Transition Densities and Traces for Invariant Feller Processes on Compact Symmetric Spaces
David Applebaum, Trang Le Ngan

TL;DR
This paper characterizes when invariant measures on compact Gelfand pairs have square-integrable densities and analyzes the transition densities of invariant Feller processes on symmetric spaces, providing Fourier expansions and asymptotic behaviors.
Contribution
It establishes necessary and sufficient conditions for densities of invariant measures and develops a Fourier series expansion for transition densities on symmetric spaces.
Findings
Conditions for square-integrable densities of invariant measures
Fourier series expansion of transition densities using spherical functions
Asymptotic analysis of return densities for subordinated Brownian motion
Abstract
We find necessary and sufficient conditions for a finite -bi-invariant measure on a compact Gelfand pair to have a square-integrable density. For convolution semigroups, this is equivalent to having a continuous density in positive time. When is a compact Riemannian symmetric pair, we study the induced transition density for -invariant Feller processes on the symmetric space . These are obtained as projections of -bi-invariant L\'{e}vy processes on , whose laws form a convolution semigroup. We obtain a Fourier series expansion for the density, in terms of spherical functions, where the spectrum is described by Gangolli's L\'evy-Khintchine formula. The density of returns to any given point on is given by the trace of the transition semigroup, and for subordinated Brownian motion, we can calculate the short time asymptotics of this quantity usingâŠ
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 Algebra and Geometry · Random Matrices and Applications · Geometry and complex manifolds
Transition Densities and Traces for Invariant Feller Processes on Compact Symmetric Spaces
David Applebaum, Trang Le Ngan
School of Mathematics and Statistics,
University of Sheffield,
Hicks Building, Hounsfield Road,
Sheffield, England, S3 7RH
      Â
e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
Abstract
We find necessary and sufficient conditions for a finite âbiâinvariant measure on a compact Gelfand pair to have a squareâintegrable density. For convolution semigroups, this is equivalent to having a continuous density in positive time. When is a compact Riemannian symmetric pair, we study the induced transition density for âinvariant Feller processes on the symmetric space . These are obtained as projections of âbiâinvariant LĂ©vy processes on , whose laws form a convolution semigroup. We obtain a Fourier series expansion for the density, in terms of spherical functions, where the spectrum is described by Gangolliâs LĂ©vyâKhintchine formula. The density of returns to any given point on is given by the trace of the transition semigroup, and for subordinated Brownian motion, we can calculate the short time asymptotics of this quantity using recent work of Bañuelos and Baudoin. In the case of the sphere, there is an interesting connection with the FunkâHecke theorem.
1 Introduction
Let be a (timeâhomogeneous) FellerâMarkov process, which takes values in a locally compact space that is equipped with a positive regular Borel measure on its Borel âalgebra. Key quantities of interest are the transition kernel which is the probability that given that , where and is a Borel set, and the Feller semigroup defined on the space of realâvalued continuous functions on that vanish at infinity by
[TABLE]
There are a number of interesting and fundamental (linked) questions that we can ask:
- (I)
Does a transition density exist for , so that
[TABLE]
and does the function have good regularity properties, such as continuity, differentiability or finite -norm? 2. (II)
Do the operators extend to form a semigroup on . If so, when is it selfâadjoint or traceâclass? 3. (III)
Does there exists a complete set of (normalised) eigenfunctions for (with ) so that for all we can write
[TABLE]
where ? 4. (IV)
When do we have a trace formula:
[TABLE]
Assuming (I) and some imposed regularity, a quite general approach was taken to (II) and (III) in [20] with assumed to be a compact separable metric space. A key role here is played by the requirement that exists and is squareâintegrable. The case where is a compact Riemannian manifold, is the Riemannian volume measure and is Brownian motion has been extensively studied. In this case is the âubiquitousâ heat kernel [23], and (I) to (IV) all have positive answers (see e.g. Chapter 3 of [31] or Chapter VI of [12]).
In [5] (and references therein) positive answers to (1) to (IV) were obtained for a class of central symmetric LĂ©vy processes in compact Lie groups (where is normalised Haar measure), which are obtained by subordinating Brownian motion. Here the key techniques used were harmonic analytic, arising from the representation theory of . The restriction to central (conjugateâinvariant) processes was key as it ensured that the Fourier transform of the measure was a scalar, and these scalars give us the required eigenvalues, through the LĂ©vyâKhintchine formula.
In this paper, we present another class of processes for which (I) to (IV) are valid. The object of interest is a FellerâMarkov process defined on a compact symmetric space , which has âinvariant transition probabilities, where is the identity component of the isometry group of , and is conditioned to start at the point fixed by a closed subgroup of (so . The reference measure is the unique (normalised) âinvariant measure on . It is wellâknown that all such processes arise as the projection to of a LĂ©vy process in whose laws form a âbiâinvariant convolution semigroup of probability measures (see [9, 24, 25]). We cannot assert that this is a special case of the theory developed in [5], as the measures we consider are not, in general, central (see Proposition 4.3); however many of the techniques developed in [5], may be applied here. In particular, we find that the eigenvalues we need are given by Gangolliâs LĂ©vyâKhintchine formula [19, 27], and the eigenvectors are the spherical functions (so we deal with a complex form of (1.1)).
The plan of the paper is as follows. In section 2, we develop some general considerations concerning measures on homogeneous spaces. Some, but not all, of the results presented there are known. The purpose of section 3, is to extend the work of [3] to find necessary and sufficient conditions, in terms of the Fourier transform, for a finite measure associated to a compact Gelfand pair to have a squareâintegrable density. In section 4, we consider convolution semigroups of probability measures, where we present a recent result of Liao [25] which tells us that the measures have a continuous density if and only if they have a squareâintegrable one. So from the work of sections 3 and 4 together, we have necessary and sufficient conditions for a measure within a convolution semigroup, as above, to have a continuous density (in positive time). In section 5 we specialise to compact symmetric spaces, where we develop the Fourier expansion of the transition density, and obtain the required trace formula. It is worth pointing out that we donât require our measures to be symmetric (or equivalently to be selfâadjoint), in contrast to [20] and [5]. We also apply the theory of [7] to study shortâtime asymptotics of the transition density corresponding to subordinated Brownian motion on . Finally in section 6, we present the example of the âsphere in a little more detail, and consider the implications of the FunkâHecke theorem within our context.
Notation. If is a locally compact Hausdorff space, then is its Borel âalgebra, will denote the linear space of continuous functions from to having compact support, is the linear space of positive regular Borel measures on , and is the subspace comprising finite measures. If is a locally compact Hausdorff group, we will denote its neutral element by . We equip the space with the binary operation of convolution , so that if , their convolution is the unique element of such that for all ,
[TABLE]
Then is a monoid, with neutral element given by the measure , where for all A\in{\mathcal{B}}(G),\delta_{e}(A):=\left\{\begin{array}[]{c c}1&\mbox{if}~{}e\in A\\ 0&\mbox{if}~{}e\notin A\end{array}\right.. If , then , where for all , and .
All spaces appearing in this paper comprise complexâvalued functions.
The space of all complexâvalued matrices is denoted by , and the trace of is written tr.
2 Absolute Continuity of Measures on Homogeneous Spaces
Let be a locally compact Hausdorff group, which we equip with a a left Haar measure . We will tend to write within integrals. The modular homomorphism from to the multiplicative group will be denoted . It is uniquely defined by the fact that
[TABLE]
for all .
Let be a closed subgroup of , with fixed Haar measure , and denote the homogeneous space of left cosets of , i.e. . We equip with the usual (Hausdorff) topology which is such that the canonical surjection is both continuous and open. We will write . The group acts on by homeomorphisms via the action
[TABLE]
for all . We will make frequent use of the fact that for all ,
[TABLE]
where for all . If is compact, we will always normalise so that .
Define by
[TABLE]
for each . It is shown that is surjective in [17], pp.61â2.
Let denote the linear subspace of comprising functions that are ârightâinvariant. If is compact, then any gives rise to by the assignment . It is not difficult to see that this induces a linear isomorphism between the two spaces. If is not compact, then may contain no functions of compact support (e.g. consider the case and ).
If then . Moreover for all we have (see e.g. [11], Proposition 3.6.1, pp. 190â1)
[TABLE]
provided .
If we begin with functions defined on , rather than on , then given , there exists a unique such that for all ,
[TABLE]
if and only if for all ,
[TABLE]
(see [30], pp. 157â8 or [34] pp. 42â5).
Some simple consequences of (2.5) are:
If is a nonâtrivial ârightâinvariant measure on , then exists if and only if for all . 2. 2.
If (2.5) holds, then taking therein to be ârightâinvariant, we see that either for all , or for all .
If we take , then it follows from (2.5) and (2.1) that exists and is unique if and only if
[TABLE]
for all . In this case we will write . It is easily seen from (2.4) that is -invariant, in that
[TABLE]
for all , and in fact, if it exists, is (up to multiplication by a nonânegative constant) the unique such measure on . If is compact, then (2.6) holds with both sides of the equation being equal to one.
We could repeat the above discussion, with being replaced by , the space of right cosets of , which is again a locally compact Hausdorff space, with topology such that the natural surjection is open and continuous. The natural action of on is , for , and if (2.6) holds, there is a unique (up to nonânegative scalar multiplication) âinvariant measure on such that for all . This measure is related to right Haar measure on in the same way that is related to left Haar measure. The mapping which takes to for all is easily seen to be a homeomorphism between and , and we then have .
From now on we will always assume that is compact. For , let . Then for all . Let denote the subset of comprising measures that are ârightâinvariant. Any measure , is determined (through the Riesz representation theorem) by its action on the space since for all ,
[TABLE]
If (2.5) is satisfied, and , then it follows from (2.3), (2.4) and (2.7) that . In particular, , as can be seen from (2.1) and the fact that for all (see also Proposition 1.10 (a) in [25]), so .
The mapping is an isometric isomorphism between and , and is an isometric isomorphism between with for . For each define for . It is wellâknown (and easy to deduce) that is an isometric isomorphism of , and if , then the mapping is continuous from to (see e.g. Proposition 1.2.1 in [6]). For each , define . Then is an isometric isomorphism. Moreover we have
Proposition 2.1**.**
If , for each the mapping is continuous from to .
Proof.
Since for all , and is an isometry, its sufficient to prove continuity at . First observe that by (2.2)
[TABLE]
and the result follows by continuity of the map . â
Now suppose that is absolutely continuous with respect to and write the RadonâNikodym derivative . In the sequel we will frequently identify with a particular member of the equivalence class that it defines in , and in common with standard probabilistic usage, we may refer to any version of as the density of (with respect to ).
Proposition 2.2**.**
If is ârightâinvariant, then is ârightâinvariant almost everywhere.
Proof.
For all , using (2.1), we have
[TABLE]
and the result follows. â
Proposition 2.3**.**
The measure is absolutely continuous with respect to Haar measure on , having Radon Nikodym if and only if is absolutely continuous with respect to the âinvariant measure on , having Radon-Nikodym derivative . Furthermore is continuous/ for , if and only if is.
Proof.
Firstly let be absolutely continuous as stated. Then its RadonâNikodym derivative is âright-invariant by Proposition 2.2, and so for some . Then for all ,
[TABLE]
and the result follows.
Conversely, if is absolutely continuous with RadonâNikodym derivative , then
[TABLE]
and the result again follows since is determined by its action on . The result on continuity follows from the fact that the mapping is a bijection between and . The integrability statement follows similarly. â
We have the following partial generalisations of a known result on locally compact groups due to RaikovâWilliamson (see [33] and [6], Theorem 4.4.1 p.98).
Proposition 2.4**.**
If is absolutely continuous with respect to then for all as .
Proof.
Writing , we have
[TABLE]
by Proposition 2.1. â
We conjecture that the converse of Proposition 2.4 also holds, but the proof of the corresponding result on a group requires both the left and right action of on itself, and we do not have analogues of both tools available to us.
The space is the set of all double cosets . Note that each such double coset is an orbit of in , i.e. if then
[TABLE]
The set is a locally compact Hausdorff space when equipped with the topology which makes the canonical surjection from to continuous and open. If is the normaliser of in , then there is an action of on so that , for all . It is shown in Corollary 3.2 of [28] that there is an invariant measure on in that for all ,
[TABLE]
Furthermore, (see Theorem 2.1 in [28]), for all ,
[TABLE]
3 SquareâIntegrability of Densities on Compact Gelfand Pairs
From now on, we will assume that forms a compact Gelfand pair, so that is a compact group, is a closed subgroup, and the Banach algebra (with respect to convolution) is commutative (see e.g. [35] for background on such structures, and for material that now follows). Haar measure will be normalised henceforth, so that . We denote by the unitary dual of , i.e. the set of all equivalence classes of irreducible representations of , with respect to unitary conjugation. If , its representation space is finiteâdimensional, and we will write dim. The celebrated PeterâWeyl theorem tells us that is a complete orthonormal basis for .
Let and be the subspaces of comprising functions that are almostâeverywhere âleftâinvariant, ârightâinvariant, and âbiâinvariant (respectively). The orthogonal projections from onto these spaces will be denoted, respectively and , so that for all ,
[TABLE]
We can and will use natural isomorphisms between these spaces to identify with with and with . This last space will often just be written as , in line with standard usage.
Now recall that a representation of is said to be spherical if there exists a nonâzero spherical vector , i.e. for all . If this is the case, then is unique up to scalar multiplication, and we define . We find it convenient to define if is not spherical. In either case, let be the orthogonal projection from to . When is spherical, we will, for convenience, assume that has norm one, and we choose an orthonormal basis in , with . Let be the subset of comprising spherical representations.
Now let , where . Then , and easy algebra yields
[TABLE]
We have the following consequences of the PeterâWeyl theorem:
Proposition 3.1**.**
* is a complete orthonormal basis for .* 2. 2.
* is a complete orthonormal basis for .* 3. 3.
* is a complete orthonormal basis for .*
Proof.
This follows easily from the PeterâWeyl theorem and (3.1). Note that at least (3) is wellâknown (see e.g. [35] Proposition 9.10.4, p.205 and [21], Theorem 3.5, pp.533â4.) â
In relation to Proposition 3.1(3), observe that the prescription
[TABLE]
for defines a (positiveâdefinite) spherical function on , i.e. a nonâtrivial continuous function from to so that for all ,
[TABLE]
and all spherical functions on arise in this way (see [21] pp.414â7 or [35] pp.204â5). Since the conjugate representation to is both irreducible and spherical whenever is, we can rewrite the result stated in the more familiar form that is a complete orthonormal basis for .
If , its Fourier transform is the matrixâvalued function
[TABLE]
where . Properties of the Fourier transform are developed in section 4.2 of [6]. In particular, uniquely determines the measure .
If is -biâinvariant, its spherical transform is the complex-valued mapping:
[TABLE]
where is a spherical function on , and this also uniquely determines (see e.g. [22]).
In [3] (see also Theorem 4.5.1 in [6]), it is shown that has a squareâintegrable density if and only if
[TABLE]
where denotes the matrix HilbertâSchmidt norm, so that . Furthermore, if (3.3) holds, then the density has the âFourier expansion:
[TABLE]
We will need the following useful characterisations of âinvariant measures by means of their Fourier transforms, in relation to which itâs worth noting that the mapping is a bijection between âleftâinvariant and ârightâinvariant measures on .
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let .
The following are equivalent:
- (a)
The measure is âleftâinvariant, 2. (b)
\widehat{\mu}(\pi)E^{K}_{\pi}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{c c}\widehat{\mu}(\pi)&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\in\widehat{G}_{s}\\ 0&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\notin\widehat{G}_{s},\end{array}\right.** 3. (c)
* for all , or and .* 2. 2.
- (a)
The measure is ârightâinvariant, 2. (b)
E^{K}_{\pi}\widehat{\mu}(\pi)=\left\{\begin{array}[]{c c}\widehat{\mu}(\pi)&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\in\widehat{G}_{s}\\ 0&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\notin\widehat{G}_{s},\end{array}\right.** 3. (c)
* for all , or and .* 3. 3.
- (a)
The measure is âbiâinvariant, 2. (b)
E^{K}_{\pi}\widehat{\mu}(\pi)E^{K}_{\pi}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{c c}\widehat{\mu}(\pi)&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\in\widehat{G}_{s}\\ 0&~{}\mbox{for all}~{}\pi\notin\widehat{G}_{s},\end{array}\right.** 3. (c)
* for all , or and .*
Proof.
We just prove (2) as (1) is similar and (3) follows from these two assertions. The equivalence of (b) and (c) is straightforward linear algebra and is left to the reader. To show that (a) implies (b), let and . If is ârightâinvariant, then
[TABLE]
and the result follows.
To show that (c) implies (a), if for all or and , then . So by Proposition 3.1(2), unless the function is ârightâinvariant. Hence, by the PeterâWeyl theorem for continuous functions (see e.g. Theorem 2.2.4 in [6], p.33), is determined by its integrals against functions in , and so it is ârightâinvariant. â
When we combine the main result of [3] (see also Theorem 4.5.1 in [6]) with that of Proposition 3.2 we get
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let .
If is âleftâinvariant, then it has an âdensity if and only if
[TABLE] 2. 2.
If is ârightâinvariant, then it has an âdensity if and only if
[TABLE] 3. 3.
If is âbiâinvariant, then it has an âdensity if and only if
[TABLE]
Proof.
We just prove (1) as the others are similar. If has an âdensity, then the result follows from (3.3) and Proposition 3.2(1). For the converse direction, note that by âleftâinvariance of and Proposition 3.2(1), we have
[TABLE]
and then the result again follows by (3.3). â
In all three cases, the Fourier expansion of the density is given by (3.4). Any (left, right or bi)ââinvariance of the measure is inherited by the density (almost everywhere). This is a consequence of Proposition 2.2 and its generalisation to the âleftâinvariant case; it can also be deduced by uniqueness of Fourier transforms, using Proposition 3.2. If is âbiâinvariant, it is easy to check that (in the âsense), for all ,
[TABLE]
Remarks.
The advantage of these results over (3.3) is the reduction in summing over the whole of to summing over the subset , and then summing over a smaller number of matrix elements; in (3) there is the additional advantage of having a single matrix element. 2. 2.
The results of this section generalise beyond the category of Gelfand pairs, to arbitrary , where is compact and is closed; but the setâup presented here is convenient for the sequel.
4 âInvariant Densities and Kernels for Convolution Semigroups
Let be a convolution semigroup of probability measures on the compact group . By this we mean that
- âą
for all ,
- âą
.
It then follows that is Haar measure on a compact subgroup of (see Theorem 4.6.1 in [6], p.104). We say that the convolution semigroup is standard if . In this case, (see e.g. Proposition 5.1.2 in [6] and the discussion that follows) for each is a strongly continuous oneâparameter contraction semigroup on . Furthermore is a contraction semigroup of linear operators on defined for each by
[TABLE]
and we have for each .
It is shown in [26] that a convolution semigroup is âleftâinvariant if and only if it is ârightâinvariant if and only if it is âbiâinvariant. Then , as defined above111It also acts as contractions on , and is a semigroup in the sense that for all , but in this case. is a contraction semigroup on , and for each is a strongly continuous oneâparameter contraction semigroup of complex numbers.
For each , we have and we note that for all ,
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.1**.**
Let .
If has a squareâintegrable or continuous density then so does . 2. 2.
If is a connected Lie group having Lie algebra and has a âdensity for , then so does .
In all cases, if is the density of , then that of is .
Proof.
Both follow easily since is an orthogonal projection from to which preserves continuity. 2. 2.
For all the mapping is well defined and continuous, indeed standard arguments yield
[TABLE]
and the result follows by a theorem of Sugiura [32] pp. 42â3 (see also Theorem 1.3.5 on p.20 of [6]).
â
Now suppose that is a standard convolution semigroup, and consider the associated set of âbiâinvariant probability measures ).
Proposition 4.2**.**
* is a âbiâinvariant convolution semigroup on .*
Proof.
For all , by (4.1),
[TABLE]
Here we have used the biâinvariance of Haar measure on to first make a change of variable and then . The fact that follows from
[TABLE]
The weak continuity follows easily from (4.1).
â
Many explicit examples of convolution semigroups that we consider in the next section fall under the aegis of Theorem 4.1 and Proposition 4.2.
Recall that is said to be central (or conjugateâinvariant) if for all , and we let be the set of all finite central measures on . It is shown in Theorem 4.2.2 of [6] that if and only if for each there exists so that . It then follows that for all . We will see important examples of central measures in the next section. If is abelian, then all measures on are central, and all irreducible representations of are oneâdimensional. The next proposition presents some evidence that if is compact and nonâabelian and is nonâtrivial, then is not central, in general.222In private eâmail communication with the authors, Ming Liao has produced an example of a nonâtrivial measure on a compact group that is both central and âbiâinvariant.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let , so that for all , and assume that there exists with dim. If is âbiâinvariant, then .
Proof.
By Proposition 3.2(3),
[TABLE]
from which we deduce that . Assume ; since the range of is oneâdimensional, we can find a non-zero vector in and this yields the desired contradiction. â
We return to the study of convolution semigroups . We are interested in the case where has a continuous density for all . The following theorem is essentially due to Liao [25], Theorem 4.8.
Theorem 4.4**.**
Let be a convolution semigroup of probability measures on the compact group . The following are equivalent:
* has an âdensity for all ,* 2. 2.
* has a continuous density for all ,* 3. 3.
The series converges absolutely and uniformly in for all .
Proof.
(2) implies (1) is obvious as for compact. (3) implies (2) since if, for each , we define
[TABLE]
then is the uniform limit of a sequence of continuous functions on and so is continuous. The fact that is the RadonâNikodym derivative of follows by the argument of Theorem 4.5.1 in [6]. To show that (1) implies (3), we present the argument given in the proof of [25], Theorem 4.8. First choose and define as above. By the Plancherel theorem and (3.3), and . Then given any , there exists a finite set so that
[TABLE]
Using the matrix inequality for , and the CauchyâSchwarz inequality, we have for all for all ,
[TABLE]
â
For the remainder of this paper, we assume that is a compact (globally Riemannian) symmetric space, so that is a compact Lie group with Lie algebra having dimension . Let be a (left) LĂ©vy process on so that has stationary and independent increments and is stochastically continuous (see e.g. [24] for relevant background). For each , let denote the law of , so that for all , then is a convolution semigroup of probability measures on . We say that the process is âbiâinvariant, if is âbiâinvariant for all (and so ). For âbiâinvariant , define by for all . Then as is shown in [25] (see also Theorem 3.2 in [9]), is a -invariant Feller process on , with (a.s.)333The most general âinvariant Feller process in is obtained by taking to be a âconjugateâinvariant LĂ©vy process, as shown in Theorems 1.17 and 3.10 of [25]; see also Theorem 2.2 in [24]. This larger class of processes is not so convenient for the spectral theoretic considerations discussed in section 5. The âinvariance is manifest as follows: for each , let be the usual transition probability, then for all :
[TABLE]
If is the transition semigroup of the process , then for all ,
[TABLE]
and as is easily verified (see also Proposition 1.16 of [25])
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.5**.**
Let be a âbiâinvariant LĂ©vy process on , and be the projected Feller process on . If for all has a continuous density , then has a continuous transition density , and for all we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Using (4.2) and (2.3), for all
[TABLE]
where is the unique function in so that . So the required transition density exists and for all , we have by (2.2),
[TABLE]
â
5 Eigenfunction Expansions for the Transition Kernel
Let the processes and be as in the previous section, so that is a âbiâinvariant convolution semigroup on . We continue to assume that has a continuous density for all . We equip with an Adâinvariant Riemannian metric which is compatible with the Riemannian structure on , and let be the associated LaplaceâBeltrami operator on . Then will denote the Casimir spectrum for so that (with if and only if is trivial) and for all . Assume that the symmetric space is irreducible, in that the action of Ad on is irreducible, where , and is the Lie algebra of . A sufficient condition for this to hold is that is semisimple (see Proposition 5.12 in [25]).
Then Gangolliâs LĂ©vy Khinchine formula (see e.g. [19], [2], [27]) tells us that for all
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
with and a âbiâinvariant LĂ©vy measure on . It follows easily from Proposition 4.3 that if is nonâabelian, then cannot be central for .
Theorem 5.1**.**
Suppose that is a âbiâinvariant convolution semigroup.
For all ,
[TABLE] 2. 2.
If has a continuous density for all , then is trace-class in , and its trace is given by
[TABLE]
Proof.
We argue as in the proof of Theorem 5.3 in [5]. First observe that since for each and , then . Hence
[TABLE]
and the result follows by Proposition 3.2 (3) and (5.1). 2. 2.
If has a continuous density, is traceâclass by Theorem 5.4.4 in [6]. From (1), we have
[TABLE]
but for each , we have , where is the conjugate representation, and the result follows when we observe that .
â
In the last theorem, we calculated the spectrum of in the space . In the next result, we restrict to the closed subspace .
Theorem 5.2**.**
Suppose that is a âbiâinvariant convolution semigroup.
For all ,
[TABLE] 2. 2.
If has a continuous density for all , then for all ,
- (a)
[TABLE] 2. (b)
[TABLE]
Proof.
This can be deduced from Theorem 5.1(1), but alternatively, using Fubiniâs theorem and (5.1), we have for all ,
[TABLE] 2. 2.
- (a)
By Fourier expansion in ,
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
The result then follows from Theorem 4.5. 2. (b)
As is ârightâinvariant for all , we may use Proposition 3.1(2) to write,
[TABLE]
but for each ,
[TABLE]
since by âbiâinvariance of for all , and the result follows easily from here.
â
It is interesting to compare Theorem 5.2 (2) (a) with results obtained by Bochner for spheres (see [10] p.1146). In the case of the heat kernel (so in (5.2)), a formula of this type on general compact homogeneous spaces is presented in [8].
We now easily deduce the following trace formula:
Corollary 5.3**.**
If is âbiâinvariant and has a squareâintegrable density for all , then
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows on putting in Theorem 5.2 (2). â
Notes
It is interesting to compare the results obtained herein with those in section 5 of [5]. We did not need to assume that the convolution semigroup is central in order to obtain a âscalarâ LĂ©vy-Khintchine formula. That follows from âbiâinvariance. 2. 2.
The formulae for the trace in the two papers are different, in that a factor of in the sum has reduced to . This is because (as seen in (5.3)), the eigenspace for each eigenvalue is spanned by the top row of the representation matrix, rather than the entire set of matrix entries. 3. 3.
It is also of interest to calculate the trace Tr of the semigroup on the space . It follows from Theorem 5.2 (1) (see also section 3 of [4]), that for each ,
[TABLE]
A standard convolution semigroup is said to be central if is central for all , and it is symmetric if is a symmetric measure, i.e. for all . Clearly if is symmetric, then so is . Moreover, it follows from Theorem 2.2 in [4] (or Theorem 5.4.1 in [6]) that is selfâadjoint in , and the LĂ©vy measure appearing in (5.1) is symmetric. If is symmetric, then for all , and the trace formula of Corollary 5.3 is a special case of Mercerâs theorem (see e.g. [13], pp.156â7).
Wellâknown examples of central symmetric convolution semigroups having densities for , are the Gaussian (heat) semigroup where for all , for some , and the -stable type semigroup where for (see Proposition 5.8.1 in [6], pp.157â8). A rather wide class of examples that fit into the context of this section, are obtained by imposing in (5.1). Then for each is the convolution of a Gaussian measure (as described above) with the law of a pure jump LĂ©vy process, and has a density by Corollary 4.5.1 in [6], p.103 (see also Theorem 3 in [27]). In each of the above cases, the measure also has a density for by Theorem 4.1.
If is Brownian motion on , then its laws give the flow of heat kernel measures, and these are central and symmetric, as discussed. In this case are the laws of âbiâinvariant (spherical) Brownian motion on , . For , these measures are symmetric, but not central when is nonâabelian. It is interesting to look at these processes from the point of view of stochastic differential equations (sdes). Let be an orthonormal basis for (with respect to the given Ad-invariant inner product), such that and . Let be a standard Brownian motion in . Then is the unique solution to the sde
[TABLE]
while is the unique solution to
[TABLE]
for , where is uniformly distributed on and denotes the Stratonovitch differential. If is the group Laplacian, then for the heat kernel , which is the density of , is the fundamental solution of the pde . The spherical heat kernel , which is the density of , is the fundamental solution of , where the âhorizontal Laplacianâ . For further details and discussion, see [2] and section 3.4 of [25].
We close this section by giving a brief account of subordination and short time asymptotics. For background on subordination in compact Lie groups, we refer the reader to section 5.7 of [6], and to [1]. Let be a subordinator having law for , that is independent of the Lévy process . Then for all , where is a Bernstein function such that , so that for all ,
[TABLE]
with and a Lévy measure on , i.e. .
We subordinate to form a new LĂ©vy process , having law for each . It is clear that if is âbiâinvariant, then so is , and we make this assumption henceforth. Then for all
[TABLE]
The subordinated semigroup , which is the transition semigroup of the process , is defined as
[TABLE]
for all , and by (5.3) and (5.5) we deduce that for all ,
[TABLE]
If has a density for all , then has a density given by , for each . From now on, let be âbiâinvariant Brownian motion on (denoted above), so that is the heat kernel on :
[TABLE]
for . Then as , we have the well-known asymptotic behaviour (see e.g. [16]):
[TABLE]
Theorem 5.4**.**
If or then is continuous for all .
Proof.
We will show that, under the stated condition, is traceâclass for all . Then exists and is squareâintegrable by Theorem 5.4.4 in [6]. It follows that is continuous by Theorem 4.4. Using (5.6) and (5.4) and the fact that for all , we find that for some ,
[TABLE]
If , we have
[TABLE]
since the right hand side is the trace of a heat kernel semigroup (with variance ) which we know to be finite. The other case is similar.
â
We assume from now on that is continuous for all .
We obtain a subordinated âinvariant Feller process on , where for all . Then inherits a transition density from which is given by
[TABLE]
for . By Theorem 4.5, we have , and so inherits joint continuity from the assumed continuity of .
By Theorem 5.2, we have the Fourier expansion:
[TABLE]
for all .
If we assume that the Bernstein function has an increasing inverse , and that is regularly varying at infinity with index , then the result of [7] yields, as ,
[TABLE]
In particular, if we take , so that for , then
[TABLE]
For a subâclass of subordinators, which includes many important examples, a more explicit asymptotic (series) expansion, which generalises that of the heat kernel, can be found in [14].
6 Invariant Feller Processes on the Sphere
Let be the âdimensional unit sphere embedded in (where ), so that
[TABLE]
Then is a compact symmetric space with and . As is conventional, we take the point to be the ânorth poleâ , where is the natural basis in . The introductory material that follows is mainly based on [15], Chapter 9. The required Adâinvariant metric on is obtained by equipping its Lie algebra with the negation of its Killing form to induce the inner product
[TABLE]
for each .
The double cosets are the orbits of in , and these are themselves spheres of dimension . These âparallelsâ may be labelled by the co-latitude . To make this more precise, observe that the mapping is a diffeomorphism, where for each ,
[TABLE]
From this we deduce that a continuous mapping is âbiâinvariant, if and only if it is zonal, i.e. for all , depends only on , and so we may write for all , where is continuous. For such zonal functions, we have the integral formula:
[TABLE]
so in (2.8), we have and .
The irreducible representation of are all spherical, and are indexed by . They act on the spaces of spherical harmonics that have dimension for , where:
[TABLE]
For all , there is a unique spherical function in which is normalised and âinvariant. These functions are given in terms of by
[TABLE]
If , then is a Legendre polynomial. More generally, for , the âs are related to the ultraspherical (Gegenbauer) polynomials (where ) as follows:
[TABLE]
for all . Finally we have the generating function identity:
[TABLE]
for (see [29], pp. 44â50 for details).
The LaplaceâBeltrami operator diagonalises on , and for each , we have
[TABLE]
so the Casimir spectrum is given by . The Gangolli LĂ©vyâKhintchine formula (5.2) then takes the form
[TABLE]
where and (see Theorem 3 in [10], [22], and [18], Theorem 5.1 for the case within a more general context).
Now let be a âinvariant Markov process on having a continuous transition density. Hence for each , we may write the transition semigroup
[TABLE]
Then as shown in [15] pp.204â5 for more general integral operators having this form, the âinvariance of the kernel determines the existence of a continuous (nonânegative) real-valued function on so that
[TABLE]
for all , where denotes the usual scalar product in . The ChapmanâKolmogorov equations take the form
[TABLE]
for each .
From the results of the previous section, we know that for each is an eigenspace for the operator , and that the eigenvalue has multiplicity . But by the FunkâHecke theorem (see Theorem 9.5.3 in [15] p.205â6), we have for all ,
[TABLE]
It would be interesting to determine the class of all such functions that arise in this way.
Acknowledgement
We thank Ming Liao for making [25] available to us at an early stage, for helpful conversations, and invaluable comments on an early draft of the paper.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S.Albeverio, M.Gordina, Lévy processes and their subordination in matrix Lie groups, Bull. Sci. Math. 131 738-760 (2007)
- 2[2] D.Applebaum, Compound Poisson processes and LĂ©vy processes in groups and symmetric spaces, J.Theor. Prob. 13 , 383â425 (2000)
- 3[3] D.Applebaum, Probability measures on compact groups which have square-integrable densities, Bull. Lond. Math. Sci. 40 1038â44 (2008), Corrigendum 42 948 (2010)
- 4[4] D.Applebaum, Some L 2 superscript đż 2 L^{2} properties of semigroups of measures on Lie groups, Semigroup Forum 79 , 217â28 (2009)
- 5[5] D.Applebaum, Infinitely divisible central probability measures on compact Lie groups - regularity, semigroups and transition kernels, Annals of Prob. 39 , 2474â96 (2011)
- 6[6] D.Applebaum, Probability on Compact Lie Groups , Springer International Publishing (2014)
- 7[7] R.Bañuelos, F.Baudoin, Trace and heat kernel asymptotics for subordinate semigroups on manifolds, ar Xiv:1308.4944 v 1 (2013)
- 8[8] A.âI. Benabdullah, Noyau de diffusion sur les espaces homogĂšne compacts, Bull. Soc. Math. France 101 , 265â283 (1973)
