From dyadic $\Lambda_{\alpha}$ to $\Lambda_{\alpha}$
Wael Abu-Shammala, Alberto Torchinsky

TL;DR
This paper demonstrates how to compute the $\Lambda_{\alpha}$ norm using dyadic grids, linking it to the characterization of Hardy spaces via dyadic and special atoms.
Contribution
It provides a method to compute the $\Lambda_{\alpha}$ norm through dyadic grids based on Hardy space atom descriptions.
Findings
$\Lambda_{\alpha}$ norm can be computed using dyadic grids
Connection established between $\Lambda_{\alpha}$ norms and Hardy space atoms
Simplifies analysis of function spaces using dyadic structures
Abstract
In this paper we show how to compute the norm, , using the dyadic grid. This result is a consequence of the description of the Hardy spaces in terms of dyadic and special atoms.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Mathematical Physics Problems · Advanced Harmonic Analysis Research · Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods
From dyadic to
Wael Abu-Shammala
Department of Mathematics
Indiana University
Bloomington IN 47405
and
Alberto Torchinsky
Department of Mathematics
Indiana University
Bloomington IN 47405
Abstract.
In this paper we show how to compute the norm , , using the dyadic grid. This result is a consequence of the description of the Hardy spaces in terms of dyadic and special atoms.
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
42B30,42B35
Recently, several novel methods for computing the BMO norm of a function in two dimensions were discussed in [9]. Given its importance, it is also of interest to explore the possibility of computing the norm of a BMO function, or more generally a function in the Lipschitz class , using the dyadic grid in . It turns out that the BMO question is closely related to that of approximating functions in the Hardy space by the Haar system. The approximation in by affine systems was proved in [2], but this result does not apply to the Haar system. Now, if denotes the closure of the Haar system in , it is not hard to see that the distance of to is \sim\big{|}\int_{0}^{\infty}f(x)\,dx\big{|}, see [1]. Thus, neither dyadic atoms suffice to describe the Hardy spaces, nor the evaluation of the norm in BMO can be reduced to a straightforward computation using the dyadic intervals. In this paper we address both of these issues. First, we give a characterization of the Hardy spaces in terms of dyadic and special atoms, and then, by a duality argument, we show how to compute the norm in , , using the dyadic grid.
We begin by introducing some notations. Let denote a family of cubes in , and the collection of polynomials in of degree less than or equal to . Given , , and a locally integrable function , let denote the unique polynomial in such that has vanishing moments up to order .
For a locally square-integrable function , we consider the maximal function given by
[TABLE]
The Lipschitz space consists of those functions such that is in , ; when the family in question contains all cubes in , we simply omit the subscript . Of course, .
Two other families, of dyadic nature, are of interest to us. Intervals in of the form , where and are arbitrary integers, positive, negative or [math], are said to be dyadic. In , cubes which are the product of dyadic intervals of the same length, i.e., of the form , are called dyadic, and the collection of all such cubes is denoted .
There is also the family . Let , where and are arbitrary integers. Clearly is dyadic if is odd, but not if is even. Now, the collection contains all dyadic intervals as well as the shifts of the dyadic intervals by their half length. In , put ; is called a special cube. Note that contains properly.
Finally, given , let , and . The subcubes of of the form , or , , are called the dyadic subcubes of .
Let denote the special cube . Given , we construct a family of piecewise polynomial splines in that will be useful in characterizing . Let be the subspace of consisting of all functions with vanishing moments up to order which coincide with a polynomial in on each of the dyadic subcubes of . is a finite dimensional subspace of , and, therefore, by the Graham-Schmidt orthogonalization process, say, has an orthonormal basis in consisting of functions with vanishing moments up to order , which coincide with a polynomial in on each dyadic subinterval of . Together with each we also consider all dyadic dilations and integer translations given by
[TABLE]
and let
[TABLE]
Our first result shows how the dyadic grid can be used to compute the norm in .
Theorem A**.**
Let be a locally square-integrable function and . Then, if, and only if, and A_{\alpha}(g)=\sup_{p\in{\mathcal{S}}_{\alpha}}\big{|}\langle g,p\rangle\big{|}<\infty. Moreover,
[TABLE]
Furthermore, it is also true, and the proof is given in Proposition 2.1 below, that . However, in this simpler formulation, the tree structure of the cubes in has been lost.
The proof of Theorem A relies on a close investigation of the predual of , namely, the Hardy space with . In the process we characterize in terms of simpler subspaces: , or dyadic , and , the space generated by the special atoms in . Specifically, we have
Theorem B**.**
Let , and . We then have
[TABLE]
where the sum is understood in the sense of quasinormed Banach spaces.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 1 we show that individual atoms can be written as a superposition of dyadic and special atoms; this fact may be thought of as an extension of the one-dimensional result of Fridli concerning - atoms, see [5] and [1]. Then, we prove Theorem B. In Section 2 we discuss how to pass from , and , to the Lipschitz space .
1. Characterization of the Hardy spaces
We adopt the atomic definition of the Hardy spaces , , see [6] and [10]. Recall that a compactly supported function with vanishing moments is an -atom with defining cube if supp, and
[TABLE]
The Hardy space consists of those distributions that can be written as , where the ’s are atoms, , and the convergence is in the sense of distributions as well as in . Furthermore,
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all possible atomic decompositions of . This last expression has traditionally been called the atomic norm of .
Collections of atoms with special properties can be used to gain a better understanding of the Hardy spaces. Formally, let be a non-empty subset of -atoms in the unit ball of . The atomic space spanned by consists of those in of the form
[TABLE]
It is readily seen that, endowed with the atomic norm
[TABLE]
becomes a complete quasinormed space. Clearly, , and, for , .
Two families are of particular interest to us. When is the collection of all -atoms whose defining cube is dyadic, the resulting space is , or dyadic . Now, although , the two quasinorms are not equivalent on . Indeed, for and , the functions
[TABLE]
satisfy , but tends to infinity with .
Next, when is the family of piecewise polynomial splines constructed above with , in analogy with the one-dimensional results in [4] and [1], is referred to as the space generated by special atoms.
We are now ready to describe atoms as a superposition of dyadic and special atoms.
Lemma 1.1**.**
Let be an -atom with defining cube , , and . Then can be written as a linear combination of dyadic atoms , each supported in one of the dyadic subcubes of the smallest special cube containing , and a special atom in . More precisely, , with .
Proof.
Suppose first that the defining cube of is , and let denote the dyadic subcubes of . Furthermore, let denote an orthonormal basis of the subspace of consisting of polynomials in , . Put
[TABLE]
and observe that for . Therefore, has vanishing moments, is supported in , and
[TABLE]
So,
[TABLE]
is an - dyadic atom. Finally, put
[TABLE]
Clearly has vanishing moments, is supported in , coincides with a polynomial in on each dyadic subcube of , and
[TABLE]
So, , and, consequently, , where
[TABLE]
In the general case, let be the defining cube of , side-length , and let and be chosen so that , and
[TABLE]
Then, .
Now, given , let be the translation and dilation of given by
[TABLE]
Clearly, moments of vanish, and
[TABLE]
Thus, is a multiple of an atom with defining cube . By the first part of the proof,
[TABLE]
The support of each is contained in one of the dyadic subcubes of , and, consequently, there is a such that
[TABLE]
is an -atom supported in one of the dyadic subcubes of . Similarly for the ’s. Thus,
[TABLE]
and we have finished. ∎
Theorem B follows readily from Lemma 1.1. Clearly, . Conversely, let be in . By Lemma 1.1 each can be written as a sum of dyadic and special atoms, and, by distributing the sum, we can write , with in , in , and
[TABLE]
Taking the infimum over the decompositions of we get , and . This completes the proof.
The meaning of this decomposition is the following. Cubes in are contained in one of the non-overlapping quadrants of . To allow for the information carried by a dyadic cube to be transmitted to an adjacent dyadic cube, they must be connected. The ’s channel information across adjacent dyadic cubes which would otherwise remain disconnected. The reader will have no difficulty in proving the quantitative version of this observation: Let be a linear mapping defined on , , that assumes values in a quasinormed Banach space . Then, is continuous if, and only if, the restrictions of to and are continuous.
2. Characterizations of
Theorem A describes how to pass from to , and we prove it next. Since and , from Theorem B it follows readily that , so it only remains to show that is characterized by the condition .
First note that if is a locally square-integrable function with and , since ,
[TABLE]
and, consequently, taking the infimum over all atomic decompositions of in , we get and .
To prove the converse we proceed as in [3]. Let . We begin by observing that functions in that have vanishing moments up to order and coincide with polynomials of degree on the dyadic subcubes of belong to and
[TABLE]
Given , for a fixed let us consider the restriction of to the space of functions with vanishing moments that are supported in . Since
[TABLE]
this restriction is continuous with respect to the norm in and, consequently, it can be extended to a continuous linear functional in and represented as
[TABLE]
where and satisfies . Clearly, is uniquely determined in up to a polynomial in . Therefore,
[TABLE]
Consequently, if
[TABLE]
is well defined a.e. and, if has vanishing moments and is supported in , we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, since each is an -atom, , it readily follows that
[TABLE]
and, consequently, and is the desired space.
The reader will have no difficulty in showing that this result implies the following: Let be a bounded linear operator from a quasinormed space into . Then, is bounded from into if, and only if, for every .
The process of averaging the translates of dyadic BMO functions leads to BMO, and is an important tool in obtaining results in BMO once they are known to be true in its dyadic counterpart, , see [7]. It is also known that BMO can be obtained as the intersection of and one of its shifted counterparts, see [8]. These results motivate our next proposition, which essentially says that if, and only if, and is in the Lipschitz class obtained from the shifted dyadic grid. Note that the shifts involved in this class are in all directions parallel to the coordinate axis and depend on the side-length of the cube.
Proposition 2.1**.**
, and .
Proof.
It is obvious that . To show the other inequality we invoke Theorem A. Since , it suffices to estimate , or, equivalently, for , . So, pick in . The defining cube of is in , and, since has vanishing moments, . Therefore,
[TABLE]
Now, a simple change of variables gives , and, consequently, also . ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] W. Abu-Shammala, J.-L. Shiu, and A. Torchinsky, Characterizations of the Hardy space H 1 superscript 𝐻 1 H^{1} and BMO, preprint.
- 2[2] H.-Q. Bui and R. S. Laugesen, Approximation and spanning in the Hardy space, by affine systems , Constr. Approx., to appear.
- 3[3] A. P. Calderón and A. Torchinsky, Parabolic maximal functions associated with a distibution, II , Advances in Math., 24 (1977), 101–171.
- 4[4] G. S. de Souza, Spaces formed by special atoms, I, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 14 (1984), no. 2, 423–431.
- 5[5] S. Fridli, Transition from the dyadic to the real nonperiodic Hardy space , Acta Math. Acad. Paedagog. Niházi (N.S.) 16 (2000), 1–8, (electronic).
- 6[6] J. García-Cuerva and J. L. Rubio de Francia, Weighted norm inequalities and related topics , Notas de Matemática 116 , North Holland, Amsterdam, 1985.
- 7[7] J. Garnett and P. Jones, BMO BMO {\rm BMO} from dyadic BMO BMO {\rm BMO} , Pacific J. Math. 99 (1982), no. 2, 351–371.
- 8[8] T. Mei, BMO is the intersection of two translates of dyadic BMO, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 336 (2003), no. 12, 1003–1006.
