This paper explores the dual spaces of Hardy-Amalgam spaces and demonstrates the boundedness of pseudo-differential operators within these function spaces, advancing understanding of their structure and applications.
Contribution
It characterizes the dual spaces of Hardy-Amalgam spaces and proves boundedness results for pseudo-differential operators on these spaces.
Findings
01
Dual spaces of Hardy-Amalgam spaces are characterized.
02
Boundedness of pseudo-differential operators is established.
03
Results extend the functional analysis framework for these spaces.
Abstract
In this paper, we carry on with the study of the Hardy-Amalgam spaces Hloc(q,p) spaces introduced in \cite{AbFt}. We investigate their dual spaces and establish some results of boundedness of pseudo-differential operators in these 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.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Harmonic Analysis Research · Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods · Dupuytren's Contracture and Treatments
Full text
Duals of Hardy-amalgam spaces Hloc(q,p) and Pseudo-differential operators
Zobo Vincent de Paul Ablé
Laboratoire de Mathématiques Fondamentales, UFR Mathématiques et Informatique, Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny Abidjan-Cocody, 22 B.P 582 Abidjan 22. Côte d’Ivoire
In this paper, we carry on with the study of the Hardy-Amalgam spaces Hloc(q,p) spaces introduced in [1]. We investigate their dual spaces and establish some results of boundedness of pseudo-differential operators in these spaces.
The celebrated paper of C. Fefferman and E. Stein [11] has been crucial in recent developments of the real variable theory of Hardy spaces. Given a function φ∈C∞(Rd) with support on B(0,1) such that ∫Rdφdx=1, where B(0,1) is the unit open ball centered at [math] and C∞(Rd) denotes the space of infinitely differentiable complex values functions on Rd, and
t>0, we denote by φt the dilated function φt(x)=t−dφ(x/t), x∈Rd. The Hardy space Hq:=Hq(Rd) is defined as the space of tempered distributions f such that the maximal function
[TABLE]
is in Lq(Rd), while its local version Hlocq:=Hlocq(Rd) introduced by D. Goldberg in [14] is that for which Mlocφ(f)∈Lq(Rd), where Mlocφ(f) is defined as in (1.1) with 0<t≤1. These spaces have been the subject of several studies and generalizations (see [3], [5], [6], [9], [13], [19], [20], [21], [24], [25], [27], [31], [37] and [38]). Also, following the maximal function approach and using Amalgams, we introduced in [1] the spaces H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) which generalize Hq and Hlocq spaces.
For recall, Amalgams arise naturally in harmonic analysis and were introduced by N. Wiener [35] in 1926. For a systematic study of these spaces and their role in Fourier analysis, we refer to [4], [12] and [18]. For 0<q,p≤+∞, the amalgam of Lq:=Lq(Rd) and Lp:=Lp(Rd) is the space (Lq,ℓp):=(Lq,ℓp)(Rd) of measurable functions f:Rd→C which are locally in Lq and such that the sequence {∥fχQk∥q}k∈Zd belongs to ℓp:=ℓp(Zd), where Qk:=k+[0,1)d=∏i=1d[ki,ki+1), χQk denotes the characteristic function of Qk and ∥f∥q:=(∫Rd∣f(x)∣qdx)q1, with the usual modification when q=+∞. In [1], we defined the Hardy-amalgam spaces H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p), for 0<q,p<+∞, by taking the Wiener-amalgam ”norm” in the definition of Hardy space Hq and local Hardy space Hlocq instead of the Lebesgue ”norm”. Next, in [2], we characterized the dual space of H(q,p), whenever 0<q≤p≤1, and obtained some results of boundedness of some classical linear operators such as Calderón-Zygmund, convolution and Riesz potential operators, when 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞.
The aim of this paper is to extend some well known results for Hlocq spaces to Hardy-amalgam spaces Hloc(q,p), when 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞, as we did in [2] for H(q,p). This article is organized as follows.
In Section 2, we recall some properties of Wiener amalgam spaces (Lq,ℓp) and Hardy-amalgam spaces H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) obtained in [1] we will need. In Section 3, we establish the atomic and molecular decompositions of Hloc(q,p) spaces, when 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞, which correspond to the local versions of those obtained in [1] for H(q,p).
Next, in Section 4, with some results of Sections 2 and 3, we characterize the dual space of Hloc(q,p), whenever 0<q≤p≤1. Lastly, in Section 5, as applications of the results of Sections 3 and 4, we study the boundedness of pseudo-differential operators in Hloc(q,p) spaces, when 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞.
Throughout the paper, we let N={1,2,…} and Z+={0,1,2,…}. We use S:=S(Rd) will denote the Schwartz class of rapidly decreasing smooth functions endowed with the topology defined by the family of norms {Nm}m∈Z+, where for all m∈Z+ and ψ∈S,
[TABLE]
with ∣β∣=β1+…+βd, ∂β=(∂/∂x1)β1…(∂/∂xd)βd for all β=(β1,…,βd)∈Z+d and ∣x∣:=(x12+…+xd2)1/2. The dual space of S is the space of tempered distributions denoted by S′:=S′(Rd) equipped with the weak-∗ topology. If f∈S′ and θ∈S, we denote the evaluation of f on θ by ⟨f,θ⟩. The letter C will be used for non-negative constants independent of the relevant variables that may change from one occurrence to another. When a constant depends on some important parameters α,γ,…, we denote it by C(α,γ,…). Constants with subscript, such as Cα,γ,…, do not change in different occurrences but depend on the parameters mentioned in it. We propose the following abbreviation \mathrm{\bf A}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\mathrm{\bf B} for the inequalities A≤CB, where C is a positive constant independent of the main parameters. If \mathrm{\bf A}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\mathrm{\bf B} and \mathrm{\bf B}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\mathrm{\bf A}, then we write A≈B. For any given (quasi-) normed spaces A and B with the corresponding (quasi-) norms ∥⋅∥A and ∥⋅∥B, the symbol A↪B means that for all f∈A, then f∈B and \left\|f\right\|_{\mathcal{B}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\left\|f\right\|_{\mathcal{A}}.
For λ>0 and a cube Q⊂Rd (by a cube we mean a cube whose edges are parallel to the coordinate axes), we write λQ for the cube with same center as Q and side-length λ times side-length of Q, while ⌊λ⌋ stands for the greatest integer less or equal to λ. Also, for x∈Rd and ℓ>0, Q(x,ℓ) will denote the cube centered at x and side-length ℓ. We use the same notations for balls. We denote by Ec the set Rd\E and diam(E):=supx,y∈E∣x−y∣. For a measurable set E⊂Rd, we denote by χE the characteristic function of E and ∣E∣ for the Lebesgue measure. Also, for any set A, we denote by #A:=card(A) its cardinality.
Throughout this paper, without loss of generality and unless otherwise specified, we assume that cubes are closed and denote by Q the set of all cubes.
2. Recalls on Wiener amalgam spaces (Lq,ℓp) and Hardy-amalgam spaces H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p)
2.1. Wiener amalgam spaces (Lq,ℓp)
For f∈(Lq,ℓp), we set
[TABLE]
Endowed with the (quasi)-norm ∥⋅∥q,p, the amalgam space (Lq,ℓp) is a complete space. It is well known that it is a Banach space if 1≤q,p≤+∞ and its dual is (Lq′,ℓp′) for 1≤q,p<+∞, where q1+q′1=1 and p1+p′1=1 with the usual conventions (see [4], [7], [12], [18] and [30]). The following result is also well known (see [4], [7], [12], [18] and [30]).
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let 0<q,q1,p,p1≤+∞. We have
(1)
(Lq,ℓq)=Lq* with ∥⋅∥q,q=∥⋅∥q.*
2. (2)
∥f∥q,p1≤∥f∥q,p* , if p≤p1 and f∈(Lq,ℓp).*
3. (3)
∥f∥q,p≤∥f∥q1,p* , if q≤q1 and f∈(Lq1,ℓp).*
Also, we have the following reverse Minkowski’s inequality for (Lq,ℓp), with 0<q<1 and 0<p≤1.
Let 0<q<1 and 0<p≤1. For all finite sequence {fn}n=0m of elements of (Lq,ℓp), we have
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.3** ([1], (2.4) and (2.5), p. 1902).**
We have S↪(Lq,ℓp), for 0<q,p≤+∞. Also, (Lq,ℓp)↪S′, for 1≤q,p≤+∞.
Remark 2.4**.**
For 0<q,p≤+∞, the convergence in S implies the convergence in (Lq,ℓp).
Likewise, for 1≤q,p≤+∞, the convergence in (Lq,ℓp) implies the convergence in S′. Consequently, for all 1≤q≤+∞ and 0<p≤+∞, the convergence in (Lq,ℓp) implies the convergence in S′, more precisely (Lq,ℓp)↪S′.
Another important property of amalgam spaces is the boundedness of the Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator M. Let f be a locally integrable function. The centralized Hardy-Littlewood maximal function M(f) is defined by
[TABLE]
Carton-Lebrun and al. proved in [8], Theorems 4.2 and 4.5, the following result.
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let 1<q,p<+∞. Then, for any locally integrable function f,
[TABLE]
A very useful generalization of this result is the following
Let 1<p,u≤+∞ and 1<q<+∞. Then, for all sequence of measurable functions {fn}n≥0,
[TABLE]
with the implicit equivalent positive constants independent of {fn}n≥0 .
2.2. Hardy-amalgam spaces H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p)
Let 0<q,p<+∞ and φ∈S with supp(φ)⊂B(0,1) and ∫Rdφ(x)dx=1. In [1], we defined the space H(q,p) as the space of tempered distributions f having their maximal function Mφ(f) in (Lq,ℓp). For f∈H(q,p), we set
[TABLE]
Similarly, we defined the space Hloc(q,p) by replacing the maximal operator Mφ by its local version Mlocφ. Also, ∥⋅∥H(q,p) and ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) respectively define norms on H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p), whenever 1≤q,p<+∞, and quasi-norms otherwise. Moreover,
[TABLE]
for all f∈H(q,p). We obtained the following result in [1].
Let 1≤q<+∞ and 0<p<+∞. Then, H(q,p)⊂Hloc(q,p)⊂Lloc1.
Also, in [1], we showed that H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) can be characterized with other maximal functions and do not depend on the choice of the function φ. Endeed, given a,b>0, Φ∈S and f∈S′, we define the non-tangential maximal function MΦ,a∗(f) of f with respect to Φ as
[TABLE]
and the auxiliary maximal function MΦ,b∗∗(f) of f with respect to Φ as
[TABLE]
Moreover, given a positive integer N, we define
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The non-tangential grand maximal function of f is defined as
[TABLE]
and the radial grand maximal function of f as
[TABLE]
Similarly, we define the local versions of these maximal functions by taking t in (0;1]. We have the following theorem (see [1], Theorem 3.7, p. 1910).
Theorem 2.9**.**
Let 0<q,p<+∞ and Φ∈S with ∫RdΦ(x)dx=0. Then, for any f∈S′, the following assertions are equivalent:
(1)
MΦ(f)∈(Lq,ℓp).
2. (2)
For all a>0, MΦ,a∗(f)∈(Lq,ℓp).
3. (3)
For all b>max{qd,pd}, MΦ,b∗∗(f)∈(Lq,ℓp).
4. (4)
There exists an integer N>max{qd,pd} such that MFN(f)∈(Lq,ℓp).
Moreover, for any N≥max{⌊qd⌋,⌊pd⌋}+1 and max{qd,pd}<b<N with N=⌊b⌋+1,
[TABLE]
Remark 2.10**.**
Theorem 2.9 holds when the maximal functions are replaced by their local versions. Thus, we obtain a variety of maximal characterizations for H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) and their independence of the choice of the function φ.
For the sequel, we retain three equivalences in Theorem 2.9 and their local versions; more precisely, for any N≥max{⌊qd⌋,⌊pd⌋}+1,
[TABLE]
We have the following remark (see [1], (3.12) and (3.13), pp. 1911-1912).
Remark 2.11**.**
Let f∈H(q,p) and Φ∈S. We have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, with C(Φ,d,q,p):=C(d,q,p)NN(Φ) a nonnegative constant independent of x and f. Thus, f is a bounded distribution,
[TABLE]
and H(q,p)↪S′. Also,
[TABLE]
In Remark 2.11, we can replace H(q,p) by Hloc(q,p) and MFN by its local version MlocFN.
The convergence in H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) implies the convergence in S′. Furthermore, H(q,p) and Hloc(q,p) are Banach spaces whenever 1≤q,p<+∞ and quasi-Banach spaces otherwise.
We give a very useful lemma in passing from H(q,p) to Hloc(q,p).
Lemma 2.13**.**
Let 0<q,p<+∞ and f∈Hloc(q,p). Then, there exist u∈H(q,p) and v∈Hloc(q,p)∩C∞(Rd) such that f=u+v and
[TABLE]
with the implicit equivalent positive constants independent of f.
Proof.
The idea of our proof is the one of the classical case, namely in passing from Hq to Hlocq (see [17], Lemma 2.2.5, p. 55). One can also see [14], Lemma 4. Fix an integer N≥max{⌊qd⌋,⌊pd⌋}+1 with N>d. Let ψ∈C∞(Rd) with supp(ψ)⊂B(0,2), 0≤ψ≤1 and ψ≡1 on B(0,1). Set θ(x):=(F−1(ψ))(x), v(x):=(f∗θ)(x), for all x∈Rd, and u:=f−f∗θ, where F−1 denotes the inverse Fourier transform F defined by (F−1(ψ))(x)=(F(ψ))(−x)=:ψ(−x) and
[TABLE]
with i2=−1 (see [15], Definitions 2.2.8 and 2.2.13). Clearly, we have v∈C∞(Rd)∩S′, since θ∈S by its definition and f∈S′. Fix ϕ∈S with supp(ϕ)⊂B(0,1), 0≤ϕ≤1 and ϕ≡1 on B(0,1/2). Then, there exists a constant C>0 such that
[TABLE]
for all 0<t≤1. Endeed, since ∫Rdϕ(x)dx=ϕ(0)=1, we have θ∗ϕt→θ in S as t→0. Therefore, for all multi-indexes β and all 0<t≤1, we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Cβ,N>0 is a constant independent of t and x. Thus,
[TABLE]
since N>d. Hence C(N)−1(θ∗ϕt)∈FN. This establishes (2.7).
by (2.9). Conversely, since v,u∈Hloc(q,p), we have
[TABLE]
by (2.10). This completes the proof of Lemma 2.13.
∎
From now on, for simplicity, we denote MFN0 by M0 and assume that 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞. We recall the following definition which is also the one of an atom for Hq.
Definition 2.14**.**
Let 1<r≤+∞ and s≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. A function a is a (q,r,s)-atom on Rd for H(q,p) if there exist a cube Q such that
(1)
supp(a)⊂Q* ,*
2. (2)
∥a∥r≤∣Q∣r1−q1* ;*
3. (3)
∫Rdxβa(x)dx=0, for all multi-indexes β with ∣β∣≤s .
Condition (3) is called the vanishing condition or the vanishing moment. We denote by A(q,r,s) the set of all (a,Q) such that a is a (q,r,s)-atom and Q is the associated cube (with respect to Definition 2.14). We obtained the following result in [1].
Let δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. For all f∈H(q,p), there exist a sequence {(an,Qn)}n≥0 in A(q,∞,δ) and a sequence of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that
[TABLE]
and, for any real η>0,
[TABLE]
Notice that in Theorem 2.15 the sequence of elements of A(q,∞,δ) can be replaced by a sequence of elements of A(q,r,δ), with 1<r<+∞, since A(q,∞,δ)⊂A(q,r,δ).
Also, we have the following result (see [1], Proposition 4.5, p. 1920) which will be very useful for the next sections.
Proposition 2.16**.**
Let 1<u,v<s≤+∞. Then, for every sequence of scalars {δn}n≥0 and every sequence {bn}n≥0 in Ls with the support of each bn embedded in a cube Qn and ∥bn∥s≤∣Qn∣s1−u1, we have
[TABLE]
with implicit constant independent of {bn}n≥0 and {δn}n≥0.
3. Atomic and molecular Decompositions of Hloc(q,p)
In this section, our aim is to give atomic and molecular decompositions of Hloc(q,p) spaces, namely reconstruction and decomposition theorems, when 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞. In fact, in our earlier paper [1], p. 1929, the idea of such decompositions for Hloc(q,p) spaces has been mentioned without more details. In the sequel, unless otherwise specified, we assume that 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞. Also, for simplicity, we adopt the following notations:
[TABLE]
3.1. Atomic Decomposition
Our definition of atom on Rd for Hloc(q,p) is the one of H(q,p) except that, when ∣Q∣≥1, the vanishing condition (3) in Definition 2.14 is not requiered. Likewise, we denote by Aloc(q,r,s) the set of all (a,Q) such that a is a (q,r,s)-atom on Rd for Hloc(q,p) and Q is the associated cube. It follows from this definition the following remark.
Remark 3.1**.**
Let 1<r≤v≤+∞. Then,
(1)
(a,Q)∈Aloc(q,v,s)⇒(a,Q)∈Aloc(q,r,s).
2. (2)
A(q,r,s)⊂Aloc(q,r,s).
Also, it is easy to see that, for all (a,Q)∈Aloc(q,r,s),
[TABLE]
where C>0 is a constant independent of the (q,r,s)-atom a.
We have the following reconstruction theorems.
Theorem 3.2**.**
Let 0<η≤1 and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. Then, for all sequences {(an,Qn)}n≥0 in Aloc(q,∞,δ) and all sequences of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that
[TABLE]
the series f:=∑n≥0λnan converges in S′ and Hloc(q,p), with
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any (an,Qn)∈Aloc(q,∞,δ), we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. For the proof of (3.3), we distinguish two cases: ∣Qn∣<1 and ∣Qn∣≥1. Denote by xn and ℓn respectively the center and the side-lenght of Qn. When ∣Qn∣<1, we know that the atom an satisfies the vanishing condition. Thus, setting Qn:=2dQn, we obtain, as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.3, pp. 1914-1915,
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. When ∣Qn∣≥1, the vanishing condition of the atom an not being requiered, we consider Qn:=4dQn. Then, it is straigthforward to see that
[TABLE]
for all x∈/Qn. Thus,
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. Combining these two cases, we obtain (3.3).
With (3.3), we end as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.3.
∎
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let max{p,1}<r<+∞, 0<η<q and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. Then, for all sequences {(an,Qn)}n≥0 in Aloc(q,r,δ) and all sequences of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that
[TABLE]
the series f:=∑n≥0λnan converges in S′ and Hloc(q,p), with
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any (an,Qn)∈Aloc(q,r,δ), we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Qn:=4dQn and μ=dd+δ+1⋅ To prove (3.5), denote by xn and ℓn respectively the center and the side-lenght of Qn. It’s clear that
[TABLE]
for all x∈Qn. Also,
[TABLE]
for all x∈/Qn. Endeed, when ∣Qn∣<1, by proceeding as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.3, pp. 1914-1915, we obtain (3.7). And when ∣Qn∣≥1, (3.7) is clearly satisfied since
[TABLE]
for all x∈/Qn. Thus, combining (3.6) and (3.7), we obtain (3.5).
With (3.5), we end as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.6, p. 1921.
∎
For our decomposition theorem, we need some lemmas. Also, we borrow some ideas from [31] and [37]. But before, we have the useful following remark.
Remark 3.4**.**
In our earlier paper [1], Lemma 4.1 has been very useful to establish the decomposition theorem of H(q,p) spaces ([1], Theorem 4.4, p. 1916). Also, in the same paper (see p. 1929), we noticed that, in Lemma 4.1, the maximal operator M0 can be replaced by its local version Mloc0, more precisely with bk=(f−ck)ηk, if ∣Q∗k∣<1, and bk=fηk, if ∣Q∗k∣≥1, for each integer k≥0. That allowed us to show that Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) (see [1], Proposition 4.11, p. 1929). However, we discovered a mistake in the proof of [1], Proposition 4.11, p. 1929. Here, we correct this error.
Proposition 3.5**.**
Suppose that 0<q≤1 and 0<p<+∞. Let p≤s≤+∞ and 0<r≤+∞. Then, Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p), (Lq,ℓs)∩Hloc(q,p) and (Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) are dense subspaces of Hloc(q,p).
Proof.
Let f∈Hloc(q,p) and δ≥max{⌊d(q1−1)⌋,⌊d(p1−1)⌋} be an integer. For each j∈Z+, we consider the level set
[TABLE]
By Remark 3.4, f can be decomposed as follows: f=gj+bj with bj=∑n≥0bj,n and
[TABLE]
where each ηj,n is supported in Q∗j,n, with
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where xj,n and ℓj,n denote respectively the center and the side-length of Q∗j,n and Rd\Oj={x∈Rd:Mloc0(f)(x)≤2j}. Set u=dd+δ+1⋅ We have 1<u and 1<min{qu,pu}, since δ≥max{⌊d(q1−1)⌋,⌊d(p1−1)⌋}⋅ Thus, with (3.9) and (3.8), by arguing as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.4, p. 1916, we obtain
[TABLE]
for all j∈Z+, so that
[TABLE]
for all j∈Z+ and \left\|f-g_{j}\right\|_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{(q,p)}}=\left\|b_{j}\right\|_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{(q,p)}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\left\|\chi_{{}_{\mathcal{O}^{j}}}\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{0}(f)\right\|_{q,p}\rightarrow 0 as j→+∞. Hence the sequence {gj}j≥0⊂Hloc(q,p) converges to f in Hloc(q,p). Moreover,
[TABLE]
for all j∈Z+, by (3.10). But, since 0<q≤1, we have
[TABLE]
Also, since 0<q≤1<pu, we have qpu>1. Thus, by Proposition 2.6 and (3.8),
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
for all j∈Z+. Therefore, for all j∈Z+,
[TABLE]
by Corollary 2.8. Combining (3.11) and (3.12), we obtain
[TABLE]
for all j∈Z+. Thus, Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p).
Also, since gj∈Lloc1 for all j∈Z+, we have ∣gj(x)∣≤Mloc0(gj)(x), for almost all x∈Rd and all j∈Z+. It follows from this estimate that
[TABLE]
all j∈Z+. Hence gj∈(Lq,ℓs)∩Hloc(q,p), for all j∈Z+. Thus, (Lq,ℓs)∩Hloc(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p).
For the proof of the density of (Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) in Hloc(q,p), our approach in the proof of [1], Proposition 4.11 is not correct, since the estimate \mathcal{M}_{{\mathrm{loc}}_{{}_{0}}}(g_{j})(x)\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}2^{j}, for almost all x∈Rd, used in [1] is not valid when the tempered distribution f∈/Lloc1. Here, we close this gap by showing that for any ϵ>0, there exists fϵ∈(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) such that
[TABLE]
which implies that (Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p). For the proof of (3.14), we distinguish two cases.
Case 1: Assume that f∈Lloc1. Then,
[TABLE]
for almost all x∈Rd and all j∈Z+. Hence gj∈L∞⊂(Lr,ℓ∞), for all j∈Z+. Thus, gj∈(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p), for all j∈Z+. Furthermore, by the above results, we know that limj→+∞∥f−gj∥Hloc(q,p)=0. Hence for any ϵ>0, there exists an integer jϵ≥0 such that gjϵ∈(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) and
[TABLE]
Case 2: Assume that f∈/Lloc1. Then, we have no longer gj∈L∞, since (3.15) does not hold. However, by the above results, we know that gj∈Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p), for all j∈Z+, and
[TABLE]
Since gj∈Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p), we can apply the preceeding argument to each gj. Thus, for each gj, there exists a sequence {gkj}k≥0⊂(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) with
[TABLE]
Let ϵ>0 and Cq,p≥1 the modulus of concavity of the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p). Then, by (3.16), there exists an integer jϵ≥0 such that ∥f−gjϵ∥Hloc(q,p)≤2Cq,pϵ⋅ Also, by (3.17), there exists an integer kjϵ≥0 such that gkjϵjϵ∈(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) and gjϵ−gkjϵjϵHloc(q,p)≤2Cq,pϵ⋅ Thus, gkjϵjϵ∈(Lr,ℓ∞)∩Hloc(q,p) and
[TABLE]
Combining the cases 1 and 2, we obtain (3.14). This completes the proof of Proposition 3.5.
∎
Now, consider f∈Hloc(q,p) and an integer δ≥0. For each j∈Z, we set Oj:={x∈Rd:Mloc0(f)(x)>2j}. By Remark 3.4, f can be decomposed as follows: f=gj+bj, with bj=∑k≥0bj,k , bj,k=(f−cj,k)ηj,k , if ∣Q∗j,k∣<1, and bj,k=fηj,k , if ∣Q∗j,k∣≥1, where each function ηj,k is supported on Q∗j,k. Also, cj,k∈Pδ:=Pδ(Rd) (the space of polynomial functions of degree at most δ) satisfies
[TABLE]
for all p∈Pδ; namely cj,k=Pkj(f), where Pkj is the projection operator from S′ onto Pδ with respect to the norm
[TABLE]
with η~j,k=∫Q∗j,kηj,k(x)dxηj,k⋅ (3.18) is understood as
[TABLE]
We denote by ckℓ the unique polynomial of Pδ which satisfies
[TABLE]
for all p∈Pδ; namely ckℓ=Pℓj+1((f−cj+1,ℓ)ηj,k), where Pℓj+1 is the projection operator from S′ onto Pδ with respect to the norm
where {e1,…,em} and {π1,…,πm} are orthonormal bases of Pδ respectively with respect to the norms (3.19) and (3.21) with m=dimPδ, and p stands for the conjugate of the polynomial p∈Pδ. The integrals in (3.22) and (3.23) are understood respectively as ⟨f,enη~j,k⟩ and ⟨(f−cj+1,ℓ)ηj,k,πnη~j+1,ℓ⟩. We have
[TABLE]
by (3.23). We have the following lemma whose proof is identical to those of [1], (4.9), (4.10) and (4.11), p. 1918.
Lemma 3.6**.**
(1)
If Q∗j,k∩Q∗j+1,ℓ=∅, then diam(Q∗j+1,ℓ)≤Cdiam(Q∗j,k) and Q∗j+1,ℓ⊂C0Q∗j,k with 1<C<C0 constants independent of f, j; k and ℓ.
2. (2)
\ \sharp\left\{k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}:\ Q_{\ast}^{j,k}\cap Q_{\ast}^{j+1,\ell}\neq\emptyset\right\}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}1, for each j∈Z and ℓ∈Z+.
3. (3)
Let j∈Z and k∈Z+. For any real λ≥9d, λQ∗j,k∩(Rd\Oj)=∅.
Set E1j:={k∈Z+:∣Q∗j,k∣<1} and E2j:={k∈Z+:∣Q∗j,k∣≥1}, for each j∈Z. Also, F1j:={k∈Z+:∣Q∗j,k∣<1/C0d} and F2j:={k∈Z+:∣Q∗j,k∣≥1/C0d}, for each j∈Z, where C0>1 is the constant C0 in Lemma 3.6 (1). We have the following lemmas whose proofs are similar to those of [1], (4.12), (4.13), p. 1918 and [23], Lemma 3.7. We omit details.
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let j∈Z and k,ℓ∈Z+.
If ℓj,k:=ℓ(Q∗j,k)<1, then
[TABLE]
If ℓj+1,ℓ:=ℓ(Q∗j+1,ℓ)<1, then
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.8**.**
For every j∈Z,
[TABLE]
where the series converges pointwise and in S′.
Now, we can give our decomposition theorem.
Theorem 3.9**.**
Let δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. For every f∈Hloc(q,p), there exist a sequence {(an,Qn)}n≥0 in Aloc(q,∞,δ) and a sequence {λn}n≥0 of scalars such that
[TABLE]
and, for all η>0,
[TABLE]
Proof.
First, we assume that f∈Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p). For each j∈Z, we consider the level set Oj:={x∈Rd:Mloc0(f)(x)>2j}. By Remark 3.4, we have f=gj+bj, with bj=k≥0∑bj,k and
[TABLE]
where each ηj,k is supported in Q∗j,k, with analogous estimates described in [1], Lemma 4.1, pp. 1913-1914. Thus, arguing as in the proof of Theorem 2.15 (see [1], Theorem 4.4, p. 1916), we obtain
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.8 and the fact that ∑k≥0ηj,kbj+1,ℓ=χOjbj+1,ℓ=bj+1,ℓ for all integer ℓ≥0 (since supp(bj+1,ℓ)⊂supp(ηj+1,ℓ)⊂Q∗j+1,ℓ⊂Oj+1⊂Oj), we have
[TABLE]
where all series converge almost everywhere and in S′, and
where C1>0 is a constant independent of f, j and k. To prove (3.30), we distinguish two cases for k.
Case 1: k∈E1j. Then, bj,k=(f−cj,k)ηj,k. Thus, since ℓ≥0∑ηj+1,ℓ=χOj+1, by rewriting (3.28), we obtain
[TABLE]
Furthermore, f∈Lloc1 implies that
[TABLE]
for almost all x∈Rd\Oj+1. This, together with Lemma 3.7 and \sum_{\ell\geq 0}\chi_{Q_{\ast}^{j+1,\ell}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}1, implies that |A_{j,k}(x)|\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}2^{j}, for almost all x∈Rd.
Case 2: k∈E2j. Then, bj,k=fηj,k and we obtain
[TABLE]
Thus, as in Case 1, we have |A_{j,k}(x)|\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}2^{j}, for almost all x∈Rd. Combining these two cases, we obtain (3.30).
Set
[TABLE]
Then, supp(aj,k)⊂Qj,k and ∥aj,k∥∞≤∣Qj,k∣−q1, by (3.29) and (3.30).
When k∈F2j, we have
[TABLE]
Hence (aj,k,Qj,k)∈Aloc(q,∞,δ).
When k∈F1j, we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For the proof of (3.32), notice that F1j⊂E1j, since 1/C0d<1 (see Lemma 3.6 (1)). Hence bj,k=(f−cj,k)ηj,k and
almost everywhere and in S′, where each (aj,k,Qj,k)∈Aloc(q,∞,δ).
Let us fix a real η>0. Arguing as in the proof of Theorem 2.15, we obtain
[TABLE]
and the convergence of (3.33) also holds in Hloc(q,p). Endeed, for each (aj,k,Qj,k)∈Aloc(q,∞,δ), we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, with u=dd+δ+1, by (3.3) (see the proof of Theorem 3.2). With (3.34) and (3.35), the convergence in Hloc(q,p) easily follows.
The general case (f∈Hloc(q,p)) follows from the density of Lloc1∩Hloc(q,p) in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) as in the classical case with appropriate modifications. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.9.
∎
Remark 3.10**.**
By the definition of aj,k , it is clear that supp(aj,k)⊂Oj. Moreover, for every j∈Z, the family {supp(aj,k)}k≥0 has the bounded intersection property, namely,
[TABLE]
Also, in Theorem 3.9, we can replace Aloc(q,∞,δ) by Aloc(q,r,δ), for any 1<r<+∞, since Aloc(q,∞,δ)⊂Aloc(q,r,δ).
We give another proof of Theorem 3.9. This approach essentially uses Lemma 2.13, Theorem 2.15 and Plancherel-Polya-Nikols’kij’s inequality that we recall.
Lemma 3.11**.**
(Plancherel-Polya-Nikols’kij’s inequality, [33], Theorem, p. 16).
Let Ω be a compact subset of Rd and 0<s<+∞. Then, there exist two constants c1>0 and c2>0 such that
[TABLE]
for all ϕ∈SΩ and all x∈Rd, where SΩ={ϕ∈S:supp(F(ϕ))⊂Ω}.
One can also see [34], § 1.5.3, (iii) (4)-(6), p. 31, for this inequality. Now, we can give our second approach of the proof of theorem 3.9.
Proof.
Let f∈Hloc(q,p). Then, by Lemma 2.13, there exist u∈H(q,p) and v∈Hloc(q,p)∩C∞(Rd) such that f=u+v and
[TABLE]
Moreover, by Theorem 2.15, there exist a sequence {(an,Qn)}n≥0 in A(q,∞,δ) and a sequence of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that u=∑n≥0λnan in S′ and H(q,p), and for any real η>0,
[TABLE]
by (3.37). Also u=∑n≥0λnan in Hloc(q,p), since H(q,p)↪Hloc(q,p).
To end, it suffices to show that there exist a sequence {(bn,Rn)}n≥0 in Aloc(q,∞,δ) and a sequence of scalars {σn}n≥0 such that v=∑n≥0σnbn in Hloc(q,p) and for any real η>0,
[TABLE]
To prove this, we borrow some ideas from [25], Lemma 7.9. Let us fix a real η>0. For m=(m1,m2,…,md)∈Zd, we let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where Rm:=∏i=1d[mi,mi+1] and θ is the function defined in the proof of Lemma 2.13, namely θ(x):=(F−1(ψ))(x) with ψ∈C∞(Rd), supp(ψ)⊂B(0,2), 0≤ψ≤1 and ψ≡1 on B(0,1), and v(x):=(f∗θ)(x), for all x∈Rd. Then, we clearly have ∣Rm∣=1, supp(bm)⊂Rm and
[TABLE]
Hence {(bm,Rm)}m∈Zd⊂Aloc(q,∞,δ). Furthermore, we claim that
[TABLE]
Endeed, by the definition of cubes Rm, it’s easy to check that for every m∈Zd,
[TABLE]
Thus, ∑m∈Zdσmbm defines a function on Rd and, for any Φ∈S,
[TABLE]
since f∈Hloc(q,p) and θ∈S implie that v:=f∗θ∈L∞, by the local version of Remark 2.11. Therefore, by Fubini’s theorem,
[TABLE]
This establishes (3.40). Also, from the definition of v and θ, it follows that supp(F(v))⊂supp(ψ)⊂B(0,2). Moreover, for all x∈Rm,
[TABLE]
since x,y∈Rm implie that z=x−y∈Q(0,2). Therefore, for any 0<s<q, we have
by Proposition 2.5 and the local version of Remark 2.11 (2.6). We rearrange the bm ’s, Rm ’s and σm ’s to obtain {(bn,Rn)}n≥0⊂Aloc(q,∞,δ) and a sequence of scalars {σn}n≥0 such that v=∑n≥0σnbn in Hloc(q,p) and (3.39) holds. Thus,
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
by (3.38) and (3.39). This finishes the second proof of Theorem 3.9.
∎
Remark 3.12**.**
Let 0<η≤1, 1<r≤+∞ and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. For simplicity, we denote by Hloc,fin(q,p) the subspace of Hloc(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,r,δ)-atoms (for Hloc(q,p)). By Theorems 3.2, 3.3 and 3.9, we have
(1)
If r=+∞, then for all f∈Hloc(q,p),
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all decompositions of f using (q,∞,δ)-atom an supported on the cube Qn.
2. (2)
If max{p,1}<r<+∞ and 0<η<q, then for all f∈Hloc(q,p),
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all decompositions of f using (q,r,δ)-atom an supported on the cube Qn.
3. (3)
Hloc,fin(q,p)* is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥.∥Hloc(q,p).*
4. (4)
Hlocq* is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥.∥Hloc(q,p).*
5. (5)
Hloc(q,p)∩Lr* is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥.∥Hloc(q,p).*
Corollary 3.13**.**
The Schwartz space S is dense in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p), for 0<q<+∞ and q≤p<+∞.
Proof.
We distinguish two cases for q.
Case 1: 0<q≤1. It’s well known that S is dense in Hlocq with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hlocq, by [14], p. 35. It follows that S is dense in Hlocq with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p), since Hlocq↪Hloc(q,p). Furthermore, Hlocq is dense in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p), by Remark 3.12. Therefore, S is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p).
Case 2: 1<q<+∞. Then, 1<q≤p<+∞. Hence Hloc(q,p)=(Lq,ℓp) with norms equivalence, by Theorem 2.7. Denote by Ccomp(Rd) the space of continuous complex values functions on Rd with compact support. It’s clear that Ccomp(Rd)⊂Lq⊂(Lq,ℓp). Moreover, Ccomp(Rd) is dense in (Lq,ℓp) with respct to the norm ∥⋅∥q,p , by [4], Section 7, p. 77. Hence Lq is dense in (Lq,ℓp) in the norm ∥⋅∥q,p. Also, S is dense in Lq in the norm ∥⋅∥q,p , since S is dense in Lq in the norm ∥⋅∥q and Lq↪(Lq,ℓp). Therefore, S is dense in (Lq,ℓp) in the norm ∥⋅∥q,p. It finally follows that S is dense in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p), since Hloc(q,p)=(Lq,ℓp) and ∥⋅∥q,p≈∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p). This finishes the proof in Case 2 and hence, the proof of Corollary 3.13.
∎
We end this subsection by giving the local version of [1], Theorem 4.9, p. 1924. For this, we define a quasi-norm on Hloc,fin(q,p) the subspace of Hloc(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,r,δ)-atoms, with 1<r≤+∞ and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ an integer fixed.
(1)
When r=+∞, we fix 0<η≤1. For every f∈Hloc,fin(q,p), we set
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all finite decompositions of f using (q,∞,δ)-atom an supported on the cube Qn.
2. (2)
When max{p,1}<r<+∞, we fix 0<η<q. we set
[TABLE]
where the infimum is taken over all finite decompositions of f using (q,r,δ)-atom an supported on the cube Qn.
It’s straightward to see that, in the two cases, ∥⋅∥Hloc,fin(q,p) defines a quasi-norm on Hloc,fin(q,p).
Remark 3.14**.**
With the above assumptions, for any (a,Q)∈Aloc(q,r,δ),
[TABLE]
since a=1a is a finite decomposition of (q,r,δ)-atoms.
Also, we will need the following lemma whose proof is similar to the one of [1], Lemma 4.8, p. 1923. We omit details.
Lemma 3.15**.**
Let f∈Hloc(q,p) such that ∥f∥Hloc(q,p)=1 and supp(f)⊂B(0,R) with R>1. Then, for all x∈/B(0,4R),
[TABLE]
where C(φ,d,q,p)>0 is a constant independent of f and x.
Now, we can give our result which is the following.
Theorem 3.16**.**
Let δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer and max{p,1}<r≤+∞.
(1)
If r<+∞, we fix 0<η<q. Then ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) and ∥⋅∥Hloc,fin(q,p) are equivalent on Hloc,fin(q,p).
2. (2)
If r=+∞, we fix 0<η≤1. Then ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) and ∥⋅∥Hloc,fin(q,p) are equivalent on Hloc,fin(q,p)∩C(Rd), where C(Rd) denotes the space of continuous complex values functions on Rd.
Proof.
We first prove the part (1). We consider an integer δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋, max{1,p}<r<+∞ and 0<η<q. Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). From Theorem 3.3, we deduce that
[TABLE]
It remains to show that
[TABLE]
By homogeneity of the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc,fin(q,p), we may assume that ∥f∥Hloc(q,p)=1. Since f is a finite linear combination of (q,r,δ)-atoms, there exists a real R>1 such that supp(f)⊂B(0,R). Hence
[TABLE]
for all x∈/B(0,4R), by Lemma 3.15. For each j∈Z, we set
[TABLE]
Denote by j′ the largest integer j such that 2j<Cφ,d,q,pR−pd. Then,
[TABLE]
for all j>j′, by (3.43). Furthermore, since f∈Lr, by the proof (first approach) of Theorem 3.9, there exist a sequence {(aj,k,Qj,k)}(j,k)∈Z×Z+ in Aloc(q,r,δ) and a sequence of scalars {λj,k}(j,k)∈Z×Z+ such that f=∑j=−∞+∞∑k≥0λj,kaj,k almost everywhere and in S′, with
[TABLE]
for each j∈Z, where the family of cubes {Qj,k∗}k≥0 satisfies
[TABLE]
Also,
[TABLE]
Set h:=∑j≤j′∑k≥0λj,kaj,k and ℓ:=∑j>j′∑k≥0λj,kaj,k , where the series converge almost everywhere and in S′. We have f=h+ℓ and supp(ℓ)⊂⋃j>j′Oj⊂B(0,4R), by (3.45) and (3.44). It follows that supp(h)⊂B(0,4R), since f=ℓ=0 sur Rd\B(0,4R). Also, with (3.45) and (3.46), arguing as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.9, p. 1924, we have
[TABLE]
since f∈Lr, r>1 and N≥⌊qd⌋+1>⌊rd⌋+1. Hence ℓ∈Lr and the series ∑j>j′∑k≥0λj,kaj,k converges to ℓ in Lr, by the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem in Lr. Thus, h=f−ℓ∈Lr. Moreover, since \sum_{k\geq 0}\chi_{{}_{\text{supp}(\mathfrak{a}_{j,k})}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}1 (see Remark 3.10 (3.36)), arguing as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.9, p. 1924, we obtain ∣h(x)∣≤Cφ,d,q,p,δR−pd, for almost all x∈Rd, by the choice of j′. Setting
[TABLE]
we have ∣C2h(x)∣≤χQ(0,8R)q−1, for almost all x∈Rd. Therefore, (C2h,Q(0,8R))∈Aloc(q,∞,δ)⊂Aloc(q,r,δ), since supp(h)⊂B(0,4R)⊂Q(0,8R).
Now, we rewrite ℓ as a finite linear combination of (q,r,δ)-atoms. For every positive integer i, we set
[TABLE]
and define the finite sum ℓi by ℓi=∑(j,k)∈Fiλj,kaj,k. The convergence of the series ∑j>j′∑k≥0λj,kaj,k to ℓ in Lr implies that there exists an integer i0>0 such that ∥ℓ−ℓi0∥r≤∣Q(0,8R)∣r1−q1. Hence (ℓ−ℓi0,Q(0,8R))∈Aloc(q,r,δ), since supp(ℓ−ℓi0)⊂B(0,4R)⊂Q(0,8R). Thus, ℓ=(ℓ−ℓi0)+ℓi0 is a finite linear combination of (q,r,δ)-atoms, and
[TABLE]
is a finite decomposition of f as (q,r,δ)-atoms. Therefore, arguing as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.9, p. 1924, we obtain
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
This implies (3.42) which completes the proof of (1).
For the part (2), we fix 0<η≤1. Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p)∩C(Rd). As in (1), we have \left\|f\right\|_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{(q,p)}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\left\|f\right\|_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{loc},fin}^{(q,p)}}, by Theorem 3.2. For the reverse inequality, we also may assume that ∥f∥Hloc(q,p)=1, by homogeneity. We have f∈Lloc1. Thus, as in the proof of (1), there exist a sequence {(aj,k,Qj,k)}(j,k)∈Z×Z+ in Aloc(q,∞,δ) and a sequence of scalars {λj,k}(j,k)∈Z×Z+ such that f=∑j=−∞+∞∑k≥0λj,kaj,k almost everywhere and in S′, and (3.45), (3.46) and (3.47) hold. Notice that each (q,∞,δ)-atom aj,k is continuous by examining its definition (see (3.28) and (3.31)), since f is continuous. Also, since ∥Φ∥1≤NN(Φ)≤1 for any Φ∈FN, it’s easy to see that
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. Then, it follows from (3.48) that Oj=∅, for all j∈Z such that ∥f∥∞≤2j. Moreover, as in the part (1), there exists a real R>1 such that supp(f)⊂B(0,R) so that (3.43) holds. Let h and ℓ be the functions as defined in the part (1). Arguing as in (1), we obtain that supp(ℓ)⊂B(0,4R) and (C2′h,Q(0,8R))∈Aloc(q,∞,δ) with C2′:=(Cφ,d,q,p,δR−pd)−1χQ(0,8R)q−1. Denote by j′′ the largest integer j such that 2j<∥f∥∞. Then
[TABLE]
Let ϵ>0. Since f is uniformly continuous, there exists a real γ>0 such that, for all x,y∈Rd, ∣x−y∣<γ implies that ∣f(x)−f(y)∣<ϵ. Without loss of generality, we may assume that γ<1. Write ℓ=ℓ1ϵ+ℓ2ϵ, with
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Using (3.45), the construction of cubes Qj,k∗ (Qj,k∗=cQ~j,k, for some 1<c<5/4, where the family of cubes {Q~j,k}k≥0 corresponds to the Whitney decomposition of Oj) and (3.44), we see that card(G1)<+∞. Therefore, ℓ1ϵ is continuous.
For any (j,k)∈G2 and x∈Qj,k, we clearly have ∣f(x)−f(xj,k)∣<ϵ, where xj,k stands for the center of Qj,k. Set
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where cj,k is the polynomial defined by (3.18). We have [f~(x)−c~j,k(x)]ηj,k(x)=[f(x)−cj,k(x)]ηj,k(x), for all x∈Rd, where ηj,k is the function in (3.18), since supp(ηj,k)⊂Qj,k∗⊂Qj,k. Hence
[TABLE]
for all p∈Pδ, by (3.18). Since ∣f~(x)∣<ϵ for all x∈Rd implies that Mloc0(f~)(x)≤ϵ for all x∈Rd, and ℓj,k:=ℓ(Qj,k∗)<C0dγ<1, then by Lemma 3.7 (3.25), we have
[TABLE]
Let i≥0 be an integer. Denote by c~ki the polynomial of Pδ such that
[TABLE]
for all p∈Pδ, where c~j+1,i(x)=cj+1,i(x)−f(xj,k). The above expression means that c~ki is the orthogonal projection of (f~−c~j+1,i)ηj,k on Pδ with respect to the norm (3.21). Since supp(ηj,k)⊂Qj,k∗⊂Qj,k, we have [f~(x)−c~j+1,i(x)]ηj,k(x)=[f(x)−cj+1,i(x)]ηj,k(x), for all x∈Rd. Hence c~ki=cki, by (3.20). Then, we infer from Lemma 3.7 (3.26) that
[TABLE]
Endeed, since c~ki=cki, we have c~ki=0, if Qj,k∗∩Qj+1,i∗=∅, by (3.24). In this case, (3.50) is clearly verified. If Qj,k∗∩Qj+1,i∗=∅, then diam(Qj+1,i∗)≤Cdiam(Qj,k∗), by Lemma 3.6 (1). Thus,
for all p∈Pδ. Endeed, Qj,k∗∩Qj+1,i∗=∅ implies that supp(ηj+1,i)⊂Qj+1,i∗⊂C0Qj,k∗=:Qj,k, by lemma 3.6 (1). Hence [f~(x)−c~j+1,i(x)]ηj+1,i(x)=[f(x)−cj+1,i(x)]ηj+1,i(x), for all x∈Rd, which implies (3.51), by (3.18). Therefore, we can apply Lemma 3.7 (3.26) to obtain (3.50).
Also, when Qj,k∗∩Qj+1,i∗=∅, we have
[TABLE]
by Lemma 3.7 (3.25), since (3.51) holds and ℓj+1,i<1. Moreover, since ℓj,k<1, it follows from the definition of λj,kaj,k (see (3.28) and (3.31)) that
[TABLE]
Also, by 0≤i∈E1j+1∑ηj+1,i(x)≤i≥0∑ηj+1,i(x)=χOj+1(x)≤1, we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Qj,k and (j,k)∈G2. From this together with (3.49), (3.50); (3.52) and the fact that \underset{i\geq 0}{\sum}\chi_{{}_{Q_{j+1,i}^{\ast}}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}1, it follows that
[TABLE]
for all x∈Qj,k and (j,k)∈G2. Thus, using the fact that \underset{k\geq 0}{\sum}\chi_{{}_{\text{supp}(\mathfrak{a}_{j,k})}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}1 (see Remark 3.10 (3.36)), we obtain
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where C3>0 is a constant independent of x, f; k and ϵ. We deduce from this estimate that ℓ is continuous. Therefore, h=f−ℓ is continuous and C2′h is a continuous (q,∞,δ)-atom.
Now, we find a finite decomposition of ℓ as continuous (q,∞,δ)-atoms by using again the splitting ℓ=ℓ1ϵ+ℓ2ϵ. Endeed, it is clear that, for all ϵ>0, ℓ1ϵ is a finite linear combination of continuous (q,∞,δ)-atoms. Also, ℓ2ϵ=ℓ−ℓ1ϵ is continuous and supp(ℓ2ϵ)⊂B(0,4R)⊂Q(0,8R). Hence taking ϵ=[C3(j′′−j′)]−1∣Q(0,8R)∣−1/q, we have ∣ℓ2ϵ(x)∣≤∣Q(0,8R)∣−1/q, by (3.53), so that (ℓ2ϵ,Q(0,8R))∈Aloc(q,∞,δ). This establishes the finite decomposition of ℓ as continuous (q,∞,δ)-atoms.
Thus, f=h+ℓ=C2′−1(C2′h)+ℓ1ϵ+ℓ2ϵ is a finite decomposition of f as continuous (q,∞,δ)-atoms and as in the part (1), we obtain
[TABLE]
This finishes the proof of the part (2) and hence of Theorem 3.16.
∎
We give a useful result of density.
Lemma 3.17**.**
Let Hloc,fin(q,p) be the subspace of Hloc(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,∞,δ)-atoms. Then, Hloc,fin(q,p)∩C∞(Rd) is a dense subspace of Hloc,fin(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p).
Proof.
We use some arguments of the proof of [37], Theorem 6.4. Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). Then, f is a finite linear combination of (q,∞,δ)-atoms. Therefore, there exists a real R>0 such that supp(f)⊂B(0,R). Furthermore, for all 0<t≤1, we have
[TABLE]
Assume that f=∑n=0jλnan with {(an,Qn)}n=0j⊂Aloc(q,∞,δ) and {λn}n=0j⊂C. Then, for all 0<t≤1,
[TABLE]
Now, for any 0<t≤1 and n∈{0,1,…,j}, we prove that there exists a constant ct,n>0 such that ct,n(an∗φt) is a (q,∞,δ)-atom lying in C∞(Rd), which implies that for any 0<t≤1,
[TABLE]
For n∈{0,1,…,j}, we have supp(an)⊂Qn:=Q(xn,ℓn). Then supp(an∗φt)⊂Qn:=Q(xn,ℓn+2t). Moreover, an∗φt∈C∞ and
[TABLE]
Also, for all β∈Z+d with ∣β∣≤δ, ∫Rdxβan(x)dx=0 implies that
[TABLE]
Thus, with ct,n:=(∥φ∥1∣Qn∣−q1∣Qn∣−q1)−1=∥φ∥1−1(∣Qn∣∣Qn∣)q1, ct,n(an∗φt) is a (q,∞,δ)-atom lying in C∞(Rd).
Likewise, supp(f−f∗φt)⊂B(0,R+1), by (3.54), and f−f∗φt has the same vanishing moments as f. Let 1<s<∞. We have
[TABLE]
since f∈Ls and ∫Rdφ(x)dx=1. Without loss of generality, we may assume that ∥f−f∗φt∥s>0, when t is small enough. Set
[TABLE]
and at:=(ct)−1(f−f∗φt). Then, at is a (q,s,δ)-atom, f−f∗φt=ctat and ct→0 as t→0, by (3.55). Thus, \left\|f-f\ast\varphi_{t}\right\|_{\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm{loc}}^{(q,p)}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}c_{t}\rightarrow 0 as t→0.
The proof of Lemma 3.17 is complete.
∎
If Hloc,fin(q,p) is the subspace of Hloc(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,∞,δ)-atoms, then it follows from Lemma 3.17 that Hloc,fin(q,p)∩C(Rd) is dense in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p), since Hloc,fin(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p) in the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p).
3.2. Molecular Decomposition
Our definition of molecule for Hloc(q,p) spaces is the one of H(q,p) spaces (see [1], Definition 5.1, p. 1931) except that, when ∣Q∣≥1, the condition (3) in [1], Definition 5.1, is not requiered. Thus, a (q,r,δ)-atom for Hloc(q,p) is a (q,r,δ)-molecule for Hloc(q,p). We denote by Mℓloc(q,r,δ) the set of all (m,Q) such that m is a (q,r,δ)-molecule centered at Q (for Hloc(q,p)).
We have the following decomposition theorem as an application of Theorem 3.9.
Theorem 3.18**.**
Let 1<r≤+∞ and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. Then, for every f∈Hloc(q,p), there exist a sequence {(mn,Qn)}n≥0 in Mℓloc(q,r,δ) and a sequence of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that
[TABLE]
and, for all η>0,
[TABLE]
Also, we have the two following reconstruction theorems which are the local analogues of [1], Theorems 5.2 and 5.3, pp. 1931-1932.
Theorem 3.19**.**
Let 0<η≤1 and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. Then, for all sequences {(mn,Qn)}n≥0 in Mℓloc(q,∞,δ) and all sequences of scalars {λn}n≥0 satisfying
[TABLE]
the series f:=∑n≥0λnmn converges in S′ and Hloc(q,p), with
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let {(mn,Qn)}n≥0 be a sequence of elements of Mℓloc(q,∞,δ) and {λn}n≥0 be a sequence of scalars satisfying (3.56). Consider an integer j≥0. Set J1={n∈{0,1,…,j}:∣Qn∣<1} and J2={n∈{0,1,…,j}:∣Qn∣≥1}. We have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Qn=2dQn and u=dd+δ+1 , by [24], (5.2), p. 3698, and
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Qn=4dQn and u=dd+δ+1 , by [25], (7.6), p. 955. Hence
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Qn=4dQn and u=dd+δ+1⋅ Thus,
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, by the proof of [1], Theorem 5.2, p. 1931. And we end as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.3, pp. 1914-1915.
∎
Theorem 3.20**.**
Let max{p,1}<r<+∞, 0<η<q and δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer. Then, for all sequences {(mn,Qn)}n≥0 in Mℓloc(q,r,δ) and all sequences of scalars {λn}n≥0 such that
[TABLE]
the series f:=∑n≥0λnmn converges in S′ and Hloc(q,p), with
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let {(mn,Qn)}n≥0 be a sequence of elements of Mℓloc(q,r,δ) and {λn}n≥0 be a sequence of scalars satisfying (3.57). Consider an integer j≥0. Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 3.19, we have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd, where Qn=4dQn and u=dd+δ+1⋅ Thus, arguing as in the proof of [1], Theorem 5.3, p. 1932, we obtain
[TABLE]
And we end as in the proof of [1], Theorem 4.3, pp. 1914-1915.
∎
4. Characterization of the dual space of Hloc(q,p)
In this section, we consider an integer δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋. Let 1<r≤+∞. We denote by Lcompr(Rd) the subspace of Lr- functions with compact support, and, for all cube Q, Lr(Q) stands for the subspace of Lr-functions supported in Q. If f∈Lloc1 and Q is a cube, then, by Riesz’s representation theorem, there exists an unique polynomial of Pδ (we recall that Pδ:=Pδ(Rd) is the space of polynomial functions of degree at most δ) that we denote by PQδ(f) such that, for all q∈Pδ,
[TABLE]
By following [37], Definition 7.1, p. 51, we introduce the following definition.
Definition 4.1**.**
(Lr,ϕ,δloc(Rd)). Let 1≤r≤+∞ and ϕ:Q→(0,+∞) be a function. The space Lr,ϕ,δloc(Rd) is the set of all f∈Llocr such that ∥f∥Lr,ϕ,δloc<+∞, where
[TABLE]
when r<+∞, and
[TABLE]
when r=+∞.
For simplicity, we just denote Lr,ϕ,δloc(Rd) by Lr,ϕ,δloc. We consider the function ϕ1:Q→(0,+∞)
defined by
[TABLE]
for all Q∈Q. Also, we set, for every T∈(H(q,p))∗,
[TABLE]
and Lr,ϕ1,δ:=Lr,ϕ1,δ(Rd) the set of all f∈Llocr such that ∥f∥Lr,ϕ1,δ<+∞ (see [2], Definition 3.2). In [2], we obtained the following duality result for H(q,p), with 0<q≤p≤1.
Suppose that 0<q≤p≤1. Let 1<r≤+∞. Then, (H(q,p))∗ is isomorphic to Lr′,ϕ1,δ with equivalent norms, where r1+r′1=1. More precisely, we have the following assertions:
(1)
Let g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δ. Then, the mapping
[TABLE]
where Hfin(q,p) is the subspace of H(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,r,δ)-atoms, extends to a unique continuous linear functional on H(q,p) such that
[TABLE]
where C>0 is a constant independent of g.
2. (2)
Conversely, for any T∈(H(q,p))∗, there exists g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δ such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where C>0 is a constant independent of T.
Now, for all T∈(Hloc(q,p))∗, for simplicity, we set
[TABLE]
With Definition 4.1 and Theorem 4.2, we have our following characterization of the dual of Hloc(q,p), when 0<q≤p≤1.
Theorem 4.3**.**
Suppose that 0<q≤p≤1. Let 1<r≤+∞. Then, (Hloc(q,p))∗ is isomorphic to Lr′,ϕ1,δloc with equivalent norms, where r1+r′1=1. More precisely, we have the following assertions:
(1)
Let g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc. Then, the mapping
[TABLE]
where Hloc,fin(q,p) is the subspace of Hloc(q,p) consisting of finite linear combinations of (q,r,δ)-atoms, extends to a unique continuous linear functional on Hloc(q,p) such that
[TABLE]
where C>0 is a constant independent of g.
2. (2)
Conversely, for any T∈(Hloc(q,p))∗, there exists g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where C>0 is a constant independent of T.
Proof.
We borrow some ideas from [37], Theorem 7.5. We distinguish two cases: 1<r<+∞ and r=+∞.
Suppose that 1<r<+∞. First, we prove (1). Fix 0<η<q. Let g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc , where r1+r′1=1. Consider the mapping Tg defined on Hloc,fin(q,p) by
[TABLE]
It is easy to verify that Tg is well defined and linear. Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). Then, there exist a finite sequence {(an,Qn)}n=0m of elements of Aloc(q,r,δ) and a finite sequence of scalars {λn}n=0m such that f=∑n=0mλnan. Set J1={n∈{0,1,…,m}:∣Qn∣<1} and J2={n∈{0,1,…,m}:∣Qn∣≥1}. We have
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
With Proposition 2.2, by arguing as in the proof of Theorem 4.2, we obtain
[TABLE]
Also,
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
by Theorem 3.16. This shows that g∈(Hloc(q,p))∗ and
[TABLE]
since Hloc,fin(q,p) is dense in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p).
Now, prove (2). Let T∈(Hloc(q,p))∗. Fix 0<η<q. Let Q be a cube such that ℓ(Q)≥1. We first prove that
[TABLE]
For any f∈Lr(Q)\{0}, we set
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. Clearly, (a,Q)∈Aloc(q,r,δ). Thus, f∈Hloc,fin(q,p)⊂Hloc(q,p) and
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
for all f∈Lr(Q). Thus, T is a continuous linear functional on Lr(Q), with
Therefore, since (Lr(Q))∗ is isomorphic to Lr′(Q), there exists gQ∈Lr′(Q) such that
[TABLE]
Now, for every cube Q such that ℓ(Q)≥1, we consider the fonction gQ as defined above. Let {Qn}n≥1 be an increasing sequence of cubes which converges to Rd and ℓ(Q1)≥1. For each cube Qn, we have
This implies that gQ1(x)=gQ2(x), for almost all x∈Q1. Thus, after changing values of gQ1 (or gQ2) on a set of measure zero, we have gQ1(x)=gQ2(x), for all x∈Q1. Arguing as above, we obtain
[TABLE]
for all x∈Qn and all n≥1. Set
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all n≥1. We have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Qn+1 and all n≥1, by (4.8). With (4.9) and (4.10), we define the function g on Rd by
[TABLE]
for all n≥1. Then, g∈Llocr′, since gn∈Llocr′, for all n≥1, and
[TABLE]
for all f∈Lr(Qn), for all n≥1, by (4.6). Thus, the function g satisfies (4.7).
To end, we show that g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc and
[TABLE]
for all f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). We have f∈Lcompr(Rd), since Hloc,fin(q,p)⊂Lcompr(Rd). Thus, there exists an integer n≥1 such that f∈Lr(Qn). Hence (4.11) holds, by (4.7).
Now, we prove that g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc. Let Q be a cube with ℓ(Q)≥1, and f∈Lr(Q) such that ∥f∥Lr(Q)≤1. Set
by Theorem 3.16 and Remark 3.14. Thus, for all f∈Lr(Q) with ∥f∥Lr(Q)≤1, we have
[TABLE]
This implies that
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Moreover, since H(q,p)⊂Hloc(q,p) and ∥f∥Hloc(q,p)≤∥f∥H(q,p) for all f∈H(q,p), we have (Hloc(q,p))∗⊂(H(q,p))∗ and T∣H(q,p)∈(H(q,p))∗. Since (4.11) holds for all f∈Hfin(q,p), from Theorem 4.2 (2), we deduce that g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δ and
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Combining (4.12) and (4.13), we obtain \left\|g\right\|_{\mathcal{L}_{r^{\prime},\phi_{1},\delta}^{\mathrm{loc}}}\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}\left\|T\right\| and g∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc. This finishes the proof of (2) and hence, the proof in Case 1<r<+∞.
The proof in Case r=+∞ is similar to the one of Theorem 4.2, we omit details. This completes the proof of Theorem 4.3.
∎
Remark 4.4**.**
(1)
The space Lr,ϕ1,δloc is independent of 1≤r<+∞ and the integer δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋, by Theorem 4.3.
2. (2)
When q=p=1, we have Hloc(q,p)=Hloc1 and ϕ1≡1. Thus, taking r=+∞ and δ=0 in Theorem 4.3, we obtain L1,ϕ1,0loc=bmo(Rd) the dual of Hloc1 introduced by Goldberg in **[14]** and which is the set of all f∈Lloc1 such that
[TABLE]
where fQ=∣Q∣1∫Qf(x)dx.
3. (3)
When q=p<1, we have Hloc(q,p)=Hlocq and ϕ1(Q)=∣Q∣q1−1, for all Q∈Q. Thus, taking r=+∞ and δ=⌊d(q1−1)⌋ in Theorem 4.3, we obtain L1,ϕ1,δloc=Λd(q1−1) the dual of Hlocq defined by Goldberg in **[14]**, Theorem 5, p. 40.
4. (4)
Also, when q=p<1, by taking 1<r<+∞, we obtain Lr′,ϕ1,δloc=bmoρ,ωr′(Rd) the dual of hωΦ(Rd)=Hlocq defined in **[37]**, in the case where Φ(t)=tq and ω≡1, with ρ(t)=t−1/Φ−1(t−1), 0<t<+∞.
5. (5)
As in **[2]**, Remark 3.4, we do not know to characterize the dual space of Hloc(q,p), whenever 0<q≤1<p<+∞.
5. Boundedness of Pseudo-differential Operators
In this section, unless otherwise specified, we assume that 0<q≤1 and q≤p<+∞. In [14], Theorem 4, D. Goldberg showed that pseudo-differential operators of a certain class (S0) are bounded on Hlocq. This result has been extended to other generalizations of Hlocq spaces (see [37], [38]). We prove that this result extends to Hloc(q,p) spaces. To see this, we recall the definition of a pseudo-differential operator and some results we will need. For more informations about pseudo-differential operators, the reader can refer to [10], [26], [29], [32], [34] and [36].
Definition 5.1** (Sρ,σμ).**
Let μ∈R, 0≤ρ≤1 and 0≤σ≤1. Sρ,σμ is the collection of all complex-values C∞ functions ψ(x,ξ) in Rd×Rd, such that, for all multi-indices α=(α1,…,αd) and β=(β1,…,βd) there exists a positive number Cαβ with
[TABLE]
Every element of Sρ,σμ is called symbol. Let ψ(x,ξ)∈Sρ,σμ. The operator T defined by
[TABLE]
for all f∈S and all x∈Rd, is called a Sρ,σμ pseudo-differential operator. For every Sρ,σμ pseudo-differential operator T, (5.1) also writes
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
For (5.2) and (5.3), See [10], Chap. 5, pp. 113-114 or [29], Chap.VI, (8), p. 235; (43), p. 250. When μ=σ=0 and ρ=1, we just denote by S0 the class S1,00.
In the rest of this section, we are interested in S0 pseudo-differential operators. It’s well known that, when ψ∈S0, for every f∈L2, (5.2) is valid for almost all x∈/supp(f), and T is a bounded operator on Lr, for any 1<r<+∞ (see [10], Chap. 5, pp. 113-114 and [29], Chap.VI, Proposition 4, p. 250). Also, we have the following
Let T be a S0 pseudo-differential operator. If ϕ∈S, then Tt(f)=ϕt∗T(f) has a symbol ψt which satisfies
[TABLE]
and a kernel Kt(x,z)=FTξψt(x,ξ) which satisfies
[TABLE]
where Cα,β>0 is a constant independent of t if 0<t≤1.
Our main result in this section is the following theorem.
Theorem 5.3**.**
Let T be a S0 pseudo-differential operator. Then, T extends to a bounded operator from Hloc(q,p) to Hloc(q,p), for all 0<q≤1.
Proof.
Let δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer and r>max{2;p} be a real. Consider the set Aloc(q,r,δ). Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). Then, there exist a finite sequence {(an,Qn)}n=0j of elements of Aloc(q,r,δ) and a finite sequence of scalars {λn}n=0j such that f=∑n=0jλnan. Set Qn:=4dQn, n∈{0,1,…,j}, and denote by xn and ℓn respectively the center and side-length of Qn. We have
[TABLE]
for all x∈Rd. Hence
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
Fix 0<η<q. Arguing as in the proof of [2], Theorem 4.20, we obtain
[TABLE]
To estimate J, it suffices to prove that
[TABLE]
for all x∈/Qn, where ϑ=dd+δ+1⋅ To show (5.6), we distinguish two cases: Case ℓn<1 and Case ℓn≥1.
Case: ℓn<1. Then, the atom an satisfies the vanishing condition. Consider x∈/Qn. Let 0<t≤1. With Lemma 5.2 (5.5), by arguing as in the proof of [2], Theorem 4.20, we obtain
[TABLE]
with ϑ=dd+δ+1⋅ Hence
[TABLE]
with ϑ=dd+δ+1 , when ℓn<1.
Case: ℓn≥1. Consider x∈/Qn. Let 0<t≤1. We have
[TABLE]
Also, for all z∈Qn, we have
[TABLE]
Combining (5.7) with Lemma 5.2 (5.4), we have, by [29], (9), p. 235 (also see [32], (0.5.5), p. 16), for all integer M>0, the existence of a constant CM>0 independent of t, such that
by Theorem 3.16. Therefore, T is bounded from Hloc,fin(q,p) to Hloc(q,p) and the density of Hloc,fin(q,p) in Hloc(q,p) with respect to the quasi-norm ∥⋅∥Hloc(q,p) yields the result.
∎
Corollary 5.4**.**
Let T be a S0 pseudo-differential operator. Then, T extends to a bounded operator from Hloc(q,p) to Hloc(q1,p1), if q1≤q and p≤p1, for all 0<q≤1.
Proof.
Corollary 5.4 follows from Proposition 2.1 and Theorem 5.3.
∎
As consequence of the proof of Theorem 5.3, every convolution operator T as in [2], Theorem 4.20, which satisfies in addition a certain condition, can be extended to a bounded operator from Hloc(q,p) to Hloc(q,p). More precisely, we have the following result.
Proposition 5.5**.**
Let T be a convolution operator, T(f)=K∗f,f∈S, where the distribution K satisfies the following conditions:
(1)
∣K(x)∣≤A,
2. (2)
∣∂βK(x)∣≤B∣x∣−d−∣β∣, for all ∣β∣≤⌊d(q1−1)⌋+1;
3. (3)
∣K(x)∣≤CK∣x∣−qd−γ, with γ≥1,
where A>0, B>0 and CK>0 are constants independent of x and β. Then, T extends to a bounded operator from Hloc(q,p) to Hloc(q,p).
Proof.
Conditions (1) and (2) imply that T is bounded on Lr, for any 1<r<+∞, by [2], Remark 4.14 and [10], Theorem 5.1. Set δ=⌊d(q1−1)⌋⋅ Let r>max{2;p} be a real. Consider the set Aloc(q,r,δ). Let f∈Hloc,fin(q,p). Then, there exist a finite sequence {(an,Qn)}n=0j in Aloc(q,r,δ) and a finite sequence of scalars {λn}n=0j such that f=∑n=0jλnan. Set Qn:=4dQn, n∈{0,1,…,j}, and denote by xn and ℓn respectively the center and side-length of Qn. We have
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
Fix 0<η<q. As in the proof of Theorem 5.3, we have
[TABLE]
To estimate J, it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
for all x∈/Qn, where ϑ=dd+δ+1⋅ To prove (5.9), we distinguish two cases, as in the proof of Theorem 5.3.
Case: ℓn<1. Consider x∈/Qn. For all 0<t≤1, we put
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
for all z∈Rd, and
[TABLE]
for all z=0 and all multi-indices β with ∣β∣≤δ+1. The proof of (5.10) and (5.11) is similar to the one of (4.41) and (4.42) of the proof of [2], Theorem 4.20, we omit details. With (5.11), we obtain
[TABLE]
where ϑ=dd+δ+1⋅
Case: ℓn≥1. Consider x∈/Qn. For all 0<t≤1, we have
[TABLE]
Furthermore, for all z∈Qn, we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where C(φ,d,q,γ,CK)>0 is a constant independent of t, x and z. We prove a general version of (5.13), namely,
[TABLE]
for all ∣z∣≥23⋅ For the proof of (5.14), consider z∈Rd such that ∣z∣≥23⋅ Then,
[TABLE]
since supp(φ)⊂B(0,1) and ∣z−y∣≥∣z∣−∣y∣>23−t>0, for all ∣y∣<t. Hence
We are going to prove Proposition 5.5 under Condition (5.15). The proof is similar to the previous, we only present points which change.
Proof.
With the same elements of the previous proof, only the estimation of J presents some modifications. Endeed, in Case : ℓn≥1, we have
[TABLE]
with ϑ=dd+δ+γ⋅ Thus, the expression of ϑ is no longer the same in the two cases (Case: ℓn<1 and Case: ℓn≥1). And hence, we have no longer (5.9), for all x∈/Qn, n∈{0,1,…,j}. To overcome the problem, we write
[TABLE]
Thus, J\raisebox{-4.30554pt}{{}\stackrel{{\scriptstyle\textstyle<}}{{\sim}}{}}J_{1}+J_{2}, with J1=∑n:ℓn<1∣λn∣Mloc0(T(an))χRd\Qnq,p and J2=∑n:ℓn≥1∣λn∣Mloc0(T(an))χRd\Qnq,p. We have
[TABLE]
where ϑ=dd+δ+1⋅ Likewise,
[TABLE]
where ϑ=dd+δ+γ⋅ Hence
[TABLE]
And we end as in the previous proof.
∎
Another consequence of Theorem 5.3 is that Hloc(q,p) (0<q≤1, q≤p) is stable under multiplication by the Schwartz class S. Endeed, let ϕ∈S. The operator T defined by
[TABLE]
for all f∈S, is clearly a S0 pseudo-differential operator. Therefore, by Theorem 5.3, T extends to a bounded operator on Hloc(q,p). Thus, we can define by extension the product of an element f∈Hloc(q,p) and a function ϕ∈S such that the product also denoted by ϕf∈Hloc(q,p).
This result extends the one of [14] to Hloc(q,p) spaces, for 0<q≤1 and q≤p.
Let Tψ be the S0 pseudo-differential operator associated with ψ∈S0. By [29], (4), p. 233,
[TABLE]
for all f,g∈S, where ⟨f,g⟩ denotes ∫Rdf(x)g(x)dx and (Tψ)∗ is the adjoint of Tψ. Also, there exists ψ∗∈S0 such that (Tψ)∗=Tψ∗, by [29], Proposition, p. 259. Combining these facts with Theorems 5.3 and 4.3, we have the following result.
Corollary 5.6**.**
Suppose that 0<q≤p≤1. Let δ≥⌊d(q1−1)⌋ be an integer, 1<r≤+∞ and T be a S0 pseudo-differential operator. Then, there exists a positive constant C such that, for all f∈Lr′,ϕ1,δloc ,
[TABLE]
Bibliography38
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] Z. V. d. P. Able, J. Feuto, Atomic decomposition of Hardy-amalgam spaces , J. Math. Anal. Appl. 455 (2017), 1899-1936.
2[2] Z. V. d. P. Able, J. Feuto, Duals of Hardy-amalgam spaces ℋ ( q , p ) superscript ℋ 𝑞 𝑝 \mathcal{H}^{(q,p)} and boundedness of operators , preprint.
3[3] W. Abu-Shammala and A. Torchinsky, The Hardy-Lorentz spaces H p , q ( ℝ n ) superscript 𝐻 𝑝 𝑞 superscript ℝ 𝑛 H^{p,q}(\mathbb{R}^{n}) , Studia Math. 182 3 (2007), 283-294.
4[4] J. P. Bertrandias, C. Datry and C. Dupuis, Unions et intersections d’espaces L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} invariantes par translation ou convolution , Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 28 (1978), 53-84.
5[5] M. Bownik, Anisotropic Hardy spaces and waveletes , Mem. Amer. Math. Soc, 164 (2003).
6[6] M. Bownik, Baode Li, Dachun Yang, and Yuan Zhou, Weighted anisotropic Hardy spaces and their applications in boundedness of sublinear operators , Indiana Univ. Math. J., 57 (2008) 3065-3100.
7[7] R. C. Busby and H. A. Smith, Product-convolution operators and mixed-norm spaces , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 263 (1981), 309-341.
8[8] C. Carton-Lebrun, H. P. Heinig and S.C. Hofmann, Integral operators on weighted amalgams , Studia Math., 109 (1994), 133-157.