Aluthge transforms of 2-variable weighted shifts
Raul E. Curto, Jasang Yoon

TL;DR
This paper introduces and analyzes two types of multivariable Aluthge transforms for 2-variable weighted shifts, revealing their effects on hyponormality, spectral properties, and fixed points, with implications for multivariable operator theory.
Contribution
It defines toral and spherical Aluthge transforms for multivariable shifts and studies their properties, including hyponormality preservation and spectral behavior, which were previously unexplored.
Findings
Toral Aluthge transform does not preserve hyponormality in 2-variable shifts.
A large class of 2-variable shifts retains hyponormality under both transforms.
Spectral properties are affected by the transforms, with fixed points being spherically quasinormal shifts.
Abstract
We introduce two natural notions of multivariable Aluthge transforms (toral and spherical), and study their basic properties. In the case of 2-variable weighted shifts, we first prove that the toral Aluthge transform does not preserve (joint) hyponormality, in sharp contrast with the 1-variable case. Second, we identify a large class of 2-variable weighted shifts for which hyponormality is preserved under both transforms. Third, we consider whether these Aluthge transforms are norm-continuous. Fourth, we study how the Taylor and Taylor essential spectra of 2-variable weighted shifts behave under the toral and spherical Aluthge transforms; as a special case, we consider the Aluthge transforms of the Drury-Arveson 2-shift. Finally, we briefly discuss the class of spherically quasinormal 2-variable weighted shifts, which are the fixed points for the spherical Aluthge transform.
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.
Aluthge transforms of -variable weighted shifts
Raúl E. Curto111The first-named author was partially supported by NSF Grants DMS-0801168 and DMS-1302666.
Department of Mathematics, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242
Jasang Yoon
School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, Texas 78539
Abstract
We introduce two natural notions of multivariable Aluthge transforms (toral and spherical), and study their basic properties. In the case of -variable weighted shifts, we first prove that the toral Aluthge transform does not preserve (joint) hyponormality, in sharp contrast with the -variable case. Second, we identify a large class of -variable weighted shifts for which hyponormality is preserved under both transforms. Third, we consider whether these Aluthge transforms are norm-continuous. Fourth, we study how the Taylor and Taylor essential spectra of -variable weighted shifts behave under the toral and spherical Aluthge transforms; as a special case, we consider the Aluthge transforms of the Drury-Arveson -shift. Finally, we briefly discuss the class of spherically quasinormal -variable weighted shifts, which are the fixed points for the spherical Aluthge transform.
keywords:
toral and spherical Aluthge transforms, hyponormal, -variable weighted shifts, Taylor spectrum 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47B20, 47B37, 47A13, 47B49; Secondary 47-04, 47A20, 47A60, 44A60
Contents
-
3.2 Hyponormality is not preserved under the toral Aluthge transform
-
5 -variable Weighted Shifts with Identical Aluthge Transforms
-
6 When is Hyponormality Invariant Under the Toral and Spherical Aluthge Transforms?
-
10 Fixed Points of the Spherical Aluthge Transform: Spherically Quasinormal Pairs
1 Introduction
Over the last two decades, the Aluthge transform for bounded operators on Hilbert space has attracted considerable attention. In this note, we set out to extend the Aluthge transform to commuting -tuples of bounded operators. We identify two natural notions (toral and spherical) and study their basic properties. We then focus on -variable weighted shifts, for which much can be said.
Let be a complex Hilbert space and let denote the algebra of bounded linear operators on . For , the polar decomposition of is , where is a partial isometry with and . The Aluthge transform of is the operator [1]. This transform was first considered by A. Aluthge, in an effort to study -hyponormal and -hyponormal operators. Roughly speaking, the idea behind the Aluthge transform is to convert an operator into another operator which shares with the first one many spectral properties, but which is closer to being a normal operator.
In recent years, the Aluthge transform has received substantial attention. I.B. Jung, E. Ko and C. Pearcy proved in [40] that has a nontrivial invariant subspace if and only if does. (Since every normal operator has nontrivial invariant subspaces, the Aluthge transform has a natural connection with the invariant subspace problem.) In [41], I.B. Jung, E. Ko and C. Pearcy also proved that and have the same spectrum. Moreover, in [43] (resp. [44]) M.K. Kim and E. Ko (resp. F. Kimura) proved that has property if and only if has property . Finally, T. Ando proved in [2] that . (For additional results, see [9] and [50].)
For a unilateral weighted shift , the Aluthge transform is also a unilateral weighted shift, given by
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that is hyponormal if and only if . Thus, by (1.1), if is hyponormal, then the Aluthge transform of is also hyponormal. However, the converse is not true in general. For example, if , then is clearly not hyponormal but the Aluthge transform is subnormal. (Here and in what follows, denotes the (unweighted) unilateral shift.) In [45], S.H. Lee, W.Y. Lee and the second-named author showed that for , the Aluthge transform, when acting on weighted shifts, need not preserve -hyponormality. Finally, G. Exner proved in [34] that the Aluthge transform of a subnormal weighted shift need not be subnormal.
In this article, we introduce two Aluthge transforms of commuting pairs of Hilbert space operators, with special emphasis on -variable weighted shifts . Since a priori there are several possible notions, we discuss two plausible definitions and their basic properties in Sections 3 and 4. Our research will allow us to compare both definitions in terms of how well they generalize the -variable notion. After discussing some basic properties of each Aluthge transform, we proceed to study both transforms in the case of -variable weighted shifts. We consider topics such as preservation of joint hyponormality, norm continuity, and Taylor spectral behavior.
For , we consider the polar decomposition , and we let
[TABLE]
denote the classical (-variable) Aluthge transform. The toral Aluthge transform of the pair is . For a -variable weighted shift , we denote the toral Aluthge transform of by .
As we will see in Proposition 3.2, the commutativity of does not automatically follow from the commutativity of ; in fact, the necessary and sufficient condition to preserve commutativity is
[TABLE]
Under this assumption, and in sharp contrast with the -variable situation, it is possible to exhibit a commuting subnormal pair such that is commuting and not hyponormal. As a matter of fact, in Theorem 3.11 we construct a class of subnormal -variable weighted shifts whose cores are of tensor form, and for which the hyponormality of can be described entirely by two parameters. As a result, we obtain a rather large class of subnormal -variable weighted shifts with non-hyponormal toral Aluthge transforms.
There is a second plausible definition of Aluthge transform, which uses a joint polar decomposition. Assume that we have a decomposition of the form
[TABLE]
where . Now, let
[TABLE]
We refer to as the spherical Aluthge transform of . Even though is not the Aluthge transform of , we observe in Section 4 that is a (joint) partial isometry; for, , from which it follows that is isometric on the range of . We will prove in Section 4 that this particular definition of the Aluthge transform preserves commutativity.
There is another useful aspect of the spherical Aluthge transform, which we now mention. If we consider the fixed points of this transform acting on -variable weighted shifts, then we obtain an appropriate generalization of the concept of quasinormality. Recall that a Hilbert space operator is said to be quasinormal if commutes with the positive factor in the polar decomposition ; equivalently, if commutes with . It follows easily that is quasinormal if and only if , that is, if and only if is a fixed point for the Aluthge transform. In Section 10, we prove that if a -variable weighted shift satisfies , then is, up to scalar multiple, a spherical isometry. It follows that we can then study some properties of the spherical Aluthge transform using well known results about spherical isometries.
In this paper, we also focus on the following three basic problems.
Problem 1.1**.**
Let and assume that is -hyponormal. Does it follow that the toral Aluthge transform is -hyponormal? What about the case of the spherical Aluthge transform ?
Problem 1.2**.**
Is the toral Aluthge transform continuous in the uniform topology? Similarly, does continuity hold for the spherical Aluthge transform ?
Problem 1.3**.**
Does the Taylor spectrum (resp. Taylor essential spectrum) of equal to that of ? What about the case of the spherical Aluthge transform ?
2 Notation and Preliminaries
2.1 Subnormality and -hyponormality
We say that is normal if , quasinormal if commutes with , subnormal if , where is normal and , and hyponormal if . For , let . We say that an -tuple of operators on is (jointly) hyponormal if the operator matrix
[TABLE]
is positive on the direct sum of copies of (cf. [4], [24]). For instance, if ,
[TABLE]
For is -hyponormal if is (jointly) hyponormal. The Bram-Halmos characterization of subnormality ([10, III.1.9]) can be paraphrased as follows: is subnormal if and only if is -hyponormal for every ([24, Proposition 1.9]). The -tuple is said to be normal if is commuting and each is normal, and is subnormal if is the restriction of a normal -tuple to a common invariant subspace. In particular, a commuting pair is said to be -hyponormal [17] if
[TABLE]
is hyponormal, or equivalently
[TABLE]
Clearly, for we have
[TABLE]
As one might expect, there is a version of the Bram-Halmos Theorem in several variables, proved in [17]: a commuting pair which is -hyponormal for every is necessarily subnormal.
2.2 Unilateral weighted shifts
For a bounded sequence of positive real numbers (called weights), let be the associated unilateral weighted shift, defined by all , where is the canonical orthonormal basis in We will often write to denote the weighted shift with a weight sequence . As usual, the (unweighted) unilateral shift will be denoted by . The moments of are given by
[TABLE]
2.3 -variable weighted shifts
Similarly, consider double-indexed positive bounded sequences , and let be the Hilbert space of square-summable complex sequences indexed by .
We define the -variable weighted shift by
[TABLE]
where and (see Figure 1(i)). Clearly,
[TABLE]
In an entirely similar way, one can define multivariable weighted shifts. Trivially, a pair of unilateral weighted shifts and gives rise to a -variable weighted shift , if we let and all . In this case, is subnormal (resp. hyponormal) if and only if and are as well; in fact, under the canonical identification of with , we have and , and is also doubly commuting. For this reason, we do not focus attention on shifts of this type, and use them only when the above mentioned triviality is desirable or needed.
2.4 Moments and subnormality
Given , the moments of are
[TABLE]
We remark that, due to the commutativity condition (2.1), can be computed using any nondecreasing path from to .
We now recall a well known characterization of subnormality for multivariable weighted shifts [39], due to C. Berger (cf. [10, III.8.16]) and independently established by Gellar and Wallen [36] in the -variable case: admits a commuting normal extension if and only if there is a probability measure (which we call the Berger measure of defined on the -dimensional rectangle (where ) such that
[TABLE]
For , we let denote the invariant subspace obtained by removing the first vectors in the canonical orthonormal basis of ; we also let . In the -variable case, if is subnormal with Berger measure , then the Berger measure of is , where means the restriction of to . As above, is the (unweighted) unilateral shift, and for we let . Let denote the point-mass probability measure with support the singleton set . Observe that and are subnormal, with Berger measures and , respectively.
2.5 Taylor spectra
We conclude this section with some terminology needed to describe the Taylor and Taylor essential spectra of commuting -tuples of operators on a Hilbert space. Let be the *complex exterior algebra *on generators with identity , multiplication denoted by (wedge product) and complex coefficients, subject to the collapsing property . If one declares to be an orthonormal basis, the exterior algebra becomes a Hilbert space with the canonical inner product, i.e., if , if . It also admits an orthogonal decomposition with . Moreover, . Let denote the creation operator, given by (). We recall that and is a partial isometry (all ). Consider a Hilbert space and set . For a commuting -tuple of bounded operators on , define
[TABLE]
Then , so . This naturally leads to a cochain complex, called the Koszul complex associated to on , as follows:
[TABLE]
where denotes the restriction of to the subspace . We define to be invertible in case its associated Koszul complex is exact. Thus, we can define the Taylor spectrum of as follows:
[TABLE]
J. L. Taylor showed that, if , then is a nonempty, compact subset of the polydisc of multiradius where is the spectral radius of () ([47], [48]). For additional facts about this notion of joint spectrum, the reader is referred to [11], [12] and [15].
3 The Toral Aluthge Transform
We will now gather several well known auxiliary results which are needed for the proofs of the main results of this section. We begin with a criterion for the -hyponormality of -variable weighted shifts. But first we need to describe concretely the toral Aluthge transform of a -variable weighted shift, and the necessary and sufficient condition to guarantee its commutativity.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let be a -variable weighted shift. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all .
Proof.
Straightforward from (1.2). ∎
In the following result we prove that the commutativity of requires a condition on the weight sequences.
3.1 Commutativity of the toral Aluthge transform
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let be a commuting -variable weighted shift, with weight diagram given by Figure 1(i). Then
[TABLE]
for all .
Proof.
Let ; by Lemma 3.1,
[TABLE]
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
From (3.2) and (3.3) it follows that if and only if
[TABLE]
as desired. ∎
Remark 3.3*.*
By Proposition 3.2 and the commutativity condition for , it is straightforward to prove that (3.1) is equivalent to
[TABLE]
for all . ∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
*([17]) Let be a commuting -variable weighted shift. Then the following are equivalent:
(i) is -hyponormal;
(ii) for all .*
We recall that is the subspace of spanned by the canonical orthonormal basis associated to indices with and (resp.
and ). For simplicity, we write and . The core of is the restriction of to the invariant subspace . A -variable weighted shift is said to be of* tensor form* if it is of the form for suitable -variable weight sequences and . We also let
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.5**.**
(cf. [42]) Let be a commuting -variable weighted shift. Then, for and we have
[TABLE]
3.2 Hyponormality is not preserved under the toral Aluthge transform
As we observed in the Introduction, the -variable Aluthge transform leaves the class of hyponormal weighted shifts invariant. In this Subsection we will show that the same is not true of the toral Aluthge transform acting on -variable weighted shifts. To see this, consider the commuting -variable weighted shift given by Figure 2(ii). That is, has a symmetric weight diagram, has a core of tensor form (with Berger measure ), and with zero-th and first rows given by backward extensions of a weighted shift whose Berger measure is ; we will denote those backward extensions by and , respectively. Also, we denote by the weight sequence associated with . Since we wish to characterize the subnormality of , we assume that and are subnormal, which requires that . Let . We recall the following result from [26].
Lemma 3.6**.**
*(Subnormal backward extension of a -variable weighted shift [26, Proposition 1.5]) Let be a weighted shift whose restriction to is subnormal, with associated measure Then is subnormal (with associated measure ) if and only if
(i)
(ii)
In this case, . In particular, is never subnormal when .*
Thus, by Lemma 3.6, we must have and . For the proof of Lemma 3.9, we need to recall a few facts about -variable weighted shifts.
Lemma 3.7**.**
*(cf. [27])
(i) Let and be two positive measures on a set . We say that on if for all Borel subset ; equivalently, if and only if for all such that on .
(ii) Let be a probability measure on , and assume that The extremal measure (which is also a probability measure) on is given by .
(iii) Given a measure on , the marginal measure is given by , where is the canonical projection onto . Thus, , for every .*
Lemma 3.8**.**
*([26, Proposition 3.10]) (Subnormal backward extension of a -variable weighted shift) Assume that is a commuting pair of hyponormal operators, and that is subnormal with associated measure . Then, is subnormal if and only if the following conditions hold:
;
;
.
Moreover, if then . In the case when is subnormal, the Berger measure of is given by*
[TABLE]
In the rest of this section, we restrict attention to the -variable weighted shift with weight diagram given as in Figure 2(ii).
Lemma 3.9**.**
Let be a -variable weighted shift, let , and assume that and . Then, is subnormal if and only if .
Proof.
Observe that the Berger measure of is and similarly the Berger measure of is . The restriction of to the subspace is then , from which it follows at once that . Therefore, for the subnormality of we will need and this naturally leads to the condition , as desired. ∎
Lemma 3.10**.**
The 2-variable weighted shift is hyponormal if and only if .
Proof.
Since the restrictions of to the subspaces and are subnormal, Lemma 3.4 says that is hyponormal if and only if . Since
[TABLE]
it follows that is hyponormal if and only if , as desired. ∎
We observe that if , then becomes , which is always true. Thus, to build an example where the hyponormality of is violated, we must necessarily assume that . Incidentally, this assumption automatically leads to , so that the subnormality of is now determined by the conditions and . In short, an example with the desired properties can be constructed once we guarantee the following three conditions:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Notice that , so if we were to assume that then both conditions (3.6) and (3.7) would be simultaneously satisfied. Moreover, if we were to assume that , then we could always find such that . We can then focus on the following question:
Can we simultaneously guarantee and ?
Alternatively, we need
[TABLE]
Now, if , then it would be possible to select such that (3.9) is satisfied. We have thus established the following result.
Theorem 3.11**.**
Let be as above, and assume that
[TABLE]
Then: (i) is subnormal; and (ii) is not hyponormal.
We will now show that the condition in Theorem 3.11 holds for a large class of -variable weighted shifts.
Example 3.12**.**
Consider the case when the measure is -atomic, that is, , with , and . (Recall that [math] cannot be in the support of , because otherwise .) We compute
[TABLE]
Thus, without loss of generality we can always assume that , that is,
[TABLE]
A calculation using Mathematica [49] reveals that for , we have for all with . As a matter of fact, there is a region in the -plane bounded by the graph of a positive convex function , such that precisely when ; contains the rectangle . ∎
We have thus established the existence of subnormal -variable weighted shifts with non-hyponormal toral Aluthge transforms.
4 The spherical Aluthge Transform
In this section, we study the second plausible definition of the multivariable Aluthge transform, which we will denote, to avoid confusion, by ; this corresponds to (1.4). We begin with the following elementary result.
Proposition 4.1**.**
*Assume that , where , and let . Assume also that is commutative. Then
(i) is a (joint) partial isometry; more precisely, is the projection onto ;
(ii) is commutative on , so in particular is commutative whenever is injective.*
Proof.
(i) An easy computation reveals that
[TABLE]
and therefore is the identity operator on , as desired.
To prove (ii), consider the product
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
It follows at once that vanishes on , as desired. ∎
We now prove:
Proposition 4.2**.**
Given a -variable weighted shift , let be given by (1.4). Assume that is commutative. Then is commutative.
Proof.
Straightforward from Proposition 4.1. ∎
We briefly pause to describe how acts on the canonical orthonormal basis vectors.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let be a -variable weighted shift. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all .
Proof.
Straightforward from (1.4). ∎
We next have:
Proposition 4.4**.**
Consider a -variable weighted shift , and assume that is a commuting pair of hyponormal operators. Then so is .
Proof.
We will establish that is hyponormal. Fix a lattice point ; we would like to prove that . Since the hyponormality of a Hilbert space operator is invariant under multiplication by a nonzero scalar, we can, without loss of generality, assume that . To simplify the calculation, let , , and . Thus, the weight diagram of is now given as in Figure 3(i). Since is hyponormal, we must necessarily have
[TABLE]
in the first column of the weight diagram in Figure 3(i). Recall also the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality . Then
[TABLE]
as desired. ∎
We now present an example of a hyponormal -variable weighted shift for which is not hyponormal. While we have already encountered this behavior (cf. Theorem 3.11), the simplicity of the following example warrants special mention (aware as we are that the result is weaker than Theorem 3.11). Moreover, this example shows that the spherical Aluthge transform may be hyponormal even if is not.
Example 4.5**.**
For , let be the -variable weighted shift in Figure 2(ii), where , , . Then
(i) is subnormal ;
(ii) is hyponormal ;
(iii) is hyponormal ;
(iv) is hyponormal .
Clearly, and for all , while on and on , where . Then is hyponormal but is not hyponormal if , and is hyponormal but is not hyponormal if .
5 -variable Weighted Shifts with Identical Aluthge Transforms
We shall now characterize the class of commuting -variable weighted shifts for which the toral and spherical Aluthge transforms agree, that is, . Using Lemmas 3.1 and 4.3, it suffices to restrict attention to the equalities
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all . Thus, we easily see that if and only if
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all , which is equivalent to
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all . If we now recall condition (2.1) for the commutativity of , that is, for all , we see at once that if and only if and for all . It follows that the weight diagram for is completely determined by the zeroth row and the weight . For, referring to Figure 1(i), once we have and , we immediately get ). With and known, we use commutativity and to calculate . Since and , we can then calculate and . A similar reasoning yields all remaining ’s and ’s.
We will now show that, for the purpose of establishing the invariance of -hyponormality under the Aluthge transform for the class , it is enough to assume that . This is an immediate consequence of the following well known result.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let be a bounded linear operator on Hilbert space, and let be its polar decomposition. Let be a complex number written in polar form, and define . Then, the polar decomposition of is . As a consequence, .
Remark 5.2*.*
By Lemma 5.1, to study the toral Aluthge transform of we can multiply by the factor . This results in a new -variable weighted shift for which for all . This subclass of is the central subject of the next section. Observe that, while the natural generalization of Lemma 5.1 is not true for the spherical Aluthge transform, it is true when restricted to , since both the toral and spherical Aluthge transforms agree on this class. ∎
6 When is Hyponormality Invariant Under the Toral and Spherical Aluthge Transforms?
In this section we identify a large class of -variable weighted shifts for which the toral ans spherical Aluthge transforms do preserve hyponormality. This is in some sense optimal, since we know that -hyponormality () is not preserved by the -variable Aluthge transform [45], as mentioned in the Introduction. Since this class is actually a subclass of (introduced in Section 5), it follows at once that all the results we establish for the toral Aluthge transform are also true for the spherical Aluthge transform.
We start with some definitions. Recall that the core of is the restriction of to the invariant subspace . is said to be of* tensor form* if it is of the form for some unilateral weighted shifts and . Consider on given by the double-indexed weight sequences for . It is clear that is a commuting pair, and we refer to it as a -variable weighted shift with diagonal core [23]. This -variable weighted shift can be represented by the weight diagram in Figure 4(i)). It is straightforward to observe that the class of shifts of the form is simply with the extra condition . (For more on these shifts the reader is referred to [23]). Now, we show that the -hyponormality of implies the -hyponormality of . For this, we present a simple criterion to detect the -hyponormality of weighted shifts.
Lemma 6.1**.**
*([14]) Let be a hyponormal weighted shift, and let . The following statements are equivalent:
(i) is -hyponormal;
(ii) The matrix*
[TABLE]
*is positive semi-definite for all ;
(iii) The Hankel matrix*
[TABLE]
is positive semi-definite for all .
6.1 Preservation of hyponormality
We then have:
Proposition 6.2**.**
Consider given by Figure 4(i). Then for
[TABLE]
Proof.
This is clear from the construction of and Figure 4(i).
For , we suppose that is a -hyponormal weighted shift. Then, by Lemma 6.1, for all , we have that the Hankel matrix
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.4, we can see that a -variable weighted shift is -hyponormal if and only if
[TABLE]
for all . Thus, for -hyponormal, it is enough to show that for all . Observe that the moments associated with are
[TABLE]
By a direct computation, we have
[TABLE]
which by (6.2) equals
[TABLE]
For , we can observe that the
[TABLE]
rows and columns of are equal. Thus, a direct calculation (i.e., discarding some redundant rows and columns in the matrix ) shows that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
Thus, if is -hyponormal then for all , which a fortiori implies that for all , as desired. The proof is now complete. ∎
Now we have the following result.
Theorem 6.3**.**
Consider the -variable weighted shift given by Figure 4(i). Suppose that is hyponormal. Then, the toral Aluthge transform is also hyponormal.
In view of Lemma 5.1, we immediately get
Corollary 6.4**.**
The conclusion of Theorem 6.3 holds in the class .
Proof of Theorem 6.3.
Since is hyponormal, by Proposition 6.2, is hyponormal. Thus, we have that for any integer , , which implies that is also hyponormal. By Proposition 6.2, is hyponormal, as desired. ∎
Remark 6.5*.*
(i) We construct an example such that is not hyponormal, but the Aluthge transform of is hyponormal. Consider the unilateral weighted shift introduced in Section 1, that is, . is not hyponormal, but the Aluthge transform is subnormal. Thus, by Proposition 6.2, we have that is not hyponormal, but is hyponormal, as desired.
(ii) Using an argument entirely similar to that in (i) above, one can show that -hyponor-mality is not preserved by the toral or spherical Aluthge transform (as in the single variable case). ∎
We can easily observe that if is of tensor form, that is, , then its toral Aluthge transform is also of tensor form; however, the spherical Aluthge transform is in general not of tensor form. In any event, hyponormality is invariant under both Aluthge transforms when is of tensor form. That the toral Aluthge transform preserves hyponormality for these -variable weighted shifts is clear; we now establish invariance of hyponormality for the spherical Aluthge transform. Recall first that, by Proposition 4.4, the spherical Aluthge transform is commuting.
Proposition 6.6**.**
Let be a -variable weighted shift of tensor form , and assume that and are hyponormal. Then is hyponormal.
Proof.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that
[TABLE]
with and . Also, it is enough to focus on the Six-Point Test at (cf. [13, Theorem 6.1], [26, Theorem 1.3]); that is, we will check that .
Observe that
[TABLE]
Thus, we obtain
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Now modify the and entries of and let
[TABLE]
A direct calculation using the Nested Determinant Test shows that and that . Thus, we have
[TABLE]
so that is hyponormal, as desired. ∎
Remark 6.7*.*
One might be tempted to claim that subnormality is also preserved by the toral and spherical Aluthge transforms, within the class of -variable weighted shifts of tensor form. However, this is not the case. Indeed, in [34] and [35], G. Exner considered the weighted shift with -atomic Berger measure (studied in [25]) and proved that the Aluthge transform of is not subnormal.
7 Continuity Properties of the Aluthge Transforms
We turn our attention to the continuity properties of the Aluthge transforms of a commuting pair. The following result is well known. For a single operator , the Aluthge transform map is continuous on ([32]). We want to extend the result to multivariable case. First, we define the operator norm of as
[TABLE]
Theorem 7.1**.**
The toral Aluthge transform map is continuous on .
Proof.
Straightforward from the definition of .
∎
We turn our attention to the continuity properties in for the spherical Aluthge transform of a commuting pair. For this, we need a couple of auxiliary results, which can be proved by suitable adaptations of the results in [32, Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2].
Lemma 7.2**.**
*Let be a pair of commuting operators, written in joint polar decomposition form, where . For and , let and let . Then:
(i) ;
(ii) ;
(iii) ;
(iv) ;
(v) For , .*
Lemma 7.3**.**
Given and , there are real polynomials and such that for every commuting pair with , we have
[TABLE]
In the statement below, refers to the operator norm topology on (see 7.1).
Theorem 7.4**.**
The spherical Aluthge transform
[TABLE]
is continuous on .
Proof.
Observe first that for , as follows from the inequality
[TABLE]
The proof is now an easy consequence of the Proof of [32, Theorem 2.3], when one uses Lemma 7.3 instead of [32, Lemma 2.2]. ∎
8 Spectral Properties of the Aluthge Transforms
In this section, we study whether the multivariable Aluthge transforms preserve the Taylor spectrum and Taylor essential spectrum, when is in the class of -variable weighted shifts with core of tensor form; this is a large nontrivial class, which has been previously studied in [15–20], [24–28] and [47–49].
We begin by looking at the toral Aluthge transform. By Proposition 3.2 and Remark 3.3, we note that the weight diagram of is as in Figure 2(i), provided the toral Aluthge transform is commutative. We first address the Taylor spectrum.
Lemma 8.1**.**
(i) ([11], [15]) Let and be Hilbert spaces, and let and be such that
[TABLE]
*is commuting. Assume that and \left(\begin{array}[]{cc}\mathbf{A}&0\\ \mathbf{B}&\mathbf{C}\end{array}\right) are Taylor invertible. Then, is Taylor invertible. Furthermore, if and are Taylor invertible, then \left(\begin{array}[]{cc}\mathbf{A}&0\\ \mathbf{B}&\mathbf{C}\end{array}\right) is Taylor invertible.
(ii) ([16]) For and two commuting -tuples of bounded operators on Hilbert space, we have:*
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
To apply Lemma 8.1, we first let
[TABLE]
Theorem 8.2**.**
Consider a commuting -variable weighted shift with weight diagram given by Figure 2(i). Assume also that and are hyponormal. Then
[TABLE]
Here denotes the closure of the open unit disk and the unit circle.
Proof.
We represent by block matrices relative to the decomposition
[TABLE]
Then, we obtain
[TABLE]
where R_{1}:=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccc}W_{\omega^{(2)}}&&\\ &W_{\omega^{(2)}}&\\ &&\ddots\end{array}\right) and R_{2}:=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}0&&&\\ \tau_{1}I&0&&\\ &\tau_{2}I&0&\\ &&\ddots&\ddots\end{array}\right).
We first consider of . Note the following:
[TABLE]
Thus, by Lemma 8.1(i) and (8.3), we have
[TABLE]
By Lemma 8.1(ii) and (8.3), we have
[TABLE]
Since the Taylor spectrum is a closed set in , by (10.1) and (10.2), we can get
[TABLE]
We next consider the Taylor essential spectrum of . Observe that is a compact perturbation of and . Also, and are compact perturbations of and , respectively. Thus, we have
[TABLE]
By Lemma 8.1(ii) and (8.3), we note
[TABLE]
Therefore, our proof is now complete. ∎
Theorem 8.3**.**
(Case of toral Aluthge Transform) Consider a commuting -variable weighted shift with weight diagram given by Figure 2(i). Assume also that and are hyponormal. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since the structure of the weight diagram for is entirely similar to that of , the results follows by imitating the Proof of Theorem 8.2. ∎
By the results of Theorems 8.2 and 8.3, we easily obtain the following result.
Corollary 8.4**.**
Consider a commuting -variable weighted shift with weight diagram given by Figure 2(i). Assume also that and are hyponormal. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Remark 8.5*.*
We note that the commutativity property is required to check the Taylor spectrum (resp. Taylor essential spectrum) of . Thus, if , then is commuting.
(ii) By Corollary 8.4, we can see that the Taylor spectrum (resp. Taylor essential spectrum) of equals that of when is commuting and and are hyponormal. Thus, Corollary 8.4 gives a partial solution to Problem 1.3.
We now turn our attention to the case of the spherical Aluthge Transform. We need a preliminary result.
Proposition 8.6**.**
Let , with core . Then if and only or for some .
Proof.
By Lemma 4.3, we recall that
[TABLE]
Since , and since leaves the subspace invariant, it readily follows that the spherical Aluthge transform of is . As a result, we may assume, without loss of generality, that , where and are unilateral weighted shifts. Now, by (8.9), for all we have
[TABLE]
If there exists such that , then for all we must have ; that is, for all . On the other hand, if for all , then for all . This completes the proof. ∎
We are now ready to state
Theorem 8.7**.**
(Case of spherical Aluthge Transform) Let be as in Proposition 8.6. Assume also that and are hyponormal. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 8.6, without loss of generality we may assume
[TABLE]
for some . Recall that
[TABLE]
By (8.10), we obtain
[TABLE]
where with and denotes Schur product. Note that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Thus, by the method used in the Proof of Theorem 8.2 we have
[TABLE]
Observe now that (8.11) and (8.12) also show that the weighted shifts associated with [math]-th row and the [math]-th column of are compact perturbations of the corresponding weighted shifts for . As a result, it is straightforward to conclude that
[TABLE]
This completes the proof of the theorem. ∎
In view of Corollary 8.4, Remark 8.5 and Theorem 8.7, it is natural to formulate the following
Conjecture 8.8**.**
Let be a commuting -variable weighted shift, whose toral and spherical Aluthge transforms are also commuting. Then , and all have the same Taylor spectrum and the same Taylor essential spectrum.
9 Aluthge Transforms of the Drury-Arveson Shift
In this section we consider the Drury-Arveson -variable weighted shift , whose weight sequences are given by
[TABLE]
If we denote the successive rows of the weight diagram of by , it is easy to see that , the (unweighted) unilateral shift, , the Bergman shift and, more generally, , the Agler -th shift (); in particular, all rows and columns are subnormal weighted shifts. For , the Berger measure of is on the closed interval , and therefore all the Berger measures associated with rows are mutually absolutely continuous, a necessary condition for the subnormality of . However, the Berger measure of the first row ( on ) is not absolutely continuous with respect to (which is the Berger measure of , the zeroth-row), and therefore cannot be subnormal (by [27]). In fact, a stronger result is true: is not jointly hyponormal, as a simple application of the Six-Point Test at reveals.
It is also known that is essentially normal; in fact, the commutators are in the Schatten p-class for , as shown by W.A. Arveson [3]. In the sequel, we prove compactness of the commutators using the homogeneous decomposition of ; this will eventually help us prove that the Aluthge transforms of are compact perturbations of . Let denote the finite dimensional vector space generated by the orthonormal basis vectors , it is easy to see that is invariant under the action of the self-commutators and the cross-commutators (). A simple calculation reveals that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
so that in we have
[TABLE]
It follows that the norm of restricted to is bounded by . Since is unitarily equivalent to the orthogonal direct sum of its restrictions to the subspaces , we easily conclude that is compact. The calculation for is identical.
In terms of , one again computes first the action on a generic basis vector in , that is,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
As before, is an orthogonal direct sum of its restrictions to the subspaces , so the previous estimate proves that is compact. As a result, we know that is essentially normal.
We will now study how much the Aluthge transforms of differ from .
Theorem 9.1**.**
*(i) is a compact perturbation of .
(ii) is a compact perturbation of .*
Proof.
(i) We first note that the weight sequences and of satisfy (3.2); that is, is commuting. Next, we observe that maps into (cf. Lemma 3.1), just as does. As a result the compactness of will be established once we prove that tends to zero as . Toward this end, we calculate
[TABLE]
Without loss of generality, we focus instead on the expression
[TABLE]
With the aid of Mathematica [49], we obtain
[TABLE]
Thus, , and therefore is compact.
(ii) As in (i) above, it suffices to prove that tends to zero as . Since
[TABLE]
we can again focus on the expression
[TABLE]
A computation using Mathematica [49] shows that
[TABLE]
We thus conclude, as before, that is compact. ∎
Corollary 9.2**.**
The -variable weighted shifts , and all share the same Taylor spectral picture.
Proof.
Since the Taylor essential spectrum and the Fredholm index are invariant under compact perturbations (cf. [12], the result follows from the well know spectral picture of ; that is, , , and . (Here denotes the unit ball in , and its topological boundary.) ∎
Remark 9.3*.*
It is an easy application of the Six-Point Test that neither nor is jointly hyponormal.
10 Fixed Points of the Spherical Aluthge Transform:
Spherically Quasinormal Pairs
In this section we discuss the structure of -variable weighted shifts which are fixed points for the spherical Aluthge transform. We believe this notion provides the proper generalization of quasinormality to several variables. As we noted in the Introduction, a Hilbert space operator is quasinormal if and only if . We use this as our point of departure for the -variable case.
Definition 10.1**.**
A commuting pair is spherically quasinormal if .
We now recall the class of spherically isometric commuting pairs of operators ([5], [6], [7], [33], [37], [38]).
Definition 10.2**.**
A commuting -tuple is a spherical isometry if .
In the literature, spherical quasinormality of a commuting -tuple is associated with the commutativity of each with . It is not hard to prove that, for -variable weighted shifts, this is equivalent to requiring that be a fixed point of the spherical Aluthge transform, that is, . A straightforward calculation shows that this is equivalent to requiring that each commutes with . In particular, is commuting whenever is commuting. Also, recall from Section 1 that a commuting pair is a spherical isometry if . Thus, in the case of spherically quasinormal -variable weighted shifts, we always have . In the following result, the key new ingredient is the equivalence of (i) and (ii).
As we noted in the Introduction, the operator is a (joint) partial isometry; for, , from which it follows that is isometric on the range of . In the case when is injective, we see that a commuting pair is spherically quasinormal if and only if each commutes with , and if and only if each commutes with (); in particular, is commuting whenever is commuting. Observe also that when is injective, we always have .
The proof of the following result is a straightforward application of Definition 10.2.
Lemma 10.3**.**
A -variable weighted shift is a spherical isometry if and only if
[TABLE]
for all .
Lemma 10.4**.**
A 2-variable weighted shift is spherically quasinormal if and only if there exists such that is a spherical isometry, that is, .
Proof.
Assume that is commuting and spherically quasinormal. Then and commute with . We now consider the following
**Claim: **For all , is constant.
For the proof of Claim, if we fix an orthonormal basis vector , then
[TABLE]
where \varepsilon$${}_{1}:=(1,0) and \varepsilon$${}_{2}:=(0,1). We thus obtain
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
We also have
[TABLE]
Hence, we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, by (10.1) and (10.2), for all , we obtain
[TABLE]
We have thus established the Claim.
It follows that is independent of . As a result, is a spherical isometry, as desired. ∎
By the proof of Lemma 10.4, we remark that once the zero-th row of , call it , is given, then the entire -variable weighted shift is fully determined. We shall return to this in Subsection 10.1.
We now recall a result of A. Athavale.
Theorem 10.5**.**
([5]) A spherical isometry is always subnormal.
By Lemma 10.4, we immediately obtain
Corollary 10.6**.**
A spherically quasinormal -variable weighted shift is subnormal.
We mention in passing two more significant features of spherical isometries.
Theorem 10.7**.**
([46]) Spherical isometries are hyporeflexive.
Theorem 10.8**.**
([33]) For every there exists a non-normal spherical isometry such that the polynomially convex hull of is contained in the unit sphere.
Remark 10.9*.*
(i) A. Athavale and S. Poddar have recently proved that a commuting spherically quasinormal pair is always subnormal [6, Proposition2.1]; this provides a different proof of Corollary 10.6.
(ii) In a different direction, let . By induction, it is easy to prove that if is spherically quasinormal, then ; by [8, Remark 4.6], is subnormal.
10.1 Construction of spherical isometries
In the class of -variable weighted shifts, there is a simple description of spherical isometries, in terms of the weight sequences and , which we now present. Since spherical isometries are (jointly) subnormal, we know that the zeroth-row must be subnormal. Start then with a subnormal unilateral weighted shift, and denote its weights by . Using the identity
[TABLE]
and the above mentioned zeroth-row, we can compute for . With these new values available, we can use the commutativity property (2.1) to generate the values of in the first row (see Figure 1); that is,
[TABLE]
We can now repeat the algorithm, and calculate the weights for , again using the identity (10.4). This is turn leads to the weights for the second row, and so on.
This simple construction of spherically isometric -variable weighted shifts will allow us to study properties like recursiveness (tied to the existence of finitely atomic Berger measures) and propagation of recursive relations. We pursue these ideas in an upcoming manuscript.
Acknowledgments. Preliminary versions of some of the results in this paper have been announced in [31]. Some of the calculations in this paper were obtained using the software tool Mathematica [49].
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] A. Aluthge, On p 𝑝 p -hyponormal Operators for 0 < p < 1 0 𝑝 1 0<p<1 , Integral Equations Operator Theory 13(1990), 307–315.
- 2[2] T. Ando, Aluthge transforms and the convex hull of the spectrum of a Hilbert space operator, in Recent advances in operator theory and its applications , Oper. Theory Adv. Appl. 160(2005), 21–39.
- 3[3] W.A. Arveson, Subalgebras of C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} -algebras. III. Multivariable operator theory, Acta Math. 181(1998), 159–228.
- 4[4] A. Athavale, On joint hyponormality of operators, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 103(1988), 417–423.
- 5[5] A. Athavale, On the intertwining of joint isometries, J. Operator Theory 23(1990), 339–350.
- 6[6] A. Athavale and S. Poddar, On the reflexivity of certain operator tuples, Acta Math. Sci. (Szeged) 81(2015), 285–291.
- 7[7] K.R.M. Attele and A.R. Lubin, Commutant lifting for jointly isometric operators - a geometrical approach, J. Funct. Anal. 140(1996), 300–311.
- 8[8] S. Chavan and V. Sholapurkar, Rigidity theorems for spherical hyperexpansions, Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 7(2013), 1545-–1568.
