(G). Being the restric- tions of a unitary operator (on a finite-dimensional Hilbert space) to an invariant subspace, the DCT is a unitary operator on L2 +(G). In a similar manner, the dis- crete sine transform (DST) is the restriction of the DFT to L2−(G). It too is a unitary operator. The DCT is a workhorse in engineering and software applications. The MP3 file format, which contains compressed audio data, and the JPEG file format, which contains compressed image data, make use of the DCT [22]. These "lossy" file formats do not perfectly replicate the original source; that is, some information is lost. However, by judiciously eliminating high-frequency components in the signal, one is able to produce sounds or images that are, to human senses, virtually indis- tinguishable from the source. Moreover, this can be done in such a way that the final file size is much smaller than the original. Why is the DCT more prevalent than the DST? Suppose that we have samples s0, s1, . . . , sm−1 taken at times t = 0, 1, 2 . . . , m − 1. To employ Fourier-analytic techniques, this signal must be extended to t ∈ Z in a periodic fashion. For many applications, it behooves the user to make this extension "smooth" in the sense that there are not large discrepancies between adjacent values. This suggests the use of a reflection and even boundary conditions; see Figure 1. A standard dictum in Fourier analysis is that greater smoothness of the input signal translates into more rapid numerical convergence of associated algorithms. The periodic extension of the sample that is used by the DCT is naturally "smoother" (for typical real-world signals) than those utilized by the DFT or DST. Consequently, it is the DCT that plays a central role in modern signal processing. There are many subtle variants of "the" DCT that appear in the literature, along with their multidimensional analogues. Our particular selection is the most suitable from the viewpoint of supercharacter theory. Indeed, our DCT matrix is precisely the U -matrix that arises from a particularly simple supercharacter theory on Z/nZ. SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 7 Figure 1. (top) Periodic extension of data s0, s1, . . . , s19 (red). The extension belongs to L2(Z/20Z). (middle) Periodic extension of the same data, but with odd boundary conditions. This signal belongs to L2−(Z/40Z). (bottom) Periodic extension of the same data, but with even boundary conditions at both edges. This signal belongs to L2 Its "smoothness" suggests that the DCT may be of more practical use than the DST, or even the DFT, for the manipulation, storage, or compression of "natural" data. +(Z/40Z). Let G = Z/nZ and ζ = exp(−2πi/n). Consider the action of the subgroup Γ = {±1} of (Z/nZ)× upon G. This produces the orbit decomposition 2}(cid:9) if n is even, if n is odd.  (cid:8){0}, {±1}, {±2}, . . . ,{ n (cid:8){0}, {±1}, {±2}, . . . ,{ n±1 2 }(cid:9) 2 ± 1}, { n X = -20-1010203040-551015-20-1010203040-15-10-551015-20-10102030-5510158 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH Let N = X = (cid:98) n 2(cid:99). For j = 0, 1, . . . , N , we define the corresponding superclasses Xj = (cid:40){j,−j} (cid:40) {j} if 2j (cid:54)= 0, if 2j = 0. ζ jk + ζ−jk ζ jk if 2j (cid:54)= 0, if 2j = 0. (cid:16) 2πjk (cid:17) For j = 0, 1, . . . , N , we have the supercharacters σj(k) = Euler's formula tells that σj(±k) = Xj cos (7) in which Xj ∈ {1, 2} is the cardinality of Xj. We index the superclasses starting at 0 rather than 1. Doing so ensures that i ∈ Xi for all i ∈ G, and so we may consider group elements and indices interchangeably. This convenience is more than enough to justify what is a small burden of notation. n , In the notation of Theorem 1, we have √ [U ]j+1,k+1 = (cid:112)XjXk cos n or more explicitly, (6) √ 2 √ 2 2 cos 2π n 2 cos 4π n ... −√ n 2 2 cos (n−2)π 2 cos 4π n 2 cos 8π n ... √ 2 2 cos 2(n−2)π n ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· U = 1√ n  √ 1 √ 2 2 ... √ 2 1  √ 1 √ 2 2 ... √ √ 2 2 (cid:16) 2πjk (cid:17) , n √ 2 2 cos (n−2)π 2 cos 2(n−2)π n n ... 2 −1)2π 2 cos 2( n √ (−1) 2 −1 2 n n √ 2 ... (8)  √ 2 −√ 1 √ 2 2 (−1) ... 2 −1 (−1) n 2 n √ 2 ...  2 cos (n−3)π 2 cos 2(n−3)π n n 2 cos (n−1)π 2 cos 2(n−1)π n n if n is even and U = 1√ n √ 2 √ 2 2 cos 2π n 2 cos 4π n ... 2 cos 4π n 2 cos 8π n ... ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· 2 cos (n−3)π 2 cos (n−1)π n n 2 cos 2(n−3)π 2 cos 2(n−1)π n n 2 cos (n−3)2π 2 cos (n−3)(n−1)π n n 2 cos (n−3)(n−1)π 2 cos (n−1)2π n n if n is odd. These so-called DCT matrices are real, symmetric, and unitary. They belong to MN +1, the set of (N + 1) × (N + 1) matrices. The main result of this section identifies the matrices diagonalized by the DCT matrix (8). Let cijk denote the number of distinct solutions (x, y) ∈ Xi × Xj to x + y = z, in which z ∈ Xk is fixed. As stated in Theorem 1, cijk is independent of the particular representation z ∈ Xk that is chosen. Theorem 9. Let G = Z/nZ, N = (cid:98) n transform matrix (8). The matrices T0, T1, . . . , TN ∈ MN +1 defined by 2(cid:99), and let U ∈ MN +1 be the discrete cosine [Ti]j+1,k+1 = (10) (cid:112)Xk (cid:112)Xj cijk SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 9 form a basis for the algebra A of matrices that are diagonalized by U . They are real, symmetric, and satisfy Ti = U DiU∗, in which Di = Xi diag(1, cos 2πi n , cos 4πi n , . . . , cos 2πN i n ) ∈ MN +1. Moreover, T0 = I and Ti generates A if and only if i is relatively prime to n. The most general matrix T ∈ MN +1 diagonalized by U is [T ]j,k = tmin(n−k−j,k−j) + tmin(n−k−j+2,k+j−2) Xj−1 1 X n 2Xk−1 1 2X n 2 tmin(j−1,k−1) 2 +1−k 1 2 +1−j 1 2 +1−j, n 2 tmax( n 2 + 1, in which t0, t1, . . . , tN ∈ C are parameters (the last case only occurs if n is even). 2 + 1 or k = n for j = n 2 +1−k) for 1 < j, k < n 2 + 1, for j = 1 or k = 1,  We defer the proof until Section 4. Instead, we focus on several examples.   Example 11. If n is even, then N = n/2 and T is √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 2t3 ... 2tN−1 tN √ √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t1 + t3 t2 + t4 ... √ 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t1 + t5 ... √ tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN−1 2tN−1 √ 2tN−2 √ 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t6 ... tN−4 + tN−2 √ 2tN−3 ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· √ 2tN−1 tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN−1 tN−4 + tN−2 ... √ t0 + t2 2t1 √ √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t1 + t3 t2 + t4 Example 12. If n is odd, then N = (cid:98)n/2(cid:99) and T is ··· ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 2t3 ... √ √ 2tN−1 2tN tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN−1 tN−1 + tN tN−2 + tN−1 √ 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t1 + t5 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t6 tN−4 + tN−2 tN−3 + tN−2 ... ... ... √ 2tN−1 tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN−1 tN−4 + tN−2 ... t0 + t3 t1 + t2  . √ tN √ 2tN−1 √ 2tN−2 2tN−3 ... √ 2t1 t0 √ 2tN tN−1 + tN tN−2 + tN−1 tN−3 + tN−2 ... t1 + t2 t0 + t1  . The combinatorial aspect of Theorem 9 deserves special attention. Example 13. If n = 7, then X0 = {0}, X1 = {1, 6}, and X3 = {3, 4}. The only solution in X3 × X1 to x + y = 3 is (4, 6). Consequently, (10) produces The two solutions in X3 × X3 to x + y = 0 are (3, 4) and (4, 3). Thus, c313 X2 = {2, 5}, (cid:112)X3 (cid:112)X1 = 1. (cid:112)X0 (cid:112)X3 = √ c330 2. [T3]2,4 = [T3]4,1 = 10 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH Computing the remaining entries in a similar fashion yields  0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0  . √ 2 1 0 0 T3 = Example 14. If n = 8, then X0 = {0}, and X4 = {4}. X1 = {1, 7}, The solutions in X3 × X1 to x + y = 4 are (3, 1) and (5, 7). Thus, (10) produces X3 = {3, 5}, X2 = {2, 6}, The only solution in X3 × X4 to x + y = 1 is (5, 4). Thus, Computing the remaining entries in a similar fashion yields Example 15. For n = 10, the most general matrix that is diagonalized by U is in which t0, t1, t2, t3, t4, t5 are free parameters. It is a linear combination of 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 √ 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 T0 = T1 = (cid:112)X4 (cid:112)X1 = (cid:112)X1 (cid:112)X4 = √ 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 √ 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 c314 [T3]2,5 = c341 [T3]5,2 =  0 0 √ 0 2 0 √ 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t1 + t5 √ t2 + t4 2t3 √ 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t4 √ t1 + t3 2t2 T3 = √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t1 + t3 t2 + t4 √ t3 + t5 2t4  √ 2. √ 2. √ 0 2 0 0 0 √  . 2t4 t3 + t5 t2 + t4 t1 + t3 √ t0 + t2 2t1 √ 2 0 1 0 0 0     ,  , 0 1 0 0 √ 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 √ 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 T3 = T5 = 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0  √ t5 √ 2t4 √ 2t3 √ 2t2 2t1 t0  ,  , 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 √ 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0  . 1 0 0 0 0 0  √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 √ 2t3 2t4 t5 0 0 0 1 0 0 √ 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 √ 0 2    0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 T2 = T4 = SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 11 Example 16. For n = 11, the most general matrix that is diagonalized by U is  √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 √ 2t3 √ 2t4 2t5 T = √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t1 + t3 t2 + t4 t3 + t5 t4 + t5 √ 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t1 + t5 t2 + t5 t3 + t4 √ 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t5 t1 + t4 t2 + t3 √ 2t4 t3 + t5 t2 + t5 t1 + t4 t0 + t3 t1 + t2  √ 2t5 t4 + t5 t3 + t4 t2 + t3 t1 + t2 t0 + t1 in which t0, t1, t2, t3, t4, t5 are free parameters. It is a linear combination of  , 0 0 0 0 0 1    1 0 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 T0 = T2 = T4 = 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 √ 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 √ 2 0 0 1 0 0  ,  , 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0    √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 √ 0 2  ,  ,  . √ 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 √ 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 √ 2 1 0 0 0 0 T1 = T3 = T5 = The matrices above are analogous to those encountered by Feig and Ben-Or [17], who considered the modified DCT matrix in which ci =(cid:112)1/n for i = 1 and(cid:112)2/n otherwise. [Cn]i,j = ci cos 4n 2π(2j − 1)(i − 1) , Example 17. Matrices diagonalized by the DCT have been studied before, but with different techniques and sometimes with different DCT matrices [17,31]. The- orem 9 recovers many established results. For example, the matrix  √ 2 1/ . . . 0 √ 2 1/ 0 ... ... 0 1/2 . . . ···  , 0 1/2 . . . . . . . . . ··· ··· . . . . . . . . . 1/2 0 ··· . . . 0 ... ... 1/2 . . . √ 1/ 2 0 √ 2 1/ 0 appears in [31]. In our notation, it corresponds to even n and parameters t0 = 0, t1 = 1/2, and t2 = t3 = ··· = tN = 0; see Example 11. 12 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH Example 18. For n odd, the bottom right N × N submatrix of any matrix diag- onalized by U is a Toeplitz plus Hankel matrix:  +  t0 t1 ... tN−1 t1 . . . . . . ··· ··· . . . . . . t1 tN−1 ... t1 t0 ··· t2 ... . . . . . . tN tN tN−1 tN . . . . . . ··· tN tN−1 ... t1   An analogous presentation exists when n is even if we also exclude the first and last row and column. In [31] it is shown that the DCT-I matrix, obtained by replacing Xk1/2 and Xj1/2 with Xk and Xj, respectively, in (8), diagonalizes matrices that are genuinely Toeplitz plus Hankel. In [23] Grishin and Strohmer demonstrate that it is simple to go from the DCT-I to U , and that there are advantages to both matrices. While the DCT-I diagonalizes certain Toeplitz plus Hankel matrices, it is not unitary like U . Theorem 9 also provides an explanation for this Toeplitz plus Hankel structure. The matrix entry [Ti]j+1,k+1 = cijk is nonzero if and only if ±i ± j = k, or equiva- lently, when i ∈ Xk−j or i ∈ Xk+j. If i ∈ Xk−j, then i ∈ X(k+(cid:96))−(j+(cid:96)) for any (cid:96) ∈ G. Thus, along the diagonal that contains (j + 1, k + 1), Ti is always nonzero; this gives us one sub- or super-diagonal of a Toeplitz matrix. Similarly, if i ∈ Xk−j, then Ti is nonzero along the entire anti-diagonal containing (j, k), giving us a component of a Hankel matrix. See [13] for a displacement-rank approach to such matrices. 4. Proof of Theorem 9 Let A denote the commutative, complex algebra of matrices that are diagonalized by U . The algebra of (N + 1) × (N + 1) diagonal matrices has dimension N + 1. Thus, dimA = N + 1. The diagonal matrices D0, D1, D2, . . . , DN are linearly independent because their diagonals n cos 4πi n ]T ∈ CN +1 n . . . cos 2πN i are the columns of the matrix [σi−1(j − 1)]N +1 matrix U . Thus, {T0, T1, . . . , TN} is linearly independent and hence it spans A. i,j=1, which is similar to the unitary [1 cos 2πi The eigenvalues 1, cos 2πi n , cos 4πi n , . . . , cos 2πN i n of Ti are distinct if and only if i is relatively prime to n. In this case, the Lagrange interpolation theorem ensures that for any diagonal matrix D ∈ MN +1, there is a polynomial p so that p(Ti) = U DU∗. Thus, Ti generates A. We claim that T0 = I. If i = 0, then Xi = {0}. Consequently, x + y ∈ Xk and (x, y) ∈ Xi × Xj and imply j = k; moreover, cijj = 1. Thus, T0 = I. We now consider Ti for i = 1, 2, . . . , N and identify the locations of all nonzero entries in each matrix. First suppose that n is odd (if n is even then there are a few additional cases to consider; we will do this later). If j = 0, then the argument above implies that i = k. Since n is odd, −i = k means i = 0. Thus, cijk = 1 and, since k = i (cid:54)= 0, we have Xk = 2. By symmetry, [Ti]i+1,1 = [Ti]1,i+1 = 2. √ An analogous approach applies if k = 0. In all other cases, i, j, k are nonzero and hence Xj = Xk = 2. SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 13 (i) Suppose that cijk = 2. Without loss of generality, let (i, j) be one of the solutions to x + y = k with (x, y) ∈ Xi × Xj. The other potential solution must be one of (i,−j), (−i,−j), or (−i, j). These possibilities imply that 2j = 0, 2k = 0, or 2i = 0, respectively. Since i, j, k (cid:54)= 0, this is not possible. (ii) Suppose that cijk = 1, with (i, j) as the solution. We see that ±i ± j = k if and only if i ∈ Xj+k or i ∈ Xk−j. For such i, Since cijk ∈ {0, 1, 2}, it follows that Ti is 0 elsewhere. [Ti]j+1,k+1 = 1. If T ∈ A, then T =(cid:80)N implies that T equals  √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 2t3 ... √ √ 2tN−1 2tN i=0 tiTi for some t0, t1, . . . , tN ∈ C. The preceding analysis √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t−1 + t3 t−2 + t4 ... √ 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t−1 + t5 ... √ 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t6 ... t2−N + tN t1−N + tN +1 t3−N + tN +1 t2−N + tN +2 t4−N + tN +2 t3−N + tN +3 · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · · · · √ 2tN−1 tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN +1 tN−4 + tN +3 ... t0 + t2N−2 t−1 + t2N−1 √ 2tN tN−1 + tN +1 tN−2 + tN +2 tN−3 + tN +3 √ ... 2t1 t0 + t2N  in which, for the sake of convenience, we let ti = t−i = tn−i for all i. The preceding simplifies to the matrix presented in Example 12. Now suppose that n is even. The preceding results largely carry over, but there are now extra cases to consider. (iii) Suppose that i = N = n 2 . Then the only solutions to x + y ∈ Xk with (x, y) ∈ Xi × Xj are when, without loss of generality, k = N − j. Since Xj = XN−j for all j, an appeal to (10) reveals that TN is the reversed identity matrix. (iv) Suppose that i (cid:54)= 0, i (cid:54)= N , and cijk = 2. In addition to the cases identified in (ii), we now have the possibilities j = N or k = N . From (10) we obtain √ [Ti]N +1,N−i+1 = [Ti]N−i+1,N +1 = 2. If T ∈ A, then T = (cid:80)N In all other cases, i, j, k (cid:54)∈ {0, N}, so the rest of our analysis from the odd case i=0 tiTi for some t0, t1, . . . , tN ∈ C. The carries over. preceding analysis implies that T equals √ √ √ √ 2t1 t0 + t2 t−1 + t3 t−2 + t4 2t2 t1 + t3 t0 + t4 t−1 + t5 2t3 t2 + t4 t1 + t5 t0 + t6 ... ... ... √ t2−N + tN t3−N + tN−1 √ 2tN−1 2tN−2 t4−N + tN−2 √ 2tN−3 · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . · · · · · · 2tN−1 tN−2 + tN tN−3 + tN−1 tN−4 + tN−2 ... t0 + t2N−2 √ 2t1 √ √ √ tN 2tN−1 2tN +2 2tN +3 ... √ 2t1 t0  √ t0 √ 2t1 √ 2t2 2t3 ... 2tN−1 tN √  . This simplifies to the matrix presented in Example 11. We can now obtain an explicit formula for the entries of the most general matrix T = [Tj,k] ∈ MN +1 diagonalized by U . The first row and column (and the last row and column if n is even) have a different structure from the rest of the matrix; one 14 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH can see that [T ]j,k = Xj−1 1 X n 2Xk−1 1 2X n 2 +1−j 1 2 tmin(j−1,k−1) 2 +1−k 1 2 tmax( n 2 +1−j, n 2 +1−k) for j = 1 or k = 1, for j = n 2 + 1 or k = n 2 + 1, holds for these sections of T ; the second case occurs only if n is even. We direct our attention now to the remaining entries. First observe that [T ]j,k = tk−1−(j−1) + tk−1+j−1 = tk−j + tk+j−2 To ensure that all of our subscripts are between 0 and n − 1, we take the absolute 2 , it follows that 0 ≤ k + j − 2 ≤ value of the first subscript. Since 1 < j, k < N < n n − 1. Thus, Finally, we need to ensure that our subscripts are between 0 and N . If N + 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, then n − i gives the correct index and is in the desired range. Consequently, [T ]j,k = tk−j + tk+j−2. [T ]j,k = tmin(n−k−j,k−j) + tmin(n−k−j+2,k+j−2). (cid:3) 5. Discrete sine transform The discrete sine transform (DST) is the oft-neglected sibling of the DCT. Since L2(G) is finite dimensional and L2−(G) = L2 it follows from the DFT- +(G) that L2−(G) is also DFT-invariant (recall that the DFT is invariance of L2 a unitary operator). As mentioned in Section 3, the DST is the restriction of the DFT to L2−(G), the subspace of odd functions in L2(G). Here G = Z/nZ, as usual. Let +(G)⊥, (cid:106) n − 1 4 (cid:107) . 2 N = As before, the sets Xj = {j,−j} for j = 1, 2, . . . , N , along with {0} (and {n/2} if n is even), partition G. In our consideration of the DCT, we saw that the supercharacters (7) are constant on each superclass. In contrast, the corresponding "supercharacters" obtained by replacing cosines with sines are no longer constant on each superclass. This is a crucial distinction between the DCT and DST: the DST does not arise directly from a supercharacter theory on G. Nevertheless, we are still able to obtain an analogue of Theorem 9 for the DST by appealing to the DFT-invariance of L2−(G) and considering the "orthogonal complement" of the DCT supercharacter theory. j=1 is an orthogonal Define τj(k) = ζ−jk − ζ jk for j = 0, 1, . . . , N . Then {τj}N basis for L2−(G) and τj(k) = −2i sin (19) in which i denotes the imaginary unit. Normalizing the τj yields vj(k) = τj(k)√ 2n = 2 sin( 2πjk n ) √ i n . Let Vn ∈ MN denote the matrix representation of the restriction of F to L2−(G) with respect to the orthonormal basis {vj}N j=1. Then Vn is unitary and a computation confirms that √ 2 i (cid:16) 2πjk [Vn]j,k = (cid:17) (20) sin n n . (cid:16) 2πjk (cid:17) , n √ SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 15 Thus, Vn = √ 2 i n  sin 2π n sin 4π n ... sin 4π n sin 8π n ... sin 2N π n sin 4N π n ··· ··· . . . ··· sin 2N π n sin 4N π n ... sin 2N 2π n  . The matrices Vn are purely imaginary, complex symmetric, and unitary. If n is clear from context, we often omit the subscript and write V . Although the DST cannot be attacked directly via supercharacter theory, we can use the DFT invariance of L2−(G) to obtain a satisfying analogue of Theorem 9. Theorem 21. Let G = Z/nZ, N = (cid:98) n− 1 transform matrix (20). Let sgn x denote the sign of x; let sgn 0 = 0. (a) The most general S ∈ MN diagonalized by V is given by 2 (cid:99), and let V ∈ MN be the discrete sine 4 sgn(cid:0) n 2 − k − j − 2(cid:96) + 1(cid:1)smin(n−k−j−2(cid:96)+1,k−j+2(cid:96)−1), (22) min(j,k)(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 [S]j,k = in which s0 = 0, and s1, s2, . . . , sN ∈ C are free parameters that correspond, in that order, to the entries in the first row of S. For i = 1, 2, . . . , N , the matrices Si obtained by setting sj = δi,j in (22) form a basis for the algebra A diagonalized by V . In particular, S1 = I. (b) Let xi,j = 1 if j ∈ Xi and 0 otherwise. The matrices T1, T2, . . . , TN ∈ MN defined by [Ti]j,k = xi,j−k − xi,j+k (23) are real, symmetric, and satisfy Ti = V DiV ∗, in which Di = 2 diag(cid:0) cos 2πi n , cos 4πi n , . . . , cos 2πN i n (cid:1) ∈ MN . Moreover, Ti generates A if and only i is relative prime to n. (c) If n is odd, then {T1, T2, . . . , TN} is a basis for A. Another formula for the entries for a general T ∈ A is given by [Ti]j,k = tmin(n−j−k,j+k) − tmin(n−j+k,j−k), in which t0 = 0, and t1, t2, . . . , tN ∈ C are free parameters. (24) For odd n, Theorem 21 provides two bases for A. The basis described in (a) is obtained by a brute force method which, if applied to the DCT, yields the basis in Theorem 9. However, it is cumbersome to work with; the following examples illustrate its inelegance and unwieldiness. The basis obtained in (b) is superior in several ways. Not only is it much simpler in appearance, it also has a nice combinatorial explanation. The matrices given by (22) and (24) are easier to grasp with examples. We defer the proof of Theorem 21 until Section 6 and focus on some instructive examples. 16 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH Example 25. If n is even, the most general matrix diagonalized by Vn is  s1 s2 s3 ... sN−1 sN s2 s1 + s3 s2 + s4 ... s3 s2 + s4 s1 + s3 + s5 ... sN−2 + sN sN−3 + sN−1 sN−1 sN−2 ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· sN−1 sN−2 + sN sN−3 + sN−1 sN sN−1 sN−2 ... s1 + s3 s2 ... s2 s1  in which s1, s2, . . . , sN are free parameters. Bini and Capovani were the first to call the matrix above a T -class matrix, and referred to the algebra A as TN . This class of matrices occurs in the study of Toeplitz matrices and is known to be diagonalized by our DST matrix [7]. We recapture this result, and with our method we are able to find an analogous basis for the case where n is odd, which has been much less studied. These matrices also form a subspace of the Toeplitz plus Hankel matrices [8]. There is a considerable amount of literature on T -class matrices because of their desirable computational properties. For instance, a TN matrix system can be solved in O(N log N ) time using algorithms for centrosymmetric Toeplitz plus Hankel matrices [25]. This makes T -class matrices suitable as preconditioners for banded Toeplitz systems [8, 11, 28]. From [28], T -class matrices may also be defined as the N × N matrices A = i,j=1 whose entries satisfy the "cross-sum" condition ai−1,j + ai+1,j = ai,j−1 + ai,j+1, [aij]N (26) in which aN +1,j = ai,N +1 = a0,j = ai,0 = 0. Example 27. If n is odd, the most general matrix that is diagonalized by Vn is sN−2 + sN sN−1 sN sN−1 + sN +1 + sN +1 sN−3 + sN−1 + sN +1 sN−2 + sN + sN +2 j=1 s2j j=1 s2j−1 in which s1, s2, . . . , sN are free parameters, and si = −sn−i. A glance at Example 25 confirms that the even and odd cases are strikingly different. Because of this unexpected complexity, the odd case, as mentioned in the preceding example, does not appear to have been addressed completely in the literature before. j=1 s2j−1 j=1 s2j However, these matrices enjoy many of the same properties T matrices do; they are Toeplitz plus Hankel, symmetric, and diagonalized by the DST matrix (20). Further, the same equation (22) used to obtain these matrices recovers the T matrices if n is even, so we may consider (22) as providing a generalization of T matrices. Using (24), a more transparent description is t2 t3 − t1 t4 − t2 ... tN − tN−2 tN − tN−1 t3 − t1 t5 − t1 t4 ... tN − tN−3 tN−1 − tN−2 t4 − t2 t5 − t1 t6 ... tN−1 − tN−4 tN−2 − tN−3 ··· ··· ··· . . . ··· ··· tN − tN−2 tN − tN−3 tN−1 − tN−4 tN − tN−1 tN−1 − tN−2 tN−2 − tN−3 ... t3 t2 − t1 ... t2 − t1 t1  T =   s1 s2 ... ... s2 s1 + s3 ... ... s3 s2 + s4 . . . ... sN−1 sN sN−2 + sN sN−1 + sN +1 ··· ··· ... . . . ... ... ... (cid:80)N−1 ··· (cid:80)N−1 ... ... (cid:80)N−1 (cid:80)N  SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 17 in which t1, t2, . . . , tN are free parameters. From this parameterization we see these matrices even almost satisfy (26), failing to hold only at the right edge. For instance, considering the (2, N ) entry, [T ]1,N + T3,N = tN − tN−1 + tN−2 − tN−3 (cid:54)= [T ]2,N−1 + [T ]2,N +1 = tN − tN−3 since the cross-sum condition takes [T ]2,N +1 = 0. Example 28. For n = 11, the most general matrix diagonalized by Vn is in which s1, s2, s3, s4, s5 ∈ C are free parameters. It is a linear combination of  1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 S1 =  s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s2 s1 + s3 s2 + s4 s3 + s5 s4 − s5 s3 s2 + s4 s1 + s3 + s5 s2 + s4 − s5 s3 + s5 − s4  , S2 =  0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 −1 1 0 1 −1 0 1 1 −1 1 −1 0 1 0 0 0  , 0 0 1 0 0  0 0 0 1 0 S4 = and S5 = s4 s3 + s5 s2 + s4 − s5 s1 + s3 + s5 − s4 s2 + s4 − s5 − s3 s5 s4 − s5 s3 + s5 − s4 s2 + s4 − s5 − s3 s1 + s3 + s5 − s4 − s2   . (29)  , 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 −1 0 1 −1 1  0 0 1 0 0  , S3 =  0 0 0 0 1 1 −1 0 0 0 1 −1 0 0 1 1 −1 1 −1 0 1 −1 1 −1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 −1 It is apparent each Si is Toeplitz plus Hankel; hence (29) is Toeplitz plus Hankel as well. Using (24) we obtain the alternate parametrization t5 − t4 t4 − t3 t3 − t2 t2 − t1   t2 t4 t3 − t1 t5 − t1 t5 − t2 t4 − t3 t4 − t2 t5 − t1 t4 − t1 t3 − t2 t5 t5 − t3 t5 − t2 t4 − t1 t2 − t1 t3 t3 − t1 t4 − t2 t5 − t3 t5 − t4 t1 in which t1, t2, t3, t4, t5 ∈ C are free parameters. It is a linear combination of  T1 =  0 −1 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 0 0 0 −1 0 0 0 −1 0 0 −1 0 −1 0 −1 1 0  ,  0 0 1 0 −1 , T4 =  0 −1 1 0 0 0 −1 0 0 0 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 −1 1 0 0 0 −1 0 1 0 0 −1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 , T5 =  0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 T2 = 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0  , 1 1 0 0 0  . 1 0 0 0 0 T3 = 0 1 1 0 0 0 −1 0 0 −1 0 −1 0 0 0 1 0 0 −1 1 0 1 0 0 0 This example highlights some of the advantages of working with either of the two bases. The S-basis is analogous to the most natural basis for the T matrices, and in particular S1 = I. However, the T -basis matrices tend to be sparser and can be computed with purely combinatorial arguments. 18 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH 6. Proof of Theorem 21 (a) Let G = Z/nZ and N = (cid:98)(n − 1 denote the discrete sine transform matrix corresponding to the modulus n. For j = 1, 2, . . . , N , define the diagonal matrices 4 )/2(cid:99) = dim L2−(G), and let V = Vn ∈ MN Cj = diag(cid:0)τj(1), τj(2), . . . , τj(N )(cid:1) ∈ MN . These matrices are linearly independent because their diagonals are scalar multiples of the rows of the unitary matrix V . Thus, {V CjV ∗}N j=1 is a basis for A. The entries of V CjV ∗ are [V CjV ∗]k,(cid:96) = 1 n τj(m)τk(m)τ(cid:96)(m). For supercharacter theories like that for the DCT and discussed in [9], resolving the analogous quantity exploited supercharacter invariance on superclasses to simplify the preceding into an inner product (cid:104)σjσk, σ(cid:96)(cid:105). We do not enjoy such a simplification but we do have the identity τj(x)τk(x) + τ1(x)τj+k+1(x) = τj+1(x)τk+1(x) (30) for all j, k, x ∈ G. Define sj,k = 1 n τj((cid:96))τ1((cid:96))τk((cid:96)) so that [sj,1 sj,2 . . . sj,N ] is the first row of V CjV ∗. Then by (30) we may rewrite N(cid:88) m=1 N(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 N(cid:88) (cid:16) N(cid:88) m=1 1 n [V CjV ∗]k+1,(cid:96)+1 = 1 n τj(m)τk+1(m)τ(cid:96)+1(m) N(cid:88) (cid:17) τj(m)τ1(m)τk+(cid:96)+1(m) τj(m)τk(m)τ(cid:96)(m) + = = [V CjV ∗]k,(cid:96) + sj,k+(cid:96)+1. m=1 m=1  s1 s2 ... Because τj = −τ−j for all j, we have sj,k = −sj,−k for all k. This condition forces t0 = 0, and also tn/2 = 0 if n is even. Furthermore, V CjV ∗ is uniquely determined by its first row. Since this holds for all j, any matrix in the span of these matrices must enjoy the same relation among its entries. If [s1 s2 . . . sN ] is the first row of some matrix in A, then that matrix is s3 sN−1 sN s2 · · · · · · . . . sN−2 + sN ... · · · (cid:80)N−1 · · · (cid:80)N−1 j=1 s2j−1 j=1 s2j sN−1 + sN +1 ... (cid:80)N−1 (cid:80)N j=1 s2j j=1 s2j−1  s1 + s3 ... s2 + s4 ... sN−2 + sN sN−1 sN sN−3 + sN−1 + sN +1 sN−2 + sN + sN +2 in which we adopt the convention si = −sn−i. sN−1 + sN +1 + sN +1 For each S ∈ A and some 1 < j, k ≤ N , we have [S]j,k − sj+k−1 = [S]j−1,k−1. Repeat this min(j, k) − 1 times, until j = 1 or k = 1. The other subscript will be max(j, k) − (min(j, k) − 1) = max(j, k) − min(j, k) + 1 = k − j + 1. SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 19 From this starting subscript, going down the diagonal we increase the row and column subscript simultaneously by 1 each time, hence increasing the subscript of s by 2 in the summation: min(j,k)(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 min(j,k)(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 [S]j,k = sk−j+1+2((cid:96)−1) = sk−j+2(cid:96)−1. We must ensure that all subscripts are in {1, 2, . . . , N}. Since s(cid:96) = −s−(cid:96), we 2 . To achieve the former, an reverse the sign of the s with indices larger than n argument similar to that in the proof of Theorem 9 permits us to use the index min(n − k − j − 2(cid:96) + 1,k − j + 2(cid:96) − 1). For the latter, note that the proper sign of the term is the same as sgn( n 2 − k − j + 2(cid:96) − 1). since the sign is simply dependent on whether the index is larger than n 2 . Hence, [S]j,k = sgn( n 2 − k − j − 2(cid:96) + 1)smin(n−k−j−2(cid:96)+1,k−j+2(cid:96)−1). min(j,k)(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 (b) Let T1, T2, . . . , TN and D1, D2, . . . , DN be defined as in the statement of Theo- rem 21. Let σj be as defined in (6) of the DCT section and note that Di = diag(cid:0)σi(1), σi(2), . . . , σi(N )(cid:1) ∈ MN . Since σ is real valued and V is symmetric, [V DiV ∗]j,k = 1 n τj((cid:96))σi((cid:96))τk((cid:96)) = 1 n τj((cid:96))τk((cid:96))σi((cid:96)). N(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 N(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 Here we may actually make a substantial simplification, since the product of two odd functions is constant on each Xj. Hence we may rewrite this as an inner product in L2 2 if n is even), then τj(x) = 0 and so +(G). If x = 0 (and x = n τj((cid:96))τk((cid:96))σi((cid:96)) = 1 2n τj((cid:96))τk((cid:96))σi((cid:96)) = (cid:104)τjτk, σi(cid:105). 1 2n N(cid:88) (cid:96)=1 1 n Further, (cid:88) x∈G τj(x)τk(x) = ζ (j−k)x + ζ (k−j)x − ζ (j+k)x − ζ−(j+k)x for all j, k, x ∈ G. Consequently, = 2 Xj−k σj−k(x) − 2 Xj+k σj+k(x) [V DiV ∗]j,k = 1 nXj−k(cid:104)σj−k, σi(cid:105) − 1 nXj+k(cid:104)σj+k, σi(cid:105) Since σ1, σ2, . . . , σN are orthogonal, we use the fact that (cid:107)σj(cid:107)2 = nXj to get (23). Each Ti matrix with i relatively prime to n generates A again by an appeal to the Lagrange interpolation theorem, as in the proof of Theorem 9. (c) Suppose n is odd. By (23), we have [Ti]j,j = xi,0 − xi,2j for j = 1, 2, . . . , N . Hence each Ti is nonzero along the main diagonal only if i ∈ X0 or i ∈ X2j. Since i ranges from 1 to N , it follows that each Ti is zero along the main diagonal except at 20 STEPHAN RAMON GARCIA AND SAMUEL YIH For some T =(cid:80)N the 2ith index, in which 2 denotes the multiplicative inverse of 2 modulo n. Hence Ti is the only matrix in {T1, T2, . . . , TN} that does not vanish at the (2i, 2i) entry. Thus, {T1, T2, . . . , TN} is linearly independent and hence it is a basis for A. i=1 tiTi, observe that Ti is nonzero precisely at the (j, k) entries for which j + k ∈ Xi or j − k ∈ Xi. If we agree that ti = t−i = tn−i, then [T ]j,k = tj+k − tj−k . The techniques used in the proof of Theorem 9 to relabel the indices so that the subscripts lie in {1, 2, . . . , N} can be used to obtain (24). (cid:3) References [1] Marcelo Aguiar, Carlos Andr´e, Carolina Benedetti, Nantel Bergeron, Zhi Chen, Persi Diaco- nis, Anders Hendrickson, Samuel Hsiao, I. Martin Isaacs, Andrea Jedwab, Kenneth Johnson, Gizem Karaali, Aaron Lauve, Tung Le, Stephen Lewis, Huilan Li, Kay Magaard, Eric Mar- berg, Jean-Christophe Novelli, Amy Pang, Franco Saliola, Lenny Tevlin, Jean-Yves Thibon, Nathaniel Thiem, Vidya Venkateswaran, C. Ryan Vinroot, Ning Yan, and Mike Zabrocki, Su- percharacters, symmetric functions in noncommuting variables, and related Hopf algebras, Adv. Math. 229 (2012), no. 4, 2310–2337. MR 2880223 [2] Carlos A. M. Andr´e, The basic character table of the unitriangular group, J. Algebra 241 (2001), no. 1, 437–471. MR MR1839342 (2002e:20082) [3] , Basic characters of the unitriangular group (for arbitrary primes), Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 130 (2002), no. 7, 1943–1954 (electronic). MR MR1896026 (2003g:20075) [4] Carlos A.M. Andr´e, Basic characters of the unitriangular group, J. Algebra 175 (1995), no. 1, 287–319. MR MR1338979 (96h:20081a) [5] Samuel G. Benidt, William R. S. Hall, and Anders O. F. Hendrickson, Upper and lower semimodularity of the supercharacter theory lattices of cyclic groups, Comm. Algebra 42 (2014), no. 3, 1123–1135. MR 3169622 [6] Bruce C. Berndt, Ronald J. Evans, and Kenneth S. Williams, Gauss and Jacobi sums, Cana- dian Mathematical Society Series of Monographs and Advanced Texts, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1998, A Wiley-Interscience Publication. MR 1625181 [7] Dario Bini and Milvio Capovani, Spectral and computational properties of band symmetric Toeplitz matrices, Linear Algebra Appl. 52/53 (1983), 99–126. MR 709346 [8] E. Boman and I. Koltracht, Fast transform based preconditioners for Toeplitz equations, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 16 (1995), no. 2, 628–645. MR 1321801 [9] J. L. Brumbaugh, Madeleine Bulkow, Patrick S. Fleming, Luis Alberto Garcia German, Stephan Ramon Garcia, Gizem Karaali, Matt Michal, Andrew P. Turner, and Hong Suh, Supercharacters, exponential sums, and the uncertainty principle, J. Number Theory 144 (2014), 151–175. MR 3239156 [10] J. L. Brumbaugh, Madeleine Bulkow, Luis Alberto Garcia German, Stephan Ramon Garcia, Matt Michal, and Andrew P. Turner, The graphic nature of the symmetric group, Exp. Math. 22 (2013), no. 4, 421–442. MR 3171103 [11] Raymond H. Chan, Michael K. Ng, and C. K. Wong, Sine transform based preconditioners for symmetric Toeplitz systems, Linear Algebra Appl. 232 (1996), 237–259. MR 1366587 [12] James W. Cooley and John W. Tukey, An algorithm for the machine calculation of complex Fourier series, Math. Comp. 19 (1965), 297–301. MR 0178586 [13] Carmine Di Fiore and Paolo Zellini, Matrix decompositions using displacement rank and classes of commutative matrix algebras, Linear Algebra Appl. 229 (1995), 49–99. MR 1352839 [14] Persi Diaconis and I. M. Isaacs, Supercharacters and superclasses for algebra groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 360 (2008), no. 5, 2359–2392. MR 2373317 [15] Persi Diaconis and Nathaniel Thiem, Supercharacter formulas for pattern groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361 (2009), no. 7, 3501–3533. MR MR2491890 (2010g:20013) [16] William Duke, Stephan Ramon Garcia, and Bob Lutz, The graphic nature of Gaussian peri- ods, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (2015), no. 5, 1849–1863. MR 3314096 [17] Ephraim Feig and Michael Ben-Or, On algebras related to the discrete cosine transform, Linear Algebra Appl. 266 (1997), 81–106. MR 1473195 [18] Christopher F. Fowler, Stephan Ramon Garcia, and Gizem Karaali, Ramanujan sums as supercharacters, Ramanujan J. 35 (2014), no. 2, 205–241. MR 3266478 SUPERCHARACTERS AND THE DFT, DCT, AND DST 21 [19] Stephan Ramon Garcia and Roger A. Horn, A second course in linear algebra, Cambridge Mathematical Textbooks, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2017. [20] Stephan Ramon Garcia, Trevor Hyde, and Bob Lutz, Gauss's hidden menagerie: from cyclo- tomy to supercharacters, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 62 (2015), no. 8, 878–888. MR 3379072 [21] Stephan Ramon Garcia and Bob Lutz, A supercharacter approach to Heilbronn sums, J. Number Theory, in press. [22] Rafael C. Gonzalez and Richard E. Woods, Digital image processing, Pearson, 2017, Fourth Edition. [23] Denis Grishin and Thomas Strohmer, Fast scattered data approximation with Neumann and other boundary conditions, Linear Algebra Appl. 391 (2004), 99–123. MR 2094605 [24] Michael T. Heideman, Don H. Johnson, and C. Sidney Burrus, Gauss and the history of the fast Fourier transform, Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 34 (1985), no. 3, 265–277. MR 815154 [25] Georg Heinig, Chebyshev-Hankel matrices and the splitting approach for centrosymmet- ric Toeplitz-plus-Hankel matrices, Linear Algebra Appl. 327 (2001), no. 1-3, 181–196. MR 1823348 [26] Anders O. F. Hendrickson, Supercharacter theory constructions corresponding to Schur ring products, Comm. Algebra 40 (2012), no. 12, 4420–4438. MR 2989654 [27] Anders Olaf Flasch Hendrickson, Supercharacter theories of cyclic p-groups, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2008, Thesis (Ph.D.)–The University of Wisconsin - Madison. MR 2711764 [28] Jef Hendrickx and Marc Van Barel, Fast direct solution methods for symmetric banded Toeplitz systems, based on the sine transform, Linear Algebra Appl. 343/344 (2002), 211– 232, Special issue on structured and infinite systems of linear equations. MR 1878943 [29] Stephen P. Humphries and Kenneth W. Johnson, Fusions of character tables and Schur rings of abelian groups, Comm. Algebra 36 (2008), no. 4, 1437–1460. MR MR2406596 (2009b:20008) [30] David W. Kammler, A first course in Fourier analysis, second ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007. MR 2382058 [31] V. Sanchez, P. Garcia, A. Peinado, J. Segura, and Rubio A., Diagonalizing properties of the discrete cosine transforms, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 43 (1995), no. 11, 2631–2641. [32] Victoria Sanchez, Antonio M. Peinado, Jose C. Segura, Pedro Garcia, and Antonio J. Rubio, Generating matrices for the discrete sine transforms, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing 44 (1996), no. 10, 2644–2646. [33] Elias M. Stein and Rami Shakarchi, Fourier analysis, Princeton Lectures in Analysis, vol. 1, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2003, An introduction. MR 1970295 [34] Francis Sullivan and Jack Dongarra, Guest editors' introduction: The top 10 algorithms, Computing in Science & Engineering 2 (2000), 22–23. [35] Nathaniel Thiem, Branching rules in the ring of superclass functions of unipotent upper- triangular matrices, J. Algebraic Combin. 31 (2010), no. 2, 267–298. MR MR2592079 [36] Nathaniel Thiem and Vidya Venkateswaran, Restricting supercharacters of the finite group of unipotent uppertriangular matrices, Electron. J. Combin. 16 (2009), no. 1, Research Paper 23, 32. MR MR2482091 (2010e:20024) Department of Mathematics, Pomona College, 610 N. College Ave., Claremont, CA 91711 E-mail address: [email protected] URL: http://pages.pomona.edu/~sg064747
1905.02603	2	1905	2019-06-06T23:51:19	Weighted sampling and weighted interpolation on combinatorial graphs	[ "math.FA" ]	For Paley-Wiener functions on weighted combinatorial finite or infinite graphs we develop a weighted sampling theory in which samples are defined as inner products with weight functions (measuring devices). Three reconstruction methods are suggested. The first two of them are using language of dual Hilbert frames and the so-called frame algorithm respectively. The third one is using the so-called weighted variational interpolating splines which are constructed in the setting of combinatorial graphs. This development requires a new set of Poincar\'e-type inequalities which we prove for functions on combinatorial graphs.	math.FA	math	WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND WEIGHTED INTERPOLATION ON COMBINATORIAL GRAPHS ISAAC Z. PESENSON Abstract. For Paley-Wiener functions on weighted combinatorial finite or infinite graphs we develop a weighted sampling theory in which samples are defined as inner products with weight functions (measuring devices). Three reconstruction methods are suggested. The first two of them are using language of dual Hilbert frames and the so-called frame algorithm respectively. The third one is using the so-called weighted variational interpolating splines which are constructed in the setting of combinatorial graphs. This development requires a new set of Poincar´e-type inequalities which we prove for functions on combinatorial graphs. 1. Introduction and main results During the last decade signal processing on graphs was developed in a number of papers, for example, in [3], [6], [12]-[20]. Many of the papers on this list considered what can be called as a "point-wise sampling". The goal of the present article is to develop sampling on graphs which is based on weighted averages over relatively small subgraphs. The idea to use local information (other than point values) for reconstruction of bandlimited functions on graphs was already explored in [19]. However, the results and methods of [19] and of our paper are very different. We also want to mention that results of the present paper are similar to results of our papers [10] and [11] in which sampling by weighted average values was developed in abstract Hilbert spaces and on Riemannian manifolds. Let G denote an undirected weighted graph, with a finite or countable number of vertices V (G) and weight function w : V (G)× V (G) → R+ 0 . w is symmetric, i.e., w(u, v) = w(v, u), and w(u, u) = 0 for all u, v ∈ V (G). The edges of the graph are the pairs (u, v) with w(u, v) 6= 0. Our assumption is that for every v ∈ V (G) the following finiteness condition holds (1.1) w(v) = Xu∈V (G) w(u, v) < ∞. Let ℓ2(G) denote the space of all complex-valued functions with the inner product and the norm hf, gi = Xv∈V (G) kfkG = kfk =  Xv∈V (G) 1 f (v)g(v) 1/2 . f (v)2  2 ISAAC Z. PESENSON Definition 1. The weighted gradient norm of a function f on V (G) is defined by (1.2) k∇fk =  Xu,v∈V (G) 1 2f (u) − f (v)2w(u, v)  1/2 . The set of all f : G → C for which the weighted gradient norm is finite will be denoted as D(∇). Remark 1.1. The factor 1 2 makes up for the fact that every edge (i.e., every unordered pair (u, v)) enters twice in the summation. Note also that loops, i.e. edges of the type (u, u), in fact do not contribute. We intend to prove Poincar´e-type estimates involving weighted gradient norm. In the case of a finite graph and ℓ2(G)-space the weighted Laplace operator L : ℓ2(G) → ℓ2(G) is introduced via (Lf )(v) = Xu∈V (G) (1.3) (f (v) − f (u))w(v, u) . This graph Laplacian is a well-studied object; it is known to be a positive-semidefinite self-adjoint bounded operator. According to Theorem 8.1 and Corollary 8.2 in [5] if for an infinite graph there exists a C > 0 such that the degrees are uniformly bounded (1.4) w(v) = Xu∈V (G) w(u, v) ≤ C, then operator which is defined by (1.3) on functions with compact supports has a unique positive-semidefinite self-adjoint bounded extension L which is acting ac- cording to (1.3). In section 2 we consider a finite connected graph G which contains more than one vertex and a functional Ψ on ℓ2(G) which is defined by a function ψ ∈ ℓ2(G), i.e. Ψ(f ) = hf, ψi = Xv∈V (G) f (v)ψ(v). We will use notation χG for the characteristic function: χG(v) = 1 for all v ∈ V (G). In these notions we prove (Theorem 2.2) that if Ψ(χG) is not zero then for any f ∈ Ker(Ψ) the following inequality holds (1.5) θ λ1k∇fk2, f ∈ Ker(Ψ), kfk2 ≤ where λ1 is the first non zero eigenvalue of the Laplacian (1.3) and (1.6) θ = Gkψk2 Ψ(χG)2 , where G is cardinality of V (G). In section 3 we extend this result to situations in which a cover by finite and connected subgraphs of a finite or infinite graph G is given. Namely, we are working under the following assumptions. WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 3 Assumptions 1. We assume that S = {Sj}j∈J form a cover of V (G) (1.7) Sj = V (G). [j∈J We don't assume that the sets Sj are disjoint but we assume that there is no any edge in E(G) which belongs to two different subsets Sj, j ∈ J. Let Lj be the Laplacian for the induced subgraph Sj. In order to insure that Lj has at least one non zero eigenvalue, we assume that every Sj ⊂ V (G), j ∈ J, is a finite and connected subset of vertices with more than one vertex. The first nonzero eigenvalue of the operator Lj will be denoted as λ1,j. Let k∇jfjk be the weighted gradient for the induced subgraph Sj. With every Sj, j ∈ J, we associate a function ψj ∈ ℓ2(G) whose support is in Sj and introduce the functionals Ψj on ℓ2(G) defined by these functions Ψj(f ) = hf, ψji = Xv∈V (Sj ) f (v)ψj (v), f ∈ ℓ2(G). Notation χj will be used for characteristic function of Sj and use fj for f χj, f ∈ ℓ2(G). As usual, the induced graph Sj has the same vertices as the set Sj but only such edges of E(G) which have both ends in Sj. The two inequalities below (1.9) and (1.10) are essentially the main inequalities we prove in section 3. We call them generalized Poincar´e-type inequalities since they contain an estimate of a function through its smoothness. Namely, we show that if Ψj(χj) = Xv∈Sj ψj(v) 6= 0, and (1.8) θj = Sjkψjk2 Ψj(χj)2 , then the following inequalities hold for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) and every ǫ > 0 (1.9) (1.10) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2fk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J ǫ Xj∈J Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2, Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2 . 1 + ǫ where Ξ = (S, {Ψj}j∈J ), S = {Sj}j∈J , ΘΞ = sup (1.11) j∈J θj < ∞, where θj is computed according to (2.3) and (1.12) ΛS = inf j∈J λ1,j > 0. 4 ISAAC Z. PESENSON Note, that an important situation occurs in (1.9) and (1.10) when f ∈ ∩j∈J KerΨj. In this case one has (1.13) and (1.14) kfk2 ≤Xj∈J θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2, f ∈ \j∈J Ker Ψj, kfk2 ≤ ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2fk2, f ∈ \j∈J Ker Ψj. Another interesting case occurs when for every j ∈ J the functional Ψj is a Dirac measure δvj at a vertex vj ∈ Sj. In this case the condition f ∈ ∩j∈J Ker δvj means that f (vj ) = 0, j ∈ J, and one obtains (see (3.13) and (3.14) below) kfk2 ≤Xj∈J λ1,j k∇jfjk2, f ∈ \j∈J Sj Ker δvj , (1.15) and (1.16) kfk2 ≤ supj∈J Sj ΛS kL1/2fk2, f ∈ \j∈J Ker δvj . A few more interesting particular situations will be discussed at the end of section 3. We also have similar inequalities for subgraphs (see formulas (3.17) and (3.18) below). Let's note, that in the continuous case (see [9]-[11]) such inequalities play an important role in the sampling and interpolation theories on Riemannian manifolds. Remark 1.2. It is interesting to note that if one will rearrange and mutually "local" inequalities (1.9), (1.13), (1.15) will stay the same but the "global" ones connect subgraphs {Sj}j∈J in any other way to obtain a new graph eG then the (1.10), (1.14), (1.16 ) will change since they will involve a new Laplacian eL which corresponds to eG. It is worth to stress that the "local" inequalities (1.9), (1.13), (1.15) are quite informative and capture highly irregular local structures of graphs. Indeed, in the case, say, of a Riemannian manifold a difference between two small neighborhoods Si and Sj is essentially their diameter. However, in the case of a graph two different even "small" sets can have very different structures. These differences are better reflected by quantities like λ1,j and θj. Let's also note that from the practical point of view, the averaging procedure (which corresponds the case when ψj is the characteristic function χj of a subset Sj) can be instrumental in reducing noise inherited into point wise measurements. In section 4 we introduce Paley-Wiener spaces P Wω for finite and infinite graphs. In section 5 using inequalities (1.9) and (1.10) and their variations we develop a sampling theory for Paley-Wiener functions on finite and infinite graphs (Theorems 5.1 and 5.2). At this point for reconstruction of functions from weighted average samples we adopt dual Hilbert frames and the so-called frame algorithm. In section 6 by using inequality (1.14) we outline a construction of variational interpolating splines which interpolate functions using their weighted average values over subsets. It is shown that Paley-wiener functions can be reconstructed using WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 5 weighted average interpolating splines when smoothness of splines goes to infinity. In section 7 we illustrate some of our results using infinite graph Z. 2. A Poincare-type inequality for finite graphs The following lemma is important for us (see [7] for finite graphs, and [3] for infinite). Lemma 2.1. If a graph G is finite or the condition (1.4) is satisfied then one has the equality (2.1) for all f ∈ ℓ2(G). Proof. It is easy to verify that under assumption (1.4) the domain D(∇) coincides with ℓ2(G). Let d(u) = wV (G)(u). Then we obtain kL1/2fk = k∇fk hf, Lfi = Xu∈V (G) = Xu∈V (G) In the same way (f (u) − f (v)) w(u, v)   Xv∈V (G) f (u)  f (u)2d(u) − Xv∈V (G) f (u)f (v)w(u, v)  . hf, Lfi = hLf, fi = Xu∈V (G)  f (u)2d(u) − Xv∈V (G) f (u)f (v)w(u, v)  . Averaging these equations yields hf, Lfi = Xu∈V (G) f (u)f (v)w(u, v)   f (u)2d(u) − Re Xv∈V (G) 2 Xu,v∈V (G) = Xu,v∈V (G) = 1 1 2f (v) − f (u)2w(u, v) = k∇fk2 . f (u)2w(u, v) + f (v)2w(u, v) − 2Ref (u)f (v)w(u, v) Lemma is proved. (cid:3) For a finite connected graph G which contains more than one vertex let Ψ be a functional on ℓ2(G) which is defined by a function ψ ∈ ℓ2(G), i.e. Ψ(f ) = hf, ψi = Xv∈V (G) f (v)ψ(v). We will use notation χG for the characteristic function: χG(v) = 1 for all v ∈ V (G). Using these notions we prove the following. 6 ISAAC Z. PESENSON Theorem 2.2. Let G be a finite connected graph which contains more than one vertex and Ψ(χG) is not zero. If f ∈ Ker(Ψ) then (2.2) θ λ1k∇fk2, f ∈ Ker(Ψ), kfk2 ≤ where λ1 is the first non zero eigenvalue of the Laplacian (1.3) and (2.3) θ = Gkψk2 Ψ(χG)2 , where G is cardinality of V (G). Proof. If λ0 < λ1 ≤ ....λN −1, N = G is the set of eigenvalue and ϕ0, ϕ1, ..., ϕN −1 is a set of orthonormal eigenfunctions then {ck(f ) = hf, ϕki} is a set of Fourier coefficients. One has and then using Parseval equality and Schwartz inequality we obtain and if f ∈ Ker(Ψ) then 0 = Ψ(f ) = From here kfk2 = c0(f )2 + (2.4) N −1Xk=1 G ck(f )2 = N −1Xk=1 ck(f )2 Ψ(χG)2 At the same time, since ϕ0 = χG√G c0(f ) = − pG Ψ(χG) f = N −1Xk ck(f )ϕk c0(f )Ψ(χG) + N −1Xk= ck(f )Ψ(ϕk). 1 pG G ck(f )Ψ(ϕk), N −1Xk=1 Ψ(χG)2 (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −1Xk=1 and hψ, ϕki = Ψ(ϕk) we have ck(f )Ψ(ϕk)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N −1Xk=1 Ψ(ϕk)2 + N −1Xk=1 2 + ck(f )2. N −1Xk=1 ck(f )2 ≤ and from Parseval formula N −1Xk=1 1 Ψ(ϕk)ϕk, ψ = Ψ(χG)ϕ0 + pG N −1Xk=1 Ψ(ϕk)2 = kψk2 − Ψ(χG)2 G . We plug the right-hand side of this formula into (2) and obtain the next inequality in which θ is given by (2.3) θ λ1kL1/2k2. To finish the proof one has to apply Lemma 2.1. Theorem is proven. λ1/2 k ck(f )2 = ck(f )2 ≤ kfk2 ≤ θ θ λ1 N −1Xk=1 N −1Xk=1 (cid:3) WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 7 Corollary 2.1. Let G be a finite connected graph which contains more than one vertex and Ψ(χG) is not zero. Then one has for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) (2.5) 2 Ψ(f ) Ψ(χG) θ λ1 k∇fk2, ≤ (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)f − χG(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) where θ as in (2.3). hold: The proof follows from the fact that for g = f − Ψ(f ) g ∈ Ker (Ψ), ∇g = ∇f. Ψ(χG) χG the following properties When ψ equals to the eigenfunction ϕ0 then for the corresponding functional Ψ0 the condition f ∈ Ker(Ψ0) is equivalent to hf, ϕ0i = 0. It is easy to see that in this case θ = 1 and then (2.2) gives the following Corollary. Corollary 2.2. If hf, ϕ0i = 0 then (2.6) kfk2 ≤ 1 λ1 k∇fk2. Note also, that this inequality immediately follows from Lemma 2.1 and from the fact that the norm of the operator L−1/2 on the subspace of all functions which are orthogonal to ϕ0 is 1/√λ1. In another particular case when ψ = χG and fG = 1 G Xv∈V (G) f (v), one has that f − fGχG belongs to the kernel of the corresponding functional Ψ and it gives the next Corollary. Corollary 2.3. For every finite graph G and for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) the following holds kf − fGχGk2 ≤ 1 λ1 k∇fk2. Theorem 2.3. Let G be a finite graph and Ψ be a functional on ℓ2(G) such that Ψ(χG) is not zero. Then the following Poincare inequality holds for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) and every ǫ > 0 (2.7) kfk2 ≤ θ λ1 (1 + ǫ)k∇fk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ where θ is defined in (2.3). Proof. One has kfk2 ≤(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) (cid:18)f − Ψ(f ) Ψ(χG) Next, we apply the inequality G2 Ψ(χG)2 Ψ(f )2, χG(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) χG(cid:19) + Ψ(f ) Ψ(χG) 2 f ∈ ℓ2(G), ǫ > 0, (2.8) A2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)A − B2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ B2 , which holds for every positive ǫ > 0. This inequality follows from two obvious inequalities A2 ≤ A − B2 + 2BA − B + B2 8 and ISAAC Z. PESENSON 2BA − B ≤ ǫA − B2 + ǫ−1B2, Choosing an ǫ > 0 and using inequality (2.8) one obtains ǫ > 0. (2.9) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)f − Ψ(f ) Ψ(χG) 2 χG(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) + 1 + ǫ ǫ G2 Ψ(χG)2 Ψ(f )2. Now an application of Corollary 2.1 gives the result. Theorem is proved. (cid:3) In the case when Ψ is defined by ψ = χG one has that Ψ(f ) Ψ(χG) χG = fGχG, fG = 1 G Xv∈V (G) f (v). Since in this case θ in (2.3) is 1, G2/Ψ(χG)2 = 1, and Ψ(f ) =Pv∈V (G) f (v) we obtain Corollary 2.4. For every connected and finite graph G which contains more than one vertex the following Poincar´e inequality holds (2.10) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) 1 λ1 k∇fk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ 2 , f ∈ ℓ2(G), ǫ > 0. (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xv∈V (G) f (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 3. A generalized Poincare-type inequality for finite and infinite graphs Let G be a finite or infinite and countable connected graph and S ⊂ V (G) is a finite and connected subset of vertices which we will treat as an induced graph and will denote by the same letter S. We remind that this means that the set of vertices of such graph, which will be denoted as V (S), is exactly the set of vertices in S and the set of edges is the set of edges in E(G) whose both ends belong to S. Let LS and k∇S (fS)k be the Laplace operator and the weighted gradient constructed according to (1.3) and (1.2) for the induced graph S. Let wS(u, v), u, v ∈ V (S), and wS(v) = Xu∈V (S) wS(u, v), v ∈ V (S), be the corresponding weight functions. We notice that for every induced subgraph S one has the inequalities and every u, v ∈ V (S) one has w(u, v) = wS(u, v). However, in general w(u) ≥ wS(u). Below we consider a cover of V (G) by finite and connected sets of vertices Sj, j ∈ J. We are using the same assumptions and notations which were introduced in Assumptions 1 in Introduction. Theorem 3.1. Let G be a connected finite or infinite and countable graph. Suppose that (1.7) holds true. Let Lj be the Laplace operator of the induced subgraph Sj whose first nonzero eigenvalue is λ1,j. The following inequality holds for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) and every ǫ > 0 kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2, θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + ǫ Xj∈J 1 + ǫ (3.1) WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 9 where Ψj(f ) = hf, ψji, function ψj ∈ ℓ2(G) has support in Sj, Ψj(χj) = Xv∈Sj ψj(v) 6= 0, and (3.2) θj = Sjkψjk2 Ψj(χj)2 .   Xv∈V (Sj) Proof. One has (3.3) kfk2 = Xv∈V (G) fj(v)2  . We apply Theorem 2.3 to have for every j ∈ J and every ǫ > 0, Sj2 Ψj(χj)2Ψj(fj)2, (3.4) f (v)2 =Xj∈J θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + fj(v)2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) Xv∈V (Sj ) 1 + ǫ ǫ and then we have for f ∈ ℓ2(G), ǫ > 0, (3.5) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2. Theorem is proved. (cid:3) As a consequence we obtain the following. Theorem 3.2. If in addition to assumptions of Theorem 3.1 we have that (3.6) ΘΞ = sup j∈J θj < ∞, Ξ = ({Sj}j∈J , {Ψj}j∈J ) , where θj is computed according to (2.3) and (3.7) ΛS = inf j∈J λ1,j > 0, S = {Sj}j∈J , then the following inequality holds for every f ∈ ℓ2(G) and every ǫ > 0 Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2 . (3.8) ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2fk2 + kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) ǫ Xj∈J 1 + ǫ Proof of this statement follows from Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 2.1 according to which Xj∈J k∇jfjk2 ≤Xj∈J k∇jfjk2 ≤ k∇fk2 = kL1/2fk. Let's consider a few interesting cases. Corollary 3.1. If all the notations and conditions of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 are satisfied and if for every j the corresponding function ψj = χj is the characteristic function of a subset of vertices Uj ⊆ Sj then the following inequalities hold (3.9) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J Sj λ1,jUjk∇jfjk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ  Xj∈J Sj2 Uj2  Xv∈Uj (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 , f (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 10 and ISAAC Z. PESENSON (3.10) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) Sj UjkL1/2fk2 + In particular, if Uj = Sj for every j ∈ J then 1 ΛS sup j∈J 1 + ǫ ǫ kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J 1 λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + 1 + ǫ (3.11) and (3.12) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) 1 ΛS kL1/2fk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J Xv∈Uj 2 . f (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Sj2  Xj∈J (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xv∈Sj (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Uj2  f (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xv∈Sj f (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ǫ Xj∈J (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 . 2 , Indeed, it follows from the fact that in this situation kψjk2 = Uj, Ψj(χj)2 = Uj2 and Ψj(χj)2 = Sj Uj The condition (3.6) boils down to supj∈J Sj < ∞. θj = Sjkψjk2 . Corollary 3.2. Suppose that all the notations and conditions of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 are satisfied. If for every j the corresponding function ψj is a Dirac measure δvj at a vertex vj ∈ Sj then kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ)Xj∈J (3.13) Sj λ1,j k∇jfjk2 + Sj2f (vj)2, ǫ Xj∈J 1 + ǫ and (3.14) kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) supj∈J Sj ΛS kL1/2fk2 + 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J Sj2f (vj)2. Proof. In this case one has kψjk = 1, Ψj(f ) = f (vj), Ψj(χj) = 1, θj = Sj for every j ∈ J. (cid:3) The next corollary is about functions which annihilate all the functionals Ψj, j ∈ J. Corollary 3.3. If all the notations and conditions of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 are satisfied and for a function f ∈ ℓ2(G) one has that Ker Ψj f ∈ \j∈J then (3.15) and (3.16) kfk2 ≤Xj∈J θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2, kfk2 ≤ ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2fk2, f ∈ \j∈J f ∈ \j∈J KerΨj, KerΨj. WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 11 Remark 3.3. If J0 ⊂ J and G0 = ∪j∈J0 Gj then every inequality in this section can be replaced by a similar one in which the term kfk2 on the left is replaced by kfk2 G0 = Xv∈G0 kfk2, and summation over J on the right is replaced by summation over J0. For example, the last two inequalities (3.15) and (3.16) would take the form (3.17) and (3.18) kfk2 G0 ≤ Xj∈J0 θj λ1,j k∇jfjk2, f ∈ \j∈J0 KerΨj, kfk2 G0 ≤ ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2 G0 f0k2, f0 = fG0, f0 ∈ \j∈J0 KerΨj, where LG0 is the Laplacian of the induced graph G0. Note, that in the case when {Ψj} is a set of "uniformly" distributed Dirac func- tions the last inequality (3.18) is called sometimes "the inequality for functions with many zeros". 4. Paley-Wiener vectors in ℓ2(G) Our next goal is to introduce the so-called Paley-Wiener functions (bandlimited functions) for which a sampling theory will be developed in the setting of combi- natorial graphs. We use for this the self-adjoint positive definite operator L in a Hilbert space ℓ2(G). In the case when L has discrete spectrum (which is always the case with finite graphs) then the Paley-Wiener space P Wω(L) is simply the span of eigenfunctions of L whose corresponding eigenvalues are not greater ω. However, when graph is infinite and spectrum of L is continuous it takes a bigger effort to define spaces P Wω(L). Consider a self-adjoint positive definite operator L in a Hilbert space ℓ2(G). According to the spectral theory [1] for self-adjoint non-negative operators there exists a direct integral of Hilbert spaces H =R H(λ)dm(λ) and a unitary operator F from ℓ2(G) onto H, which transforms the domains of Lk, k ∈ N, onto the sets Hk = {x ∈ Hλkx ∈ H} with the norm (4.1) kx(λ)kHk = hx(λ), x(λ)i1/2 (cid:18)Z ∞ H(λ)dm(λ)(cid:19)1/2 λ2kkx(λ)k2 H(λ) = 0 . and satisfies the identity F (Lkf )(λ) = λk(F f )(λ), if f belongs to the domain of Lk. We call the operator F the Spectral Fourier Transform. As known, H is the set of all m-measurable functions λ 7→ x(λ) ∈ H(λ), for which the following norm is finite: kxkH =(cid:18)Z ∞ 0 H(λ)dm(λ)(cid:19)1/2 kx(λ)k2 For the characteristic function 1[0, ω] one can introduce the projector 1[0, ω](L) by using the formula (4.2) 1[0, ω](L)f = F −11[0, ω](λ)F f, f ∈ H. 12 ISAAC Z. PESENSON Definition 2. The Paley-Wiener space P Wω(L) ⊂ ℓ2(G) is defined as the image space of the projection operator 1[0, ω](L). Many properties of Paley-Wiener spaces for general self-adjoint operators in Hilbert spaces can be found in our papers [9]. The most important for us is the following. Theorem 4.1. A function f ∈ ℓ2(G) belongs to the spaces P Wω(L) if and only if the following Bernstein inequalities holds true (4.3) kLsfk ≤ ωskfk for all s ∈ R+; 5. A sampling theorem and a reconstruction methods using frames 5.1. A sampling theorem. Let's remind that a set of vectors {ξν} in a Hilbert space H is called a Hilbert frame if there exist constants A, B > 0 (frame bounds) such that for all f ∈ H (5.1) hf, ξνi2 ≤ Bkfk2. Akfk2 ≤Xν What is remarkable about frames is the fact that one can perfectly reconstruct a vector f from its projections hf, ξνi. Namely, according to the general theory of Hilbert frames [2], [4] the frame inequality (5.1) implies that there exists a dual frame {Ων} (which is not unique in general) for which the following reconstruction formula holds (5.2) f =Xv hf, ξνi Ων. In general it is not easy to find a dual frame. For this reason one can resort to the following frame algorithm (see [4], Ch. 5) which performs reconstruction by iterations. Given a relaxation parameter 0 < ρ < 2 B , set η = max{1 − ρA, 1 − ρB} < 1. Let f0 = 0 and define recursively (5.3) where Φ is the frame operator which is defined on H by the formula Φf =Pν hf, ξνi ξν . In particular, f1 = ρΦf = ρPj hf, ξνi ξν. Then limn→∞ fn = f with a geometric fn = fn−1 + ρΦ(f − fn−1), rate of convergence, that is, (5.4) In particular, for the choice ρ = 2 kf − fnk ≤ ηnkfk. A+B the convergence factor is η = B − A A + B . Let δsi , i ∈ I be the Dirac delta concentrated at the vertex si. Theorem 5.1. If all the notations and conditions of Theorems 3.1 and 3.2 hold then the set of functionals {Ψj}j∈J is a frame in any space P Wω(L) as long as (1) (5.5) 0 < ω < ΛS (1 + ǫ)ΘΞ , ǫ > 0, WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 13 (2) there exists a constant c = c({Sj},{Ψj}) such that for every j ∈ J the following inequality holds (5.6) Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 ≤ c, (3) there exists a constant C = C({Sj},{Ψj}) such that for every j ∈ J one has (5.7) kψjk2 ≤ C. In other words, if for an ǫ > 0 the following inequality holds (5.8) γ = (1 + ǫ) ΘΞ ΛS ω < 1, ǫ > 0, along with (5.6) and (5.7) then (1 + ǫ)c kfk2 ≤Xj∈J (1 − γ)ǫ (5.9) Ψj(f )2 ≤ Ckfk2. Proof. We notice that since support of ψj is in Sj we have Ψj(fj) = hf, ψji = Ψj(f ). Now, if f ∈ P Wω(L) then by the Bernstein inequality (4.3) the (3.8) can be rewrit- ten as kfk2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) ΘΞ ΛS ωkfk2 + Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2 . 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J fj(v)ψj (v)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 2 If (5.6) and (5.8) hold then one obtains the left-hand side of (5.9). On the other hand, we have Xj∈J Ψj(f )2 =Xj∈J Theorem is proven. Xv∈Sj (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ≤Xj∈J kψjk2kfjk2 ≤ Ckfk2. (cid:3) Note, that for the classical Paley-Wiener spaces on the real line the inequalities similar to (5.9) in the case when {ψj} are delta functions were proved by Plancherel and Polya. Today they are better known as the frame inequalities. Now we can formulate sampling theorem based on average values. Theorem 5.2. Under the same conditions and notations as in Theorem 5.1 every function f ∈ P Wω(L) is uniquely determined by the set of numbers {hf, ψji}j∈J and can be reconstructed from this set of values in a stable way using dual frames (5.2) or the iterative frame algorithm (5.3). 5.2. Important particular cases. (1) (Sampling by averages-I). If for every j the corresponding function ψj = χj is the characteristic function of a subset of vertices Uj ⊂ Sj then inequalities (5.5)-(5.7) take the form respectively 0 < ω < ΛS (1 + ǫ) supj∈J Sj , Sj2 Uj2 ≤ c, Uj ≤ C, 14 ISAAC Z. PESENSON and the Plancherel-Polya inequalities (5.9) hold with the same constants c and C. In particular, if Uj = Sj for every j ∈ J then (5.5) takes the form (5.10) 0 < ω < ΛS (1 + ǫ) supj∈J Sj , the condition (5.6) is trivially satisfied with c = 1, and (5.7) becomes Sj ≤ C. The (5.9) holds true with the corresponding constants C and c = 1. (2) (Sampling by averages-II). In the case Uj = Sj and ψj = χj, 1 pSj every θj in (3.2) is one and it gives that ΘΞ in (3.6) is also one. Thus (5.5) takes the form (5.11) (5.12) (5.13) 0 < ω < ΛS 1 + ǫ , ǫ > 0. Moreover, in this case C = c = 1. After all the Plancherel-Polya inequality (5.9) becomes (1 + ǫ) kfk2 ≤Xj∈J (1 − γ)ǫ Ψj(f )2 ≤ kfk2, f ∈ P Wω(G), where γ = 1 + ǫ ΛS ω < 1, ǫ > 0. (3) (Point wise sampling). If for every j the corresponding function ψj is a Dirac measure δvj at a vertex vj ∈ Sj then the condition (5.5) takes the form (5.10), the condition (5.6) will have form Sj2 ≤ c, the condition (5.7) is trivially satisfied with C = 1. The (5.9) holds true with these constants. 5.3. Reconstruction algorithms in terms of frames. What we just proved in the previous section is that under the same assumptions as above the set of functionals f → hf, ψji is a frame in the subspace P Wω(L). This fact allows to apply the well known result of Duffin and Schaeffer [2] which describes a stable method of reconstruction of a function f ∈ P Wω(L) from a set of samples {hf, ψji}. Theorem 5.3. If all the conditions of Theorem 3.1 are satisfied then there exists a dual frame {Ωj} in P Wω(L) such that f =Xj hf, ψji Ωj =Xj hf, Ωji Pωψj where Pω is the orthogonal projection of ℓ2(G) onto P Wω(L). Another possibility for reconstruction is to use frame algorithm (see section 5). WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 15 6. Weighted Average Variational Splines and a reconstruction algorithm 6.1. Variational interpolating splines. As in the previous sections we assume that G is a connected finite or infinite graph, S = {Sj}j∈J , is a disjoint cover of V (G) by connected and finite subgraphs Sj and every ψj ∈ ℓ2(Sj), j ∈ J, has support in Sj. For a given sequence a = {aj} ∈ l2 the set of all functions in ℓ2(G) such that Ψj(f ) = hf, ψji = aj will be denoted by Za. In particular, Z0 = \j∈J Ker(Ψj) corresponds to the sequence of zeros. We consider the following optimization prob- lem: For a given sequence a = {aj} ∈ l2 find a function f in the set Za ⊂ ℓ2(G) which minimizes the functional u → kLk/2uk, u ∈ Za. Theorem 6.1. Under the above assumptions the optimization problem has a unique solution for every k. Proof. Using Theorem 3.1 one can justify the following algorithm (see [8], [10]): (1) Pick any function f ∈ Za. (2) Construct P0f where P0 is the orthogonal projection of f onto Z0 with respect to the inner product hf, gik =Xj hf, ψjihg, ψji + hLk/2f, Lk/2gi. (3) The function f − P0f is the unique solution to the given optimization problem. (cid:3) Definition 3. For f ∈ ℓ2(G) the interpolating variational spline is denoted by sk(f ) and it is the solution of the minimization problem such that sk(f ) − f ∈ Z0. Clearly, "interpolation" is understood in the sense that (6.1) Ψj(sk(f )) = Ψj(f ). One can easily prove the following characterization of variational splines. Theorem 6.2. A function u ∈ ℓ2(G) is a variational spline if and only if Lku is orthogonal to LkZ0. 6.2. Reconstruction using splines. The following Lemma was proved in [8], [10]. Lemma 6.3. If A is a self-adjoint non-negative operator in a Hilbert space X and for an ϕ ∈ X and a positive a > the following inequality holds true then for the same ϕ ∈ H, and all k = 2l, l = 0, 1, 2, ... the following inequality holds kϕk ≤ akAϕk, kϕk ≤ akkAkϕk. 16 ISAAC Z. PESENSON By using the same reasoning as in [8], [10] one can prove the following recon- struction theorem. Below we are keeping notations of Theorem 5.1. Theorem 6.4. Let's assume that G is a connected finite or infinite graph, {Sj}j∈J is a disjoint cover of V (G) by connected and finite subgraphs Sj and every ψj ∈ ℓ2(Sj ), j ∈ J, has support in Sj. If (6.2) 0 < ω < ΛS ΘΞ , (6.3) (6.4) ΘΞ = sup j∈J θj = θj = Sjkψjk2 Ψj(χj)2 , ΛS = inf j∈J λ1,j, then any function f in P Wω(L), ω > 0, can be reconstructed from a set of values {hf, ψji} using the formula f = lim k→∞ sk(f ), k = 2l, l = 0, 1, ..., and the error estimate is (6.5) where kf − sk(f )k ≤ 2γkkfk, k = 2l, l = 0, 1, ..., γ = ΘΞ ΛS ω < 1. Proof. For a k = 2l, l = 0, 1, 2, .... apply to the function f − sk(f ) inequality (3.8) for any ǫ > 0: kf − sk(f )k2 ≤ (1 + ǫ) ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2(f − sk(f ))k2+ (6.6) 1 + ǫ ǫ Xj∈J Sj2 Ψj(χj)2 Ψj(fj)2 . Since sk(f ) interpolates f the last term here is zero. Because ǫ here is any positive number it brings us to the next inequality kf − sk(f )k2 ≤ and an application of Lemma 6.3 gives ΘΞ ΛS kL1/2(f − sk(f ))k2, ΛS(cid:19)k kf − sk(f )k2 ≤(cid:18) ΘΞ kLk/2(f − sk(f ))k2. Using minimization property of sk(f ) and the Bernstein inequality (4.3) for f ∈ P Wω(L) one obtains (6.5). Theorem is proved. (cid:3) One can formulate similar statements adapted to particular cases listed in sub- section 5.2. WEIGHTED SAMPLING AND INTERPOLATION ON GRAPHS 17 7. Example. Average sampling on Z Let us consider a one-dimensional infinite lattice Z = {...,−1, 0, 1, ...} as an unweighted graph. The dual group of the commutative additive group Z is the one-dimensional torus. The corresponding Fourier transform F on the space ℓ2(Z) is defined by the formula F (f )(ξ) =Xk∈Z f (k)eikξ, f ∈ ℓ2(Z), ξ ∈ [−π, π). It gives a unitary operator from ℓ2(Z) on the space L2(T) = L2(T, dξ/2π), where T is the one-dimensional torus and dξ/2π is the normalized measure. One can verify the following formula The next result is obvious. F (Lf )(ξ) = 4 sin2 ξ 2F (f )(ξ). Theorem 7.1. The spectrum of the Laplace operator L on the one-dimensional lattice Z is the interval [0, 4]. A function f belongs to the space P Wω(Z), 0 ≤ ω ≤ 4, if and only if the support of F f is a subset of [−π, π) on which 4 sin2 ξ 2 ≤ ω. We consider the cover Ξ = {Sj} of Z by disjoint sets Sj = {j − 1, j, j + 1} where j runs over all integers divisible by 3: {...,−3, 0, 3, ...} = 3Z. We treat every Sj as an induced graph whose set of vertices is V (Sj) = {j − 1, j, j + 1}, j ∈ 3Z, and which has two edges (j − 1, j) and (j, j + 1). Let' introduce functionals Ψj as j ∈ 3Z, f ∈ ℓ2(Z). (7.1) Ψj(f ) = hf, ψji = One can check that spectrum of the Laplace operator Lj on Sj defined by (1.3) contains just three values {0, 2, 4}. Thus ΛS = 2. For an 0 < ω < 4 and ǫ > 0 condition (6.2) takes form (f (j − 1) + f (j) + f (j + 1)) , 1 √3 (7.2) γ = (1 + ǫ) ω 2 < 1. Note, that since 1 + ǫ can be arbitrary close to 1 the condition (7.2) implies that 0 < ω < 2. As an application of Theorem 5.2 we obtain the following result. Theorem 7.2. If 0 < ω < 2 then every f ∈ P Wω(Z) is uniquely determined by its average values {hf, ψji} defined in (7.1) and can be reconstructed from them in a stable way. In particular, if instead of infinite graph Z one would consider a path graph ZN whose eigenvalues are given by formulas 2 − 2 cos kπ N −1 , k = 0, 1, ..., N − 1, the last Theorem would mean that any eigenfunction with eigenvalue from a lower half of the spectrum is uniquely determined and can be reconstructed from averages (7.1). References [1] M. Birman and M. Solomyak, Spectral Theory of Selfadjoint Operators in Hilbert Space, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, 1987. [2] R. Duffin, A. Schaeffer, A class of nonharmonic Fourier series, Trans. AMS, 72, (1952), 341-366. [3] H. Fuhr, Hartmut, I. Pesenson, Poincar´e and Plancherel-Polya inequalities in harmonic analysis on weighted combinatorial graphs, SIAM J. Discrete Math. 27 (2013), no. 4, 2007- 2028. [4] K. Grochenig, Foundations of Time-Frequency Analysis, Birkhauser, 2001. 18 ISAAC Z. PESENSON [5] S. Haeseler, M. Keller, D. Lenz, R. Wojciechowski, Laplacians on infinite graphs: Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions, J. Spectr. Theory 2 (2012), no. 4, 397-432. [6] Madeleine S. Kotzagiannidis, Pier Luigi Dragotti, Sampling tion of Sparse Signals on Circulant Graphs https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acha.2017.10.003. - An Introduction to Graph-FRI and Reconstruc- , [7] B. Mohar, Some applications of Laplace eigenvalues of graphs, in G. Hahn and G. Sabidussi, editors, Graph Symmetry: Algebraic Methods and Applications (Proc. Montr´real 1996), vol- ume 497 of Adv. Sci. Inst. Ser. C. Math. Phys. Sci., pp. 225-275, Dordrecht (1997), Kluwer. [8] I. Pesenson, Sampling of Paley-Wiener functions on stratified groups, J. Four. Anal. Appl. 4 (1998), 269 -- 280. [9] I. Pesenson, A sampling theorem on homogeneous manifolds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 352/9 (2000), 4257 -- 4269. [10] I. Pesenson, Sampling of band limited vectors, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 7/1 (2001), 93-100. [11] I. Pesenson, Poincar´e-type inequalities and reconstruction of Paley-Wiener functions on manifolds, J. Geometric Anal. 4/1 (2004), 101-121. [12] I. Pesenson, Sampling in Paley-Wiener spaces on combinatorial graphs, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 360 (2008), no. 10, 5603-5627. [13] I. Z. Pesenson, Variational splines and Paley-Wiener spaces on combinatorial graphs, Constr. Approx. 29 (2009), no. 1, 1-21. [14] I. Z. Pesenson, M. Z. Pesenson, Sampling, filtering and sparse approximations on combina- torial graphs, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 16 (2010), no. 6, 921-942. [15] Chen, Siheng; Varma, Rohan; Sandryhaila, Aliaksei; Kovacevich, Jelena, Discrete signal processing on graphs: sampling theory, IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 63 (2015), no. 24, 6510- 6523. [16] David I Shuman ; Sunil K. Narang ; Pascal Frossard ; Antonio Ortega ; Pierre Vandergheynst ,The emerging field of signal processing on graphs: Extending high-dimensional data analysis to networks and other irregular domains, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 30(3),2013, 83- 98. [17] Strichartz, Robert S. Half sampling on bipartite graphs, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 22 (2016), no. 5, 1157-1173. [18] Tsitsvero, Mikhail; Barbarossa, Sergio; Di Lorenzo, Paolo, Signals on graphs: uncertainty principle and sampling, IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 64 (2016), no. 18, 4845-4860. [19] Xiaohan Wang, Pengfei Liu, Yuantao Gu Local-Set-Based Graph Signal Reconstruction, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing (2015) [20] Huang, Weiyu; Marques, Antonio G.; Ribeiro, Alejandro R. Rating prediction via graph signal processing, IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 66 (2018), no. 19, 5066-5081. Department of Mathematics, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122 E-mail address: [email protected]
1802.01973	1	1802	2018-02-06T14:42:10	Shorted operators and minus order	[ "math.FA" ]	Let $\mathcal{H}$ be a Hilbert space, $L(\mathcal{H})$ the algebra of bounded linear operators on $\mathcal{H}$ and $W \in L(\mathcal{H})$ a positive operator. Given a closed subspace $\mathcal{S}$ of $\mathcal{H}$, we characterize the shorted operator $W_{/ \mathcal{S}}$ of $W$ to $\mathcal{S}$ as the maximum and as the infimum of certain sets, for the minus order $\stackrel{-}{\leq}.$ Also, given $A \in L(\mathcal{H})$ with closed range, we study the following operator approximation problem considering the minus order: $$ min_{\stackrel{-}{\leq}} \ \{(AX-I)^W(AX-I) : X \in L(\mathcal{H}), \mbox{ subject to } N(A^W)\subseteq N(X) \}. $$ We show that, under certain conditions, the shorted operator $W_{/R(A)}$ (of $W$ to the range of $A$) is the minimum of this problem and we characterize the set of solutions.	math.FA	math	Shorted operators and minus order M. Continoa,b J. I. Giribeta,b A. Maestripieria,b a Instituto Argentino de Matem´atica "Alberto Calder´on" - CONICET. Saavedra 15, piso 3 (1083) Ciudad Aut´onoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina. b Facultad de Ingenier´ıa - Universidad de Buenos Aires. Paseo Col´on 850 (1063), Ciudad Aut´onoma de Buenos Aires, Argentina. ARTICLE HISTORY Compiled November 9, 2018 ABSTRACT Let H be a Hilbert space, L(H) the algebra of bounded linear operators on H and W ∈ L(H) a positive operator. Given a closed subspace S of H, we characterize the shorted operator W/S − of W to S as the maximum and as the infimum of certain sets, for the minus order ≤. Also, given A ∈ L(H) with closed range, we study the following operator approximation problem considering the minus order: min− ≤ {(AX − I)∗W (AX − I) : X ∈ L(H), subject to N (A∗W ) ⊆ N (X)}. We show that, under certain conditions, the shorted operator of W/R(A) is the minimum of this problem and we characterize the set of solutions. KEYWORDS Shorted operators; minus order; oblique projections 1. Introduction The minus order was introduced by Hartwig [21] and independently by Nambooripad [29], in both cases on semigroups, with the idea of generalizing some classical partial orders. In [5], Antezana et al., extended the notion of the minus order to bounded linear operators acting on an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space. In this case, if H is a Hilbert space and L(H) is the algebra of bounded linear operators acting on H, for A, B ∈ L(H), A − ≤ stands for the minus order of operators) if the Dixmier angle between R(A) and R(B − A) and the Dixmier angle between R(A∗) and R(B∗ − A∗) are less than 1, where R(T ) stands for the range of the operator T. Independently, in [31] Semrl gave another characterization of the − ≤ B (where the symbol − ≤ B if and only if there are bounded (oblique) projections, i.e. minus order, he showed that A idempotents, P and Q such that A = P B and A∗ = QB∗. In [18], a new characterization of the minus order for operators acting on Hilbert spaces was given in terms of the so called range − ≤ B is equivalent to the range of B being the additivity property. Namely, it was proved that A direct sum of ranges of A and B − A and the range of B∗ being the direct sum of ranges of A∗ and B∗ − A∗, which generalizes previous results presented in [31]. This plays an equivalent role to the rank additivity characterization when A and B are matrices [21, 26]. In [5] the notion of shorted operator appears in relation with the minus order. Given a closed subspace S of H and W ∈ L(H) a positive operator, in 1947, Krein [23], proved the existence of a maximum (with respect to the order induced by the cone of positive operators) of the set M(W, S) = {X ∈ L(H) : 0 ≤ X ≤ W and R(X) ⊆ S ⊥}. Krein used this extremal operator in his theory of extension of symmetric operators. Years later, Anderson and Trapp [2] studying the same problem, called this maximum the shorted operator of W to S (in the following denoted W/S) and showed interesting properties of this operator and its connections with electrical circuit theory. The shorted operator have shown to be useful in many applications [5], [32]. The pair (W, S) is said to be compatible if there exists a bounded linear (not necessarily selfadjoint) projection Q onto S such that W Q is selfadjoint. Thus, if P(W, S) = {Q ∈ L(H) : Q2 = Q, R(Q) = S, W Q = Q∗W }, then (W, S) is compatible if and only if P(W, S) is not empty. In [15], it was shown that there exists a strong relationship between compatibility, the projections of P(W, S) and the shorted operator W/S . Later, in [5], the notion of shorted operator was generalized to that of bilateral shorted operator, for an operator W ∈ L(H) (not necessarly positive) and a pair of closed subspaces. The proposed definition comes from the notion of weak complementability, which is a refinement of a finite dimensional notion due to T. Ando [3]. In that paper, it was proven that given an operator W ∈ L(H) positive and a closed subspace S, the shorted operator W/S was the maximum of the set M−(W, S) = {X ∈ L(H) : X − ≤ W, R(X) ⊆ S ⊥, R(X ∗) ⊆ S ⊥} with the minus order when the pair (W, S) is compatible. One of the goals of this paper is to prove that the shorted operator is the maximum of the set M−(W, S) with the minus order if and only if the operator W is compatible with the nullspace of W/S , N (W/S ), which generalizes the results given in [5]. Given W ∈ L(H)+ and A, B ∈ L(H) with closed ranges such that N (B) = N (A∗W ), in [10] it was shown that, considering the order induced by the cone of positive operators, W/R(A) = inf≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). Moreover, also in [10] it was proved the the minimum of the previous set exists if and only if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. In this work we study a similar problem considering the minus order: given W ∈ L(H) a positive operator and A, B ∈ L(H) with closed ranges such that N (B) = N (A∗W ), we study the existence of (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I), (1.1) min − ≤ X∈L(H) and its connection with the shorted operator. The paper is organized as follows. In section 2, some characterizations of the compatibility of the pair (W, S) are given. Also the concept of W -inverse of an operator A, and some properties 2 are presented. In section 3, we collect some useful known results about the minus order, and the connection between compatibility and shorted operators is stated. Also, in this section we prove that the shorted operator of W to S, denoted by W/S , is the maximum (in the minus order) of the set M−(W, S) if and only if the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. In section 4, we study problem (1.1). We prove that W/R(A) is a lower bound for the set {(AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) : X ∈ L(H)} (in the minus order) if and only if the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible and in this case, under additional hypothesis, in particular, if W is injective, then W/R(A) is the infimum of that set. We also prove that W/R(A) is the minimum of the previous set if and only if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Moreover, a characterization of the set of solutions is given in terms of the W - inverses of A. Motivated by the concepts of the left and the right star orders (see [8]), in section 5 we define the left and right weigthed star orders on L(H). These are equivalent to the minus order, with an additional condition on the angle between the ranges of the operators involved imposed by some positive weight. The last part of the section is devoted to appplications. We apply the new characterization of the weighted star order to systems of equations and least squares problems. We also give some formulas for the compression WS = W − W/S of W to the range of the sum of two closed range operators. 2. Preliminaries In the following H denotes a separable complex Hilbert space, L(H) is the algebra of bounded linear operators from H to H, and L(H)+ the cone of semidefinite positive operators. GL(H) is the group of invertible operators in L(H), CR(H) is the subset of L(H) of all operators with closed range. For any A ∈ L(H), its range and nullspace are denoted by R(A) and N (A), respectively. Finally, A† denotes the Moore-Penrose inverse of the operator A ∈ L(H). Given two closed subspaces M and N of H, M +N denotes the direct sum of M and N and M ⊖ N = M ∩ (M ∩ N )⊥. If H is decomposed as a direct sum of closed subspaces H = M +N , the projection onto M with nullspace N is denoted by PM//N , and the orthogonal projection onto M is denoted PM = PM//M⊥. Also, Q denotes the subset of L(H) of oblique projections, i.e. Q = {Q ∈ L(H) : Q2 = Q}. Given W ∈ L(H)+ and a closed subspace S of H, the pair (W, S) is compatible if there exists Q ∈ Q with R(Q) = S such that W Q = Q∗W. The last condition means that Q is W -Hermitian, in the sense that h Qx, y iW = h x, Qy iW , for every x, y ∈ H, where h x, y iW = h W x, y i defines a semi-inner product on H. Thus, if P(W, S) = {Q ∈ L(H) : Q2 = Q, R(Q) = S, W Q = Q∗W }, then (W, S) is compatible if and only if P(W, S) is not empty. The W -orthogonal companion of S is S ⊥W = {x ∈ H : h W x, y i = 0, y ∈ S}. We will use that S ⊥W = (W S)⊥ = W −1(S ⊥). The concept of compatibility between a positive operator W ∈ L(H) and a closed subspace S, has proved to be useful in several applications such as approximation theory, signal processing, among others, see for instance [12]-[17]. As it was proved in [15, Prop. 3.3], the compatibility of the pair (W, S) is equivalent to a 3 decomposition of the space in terms of the subspace S and its W -orthogonal companion. This is stated in the following theorem. Theorem 2.1. Given W ∈ L(H)+ and a closed subspace S ⊆ H, the following conditions are equivalent: i) The pair (W, S) is compatible, ii) H = S + S ⊥W , iii) (W, S + N (W )) is compatible, iv) H = S + (S ⊥W ⊖ S). Suppose that the pair (W, S) is compatible and let N = S ∩S ⊥W , observe that N = S ∩N (W ); we define the projection, PW,S = PS//S ⊥W ⊖N . The following theorem, proved in [7, Theorem 3.1], establishes conditions for the existence of solutions of the equation AXB = C. Theorem 2.2. Let A, B, C ∈ L(H). If R(A), R(B) or R(C) are closed, then the equation AXB = C admits a bounded solution if and only if R(C) ⊆ R(A) and R(C ∗) ⊆ R(B∗). In [25] S. K. Mitra and C. R. Rao introduced the notion of W -inverse of a matrix, following these ideas, in [9] this notion has been extended to linear operators as follows. Definition. Given A ∈ CR(H), B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, X0 ∈ L(H) is a W -inverse of A in R(B), if for each x ∈ H, X0x is a weighted least squares solution of Az = Bx, i.e. kAX0x − BxkW ≤ kAz − BxkW , for every x, z ∈ H. When B = I, X0 is called a W -inverse of A, see [11]. The next theorem characterizes the W -inverses. Theorem 2.3. Given A ∈ CR(H), B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, the following conditions are equivalent: i) The operator A admits a W -inverse in R(B), ii) R(B) ⊆ R(A) + R(A)⊥W , iii) the normal equation A∗W (AX − B) = 0 admits a solution. In particular, the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible if and only if the normal equation A∗W (AX−I) = 0 admits a solution. Proof. See [9, Theorem 2.4] Theorem 2.4. Given A ∈ CR(H) and W ∈ L(H)+. If the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible then, for X0 ∈ L(H), the following conditions are equivalent: i) X0 is a W -inverse of A, ii) (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I) = min≤ X∈L(H) (AX − I)∗W (AX − I) = W/R(A), iii) X0 is a solution of the normal equation A∗W (AX − I) = 0. Proof. See [9, Proposition 4.4]. 4 Section 3 is devoted to establish a link between the minus order and the shorted operator. For this purpose, the concept of compatibility will be used. 3. Shorted operator, compatibility and minus order Given a positive operator W ∈ L(H)+ and a closed subspace S ⊆ H the notion of shorted operator of W to S, was introduced by M. G. Krein in [23] and later rediscovered by W. N. Anderson and G. E. Trapp, who established a new characterization for this operator [1]. As it was proved in [2], the set M(W, S) = {X ∈ L(H) : 0 ≤ X ≤ W and R(X) ⊆ S ⊥} has a maximum element, with respect to the order ≤, induced in L(H) by the cone of positive operators. Then, the shorted operator of W to S is defined by The S-compression WS of W is the (positive) operator defined by W/S = max≤ M(W, S). WS = W − W/S . For many results on shorted operators, the reader is referred to [1] and [2]. Next we collect some results regarding W/S and WS which will be useful in the rest of this work. If W ∈ L(H)+, W 1/2 denotes the (positive) square root of W. Theorem 3.1. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H a closed subspace. Then i) W/S = inf≤ {E∗W E : E ∈ Q, N (E) = S}, ii) W/S = W 1/2PW −1/2(S ⊥)W 1/2, iii) R(W ) ∩ S ⊥ ⊆ R(W/S ) ⊆ R(W 1/2) ∩ S ⊥, and N (W/S ) = W −1/2(W 1/2(S)), iv) W (S) ⊆ R(WS) ⊆ W (S), and N (WS ) = W −1(S ⊥). The formula in ii) was stated by Pekarev, see [27]. The inclusions in iii) and iv) can be strict, see [16]. Since the infimum appearing in i) of Theorem 3.1 is not attained, it is useful to establish a condition when it is. This is given in the following theorem, see [15] and [16]. Theorem 3.2. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. The following conditions are equivalent: i) The pair (W, S) is compatible, ii) W/S = min {E∗W E : E ∈ Q, N (E) = S}, iii) R(W/S ) = R(W ) ∩ S ⊥ and N (W/S ) = N (W ) + S. If any (and then all) of the above conditions holds, then W/S = W (I − Q), for any Q ∈ P(W, S). 5 Minus order and compatibility Different (but equivalent) definitions where given for minus order, for example, using generalized − ≤ B if the Dixmier inverses in the matrix case, see [24]. For operators A, B ∈ L(H), in [5], A angle between R(A) and R(B − A) and the Dixmier angle between R(A∗) and R(B∗ − A∗) are less than 1. In this work we give the following definition, equivalent to those appearing in [31] and [18], where in [18, Theorem 3.3], a characterization of the minus order in terms of the range additivity property is given. Definition. Consider A, B ∈ L(H), we write A such that A = P B and A∗ = QB∗. − ≤ B if there exist (oblique) projections P, Q ∈ Q The projections P and Q can be taken such that R(P ) = R(A) and R(Q) = R(A∗). It was proven in [31] and [18] that − ≤ is a partial order, known as the minus order for operators. Theorem 3.3. Consider A, B ∈ L(H). Then the following assertions are equivalent: − ≤ B, i) A ii) R(B) = R(A) +R(B − A) and R(B∗) = R(A∗) +R(B∗ − A∗). The left minus order was defined in [18] for operators in L(H). Using Theorem 3.3, it is easy to see that this notion is weaker than the minus order, in the infinite dimensional setting. Definition. Consider A, B ∈ L(H), we write A − ≤ B if R(B) = R(A) +R(B − A). If R(B) is closed, the left minus order and the minus order are equivalent, in the sense that A − ≤ B if and only if A − ≤ B, as shows the following result, see [18, Theorem 3.14]. Theorem 3.4. Let A, B ∈ L(H) such that A − ≤ B. If R(B) is closed then R(A) and R(B − A) are closed and A − ≤ B. Recall that M(W, S) = {X ∈ L(H) : 0 ≤ X ≤ W and R(X) ⊆ S ⊥}. Lemma 3.5. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. Then i) M(W, N (W/S )) = M(W, S), ii) W/S = W/N (W/S ), iii) W (N (W/S ))⊥ = W (S)⊥. i) : The inclusion S ⊆ N (W/S ) (see iii) of Theorem 3.1) implies that M(W, N (W/S )) ⊆ Proof. M(W, S). To see the opposite inclusion, take X ∈ M(W, S), then 0 ≤ X ≤ W/S . In this case, applying Douglas' theorem [19], R(X 1/2) ⊆ R(W 1/2 /S ) ⊆ R(W/S ) = N (W/S )⊥. But, R(X) ⊆ R(X 1/2) and then X ∈ M(W, N (W/S )). ii) : Using item i), we have that W/N (W/S ) = max≤ M(W, N (W/S )) = max≤ M(W, S) = W/S . iii) : It follows from item ii) that WS = WN (W/S) so that, from iv) of Theorem 3.1, W (N (W/S ))⊥ = N (WN (W/S )) = N (WS ) = W (S)⊥. 6 The next result shows that the inequality W/S − ≤ W is equivalent to the range inclusion R(W/S ) ⊆ R(W ) and also to a compatibility condition. Proposition 3.6. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. Then the following condi- tions are equivalent: − ≤ W, i) W/S ii) the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible, iii) H = N (W/S ) + N (WS ), iv) R(W/S ) ⊆ R(W ). i) ⇔ ii) : Suppose that W/S − ≤ W, then there exists E ∈ Q with R(E∗) = R(W/S ), such Proof. that W/S = E∗W = W E. Then (I − E∗)W = W (I − E) and R(I − E) = N (W/S ) Hence, the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. Conversely, suppose that the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. Let Q ∈ P(W, N (W/S )) then by Theorem 3.2 and Lemma 3.5, W (I − Q) = W/N (W/S) = W/S , and W/S − ≤ W. ii) ⇔ iii) : By Theorem 2.1, (W, N (W/S )) is compatible if and only if H = N (W/S ) + N (W/S )⊥W = N (W/S ) + S ⊥W = N (W/S ) + N (WS ), where we used Lemma 3.5 and Theorem 3.1. − ≤ W , applying Theorem 3.3, we have that R(W/S ) ⊆ R(W ). i) ⇔ iv) : Suppose that W/S Conversely, suppose that R(W/S ) ⊆ R(W ), then R(W ) = R(W/S ) + R(WS ). To see that R(W/S ) ∩ R(WS ) = {0}, consider x ∈ R(W/S ) ∩ R(WS ). Since R(WS ) ⊆ R(W ), it follows from iii) of Theorem 3.1 that R(W/S ) = W ∩ S ⊥. Then there exists y such that x = W y and x ∈ S ⊥. Also, from iv) of Theorem 3.1, x ∈ W (S) so that there exists a sequence {sn}n∈N ⊆ S such that W sn → h y, x i . Hence, n→∞ 0 = h y, x i = kW 1/2yk2, and then W 1/2y = 0 and x = W y = 0. Therefore R(W ) = R(W/S ) ∔ x. In this case 0 = h x, sn i = h y, W sn i → n→∞ R(WS ), and applying Theorem 3.3, it follows that W/S − ≤ W. Corollary 3.7. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. Then the pair (W, S) is compatible if and only if W/S − ≤ W and W 1/2(S) is closed in R(W 1/2). Proof. If (W, S) is compatible then, by Theorem 3.2, N (W/S ) = S + N (W ). By Theorem 2.1, (W, N (W/S )) is also compatible. Applying Proposition 3.6, it follows that W/S − ≤ W. 7 Also, (W, S) is compatible if and only if H = S + W −1(S ⊥) and applying W 1/2 to both sides of the equality, we get R(W 1/2) = W 1/2S⊕(W 1/2S)⊥∩R(W 1/2) ⊆ W 1/2S∩R(W 1/2)⊕(W 1/2S)⊥∩R(W 1/2) ⊆ R(W 1/2). Therefore, W 1/2S = W 1/2S ∩ R(W 1/2), so that W 1/2(S) is closed in R(W 1/2). See also, [16, Proposition 3.8]. Conversely, suppose that W/S − ≤ W and W 1/2(S) is closed in R(W 1/2). Then, by Proposition 3.6, the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. But, by Theorem 3.1, N (W/S ) = W −1/2(W 1/2(S) ∩ R(W 1/2)) = W −1/2(W 1/2(S)) = S + N (W ). Therefore, by Theorem 2.1, the pair (W, S) is compatible. The shorted operator can also be characterized as the maximum of certain set when the minus order is considered. More precisely, for W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H a closed subspace, define M−(W, S) = {X ∈ L(H) : X − ≤ W, R(X) ⊆ S ⊥, R(X ∗) ⊆ S ⊥}. In [24], Mitra proved (for matrices in Cm×n) that the shorted operator is the maximum of the set M−(W, S), where the partial ordering is the minus order. In [5], Antezana et al. proved a similar result for operators when the pair (W, S) is compatible. The next results generalize this fact. Lemma 3.8. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. Then M−(W, N (W/S )) = M−(W, S). Proof. Since S ⊆ N (W/S ), then N (W/S )⊥ ⊆ S ⊥ and M−(W, N (W/S )) ⊆ M−(W, S). On the other hand, let X ∈ M−(W, S), then X − ≤ W and so, by Theorem 3.3, R(X) ⊆ R(W ). Therefore, if R(X) ⊆ S ⊥ then W −1(R(X)) ⊆ W −1(S ⊥) = W −1(N (W/S )⊥). Then W (W −1(R(X))) ⊆ N (W/S )⊥, but W (W −1(R(X))) = R(X) ∩ R(W ) = R(X). Hence, R(X) ⊆ N (W/S )⊥. Analogously, R(X ∗) ⊆ N (W/S )⊥, because, since W is positive, X M−(W, S) ⊆ M−(W, N (W/S )). − ≤ W implies that X ∗ − ≤ W . Therefore Theorem 3.9. Let W ∈ L(H)+ and S ⊆ H be a closed subspace. Then the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible if and only if W/S = max − ≤ M−(W, S). − ≤ W. By Proof. Suppose the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. By Proposition 3.6, W/S Lemma 3.5, W/S = W/N (W/S), therefore R(W/S ) = R(W/N (W/S )) ⊆ N (W/S )⊥. Hence W/S ∈ 8 M−(W, N (W/S )). On the other hand, given X ∈ M−(W, N (W/S )), from X − ≤ W, there exists E ∈ Q such that X = EW. Let Q ∈ P(W, N (W/S )) then by Theorem 3.2, W/N (W/S ) = W (I − Q). The inclusion R(X ∗) ⊆ N (W/S )⊥ = R(Q)⊥ = N (Q∗), implies that Q∗X ∗ = 0, or equivalently X(I − Q) = X. Then X = X(I − Q) = EW (I − Q) = EW/N (W/S ) = EW/S . In a similar way, there exists a projection F such that X ∗ = F W/S . Therefore X − ≤ W/S . Then, by Lemma 3.8, W/S = max − ≤ M−(W, N (W/S )) = max − ≤ M−(W, S). Conversely, if W/S = max − ≤ M−(W, S), in particular W/S − ≤ W, and by Proposition 3.6, the pair (W, N (W/S )) is compatible. 4. Shorted operator characterizations and the minus order Let W ∈ L(H)+ and A, B ∈ CR(H) such that N (B) = R(A)⊥W . In [10, Proposition 3.1] it was proved that the infimum (in the order induced by the cone of positive operators) of the set {(AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) : X ∈ L(H)} exists and inf≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) = W/R(A). (4.1) Also in [10, Theorem 3.2], it was proved that the minimum of this set exists if and only if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. In this section, we study a similar problem considering the minus order: for W ∈ L(H)+ and A, B ∈ CR(H), analyze the existence of (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). (4.2) min − ≤ X∈L(H) Problem (4.2) can be restated as a minimization problem with a constraint. In fact, problem (4.2) is equivalent to the following problem: analize the existence of (AX − I)∗W (AX − I) subject to N (A∗W ) ⊆ N (X). min − ≤ X∈L(H) 9 Proposition 4.1. Let A, B ∈ CR(H) and W ∈ L(H)+ such that N (B) = R(A)⊥W . Then the shorted operator W/R(A) is a lower bound for {(AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) : X ∈ L(H)} if and only if the pair (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible. In this case, if R(A) + R(A)⊥W is closed, then W/R(A) = inf − ≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). Proof. Let X ∈ L(H), then F (X) := (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) = W/R(A) + (AXB − I)∗WR(A)(AXB − I). By Lemma 3.5, we have that W/N (W/R(A)) = W/R(A) and N (W/R(A))⊥W = R(A)⊥W . Suppose the pair (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible, let Q ∈ P(W, N (W/R(A))), then F (X)(I − Q) = W/R(A)(I − Q) + (AXB − I)∗WR(A)(AXB − I)(I − Q) = W/R(A), where we used that R(Q) = N (W/R(A)), then W/R(A)(I − Q) = W/R(A), and the facts that R(I − Q) = N (Q) ⊆ N (W/R(A))⊥W = R(A)⊥W = N (B) and N (WR(A)) = R(A)⊥W . Therefore F (X)(I − Q) = W/R(A) = (I − Q∗)F (X), for every X ∈ L(H). Then W/R(A) − ≤ F (X), for every X ∈ L(H). Hence, W/R(A) is a lower bound for {F (X) : X ∈ L(H)}. Conversely, suppose W/R(A) is a lower bound for {F (X) : X ∈ L(H)}, in particular W/R(A) − ≤ W, and by Proposition 3.6, the pair (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible. Finally, suppose that (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible and R(A) + R(A)⊥W is closed. Then R(A) + N (B) is closed and by [22, Corollary 2.5] R(BA) is closed. Also, since N (B) = N (A∗W ), we have that N (BA) = N (A∗W A). Therefore R(A∗W 1/2) ⊆ R(A∗W A) = R(A∗B∗) = R(A∗B∗). Then, by Theorem 2.2, there exists X0 ∈ L(H) such that W 1/2AX0BA = W 1/2A. Then R(A) ⊆ N (W 1/2(AX0B − I)) = N (F (X0)), or equivalently R(F (X0)) ⊆ R(A)⊥. Let D ∈ L(H) be any lower bound for {F (X) : X ∈ L(H)}, then − ≤ F (X), for every X ∈ L(H). D In particular, D − ≤ W. Since D − ≤ F (X0), by Theorem 3.3, R(D) ⊆ R(F (X0)) ⊆ R(A)⊥. From − ≤ F (X0). Therefore, in the D same way as before, we get R(D∗) ⊆ R(A)⊥. Then D ∈ M−(W, S) and since (W, N (W/R(A))) − ≤ F (X0) and the fact that F (X0) is positive we get that D∗ is compatible, by Theorem 3.9, D − ≤ W/R(A). 10 For example, if W is injective, then W/R(A) = inf − ≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). In fact, if W is injective and the pair (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible, by Theorem 2.1, H = N (W/R(A)) ∔ W −1(N (W/R(A))⊥) = N (W/R(A)) ∔ W −1(R(A)⊥), and since R(A) ⊆ N (W/R(A)), it follows that R(A) ∔ W −1(R(A)⊥) is also closed and by the last theorem we get the result. The next proposition shows that the minimum of (4.2) in the minus order is W/R(A) if and only if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. First, we need the following lemma which shows that when W/R(A) is in the image of the function G(X) = (AX − I)∗W (AX − I), the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. For its proof, we follow the same ideas as in [9, Theorem 3.2]. Lemma 4.2. Let A ∈ CR(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, there exists X0 ∈ L(H) such that W/R(A) = (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I), if and only if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Proof. Suppose that W/R(A) = (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I), for certain X0 ∈ L(H). Writing W = W/R(A) + WR(A), it follows that W/R(A) = (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I) = W/R(A) + (AX0 − I)∗WR(A)(AX0 − I), because R(A) ⊆ N (W/R(A)). Therefore (AX0 − I)∗WR(A)(AX0 − I) = 0, or, equivalently, W 1/2 R(A)(AX0 − I) = 0. Then, by iv) of Theorem 3.1, R(AX0 − I) ⊆ N (WR(A)) = W −1(R(A)⊥), or W (R(AX0 − I)) ⊆ R(A)⊥ ∩ R(W ). Then R(W/R(A)) = R((AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I)) ⊆ (AX0 − I)∗(R(A)⊥ ∩ R(W )) = R(A)⊥ ∩ R(W ), because A∗(R(A)⊥) = 0. Then, by iii) of Theorem 3.1, R(W/R(A)) = R(A)⊥ ∩ R(W ). Also x ∈ N (W/R(A)) if and only if W 1/2(AX0 − I)x = 0, or equivalently (AX0 − I)x ∈ N (W ). In this case x ∈ N (W ) + R(A), and then again applying iii) of Theorem 3.1, N (W/R(A)) = N (W ) + R(A). Therefore R(W/R(A)) = R(A)⊥ ∩ R(W ) and N (W/R(A)) = N (W ) + R(A) and by Theorem 3.2, the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Conversely, if the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible, by Theorem 3.2, W/R(A) = W (I − Q) = (I − Q)∗W (I − Q), for any Q ∈ P(W, R(A)). Consider X0 = A†Q, then AX0 = Q and F (X0) = W/R(A). We denote Sp, for some 1 ≤ p < ∞, the p-Schatten class, see [30]. Let W ∈ L(H)+, such that 11 W 1/2 ∈ Sp for some 1 ≤ p < ∞, in the following we define kXkp,W = kW 1/2Xkp, for any X ∈ L(H). For A, B ∈ CR(H) such that N (B) = R(A)⊥W , the next proposition, shows the equivalence between the existence of minimum of problem (4.2) and the existence of min X∈L(H) kAXB − Ikp,W . Proposition 4.3. Let A, B ∈ CR(H) and W ∈ L(H)+ such that N (B) = R(A)⊥W . Then the following are equivalent: i) W/R(A) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I), ii) the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible, iii) W/R(A) = min≤ X∈L(H) (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). If W 1/2 ∈ Sp for some 1 ≤ p < ∞, conditions i), ii) and iii) are also equivalent to iv) kW 1/2 /R(A)kp = min X∈L(H) kAXB − Ikp,W . i) ⇔ ii) : Suppose the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Then, by Theorem 2.1 and The- Proof. orem 3.2, N (W/R(A)) = R(A) + N (W ) and the pair (W, N (W/R(A))) is compatible. Thus, by Proposition 4.1, W/R(A) is a lower bound for {F (X) : X ∈ L(H)}, where F (X) := (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I). It remains to see that there exists X0 ∈ L(H) such that W/R(A) = F (X0). Let Q ∈ P(W, R(A)), then by Theorem 3.2, W/R(A) = (I − Q)∗W (I − Q). Observe that R(W 1/2Q) = R(W 1/2A). On the other hand, since B ∈ CR(H) and N (W 1/2Q) = N (W Q) = N (Q∗W ) = W −1(N (Q∗)) = W −1(R(Q)⊥) = R(A)⊥W = N (B), we have that R(Q∗W 1/2) ⊆ N (W 1/2Q)⊥ = N (B)⊥ = R(B∗). Then, by Theorem 2.2, there exists X0 ∈ L(H), such that W 1/2AX0B = W 1/2Q. Thus (AX0B − I)∗W (AX0B − I) = (I − Q)∗W (I − Q) = W/R(A), and W/R(A) ∈ {F (X) : X ∈ L(H)}. Hence, W/R(A) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) F (X). Conversely, suppose W/R(A) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) F (X). Then, there exists X0 ∈ L(H), such that (AX0B − I)∗W (AX0B − I) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) F (X) = W/R(A). Then, by Lemma 4.2, the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. ii) ⇔ iii) and ii) ⇔ iv) : follow from the fact that N (B) = N (A∗W ) and [10, Theorem 4.3]. 12 Proposition 4.4. Let A, B ∈ CR(H) and W ∈ L(H)+ such that N (B) = R(A)⊥W and the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Then, for X0 ∈ L(H), the following conditions are equivalent: i) (AX0B − I)∗W (AX0B − I) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) ii) A∗W (AX0B − I) = 0, iii) X0B is a W -inverse of A. (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) = W/R(A), Proof. The equivalence between i), ii), iii) follows from the fact that X0 ∈ L(H) satisfies (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) = W/R(A) if and only if (AX0B − I)∗W (AX0B − I) = min − ≤ X∈L(H) X0 satisfies (AX0B − I)∗W (AX0B − I) = min≤ X∈L(H) Proposition 4.3) and [10, Theorem 3.2]. (AXB − I)∗W (AXB − I) = W/R(A) (see 5. Weighted star order and applications In [20], Drazin introduced the star order on semigroups with involutions and in [8], Baksalary and Mitra defined the left and right star orders on the set of complex matrices. Later, Antezana et al. studied the star order on the algebra of bounded operators on a Hilbert space [4]. Given A, B ∈ L(H), the star order A order A ≤ ∗ B are defined, respectively, by A A∗A = A∗B and R(A) ⊆ R(B) and A ≤ ∗ B if AA∗ = BA∗ and R(A∗) ⊆ R(B∗). ∗ ≤ B, the left star order A ∗ ≤ B and the right star ∗ ≤ B if A∗A = A∗B and AA∗ = BA∗; A ∗ ≤ B if If A, B ∈ L(H), then A ∗ ≤ B if and only if there exist orthogonal projections P, Q such that A = P B and A∗ = QB∗, see [4, Proposition 2.3]. Observe that A ∗ ≤ B if and only A − ≤ B, R(B − A) ⊆ R(A)⊥ and R(B∗ − A∗) ⊆ R(A∗)⊥. More generally, given a positive operator W, we now introduce the weighted star order, which is the minus order with an additional condition on the angle between the ranges of the operators involved, imposed by the weight W. Definition. Given A, B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, we say A ∗W ≤ B if A − ≤ B and R(B − A) ⊆ R(A)⊥W . Analogously, we say A ≤ ∗W B if A ≤ − B and R(B∗ − A∗) ⊆ R(A∗)⊥W . Finally, we say A ∗W ≤ B if A ∗W ≤ B and A ≤ ∗W B. Proposition 5.1. Let A, B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, then A ∗W ≤ B if and only if R(B) = R(A) ∔ R(B − A) and A∗W A = A∗W B. Proof. Suppose that R(B) = R(A) ∔ R(B − A) and A∗W A = A∗W B, then by the definition of − ≤ , A − ≤ B and since A∗W A = A∗W B it follows that R(B − A) ⊆ N (A∗W ) = R(A)⊥W , then A ∗W ≤ B. Conversely, if A ∗W ≤ B, then A − ≤ B, or R(B) = R(A) ∔ R(B − A), and since R(B − A) ⊆ R(A)⊥W = N (A∗W ), we have A∗W A = A∗W B. Proposition 5.2. Let W ∈ L(H)+, then the relations ∗W ≤ , ≤ ∗W and ∗W ≤ are partial orders. 13 Proof. Observe that ∗W ≤ , ≤ ∗W and − ≤, ≤ − and − ≤ are antisymmetric (see [18, Proposition 3.11]). ∗W ≤ are clearly reflexive and also antisymmetric, because Finally, if A ∗W ≤ B and B ∗W ≤ C, then A − ≤ B and it follows that R(A) ⊆ R(B), therefore R(W 1/2A) ⊆ R(W 1/2B). Also A∗W A = A∗W B, so that W 1/2A ∗ ≤ W 1/2B. In the same way W 1/2B ∗ ≤ W 1/2C, then since ∗ ≤ is transitive, W 1/2A ∗ ≤ W 1/2C and therefore A∗W A = A∗W C. On the other hand, if A ∗W ≤ B and B ∗W ≤ C, then A − ≤ B and B − ≤ C, and since − ≤ is transitive (see [18, Proposition 3.11]), we also have that A − ≤ C. Then, by Proposition 5.1, A ∗W ≤ C and the relation ∗W ≤ is a partial order. In a similar way, it can be proven that ∗W ≤ , ≤ ∗W are transitive. Lemma 5.3. Let A, B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+, such that N (W ) ∩ R(A) = {0} and the pair (W, R(A)) is compatible. Then the following are equivalent: i) A ∗W ≤ B, ii) R(A) ⊆ R(B) and A = PW,R(A)B. iii) R(A) ⊆ R(B) and A∗W A = A∗W B. i) ⇒ ii) : Suppose A ∗W ≤ B, then R(B) = R(A)∔R(B −A) and R(B −A) ⊆ R(A)⊥W = Proof. N (PW,R(A)), therefore R(A) ⊆ R(B). Hence 0 = PW,R(A)(B − A) = PW,R(A)B − A = 0 and A = PW,R(A)B. ii) ⇒ iii) : Suppose R(A) ⊆ R(B) and A = PW,R(A)B. Then R(B − A) ⊆ N (PW,R(A)) ⊆ R(A)⊥W = N (A∗W ), therefore A∗W A = A∗W B. iii) ⇒ i) : Suppose R(A) ⊆ R(B) and A∗W A = A∗W B. The inclusion R(A) ⊆ R(B) is equivalent to R(B) = R(A) + R(B − A), see [6, Proposition 2.4]. On the other hand, from A∗W A = A∗W B, it follows that R(B − A) ⊆ N (A∗W ) = R(A)⊥W . Finally, if y ∈ R(A) ∩ R(B − A), then there exists x, z ∈ H such that Multiplying the last equation by A∗W, we get y = Ax = (B − A)z. A∗W Ax = A∗W (B − A)z = 0, then W Ax = 0, so that Ax ∈ R(A) ∩ N (W ) = {0}, hence y = Ax = 0 and R(B) = R(A) ∔ R(B − A). Then A ∗W ≤ B. A similar result can be stated for ≤ ∗W . Corollary 5.4. Let A ∈ CR(H), B ∈ L(H) and W ∈ L(H)+ such that N (W ) ∩ R(A) = {0}, N (W )∩R(A∗) = {0} and the pairs (W, R(A)) and (W, R(A∗)) are compatible. Then the following are equivalent: ∗W ≤ B, i) A ii) A∗ = PW,R(A∗)B∗ and A = PW,R(A)B, iii) AW A∗ = BW A∗ and A∗W A = A∗W B. Proof. Straightforwards. Theorem 5.5. Let A, B ∈ L(H) such that R(A + B) is closed and C ∈ L(H). Let W ∈ L(H)+ 14 such that (W, R(A + B)) is compatible, W 1/2 ∈ Sp for some 1 ≤ p < ∞, and A ∗W ≤ A + B. Then the following statements are equivalent: i) X0 ∈ L(H) satisfies k(A + B)X0 − Ckp,W = min X∈L(H) k(A + B)X − Ckp,W ; ii) X0 ∈ L(H) satisfies   kAX0 − Ckp,W = min X∈L(H) kBX0 − Ckp,W = min X∈L(H) kAX − Ckp,W kBX − Ckp,W . Proof. First observe that if R(A + B) is closed and A ∗W ≤ A + B, by Proposition 5.1 and Corollary 3.4, we have A∗W B = 0 and A − ≤ A + B. Now, suppose item i) holds, then by [9, Theorem 4.5], X0 is a solution of (A∗ + B∗)W ((A + B)X − C) = 0. Therefore, R(W (A + B)X0 − C) ⊆ N (A∗ + B∗) = N (A∗) ∩ N (B∗), because A − ≤ A + B. Then A∗W ((A + B)X0 − C) = B∗W ((A + B)X0) − C) = 0, and since A∗W B = 0, it holds that A∗W (AX0 − C) = B∗W (BX0 − C) = 0, or equivalently by [9, Theorem 4.5], X0 ∈ L(H) satisfies kAX0 − Ckp,W = min X∈L(H) kBX0 − Ckp,W = min X∈L(H) kAX − Ckp,W kBX − Ckp,W .   Conversely, suppose item ii) holds, then by [9, Theorem 4.5], X0 is a solution of the system (cid:26) A∗W (AX − C) = 0 B∗W (BX − C) = 0, therefore, since A∗W B = 0, we have (A∗ + B∗)W ((A + B)X0 − C) = A∗W (AX0 − C) + B∗W (BX0 − C) = 0. Then X0 is as solution of (A∗ + B∗)W ((A + B)X − C) = 0 and by [9, Theorem 4.5], we have item i). Corollary 5.6. Let A, B ∈ L(H) such that R(A + B) is closed. Let W ∈ L(H)+ such that the pair (W, R(A + B)) is compatible and A ∗W ≤ A + B. Then X0 is a W -inverse of A + B in R(C) if and only if X0 is a W -inverse of A in R(C) and a W -inverse of B in R(C), Proof. By Theorem 2.3, X0 is W -inverse of A + B in R(C) if and only if X0 is a solution of (A∗ + B∗)W ((A + B)X − C) = 0, 15 if and only if, by the proof of Theorem 5.5, X0 is a solution of the system (cid:26) A∗W (AX − C) = 0, B∗W (BX − C) = 0, or equivalently, again by Theorem 2.3, X0 is a W -inverse of A in R(C) and a W -inverse of B in R(C). Corollary 5.7. Let A, B ∈ L(H) with R(A+B) closed. Let W ∈ L(H)+ such that (W, R(A+B)) is compatible and A ∗W ≤ A + B. Then WR(A+B) = WR(A) + WR(B). It follows from Theorem 2.3, for C = I, that (W, R(A + B)) is compatible if and only if Proof. there exists X0 such that (A∗ + B∗)W ((A + B)X0 − I) = 0. By Corollary 5.6, this is equivalent to (cid:26) A∗W (AX0 − I) = 0, B∗W (BX0 − I) = 0. (5.1) (5.2) On the other hand, by Theorem 2.4, equation (5.1) and (5.2) are equivalent to the equalities W/R(A+B) = ((A + B)X0 − I)∗W ((A + B)X0 − I), W/R(A) = (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I) and W/R(B) = (BX0 − I)∗W (BX0 − I). But, using the fact that A ∗W ≤ A + B, it follows that W/R(A+B) = ((A + B)X0 − I)∗W ((A + B)X0 − I) = = (AX0 − I)∗W (AX0 − I) + (BX0 − I)∗W (BX0 − I) − W = W/R(A) + W/R(B) − W. Therefore, WR(A+B) = WR(A) + WR(B). Acknowledgements This research was partially supported by CONICET PIP 0168. 16 References [1] Anderson W.N., Shorted Operators, SIAM J. Appl. Math, 20 (1971), 520-525. [2] Anderson W.N., Trapp G.E, Shorted Operators II, SIAM J. Appl. Math, 28 (1975), 60-71. [3] Ando T., Generalized Schur complements, Linear Algebra Appl. 27 (1979), 173-186. [4] Antezana J. , Cano C., Mosconi I., Stojanoff D. , A note on the star order in Hilbert spaces, Linear and Multilinear Algebra 58 8 (2010), 1037-1051. [5] Antezana J., Corach G., Stojanoff D. Bilateral shorted operators and parallel sums, Linear Algebra Appl. 414 2 (2006), 570-588. [6] Arias M.L., Corach G., Maestripieri A. Range additivity, shorted operator and the Sherman-Morrison-Woodbury formula, Linear Algebra Appl., 467 (2015), 86-99. [7] Arias M.L., Gonzalez M.C., Positive solutions to operator equations AXB = C, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 433 (2010), 1194-1202. [8] Baksalary J.K., Mitra S. K., Left-star and right-star partial orderings, Linear Algebra Appl. 149 (1991), 73-89. [9] Contino M., Giribet J.I, Maestripieri A., Weighted Procrustes problems, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 445 (2017), 443458. [10] Contino M., Giribet J.I, Maestripieri A., Weighted least square solutions of the equation AXB − C = 0, Linear Algebra Appl. 518 (2017), 177-197. [11] Corach G., Fongi G., Maestripieri A., Weighted projections into closed subspaces, Studia Mathematica, 216 (2013), 131-148. [12] Corach G., Giribet J. I., Oblique projections and sampling problems. Integral Equations and Operators Theory, 70, (2011), 307-322. [13] Corach G., Giribet J. I., Sard's approximation processes and oblique projections. Studia Mathematica 194 (2009), 65-80. [14] Corach G., Maestripieri A., Weighted generalized inverses, oblique projections and least squares problems, Numer. Funct. Anal. Optim., 6 (2005), 659-673. [15] Corach G., Maestripieri A., Stojanoff D., Oblique projections and Schur complements, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged), 67 (2001), 439-459. [16] Corach G., Maestripieri A., Stojanoff D., Generalized orthogonal projections and shorted operators, Margarita Mathem´atica, Departamento de Matem´aticas y Computaci´on, Uni- versidad de La Rioja, (2001), 607-625. [17] Corach G., Maestripieri A., Stojanoff D., Oblique projections and abstract splines, Journal of Approximation Theory, 117 (2002), 189-206. [18] Djiki´c, M.S., Fongi G., Maestripieri A., The minus order and range additivity, Linear Algebra Appl. 531 (2017), 234-256. [19] Douglas R. G., On majorization, factorization and range inclusion of operators in Hilbert space, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 17 (1966), 413-416. [20] Drazin M.P., Natural structures on semigroups with involution, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 84, 1 (1978), 139-141. [21] Hartwig R.E., How to partially order regular elements, Japanese Journal of Mathematics, 25 (1980), 1-13. [22] Izumino S., The product of operators with closed range and an extension of the reverse order law, Tohoku Math. J., 34 (1982), 43-52. [23] Krein M.G., The theory of self-adjoint extensions of semibounded Hermitian operators and its applications, Mat. Sb. (N.S.), 20, 62 (1947), 431-495. [24] Mitra S.K., The minus partial order and the shorted matrix, Linear Algebra Appl. 83 (1986), 1-27. [25] Mitra, S. K., Rao, C. R., Projections under seminorms and generalized Moore Penrose inverses and operator ranges, Linear Algebra Appl., 9 (1974), 155-167. 17 [26] Mitra, S. K., Matrix partial order through generalized inverses: unified theory, Linear Al- gebra Appl. 148 (1991), 237-263. [27] Pekarev E. L., Shorts of operators and some extremal problems, Acta Sci. Math.(Szeged), 56 (1992), 147-163. [28] Mitra, S. K., Rao, C. R., Theory and application of constrained inverse of matrices, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 24 (1973), 473-488. [29] Nambooripad S. K., The natural partial order on a regular semigroup, Proceedings of the Edinburgh Mathematical Society (Series 2) 23 03 (1980), 249-260. [30] Ringrose J.R., Compact non-self-adjoint operators, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1971. [31] Semrl P., Automorphisms of B(H) with respect to minus partial order, Journal of Mathe- matical Analysis and Applications 369 1 (2010), 205-213. [32] Zhang F., The Schur complement and its applications, Vol. 4., Springer Science & Business Media, 2006. 18
1208.3699	1	1208	2012-08-17T22:04:29	On discrete analytic functions: Products, Rational Functions, and some Associated Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces	[ "math.FA", "math.CV" ]	We introduce a family of discrete analytic functions, called expandable discrete analytic functions, which includes discrete analytic polynomials, and define two products in this family. The first one is defined in a way similar to the Cauchy-Kovalevskaya product of hyperholomorphic functions, and allows us to define rational discrete analytic functions. To define the second product we need a new space of entire functions which is contractively included in the Fock space. We study in this space some counterparts of Schur analysis.	math.FA	math	ON DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS: PRODUCTS, RATIONAL FUNCTIONS, AND SOME ASSOCIATED REPRODUCING KERNEL HILBERT SPACES DANIEL ALPAY, PALLE JORGENSEN, RON SEAGER, AND DAN VOLOK Abstract. We introduce a family of discrete analytic functions, called ex- pandable discrete analytic functions, which includes discrete analytic polyno- mials, and define two products in this family. The first one is defined in a way similar to the Cauchy-Kovalevskaya product of hyperholomorphic functions, and allows us to define rational discrete analytic functions. To define the sec- ond product we need a new space of entire functions which is contractively included in the Fock space. We study in this space some counterparts of Schur analysis. Contents Introduction 1. 2. Polynomials and rational functions on the set of integers 3. Discrete polynomials of two variables 4. Discrete analytic polynomials 5. Expandable discrete analytic functions 6. The Cauchy-Kovalevskaya product 7. Rational discrete analytic functions 8. The C∗-algebra associated to expandable discrete analytic functions 9. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space of entire functions 10. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space of expandable discrete analytic function References 1 4 7 10 12 14 16 18 21 26 28 1. Introduction In this paper, we explore a spectral theoretic framework for representation of dis- crete analytic functions. While the more familiar classical case of analyticity plays 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 30G25, 30H20, 32A26, 43A22 , 46E22, 46L08, 47B32, 47B39; secondary: 20G43. Key words and phrases. Discrete analytic functions, 2D lattice Z2, reproducing kernel Hilbert space, Szego and Bergman, multipliers, Cauchy integral representation, difference operators, Lie algebra of operators, Fourier transform, realizable linear systems, expandable functions, rational functions, Cauchy-Riemann equations, Cauchy-Kovalevskaya theorem, Schur analysis, Fock space. D. Alpay thanks the Earl Katz family for endowing the chair which supported his research. The research of the authors was supported in part by the Binational Science Foundation grant 2010117. 1 2 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK an important role in such applications as the theory of systems and their realiza- tions, carrying over this to the case of discrete analytic functions involves a number of operator- and spectral theoretic subtleties; for example, we show that the repro- ducing kernel, in the discrete case, behaves quite differently from the case of the more familiar classical kernels of Szego and Bergman. We introduce a reproduc- ing kernel of discrete analytic functions, which is naturally isomorphic to a Hilbert space of entire functions contractively included in the Fock space. The pointwise product of two discrete analytic functions need not be discrete analytic, and we introduce two products, each taking into account the specificities of discrete ana- lyticity. The first product is determined by a solution to an extension question for rational functions, extending from Z+ to the right half-plane in the 2D lattice Z2. Our solution to the extension problem leads to a new version of the multiplication op- erator Z. We further prove that the product in A will be defined directly from Z. This in turn yields a representation of the multiplier problem for the repro- ducing kernel Hilbert space H. While it is possible to think of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space H as an extension of one of the classical Beurling-Lax theory for Hardy space, the case for discrete analytic function involves a new and different spectral analysis, departing from the classical case in several respects. For example, we show that the new multiplication operator Z is part of an infinite-dimensional non-Abelian Lie algebra of operators acting on the reproducing kernel Hilbert space H. With this, we are able to find the spectral type of the operators described above. The theory of discrete analytic functions has drawn a lot of attention recently, in part because of its connections with electrical networks and random walks. In the case of functions defined on the integer grid the notion of discrete analyticity was introduced by J. Ferrand (Lelong) in [15]: Definition 1.1. A function f : Z2 −→ C is said to be discrete analytic if (1.1) f (x + 1, y) − f (x, y + 1) . ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, The properties of discrete analytic functions were extensively investigated by R. J. Duffin in [13]. In this work it was shown that discrete analytic functions share many important properties of the classical continuous analytic functions in the complex domain, such as Cauchy integral representation and the maximum modulus prin- ciple. More recently, the notion of discrete analyticity and accompanying results were extended by C. Mercat to the case of functions defined on arbitrary graph embedded in an orientable surface; see [22]. f (x + 1, y + 1) − f (x, y) = 1 + i 1 − i The concept of discrete analyticity seems to cause significant difficulties in the following regard: the pointwise product of two discrete analytic functions is not necessarily discrete analytic. For example, the functions z := x + iy and z2 are discrete analytic in the sense of Definition 1.1, but z3 is not. Thus a natural ques- tion arises, how to describe all complex polynomials in two variables x, y whose restriction to the integer grid Z2 is discrete analytic, and, more generally, rational discrete analytic functions. This problem was originally considered by R. Isaacs, using a definition of discrete analyticity (the so-called monodiffricity), which is al- gebraically simpler than Definition 1.1. In [17] R. Isaacs has posed a conjecture that A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 3 all monodiffric rational functions are polynomials. This conjecture was disproved by C. Harman in [16], where an explicit example of a non-polynomial monodiffric function, rational in one quadrant, was constructed. The results of R. Isaacs and C. Harman suggest that in the setting of discrete an- alytic functions the notion of rationality based on the pointwise product is not a suitable one. In order to introduce a class of rational discrete analytic functions, which would be sufficiently rich for applications, one needs a suitable definition of the product. This is one of the main objective of the present paper to introduce two products in the setting of discrete analytic functions. Organization: The paper is organized as follows. Sections 2 through 4 cover our preparation of the discrete framework: analysis and tools. In Definition 2.1, the notion of discrete analyticity makes a key link between the representation in the two integral variables (x, y) in the 2-lattice Z2 , thus making precise the interaction between the two integral variables x and y implied by analyticity. The notion of analyticity in the discrete case is a basic rule (Definition 1.1) from which one makes precise contour-summations around closed loops in Z2. In section 2, we introduce a basis system of polynomials (which will appear to be restriction to the positive real axis of discrete analytic polynomials ζn defined in section 5), see equation (2.1). We further introduce a discrete Fourier transform for functions of (x, y) in the 2-lattice Z2, and in the right half-plane H+ = Z+×Z in Z2. The Fourier representation in H+ is then used in sections 3 and 4; where we study extensions from Z to Z2, and from Z+ to H+. We begin our analysis in section 4 with some lemmas for the polyno- mial case. Theorem 4.1 offers a discrete version of the Cauchy-Riemann equations; we show that the discrete analytic functions are defined as the kernel of a del-bar operator D; to be studied in detail in section 7, as part of a Lie algebra represen- tation. In Theorem 4.2 we show that every polynomial function on Z has a unique discrete analytic extension to Z2. Sections 5 and 6 deal with expandable functions (Definition 5.5), and section 7 rational discrete analytic functions. The expand- able functions are defined from a basis system of discrete analytic polynomials ζn from section 2, and a certain Cauchy-estimate, equation (5.10). We shall need two products defined on expandable functions, the first is our Cauchy-Kovalesvskaya product (in section 6), and the second (section 10) is defined on algebra gener- ated by the discrete analytic polynomials ζn. Its study makes use of realizations from linear systems theory. The definition of the Cauchy-Kovalesvskaya product relies on uniqueness of extensions for expandable functions (Corollary 5.6). Hence it is defined first for expandable functions, and then subsequently enlarged; first to the discrete analytic rational functions (section 7), and then to a new reproducing kernel Hilbert space in section 8. The latter reproducing kernel Hilbert space has its kernel defined from the discrete analytic polynomials ζn; see (8.1). The study of the reproducing kernel Hilbert space in turns involves such tools from analysis as representations of Lie algebras (Theorem 7.4), and of C∗-algebras (Theorem 8.4). (2.3) where (2.4) f (x) = ∞Xn=1bf (n)x[n], n→∞ (cid:16)n!bf (n)(cid:17) 1 lim sup n ≤ 1. 4 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK 2. Polynomials and rational functions on the set of integers In what follows, Ω stands for one of two sets: Z or Z+, and x[n] denotes the polynomial of degree n defined by (2.1) (if n = 0, x[0] := 1). x[n] := n−1Yj=0 (x − j) They have the generating function (2.2) (1 + t)x = x[k] tk k! , xXk=0 and their discrete analytic extensions ζn(x, y) are studied in section 5. The purpose of this section is to prove (see Theorem 2.9 below) that any rational function f : Z+ −→ C (see Definition 2.7) has a unique representation Definition 2.1. The linear difference operator δ on the space of functions f : Ω −→ C is defined by (δf )(x) = f (x + 1) − f (x), x ∈ Ω. Proposition 2.2. Let f : Z+ −→ C. Then, for every x ∈ Z+ the series f (x) := Xn∈Z+ f (n)x[n] has a finite number of non zero terms. Proof. In view of (2.1), ∀x ∈ Z+, ∀n ∈ Z+, x < n =⇒ x[n] = 0. Therefore, for every x ∈ Z+ the series f (x) contains at most x + 1 non-zero terms. (cid:3) Proposition 2.3. Let f : Z+ −→ C. Then there exists a unique function f : Z+ −→ C such that (2.5) f (n)x[n]. ∀x ∈ Z+, f (x) = Xn∈Z+ The function f (n) is given by (2.6) f (n) = (δnf )(0) n! . A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 5 Proof. To show the uniqueness of f (n), assume that (2.5) holds for some function f (n) and apply the identity (2.7) δx[n] = nx[n−1] repeatedly to obtain (2.6). Next, let the function f (n) be defined by (2.6). Then, according to Proposition 2.2, the series f (x) := Xn∈Z+ f (n)x[n] converges absolutely for every x ∈ Z+ and defines a function f : Z+ −→ C. Hence (2.6) holds with f replacing f and ∀n ∈ Z+, (δnf )(0) = n! f (n) = (δn f )(0). Now one can verify that (2.8) ∀x ∈ Z+, ∀n ∈ Z+, by induction on x: If (δnf )(x) = (δn f )(x) ∀n ∈ Z+, (δnf )(x) = (δn f )(x) then ∀n ∈ Z+, (δnf )(x + 1) = (δnf )(x) + (δn+1f )(x) = (δn f )(x) + (δn+1 f )(x) = (δn f )(x + 1). It remains to set n = 0 in (2.8) to obtain (2.5). Definition 2.4. Let f : Z+ −→ C. Then the function f : Z+ −→ C, defined by (2.6), is said to be the Fourier transform of f . Suppose that a function f : Z −→ C is such that (cid:3) ∀x ∈ Z, f (x) = p(x), where p(x) is a polynomial with complex coefficients. Then such a polynomial p(x) is unique, and we shall call the function f itself a polynomial. If f (x) 6≡ 0, the degree of f (x) is the same as the degree of p(x). Proposition 2.5. Let f : Z −→ C be a polynomial, and let f : Z+ −→ C be the . Then the function f has a finite support Fourier transform of the restriction fZ+ and ∀x ∈ Z, Proof. Note that (if f = const, δf = 0). Hence ∀n ∈ Z+, Since f (x) = Xn∈Z+ f (n)x[n]. deg(δf ) = deg(f ) − 1 n > deg(f ) =⇒ δnf = 0. (δf )Z+ = δ(fZ+ ), 6 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK (2.6) implies that It follows that ∀n > deg(f ), f (n) = 0. f (n)x[n] Xn∈Z+ is, in fact, a polynomial, which coincides with the polynomial f (x) on Z+ and hence on Z. (cid:3) It follows from Proposition 2.5 and identity (2.7) that if f : Z −→ C is a polynomial then so is δf . A converse statement can be formulated as follows: Proposition 2.6. Let f : Z −→ C be a polynomial. Then there exists a polynomial g : Z −→ C such that f (x) ≡ (δg)(x). If f (x) 6≡ 0 then deg(g) = deg(f ) + 1. Proof. By Proposition 2.5, where f : Z+ −→ C is a function with finite support. Consider the polynomial f (n)x[n], f (x) = Xn∈Z+ g(x) = Xn∈Z+ (δg)(x) = Xn∈Z+ f (n) n + 1 x[n+1], f (n)x[n] = f (x). (cid:3) then, in view of (2.7), ∀x ∈ Z, Definition 2.7. A function f : Z+ −→ C is said to be rational if there exist polynomials p, q : Z+ −→ C such that ∀x ∈ Z+, q(x) 6= 0, and ∀x ∈ Z+, f (x) = p(x) q(x) . Proposition 2.8. Let f : Z+ −→ C be given. Then f (x) is a rational function if and only if there exist a polynomial p(x) and matrices A, B, C such that (2.9) and (2.10) σ(A) ∩ Z+ = ∅, f (x) = p(x) + C(xI − A)−1B. Proof. We first recall that a matrix-valued rational function of a complex variable can always be written in the form (2.11) r(z) = p(z) + C(zI − A)−1B, where the matrix-valued polynomial p takes care of the pole at infinity, and A, B and C are matrices of appropriate sizes. Furthermore, when the dimension of A is minimal, the (finite) poles of r coincide with the spectrum of A; see [8, 19]. Here, we consider complex-valued functions, and thus C and B are respectively a row A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 7 and column vector. Now, by Definition 2.7, f is a rational function if and only if it is the restriction on Z+ of a rational function of a complex variable, with no poles on Z+, that is if and only if it can be written as (2.10) with the matrix A satisfying furthermore (2.9). (cid:3) Theorem 2.9. Let f : Z+ −→ C be rational, and let f : Z+ −→ C be the Fourier transform of f . Then lim sup n→∞ ( f (n)n!)1/n ≤ 1. Proof. According to Proposition 2.8, there exist a polynomial p(x) and matrices A, B, C such that σ(A) ∩ Z+ = ∅ and Hence, for n > deg(p), f (x) = p(x) + C(xI − A)−1B. nYj=1 k(cid:18)I − 1 n A(cid:19)−1 f (n)n! = (δnf )(0) ≤ kCk · kBk · kA−1k · A(cid:19)−1 n ≥ N =⇒ f (n)n! ≤ M (1 + ǫ)n, n→∞ k(cid:18)I − ∀ǫ > 0, ∃M, N ∈ Z+, ∀n ∈ Z+ k = 1, 1 n lim k. : Since and the conclusion follows. (cid:3) 3. Discrete polynomials of two variables Definition 3.1. The linear difference operators δx, δy on the space of functions f : Ω1 × Ω2 −→ C are defined by (δxf )(x, y) := f (x + 1, y) − f (x, y), (δyf )(x, y) := f (x, y + 1) − f (x, y). Note that the difference operators δx and δy commute: (3.1) (δxδyf )(x, y) = (δyδxf )(x, y) = f (x + 1, y + 1) − f (x, y + 1) − f (x + 1, y) + f (x, y). Proposition 3.2. Let f : Z2 + −→ C. Then for every (x, y) ∈ Z2 +, the series (3.2) f (x, y) := X(m,n)∈Z2 + f (m, n)x[m]y[n] contains finitely many non-zero terms. Proof. In view of (2.1), ∀x ∈ Z+, ∀n ∈ Z+, x < n =⇒ x[n] = 0. Therefore, for every (x, y) ∈ Z2 non-zero terms. + the series f (x) contains at most (x + 1)(y + 1) (cid:3) Formula (3.2) can be viewed as a transform of a discrete function. The inverse transform is calculated in the next proposition. 8 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK Proposition 3.3. Let f : Z2 Z2 + −→ C such that (3.3) ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2 +, + −→ C. Then there exists a unique function f : f (x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 f (m, n)x[m]y[n]. + The function f (m, n) is given by (3.4) f (m, n) = (δm x δn y f )(0, 0) m!n! , (m, n) ∈ Z2 +. Proof. First, fix x ∈ Z+ and consider the function fx : Z+ −→ C given by fx(y) = f (x, y), y ∈ Z+. Then, according to Proposition 2.3, there is a unique function fx : Z+ −→ C such that ∀y ∈ Z+, the function fx(n) is given by fx(y) = Xn∈Z+ fx(n)y[n]; fx(n) = (δn y f )(x, 0) n! , n ∈ Z+. Next, fix n ∈ Z+ and consider the function gn : Z+ −→ C given by gn(x) = fx(n), x ∈ Z+. By the same Proposition 2.3, there is a unique function gn : Z+ −→ C such that ∀x ∈ Z+, the function gn(m) is given by gn(m) = gn(x) = Xm∈Z+ gn(m)x[m]; (δm x δn y f )(0, 0) m!n! , m ∈ Z+. Thus ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2 +, f (x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + gn(m)x[m]y[n]. It remains to set f (m, n) = gn(m). (cid:3) Definition 3.4. Let f : Z2 (3.4), is said to be the Fourier transform of f . + −→ C. Then the function f : Z2 + −→ C, defined by Theorem 3.5. Let p(z, w) be a complex polynomial in two variables. Then, p(cid:12)(cid:12)Z2 = 0 if and only if p ≡ 0. Proof. Write (3.5) p(z, w) = pn(z)wn, NXn=0 where the pn are polynomials in z. The equations p(z, w) ≡ 0 for w = 0, 1, . . . N lead to (using a Vandermonde determinant) that p0(z), p1(z), . . . , pN (z) vanish on Z and hence identically. (cid:3) A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 9 Suppose that a function f : Z2 −→ C is such that ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, f (x, y) = p(x, y), where p(x, y) is a polynomial with complex coefficients. Then in view of Theorem 3.5, such a polynomial p(x, y) is unique, and we shall call the function f itself a polynomial. If f (x, y) 6≡ 0, the degree of f (x, y) is the same as the degree of p(x, y). Proposition 3.6. Let f : Z2 −→ C be a polynomial, and let f : Z2 + −→ C be the . Then the function f has a finite support Fourier transform of the restriction fZ2 and + ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, f (x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + f (m, n)x[m]y[n]. Proof. First, in view of (3.4) and of the fact that ∀(m, n) ∈ Z2 +, ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, m + n > deg(f ) =⇒ (δm x δn y f )(x, y) = 0, the function f has a finite support. It follows that X(m,n)∈Z2 + f (m, n)x[m]y[n] + and (cid:3) is, in fact, a polynomial, which coincides with the polynomial f (x, y) on Z2 hence on Z2. It follows from Proposition 3.6 and identity (2.7) that if f : Z2 −→ C is a polynomial then so are δxf and δyf . A converse statement can be formulated as follows. It will be used in the proof of Theorem 4.2, Proposition 3.7. Let f, g : Z2 −→ C be two polynomials, such that (δyf )(x, y) ≡ (δxg)(x, y). (3.6) Then there exists a polynomial h : Z2 −→ C such that (3.7) (δxh)(x, y) ≡ f (x, y), (δyh)(x, y) ≡ g(x, y). Proof. By Proposition 3.6, there exist functions f , g : Z2 such that + −→ C with finite support, f (x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + f (m, n)x[m]y[n], g(m, n)x[m]y[n]. g(x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + Then identity (3.6) implies that (3.8) ∀(m, n) ∈ Z2 +, Consider the polynomial h(x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + (n + 1) f (m, n + 1) = (m + 1)g(m + 1, n). f (m, n) m + 1 x[m+1]y[n] + Xn∈Z+ g(0, n) n + 1 y[n+1], then ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, (δxh)(x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + f (m, n)x[m]y[n] = f (x, y). 10 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK On the other hand, in view of (3.8), h(x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + g(m, n) n + 1 x[m]y[n+1] + Xn∈Z+ f (m, 0) m + 1 x[m+1], hence ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, (δyh)(x, y) = X(m,n)∈Z2 + g(m, n)x[m]y[n] = g(x, y). 4. Discrete analytic polynomials (cid:3) Difference operators: It is convenient to recast Definition 1.1 in terms of the difference operators. In what follows, each of the sets Ω1, Ω2 is either Z or Z+. Theorem 4.1. A function f : Ω1 × Ω2 −→ C is discrete analytic if and only if ∀(x, y) ∈ Ω1 × Ω2, ( ¯Df )(x, y) = 0, where (4.1) Proof. In view of (3.1), ¯D := (1 − i)δx + (1 + i)δy + δxδy. ∀(x, y) ∈ Ω1 × Ω2, f (x + 1, y + 1) − f (x, y) 1 + i − f (x + 1, y) − f (x, y + 1) 1 − i 1 − i 2 = 1 − i 2 = (f (x + 1, y + 1) − f (x, y) − if (x + 1, y) + if (x, y + 1)) ((δxδyf )(x, y) − 2f (x, y) + (1 − i)f (x + 1, y) + (1 + i)f (x, y + 1)) = 1 − i 2 ((δxδyf )(x, y) + (1 − i)(δxf )(x, y) + (1 + i)(δyf )(x, y)). (cid:3) Extension: In view of Definition 1.1, given f0 : Z −→ C there are infinitely dis- crete analytic functions f on Z2 such that f (x, 0) = f0(x). However, the following theorem show that in the case when f0 is a polynomial, only one of these discrete analytic extensions will be a polynomial in x, y. The result itself originates with the work of Duffin [13], and we give a new proof. Theorem 4.2. Let p : Z −→ C be a polynomial. Then there exists a unique discrete analytic polynomial q : Z2 −→ C such that ∀x ∈ Z, q(x, 0) = p(x). In particular, q(x, y) ≡ 0 if and only if p(x) ≡ 0. If this is not the case, deg(q) = deg(p). Lemma 4.3. Let q : Z2 −→ C be a discrete analytic polynomial, such that q(x, 0) ≡ 0. Then q(x, y) ≡ 0. A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 11 Proof. Assume the opposite, then deg(q) > 0, and q can be chosen so that deg q is the smallest possible. Observe that (δxq)(x, y) is also a discrete analytic polynomial, that (δxq)(x, 0) ≡ 0, and that deg(δxp) < deg(p). Hence (δxq)(x, y) ≡ 0. Since q(x, y) is discrete analytic, Definition 4.1 implies that ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, (δyq)(x, y) = i − 1 2 ((1 − i + δy)δxq)(x, y) = 0. Thus and hence q = const - a contradiction. (cid:3) (δxq)(x, y) ≡ (δyq)(x, y) ≡ 0 Proof of Theorem 4.2. The uniqueness of the polynomial q(x, y) follows from Lemma 4.3. The existence in the case p = const is clear: it suffices to set q(x, y) = p(0). If p 6= const we proceed by induction on d = deg(p). According to Proposition 2.6, (δp)(x) is a polynomial and deg(δp) = d − 1. Therefore, by the induction assumption, there is a discrete analytic polynomial f (x, y), such that ∀x ∈ Z, f (x, 0) = (δp)(x) and deg(f ) = d − 1. Let g : Z2 −→ C be defined by g(x, y) = if (x, y) − 1 − i 2 (δyf )(x, y), then g(x, y) is also a discrete analytic polynomial, deg(g) = d − 1. Furthermore, since ( ¯Df )(x, y) ≡ 0, ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, (δxg)(x, y) = i(δxf )(x, y) − 1 − i 2 (δxδyf )(x, y) = i(δxf )(x, y) + 1 − i 2 ((1 − i)(δxf )(x, y) + (1 + i)(δyf )(x, y)) = (δyf )(x, y). Hence, according to Proposition 3.7, there exists a polynomial h : Z2 −→ C such that (δxh)(x, y) ≡ f (x, y), (δyh)(x, y) ≡ g(x, y). Since ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, the polynomial h(x, y) is discrete analytic. Finally, since ( ¯Dh)(x, y) = (1 − i)f (x, y) + (1 + i)g(x, y) + (δyf )(x, y) = 0, ∀x ∈ Z, (δxh)(x, 0) = f (x, 0) = (δp)(x), h(x, 0) − p(x) is a constant function. Thus it suffices to set q(x, y) = h(x, y) − h(0, 0) + p(0) to complete the proof. (cid:3) 12 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK 5. Expandable discrete analytic functions In view of Theorem 4.2, there exists a unique discrete analytic polynomial ζn(x, y) determined by Then (as follows from Proposition 3.6 and identities (2.7), (3.1)) (δxζn)(x, y) is also a discrete analytic polynomial such that ζn(x, 0) ≡ x[n]. Hence, by the uniqueness part of Theorem 4.2, (δxζn)(x, 0) ≡ δx[n] ≡ nx[n−1]. (δxζn)(x, y) ≡ nζn−1(x, y) (5.1) (if n = 0, ζ0(x, y) ≡ 1 and (δxζ0)(x, y) ≡ 0). Proposition 5.1. For each (x, y) ∈ Z2 the function (5.2) 1 + i + z(cid:19)y ex,y(z) = (1 + z)x(cid:18) 1 + i + iz , is analytic (in the usual sense) in the variable z in the open unit disk D, and admits the Taylor expansion Proof. The analyticity is clear because x, y ∈ Z and we have ∀z ∈ D. zncn(x, y) n! , znζn(x, y) n! , ∀z ∈ D. ex,y(z) = Xn∈Z+ ex,y(z) = Xn∈Z+ (5.3) where Since dn cn(x, y) = dzn ex,y(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)z=0 ex+1,y(z) − ex,y(z) = zex,y(z) = Xn∈Z+ ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, ∀n ∈ Z+, . zn+1cn(x, y) n! , (δxcn)(x, y) = ncn−1(x, y) (if n = 0, c0(x, y) ≡ 1 and (δxc0)(x, y) ≡ 0). Similarly, since (5.4) ex+1,y+1(z) − ex,y(z) ex+1,y(z) − ex,y+1(z) = 1 + i − 1 − i =(cid:18)(1 + z) 1 + i + iz 1 + i + z − 1(cid:19) ex,y(z) 1 + i −(cid:18)1 + z − 1 + i + iz 1 + i + z(cid:19) ex,y(z) 1 − i = 0, we have ∀(x, y) ∈ Z2, and ∀n ∈ Z+, ( ¯Dcn)(x, y) = 0. Thus, for every n ∈ Z+, the function cn : Z2 −→ C is discrete analytic. Next, we show by induction that (5.5) Indeed, for n = 0, ∀n ∈ Z+, cn(x, y) ≡ ζn(x, y). c0(x, y) ≡ 1 ≡ ζ0(x, y). A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 13 Assume that, for some n ∈ Z+, then, in view of (5.1), cn(x, y) ≡ ζn(x, y), (δxcn+1(x, y) ≡ (n + 1)cn(x, y) ≡ (n + 1)ζn(x, y) ≡ (δxζn+1(x, y), hence But the functions cn+1 and ζn+1 are discrete analytic, hence (δx(ζn+1 − cn+1))(x, y) ≡ 0. and It follows that since one concludes that ( ¯D(ζn+1 − cn+1))(x, y) ≡ 0 (δy(ζn+1 − cn+1))(x, y) ≡ 0. ζn+1 − cn+1 = const; ζn+1(0, 0) = 0 = cn+1(0, 0), cn+1(x, y) ≡ ζn+1(x, y), and (5.5) follows. Corollary 5.2. Let x, n ∈ Z+. Then, (5.6) ζn(x, 0) =(x(x − 1)··· (x − n + 1) = x[n], if n ≤ x if n > x. 0, Proof. Set y = 0 in ex,y(z) in (5.2). By (5.5) we get (5.7) (1 + z)x = Xn∈Z+ zn n! ζn(x, 0). (cid:3) (cid:3) (5.6) follows by comparing the coefficients of zn in (5.7). Theorem 5.3. It holds that ∀(x, y) ∈ Z+ × (Z \ {0}), lim sup n→∞ (cid:18)ζn(x, y) n! (cid:19)1/n = 1 √2 . Proof. When x ≥ 0 the function (5.2) is analytic in the variable z in the disk centered at the origin and of radius √2, and has a pole on the boundary of this disk. Hence the radius of convergence of the McLaurin series is precisely √2, and lim sup n→∞ (cid:18)ζn(x, y) n! (cid:19)1/n = 1 √2 . (cid:3) Theorem 5.4. Let g : Z+ −→ C be such that for every (x, y) ∈ Z+ × Z the series (5.8) g(n)ζn(x, y) converges absolutely. Then the function f : Z+ × Z −→ C, defined by (5.8), is discrete analytic, and it holds that f (x, y) = Xn∈Z+ g(n) ≡ f0(n), 14 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK where the function f0 : Z+ −→ C is given by f0(x) = f (x, 0), (5.9) x ∈ Z+. Proof. The discrete analyticity of f follows directly from the discrete analyticity of the polynomials ζn. Furthermore, when y = 0 the formula (5.8) becomes f0(x) = Xn∈Z+ g(n)x[n], hence, according to Proposition 2.3, g = f0. (cid:3) Now we can introduce the main class of functions to be considered in this paper. Definition 5.5. A function f : Z+ × Z −→ C is said to be expandable if: (1) the Fourier transform f0 of the function f0 : Z+ −→ C, given by (5.9), satisfies the estimate (5.10) lim sup n→∞ ( f0(n)n!)1/n < √2; (2) the function f admits the representation f (x, y) = Xn∈Z+ f0(n)ζn(x, y), (x, y) ∈ Z+ × Z. The class of expandable functions contains all discrete analytic polynomials, and elements of this class are determined by their values on the positive horizontal axis. Corollary 5.6. Suppose that f0 : Z+ −→ C is rational. Then there exists a unique expandable function f : Z+ × Z −→ C such that f (x, 0) ≡ f0(x). Proof. This is a consequence of Theorem 2.9. (cid:3) 6. The Cauchy-Kovalevskaya product Theorem 5.4 and Corollary 5.6 allows us to define a (partially) defined product on expandable functions, which is everywhere defined on rational functions. This prod- uct will be denoted by ⊙ and called, for reasons to be explain later in the section, the Cauchy-Kovalesvskaya product. Consider f1 and f2 two expandable functions, and assume that the Fourier transform of the pointwise product f1(x, 0)f2(x, 0) satisfy (5.10). Then there exists a unique discrete analytic expandable function g such that g(x, 0) = f1(x, 0)f2(x, 0) (6.1) g is called the Cauchy-Kovalesvskaya product of f1 and f2 and is denoted by f1⊙f2. Note that the Cauchy-Kovalesvskaya product of two rational functions always exist. We now give a more formal definition of the product: Definition 6.1. Let f : Z2 −→ C be a polynomial, such that f (x, 0) ≡ c0 + c1x + ··· + cnxn, and let g : Ω × Z −→ C be given. The Cauchy-Kovalevskaya (C-K) product of f and g is defined by (6.2) (g ⊙ f )(x, y) = (f ⊙ g)(x, y) = c0g(x, y) + c1(Zg)(x, y) +··· + cn(Z ng)(x, y). A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 15 We shall abbreviate this as (6.3) f ⊙ g = f (Z)g. The commutativity asserted in the definition is proved in the following theorem. Theorem 6.2. (1) The restriction of the C-K product to Z+ is the product of the restriction. (2) The C-K product is the unique discrete analytic extension corresponding to the product of the restrictions. (3) The C-K product is commutative, i.e. (6.4) g ⊙ f = f ⊙ g for all choices of discrete analytic polynomials Proof. (1) Setting y = 0 in (6.2) and taking into account the definition of Z we have (g ⊙ f )(x, 0) = c0g(x, 0) + c1(Zg)(x, 0) + ··· + cn(Z ng)(x, 0) (6.5) = c0g(x, 0) + c1xg(x, 0) + ··· + cnxng(x, 0) = f (x, 0)g(x, 0). (2) For an expandable function the discrete Cauchy-Riemann equation Df = 0 with prescribed initial values on the horizontal positive axis has a unique solution (see Theorem 5.4). (3) is then clear from (1) and (2). (cid:3) We now explain the name given to this product. Recall that the classical Cauchy- Kovalevskaya theorem concerns uniqueness of solutions of certain partial differential equations with given initial conditions. See for instance [20]. In Clifford analysis, where the pointwise product of hyperholomorphic functions need not be hyper- holomorphic, this theorem was used by F. Sommen in [26] (see also [9]) to define the product of hyperholomorphic quaternionic-valued functions in R4 by extending the pointwise product from an hyperplane. In the present setting of expandable functions the discrete Cauchy-Riemann equation Df = 0 with prescribed initial values on the horizontal positive axis also has a unique solution. This is why the pointwise product on the horizontal positive axis can be extended to a unique ex- pandable function, which we call the C-K product. If p is a discrete analytic polynomial and f is an expandable function, p ⊙ f is the expandable function determined by (6.6) (p ⊙ f )(x, 0) = p(x, 0)f (x, 0). However it is not true in general that the pointwise product of the restrictions of two expandable functions, say f and g, is itself the restriction of an expandable function, as is illustrated by the example (6.7) where ex,y(t) is defined by (5.2) and t >. Indeed, ex,0(t) = (1 + t)x (6.8) f (x, y) = g(x, y) = ex,y(t), 16 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK (ex,0(t))2 = ex,0(2t + t2) will not be the restriction of an expandable function for is the restriction of an expandable function whenever t < √2. On the other hand, t >p1 + √2 − 1 which is strictly smaller than √2. We note that the C-K product for hyperholomorphic functions was used in [3, 4, 5] to define and study rational hyperholomorphic functions, and some related reproducing Hilbert spaces. Proposition 6.3. For m, n ∈ Z+ and j ∈ {0, . . . , m + n}, set (6.9) cm,n j = x=0. Then, (6.10) j! δj(cid:0)x[m]x[n](cid:1) m+nXj=0 ζm ⊙ ζn = cm,n j ζj. Proof. It suffices to note that (6.10) holds for y = 0, thanks to Proposition 2.3. (cid:3) Systems like (6.10) occur in the theory of discrete hypergroups. See [21]. 7. Rational discrete analytic functions As we already mentioned, the pointwise product of two discrete analytic functions need not be discrete analytic. In the sequel of the section we define a product on discrete analytic functions when one of the terms is a polynomial, and show that a rational function is a quotient of discrete analytic polynomials with respect to this product. We first need the counterpart of multiplication by the complex variable. Definition 7.1. The multiplication operator Z on the class of functions f : Ω × Z −→ C is given by (Zf )(x, y) = xf (x, y) + iy f (x, y + 1) + f (x, y − 1) . 2 Proposition 7.2. Let f be a function from Ω × Z into C. Then (1) (7.1) (Zf )(x, 0) ≡ xf (x, 0). Furthermore: (2) If f is a polynomial, then so is Zf. (3) If f is discrete analytic, then so is Zf . Proof. The proofs of (1) and (2) are clear from the definition. The proof of (3) follows from the identity (7.6) in Theorem 7.4. (cid:3) Proposition 7.3. Let f : Z+ × Z −→ C be expandable. Then so is Zf . particular, In (7.2) Proof. By Proposition 7.2, for every n ∈ Z+, (Zζn)(x, y) is a discrete analytic polynomial. In view of (7.1), (Zζn)(x, y) ≡ ζn+1(x, y) + nζn(x, y). ∀n ∈ Z+, hence formula (7.2) follows from Theorem 4.2. (Zζn)(x, 0) = x · x[n] = x[n+1] + nx[n], A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 17 Let f0 : Z+ −→ C be defined by (5.9), then (Zf )(x, 0) = xf0(x) = Xn∈Z+ (n f0(n) + f0(n − 1))x[n], where f0(−1) := 0. Since lim sup n→∞ ( f0(n)n!)1/n < √2, lim sup n→∞ (n f0(n) + f0(n − 1)n!)1/n < √2. f (x, y) = Xn∈Z+ f0(n)(Zζn)(x, y) = Xn∈Z+ f0(n)ζn(x, y), (n f0(n) + f0(n − 1))ζn(x, y). Finally, since where the convergence is absolute, (Zf )(x, y) = Xn∈Z+ From the preceeding proof we note that (7.3) ζ1 ⊙ ζn = Zζn = nζn + ζn+1. (cid:3) Theorem 7.4. The operators δx, δy,Z and D generate a Lie algebra of linear operators on the space of all functions from Z2 into C. The Lie bracket is [A, B] = AB − BA and the relations on the generators are (7.4) (7.5) (7.6) (7.7) [δx,Z] = 1 + δx, [δy,Z] = i(1 + δy + δ2 y), [D,Z] =(cid:18) 1 + i i 2 + 2 δy(cid:19) D, [D, δx] = [D, δy] = [δx, δy] = 0. Proof. The identities (7.4)-(7.7) can be verified by the calculations in the proofs of the two preceding propositions. (cid:3) Definition 7.5. A function f : Z+ × Z −→ C is said to be a rational discrete analytic function if f (x, y) is expandable and f (x, 0) is rational. Theorem 7.6. An expandable function f : Z+ × Z −→ C is rational if and only if it is a C-K quotient of discrete analytic polynomials function that is, if and only if there exist discrete analytic polynomials p(x, y) and q(x, y) such that and ∀x ∈ Z+, q(x, 0) 6= 0 (q ⊙ f )(x, y) ≡ p(x, y). Proof. Suppose first that f is rational, and let f0(x) denote the restriction of f to the horizontal positive axis. By definition there exists two polynomials p0(x) and q0(x) such that q0(x) 6= 0 (on Z+) and (7.8) q0(x)f0(x) = p0(x), x ∈ Z+. 18 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK Let p(x, y) and q(x, y) denote the discrete analytic polynomials extending p0(x) and q0(x) respectively. Then both p and q⊙ f are expandable functions, which coincide on Z+, and therefore everywhere. Conversely, let p(x, y) and q(x, y) be the discrete analytic polynomials such that and Setting y = 0 leads to which ends the proof. ∀x ∈ Z+, q(x, 0) 6= 0 (q ⊙ f )(x, y) ≡ p(x, y). ∀x ∈ Z+, q(x, 0)f (x, 0) = p(x, 0), (cid:3) Theorem 7.7. Let p(x, y) and q(x, y) be the discrete analytic polynomials such that Then there is a unique expandable rational function f such that ∀x ∈ Z+, q(x, 0) 6= 0 Proof. Denote (q ⊙ f )(x, y) ≡ p(x, y). According to Proposition 7.3, the function g : Z+ × Z −→ C is expandable, and therefore can be written as g(x, y) = (q ⊙ f )(x, y). g(x, y) = Xn∈Z+ g0(n)ζn(x, y), where g0 is the Fourier transform of its restriction g0(x) = g(x, 0). In particular, by Theorem 5.4, g is discrete analytic. In view of (7.1), g0(x) = q(x, 0)f (x, 0) = p(x, 0), hence, by Proposition 2.5, g0 has finite support and g is a discrete analytic polyno- mial. In view of Theorem 4.2, g(x, y) ≡ p(x, y). (cid:3) 8. The C∗-algebra associated to expandable discrete analytic functions . We denote by HDA the reproducing kernel Hilbert space with reproducing kernel (8.1) ζn(x1, y1)ζn(x2, y2)∗ K((x1, y1), (x2, y2)) = , ∞Xn=0 (n!)2 and let en := 1 n! ζn be the corresponding ONB in HDA. Then, Theorem 8.1. (8.2) δxe1 = 0 and δxen = en−1, n > 1, i.e., δx is a copy of the backwards shift. A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 19 Proof. Using Proposition 5.1, we get zn n! ζn(x, y) into (8.3), we get δxζ1 = 0 (cid:3) (8.3) δxex,y(z) = ex+1,y(z) − ex,y(z) = zex,y(z). and δxζn = nζn−1 if n > 1. The result (8.2) follows. Proposition 8.2. In HDA we have Substituting the expression ex,y(z) =Pn∈Z+ δy = δx(cid:18)I − 2 (cid:19)n ∞Xn=0(cid:18) i − 1 i − 1 2 (8.4) δx(cid:19)−1 δn+1 x , = where the convergence of the above series is in the operator norm Proof. Recall that the operator D was defined in (4.1). Since the elements of HDA are discrete analytic we have D = 0 in HDA, that is, (1 − i)δx + (1 + i)δy + δxδy = 0, δy ((1 + i)I + δx) = (1 − i)δx. (8.5) and thus (8.6) (8.7) Since δx is an isometry, and has in particular norm 1, we can solve equation (8.5) and obtain (8.4). The power expansion converges in the operator norm since k(cid:18) i − 1 2 (cid:19) δxk = 1 √2 < 1. (cid:3) Theorem 8.3. The C∗-algebra generated by δx, or equivalently by δx and δy is the Toeplitz C∗-algebra. Proof. This follows from the preceding proposition and from [11]. Indeed it is known [11] that the Toeplitz C∗-algebra T is the unique C∗-algebra generated by the shift. Since δ∗ x is a copy of the shift, and δy ∈ C∗(δ∗ x), the result follows. (cid:3) We now consider 1 2 (8.8) (Z + Z ∗) , A = Re Z = where Z is defined from Definition 7.1. Theorem 8.4. (i) The operator A is essentially self-adjoint on the linear span D of the functions ζn, n ∈ Z+. (ii) On D it holds that (8.9) [δx, A] = 1 (iii) There exists a strongly continuous one parameter semi-group αt such that : T −→ T x(cid:1) . 2(cid:0)I + δx + δ2 (8.10) where T denotes the Toeplitz C∗-algebra. (eitA)b(e−itA) = αt(b), ∀t ∈ R, ∀b ∈ T , 20 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK Proof. In (iii), we denote by eitA the unitary one-parameter group generated by the self-adjoint operator A from (i). The matrix representation of A with respect to the ONB en := 1 n! ζn is: (8.11)  0 n − 2 n − 1 n − 1 n − 1 n 0 0 0 n n 0 n + 1 n + 1 n + 1 n + 2 n + 2 n + 2 0 0  It is therefore a banded infinite matrix with terms going to infinity linearly with n. It follows from [18] that A is essentially self-adjoint. (ii) By definition of Z and δx [A, δ∗ x](en) = (Aδ∗ xA)(en) x − δ∗ (en + en+1 + en+2) = = 1 2 1 2 (I + δ∗ x + δ∗2 x )en, (8.12) and hence the result. (iii) We have (8.13) and (8.14) eitAbe−itA = (it)n n! ∞Xn=0 (ad A)n (b), (ad A)n+1 (b) = [A, (ad A)n b], We verify (8.13) on monomials of δx and δ∗ for more details regarding limits. x using (8.14) and induction. See [10, 24] (cid:3) The next corollary deals with a flow. For more information on this topic, see [23]. 0 −→ T /K −→ T −→ C(T) −→ 0, Corollary 8.5. The one-parameter group {αt} ⊂ Aut (T ) passes to a flow on the circle group T = {z ∈ C ; z = 1}. Proof. By [11], the Toeplitz algebra T has a represnetation as a short exact sequence (8.15) where K is a copy of the C∗-algebra of all compact operators on HDA. Hence, (8.16) Since the left hand-side of (8.10) leaves K invariant, it follows that (8.17) passes to the quotient T /K ≃ C(T). T /K ≃ C(T). : T −→ T αt (cid:3) A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 21 9. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space of entire functions As we stated in the previous section, the C-K product has the disadvantage of not being defined for all pairs of expandable functions. In Section 10 we introduce a different product which turns the space of expandable functions into a ring, and consider a related reproducing kernel Hilbert space. In preparation we introduce in the present section a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of entire functions of a complex variable within which the results of Section 10 can be set in a natural way. To set these results in a wider setting, let us recall a few facts on Schur analysis, that is, on the study of functions analytic and contractive in the open unit disk. If s0 is such a function (in the sequel, we write s0 ∈ S ), the operator of multiplication by s0 is a contraction from the Hardy space of the open unit disk H2 into itself. The kernel (9.1) 1 − s0(z)s0(w)∗ 1 − zw∗ is then positive definite in the open unit D, and its associated reproducing kernel Hilbert space H(s0) was first studied by de Branges and Rovnyak. Spaces H(s0) and their various generalizations play an important role in linear system theory and in operator theory. See for instance [1, 2, 7, 14] for more information. Here we replace H2 by two spaces, a space of entire functions in the present section and a space of discrete analytic functions in the next section. Thus, let H be a Hilbert space, and let O denote the space of L(H)-valued functions analytic at the origin, and consider the linear operator T on O defined by (9.2) T (znAn) = zn n! An, An ∈ L(H). Then TO is a space of L(H)-valued entire functions. The operator T induces a product ♦ of elements in TO via (T f )♦(T g) = T (f g). Theorem 9.1. Let H be a Hilbert space and let A is a bounded operator from H into itself. Then the L(H)-valued entire function znAn ∞Xn=0 (IH − zA)−♦ = ( ) = ezA n! satisfies (9.3) and it is the only function in TO with this property. Proof. This comes from the power expansion and norm estimates. (IH − zA)♦(IH − zA)−♦ = IH, (cid:3) Take now H = C and let H2 denote the Hardy space of the unit disk. Then T is a positive contractive injection from H2 into itself. Denote by H the space T H2 equipped with the range norm: ∀f ∈ H2, kT fkH = kfk2. 22 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK Then T : H2 −→ H is unitary, and H is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of entire functions with the reproducing kernel KH(z, w) = (zw∗)n (n!)2 . ∞Xn=0 Proposition 9.2. H is the Hilbert space of entire functions such that ZC f (z)2K0(2z)dA(z) < ∞, K0(r) = exp(−r cosh t)dt 1 πZR where (9.4) and (9.5) is the modified Bessel function of the second kind of order 0. Proof. This follows from the fact that the Mellin transform of the square of the function Γ is the function K0(2√x). See for instance [12, p. 50] for the latter. (cid:3) We note that H is contractively included in the Fock space since the reproducing kernel of the latter is KF (z, w) = , n! znw∗n ∞Xn=0 (zw∗)n(cid:18) 1 ∞Xn=0 1 (n!)2(cid:19) n! − KF (z, w) − KH(z, w) = is positive definite in C. See for instance [6, Theorem I, p. 354], [25] for differences of positive definite functions. In view of Liouville's theorem, the only multipliers on H in the sense of the usual pointwise product are constants. The class of multipliers in the sense of the ♦ product is more interesting. Theorem 9.3. A function s ∈ O is a contractive ♦-multiplier on H if and only if it is of the form where S denotes the Schur class of functions analytic and contractive in the open unit disk. s = T s0, s0 ∈ S , Proof. Assume first that s ∈ O is a contractive ♦-multiplier on H. Then s = s♦1 ∈ H and hence s = T s0 for some s0 ∈ H2. Furthermore, let f ∈ H2. Since s♦(T f ) = T (s0f ) ∈ H, s0f ∈ H2. Since kfkH2 = kT fkH ≥ ks♦(T f )kH = kT (s0f )kH = ks0fkH2, s0 ∈ S . Conversely, if s = T s0 where s0 ∈ S , and f ∈ H2 then s♦(T f ) = T (s0f ) ∈ H and ks♦(T f )kH = kT (s0f )kH = ks0fkH2 ≤ kfkH2 = kT fkH. Thus s is a contractive ♦-multiplier on H. (cid:3) A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 23 Let s0 ∈ S . The operator Ms0 of pointwise multiplication is a contraction from s0 endowed with the range norm is called the associated de Branges-Rovnyak space. We denote it by H(s0). Similarly one can associate with s ∈ T S a reproducing kernel H2 into itself. The operator rangepI − Ms0 M ∗ Ks(z, w) = ((I − MsM ∗ s )KH(·, w)) (z), where Ms denotes the operator of ♦-multiplication by s on H. The corresponding s ) with the range norm; it will reproducing kernel Hilbert space is ran(pI − MsM ∗ be denoted by H(s). Theorem 9.4. The mapping f 7→ T f is unitary from de Branges - Rovnyak space H(s0) onto H(s). Proof. Since MsT = T Ms0, pI − MsM ∗ s T = TqI − Ms0M ∗ s0 . (cid:3) The H(s) spaces can be characterized in terms of ∂-invariance, where ∂ is the differentiation operator: ∂f = f ′. Lemma 9.5. The operator ∂ is bounded on H; moreover, (9.6) ∂T = T R0, where R0 is the backward shift operator, and ∂∗∂ = IH − C∗C, ∂∂∗ = IH, where Cf := f (0). Furthermore, the reproducing kernel of H is given by KH(z, w) = Cez∂ew∗∂ ∗ C∗. Proof. The claims follow from the definition of the operator T in (9.2). We prove only (9.6). Let f ∈ H2 with power series expansion anzn. (9.7) f (z) = (R0f )(z) = anzn−1, ∞Xn=0 ∞Xn=1 ∞Xn=1 dz ∞Xn=0 d an (n − 1)! an n! = (∂T f )(z). Then, (9.8) and therefore (9.9) (T R0f )(z) = = zn−1 zn! (cid:3) 24 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK Theorem 9.6. A closed subspace H of H is ∂-invariant if and only if where s0(z) is an inner function. H = H ⊖ MT s0 H, Proof. Let H be a closed subspace of H then H = T H0 where H0 is a closed sub- space of H2. H is ∂-invariant if and only if H0 is R0-invariant, which is equivalent to H2 ⊖ H0 being invariant under multiplication by z. By the Beurling-Lax theo- rem, the last condition holds if and only if H2 ⊖ H0 = Ms0 H2, where s0 is an inner function. (cid:3) Theorem 9.7. Let s ∈ T S . Then s admits the representation Cet∂Bdt, s(z) = D +Z z (cid:18) ∂ B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H(s) 0 C (cid:19) −→(cid:18)H(s) C (cid:19) where is a coisometry given by ∂f = f ′, B1 = s′, Cf = f (0), D1 = s(0). Proof. Write s = T s0, where s0 ∈ S . Then where s0(z) = D0 + zC0(I − zR0)−1B0, (cid:18)R0 B0 C0 D0(cid:19) :(cid:18)H(s0) C (cid:19) −→(cid:18)H(s0) C (cid:19) is a coisometry given by R0f = (f − f (0))/z, B01 = R0s0, C0f = f (0), D01 = s0(0) = s(0). Hence zn+1 (n + 1)! zn+1 (n + 1)! C0Rn 0 B0 C0T −1(T R0T −1)nT B0 s(z) = D0 + = D0 + ∞Xn=0 ∞Xn=0 ∞Xn=0 = D +Z z = D + 0 zn+1 (n + 1)! C∂nB Cet∂Bdt. (cid:3) be a coisometry. Then the function (cid:18)A B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H s(z) = D +Z z 0 C(cid:19) −→(cid:18)H C(cid:19) CetABdt A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 25 Theorem 9.8. Let H be a Hilbert space and let is a contractive ♦-multiplier on H, and the corresponding reproducing kernel is given by Proof. Set Ks(z, w) = CezAew∗A∗ C∗. s0(z) = D + zC(I − zA)−1B, then s0 ∈ S and s = T s0. Since Ks0(z, w) = C(I − zA)−1(I − wA)−∗C∗, the formula for Ks(z, w) follows. (cid:3) Theorem 9.9. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space H of functions in O is of the form H = H(s) for some s ∈ T S if and only if (1) H is ∂-invariant; (2) for every f ∈ H k∂fk2 H ≤ kfk2 H − f (0)2. Proof. One direction follows immediately from Theorem 9.4. The proof of the other direction is modelled after the proof of [2, Theorem 3.1.2, p. 85] and is done as follows: let H be ∂-invariant; then for every f ∈ H Cez∂f = f (z), where Cf = f (0). Hence the reproducing kernel of H is given by L(z, w) = Cez∂ew∗∂ ∗ C∗. Since there exists a coisometry But the the function ∂∗∂ + C∗C ≤ I, C(cid:19) −→(cid:18)H C(cid:19) . (cid:18) ∂ B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H s(z) = D +Z z 0 Cet∂Bdt is a contractive ♦-multiplier and the associated kernel Ks(z, w) coincides with L(z, w). Hence H = H(s). (cid:3) It is also of interest to consider ♦-rational matrix valued functions. Theorem 9.10. Tne following are equivalent: (1) A function f ∈ TO is ♦-rational in the sense that for some polynomial p(z), not vanishing at the origin, p♦f is also a polynomial. 26 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK (2) f (z) is of the form f (z) = D +Z z 0 CetABdt with A, B, C, D - matrices of suitable dimensions; (3) the columns of ∂f belong to a finite-dimensional ∂-invariant space. Proof. It suffices to observe that a function f ∈ TO is ♦- rational if and only if it is of the form f = T f0 wheref0 ∈ O is rational in the usual sense. (cid:3) 10. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space of expandable discrete analytic function In parallel with the previous section, we introduce the product ⊡ of expandable discrete analytic functions by (10.1) ζn ⊡ ζm = m!n!ζm+n (m + n)! . The advantage of this product versus the C-K one is that the space of expandable discrete analytic functions forms a ring. Consider the linear mapping V : zn 7→ ζn. Then V T maps, in particular, the space of functions analytic in a neighborhood of the closed disk {z : z ≤ 1/√2} onto the space of expandable functions. Then V H with the range norm is the reproducing kernel Hilbert space HDA with the reproducing kernel (8.1) Note that K((x1, y1), (x2, y2)) = ζn(x1, y1)ζn(x2, y2)∗ (n!)2 . ∞Xn=0 V ∂ = δxV, V (ezA) = ex,y(A). Since V : H −→ HDA is unitary, the following theorems are direct consequences of Theorems 9.3-9.10 in the previous section. We state them here in order to emphasize the new product. Theorem 10.1. A closed subspace H of HDA is δx-invariant if and only if H = HDA ⊖ MV T s0HDA, where s0(z) is an inner function. Theorem 10.2. Let s ∈ V T S . Then s admits the representation s(x, y) = D + Cex,y(δx) ⊡ (ζ1(x, y)B), where is a coisometry given by (cid:18)δx B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H(s) C (cid:19) −→(cid:18)H(s) C (cid:19) B1 = δxs, Cf = f (0), D1 = s(0). A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 27 Theorem 10.3. Let H be a Hilbert space and let (cid:18)A B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H C(cid:19) −→(cid:18)H C(cid:19) be a coisometry. Then the function s(z) = D + Cex,y(A) ⊡ (ζ1(x, y)B), is a contractive ⊡-multiplier on HDA, and the corresponding reproducing kernel is given by Ks((x1, y1), (x2, y2)) = Cex1,y1(A)(ex2,y2(A))∗C∗. Theorem 10.4. A reproducing kernel Hilbert space H of expandable functions is of the form H = H(s) for some s ∈ V T S if and only if (1) H is δx-invariant; (2) for every f ∈ H kδxfk2 H ≤ kfk2 H − f (0, 0)2. Theorem 10.5. The following are equivalent: (1) An expandable function f is ⊡-rational in the sense that for some discrete analytic polynomial p(x, y), not vanishing at the origin, p ⊡ f is also a discrete analytic polynomial. (2) f (x, y) is of the form f (x, y) = D + Cex,y(A) ⊡ (ζ1(x, y)B), with A, B, C, D - matrices of suitable dimensions, and kAk < √2, and ex,y(A) is as in (5.2). (3) the columns of δxf belong to a finite-dimensional δx-invariant space of ex- pandable functions. Theorem 10.6. Let s ∈ T S . Then s admits the representation s(x, y) = D + Cex,y(δx) ⊡ (ζ1(x, y)B), where is a coisometry given by (cid:18)δx B C D(cid:19) :(cid:18)H(s) C (cid:19) −→(cid:18)H(s) C (cid:19) B1 = s′, Cf = f (0), D1 = s(0). Theorem 10.7. The following are equivalent: (1) An expandable function f is ⊡-rational in the sense that for some discrete analytic polynomial p(x, y), not vanishing at the origin, p ⊡ f is also a discrete analytic polynomial. (2) f (x, y) is of the form f (x, y) = D + Cex,y(A) ⊡ (ζ1(x, y)B), with A, B, C, D - matrices of suitable dimensions, and kAk < √2, and ex,y(A) is as in (5.2). (3) the columns of δxf belong to a finite-dimensional δx-invariant space. 28 D. ALPAY, P. JORGENSEN, R. SEAGER, AND D. VOLOK References [1] D. Alpay. The Schur algorithm, reproducing kernel spaces and system theory. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001. Translated from the 1998 French original by Stephen S. Wilson, Panoramas et Synth`eses. [2] D. Alpay, A. Dijksma, J. Rovnyak, and H. de Snoo. Schur functions, operator colligations, and reproducing kernel Pontryagin spaces, volume 96 of Operator theory: Advances and Applications. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 1997. [3] D. Alpay, M. Shapiro, and D. Volok. Espaces de de Branges Rovnyak: le cas hyper -- analytique. Comptes Rendus Math´ematiques, 338:437 -- 442, 2004. [4] D. Alpay, M. Shapiro, and D. Volok. Rational hyperholomorphic functions in R4. J. Funct. Anal., 221(1):122 -- 149, 2005. [5] D. Alpay, M. Shapiro, and D. Volok. Reproducing kernel spaces of series of Fueter polyno- mials. In Operator theory in Krein spaces and nonlinear eigenvalue problems, volume 162 of Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., pages 19 -- 45. Birkhauser, Basel, 2006. [6] N. Aronszajn. Theory of reproducing kernels. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 68:337 -- 404, 1950. [7] M. Bakonyi and T. Constantinescu. Schur's algorithm and several applications, volume 261 of Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series. Longman Scientific & Technical, Harlow, 1992. [8] H. Bart, I. Gohberg, and M.A. Kaashoek. Minimal factorization of matrix and operator functions, volume 1 of Operator Theory: Advances and Applications. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 1979. [9] F. Brackx, R. Delanghe, and F. Sommen. Clifford analysis, volume 76. Pitman research notes, 1982. [10] Ola Bratteli and Palle E. T. Jørgensen. Unbounded derivations tangential to compact groups of automorphisms. J. Funct. Anal., 48(1):107 -- 133, 1982. [11] L. A. Coburn. The C ∗-algebra generated by an isometry. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 73:722 -- 726, 1967. [12] Serge Colombo. Les transformations de Mellin et de Hankel: Applications `a la physique math´ematique. Monographies du Centre d'´Etudes Math´ematiques en vue des Applications: B. -- M´ethodes de Calcul. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 1959. [13] R. J. Duffin. Basic properties of discrete analytic functions. Duke Math. J., 23:335 -- 363, 1956. [14] H. Dym. J -- contractive matrix functions, reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces and interpolation. Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC, 1989. [15] Jacqueline Ferrand. Fonctions pr´eharmoniques et fonctions pr´eholomorphes. Bull. Sci. Math. (2), 68:152 -- 180, 1944. [16] C. J. Harman. A note on a discrete analytic function. Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., 10:123 -- 134, 1974. [17] Rufus Isaacs. Monodiffric functions. Construction and applications of conformal maps. In Proceedings of a symposium, National Bureau of Standards, Appl. Math. Ser., No. 18, pages 257 -- 266, Washington, D. C., 1952. U. S. Government Printing Office. [18] Palle E. T. Jørgensen. Essential self-adjointness of semibounded operators. Math. Ann., 237(2):187 -- 192, 1978. [19] R. E. Kalman, P. L. Falb, and M. A. Arbib. Topics in mathematical system theory. McGraw- Hill Book Co., New York, 1969. [20] S. G. Krantz and H. P. Parks. A primer of real analytic functions, volume 4 of Basler Lehrbucher [Basel Textbooks]. Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, 1992. [21] Rupert Lasser and Eva Perreiter. Homomorphisms of l1-algebras on signed polynomial hy- pergroups. Banach J. Math. Anal., 4(2):1 -- 10, 2010. [22] Christian Mercat. Discrete Riemann surfaces and the Ising model. Comm. Math. Phys., 218(1):177 -- 216, 2001. [23] Edward Nelson. Topics in dynamics. I: Flows. Mathematical Notes. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1969. [24] Gert K. Pedersen. C ∗-algebras and their automorphism groups, volume 14 of London Math- ematical Society Monographs. Academic Press Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers], London, 1979. [25] S. Saitoh. Theory of reproducing kernels and its applications, volume 189. Longman scientific and technical, 1988. A PRODUCT FOR DISCRETE ANALYTIC FUNCTIONS 29 [26] F. Sommen. A product and an exponential function in hypercomplex function theory. Appli- cable Anal., 12(1):13 -- 26, 1981. (DA) Department of Mathematics Ben Gurion University of the Negev P.O.B. 653, Be'er Sheva 84105, ISRAEL E-mail address: [email protected] (PJ) Department of Mathematics 14 MLH The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242-1419 USA E-mail address: [email protected] (RS) and (DV) Mathematics Department 138 Cardwell Hall Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 E-mail address: [email protected]
1903.03912	1	1903	2019-03-10T03:36:27	Multiplicative weak convergence in Banach $f$-algebras	[ "math.FA" ]	In this paper, we study multiplicative weak convergence in Banach f-algebra and multiplicative weak* convergence in its dual.	math.FA	math	MULTIPLICATIVE WEAK CONVERGENCE IN BANACH f -ALGEBRAS ZHANGJUN WANG, ZILI CHEN, AND JINXI CHEN Abstract. A net (xα) in an f -algebra E is called multiplicative o−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+. A order convergent to x ∈ E if xα − xu net (xα) in a Banach f -algebra E is called multiplicative norm convergent to x ∈ E if xα − xu → 0 for all u ∈ E+. In this paper, we study this convergence in Banach f -algebra and its dual, A net (xα) in a Banach f -algebra E is called multiplicative weak convergent to x ∈ E if xα − xu w−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+. 1. Introduction A net (xα) in a Riesz space E is called order convergent to x ∈ E if xα − x ≤ yβ for yβ ↓ 0 ∈ E+. A net (xα) in a Riesz space E is o−→ 0 for called unbounded order convergent to x ∈ E if xα − x ∧ u all u ∈ E+[4,5]. A net (xα) in a Banach lattice E is called unbounded kk norm convergent to x ∈ E if xα − x ∧ u −→ 0 for all u ∈ E+[6,7]. A net (xα) in a Banach lattice E is called unbounded absolute weak convergent to x ∈ E if xα − x ∧ u w−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+[8,9]. In [1],a vector lattice E under an associative multiplication is said to be a Riesz algebra whenever the multiplication makes E an algebra (with the usual properties).A Riesz algebra E is called commutative if xy = yx for all x, y ∈ E. A Riesz algebra E is called f-algebra if E has additionally property that x∧ y = 0 implies (xz) ∧ y = (zx) ∧ y = 0 and xy ∈ E+ for every x, y ∈ E+.A vector lattice E is called Archimedean whenever 1 n x ↓ 0 holds in E for each x ∈ E+.Every Archimedean f -algebra is commutative.In this article, unless otherwise, all vector lattices are assumed to be real and Archimedean, and so f -algebras are commutative. An f -algebra E which is at the same time a Banach Date: March 20, 2019. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. xxx,xxx. Key words and phrases. Banach lattices, f -algebra, multiplicative weak conver- gence, multiplicative order convergence, multiplicative weak convergence, multi- plicative weak star convergence. 1 2 Z. WANG, Z. CHEN, AND J. CHEN lattice is called a Banach f -algebra whenever kxyk ≤ kxkyk holds for all x, y ∈ E. A net (xα) in an f -algebra E is called multiplicative order convergent o−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+ in[11]. A net (xα) in a to x ∈ E if xα − xu Banach f -algebra E is called multiplicative norm convergent to x ∈ E if xα − xu → 0 for all u ∈ E+ in[12]. Definition 1.1. A net (xα) in a Banach f -algebra E is called multi- w−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+ plicative weak convergent to x ∈ E if xα − xu (xα convergent to x α) in a Banach f -algebra E w∗ −→ 0 for all u ′ ∈ E if x ′u α − x ′ ′ is called multiplicative weak star ′ ′ ∈ E ′ + (x α mw∗ −−→ x ′). mw−−→ x). A net (x ′ mw−−→ x) Remark 1.2. For a net (xα) in a Banach f -algebra E,(xα mw−−→ xy)for all y ∈ E because of xαy − xyu = xα − xyu implies (xαy for all u ∈ E+. The converse holds true in Banach f -algebras with mw−−→ xy)for each y ∈ E. the multiplication unit. Indeed, assume(xαy w−→ 0. Similarily, the mw∗- Fix u ∈ E+, so, xα − xu = xαe − xeu convergence has those properties. Remark 1.3. In Banach f -algebras, the weak convergence does not implies the mw-convergence, unless it has Schur property. The con- verse holds true in Banach f -algebras with the multiplication unit. w−→ 0, so Assume(xαy xα mw−−→ xy)for each y ∈ E, then xα − x = xα − xe w−→ x. Remark 1.4. In order continuous Banach f -algebras, order conver- gence and mo-convergence imply the mn-convergence. 2. Results Lemma 2.1. Let (xα)and (yα) be two nets in a Banach f -algebra E. Then the following holds true: mw−−→ x iff xα − x mw−−→ x then yβ (1) xα (2) if xα (3) suppose xα mw−−→ 0 iff xα − x mw−−→ 0; mw−−→ x for each subnet (yβ) of (xα); mw−−→ x and yβ mw−−→ y, then axα + byβ mw−−→ ax + by for any a, b ∈ R; mw−−→ x and xα mw−−→ x then xα mw−−→ x. (4) if xα (5) if xα The mw∗-convergence also has those properties. mw−−→ y, then x = y; Proof. We only need x − y ≤ x − xα + xα − y and (cid:12) xα − x. (cid:12)xα − x(cid:12) (cid:12) ≤ (cid:3) MW-CONVERGENCE 3 Lemma 2.2. For a Banach f -algebra E is order continuous, the mo- convergence implies mw-convergence. Proof. According to [12,remark 1.2], we have the conclusion. (cid:3) Lemma 2.3. Every disjoint decreasing sequence in a Banach f -algebra mw-converges to zero. Proof. Suppose (xn) is a disjoint and decreasing sequence in an Banach f -algebra E. So, xnu is also a disjoint sequence in E for all u ∈ E+ by[2,definition 2.53 and 3,definition 3.1.8].Fix u ∈ E+, by[8.lemma 2], w−→ 0 in E for all w ∈ E+. Thus, we have xnu in particular for fixed n0, taking w as xn0u. Then, for all n ≥ n0, we get uaw−−→ 0 in E. So, xnu∧w xnu = xnu ∧ xn0u = xnu ∧ w Since xnu ≤ xn0u, therefore, xn mw−−→ 0 in E. w−→ 0 (cid:3) Lemma 2.4. Let E be an Banach f -algebra, B be a projection band mw−−→ x in of E and PB be the corresponding band projection. Then xα E implies PB(xα) mw−−→ PB(x) in both E and B. Proof. The proof is similarly to [11,proposition 2.7]. (cid:3) Lemma 2.5. Let (xα) be a net in a Banach f -algebra E with order continuous norm. Then we have that mw−−→ x implies x ∈ E+; (1) 0 ≤ xα (2) if (xα) is monotone and xα mw−−→ x then xα w−→ x. Proof. (1): Assume (xα) consists of non-zero elements and mw-converges mw−−→ x+ ≥ 0. to x ∈ E. Then, by Lemma 2.1(5), we have xα = x+ α Therefore, we have x ∈ E+. (2): For a fixed α ,we have xβ − xα ∈ E+ for β ≥ α. By (1), we mw−−→ x − xα ∈ E+, so xα ↑ x, since E is order continuous, w−→ x. (cid:3) have xβ − xα therefore, xα The lattice operations in Banach lattice f -algebras are mw-continuous in the following sense. Proposition 2.6. Let (xα)α∈A and (yβ)β∈B be two nets in a Banach mw−−→ f -algebra E. If xα x ∨ y.(∧ and are similarily) mw−−→ y then (xα ∨ yβ)(α,β)∈A×B mw−−→ x and yβ Proof. Assume xα mw−−→ x and yβ mw−−→ y. Since we have xα ∨ yβ − x ∨ yu ≤ xα ∨ yβ − xα ∨ yu + xα ∨ y − x ∨ yu ≤ yβ − yu + xα − xu for every u ∈ E+.That is, (xα ∨ yβ)(α,β)∈A×B w−→ 0 mw−−→ x ∨ y. (cid:3) 4 Z. WANG, Z. CHEN, AND J. CHEN The multiplication in f -algebra is mw-continuous in the following sense. Proposition 2.7. Let E be a Banach lattice f -algebra, and (xα)α∈A mw−−→ y for some and (yβ)β∈A be two nets in E. If xα mw−−→ xy. x, y ∈ E ,(xα) or (yβ) is monotone, then we have xαyβ mw−−→ x and yβ Proof. Assume xα and yβ − xu mw−−→ x and yβ mw−−→ y, then we have xα − xu w−→ 0 w−→ 0 for every u ∈ E+.Since xαyβ − xyu = xαyβ − xαy + xαy − xyu ≤ xα − x + xyβ − yu + xα − xyu ≤ xα − xyβ − yu + yβ − yxu + xα − xyu The second and the third terms are weak converges to zero, we show first term is weak converges to zero. Assume (xα) is increasing, then xα − x ≤ 2x and 2yβ − yxu is weak converges to zero, so we have the conclusion. (cid:3) Theorem 2.8. Let E be a order continuous Banach f -algebra with a mw−−→ 0 iff multiplicative unit e and (xn) ↓ be a sequence in E. Then xn xn(u ∧ n) w−→ 0 for all u ∈ E+. Proof. For the forward implication, assume xn for all u ∈ E+. Since xn(u∧e) ≤ xnu mw−−→ 0, then xnu w−→ 0 w−→ 0,therefore, xn(u∧n) w−→ 0. For the reverse implication, by applying [2,theorem 2.57],we have xnu ≤ xn(u − u ∧ ne) + xn(u ∧ ne) ≤ 1 n u2xn + nxn(u ∧ e) Since (xn) ↓ and E is a order continuous Banach f -algebra, we have the first term converges weakly to zero, and it is similarily to the proof mw−−→ of [6,lemma 2.11], the second term weak convergent to zero, so xn 0. (cid:3) It is similarily to [12,proposition 2.4], we have the following result. Theorem 2.9. Let 0 ≤ (xα)α∈A ↓ be a net in a Banach f -algebra E with a quasi-interior point e. Then xα mw−−→ 0 iff xαe w−→ 0. Corollary 2.10. Let 0 ≤ (xα)α∈A ↓ be a net in an order continuous mw−−→ 0 iff Banach f -algebra E with a weak order unit e. Then xα xαe w−→ 0. Corollary 2.11. Let 0 ≤ (xα)α∈A ↓ be a net in a separable Banach f -algebra E. Then xα mw−−→ 0 iff xαe w−→ 0. MW-CONVERGENCE 5 Corollary 2.12. Let 0 ≤ (xα)α∈A ↓ be a net in a Banach f -algebra E mw−−→ 0 iff xα(e + u) w−→ 0 for all with a quasi-interior point e. Then xα u ∈ E+. Definition 2.13. A subset A of E is called a f -weak-almost order bounded if for any ǫ > 0, there is u ∈ E+, f ∈ E + such that f (x − ux) ≤ ǫ. ′ Next, we have the following work, it is similarily to [10,proposition 2.8]. Theorem 2.14. Let E be a Banach f -algebra. If (xα) is f -weak-almost order bounded and mw-converges to x, then xα ′ σ(E,E −−−−−→ x. ) Proof. If (xα) is f -weak-almost order bounded net. Then the net (xα − x) is also. For any ǫ > 0, there exists u > 0, f ∈ E + such that ′ f (xα − x − uxα − x) ≤ ǫ. mw−−→ x, we have xα −xu w−→ 0. Therefore, we have xα Since xα x. ′ σ(E,E ) −−−−−→ (cid:3) Definition 2.15. Let (xα) be a net in a Banach lattice f -algebra E. Then (1) (xα) is said to be mw-Cauchy if the net (xα − xα′ )(α,α′ )∈A×A mw-converges to 0. (2) E is called (σ)-mw-complete if every mw-Cauchy net(sequence) in E is mw-convergent. (3) E is called mw-continuous if xα o−→ 0 implies that xα mw−−→ 0. mw−−→ 0. Lemma 2.16. A Banach f -algebra is mw-continuous iff xα ↓ 0 implies xα Proof. Let (xα) o−→ 0, we have there exists yβ ↓ 0 and xα ≤ yβ. Since yβ ↓ 0, so yβ (cid:3) mw−−→ 0, we have xα mw−−→ 0. Theorem 2.17. Let E be an mw-complete Banach f -algebra. Then the following statements are quivalent: (1) E is mw-continuous; (2) if 0 ≤ xα ↑≤ x holds in E then (xα) is an mw-Cauchy net; (3) xα ↓ 0 implies xα mw−−→ 0 in E. Proof. (1) ⇒ (2): By the proof of [2,lemma 1.37], we have (yβ −xα)α,β ↓ mw−−→ 0, so (xα) is an 0; according to lemma 2.16, we have (yβ − xα)α,β mw-Cauchy net. 6 Z. WANG, Z. CHEN, AND J. CHEN (2) ⇒ (3): Fix arbitrary α0, we have 0 ≤ (xα0 − xα)(α≥α0) ↑≤ xα0. So (xα0 − xα)(α≥α0) is mw-Cauchy net ,so (xα′ − xα) mw−−→ 0. Since E mw−−→ x. Because of lemma 2.5, we have x = 0, is mw-complete, so xα therefore, xα mw−−→ 0. (3) ⇒ (1): By lemma 2.16. (cid:3) Corollary 2.18. (σ)-mw-complete also has those properties of the last theorem. Corollary 2.19. Every mw-continuous and mw-complete Banach f - algebra is Dedekind complete. Proof. Suppose E is mw-continuous and mw-complete and 0 ≤ xα ↑≤ mw−−→ x and by the y in E. By theorem 2.17, (xα) is mw-Cauchy, so xα proof of lemma 2.5, we have xα ↑ x, so E is Dedekind complete. (cid:3) It was observed in [7,8,10], we now turn our attention to a topology on Banach f -algebras. The sets of the form Vu,ǫ,f = {x ∈ E : f (xu) < ǫ}, where u ∈ E+, ǫ > 0, f ∈ E + form a base of zero neighborhoods for a Hausdorff topology, and the convergence in this topology is exactly the mw-convergen. ′ Similarily to [7,8,10], we these conclusions. Lemma 2.20. Vu,ǫ,f is either contained in [−u, u] or contains a non- trivial ideal. Lemma 2.21. If Vu,ǫ,f is contained in [−u, u], then u is a strong unit. Similarily to [10] Theorem 2.22. Let E be a Banach lattice.E when one of the following conditions is valid: (1) mw-topology agrees with norm topology. (2) mw-topology agrees with weak topology. ′ has a strong order unit Problem 2.23. How to describe the compactness of mw-topology. When the mw-topology is metrizability. Acknowledgement. xxxxxx References [1] W. A. J. Luxemburg and A. C. Zaanen, Riesz Spaces. II, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1983. [2] C. D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw, Positive Operators, Springer, 2006. MW-CONVERGENCE 7 [3] P. Meyer-Nieberg, Banach lattices, Universitext, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. [4] N. Gao and F. Xanthos, Unbounded order convergence and application to martingales without probability, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 415(2), 2014, 931-947. [5] H. Li, Z. Chen ,Some loose ends on unbounded order convergence, Positivity. 22(1), 2018, 83-90. [6] Y. Deng, M. O'Brien and V. G. Troitsky, Unbounded norm convergence in Banach lattices, to appear in Positivity.21(3),2018,963-974. [7] M. Kandi´c, M. A. A. Marabeh and V. G. Troitsky, Unbounded norm topology in Banach lattices, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 451(1), 2017, 259-279. [8] Zabeti, Omid, Unbounded absolute weak convergence in Banach lattices, Pos- itivity 22.2 (2018): 501-505. [9] H.Li and Z.Chen, Some results on unbounded absolute weak Dunford-Pettis operators, arXiv(2019):1902.00232. [10] Z.Wang ,Z.Chen and J.Chen , Unbounded absolute weak* convergence in dual Banach lattices, arXiv(2019):1903.02168v2. [11] A. Aydin, Multiplicative order convergence in f -algebras , arXiv(2019):1901.04043v2. [12] A. Aydin, Multiplicative norm convergence in Banach lattice f -algebras , arXiv(2019):1902.10927. School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610000. E-mail address: [email protected] School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610000. E-mail address: [email protected] School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610000. E-mail address: [email protected]
1708.07669	2	1708	2018-01-05T10:58:11	The distance between two limit $q$-Bernstein operators	[ "math.FA" ]	For $q\in(0,1),$ let $B_q$ denote the limit $q$-Bernstein operator. In this paper, the distance between $B_q$ and $B_r$ for distinct $q$ and $r$ in the operator norm on $C[0,1]$ is estimated, and it is proved that $1\leqslant \\|B_q-B_r\\|\leqslant 2,$ where both of the equalities can be attained. To elaborate more, the distance depends on whether or not $r$ and $q$ are rational powers of each other. For example, if $r^j\neq q^m$ for all $j,m\in \mathbb{N},$ then $\\|B_q-B_r\\|=2,$ and if $r=q^m, m\in \mathbb{N},$ then $\\|B_q-B_r\\|=2(m-1)/m.$	math.FA	math	The distance between two limit q-Bernstein operators Sofiya Ostrovska and Mehmet Turan Atilim University, Department of Mathematics, Incek 06836, Ankara, Turkey e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract For q ∈ (0, 1), let Bq denote the limit q-Bernstein operator. In this paper, the distance between Bq and Br for distinct q and r in the operator norm on C[0, 1] is estimated, and it is proved that 1 6 kBq − Brk 6 2, where both of the equalities can be attained. To elaborate more, the distance depends on whether or not r and q are rational powers of each other. For example, if rj 6= qm for all j, m ∈ N, then kBq − Brk = 2, and if r = qm, m ∈ N, then kBq − Brk = 2(m − 1)/m. Keywords: Limit q-Bernstein operator, Peano kernel, positive linear operators 2010 MSC: 47A30, 47B30, 41A36 1 Introduction and statement of results The limit q-Bernstein operator Bq can be viewed as an analogue of the Sz´asz-Mirakyan operator pertinent the Euler distribution, also known as the q-deformed Poisson distribution, see [5, Ch. 3, Sec. 3.4] and [9]. The latter is used in the q-boson theory, which delivers a q-deformation of the quantum harmonic oscillator formalism [3]. Going into details, the q-deformed Poisson distribution defines the distribution of energy in a q-analogue of the coherent state [3, 7]. The q-analogue of the boson operator calculus is recognized as an indispensable area within theoretical physics. It 1 brings out explicit expressions for the representations of the quantum group SUq(2), which plays an important role in various problems such as exactly solvable lattice models of statistical mechanics, integrable model field theories, conformal field theory, only to mention a few. For additional information the reader is referred to [4]. Therefore, linear operators related to the q-deformed Poisson distribution, in particular the limit q-Bernstein operator, are of significant interest for applications. The operator Bq also emerges as a limit for a sequence of q-Bernstein polynomials in the case 0 < q < 1. Over the past years, the limit q-Bernstein operator has been studied widely from different perspectives. Its approximation, spectral, and functional-analytic properties, probabilistic interpretation, the behavior of iterates, and the impact on the analytic characteristics of functions have been examined. See, for example, [8, 12, 13]. The review of obtained results along with extensive bibliography can be found in [10]. Let q > 0. For any a ∈ C, as given in [2, Ch. 10], we denote: (a; q)0 := 1, (a; q)k := k−1 (1 − aqs), Ys=0 (a; q)∞ := ∞ Ys=0 (1 − aqs). Definition 1.1. [6] For each q ∈ (0, 1), and f ∈ C[0, 1], the limit q-Bernstein operator is defined by f 7→ Bqf where f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) if x ∈ [0, 1) ∞ Bq(f ; x) = Xk=0  f (1) if x = 1 in which pk(q; x) = xk(x; q)∞ (q; q)k . As it can be readily seen that Bq(f ; x) is defined by the values of f on the set Jq := {1 − qk : k ∈ N0}. Further, Euler's identity [2, page 490, Corollary 10.2.2] 1 (x; q)∞ = ∞ Xk=0 xk (q; q)k , x < 1, q < 1, 2 (1) (2) (3) implies that ∞ Xk=0 pk(q; x) =  1, x ∈ [0, 1) 0, x = 1. (4) Formulae (1) and (4) show that Bq is a positive linear operator on C[0, 1] with kBqk = 1. Recently, the continuity of the operator Bq with respect to the parameter has been examined in [1] where the outcome below has been presented. Theorem 1.2. For every f ∈ C[0, 1], one has: and the convergence is uniform on [0, 1]. lim q→a Bq(f ; x) = Ba(f ; x) This demonstrates the continuity of Bq in strong operator norm. The aim of the current paper is to investigate whether the continuity persists with respect to the topology produced by the uniform operator norm. It turns out that in this topology, {Bq}q∈(0,1) forms a discrete set of operators where each Bq is an isolated point so that kBq − Brk > 1 whenever q 6= r. The reasoning of the present paper is based essentially on the next theorem, which in itself can be of interest. The idea of the proof is attributed to a statement made by a Mathoverflow user under the nickname 'fedja', see [14]. Theorem 1.3. Let q ∈ (0, 1) and m > 2 be an integer. Then, for all x ∈ [0, 1] and all k ∈ N0, the following inequality holds: pmk(q; x) 6 pk(qm; x). (5) Obviously, by the triangle inequality, kBq − Brk 6 2. In some cases, the equality is attained, as claimed by the below-mentioned result. Theorem 1.4. Let q, r ∈ [0, 1]. If Jq ∩ Jr = {0}, then kBq − Brk = 2. Now, comes the case Jq ∩ Jr 6= {0}. This situation occurs when rj = qm for some positive integers j and m and reveals: 3 Theorem 1.5. Let 0 < r < q < 1 and rj = qm where j and m are mutually prime positive integers. Then kBq − Brk > 2(m−1) m . In the case when j = 1, i.e., Jqm = Jr ⊂ Jq, the exact value of kBq − Brk has been obtained. Theorem 1.6. Let q ∈ (0, 1) and r = qm for some integer m > 2. Then kBq − Brk = 2(m−1) m . Corollary 1.7. For any q 6= r, one has 1 6 kBq − Brk 6 2. The inequalities are sharp in the sense that both equalities are attained. 2 Some auxiliary results In this section, some results which will later contribute in proving our theorems, are presented. To begin with, we point out the following: Observation 2.1. For any positive integer m, one has: lim x→1− ∞ Xk=0 pmk(q; x) = 1 m . (6) Proof. Clearly, pmk(q; x) = (x; q)∞ ∞ Xk=0 xmk (q; q)mk ∞ Xk=0 6 (x; q)∞ xmk (q; q)k = (x; q)∞ (xm; q)∞ ∞ Xk=0 where the identity (3) is used. Therefore, ∞ Xk=0 pmk(q; x) 6 (x; q) (xm; q)∞ = 1 − x 1 − xm (qx; q)∞ (qxm; q)∞ → 1 m as x → 1−. On the other hand, pmk(q; x) = (x; q)∞ > (x; q)∞ ∞ Xk=0 xmk (q; q)mk ∞ Xk=0 (x; q)∞ = 1 − x 1 − xm = (q; q)∞(1 − xm) ∞ xmk (q; q)∞ Xk=0 (qx; q)∞ (q; q)∞ → 1 m as x → 1−. Lemma 2.2. If, for every k ∈ N, inequality (5) holds for x ∈ [0, 1 − qmk+m/2], then it holds for all x ∈ [0, 1]. 4 Proof. Clearly, [0, 1] = {1}S∞ (2), inequality (5) can be expressed as k=1[0, 1 − qmk+m/2]. For x = 1, the inequality (5) is obvious. Now, by xmk(x; q)∞ (q; q)mk 6 xk(x; q)∞ (qm; qm)k or, equivalently, Clearly, uk(x) := x(m−1)k k−1 m−1 Yj=0 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mj 6 ∞ m−1 Yj=0 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mjx . (7) max j∈N uj(x) = uk(x) on [1 − αk−1, 1 − αk] where αk can be found from the equation uk+1(x) = uk(x). Therefore, if for every k ∈ N, (7) holds on [0, 1 − αk], then it holds on [1 − αk−1, 1 − αk], and, as a result, on [0, 1]. That is why, (7) is going to be proved on [0, 1 − qmk+m/2] ⊇ [0, 1 − αk] for every k ∈ N. To justify this inclusion, one has to show that αk > qmk+m/2. Indeed, m−1 (1 − αk)m−1 = m−1 m−1 (1 − qmk+ℓ) [(1 − qmk+ℓ)(1 − qmk+m−ℓ)] Yℓ=1 =vuut Yℓ=1 Yℓ=1 p1 − qmk+ℓ − qmk+m−ℓ + q2mk+m Yℓ=1 q(1 − qmk+m/2)2 = (1 − qmk+m/2)m−1 m−1 = 6 by virtue of the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality. This completes the proof. Lemma 2.3. Let ρ(t) = 1/(et + e−t − 2), t > 0. Then, for all s, t > 0, the following inequality is valid: ρ(s + t) 6 e−sρ(t). (8) Proof. Equivalently, one may prove that 1/ρ(s + t) > es/ρ(t), that is, e−t − 2 6 e−2s−t − 2e−s. If s = 0, then both sides are equal, while for s > 0, the derivative of the right hand side with respect to s is positive, which yields the statement. 5 we set, for m > 2, For the sequel, a special quadrature formula to approximateR b b − a m Qm(f ; a, b) := m−1 b − a m − 1 Xj=1 f(cid:18)a + j(cid:19) . (9) a f (t)dt is needed. More precisely, It is not difficult to see that the quadrature formula gives the exact value of the integral for polynomials of degree at most 1. Denote by Ra,b(f ) the error in this approximation, i.e., Ra,b(f ) =Z b a f (t)dt − Qm(f ; a, b). Lemma 2.4. The error (10) is given by Ra,b(f ) =Z b a Ka,b(t)f ′′(t)dt where Ka,b(t) =   and h1 = b−a m . 1 1 2(t − a)2 m−1(cid:1)2 2(cid:0)t − a − mh1k 2(b − t)2 1 + mh2 1k(m−k−1) 2(m−1)2 if t ∈ [a, a + h1] if t ∈ [a + kh1, a + (k + 1)h1], 1 6 k 6 m − 2 if t ∈ [b − h1, b] (10) (11) (12) Proof. By Peano's Theorem (see, for example [11, Theorem 3.2.3, page 123]), the error is expressed by (11) where Ka,b(t) = Ra,b((x − t)+) and (x − t)+ =  x − t 0 if x > t, if x < t. Here, (x− t)+ is considered as a function of x. Plain calculation of Ra,b((x− t)+) using (10) results in (12). In what follows, given h > 0, denote by K(t) the h-periodic function on R such that K(t) = K0,h(t) for t ∈ [0, h] where Ka,b(t) is given by (12). In other words, K(t + h) = K(t) for all t ∈ R and K(t) = 1 2 t2 − hk m − 1 t + h2k(k + 1) 2m(m − 1) where h1 = h/m. for t ∈ [kh1, (k + 1)h1], 0 6 k 6 m − 1 (13) 6 Lemma 2.5. For all m > 2, the following inequality holds: Proof. For j = 0, 1, 2, set Z h 0 K(t) dt t2 > 8Z 3h h K(t) dt t2 . Ij :=Z h 0 K(t) (t + jh)2 dt. The inequality (14) is equivalent to I0 > 8(I1 + I2). Now, I0 =Z h 0 = h 2m = h − which gives m−1 kh1 Xk=1Z (k+1)h1 k(cid:19) + 1 + K(t) 0 m−1 t2 dt =Z h1 Xk=1(cid:20) h hk 2m − m − 1 k ln(cid:18)1 + Xk=1 K(t) t2 dt + ln(cid:18)1 + k(cid:19) m−1 h 1 m − 1 K(t) t2 dt h2k(k + 1) 2m(m − 1)(cid:18) 1 kh1 − (14) 1 (k + 1)h1(cid:19)(cid:21) (m − 1)I0 h = m − 1 − m ln m + ln(m!). On the other hand, for j > 1, using (13) and the substitution x = t + jh, one obtains Ij =Z h 0 m−1 m−1 kh1 K(t) K(t) Xk=0Z (k+1)h1 (t + jh)2 dt = 2 − h(cid:18)j + (cid:20) 1 m − 1(cid:19) ln(cid:18)1 + Xk=0Z jh+(k+1)h1 Xk=0(cid:18)j + h 2 − h jh+kh1 (t + jh)2 dt. + h2(cid:18) j2 m − 1(cid:19) 1 jm + k(cid:19) + Sj m−1 x k k 2 1 = = where + jk m − 1 + k(k + 1) 2m(m − 1)(cid:19) 1 x2(cid:21) dx Sj = = = = m−1 2 h h2 h1 Xk=0(cid:18)j2 2 "j2(cid:18) 1 j − 2 ( j 2 (cid:20) j j + 1 j + 1 + h h + + + jk m − 1 j + 1(cid:19) + 1 1 m − 1 m m − 1 − k(k + 1) 2m(m − 1)(cid:19)(cid:18) 1 jm + k − 1 m − 1 m−1 Xk=0 [2mjk + k(k + 1)](cid:18) 1 1 jm + k + 1(cid:19) jm + k − jm + k + 1(cid:19)(cid:21)) 1 1 jm + k + 1(cid:19)# m−1 Xk=0(cid:20)1 − jm(jm + 1)(cid:18) 1 jm(jm + 1) m − 1 (cid:18) 1 jm − 7 jm + k − jm + m(cid:19)(cid:21) = 1 h 2 . Therefore, or Ij = h − h m−1 Xk=0(cid:18)j + k m − 1(cid:19) ln(cid:18)1 + 1 jm + k(cid:19) Ij h = 1 − j ln(cid:18)1 + 1 j(cid:19) − m m − 1 ln(jm + m) + ln[(jm + m)!] − ln[(jm)!] m − 1 . With the help of Stirling's formula √2πnn+1/2e−n+1/(12n+1) < n! < √2πnn+1/2e−n+1/(12n), one gets I1 + I2 h m[ln(2m) + ln(3m)] m[ln(2m) + ln(3m)] + ln[(3m)!] − ln(m!)] m − 1 = 2 + ln 2 − 2 ln 3 − 6 2 + ln 2 − 2 ln 3 − m − 1(cid:20)(cid:18)3m + + 1 m − 1 m − 1 1 2(cid:19) ln(3m) −(cid:18)m + 1 2(cid:19) ln(m) − 2m + 1 36m − 1 12m + 1(cid:21) and as a result while (m − 1)(I1 + I2) h 6 −2 + 5 2 ln 3 − ln 2 + 1 36m − 1 12m + 1 , (m − 1)I0 h > −1 + ln√2πm + 1 12m + 1 . The needed inequality I0 > 8(I1 + I2) for all m > 2 follows from the fact that −1 + ln√2πm + 1 12m + 1 > 8(cid:18)−2 + 5 2 ln 3 − ln 2 + 1 36m − 1 12m + 1(cid:19) , or equivalently, To see this, let ln√2πm + 9 12m + 1 − 2 9m + 15 − 20 ln 3 + 8 ln 2 > 0. θ(x) = ln√2πx + 9 12x + 1 − 2 9x + 15 − 20 ln 3 + 8 ln 2. 8 Then, θ′(x) = 1 2x − 108 (12x + 1)2 + 2 9x2 > 1 2x − 108 (12x)2 + 2 9x2 = 18x − 19 36x2 > 0 for x > 2. Hence, for all m > 2, one has: which completes the proof. θ(m) > θ(2) ≈ 0.0073, Remark 2.6. In the case m = 2, an alternative proof is presented in [14]. Corollary 2.7. Let ρ(t) be the function from Lemma 2.3. Then Z h 0 K(t)ρ(t)dt > 8Z 3h h K(t)ρ(t)dt. Proof. The statement is a consequence of the fact that t 7→ 1 for t > 0. t2ρ(t) = et+e−t−2 t2 is an increasing function Corollary 2.8. For h 6 h0 := ln 4, Z h 0 K(t)ρ(t)dt > e3h/2Z 3h h K(t)ρ(t)dt. Next, for a given f : [a, b] → R, denote by Ea,b the error in the composite quadrature formula to approximate R b a f (t)dt when the interval [a, b] is divided into n subintervals of equal length h and the rule (9) is applied on each subinterval. That is, Xj=1 where h = (b − a)/n. If b = ∞, we take n = ∞. f (t)dt − Ea,b =Z b n a Qm(f ; a + (j − 1)h, a + jh), (15) Lemma 2.9. Let f (t) = − ln(1 − e−t), t > 0. Then, for all a > 0 and any step size, one obtains: Es+a,∞ 6 e−sEa,∞. Proof. By Peano's Theorem on the integral representation of the error term, Es,∞ =Z ∞ s f ′′(t)K(t − s)dt, 9 where K(t) is defined by (13). Since f ′′(t) = ρ(t), from Lemma 2.3, application of (8) yields: Es+a,∞ =Z ∞ s+a ρ(t)K(t − s − a)dt =Z ∞ a ρ(t + s)K(t − a)dt 6 e−sZ ∞ a ρ(t)K(t − a)dt = e−sEa,∞. Lemma 2.10. If f (t) = − ln(1 − e−t), t > 0, then for all S, T > 0, there holds: Z ∞ S f (t)dt > −ST +Z T 0 f (t)dt. Proof. It can be observed geometrically since f (t) is a decreasing continuous function symmetric about the line y = x. 3 Proofs of the main results Proof of Theorem 1.3. As it was done in the proof of Lemma 2.2, inequality (5) is equivalent to x(m−1)k k−1 m−1 Yj=0 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mj 6 ∞ m−1 Yj=0 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mjx . Taking the logarithm of both sides leads to −(m − 1)k ln(cid:18) 1 x(cid:19) + k−1 m−1 Xj=0 Xℓ=1 ln(cid:18) 1 1 − qℓ+mj(cid:19) 6 ∞ m−1 Xj=0 Xℓ=1 ln(cid:18) 1 1 − qℓ+mjx(cid:19) . Set h = ln(1/qm), S = ln(1/x), T = kh and f (t) = − ln(1 − e−t). Then the inequality becomes −ST + k−1 Xj=0 h m − 1 m−1 Xℓ=1 f (jh + h m ℓ) 6 ∞ Xj=0 h m − 1 m−1 Xℓ=1 f (S + jh + h m ℓ) which can be written as −ST + k−1 Xj=0 Qm(f ; jh, (j + 1)h) 6 ∞ Xj=0 Qm(f ; S + jh, S + (j + 1)h). The sums in the last inequality can be viewed as the composite quadrature formulas for the integrals R T 0 f (t)dt and R ∞ S f (t)dt, respectively. Therefore, by (15), one has −ST +Z T 0 f (t)dt − E0,T 6Z ∞ S f (t)dt − ES,∞. 10 Using Lemma 2.10, if one can show that E0,T > ES,∞ (16) for h 6 h0, the proof will be complete for q > 1/2. Due to Lemma 2.2, we need only to deal with the case x ∈ [0, 1 − qmk+m/2] or e−S 6 1 − e−T −h/2. (17) By Lemma 2.9, one derives that ES,∞ 6 e−SE0,∞ and also ET,∞ 6 e−T +hEh,∞ As f ′′(t) = ρ(t), using Corollary 2.8 along with Peano's Theorem implies that Eh,3h 6 e−3h/2E0,h whenever h 6 h0. Thence, whence Eh,∞ = Eh,3h + E3h,∞ 6 e−3h/2E0,h + e−2hEh,∞ 6 e−3h/2E0,∞, E0,T = E0,∞ − ET,∞ >(cid:0)1 − e−T −h/2(cid:1) E0,∞ > e−SE0,∞ > ES,∞ due to (17). This is the desired inequality (16). To finish the proof, we observe that for all q ∈ (0, 1 2), x ∈ [0, 1] and i ∈ N, it is true that 1 6 x 1 − qi 1 − qix and thence, for q ∈ (0, 1 2) and x ∈ [0, 1] Yℓ=1 Yj=0 Yj=0 1 − qℓ+mj m−1 k−1 k−1 6 x m−1 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mjx 6 ∞ m−1 Yj=0 Yℓ=1 1 1 − qℓ+mjx . The proof is complete. Proof of Theorem 1.4. For given ε > 0, one can find δ > 0 such that p0(q; x) < ε/4 for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. Because of (4), for N ∈ N, one may write: Xk=N +1 pk(q; x) = 1 − p0(q; x) − x ∈ [0, 1). Xk=1 pk(q; x), ∞ N Notice that the series in (4) converges uniformly on any closed subinterval of [0, 1), in particular, on [0, 1 − δ]. Therefore, there exists N0 ∈ N, such that ∞ Xk=N +1 pk(q; x) < ε 4 , for all x ∈ [0, 1 − δ], N > N0. 11 Hence, on [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ], there holds: pk(q; x) > 1 − ε 2 . N Xk=1 (18) Apply this procedure to find N1, N2 and δ satisfying both pk(q; x) > 1 − ε 2 and N1 Xk=1 pk(r; x) > 1 − ε 2 N2 Xk=1 for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. Setting N = max{N1, N2}, one obtains N Xk=1 [pk(q; x) + pk(r; x)] > 2 − ε for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. At this point, for every N ∈ N, consider a function fN ∈ C[0, 1] such that kfNk = 1 and when k = 1, 2, . . . , N, fN (1 − qk) = 1 fN (1 − rk) = −1 when k = 1, 2, . . . , N, fN (1 − qk) = fN (1 − rk) = 0 when k 6= 1, 2, . . . , N, . Then, Since, (Bq − Br) f (x) = N Xk=1 [pk(q; x) + pk(r; x)] > 2 − ε for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. kBq − Brk > k (Bq − Br) f (x)k > 2 − ε and as ε > 0 has been chosen arbitrarily, one concludes that kBq − Brk > 2. On the other hand, by the triangle inequality, one has kBq − Brk 6 2, and the statement follows. ∞ Xk=0 =Xmk (Bq − Br) f (x) = Proof of Theorem 1.5. Let f ∈ C[0, 1]. Then, for x ∈ [0, 1), Xk=0 f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) − f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) +Xm∤k −Xjk Xk=0 f (1 − qmk) [pmk(q; x) − pjk(r; x)] f (1 − rk)pk(r; x) −Xj∤k ∞ = 12 ∞ f (1 − rk)pk(r; x) f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) f (1 − rk)pk(r; x) +Xm∤k f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) −Xj∤k f (1 − rk)pk(r; x) For each N ∈ N, choose fN ∈ C[0, 1] with kfNk = 1 in such a way that for j ∤ k, k 6 N, fN (1 − rk) = −1 fN (1 − qk) = −1 fN (1 − qk) = 1 fN (1 − qk) = fN (1 − rk) = 0 for k > N. for mk, k 6 N, for m ∤ k, k 6 N, Then, (Bq − Br) fN (x) = N N ⌊N/m⌋ pk(q; x) + pk(r; x) − 2 pmk(q; x). Xk=0 Xk=0 Xk=0 ⌊N/m⌋ Xk=0 Following the line of reasoning in the preceding proof and bearing in mind (6), one may opt for δ > 0 and N ∈ N such that, for every ε > 0, N Xk=0 N Xk=0 The statement is now immediate. pk(q; x) + pk(r; x) − 2 pmk(q; x) > 2 − 2 m − ε when x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. ∞ ∞ (Bq − Br) f (x) = Proof of Theorem 1.6. Let f ∈ C[0, 1]. Then Xk=0 f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) − f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) +Xm∤k f (1 − qmk) [pmk(q; x) − pk(qm; x)] +Xm∤k Xk=0 =Xmk Xk=0 f (1 − rk)pk(r; x) f (1 − qk)pk(q; x) − = ∞ Using Theorem 1.3 and (4), the last inequality becomes ∞ f (1 − qmk)pk(qm; x) Xk=0 f (1 − qk)pk(qm; x) (Bq − Br) f (x) 6 2kfk 1 − pmk(q; x)! , for x ∈ [0, 1). ∞ Xk=0 Now, by (6), for all ε > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that pmk(q; x) > 1 m − ε 2 , for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. ∞ Xk=0 Therefore, (Bq − Br) f (x) 6 2kfk(cid:18)1 − 1 m + ε 2(cid:19) , for x ∈ [1 − 2δ, 1 − δ]. This implies that kBq − Brk 6 2− 2/m. Together with Theorem 1.5, this yields the statement. 13 Acknowledgments During the work on this paper, the authors were lucky to see the discussion on Mathoverflow [14] concerning inequality (5) in the case m = 2. We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all MO users, who participated in this fruitful discussion, especially to the user whose nickname is 'fedja' and whose grasp of the subject was of a significant inspiration. We are also pleased to thank Prof. Alexandre Eremenko (Purdue University, USA) for his encouragement and valuable help throughout the entire process of our work. References [1] M. M. Almesbahi, On Properties of q-Bernstein Polynomials, Master's Thesis, Atilim Uniersity, 2017. [2] G. E. Andrews, R. Askey, R. Roy, Special Functions, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and Its Applications, The University Press, Cambridge, 1999, 664 pp. [3] L.C.Biedenharn, The quantum group SUq(2) and a q-analogue of the boson operators, J.Phys.A: Math. Gen., 22, 1989, L873-L878. [4] L. Castellani , J. Wess (eds), Quantum Groups and Their Applications in Physics, IOS Press, 1996, 652 pages [5] Ch. A. Charalambides, Discrete q-Distributions, Wiley, 2016. [6] II'inskii A, Ostrovska S. Convergence of generalized Bernstein polynomials. J. Approx. Theory 2002; 116(1):100-112. [7] S. Jing, The q-deformed binomial distribution and its asymptotic behaviour, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 27, 1994, 493-499. [8] N. I. Mahmudov, Higher order limit q-Bernstein operators, Math. Methods Appl. Sciences, (2011) 34(13), 1618-1626. 14 [9] S. Ostrovska, Positive linear operators generated by analytic functions, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. (Math. Sci.) Vol. 117, No 4, November 2007, pp. 485-493. [10] S. Ostrovska, A Survey of Results on the Limit q-Bernstein Operator, Journal of Applied Mathematics, Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 159720, 7 pages. [11] J. Stoer, R. Bulirsch, Introduction to numerical analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1980. [12] V.S. Videnskii, On some classes of q-parametric positive operators, Operator Theory, Advances and Applications, Vol. 158, (2005), 213-222. [13] H. Wang, Properties of convergence for the q-Meyer-Konig and Zeller operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 335 (2), (2007), 1360-1373. [14] https://mathoverflow.net/questions/269740/inequality-for-functions-on-0-1 15
1309.1908	1	1309	2013-09-07T21:18:53	On Borel structures in the Banach space C(\beta\omega)	[ "math.FA" ]	M. Talagrand showed that, for the Cech-Stone compactification \beta\omega\ of the space of natural numbers, the norm and the weak topology generate different Borel structures in the Banach space C(\beta\omega). We prove that the Borel structures in C(\beta\omega) generated by the weak and the pointwise topology are also different. We also show that in C(\omega), where \omega=\beta\omega - \omega, there is no countable family of pointwise Borel sets separating functions from C(\omega*).	math.FA	math	ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK Abstract. M. Talagrand showed that, for the Cech-Stone compactification βω of the space of natural numbers ω, the norm and the weak topology generate different Borel structures in the Banach space C(βω). We prove that the Borel structures in C(βω) generated by the weak and the pointwise topology are also different. We also show that in C(ω∗), where ω∗ = βω \ ω, there is no countable family of pointwise Borel sets separating functions from C(ω∗). 3 1 0 2 p e S 7 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 8 0 9 1 . 9 0 3 1 : v i X r a 1. Introduction Given a compact space K, by C(K) we denote the Banach space of continuous real-valued functions K, equipped with the standard supremum norm. If K = βω, the Cech-Stone compactification of the space ω of natural numbers, then C(βω) is isometric to the classical Banach space l∞. One can consider three natural topologies on C(K): τp ⊆ weak ⊆ norm, where τp is the topology of pointwise convergence. Consequently, one has three corresponding Borel σ-algebras Borel(C(K), τp) ⊆ Borel(C(K), weak) ⊆ Borel(C(K), norm). Those three σ-algebras are equal for many classes of nonmetrizable spaces K, this is the case for all spaces K such that the space C(K) admits the so called Date: September 30, 2018. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46B26, 46E15, 54C35, 54H05. Key words and phrases. weak topology, pointwise topology, C(K), Borel structure. Research of the first author was partially supported by the National Science Center research grant DEC-2012/07/B/ST1/03363. Research of the second author was partially supported by MNiSW Grant N N201 418939 (2010 -- 2013). 1 2 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK pointwise Kadec renorming, see [Ed2] and [Ra], we also refer the reader to the paper [MP, Sec. 3] for some comments concerning coincidence of these σ-algebras. On the other hand, Talagrand [Ta] proved that Borel(C(βω), weak) 6= Borel(C(βω), norm). Marciszewski and Pol [MP] showed that Borel(C(S), τp) 6= Borel(C(S), weak) for S being the Stone space of the measure algebra. Since, for the space S, the Banach spaces C(S) and C(βω) are isomorphic, it follows that C(S) has three different Borel structures. Let us note that the Borel structures in function spaces (C(S), τp) and (C(βω), τp) are essentially different, see Remark 4.6. We show in the present paper that Borel(C(βω), τp) 6= Borel(C(βω), weak); our result and Talagrand's theorem mentioned above imply that, even though βω is separable, the space C(βω) possesses three different Borel structures as well. Proving our main result, stated below as Theorem 3.5, we build on ideas from [MP] and show that in fact there is a measure bµ ∈ C(βω)∗ which is not pointwise Borel measurable. Recall that, if ϕ : K → L is a continuous surjection, then the map f 7→ f ◦ ϕ defines an embedding of C(L) into C(K) with respect to the norm, weak, and pointwise topologies. Since βω is a continuous image of ω∗, it follows from Theorem 3.5 that for ω∗ = βω \ ω one also has Borel(C(ω∗), τp) 6= Borel(C(ω∗), weak). This result was obtained in [MP, remark 6] under some additional set-theoretic assumption. We show in Section 4 that no sequence of pointwise Borel sets separates points of C(ω∗). Section 5 contains some remarks concerning σ-fields of Baire sets in function spaces on βω and ω∗. 2. Measures on ω and βω We shall consider only nonnegative, finite measures. We will use the well- known fact that any finitely additive measure µ on (ω, P(ω)) corresponds to a uniquely determined Radon measure bµ on βω such that µ(A) = bµ(A), for any A ∈ P(ω), where A is the closure of A in βω, cf. [Fr]. ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 3 In the sequel, we consider only measures µ on ω vanishing on singletons; then for the corresponding measures bµ on βω, we have bµ(ω) = 0, and we may as well treat such measures bµ as being defined on ω∗. The following auxiliary result can be found in [BJ, Theorem 2.2.4]. Proposition 2.1. If (Gn)n is a sequence of dense open subsets of 2ω then there is a sequence (In)n of pairwise disjoint finite subsets of ω and a sequence of functions ϕn : In → 2 such that x ∈ Tn Gn for every x ∈ 2ω for which the set {n ∈ ω : xIn = ϕn} is infinite. Proposition 2.2. No nonzero measure on ω, vanishing on singletons, is mea- surable with respect to the σ-algebra of subsets of 2ω having the Baire property. Proof. Suppose, towards a contradiction, that µ, treated as a function on 2ω, is measurable with respect to the σ-algebra of subsets of 2ω having the Baire prop- erty. Without loss of generality, we can assume that µ(ω) = 1. The inverse image µ−1(S) of any Borel subset S of the unit interval [0, 1] is a tail-set with the Baire property, hence, by 0 -- 1 Law (see [Ox]) is either meager or comeager. Observe that there exist (necessarily unique) t ∈ [0, 1] such that µ−1(t) is comeager. Indeed, if µ−1(1) is comeager, then we are done. Otherwise, we can define inductively a sequence of integers kn ≤ 2n − 1, such that µ−1([kn/2n, (kn + 1)/2n)) is comeager for n ∈ ω. Then the required t is a unique element of Tn∈ω[kn/2n, (kn + 1)/2n). The map h : P(ω) → P(ω), defined by h(A) = ω \ A, is a homeomorphism of P(ω) such that h(µ−1(t)) = µ−1(1 − t). Therefore t = 1 − t, and t = 1/2. By Proposition 2.1 , we have functions ϕn : In → 2 defined on pairwise disjoint finite sets In such that µ(A) = 1/2 whenever χA agrees with infinitely many ϕn's. Let N1, N2, N3 be a partition of ω consisting of infinite sets and let Bi =[{{k : ϕn(k) = 1} : n ∈ Ni}, i = 1, 2, 3. Then, for each i ≤ 3, µ(Bi) = 1/2 and the sets Bi are pairwise disjoint, a contradiction. (cid:3) For any subset A of ω we write d(A) = lim sup n A ∩ n n , 4 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK for the outer asymptotic density of a set A and d(A) = lim n A ∩ n n , whenever the set A has the asymptotic density, i.e. when the above limit exists. Given a bounded sequence (xn)n∈ω and an ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗, by lim℘ xn we denote the ℘-limit of (xn). For any ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗, we define the measure d℘ on ω by the formula d℘(A) = lim ℘ A ∩ n n , for A ⊆ ω, cf. [Fr] or [BFPR]. Lemma 2.3. For any ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗ and any ε > 0, there exists a set A ∈ ℘ having asymptotic density and such that d(A) < ε. Proof. Take n ≥ 1 such that 1/n < ε and put Ak = {ni + k : i ∈ ω} for k = 0, 1, . . . , n − 1. Then there exists k < n such that Ak ∈ ℘. Clearly, d(Ak) = 1/n. (cid:3) We also recall the following standard fact concerning the outer density. Here, for A, B ⊆ ω, A ⊆∗ B denotes, as usual, that A \ B is finite, and we denote by A∗ the set A \ A, where A is the closure of A in βω. Lemma 2.4. Let ε > 0 and An ⊆ ω, n ∈ ω, be such that An ⊆ An+1 and d(An) < ε for every n ∈ ω. Then there exists A ⊆ Sn∈ω An such that d(A) ≤ ε and An ⊆∗ A for every n ∈ ω. Proof. By the definition of d we have ∀n ∈ ω ∃kn ∈ ω ∀k ≥ kn An ∩ k k < ε . Without loss of generality, we can assume that the sequence (kn) is increasing. We define A = [n∈ω An ∩ (kn+1 \ kn) ⊆ [n∈ω An . Since An ⊆ An+1, we have (An \ kn) ⊆ A, and therefore A∗ n ⊆ A∗ for every n ∈ ω. For any k > k0, we have k ∈ kn+1 \ kn, for some n ∈ ω, and A ∩ k ⊆ An ∩ k, therefore A ∩ k/k < ε, and consequently d(A) ≤ ε. (cid:3) ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 5 Obviously, for the sets An and A as in the above lemma, we haveSn∈ω A∗ n ⊆ A∗ and d℘(A) ≤ ε for any ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗. Let us note, however, that this does not necessarily mean that for every increasing sequence A0 ⊆ A1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ ω such that d℘(An) < ε there is A almost containing every An and such that d℘(A) ≤ ε. Measures on P (ω) with such an approximation property may fail to exist, see [Me] for details. Corollary 2.5. For any ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗, the measure bd℘ vanishes on separable subsets of ω∗. Proof. Let X be a subset of ω∗ contained in the closure of a set {Fn : n ∈ ω} ⊆ ω∗. Fix ε > 0. For any n ∈ ω, by Lemma 2.3, we can pick Bn ∈ Fn with d(Bn) < ε/2n+1. Then, for An =Sk≤n Bk, we have d(An) < ε, and we can apply Lemma 2.4 for the sequence (An), obtaining the set A satisfying d(A) ≤ ε. For any n ∈ ω, we have Bn ⊆ An ⊆∗ A, hence A ∈ Fn. Therefore the closure in ω∗ of the set {Fn : n ∈ ω} is contained in A∗, and bd℘(X) ≤ bd℘(A∗) ≤ ε. Since ε was arbitrarily chosen, it follows that bd℘(X) = 0. 3. Borel(C(βω), weak) and Borel(C(βω), τp) are different (cid:3) Let ℘ be a fixed ultrafilter from ω∗ and let µ = d℘ be the measure on P (ω) respect to the σ-algebra of weakly Borel subsets of C(βω). In this section we defined in section 2; we write bµ for the corresponding Radon measure on βω. Then bµ is a continuous functional on C(βω) so in particular bµ is measurable with shall show that the measure bµ is not pointwise Borel measurable and in this way conclude our main result. The approach presented below builds on the technique developed by Burke and Pol [BPo] and Marciszewski and Pol [MP]. We need to fix several pieces of notation. For a set X, by [X]<ω we denote the family of all finite subsets of X, and X <ω stands for the set of all finite sequences of elements of X. Given sequences s, t ∈ X <ω, s a t denotes their concatenation. For functions f and g, f ≺ g means that the domain dom(f ) of f is contained in the domain of g and g dom(f ) = f . We also use this notation for sequences, treating them as functions. Writing 2 = {0, 1}, we denote by Cp(βω, 2) the space of all continuous functions f : βω → 2 equipped with the pointwise topology. In the sequel we consider some subsets of (P (ω))2 = P (ω) × P (ω); a typical element of such a set is a pair c = (A, B), where A, B ⊆ ω. Given some ci ∈ 6 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK (P (ω))2, we shall use the convention for elements that every ci can be written as ci = (Ai, Bi). Let C be a subset of (P (ω) × P (ω))ω of those sequences c = (c0, c1, . . .) for which the following conditions are satisfied for every i: 3.1(1) Ai ⊆ Ai+1, Bi ⊆ Bi+1, Ai ∩ Bi = ∅; 3.1(2) d(Ai), d(Bi) < 1/6. We moreover denote by S the set of all finite sequences from (P (ω) × P (ω))<ω satisfying conditions 3.1. Given f ∈ C(βω), i ∈ {0, 1}, and A ⊆ ω, we write f A ≃ i if the equality f (x) = i holds for bµ-almost all x ∈ A∗. We equip P (ω) × P (ω) with the discrete topology and C with the product topology inherited from (P (ω) × P (ω))ω. Finally, we define a topological space E that is crucial for our considerations as follows E = {(f, c) ∈ Cp(βω, 2) × C : f An ≃ 0, f Bn ≃ 1 for every n}; here c = (c0, c1, c2, . . .) and ci = (Ai, Bi). Let Z be the set of all pairs z = (z(0), z(1)) ∈ [ω∗]<ω × [ω∗]<ω, such that z(0)∩z(1) = ∅. For z, z′ ∈ Z we write z ⊏ z′ to denote that z(0) ⊆ z′(0) and z(1) ⊆ z′(1). Basic open neighborhoods in E are of the form N(σ, z, s), where σ ∈ 2<ω, z ∈ Z, s ∈ S, and N(σ, z, s) is the set of all (f, c) ∈ E such that (a) f (x) = i for every x ∈ z(i), i = 0, 1; (b) σ ≺ f and s ≺ c. singletons. Note that every set of the form N(σ, z, s) is nonempty, since bµ vanishes on Let us say that s ∈ S captures z ∈ Z if, writing s = t a (A, B), we have z(0) ⊆ A∗ and z(1) ⊆ B∗. Lemma 3.2. Every basic open set N(σ, z, s) in E contains a neighborhood N(σ, z, s′) where s′ captures z. Proof. Indeed, if (A, B) is the final pair in s then for any ε > 0, using Lemma 2.3 we can find sets C, D ⊆ ω of asymptotic density < ε and such that z(0) ⊆ C ∗, ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 7 z(1) ⊆ D∗. Then we can put s′ = s a (A′, B′), where A′ = A ∪ C, B′ = B ∪ D and ε is small enough. (cid:3) Lemma 3.3. Let N(σ, z, s) be a basic open set in E, where σ ∈ 2l. If G is a dense open subset of N(σ, z, s) then, for every k ≥ l, there are m > k, z′ ∈ Z with z ⊏ z′, s′ ∈ S with s ≺ s′, and a function ϕ : I = {i : k ≤ i < m} → 2, such that for every τ ∈ 2k−l N(σ a τ a ϕ, z′, s′) ⊆ G. Proof. Given τ0 ∈ 2k−l, we have N(σ a τ0, z, s) ∩ G 6= ∅ so for some interval I1 = {i : k ≤ i < m1} and ϕ1 : I1 → 2 there are z1 ⊐ z and s1 ≻ s such that N(σ a τ0 a ϕ1, z1, s1) ⊆ G. Take another τ1 ∈ 2k−l. Apply the same argument for N(σ a τ1 a ϕ1, z1, s1). It is clear that we arrive at the conclusion after examining all τ ∈ 2k−l. (cid:3) Lemma 3.4. Let (Gn)n∈ω be a decreasing sequence of open subsets of E such that G0 6= ∅ and every Gn is dense in G0. Then there exist a sequence c = ((An, Bn))n∈ω ∈ C, sets A, B ⊆ ω, countable sets Z(0), Z(1) ⊆ ω∗, and a sequence ϕn : In → 2 of functions defined on pairwise disjoint finite sets In ⊆ ω such that (i) Sn∈ω A∗ n ⊆ A∗, Sn∈ω B∗ n ⊆ B∗, A ∩ B = ∅; (ii) µ(A), µ(B) ≤ 1 6 ; (iii) Z(0) ⊆ A∗, Z(1) ⊆ B∗; (iv) for every f ∈ Cp(βω, 2) satisfying -- f A ≃ 0, f B ≃ 1, -- f Z(i) = i for i = 0, 1, -- f I0 = ϕ0, -- f In = ϕn for infinitely many n ≥ 1, we have (f, c) ∈Tn∈ω Gn. Proof. Fix a basic neighborhood N(σ0, z0, s0) ⊆ G0; by Lemma 3.2 we can assume that s0 captures z0. Take k0 such that σ ∈ 2k0, set I0 = {0, . . . , k0 − 1} and ϕ0 = σ0. 8 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK We shall define inductively natural numbers k0 < k1 < k2 < . . ., functions ϕn : In = {i : kn−1 ≤ i < kn} → 2, pairs zn ∈ Z with z0 ⊏ z1 ⊏ . . ., and sequences s0 ≺ s1 ≺ . . . in S such that for every n ≥ 0 -- sn captures zn; -- for every τ ∈ 2kn−k0 we have N(ϕ0 a τ a ϕn+1, zn+1, sn+1) ⊆ Gn+1. Having kn, ϕn, . . . defined, we make the inductive step using Lemma 3.3 for the neighborhood N(ϕ0, zn, sn) with G = Gn+1 ∩ N(ϕ0, zn, sn), l = k0, and k = kn and we use m, z′, and s′ given by this lemma to define kn+1, zn+1, and sn+1. We complete our choice applying Lemma 3.2. The sequence sn ∈ S defines the unique element c = ((An, Bn))n∈ω ∈ C; we take A, B applying Lemma 2.4 to sequences (An)n and (Bn)n (see also the remark note that Z(0) ⊆ A∗ and Z(1) ⊆ B∗. Now, if f satisfies (iv) then (f, c) ∈ Gn, for infinitely many n, so (f, c) ∈ (cid:3) following the proof of Lemma 2.4). We put Z(0) =Sn zn(0) and Z(1) =Sn zn(1); Tn Gn. Theorem 3.5. The measure bµ is not measurable with respect to the pointwise Borel sets in C(βω). In particular, Borel(C(βω), τp) 6= Borel(C(βω), weak). Proof. Suppose otherwise; then F0 = {f ∈ Cp(βω, 2) : Z f dbµ < 1/2}, is pointwise Borel in Cp(βω, 2). Let F1 = Cp(βω, 2) \ F0. Let π : E → Cp(βω, 2) denote the projection onto the first axis. It follows that the sets π−1(Fi) are Borel in E, so both π−1(F0) and π−1(F1) have the Baire property in E. Therefore, for some i ∈ {0, 1}, there is a decreasing sequence (Gn)n of open sets in E, where G0 6= ∅, every Gn is dense in G0 and Tn Gn ⊆ π−1(Fi). Take c ∈ C, A, B ⊆ ω, Z(0), Z(1), ϕn : In → 2 as in Lemma 3.4. Let R be an uncountable almost disjoint family of infinite subsets of ω. For R ∈ R let IR = I0 ∪ [n∈R In; then the family {IR : R ∈ R} is almost disjoint too. Therefore there is R ∈ R such that ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 9 -- (Z(0) ∪ Z(1)) ∩ I ∗ -- µ(IR) = 0. R = ∅, and Set A′ = A \ IR, B′ = B \ IR. Take any function f ∈ C(βω, 2) such that f ≡ 0 on A′, f ≡ 1 on B′ and f is defined on IR so that f In = ϕn for n ∈ R ∪ {0}. Then f ≡ 0 on Z(0) and f ≡ 1 on Z(1), f A ≃ 0, f B ≃ 1. It follows from Lemma 3.4 that (f, c) ∈Tn Gn ⊆ π−1(Fi). On the other hand, f can be freely defined on the set D = ω \ (A′ ∪ B′ ∪ IR), where µ(D) ≥ 2/3, soR f dbµ can take values less than 1/2 and greater than 1/2, a contradiction. (cid:3) 4. On C-sets in (C(ω∗), τp) Let us recall that in a topological space X, the elements of the smallest σ- algebra in X containing open sets and closed under the Souslin operation are called C-sets, cf. [Ke]. The C-sets are open modulo meager sets and any preimage of a C-set under a continuous map is a C-set. Theorem 4.1. No countable family of C-sets separates the functions in the space (C(ω∗), τp). Remark 4.2. From the fact that βω is separable, it follows easily that (C(βω), τp) contains a countable family of open sets separating functions. The above properties of function spaces imply immediately the following Corollary 4.3. There is no Borel-measurable injection ϕ : (C(ω∗), τp) → (C(βω), τp). We keep here a part of the notation introduced in Section 3; in particular, we will use the space C and the sets S, Z, defined in that section. By Cp(ω∗, 2) we denote the subspace of (C(ω∗), τp) consisting of 0 -1-valued functions. The role of the space E from the previous section will be played by the following space F = {(f, c) ∈ Cp(ω∗, 2) × C : f A∗ n ≡ 0, f B∗ n ≡ 1 for every n}; where c = (c0, c1, c2, . . .) and ci = (Ai, Bi). 10 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK We will say that a pair z ∈ Z and a sequence s = ((A0, B0), . . . , (An, Bn)) ∈ S n. Clearly, if s captures z (see Sec. 3), n = ∅ = z(1) ∩ A∗ are consistent if z(0) ∩ B∗ then s and z are consistent. Basic open neighborhoods in F are of the form O(z, s), where z ∈ Z and s ∈ S are consistent, and O(z, s) is the set of all (f, c) ∈ F such that (a) f (x) = i for every x ∈ z(i), i = 0, 1; (b) s ≺ c. Note that the condition that s and z are consistent implies that every set O(z, s) is nonempty. Repeating the proof of Lemma 3.2, one easily obtains the following Lemma 4.4. For any consistent z ∈ Z and s ∈ S, the basic open set O(z, s) in F contains a neighborhood O(z, s′), where s′ captures z. The proof of Theorem 4.1 is based on the following auxiliary result. Lemma 4.5. For any sequence (Xn)n∈ω of C-sets in F there exist a sequence c = ((An, Bn))n∈ω ∈ C and sets A, B ⊆ ω such that -- Sn∈ω A∗ n ⊆ A∗, Sn∈ω B∗ -- µ(A), µ(B) ≤ 1 6 ; -- for any n ∈ ω, the set n ⊆ B∗, A ∩ B = ∅, {f ∈ Cp(ω∗, 2) : f A∗ ≡ 0, f B∗ ≡ 1} × {c} is either contained in Xn or disjoint from Xn. Proof. We inductively define a decreasing sequence (Vn)n of nonempty open sub- sets of F and for every n we choose • sequences (U n k )k of open sets dense in Vn such that Tk∈ω U n k is either contained in Xn or disjoint from Xn; • zn ∈ Z and sn ∈ S capturing zn such that zn−1 ⊏ zn, sn−1 ≺ sn, and O(zn, sn) ⊆ \i,k≤n U i k. Suppose that the construction has been carried out for i < n (or n = 0). Since Xn ∩ O(zn−1, sn−1) ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 11 is a C−set there is a nonempty open set Vn ⊆ O(zn−1, sn−1) and a sequence of its dense open subsets (U n k is either contained in Xn or disjoint k is open and nonempty (because Vi are k )k such thatTk∈ω U n k are dense in Vi). Moreover, Gn ⊆ Vn ⊆ O(zn−1, sn−1). from it. Then the set Gn = Ti,k≤n U i decreasing and U i Now, we can choose consistent zn ∈ Z and sn ∈ S such that zn−1 ⊏ zn, sn−1 ≺ sn, and O(zn, sn) ⊆ Gn; by Lemma 4.4 we can additionally require that sn captures zn. The sequence s0 ≺ s1 ≺ . . . defines the unique element c = ((An, Bn))n∈ω ∈ C. We also obtain the sets A, B in the same way as in the proof of Lemma 3.4, applying Lemma 2.4 to sequences (An)n and (Bn)n. It follows that whenever the function f ∈ Cp(ω∗, 2) takes values 0 on A∗ and 1 on B∗, the pair (f, c) belongs to F and, for every n, (f, c) ∈ O(zn, sn), since sn ≺ c and sn captures zn. Therefore (f, c) ∈ \n∈ω \i,k≤n U i k = \n∈ω\k∈ω U n k ⊆ \k∈ω U n k , for every n, and the lemma follows. (cid:3) Theorem 4.1 can be easily derived from the above lemma. Indeed, if Yn are C−sets in (C(ω∗), τp) then Zn = Yn ∩ Cp(ω∗, 2) are C−sets in Cp(ω∗, 2). Let π : F → Cp(ω∗, 2) be the projection onto the first axis. Then Xn = π−1(Zn) are C−sets in the space F. Applying Lemma 4.5 to such sets Xn we conclude that there are two different functions g1, g2 with giA∗ ≡ 0, giB∗ ≡ 1 for i = 1, 2. It follows that (gi, c) are not separated by Xn and hence gi are not separated by the sets Yn. Remark 4.6. Adjusting the argument from the proof of Theorem 4.1 for the setting from the paper [MP], one can also prove that, for the Stone space S of the measure algebra, the function space (C(S), τp) has no sequence of C−sets separating points (this is an unpublished result of R. Pol). It follows that the Banach spaces C(S) and C(βω) are isomorphic, but there is no Borel-measurable injection ϕ : (C(S), τp) → (C(βω), τp). 5. Baire σ-algebras in function spaces on βω and ω∗ If (X, τ ) is any topological space then the Baire σ-algebra Ba(X, τ ) is defined to be the smallest one making all the continuous functions on X measurable, cf. [Ed1], [Ed2]. Recall that if (X, τ ) is a locally convex linear topological space then 12 WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK Ba(X, τ ) is actually generated by all continuous functionals, see [Ed1], Theorem 2.3. For a compact space K, we denote by Ba(C(K), weak), Ba(C(K), τp) the Baire σ-algebras in C(K) endowed with the weak topology, or the pointwise topology, respectively, Theorem 3.5 implies directly the following result from [APR1, Theorem 3.4] Theorem 5.1 (Avil´es-Plebanek-Rodr´ıguez). Ba(C(βω), weak) 6= Ba(C(βω), τp) . Using results from section 2 we can also give a simpler proof of the above theorem: Ba(C(βω), τp)-measurable. Assume the contrary. Then there exists a countable Proof. We shall show that, for any ultrafilter ℘ ∈ ω∗, the measure bd℘ is not subset X of βω such that bd℘ is measurable with respect to the σ-algebra of subsets of C(βω) generated by {δx : x ∈ X}. Corollary 2.5 implies that bdp vanishes bd℘(A) < 1. Let E = {f ∈ C(βω) : f A ≡ 0}. Observe that bd℘E is measurable with respect to the σ-algebra generated by {δx : x ∈ X ∩ ω}, and for any subset C of B = ω \ A the characteristic function χC : βω → R belongs to E. Then the measure ν : P(ω) → [0, 1] defined by on the closure of X ∩ ω∗ in βω. Take A ⊆ ω such that X ∩ ω∗ ⊆ A and v(Z) = d℘(Z ∩ B) = bd℘(Z ∩ B) = bd℘(χZ∩B) , for Z ∈ P(ω), is nonzero, Borel-measurable and vanishes on points of ω, a con- tradiction with Proposition 2.2. (cid:3) Note finally that for any compact space K we have the following inclusions Ba(C(K), τp) ⊂ Borel(C(K), τp) ∩ ∩ Ba(C(K), weak) ⊂ Borel(C(K), weak) ⊂ Borel(C(K), norm). The space K = 2ω1 is an example of a nonmetrizable compactum K for which all the five σ-algebras on C(K) are equal, see [APR2]. From previous results and the proposition below it follows that all inclusions in the above diagram are strict for the space K = βω. Since βω is a continuous image of ω∗, this is also the case for K = ω∗, cf. [APR1, Corollary 3.3]. ON BOREL STRUCTURES IN THE BANACH SPACE C(βω) 13 Proposition 5.2. Bor(C(βω), τp) 6⊆ Ba(C(βω), weak). Proof. Let {Aα : α < ω1} be a family of almost disjoint subsets of ω. For every α < ω1 we pick Fα ∈ ω∗ such that Aα ∈ Fα. Let us consider the set V = {f ∈ C(βω) : f (Fα) > 0 for some α < ω1}. Then V is τp-open; we shall check that V /∈ Ba(C(βω), weak). Suppose otherwise; then V lies in the σ-algebra generated by {δn : n ∈ ω} and some family {µn : n ∈ ω}, where every µn is a probability measure on ω∗. There is β < ω1 such that µn(Aβ) = 0 for every n. Let F be the set of all 0 -1-valued functions in C(βω) which vanish outside Aβ. It follows that the set F ∩ V lies in the σ-algebra of subsets of F which is generated by the restrictions of µn's and δn's to F which is simply the σ-algebra generated by δn for n ∈ Aβ. On the other hand, F ∩ V = {χN : N ∈ Fβ, N ⊆ Aβ}, a contradiction, since Fβ ∩ 2Aβ is not Borel in the Cantor set 2Aβ . (cid:3) References [APR1] A. Avil´es, G. Plebanek, and J. Rodr´ıguez, On Baire measurability in spaces of contin- uous functions, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 398 (2013), 230 -- 238. [APR2] A. Avil´es, G. Plebanek, J. Rodr´ıguez, Measurability in C(2κ) and Kunen cardinals, Israel J. Math. 195 (2013), 1 -- 30. T. Bartoszyski and H. Judah, Set theory. On the structure of the real line, A K Peters, [BJ] Ltd., Wellesley, MA, 1995. [BFPR] A. Blass, R. Frankiewicz, G. Plebanek, C. Ryll-Nardzewski, A note on extensions of asymptotic density, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (2001), 3313 -- 3320. [BPo] D.K. Burke and R. Pol, On Borel sets in function spaces with the weak topology, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 68 (2003), no. 3, 725 -- 738. [Ed1] G.A. Edgar, Measurability in a Banach space, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 26 (1977), no. 4, 663 -- 677. [Ed2] G.A. Edgar, Measurability in a Banach space. II, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 28 (1979), no. 4, 559 -- 579. [Fr] D.H. Fremlin, Measure Theory, Vol. 4: Topological Measure Theory, Torres Fremlin, 2003. A.S. Kechris, Classical Descriptive Set Theory, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995. [Ke] [MP] W. Marciszewski and R. Pol, On some problems concerning Borel structures in function spaces, RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas F´ıs. Nat. Ser. A Mat., 104 (2010), 327 -- 335. 14 [Me] [Ox] [Ra] [Ta] WITOLD MARCISZEWSKI AND GRZEGORZ PLEBANEK A.H. Mekler, Finitely additive measures on N and the additivity property, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 92 (1984), 439 -- 444. J.C. Oxtoby, Measure and category, volume 2 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1980. M. Raja, Kadec norms and Borel sets in a Banach space, Studia Math. 136 (1999), 1 -- 16. M. Talagrand, Comparaison des boreliens dun espace de Banach pour les topologies fortes et faibles, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 27 (1978), 1001 -- 1004. Institute of Mathematics, University of Warsaw, Banacha 2 02 -- 097 Warszawa, Poland E-mail address: [email protected] Instytut Matematyczny, Uniwersytet Wroc lawski, pl. Grunwaldzki 2/4, 50 -- 384 Wroc law, Poland E-mail address: [email protected]
1504.05547	2	1504	2015-06-26T01:57:05	Asymptotic estimates on the von Neumann inequality for homogeneous polynomials	[ "math.FA", "math.OA" ]	By the von Neumann inequality for homogeneous polynomials there exists a positive constant $C_{k,q}(n)$ such that for every $k$-homogeneous polynomial $p$ in $n$ variables and every $n$-tuple of commuting operators $(T_1, \dots, T_n)$ with $\sum_{i=1}^{n} \Vert T_{i} \Vert^{q} \leq 1$ we have \[ \\|p(T_1, \dots, T_n)\\|_{\mathcal L(\mathcal H)} \leq C_{k,q}(n) \; \sup\{ \|p(z_1, \dots, z_n)\| : \textstyle \sum_{i=1}^{n} \vert z_{i} \vert^{q} \leq 1 \}\,. \] For fixed $k$ and $q$, we study the asymptotic growth of the smallest constant $C_{k,q}(n)$ as $n$ (the number of variables/operators) tends to infinity. For $q = \infty$, we obtain the correct asymptotic behavior of this constant (answering a question posed by Dixon in the seventies). For $2 \leq q < \infty$ we improve some lower bounds given by Mantero and Tonge, and prove the asymptotic behavior up to a logarithmic factor. To achieve this we provide estimates of the norm of homogeneous unimodular Steiner polynomials, i.e. polynomials such that the multi-indices corresponding to the nonzero coefficients form partial Steiner systems.	math.FA	math	ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS ABSTRACT. By the von Neumann inequality for homogeneous polynomials there exists a positive constant Ck,q (n) such that for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting operators (T1,... , Tn ) withPn i=1 kTi kq ≤ 1 we have kp(T1,... , Tn )kL (H ) ≤ Ck,q (n) sup{p(z1,... , zn ) :Pn i=1 zi q ≤ 1}. For fixed k and q, we study the asymptotic growth of the smallest constant Ck,q (n) as n (the number of variables/operators) tends to infinity. For q = ∞, we obtain the correct asymptotic behavior of this con- stant (answering a question posed by Dixon in the seventies). For 2 ≤ q < ∞ we improve some lower bounds given by Mantero and Tonge, and prove the asymptotic behavior up to a logarithmic factor. To achieve this we provide estimates of the norm of homogeneous unimodular Steiner polynomials, i.e. polynomials such that the multi-indices corresponding to the nonzero coefficients form partial Steiner systems. 5 1 0 2 n u J 6 2 ] . A F h t a m [ 2 v 7 4 5 5 0 . 4 0 5 1 : v i X r a 1. INTRODUCTION A classical inequality in operator theory, due to von Neumann [30], asserts that if T is a linear con- traction on a complex Hilbert space H (i.e., its operator norm is less than or equal to one) then kp(T )kL (H ) ≤ sup{p(z) : z ∈ C, z ≤ 1}, for every polynomial p in one (complex) variable. Note that, as a direct consequence of von Neumann's inequality, we can define a functional calculus on the disk algebra. There are many other consequences of this important inequality in functional analysis; we refer the reader to [25, Chapter 1] and the refer- ences therein for a fuller treatment of this inequality and its applications. For some time, it was very natural to ask whether the von Neumann inequality could be extended to polynomials in two or more commuting contractions. For polynomials in two contractions Ando [2], using "dilation theory" (see [28]), provided a positive answer. However, in the mid seventies, Varopou- los [29] showed that von Neumann's inequality cannot be extended to three or more contractions. For 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47A13, 47A60, Secondary 28A78, 60G99, 46G25, 05B05. Key words and phrases. Multivariable von Neumann inequality; Commuting contractions, unimodular homogeneous polynomials, Steiner systems. The first two named authors were supported by projects CONICET PIP 0624, PICT 2011-1456, UBACyT 20020130300057BA, UBACyT20020130300052BA. The third named author was supported by project MTM2014-57838-C2-2-P. 1 2 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS this, he used the metric theory of tensor products together with probabilistic tools to construct a poly- nomial and operators that violate the inequality. The work of Varopoulos has since been simplified and extended by several authors [5, 9, 15, 21, 22]. It is an open problem of great interest in operator theory (see [6, 25]) to determine whether there exists a constant K (n) that adjusts von Neumann's inequality. More precisely, it is unknown whether or not for every n there exists a constant K (n) such that (1) kp(T1,..., Tn)kL (H ) ≤ K (n) sup{p(z1,... , zn) : zi ≤ 1}, for every polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple (T1,... , Tn) of commuting contractions in L (H ). Dixon in [15] gave lower estimates for the optimal K (n) and showed that, if such a constant verifying (1) exists, then it must grow faster than any power of n. He did this by considering the problem in the smaller class of k-homogeneous polynomials. More precisely, he studied the asymptotic behavior (as n, the number of variables/operators, tends to infinity) of the smallest constant Ck,∞(n) such that (2) kp(T1,..., Tn)kL (H ) ≤ Ck,∞(n) sup{p(z1,..., zn) : zi ≤ 1}, for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting contractions (T1,..., Tn). In [15, Theorem 1.2] he showed that (3) n 1 2£ k−1 2 ¤ ≪ Ck,∞(n) ≪ n k−2 2 , where [x] denotes the integer part of x. For the lower bound Dixon used probabilistic techniques (the Kahane-Salem-Zygmund theorem) and combinatorial ideas (Steiner systems) along with an ingenious construction of the operators and the Hilbert space involved. This problem was taken up by Mantero and Tonge in [21]. Among other problems, for each 1 ≤ q < ∞ they consider Ck,q (n), the smallest constant such that (4) kp(T1,..., Tn)kL (H ) ≤ Ck,q (n) sup{p(z1,..., zn) : n Xj=1z jq ≤ 1}, for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting contractions L (H ) ≤ 1. They give upper and lower estimates for the growth of Ck,q (n) [21, q i=1kTik (T1,..., Tn) withPn Propositions 11 and 17] (here q′ denotes the conjugate of q; see below): (5) (6) n n k 2 − 1 k−1 q′ − 1 2£ k 2¤ ≪ Ck,q (n) ≪ n 2¡£ k 2¤+1¢ ≪ Ck,q (n) ≪ n k−2 q′ k−2 2 for 1 ≤ q ≤ 2, for 2 ≤ q < ∞. It is worth noting that the upper bounds here hold for every n-tuple (T1,..., Tn) satisfyingPn i=1kTikq ≤ 1 (and even a weaker condition), not necessarily commuting. If we do not ask the contractions to com- mute, this bound is shown to be optimal in [21, Proposition 15]. ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 3 Based on the combinatorial methods from [15] (i.e., considering polynomials whose monomials are determined by Steiner blocks) we change the construction of the Hilbert space and the operators given there to find the exact asymptotic growth of Ck,∞(n), answering a question that was explicitly posed by Dixon. On the other hand, by applying some probabilistic tools used by Bayart in [3], we are able to control the increments of a Rademacher process and in this way we in this way we manage to narrow the range in (6), showing that the exponent in the power of n is indeed optimal. We collect this in our main result. Theorem 1.1. For k ≥ 3 and 1 ≤ q ≤ ∞, let Ck,q(n) be the smallest constant such that kp(T1,..., Tn)kL (H ) ≤ Ck,q (n) sup{p(z1,... , zn) : k(z j ) jkq ≤ 1}, for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting contractions L (H ) ≤ 1. Then q i=1kTik (T1,... , Tn) withPn (i) Ck,∞(n) ∼ n (ii) for 2 ≤ q < ∞ we have k−2 2 log−3/q (n) n In particular, n k−2 2 −ε ≪ Ck,q (n) ≪ n k−2 2 k−2 2 . k−2 2 ≪ Ck,q (n) ≪ n for every ε > 0. The proof of this result will be given in Section 3. 2. STEINER UNIMODULAR POLYNOMIALS The systematic study of norms of random homogeneous polynomials started with the Kahane-Salem- Zygmund theorem [17, Chapter 6], which is found very useful in Fourier analysis. More recently, ap- plications of norms of random polynomials with unimodular coefficients were found in complex and functional analysis (see for example [7, 13, 8, 3]). The philosophy in this problem and in many others of the same kind (e.g. to compute the Sidon constant for polynomials [23, 11]) is to find polynomials which have "big" (or "many") coefficients, but whose maximum modulus on the unit ball is "small". In this section we are going to relax the number of terms appearing in the polynomials, by allowing them to have some zero coefficients. In this way we will find a special class of tetrahedral unimodular polynomials having many terms, but keeping the maximum modulus quite small. Let us first start with some notation and preliminaries. As usual we will denote ℓn q for Cn with the norm k(z1,..., zn)kq =¡Pn A k-homogeneous polynomial in n variables is a function p : Cn → C of the form c J z j1 ··· z jk , i=1ziq¢1/q if 1 ≤ q < ∞ and k(z1,..., zn)k∞ = maxi=1,...,n zi for q = ∞. p(z1,..., zn) = Xα∈Nn n = XJ=( j1,..., jk) 1 ··· zαn aαzα1 1≤ j1≤...≤ jk≤n 0 α=k 4 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS where aα ∈ C and α = α1 +··· + αn. Given α we have aα = c J where J = (1, α1...,1,..., n, αk..., n). We will write zα1 q ) the Banach space of all n = zα and z j1 ··· z jk = z J . For 1 ≤ q ≤ ∞ we denote by P (k ℓn 1 ··· zαn k-homogeneous polynomials on n variables with the norm kpkP (k ℓn q ) = sup{p(z1,..., zn) : k(z1,..., zn)kq ≤ 1}. It is a well known fact (see e.g. [14, Chapter 1]) that for every k-homogeneous polynomial there is a unique symmetric k-linear form L on Cn such that p(z) = L(z,... , z) for all z ∈ Cn. Also for each 1 ≤ q ≤ ∞ and k ≥ 2 there exists a constant λ(k, q) > 0 such that (7) q ) ≤ sup{L(z(1),..., z(k)): kz( j )kq ≤ 1, j = 1,... , k} ≤ λ(k, q)kpkP (kℓn q ) . k! but improvements in concrete cases include λ(k,2) = 1 and λ(k,∞) ≤ k kpkP (kℓn In general λ(k, q) ≤ k k (see [14, Propositions 1.44, 1.43]). If (an)n and (bn)n are two sequences of real numbers we will write an ≪ bn if there exists a constant C > 0 (independent of n) such that an ≤ C bn for every n. We will write an ∼ bn if an ≪ bn and bn ≪ an. Given a set A we will denote its cardinality by A. For an index 1 < q < ∞ we denote by q′ its conjugate: 1 = 1 q + 1 q′ . k+1 2 k 2 (k+1) 2k k! Let C ⊂ Nn 0 denote any set of multi-indices α with α = k. Then as a consequence of the Kahane- Salem-Zygmund theorem [17, Chapter 6] there exists a k-homogeneous polynomial, with unimodular coefficients aα for α ∈ C and aα = 0 if α ∉ C , of small maximum modulus on the n-polydisk. More precisely, let (εα)α∈C be independent Bernoulli variables on a probability space (Ω, Σ, P), then we have P{ω ∈ Ω : k Xα∈C εα(ω)zαkP (k ℓn ∞ ) ≥ D¡n log(k)C ¢1/2} ≤ 1 k 2e n , where D > 0 is an absolute constant which is less than 8. In particular there are signs (aα)α∈C such that the k-homogeneous unimodular polynomial (8) satisfies (9) p(z) = Xα∈C aαzα , kpkP (kℓn ∞ ) ≤ D¡n log(k)C ¢1/2 . We are going to work with polynomials with many zero coefficients, expecting that this will make the norm of the polynomial small enough. The presence of C in (9) is sufficient for our needs when the norm of the polynomial is computed in ℓn p and then we need ∞ different tools. The relevant results we have to hand [7, 12, 13, 3] do not take into account the number but not when we consider the norm in ℓn of non-zero coefficients, so considering our tetrahedral polynomials does not improve these estimates. We deal with polynomials with a particular combinatorial configuration in order to get useful estimates for our purposes. We modify some arguments from [3], reflecting this configuration. ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 5 To achieve our goal we consider special subsets of multi-indices: partial Steiner systems on the set {1,... , n}. An S p(t, k, n) partial Steiner system is a collection of subsets of size k of {1,... , n} such that every subset of t elements is contained in at most one member of the collection of subsets of size k. Definition 2.1. A k-homogeneous polynomial of n variables, is a Steiner unimodular polynomial if there exists an S p(t, k, n) partial Steiner system S such that p(z1,..., zn) =PJ∈S c J z J and c J = ±1. Observe that our Steiner unimodular polynomials are tetrahedral, i.e. in every term z J each variable z j0 appears at most once. In other words, no term in the polynomial contains a factor of degree 2 or higher in any of the variables z1,..., zn. The first one to consider Steiner unimodular polynomials was Dixon [15], who used S p([(k − 1)/2], k, n) partial Steiner systems. He used this to obtain lower bounds for (2). The combinatorial property was only applied to define some Hilbert space operators that violate the inequality, but not to estimate the norm of the polynomial, which he did using (9) and the number of non-zero coefficients. In the following lemmas, in ℓn q , 1 ≤ q < ∞, we will strongly use the fact that the multi-indices of the non-zero coefficients form a partial Steiner system to estimate the maximum modulus. We use an entropy argument due to Pisier to control the increments of a Rademacher process and subsequently apply an interpolation argument. Let us first recall some definitions and a result on regularity of random process. A complete account on these can be found in [20, Chapters 4 and 11]. A Young function ψ is a convex increasing function defined on [0,∞[ such that limt→∞ ψ(t) = ∞ and ψ(0) = 0. For a probability space (Ω, Σ, P), the Orlicz space Lψ = Lψ(Ω, Σ, P) is defined as the space of all real-valued random variables Z for which there exists c > 0 such that E(ψ(Z/c)) < ∞. It is a Banach space with the norm kZkLψ = inf{c > 0 : E(ψ(Z/c)) ≤ 1}. Let (X , d) be a metric space. Given ε > 0, the entropy number N (X , d; ε) is defined as the smallest number of open balls of radius ε in the metric d, which form a covering of the metric space X . With this, the entropy integral of (X , d) with respect to ψ is given by Jψ(X , d) :=Zdiam(X ) 0 ψ−1(N (X , d; ε))d ε. We are going to define a random process (Yz)z∈Bℓn supz Yz. To do so, we use the following theorem due to Pisier [24] (see also [20, Theorem 11.1]) that bounds this expectation with the entropy integral, provided that the random process satisfies a certain and we will need to estimate the expectation of 2 contraction condition. Theorem 2.2. Let Z = (Zx)x∈X be a random process indexed by (X , d) in Lψ such that, for every x, x′ ∈ X , kZx − Zx′kLψ ≤ d(x, x′). 6 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS Then, if Jψ(X , d) is finite, Z is almost surely bounded and E¡ sup x,x′∈X Zx − Zx′¢ ≤ 8Jψ(X , d). Let now k ≥ 2 and let S be a S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system. We consider a family of indepen- we define the following dent Bernoulli variables (εJ )J∈S on the probability space (Ω, Σ, P). For z ∈ Bℓn Rademacher process indexed by Bℓn as 2 2 (10) Yz = 1 k XJ∈S εJ z J . We view it as a random process in the Orlicz space defined by the Young function ψ2(t) = e t 2 − 1. Lemma 2.3. The Rademacher process defined in (10) fulfils the following Lipschitz condition: kYz − Yz′kLψ2 ≤ Ckz − z′k∞, for some universal constant C ≥ 1 and every z, z′ ∈ Bℓn 2 . Proof. As a consequence of Khintchine inequalities (see e.g. [10, Sect 8.5]), the ψ2-norm of a Rademacher process is comparable to its L2-norm. Now, kYz − Yz′kL2 = = ≤ ≤ k 1 1 k¡ZΩ XJ∈S εJ (ω)(z J − z′J )2d P(ω)¢1/2 k¡ XJ∈S Xu=1 )z′ju+1 z j1 ... z ju−1(z ju − z′ju Xu=1¡ XJ∈S z j1 ... z ju−1(z ju − z′ju )z′ju+1 Xu=1kz − z′k∞¡ XJ∈S z j1 ... z ju−1 z′ju+1 1 k 1 k k k 1 = k¡ XJ∈S z J − z′J2¢1/2 ... z′jk2)1/2 ... z′jk2¢1/2 ... z′jk2¢1/2 Since S is an S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system, given j1,..., ju−1, ju+1,... , jk for a fixed u, there is at ... z′jk2 most one index ju such that ( j1,... , jk) belongs to S . Therefore the sumPJ∈S z j1 ... z ju−1 z′ju+1 can be bounded by n n n ( Xlu−1=1zlu−12)( and this is less than or equal to one (since z, z′ ∈ Bℓn concludes the proof. Xl1=1zl12)··· ( 2 n Xlu+1=1z′lu+12)··· ( Xlk=1z′lk2), ). This combined with the previous inequality (cid:3) We are now in a position to use Theorem 2.2 with Lψ2, X = Bℓn and d = k · k∞ to bound the ex- ,k · k∞). Note that pectation of the supremum. For this, we estimate the entropy integral Jψ2(Bℓn 2 (t) = log1/2(t + 1); we use instead log1/2(t), which does not change the computation of the inte- ψ−1 gral. We estimate the integral in the following result, which is a version of [3, Lemma 2.1]; the proof is 2 2 essentially the same and we include it here for the sake of completeness. ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 7 Lemma 2.4. There exists C > 0 such that for every n ≥ 2 we have Jψ2 (Bℓn 2 ,k · k∞) ≤ C log3/2(n). Proof. We fix n and for each m we consider the number By result of Schütt [27, Theorem 1] there exists a constant K , independent of n and m, such that em = inf{σ > 0 : Bℓn 2 ⊂ xi + σBℓn ∞ }. 2m [i=1 (11) em ≤ K × 1 m ) ¡ log(1+ 2n m 2− m 2n n− 1 2 ¢1/2 if m ≤ log(n), if log(n) ≤ m ≤ 2n, if m ≥ 2n .   Let us note that Schütt's result is stated for real spaces. Since the (2n)-dimensional real euclidean space 2 we get (11). 2 ≤ ε < K 2− m 2n n− 1 2n n− 1 is isometrically isomorphic to ℓn For m ≥ 2n, if K 2− m+1 ZK /(2pn) log1/2¡N (Bℓn 0 2 With the same argument, if K integral from K 2pn to Kq log2 We define now εm =¡ log(1+ 2n 2m+1. Then 2 , then by (11) we have N (Bℓn ,k · k∞; ε) ≤ 2m+1 ≤ 2 K 2n ε2n nn and 2 0 ε2n¢d ε =ZK /2 n1/2 log1/2¡ 2K 2 ,k · k∞; ε)¢d ε ≤ZK /(2pn) 2pn ≤ εKq log2 ¢1/2 for [log n] ≤ m < 2n. Again by (11), if εm+1 ≤ ε < εm then N (Bℓn u2 ¢d u = K1 < ∞. ,k · k∞; ε) ≤ 22n and with this we can bound the log1/2¡ 2C 2 2n by some K2. m ) 2n then N (Bℓn m 0 2 2 ,k ·k∞; ε) ≤ Zε[log(n)] ε2n log1/2¡N (Bℓn 2 We write ,k · k∞; ε)¢d ε ≤ (εm − εm+1) = Khlog1/2(1+ 2n m1/2 m ) and we get − 2n−1 Xm=[log(n)] log1/2(1+ 2n m ) (m + 1)1/2 + (m + 1)1/2(εm − εm+1)log1/2(2). log1/2(1+ 2n m ) (m + 1)1/2 − log1/2(1+ 2n m+1 ) (m + 1)1/2 i Zε[log(n)] ε2n 2 log1/2¡N (Bℓn ≤ K³log1/2(n) ,k · k∞; ε)¢d ε Xs=[log(n)] 2s−1 2n s + 1 Finally, for the remaining subinterval we have that, by (11), if ε ≥ ε[log(n)], then N (Bℓn Hence )− log1/2(1+ Xs=[log(n)] log1/2(1+ (s + 1)1/2 s3/2 + 2n s 2s−1 2 )´ ≤ K3 log3/2(n). ,k · k∞; ε) ≤ 2log(n). Z1 ε[log(n)] log1/2¡N (Bℓn 2 ,k · k∞; ε)¢d ε ≤ K4Z1 0 log1/2(n)d ε ≤ K4 log1/2(n). (cid:3) This completes the proof. We can now find Steiner unimodular polynomials that have small norm in P (k ℓn q ), for every 2 ≤ q ≤ ∞ simultaneously. 8 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS Theorem 2.5. Let k ≥ 2 and S be an S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system. Then there exist signs (c J )J∈S and a constant Ak,q > 0 independent of n such that the k-homogeneous polynomial p =PJ∈S c J z J satis- fies kpkP (kℓn q ) ≤ Ak,q ×  log 3 q (n)n k 2 ( q−2 q ) 3q−3 q (n) log for 2 ≤ q < ∞ for 1 ≤ q ≤ 2. Moreover, the constant Ak,q may be taken independent of k for q 6= 2. Proof. To prove this theorem we will first find a polynomial with small norm both in P (k ℓn 2 ) and in ). For this we use an interesting technique borrowed from the proof of [8, Lemma 2.1], followed P (k ℓn ∞ by an interpolation argument. k¡ n k−1¢. We use S to Note first that any S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system S satisfies that S ≤ 1 as in (10). By Lemma 2.3, Theorem 2.2 and Lemma 2.4 there is define a Rademacher process (Yz)z∈Bℓn a constant K > 0 such that E(supz∈Bℓn P{ω ∈ Ω : k XJ∈S (12) 2 2 Yz) ≤ K log3/2(n). Therefore, by Markov's inequality we have εJ (ω)z JkP (k ℓn 2 ) ≥ M kK log3/2(n)} ≤ 1 M , where M is some constant to be determined. On the other hand, recall that by (8) we have εJ (ω)z JkP (k ℓn P{ω ∈ Ω : k XJ∈S k 2en−1 (note that we can take M = 2 here) we have the following inequalities for ω ) ≥ D¡n log(k)S ¢1/2} ≤ ∞ 1 k 2e n , Therefore, if M > 1+ 1 in a positive measure set   kPJ∈S εJ (ω)z JkP (kℓn kPJ∈S εJ (ω)z JkP (kℓn 2 ) ≤ M kK log3/2(n), ) ≤ D¡n log(k)S ¢1/2 ∞ ≤ D³ log(k) k k−1¢n´1/2 ¡ n ≤ D³ log(k) k! nk´1/2 . There is a choice of signs (c J )J∈S such that the polynomial p(z) :=PJ∈S c J z J satisfies the inequalities in q ) for 2 < q < ∞. We consider the k-linear form associated to p then [4, Theorem 4.4.1], together with (7) and (13), give (13). We now use an interpolation argument to obtain a bound of the norm of p in P (k ℓn (13) (14) (15) kpkP (kℓn log1/2(k) q q ) ≤¡M kK¢2/q¡Dλ(k,∞) ≤ max{M K , D}³ k ¢ q−2 pk! 2 (k + 1) k+1 2 plog k ´ q−2 2k k!pk! {z Ak,q k } log3/q (n)n k 2 ( q−2 q ) q k 2 q log3/q (n)n k 2 ( q−2 q ) . Note that for q > 2, Ak,q → 0 as k → ∞, and thus we may take a constant independent of k in this case. For q = 1, it is immediately seen that every Steiner unimodular polynomial has norm less than or equal to one. Actually, more can be said. Let P(z) =Pα=k aαzα be any k-homogeneous polynomial. ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 9 Then (16) P(z) ≤ Xα=kaαzα ≤ sup α=knaα α! k!o Xα=k k! α! 1 and ℓn In particular, the polynomial p considered above satisfies kpkP (kℓn polation between the ℓn 2 cases we obtain that for 1 < q < 2, q ) ≤³ k k q ¡M kK log3/2(n)¢ 2q−2 q = Ak,q log Note that also in this case, for every 1 ≤ q < 2 we have Ak,q → 0 as k → ∞. (k!)2´ 2−q kpkP (kℓn zα = sup α=knaα 1 ) ≤ 1 α! k!o³ n Xj=1z j´k . k! . Finally, proceeding by inter- 3q−3 q (n). (cid:3) As was already noted in [12, Corollary 6.5], the argument in (16) improves the estimates given in [7] and [3, Corollary 3.2] for the q = 1 case. 2 ) less than or equal to 1 Remark 2.6. It is not difficult to prove that every 2-homogeneous Steiner unimodular polynomial has norm in P (2ℓn 2. It would be interesting to know if there exists a constant C , perhaps depending on k ≥ 3 and not on n, such that given any S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system S , we can find a k-homogeneous unimodular polynomial p(z) :=PJ∈S c J z J with kpkP (kℓn 2 ) ≤ C . An affirmative answer to this question would in particular give that the upper bound given by Mantero and Tonge (6) for Ck,q(n) with 2 ≤ q < ∞ is actually optimal. The last ingredient we need for our applications is the existence of nearly optimal partial Steiner systems, in the sense that they have many elements. This translates to many unimodular coefficients of the Steiner polynomials. It is well known that any partial Steiner system S p(t, k, n) has cardinality less t¢/¡k than or equal to¡n t¢. A conjecture of Erdos and Hanani [16], proved positively by Rödl [26], states that there exist partial Steiner systems S p(t, k, n) of cardinality at least (1−o(1))¡n t¢, where o(1) tends to zero as n goes to infinity. This bound was improved in [1] (see also [19] for a panoramic overview of the subject), where it is proved that there exists a constant c > 0 such that there exist partial Steiner systems S p(k − 1, k, n) of cardinality at least ¡ n k−1¢k ³1− ¡ n k−1¢k ³1− k−1´, ´, for k = 3. for k > 3, t¢/¡k c log3/2 n 1 k−1 n c 1 n (17) Taking partial Steiner systems of this cardinality in Theorem 2.5 we have the following. Corollary 2.7. Let k ≥ 3. Then there exists a k-homogeneous Steiner unimodular polynomial p of n com- plex variables with at least ψ(k, n) (defined in (17)) coefficients satisfying the estimates in Theorem 2.5. Note that in this case ψ(k, n)≫ nk−1. Remark 2.8. Very recently, a longstanding open problem in combinatorial design theory was solved by Keevash [18]. A Steiner system S(t, k, n) is a collection of subsets of size k of {1,... , n} such that every 10 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS subset of t elements is contained in exactly one member of the collection of subsets of size k. Keevash's result implies the asymptotic existence of Steiner systems, that is, that given t < k, Steiner systems S(t, k, n) exist for every sufficiently large n that satisfies some natural divisibility conditions. In partic- ular, for an infinite number of n's we may take ψ(k, n)=¡ n k−1¢/k in the above corollary. 3. ESTIMATES ON THE MULTIVARIABLE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY In this section we estimate the asymptotic failure of different versions of the multivariable von Neu- mann inequality for homogeneous polynomials. Before we prove Theorem 1.1, let us observe that we modify Dixon's original proof of the lower bound in (3) in several ways. Dixon considered partial Steiner systems S p([(k − 1)/2], k, n), for which the number of non-zero coef- ficients is of the order n[ k−1 2 ]. This is not enough to find a good lower bound. Instead, we use partial Steiner systems S p(k − 1, k, n). This allows us to have more non-zero coefficients, but also forces us to make a new construction of the Hilbert space and the operators which we feel is closer to that given by Varopoulos in [29]. Proof of Theorem 1.1 -- (i). The upper bound was proved in [15, Theorem 1.2]. Thus we only have to construct a polynomial, a Hilbert space and commuting contractions that show that the asymptotic growth of this bound is optimal. Let n ≥ k ≥ 3 and choose a partial Steiner system S p(k − 1, k, n), denoted by S , such that S = ψ(k, n) as in (17). By Theorem 2.5, see also (13), there exists a k-homogeneous polynomial p(z) =PJ∈S c J z J , with c J = ±1 for every J ∈ S and such that (18) kpkP (k ℓn ∞ ) ≤ D³ log(k) k Ã n k − 1!n´1/2 . Let H be the (finite dimensional) Hilbert space which has as orthonormal basis the following vectors e; e( j1,..., jm) fi g . for 0 ≤ m ≤ k − 2 and 1 ≤ j1 ≤ ··· ≤ jm ≤ n; for i = 1,... , n;   Given any subset {i1,..., ir } ⊂ {1,... , n}, we denote by [i1,..., ir ] its nondecreasing reordering. We define, for l = 1,..., n, the operators that act as follows on the basis of H , Tl e = e(l ) Tl e( j1,..., jm) = e[l , j1,..., jm], Tl e( j1,..., jk−2) =Pi γ{i ,l, j1,..., jk−2} fi , Tl fi = δl i g , Tl g = 0, if 0 ≤ m < k − 2 ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 11 where γ{i1,...,ik} =  c{i1,...,ik }, 0 if {i1,..., ik} ∈ S otherwise. Since S is an S p(k − 1, k, n) partial Steiner system, kTlk = 1 for l = 1,..., n. It is easily checked that the operators commute. We have p(T1,..., Tn)e = X{i1,...,ik }∈S c{i1,...,ik }Ti1Ti2 ... Tik e = X{i1,...,ik }∈S c2 {i1,...,ik}g = S g = ψ(k, n)g . Now, using (18) we get kp(T1,... , Tn)kL (H ) ≥ kp(T1,..., Tn)ekH = ψ(k, n) This gives the desired conclusion. ≥ 1 D³ ¡ n k−1¢ nk log(k)´ 1 2¡1− o(1)¢kpkP (kℓn ∞ ) ≫ n k−2 2 kpkP (kℓn ∞ ). (cid:3) T j Proof of Theorem 1.1 -- (ii). The upper bound was proved in [21, Corollary 11]. For the lower bound, we take the Hilbert space and the operators T1,..., Tn defined in the proof of Theorem 1.1 -- (i). Then R j = n1/q for j = 1,..., n clearly satisfyPn i=1kRikq ≤ 1. Taking the polynomial p given by Theorem 2.5 we have 1 nk/q kp(T1,..., Tn)ekH = S kp(R1,..., Rn)kL (H ) ≥ nk/q kpkP (kℓn Ak,q log3/q (n)n q )S 2 ( q−2 q ) k ≥ nk/q ≥ A−1 k,qCk log−3/q (n)n k−2 2 ). 2 kpkP (kℓn This concludes the proof of the theorem. (cid:3) 3.1. Other possible extensions of the von Neumann inequality for homogeneous polynomials: some particular cases. Mantero and Tonge [21, Proposition 17] also obtained lower bounds for Ck,q,r (n), defined as the least constant C such that (19) kp(T1,... , Tn)kL (H ) ≤ C sup{p(z1,..., zn) : n Xj=1z jq ≤ 1}, for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting contractions L (H ) ≤ 1. Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 1.1 -- (ii), we can show the i=1kTikr (T1,... , Tn) withPn following. Proposition 3.1. Let k ≥ 3, then r )−1 q − 1 (i) log−3/q (n)nk( 1 (ii) log−3/q′(n)n k 2+ 1 r′ −1 ≪ Ck,q,r (n), for q ≤ 2 and 1 ≤ r ≤ ∞. ≪ Ck,q,r (n), for q ≥ 2 and 1 ≤ r ≤ ∞, Remark 3.2. The above proposition improves the lower bounds for Ck,q,r given in [21, Proposition 17] in all cases but q ≤ 2 and k = 3. 12 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS Another possible multivariable extension of the von Neumann inequality (also studied in [21]) is by considering polynomials on commuting operators T1,..., Tn satisfying that for any pair h, g of norm one vectors in the Hilbert space, (20) Xj=1〈T j h, g〉q ≤ 1, or, equivalently, that for any vector α ∈ Cn such that kαkℓn n q′ = 1, we have Let Dk,q (n), denote the smallest constant such that n Xj=1 °°° α j T j°°° ≤ 1. (21) kp(T1,..., Tn)kL (H ) ≤ Dk,q (n) sup{p(z1,..., zn) : n Xj=1z jq ≤ 1}, for every k-homogeneous polynomial p in n variables and every n-tuple of commuting contractions (T1,..., Tn) satisfying (20). The upper bound obtained in [21, Proposition 20] is Dk,q(n) ≪  (k−1)( 1 (k−1)( 1 2+ 1 q ) 2+ 1 q′ ) n n for q ≥ 2, for q ≤ 2. For k = 3 and q = 2 we show that this is optimal up to a logarithmic factor. Proposition 3.3. We have the following asymptotic behavior: n2 log15/4 n ≪ D3,2(n) ≪ n2. Proof. Let p(z) =PJ∈S c J z J be a 3-homogeneous Steiner unimodular polynomial as in Theorem 2.5 ,..., and let T1,..., Tn be the operators defined in the proof of Theorem 1.1 -- (i). We prove first that satisfy (20). Note that these operators are defined on a (2n + 2)-dimensional Hilbert space H with or- thonormal basis {e, e1,..., en, f1,..., fn, g }. T1 kpk1/2 P (3 ℓn 2 ) Tn kpk1/2 P (3 ℓn 2 ) For α ∈ ℓn 2 and h ∈ H , (below we take some β in the unit ball of ℓn 2 ) °°°Xj 2 α j T j h°°° 2 2 = 〈h, e〉2kαk2 α j〈h, f j〉¯¯¯ +¯¯¯Xj α j〈h, el〉a{i , j ,l}¯¯¯ =Xj α j〈h, e〉2+Xi ¯¯¯Xj ,l α j〈h, el〉a{i , j ,l}´2 α j〈h, f j〉¯¯¯ +¯¯¯Xj 2 +³Xi βiXj ,l 2 k(〈h, el〉)lk2 2 )kαk2 2 +kpkP (3ℓn ℓn 2 khk2 H . ≤ 〈h, e〉2kαk2 2 )kαk2 ≤ kpkP (3ℓn 2 +kαk2 ℓn ℓn ℓn ℓn ℓn 2 2 k(〈h, f j〉) jk2 ℓn 2 Therefore, T1 kpk1/2 P (3ℓn 2 ) ,... , Tn kpk1/2 P (3ℓn 2 ) °°°p( and this concludes the proof. )°°°L (H ) ≥ kpk−3/2 P (3ℓn 2 )kp(T1,..., Tn)ekH = kpk−3/2 P (3ℓn 2 )S ≫ kpkP (3ℓn 2 ) n2 log15/4 n , (cid:3) ASYMPTOTIC ESTIMATES ON THE VON NEUMANN INEQUALITY FOR HOMOGENEOUS POLYNOMIALS 13 Acknowledgements. We wish to thank the referee for her/his comments. Also, we would like to warmly thank our friend Michael Mackey for his careful reading and suggestions that improved considerably the final presentation of the paper. REFERENCES [1] Noga Alon, Jeong-Han Kim, and Joel Spencer. Nearly perfect matchings in regular simple hypergraphs. Israel J. Math., 100:171 -- 187, 1997. [2] Tsuyoshi Andô. On a pair of commutative contractions. Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged), 24:88 -- 90, 1963. [3] Frédéric Bayart. Maximum modulus of random polynomials. Q. J. Math., 63(1):21 -- 39, 2012. [4] Jöran Bergh and Jörgen Löfström. Interpolation spaces. An introduction. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1976. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, No. 223. [5] Ron Blei. Multidimensional extensions of the Grothendieck inequality and applications. Ark. Mat., 17(1):51 -- 68, 1979. [6] Ron Blei. Analysis in integer and fractional dimensions, volume 71 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001. [7] Harold P. Boas. Majorant series. J. Korean Math. Soc., 37(2):321 -- 337, 2000. Several complex variables (Seoul, 1998). [8] Daniel Carando and Verónica Dimant. Extension of polynomials and John's theorem for symmetric tensor products. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 135(6):1769 -- 1773 (electronic), 2007. [9] Michael J. Crabb and Alexander M. Davie. von Neumann's inequality for Hilbert space operators. Bull. London Math. Soc., 7:49 -- 50, 1975. [10] Andreas Defant and Klaus Floret. Tensor norms and operator ideals. North-Holland Mathematics Studies, 176. North- Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1993. [11] Andreas Defant, Leonhard Frerick, Joaquim Ortega-Cerdà, Myriam Ounaïes, and Kristian Seip. The Bohnenblust-Hille inequality for homogeneous polynomials is hypercontractive. Ann. of Math. (2), 174(1):485 -- 497, 2011. [12] Andreas Defant, Domingo García, and Manuel Maestre. Bohr's power series theorem and local Banach space theory. J. Reine Angew. Math., 557:173 -- 197, 2003. [13] Andreas Defant, Domingo García, and Manuel Maestre. Maximum moduli of unimodular polynomials. J. Korean Math. Soc., 41(1):209 -- 229, 2004. Satellite Conference on Infinite Dimensional Function Theory. [14] Seán Dineen. Complex analysis on infinite dimensional spaces. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. London: Springer, 1999. [15] Peter G. Dixon. The von Neumann inequality for polynomials of degree greater than two. J. London Math. Soc. (2), 14(2):369 -- 375, 1976. [16] Paul Erdos and Haim Hanani. On a limit theorem in combinatorial analysis. Publ. Math. Debrecen, 10:10 -- 13, 1963. [17] Jean-Pierre Kahane. Some random series of functions. D. C. Heath and Co. Raytheon Education Co., Lexington, Mass., 1968. [18] Peter Keevash. The existence of designs. Preprint arXiv:1401.3665. [19] Jeong Han Kim. Nearly optimal partial Steiner systems. In Brazilian Symposium on Graphs, Algorithms and Combina- torics, volume 7 of Electron. Notes Discrete Math., page 4 pp. (electronic). Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2001. [20] Michel Ledoux and Michel Talagrand. Probability in Banach spaces, volume 23 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas (3)]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991. Isoperimetry and processes. [21] Anna Maria Mantero and Andrew Tonge. Banach algebras and von Neumann's inequality. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 38(2):309 -- 334, 1979. 14 DANIEL GALICER, SANTIAGO MURO, PABLO SEVILLA-PERIS [22] Anna Maria Mantero and Andrew Tonge. The Schur multiplication in tensor algebras. Studia Math., 68(1):1 -- 24, 1980. [23] Brian Maurizi and Hervé Queffélec. Some remarks on the algebra of bounded Dirichlet series. J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 16(5):676 -- 692, 2010. [24] Gilles Pisier. Some applications of the metric entropy condition to harmonic analysis. In Banach spaces, harmonic anal- ysis, and probability theory (Storrs, Conn., 1980/1981), volume 995 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 123 -- 154. Springer, Berlin, 1983. [25] Gilles Pisier. Similarity problems and completely bounded maps, volume 1618 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer- Verlag, Berlin, expanded edition, 2001. Includes the solution to "The Halmos problem". [26] Vojtech Rödl. On a packing and covering problem. European J. Combin., 6(1):69 -- 78, 1985. [27] Carsten Schütt. Entropy numbers of diagonal operators between symmetric Banach spaces. J. Approx. Theory, 40(2):121 -- 128, 1984. [28] Béla Sz.-Nagy. Unitary dilations of Hilbert space operators and related topics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1974. Expository Lectures from the CBMS Regional Conference held at the University of New Hampshire, Durham, N.H., June 7-11, 1971, Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, No. 19. [29] Nicholas Th. Varopoulos. On an inequality of von Neumann and an application of the metric theory of tensor products to operators theory. J. Functional Analysis, 16:83 -- 100, 1974. [30] Johann von Neumann. Eine Spektraltheorie für allgemeine Operatoren eines unitären Raumes. Math. Nachr., 4:258 -- 281, 1951. DEPARTAMENTO DE MATEMÁTICA - PAB I, FACULTAD DE CS. EXACTAS Y NATURALES, UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES, (1428) BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA AND CONICET E-mail address: [email protected] E-mail address: [email protected] INSTITUTO UNIVERSITARIO DE MATEMÁTICA PURA Y APLICADA, UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE DE VALÈN- CIA, CMNO VERA S/N, 46022, VALENCIA, SPAIN E-mail address: [email protected]
1307.5620	1	1307	2013-07-22T08:32:59	On the spaces of $\lambda-$ convergent and bounded series	[ "math.FA" ]	The main purpose of this study is to introduce the spaces $cs^{\lambda}, cs_0^{\lambda}$ and $bs^{\lambda}$ which are $BK-$spaces of non-absolute type. We prove that these spaces are linearly isomorphic to the spaces $cs, cs_0$ and $bs$, respectively and derive some inclusion relations. Additionally, their Schauder bases have been constructed and the $\alpha-,\beta-$ and $\gamma-$ duals of these spaces have been computed. Finally, we characterize some matrix classes from the spaces $cs^{\lambda}, cs_0^{\lambda}$ and $bs^{\lambda}$ to spaces $\ell_p, c$ and $c_0$, where $1\leq p\leq\infty$ .	math.FA	math	ON THE SPACES OF λ− CONVERGENT AND BOUNDED SERIES MELTEM KAYA AND HASAN FURKAN∗ Abstract. The main purpose of this study is to introduce the spaces csλ, csλ and bsλ which are BK −spaces of non-absolute type. We prove that these spaces are linearly isomorphic to the spaces cs, cs0 and bs, respectively and derive some inclusion relations. Additionally, their Schauder bases have been constructed and the α−, β− and γ− duals of these spaces have been computed. Finally, we characterize some matrix classes from the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ to spaces ℓp, c and c0, where 1 6 p 6 ∞ . 0 1. Preliminaries, Background and Notation By a sequence space, we understand a linear subspace of the space w = CN, where N = {0, 1, 2, . . . }. A sequence spaces E with a linear topology is called a K− spaces provided each of the maps pi : E → C defined pi(x) = xi is continuous for all i ∈ N, where C denotes the complex field and N = {0, 1, 2, . . . }. A K− space is called an F K− space provided E is a complete linear metric space. An F K− spaces whose topology is normable is called a BK− space (see [1, pages 272- 273]) which contains φ, the set of all finitely non -- zero sequences. We write ℓ∞, c and c0 for the spaces of all bounded, convergent and null sequences, respectively. Also by ℓp, we denote the space of all p -- absolutely summable sequences, where 1 6 p < ∞. Moreover, we write bs, cs and cs0 for the sequences spaces of all bounded, convergent and null series, respectively. Let µ and ν be two sequence spaces, and let A = (ank) be an infinite matrix of complex numbers ank, where n, k ∈ N. Then we say that A defines a matrix transformation from µ into ν, and we denote it by writing A : µ → ν if for every sequence x = (xk) ∈ µ, the sequence Ax = {(Ax)}, the A- transform of x, is in ν, where ankxk , (n ∈ N, x ∈ D00(A)), (1.1) (Ax)n :=Xk and by D00(A) denotes the subspace of w consisting of x ∈ w for which the sum exists as a finite sum. For simplicity in notation, here and in what follows, the summation without limits runs from 0 to ∞ and we shall use the convention that any term with a negative subscript is equal to naught, for example, λ−1 = 0 and x−1 = 0. By (µ : ν), we denote the class of all matrices A such that A : µ → ν. Thus A ∈ (µ : ν) if and only if the series on the right side of (1.1) convergens for each 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 40C05,40H05,46A45. Key words and phrases. λ spaces, matrix domain of a sequence space, α, β and γ duals, matrix mappings, the series spaces cs and bs. *Corresponding author. 1 n ∈ N and each x ∈ µ and we have Ax = {(Ax)n}n∈N ∈ ν for all x ∈ µ . For an arbitrary sequence space µ, the matrix domain µA of an infinite matrix A in µ is defined by µA := {x ∈ w : Ax ∈ µ}, (1.2) which is a sequence space. If A is triangle, then one can easily observe that the normed sequence spaces µA and µ are norm isomorphic, i.e., µA ∼= µ. If µ is a sequence space, then the continuous dual µ∗ A of the space µA is defined by µ∗ A := {f : f = g ◦ A, g ∈ µ∗}. We denote the collection of all finite subsets of N by F . Also, we will write e(k) for the sequence whose only non-zero term is 1 in the kth place for each k ∈ N. Throughout this paper, let λ = (λk) be a strictly increasing sequence of positive real tending to infinity; that is 0 < λ0 < λ1 < λ2 < ..., lim k→∞ λk = ∞. We define the matrix Λ = (λnk) of weighted mean relative to the sequence λ by λnk =(cid:26) λk−λk−1 0, λn , 0 6 k 6 n, k > n, for all k, n ∈ N. With a direct calculation we derive the equality Λn(x) = 1 λn n Xk=0 (λk − λk−1)xk; (n ∈ N). (1.3) It is easy to show that the matrix Λ is regular and is reduced, in the special case λk = k + 1 for all k ∈ N to the matrix C1 of Ces`aro means of order one. Introducing the concept of Λ− strong convergence, several results on Λ− strong convergence of numerical sequences and Fourier series were given by M´oricz [2]. Since we have Qn = n Xk=0 qk = λn, rnk = qk Qn = λk − λk−1 λn = λnk in the special case qk = λk − λk−1 for all k ∈ N, the matrix Λ is also reduced to the Riesz means Rq = (rnk) with respect to the sequence q = (qk). ∞, cλ, cλ 0 and ℓλ We summarize the knowledge in the existing literature concerning with the λ- matrices domain over some sequence spaces. Mursaleen and Noman [3, 4, 5, 6] introduced the spaces ℓλ p of lambda-bounded, lambda-convergent, lambda-null and lambda-absolutely p−summable sequences and gave the inclusion relations between these spaces and the classical sequence spaces ℓ∞, c and c0. Later, Mursaleen and Noman [7] investigated the difference spaces cλ 0 (∆) and cλ(∆) 0 and cλ. Recently, on paranormed λ− sequence spaces obtained from the spaces cλ of non-absolute type has been studied by Karakaya, Noman and Polat [8]. More recently, Sonmez and Ba¸sar [9] introduce the difference sequence spaces cλ 0 (B) and 0 (∆) and cλ(∆). Quite recently, cλ(B), which are the generalization of the spaces cλ on some new sequence spaces of non-absolute type and matrix transformations has been studied by Ganie and Sheikh [10]. Same authors has been studied on spaces of λ− convergent sequences and almost convergence [11]. Also, on the fine spectrum of the operator defined by lambda matrix over the spaces of null and convergent sequences has been studied by Ye¸silkayagil and Ba¸sar [12]. 2 In this work, our purpose is to construct sequence spaces of csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ by using a matrix domain over a normed space as done by [3]. We define the sequence y = (yk), which will be frequently used, as the Λ- transform of a sequence x = (xk), i.e., y = Λ(x) and so we have yk := 1 λk k Xj=0 (λj − λj−1)xj ; (k ∈ N). (1.4) Also, we say that a sequence x = (xk) ∈ w is λ-convergent if Λx ∈ c. In particular, we say that x is λ-null sequence if Λx ∈ c0 and we say that x is λ-bounded if Λx ∈ ℓ∞. 2. The sequence spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ In the present section, we introduce the sequence spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ as the sets of all sequences whose Λ-transforms are in the spaces cs, cs0 and bs, respectively, that is and m m csλ lim m→∞ csλ = (x = (xk) ∈ w : 0 = (x = (xk) ∈ w : Xn=0 Xn=0 m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) bsλ = (x = (xk) ∈ w : sup Xn=0 lim m→∞ m 1 λn 1 λn 1 λn n n Xk=0 Xk=0 n Xk=0 (λk − λk−1)xk exists) , (λk − λk−1)xk = 0) (λk − λk−1)xk(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞) . With the notation of (1.2), we can redefine the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ as the csλ = (cs)Λ, csλ matrix domains of the triangle Λ in the spaces cs, cs0 and bs by 0 = (cs0)Λ and bsλ = (bs)Λ. Then, it is immediate by (2.1) that the sets csλ, csλ (2.1) 0 and bsλ are linear spaces 0 and bsλ with coordinatewise addition and scalar multiplication, that is, csλ, csλ are the sequence spaces consisting of all sequences which are λ-convergent, λ-null and λ-bounded series of type λ, respectively. Now, we may begin with the following theorem which is essential in the text. Theorem 2.1. The sequence spaces csλ, csλ norm kxkcsλ = kxkcsλ = kxkbsλ, that is, 0 0 and bsλ are BK-spaces with the same kxkbsλ = kΛ(x)kbs = sup < ∞. m Xn=0 m (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Λn(x)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Proof. Since (2.1) holds and cs, cs0 and bs are BK- spaces with the respect to their natural norms and the matrix Λ is a triangle, Theorem 4.3.12 of Wilansky [13, page 63] gives the fact that csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ are BK- spaces with the given norms. This completes the proof. (cid:3) Remark 1. One can easily check that the absolute property does not hold on the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ, that is, kxkcsλ 6= kxkcsλ , kxkcsλ and 0 and bsλ, and this kxkbsλ 6= kxkbsλ for at least one sequence in the spaces csλ, csλ 6= kxkcsλ 0 0 3 shows that csλ, csλ x = (xk). 0 and bsλ are the sequence spaces of non-absolute type, where Now, we give the final theorem of this section. 0 and bsλ of non-absolute type are Theorem 2.2. The sequence spaces csλ, csλ isometrically isomorphic to the spaces cs, cs0 and bs, respectively, that is csλ ∼= cs, csλ 0 ∼= cs0 and bsλ ∼= bs. Proof. To prove this, we should show the existence of an isometric isomorphism between the spaces csλ 0 and cs0. Consider the transformation T defined, with the notation of (1.4), from csλ 0 to cs0 by x 7→ y(λ) = T x. Then, T (x) = y = Λ(x) ∈ cs0 for every x ∈ csλ 0 and the linearity of T is clear. Also, it is trivial that x = θ whenever T x = θ and hence T is injective. Furthermore, let y = (yk) ∈ cs0 be given and define the sequence x = (xk) by xk := k Xj=k−1 (−1)k−j λj λk − λk−1 yj; (k ∈ N). (2.2) Then, by using (1.3) and (2.2), we have for every n ∈ N that Λn(x) = = = 1 λn 1 λn 1 λn = yn. n n Xk=0 Xk=0 Xk=0 n (λk − λk−1)xk (−1)k−j λjyj k Xj=k−1 (λkyk − λk−1yk−1) This shows that Λ(x) = y and since y ∈ cs0, we obtain that Λ(x) ∈ cs0. Thus, we deduce that x ∈ csλ 0 and T x = y. Hence T is surjective. Moreover, one can easily see for every x ∈ csλ 0 that kT xkcs0 = ky(λ)kcs0 = kλ(x)kcs0 = kxkcsλ 0 which means that T is norm preserving. Therefore T is isometry. Consequently T is an isometric isomorphism which show that the spaces csλ 0 and cs0 are isometrically isomorphic. It is clear that if the spaces csλ 0 and cs0 are replaced by the respective one of the spaces csλ and cs or bsλ and bs, then we obtain the fact that csλ ∼= cs and bsλ ∼= bs. This completes the proof. (cid:3) 3. The inclusion Relations In the present section, we establish some inclusion relations concerning with the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ. We may begin with the following lemma. Lemma 3.1. For any sequence x = (xk) ∈ w, the equality Sn(x) = xn − Λn(x); (n ∈ N) (3.1) 4 holds, where S(x) = {Sn(x)} is the sequence defined by S0(x) = 0 and Sn(x) = 1 λn n Xk=1 λk−1(xk − xk−1); (n > 1). Theorem 3.2. The inclusions csλ 0 ⊂ csλ ⊂ bsλ strictly hold. 0 ⊂ csλ ⊂ bsλ hold. Proof. It is obvious that the inclusions csλ Let us consider the sequence x = (xk) defined by xk = λk 1 (k+2)2 − λk−1 λk − λk−1 1 (k+1)2 ; (k ∈ N). In the present case, we obtain for every n ∈ N that equality Λn(x) = 1 λn n Xk=0(cid:18)λk 1 (k + 2)2 − λk−1 1 (k + 1)2(cid:19) = 1 (n + 2)2 which shows that Λ(x) ∈ cs\cs0. Thus, the sequence x is in csλ but not in csλ 0 . Hence csλ 0 ⊂ csλ is a strict inclusion. To show that csλ ⊂ bsλ inclusion is strict, we define the sequence y = (yk) by yk = (−1)k(cid:18) λk + λk−1 λk − λk−1(cid:19) ; (k ∈ N). Then, we have for every n ∈ N that n m m Xn=0 1 λn Xn=0 Xk=0 Λn(y) = (−1)k(λk + λk−1) = (−1)n. m Xn=0 This shows Λ(y) ∈ bs\cs. Thus, the sequence y is in bsλ but not in csλ and hence csλ ⊂ bsλ is a strict inclusion. This concludes the proof. (cid:3) Lemma 3.3. [3, Theorem 4.1.]The inclusions cλ 0 ⊂ cλ ⊂ ℓλ ∞ strictly hold. Theorem 3.4. The inclusions csλ ⊂ cλ 0 and bsλ ⊂ ℓλ ∞ strictly hold. Proof. It is clear that the inclusion csλ ⊂ cλ and hence Λ(x) ∈ c0 which means that x ∈ cλ defined by 0 holds, since x ∈ csλ implies Λ(x) ∈ cs 0 . Consider the sequence x = (xk) xk = 1 k + 1 ; (k ∈ N). Then, x ∈ c0 and hence x ∈ cλ hand, we have for every n ∈ N that 0 , since the inclusion c0 ⊂ cλ 0 holds. On the other Λn(x) = > = 1 λn n Xk=0 1 λn(n + 1) 1 n + 1 λk − λk−1 k + 1 (λk − λk−1) n Xk=0 which shows that Λ(x) 6∈ cs and hence x 6∈ csλ. Thus, the sequence x is in cλ not in csλ. Therefore, the inclusion csλ ⊂ cλ 0 is strict. 0 but 5 Similarly, it is also trivial that the inclusion bsλ ⊂ ℓλ ∞ holds. To show that this inclusion is strict, we define the sequence y = (yk) by In the present case, we have for every n ∈ N that yk = e = (1, 1, 1, ...) ; (k ∈ N). Λn(y) = 1 λn n Xk=0 (λk − λk−1) = 1 which shows that Λ(y) ∈ ℓ∞\bs. Thus, the sequence y is in ℓλ hence bsλ ⊂ ℓλ ∞ is a strict inclusion. This completes the proof. ∞ but not in bsλ and Theorem 3.5. The inclusion csλ ⊂ cs holds if and only if S(x) ∈ cs for every sequence x ∈ csλ. Proof. Suppose that the inclusion csλ ⊂ cs holds, and take any x = (xk) ∈ csλ. Then Λx ∈ cs and x ∈ cs by the hypothesis. Thus, we deduce from (3.1) that (cid:3) m m m (xn − Λn(x)) = xn − Λn(x) = Xn=0 Xn=0 Xn=0 Hence, we obtain from (3.2) by letting m → ∞ that Sn(x). (3.2) m Xn=0 lim m Xn=0 Sn(x) =Xn xn −Xn Λn(x). (3.3) m m As (xn) ∈ cs and (Λn(x)) ∈ cs, the right hand side of the equality (3.3) is convergent Conversely, let x ∈ csλ be given. Then, we have by the hypothesis that n=0 Sn(x) converges and so, S(x) ∈ cs. as m → ∞. Thereby, the series Pm S(x) ∈ cs. Again, it follows by (3.2) that lim m Xn=0 xn =Xn Sn(x) +Xn Λn(x) which shows that x ∈ cs since Λ(x) ∈ cs and S(x) ∈ cs. Hence, the inclusion csλ ⊂ cs holds and this concludes the proof. (cid:3) Theorem 3.6. The inclusion csλ sequence x ∈ csλ 0 . 0 ⊂ cs0 holds if and only if S(x) ∈ cs0 for every Proof. One can see by analogy that the inclusion csλ if S(x) ∈ cs0 for every sequence x ∈ csλ 0 . This completes the proof. 0 ⊂ cs0 also holds if and only (cid:3) Theorem 3.7. The inclusion bsλ ⊂ bs holds if and only if S(x) ∈ bs for every sequence x ∈ bsλ. Proof. Suppose that the inclusion bsλ ⊂ bs holds, and take any x = (xk) ∈ bsλ. Then, x ∈ bs by the hypothesis. Thus, we obtain from equality (3.1) kS(x)kbs 6 kxkbs + kΛ(x)kbs = kxkbs + kxkbsλ < ∞ which yields that S(x) ∈ bs. Conversely, assume that S(x) ∈ bs for every x ∈ bsλ. Again, we obtain from equality (3.1) kxkbs 6 kS(x)kbs + kΛ(x)kbs = kS(x)kbs + kxkbsλ < ∞. 6 This shows that x ∈ bs. Hence, the inclusion bsλ ⊂ bs holds. This completes the proof. (cid:3) 4. The Basis for the Spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ In the present section, we give a sequence of the points of the spaces csλ and csλ 0 which forms a basis for these spaces. If a normed sequence space X contains a sequence (bn) with the property that for every x ∈ X there is a unique sequence of scalars (αn) such that lim n→∞ kx − (α0b0 + α1b1 + . . . + αnbn)k = 0 which has the sum x is then called the expansion of x with respect to (bn) and is then (bn) is called a Schauder basis (or briefly basis) for X. The series Pk αkbk written as x =Pk αkbk. Now, since the transformation T defined from csλ 0 to cs0 in the proof of Theo- rem 2.2 is an isomorphism. Therefore, we have the following theorem: Theorem 4.1. Define the sequence e(n) λn λ = {(e(n) {(e(n) λ )k} =(cid:26) (−1)k−n 0 λk −λk−1 λ )k} for every fixed k ∈ N by , n 6 k 6 n + 1, , otherwise, for all k ∈ N. Then, we have a) The sequence (e(0) every x ∈ csλ or csλ λ , . . .) is a Schauder basis for the spaces csλ and csλ λ , e(1) 0 has a unique representation of the form 0 and b) bsλ has no Schauder basis. x = ∞ Xn=0 Λn(x)e(n) λ . (4.1) Proof. a) ([13, Theorem 2.3.]) It is clear that e(n) λ basis for cs and Λ(e(n) λ ) = e(n). Let x ∈ csλ be given. Then, y = Λ(x) ∈ cs and is a basis for csλ since e(n) is a y[m] = yne(n) → y (m → ∞) m Xn=0 for a unique sequence (yn)∞ n=0 of scalars. Therefore, we obtain that Since yn = Λn(x), we can write as Λ−1(y[m]) = m Xn=0 ynΛ−1(e(n)) = yne(n) λ . m Xn=0 m x[m] = λn(x)e(n) λ . Xn=0 Consequently, kx[m] −xkcsλ = kΛ(x[m] −x)kcs = kΛ(x[m])−Λ(x)kcs = ky[m] −ykcs → 0 (m → ∞). Thus, we deduce that limm→∞ kx[m] − xk = 0, which shows that x ∈ csλ is repre- sented as in (4.1). 7 Finally, let us show the uniqueness of the representation (4.1) of x ∈ csλ. For, λ . Since the linear transformation T defined from csλ to cs, in the proof of Theorem 2.2, is continuous, we have suppose on the contrary that there exists another representation x = Pn αne(n) Λk(x) =Xn αnΛk(e(n) λ ) =Xn αnδkn = αk; (k ∈ N). Therefore, the representation (4.1) of x ∈ csλ is unique. It can be proved similarly for csλ 0 . This completes the proof. b)As a direct consequence of Remark 2.2. of Malkowsky and Rakocevi´c [15], (cid:3) bsλ has no Schauder basis. As a result, it easily follows from Theorem 2.1 that csλ and csλ 0 are the Banach spaces with their natural norms. Then by Theorem 4.1 we obtain the the following corollary: Corollary 4.2. The sequence spaces csλ and csλ 0 of non-absolute type are separable. 5. The α−, β− and γ− duals of the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ In this section, we state and prove the theorems determining the α−, β− and 0 and bsλ of non-absolute type. For arbitrary γ− duals of the sequence spaces csλ, csλ sequence spaces X and Y , the set M (X, Y ) defined by M (X, Y ) = {a = (ak) ∈ w : ax = (akxk) ∈ Y ∀x = (xk) ∈ X} (5.1) is called the multiplier space of X and Y . One can easily observe for a sequence space Z with Y ⊂ Z and Z ⊂ X that the inclusions M (X, Y ) ⊂ M (X, Z) and M (X, Y ) ⊂ M (Z, Y ) hold, respectively. With the notation of (5.1), the α−, β− and γ− duals of a sequence space X, which are respectively, denoted by X α, X β and X γ are defined by X α = M (X, ℓ1), X β = M (X, cs) and X γ = M (X, bs). It is clear that X α ⊂ X β ⊂ X γ. Also, it can be obviously seen that the inclusions X α ⊂ Y α, X β ⊂ Y β, and X γ ⊂ Y γ hold whenever Y ⊂ X. The following known results [16] are fundamental for this section. Lemma 5.1. A = (ank) ∈ (cs : ℓ1) if and only if sup N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup Xn∈N Xk∈K Xn∈N Xk∈K (ank − an,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (ank − an,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞. (5.2) < ∞. (5.3) Lemma 5.2. A = (ank) ∈ (cs0 : ℓ1) if and only if Lemma 5.3. A = (ank) ∈ (bs : ℓ1) if and only if (5.3) holds and lim k ank = 0, ∀n ∈ N. 8 (5.4) Lemma 5.4. A = (ank) ∈ (cs : c) if and only if and ank − an,k+1 < ∞, sup n Xk lim n ank exist for all k ∈ N. Lemma 5.5. A = (ank) ∈ (cs0 : c) if and only if (5.5) holds lim n (ank − an,k+1) exist for all k ∈ N. Lemma 5.6. A = (ank) ∈ (bs : c) if and only if (5.4) and (5.6) hold and ank − an,k−1 converges. Xk Lemma 5.7. A = (ank) ∈ (cs : ℓ∞) if and only if ank − an,k−1 < ∞. sup n Xk Lemma 5.8. A = (ank) ∈ (cs0 : ℓ∞) if and only if (5.5) holds. Lemma 5.9. A = (ank) ∈ (bs : ℓ∞) if and only if (5.4) and (5.5) hold. Now, we prove the following result. (5.5) (5.6) (5.7) (5.8) (5.9) Theorem 5.10. Define the sets mλ 1 and mλ 2 as follows: and mλ 1 =(a = (an) ∈ w : mλ 2 =(a = (an) ∈ w : sup N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup (bλ nk − bλ Xn∈N Xk∈K (bλ nk − bλ Xn∈N Xk∈K n,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) n,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞) < ∞) ; (5.10) (5.11) where the matrix Bλ = (bλ nk) is defined via the sequence a = (an) ∈ w by bλ nk =(cid:26) (−1)n−k 0 λk λn−λn−1 an if n − 1 6 k 6 n, if n − 1 > k or k > n, for all n, k ∈ N. Then {csλ}α = mλ 1 and {csλ 0 }α = {bsλ}α = mλ 2 . Proof. Let a = (an) ∈ w. Then, by bearing in mind the relations (1.4) and (2.2), it is immediate that the equality anxn = n Xk=n−1 (−1)n−k λk λn − λn−1 anyk = Bλ n(y) (5.12) holds for all n ∈ N. We therefore observe by (5.12) that ax = (anxn) ∈ ℓ1 whenever x = (xk) ∈ csλ if and only if Bλy ∈ ℓ1 whenever y = (yk) ∈ cs. This means that the sequence a = (an) ∈ {csλ}α if and only if Bλ ∈ (cs : ℓ1). Hence, we obtain by Lemma 5.1 with Bλ instead of A that a = (an) ∈ {csλ}α if and only if (bλ nk − bλ < ∞ sup N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xn∈N Xk∈K 9 n,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) which yields the result that {csλ}α = mλ 1 . Similarly, we deduce from Lemma 5.3 with (5.12) that a = (an) ∈ {bsλ}α if and only if Bλ ∈ (bs : ℓ1). Then, it is clear that the columns of the matrix B are in the space c0, since for all k ∈ N. Therefore, we derive from (5.3) that lim n bλ nk = 0 This shows that {csλ 2 . This completes the proof. Theorem 5.11. Define the sets mλ 3 and mλ 4 as follows : nk − bλ < ∞. n,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (5.13) (cid:3) ∞ (bλ sup Xn∈N Xk∈K 0 }α = {bsλ}α = mλ N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 3 = (a = (ak) ∈ w : Xk=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) k (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 4 = (cid:26)a = (ak) ∈ w : sup k→∞(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 5 = (cid:26)a = (ak) ∈ w : λk − λk−1(cid:19) = ¯∆(cid:18) lim ak mλ mλ mλ where λk − λk−1 < ∞) , ¯∆(cid:18) ¯∆( λk λk − λk−1 λk λk − λk−1 ak )λk(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ak(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞(cid:27) , ak(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) exists(cid:27) , ak+1 λk+1 − λk ak − λk − λk−1 3 ∩ mλ 0 }β = mλ for all k ∈ N. Then {csλ}β = {csλ 4 and {bsλ}β = mλ 3 ∩ mλ 5 . Proof. Because of the proof may also be obtained for the space bsλ in the similar way, we omit it. Take any a = (ak) ∈ w and consider the equation (5.14) anyn = T λ n (y), where the matrix T λ = (tλ akxk = n Xk=0 ak yj  λn λn − λn−1 λk − λk−1 k n λj ak n−1 (−1)k−j  Xk=0 Xj=k−1  λk − λk−1(cid:19) λkyk + ¯∆(cid:18) Xk=0 nk =  λk −λk−1(cid:17) λk nk) is defined by λn−λn−1 0 ¯∆(cid:16) an λn ak = tλ if 0 6 k 6 n − 1, if k = n, if k > n. for all n, k ∈ N. Thus, we deduce by (5.14) that ax = (akxk) ∈ cs where x = (xk) ∈ csλ if and only if T λ(y) ∈ c whenever y = (yk) ∈ cs. This means that a = (ak) ∈ {csλ}β if and only if T λ ∈ (cs : c). Therefore, by using Lemma 5.4, we derive from (5.5) and (5.6) that < ∞, ∞ Xk=0(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) ¯∆(cid:18) ¯∆( n (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup ak λk − λk−1 λn λn − λn−1 10 )λk(cid:19)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) an(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) < ∞ and lim n tλ nk = ¯∆(cid:18) ak λk − λk−1(cid:19) λk, respectively. Thereby, we conclude that {csλ}β = {csλ 0 }β = mλ 3 ∩ mλ 4 . (cid:3) Theorem 5.12. The γ-dual of the space csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ is the set mλ 3 ∩ mλ 4 . Proof. The proof of this result follows the same lines that in the proof of Theorem 5.11 using Lemma 5.7, Lemma 5.8 and Lemma 5.9 instead of Lemma 5.4. (cid:3) 6. Certain matrix mappings on the spaces csλ, csλ 0 and bsλ In this present section, we characterize the matrix classes (csλ : ℓp), (csλ 0 : ℓp), 0 : c) and (bsλ : c), where (bsλ : ℓp), (csλ : c0), (csλ 1 6 p 6 ∞. 0 : c0), (bsλ : c0), (csλ : c), (csλ For an infinite matrix A = (ank), we write for brevity that ank = ¯∆(cid:18) ank λk − λk−1(cid:19) λk =(cid:18) ank λk − λk−1 − an,k+1 λk+1 − λk(cid:19) λk (n, k ∈ N). The following lemmas will be needed in proving our results. Lemma 6.1. A = (ank) ∈ (cs : c0) if and only if (5.5) holds and lim n ank = 0 (∀k ∈ N). Lemma 6.2. A = (ank) ∈ (cs0 : c0) if and only if (5.5) holds and lim n (ank − an,k+1) = 0 (∀k ∈ N). Lemma 6.3. A = (ank) ∈ (bs : c0) if and only if (5.4) holds and Lemma 6.4. A = (ank) ∈ (cs0 : ℓp) if and only if lim ank − an,k+1 = 0. n Xk (ank − an,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (ank − an,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup k Xn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk∈K k Xn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk∈K sup p < ∞ (1 < p < ∞). (6.4) p < ∞ (1 < p < ∞). (6.5) (6.1) (6.2) (6.3) (6.6) (6.7) Lemma 6.5. A = (ank) ∈ (cs : ℓp) if and only if Lemma 6.6. A = (ank) ∈ (bs : ℓp) if and only if (5.4) and (6.4) hold. Now, we give the following results on the matrix transformations. Theorem 6.7. (i) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ : ℓ∞) if and only if ∞ and sup ank − ak−1 < ∞ n Xk=0 k (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) sup λk λk − λk−1 < ∞. ank(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) 11 (ii) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ 0 : ℓ∞) if and only if (6.7) holds and (iii) A = (ank) ∈ (bsλ : ℓ∞) if and only if (6.8) holds and ∞ n sup Xk=0 k→∞(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) lim ank − ak+1 < ∞. λk λk − λk−1 exists, ank(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) lim k ank = 0 and an < ∞. sup n (6.8) (6.9) (6.10) (6.11) Proof. Suppose that conditions (6.6) and (6.7) hold and take any x = (xk) ∈ csλ. k=0 ∈ (csλ)β for all n ∈ N and this Then, we have by Theorem 5.11 that (ank)∞ implies the existence of the A-transform of x, i.e.; Ax exists. Further, it is clear that the associated sequence y = (yk) is in the cs and hence y ∈ c0. Let us now consider the following equality derived by using the relation (1.4) from the mth partial sum of the series Pk ankxk : m−1 m λm ankxk = ankyk + λm − λm−1 Xk=0 anmym, (∀n, m ∈ N). (6.12) Xk=0 Xk Xk=0 Therefore, by using (6.6) and (6.7), from (6.12) as m → ∞ we obtain that equality ankxk =Xk ankyk for all n ∈ N. (6.13) Further, since the matrix A = (ank) is in the class (cs : ℓ∞) by Lemma 5.7 and (6.6); we have Ay ∈ ℓ∞. Therefore, we deduce from (1.1) and (6.13) that Ax ∈ ℓ∞ and hence A ∈ (csλ, ℓ∞). Conversely, suppose that A ∈ (csλ, ℓ∞). Then (ank)∞ k=0 ∈ (csλ)β for all n ∈ N and this, with Theorem 5.11, implies both (6.7) and ∞ ank − ak+1 < ∞ for all n ∈ N which together imply that relation (6.13) holds for all sequences x ∈ csλ and y ∈ cs. Further, since Ax ∈ ℓ∞ by the hipothesis; we obtain by (6.13) that Ay ∈ ℓ∞ which shows that A ∈ (cs : ℓ∞), where A = (ank). Hence, the necessity of (6.6) is immediate by (5.7). This concludes the proof of part (i). Since part (ii) can be proved similarly, we omit its proof. (cid:3) Corollary 6.8. (i) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ : c) if and only if (6.7), and (6.8) hold and lim n→∞ ank exists. (ii) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ 0 : c) if and only if (6.7) and (6.8) hold and lim n (ank − an,k+1) exists. (iii) A = (ank) ∈ (bsλ : c) if and only if (6.9), (6.10) and (6.14)hold and lim n→∞Xk ank − ak−1 exists, 12 (6.14) (6.15) (6.16) Corollary 6.9. (i) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ : c0) if and only if (6.7) and (6.8) hold and lim n an exist. (6.17) lim n ank = 0. (ii) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ 0 : c0) if and only if (6.7) and (6.8) hold and lim n (ank − an,k+1) = 0. (iii) A = (ank) ∈ (bsλ : c0) if and only if (6.9) and (6.10) hold and ank − an,k+1 = 0, lim n Xk lim n an = 0. Corollary 6.10. (i) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ : ℓ1) if and only if (6.7) holds and (ii) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ 0 : ℓ1) if and only if (6.7) and (6.22) hold and < ∞. (6.23) < ∞. (6.24) (iii) A = (ank) ∈ (bsλ : ℓ1) if and only if (6.9), (6.10), (6.22), and (6.24) hold and ank − an,k+1 < ∞, sup Xk N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xn∈N Xk∈K N,K∈F(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xn∈N Xk∈K sup (ank − an,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (ank − an,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) p p an < ∞. Xn (ank − an,k−1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) (ank − an,k+1)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xn anp < ∞. sup K∈FXn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk∈K K∈FXn (cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk∈K sup (6.18) (6.19) (6.20) (6.21) (6.22) (6.25) (6.28) Corollary 6.11. (i) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ : ℓp) if and only if (6.7) and (6.22) hold and (ii) A = (ank) ∈ (csλ 0 : ℓp) if and only if (6.7) and (6.22) hold and < ∞. (6.26) < ∞. (6.27) (iii) A = (ank) ∈ (bsλ : ℓp) if and only if (6.9), (6.10), (6.22) and (6.27) hold and Since Corollary 6.8, Corollary 6.9, Corollary 6.10 and Corollay 6.11 can be proved similarly with Theorem 6.7, we omit their proofs. 13 7. Conclusion ∞, cRt = rt c and (c0)Rt = rt 0 in [20], (ℓp)Rt = rt 0 and cEr = er c in [22], (ℓp)Er = er p and (ℓ∞)Er = er c in [24], [(c0)(u, p)]Ar = ar In the literature, the approach of constructing a new sequence space by means of the matrix domain of a particular limitation method has recently been employed by several authors, for example, [17 − 35]. They introduced the sequence spaces (ℓ∞)Nq and (cNq in [17], (ℓp)C1 = Xp and (ℓ∞)C1 = X∞ in [18], µG = Z(u, ν; µ) in [19], (ℓ∞)Rt = rt p in [21], ∞ in [23], (c0)Ar = ar (c0)Er = er 0 and cAr = ar c(u, p) in [25], er 0(∆ : p) = (c0(p))Er ∆, er(∆ : p) = (c(p))Er ∆ and er ∞(∆ : p) = (ℓ∞(p))Er ∆ in [26], (ℓp)Ar = ar ∞ in [27], (c0)C1 = c0 and cC1 = c in [28], (f0)C1 = f0 and fC1 = f in [29], (f0)Rt = f0 and fRt = f in [30], {ℓ∞}B(r,s) = ℓ∞, {cB(r,s) = c, {c0}B(r,s) = c0 and {ℓp}B(r,s) = ℓp in [31], fB(r,s) = f , {f0}B(r,s) = f0 in [32], νB(r,s,t) = ν(B) in [33], and fB(r,s,t) = f (B) in [34]; where Nq, C1, Rt, and Er denote Norlund, Ces`aro, Riesz, and Euler means, respectively. Ar, G, B(r, s) and B(r, s, t) are , respectively, defined in [24, 19, 31, 33],µ ∈ {c0, c, ℓp}, ν ∈ {ℓ∞, c0, c, ℓp} and 1 6 p < ∞. Also co(u, p) and c(u, p) denote sequence spaces genarated from the Maddox's spaces c0(p) and c(p) by Ba¸sarır [35]. 0(u, p) and [c(u, p)]Ar = ar p and (ℓ∞)Ar = ar 0 and ℓλ Quite recently, Mursaleen and Noman have introduced the sequence spaces ∞, cλ, cλ ℓλ p in the case 1 6 p 6 ∞ in [3, 5], respectively. Although the matrix Λ is used for obtaining some new sequence spaces by its domain from the classical sequence spaces, the triangle matrix Λ over the sequence spaces cs, cs0 and bs is not studied. So, working the domain of Λ matrix in the spaces cs, cs0 and bs is meaningful, which is filling up a gap in the existing literature. Finally, the domain of difference matrix in the cs, cs0, bs and csλ, csλ 0 , bsλ was not studied. We conclude our work by expressing from now on that the aim of our next papers is to investigate the difference spaces csλ(∆), csλ 0 (∆) and bsλ(∆). References [1] B. Choudhary, S. Nanda, Functional Analysis with Applications, John Wiley & Sons, New Delhi, India 1989. [2] F. M´oricz, On Λ -- strong convergence of numerical sequences and Fourier series, Acta Math- ematica Hungarica, 54(3-4)(1989), 319 -- 327. [3] M. Mursaleen, A.K. Noman, On the spaces of λ-convergent and bounded sequences, Thai J. Math. 8(2)(2010), 311 -- 329. [4] M. Mursaleen, A.K. Noman, Applications of the Hausdorff measure of noncompactness in some sequence spaces of weighted means, Comput. Math. Appl. 60(5)(2010), 1245 -- 1258. [5] M. Mursaleen, A. K. Noman, On some new sequence spaces of non-absolute type related to the spaces ℓp and ℓ∞ I, Faculty of sciences and Math. Univ. of Nis 25(2)(2011), 33 -- 51. [6] M. Mursaleen, A.K. Noman, On some new sequence spaces of non-absolute type related to the spaces ℓp and ℓ∞ II, Math. Commun. 16(2011), 383 -- 398. [7] M. Mursaleen, A.K. Noman, On some new difference sequence spaces of non-absolute type, Math. Comput. Modelling 52(3-4)(2010), 603 -- 617. [8] V. Karakaya, A.K. Noman, H. Polat, On paranormed λ− sequence spaces of non-absolute type, Math. Comput. Modelling 54(2011), 1473 -- 1480. [9] A. Sonmez, F. Ba¸sar, Generalized difference spaces of non-absolute type of convergent and null sequences, Abstract and Applied Analysis 2012: Article ID 435076,20pages, doi:10.1155/2012/435076. [10] Ab.H. Ganie, N. A. Sheikh, On some new sequence spaces of non-absolute type and matrix transformations, J. Egyptian Math. Society, 21(2013), 108 -- 114. [11] N. A. Sheikh, Ab.H. Ganie, On spaces of λ− convergent sequences and almost convergence, Thai J. Math., 11(2)(2013), 393-398. 14 [12] M. Ye¸silkayagil, F. Ba¸sar, On the fine spectrum of the operator defined by lambda matrix over the spaces of null and convergent sequences, Abstract and Applied Analysis 2013: Article ID687393,13pages,http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/687393 . [13] A. Wilansky, Summability Throught Functional Analysis, vol. 85 of North-Holland Mathe- matics Studies, North-Holland, Oxford, UK, 1984. [14] A. M.Jarrah, E. Malkowsky, Ordinary, absolute and strong summability and matrix trans- formations, FILOMAT 17(2003), 59 -- 78. [15] E. Malkowsky, V. Rakocevi´c, On matrix domains of triangles, App. Math. and Comp. 189(2007), 1146 -- 1168. [16] M. Stieglitz, H. Tietz, Matrixtransformationen von Folgenraumen Eine Ergebnisubersict, Math. Z., 154(1977), 1 -- 16. [17] C. S. Wang, On Norlund sequence spaces, Tamkang J. Math. 9(1978), 269 -- 274. [18] P. N. Ng, P. Y. Lee, Ces`a ro sequence spaces of non-absolute type, Comment. Math. Prace Mat. 20(2)(1978), 429 -- 433. [19] E. Malkowsky, E. Sava¸s, Matrix transformations between sequence spaces of generalized weighted means, Appl. Math. Comput. 147(2004), 333 -- 345 . [20] E. Malkowsky, Recent results in the theory of matrix transformations in sequence spaces, mat. Vesnik, 49(1997), 187 -- 196. [21] B. Altay, F. Ba¸sar,On the paranormed Riesz sequence spaces of non-absolute type, Southeast Asian Bull. Math., 26(5)(2003), 701 -- 715. [22] B. Altay, F. Ba¸sar,Some Euler sequence spaces of non-absolute type, Ukrainian Math. j., 57(1)(2005), 1 -- 17. [23] B. Altay, F. Ba¸sar, M. Mursaleen,On the Euler sequence spaces which include the spaces ℓp and ℓ∞ I, Information Sciences, 176(10)(2006), 1450 -- 1462. [24] C. Aydın, F. Ba¸sar,On the new sequence spaces which include the spaces c0 and c , Hokkaido math. J.,33(2)(2004), 383 -- 398. [25] V. Karakaya, H. Polat,Some new paranormed sequence spaces defined by Euler and difference operators , Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) ,76(1-4)(2010), 877 -- 100. [26] C. Aydın, F. Ba¸sar,Some new paranormed sequence spaces , Information Science,160(1- 4)(2004), 27 -- 40. [27] C. Aydın, F. Ba¸sar,Some new paranormed sequence spaces which include the spaces ℓp and ℓ∞ , Demonstratio Mathematica,38(3)(2005), 641 -- 656. [28] M. S¸engonul, F. Ba¸sar,Some new Ces`aro sequence spaces of non-absolute type which include the spaces c0 and c , Soochow j. Math.,31(1)(2005), 107 -- 119. [29] K.Kayaduman, M. S¸engonul, The spaces of Ces`aro almost convergent sequences and core theorems, Acta Math. Sci., Ser. B, Engl. Ed. 32(6)(2012), 2265 -- 2278. [30] M. S¸engonul, K.Kayaduman, On the Riesz almost convergent sequence spaces , Abstract and Applied Analysis 2012: Article ID691694,18pages,http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/691694 . [31] M. Kiri¸s¸ci, F. Ba¸sar, Some new sequence spaces derived by the domain of genaralized differ- ence matrix , Comput. Math. Appl.(2011) 60, 1299 -- 1309. [32] F. Ba¸sar, M. Kiri¸s¸ci , Almost convergence and generalized difference matrix, Comput. Math. Appl. 61(3)(2011), 602 -- 611. [33] A. Sonmez, Some new sequence spaces derived by the domain of the triple band matrix, Comput. Mat. Appl. 62(2)(2011), 641 -- 650. [34] A. Sonmez,A Almost convergence and triple band matrix, Math. Comput. Model. 57(2013), 2393 -- 2402 . [35] M. Ba¸sarır, On some new sequence spaces and related matrix transformation, Indian J. Pure and App.Math., 26(10)(1995), 1003 -- 1010 . (M. Kaya) Kahramanmaras¸ Sutc¸u Imam Universitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu , 46100 -- Kahramanmaras¸, Turkiye E-mail address, M. Kaya: [email protected] (H. Furkan) Kahramanmaras¸ Sutc¸u Imam Universitesi, Fen Edebiyat Fakultesi, 46100 -- Kahra-manmaras¸, Turkiye E-mail address, H. Furkan: [email protected], [email protected] 15
1801.04469	1	1801	2018-01-13T17:48:13	On the equivalence of the Mizoguchi-Takahashi locally contractive map to Nadler's locally contractive map	[ "math.FA" ]	In this article, we have proved the equivalence between the Mizoguchi-Takahashi uniformly~locally~contractive map to the multi-valued map satisfying the Nadler contractive condition uniformly~locally~on a metrically convex space.	math.FA	math	On the equivalence of the Mizoguchi-Takahashi locally contractive map to Nadler's locally contractive map ‡ Asrifa Sultana ∗ Xiaolong Qin † Abstract In this article we have proved the equivalence between the Mizoguchi-Takahashi uniformly lo- cally contractive map to the multi-valued map satisfying the Nadler contractive condition uni- formly locally on a metrically convex space. ∗Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Bhilai, Chhattisgarh 492015, India †Institute for Fundamental and Frontier Science, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China ‡This article is an initial draft of the complete paper 8 1 0 2 n a J 3 1 ] . A F h t a m [ 1 v 9 6 4 4 0 . 1 0 8 1 : v i X r a 1 1 Introduction In 1969, Nadler [6] established a multi-valued extension of the famous Banach contraction principle. Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and CB(X) denote the family of all non-empty closed and bounded subsets of X. Let H be the Hausdorff metric with respect to d on CB(X). Nadler [6] proved that any multi-valued map F from X to CB(X) has a fixed point if there exists some k ∈ [0, 1) such that H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ kd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X. An interesting extension of this result was obtained in 1989, by Mizoguchi and Takahashi [5]. Theorem 1.1 [5] Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and let F : X → CB(X) be a map such that H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ α(d(x, y))d(x, y) ∀ x, y ∈ X, x 6= y, (1) where α : (0, ∞) → [0, 1) is such that lim sups→t+ α(s) < 1 for every t ∈ [0, ∞). Then F has a fixed point. It is worth to note that any Mizoguchi-Takahashi contraction on a metric space need not be a Nadler contraction (for example, one can refer [7, 1]). On the other hand, Edelstein [2] introduced the notion of uniformly locally contractive mapping on a metric space. For a metric space (X, d), a mapping f : X → X is called an (ε, k)-uniformly lo- cally contractive (where ε > 0 and k ∈ [0, 1)) if d(f x, f y) ≤ kd(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X with d(x, y) < ε. It is worth to note that an (ε, k)-uniformly locally contractive need not be a Banach contraction (for example, one can refer [2, 4]). Edelstein [2] established the following extension of Banach contraction principle. Theorem 1.2 [2] Let (X, d) be a complete metric space. An (ε, k)-uniformly locally contractive map f : X → X has a unique fixed point if (X, d) is ε-chainable, that is, for any given a, b ∈ X, there exist N ∈ N and a sequence (yi)N i=0 in X such that y0 = a, yN = b and d(yi−1, yi) < ε for 1 ≤ i ≤ N . In [6], Nadler extended this result to multi-valued mappings. Let (X, d) be a metric space and H be the Hausdorff metric with respect to d on the family CB(X) of all non empty closed and bounded subsets of X. Nadler [6] generalized the above result by deriving the following theorem. Theorem 1.3 [6] Let (X, d) be a complete metric space and F : X → CB(X) be a mapping such that for all x, y ∈ X with d(x, y) < ε, H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ kd(x, y) for some k ∈ [0, 1). (2) Then the map F has a fixed point if (X, d) is ε-chainable. Recently, Eldred et al. [1] explored some spaces on which the Mizoguchi-Takahashi contraction is equivalent to Nadler contraction. They have proved that Mizoguchi-Takahashi's condition reduces to a multi-valued contraction in a metrically convex space. Also, they have derived the equivalence in a compact metric space. 2 In this paper, we have shown that the multi-valued map satisfying the Mizoguchi-Takahashi's contractive condition uniformly locally is equivalent to a uniformly locally contractive multi-valued map due to Nadler [6] on a metrically convex space. 2 Preliminaries In this section we give some definitions and notations which are useful and related to context of our results. Let (X, d) be a metric space and p, q be any two arbitrary points in X. A point r ∈ X is called metrically between p and q if d(p, q) = d(p, r) + d(r, q) where p 6= q 6= r. We say the metric space (X, d) metrically convex if for any two arbitrary points p and q, there is a point r in X which is metrically between p and q. A subset M of a metric space (X, d) is said to be a metric segment with joining points p, q ∈ M if there is a closed and bounded interval [a, b] ⊆ R and an isometry φ from the set [a, b] onto the set M such that φ(a) = p and φ(b) = q. Now, we recall the following result due to Khamsi and Kirk [3] which will be used in our main result. Theorem 2.1 Let (X, d) be complete metrically convex metric space. Then any two arbitrary points in X are the joining points of at least one metric segment in X. For the given metric space (X, d), the notation CB(X) denotes the family of all non empty closed and bounded subsets of X. For A, B ∈ CB(X), let H(A, B) = max(cid:26)sup a∈A d(a, B), sup b∈B d(b, A)(cid:27) , where d(a, B) = infb∈Bd(a, b). Then the map H is a metric on CB(X) which is called the Hausdorf f metric induced by d. 3 Main results The following result is the main result proved by us in this article. Theorem 3.1 Let (X, d) be a metrically convex complete metric space and F : X → CB(X) be such that ∀x, y ∈ X with d(x, y) < ε (where ε > 0), H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ α(d(x, y))d(x, y), (3) where α : [0, ∞) → [0, 1) is such that lim sups→t+ α(s) < 1 for every t ∈ [0, ∞). Then F is an (ε, k)-uniformly locally contractive multi-valued mapping (for some k ∈ [0, 1)). 3 Proof. Our aim here is to prove that F is an (ε, k)-uniformly locally contractive multi-valued mapping, that is, there exists k ∈ [0, 1) such that H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ kd(x, y) ∀x, y ∈ X with d(x, y) < ε. Let us consider a subset P of real numbers where P = {p > 0 : sup{α(d(x, y)) : 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ p} = 1}. Then the following two cases occurs. Our aim is to show that F becomes an (ε, k)-uniformly lo- cally contractive mapping in each case. Let x1, x2 be two arbitrary elements in X such that d(x1, x2) < ε. Case 1: P = ∅. Therefore sup{α(d(x, y)) : 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ p} < 1 for any p > 0. Let q be a fixed positive real number. Let us suppose that sup{α(d(x, y)) : 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ q} = k. Clearly, k < 1. Hence, it follows from equation (3) that if x and y be two elements in X with d(x, y) < min{ε, q}, then H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ α(d(x, y))d(x, y) ≤ kd(x, y). (4) If q ≥ ε, then min{ε, q} = ε. Hence d(x1, x2) < min{ε, q}. By (4), we have H(F (x1), F (x2)) ≤ α(d(x1, x2))d(x1, x2) ≤ kd(x1, x2). Suppose that q < ε. Then min{ε, q} = q. Since X is metrically convex metric space, we can find a, b ∈ R and an isometry φ : [a, b] → X such that φ(a) = x1 and φ(b) = x2. For some r with 0 < r < q, there exists a positive integer m such that d(x1, x2) = d(φ(a), φ(b)) = d(a, b) = d(a, a + r) + d(a + r, a + 2r) + · · · + d(a + mr, b) = d(x1, φ(a + r)) + d(φ(a + r), φ(a + 2r)) + · · · + d(φ(a + mr), x2), where m is such that a + mr < b < a + (m + 1)r. Now, d(x1, φ(a + r)) = d(a, a + r) = r < min{ε, q} and hence we have from equation (4) that H(F (x1), F (φ(a + r)))) ≤ kd(x1, φ(a + r))). Similarly, for any natural number n < m, we have d(φ(a + nr), φ(a + (n + 1)r)) < min{ε, q} and hence by (4), we get H(F (φ(a + nr)), F (φ(a + (n + 1)r)))) ≤ kd(φ(a + nr), φ(a + (n + 1)r))). Moreover, d(φ(a + mr), x2) < r < min{ε, q} and thus by using (4) we have H(F (φ(a + mr)), F (x2)) ≤ kd(φ(a + mr), x2). Thus for any x1, x2 ∈ X with d(x1, x2) < ε, we have H(F (x1), F (x2)) ≤ H(F (x1), F (φ(a + r))) + · · · + H(F (φ(a + mr)), F (x2)) ≤ k[d(x1, φ(a + r)) + d(φ(a + r), φ(a + 2r)) + · · · + d(φ(a + mr), x2)] = kd(x1, x2). 4 Case 2: P 6= ∅. Let p0 = inf P . If p0 = 0, then we can find a sequence {pn}n of P such that pn → 0 as n → ∞. Since pn ∈ P for all n, sup{α(d(x, y)) : 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ pn} = 1 for all n ∈ N. By the properties of supremum, there exists a sequence {(xn, yn)}n such that d(xn, yn) ≤ pn and α(d(xn, yn)) > 1 − 1 n . Hence 1 − 1 n ≤ α(d(xn, yn)) ≤ 1 for all n ∈ N. Thus d(xn, yn) → 0 and α(d(xn, yn)) → 1 as n → ∞. This is a contradiction as α : [0, ∞) → [0, 1) with lim sups→t+ α(s) < 1 ∀t ∈ [0, ∞). Therefore p0 6= 0. Thus for any 0 < q0 < p0, sup{α(d(x, y)) : 0 ≤ d(x, y) ≤ q0} = k0 < 1. Hence, it follows from equation (3) that for any two elements x and y in X with d(x, y) < min{ε, q0} H(F (x), F (y)) ≤ α(d(x, y))d(x, y) ≤ k0d(x, y). (5) If q0 ≥ ε, then d(x1, x2) < ε = min{ε, q0}. Hence from equation (5) H(F (x1), F (x2)) ≤ α(d(x1, x2))d(x1, x2) ≤ k0d(x1, x2). Let us assume that q0 < ε. Since X is metrically convex metric space, we can find a0, b0 ∈ R and an isometry φ0 : [a0, b0] → X such that φ0(a0) = x1 and φ0(b0) = x2. Similar to case 1, it follows that for some r0 with q0 > r0 > 0, there exists a positive integer m0 such that d(x1, x2) = d(x1, φ0(a0 + r0)) + · · · + d(φ0(a0 + m0r0), x2), where m0 is such that a0 + m0r0 < b0 < a0 + (m0 + 1)r0. Moreover, for any non-negative integer 0 ≤ n0 < m0, we have similar to Case 1 that d(φ0(a0 + n0r0), φ0(a0 + (n0 + 1)r0)) < min{ε, q0} and hence by (5) H(F (φ0(a0 + n0r0)), F (φ0(a0 + (n0 + 1)r0)))) ≤ k0d(φ0(a0 + n0r0), φ0(a0 + (n0 + 1)r0))). Thus for any x1, x2 ∈ X with d(x1, x2) < ε, we have H (F (x1), F (x2)) ≤ H(F (x1), F (φ0(a0 + r0))) + · · · + H(F (φ0(a0 + m0r0)), F (x2)) ≤ k0 [d(x1, φ0(a0 + r0)) + · · · + d(φ0(a0 + m0r0), x2)] = k0d(x1, x2). Therefore F is an (ε, k)-uniformly locally contractive multi-valued mapping in both cases. Hence the proof is complete. ✷ References [1] A. A. Eldred, J. Anuradha, P. Veeramani, On the equivalence of the Mizoguchi-Takahashi fixed point theorem to Nadler's theorem, Applied Mathematics Letters 22 (2009) 1539-1542. [2] M. Edelstein, An extension of BanachSs contraction principle, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 12 (1961) 7-10. [3] M.A. Khamsi, W.A. Kirk, An Introduction to Metric Spaces and Fixed Point Theory, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2001. [4] L. M´at´e, The Hutchinson UBarnsley theory for certain non-contraction mappings, Period. Math. Hungar. 27 (1993) 21-33. 5 [5] N. Mizoguchi, W. Takahashi, Fixed point theorems for multivalued mappings on complete metric space, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 141 (1989) 177-188. [6] S.B. Nadler Jr., Multi-valued contraction mappings, Pacific J. Math. 30 (1969) 475-488. [7] T. Suzuki, Mizoguchi-Takahashi's fixed point theorem is a real generalization of Nadler's, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 340 (2008) 752-755. 6
1804.07288	4	1804	2018-10-03T15:24:16	On the Invertibility of the Sum of Operators	[ "math.FA", "math.OA" ]	The primary purpose of this paper is to investigate the question of invertibility of the sum of operators. The setting is bounded and unbounded linear operators. Some interesting examples and consequences are given. As an illustrative point, we characterize invertibility for the class of normal operators. Also, we give a very short proof of the self-adjointness of a normal operator when the latter has a real spectrum.	math.FA	math	ON THE INVERTIBILITY OF THE SUM OF OPERATORS MOHAMMED HICHEM MORTAD Abstract. The primary purpose of this paper is to investigate the question of invertibility of the sum of operators. The setting is bounded and unbounded linear operators. Some interesting examples and consequences are given. As an illustrative point, we characterize invertibility for the class of normal operators. Also, we give a very short proof of the self-adjointness of a normal operator when the latter has a real spectrum. Let H be a complex Hilbert space and let B(H) denote the algebra of all bounded 1. Introduction linear operators on H. An A ∈ B(H) is called positive (symbolically A ≥ 0) if hAx, xi ≥ 0 ∀x ∈ H. By a square root of A ∈ B(H), we mean a B ∈ B(H) such that B2 = A. If A ≥ 0, then there is one and only one B ≥ 0 such that B2 = A. This positive B is denoted by √A. Recall that any T ∈ B(H) is expressible as T = A + iB where A, B ∈ B(H) are self-adjoint. Besides, A = ReT = T + T ∗ 2 and B = ImT = T − T ∗ 2i . It is readily verifiable that T is normal iff AB = BA. We also recall some known results which will be called on below (these are standard facts, see [8] for proofs). Theorem 1.1. Let A, B ∈ B(H). Then 0 ≤ A ≤ B =⇒ √A ≤ √B. Lemma 1.2. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB = BA and A, B ≥ 0. Then √A + B ≤ √A + √B. Theorem 1.1 is known to hold for α ∈ (0, 1) instead of 1 Hence we may easily establish the analogue of Lemma 1.2 for nth roots. Lemma 1.3. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB = BA and A, B ≥ 0. If n ∈ N, then (A + B) 2 (the Heinz Inequality). n + B 1 1 n . 1 n ≤ A Let us say a few more words about the absolute value of an operator (that is, A = √A∗A with A ∈ B(H)). It is well known that the properties of the absolute value of complex numbers cannot all just be carried over to B(H) (even for self- adjoint operators). This applies for example to the multiplicativity property and to 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47A05, Secondary 47B65, 47B25, 47A10. Key words and phrases. Invertibility. Absolute value. Normal, self-adjoint and positive operators. Square roots. Cartesian decomposition. Bounded and unbounded operators. 1 2 M. H. MORTAD triangle inequalities. For counterexamples, readers may wish to consult [8]. See also [9] to see when these results hold. The similar question on unbounded operators may be found in the recent work [2]. Some results, however, do hold without any special assumption. One of them is the following simple result. Proposition 1.4. Let A, B ∈ B(H). Then A + B2 ≤ 2A2 + 2B2. The following known result is also primordial. Proposition 1.5. (see [5] for a new proof ) Let A, B ∈ B(H). If 0 ≤ A ≤ B and if A is invertible, then B is invertible and B−1 ≤ A−1. We digress a little bit to notice a simple proof of the positiveness of the spectrum of a positive operator using the previous proposition: If λ < 0, then −λI > 0 and so A − λI ≥ −λI because A ≥ 0. Hence A − λI is invertible as −λI is, i.e. λ 6∈ σ(A). A simple application of the Functional Calculus for self-adjoint operators is as follows. Example 1.6. Let A ∈ B(H) be such that 0 ≤ A ≤ I. If α ∈ [0, 1], then Aα ≥ A. From [6] we recall the following result. Proposition 1.7. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be commuting. Then σ(A + B) ⊂ σ(A) + σ(B) where where σ(A) + σ(B) = {λ + µ : λ ∈ σ(A), µ ∈ σ(B)}. We call the result in the previous proposition the "subadditivity of the spec- trum". There is also a "submultiplicativity of the spectrum", that is, Proposition 1.8. ([6]) Let A, B ∈ B(H) be commuting. Then σ(AB) ⊂ σ(A)σ(B) σ(A)σ(B) = {λµ : λ ∈ σ(A), µ ∈ σ(B)}. In Proposition 2.21, we show that Proposition 1.8 implies Proposition 1.7 in the context of self-adjoint operators and that the backward implication also holds but for positive and invertible operators. Recall also the following definition. Definition. Let T and S be unbounded positive self-adjoint operators. We say that S ≥ T if D(S 2 ) ⊆ D(T 2 ). 1 1 The "natural but weak extension" is defined as in Definition 10.5 (Page 230) in [11]: If S and T are non-necessarily bounded symmetric operators, then S (cid:23) T if D(S) ⊂ D(T ) and 1 2 ) and(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)S 1 2 x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≥(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)T 1 2 x(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) for all x ∈ D(S hSx, xi ≥ hT x, xi ∀x ∈ D(S). Notice that Proposition 1.5 remains valid for unbounded operators. Indeed, as on Page 200 in [12], if S and T are self-adjoint, T is boundedly invertible and S ≥ T ≥ 0, then S is boundedly invertible and S−1 ≤ T −1. of Operator Theory. Finally, we assume that readers are familiar with other basic notions and results INVERTIBILITY OF SUMS 3 The sum of two invertible operators is not necessarily invertible even if strong conditions are imposed. For instance, if we take A to be invertible and positive, then setting B = −A, we see that AB = BA and that B is invertible. But plainly A + B is not invertible. Positivity must also be avoided as it may make some of the results evident. For instance, if A, B ∈ B(H) are such that A, B ≥ 0 and A say is invertible, then obviously A + B (≥ A) is invertible by Proposition 1.5. These two observations make the investigation of this question a little hopeless. However, the approach considered by Bikchentaev in [1] deserves to be investigated further. This is one aim of the paper. Another purpose is to treat some of these questions in an unbounded setting. Some interesting consequences, examples and counterexamples accompany our results. 2. Main Results Theorem 2.1. Let A, B ∈ B(H). (1) If A + B is invertible, then so is A2 + B2. (2) If A + B is invertible, then so are A + B and A2n + B2n (n ∈ N) as (3) Assume here that A, B ≥ 0 and let α, β ∈ C. Then well. αA + βB invertible =⇒ A + B invertible. Remark. Most of the previous results appeared in [1], but our proof is simpler. Proof. (1): It is clear that A + B invertible =⇒ A + B2 invertible =⇒ A2 + B2 invertible by Propositions 1.4 & 1.5. (2): By the first property, A2 + B2 is invertible from which we readily get that A4 + B4 is invertible and, by induction, we establish the invertibility of A2n + B2n . The invertibility of A + B is not hard to prove. WLOG we may assume that kAk ≤ 1 and kBk ≤ 1. Hence A∗A ≤ I and B ∗B ≤ I, and so A ≤ I and B ≤ I by Theorem 1.1. By the Functional Calculus, A2 ≤ A and B2 ≤ B. This implies that A + B ≥ A2 + B2 ≥ 0. Proposition 1.5 allows us to confirm the invertibility of A + B, as desired. (3): Since αA + βB is invertible, by the previous property, so is αA + βB or merely αA + βB as A, B ≥ 0. Since we can assume α ≥ β > 0, we infer that α(A + B) ≥ αA + βB. Consequently, α(A + B) or simply A + B is invertible. Corollary 2.2. Let A ∈ B(H) be invertible. Then A − B + B is invertible for every B ∈ B(H). Proof. Since A is invertible and A = (A − B) + B, it follows that A − B + B too is invertible by the previous result. (cid:3) (cid:3) Remark. It is clear that if T is invertible, then the self-adjoint ReT + ImT need not be invertible. For instance: 4 M. H. MORTAD Example 2.3. Let A be self-adjoint and invertible and set B = −A. Then is invertible while A + B = 0 is not. A + iB = A − iA = (1 − i)A Nonetheless, we have the following. Corollary 2.4. Let A ∈ B(H) be invertible. Then ReA + ImA is invertible. Proof. Just write A = ReA + iImA, then apply Theorem 2.1. (cid:3) The next corollary appeared in [1]. Corollary 2.5. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that A + B is invertible. If p, q ∈ (0,∞), then Ap + Bq is invertible. Proof. WLOG, we assume that A ≤ I and B ≤ I. We can always find an n ∈ N such that p, q ≤ 2n. Then by Example 1.6, we have Therefore, Thus, p q A 2n ≥ A and B 2n ≥ B. Ap ≥ A2n Ap + Bq ≥ A2n and Bq ≥ B2n + B2n . . Since A2n + B2n is already invertible (Theorem 2.1), we obtain the invertibility of Ap + Bq from Proposition 1.5. (cid:3) Now, we give an interesting consequence on the invertibility of matrices of bounded operators. Corollary 2.6. Let A, B, C, D ∈ B(H) and define T ∈ B(H ⊕ H) by T =(cid:18) A B C D (cid:19) . If T is invertible, then so are A + C and B + D. In particular, if D is normal and B = 0 (resp. if A is normal and C = 0), then Proof. Write σ(D) (resp. σ(A)) ⊂ σ(T ). T =(cid:18) A 0 0 D (cid:19) +(cid:18) 0 B C 0 (cid:19) {z } {z } Since T is invertible, so is S + R. But D (cid:19) and R =(cid:18) C B + D (cid:19) (cid:18) A + C S =(cid:18) A and so 0 0 0 0 0 S R . 0 B (cid:19) is invertible. This means that A + C and B + D are invertible. operator is invertible iff its absolute value is. For the last claim just reason contrapositively by remembering that a normal (cid:3) INVERTIBILITY OF SUMS 5 Proposition 2.7. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB = BA and either A or B is normal. Then A + B is invertible ⇐⇒ A2 + B2 is invertible. Proof. We already proved the implication "⇒" in Theorem 2.1. Assume now that A2 + B2 is invertible. Since A commutes with B, it follows by the Fuglede Theorem that A∗B = BA∗. Hence by known techniques, we may get the commutativity of A2 and B2. Therefore, from Lemma 1.2 we obtain Hence pA2 +pB2 ≥pA2 + B2. A + B ≥pA2 + B2. SincepA2 + B2 is invertible, Proposition 1.5 gives the invertibility of A + B, as wished. (cid:3) Remark. The invertibility of A2 + B2 does not yield that of A + B even in the event of the self-adjointness of A and B. As a counterexample, just consider an invertible and self-adjoint A such that A = −B. Example 2.8. Let A ∈ B(H). We know that cos2 A + sin2 A = I. It then follows that cos A + sin A is invertible. Example 2.9. Let A be self-adjoint and invertible. Set B = iA. Then A2 +B2 = 0 is obviously not invertible. The idea of the proof of Proposition 2.7 leads to the following generalization. Proposition 2.10. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB = BA and either A or B is normal. Then A + B is invertible ⇐⇒ An + Bn is invertible where n ∈ N. The following example shows that both the real and imaginary parts of an in- vertible operator may be not invertible. Example 2.11. Consider the multiplication operators Af (x) = cos xf (x) and Bf (x) = sin xf (x) both defined on L2(R). Then A and B are not invertible. However, T f (x) = (A + iB)f (x) = (cos x + i sin x)f (x) = eixf (x) is invertible (even unitary!). It is fairly easy to see that a normal T = A + iB is invertible iff A2 + B2 [8]). With this observation, we may state the following is invertible (see e.g. interesting characterization of invertibility for the class of normal operators. Proposition 2.12. Let T = A + iB be normal in B(H). Then T is invertible ⇐⇒ A + B is invertible. In particular, if λ = α + iβ, then λ ∈ σ(T ) ⇐⇒ A − αI + B − βI is not invertible. 6 M. H. MORTAD Remark. (cf. [2]) Another way of establishing the previous result is as follows. By [9], we know that if T ∈ B(H) is normal, then T ≤ ReT + ImT. Hence the invertibility of T entails that ReT + ImT. Conversely, if T is normal (in fact hyponormality suffices here), then ImT ≤ T and ReT ≤ T and so ImT + ReT ≤ 2T. Therefore, the invertibility of ImT + ReT implies that of T . The following related version to Proposition 1.7 does not make use of the Gelfand Transform. Proposition 2.13. Let S, T ∈ B(H) be normal and such that ST = T S. Then σ(S + T ) ⊂ σ(ReS + ReT ) + iσ(ImS + ImT ). Proof. Write S = A + iB and T = C + iD. Since ST = T S and S and T are normal, S + T is normal (see e.g. [10]). Hence, if we let λ = α + iβ ∈ C, then S + T − λI = (A + C − αI) + i(B + D − βI) becomes normal. So, if λ ∈ σ(S +T ), then Proposition 2.12 says that A+C−αI+ B + D − βI is not invertible. If either A + C − αI or B + D − βI is invertible, then clearly A + C − αI + B + D − βI would be invertible! Therefore, both A + C − αI and B + D − βI are not invertible, i.e. A + C − αI and B + D − βI are not invertible. In other language, α ∈ σ(A+C) and β ∈ σ(B +D). Accordingly, λ = α + iβ ∈ σ(A + C) + iσ(B + D), as wished. Corollary 2.14. Let T = A + iB be normal in B(H). Then (cid:3) σ(T ) ⊂ σ(A) + iσ(B). As another consequence, we have a new and shorter proof of a well known result. Corollary 2.15. Let A ∈ B(H) be self-adjoint. Then σ(A) ⊂ R. Proof. Let λ 6∈ R, i.e. λ = α + iβ (α ∈ R, β ∈ R∗). Since A − αI is self-adjoint, it follows that A − αI − iβI is normal. By the invertibility of βI, it follows that of A − αI + βI (by Proposition 1.5). By Proposition 2.12, this means that A − λI is invertible, that is, λ 6∈ σ(A). (cid:3) The following result appeared in [9]. Proposition 2.16. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB = BA. If A is normal and B is hyponormal, then the following inequality holds: A − B ≤ A − B. As a consequence of the previous result, we get a very short proof concerning the spectrum of unitary operators. Corollary 2.17. Let A ∈ B(H) be unitary. Then σ(A) ⊂ {λ ∈ C : Proof. We have A = I and so 1 − λI = I − λI ≤ A − λI. Thus, if λ 6= 1, then λ 6∈ σ(A). λ = 1}. (cid:3) It is known that a normal operator having a real spectrum is self-adjoint. The proof is very simple if we know the very complicated Spectral Theorem for normal operators. It would be interesting to prove this result along the lines of the proof of Corollary 2.15. Notice also that this can very easily be established if the imaginary INVERTIBILITY OF SUMS 7 part of T is a scalar operator. A new proof in the general case has not been obtained yet. Nonetheless, as an application of Proposition 1.7, we have the following short proof (which seems to have escaped notice) of this result. Proposition 2.18. Let T = A + iB be normal in B(H) and such that σ(T ) ⊂ R. Then T is self-adjoint. Proof. Recall that A and B are self-adjoint. The normality of T is equivalent to AB = BA. Hence T A = AT . Since T − A = iB, we have by Proposition 1.7 iσ(B) = σ(iB) = σ(T − A) ⊂ σ(T ) + σ(−A) ⊂ R. Thus, necessarily σ(B) = {0}. Accordingly, the Spectral Radius Theorem gives us B = 0 and so T = A, i.e. T is self-adjoint. (cid:3) What is also interesting is that since Proposition 1.7 holds in the context of Banach algebras (see Theorem 11.23 in [10]), Proposition 2.18 becomes valid in the context of C ∗-algebras. The proof is identical and so it is omitted. Proposition 2.19. Let A be a C ∗-algebra and let a ∈ A be a normal element. If σ(a) ⊂ R, then a is hermitian. We also have the following related result. Proposition 2.20. Let A be a C ∗-algebra and let a ∈ A be a normal element. If σ(a) is purely imaginary, then a is skew-hermitian (i.e. a∗ = −a). Proof. Write a = x + iy where x and y are commuting hermitian elements of A. Write x = a − iy and proceed as above to force x = 0. The last result about the spectrum is the following. (cid:3) Proposition 2.21. The "subadditivity of the spectrum" is equivalent to the "sub- multiplicativity of the spectrum" in the context of bounded positive, commuting and invertible operators. Proof. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be self-adjoint and such that AB = BA. Assume that Proposition 1.8 holds. Let λ ∈ σ(A + B). Then the Spectral Mapping Theorem yields eλ ∈ σ(eA+B) = σ(eAeB) ⊂ σ(eA)σ(eB), that is, eλ = eαeβ for α ∈ σ(A) and β ∈ σ(B). Hence λ = ln(eαeβ) = α + β ∈ σ(A) + σ(B). Now, suppose that Proposition 1.7 holds. Suppose also here that A and B are positive and invertible. Let λ ∈ σ(AB). Since AB is positive and invertible, by the Spectral Mapping Theorem we get ln λ ∈ σ[ln(AB)] = σ(ln A + ln B) ⊂ σ(ln A) + σ(ln B) = ln[σ(A)] + ln[σ(B)], i.e. ln λ = ln α + ln β with α ∈ σ(A) and β ∈ σ(B). Thus, λ = αβ ∈ σ(A)σ(B), as required. (cid:3) Let's go back to invertibility. Proposition 2.22. Let A, B ∈ B(H) be such that AB ≥ 0 and AB is invertible. Then A∗2 + B2 is invertible. 8 M. H. MORTAD Proof. Let x ∈ H. Then hABx, xi = hABx, xi = hBx, A∗xi ≤ kA∗xkkBxk ≤ 2(kA∗xk2 + kBxk2) = 2(hAA∗x, xi + hB ∗Bx, xi) = h2(AA∗ + B ∗B)x, xi, that is, AB ≤ 2(AA∗ + B ∗B) = 2(A∗2 + B2). Proposition 1.5 allows us to establish the invertibility of A∗2 + B2, as required. Remark. Notice that the result is obvious if either A or B is invertible. In order to keep the result non-trivial we need also to avoid ker A = ker A∗ and ker B = ker B ∗ (see [4]). This remark applies to the unbounded case as well (treated in Theorem 2.25 below). (cid:3) Remark. The fact that we have assumed the invertibility of AB is essential as seen by the following example. Example 2.23. Let A be the positive operator defined by Setting B = A, we see that ABf (x) = x2f (x) is positive. However, Af (x) = xf (x), f ∈ L2(0, 1). (A∗2 + B2)f (x) = (A2 + B2)f (x) = 2x2f (x) is not invertible. As a consequence of the foregoing proposition, we have the following. Corollary 2.24. Let A ∈ B(H) be right (resp. left) invertible with B ∈ B(H) being its right (resp. left) inverse. Then A∗2 + B2 (resp. A2 + B ∗2) is always invertible. Proof. Since A is right invertible, for some B ∈ B(H), we have AB = I. Since the latter is positive and invertible, the result follows immediately. The case of left-invertibility is identical. (cid:3) We can generalize Proposition 2.22 to unbounded operators. Theorem 2.25. Let A and B be two operators such that A is closed and B ∈ B(H). (1) If BA is positive (i.e. hBAx, xi ≥ 0 for all x ∈ D(BA)) and invertible, then A2 + B ∗2 is invertible. Besides, h(A2 + B ∗2)−1x, xi ≤ h(BA)−1x, xi ∀x ∈ H. (2) If AB is densely defined, positive and invertible, then A∗2 +B2 is invert- ible. Moreover, h(A∗2 + B2)−1x, xi ≤ h(AB)−1x, xi ∀x ∈ H. Proof. (1): The first step is to show that BA ≤ 2A2 + 2B ∗2. Observe that D(A2 + B ∗2) = D(A∗A + BB ∗) = D(A∗A) ⊂ D(A) = D(BA). Now, let x ∈ D(A∗A). As in the bounded case, we may prove hBAx, xi = hBAx, xi = hAx, B ∗xi ≤ kAxkkB ∗xk ≤ 2h(A2 + B ∗2)x, xi. This means that BA (cid:22) 2A2 + 2B ∗2. Since BA is positive, it is (only) symmetric. Since it is invertible, it follows that BA is actually self-adjoint (and positive). Thus, by Lemma 10.10 in [11], "(cid:22)" becomes "≤", that is, we have established the INVERTIBILITY OF SUMS 9 desired inequality BA ≤ 2A2 + 2B ∗2. Since BA is positive, invertible and BA and A2 + B ∗2 are self-adjoint, it follows that A2 + B ∗2 is invertible by the unbounded version of Proposition 1.5 (recalled also in the introduction), as wished. (2): The idea is similar to the previous case. As AB is symmetric and invertible, then it is self-adjoint (and positive). Hence B ∗A∗ ⊂ (AB)∗ = AB and so D(A∗) = D(B ∗A∗) ⊂ D(AB). The main point is to show that AB ≤ 2A∗2 + 2B2. Clearly, D(A∗2 + B2) = D(A∗2) = D(AA∗) ⊂ D(A∗) ⊂ D(AB). Now, let x ∈ D(AA∗). Then hABx, xi = hBx, A∗xi ≤ kBxkkA∗xk ≤ 2kBxk2 + kA∗xk2 = 2hBx, Bxi + 2hA∗x, A∗xi = h2(B2 + A∗2)x, xi. As above, AB (cid:22) 2B2+2A∗2 becomes AB ≤ 2B2+2A∗2. Thus, the invertibility of B2 + A∗2 follows from that of AB, as wished. (cid:3) Let's give an explicit and non-trivial application of the previous result. Example 2.26. Let A be defined by Af (x) = f ′(x) on the domain D(A) = {f ∈ L2(0, 1) : f ′ ∈ L2(0, 1)}. Then A is densely defined and closed (but it is not normal, see e.g. [7]). Also, A∗f (x) = −f ′(x) on D(A∗) = {f ∈ L2(0, 1) : f ′ ∈ L2(0, 1), f (0) = f (1) = 0} so that A∗2 = AA∗f (x) = −f ′′(x) with D(AA∗) = {f ∈ L2(0, 1) : f ′′ ∈ L2(0, 1), f (0) = f (1) = 0}. Let V be the Volterra operator defined on L2(0, 1), i.e. (V f )(x) =Z x f (t)dt, f ∈ L2(0, 1). Then (see e.g. [8]) V 2f = V ∗V f = P∞ n=1 λnhf, fnifn with (fn) being the eigen- vectors corresponding to the distinct eigenvalues λn of V ∗V (and f ∈ L2(0, 1)). Now, neither A nor V is invertible. However, A is right invertible for D(AV ) = L2(0, 1) and AV f (x) = f (x) for f ∈ L2(0, 1). This means that AV is positive and invertible. Therefore, the unbounded operator 0 d2 dx2 + V 2 is invertible on the domain D(AA∗) given above. − Next, we pass to the invertibility of finite sums. Lemma 2.27. (cf. [3]) Let (Ak)k=1,...,n be in B(H) and let (ak)k=1,...,n be in C. Then 2 n (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Xk=1 akAkx(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) ≤ n Xk=1 ak2* n Xk=1 A∗ kAkx, x+ for all x ∈ H. 10 M. H. MORTAD Proof. Clearly, n k=1 AkBk k=1 A∗ n n n n (cid:3) If (cid:3) k=1 Ak2. ≤ n Xk=1 ak2! 1 2 n Xk=1 all vanish simultaneously!). 2 kAkxk2! 1 akAkx(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) kakAkxk ≤ n Xk=1 k=1 akAk is invertible, it is bounded below, i.e., for some α > 0 and all k=1 akAkxk ≥ αkxk. By Lemma 2.27 and by the self-adjointness k=1 Ak2 is invertible (given that the ak cannot (cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:13) Xk=1 for all x ∈ H. Corollary 2.28. Let (Ak)k=1,...,n be in B(H) and let (ak)k=1,...,n be in C. k=1 akAk is invertible, then so is Pn Pn Proof. AsPn x ∈ H, we have kPn kAk, it follows that Pn of Pn Theorem 2.29. Let (Ak)k=1,...,n and let (Bk)k=1,...,n be in B(H). If Pn is positive and invertible, then Pn k=1 Bk2 too is invertible. Proof. Let x ∈ H. Then AkBkx, x+ =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) * n * n Xk=1 Xk=1 =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) kxi(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=1 Xk=1 hBkx, A∗ hBkx, A∗ ≤ kBkxk2vuut ≤vuut Xk=1 Xk=1 kA∗ kBkx, x+vuut* n =vuut* n Xk=1 Xk=1 2 * n Bk2x, x+ +* n Xk=1 Xk=1 ≤ Since Pn k2 +Pn ofPn k=1 A∗ Corollary 2.30. Let (Ak)k=1,...,n be in B(H). If Pn invertible, then so is Pn k2 +Pn hAkBkx, xi(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) =(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) AkBkx, x+(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:12) Xk=1 Xk=1 kBkxkkA∗ kxi ≤ kxk kBkx, xivuut kxk2 =vuut Xk=1 Xk=1 hB ∗ kx, x+ k2x, x+! = A∗ k=1 AkBk is positive and invertible, Proposition 1.5 gives the invertibility (cid:3) k=1 Bk2, as needed. k (or Pn k2 +Pn k ≥ 0 for every k. Hence clearlyPn k=1 Ak2. k=1 A∗ k=1 AkA∗ Proof. First, remember that AA∗ Now apply Theorem 2.29 to get the desired result. k2)x, x+ . 1 2* n Xk=1 k=1 AkA∗ k ≥ 0. (cid:3) (Bk2 + A∗ hAkA∗ kx, xi n n n n k=1 A∗ kAk) is B ∗ AkA∗ k=1 A∗ 1 References [1] A. M. Bikchentaev, On invertibility of some operator sums, Lobachevskii J. Math., 33/3 (2012) 216-222. [2] I. Boucif, S. Dehimi and M. H. Mortad, On The Absolute Value of Unbounded Operators, J. Operator Theory (to appear). arXiv:1804.00899v2 [3] C. Costara, D. Popa, Exercises in Functional Analysis, Kluwer Texts in the Mathematical Sciences, 26, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 2003. [4] S. Dehimi, M. H. Mortad, Right (or left) invertibility of bounded and unbounded operators and applications to the spectrum of products, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory, 12/3 (2018) 589-597. INVERTIBILITY OF SUMS 11 [5] S. Dehimi, M. H. Mortad, Generalizations of Reid Inequality, Mathematica Slovaca (to ap- pear). arXiv:1707.03320. [6] R. V. Kadison, J. R. Ringrose, Fundamentals of the Theory of Operator Algebras. Vol. I. Ele- mentary Theory. Reprint of the 1983 original. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 15. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1997. [7] M. H. Mortad, A Criterion for the Normality of Unbounded Operators and Applications to Self-adjointness, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2), 64 (2015) 149-156. [8] M. H. Mortad, An Operator Theory Problem Book, World Scientific Publishing Co., (to appear in 2018). [9] M. H. Mortad, On The Absolute Value of The Product and the Sum of Linear Operators, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, II. Ser (to appear). DOI: 10.1007/s12215-018-0356-8. arXiv:1702.08671. [10] W. Rudin, Functional Analysis, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Second edition, International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1991. [11] K. Schmüdgen, Unbounded Self-adjoint Operators on Hilbert Space, Springer. GTM 265 (2012). [12] J. Weidmann, Linear Operators in Hilbert Spaces (translated from the German by J. Szücs). Springer-Verlag. GTM 68 (1980). Department of Mathematics, University of Oran 1, Ahmed Ben Bella, B.P. 1524, El Menouar, Oran 31000, Algeria. Mailing address: Pr Mohammed Hichem Mortad BP 7085 Seddikia Oran 31013 Algeria E-mail address: [email protected], [email protected].

Subsets and Splits

No saved queries yet

Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.