This paper develops the theory of variable exponent Hardy spaces on infinite graphs with discrete Laplacians, including their atomic decompositions and boundedness of key operators, advancing harmonic analysis on graph structures.
Contribution
It introduces a new framework for variable exponent Hardy spaces on graphs and analyzes the boundedness of classical harmonic analysis operators within this setting.
Findings
01
Established atomic and molecular decompositions for these Hardy spaces.
02
Proved boundedness of Littlewood-Paley functions, Riesz transforms, and spectral multipliers.
03
Extended harmonic analysis tools to variable exponent spaces on graphs.
Abstract
In this paper we develop the theory of variable exponent Hardy spaces associated with discrete Laplacians on infinite graphs. Our Hardy spaces are defined by square integrals, atomic and molecular decompositions. Also we study boundedness properties of Littlewood-Paley functions, Riesz transforms, and spectral multipliers for discrete Laplacians on variable exponent Hardy spaces.
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.
Full text
††footnotetext: Last modification: March 8, 2024.
Variable exponent Hardy spaces associated with discrete Laplacians on graphs
V. Almeida
,
J. J. Betancor
,
A. J. Castro
and
L. Rodríguez-Mesa
Víctor Almeida,
Jorge J. Betancor,
Lourdes Rodríguez-Mesa
Departamento de Análisis Matemático,
Universidad de La Laguna,
Campus de Anchieta, Avda. Astrofísico Sánchez, s/n,
In this paper we develop the theory of variable exponent Hardy spaces associated with discrete Laplacians on infinite graphs. Our Hardy spaces are defined by square integrals, atomic and molecular decompositions. Also we study boundedness properties of Littlewood-Paley functions, Riesz transforms, and spectral multipliers for discrete Laplacians on variable exponent Hardy spaces.
The authors are partially supported by Spanish Government grant
MTM2016-79436-P. The third author is also supported by Nazarbayev
University Social Policy Grant.
1. Introduction
Variable exponent Lp(⋅)-spaces were consider for the first
time by Orlicz [43]. Later, Nakano [41, p. 284] pointed
out that those spaces appear as special cases of the ones studied in
[41]. Inspired by Nakano’s results, modular spaces were
investigated by several authors. An important step in the study of
variable exponent spaces was the paper of Kovác̆ik and Rákosník
[35] where the main properties of the Lebesgue and Sobolev
spaces with variable exponent were established. In this century the
variable exponent spaces have been studied systematically and
intensively. Interesting connections between variable exponent
spaces and other areas have been developed (see, for instance,
[1], [2], [12], [21],
[47] and [48]). In the recent monographs [17] and
[23] the theory of variable exponent Lebesgue and Sobolev
spaces is developed in an exhaustive way.
In this paper we are interested in variable exponent Hardy spaces.
The classical theory of Hardy spaces in Rn has been
extended to a variable exponent setting by Nakai and Sawano
[39], Sawano [53], and Cruz-Uribe and Wang [20].
Variable exponent Hardy spaces Hp(⋅)(Rn) were
characterized by using Riesz transforms by Yang, Zhuo and Nakai
[61], and intrinsic square functions by Zhuo, Yang and Liang
[64]. Hardy spaces of variable exponent
HLp(⋅)(Rn) associated with certain classes of
operators L have been investigated by Zhuo and Yang ([60]
and [63]) and Yang, Zhang and Zhuo [58].
Our objective is to study variable exponent Hardy spaces on graphs.
Our graphs will be spaces of homogeneous type in the sense of
Coifman and Weiss [14]. Hardy spaces on spaces of
homogeneous type were firstly studied by Coifman and Weiss
[15] and Macías and Segovia ([36] and
[37]).
Let X be a set equipped with a non negative quasidistance d. Suppose that μ is a σ-finite measure defined on a σ-algebra on X containing the open balls associated with d. We assume that μ(B)>0, for every d-ball B. We say that the triple (X,μ,d) is a space of homogeneous type when μ satisfies the following doubling property: there exists C>0 such that, for every x∈X and r>0, μ(B(x,2r))≤Cμ(B(x,r)). Note that this implies that there exist C,D>0 such that μ(B(x,r))≤C(r/s)Dμ(B(x,s)), for every x∈X and 0<s<r.
Assume that p:X→(0,∞) is a μ-measurable function. If f is a complex μ-measurable function on X we define the modular ρp(⋅)(f) of f by
[TABLE]
The variable exponent Lebesgue space Lp(⋅)(X) is the collection of all complex μ-measurable functions f such that,
there exists λ>0 for which ρp(⋅)(λf)<∞. The quasinorm ∥⋅∥Lp(⋅)(X) on Lp(⋅)(X) is defined by
[TABLE]
As it was mentioned, the theory of variable exponent Lebesgue spaces
in Rn can be found in the monographs [17] and
[23]. A very important problem in this field was to find
conditions for the exponent p(⋅) such that the
Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator M is bounded in
Lp(⋅)(Ω) when Ω is a subset of Rn.
Diening [22] and Pick and Ruzicka [46] obtained the
first results concerning this question. Later, Nekvinda [42]
and Cruz-Uribe, Fiorenza and Neugebauer [19] improve them.
Maximal functions are useful tools in our developments. The above
results on Rn were extended to spaces of homogeneous
type in [31], [32] and [34] by considering bounded
spaces or using a ball condition as in [22]. The most general
result for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator M on
Lp(⋅)(X) when X is unbounded was established by
Adamowicz, Harjulehto and Hästö [3]. We say that
p:X→(0,∞) is log-Hölder continuous in X
when the two following properties are satisfied
(i)
There exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
There exist x0∈X, C>0 and a∈R such that
[TABLE]
As it was proved in [3, Lemma 2.1] the property (ii) does not depend on x0. We consider the following class of exponent Plog(X) defined by
[TABLE]
Note that if p∈Plog(X), then rp∈Plog(X), for every r>0. If p:X→(0,∞) is a function we define
[TABLE]
We always assume that 0<p−≤p+<∞.
The following result, [3, Corollary 1.8], will be very useful in the sequel.
Theorem A**.**
Let X be a space of homogeneous type. Assume that p∈Plog(X) with p−>1. Then, there exists C>0 such
that
[TABLE]
Recently, Zhuo, Sawano and Yang [62] have studied Hardy spaces
with variable exponents on RD spaces. RD spaces are special spaces
of homogeneous type satisfying an inverse doubling condition (see
[30], [40] and [59]). If μ is a measure defining
a RD space X, then μ({x})=0, x∈X. This is an important
point because we are going to define Hardy spaces on graphs that are
spaces of homogeneous type but they are not RD spaces.
We now describe the graphs that we consider in this paper (see
[8] and [10]). By Γ we denote a countably infinite
set. The elements of Γ are called vertices of the graph.
ν represents a nonnegative symmetric function defined on
Γ×Γ. We say that two vertices x,y∈Γ are
neighbors when ν(x,y)>0, and in that case we write x∼y.
For every x∈Γ we denote deg(x)=card{y∈Γ:x∼y}. We assume that deg(x)>0, for every x∈Γ, and
supx∈Γdeg(x)<∞. We now define a measure μ on
Γ as follows. For every x∈Γ, μ({x}) is given
by
[TABLE]
To simplify we write μ(x) instead of μ({x}), for every x∈Γ. For every A⊂Γ we define μ(A)=∑x∈Aμ(x). Thus, μ is a measure on Γ. We assume that μ(Γ)=+∞.
If x,y∈Γ, we say that they are connected when x∼y or there exist x1,x2,...,xn∈Γ such that x∼x1∼x2∼ … ∼xn∼y, and in that case we call [x,x1,...,xn,y]
a path of length n+1 joining x and y. We assume that each x,y∈Γ are connected. Note that this fact implies that μ(x)=0, for every x∈Γ. We now define a distance d on Γ as follows
•
d(x,x)=0;
•
d(x,y)=1 if, and only if, x=y and x∼y;
•
d(x,y)=n≥2 when x=y, ν(x,y)=0 and n is the minimum length of all possible paths joining x and y.
As usual we denote by B(x,r)={y∈Γ:d(x,y)<r}, for every x∈Γ and r>0. Note that, in general, a ball has not a unique center and a unique radius. In particular, B(x,r)=B(x,[r]), x∈Γ and r>0, where [r]=n provided that n−1<r≤n, with n∈N+. Here and in the sequel N+=N∖{0}. The distance d defines the discrete topology on Γ.
We define on Γ the Markov kernel p by
[TABLE]
The following two useful properties hold
(i)
∑y∈Γp(x,y)=1,x∈Γ,
2. (ii)
p(x,y)μ(x)=p(y,x)μ(y),x,y∈Γ.
By using the Markov kernel we define the Markov operator P by
[TABLE]
where f is a complex function defined on Γ. The operator L=I−P is the discrete Laplace operator on Γ associated with ν.
For every n∈N, n≥2, we consider the n-th convolution power of the Markov kernel pn defined by
[TABLE]
We consider p1=p. Then, for every n∈N+, we have that
[TABLE]
and P0f=f, where again f is a complex function defined on Γ.
In our setting we assume as in [6] the following conditions.
(a)
The triple (Γ,μ,d) is a space of homogeneous type. Hence, the measure μ is doubling with respect to the distance d an there exist C,D>0 such that
[TABLE]
2. (b)
There exist C,c>0 such that
[TABLE]
If μ is doubling you only need that (1.2) be true when x=y in order to (1.2) hold for any pair of x,y∈Γ.
3. (c)
For certain α>0, Γ satisfies property Δ(α), that is, for every x∈Γ, x∼x, and ν(x,y)≥αμ(x), for every x,y∈Γ such that x∼y.
We recall (see [10, (3)]) that when μ is doubling, Γ
satisfies Δ(α) with α>0, and
(pn)n=1∞ verifies (1.2), then there exist c4,C4>0 such
that, for every n∈N+, k∈N and x,y,∈Γ,
[TABLE]
where pn,k represents the kernel of the operator
(I−P)kPn, for every n∈N+ and k∈N.
Our first objective is to define Hardy spaces with variable exponents by using Littlewood-Paley square functions. We consider the square function SL defined by
[TABLE]
SL defines a bounded operator in L2(Γ) ([10, p. 3460]).
In [8] and [10] Hardy spaces on Γ were defined. We
extend definitions and results in [10] to variable exponent
settings.
We say that f∈L2(Γ) is in HLp(⋅)(Γ) when SL(f)∈Lp(⋅)(Γ). We define the Hardy space HLp(⋅)(Γ) as the completion of HLp(⋅)(Γ) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥HLp(⋅)(Γ) where
[TABLE]
Here and in the sequel we write ∥⋅∥p(⋅) to refer to
∥⋅∥Lp(⋅)(Γ).
Before giving a characterization of HLp(⋅)(Γ) by using atoms we introduce tent spaces in our variable exponent setting.
If β>0 and x∈Γ, we denote by Υβ(x)
the cone with vertex x and aperture β defined by
[TABLE]
To simplify we write Υ(x) to denote Υ1(x). If E⊂Γ and β>0 we define the tent Tβ(E) over E with overture β as follows:
[TABLE]
We also write T(E) to refer to T1(E). If x∈Γ and
r>0 we can see that the tent T(B) over B=B(x0,r0) is the set
given by
[TABLE]
Assume that f is a complex valued function defined on Γ×N+. We consider the following sublinear operator
[TABLE]
We define the tent space T2p(⋅)(Γ) as follows. A complex valued function f defined on Γ×N+ is said to be in T2p(⋅)(Γ) provided that A(f)∈Lp(⋅)(Γ). On T2p(⋅)(Γ) we consider the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥T2p(⋅)(Γ) given by
[TABLE]
If 0<q<∞, we say that a complex valued function a defined on Γ×N+ is a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom when there exists a ball B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, such that
(i)
suppa⊆T(B),
2. (ii)
∥a∥T2q(Γ)≤μ(B)1/q∥χB∥p(⋅)−1.
Here and in the sequel if E⊂Γ, we denote by χE
the characteristic function supported in E. If 0<r<∞,
T2r(Γ) represents the tent space T2p(⋅)(Γ)
when p(x)=r, x∈Γ.
For every sequences (λj)j∈N of complex numbers and (Bj)j∈N of balls we define
[TABLE]
where p=min{1,p−}.
We now establish a description of T2p(⋅)(Γ) by using atoms.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let p(⋅)∈Plog(Γ) and 1<q<∞.
(i) For certain C>0 the following property is satisfied: if f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ) there exist, for each j∈N, λj>0 and a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom aj associated with a ball Bj such that
[TABLE]
where the series converges absolutely for every (x,k)∈Γ×N+ and
[TABLE]
Moreover, f=∑j∈Nλjaj in the sense of convergence in T2p(⋅)(Γ).
(ii) There exists C>0 such that if, for every j∈N, λj∈C and aj is
a (T2p(⋅)q)-atom associated with the ball Bj such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞, then the series f=∑j∈Nλjaj converges absolutely for every (x,k)∈Γ×N+ and in T2p(⋅)(Γ). Furthermore
[TABLE]
(iii) If 0<r<∞ and f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T2r(Γ), then the series in (1.4) also converges to f in T2r(Γ).
By applying Theorem 1.1 we obtain an atomic decomposition for the Hardy space HLp(⋅)(Γ).
Let M∈N+ and 1<q<∞. We say that a∈Lq(Γ) is a (q,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with a ball B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, when there exists b∈Lq(Γ) satisfying that:
A function f∈L2(Γ) is in HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) when there exist, for every j∈N, λj∈C and a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with the ball Bj such that
[TABLE]
and A({λj},{Bj})<∞. For every f∈HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) we define ∥f∥HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) by
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken of over all the pair of sequences {λj}j∈N and {Bj}j∈N satisfying that, for every j∈N, λj∈C and there exists a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with the ball Bj such that f=∑j∈Nλjaj, in L2(Γ) and A({λj},{Bj})<∞. By HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) we represent the completion of HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ).
By using Theorem 1.1 we prove that the Hardy spaces HLp(⋅)(Γ) and HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) coincide.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ), r≥2, r>p+, M∈N+, and M>2D/p−. The following assertions hold.
(a) There exists C>0 satisfying that: if, for every j∈N, λj∈C and aj is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with the ball Bj such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞, then the series ∑j∈Nλjaj converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ) and
[TABLE]
where f=∑j∈Nλjaj.
(b) There exists C>0 such that, for every f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ), there exist, for each j∈N, λj∈C and a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with the ball Bj such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The Hardy space HLp(⋅)(Γ) coincides with the space
Lp(⋅)(Γ) provided that p∈Plog(Γ) and p−>1 (see Proposition
4.7).
Next we introduce the molecules in our setting that will be useful
to study the boundedness of operators in HLp(⋅)(Γ)
(see Section 5).
Let M∈N+, 1<q<∞, and ε>0. We say
that a function m:Γ⟶C is a
(q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule when there exist a function
b:Γ⟶C and a ball B=B(xB,rB) with
xB∈Γ and rB≥1 such that
(i) m=LMb and,
(ii) For every k=0,...,M,
[TABLE]
where, for every j∈N+, Sj(B)=B(xB,2j+1rB)∖B(xB,2j−1rB), and S0(B)=B.
Every (q,p(⋅),M)-atom is
also a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule, for every
ε>0.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ), M∈N+,
M>2D/p− and ε>D/p−, q≥2, and q>p+. There
exists C>0 satisfying that: if, for every j∈N,
λj∈C and mj is a
(q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule associated with the ball
Bj, such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞, then
the series ∑j∈Nλjmj∈HLp(⋅)(Γ) converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ) and
[TABLE]
where f=∑j∈Nλjmj.
We now consider, for every f:Γ⟶C, the
radial maximal function M+(f) given by
[TABLE]
We define
[TABLE]
and we denote by HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) the completion of
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) with respect to the quasi-norm
∥⋅∥HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) defined by
[TABLE]
We establish (see Proposition 4.8) that
HLp(⋅)(Γ) is a subspace of
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ).
As it was mentioned Zhuo, Sawano and Yang [62] defined Hardy
spaces with variable exponent on homogeneous spaces (X,μ,d) of
RD-type. If (X,μ,d) is a RD-space of homogeneous type,
μ(x)=0, for every x∈X. Hence, our graphs are not
RD-spaces.
In [15] in the context of homogeneous type spaces atomic Hardy
spaces are considered. Macías and Segovia [36]
characterized those Hardy spaces by using a grand-maximal function
provided that (X,μ,d) is a normal homogeneous type space. We say
that a homogeneous type space is normal when the following property
holds: there exist A1,A2,K>0 such that, for every x∈X,
(i)
A1r≤μ(B(x,r)), r>0,
2. (ii)
A2r≥μ(B(x,r)), r≥Kμ(x),
3. (iii)
B(x,r)={x}, 0<r<Kμ(x).
Also, a normal space (X,d,μ) is said to have order α>0
when
[TABLE]
for every x,y,z∈X, d(x,z)<r, d(y,z)<r. Macías and
Segovia [37] proved that if (X,μ,d) is a space of
homogeneous type there exists a quasimetric d1 on X defining
the same topology as d on X such that (X,μ,d1) is a normal
space of order α, for some α>0. In general, d and
d1 are not comparable.
Later Uchiyama ([54, Theorem 1 and Corollary 1])
characterized Hardy spaces Hp(X) by using radial maximal
functions associated to certain nonnegative continuous functions
provided that (X,μ,d) is a space of homogeneous type such that
μ(B(x,r))∼r, for every x∈X and r>0. This result was
extended to RD-spaces by Grafakos, Liu, and Yang [29].
By putting all together the above ideas (see also [50]) we
could think on proving a characterization of our
HLp(⋅)(Γ) by using the radial maximal function
M+. The problem is that we would need to consider a
quasimetric d1 topologically equivalent to the graph metric d
for which the space (Γ,μ,d1) is normal and then proceed,
for instance, as in the proof of [28, Theorem 1.6]. But when
we change the quasimetric we can not be sure that our Markov kernel
pn satisfies the sufficient estimates (exponential upper
bounds,…). At this moment we do not know how to prove the
characterization of the Hardy space HLp(⋅)(Γ) by
using the radial maximal function M+.
Yang and Zhuo [60] and [63], and Yang, Zhang and Zhuo
[58] studied variable Hardy spaces associated with operators
L on Rn such that the semigroup generated by
L satisfies some kind of Gaussian or off diagonal
estimates. However, it is not clear for the semigroup generated by
the discrete Laplacian L whether those kind of estimates hold or
not (see [16], [44] and [45]). Our study relies on
the upper Gaussian estimates for the iterates of the Markov
operators (1.2).
Bui, Cao, Ky, Yang and Yang [9] and D. Yang and S. Yang
([56] and [57]) studied Musielak-Orlicz-Hardy spaces
Hφ,L(Rn) associated with operators.
Here φ is known as a Musielak-Orlicz function. It is an
interesting question to define Musielak-Orlicz-Hardy spaces in our
discrete settings. When we consider as Musielak-Orlicz function
φ(x,t)=tp(x), t>0 and x∈Rn, the
Musielak-Orlicz-Hardy space Hφ,L(Rn)
reduces to the variable exponent Hardy space
HLp(⋅)(Rn). However,
the Musielak-Orlicz-Hardy spaces Hφ,L(Rn)
are defined requiring certain conditions for φ (for
instance, φ is a uniform Muckenhoupt weight) that are not
always satisfied when φ(x,t)=tp(x) and p is log-Holder
continuous. Hence, the studies about Musielak-Orlicz-Hardy spaces
and variable exponent Hardy spaces associated with operators do not
cover each other.
This paper is organized in the following way. Section 2 is dedicated
to establish some results that will be very useful throughout this
work. Theorem 1.1 is proved in Section 3 while the proofs of
Theorems 1.2 and 1.3 are established in Section 4. Theorem 1.2 is separated in Propositions 4.3 and 4.4.
In Section 5 we use atomic and molecular characterizations of
HLp(⋅)(Γ) to study
HLp(⋅)(Γ)-boundedness properties of certain
Littlewood-Paley square functions, Riesz transforms, and spectral
multipliers for the discrete Laplacian L.
From now on C and c represent positive constants that can change in each occurrence.
Acknowledgements. The authors would strongly like to give
thanks to Professor Dachun Yang for sending us his paper [62]
(jointly with C. Zhuo and Y. Sawano).
2. Auxiliary results
In this section we present some results that will be very useful in
the sequel.
By using Rubio de Francia extrapolation theorem (see, for instance,
[18]) we can obtain the following Fefferman-Stein vector
valued inequality in our variable exponent setting. This property
also can be seen as a special case of [62, Theorem 2.7].
Lemma 2.1**.**
Assume that p∈Plog(Γ), p−>1, and 1<q<∞. Then,
there exists C>0 such that, for every sequence {fj}j∈N⊂Lp(⋅)(Γ), we have that
[TABLE]
The following result is a special case of [62, Proposition
2.11].
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ) and q∈[1,∞]∩(p+,∞].
There exists C>0 such that if, for every j∈N,
λj∈C, aj∈Lq(Γ) and Bj is a ball
in Γ satisfying that
(i) supp(aj)⊂Bj,
(ii) ∥aj∥q≤μ(Bj)1/q∥χBj∥p(⋅)−1,
then
[TABLE]
The results proved in the next lemma are consequence of Theorem A and Lemma
2.2.
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ).
(i) If 0<w<p−, there exists C>0 such that, for every x∈Γ,
β>1 and r>0, we have that
[TABLE]
(ii) If q∈[1,∞)∩(p+,∞), there exists C>0 such that, for every x∈Γ,
β>1 and r>0, we have that
[TABLE]
Proof.
We consider x0∈Γ, r0>0, and β>1.
(i) We choose 0<w<p−. We have that, for every x∈B(x0,βx0),
[TABLE]
By Theorem A we deduce that
[TABLE]
(ii) Let q∈[1,∞)∩(p+,∞). We define the function a0=λ0χB(x0,r0),
where λ0=(μ(B(x0,βr0))/μ(B(x0,r0)))1/q. It
is clear that supp(a0)⊂B(x0,βr0) and ∥a0∥q≤(μ(B(x0,βr0)))1/q. Then, according to Lemma
2.2, we get
[TABLE]
and the proof is completed.
∎
By proceeding as in the last proof but using Lemma 2.1
instead of Theorem A we can obtain the following lemma.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ) and 0<w<p−.Then, there exists
C>0 such that, for every β≥1 and every sequences
{xj}j∈N⊂Γ, {rj}j∈N⊂(0,∞), and {λj}j∈N⊂C we
have that
[TABLE]
3. Tent spaces of variable exponents on graphs. (Proof of Theorem 1.1)
Tent spaces were introduced by Coifman, Meyer and Stein in [13]. These spaces play an important role in the development of the theory of Hardy spaces in different settings. Discrete tent spaces were considered in [10] (see also [8]) to define Hardy spaces associated with operators on graphs. In this section we study tent spaces of variable exponents on graphs. Discrete tent spaces in [10] are particular cases of our variable exponent tent spaces on graphs.
In order to prove this result we follow the ideas developed in
[13, Proof of Theorem 1, (c)] (see also [52, Theorem
1.1]). We need to make some modifications because we have
variable exponents (see [64, Theorem 2.16] for a proof in the
continuous case). We need to introduce the concept of
γ-density. Suppose that F is a subset of Γ such that
the complement Fc of F has finite μ-measure. Let 0<γ<1. We say that x∈Γ has global γ-density with
respect to F when, for every r>0,
[TABLE]
We denote by Fγ∗ the set of all those elements of Γ with global γ-density with respect to F. It is clear that Fγ∗⊂F. Also we have that
[TABLE]
Here M denotes the centered Hardy-Littlewood maximal
function. Since M is of weak type (1,1) and we are
dealing with a space of homogeneous type, there exists C>0 such
that
[TABLE]
Here C does not depend on F.
(i) Suppose that f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T22(Γ). Let k∈Z. We define
[TABLE]
and Fk=Okc. Since A(f)∈Lp(⋅)(Γ) and p+<∞, we have that ∑x∈Γ∣A(f)(x)∣p(x)μ(x)<∞ and then μ(Ok)<∞.
Fix η,γ∈(0,1). We could take for instance
η=γ=1/2 but to simplify we prefer keep writing η and
γ. A careful reading of [52, Lemma 2.1] allows us to
ensure that there exists C>0 for which
[TABLE]
Since f∈T22(Γ) by using dominated convergence theorem we get that
[TABLE]
We have that
[TABLE]
It follows that f(y,t)=0, (y,t)∈∩k∈Z(∪x∈(Fk)γ∗Υ1−η(x)). Hence,
[TABLE]
We apply [52, Lemma 2.2] to Ωk=((Fk)γ∗)c,
k∈Z. Note that μ(Ok)≤μ(Ωk)≤1−γCμ(Ok)<∞ and Ωk=Γ, k∈Z. There exists C>0 such
that for every k∈Z there exists a set Ik⊂N, and, for every n∈Ik, xnk∈Γ and
φnk:Γ⟶[0,∞) satisfying, by
taking rnk=d(xnk,Ωkc)/10, that:
•
Ωk=∪n∈IkB(xnk,rnk);
•
B(xik,rik/4)∩B(xjk,rjk/4)=∅, provided that i,j∈Ik, i=j;
Note that, for every k∈Z and j∈Ik, \mboxsupp(ajk)⊂T(B(xjk,Cηrjk))∩T1−η(Ωk)∩(T1−η(Ωk+1))c [52, p.
132].
We are going to see that there exists C>0 such that, for every k∈Z and j∈Ik, Cajk is a (T2p(⋅),2)-atom.
Let k∈Z and j∈Ik. Suppose that h∈T22(Γ) with ∥h∥T22(Γ)≤1. By using [52, Lemma 2.1] and Hölder’s inequality we get
[TABLE]
because x∈B(xjk,Cηrjk) provided that (y,t)∈Υ(x)∩T(B(xjk,Cηrjk))).
Then Hölder’s inequality leads to
[TABLE]
Since (T22(Γ))′=T22(Γ) we conclude that
[TABLE]
Hence ajk/C is a (T2p(⋅),2)-atom. Note that C does not depend on k nor on j.
In a similar way we can see that, for every r∈(1,∞), since (T2r(Γ))′=T2r′(Γ), there exists C>0 such that, for every k∈Z and j∈Ik,
[TABLE]
and then ajk/C is a (T2p(⋅),r)-atom.
Our next objective is to see that A({λjk},{B(xjk,Cηrjk)})≤C∥f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ). In order to do this we proceed as in [64, p. 1569]. By (2), for every j,k∈N, we have that
[TABLE]
Then, we get
[TABLE]
Here 0<r<p. According to Lemma 2.1 it follows that
[TABLE]
If x∈Ωk, then M(χOk)(x)>1−γ. Hence, χΩk≤1−γ1M(χOk). By proceeding as above we obtain
[TABLE]
Since {x∈Γ:A(f)(x)=+∞}=∅, we can write
[TABLE]
We get
[TABLE]
We are going to see that the equality (3.3) also holds in
T2p(⋅)(Γ), that is, the series converges to f in
T2p(⋅)(Γ). Assume that {(kℓ,jℓ)}ℓ∈N represents an ordenation in the set {(k,j):k∈Z,j∈Ik}. Note that the series in (3.3) is
absolutely pointwisely convergent in Γ×N+.
Then, we can write
[TABLE]
Since f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ), according to (3.5), the series
[TABLE]
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ).
For every ℓ∈N, since suppajℓkℓ⊂T(B(xjℓkℓ,Cηrjℓkℓ)), we have that
Hence the series ∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ converges in T2p(⋅)(Γ) to a certain g∈T2p(⋅)(Γ). Then (see, for instance, [20, Lemma 2.4]),
[TABLE]
and it follows that, for every x∈Γ,
[TABLE]
We deduce that
[TABLE]
for every (y,t)∈Γ×N+. Hence g=f. Thus, we prove that the series in (3.3) converges to f in T2p(⋅)(Γ).
Suppose now that 1<r<∞ and f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ).
Since T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T22(Γ) is dense in
T2p(⋅)(Γ), for every k∈N+, there
exists fk∈T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T22(Γ) such that
∥fk−f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ)≤2−k∥f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ). Also, we take f0=0. We
have that f=∑k=1∞(fk−fk−1), where the series
converges in T2p(⋅)(Γ).
According to the first part of this proof, for every k∈N+, we can write
[TABLE]
where the series is absolutely pointwisely convergent and it
converges in T2p(⋅)(Γ) where, for each j∈N+, ajk is a (T2p(⋅),r)-atom associated
with the ball Bjk and λjk>0 satisfying that
∑j=1∞(λjk)pχBjk∥χBjk∥p(⋅)−p
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ) and
[TABLE]
Here C>0 does not depend on k.
Assume that {(kℓ,jℓ):ℓ∈N} is an ordenation of N+×N+. We are going to see that ∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ=f in the sense of convergence in T2p(⋅)(Γ). Indeed, let ϵ>0. There exists δ∈N+ such that ∥∑k=1δ(fk−fk−1)−f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ)<ϵ. By Lemma 2.2 we can write, for every m∈N+,
[TABLE]
Since, for every k∈N+, the series ∑j=1∞∥χBjk∥p(⋅)p∣λjk∣pχBjk
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ), there exists
m0∈N+ such that
[TABLE]
for every k∈N+, k=1,...,δ.
We now choose L0∈N such that
[TABLE]
We have that, for every L>L0,
[TABLE]
Thus, we proved that ∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ=f in
T2p(⋅)(Γ).
(ii) Suppose now that 1<q<∞ and that, for every j∈N, λj∈C and aj is a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom associated with the ball Bj, satisfying that A({λj},{Bj})<∞.
By proceeding as above we get that ∑j∈Nλjaj converges in T2p(⋅)(Γ) and if f=∑j∈Nλjaj in T2p(⋅)(Γ), we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for every j∈N, ∣aj∣ is (T2p(⋅),q)-atom associated with the ball Bj, and A({∣λj∣},{Bj})<∞. Then, the series ∑j∈N∣λj∣∣aj∣ converges in T2p(⋅)(Γ). By taking in mind [20, Lemma 2.4] that also holds in our setting, we deduce that ∑j∈N∣λj∣∣aj(x,k)∣<∞, for every (x,k)∈Γ×N+.
(iii) Let 0<r<∞. Assume that f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T2r(Γ)∩T22(Γ). We are going to see that the equality in (3.3) also holds in T2r(Γ). As in (3.6) we write
[TABLE]
where {(kℓ,jℓ):ℓ∈N} represents an ordenation in the set {(k,j):k∈Z,j∈Ik}.
Suppose firstly that 0<r≤1. We define, for every k∈Z and j∈Ik,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It is clear that ajkλjk=ajkλjk, k∈Z, j∈Ik. By
proceeding as in the proof of (3.4) we can see that there
exists C>0 such that for every k∈Z and j∈Ik,
Cajk is a (T2q(Γ),r)-atom associated with
the ball B(xjk,Cηrjk). Also, we have that
Hence, the series ∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ converges in T2r(Γ) and f=∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ in T2r(Γ).
Suppose now r∈(1,∞). We have that
[TABLE]
Then, Fk−1⊂Fk, k∈Z, and ∩k∈ZFk={x∈Γ:A(f)(x)=0}. Hence, since f∈T2r(Γ), the monotone convergence theorem leads to
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we recall that, for every k∈Z, Ωk=((Fk)γ∗)c, and, by (3.1),
[TABLE]
Also, Ok+1⊂Ok, k∈Z, and ∩k∈ZOk={x∈Γ:A(f)(x)=+∞}=∅. Hence, limk→+∞μ(Ok)=0, and
then limk→+∞μ(Ωk)=0. Since f∈T2r(Γ), the dominated convergence theorem implies that
[TABLE]
Let ε>0. By (3.7) and (3.8), there exists m0∈N such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For k∈Z and j∈Ik, we define Ak,j=supp(akj). Then,
[TABLE]
For every k∈Z, by taking into account the Whitney
covering {B(xjk,rjk)}j∈Ik it follows that
[TABLE]
We define
[TABLE]
We have that, for k∈Z, k<−m0 and j∈Ik,
[TABLE]
By using [52, Lemma 2.1] we get, for every h∈T2r′(Γ) such that ∥h∥T2r′(Γ)≤1,
Since suppAk,j⊂T1(B(xjk,Cηrjk)), we have that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and we get
[TABLE]
By using (3.1), the doubling property of μ and the Whitney covering properties we obtain, for each k∈Z,
[TABLE]
Then, we have that
[TABLE]
and since f∈T2r(Γ) it follows that
[TABLE]
Then, there exists m1∈N such that
[TABLE]
We conclude that
[TABLE]
There exists ℓ0∈N such that ∣kℓ∣+jℓ>m0+m1 provided that ℓ>ℓ0. We obtain that
[TABLE]
Thus we establish that the series ∑ℓ∈Nλjℓkℓajℓkℓ converges in T2r(Γ). Also, we have that f=∑ℓ∈Nλjℓkℓajℓkℓ in T2r(Γ).
We define Tc(Γ) the space of complex functions f defined
on Γ×N+ such that suppf is finite. Note
that in Γ×N+ the compact sets are the finite
sets. Tc(Γ) is a dense subspace of T2p(⋅)(Γ) and in T2r(Γ). Suppose now that f∈T2p(⋅)(Γ)∩T2q(Γ). There exists a sequence {fk}k∈N⊂Tc(Γ) such that f0=0, and
∥fk−f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ)≤2−k∥f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ) and
∥fk−f∥T2r(Γ)≤2−k∥f∥T2r(Γ). By the
above arguments, for every k∈N+, we can
write
[TABLE]
where the series is absolutely pointwisely convergent, and also in
both T2p(⋅)(Γ) and in T2r(Γ), and, for each
j∈N+, ajk is a (T2p(⋅),r)-atom
associated with the ball Bjk and λjk>0 satisfying that
∑j=1∞(λjk)pχBjk∥χBjk∥p(⋅)−p
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ) and
[TABLE]
Here C>0 does not depend on k.
By proceeding as in the end of part (i) we can prove
that if {(kℓ,jℓ):ℓ∈N} is an ordenation
of Z×N+, then ∑ℓ=0∞λjℓkℓajℓkℓ=f in the sense of
convergence in T2p(⋅)(Γ) and in T2q(Γ).
∎
4. Variable exponents Hardy spaces on graphs
We recall the definition of our Hardy spaces. We define, for every
f∈L2(Γ),
[TABLE]
The Hardy space HLp(⋅)(Γ) is defined as the
completion of
[TABLE]
with respect to the quasinorm ∥⋅∥HLp(⋅)(Γ) given by
[TABLE]
The following result was established in [10, Theorem 3.7] (see
also [27, Proposition 2.1]).
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let M∈N+. Then, for every f∈L2(Γ) we have
[TABLE]
on L2(Γ), where the coefficients ck,N, N∈N+, are defined as follows:
(i) ck,1=1, k∈N,
(ii) ck,N+1=∑j=0kcj,N, k∈N.
As above we denote by Tc(Γ) the space of complex functions
f defined on Γ×N+ such that suppf is
finite.
Motivated by the representation (4.1) and the definition of
Hardy spaces we introduce the operator ΠM, M∈N+, as follows
[TABLE]
for every f∈Tc(Γ). These operators were considered in
[10]. Next we generalize [10, Proposition 3.14].
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let M∈N+. The operator ΠM can be extended from
Tc(Γ) to:
(i) T2q(Γ) as a bounded operator from T2q(Γ)
into Lq(Γ), for every 1<q<∞. Moreover, if we also
continue denoting ΠM to the extension operator, for every f∈T2q(Γ), with 1<q<∞, we have that
[TABLE]
(ii) T2p(⋅)(Γ) as a bounded operator from
T2p(⋅)(Γ) into HLp(⋅)(Γ), provided
that p∈Plog(Γ) and M>2D/p−.
Proof.
We recall that Tc(Γ) is a dense subspace of T2p(⋅)(Γ), and in particular of T2q(Γ), 0<q<∞.
(i) Let 1<q<∞. Assume that f∈Tc(Γ) and h∈Lq′(Γ). We have that
[TABLE]
Note that the series appearing above are actually finite sums because f∈Tc(Γ).
We can write
[TABLE]
because pn(x,y)μ(x)=pn(y,x)μ(y), x,y∈Γ and
n∈N.
Since
0≤ck,M+1≤(k+1)M, k∈N, by using
[10, Proposition 3.2, (a)], we get
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Note that, since
[TABLE]
according to [8, Proposition 4.6] we obtain that A(g)∈Lq′(Γ) and by using Hölder’s inequality we
obtain
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
Thus we prove that ΠM can be extended from Tc(Γ) to T2q(Γ) as a bounded operator from T2q(Γ) into Lq(Γ). We continue denoting by ΠM to a such extension.
Let now f∈T2q(Γ). For every ℓ,m∈N+,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Here x0∈Γ is fixed.
Let ℓ∈N+. By using dominated convergence theorem we deduce that fℓ,m→fℓ, as m→∞, in T2q(Γ). Then,
[TABLE]
in the sense of convergence in Lq(Γ). For every t∈N+, fℓ,m(.,t)→fℓ(.,t), as m→∞, in
Lq(Γ). Indeed, let t∈N+. By taking into
account that μ is doubling (see (1.1)) we have that,
for every m,ℓ∈N+,
[TABLE]
Since P is a bounded operator in Lq(Γ), it follows that
[TABLE]
Also, fℓ→f, as ℓ→∞, in T2q(Γ). Then,
ΠM(fℓ)→ΠM(f), as ℓ→∞, in Lq(Γ).
Hence, we obtain (4.2).
(ii) Let f∈Tc(Γ). We take q=2max{1,p+}.
According to Theorem 1.1, for every j∈N, there
exist λj∈(0,∞) and a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom
aj associated to a ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with
xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, such that
[TABLE]
where the series converges in both T2p(⋅)(Γ) and
T22(Γ), and A({λj},{Bj})≤C∥f∥T2p(⋅)(Γ), where C does not depend on
f. Note that as it was shown in (3.4), for every j∈N, aj is a (T2p(⋅),r)-atom for every
1<r<∞.
By Proposition 4.2, (i)ΠM can be extended to
T22(Γ) as a bounded operator from T22(Γ) to
L2(Γ). We have that
[TABLE]
We are going to see that SL(ΠM(f))∈Lp(⋅)(Γ) and that
[TABLE]
for a certain C>0 that does not depend on f.
For every j∈N, we write αj=ΠM(aj). The operator P is bounded in L2(Γ). Then, for every k∈N+,
[TABLE]
Hence, for every k∈N,
[TABLE]
By using Fatou’s lemma we get
[TABLE]
We recall that, according to [8, Proposition 4.6], SL is a bounded operator from Lq(Γ) into itself.
If B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, we define S0(B)=B(xB,8MrB), and, for every i∈N+, Si(B)=B(xB,2i+3MrB)∖B(xB,2i+2MrB). As above we denote p=min{1,p−}. We can write
[TABLE]
By using (i) we get
[TABLE]
Since q∈[1,∞)∩(p+,∞), by Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, (i), and
2.4, and Theorem 1.1 it follows that
[TABLE]
Let j∈N+. In order to study SL(αj) in Γ∖S0(Bj) we write
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Note that supp(βj)⊂B(xBj,2rBj). We have that, for every x∈Γ,
[TABLE]
Here SM,k denotes the kernel of the operator (I−P)M+1P[k/2], for every k∈N, k≥2.
Since supp(βj)⊂B(xBj,2rBj), we obtain
[TABLE]
Also, d(x,xBj)≥8MrBj≥(M+4)rBj, provided that x∈Γ∖S0(Bj). Then, (I−P)M+1(βj)(x)=0, for every x∈Γ∖S0(Bj). We can write
[TABLE]
If z∈B(xBj,2rBj), y∈B(x,k), k≤d(x,xBj)/2 and x∈Γ∖S0(Bj), then d(y,z)≥d(x,xBj)/4. Also, B(x,d(x,xBj))⊂B(y,2d(x,xBj)), provided that y∈B(x,k), k≤d(x,xBj)/2. By using (1.1) and (1.3) we deduce that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by invoking again (1.3), we get
[TABLE]
We have that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Estimates (4), (4) and Jensen’s inequality lead to
[TABLE]
If x∈Γ∖S0(Bj), Bj⊂B(xBj,d(x,xBj)), and then
[TABLE]
By combining the above estimates we obtain
[TABLE]
Hence,
[TABLE]
We now study ∥βj∥2. We recall that
[TABLE]
Assume that h∈L2(Γ). We have that
[TABLE]
Since P is a selfadjoint and contractive operator in L2(Γ) and ck,M+1≤(k+1)M, k∈N, we can write
[TABLE]
Since aj is a (T2p(⋅),2)-atom associated with Bj it
follows that
[TABLE]
We get
[TABLE]
We choose 0<w<p−. Since q∈[1,∞)∩(p+,∞), according to Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, (i), and 2.4, we obtain
[TABLE]
Since M>2D/p−, by choosing above 0<w<p− such that M>2D/w, it follows from (4), (4) and (4) that
[TABLE]
∎
We recall the definitions of atoms in HLp(⋅)(Γ). Let M∈N+ and 1<r<∞. We say that a∈Lr(Γ) is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with a ball
B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, when there
exists b∈Lr(Γ) satisfying that:
If f∈L2(Γ), we say that f has a (2,p(⋅),M)-atomic representation when
[TABLE]
where, for every j∈N, λj∈C and
aj is a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with the ball Bj, satisfying
that A({λj},{Bj})<∞.
We define the atomic Hardy space HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ)
as follows: f∈L2(Γ) is in
HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) if and only if f has
a (2,p(⋅),M)-atomic representation. On
HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) as usual we consider
the quasinorm ∥⋅∥HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) given by
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
for every sequence {λj}j∈N of complex
numbers and {Bj}j∈N of balls, and where the
infimum is taken over all the sequences {λj}j∈N and {Bj}j∈N such that f=∑j∈Nλjaj, being, for every j∈N, aj
a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with Bj.
The atomic Hardy space HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) is
defined as the completion of HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) with respect to the quasinorm
∥⋅∥HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ).
We now prove Theorem 1.2 by establishing the next two propositions.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Assume that p∈Plog(Γ), r≥2, r>p+ and M∈N+, M>2D/p−.
There exists C>0 satisfying that: if, for every j∈N, λj∈C and aj is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom
associated with the ball Bj such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞, then the series ∑j∈Nλjaj converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ) and
[TABLE]
where f=∑j∈Nλjaj.
Proof.
In order to proof this fact we proceed as in the proof of
Proposition 4.2, (ii). If B=B(xB,rB) is a ball we recall that S0(B)=B(xB,8MrB), and, for every i∈N+,
Si(B)=B(xB,2i+3MrB)∖B(xB,2i+2MrB). Assume that, for every j∈N, λj∈C and aj is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom
associated with the function bj and the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞. Let
ℓ1,ℓ2∈N, ℓ1<ℓ2. We have that
[TABLE]
Since SL is a bounded operator in Lr(Γ), the properties
of the (r,p(⋅),M)-atoms lead to
[TABLE]
Since r>max{1,p+}, by using Lemmas 2.2,
2.3, (i), and 2.4 we get
[TABLE]
Let j∈N+. We can write
[TABLE]
Here SM,k denotes as above the kernel of the operator (I−P)M+1P[k/2], for every k∈N, k≥2.
Since supp(bj)⊂Bj, then supp((I−P)M+1(bj))⊂B(xBj,(M+2)rBj), so (I−P)M+1(bj)(x)=0, x∈Γ∖S0(Bj). Hence,
According to Lemmas 2.2 and 2.4, since r>max{p+,1}, we can
write
[TABLE]
Then, we deduce that
[TABLE]
because M>2D/p−.
Since the series \sum_{j\in\mathbb{N}}\Big{(}\frac{|\lambda_{j}|\chi_{B_{j}}}{\|\chi_{B_{j}}\|_{p(\cdot)}}\Big{)}^{\mathfrak{p}}
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ), we conclude that
the series ∑j∈Nλjaj converges in
HLp(⋅)(Γ), and
[TABLE]
where f=∑j∈Nλjaj.
∎
Our next objective is to see that each f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ)
admits (r,p(⋅),M)-representations.
Proposition 4.4**.**
Assume that p∈Plog(Γ), r≥2, r>p+, M∈N+ and M>2D/p−. There exists C>0 such that, for every f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ) there exist, for every j∈N, λj∈C and a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with Bj such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let f∈L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ). According to
Proposition 4.1, we have that
[TABLE]
where ck,1=1 and ck,N+1=∑j=0kcj,N, N∈N+ and k∈N.
We can write
[TABLE]
Since f∈L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ),
k(I−P)P[k/2](f)∈T22(Γ)∩T2p(⋅)(Γ),
k∈N+, and according to Theorem 1.1 there
exist, for every j∈N, λj∈C and a
(T2p(⋅),r)-atom aj associated to
Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, satisfying that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where the series converges in both T2p(⋅)(Γ) and T22(Γ).
Note that, for every m∈N, ζm=∑j=0mλjaj∈Tc(Γ). By Proposition 4.2 we have that
[TABLE]
in L2(Γ), and in HLp(⋅)(Γ). Also, for every x∈Γ,
[TABLE]
We are going to see that there exists C>0 such that, for every j∈N, CΠM(aj) is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom.
Let j∈N. We write ΠM(aj)=(I−P)Mbj, where
[TABLE]
Note that, for every ℓ∈N+, aj(.,ℓ)∈Lr(Γ),
because supp(aj(.,ℓ)) is finite.
Hence, since P is a contraction in Lr(Γ), bj∈Lr(Γ).
As it was proved in [10, p. 3463], suppLkbj⊂B(xBj,M+2rBj)⊂B(xBj,(M+2)rBj)=Bj, for every k=0,...,M.
In order to estimate ∥Lkbj∥r, k=0,...,M, we proceed as in
[8, p. 828-829]. Let k∈N, 0≤k≤M. Assume
that h∈Lr′(Γ). By taking into account that
cR,M+1≤(R+1)M, R∈N, the operator P is
selfadjoint, [10, Proposition 3.2, (a)], and Hölder’s inequality, we obtain
Suppose now that f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ). Since HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ) is a dense subspace of HLp(⋅)(Γ), there exists a sequence (fk)k∈N⊂HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ) such
that f0=0, fk⟶f, as k→∞, in
HLp(⋅)(Γ), and ∥fk−f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ)≤2−k∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ), k∈N.
According to the first part of this proof, for every k∈N,
[TABLE]
where, for every j∈N, λj,k∈C and aj,k is a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with the ball Bj,k, such that
[TABLE]
We have that
[TABLE]
Suppose that {(jℓ,kℓ)}ℓ∈N is an ordenation of N×N. By using Minkowski’s inequality we can write
[TABLE]
According to Proposition 4.3 we deduce that the series
∑ℓ∈Nλjℓ,kℓajℓ,kℓ converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ).
We are going to see that f=∑ℓ∈Nλjℓ,kℓajℓ,kℓ.
Let ϵ>0. There exists L0∈N such that if ℓ0∈N, ℓ0≥L0, then
[TABLE]
Let ℓ0∈N, ℓ0≥L0. We define
k^0=max{kℓ,ℓ=0,...,ℓ0} and
J0=max{jℓ,ℓ=0,...,ℓ0}. There exists
k^1∈N such that k^1>k^0 and
[TABLE]
We choose J1∈N, J1>J0, and such that
[TABLE]
for every k=0,...,k^1.
Then, by defining U0={(j,k):j=1,...,J1,k=0,...,k^1}
and W0={(jℓ,kℓ):ℓ≤ℓ0} we have that
W0⊂U0 and
[TABLE]
By combining the above estimates we conclude that
[TABLE]
Note that the constant C>0 does not depend on ℓ0.
∎
As a consequence of Propositions 4.3 and 4.4 we deduce
the following result.
Corollary 4.5**.**
Assume that p∈Plog(Γ), p+<2 and M∈N+, M>2D/p−.
Then, HLp(⋅)(Γ)=HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) and
the quasinorms are equivalent.
We now establish that HLp(⋅)(Γ)=Lp(⋅)(Γ) provided that p−>1. In order to prove
this property we need to see that SL defines a bounded sublinear
operator from Lp(⋅)(Γ) into itself when p−>1.
We recall the definitions of Muckenhoupt classes of weights Ar(Γ), 1≤r≤∞, in our setting. If 1<r<∞ we say that a function w:Γ⟶(0,∞) is in Ar(Γ) when there exists C>0 such that, for every ball B⊂Γ,
[TABLE]
where r′=r−1r is the exponent conjugated of r.
A function w:Γ⟶(0,∞) is said to be in A1(Γ) when there is a constant C>0 such that, for every ball B⊂Γ,
[TABLE]
By A∞(Γ) is denoted, as usual, the union ∪1≤p<∞Ap(Γ).
If 1≤r<∞ and w:Γ⟶(0,∞),
Lr(Γ,w) denotes the weighted Lp-space on
(Γ,μ,d).
Proposition 4.6**.**
(i) Let 1<q<∞ and w∈Aq(Γ). Then, SL defines a bounded operator from Lq(Γ,w) into itself.
(ii) Let p∈Plog(Γ) such that p−>1. Then, SL defines a bounded operator from Lp(⋅)(Γ) into itself.
Proof.
(i) We adapt to our context some arguments developed in [38, Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 4.1.1]. We divide the proof in four steps and we sketch the proof of each of them.
Step1. For every β≥1 we define the operator Aβ as follows
[TABLE]
where F:Γ×N+⟶C.
Let β≥1, 1<s<∞ and w∈As(Γ). There exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
Note that (4.11) is non trivial when A(F)∈Ls(Γ,w).
To prove (4.11) we can show firstly that (4.11) holds when s=2 and w∈Ar(Γ), 1<r<∞, and then to argue by using extrapolation (see the proof of [38, Proposition 3.2]).
Step2. We define, for every r∈(0,∞), the maximal operator Cr by
[TABLE]
For every 0<r<∞, 1<s<∞ and w∈As(Γ), we have that there exists C>0 for which
[TABLE]
when F:Γ×N+⟶C. The proof of (4.12) can be completed by following some ideas developed in the proof of [38, Proposition 3.34]. We need to use a Whitney covering theorem in our setting that can be find in [36, Lemma 2.9] to establish (4.12) for every complex function F with compact (finite) support in Γ×N+ by employing a good λ argument involving Aβ for certain β>1 and using (4.11). Then, (4.12) can be proved for general complex valued functions F on Γ×N+ by approximation.
Step3. We consider, for every r∈(0,∞), the maximal operator Cr given by
[TABLE]
for every x∈Γ, where f:Γ⟶C.
For every 1<r<∞,
[TABLE]
We can prove (4.13) arguing as in the proof of [38, Proposition 4.1]. We need to make some modifications in our setting. Let 1<r<∞, x∈Γ and f:Γ⟶C. We take a ball B=B(xB,rB) such that x∈B. We decompose f in the following way f=f1+f2, where f1=fχB(xB,4rB).
According to [8, Proposition 4.6, (ii)] SL is bounded from Lr(Γ) into itself. Then, we can write
[TABLE]
We have taken into account that μ is doubling.
We define, for every j∈N, Zj(B)=B(xB,2j+1rB)∖B(xB,2jrB). By taking into account that (I−P)f2(y)=0 when y∈B(xB,2rB), and using (1.3) we get
[TABLE]
Since B(xB,rB)⊂B(y,3rB), when y∈B(xB,2rB), and μ is doubling it follows that
[TABLE]
for every y∈B(xB,2rB), j,k∈N+, k≤rB and j≥2.
Hence, we obtain
[TABLE]
By taking the supremum over all the balls B such that x∈B we establish (4.13).
Step4. We now combine (4.12) and (4.13) to prove that SL is bounded from Lq(Γ,w) into itself.
We choose 1<r<q such that w∈Aq/r(Γ). Then we can write
[TABLE]
We have applied that M is bounded from Ls(Γ,v) into itself, for every s∈(1,∞) and v∈As(Γ).
(ii) This assertion can be proved by using (i) and extrapolation arguments as in [18, Theorem 1.3].
∎
Note that Proposition 4.6 is an extension of [8, Proposition 4.6, (ii)].
Proposition 4.7**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ) such that p−>1. Then, HLp(⋅)(Γ)=Lp(⋅)(Γ), algebraic and topologically.
Proof.
Suppose that f∈L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ). According to Proposition 4.4 by taking r≥2, r>p+, M∈N+, and >2D/p−, there exist, for every j∈N, λj∈C and a (r,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with the ball Bj such that f=∑j=0∞λjaj, where the series converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ) and pointwisely, and A({λj},{Bj})≤C∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ). By using Lemma 2.2 we obtain, for every j1,j2∈N and j1<j2,
[TABLE]
Note that in this case p=1. Since the series
[TABLE]
is convergent in Lp(⋅)(Γ), the series ∑j=0∞λjaj also converges in Lp(⋅)(Γ) and
[TABLE]
So we have that f=∑j=0∞λjaj in the sense of convergence in Lp(⋅)(Γ).
On the other hand, if f∈L2(Γ)∩Lp(⋅)(Γ), from Proposition 4.6 we deduce that SL(f)∈Lp(⋅)(Γ) and ∥SL(f)∥p(⋅)≤C∥f∥p(⋅), that is, f∈L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ) and ∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ)≤C∥f∥p(⋅).
By taking closures we conclude that HLp(⋅)(Γ)=Lp(⋅)(Γ) and the two norms are equivalent.
∎
We recall the definition of molecules. Let p∈Plog(Γ) and M∈N+, 1<q<∞, and ε>0. We say that a function m∈Lq(Γ) is a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule when
there exists a function b∈Lq(Γ) and a ball B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, such that m=LMb and, for every k=0,...,M,
[TABLE]
where Sj(B)=B(xB,2j+1rB)∖B(xB,2j−1rB), j∈N+ and S0(B)=B.
Suppose that M∈N, 1<q<∞ and a is a (q,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with the ball B and
the function b∈Lq(Γ). Let k∈N, k=0,...,M. Since suppLkb⊂B, ∥Lkb∥Lq(Sj(B))=0, j∈N+. Also, ∥Lkb∥Lq(S0(B))=∥Lkb∥q≤rBM−k(μ(B))1/q∥χB∥p(⋅)−1. Hence, a is a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule, for every ε>0.
Also, there exists C>0 such that CΠM(a) is a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule provided that a is a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom, 2≤q<∞, ε>0, and M∈N+. Indeed, assume that 2≤q<∞, ε>0, M∈N+, and a is a (T2p(⋅),q)-atom associated with the ball B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1. We define α=ΠM(a). We can write α=LMb, where
[TABLE]
Assume that j0∈N+ such that 2j0−1>M+1. As it was established in (4.10) we have that, for every ℓ∈N, 0≤ℓ≤M,
[TABLE]
Hence, according to Lemma 2.3, (i), there exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
for every ℓ∈N, 0≤ℓ≤M, j∈N and j≤j0.
Suppose now ℓ∈N, 0≤ℓ≤M, and j∈N, j>j0. Let h∈Lq′(Γ)∩L2(Γ) such that supp(h)⊂Sj(B). By proceeding as in [8, Proposition 3.2, (a)] we obtain
[TABLE]
where, for every x∈Γ,
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
being q′=q/(q−1).
Note that d(x,xB)<rB provided that d(x,y)<k and (y,k)∈T(B). Also, since supp(h)⊂B(xB,2j+1rB)∖B(xB,2j−1rB), we have that
[TABLE]
Hence Lℓ(h)(y)=0, y∈B. Since q≥2, Jensen’s inequality leads to
Note that C does not depend on b and j. Thus, we have shown
that α is a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule.
Assume now that q∈[1,∞)∩(p+,∞) and m is a
(q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule associated with the ball
B=B(xB,rB) and the function b as in the definition. By using
Lemma 2.3, (ii), we deduce, for every
k=0,...,M, that
In order to establish this result we proceed as in the proof of Proposition 4.3. Suppose that, for every j∈N, λj∈C and mj is a (q,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule associated to the function bj and the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞.
We are going to see that, for every ϵ>0, there exists j0∈N such that, for every j1,j2∈N, j0≤j1<j2,
[TABLE]
Let j1,j2∈N, j1<j2. We have that
[TABLE]
If B=B(xB,rB) is a ball, we recall that
S0(B)=B(xB,8MrB) and, for every i∈N+,
Si(B)=B(xB,2i+3MrB)∖B(xB,2i+2MrB).
Then, we get
[TABLE]
Since SL is bounded from Lq(Γ) into itself
([8, p. Proposition 4.6, (ii)]), by (4) we get,
Let j∈N and i∈N+. Since q≥2 and q>p+, by
(4) and (1.3), we obtain
[TABLE]
In order to study ∑x∈Si(Bj)I1,j(x)qμ(x) we
split mj in the following way
[TABLE]
Since SL is bounded in Lq(Γ) we obtain
[TABLE]
where ℓ0∈N, 2ℓ0≤M<2ℓ0+1. Molecular properties of mj
and Lemma 2.3, (i), imply that
[TABLE]
According to (1.3), (4) and by taking into
account that supp(L(mj,1))∩Si(Bj)=∅ and that d(y,z)≥c2irBj provided that z∈B(xBj,2i−3MrBj), x∈Si(Bj), d(y,x)<k≤d(x,xBj)/2, we can write
[TABLE]
On the other hand, d(y,z)≥c2irBj provided that z∈/B(xBj,2i+4MrBj), x∈Si(Bj), d(y,x)<k≤d(x,xBj)/2. By proceeding as above we deduce that
converges in Lp(⋅)/p(Γ), there exists j0∈N such that, for every j1,j2∈N, j0≤j1<j2,
[TABLE]
The completeness of HLp(⋅)(Γ) implies that the series ∑j=1∞λjmj converges in HLp(⋅)(Γ). By writing f=∑j=1∞λjmj we have that
[TABLE]
∎
For every complex function f defined on Γ we consider the maximal function M+(f) given by
[TABLE]
According to [26, (2.3)] we have that
∣Pk(f)∣≤CM(f), k∈N+. Then, M+(f)≤CM(f) and the maximal function M+ defines a bounded (sublinear) operator from Lq(Γ) into itself, for every 1<q≤∞.
We say that f∈L2(Γ) is in
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) when M+(f)∈Lp(⋅)(Γ). The maximal Hardy space
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) is the completion of
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) with respect to the norm
∥⋅∥HL,+p(⋅)(Γ) defined by
[TABLE]
Next we establish that HLp(⋅)(Γ) is a subspace of
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ).
Proposition 4.8**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ). There exists C>0 such that,
for every f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ) we have
that
[TABLE]
Hence, HLp(⋅)(Γ) is contained in
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ).
Proof.
Let f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ). We take
q=2max{2,p+} and M∈N, M>4D/p−. According to the proof of Proposition 4.4, there
exists, for every j∈N, λj∈C and
a (q,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated to the ball
Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, such that
[TABLE]
and A({λj},{Bj})≤C∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ). Since, for every n∈N, Pn is bounded in L2(Γ) we have that, for
every n∈N,
Let j∈N and i∈N+. Since Pn(aj)(x)=0, when x∈Si(Bj) and n∈N, n<2i, we can write
[TABLE]
Since aj is a (q,p(⋅),M)-atom we can write aj=LMbj,
where \mboxsuppbj⊂Bj and ∥bj∥q≤rBjMμ(Bj)1/q∥χBj∥p(⋅)−1. According
to (1.3) and (4), for every n∈N+, the kernel
pn,M of the operator LMPn satisfies that
[TABLE]
We define Pn,M(x)=∑y∈Γ∣pn,M(x,y)∣, x∈Γ. By using Jensen’s
inequality we obtain, for every complex function g defined on
Γ,
We have taken into account that d(x,y)≥d(x,xBj)/2≥4rBj, when x∈Γ∖S0(Bj) and y∈Bj.
By putting Dn(x)=D, when d(x,xBj)>n, and Dn(x)=0,
when d(x,xBj)≤n, we obtain
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
We take 2D/M<w<p−. We recall that 2D/M<p−. Lemmas
2.2 and 2.4 lead to
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
∎
We now consider other type of atoms (see [62, Definition
4.1]). We say that a complex valued function a defined in
Γ is a (2,p(⋅))-atom associated with the ball B when
the following properties are satisfied
(i) supp(a)⊂B,
(ii) ∥a∥2≤(μ(B))1/2∥χB∥p(⋅)−1,
(iii) ∑x∈Ba(x)μ(x)=0.
Note that if M∈N+ and a is a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom
associated with the ball B, then a is a (2,p(⋅))-atom
([10, Remark 3.4, (i)]).
A function f∈L2(Γ) is in the Hardy space
Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) when, for every j∈N, there exist λj∈C and a
(2,p(⋅))-atom aj associated to the ball Bj such that
f=∑j=0∞λjaj, in L2(Γ), and
A({λj},{Bj})<∞. For every f∈Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) we define
∥f∥Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) by
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all the sequences
{λj}j=0∞ of complex numbers and
{Bj}j=0∞ of balls in Γ such that, for every
j∈N, there exists a (2,p(⋅))-atom associated
with the ball Bj and f=∑j=0∞λjaj, in
L2(Γ). Thus, ∥.∥Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) is a
(quasi)norm in Hatomp(⋅)(Γ).
We define the space Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) as the completion
of Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) with respect to
∥.∥Hatomp(⋅)(Γ). We have that
HL,M,atp(⋅)(Γ) is a subspace of
Hatomp(⋅)(Γ).
We say that a graph (Γ,μ,d) has the Poincaré property
when there exists C>0 such that for every
f:Γ→R, x0∈Γ and r0>0,
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
In ([50, Lemma 4]) it was established that if μ is
doubling, Γ satisfies the Poincaré property and property
Γ satisfies Δ(α), with α>0, then there
exist c3,C3>0 and h∈(0,1) such that, for every
n∈N and x,y,y0∈Γ being
d(y0,y)≤n,
[TABLE]
We now prove that, under certain conditions,
Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) is a subspace of
HL,+p(⋅)(Γ).
Proposition 4.9**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ). Assume that (Γ,μ,d) has, in addition to the properties we have adopted from the beginning, the Poincaré property, p+<2, and D+hD<p, where h is the one in (4.17). Then, Hatomp(⋅)(Γ) is continuously contained in HL,+p(⋅)(Γ).
Proof.
Let f∈Hatomp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ). Then, f=∑j=0∞λjaj, in L2(Γ), where for every j∈N, there exist λj∈C and a (2,p(⋅))-atom aj associated to the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj) such that A({λj},{Bj})<∞. For every k∈N,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Assume that a is a (2,p(⋅))-atom associated with the ball
B=B(xB,rB).
In the following we are inspired by some ideas developed in [49, p.
60-61].
We now assume that x∈B(xB,2rB). We take firstly k∈N such that k≤rB2. According to (1.2) we have that
[TABLE]
If y∈B, then d(x,y)≥21d(x,xB) so, we have
[TABLE]
We now assume that k>rB2. Since ∑Γa(y)μ(y)=0, we
can write
[TABLE]
By taking into account that p(x,y)μ(x)=p(y,x)μ(y), x,y∈Γ, we also obtain, for every k∈N, pk(x,y)μ(x)=pk(y,x)μ(y), x,y∈Γ. From (4.17) and the relation we have just shown we deduce that
[TABLE]
Since k>rB2, we get
[TABLE]
We define Dk(x)=0, when rB+d(x,xB)<k, and Dk(x)=D, when rB+d(x,xB)≥k. It follows that, for every k∈N+,
[TABLE]
We have used in the last line that B⊂B(x,rB+d(x,xB)).
Since ∣Pk(a)∣≤CM(a), k∈N, the above estimations lead to
[TABLE]
We can write
[TABLE]
Let j∈N. It is clear that
\mboxsupp(M(aj)χB(xBj,2rBj))⊂B(xBj,2rBj). Also, according to Lemma 2.3, (i),
there exists C>0 such that,
In [55] (see also [25]) Hardy spaces associated with
operators are compared with the classical ones. In [55, Theorem
6.1] it is proved that imposing certain conditions on the heat
kernel is sufficient in order that Hardy operators, associated with
the operator they are dealing with, coincide with the classical
ones. In Yang and Zhou obtained in [59, Theorem 5.3] a version
of [55, Theorem 6.1] in the variable exponent setting. As far
as we know this question has not been investigated for Hardy spaces
associated with operators on graphs even for constant exponents. Our
purpose is to study this question in a foregoing paper.
5. Applications
In this section we present some applications of the atomic and molecular characterizations proved in the previous section. We establish HLp(⋅)(Γ)-boundedness properties of some square functions, Riesz transforms, and L-spectral multipliers.
5.1. Square functions
Assume that N∈N+. The square function GL,N is defined as follows:
[TABLE]
where f is complex function defined on Γ.
The sublinear operator GL,N is bounded from Lr(Γ) into itself, for every 1<r<∞ [8, Proposition 4.6] (see also [6], [7], and [26]),
and from HLr(Γ) into Lr(Γ), for every 0<r≤1 ([8, Theorem 4.1] and [10, Theorem 6.1]). We now extend [10, Theorem 6.1] to our variable exponent setting.
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ) and N∈N+. Then, the square function GL,N can be extended from HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ) to HLp(⋅)(Γ) as a bounded operator from HLp(⋅)(Γ) to Lp(⋅)(Γ).
Proof.
We are going to see that there exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
Assume that f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ), M∈N, M>D/p−, and q=2max{2,p+}.
According to Proposition 4.4, there exist, for every j∈N, λj∈C and a (q,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated
to the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and rBj≥1, such that f=∑j=0∞λjaj, where the series converges
in L2(Γ) and in HLp(⋅)(Γ), and such that A({λj},{Bj})≤C∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ). Here C>0 does not depend on f.
Our objective is to see that
[TABLE]
for a certain C>0 independent of f. In order to do this we adapt the arguments in the proof of Proposition 4.2.
As above if B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, we denote S0(B)=B(xB,8MrB) and, for every i∈N+, Si(B)=B(xB,2i+3MrB)∖B(xB,2i+2MrB). Since P is bounded in L2(Γ) we can write
[TABLE]
and then
[TABLE]
for every k∈N+. It follows that
[TABLE]
Since GL,N is bounded in Lq(Γ) we deduce that
[TABLE]
By taking into account Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, (i), and 2.4 we get
[TABLE]
Let j∈N and i∈N+. We have that aj=LMbj, where bj∈Lq(Γ)
satisfying that, for every ℓ=0,...,M,
(i) supp(Lℓbj)⊂Bj,
(ii) ∥Lℓbj∥q≤rBjM−ℓμ(Bj)1/q∥χBj∥p(⋅)−1.
Since d(x,z)≥d(x,xBj)/2, when z∈Bj and x∈Si(Bj), (1.3) leads to
[TABLE]
where Dk=2D, when k≤2i+1MrBj, and Dk=0,
when k>2i+1MrBj.
Then,
[TABLE]
We can write
[TABLE]
According to Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, (i), and 2.4, we have that
[TABLE]
where 0<w<p−.
By choosing 2D/M<w<p−, we conclude that
[TABLE]
∎
5.2. Spectral multipliers for the discrete Laplacian L
The discrete Laplacian L is a positive operator in L2(Γ)
and ∥Lf∥2≤2∥f∥2, f∈L2(Γ). Then, the spectrum
of L is contained in [0,2] and there exists an spectral
measure EL such that L=∫[0,2]λdEL(λ). If F is a complex bounded measurable function
defined in [0,2] the operator F(L) defined by
[TABLE]
is bounded from L2(Γ) into itself. The operators F(L) in
(5.1) are called spectral multipliers for the operator L. If
the graph Γ satisfies the property Δ(α), for some
α>0, −1 is not in the spectrum of P and then the exists
a0∈(0,2) such that the spectral measure EL is supported in
[0,a0] (see [24, Lemma 1.3]).
Our objective is to give conditions on F that allow us to extend
the operator F(L) from L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ) to
HLp(⋅)(Γ) as a bounded operator from
HLp(⋅)(Γ) into itself.
Let s>0. If f:R⟶C is a
C[s](R)-function we define ∥f∥Cs by
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
The space Cs(R) is defined by
[TABLE]
In order to get boundedness properties for spectral multipliers it
is usual to consider the following property. We say that a complex
bounded measurable function F defined on [0,∞) satisfies
the property Rs with s>0 when
[TABLE]
Here, η is a fixed C∞((0,∞)) with compact support
and it is not identically zero.
It is known that F(L) can be extended from
(i) Lp(Γ)∩L2(Γ) to Lp(Γ) as a bounded
operator from Lp(Γ) into itself when F satisfies Rs
with s>D/2, for every 1<p<∞ ([11, p. 266, (i)]).
(ii) HLp(Γ)∩L2(Γ) to HLp(Γ) as a bounded
operator from HLp(Γ) into itself when F satisfies Rs
with s>D(1/p−1/2), for every 0<p≤1 ([10, Theorem 6.2] and [33]).
Next we generalize [10, Theorem 6.2] to our variable exponent
setting.
Proposition 5.2**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ), p+<2, and s>2D/p−. Assume that F is a complex
bounded measurable function on (0,∞) satisfying Rs. Then,
F(L) is bounded from HLp(⋅)(Γ) into itself.
Proof.
We use the procedure in the proof of [10, Theorem 6.2] (see also [4])
with the necessary modifications due to the variable exponent
context. We consider M∈N, M>2D/p−. Suppose
that f∈L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ). According to
Proposition 4.4 there exists, for every j∈N,
λj∈C and a (2,p(⋅),2M)-atom associated to
the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), with xBj∈Γ and
rBj≥1, such that f=∑j=0∞λjaj in the
sense of convergence in L2(Γ) and in
HLp(⋅)(Γ), and
[TABLE]
Since F(L) is bounded in L2(Γ) we have that
[TABLE]
We are going to see that there exists C>0 such that, for every
j∈N, CF(L)(aj) is a
(2,p(⋅),M,ε)-molecule for some ε>D/p−. When
this fact is proved the proof finishes because from Theorem
1.3 it follows that F(L)(f)∈HLp(⋅)(Γ) and
[TABLE]
Suppose that a is a (2,p(⋅),2M)-atom associated to the ball
B=B(xB,rB), with xB∈Γ and rB≥1, and the
function b∈L2(Γ). It is clear that
F(L)(a)=LMF(L)(LM(b)). Since L and F(L) are bounded
operators in L2(Γ), the function w=F(L)(LM(b))∈L2(Γ). We have to prove that, for some ε>D/p−,
[TABLE]
for every j∈N and k=0,...,M, where Sj(B)=B(xB,2j+1rB)∖B(xB,2j−1rB), j∈N+ and S0(B)=B.
Let k=0,...,M. By using the properties of the function b and
once more that L and F(L) are bounded operators in L2(Γ) we
deduce that
[TABLE]
Assume that j∈N+. We choose 0≤θ∈C∞(R) such that
[TABLE]
and, for every ℓ∈N+, we define ψℓ∈C∞(R) satisfying that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
We can write the following decomposition [8, p. 840] (see also
[4])
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
where the convergence is understood in the space of operators in
L2(Γ). In order to prove this we consider firstly a complex valued function f defined on Γ with support in a finite set Ω. According to (1.2) we have that, for every n∈N+,
[TABLE]
Then, since μ(Γ)=∞, limn→∞Pn(f)(x)=0, for every x∈Γ. By using monotone convergence theorem we deduce that
[TABLE]
Hence limn→∞∥Pn(f)∥2=0. A density argument allows us to conclude that limn→∞∥Pn(f)∥2=0, for every f∈L2(Γ).
The gradient ∇f of a complex function f defined on
Γ is defined by
[TABLE]
It is clear that ∇ is a sublinear operator.
By using spectral theory we can define, for every α∈R, the operator Lα as follows
[TABLE]
If α≥0, then Lα is a bounded operator in L2(Γ). However, if α<0, the operator Lα is unbounded in L2(Γ) and the domain D(Lα) of Lα is given by
[TABLE]
The square root L1/2 of L is bounded in L2(Γ) and ∥L1/2f∥2=∥∇f∥2, f∈L2(Γ). Thus the equality can be rewritten ∥∇L−1/2f∥2=∥f∥2, f∈R2(L1/2), where R2(L1/2) denotes the range of L1/2 in L2(Γ). R2(L1/2) is dense in L2(Γ).
We define the Riesz transform RL associated with L on Γ by
[TABLE]
RL can be extended from R2(L1/2) to L2(Γ) as an isometry in L2(Γ).
In [7, Lemma 1.13] it was proved that, if f∈R2(L1/2) then
[TABLE]
in L2(Γ), where the sequence {βk}k∈N is defined by the expansion
[TABLE]
Hence, we have that
[TABLE]
If the properties (a), (c), and (1.2) for x=y hold for
(Γ,μ,d), RL can be extended from L2(Γ)∩Lq(Γ) to Lq(Γ) as a bounded operator from
Lq(Γ) into itself, for every 1<q≤2, and from
L1(Γ) into L1,∞(Γ), the weak L1(Γ)
(see [51]). In order that RL can be extended from
L2(Γ)∩Lq(Γ) to Lq(Γ) as a bounded operator
from Lq(Γ) into itself when q>2 it is not sufficient with
the properties (a), (c), and (1.2) for x=y, as the example of
two copies of Z2 linked between with an edge shows
[51, Section 4]. In [7, Theorem 1.3] it is established
that if (Γ,μ,d) satisfies (a), (c), Poincaré inequality and
there exists C>0 such that, for every f∈Lq0(Γ) and
k∈N+,
[TABLE]
being q0>2, then RL can be extended from L2(Γ)∩Lq(Γ) to Lq(Γ) as a bounded operator from Lq(Γ) into itself when 2≤q<q0. Weighted Lq-inequalities for the Riesz transform RL were established by Badr and Martell [6].
Boundedness properties for RL in Hardy spaces Hq(Γ),
0<q≤1, were proved in [8, Theorem 4.2] and [10, Theorem
6.5]. In the next proposition we extend those results in
[8] and [10] to our variable exponent Hardy spaces
HLp(⋅)(Γ).
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let p∈Plog(Γ) such that p+<2. Then, RL can be extended from L2(Γ)∩HLp(⋅)(Γ) to HLp(⋅)(Γ) as a bounded operator from HLp(⋅)(Γ)
into Lp(⋅)(Γ).
Proof.
Suppose that f∈HLp(⋅)(Γ)∩L2(Γ). Let M∈N and M>2D/p−. According to Proposition 4.4, for every j∈N, there exist λj∈C and a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom aj associated with the ball Bj=B(xBj,rBj), such that f=∑j=0∞λjaj in L2(Γ) and in HLp(⋅)(Γ), and A({λj},{Bj})≤C∥f∥HLp(⋅)(Γ). Since RL is bounded in L2(Γ) we have that
[TABLE]
Also, we can write
[TABLE]
Since RL is bounded in L2(Γ) it follows that
[TABLE]
According to Lemmas 2.2, 2.3, (i), and 2.4 we deduce that
[TABLE]
Assume now that a is a (2,p(⋅),M)-atom associated with the ball B=B(xB,rB) and the function b∈L2(Γ). Since a=LMb=L1/2LM−1/2b∈R2(L1/2) we can write
[TABLE]
where pk,M represents the kernel of the operator LMPk, for every k∈N. Note that, for every k∈N, supp(Pka)⊂B(xB,rB+k). Then, supp(∇Pk(a))⊂B(xB,rB+k+1). We have that
[TABLE]
By [10, Lemma 6.6], Lemma 2.3, (i), and by proceeding as in [8, p. 838] we get, for every i∈N+,
[TABLE]
Here 0<w<p−. From Lemma 2.4, for every i∈N+, we deduce that
[TABLE]
Then, since M>2D/p− we conclude that
[TABLE]
and the proof is finished.
∎
Bibliography64
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] R. Aboulaich, D. Meskine, and A. Souissi , New diffusion models in image processing , Comput. Math. Appl., 56 (2008), pp. 874–882.
2[2] E. Acerbi and G. Mingione , Regularity results for a class of functionals with non-standard growth , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 156 (2001), pp. 121–140.
3[3] T. Adamowicz, P. Harjulehto, and P. Hästö , Maximal operator in variable exponent Lebesgue spaces on unbounded quasimetric measure spaces , Math. Scand., 116 (2015), pp. 5–22.
4[4] G.K. Alexopoulos , Spectral multipliers on discrete groups , Bull. London Math. Soc., 33 (2001), pp. 417-424.
5[5] , Spectral multipliers for Markov chains , J. Math. Soc. Japan, 56 (3) (2004), pp. 833-852.
6[6] N. Badr and J.M. Martell , Weighted norm inequalities on graphs , J. Geom. Anal., 22 (4) (2012), pp. 1173–1210.
7[7] N. Badr and E. Russ , Interpolation of Sobolev spaces, Littlewood-Paley inequalities and Riesz transforms on graphs , Publ. Mat., 53 (2009), pp. 273-328.
8[8] T. A. Bui , Weighted Hardy spaces associated to discrete Laplacians on graphs and applications , Potential Anal., 41 (2014), pp. 817–848.