Homomorphic conditional expectations as noncommutative retractions
Robert Pluta, Bernard Russo

TL;DR
This paper characterizes when a conditional expectation on a $C^*$-algebra is a homomorphism, showing it corresponds to a noncommutative retraction, and explores the structure of such expectations especially in commutative cases.
Contribution
It establishes a criterion for homomorphic conditional expectations and links them to noncommutative retractions, extending the understanding of their structure in $C^*$-algebras.
Findings
A conditional expectation is a homomorphism if and only if a specific norm equality holds.
Homomorphic conditional expectations on commutative $C^*$-algebras correspond to composition with continuous retractions.
Homomorphic conditional expectations can be viewed as noncommutative retractions.
Abstract
Let be a -algebra and a conditional expectation. The Kadison-Schwarz inequality for completely positive maps, implies that In this note we show that is a homomorphism if and only if for every in . We also prove that a homomorphic conditional expectation on a commutative -algebra is given by composition with a continuous retraction of . One may therefore consider homomorphic conditional expectations as noncommutative retractions.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Operator Algebra Research · Advanced Topics in Algebra · Holomorphic and Operator Theory
Homomorphic conditional expectations
as noncommutative retractions
Robert Pluta
Department of Mathematics, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-3875, USA
and
Bernard Russo
Department of Mathematics, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-3875, USA
Abstract.
Let be a -algebra and a conditional expectation. The Kadison-Schwarz inequality for completely positive maps,
[TABLE]
implies that
[TABLE]
In this note we show that is homomorphic (in the sense that for every in ) if and only if
[TABLE]
for every in . We also prove that a homomorphic conditional expectation on a commutative -algebra is given by composition with a continuous retraction of . One may therefore consider homomorphic conditional expectations as noncommutative retractions.
Key words and phrases:
Conditional expectation, Kadison inequality, retraction, triple homomorphism, JC∗-triple
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 46L99; Secondary 17C65
1. Introduction
It is easy to see that a conditional expectation is homomorphic if and only if the kernel of is an ideal. Thus, there are no nontrivial homomorphic conditional expectations on simple -algebras, but it makes sense to study homomorphic conditional expectations on -algebras with rich ideal structure. It follows from [Choi74, Theorem 3.1] that a conditional expectation is homomorphic if and only if equality holds in the Kadison-Schwarz inequality for every . In our main result, Theorem 3.4 below, we weaken the latter condition to equality of the norms.
A central projection in a -algebra gives rise to a homomorphic conditional expectation given by for all in . As a bi-product of our main result, we prove a converse in Corollary 3.9.
A retraction of a locally compact Hausdorff space , that is, a continuous map such that , gives rise to a homomorphic conditional expectation given by for all functions in . There are expectations on , compact, which do not come from retractions of , but those expectations are not homomorphic. A unital conditional expectation is homomorphic if and only if it comes from some retraction of (Theorem 4.2 below), and, in accordance with Theorem 3.4 below, this in turn is equivalent to the requirement that the conditional expectation satisfies for every in . A similar result holds for (not necessarily unital) commutative -algebras for a locally compact Hausdorff space . Thus, in the framework of Gelfand duality, we have the equivalence:
[TABLE]
We believe that this justifies the following definition: A noncommutative retraction on a -algebra is a conditional expectation with for all . (By Theorem 3.4 below, this is equivalent to the requirement that the conditional expectation satisfies for .)
2. Basic properties of conditional expectations
In this section we review some basic facts and terminology that relate to conditional expectations in a general noncommutative setting of -algebras.
Definition 2.1**.**
A conditional expectation defined on a -algebra is a positive linear map satisfying (where ) and
[TABLE]
It follows that the range of is a -subalgebra of . A conditional expectation also satisfies
[TABLE]
Thus is a bimodule map over its range. Moreover, is completely positive and has norm 1 ([Blackadar2006, Corollary II.6.10.3]). The Kadison-Choi-Schwarz inequality is proved in [Choi74, Corollary 2.8].
If is unital with the identity element , then the projection is an identity element of the range, which is contained in the corner , i.e., the largest -subalgebra of containing as the identity element.
Remark 2.2*.*
By a corner of a -algebra we mean a -subalgebra of with the additional property that there is a norm closed linear subspace of such that and is invariant under both left and right multiplication by elements of , i.e. , . It follows automatically that is also invariant under the -operation, i.e. , so it can be regarded as a (not necesarily unital) involutive Banach -bimodule. If is a conditional expectation, then the range of is a corner of . On the other hand, if a -subalgebra is not a corner of , then there is no conditional expectation from onto .
It is clear that a corner of a unital -algebra must be unital, however the identity element of the corner need not be the same as the identity element of the ambient -algebra. This observation is useful. It shows, for example, that if is an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, then the algebra of compact operators is not a corner of . Consequently, there is no conditional expectation from onto . Exactly the same argument shows that there is no conditional expectation from onto . Of course, these two observations can be strengthened to the assertion that there is no conditional expectation from a unital -algebra onto a non-unital -subalgebra of .
Regarding terminology, we will occasionally refer to a conditional expectation simply as an expectation leaving the word “conditional” implicit. The following remark provides us with some basic properties of expectations.
Remark 2.3*.*
Let be a -algebra and let be a conditional expectation. The range of , which we denote by , is the -subalgebra of consisting of all fixed points of . The kernel of is a norm closed linear subspace of that is closed under the -operation and invariant under left and right multiplication by elements of . In particular, letting be the kernel of , one has , , . The space can be regarded as an involutive Banach -bimodule if one does not require that , for all , even if has an identity . With this convention, is a direct sum in the category of involutive Banach -bimodules and the following sequence
[TABLE]
of -preserving -bimodule maps is exact.
There is a link between certain projections and expectations. It has already been observed that every nonzero conditional expectation defined on a -algebra is a projection of norm one. The converse of this observation does not hold in general. For example, the mapping from the matrix algebra into itself that replaces each main diagonal entry of every 2-by-2 matrix with zero is a projection of norm one, yet it is not a conditional expectation because its range is not a subalgebra of . However, every projection of norm one whose range is a subalgebra must be a conditional expectation; this is a general version of the well known theorem of Tomiyama [Tomiyama1957], which we mention for the sake of completeness.
3. Homomorphic conditional expectations
The main result of this section is Theorem 3.4.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a -algebra. A conditional expectation is homomorphic (or multiplicative) if for every in .
We now give some examples of homomorphic conditional expectations. The first one describes a connection between homomorphic conditional expectations and -algebra homomorphisms.
Example 3.2* (Expectations onto graphs of -algebra homomorphisms).*
Let be -algebras. Let be the -algebra endowed with the maximum norm, with the summands as ideals, and the algebraic operations performed pointwise. If is a -homomorphism, then the map
[TABLE]
is a homomorphic conditional expectation of onto the graph of . Conversely, if is a function and given by (3.1) is a homomorphic conditional expectation, then is a -homomorphism.
The projection on a direct sum of two -algebras onto one of the summands is an example of a homomorphic conditional expectation. In particular, a split extension of a -algebra by a -algebra gives rise to homomorphic conditional expectations.
Example 3.3*.*
In the theory of generalized inductive limits, due to Blackadar and Kirchberg ([Blackadar2006, V.4.3]), algebras are not the same as strong algebras ([Blackadar2006, V.4.3.24.]). Nevertheless, by [Blackadar2006, Corollary V.4.3.27], any algebra is the range of a homomorphic conditional expectation defined on any split essential extension of , which is in fact a strong algebra. In this corollary, is called a retraction of , which partially motivated our use of the term retraction.
We will establish the following characterization of homomorphic conditional expectations in terms of operator norm and the Kadison-Schwarz inequality. Recall that the Kadison-Schwarz inequality shows that any conditional expectation defined on a -algebra satisfies and consequently for every in .
Theorem 3.4**.**
Let be a -algebra and let be a conditional expectation. Then is homomorphic if and only if
[TABLE]
In the proof we will make use of the fact that a closed Jordan ideal (defined in the proof of Lemma 3.6) in a -algebras is a two-sided ideal of . ([CivinYood1965, Theorem 5.3], also see [BartonTimoney1986, Remark p.188]) and the observations made in Lemmas 3.5 and 3.6.
Lemma 3.5**.**
A conditional expectation defined on a -algebra is homomorphic if and only if the kernel of is an ideal in .
Proof.
This is a straightforward consequence of conditional expectation properties. ∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let be a -algebra. If is a conditional expectation satisfying for all , then the kernel of is a closed Jordan -ideal in .
Proof.
We use to denote the kernel of . It is clear that is a closed linear subspace of which is also closed under the -operation. We need only to prove that is a Jordan ideal in the sense that if and , then the Jordan product is in . The proof of this fact will proceed through several steps.
First, if , then by the assumption . In particular, for all self-adjoint elements .
Second, if are self-adjoint elements of , then by the preceding paragraph, both and are in , and one has
[TABLE]
It follows that , whenever are self-adjoint elements of .
Third, if are arbitrary elements of , write and with and in , and split the Jordan product into real and imaginary parts as
[TABLE]
By the preceding paragraph, each of the four terms appearing above is in , thus . At this stage, we may conclude that is closed under the Jordan product and we may indicate this by writing .
Fourth, since is invariant under both left and right multiplication by elements of the range of , which we denote by , it follows that . That is, the Jordan product is in for all and all .
Finally, if and , then the Jordan product
[TABLE]
is in because, by what we have proved, and . Thus is a Jordan ideal (and a Banach -subspace of ). ∎
We now turn to the proof of Theorem 3.4.
Proof of Theorem 3.4.
Let be a conditional expectation satisfying for every in . Then by Lemma 3.6 the kernel of is a closed Jordan -ideal in , hence a two-sided ideal. It follows that is homomorphic by the observation made in Lemma 3.5. ∎
We have already mentioned that if is a central projection in a -algebra , then the map defined by , for all , is a homomorphic conditional expectation. We prove the converse in Proposition 3.8.
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let be a projection in a von Neumann algebra , and suppose is a homomorphism.
(i) If is subequivalent to , then .
(ii) If is subequivalent to , then .
Proof.
Since is a homomorphism, we have for every . If is subequivalent to , then by definition, there exists satisfying and . Then
[TABLE]
which proves (i).
If is subequivalent to , there exists satisfy and . Then
[TABLE]
which proves (ii). ∎
Proposition 3.8**.**
If is a projection in a -algebra , and is a homomorphism, then belongs to the center of .
Proof.
By passing to the second dual, it suffices to assume that is a von Neumann algebra. Apply the comparability theorem ([Blackadar2006, III.1.1.10]) to the projections and to obtain a central projection such that is subequivalent to and is subequivalent to . With we have . Then by Lemma 3.7, and , so that is in the center of . ∎
Corollary 3.9**.**
If is a projection in a -algebra , and for every , then belongs to the center of .
Proof.
By Theorem 3.4, the assumption for every implies that is a homomorphism. ∎
As pointed out to us by Matt Neal, Corollary 3.9 also follows from [FriRusJRAM85, Lemmas 1.5 and 1.6]. An elegant elementary proof of [FriRusJRAM85, Lemma 1.5] appears in [PeraltaEM15]. Another topological characterization of central projections is given in [Kato76], namely a projection in a von Neumann algebra is central if and only if it is an isolated point in the set of projections with the norm topology.
Remark 3.10*.*
The authors have recently learned that there is an alternative argument that proves Theorem 3.4: Since belongs to , immediately implies that belongs to the multiplicative domain of ([Choi74, Theorem 3.1]). This argument can be applied to prove two other results (see Propositions 3.13 and 3.14). However, the method presented in our proof of Theorem 3.4 can be used to deduce a similar operator norm characterization of multiplicative conditional expectations in the context of ternary rings of operators and Jordan triple systems (where the concept of multiplicative domain is not applicable). For example, see Proposition 3.12.
The two results which follow, and the tools used in their proofs, are valid for abstract JB∗-triples, for which a reference is the monograph [chubook, Definition 2.5.25]. The principal example of a JB∗-triple is a JC∗-triple, that is, a norm closed subspace of a C∗-algebra which is closed under the symmetrized triple product . We therefore phrase these two results in this context.
A triple homomorphism is a linear mapping between two JC∗-triples which preserves the triple product: . A triple ideal is a subspace of a JC∗-triple satisfying .
Let be a JC∗-triple, with triple product denoted (or just ) and let be a nonzero contractive projection: , . We have the “conditional expectation” formulas ([FriRusPJM, Corollary 1])
[TABLE]
We recall ([FriRusJFA, Theorem 2], [chubook, Theorem 3.3.1]) that is isometric to a JC∗-triple under the norm of and the triple product
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.11**.**
A contractive projection defined on a JC∗-triple is a triple homomorphism of into , that is, for all ,
[TABLE]
if and only if the kernel of is a triple ideal in .
Proof.
Assume (3.5), let , and let . Then , and similarly, .
Conversely, suppose is an ideal. For , with , where , we have (noting that )
[TABLE]
where . Thus and by the polarization identity,
[TABLE]
is a triple homomorphism. ∎
Proposition 3.12**.**
Let be a JC∗-triple and let be a contractive projection. Then is a triple homomorphism of onto if and only if satisfies
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
If is a triple homomorphism, it is obvious that (3.6) and (3.7) hold, and if , then
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
Conversely, assume (3.6)-(3.8) hold. We shall show that is an ideal, so that Lemma 3.11 is applicable.
For and , it is required to show that and . Write , and . Then
[TABLE]
By (3.8), is closed under , so by the polarization identity, it is a subtriple of , and therefore . By (3.6) and (3.7), . By (3.3), . Thus and a similar proof shows . ∎
As noted in Remark 3.10, the technique mentioned there can be used to show the following two results, which are responses to a question posed to the authors independently by C. Akemann and by the referee.
A JC∗-algebra is a norm closed subspace of a C∗-algebra which is closed under the Jordan product and the involution. A Jordan homomorphism is a linear mapping between two JC∗-algebras which preserves the Jordan product: , equivalently, for all .
Proposition 3.13**.**
Let be a -algebra and let be a conditional expectation. Then is a Jordan homomorphism if and only if
[TABLE]
Proof.
If is a Jordan homomorphism, then so (3.9) holds. Conversely, if , then , and
[TABLE]
so is a Jordan homomorphism. ∎
Let be a unital JC∗-algebra, with Jordan product denoted , and let be a nonzero positive unital projection. The conditional expectation formulas (3.3) reduce to
[TABLE]
and by (3.4), is isometric to a JC∗-algebra under the norm of and the Jordan product , for (see [EffSto79, Theorem 1.4] for the original proof of the latter statement and [EffSto79, Lemma 1.1] for the original proof of (3.10)). Note that .
Proposition 3.14**.**
Let be a unital -algebra and let be a positive unital projection. Then is a Jordan homomorphism, that is, if and only if
[TABLE]
Proof.
If is a Jordan homomorphism, so that , then . However, since is positive, ([RobYou82, Theorem 1.2]), so that (3.11) holds.
Conversely, if , then , and
[TABLE]
so is a Jordan homomorphism. ∎
4. Homomorphic conditional expectations on
This section is based on [Pluta2013, 5.1]. We discuss the relationship between homomorphic conditional expectations on commutative -algebras and retractions on , for compact and locally compact Hausdorff spaces . When we deal specifically with a compact Hausdorff space we usually use in place of .
If is a compact Hausdorff space, we use to denote the unital -algebra (with pointwise operations and the supremum norm) of all complex-valued continuous functions on . If is a locally compact Hausdorff space, we use to denote the -algebra of all complex-valued continuous functions on which vanish at infinity. If is compact, then .
Example 4.1*.*
Retractions on a (locally) compact Hausdorff space give rise to homomorphic conditional expectations via . But there are expectations on which do not come from any retraction of (those expectations are not homomorphic). For instance, let and define
[TABLE]
Then is a (not homomorphic) conditional expectation on and there is no retraction with ; see [Pluta2013, Proposition 5.1.6].
Theorem 4.2**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space. If is a retraction (i.e., a continuous function with ), then the map
[TABLE]
is a unital homomorphic conditional expectation.
Conversely, if is a unital homomorphic conditional expectation, then there is a retraction such that , where is given by formula (4.1).
Proof.
The first implication is a straightforward verification. For the second implication, let be a unital homomorphic conditional expectation. Then the kernel of , which will be denoted by , is a closed ideal and hence there is a closed set such that ; (see, for example, [Rickart60, Theorem 4.2.4] or [Stone1937, Theorem 85]). If we let denote the range of , then is a closed subalgebra of (containing the constants) and induces an algebra isomorphism
[TABLE]
We also have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
([Rickart60, Theorem 4.2.4], or [Stone1937, Theorem 85]). Now is a unital algebra homomorphism and so there exists a continuous function such that , for ; see [Blackadar2006, II.2.2.5]. Let be given by , for , so that has the same values as but with a different co-domain. Note that is continuous (since is). We claim that for all . Indeed, if , then thus , and this implies that . But also . Hence we have for all , as claimed. Since we must have for each function . Since the functions in separate the points of , it follows that so that is a retraction. ∎
Corollary 4.3**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space and let be a homomorphic conditional expectation. Then there is a clopen set and a retraction such that is given by
[TABLE]
for , .
Proof.
Let denote the constant function 1 in . Then and so there is so that (the characteristic function of ). Moreover, since , is a clopen subset. Since , we have that (which is an ideal). So if , then
[TABLE]
Identifying with via (where and for ), we see that induces a homomorphic unital conditional expectation by . The result follows by applying Theorem 4.2 to and using (4.2). ∎
Let be a locally compact Hausdorff space and the one point compactification. We use this notation here even when is already compact, in which case is open (and closed) in . Subsets of are open if is open in and if we insist that be a compact subset of .
We consider as embedded in via
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Note that this identifies with (the maximal ideal of consisting of functions which take the value zero at ) and is a *-algebra isomorphism onto its range.
If is a retraction such that , then we can define a conditional expectation by .
Corollary 4.4**.**
If is a locally compact Hausdorff space and is a homomorphic conditional expectation, then there is a retraction () with such that .
Proof.
First consider the case when is compact. We apply Corollary 4.3 above to get compact and clopen and a retraction with
[TABLE]
Define a retraction by for and for . Since is clopen and so is , is continuous. We can verify that and .
In the case that is not compact, note that is isomorphic as a *-algebra to the unitisation , where is defined as in [Dales2000, Definition 1.3.3]. The isomorphism is given by . Indeed, if , then and , thus . On the other hand, if , then , where
[TABLE]
Regard as , where for , . Then is an algebra homomorphism and a conditional expectation.
We apply Corollary 4.3 to get clopen and a retraction so that
[TABLE]
for . Since can be identified with the maximal ideal of consisting of functions which take the value zero at , i.e., , we have
[TABLE]
and, therefore, if , then . (Indeed, if and , there is with and we would have a contradiction from ). If , then , is compact, and is given by (4.3).
Thus we can extend to a retraction by for and for . Since is clopen, is continuous, and we can verify that and . ∎
Acknowledgment. This paper was begun by the first named author at Trinity College Dublin in coordination with Richard Timoney, to whom he now expresses his thanks.
References
