Approximation numbers of composition operators on the Hardy space of the infinite polydisk
Daniel Li (LML), Herv\'e Queff\'elec (LPP), L Rodr\'iguez-Piazza

TL;DR
This paper investigates the approximation numbers of composition operators acting on the Hardy space of the infinite polydisk, focusing on their behavior within the part of the space.
Contribution
It provides new insights into the approximation numbers of composition operators on Hardy spaces of the infinite polydisk, a less-explored area in functional analysis.
Findings
Characterization of approximation numbers for specific composition operators
Analysis of the decay rates of approximation numbers in this setting
New bounds or estimates for these approximation numbers
Abstract
We study the composition operators of the Hardy space on D {\ell} 1 , the {\ell} 1 part of the infinite polydisk, and the behavior of their approximation numbers.
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.
Approximation numbers of composition operators on the Hardy space of the infinite polydisk
Daniel Li, Hervé Queffélec, L. Rodríguez-Piazza
Abstract. We study the composition operators of the Hardy space on , the part of the infinite polydisk, and the behavior of their approximation numbers.
1 Introduction
Recently, in [2], we investigated approximation numbers , of composition operators , on the Hardy or Bergman spaces , over a bounded symmetric domain . Assuming that has non-empty interior, one of the main results of this study was the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1** ([2]).**
Let be compact. Then:
* we always have where are positive constants;*
* if is a product of balls and if for some , then:*
[TABLE]
As a result, the minimal decay of approximation numbers is slower and slower as the dimension increases, which might lead one to think that, in infinite-dimension, no compact composition operators can exist, since their approximation numbers will not tend to [math]. After all, this is the case for the Hardy space of a half-plane, which supports no compact composition operator ([12], Theorem 3.1; in [9], it is moreover proved that as soon as is bounded; see also [15] for a necessary and sufficient condition for has compact composition operators, where is a domain of ). We will see that this is not quite the case here, even though the decay will be severely limited. In particular, we will never have a decay of the form for some .
2 Framework and reminders
2.1 Hardy spaces on
Let be the unit circle of the set of complex numbers. We consider and equip it with its Haar measure . This is a compact Abelian group with dual , the set of eventually zero sequences of integers. We denote the Hilbert subspace of formed by the functions whose Fourier spectrum is contained in :
[TABLE]
The set is called the narrow cone of Helson, and we also denote . Any element of that subspace can be formally written as:
[TABLE]
Here, is the canonical basis of formed by characters, and accordingly is the canonical basis of .
Now we consider .
Any defines an analytic function on the infinite-dimensional Reinhardt domain by the formula:
[TABLE]
where the series is absolutely convergent for each , as the pointwise product of two square-summable sequences. Indeed, using an Euler type formula, we get for :
[TABLE]
and hence, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality:
[TABLE]
If and , we have set, as usual, .
This shows that can be identified with , the Hardy-Hilbert space of analytic functions on with
[TABLE]
This setting is customary in connection with Dirichlet series (see [7]).
In this paper, for a technical reason appearing below in the proof of Proposition 2.5, we will consider, instead of , the sub-domain:
[TABLE]
i.e. the open subset of formed by the sequences:
[TABLE]
and the restrictions to of the functions . We denote the space of such restrictions.
Hence if and only if:
[TABLE]
and .
We now identify the space with the space .
We more generally define Hardy spaces , for , in the usual way:
[TABLE]
where is analytic in and with:
[TABLE]
We have . Moreover, contractively embeds into for .
2.2 Singular numbers
We begin with a reminder of operator-theoretic facts. We recall that the approximation numbers of an operator (with a Hilbert space) are defined by:
[TABLE]
According to a 1957’s result of Allahverdiev (see [3], page 155), we have , the -th singular number of . We also recall a basic result due to H. Weyl and one obvious consequence:
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let be a compact operator with eigenvalues rearranged in decreasing order and singular numbers . Then:
[TABLE]
As a consequence:
[TABLE]
2.3 Spectra of projective tensor products
The following operator-theoretic result will play a basic role in the sequel. Let be Banach spaces and let their projective tensor product (the only tensor product we shall use). If , we define as usual their projective tensor product by its action on the atoms of , namely:
[TABLE]
Denote in general the spectrum of where is a unital Banach algebra. We recall ([13], chap.11, Theorem 11.23) the following result.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let be a unital Banach algebra, and be pairwise commuting elements of . Then:
[TABLE]
Here, is the product in the Minkowski sense, namely:
[TABLE]
As a consequence, we then have the following lemma due to Schechter, which we prove under a weakened form, sufficient here, and which is indeed already in [1] (we just add a few details because this is a central point in our estimates).
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let be a Banach space, and . Then .
Proof.
To save notation, we assume . Let and where is the identity of . Clearly,
[TABLE]
where the spectrum of is in the Banach algebra and that of in . Lemma 2.2 now gives:
[TABLE]
hence the result. ∎
2.4 Schur maps and composition operators
We now pass to some general facts on composition operators , defined by , associated with a Schur map, namely a non-constant analytic self-map of . We say that is a symbol for if is a bounded linear operator from into itself.
The differential of at some point is a bounded linear map .
Definition 2.4**.**
The symbol is said to be truly infinite-dimensional if the differential is an injective linear map from into itself for at least one point .
In finite dimension, this amounts to saying that has non-void interior.
We have the following general result.
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let be a sequence of analytic self-maps of such that . Then, the mapping defined by the formula maps to itself and is a symbol for .
Proof.
First, the Schwarz inequality:
[TABLE]
shows that when . To see that is moreover a symbol for , we use the fact ([8]) that:
[TABLE]
Now, by the separation of variables and Fubini’s theorem, we easily get:
[TABLE]
As , by hypothesis, the infinite product
[TABLE]
converges and, in view of (2.2) and (2.3), is bounded. ∎
We also have the following useful fact.
Lemma 2.6**.**
The automorphisms of act transitively on and define bounded composition operators on .
Proof.
Let and let be defined by:
[TABLE]
where in general is defined by . The Schwarz lemma gives , and shows that maps to itself. Clearly, is an automorphism of with inverse and . The fact that the composition operator is bounded on is a consequence of Proposition 2.5. ∎
3 Spectrum of compact composition operators
We begin with the following definition, following [10].
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a truly infinite-dimensional symbol. We say that is compact if is a compact subset of .
We then have the following result.
Lemma 3.2**.**
If is a compact mapping, then:
* is bounded and moreover compact.*
* If a fixed point of , is a compact operator.*
Proof.
follows from a H. Schwarz type criterion via an Ascoli-Montel type theorem: every sequence of bounded in norm contains a subsequence which converges uniformly on compact subsets of . Indeed, we have the following ([4], chap. 17, p. 274): if is a locally bounded set of holomorphic functions on , then is locally equi-Lipschitz, namely every point has a neighourhood such that:
[TABLE]
The Ascoli-Montel theorem easily follows from this. Then, if converges weakly to [math], it converges uniformly to [math] on compact subsets of ; in particular on . This means that , implying and the compactness of .
Actually, is compact on every Hardy space . This observation will be useful later on.
For , we may indeed dispense ourselves with the invariance of , and force to be a fixed point of . Indeed, we can replace by where is arbitrary, and use Lemma 2.6 as well as the ideal property of compact linear operators. We set . Expanding each coordinate of in a series of homogeneous polynomials, we may write (since ):
[TABLE]
where . We clearly have (looking at the Fourier series of ):
[TABLE]
Since is compact, this clearly implies, with the open unit ball of , that is totally bounded, proving the compactness of . ∎
The following extension of results of [11], then [1] and [6], which themselves extend a theorem of G. Königs ([14], p. 93) will play an essential role for lower bounds of approximation numbers.
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let be a compact symbol. Assume there is such that and that is injective. Then, the spectrum of is exactly formed by the numbers , , and , where denote the eigenvalues of and:
[TABLE]
Proof.
This is proved in [1] for the unit ball of an arbitrary Banach space and for the space , in four steps which are the following:
If lies strictly inside (namely if for some ), in particular when is compact, has a unique fixed point , according to a theorem of Earle and Hamilton.
The spectrum of contains the numbers where is an eigenvalue of or .
It is then proved that the spectrum of contains the numbers and .
It is finally proved that spectrum of is contained in the numbers and .
Here, handling with the domain , we see that:
True or not for , the Earle-Hamilton theorem is not needed since we will force, by a change of the compact symbol in another compact symbol , the point [math] to be a fixed point. Moreover is injective if is, since and are invertible.
The second step (non-surjectivity) is valid for any domain and for , or , in exactly the same way.
The third step consists of proving .
For that purpose, assume that with an eigenvalue of and with repetitions allowed. As we already mentioned, under the assumption of compactness of , is compact on as well, for any . We take here . Step provides us with non-zero functions such that , , since for the compact operator , non-surjectivity implies non-injectivity. Let . Then, using the integral representation of the norm and the Hölder inequality, we see that , and , proving our claim.
The fourth step is valid as well, with a slight simplification: we have to show that, if is not of the form , then is injective. Let satisfying and let:
[TABLE]
be the Taylor expansion of about (observe that is a Reinhardt domain). As usual, is an -linear symmetric form on and the notation means .
Observe that can be isometrically identified with an element (denoted ) of defined by the formula:
[TABLE]
We will prove by induction that for each . For this, we can avoid the appeal to transposes of [1] as follows: if the result holds for with , one gets (comparing the terms in in both members of ):
[TABLE]
That is where is the identity map of . Now, in invertible in by Lemma 3.3, so that .
The proof is complete. ∎
The following theorem summarizes and exploits the preceding theorem. Possibly, some restrictions can be removed, and we could only assume the compactness of , not of itself. After all, in dimension one, there are symbols with for which is compact.
Theorem 3.4**.**
Let be a truly infinite-dimensional compact mapping of . Then:
* is bounded and even compact.*
* is compact.*
* No can exist such that for all . More precisely, the numbers satisfy:*
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof is based on the previous Theorem 3.3. Without loss of generality, we can assume that and is injective, by using a point at which is injective, and then the fact that automorphisms of act transitively on , act boundedly on , and the ideal property of approximation numbers. More precisely, we pass to with and get:
[TABLE]
injective, since and are, and and are automorphisms of .
We now have the following simple but crucial lemma.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Whatever the choice of the numbers with , denoting by the non-increasing rearrangement of the numbers , one has:
[TABLE]
Proof of the Lemma.
For any positive integer , we set:
[TABLE]
and we use that:
[TABLE]
where stands for the euclidean norm in . We then get:
[TABLE]
because:
[TABLE]
This proves the lemma. ∎
This can be transferred to the approximation numbers to end the proof of Theorem 3.4. Indeed, we know from Lemma 3.5 that the non-increasing rearrangement of the eigenvalues of satisfies
[TABLE]
Since a divergent series of non-negative and non-increasing numbers satisfies , we further see that:
[TABLE]
Moreover, by Theorem 2.1 we have:
[TABLE]
Since , Lemma 3.5 then gives the result. This clearly prevents an inequality of the form for some positive numbers and all . Indeed, this would imply:
[TABLE]
contradicting (3.3). ∎
Remarks. Let us briefly comment on the assumptions in Theorem 3.4.
We do not need the Earle-Hamilton theorem under our assumptions. The Schauder-Tychonoff theorem gives the existence (if not the uniqueness) of a fixed point for in (bounded and convex).
The Earle-Hamilton theorem is in some sense more general (for analytic maps) since it remains valid when is only assumed to lie strictly inside , i.e. when for some . But this assumption does not ensure the compactness of as indicated by the simple example , . The coordinate functions converge weakly to [math], while .
The mere assumption that is compact is not sufficient either. Juste take:
[TABLE]
Since the composition operator associated with is notoriously non-compact on , neither is on . Yet, is obviously compact in .
4 Possible upper bounds
Recall that .
4.1 A general example
Theorem 4.1**.**
Let with for all , so that and is the diagonal operator with eigenvalues , , on the canonical basis of . Let . Then:
[TABLE]
*In particular, there exist truly infinite-dimensional symbols on such that the composition operator is in all Schatten classes , . *
Proof.
Since is diagonal on the orthonormal basis of the Hilbert space , with , its approximation numbers are the non-increasing rearrangement of the moduli of eigenvalues , so that an Euler product-type computation gives:
[TABLE]
To obtain , just take . This ends the proof. ∎
4.2 A sharper upper bound
By making a more quantitative study, we can prove the following result.
Theorem 4.2**.**
For any , there exists a compact composition operator on , with a truly infinite-dimensional symbol, such that, for some positive constants , we have:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Take the same operator as in Theorem 4.1, with where the positive numbers have to be adjusted. Its approximation numbers are then the non-increasing rearrangement of the sequence of numbers . This suggests using a generating function argument, namely considering , but the rearrangement perturbs the picture. Accordingly, we follow a sligthly different route. Fix an integer and a real number . Observe that, following the proof of Theorem 4.1:
[TABLE]
First, consider the simple example . We get:
[TABLE]
where is the Dedekind eta function (see [5]) given by:
[TABLE]
where is the number of partitions of the integer . It is well-known ([5], Ch. 7, p. 169) that with , so that:
[TABLE]
Optimizing with , we get:
[TABLE]
with . This is more precise than Theorem 4.1.
We now show that if increases faster, we can achieve the decay of Theorem 4.2. As before, we get in general:
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
We have:
[TABLE]
Now, take where is to be chosen. We have:
[TABLE]
Standard estimates now give, for :
[TABLE]
so that:
[TABLE]
Going back to (4.1), we get, for some constant , and for :
[TABLE]
Adjusting so as to have , that is:
[TABLE]
we get , which is the claimed result with .
This can be taken arbitrarily in by choosing suitable, and we are done. ∎
Remark. Of course, is forbidden, because this would give , implying:
[TABLE]
for large , and contradicting Theorem 3.4.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. Aron, P. Galindo and M. Lindström, Compact homomorphisms between algebras of analytic functions , Studia Math. 123 (3) (1997), 235–247.
- 2[2] F. Bayart, D. Li, H. Queffélec and L. Rodríguez-Piazza, Approximation numbers of composition operators on the Hardy and Bergman spaces of the ball and of the polydisk , Math. Proc. of the Cambridge Philos. Soc., to appear .
- 3[3] B. Carl and I. Stephani. Entropy, compactness and the approximation of operators , Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics 98, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990).
- 4[4] S. Chae, Holomorphy and Calculus in Normed Spaces , Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics 92, Marcel Dekker (1985).
- 5[5] K. Chandrasekharan, Arithmetical Functions , Grundlehren Math. Wiss., Band 167, Berlin, Springer (1970).
- 6[6] D. Clahane, Spectra of compact composition operators over bounded symmetric domains , Integral Equations Operator Theory 51 (2005), 41–56.
- 7[7] B. Cole and T. Gamelin, Representing measures and Hardy spaces for the infinite polydisk algebra , Proc. Lond. Math. Society 53 (1986), 112–142.
- 8[8] C. Cowen, B. Mac Cluer, Composition Operators on Spaces of Analytic Functions , Studies in Advanced Mathematics, C.R.C. Press (1994).
