A uniqueness theorem for the Nica–Toeplitz algebra of a compactly aligned product system
James Fletcher
School of Mathematics and Statistics
Victoria University of Wellington
Wellington 6140, New Zealand
[email protected]
Abstract.
Fowler introduced the notion of a product system: a collection of Hilbert bimodules X={Xp:p∈P} indexed by a semigroup P, endowed with a multiplication implementing isomorphisms Xp⊗AXq≅Xpq. When P is quasi-lattice ordered, Fowler showed how to associate a C∗-algebra NTX to X, generated by a universal representation satisfying some covariance condition. In this article we prove a uniqueness theorem for these so called Nica–Toeplitz algebras.
Key words and phrases:
Nica–Toeplitz algebra; Product system; Hilbert bimodule
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
46L05 (Primary) 46L08, 46L55 (Secondary)
This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship and by the Marsden grant 15-UOO-071 from the Royal Society of New Zealand.
1. Introduction
Suppose A is a C∗-algebra and X is a right Hilbert A-module. When X comes equipped with a left action of A by adjointable operators, we call X a Hilbert A-bimodule. When this left action of A is faithful, Pimsner showed how to associate a C∗-algebra TX to X, called the Toeplitz algebra of X, generated by the raising and lowering operators on the Fock space of X [14]. In [7], Fowler and Raeburn generalised the situation to arbitrary left actions by adjointable operators, and showed that TX may be realised as the universal C∗-algebra generated by so called Toeplitz representations. In the spirit of Coburn’s Theorem for the classical Toeplitz algebra [2], Fowler and Raeburn also proved a uniqueness theorem for TX [7, Theorem 2.1] that provides a sufficient condition for a representation of TX to be faithful. Loosely speaking, their result states that a representation of TX on a Hilbert space H will be faithful, provided the representation leaves enough room in H for the coefficient algebra A to act faithfully.
Subsequently Fowler introduced the notion of a product system of Hilbert bimodules [6], generalising the continuous product systems of Hilbert spaces studied by Arveson [1] and the discrete product systems studied by Dinh [3]. Loosely speaking, a product system of Hilbert A-bimodules over a unital semigroup P consists of a semigroup X=⨆p∈PXp, such that each Xp is a Hilbert A-bimodule, and the map x⊗Ay↦xy extends to an isomorphism from Xp⊗AXq to Xpq for each p,q∈P∖{e}. Motivated by the work of Nica [13] and Laca and Raeburn on Toeplitz algebras associated to non-abelian groups [10], Fowler studied representations of compactly aligned product systems over quasi-lattice ordered groups — semigroups sitting inside groups possessing a semi-lattice like structure, satisfying an additional constraint called Nica covariance. Generalising the Toeplitz algebra associated to a single Hilbert bimodule, Fowler showed how to associate a C∗-algebra NTX, generated by a universal Nica covariant representation, to each compactly aligned product system X. We call this C∗-algebra the Nica–Toeplitz algebra of X. Furthermore, Fowler associates a twisted semigroup crossed product algebra to each compactly aligned product system, and characterises their faithful representations [6, Theorem 7.2]. Restricting to the subalgebra NTX then gives a uniqueness theorem for Nica–Toeplitz algebras, generalising both Laca and Raeburn’s uniqueness theorem for Toeplitz algebras of quasi-lattice ordered groups [10, Theorem 3.7] and Fowler and Raeburn’s uniqueness theorem for Toeplitz algebras of Hilbert bimodules [7, Theorem 2.1] — at least in the case where the bimodule is ‘essential’.
In this article we prove a slightly more general version of Fowler’s uniqueness theorem for Nica–Toeplitz algebras associated to compactly aligned product systems over quasi-lattice ordered groups. The result gives a sufficient condition for the induced representation ψ∗ of a Nica covariant representation ψ (on a Hilbert space H) to be faithful. This condition basically says that the ranges of all the operators {ψp(x):x∈Xp, p∈P∖{e}} should leave enough room in H for A to act faithfully. When A acts by compacts on each fibre of X, we will see that this condition is also necessary. Unlike in Fowler’s result, we do not insist that each fibre of the product system is essential (i.e. we do not require that Xp=A⋅Xp for each p∈P). Whilst there do not seem to many ‘natural’ examples of Hilbert bimodules with nondegenerate left actions, this level of generality was made use of in our article [5]. Moreover, in contrast to Fowler’s proof, we do not view the Nica–Toeplitz algebra as a subalgebra of a twisted semigroup crossed product, working with NTX directly. Furthermore, we note that Fowler’s result as stated in [6, Theorem 7.2] is technically false when applied to any product system over the trivial semigroup {e}, and correct this error in our result.
The article is set out as follows. In Section 2 we fix notation and recap the necessary background material for Hilbert bimodules, product systems of Hilbert bimodules, and their associated Nica–Toeplitz algebras. In Section 3 we present the proof of our uniqueness theorem for Nica-Toeplitz algebras.
After completing this article, it was brought to our attention that Kwaśniewski and Larsen had already proved a far-reaching generalisation of our (along with Fowler’s) uniqueness theorem [8, Corollary 10.14] for full Nica–Toeplitz algebras associated to well-aligned ideals of right tensor C∗-precategories. Subsequent to the initial version of this article appearing on the arXiv, Kwaśniewski and Larsen showed how their more general result can be applied to product systems over right LCM semigroups (themselves a generalisation of quasi-lattice ordered groups) [9, Theorem 2.19]. Despite this, we still feel that the results in this article will find use amongst those studying product systems over quasi-lattice ordered groups. We provide a direct proof of the uniqueness theorem in the quasi-lattice ordered case, and as such avoid the various technical conditions present in [9, Theorem 2.19]. We also note that in Corollary 3.12, we show how to extend the uniqueneness theorem to representations in arbitrary C∗-algebras (rather than just on Hilbert spaces), provided the action on each fibre is compact.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Hilbert bimodules
We attempt to summarise only those aspects of Hilbert bimodules that we will need. Readers unfamiliar with this material, or looking for more detail, are directed to [11].
Let A be a C∗-algebra. A (right) inner-product A-module is a complex vector space X equipped with a map ⟨⋅,⋅⟩A:X×X→A, linear in its second argument, and a right action of A, such that for any x,y∈X and a∈A, we have
- (i)
⟨x,y⟩A=⟨y,x⟩A∗;
2. (ii)
⟨x,y⋅a⟩A=⟨x,y⟩Aa;
3. (iii)
⟨x,x⟩A≥0 in A; and
4. (iv)
⟨x,x⟩A=0 if and only if x=0.
It follows from [11, Proposition 1.1] that the formula ∥x∥X:=∥⟨x,x⟩A∥A1/2 defines a norm on X. If X is complete with respect to this norm, we say that X is a (right) Hilbert A-module.
Let X be a (right) Hilbert A-module. We say that a map T:X→X is adjointable if there exists a map T∗:X→X such that ⟨Tx,y⟩A=⟨x,T∗y⟩A for each x,y∈X. Every adjointable operator T is automatically linear and continuous, and the adjoint T∗ is unique. The collection of adjointable operators on X, denoted by LA(X), equipped with the operator norm is a C∗-algebra. For each x,y∈X there is an adjointable operator Θx,y∈LA(X) defined by Θx,y(z)=x⋅⟨y,z⟩A. We call operators of this form (generalised) rank-one operators. The closed subspace KA(X):=span{Θx,y:x,y∈X} is an essential ideal of LA(X), whose elements we refer to as (generalised) compact operators.
A (right) Hilbert B–A-bimodule is a (right) Hilbert A-module X together with a ∗-homomorphism ϕ:B→LA(X). When A=B, we say that X is a Hilbert A-bimodule. We think of ϕ as implementing a left action of B on X, and frequently write b⋅x for ϕ(b)(x). Since each ϕ(b)∈LA(X) is A-linear, we have that b⋅(x⋅a)=(b⋅x)⋅a for each a∈A, b∈B, and x∈X.
An important example is the Hilbert A-bimodule AAA, which is just the set A equipped with the inner product given by ⟨a,b⟩A=a∗b and left and right actions of A given by multiplication. Then KA(AAA) is isomorphic to A via the map Θa,b↦ab∗, whilst LA(AAA) is isomorphic to the multiplier algebra of A.
The Hewitt–Cohen–Blanchard factorisation theorem [17, Proposition 2.31] says that if x is an element of a Hilbert A-module X, then there exists a unique x′∈X such that x=x′⋅⟨x′,x′⟩A. Hence, X is a right nondegenerate A-module in the sense that X=span{x⋅a:x∈X,a∈A}. It is not necessarily true that every Hilbert A-bimodule is left nondegenerate in the sense that X=span{a⋅x:x∈X,a∈A} (in [6], Fowler calls such bimodules essential).
The balanced tensor product X⊗AY of two Hilbert A-bimodules X and Y is formed as follows. Let X⊙Y be the algebraic tensor product of X and Y as complex vector spaces, and let X⊙AY be the quotient of X⊙Y by the subspace spanned by elements of the form x⋅a⊙y−x⊙a⋅y where x∈X, y∈Y, and a∈A (we write x⊙Ay for the coset containing x⊙y). Then the formula
⟨x⊙Ay,w⊙Az⟩A:=⟨y,⟨x,w⟩A⋅z⟩A,
determines a bounded A-valued sesquilinear form on X⊙AY. Let N be the subspace span{n∈X⊙AY:⟨n,n⟩A=0}. The formula ∥z+N∥:=infn∈N∥⟨z+n,z+n⟩A∥A1/2 defines a norm on (X⊙AY)/N, and we define X⊗AY to be the completion of (X⊙AY)/N with respect to this norm. The balanced tensor product X⊗AY carries a left and right action of A, such that a⋅(x⊗Ay)⋅b=(a⋅x)⊗A(y⋅b) for each x∈X, y∈Y, and a,b∈A.
Given Hilbert A-bimodules X and Y and an adjointable operator S∈LA(X), there exists an adjointable operator S⊗AidY∈LA(X⊗AY) (with adjoint S∗⊗AidY) determined by the formula (S⊗AidY)(x⊗Ay)=(Sx)⊗Ay for each x∈X and y∈Y.
We will also make use of the theory of induced representations. Given a Hilbert B–A-bimodule X and a nondegenerate representation π:A→B(H) of A on a Hilbert space H, [17, Proposition 2.66] gives a representation X-IndABπ:B→B(X⊗AH) such that (X-IndABπ)(b)(x⊗Ah)=(b⋅x)⊗Ah for each b∈B, x∈X, and h∈H.
2.2. Product systems of Hilbert bimodules and quasi-lattice ordered groups
Let A be a C∗-algebra and P a semigroup with identity e. A product system over P with coefficient algebra A is a semigroup X=⨆p∈PXp such that
- (i)
Xp⊆X is a Hilbert A-bimodule for each p∈P;
2. (ii)
Xe is equal to the Hilbert A-bimodule AAA;
3. (iii)
For each p,q∈P∖{e}, there exists a Hilbert A-bimodule isomorphism Mp,q:Xp⊗AXq→Xpq satisfying Mp,q(x⊗Ay)=xy for each x∈Xp and y∈Xq;
4. (iv)
Multiplication in X by elements of Xe=A implements the left and right actions of A on each Xp, i.e. xa=x⋅a and ax=a⋅x for each a∈A, x∈Xp, and p∈P.
For each p∈P, we write ϕp:A→LA(Xp) for the ∗-homomorphism that implements the left action of A on Xp, i.e. ϕp(a)(x)=a⋅x=ax for each a∈A and x∈Xp. Since X is a semigroup, multiplication in X is associative. In particular, ϕpq(a)(xy)=(ϕp(a)x)y for all p,q∈P, a∈A, x∈Xp, and y∈Xq. Also, for each p∈P, we write ⟨⋅,⋅⟩Ap for the A-valued inner-product on Xp.
By (ii) and (iv), for each p∈P there exist A-linear inner-product preserving maps Mp,e:Xp⊗AXe→Xp and Me,p:Xe⊗AXp→Xp such that Mp,e(x⊗Aa)=xa=x⋅a and Me,p(a⊗Ax)=ax=a⋅x for each a∈Xe=A and x∈Xp. By the Hewitt–Cohen–Blanchard factorisation theorem, each Mp,e is automatically an A-bimodule isomorphism. On the other hand, the maps Me,p need not be isomorphisms, since we do not require that each Xp is (left) nondegenerate (i.e. Me,p need not be surjective).
Given p∈P∖{e} and q∈P, the A-bimodule isomorphism Mp,q:Xp⊗AXq→Xpq enables us to define a ∗-homomorphism ιppq:LA(Xp)→LA(Xpq) by
[TABLE]
for each S∈LA(Xp). Equivalently, the ∗-homomorphism ιppq is characterised by the formula ιppq(S)(xy)=(Sx)y for each S∈LA(Xp), x∈Xp, and y∈Xq.
Since Xe⊗AXq need not in general be isomorphic to Xq, we cannot always define a map from LA(Xe) to LA(Xq) using the above procedure. However, as KA(Xe)=KA(AAA)≅A, we can define ιeq:KA(Xe)→LA(Xq) by ιeq(a):=ϕq(a). For notational purposes, we define ιpr:LA(Xp)→LA(Xr) to be the zero map whenever p,r∈P and r=pq for all q∈P.
We are primarily interested in situations where the underlying semigroup possesses some additional order structure. In particular we focus on the quasi-lattice ordered groups introduced by Nica [13]. A quasi-lattice ordered group (G,P) consists of a group G and a subsemigroup P of G such that P∩P−1={e}, and with respect to the partial order on G induced by p≤q⇔p−1q∈P, any two elements p,q∈G which have a common upper bound in P have a least common upper bound in P. It is straightforward to show that if two elements in G have a least common upper bound in P, then this least common upper bound is unique. We write p∨q for the least common upper bound of p,q∈G if it exists. For p,q∈G, we write p∨q=∞ if p and q have no common upper bound in P, and p∨q<∞ otherwise. We can also extend the notion of least upper bounds in (G,P) from pairs of elements in P to finite subsets of P. We define ⋁∅:=e, ⋁{p}:=p for any p∈P, and for any n≥2 and C:={p1,…pn}⊆P we define ⋁C:=p1∨⋯∨pn (since P∩P−1={e}, the relation ≤ is antisymmetric, and so this is well-defined).
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a product system over P. We say that X is compactly aligned if, whenever S∈KA(Xp) and T∈KA(Xp) for some p,q∈P with p∨q<∞, we have ιpp∨q(S)ιqp∨q(T)∈KA(Xp∨q). Note that this condition does not imply that either ιpp∨q(S) or ιqp∨q(T) is compact.
2.3. Representations of compactly aligned product systems, Nica covariance, and the Nica–Toeplitz algebra
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. A representation of X in a C∗-algebra B is a map ψ:X→B such that:
- (T1)
each ψp:=ψ∣Xp is a linear map, and ψe is a C∗-homomorphism;
2. (T2)
ψp(x)ψq(y)=ψpq(xy) for all p,q∈P and x∈Xp, y∈Xq;
3. (T3)
ψp(x)∗ψp(y)=ψe(⟨x,y⟩Ap) for all p∈P and x,y∈Xp.
It follows from (T1) and (T3) that a representation ψ is always norm-decreasing, and isometric if and only ψe is injective. Proposition 8.11 of [16] shows that for each p∈P, there exists a ∗-homomorphism ψ(p):KA(Xp)→B such that ψ(p)(Θx,y)=ψp(x)ψp(y)∗ for all x,y∈Xp.
We say that a representation ψ:X→B is Nica covariant if, for any p,q∈P and S∈KA(Xp), T∈KA(Xq), we have
[TABLE]
It follows from an application of the Hewitt–Cohen–Blanchard factorisation theorem that for any p,q∈P, we have
[TABLE]
Associated to each product system there exists a canonical Nica covariant representation called the Fock representation. We let FX:=⨁p∈PXp denote the space of sequences (xp)p∈P such that xp∈Xp for each p∈P and ∑p∈P⟨xp,xp⟩Ap converges in A. By [11, Proposition 1.1] there exists a well defined A-valued inner product on FX such that ⟨(xp)p∈P,(yp)p∈P⟩A=∑p∈P⟨xp,yp⟩Ap, and that FX is complete with respect to the induced norm. Letting A act pointwise from the left and right gives FX the structure of a Hilbert A-bimodule, which we call the Fock space of X. Lemma 5.3 of [6] shows that there exists an isometric Nica covariant representation l:X→LA(FX) such that lp(x)(yq)q∈P=(xyq)q∈P for each p∈P, x∈Xp, and (yq)q∈P∈FX. We call l the Fock representation of X.
Using [12, Theorem 2.10] it can be shown that there exists a C∗-algebra NTX, which we call the Nica–Toeplitz algebra of X, and a Nica covariant representation iX:X→NTX, that are universal in the following sense:
- (i)
NTX is generated by the image of iX;
2. (ii)
if ψ:X→B is any other Nica covariant representation of X, then there exists a ∗-homomorphism ψ∗:NTX→B such that ψ∗∘iX=ψ.
Since iX generates NTX, it follows that NTX=span{iX(x)iX(y)∗:x,y∈X}.
Proposition 4.7 of [6] shows that there exists a coaction δX:NTX→NTX⊗C∗(G) (we use an unadorned ⊗ to denote the minimal tensor product of C∗-algebras), which we call the canonical gauge coaction, such that δX(iXp(x))=iXp(x)⊗iG(p) for each p∈P and x∈Xp. For those readers interested in learning more about coactions in general, we suggest [4, Appendix A].
Lemma 1.3 of [15] shows that there exists a conditional expectation EδX of NTX onto the generalised fixed-point algebra NTXδX:={b∈NTX:δX(b)=b⊗iG(e)} defined by EδX:=(idNTX⊗ρ)∘δX, where ρ:C∗(G)→C is the canonical trace. It can be shown that NTXδX=span{iXp(Xp)iXp(Xp)∗:p∈P}, and, for any p,q∈P, x∈Xp, y∈Xq, we have EδX(iXp(x)iXq(y)∗)=δp,qiXp(x)iXq(y)∗. We are particularly interested in the situation where the expectation EδX is faithful on positive elements, i.e. EδX(b∗b)=0⇒b=0 for any b∈NTX. Inspired by [6, Definition 7.1], we say that a compactly aligned product system X is amenable if EδX is faithful on positive elements. The argument of [10, Lemma 6.5] shows that if G is an amenable group, then X is an amenable product system.
3. A uniqueness theorem for Nica–Toeplitz algebras
Firstly, we fix some notation.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group, X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A, and ψ:X→B(H) a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. We define a collection {Ppψ:p∈P} of projections in B(H) by Peψ:=idH and Ppψ:=projψp(Xp)H for each p∈P∖{e}. We also set P∞ψ:=0.
The purpose of this article is to prove the following result:
Theorem 3.2**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Suppose ψ:X→B(H) is a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H.
- (i)
If the product system X is amenable, and, for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}, the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful, then the induced ∗-homomorphism ψ∗:NTX→B(H) is faithful.
2. (ii)
If ψ∗ is faithful and ϕp(A)⊆KA(Xp) for each p∈P, then the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}.
The main step in the proof of the uniqueness theorem is to show that the expectation EδX is also implemented spatially, i.e. there is a compatible expectation Eψ of ψ∗(NTX) onto ψ∗(NTXδX). To get this compatible expectation we need to be able to calculate the norms of elements of ψ∗(NTXδX). To do this we will make use of the following well-known fact about operators on Hilbert spaces: if P1,…,Pn∈B(H) are mutually orthogonal projections that commute with T∈B(H) and satisfy ∑i=1nPi=idH, then ∥T∥B(H)=max1≤i≤n∥PiT∥B(H).
We now work towards showing that there exists a collection of mutually orthogonal projections in B(H) that decompose the identity and commute with everything in ψ∗(NTXδX).
We begin by showing that the ∗-homomorphism ψ(p):KA(Xp)→B(H) has a canonical extension to all of LA(Xp) (for each p∈P), and establish some properties of this extension.
Proposition 3.3**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. Then
- (i)
For each p∈P, there exists a representation ρpψ:LA(Xp)→B(H) such that for each S∈LA(Xp),
[TABLE]
and ρpψ(S) is zero on (ψp(Xp)H)⊥.
2. (ii)
ρpψ∣KA(Xp)=ψ(p).
3. (iii)
For any q∈P and a∈A≅KA(Xe), we have
ρqψ(ιeq(a))=ρeψ(a)Pqψ.
Furthermore, if p∈P∖{e}, then
ρpqψ(ιppq(S))=ρpψ(S)Ppqψ
for any and S∈LA(Xp).
4. (iv)
If K⊆H is a ψe-invariant subspace of H, then the subspace M:=ψp(Xp)K is ρpψ-invariant. Furthermore, if ψe∣K is faithful, then ρpψ∣M is also faithful.
Proof.
Observe that for any p∈P and x,y∈Xp and h,k∈H, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, there exists a linear isometry U:Xp⊗AH→H such that
U(x⊗Ah)=ψp(x)h
for each x∈Xp and h∈H. Equation (3.1) shows that U∗(ψp(x)h)=x⊗Ah for each x∈Xp and h∈H. We claim that U∗∣(ψp(Xp)H)⊥=0. To see this, observe that for any f∈(ψp(Xp)H)⊥ and y∈Xp, h∈H we have
[TABLE]
and hence U∗(f)=0. Since
Xp⊗AH=(Xp⋅A)⊗AH=Xp⊗Aψe(A)H,
we may assume that the representation ψe is nondegenerate without loss of generality. With this in mind, define ρpψ:LA(Xp)→B(H) by
[TABLE]
for each S∈LA(Xp). Thus, for each S∈LA(Xp), the restriction ρpψ(S)∣(ψp(Xp)H)⊥ is zero, whilst for any x∈Xp and h∈H we have
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of part (i).
Since both ψ(p) and ρpψ are ∗-homomorphisms, to prove (ii) it suffices to show that ψ(p) and ρpψ agree on rank-one operators. Fix x,y∈Xp. Firstly, we check that ψ(p)(Θx,y) and ρpψ(Θx,y) agree on ψp(Xp)H. For any z∈Xp and h∈H, we have
[TABLE]
Since both ψ(p)(Θx,y) and ρpψ(Θx,y) are linear and continuous, we conclude that they agree on ψp(Xp)H.
It remains to check that ψ(p)(Θx,y) and ρpψ(Θx,y) agree on the orthogonal complement (ψp(Xp)H)⊥. Making use of part (i), we see that the restriction ρpψ(Θx,y)∣(ψp(Xp)H)⊥=0. Since
[TABLE]
for any h∈(ψp(Xp)H)⊥ and k∈H, we conclude that ψ(p)(Θx,y)∣(ψp(Xp)H)⊥=0 as well. This completes the proof of part (ii).
We now prove part (iii). Let q∈P and a∈A. If q=e, then Pqψ=idH, and so
[TABLE]
On the other hand, if q=e, then Pqψ=projψq(Xq)H. Hence, both ρeψ(a)Pq and ρeψ(ιeq(a)) are zero on (ψq(Xq)H)⊥. Since ρqψ(ιeq(a)) and ρeψ(a)Pqψ are linear and continuous, whilst
[TABLE]
for any x∈Xq and h∈H, we see that ρqψ(ιeq(a)) and ρeψ(a)Pqψ also agree on ψq(Xq)H. Thus, ρqψ(ιeq(a))=ρeψ(a)Pqψ.
Now fix p∈P∖{e} and S∈LA(Xp). Since pq=e, both ρpqψ(ιppq(S)) and ρpψ(S)Ppqψ are zero on the orthogonal complement (ψpq(Xpq)H)⊥. Observe that for any x∈Xp, y∈Xq, and h∈H, we have
[TABLE]
which by part (i) is the same as
[TABLE]
Since ψpq(Xpq)H=ψp(Xp)ψq(Xq)H, whilst ρpqψ(ιppq(S)) and ρpψ(S)Ppqψ are linear and continuous, we conclude that ρpqψ(ιppq(S)) and ρpψ(S)Ppqψ are also equal on ψpq(Xpq)H.
Finally, we prove part (iv). Firstly, observe that the subspace M is ρpψ-invariant, since ρpψ(S)(ψp(x)k)=ψp(Sx)k∈M for any S∈LA(Xp), x∈Xp, and k∈K. Now suppose that ψe∣K is faithful. Since LA(Xp) acts faithfully on Xp, the induced representation Xp-IndALA(Xp)(ψe∣K):LA(Xp)→B(Xp⊗AK) is faithful by [17, Corollary 2.74]. Since U implements a unitary equivalence between Xp-IndALA(Xp)(ψe∣K) and ρpψ∣M, and unitary equivalence preserves the faithfulness of representations, we conclude that ρpψ∣M is faithful.
∎
We now show what a product of projections from the collection {Ppψ:p∈P} looks like.
Proposition 3.4**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. Then for each p,q∈P, we have
[TABLE]
In particular, the projections {Ppψ:p∈P} commute.
Proof.
Firstly, observe that part (i) of Proposition 3.3 implies that Ppψ=ρpψ(idXp) for any p∈P∖{e}.
Next, we show that if p∈P and (ei)i∈I is the canonical approximate identity for the C∗-algebra KA(Xp), then
- (i)
limi∈I(eix)=x for each x∈Xp;
2. (ii)
\lim_{i\in I}\big{(}\rho_{p}^{\psi}(e_{i})\big{)}=\rho_{p}^{\psi}\left(\mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{X}_{p}}\right) (converging in the strong operator topology).
To see (i), fix x∈Xp and ε>0.
Choose x′∈Xp so that x=x′⋅⟨x′,x′⟩A by the Hewitt–Cohen–Blanchard factorisation theorem. Choose i∈I such that for all j≥i,
[TABLE]
Thus, for all j≥i, we have
[TABLE]
Since ε>0 was arbitrary, we conclude that limi∈I(eix)=x for each x∈Xp.
We now move on to proving (ii). Fix h∈H and ε>0. If h∈(ψp(Xp)H)⊥, then
[TABLE]
for each i∈I. Thus, \lim_{i\in I}\big{\|}\rho_{p}^{\psi}(e_{i})h-\rho_{p}^{\psi}\left(\mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{X}_{p}}\right)h\big{\|}_{\mathcal{H}}=0. On the other hand, if h∈ψp(Xp)H, then we can choose x1,…,xn∈Xp and h1,…,hn∈H such that
[TABLE]
Since ∥ei∥LA(Xp)≤1 for each i∈I and ρpψ is norm-decreasing, we see that
[TABLE]
By (i), for each 1≤i≤n, we can choose ji∈I such that whenever k≥ji,
[TABLE]
As I is directed, we can choose m∈I such that m≥ji for each 1≤i≤n. Since ψp is norm-decreasing, we see that for any k≥m,
[TABLE]
Thus, for each k≥m,
[TABLE]
Since ε>0 was arbitrary, we conclude that \lim_{i\in I}\big{\|}\rho_{p}^{\psi}(e_{i})h-\rho_{p}^{\psi}\left(\mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{X}_{p}}\right)h\big{\|}_{\mathcal{H}}=0 for each h∈H. Thus, limi∈Iρpψ(ei)=ρpψ(idXp) in the strong operator topology.
Finally, we are ready to prove that PpψPqψ=Pp∨qψ for every p,q∈P. Since Peψ=idH, the result is trivial when p=e or q=e. Thus, we may as well suppose that p,q=e. Let (ei)i∈I and (fj)j∈J be the canonical approximate identities for KA(Xp) and KA(Xq) respectively. Then for any i∈I and j∈J, Proposition 3.3 and the Nica covariance of ψ tell us that
[TABLE]
Hence, by (ii), we have
[TABLE]
Thus, PpψPqψ=Pp∨qψ for each p,q∈P.
∎
Our aim is to use the projections defined in Definition 3.1 to construct a collection of mutually orthogonal projections in B(H) that decompose the identity and commute with everything in ψ∗(NTXδX).
Definition 3.5**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. Let F be a finite subset of P. For each C⊆F, define
[TABLE]
where, by convention, the product over the empty set is idH.
Whilst we have defined the projections QC,Fψ, for every subset C of F, we are particularly interested in the projections corresponding to so called initial segments of F.
Definition 3.6**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group. Let F⊆P be a finite set. A subset C⊆F is said to be an initial segment of F if ⋁C<∞ and
C={t∈F:t≤⋁C}.
The next result shows how the projections \{Q_{C,F}^{\psi}:\text{CisaninitialsegmentofF}\} and {Ppψ:p∈P} interact with the operators {ψp(x):p∈P,x∈Xp}.
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H.
- (i)
Let p,q∈P and x∈Xp. Then
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
If F⊆P is finite and p∈F, then
[TABLE]
for any initial segment C of F.
Proof.
Fix p,q∈P and x∈Xp. If p∨q=∞, then ψq(y)∗ψp(x)=0 for any y∈Xq. Hence, for any h,g∈H, it follows that
[TABLE]
Thus, ψp(Xp)H⊆(ψq(Xq)H)⊥, and so Pqψψp(x)=0.
Now suppose that p∨q<∞. If p=p∨q, then p≥q, and so
[TABLE]
If p=p∨q, then for any y∈Xp−1(p∨q) and h∈H, we have
[TABLE]
Consequently, ψp(x)Pp−1(p∨q)ψ and Pqψψp(x) agree on ψp−1(p∨q)(Xp−1(p∨q))H. It remains to check that they agree on the orthogonal complement (ψp−1(p∨q)(Xp−1(p∨q))H)⊥. Let f∈(ψp−1(p∨q)(Xp−1(p∨q))H)⊥. We need to show that Pqψψp(x)f=0. It suffices to show that ψp(x)f∈(ψq(Xq)H)⊥: for any y∈Xq and h∈H, we have
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of (i).
We now prove part (ii). Fix a finite set F⊆P with p∈F. Let C be an initial segment of F. If p≤⋁C, then p∨(⋁C)=⋁C<∞. By part (i) it follows that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, suppose that p≤⋁C. Since p∈F, this implies that C=F. Moreover, since C is an initial segment of F, this forces p∈F∖C. Therefore,
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of part (ii).
∎
Using the previous result we can show that every element of ψ∗(NTXδX) commutes with the projections {Ppψ:p∈P} and {QC,Fψ:C⊆F}.
Proposition 3.8**.**
For any q∈P, the projection Pqψ commutes with every element of ψ∗(NTXδX). In particular, if F⊆P is finite and C⊆F, then QC,Fψ commutes with every element of ψ∗(NTXδX).
Proof.
Since ψ∗(NTXδX)=span{ψp(Xp)ψp(Xp)∗}, it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
for each x,y∈Xp. Via two applications of Lemma 3.7, we see that
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
We now show that the projections \{Q_{C,F}^{\psi}:\text{CisaninitialsegmentofF}\} are mutually orthogonal and decompose the identity operator on H.
Proposition 3.9**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X. Let F⊆P be finite. Then
- (i)
if C⊆F is not an initial segment of F, then QC,Fψ=0;
2. (ii)
{QC,Fψ:C⊆F is an initial segment of F}* is a decomposition of the identity on H into mutually orthogonal projections.*
Proof.
Suppose C⊆F is not an initial segment of F. If ⋁C=∞, then
[TABLE]
Alternatively, ⋁C<∞ and C={t∈F:t≤⋁C}. Thus, C=F. Choose t∈F∖C with t≤⋁C. Since t∨(⋁C)=⋁C, we see that
[TABLE]
Thus, QC,Fψ=0, which proves part (i).
We now prove part (ii). Since QC,Fψ=0 whenever C is not an initial segment of F, it suffices to show that {QC,Fψ:C⊆F} is a decomposition of the identity into mutually orthogonal projections. Firstly, we show orthogonality. Suppose C,D⊆F are distinct. Without loss of generality, we may assume that D∖C=∅. Thus, C=F and we can choose t∈D∖C. Since t∨(⋁D)=⋁D, we have
[TABLE]
It remains to check that ∑C⊆FQC,Fψ=idH. To prove this, we will use induction on ∣F∣. When ∣F∣=0 we have
[TABLE]
Now let n≥0 and suppose that ∑C⊆FQC,Fψ=idH whenever F⊆P and ∣F∣=n. Fix F′⊆P with ∣F′∣=n+1. Then, for any y∈F′, we have
[TABLE]
where the last equality follows from applying the inductive hypothesis to F′∖{y}.
∎
Putting these results together we get an expression for the norm of an element in ψ∗(NTXδX) that does not depend on the representation ψ.
Lemma 3.10**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. If Z:=∑kψpk(xk)ψpk(yk)∗∈ψ∗(NTXδX) is a finite sum, then
[TABLE]
for any finite set F⊆P containing each pk. Furthermore, if the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let F be a finite subset of P containing each pk. Since QC,Fψ commutes with Z for each C⊆F (by Proposition 3.8) and \{Q_{C,F}^{\psi}:\text{CisaninitialsegmentofF}\} is an orthogonal decomposition of the identity, we have that
[TABLE]
However, for any initial segment C of F, Lemma 3.7 shows that
[TABLE]
Using parts (ii) and (iii) of Proposition 3.3, this is equal to
[TABLE]
Now suppose that for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}, the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful. To complete the proof we will show that the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful, and hence
[TABLE]
Let K:=∏{t∈F∖C:t∨(⋁C)<∞}(idH−P(⋁C)−1(t∨(⋁C))ψ)H. Since ψe(a)Ppψ=Ppψψe(a), for each a∈A and p∈P, by Lemma 3.7, we see that K is a ψe-invariant subspace of H. As C is an initial segment of F, if t∈F∖C with t∨(⋁C)<∞, then t≤⋁C, and so (⋁C)−1(t∨(⋁C))=e. Thus, ψe∣K is faithful. Therefore, by Proposition 3.3 it follows that M:=ψ⋁C(X⋁C)K is a ρ⋁Cψ-invariant subspace and ρ⋁Cψ∣M is faithful. To show that the map LA(X⋁C)∋T↦QC,Fψρ⋁Cψ(T)∈B(H) is faithful, it remains to check that M⊆QC,FψH. Lemma 3.7 tells us that for any x∈X⋁C, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, QC,Fψ is the identity on
[TABLE]
and so M⊆QC,FψH.
∎
Now that we have an expression for the norm of elements in ψ∗(NTXδX), we are ready to show that the expectation EδX can be implemented spatially.
Proposition 3.11**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X a compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Let ψ:X→B(H) be a Nica covariant representation of X on a Hilbert space H. Suppose that for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}, the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful. Then
- (i)
ψ∗∣NTXδX* is faithful; and*
2. (ii)
there exists a linear map Eψ:ψ∗(NTX)→ψ∗(NTXδX) such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Firstly, we prove that the restriction of ψ∗ to NTXδX is faithful. Fix a finite sum Z:=∑kiXpk(xk)iXpk(yk)∗∈NTXδX. Let σ:NTX→B(H′) be a faithful representation. Thus, σ∘iX is a Nica covariant representation of X on H′. For any finite set F⊆P containing each pk, two applications of Lemma 3.10 show that
[TABLE]
where we used the fact that each QC,Fσ∘iX is a projection and each ∗-homomorphism ρ⋁Cσ∘iX is norm-decreasing.
Thus, ψ∗∣NTXδX is faithful.
Next we prove part (ii). We first show that for any finite sum ∑kψpk(xk)ψqk(yk)∗, we have
[TABLE]
Let F⊆P be the finite set consisting of each pk and qk. By Lemma 3.10, there exists an initial segment C of F such that
[TABLE]
For each s,t∈C with s=t and (s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C))<∞ define
[TABLE]
Observe that for any s,t∈C with s=t and (s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C))<∞ we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Thus, βs,t≥⋁C. Hence, P⋁CψPβs,tψ=P(⋁C)∨βs,tψ=Pβs,tψ, and we can define a projection
[TABLE]
We claim that
[TABLE]
Since RC,Fψ commutes with ∑k:pk=qkψpk(xk)ψpk(yk)∗ by Proposition 3.8, it suffices to show that RC,Fψψp(x)ψq(y)∗RC,Fψ=0 whenever x∈Xp, y∈Xq, with p,q∈F and p=q. Firstly, if p∈C or q∈C, then p≤⋁C or q≤⋁C (since C is an initial segment of F), and so by Lemma 3.7 we have QC,Fψψp(x)=0 or QC,Fψψq(y)=0. Consequently,
[TABLE]
Alternatively, if p,q≤⋁C and (p−1(⋁C))∨(q−1(⋁C))=∞, then
[TABLE]
Hence, Lemma 3.7 tells us that
[TABLE]
With this in mind, suppose that p,q∈C and (p−1(⋁C))∨(q−1(⋁C))<∞. Since p and q are distinct, it follows that either p−1(⋁C)<(p−1(⋁C))∨(q−1(⋁C)) or q−1(⋁C)<(p−1(⋁C))∨(q−1(⋁C)). By taking adjoints, we may assume, without loss of generality, that p−1<(p−1(⋁C))∨(q−1(⋁C)). Therefore,
[TABLE]
Consequently, an application of Lemma 3.7 shows that
[TABLE]
Additionally, we claim that the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful. Let
[TABLE]
As ψe(a)Pqψ=Pqψψe(a), for each a∈A and q∈P, by Lemma 3.7, we see that K is a ψe-invariant subspace of H. Since C is an initial segment of F, if p∈F∖C with p∨(⋁C)<∞, then p≤⋁C, and so (⋁C)−1(p∨(⋁C))=e. We also claim that for any s,t∈C with s=t and (s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C))<∞, we have (⋁C)−1βs,t=e. Firstly, if s−1(⋁C)<(s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C)), then
[TABLE]
On the other hand, if s−1(⋁C)=(s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C)), then
[TABLE]
since s=t. Thus, ψe∣K is faithful. Hence, by Proposition 3.3 it follows that the subspace M:=ψ⋁C(X⋁C)K is ρ⋁Cψ-invariant and ρ⋁Cψ∣M is faithful. To see that the map LA(X⋁C)∋T↦RC,Fψρ⋁Cψ(T)∈B(H) is faithful, it remains to show that M⊆RC,FψH. Suppose s,t∈C with s=t and (s−1(⋁C))∨(t−1(⋁C))<∞. Since ⋁C≤βs,t, Lemma 3.7 tells us that for any x∈X⋁C we have
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
Hence, RC,Fψ is the identity on
[TABLE]
and so M⊆RC,FψH.
Putting all of this together, we see that
[TABLE]
Since the norm estimate (3.2) holds, the formula ψp(x)ψq(y)∗↦δp,qψp(x)ψq(y)∗ extends to a map on ψ∗(NTX)=span{ψp(x)ψq(y)∗:p,q∈P, x∈Xp, y∈Xq} by linearity and continuity, which we denote by Eψ. Furthermore, for any p,q∈P, x∈Xp, y∈Xq, we have
[TABLE]
Since NTX=span{iXp(x)iXq(y)∗:p,q∈P,x∈Xp,y∈Xq}, whilst the maps Eψ∘ψ∗ and ψ∗∘EδX are linear and norm-decreasing, we conclude that Eψ∘ψ∗=ψ∗∘EδX. This completes the proof of part (ii).
∎
Finally, we prove the uniqueness theorem for Nica–Toeplitz algebras. We remind the reader that if (G,P) is a quasi-lattice ordered group with G amenable, then any compactly aligned product system X over P is automatically amenable (in the sense that the expectation EδX is faithful on positive elements).
Proof of Theorem 3.2.
Suppose that the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful for any finite set K⊆P∖{e}. Let b∈NTX be such that ψ∗(b)=0. Thus,
[TABLE]
Since ψ∗ is faithful on NTXδX=EδX(NTX), we must have EδX(b∗b)=0. As EδX is faithful on positive elements, we conclude that b=0. Hence, ψ∗ is faithful.
We now prove (ii). Suppose that ψ∗ is faithful and ϕp(A)⊆KA(Xp) for each p∈P. Fix a finite set K⊆P∖{e}. For each a∈A, define
[TABLE]
We claim that for any Nica covariant representation φ:X→B(H′) we have
[TABLE]
To see this, firstly observe that for any t∈P and a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Hence, to prove that Equation (3.3) holds, it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
To prove this we use induction on ∣K∣. When ∣K∣=0 we have
[TABLE]
Now let n∈N and suppose we have equality whenever K⊆P and ∣K∣=n. Fix K′⊆P with ∣K′∣=n+1. Let s∈K′. Then
[TABLE]
This proves that Equation (3.4) holds, and so Equation (3.3) follows.
Now let π:A→B(H′) be a faithful nondegenerate representation of A. Define Ψ:X→B(FX⊗AH′) by
[TABLE]
where l:X→LA(FX) is the Fock representation of X. Since l is a Nica covariant representation of X and FX-IndALA(FX)π is a ∗-homomorphism, Ψ is a Nica covariant representation of X. We claim that the representation
[TABLE]
is faithful. To see this, suppose that a∈A∖{0}, so that aa∗=0. As π is faithful, we can find h∈H′ such that π(aa∗)h=0. For any t∈P∖{e} we have
[TABLE]
Hence, it follows that PtΨ=projΨt(Xt)(FX⊗AH′) is zero on A⊗AH′⊆FX⊗AH′. Thus, as e∈K we see that
[TABLE]
which is nonzero because
[TABLE]
Therefore, A∋a↦Ψe(a)∏t∈K(idFX⊗AH′−PtΨ)∈B(FX⊗AH′) is faithful.
Putting all of this together, and using that ψ∗ is faithful at the penultimate equality, we see that for any a∈A,
[TABLE]
Hence, A\ni a\mapsto\psi_{e}(a)\prod_{t\in K}\big{(}\mathrm{id}_{\mathcal{H}}-P_{t}^{\psi}\big{)}\in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) is faithful.
∎
In practice, we are often interested in representations of product systems in more general C∗-algebras, rather than on Hilbert spaces. The following corollary shows that provided the coefficient algebra acts compactly on each fibre of the product system, we can still characterise the faithfulness of the induced representation.
Corollary 3.12**.**
Let (G,P) be a quasi-lattice ordered group and X an amenable compactly aligned product system over P with coefficient algebra A. Suppose that A acts compactly on each Xp. Let ψ:X→B be a Nica covariant representation of X in a C∗-algebra B. Then the induced ∗-homomorphism ψ∗:NTX→B is faithful if and only if for every a∈A∖{0} and every finite set K⊆P∖{e}, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Fix a faithful representation π:B→B(H). Then π∘ψ:X→B(H) is a Nica covariant representation with induced representation (π∘ψ)∗=π∘ψ∗. If a∈A and t∈P∖{e}, then Proposition 3.3 implies that
[TABLE]
Hence, for any a∈A and any finite set K⊆P∖{e}, we have that
[TABLE]
and so the result follows from Theorem 3.2.
∎
4. Acknowledgements
The results in this article are from my PhD thesis. Thank you to my supervisors Adam Rennie and Aidan Sims at the University of Wollongong for their advice and encouragement during my PhD and during the writing of this article.