On Inclusion Properties of Two Versions of Orlicz-Morrey Spaces
Al A. Masta, Hendra Gunawan, and Wono Setya-Budhi

TL;DR
This paper investigates the inclusion relations between two versions of Orlicz-Morrey spaces on , providing comparisons and extending results to their weak variants, with key insights from characteristic function norms.
Contribution
It offers a detailed comparison of the inclusion properties of two definitions of Orlicz-Morrey spaces and extends the analysis to weak spaces, clarifying their relationships.
Findings
Inclusion criteria for the two versions are established.
Norms of characteristic functions of balls are crucial for the analysis.
Results are extended to weak Orlicz-Morrey spaces.
Abstract
There are two versions of Orlicz-Morrey spaces (on ), defined by Nakai in 2004 and by Sawano, Sugano, and Tanaka in 2012. In this paper we discuss the inclusion properties of these two spaces and compare the results. Computing the norms of the characteristic functions of balls in is one of the keys to our results. Similar results for weak Orlicz-Morrey spaces of both versions are also obtained.
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 Harmonic Analysis Research · Advanced Banach Space Theory · Holomorphic and Operator Theory
affil0affil0affiliationtext: 1,2,3Analysis and Geometry Group, Faculty of Mathematics and
Natural Sciences, Bandung Institute of Technology,
Jl. Ganesha 10, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
E-mail: 1[email protected], 2[email protected], 3[email protected]
On Inclusion Properties of Two Versions of Orlicz-Morrey Spaces
Al Azhary Masta1111Permanent Address: Department of Mathematics Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudi 229, Bandung 40154, Indonesia
Hendra Gunawan2
Wono Setya-Budhi3
Abstract
There are two versions of Orlicz-Morrey spaces (on ), defined by Nakai in 2004 and by Sawano, Sugano, and Tanaka in 2012. In this paper we discuss the inclusion properties of these two spaces and compare the results. Computing the norms of the characteristic functions of balls in is one of the keys to our results. Similar results for weak Orlicz-Morrey spaces of both versions are also obtained.
**Keywords: Inclusion property, Orlicz-Morrey spaces, weak Orlicz-Morrey spaces.
MSC 2010: Primary 46E30; Secondary 46B25, 42B35.**
1 Introduction
Orlicz-Morrey spaces are generalizations of Orlicz spaces and Morrey spaces (on ). There are two versions of Orlicz-Morrey spaces: one is defined by Nakai [Gala, Nakai1] and another by Sawano, Sugano, and Tanaka [Gala, Sawano]. We shall discuss both of them here. In particular, we are interested in the inclusion properties of these spaces.
A function is called a Young function if is convex, left-continuous, , and . Given two Young functions , we write if there exists a constant such that for all .
Let be the set of all functions such that is nondecreasing but is nonincreasing. For a Young function , we also define to be the set of all functions such that is nondecreasing but for any , is nonincreasing.
For , we write if there exists a constant such that for all . If and , then we write .
Let be a Young function and . The Orlicz-Morrey spaces (of Nakai’s version) is the set of measurable functions such that for every and , the following quantity
[TABLE]
is finite. We use the notation to denote the open ball in centered at with radius , and for its Lebesgue measure. The Orlicz-Morrey spaces is a Banach space with respect to the norm
For , the space is the Orlicz space . Meanwhile, for and where , the space reduces to the Morrey space .
Now, let be a Young function and . Sawano, Sugano, and Tanaka defined the Orlicz-Morrey space to be the set of measurable functions such that
[TABLE]
where \|f\|_{(\Psi,B(a,r))}:=\inf\bigl{\{}{b>0:\frac{1}{|B(a,r)|}\int_{B(a,r)}\Psi\bigl{(}\frac{|f(x)|}{b}\bigr{)}dx\leq 1}\bigr{\}}. Notice here that dominates of the growth .
For the Young function (), the spaces are recognized as the generalized Morrey spaces .
Recently, Gunawan et al. [Gunawan] presented a sufficient and necessary condition for the inclusion relation between generalized Morrey spaces, as in the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let and . Then the following statements are equivalent:
(a)* .*
(b)* .*
(c)* There exists a constant such that for every .*
In the same paper, Gunawan et al. also gave a necessary and sufficient condition for the inclusion relation between generalized weak Morrey spaces.
Meanwhile, the inclusion relation between Orlicz spaces and between weak Orlicz spaces are known (see [Lech, Masta1]). In 2016, Masta et al. [Masta2] also obtained the inclusion properties of Orlicz-Morrey space of Nakai’s version, as in the following theorem.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let be Young functions and such that . Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1)* .*
(2)* .*
(3)* There exists a constant such that*
[TABLE]
for every .
Remark 1.3**.**
Note that the relation is a necessary and sufficient condition for the inclusion relation between Orlicz-Morrey spaces of Nakai’s version. For , Theorem 1.2 reduces to Theorem 3.4(a) in [Lech]. Furthermore, for and , Theorem 1.2 complements Corollary 2.11 in [Alen], which states that is a sufficient condition for inclusion relation between Orlicz spaces. Related results about inclusion properties of Orlicz-Morrey spaces can be found in [Kita].
In this paper, we would like to obtain the inclusion properties of Orlicz-Morrey spaces of Sawano-Sugano-Tanaka’s version, and compare it with the result for Nakai’s version. In addition, we will also prove similar results for weak Orlicz-Morrey spaces of both versions. With our results, we can see what parameters are significance in the inclusion properties for both versions.
To prove the results, we will use the same method as in [Gunawan, Masta1, Masta2], that is by computing the norms of the characteristic functions of balls in . We also employ the properties of the inverse function of , which are presented in the following lemma.
Lemma 1.4**.**
[Masta2, Nakai1, Rao]* Suppose that is a Young function and denotes its inverse, which is given by for every . Then the followings hold:*
(1)* .*
(2)* for .*
(3)* for .*
(4)* If, for some constants , we have , then for .*
Throughout this paper, the letter denotes a constant that may vary in values from line to line. To keep track of some constants, we use subscripts, such as and .
2 Inclusion Properties of Orlicz-Morrey Spaces
As mentioned earlier, the key to our results is knowing the norms of the characteristic balls in . Here is the first one on :
Lemma 2.1**.**
[Gala]* For every and , we have .*
Our first theorem gives equivalent statements for the inclusion relation between Orlicz-Morrey spaces of Sawano-Sugano-Tanaka’s version.
Theorem 2.2**.**
Let be Young functions such that and . Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1)* .*
(2)* .*
(3)* There exists a constant such that*
[TABLE]
for every .
Proof. Let us first prove that (1) implies (2). Let . Recall that means that there exists a constant such that for every . For every and , let A_{(\Psi_{1},B(a,r))}=\bigl{\{}{b>0:\frac{1}{|B(a,r)|}\int_{B(a,r)}\Psi_{1}\bigl{(}\frac{|f(x)|}{C_{1}b}\bigr{)}dx\leq 1}\bigr{\}} and A_{(\Psi_{2},B(a,r))}=\bigl{\{}{b>0:\frac{1}{|B(a,r)|}\int_{B(a,r)}\Psi_{2}\bigl{(}\frac{|f(x)|}{b}\bigr{)}dx\leq 1}\bigr{\}}. Thus, for any , we have
[TABLE]
Hence it follows that , and so we conclude that . Accordingly, we have
[TABLE]
and this holds for every and .
Now there exists such that for every . Combining this with the previous estimate, we obtain
[TABLE]
This proves that .
Next, since is a Banach pair, it follows from [Krein, Lemma 3.3] that (2) and (3) are equivalent. It thus remains to show that (3) implies (1).
Assume that (3) holds. Let and . By Lemma 2.1, we have
[TABLE]
whence . Since and are arbitrary, we get for every , where . ∎
Corollary 2.3**.**
Let be a Young function and . Then the following statements are equivalent:
(1)* .*
(2)* .*
(3)* There exists a constant such that*
[TABLE]
for every .
