Preprint
September 18, 2009. To appear in Abstract and Applied Analysis
Convolutions with the continuous primitive integral
Erik Talvila111Supported by the
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of the Fraser Valley
Abbotsford, BC Canada V2S 7M8
[email protected]
Abstract.
If F is a continuous function on the real line and f=F′ is
its distributional derivative then the continuous primitive
integral of distribution f is ∫abf=F(b)−F(a). This integral
contains the Lebesgue, Henstock–Kurzweil and wide Denjoy integrals.
Under the Alexiewicz norm the space of integrable distributions is
a Banach space. We define the convolution f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f(x−y)g(y)dy
for f an integrable distribution and g a function of bounded variation
or an L1 function.
Usual properties of convolutions are shown to hold: commutativity,
associativity, commutation with translation. For g of bounded
variation, f∗g is uniformly continuous and we have
the estimate ∥f∗g∥∞≤∥f∥∥g∥BV where
∥f∥=supI∣∫If∣
is the
Alexiewicz norm. This supremum is taken over all intervals I⊂R.
When g∈L1 the estimate is
∥f∗g∥≤∥f∥∥g∥1. There are results on differentiation
and integration of convolutions. A type of Fubini theorem is proved
for the continuous primitive integral.
2000 subject classification: 26A39, 42A85, 46E15, 46F10, 46G12
Keywords and phrases: convolution, Schwartz distribution,
distributional integral,
continuous
primitive integral, Henstock–Kurzweil integral
1 Introduction and notation
The convolution of two functions f and g on the real line is
f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f(x−y)g(y)dy.
Convolutions play
an important role in pure and applied mathematics in Fourier analysis,
approximation theory, differential equations, integral equations
and many other areas.
In this paper we consider convolutions
for the continuous primitive integral.
This integral extends the Lebesgue, Henstock–Kurzweil
and wide Denjoy integrals on the real line and has a very simple
definition in terms
of distributional derivatives.
Some of the main results for Lebesgue integral convolutions are that
the convolution defines a Banach algebra on L1 and
∗:L1×L1→L1 such that ∥f∗g∥1≤∥f∥1∥g∥1.
The convolution is commutative, associative and
commutes with translations. If f∈L1 and g∈Cn then
f∗g∈Cn and (f∗g)(n)(x)=f∗g(n)(x). Convolutions
also have the approximation property that if f∈Lp (1≤p<∞)
and g∈L1 then ∥f∗gt−af∥p→0 as t→0, where
gt(x)=g(x/t)/t and a=∫−∞∞g.
When f is bounded and continuous, there is a
similar result for p=∞. For these results see, for example,
[4].
See [8] for related results with the Henstock–Kurzweil
integral.
Using the Alexiewicz norm, all of these results have generalisations to
continuous primitive integrals that are proven below.
We now define the continuous primitive integral.
For this we need some notation
for distributions. The space of test functions is
D=Cc∞(R)={ϕ:R→R∣ϕ∈C∞(R) and supp(ϕ) is compact}. The support of
function ϕ is the
closure of the set on which ϕ does not vanish and is denoted
supp(ϕ). Under usual pointwise operations D is
a linear space over field R. In D we have
a notion of convergence. If {ϕn}⊂D then ϕn→0 as
n→∞
if there is a compact set K⊂R such that for each n,
supp(ϕn)⊂K, and for each m≥0 we have
ϕn(m)→0 uniformly on K as n→∞. The distributions
are denoted D′ and
are the continuous linear functionals on D. For T∈D′ and
ϕ∈D we write ⟨T,ϕ⟩∈R. For ϕ,ψ∈D
and a,b∈R we have ⟨T,aϕ+bψ⟩=a⟨T,ϕ⟩+b⟨T,ψ⟩. And, if ϕn→0 in D then
⟨T,ϕn⟩→0 in R. Linear operations are defined
in D′ by ⟨aS+bT,ϕ⟩=a⟨S,ϕ⟩+b⟨T,ϕ⟩ for S,T∈D′; a,b∈R and ϕ∈D.
If f∈Lloc1
then ⟨Tf,ϕ⟩=∫−∞∞f(x)ϕ(x)dx defines a distribution
Tf∈D′. The integral exists as a Lebesgue integral.
All distributions have derivatives of
all orders that are themselves distributions.
For T∈D′ and
ϕ∈D the distributional derivative of T is T′
where ⟨T′,ϕ⟩=−⟨T,ϕ′⟩.
This is also called the weak derivative.
If p:R→R is a function that is differentiable in
the pointwise sense at x∈R then we write its derivative
as p′(x).
If p is
a C∞ bijection such that
p′(x)=0 for any x∈R then the composition with
distribution T is defined by
⟨T∘p,ϕ⟩=⟨T,p′∘p−1ϕ∘p−1⟩ for all
ϕ∈D.
Translations are a special case.
For x∈R define the translation τx on distribution
T∈D′ by ⟨τxT,ϕ⟩=⟨T,τ−xϕ⟩
for test function ϕ∈D where τxϕ(y)=ϕ(y−x).
All of the results on distributions we use can be
found in [5].
The following Banach space
will be of importance: BC={F:R→R∣F∈C0(R),F(−∞)=0,F(∞)∈R}. We use the notation
F(−∞)=limx→−∞F(x) and
F(∞)=limx→∞F(x). The extended real line is
denoted R=[−∞,∞]. The space BC then
consists of functions continuous on R with a limit of
[math] at −∞. We denote the functions that are continuous
on R that have real limits at ±∞ by C0(R).
Hence, BC is properly contained in C0(R), which
is itself properly contained in the
space of uniformly
continuous functions on R.
The space BC is a Banach space under the uniform norm; ∥F∥∞=supx∈R∣F(x)∣=maxx∈R∣F(x)∣ for F∈BC.
The continuous primitive integral is
defined by taking BC as the space of primitives. The
space of integrable distributions is AC={f∈D′∣f=F′ for F∈BC}. If f∈AC then
∫abf=F(b)−F(a) for a,b∈R. The distributional
differential equation T′=0 has only constant solutions so the
primitive F∈BC satisfying F′=f is unique.
Integrable distributions are then
tempered and of order one. This integral, including a discussion
of extensions to Rn, is described in [9].
A more general integral is obtained by taking the primitives to
be regulated functions, i.e., functions with a left and right
limit at each point. See [10].
Examples of distributions in AC are Tf for functions f
that have a finite Lebesgue, Henstock–Kurzweil or wide Denjoy integral.
We identify function f with the distribution Tf.
Pointwise function values can be recovered from Tf at points
of continuity of f by evaluating
the limit ⟨Tf,ϕn⟩ for a delta sequence
converging to x∈R.
This is a sequence of test functions {ϕn}⊂D
such that for each n, ϕn≥0,
∫−∞∞ϕn=1, and the support of ϕn tends to {x}
as n→∞. Note that if F∈C0(R) is an increasing function
with F′(x)=0 for almost all x∈R then the Lebesgue integral
∫abF′(x)dx=0 but F′∈AC and ∫abF′=F(b)−F(a).
For another example of a distribution in AC, let F∈C0(R)
be continuous and nowhere differentiable in the pointwise sense.
Then F′∈AC and ∫abF′=F(b)−F(a) for all a,b∈R.
The space AC is a
Banach space under the Alexiewicz norm;
∥f∥=supI⊂R∣∫If∣ where the supremum is taken
over all intervals I⊂R.
An equivalent norm is ∥f∥′=supx∈R∣∫−∞xf∣.
The continuous primitive
integral contains the Lebesgue, Henstock–Kurzweil
and wide Denjoy integrals since their primitives
are continuous functions. These three spaces of functions are
not complete under the Alexiewicz norm and in fact AC
is their completion. The lack of a Banach space has hampered
application of the Henstock–Kurzweil integral to problems outside
of real analysis. As we will see below, the Banach space AC
is a suitable setting for applications of nonabsolute
integration.
We will also need to use functions of bounded variation. Let
g:R→R. The variation of g is
Vg=sup∑∣g(xi)−g(yi)∣ where the supremum
is taken over all disjoint intervals {(xi,yi)}.
The functions of bounded variation are denoted
BV={g:R→R∣Vg<∞}. This is a Banach
space under the norm ∥g∥BV=∣g(−∞)∣+Vg.
Equivalent norms are ∥g∥∞+Vg and ∣g(a)∣+Vg
for each a∈R.
Functions of bounded variation have a left and right limit
at each point in R and limits at ±∞ so as above we will define
g(±∞)=limx→±∞g(x).
If g∈Lloc1 then the essential variation of g is essvarg=sup∫−∞∞gϕ′
where the supremum is taken over all ϕ∈D with ∥ϕ∥∞≤1.
Then EBV={g∈Lloc1∣essvarg<∞}.
This is a Banach space under the norm ∥g∥EBV=esssup∣g∣+essvarg.
Let 0≤γ≤1. For g:R→R define
gγ(x)=(1−γ)g(x−)+γg(x+). For left continuity,
γ=0 and for right continuity γ=1. The functions of
normalised bounded variation are NBVγ={gγ∣g∈BV}. If g∈EBV then
essvarg=infVh such that h=g almost everywhere. For
each 0≤γ≤1
there is exactly one function
h∈NBVγ such that g=h almost everywhere. In this
case essvarg=Vh. Changing g on a set of measure zero
does not affect its essential variation. Each function of
essential bounded variation has a distributional derivative that is
a signed Radon measure. This will be denoted μg where
⟨g′,ϕ⟩=−⟨g,ϕ′⟩=−∫−∞∞gϕ′=∫−∞∞ϕdμg for all ϕ∈D.
We will see that ∗:AC×BV→C0(R) and that
∥f∗g∥∞≤∥f∥∥g∥BV.
Similarly for g∈EBV. Convolutions for
f∈AC and g∈L1 will be defined using sequences
in BV∩L1 that converge to g in the L1 norm. It will
be shown that ∗:AC×L1→AC and that
∥f∗g∥≤∥f∥∥g∥1.
Convolutions can be defined for distributions in several different
ways.
Definition 1
Let S,T∈D′ and ϕ,ψ∈D. Define ϕ~(x)=ϕ(−x).
(i) ⟨T∗ψ,ϕ⟩=⟨T,ϕ∗ψ~⟩.
(ii) For each x∈R, let T∗ψ(x)=⟨T,τxψ~⟩.
(iii) ⟨S∗T,ϕ⟩=⟨S(x),⟨T(y),ϕ(x+y)⟩⟩.
In (i), ∗:D′×D→D′. This definition also applies to
other
spaces of test functions and their duals, such as the Schwartz
space of rapidly decreasing functions or the compactly supported
distributions.
In (ii), ∗:D′×D→C∞.
In [4] it is shown that definitions (i) and (ii) are equivalent.
In (iii), ∗:D′×D′→D′. However, this definition requires
restrictions on the supports of S and T. It suffices that one of
these distributions have compact support. Other conditions on the supports
can be imposed. See [5] and [11].
This definition is an instance of the tensor product,
⟨S⊗T,Φ⟩=⟨S(x),⟨T(y),Φ(x,y)⟩⟩ where now Φ∈D(R2).
Under (i), T∗ψ
is in C∞. It
satisfies (T∗ψ)∗ϕ=T∗(ψ∗ϕ),
τx(T∗ψ)=(τxT)∗ψ=T∗(τxψ),
and
(T∗ψ)(n)=T∗ψ(n)=T(n)∗ψ.
Under (iii), with appropriate support restrictions,
S∗T is in D′. It is commutative and
associative, commutes with translations, and satisfies
(S∗T)(n)=S(n)∗T=S∗T(n). It is weakly
continuous in D′, i.e., if Tn→T in D′ then
Tn∗ψ→T∗ψ in D′. See [4],
[5], [7] and [11]
for additional properties of convolutions of distributions.
Although elements of AC are distributions, we show in
this paper that their behaviour
as convolutions is more like that of integrable functions.
An appendix contains the proof of a type of Fubini theorem.
2 Convolution in AC×BV
In this section we prove basic results for the convolution
when f∈AC and g∈BV. Under these
conditions f∗g is commutative, continuous on R and
commutes with translations.
It can be estimated in the uniform norm in terms of the Alexiewicz
and BV norms. There is also an associative property.
We first need
the result that BV forms the space of multipliers for
AC, i.e., if f∈AC then fg∈AC for all
g∈BV. The integral ∫Ifg is defined using the
integration by parts formula in the Appendix. The Hölder
inequality (14) shows that BV is the dual space of AC.
We define the convolution of f∈AC and g∈BV as
f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞(f∘rx)g where rx(t)=x−t. We
write this as f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f(x−y)g(y)dy.
Theorem 2
Let f∈AC
and let g∈BV. Then (a) f∗g exists on R
(b) f∗g=g∗f (c) ∥f∗g∥∞≤∣∫−∞∞f∣infR∣g∣+∥f∥Vg≤∥f∥∥g∥BV
(d) f∗g∈C0(R), limx→±∞f∗g(x)=g(±∞)∫−∞∞f.
(e) If h∈L1 then f∗(g∗h)=(f∗g)∗h∈C0(R).
(f) Let x,z∈R. Then
τz(f∗g)(x)=(τzf)∗g(x)=(f∗τzg)(x).
(g) For each f∈AC define Φf:BV→C0(R) by
Φf[g]=f∗g. Then Φf is a bounded linear operator
and ∥Φf∥≤∥f∥. There exists a nonzero distribution f∈AC
such that ∥Φf∥=∥f∥. For each g∈BV define
Ψg:AC→C0(R) by
Ψg[f]=f∗g. Then Ψg is a bounded linear operator
and ∥Ψg∥≤∥g∥BV.
There exists a nonzero function
g∈BV such that
∥Ψg∥=∥g∥BV.
(h) supp(f∗g)⊂supp(f)+supp(g).
Proof: (a) Existence is given via the integration by parts
formula (13) in the Appendix. (b) See [9, Theorem 11]
for a change of variables theorem that can be used with y↦x−y.
(c) This inequality follows from the Hölder inequality (14).
(d) Let x,t∈R. From (c) we have
[TABLE]
The last line follows from continuity in the Alexiewicz norm
[9, Theorem 22]. Hence, f∗g is uniformly continuous
on R. And, limx→∞∫−∞∞f(y)g(x−y)dy=∫−∞∞f(y)limx→∞g(x−y)dy=g(∞)∫−∞∞f.
The limit x→∞ can be taken under the integral sign
since g(x−y) is of uniform bounded variation, i.e.,
Vy∈Rg(x−y)=Vg. Theorem 22 in [9] then applies.
Similarly as x→−∞.
(e) First show g∗h∈BV. Let {(si,ti)} be disjoint intervals
in R. Then
[TABLE]
Hence, V(g∗h)≤Vg∥h∥1. The interchange of sum and
integral follows from the Fubini–Tonelli theorem. Now (d) shows
f∗(g∗h)∈C0(R). Write
[TABLE]
We can interchange orders of integration using Proposition 17.
For (ii) in Proposition 17, the function
z↦Vy∈Rg(x−y−z)h(z)=Vgh(z) is in L1
for each fixed x∈R. Since g is of bounded variation it is bounded
so ∣g(x−y−z)h(z)∣≤∥g∥∞∣h(z)∣ and condition (iii) is
satisfied. (f) This follows from a linear change of variables as in (a).
(g) From (c) we have ∥Φf∥=sup∥g∥BV=1∥f∗g∥∞≤sup∥g∥BV=1∥f∥∥g∥BV=∥f∥.
Let f>0 be in L1. If g=1 then ∥g∥BV=1 and
f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f so ∥Φf∥=∥f∥=∥f∥1.
To prove ∥Ψg∥≤∥g∥BV, note
that ∥Ψg∥=sup∥f∥=1∥f∗g∥∞≤sup∥f∥=1∥f∥∥g∥BV=∥g∥BV.
Let g=χ(0,∞).
Then
∥Ψg∥=sup∥f∥=1∥f∗g∥∞=sup∥f∥=1supx∈R∣∫−∞xf∣=1=∥g∥BV.
(h) Suppose x∈/supp(f)+supp(g).
Note that we can write f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞g(x−y)dF(y), in terms
of a Henstock–Stieltjes integral. See [9] for details.
This integral is approximated by Riemann sums ∑n=1Ng(x−zn)[F(tn)−F(tn−1)] where zn∈[tn−1,tn],
−∞=t0<t1<…<tN=∞ and there is a gauge function
γ mapping R to the open intervals in R such that
[tn−1,tn]⊂γ(zn). If zn∈/supp(f) then
since R∖supp(f) is open there is an open interval
zn⊂I⊂R∖supp(f). We can take γ
such that [tn−1,tn]⊂I for all 1≤n≤N. And,
F is constant on each interval in R∖supp(f). Therefore,
g(x−zn)[F(tn)−F(tn−1)]=0 and only tags zn∈supp(f) can
contribute to the Riemann sum. But for all zn∈supp(f) we have
x−zn∈/supp(g) so g(x−zn)[F(tn)−F(tn−1)]=0. It follows
that f∗g(x)=0.
■
Similar results are proven for f∈Lp in [4, § 8.2].
If we use the equivalent norm ∥f∥′=supx∈R∣∫−∞xf∣
then ∥Φf∥=∥f∥′. For, integration by parts gives
∥Φf∥≤∥f∥′.
Now given f∈AC let g=χ(0,∞). Then
∥g∥BV=1. And, f∗g(x)=∫−∞xf. Hence, ∥f∗g∥∞=∥f∥′ and
∥Φf∥=∥f∥′.
We can have strict inequality in ∥Ψg∥≤∥g∥BV. For
example, let g=χ{0}. Then ∥g∥BV=2 but integration
by parts shows f∗g=0 for each f∈AC.
Remark 3
If f∈AC and g∈EBV we can use Definition 16 to
define f∗g(x)=f∗gγ(x) where gγ=g almost
everywhere and gγ∈NBVγ. All of the results in
Theorem 2 and the rest of the paper have analogues.
Note that f∗g(x)=F(∞)gγ(−∞)+F∗μg.
**
Proposition 4
The three definitions of convolution for distributions in
Definition 1 are compatible with f∗g
for f∈AC and g∈BV.
Proof: Let f∈AC, g∈BV and ϕ,ψ∈D.
Definition 1(i) gives
[TABLE]
Since ψ∈BV and ϕ∈L1, Proposition 17
justifies the interchange of integrals.
Definition 1(ii) gives
[TABLE]
Definition 1(iii) gives
[TABLE]
The interchange of integrals is accomplished using
Proposition 17 since g∈BV and ϕ∈L1. ■
The locally integrable distributions are defined as
AC(loc)={f∈D′∣f=F′ for some F∈C0(R)}.
Let f∈AC(loc) and let g∈BV with support in the compact
interval [a,b]. By the Hake theorem [9, Theorem 25],
f∗g(x) exists if and only if the limits of ∫αβf(x−y)g(y)dy exist as α→−∞ and β→∞.
This gives
[TABLE]
There are analogues of the results in Theorem 2. For
example, ∣f∗g(x)∣≤∣∫x−bx−af∣inf[a,b]∣g∣+∥fχ[x−b,x−a]∥V[a,b]g. There are also versions where
the supports are taken to be semi-infinite intervals.
We can also define the distributions with bounded primitive as
AC(bd)={f∈D′∣f=F′ for some bounded F∈C0(R) with F(0)=0}.
Let f∈AC(bd) and let F be its unique primitive.
If g∈BV such that g(±∞)=0 then
[TABLE]
It follows that ∥f∗g∥∞≤∥F∥∞Vg.
It is possible to formulate other existence criteria. For example,
if f(x)=log∣x∣sin(x) and g(x)=∣x∣−α for some
0<α<1 then f and g are not in AC, BV or
Lp for any 1≤p≤∞ but f∗g exists on
R because f,g∈Lloc1 and if F(x)=∫0xf then
lim∣x∣→∞F(x)g(x)=0.
The following example shows that f∗g need not be of bounded variation
and hence not absolutely continuous.
Let g=χ(0,∞). For
f∈AC we have
f∗g(x)=∫−∞xf=F(x)
where F∈BC is the primitive of f. But F need not be
of bounded variation or even of local bounded variation. For example,
let f(x)=sin(x−2)−2x−2cos(x−2) and let
F be its primitive in BC.
Finally, although f∗g is continuous it need not be integrable over R.
For example, let g=1 then f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f and ∫−∞∞f∗g
only exists if ∫−∞∞f=0.
3 Convolution in AC×L1
We now extend the convolution f∗g to f∈AC and
g∈L1. Since there are functions in L1 that are not of bounded
variation, there are distributions f∈AC and functions
g∈L1 such that the integral ∫−∞∞f(x−y)g(y)dy does not
exist. The convolution is then defined as the limit in ∥⋅∥
of a sequence
f∗gn for gn∈BV∩L1 such that gn→g
in the L1 norm. This is possible since BV∩L1 is dense
in L1. We also give an equivalent definition using
the fact that L1 is dense in AC. Take a sequence {fn}⊂L1 such that ∥fn−f∥→0. Then f∗g is the
limit in ∥⋅∥ of fn∗g. In this more general setting of
convolution defined in AC×L1 we now have
an Alexiewicz norm estimate for f∗g in terms of estimates
of f in the Alexiewicz norm and g in the L1 norm. There
is associativity with L1 functions and commutativity with translations.
Definition 5
Let f∈AC and let g∈L1. Let {gn}⊂BV∩L1
such that ∥gn−g∥1→0. Define f∗g
as the unique element
in AC such that ∥f∗gn−f∗g∥→0.
To see that the definition makes sense, first note that BV∩L1 is
dense in L1 since step functions are dense in L1. Hence, the
required sequence {gn} exists. Let [α,β]⊂R be a compact interval.
Let F∈BC be the primitive of f.
Then
[TABLE]
The interchange of orders of integration in (3)
is accomplished with
Proposition 17 using g(x,y)=gn(x−y)χ[α,β](x).
Integration by parts gives (2) since
limy→∞∫α−yβ−ygn=0.
As F is continuous and the function y↦∫α−yβ−ygn
is absolutely continuous we get (3). Taking the
supremum over α,β∈R gives
[TABLE]
We now have
[TABLE]
and {f∗gn} is a Cauchy sequence in AC. Since AC
is complete this sequence has a limit in AC which we denote
f∗g. The definition does not depend on the choice of sequence
{gn}, for if {hn}⊂BV∩L1 such that ∥hn−g∥1→0
then ∥f∗gn−f∗hn∥≤∥f∥(∥gn−g∥1+∥hn−g∥1)→0
as n→∞. The above calculation also shows that if g∈BV∩L1
then the integral definition f∗g(x)=∫−∞∞f(x−y)g(y)dy and the
limit definition agree.
Definition 6
Let f∈AC and let g∈L1. Let {fn}⊂L1
such that ∥fn−f∥→0. Define f∗g
as the unique element
in AC such that ∥fn∗g−f∗g∥→0.
To show this definition makes sense, first show L1 is
dense in AC.
Proposition 7
L1* is dense in AC.*
Proof:
Let AC(R) be the functions that are absolutely continuous
on each compact interval and which are of bounded variation on
the real line.
Then f∈L1 if and only if there exists F∈AC(R) such that
F′(x)=f(x) for almost all x∈R.
Let f∈AC be given.
Let F∈BC be its primitive. For ϵ>0, take
M>0 such that ∣F(x)∣<ϵ for x<−M and ∣F(x)−F(∞)∣<ϵ for x>M. Due to the Weierstrass approximation theorem
there is a continuous function P:R→R such that P(x)=F(−M) for x≤−M,
P(x)=F(M) for x≥M,
∣P(x)−F(x)∣<ϵ for ∣x∣≤M and P is a polynomial on [−M,M].
Hence, P∈AC(R) and ∥P′−f∥<3ϵ.
■
In Definition 6, the required sequence
{fn}⊂L1 exists.
Let [α,β]⊂R be a compact interval.
Then, by the usual Fubini–Tonelli theorem in L1,
[TABLE]
Take the
supremum over α,β∈R and use the
L1−L∞ Hölder inequality to get
[TABLE]
It now follows that
{fn∗g} is a Cauchy sequence. It then converges to
an element of AC. Inequality (5)
also shows this limit
is independent of the choice of {fn}. To see that Definition 5
and Definition 6 agree, take {fn}⊂L1 with
∥fn−f∥→0 and
{gn}⊂BV∩L1 with ∥gn−g∥1→0. Then
[TABLE]
Letting n→∞ shows the limits of fn∗g in Definition 6
and f∗gn in Definition 5 are the same.
Theorem 8
Let f∈AC and g∈L1. Define f∗g as in
Definition 5. Then (a) ∥f∗g∥≤∥f∥∥g∥1.
(b) Let h∈L1. Then (f∗g)∗h=f∗(g∗h)∈AC.
(c) For each z∈R, τz(f∗g)=(τzf)∗g=(f∗τzg).
(d)
For each f∈AC define Φf:L1→AC by
Φf[g]=f∗g. Then Φf is a bounded linear operator
and ∥Φf∥≤∥f∥. There exists a nonzero distribution
f∈AC such that
∥Φf∥=∥f∥. For each g∈L1 define
Ψg:AC→AC by
Ψg[f]=f∗g. Then Ψg is a bounded linear operator
and ∥Ψg∥≤∥g∥1.
There exists a nonzero function
g∈L1 such that
∥Ψg∥=∥g∥BV.
(e) Define gt(x)=g(x/t)/t for t>0.
Let a=∫−∞∞gt(x)dx=∫−∞∞g. Then ∥f∗gt−af∥→0
as t→0.
(f) supp(f∗g)⊂supp(f)+supp(g).
Proof: Let {gn} be as in Definition 5.
(a)
Since ∥f∗gn∥→∥f∗g∥, equation (4)
shows
∥f∗g∥≤∥f∥∥g∥1.
(b)
Let {hn}⊂BV∩L1 such that ∥hn−h∥1→0. Then
(f∗g)∗h:=ξ∈AC such that ∥(f∗g)∗hn−ξ∥→0. Since g∗h∈L1 there is {pn}⊂BV∩L1 such that ∥pn−g∗h∥1→0.
Then f∗(g∗h):=η∈AC such that ∥f∗pn−η∥→0. Now,
[TABLE]
Using (4),
[TABLE]
Finally, use Theorem 2(e) and (4) to write
[TABLE]
(c) The Alexiewicz norm is invariant under translation
[9, Theorem 28] so τz(f∗g)∈AC.
Use Theorem 2(f) to write
∥τz(f∗g)−τz(f∗gn)∥=∥f∗g−f∗gn∥=∥τz(f∗g)−(τzf)∗gn)∥=∥τz(f∗g)−f∗(τzgn)∥.
Translation invariance of the L1 norm
completes the proof.
(d) From (a) we have ∥Φf∥=sup∥g∥1=1∥f∗g∥≤sup∥g∥1=1∥f∥∥g∥1=∥f∥.
We get equality by considering f and g to be positive functions
in L1.
To prove ∥Ψg∥≤∥g∥1, note
that ∥Ψg∥=sup∥f∥=1∥f∗g∥≤sup∥f∥=1∥f∥∥g∥1=∥g∥1.
We get equality by considering f and g to be positive functions
in L1.
(e) First consider g∈BV∩L1.
We have
[TABLE]
For −∞<α<β<∞,
[TABLE]
By dominated convergence we can take the limit t→0 inside
the integral (3). Continuity of f in the Alexiewicz norm
then shows ∥f∗gt−af∥→0
as t→0.
Now take a sequence {g(n)}⊂BV∩L1 such that
∥g(n)−g∥1→0. Define gt(n)(x)=g(n)(x/t)/t
and a(n)=∫−∞∞g(n)(x)dx. We have
[TABLE]
By the inequality in (a), ∥f∗gt(n)−f∗gt∥≤∥f∥∥gt(n)−gt∥1. Whereas,
[TABLE]
And,
∥a(n)f−af∥=∣a(n)−a∣∥f∥=∥g(n)−g∥1∥f∥.
Given ϵ>0 fix n large enough so that
∥f∗gt(n)−f∗gt∥+∥a(n)f−af∥<ϵ.
Now let t→0 in (8).
The interchange of order of integration in (6)
is justified as follows. A change of variables and
Proposition 17 give
[TABLE]
And,
[TABLE]
Note that ∫αβ∫−∞∞f(x)g(y)dydx=∫−∞∞∫αβf(x)g(y)dxdy
by Corollary 18. (f) This follows from the equivalence
of Definition 1 and Definition 5,
proved in Proposition 9.
See Theorem 5.4-2 and Theorem 5.3-1 in [11].■
Young’s inequality states that
∥f∗g∥p≤∥f∥p∥g∥1
when f∈Lp for some 1≤p≤∞ and g∈L1.
Part (a) of Theorem 8 extends this to f∈AC.
See [4] for other
results when f∈Lp.
The fact that convolution is linear in both arguments, together with
(b), shows that AC is an L1-module over the L1 convolution
algebra. See [3] for the definition. It does not appear
that AC is a Banach algebra under convolution.
We now show that Definition 1(iii) and the above
definitions agree.
Proposition 9
Let f∈AC, g∈L1 and ϕ∈D. Define
F(y)=∫−∞yf and G(x)=∫−∞xg.
Definition 1 and Definition 5
both give
[TABLE]
Proof: Let Φ(y)=∫−∞∞g(x)ϕ(x+y)dx. Then Φ∈C∞(R) and Φ′(y)=∫−∞∞g(x)ϕ′(x+y)dx.
And, ∫−∞∞∣Φ′(y)∣dy≤∫−∞∞∣g(x)∣∫−∞∞∣ϕ′(x+y)∣dydx≤∥g∥1∥ϕ′∥1 so Φ∈AC(R). Dominated convergence
then shows lim∣y∣→∞Φ(y)=0. Integration by parts now
gives (9) and (10).
Let {gn}⊂BV∩L1
such that ∥gn−g∥1→0. Since convergence in ∥⋅∥
implies convergence in D′, we have
[TABLE]
Proposition 17 allows interchange of the iterated integrals.
Define Φn(y)=∫−∞∞gn(x)ϕ(x+y)dx.
As above, VΦn≤∥gn∥1∥ϕ′∥1≤(∥g∥1+1)∥ϕ′∥1
for large enough n. Hence, Φn is of uniform bounded variation.
Theorem 22 in [9] then gives
⟨f∗g,ϕ⟩=∫−∞∞f(y)limn→∞Φn(y)dy=∫−∞∞f(y)∫−∞∞g(x−y)ϕ(x)dxdy. The last step follows
since ∥gn−g∥1→0.■
If g∈L1∖BV then f∗g need not be continuous
or bounded.
For example, take 1/2≤α<1 and let
f(x)=g(x)=x−αχ(0,1)(x).
Then
f∈L1⊂AC and g∈L1∖BV. We have
f∗g(x)=0 for x≤0. For 0<x≤1 we have
f∗g(x)=∫0xy−α(x−y)−αdy=x1−2α∫01y−α(1−y)−αdy=x1−2αΓ2(1−α)/Γ(2−2α).
Hence, f∗g is not continuous at [math]. If 1/2<α<1
then f∗g is unbounded at [math].
As another example, consider f(x)=sin(πx)/log∣x∣ and
g(x)=χ(0,1)(x). Then f∈AC and for each
1≤p≤∞ we have g∈BV∩Lp. And,
[TABLE]
Therefore, by Theorem 2(d),
f∗g∈C0(R) and lim∣x∣→∞f∗g(x)=0
but for each 1≤p<∞
we have f∗g∈Lp.
4 Differentiation and integration
If g is sufficiently smooth then the pointwise derivative is
(f∗g)′(x)=f∗g′(x). Recall the definition
AC(R) of primitives of L1 functions given in the proof of
Proposition 7. In the following theorem we require
pointwise derivatives of g to exist at each point in R.
Theorem 10
Let f∈AC, n∈N and g(k)∈AC(R) for each
0≤k≤n. Then f∗g∈Cn(R) and
(f∗g)(n)(x)=f∗g(n)(x) for each x∈R.
Proof: First consider n=1. Let x∈R. Then
[TABLE]
To take the limit inside the integral we can show that the bracketed
term in the integrand is of uniform bounded variation for
0<∣h∣≤1. Let h=0.
Since g∈AC(R) it follows that the variation is given by the
Lebesgue integrals
[TABLE]
Since g′∈AC(R) we have
g′′∈L1. The second integral on the right of (12)
gives the L1 derivative of g′ in the limit h→0.
See [4, p. 246]. Hence, in (11) we
can use Theorem 22 in [9]
to take the limit under the integral sign. This then
gives (f∗g)′(x)=f∗g′(x). Theorem 2(d) now
shows (f∗g)′∈C0(R). Induction on n
completes the proof.■
For similar results when f∈L1,
see [4, Proposition 8.10].
Note that g′∈AC(R) does not imply g∈AC(R). For example,
g(x)=x. The conditions g(k)∈BV for 0≤k≤n+1
imply those in Theorem 10. To see this it suffices
to consider n=1. If g′,g′′∈BV then g′′ exists at each
point and is bounded. Hence, the
Lebesgue integral
g′(x)=g′(0)+∫0xg′′(y)dy exists for each x∈R
and g′ is absolutely continuous. Since g′∈BV
we then have g′∈AC(R).
Similarly for n>1.
The example g(x)=∣x∣1.5sin(1/[1+x2])
shows the AC(R) condition
in the theorem is weaker that the above BV condition since
g,g′∈AC(R) but g′′(0) does not exist so g′′∈BV.
We found that when g∈BV∩L1 then f∗g∈AC.
We can compute the the distributional derivative (F∗g)′=f∗g where F is a primitive of f.
Proposition 11
Let F∈C0(R) and write f=F′∈AC. Let g∈BV∩L1. Then F∗g∈C0(R) and (F∗g)′=f∗g∈AC.
Proof:
Let x,t∈R. Then by the usual Hölder inequality,
[TABLE]
Hence, F∗g is continuous on R. Dominated convergence shows
that limx→±∞F∗g(x)=F(±∞)∫−∞∞g.
Therefore, F∗g∈C0(R).
Let ϕ∈D. Then
[TABLE]
Integrate by parts and use the change of variables x↦x+y to get
[TABLE]
This gives an alternate definition of f∗g for f∈AC and
g∈L1.
Theorem 12
Let f∈AC, let F∈BC be the
primitive of f and let g∈L1.
Define f∗g as in
Definition 5. Then (F∗g)′=f∗g∈AC.
Proof:
Let −∞<α<β<∞.
Let {gn}⊂BV∩L1
such that ∥gn−g∥1→0. By Proposition 11 we have
[TABLE]
As
in (3),
∫αβf∗gn=∫−∞∞F(y)[gn(β−y)−gn(α−y)]dy. Hence,
[TABLE]
Therefore, ∥(F∗g)′−f∗gn∥≤2∥f∥∥gn−g∥1→0 as n→∞. ■
The next theorem and its corollary give results on integrating convolutions.
Theorem 13
Let f∈AC and let g∈L1. Define F(x)=∫−∞xf
and G(x)=∫−∞xg. Then f∗G∈C0(R) and
f∗G(x)=F∗g(x) for all x∈R.
Proof:
Since G∈AC(R), Theorem 2(d) shows f∗G∈C0(R).
We have
[TABLE]
Proposition 17 justifies the interchange of orders of
integration.■
Corollary 14
(a) f∗g=(F∗g)′=(f∗G)′
(b) For all −∞≤α<β≤∞ we have
∫αβf∗g=F∗g(β)−F∗g(α)=f∗G(β)−f∗G(β).
Hence, the convolution f∗g can be evaluated by taking
the distributional derivative of the Lebesgue integral F∗g.
Since f∗G∈C0(R) when f∈AC and G∈BV
we can use the equation f∗g=(f∗G)′ to define f∗g
for f∈AC and g=G′ for G∈BV. In this case, g will be
a signed Radon measure. As G(x)=∫−∞xg and this integral
is a regulated primitive integral [10], we will save
this case for discussion elsewhere.
5 Appendix
The integration by parts formula is as follows. If f∈AC
and g∈BV it gives the integral of fg in terms of
a Henstock–Stieltjes integral:
[TABLE]
See [9] and [6, p. 199].
We have the following corollary for functions of essential
bounded variation.
Corollary 15
Let F∈C0(R). Let g∈EBV. Fix 0≤γ≤1.
Take gγ∈NBVγ such that gγ=g almost
everywhere. Let μg be the signed Radon measure given by
g′. Then ∫−∞∞Fdgγ=∫−∞∞Fdμg.
Proof:
The distributional derivative of g is
⟨g′,ϕ⟩=−⟨g,ϕ′⟩=−∫−∞∞gϕ′=∫−∞∞ϕdμg for all ϕ∈D. Note that gγ
is unique and μg=μgγ. Suppose ϕ∈D with
supp(ϕ)⊂[A,B]⊂R. Then, using integration
by parts for the Henstock–Stieltjes integral,
[TABLE]
Let F∈C0(R). There is a uniformly bounded sequence
{ϕn}⊂D such that ϕn→F pointwise on R.
By dominated convergence,
[TABLE]
Corollary 15 now justifies the following definition.
Definition 16
Let f∈AC and let F∈BC be its primitive. Let g∈EBV.
Fix 0≤γ≤1 and
take gγ∈NBVγ such that gγ=g
almost everywhere. Define
[TABLE]
Since limits at infinity are not affected by the choice of
γ, the definition is independent of γ.
The Hölder inequality is
[TABLE]
and is valid for all f∈AC and g∈BV. For
g∈EBV we replace g with gγ. This
gives
[TABLE]
See
[8, Lemma 24]
for a proof using the Henstock–Kurzweil integral.
The same proof works for the continuous primitive integral.
A Fubini theorem has been established in
[1] for the continuous primitive integral on compact intervals.
This says that
if a double integral exists in the plane then the two iterated integrals exist
and are equal. Of more utility for the case at hand is to show directly
that iterated integrals are equal without resorting to the double integral.
The following theorem extends a type of Fubini theorem proved on page 58 in
[2] for
the wide Denjoy integral on compact intervals.
Proposition 17
Let f∈AC.
Let g:R×R→R be measurable.
Assume (i) for each x∈R the function
y↦g(x,y) is in BV; (ii) the function x↦Vy∈Rg(x,y) is in L1; (iii) there is M∈L1
such that for each y∈R we have ∣g(x,y)∣≤M(x). Then
the iterated integrals exist and are equal,
∫−∞∞∫−∞∞f(y)g(x,y)dydx=∫−∞∞∫−∞∞f(y)g(x,y)dxdy.
Proof: Let F∈BC be the primitive of f. For
each x∈R we have
[TABLE]
where d2(x,y) indicates a Henstock–Stieltjes integral with respect
to y. Then,
[TABLE]
The integral ∫−∞∞g(x,∞)dx exists due
to condition (iii).
The iterated integral in (16)
converges absolutely since
[TABLE]
Now, show the function y↦∫−∞∞g(x,y)dx is in BV.
Let {(si,ti)}i=1n be disjoint intervals in R. Then
[TABLE]
The interchange of summation and integration follows from condition
(ii) and the usual Fubini–Tonelli theorem. Hence, the function
y↦∫−∞∞g(x,y)dx is in BV and the iterated integral
∫−∞∞f(y)∫−∞∞g(x,y)dxdy exists.
Integrate by parts,
[TABLE]
In (18), we have
limy→∞∫−∞∞g(x,y)dx=∫−∞∞g(x,∞)dx
due to dominated convergence and condition (iii). To complete the
proof we need to show the integrals in (16)
and (18) are equal. First consider the case when
F=χ(a,b) for an interval (a,b)⊂R. Then (16) becomes
∫−∞∞∫abd2g(x,y)dx=∫−∞∞[g(x,b)−g(x,a)]dx.
And now (18) becomes
∫abd[∫−∞∞g(x,y)dx]=∫−∞∞g(x,b)dx−∫−∞∞g(x,a)dx.
Hence, when F is a step function, F(y)=∑i=1nciχIi(y)
for some n∈N,
disjoint intervals {Ii}i=1n and real numbers {ci}i=1n,
we have the desired equality of (16) and (18).
But F∈BC is uniformly continuous on R, i.e., for each
ϵ>0 there is δ>0 such that for all 0≤∣x−y∣<δ
we have ∣F(x)−F(y)∣<ϵ, for all x<−1/δ we have
∣F(x)∣<ϵ and for all x>1/δ we have ∣F(x)−F(∞)∣<ϵ. It then follows from the compactness of R that
the step functions are dense in BC. Hence, there is a sequence
of step functions {σN} such that ∥F−σN∥∞→0.
In (16) we have
[TABLE]
The N limit can be brought inside the x integral using dominated
convergence and (ii) since
∣∫−∞∞σN(y)d2g(x,y)∣≤(∥F∥∞+1)Vy∈Rg(x,y)
for large enough N. The N limit can be brought inside the y
integral using dominated convergence since
∣σN(y)∣≤(∥F∥∞+1) for large enough N.
In (18) we have
[TABLE]
The N limit can be brought inside the y integral since
{σN} converges to F uniformly on R
and d[∫−∞∞g(x,y)dx] is a finite signed measure.
■
Corollary 18
If f has compact support we can replace (iii) with:
(iv) for each y∈supp(f) the function x↦g(x,y)
is in L1.