$L^p$-norm estimate of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle
Tomasz Beberok

TL;DR
This paper provides an estimate of the $L^p$-norm of the Bergman projection specifically on the Hartogs triangle, contributing to the understanding of projection behavior on complex domains.
Contribution
It offers a new $L^p$-norm estimate for the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle, a domain with complex geometric structure.
Findings
Derived explicit $L^p$-norm bounds for the Bergman projection.
Extended understanding of projection behavior on non-smooth domains.
Potential applications to complex analysis and PDEs.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to give an estimate of the -norm of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle.
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
TopicsHolomorphic and Operator Theory · Algebraic and Geometric Analysis · Advanced Harmonic Analysis Research
-norm estimate for the Bergman projection on Hartogs triangle
Tomasz Beberok
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University,
Lojasiewicza 6, 30-048 Krakow, Poland
**-norm estimate of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle **
Tomasz Beberok
Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to give an estimate of the -norm of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle.
Keywords: Bergman projection; Hartogs triangle; norm estimates; AMS Subject Classifications: primary 32A36, 47G10, secondary 32W05, 32A25
1 Introduction
In this note we show an estimate of the -norm of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle, the pseudoconvex domain in defined as
[TABLE]
for . The Hartogs triangle has remarkable geometric and function-theoretic properties, and is a classical source of counterexamples in complex analysis. The boundary of the domain has a serious singularity at the point 0, where cannot even be represented as a graph of a continuous function. The closure does not have a Stein neighborhood basis. Instead, it has a nontrivial Nebenhülle. The -problem on is not globally regular (see [2]).
Let denote the unit disc in , and the normalized Lebesgue volume measure on , while is the normalized surface measure on its boundary . Let denote the Lebesgue volume measure on . The space consists of all holomorphic functions on , for which
[TABLE]
where . The orthogonal projection operator is the Bergman projection associated with the domain . It follows from the Riesz representation theorem that the Bergman projection is an integral operator with the kernel on , i.e. for all (see [8], section 1 for more on this topic). It is well known that (see [5])
[TABLE]
The Bergman projection is a central object in the study of analytic function spaces. It naturally relates to fundamental questions such as duality and harmonic conjugates, and it is also a building block for Toeplitz operators. Understanding its behaviour and estimating its size is therefore of vital importance on several occasions. There are several articles on Bergman projections. We refer the reader to the following articles and the references therein [3, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17] for details of this interesting topic. In [1], Chakrabarti and Zeytuncu proved that the Bergman projection is a bounded operator from to if and only if . For the interested reader, we recommend [6] for more general result. A natural and interesting question is to determine the exact value of the -operator norm of this operator. This turns out to be a difficult task to accomplish, except for the trivial case when .
2 Preliminaries
2.1 The hypergeometric function
If the real part of the complex number is positive (), then the integral
[TABLE]
converges absolutely, and is known as the Euler integral of the second kind. The recurrence relation
[TABLE]
can be used to uniquely extend the integral formulation for to a meromorphic function defined for all complex numbers , except integers less than or equal to zero. Other important functional equations for the gamma function are Euler’s reflection formula
[TABLE]
and the duplication formula
[TABLE]
discovered by Legendre (see [7], Chapter I for more on this topic). Let , that is, , for . The notation is called the Pochhammer symbol. The classical Euler-Gauss hypergeometric function is defined by
[TABLE]
The series converges when and diverges when . For the readers’s convenience, we list the properties of the function that will be important for this paper
[TABLE]
We refer to [7], Chapter II for more properties of this function.
2.2 Essential lemmas
Lemma 2.1
For , we have (see [12])
[TABLE]
It follows from the above lemma and the formula that
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.2
Let and . We have (see [12])
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.3
Let . For , we have
[TABLE]
**Proof. ** Fix and denote
[TABLE]
Then the equals
[TABLE]
where , and
[TABLE]
Now we focus on the integral in brackets. Making the substitution we have
[TABLE]
For fixed , by Lemma 2.2, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
For , denote
[TABLE]
Introducing polar coordinate in variable we have
[TABLE]
Next, by Lemma 2.1
[TABLE]
Hence, by (6) we obtain
[TABLE]
Finally, by (5)
[TABLE]
If , then is the increasing function of (), since its Taylor coefficients are all positive. Therefore, by (4)
[TABLE]
Using the duplication formula (3), we get
[TABLE]
In the case when we consider the function
[TABLE]
Applying differentiation formula of the hypergeometric function (7), we have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Since and for , we obtain that the function is an increasing function on an interval . Therefore the conclusion about a constant is the same as in the case when which completes the proof.
Lemma 2.4
[12]** Let and . The identity
[TABLE]
holds for any .
Lemma 2.5
[12]** Let and
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Then we have
[TABLE]
3 Main result
Our main result reads as follows.
Theorem 3.1** (Main Theorem)**
For , we have
[TABLE]
where is the conjugate exponent of .
**Proof. ** First we prove the upper estimate in (9). To do so, we use the well known Schur’s test (see, for instance, [18] Theorem 3.6).
Lemma 3.1
Suppose that is a -finite measure space and is a nonnegative measurable function on and the associated integral operator
[TABLE]
Let and . If there exist a positive constant and a positive measurable function on such that
[TABLE]
for almost every in and
[TABLE]
for almost every in , then is bounded on with .
We only need to consider the case when , and the case when then follows from the duality. If we put
[TABLE]
where is the conjugate exponent of , it is clear that
[TABLE]
for almost every and , respectively. From Lemma 2.3
[TABLE]
Hence, an application of Schur’s test gives the desired upper estimate. To prove the lower estimate, we define, for
[TABLE]
We show that
[TABLE]
By the definition we have
[TABLE]
Making the substitution , we have
[TABLE]
Now (10) follows from the well known Forelli-Rudin estimate (see [16], Proposition 1.4.10).
A similar calculations show that
[TABLE]
Using twice Lemma 2.4, we get
[TABLE]
It is easy to check that
[TABLE]
where . Hence
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
It is obvious that
[TABLE]
The following lemma completes the proof of the main result
Lemma 3.2
Define as above. Then for
[TABLE]
But to avoid disrupting the flow of the paper with several pages of computations, we postpone its proof to the next section.
4 Proof of Lemma 3.2
It is enough to show that each term of divided by goes to zero as . We start with
[TABLE]
Making the substitution , we have
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.5 yields that there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
Since is finite (when ) and we can write
[TABLE]
for some constant . Therefore by the Forelli-Rudin estimate
[TABLE]
Hence, by (10)
[TABLE]
The limit
[TABLE]
can be obtained by the similar method and we omit the details.
Let us now consider
[TABLE]
As before we make a substitution
[TABLE]
From the Forelli-Rudin estimate there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
Since is finite (when ) and
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Therefore, by (10)
[TABLE]
A similar calculation reveals that
[TABLE]
for some constant . Since
[TABLE]
we conclude that
[TABLE]
Next we investigate
[TABLE]
After a change of variables
[TABLE]
Hence, (using Lemma 2.5)
[TABLE]
for some constants . Since the function (as a function of ) is bounded on and is finite, it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
Apply Lemma 2.5 again, we have
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
This is what we wanted to establish. A similar calculations show that
[TABLE]
That completes the proof.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Chakrabarti, D., Zeytuncu Y.E.: L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 {L}^{p} mapping properties of the Bergman projection on the Hartogs triangle. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 144 (4), 1643–1653 (2016)
- 2[2] Chaumat, J., Chollet, A.M.: Régularité höldérienne de l’opérateur ∂ ¯ ¯ \overline{\partial} sur le triangle de Hartogs. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble). 41 (4), 867–882 (1991)
- 3[3] Chen, L.: The L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 {L}^{p} boundedness of the Bergman projection for a class of bounded Hartogs domains. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 448 (1), 598–610 (2017)
- 4[4] Dostanić, M.R.: Two sided norm estimate of the Bergman projection on Lp spaces, Czechoslovak Math. J. 58 (133(2)), 569–575 (2008)
- 5[5] Edholm, L.D.: Bergman theory of certain generalized Hartogs triangles, Pacific J. Math. 284 (2), 327–-342 (2016)
- 6[6] Edholm, L.D., Mc Neal, J.D.: The Bergman projection on fat Hartogs triangles: L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} boundedness. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 144 (5), 2185–2196 (2016)
- 7[7] Erdélyi, A., Magnus, W., Oberhettinger, F., Tricomi F.G.: Higher Transcendental Functions, vol. I, Mc Graw-Hill, New York (1973)
- 8[8] Krantz, S.G.: Geometric analysis of the Bergman Kernel and Metric. Springer, New York (2013)
