This paper demonstrates that the 1-dimensional complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator is a normal diffusion operator for certain parameter ranges, expanding understanding of its mathematical properties.
Contribution
It establishes the normality of the complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator for all fixed angles within a specific range, revealing new structural insights.
Findings
01
The operator is a normal diffusion operator for heta in (-π/2, 0)∪(0, π/2).
02
The operator is nonsymmetric but normal.
03
Provides a mathematical characterization of the operator's properties.
Abstract
We show that for any fixed θ∈(−2π,0)∪(0,2π), the 1-dimensional complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator \begin{equation*} \tilde{\mathcal{L}}_{\theta}= 4\cos\theta \frac{\partial^2}{\partial z\partial \bar{z}}-e^{\mi\theta} z \frac{\partial}{\partial z}-e^{-\mi\theta}\bar{z} \frac{\partial}{\partial \bar{z}}, \end{equation*} is a normal (but nonsymmetric) diffusion operator.
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
TopicsNonlinear Partial Differential Equations · Geometric Analysis and Curvature Flows · Advanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering
Full text
On the 1-dimensional complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator
CHEN Yong
School of Mathematics and Computing Science, Hunan
University of Science and Technology,
We show that for any fixed θ∈(−2π,0)∪(0,2π), the 1-dimensional complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator
[TABLE]
is a normal (but nonsymmetric) diffusion operator.
**Keywords: ** Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup; Complex Hermite Polynomials; Normal operator; Symmetric diffusion operator; Normal diffusion operator.
MSC: 60H10,60H07,60G15.
1 Introduction
This paper is a sequel of the previous paper [3], in which the aim was to obtain the eigenfunctions of 1-dimensional complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator [3, Theorem 2.6]
[TABLE]
where θ∈(−2π,2π) is fixed and ∂z∂f=21(∂x∂f−i∂y∂f),∂zˉ∂f=21(∂x∂f+i∂y∂f) are
the Wirtinger derivatives of f at point z=x+iy with x,y∈R.
They show that the eigenfunctions are the complex Hermite polynomials and form an orthonormal basis of L2(γ) where dγ=2π1e−2x2+y2dxdy (see Proposition 2.2 below).
In this paper, we will firstly show that L~θ can be realized as an unbounded normal operator (see [13, p368]) in L2(γ) but nonsymmetric when θ=0. Secondly, we extend the known fact about the 1-dimensional real symmetric diffusion operator [2, 16, 17] to the complex case. Precisely stated, we present the explicit expression of L~θ in L2(γ) (see Theorem 4.3) and show that it is a normal diffusion operator (see Theorem 4.4).
This article is organized as follows. Section 2 provides necessary information of complex Hermite polynomials. Section 3 contains the proof of the normality of the complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup. Section 4 contains the main results on the explicit expression of L~θ and the property of the normal diffusion operator. Finally, some necessary approximation of identity and N-representation theorem are listed in Appendix.
2 Preliminaries
Definition 2.1**.**
(Definition of the complex Hermite polynomials [3, Definition 2.4])
We call ∂:=∂z∂ and ∂ˉ:=∂zˉ∂ the complex annihilation operators.
Let m,n∈N. We define the sequence on C (or say: R2)
[TABLE]
where (∂∗ϕ)(z)=−∂zˉ∂ϕ(z)+2zϕ(z),(∂ˉ∗ϕ)(z)=−∂z∂ϕ(z)+2zˉϕ(z) for ϕ∈C↑1(R2) (see Definition 5.1) are the adjoint of the operators ∂,∂ˉ in L2(γ) respectively (the complex creation operator).
In [3, Theorem 2.7, Corollary 2.8], the authors show that Jm,n(z) satisfies that:
Proposition 2.2**.**
The complex Hermite polynomials {Jm,n(z):m,n∈N} form an orthonormal basis of L2(γ) where dγ=2π1e−2x2+y2dxdy. Thus, every function f in L2(γ) has a unique series expression
[TABLE]
where the coefficients bm,n are given by
[TABLE]
Moreover, for any θ∈(−2π,2π) and each m,n∈N,
[TABLE]
The real Hermite polynomials are defined by the formula111Note that Hn(x)=n!(−1)nex2/2dxndne−x2/2 in [9, 14] and Hn(x)=(−1)nex2/2dxndne−x2/2 in [3, 6], here we use the definition in [17].
[TABLE]
The following property gives the fundamental relation between the real and the complex Hermite polynomials [3, Corollary 2.8].
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let z=x+iy with x,y∈R. Then the real and the complex Hermite polynomials satisfy that
[TABLE]
Thus, both the class {Jk,l(z):k+l=n} and the class {Hk(x)Hl(y):k+l=n} generate the same linear subspace of L2(γ).
3 The normality of the complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup
In [3], the following complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process {Zt} is considered:
[TABLE]
where θ∈(−2π,2π), and ζt=B1(t)+iB2(t) is a complex Brownian motion. Solving for Z gives
[TABLE]
Thus, the associated Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup of Eq.(3.4) has the following explicit representation, due to Kolmogorov, for each φ∈Cb(R2) (the space of all continuous and bounded complex-valued functions on R2),
[TABLE]
where y=y1+iy2 and x,y∈C and we write a function φ(y1,y2) of the two real variables y1 and y2 as φ(y) of the complex argument y1+iy2 (i.e.,
we use the complex representation of R2 in (3.6-3.7)). The change of variable formula yields the following Mehler formula [3, p584].
Proposition 3.1**.**
(Mehler formula)*
For each φ∈Cb(R2),*
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Similar to the real Ornstein-Uhlenbeck semigroup [14, Proposition 2.3], using the rotation invariant of the measure γ and Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem, it follows from Proposition 3.1 that γ is the unique invariant measure of Pt. In detail, for each φ∈Cb(R2),
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Denote the associated transition probabilities on C as Pt(x,A)=Pt1A(x) for each A∈B(R2).
Along the same line of the real case [2, 14, 17], for each p≥1, it follows from Jensen’s inequality that for each φ∈Cb(R2),
[TABLE]
It follows from the B.L.T. theorem [12, p9] that {Pt}t≥0 can be uniquely extended to a strong continuous contraction semigroup {Ttp}t≥0 on Lp(γ) for each p≥1 222Namely, Ttp is the closure (see [12, p250]) in Lp(γ) of the operator Pt.. Let Ap be the (infinitesimal) generator, then Ap is closed and D(Ap)=Lp(γ) (i.e., densely defined) [10, 12].
Lemma 3.2**.**
Suppose Y=(y1,…,yn),Z=(z1,…,zn)∈Cn and
Y=MZ,
where M=(Mij) is an n-by-n unitary matrix over the field C.
If zi,i=1…,n are independent, each being centered complex normal such that E∣zi∣2=σ2, then yi,i=1…,n are also independent, each being centered complex normal such that E∣yi∣2=σ2.
Proof.
It follows from [4, Theorem 1.1] that yi,i=1…,n are centered complex normal. In addition, we have that
[TABLE]
where δij is the Kronecker delta. Thus, yi,i=1…,n have independent identical distributions with variance σ2.
∎
Proposition 3.3**.**
For each θ∈(−2π,2π),
denote the semigroup Pt depending on θ in (3.6) by Ptθ, then for each ϕ∈Cb(R2)
[TABLE]
where (Ptθ)∗ is the adjoint operator of Ptθ in L2(γ). Furthermore, when restricted on Cb(R2), (Ptθ)∗=Pt−θ.
Proof.
Set α=eiθ.
For each ϕ,ψ∈Cb(R2) and t≥0, we have that
[TABLE]
where (3.13) is deduced from Lemma 3.2 by taking n=2 and
[TABLE]
and (3.14) is deduced from the rotation invariant of the measure γ.
Therefore, the adjoint operator of Ptθ in L2(γ) satisfies that (Ptθ)∗=Pt−θ when restricted on Cb(R2) for each θ∈(−2π,2π). Thus, for each ϕ∈Cb(R2),
[TABLE]
where (3.15) is deduced from the well-known fact that if Z1,Z2 are two independent standard complex normal random variables, then e−αˉt1−e−2tReαZ1+1−e−2tReαZ2 and 1−e−4tReαZ1 have the same law [4, Theorem 1.1].
∎
Theorem 3.4**.**
{Tt2}t≥0* is a semigroup of normal operators (see [13, p382]) in L2(γ) and thus the generator A2 is a normal operator in L2(γ).*
Proof.
Since Tt2 is the closure of the contraction operator Pt in L2(γ), it follows from (c) of Theorem VIII.1 in [12, p253] that
the adjoint operator of Tt2 equals to that of Pt. It follows from the density argument that (3.12) can be extended to each ϕ∈L2(γ), i.e.,
[TABLE]
Thus {Tt2}t≥0 is a semigroup of normal operators. It follows from [13, Theorem 13.38] that the generator A2 is a normal operator in L2(γ).
∎
4 The normal diffusion operators in C
The first aim of this section is to show the explicit expression of the generator A2.
Definition 4.1**.**
For any θ∈(−2π,2π), define
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.2**.**
If ϕ∈C↑2(R2), then ϕ∈D(Lθ) and
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.3**.**
Let A2 be as in Theorem 3.4 and Lθ be as in Definition 4.1.
For any θ∈(−2π,2π), A2=Lθ, i.e., D(A2)=D(Lθ) and A2φ=Lθφ on D(Lθ).
The second aim of this section is to show that the operator Lθ defined above satisfies the following theorem,
which is named as the normal diffusion operator analogous to the symmetric diffusion operator given by Stroock [2, 16, 17].
Theorem 4.4**.**
(normal diffusion operator)*
The densely defined linear closed operator Lθ defined in Proposition 4.1 is a normal diffusion operator. Namely, it satisfies that:*
Lθ* is a normal operator on D(Lθ).*
2)
1∈D(Lθ)* and Lθ1=0.*
3)
There exists a linear subspace D⊂{ϕ∈D(Lθ)∩L4(γ):Lθϕ∈L4(γ),∣ϕ∣2∈D(Lθ)} such that graph(Lθ∣D) is dense in graph(Lθ).
4)
For any θ∈(−2π,2π), define
[TABLE]
for ϕ,ψ∈D. Then \big{(}{\cdot,\,\cdot}\big{)}_{\theta}:\,\mathcal{D}\times\mathcal{D}\to L^{2}(\gamma) is a non-negative definite bilinear form on the field C.
5)
*(Diffusion property)If ϕ=(ϕ1,…,ϕn)∈Dn and F∈C↑2(Cn), then F∘ϕ∈D(Lθ) and
*
[TABLE]
6)
Lθ* has an extension A1 to L1(γ) with domain D(A1) such that*
[TABLE]
i.e., the closure of Lθ in L1(γ) is A1.
Proofs of Theorem 4.2-4.4 are presented in Section 4.1.
4.1 Proofs of Theorems
Proposition 4.5**.**
Let Lθ be as in Definition 4.1. Then Lθ is closed on L2(γ).
Proof.
Suppose that fk∈D(Lθ) such that fk→f,Lθfk→g in L2(γ), we will show that f∈D(Lθ) and Lθf=g.
In fact, by Fatou’s lemma and Parseval’s identity the triangle inequality we have that
[TABLE]
Thus f∈D(Lθ). In addition, since for each m,n≥0, as k→∞,
[TABLE]
it follows from Parseval’s identity and Fatou’s lemma that
[TABLE]
Thus Lθf=g.
∎
Remark 1**.**
Suppose that Hm,n(x,y)=Hm(x)Hn(y) is the Hermite polynomial of two variables. Then it follows from Proposition 2.3 that
[TABLE]
Together with
[TABLE]
we deduce that
[TABLE]
that is to say, D(Lθ) is independent to θ. In fact, the right hand side of (1) is exact the Sobolev weighted space Hγ2, please refer to [7] for details.
Proposition 4.6**.**
For any θ∈(−2π,2π), Lθ is a normal operator on D(Lθ) such that 1∈D(Lθ) and Lθ1=0.
Proof.
Suppose that f,g∈D(Lθ). It follows from Parseval’s identity that
[TABLE]
Thus, the adjoint operator of Lθ is Lθ∗=L−θ. The equality (1) implies that D(Lθ)=D(L−θ)=D(Lθ∗). And for each f∈D(Lθ) such that Lθf∈D(Lθ∗), we have that
[TABLE]
Therefore, Lθ is a normal operator on D(Lθ). 1∈D(Lθ) and Lθ1=0 is trivial.
∎
Proposition 4.7**.**
Denote by D=span{Jm,n,m,n≥0} the linear span (also called the linear hull) of complex Hermite polynomials. Then
imply that D=span{Jm,n,m,n≥0}=span{zmzˉn,m,n≥0}.
But f(z)=zmzˉn belonging to the right hand side of (4.21) is trivial. Thus (4.21) holds.
Since D is a dense subset of L2(γ) (see Proposition 2.2), D is dense in D(Lθ). Note that Lθ is a closed operator, we get that graph(Lθ∣D) is dense in graph(Lθ).
∎
*Proof of Theorem 4.2. *
First, it follows from Proposition 2.2 that (4.18) holds when ϕ∈D=span{Jm,n,m,n≥0}.
Second, suppose that ϕ∈L2(γ) satisfies that the sequence am,n=⟨ϕ,Hm(x)Hn(y)⟩ is rapidly decreasing, then we will show that ϕ∈D(Lθ) and (4.18) is satisfied.
In fact, it follows from Proposition 5.7 that the Hermite expansion ϕ(z)=∑m,n=0∞am,nHm(x)Hn(y) satisfies that
[TABLE]
where ϕl=∑m+n≤lam,nHm(x)Hn(y).
Thus,
[TABLE]
It follows from Proposition 2.3 that ∑m+n≤lam,nHm(x)Hn(y)=∑m+n≤lbm,nJm,n(z). Thus, as l→∞, we have that in L2(γ), ϕl→ϕ and
[TABLE]
Since Lθ is closed, we have that ϕ∈D(Lθ) and (4.18) is satisfied.
Finally, it follows from Proposition 5.5 that if ϕ∈C↑2(R2) then there exists an approximation of identity Bϵϕ∈Cc∞(R2) such that for all p1+p2≤2 and k1,k2≥0, xk1yk2∂xp1∂yp2∂p1+p2(Bϵϕ)→xk1yk2∂xp1∂yp2∂p1+p2ϕ in L2(γ) as ϵ→0. In addition, it follows from Proposition 5.6 that the sequence ⟨Bϵϕ,Hm(x)Hn(y)⟩ is rapidly decreasing.
Thus, as ϵ→0, we have that in L2(γ), Bϵϕ→ϕ and
[TABLE]
Since Lθ is closed, we have that ϕ∈D(Lθ) and (4.18) is satisfied.
□
*Proof of Theorem 4.3. *
First, it follows from the density argument (see Proposition 5.5) and Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem that the Mehler formula (3.8) is still valid for φ∈C↑0(R2), i.e.,
[TABLE]
Then Tt2φ(x)=Ptφ(x)=Ex[φ(Zt)] for each φ∈C↑0(R2).
Second, using (3.4), it follows from Ito’s lemma and Theorem 4.2 that for each φ∈C↑2(R2),
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where to get the last equality we use the continuity of t→Tt2φ for any φ∈L2(γ) (see [10, Corollary 2.3] or part (a) of [10, Theorem 2.4]). Therefore, A2=Lθ on C↑2(R2),
Third, since graph(Lθ∣C↑2(R2)) is dense in graph(Lθ) (see Proposition 4.7) and A2 is closed, we have that Lθ⊆A2.
It follows from Proposition 4.6 and Theorem 3.4 that both Lθ and A2 are normal operators. Since Lθ is maximally normal (see [13, Theorem 13.32]), we have that A2=Lθ. □
Corollary 4.8**.**
For any θ∈(−2π,2π), Lθ⊆A1 (i.e., A1 is an extension of Lθ to L1(γ)) and
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof is similar to the real case [2, p19]. In detail,
D(Lθ)=D(A2)⊂{ϕ∈D(A1)∩L2(γ):A1ϕ∈L2(γ)} is trivial. Now suppose that ϕ∈D(A1)∩L2(γ) and A1ϕ∈L2(γ), then as t→0,
[TABLE]
where to get the last equality we use again the continuity of t→Tt2φ. Thus ϕ∈D(A2)=D(Lθ) and (4.22) holds.
∎
*Proof of 4),5) of Theorem 4.4. *
Since F∈C↑2(Cn) and ϕ=(ϕ1,…,ϕn)∈Dn, then F∘ϕ∈C↑2(R2).
By the complex version of the chain rule [15, p27], it follows from Theorem 4.2 that
[TABLE]
Taking F(z1,z2)=z1z2 in the above equation, we have that
[TABLE]
Clearly, \big{(}{\phi,\,\psi}\big{)}_{\theta} is a non-negative definite bilinear form on the field C. Substituting (4.24) into (4.23), we show (5)).
□
*Proof of Theorem 4.4. * By Proposition 4.5, the operator Lθ is closed. 4)-5) of Theorem 4.4 have been shown before.
1)-3) and 6) of Theorem 4.4 are shown in Proposition 4.6-4.7 and Corollary 4.8 respectively.
□
5 Appendix
To be self-contained, we list the necessary results of functions slowly
increasing at infinity. Some results which can not be found in textbooks will be shown shortly here.
In this section all functions will be complex-valued and defined on Rn.
Definition 5.1**.**
Denote by Cc∞(Rn) the space of smooth and compactly supported functions on Rn [1, p5]). Denote by S(Rn) the space of C∞ functions rapidly decreasing at infinity [1, p105].
We say that a continuous function f(x) is slowly increasing at infinity if there exists an integer k such that
(1+r2)−2kf(x) is bounded in Rn with r=∣x∣ [1, p110]. Denote by C↑m(Rn) the space of all
functions having slowly increasing at infinity continuous partial derivatives of
order ≤m.
Notation 1**.**
Denote by γ the n-dimensional standard Gaussian measure:
[TABLE]
Denote the density function by ρ(x)=dxdγ(x).
5.1 Approximation of identity of C↑m(Rn) in Lq(γ)
Notation 2**.**
Set
[TABLE]
where ∣x∣=x12+⋯+xn2 and 1B the characteristic function of set B.
Divide this function by its integral over the whole space to get a function α(x) of integral one which is called a mollifier. Next, for every ϵ>0, define [1, p5]
[TABLE]
Let Lloc1(Rn) be the space of locally integrable function on Rn. If u∈Lloc1(Rn), the function
[TABLE]
is said to be the convolution of u and αϵ [1, Definition 1.4]. It is also denoted by the convolution operator Aϵu=(u∗αϵ)(x).
Lemma 5.2**.**
Suppose that f(x)∈C↑0(Rn). Then Aϵf∈C↑∞(Rn) (the space of C∞ functions slowly increasing at infinity) and for any q≥1 and any k∈Nn, ϵ→0limxkAϵf=xkf in Lq(γ).
Proof.
First, for any ϵ>0, since αϵ∈Cc∞(Rn)⊂S(Rn) and f(x)∈C↑0(Rn)⊂S′(Rn) (tempered
distributions, see Example 4 in [1, 110]), it follows from Theorem 4.9 of [1, p133] that Aϵf=f∗αϵ∈C↑∞(Rn).
Second, since any polynomial P(x),x∈Rn, is in Lq(γ), we have f,Aϵf∈Lq(γ). Thus,
∥Aϵf−f∥qq=limn→∞∫Ba∣Aϵf−f∣qdγ(x) where Ba={x∈Rn,∣x∣≤a}.
Finally, given σ>0, there exists Ba such that
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
It follows from [1, Theorem 1.1] that Aϵf→f uniformly on Ba as ϵ→0. Thus there exists ϵ0>0 such that supx∈Ba∣Aϵf−f∣≤(2σ)q1 for any 0<ϵ<ϵ0. Together with (5.28) and (5.29), we have that ∥Aϵf−f∥qq≤σ, which proves that Aϵf→f in Lq(γ), as ϵ→0.
Similar to the above proof, it follows that for any k∈Nn, ϵ→0limxkAϵf=xkf in Lq(γ).
∎
Corollary 5.3**.**
Suppose that f(x)∈C↑m(Rn). Then for any p,k∈Nn such that ∣p∣≤m, xk∂p(Aϵf)→xk∂pf in Lq(γ), as ϵ→0.
Proof.
First, if f(x)∈C↑m(Rn) then ∂pf∈C↑0(Rn) for any p∈Nn such that ∣p∣≤m. It follows from Lemma 5.2 that xkAϵ(∂pf)→xk∂pf in Lq(γ) for any k∈Nn.
Second, for any p∈Nn, if u,∂pu∈Lloc1(Rn) then ∂p(Aϵu)=Aϵ(∂pu).
Finally, since C↑0(Rn)⊂Lloc1(Rn), we have that xk∂p(Aϵf)→xk∂pf in Lq(γ).
∎
Notation 3**.**
Let a∈R+ and denote by Ba+1 and Ba concentric balls of radius a+1 and a, respectively. It follows from Corollary 3 of [1, p9] that there exists a so-called (smooth) cutoff function βa(x)∈Cc∞(Rn) such that: (i) 0≤βa≤1 and suppβa⊂Ba+1, (ii) βa(x)=1 on Ba, (iii) for all p∈Nn, supx∈R∣∂pβa∣≤c(n,p).
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let the cutoff function βa prevail. Suppose that g∈C↑∞(Rn) and set ga=gβa. Then ga∈Cc∞(Rn), and for any k,p∈Nn, a→∞limxk∂pga=xk∂pg in Lq(γ) for any q≥1.
Proof.
The Lebniz’s rule implies that
[TABLE]
Denote Ga=Rn−Ba, it follows from (i)-(iii) of Notation 3 that
[TABLE]
where c=0<l≤pmaxc(n,p−l)×max(lp).
Since g∈C↑∞(Rn), we have h(x):=xk∑l≤p∂p−lg∈C↑∞(Rn)⊂Lq(γ). Therefore, h1Ga→0 in Lq(γ) as a→∞. Together with (5.1), we have that a→∞limxk∂pga=xk∂pg in Lq(γ).
∎
Proposition 5.5**.**
**(Approximation of identity of C↑m(Rn) in Lq(γ))
**Suppose that f(x)∈C↑m(Rn). Denote
[TABLE]
Then Bϵf∈Cc∞(Rn), and for q≥1 and k,p∈Nn such that ∣p∣≤m, xk∂p(Bϵf)→xk∂pf in Lq(γ), as ϵ→0.
Proof.
Lemma 5.2 implies that Aϵf∈C↑∞(Rn). Then it follows from Lemma 5.4 that Bϵf∈Cc∞(Rn) and xk∂p(Bϵf)−xk∂p(Aϵf)q→0. Corollary 5.3 implies that xk∂p(Aϵf)−xk∂pfq→0. By the triangle inequality, we have
[TABLE]
∎
5.2 The N-representation theorem for S(Rn) in L2(γ)
Suppose Hl(x)=l!(−1)lex2/2dxldle−x2/2 is the l-th Hermite polynomial of one variable. It is well known that the set of Hermite polynomials of several variables
[TABLE]
is an orthonormal basis of L2(γ). Thus, every function u∈L2(γ) has a unique series expression
[TABLE]
where the coefficients am are given by
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.6**.**
u∈L2(γ)* satisfies that am=∫Rnu(x)Hm(x)dγ(x) is rapidly decreasing (i.e., for r∈Nn≥0, am=O(m−r) as ∣m∣→∞) if and only if u=fρ−21 with f∈S(Rn).*
Proof.
Denote the Hermite functions Hm(x)=Hm(x)ρ21, then
∫Rnu(x)Hm(x)dγ(x)=∫Rnf(x)Hm(x)dx. The desired conclusion is followed from Theorem 3.5 and Exercise 3 of [5, pp135].
∎
Remark 2**.**
Clearly, the smooth and compactly supported function satisfies the above condition. In fact,
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.7**.**
If u∈L2(γ) satisfies that am=∫Rnu(x)Hm(x)dγ(x) is rapidly decreasing, then the Hermite expansion u(x)=∑m∈NnamHm(x) satisfies that
[TABLE]
where ul=∑∣m∣≤lamHm(x).
Proof.
Proposition 5.6 implies that S(Rn)∋f=∑mamHm(x). Denote fl=ulρ21, then it follows from the N-representation theorem for S(Rn) (see Theorem V.13 of [12, p143]) that fl→f in S(Rn) which means that xm∂i(f−fl)L2(dx)→0∀m,i∈Nn as l→∞.
The Lebniz’s rule implies that there exists a constant c>0 such that
[TABLE]
Thus the desired conclusion follows.
∎
Bibliography17
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] Barros-Neto, J. 1973. An Introduction to the Theory of Distributions , Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York.
2[2] Bell, D.R. 2006. The Malliavin Calculus , Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, New York.
3[3] Chen, Y. and Liu, Y. 2014. On the eigenfunctions of the complex Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operators, Kyoto J. Math.,Vol.54, No.3, 577-596.
4[4] Itô, K. 1953. Complex Multiple Wiener Integral, Japan J.Math. 22, 63-86. Reprinted in: Kiyosi Itô selected papers , Edited by Daniel W. Stroock, S.R.S. Varadhan, Springer-Verlag, 1987.
5[5] Jones, D.S. 1982. The theory of generalised functions , 2nd ed, Cambridge University Press.
6[6] Kuo, H. H. 2006. Introduction to Stochastic Integration , Springer.
7[7] Lunardi, A. 1997. On the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck operator in L 2 superscript 𝐿 2 L^{2} spaces with respect to invariant measures, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Vol. 349, 1, 155-169.
8[8] Malliavin, P. 1997. Stochasitc Analysis , Springer. J. Funct. Anal., Vol. 196, 1, 40-60.