The mean transform and the mean limit of an operator
F. Chabbabi, E. Curto, M. Mbekhta

TL;DR
This paper investigates the iterative behavior of the mean transform of bounded linear operators on Hilbert spaces, establishing new bounds and relationships for spectral properties, especially for unilateral weighted shifts.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of the mean limit of an operator, provides new estimates for numerical range and radius, and characterizes the spectral radius for unilateral weighted shifts.
Findings
Derived bounds for numerical range and radius of the mean transform.
Established the relationship between spectral radius and mean limit for weighted shifts.
Identified the conditions under which the mean limit exists and its properties.
Abstract
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Hilbert space , and let be the polar decomposition of . The mean transform of is defined by . In this paper we study the iterates of the mean transform and we define the mean limit of an operator as the limit (in the operator norm) of those iterates. We obtain new estimates for the numerical range and numerical radius of the mean transform in terms of the original operator. For the special class of unilateral weighted shifts we describe the precise relationship between the spectral radius and the mean limit, and obtain some sharp estimates.
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.
The Mean Transform and The Mean Limit of an Operator
Fadil Chabbabi
Université Lille, UFR de Mathématiques, Laboratoire CNRS-UMR 8524 P. Painlevé, 59655 Villeneuve d’Ascq Cedex, France
,
Raúl E. Curto
Department of Mathematics, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA
and
Mostafa Mbekhta
Université Lille, UFR de Mathématiques, Laboratoire CNRS-UMR 8524 P. Painlevé, 59655 Villeneuve d’Ascq Cedex, France
Abstract.
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Hilbert space , and let be the polar decomposition of . The mean transform of is defined by . In this paper we study the iterates of the mean transform and we define the mean limit of an operator as the limit (in the operator norm) of those iterates. We obtain new estimates for the numerical range and numerical radius of the mean transform in terms of the original operator. For the special class of unilateral weighted shifts we describe the precise relationship between the spectral radius and the mean limit, and obtain some sharp estimates.
Key words and phrases:
normal operator, quasinormal operator, polar decomposition, mean transform
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
47A05, 47A10, 47B49, 46L40
The first and third named authors were partially supported by Labex CEMPI (ANR-11-LABX-0007-01). The second named author was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1302666.
1. Introduction
Let be a Hilbert space equipped with its inner product . We denote by the algebra of all bounded linear operators on , and by the set of unitary operators on . For an arbitrary operator , we denote by , and the range, the null subspace, and the operator adjoint of , respectively. The numerical range of is the set
[TABLE]
and the numerical radius of is defined as
[TABLE]
We refer the reader to [14] for more information about the numerical range and numerical radius.
We also let denote the spectrum of , and denote its spectral radius. An operator is said to be quasinormal if it commutes with . For , we say that is -hyponormal if . In the case when and , the operator is called hyponormal and semi-hyponormal, respectively.
As usual, for we denote the modulus of by and we shall always write, without further mention, to be the canonical polar decomposition of , where is the appropriate partial isometry satisfying . The Aluthge transform of was defined in [1] by
[TABLE]
The mean transform of , recently introduced in [11], is given as
[TABLE]
We refer the reader to [1, 7, 8, 9, 11, 10] for such operator transforms.
It is well known that the quasinormal operators are exactly the fixed points of the Aluthge transform and of the mean transform (see [11]). The sequences of iterates of mean and Aluthge transforms of an operator are denoted by and (respectively), with , and . A list of detailed and informative articles on the subject includes [2, 9, 11, 10].
In the next sections we establish some new properties of the mean transform. We also introduce the mean limit of an operator, and we study the mean transform iterates in some particular cases. Moreover, we obtain several new relations between the Aluthge and mean transforms for unilateral weighted shifts. For this class of operators, we obtain some sharp estimates for the spectral radius of the mean transform and the mean limit.
2. Some results about the mean transform
Contrary to what happens with the Aluthge transform, the mean transform does depend on the polar decomposition of the given operator. For example, consider acting on . The canonical polar decomposition of is , where and On the other hand, we can also write , where is unitary. This is the so-called maximal polar decomposition of , since the partial isometry is unitary. In this case,
[TABLE]
which shows that the mean transform depends on the polar decomposition. In what follows, we will always use the canonical polar decomposition when dealing with the mean transform.
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let be an arbitrary operator. Then we have
[TABLE]
In particular if and only if .
Proof.
Let be the canonical polar decomposition of , and let . Then and thus . This show that .
Conversely, if then
[TABLE]
and hence
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
Since and are both positive, we obtain
[TABLE]
As a consequence,
[TABLE]
as desired. ∎
Theorem 2.2**.**
Let . Then the following statements are equivalent.
- (i)
* is invertible.* 2. (ii)
* is invertible and is closed.*
Proof.
Let be the canonical polar decomposition of . We assume that is invertible; then is closed. Moreover, is unitary and the operators and are positive and invertible. Hence , and is invertible. It follows that is also invertible.
Assume now that is invertible. From Proposition 2.1, is one-to-one, so is isometry, i.e. . It follows that is also invertible, and its inverse is . Therefore, is unitary, since it maps isometrically onto . Therefore, . Since is closed, . Hence is invertible. This completes the proof. ∎
Remark 2.3**.**
In Theorem 2.2 (ii), the condition “ is closed” is required; without it, the reverse implication is false, as shown by the following example.
Example 2.4**.**
Let us denote by the canonical basis of , and by the weighted bilateral shift defined by for all , where
[TABLE]
The mean transform is also a weighted shift, and we have for , where
[TABLE]
*Clearly, , and therefore the operator is not invertible. On the other
hand, we have for all , and from this it follows that is invertible. ∎*
Remark 2.5**.**
In general we have:
(1) (see [11]);
(2) (see [10]).
Proposition 2.6**.**
Let . Then the following properties hold.
* For all , .*
* For every unitary or anti-unitary operator , we have*
[TABLE]
* *
Proof.
(i) Straightforward from (1.1).
(ii) Let be the polar decomposition of and let be a unitary operator. First note that
[TABLE]
and we therefore have
[TABLE]
where . Observe that is a partial isometry and ; it follows that is the polar decomposition of . This implies that
[TABLE]
When is anti-unitary, the result is obtained in a similar fashion.
(iii) The implication is obvious, so we focus on ). Assume that ; hence is a positive partial isometry. In particular, is an orthogonal projection. On the other hand, still using , we can use Proposition 2.1(i) and conclude that is one-to-one. Then is an isometry, so . Therefore and . ∎
Lemma 2.7**.**
(Heinz inequality, cf. [6]) Let such that and are positive operators. Then
[TABLE]
Corollary 2.8**.**
Let . Then
[TABLE]
In particular, r(T)\leq\big{\|}\widehat{T}\big{\|}.
For partial isometries, we have the following result.
Proposition 2.9**.**
Let be a partial isometry. Then
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
Proof.
The modulus of is and the polar decomposition of is . Hence
[TABLE]
Since , it follows that
[TABLE]
Now observe that if is invertible then and therefore ; it follows that is also invertible. Conversely, if is invertible then (2.1) implies that is left invertible, that is, is an isometry. This means , and therefore , and a fortiori is also invertible. This argument together with (2.2) establishes the equality of the spectra. ∎
By Corollary 2.8, . As a consequence, the norm of the iterated mean transforms is a non-increasing sequence. Since it is bounded below by [math], it converges; we denote the limit by .
Definition 2.10**.**
Let . The mean limit is the limit in norm of the sequence of mean transform iterates; that is,
[TABLE]
Remark 2.11**.**
Let and . Then
- (i)
* and .* 2. (ii)
In the case when is quasinormal, . 3. (iii)
If then ; as a consequence, .
For the reader’s convenience we provide a proof of (iii). Consider the canonical polar decomposition , and recall that . Since we must have . It then follows that , which readily implies . The desired result is now clear.
It is now natural to formulate the following
Problem 2.12**.**
For a general bounded linear operator , describe what says about .
For , we denote by the rank one operator defined by
[TABLE]
The -Aluthge transform [2] of a rank one operator is given in [3] as follows:
[TABLE]
In the following lemma, we give the mean transform of this class of operators, and we show that the sequence of their mean iterates converges to the Aluthge transform.
Lemma 2.13**.**
Let be two nonzero vectors, let be the rank one operator with range generated by , and let . Then the -th iterate of is
[TABLE]
In particular, and
Proof.
We first exhibit the mean transform of a rank one operator. A simple calculation yields
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
We then have and is an orthogonal projection. Hence is a partial isometry and
[TABLE]
Therefore is the canonical polar decomposition of . It follows that
[TABLE]
Now, by induction on the equality
[TABLE]
holds immediately. Moreover,
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
∎
To study the mean iterates of a large class of Hilbert space operators we will first need the following result.
Lemma 2.14**.**
Let , with canonical polar decomposition . The following assertions are equivalent.
- (1)
. 2. (2)
. 3. (3)
* is quasinormal (i.e., ).*
In this case, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Suppose that holds. Then
[TABLE]
Hence, . Thus .
Suppose that holds. Then
[TABLE]
It follows, . Hence and thus .
Since , we have . Hence and
[TABLE]
This completes the proof. ∎
We now state and prove one of our main results.
Theorem 2.15**.**
Let and suppose that . Let be the canonical polar decomposition of , and let . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We will use induction on . For , the equality (2.3) holds immediately. Since , we can use Lemma 2.14 to conclude that
[TABLE]
In particular, (2.3) holds also for .
We now assume that (2.3) holds for . From Proposition 2.1 we have
[TABLE]
Since , it follows that
[TABLE]
Hence is the canonical polar decomposition of . Thus
[TABLE]
Hence (2.3) holds for . This completes the proof. ∎
Corollary 2.16**.**
Let be such that and are one-to-one. Then for all . In particular, and have the same mean limit
[TABLE]
Theorem 2.17**.**
Let and suppose that . If is a semi-hyponormal operator then is also semi-hyponormal. Moreover, the sequence of mean iterates converges in the strong operator topology to a normal operator , and we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be the polar decomposition of . It is easy to get that . Suppose that is semi-hyponormal. Then . Multiplying this inequality by on the left and by on the right, we get that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, since , Lemma 2.14 and a simple calculation yield
[TABLE]
Hence, it follows from Lemma 2.14 again that is the canonical polar decomposition of , and
[TABLE]
This shows that is semi-hyponormal.
Since , we have
[TABLE]
For the first inclusion, note that the condition on the kernels implies that . It follows, by definition of , that . The second inclusion is obtained as follows:
[TABLE]
Now, by the induction we obtain, for all ,
[TABLE]
We also know that is the canonical polar decomposition of , with
[TABLE]
In particular, is an increasing sequence, so it converges in the strong operator topology to a positive operator with . It follows that . From (2.5), satisfies , and therefore . It follows that strongly converges to the normal operator . Again, from (2.5) we obtain , for all , as desired. ∎
Remark 2.18**.**
Under the assumption of Theorem 3.1, if the sequence \big{(}(V^{*})^{k}|T|V^{k}\big{)}_{k\in\mathbb{N}} converges in the strong (resp. weak) operator topology to an operator , then so does the sequence of operator mean iterates ; the limit is the normal operator .
3. Numerical range and numerical radius
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let . Then
[TABLE]
where denotes the closure of the numerical range of . In particular,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Recall first the well known formula for the numerical range, (see [14, Theorem 4 and Corollary])
[TABLE]
Let be the canonical polar decomposition of . From [4, Lemma 2.3] we have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
(Cf. [12]) Let such that are positive. Then
[TABLE]
for all .
As a direct consequence of Theorem 3.1 and Lemma 3.2 we get the following result.
Corollary 3.3**.**
Let be an arbitrary operator, and recall that denotes the Aluthge transform of . Then
[TABLE]
4. The mean limit for unilateral weighted shifts
Let be the Hilbert space of complex square-summable sequences , with the norm . Given any bounded sequence of strictly positive numbers , the associated unilateral weighted shift is defined by
[TABLE]
where . When for all , is simply the standard (unweighted) unilateral shift on .
Clearly, is a bounded linear operator on , with operator norm . The spectral radius of is well known (see, for example, [5, Problem 91]):
[TABLE]
The spectrum of is given in [13, p.66, Theorem 4] by
[TABLE]
The Aluthge transform of is also a unilateral weighted shift:
[TABLE]
By induction, the iterates of the Aluthge transform are given in [9] by
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and .
As explained in [11], the mean transform of is
[TABLE]
The mean iterates of the weighted shift are also weighted shifts with weight sequences
[TABLE]
We remark that, for a sequence of strictly positive numbers , we have the following relation between the iterates of Aluthge and mean transforms,
[TABLE]
where, \exp(\beta)=\big{(}\exp(\beta_{i})\big{)}_{i\in\mathbb{N}} for any sequence .
In contrast to what happens with the iterates of the Aluthge transform, the spectrum of the mean transform is not the same as the spectrum of the original operator. Moreover, in general the sequence of norms of the mean iterates does not converge to the spectral radius, as shown by the following example.
Example 4.1**.**
Let be the unilateral weighted shift defined by , where . As proven in [11], (the unweighted unilateral shift), and is therefore quasi-normal. However, is not quasinormal. This proves that the inverse mean transform does not preserve the set of quasinormal operators.
On the other hand, by the formula for the spectral radius of a unilateral weighted shift (given in [5, Problem 91]), we get the following
[TABLE]
Hence, from [13, Section 4], we conclude that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, the mean iterates of are
[TABLE]
Therefore . Thus, in general the sequence of operator mean iterates does not converge to the spectral radius. This is in sharp contrast to what happens for the Aluthge transform (see [15]). ∎
Theorem 4.2**.**
Let be a sequence of strictly positive numbers, and let be the associate weighted shift. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the spectral radius formula we obtain
[TABLE]
∎
As a direct consequence, we have the following result.
Corollary 4.3**.**
For a unilateral weighted shift , we have
[TABLE]
Theorem 4.4**.**
Let be a sequence of strictly positive numbers, and let . The following estimate for the mean limit of holds:
[TABLE]
Proof.
Using the iterates of Aluthge and mean transforms for the weighted shift and Yamazaki’s formula for the spectral radius (via the iterates of the Aluthge transform), we get
[TABLE]
Using (4.3) and the particular form of the mean iterates of a unilateral weighted shift (cf. (4.2)), we obtain
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
∎
Remark 4.5**.**
In general the inequality in Theorem 4.4 can be strict, as shown in Example 4.1.
On the other hand, when the sequence converges we have the following.
Proposition 4.6**.**
Let be a sequence of positive numbers () and assume that converges. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We let . Then, for every there exists such that for all .
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
Hence, there exists , such that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for we have
[TABLE]
where . This completes the proof. ∎
Remark 4.7**.**
Any semi-hyponormal unilateral weighted shift has a weight sequence satisfying the hypothesis of Proposition 4.6.
Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank the referee for carefully reading our manuscript and making many valuable suggestions.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] A. Aluthge , On p-hyponormal operators for 0 < p < 1 0 𝑝 1 0<p<1 , Integral Equations Operator Theory 13 (1990), 307–315.
- 2[2] A.J. Antezana, P. Massey and D. Stojanoff , λ 𝜆 \lambda -Aluthge transforms and Schatten ideals , Linear Algebra Appl., 405 (2005), 177–199.
- 3[3] F. Chabbabi , Product commuting maps with the λ 𝜆 \lambda -Aluthge transform , preprint 2016, submitted.
- 4[4] C. Foiaş, I.B. Jung, E. Ko and C. Pearcy , Complete contractivity of maps associated with the Aluthge and Duggal transform , Pacific Journal of Math. 209 (2003), 249–259.
- 5[5] P.R. Halmos , A Hilbert Space Problem Book , Second Edition, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1992.
- 6[6] E.Heinz , Beiträge zur Störungstheorie der Spektralzerlegung , Math. Ann. 123, (1951). 415–438.
- 7[7] I.B. Jung, E. Ko, and C. Pearcy , Aluthge transform of operators , Integral Equations Operator Theory 37 (2000), 437–448.
- 8[8] I.B. Jung, E. Ko and C. Pearcy , Spectral pictures of Aluthge transforms of operators , Integral Equations Operator Theory 40 (2001), 52–60.
