Variational principles for spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms of $C(X,D)$
B. K. Kwasniewski, A. V. Lebedev

TL;DR
This paper develops variational formulas for the spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms on $C(X,D)$, extending to a broad class of operators and linking spectral radius to Lyapunov exponents in dynamical systems.
Contribution
It introduces new variational principles for spectral radius involving cocycles over partial dynamical systems with values in Banach algebras, generalizing previous formulas.
Findings
Formulas for spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms on $C(X,D)$.
Variational principles involving Lyapunov exponents and linear extensions.
Application to operators on Banach spaces, especially $B(F)$, with spectral radius as a Lyapunov exponent.
Abstract
We give formulas for the spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms , , where is a compact Hausdorff space and is a unital Banach algebra. Under the assumption that generates a partial dynamical system , we establish two kinds of variational principles for : using linear extensions of and using Lyapunov exponents associated with ergodic measures for . This requires considering (twisted) cocycles over with values in an arbitrary Banach algebra , and thus our analysis can not be reduced to any of mutliplicative ergodic theorems known so far. The established variational principles apply not only to weighted endomorphisms but also to a vast class of operators acting on Banach spaces that we call abstract weighted shifts associated with . In…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMathematical Dynamics and Fractals · advanced mathematical theories · Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods
Variational principles for spectral radius of
weighted endomorphisms of
Bartosz Kosma Kwaśniewski
Institute of Mathematics, University of Białystok
ul. K. Ciołkowskiego 1M, 15-245 Białystok, Poland
and
Andrei Lebedev
Belorussian State University, Nesavisimosti av., 4, Minsk, Belarus; Institute of Mathematics, University of Białystok
ul. K. Ciołkowskiego 1M, 15-245 Białystok, Poland
Abstract.
We give formulas for the spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms , , where is a compact Hausdorff space and is a unital Banach algebra. Under the assumption that generates a partial dynamical system , we establish two kinds of variational principles for : using linear extensions of and using Lyapunov exponents associated with ergodic measures for . This requires considering (twisted) cocycles over with values in an arbitrary Banach algebra , and thus our analysis can not be reduced to any of mutliplicative ergodic theorems known so far.
The established variational principles apply not only to weighted endomorphisms but also to a vast class of operators acting on Banach spaces that we call abstract weighted shifts associated with . In particular, they are far reaching generalizations of formulas obtained by Kitover, Lebedev, Latushkin, Stepin and others. They are most efficient when , for a Banach space , and endomorphisms of induced by are inner isometric. As a by product we obtain a dynamical variational principle for an arbitrary operator and that it’s spectral radius is always a Lyapunov exponent in some direction , when is reflexive.
Key words and phrases:
variational principle, spectral radius, endomorphism, Lyapunov exponent, cocycle
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
47B48, 37A99 (primary), 37H15, 47A10 (secondary)
The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement number 621724. As well as Polish National Science Centre grant number DEC-2011/01/D/ST1/04112
Introduction
Let be an endomorphism of a Banach algebra . The study of spectra of weighted endomorphisms , , has a long tradition and is interesting in its own right, see, for instance, [Kit79], [Kam79], [Kam81], [JR88], where usually the case when is commutative and/or is compact is considered. Our interest in weighted endomorphisms stems from their relationship with weighted composition operators. Spectral properties of such operators play a crucial role in numerous problems in mathematical physics, ergodic theory, stochastic processes, information theory, the theory of solvability of functional differential equations, wavelet analysis etc. We refer, for example, to the books and survey articles [Wal82], [LS91’], [LM94], [AL94], [KL94], [Ant96], [CL99], [ABL12].
In the case when the shift (the underlying map) is reversible, the theory of weighted composition operators was axiomatized in [AL94]. Namely, let be a Banach subalgebra of the algebra of bounded linear operators acting on a Banach space and let be an invertible isometry such that . Then operators of the form , , are called (abstract) weighted shift operators with weight in the algebra . Within this setting the formula , , defines an automorphism of . It turns out that all the fundamental spectral data concerning , , can be efficiently phrased and analyzed in terms of the noncommutative dynamical system , see [AL94], [Ant96], [CL99], [ABL12]. In particular, the spectral radii of the weighted shift and the weighted automorphism coincide. When is a commutative uniform unital Banach algebra (i.e. the Gelfand transform is an isometry) the spectral radius is given by the following variational principle (see [Kit79], [Leb79], and [AL94, 4] or [Ant96, 5]):
[TABLE]
where is the homeomorphism dual to , is the set of -invariant Borel probability measures and is the set of -ergodic measures. This covers, for instance, the situation when or , is the algebra of operators of multiplication by functions in and is an operator of composition with a measure preserving homeomorphism .
We note the resemblance of (1) to the Ruelle-Walters variational principle [Rue78, Rue89, Wal82]. The latter express the topological pressure for a continuous map and potential , , as
[TABLE]
where is Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy for . It covers as a particular case the Dinaburg-Goodman variational principle , where is the topological entropy of . Thus if it happens that is a map of topological entropy zero, then (1) and (2) imply that the spectral exponent of is equal to the topological pressure for with potential : We recall that one of the main mathematical tools behind thermodynamical formalism is that, in the case of topological Markov chains [Rue78, Bow74, LS88] or, more generally, expanding local homeomorphisms [Rue89], topological pressure is equal to the spectral exponent of a transfer operator. For general irreversible dynamics that admits transfer operators, cf. [Kwa12’], their spectral analysis leads to variational principles containing -entropy [ABL11]. For a comprehensive account on history and relationships between the spectral analysis of weighted shift and transfer operators we refer to [ABL12].
In all the aforementioned variational principles the algebra of weights is commutative. Latushkin and Stepin [LS91] analyzed the case when for a separable Hilbert space and is given by a composition with a homeomorphism . This models situation of weighted composition operators acting on vector-valued spaces . Under the assumption that takes values in compact operators , they proved (see also [AL94] or [CL99]) that
[TABLE]
where is the maximal Lyapunov exponent appearing in Ruelle’s version of Multiplicative Ergodic Theorem [Rue82] applied to the dynamical measure system and the cocycle coming from .
The aim of the present paper is to give a detailed picture of the corresponding variational principles in a general irreversible situation and for more general non-commutative algebras of weights. More specifically, we introduce and initiate a study of abstract weighted shifts , , associated with an endomorphism (Definition 2.14). In our setting is a partial isometry on a Banach space , as defined by Mbekhta [Mbe04], and , , where is a partial isometry adjoint to . We note that any contractive endomorphism on a unital Banach algebra can represented in this form (Proposition 2.17). Moreover, since in this article we focus on spectral radius, our analysis boils down to the study of spectral radius of the weighted endomorphism , as we always have (see Proposition 2.18). A number of concrete examples of abstract weighted shifts associated with endomorphisms were considered in [Kwa09], see also [KL08], [Kwa12]. We plan to investigate their spectral properties in a forthcoming paper.
In the present article we have established a number of variational principles (VPs in short). A general scheme of relationships between them is presented on Figure 1.
We start with preliminary Sections 1 and 2 where we discuss the necessary objects and results concerning endomorphisms (i.e. irreversible and non-commutative dynamics) and weighted shift operators associated with endomorphisms. In contrast to reversible dynamics associated with automorphisms, natural maps associated with endomorphisms are partial mappings, i.e. continuous maps defined on a subset of a compact space .111 This seemingly annoying technical detail turns out to be a friend in disguise, as when considering ’linear extensions’ we need to deal with partial maps anyway, and we believe that keeping track of the domains is beneficial here. In section 3, we show that natural ergodic measures are the usual measures for the restriction to an essential domain of . Our main technical tool is what we call variational principle for of empirical averages over (Theorem 3.5). It implies that for empirical averages the operations and do commute (Corollary 3.6). Moreover, it readily gives a generalization of formula (1) to the case of weighted endomorphisms of a commutative uniform algebra (Theorem 5.1).
In order to deal with noncommutative Banach algebras, in Section 4, we study Lypaunov exponents associated with an operator valued function and a partial dynamical system . We introduce spectral exponent which is equal to when and is given by a composition with (Definition 4.2). We construct a continuous linear extension of where and is a quotient of a unit ball in . Variational principle for of empirical averages applied to implies a generalization of (1) that expresses the spectral exponent in terms of maximum of integrals taken over the extended system (Theorem 4.6). By projecting measures from to , the aforementioned generalization of (1) implies a generalization of (3), which says that the spectral exponent is the maximum of measure exponents and it realizes as Lypanuov exponent in a concrete direction when passing to dual space (Theorem 4.10 and Corollary 4.14). This result has a flavor of a variational principle for topological pressure. We note that we achieved it without appealing to any of Mutliplicative Ergodic Theorems, cf. Remark 4.15.
Finally, in Section 5 we apply the aforementioned results to weighted endomorphisms of where is a unital Banach algebra. We assume that the endomorphism satisfies , which is equivalent to assuming that is of the form
[TABLE]
where is a partial dynamical system and a continuous field of endomorphisms of . Thus not only the shift but also the ’twist’ is involved. We show that the logarithm of spectral radius is equal to a spectral exponent of a cocycle with values in . This leads to analogues of (1), (3) developed for general case (Theorem 5.15). The obtained formulas can be significantly improved when and all the endomorphisms are isometric and inner. Then for any family that implements endomorphisms , we may formulate generalizations of (1), (3) using cocycles associated to the function
[TABLE]
see Theorems 5.10 and 5.11. One may view these last theorems as main results of the paper. When , they can be applied to any contractive endomorphism of (Remark 5.13). In essence, all the VPs in the paper can be deduced from these theorems. One of the main difficulties in proving them is that, in general, there are cohomological obstructions implying that the map (4) is discontinuous (Remark 1.15). In fact, the special form of continuous linear extension , we constructed in Section 4, is dictated by the need of overcoming this difficulty. En passant, we mention that any operator may be treated as an element in . Then our generalization of (1) gives a ’Dynamical Variational Principle’ for the spectral radius of an arbitrary operator (Theorem 5.4), and our generalization of (3) gives an improvement of the classical Gelfand’s formula (Corollary 5.6).
Section 6 contains a brief summary of our result and their potential applications.
1. Endomorphisms of Banach algebras
A general (irreversible) dynamics on non-commutative structures (algebras) is naturally given by means of endomorphisms. In this section we discuss the corresponding objects and facts that will be used in our further analysis.
1.1. Endomorphisms of commutative algebras and partial maps
Let be a commutative Banach algebra with an identity. Recall that the space of non-zero linear multiplicative functionals on equipped with ∗-weak topology (induced from the dual space ) is a compact Hausdorff. It is called the maximal ideals space of , or the (Gelfand) spectrum of . The Gelfand transform is the homomorphism:
[TABLE]
where is the algebra of all complex valued continuous functions on . Recall that is called semisimple if the Gelfand transform is a monomorphism, that is when the radical of is zero. We say that is regular if it is semisimple and the functions , , separate points from closed sets in ; that is for each point and a closed subset such that there exists an element such that and .
Let be an endomorphism. Then for every the functional is linear and multiplicative. Thus the dual operator to defines the map from to the set (the functional may be zero). Note that the restriction of this map to takes values in and therefore it can be considered a partial map on .
Proposition 1.1**.**
For any endomorphism of a commutative Banach algebra there is a uniquely determined continuous map defined on a clopen (closed and open) subset such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, iff preserves the identity of algebra .
Proof.
Uniqueness of follows from that the functions , , separate points of . Since is the characteristic function of the set , it follows that is clopen and it is equal to if and only if , cf. [Żel68, 20]. Thus we have only to verify the continuity of (note that we do not presuppose the continuity of ). If is a semisimple, then is automatically continuous [Żel68, Corollary 13.4]. In general the spectrum of quotient algebra , can be naturally identified with . Therefore the dual map to the homomorphism given by , , coincides with the dual map to . So the continuity of , [Żel68, Theorem 13.2], implies the continuity of . ∎
Definition 1.2**.**
We will call the map satisfying (5) the partial map dual to the endomorphism . In general, by a partial dynamical system we mean a pair where is compact Hausdorff space and is a continuous map defined on an open set .
1.2. Endomorphisms of
Let be the Banach algebra of continuous functions defined on a compact Hausdorff space and taking values in a Banach algebra . Any endomorphism gives rise to a family of endomorphisms of where
[TABLE]
Moreover, since , the mapping is continuous for every . We will call the continuous field of endomorphisms of generated by the endomorphism . More generally, by a continuous field of endomorphism of on we mean any family such that is continuous for every . Note that for any continuous field the set
[TABLE]
is open in . If, in addition, is unital, then is unital and is clopen, as we have .
Proposition 1.3**.**
Let be a Banach algebra and let . For any continuous partial map (defined on a clopen set ) and any continuous field of non-zero endomorphisms , the formula
[TABLE]
defines an endomorphism of the algebra . Formula (8) determines both the field of endomorphisms and the partial dynamical system uniquely.
Moreover, if is unital then an arbitrary endomorphism of is of the form (8) if and only if
[TABLE]
that is, when "almost invariates" the algebra .
Proof.
We adopt the proof of [Kwa16, Proposition 3.5]. It is obvious that the map given by (8) is multiplicative and linear. It is well defined as using the Lipschitz property of bounded linear maps we get that the map is continuous for every continuous field of endomorphisms. If is given by (8), then both the field of endomorphisms and the set are determined by via formulae (6), (7). Now if we assume that satisfies (8) with replaced with a different map , then there is such that . Take such that and , and let . On one hand we get , while on the other , a contradiction.
Assume that is unital and satisfies (9). Then for every there exists such that
[TABLE]
Clearly, the function is uniquely determined by on the set . Since (as a norm of an idempotent), the set is open and compact. Now it is straightforward to see that the formula defines an endomorphism whose range is . Hence generates a partial map , see Proposition 1.1. For every and we have
[TABLE]
Thus satisfies (9), by continuity and linearity. ∎
In the nomenclature of [Kwa16, Definition 3.3], an endomorphism satisfying (8) is said to be induced by a morphism of the corresponding bundle of algebras. In accordance with Definition 1.2 we adopt the following:
Definition 1.4**.**
If is an endomorphism of the form (8) we say that generates the partial dynamical system .
We will show that when for a Banach space and the endomorphisms in the associated field are inner, then generates a partial dynamical system (see Proposition 1.11 below). In particular, if , then every endomorphism of generates a partial dynamical system. In the infinite dimensional case, even when is a Hilbert space, there are -endomorphisms of that do not generate partial dynamical systems in the sense of Definition 1.4:
Example 1.5**.**
Let be a Hilbert space and let ,…, , , be isometries with orthogonal ranges: , , . Let be discrete space and consider given by
[TABLE]
One readily sees that is a -endomorphism of that does not satisfy (9).
1.3. Endomorphisms of generating inner fields of endomorphisms
Throughout this subsection we fix a Banach space .
Definition 1.6**.**
An endomorphism is inner if there are such that
Proposition 1.7**.**
Suppose that is an inner endomorphism and are such that for all .
- (1)
* is injective if and only if ;* 2. (2)
if is contractive then is isometric if and only if and up to normalization is an isometry (i.e. for , we have that is an isometry, and ).
Proof.
For and we denote by the corresponding rank one operator, given by the formula , .
(1). If , then for all , and hence is injective.
Conversely, assume that . If , then is not injecitve. Thus we may assume that . Then , for every . Indeed, if , then
[TABLE]
implies that , which contradicts . Thus there exists such that and are linearly independent. By Hahn-Banach theorem there exists such that and . Then on one hand is a projection onto the space spanned by . On the other hand, is an idempotent (since is an idempotent) and its range is contained in the space spanned by . However, . Hence and therfore fails to be injective.
(2). Let be contractive. If and is an isometry, then for every we have
[TABLE]
Hence is isometric.
Conversely, assume that is isometric. Then by part (1). Let us take any functional of norm . Note that since is surjective. Now for each we get
[TABLE]
Thus replacing with , , we may assume that is an isometry. ∎
Proposition 1.8**.**
For any endomorphism the following statements are equivalent:
- (1)
* is injective and inner;* 2. (2)
* and there is an injective such that*
[TABLE]
Moreover, if (2) holds then there exists a unique such that for all . If is isometric, we may choose to be isometry and then .
Proof.
Assume (1) and let be such that for all . Then , which implies (because we always have ). By Proposition 1.7(1) we have . Hence is injective and for every we get . Thus (1)(2).
Now assume (2). Note that for any we have . Hence
[TABLE]
Since is an idempotent, this implies that is a closed complemented subspace of . In particular, is a bounded invertible operator. Defining
[TABLE]
we get such that , and therefore equality , implies that Hence is inner. Clearly, we have and threfore is injective by Proposition 1.7(1). Thus (2)(1).
Suppose now that equivalent conditions (1), (2) hold. Let be as in (2) and let be any operator such that for all . Since , we conclude that (recall that is a bijection). Note also that by Proposition 1.7(1). Hence . Therefore has to be of the form (10).
If is isometric, we may choose to be isometry by Proposition 1.7(2). Then and if . Thus . ∎
Example 1.9** (endomorphisms of ).**
By Skolem–Noether theorem endomorphisms of are necessarily inner automorphisms: for every non-zero endomorphism there is an invertible such that . This well known fact could also be recovered using Proposition 1.8.
Example 1.10** (-endomorphisms of ).**
Let be a separable Hilbert space. Let be a -endomorphism. It is well known, cf. [Lac93], [BJP96], that is necessarily injective. Moreover, there is a number called multiplicity index or Powers index for , and a family of isometries with orthogonal ranges such that
[TABLE]
where in the case the sum is weakly convergent. It follows that a -endomorphism of is inner if and only if its multiplicity index is (the only if part follows from the last part of Lemma 1.7 and Proposition 2.1 below).
Endomorphism in Example 1.5 generates a field of endomorphisms of with Powers index , and thus they are not inner. This agrees with the following:
Proposition 1.11**.**
Let be an endomorphism and let be the field of (non-zero) endomorphisms of generated by . If the endomorphisms are inner, then generates a partial dynamical system. More specifically, are inner if and only if is of the form
[TABLE]
where is a continuous partial map and .
Proof.
By Proposition 1.3, it suffices to show that satisfies condition (9). To this end, let . We need to show that there is such that
[TABLE]
Since we assume are inner, there are operators such that for and . In particular, we have . Thus putting for each we may identify with . Then we get . This implies that lies in the center of the algebra . Indeed, for all we have
[TABLE]
Hence for each there is a number such that
[TABLE]
The function obtained in this way is continuous this is forced by the continuity of the maps and ). Putting outside the clopen set , we get the desired function . ∎
Corollary 1.12**.**
A mapping is an endomorphism if and only if it is of the form
[TABLE]
where is a continuous partial mapping of and is a family of invertible matrices.
Proof.
Combine Proposition 1.11 and Example 1.9. ∎
There is no a priori given universal way of choosing the operators in Proposition 1.11. Even when considering with a weak operator topology, the mapping may be discontinuous or even unmeasurable:
Example 1.13**.**
Let and , for . Suppose is a Vitali set (an unmeasurable subset of ). Put , for , and , for . Then is an unmeasurable field of isometries generating continuous field of automorphisms .
In the isometric case, the choice of is unique up to constants in and we may choose to be continuous locally. Thus, the obstacles to continuity of may be identified by means of cohomological objects:
Lemma 1.14**.**
Suppose that is a continuous field of inner isometric endomorphisms of . Let be such that , for , and is an isometry, for .
- (1)
The operators are determined up to constants in . Namely, if where are isometries, then for all if and only if there is such that and . 2. (2)
For any there is an open neighbourhood of and numbers such that the map is continuous for every .
Proof.
(1). By Proposition 1.7(1) we have . Thus for every we get
[TABLE]
Hence belongs to the center of and therefore is a multiple of the identity operator. That is for . This implies that (because both , are isometries onto , and is an inverse to ). Since we get .
(2). Take and . Without loss of generality we may assume . Let , be such that . Then is a norm one projection onto the space spanned by . Since the map is continuous the set
[TABLE]
is open. For every we put
[TABLE]
so that we have . Note that is continuous. Also the map is continous, because for . Hence for every the map
[TABLE]
is continuous. Thus putting we get the assertion. ∎
Remark 1.15**.**
Let be a continuous field of -automorphisms of the algebra compact operators on an infinite dimensional (separable) Hilbert space . Then a similar fact to Lemma 1.14 holds, cf. [RW98, Proposition 1.6]. That is, is implemented by a field of unitary operators , which locally can be chosen to be continuous. Therefore, extends uniquely to a continuous field of -automorphisms , and we may identify such fields with -linear automorphisms of . The latter form a group that we denote by . Let be the group of inner automorphisms of . Clearly, is a subgroup of , and can be written in the form , , for a continuous map if and only if . By [RW98, Theorem 5.42] we have
[TABLE]
where is the second ech cohomology group of with integer coefficients. Thus whenever is non-trivial, so for instance when is a two-dimensional sphere or a torus, there is always a continuous field of (inner) automorphisms of such that every field of operators that implements is discontinuous (then is necessarily a unitary and ).
2. Abstract weighted shift operators and weighted endomorphisms
In this section we introduce abstract weighted shift operators associated with endomorphisms. To this end, we use the notion of partial isometry acting on Banach spaces in the sense of Mbekhta. We show that spectral radii of the corresponding weighted partial isometries and weighted endomorphisms are equal. Thus the results of the present paper can be readily applied to a vast class of operators acting on Banach spaces.
2.1. Partial isometries on Banach spaces and endomorphisms
Recall that an operator acting on a Hilbert space is a partial isometry if it is an isometry on the orthogonal complement of its kernel. Then is called the initial subspace and the final subspace of . Partial isometries on Hilbert spaces have a number of various well known characterisations. For instance, is a partial isometry iff one of the following equivalent conditions hold:
- i)
is an orthogonal projection (onto initial subspace),
- ii)
is an orthogonal projection (onto the final subspace),
- iii)
,
- iv)
.
We recall one more characterisation of partial isometries which leads to a generalization of this notion to the realm of Banach spaces.
Proposition 2.1** ([Mbe04] 3.1, 3.3).**
Let be a Hilbert space. An operator is a partial isometry if and only if is a contraction and there exists a contraction which is a generalized inverse to , that is and (then we necessarily have ).
Definition 2.2** ([Mbe04]).**
Let be an operator on a Banach space . We say that is a partial isometry if it is a contraction and there is a contraction such that
[TABLE]
Contractions and satisfying the above relations will be called mutually adjoint partial isometries.
Remark 2.3**.**
- i)
A partial isometry on a Banach space can have more than one partial isometry as adjoint, see Example 2.5 below.
- ii)
Not every isometry on a Banach space is a partial isometry. On the other hand, there are spaces (that are not Hilbert spaces) where all isometries are partial isometries. For example, , are such Banach spaces, cf. [Mbe04].
The following proposition is a slightly extended version of [Mbe04, Proposition 4.2]. It gives a useful description of adjoints to a partial isometry on Banach space.
Proposition 2.4**.**
Let . The following conditions are equivalent:
- i)
* is a partial isometry,*
-
ii)
-
a)
the kernel of operator possesses a complement such that restriction of on is an isometry,
- b)
there exists a contractive projection onto the range of operator .
If conditions , are satisfied then relations
[TABLE]
establish a bijective correspondence between partial isometries adjoint to and pairs , where is a complement to and is a contractive projection onto .
Example 2.5**.**
Let us consider the classical unilateral left shift operator acting on the space , or :
[TABLE]
Clearly, is a partial isometry in the sense of Definition 2.2. The only projection onto is the identity operator. If with , then the only complement to the subspace on which the operator is an isometry is the subspace Therefore in this case the only partial isometry adjoint to is the classical right shift
[TABLE]
In the case when or , the situation changes. Indeed, then complements to the kernel on which the operator is an isometry can be indexed by elements of the unit ball of the dual space :
[TABLE]
Hence all the partial isometries adjoint to are of the form
[TABLE]
Thus, if , then partial isometries adjoint to are indexed by probability measures on , while if , then they are indexed by all normalized finitely additive measures on .
Let us fix a pair of mutually adjoint partial isometries , acting on a Banach space . This pair naturally defines the following two mappings on :
[TABLE]
It is straightforward to see that the mappings are mutually adjoint partial isometries on the Banach space . We will discuss now some natural criteria for multiplicativity of the partial isometry on subsets of . For a subset we denote by its commutant, that is . In the Hilbert space case there is a number of conditions equivalent to multiplicativity of on :
Proposition 2.6**.**
Let be a partial isometry on a Hilbert space and put for . Let be a self-adjoint set, that is . The following conditions are equivalent:
- i)
,
- ii)
* for every *
- iii)
* for every .*
- iv)
* for every *
Proof.
ii) and iii) are equivalent, as one is the adjoint of the other. That i) is equivalent to ii) and iii), and that they imply iv) is easy and follows from Proposition 2.9 below, see also [LO04, Proposition 2.2]. To see that iv) implies ii) let . Then
[TABLE]
because and therefore . ∎
Remark 2.7**.**
If contains the identity operator , the condition iv) in Proposition 2.6 implies that is necessarily a partial isometry. Indeed, if is any operator such that satisfies this condition with , then is an orthogonal projection, and hence a partial isometry.
Corollary 2.8**.**
Let be a -subalgebra and a partial isometry. The map , , restricts to an endomorphism of if and only if
[TABLE]
Proof.
The map preserves if and only if . It is multiplicative on if and only if by Proposition 2.6. ∎
In the general Banach space case only some implications in the above equivalences remain valid:
Proposition 2.9**.**
Let be a partial isometry with an adjoint , and let . Put for . The following conditions are equivalent:
- i)
,
- ii)
* and for every .*
Each of these equivalent conditions imply that , .
Proof.
Assuming i), for any , we have and . Hence i)ii). Conversely, using ii), for any , we get . Thus ii)i). Moreover, the definition of a partial isometry along with i) imply that for we have ∎
Corollary 2.10**.**
Let be an algebra, and and be mutually adjoint partial isometries such that
[TABLE]
Then the mapping is an endomorphism of .
For a given algebra and a partial isometry relations (11) may be satisfied by different partial isometries that are adjoint to , and the corresponding endomorphisms of may be different, cf. Example 2.12 below. However, as the next statement shows, for commutative algebras and -endomorphisms of ∗-algebras, does not depend on the choice of operator in (11).
Proposition 2.11**.**
Let be an algebra containing . Let be a partial isometry and , be partial isometries adjoint to such that
[TABLE]
Restrictions of maps , , to coincide, that is they generate the same endomorphism if and only if . And if and only if . In particular, on , whenever is commutative or when is a ∗-algebra and both , , are -preserving.
Proof.
Note that for we have
[TABLE]
By symmetry we also get Thus, if then endomorphisms do coincide. The foregoing relations also show that
[TABLE]
Therefore if and only .
Finally, assume that is a ∗-algebra and , , are -preserving. Then , . These equalities along with (12) give us ∎
Example 2.12**.**
Let be the space of converging sequences with sup-norm. Then the operator is an isometry on . Let us consider the following two contractions and on :
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
These are partial isometries adjoint to , and Thus by Corollary 2.10, and are endomorphisms of . These endomorphisms are different, since .
Example 2.13**.**
Let and for . In this situation we have the following complements of the kernel of on which is an isometry:
[TABLE]
In addition is a surjection. Therefore is a partial isometry, and every partial isometry adjoint to is an isometry (see Proposition 2.4). These operators are of the form and where . Since , , the mappings
[TABLE]
preserve the identity . Thus in view of Proposition 2.11 whenever we have a unital subalgebra such that a pair satisfy relations (11), the restriction of to does not depend on . Let us consider two situations:
i) If , then all the pairs , satisfy relations (11) and all the mappings define the identity endomorphism on .
ii) If is the algebra of operators of multiplication by sequences that are constant beginning from the second coordinate (that is sequences of the form , ), then all the mappings , , preserve while only and are multiplicative on . Moreover, and define different endomorphisms on : , This does not contradict Proposition 2.11 since among the pairs , only and satisfy relations (11).
2.2. Weighted shift operators on Banach spaces
Now we are in a position to formulate the definition of abstract weighted shift operators associated with endomorphisms, that generalizes [AL94, 3.1] and appears in [Kwa09]:
Definition 2.14**.**
Let be a Banach space. Suppose that is an algebra containing and let be a partial isometry which admits an adjoint partial isometry satisfying
[TABLE]
So that given by , , is an endomorphism of , by Corollary 2.10. We call operators of the form
[TABLE]
(abstract) weighted shift operators associated with the endomorphism . We refer to as to the algebra of weights. The role of shift is played by .
Remark 2.15**.**
- i)
Recall that if is commutative then the endomorphism in this definition does not depend on the choice of , and the same is true when is a ∗-algebra and is a -endomorphism (see Proposition 2.11). In these cases we will say that generates the endomorphism .
- ii)
If is a commutative Banach algebra then determines a partial map on the spectrum of (Proposition 1.1). In this case we also say that generates the partial map .
Example 2.16**.**
Let , be the classical unilateral shift operators on the space of Example 2.5, and let be the algebra of operators of multiplication by bounded sequences: . Then and are mutually adjoint partial isometries and
[TABLE]
and, in particular, , Therefore the classical unilateral weighted shift operators , , are abstract weighted shift operators with weights in . Note that being an abstract weighted shift depends on the algebra we consider. Also , , , are not abstract weighted shifts in the sense of [AL94, 3.1], as none of and is invertible.
A -endomorphism , where is a Hilbert space, is generated by a single (partial) isometry if and only if Power’s index of is , see subsection 1.3. On the other hand, it is well known, see [KL13, Theorem 1.11] or [Kwa16, Proposition 2.6], that any -endomorphism of an arbitrary -algebra can be represented in a faithful and non-degenerate way on some Hilbert space, so that it becomes generated by a partial isometry. As we show below this result generalizes to the Banach case. This means that the family of weighted shift operators presented in Definition 2.14 is vast – in fact, up to representation, for any contractive endomorphism there exists a weighted shift operator associated with it. Note that if is implemented by partial isometries , , it has to be contractive, that is we necessarily have .
Proposition 2.17**.**
Let be a unital Banach algebra and let be a contractive endomorphism. Then there is a Banach space , a unital isometric homomorphism and mutually adjoint partial isometries , such that
[TABLE]
Thus for each the operator is an abstract weighted shift associated with the endomorphism (isometricially conjugated with) .
Proof.
We consider the Banach space
[TABLE]
Then the formula defines a unital homomorphism . Using that is contractive and that one gets that for every . Hence is isometric. It is readily check that putting
[TABLE]
we get the desired mutually adjoint partial isometries . ∎
The main idea behind introducing abstract weighted shifts is that some of their spectral properties can be investigated in terms of the associated non-commutative dynamical system . In this paper we focus on spectral radii. As the next proposition shows for these spectral characteristics the relationship between and weighted endomorphism is as literal as one may think. Moreover, it also tells us that the spectral radius depends only on the values of the ’cocycle’ generated by and , i.e. the sequence of elements , (cf. Subsection 4.1).
Proposition 2.18**.**
Suppose that , , is an abstract weighted shift operator and is an associated endomorphism. Then for the spectral radius of the operator we have
[TABLE]
where is the spectral radius of the weighted endomorphism treated as an element of . In particular, for every .
Proof.
The formula is a consequence of Gelfand’s formula and the following two inequalities:
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By Proposition 2.9, we have , and hence by induction we have . Using this and that is a contraction, we get
[TABLE]
On the other hand, using that and are contractions we have
[TABLE]
Thus .
Proceeding in a similar way one can show that
[TABLE]
and therefore . Thus by induction, for every . ∎
Corollary 2.19**.**
Let be a contractive endomorphism of a unital Banach algebra . For any and we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 2.17 we may view as being associated with an abstract weighted shift, and then the assertion follows from Proposition 2.18.222Alternatively, one may readilly adapt the proof of Proposition 2.18. ∎
3. Ergodic measures for partial maps and limits of empirical averages
We start by introducing some notation for the partial dynamical system (cf. Definition 1.2). For we denote by and respectively the domain and the range of the partial map . Namely, the sets are given by inductive formulae , , , and then . Note that for , the sets are clopen while , in general, are only closed. For all one has
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that if is a partial map dual to an endomorphism , cf. Definition 1.2, then is nothing but the map dual to the endomorphism .
Definition 3.1**.**
We define the essential domain of the partial map as the set
[TABLE]
Then the map is everywhere defined and surjective.
Standard definitions of invariant and ergodic measures for full maps make sense also for partial maps. Thus we define them this way. However, we could equivalently define them as the corresponding notions for the restricted full map .
Definition 3.2**.**
Let be a partial dynamical system. Let be a normalized Radon measure on . We say that on is -invariant, if , for every Borel . If in addition for every Borel we have
[TABLE]
we call -ergodic. We denote by the set of all normalized -invariant Radon measures on , and by the measures in that are -ergodic.
Lemma 3.3**.**
If , then . Thus one may consider -invariant (ergodic) measures for the partial map as -invariant (ergodic) measures for full map :
[TABLE]
Proof.
By continuity of measure it suffices to show that for every . We do it inductively. The zero step is obvious because . However, if we have for some , then using equality and -invariance of we get Hence for all .
Now let us notice that for every we have and therefore
[TABLE]
where we used -invariance of , the inclusion and the above shown fact that . Thus the assumption that implies . Hence by induction we get for all . ∎
Remark 3.4**.**
Recall that a point is non-wandering points for a full map if for every open neighbourhood of there is such that . Denoting the set of non-wandering points by we have and . For a partial map we define to be the set of non-wandering points for the full map . Then is a full map and
[TABLE]
The next variational principle (in the full map case) is implicit in a number of works, cf. [Leb79], [Kit79], [AL94, 4], [Ant96, 5]. It implies that when considering empirical averages, i.e. the sums of the form (13) below, the operations and commute (see Corollary 3.6).
Theorem 3.5** (Variational principle for of empirical averages).**
Let be a partial dynamical system and let be a continuous and bounded from above function where is the domain of (an open subset of ). We define the corresponding empirical averages to be functions , , given by
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
if and otherwise.
Proof.
Clearly, the sequence is sub-additive, and . Hence the limit exists and is equal to (it may be ). For any we have and therefore
[TABLE]
To construct a measure for which the converse inequality holds, we may assume that . Then there are points such that , so that . Put
[TABLE]
where is the unit measure accumlated in point . By Banach–Alaoglu theorem there is a subsequence convergent in the *-weak topology to a probability measure . In other words,
[TABLE]
To prove that is -invariant it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
where by we mean , when , and [math] otherwise. However, using the definition of (and ) and boundedness of we get
[TABLE]
Thus is -invariant and in particular it supported on , by Lemma 3.3.
To prove the inequality note that in view of the choice of points and definition of measures we have
[TABLE]
Even though is continuous on , we can not directly conclude that , as may not be bounded from below. Nevertheless, putting for
[TABLE]
we have and . Hence for each
[TABLE]
Moreover, the functions form a decreasing sequence that converges pointwise to on , which is -almost everywhere. Thus . This concludes the proof of the equality
[TABLE]
To finish the proof we need to show that the maximum above is attained at an ergodic measure. To this end take such that . Then for every we have
[TABLE]
By Choquet-Bishop-de Leeuw Theorem (see, for instance, [Phe01, page 22]), there exists a probability measure on such that
[TABLE]
The above equality and the earlier inequality imply existence of with ∎
Corollary 3.6**.**
Retain the notation and assumptions of Theorem 3.5. There is and a subset , , such that
[TABLE]
In particular, .
Proof.
By Theorem 3.5 there is such that . By the Birkhoff-Khinchin ergodic theorem there exists a subset , such that for every the sum converges to . This gives the first part of assertion.
For the second part note that for every , the sequence is (sub-)additive, and therefore the limit of exists. Moreover, we clearly have . This together with the first part of the assertion gives the desired equality. ∎
4. Variational principles for cocycles and Lyapunov exponents
Here we introduce the spectral exponent of an operator-valued function and prove variational principles that express this exponent either in terms of a linear extension or in terms of measure Lyapunov exponents. These results will serve as fundamental instruments in the proofs of all the variational principles for spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms discussed further in Section 5.
4.1. Cocycles, Lyapunov exponents and linear extensions
Let us fix a partial dynamical system and a Banach space . Let us also fix an operator valued function which is bounded in the sense that .
Definition 4.1**.**
We associate to the triple two functions given by the formulae
[TABLE]
where , . We call and cocycles of with respect to . We refer to as a forward cocycle and to as a backward cocycle.
We are interested in ergodic properties of these cocycles and the arising variational principles for them. If is a homeomorphism we have
[TABLE]
so we can study properties of the forward cocycle by looking at the backward cocycle, and vice versa. In general, in the irreversible case, we can relate the forward and backward cocycles by passing to adjoints. Namely, let be the space dual to and define the adjoints of , by taking pointwise adjoints: and . Similarly, define . Then we have
[TABLE]
Both and have their advantages. Ergodic properties of seem easier to calculate, while is more relevant for calculation of spectral radius:
Definition 4.2**.**
Since the sequence is subadditive (i.e. ), we have the following equality
[TABLE]
We call its common value the spectral exponent of with respect to .
Remark 4.3**.**
Let be Banach algebra, and let be a contractive endomorphism that generates a partial dynamical system . For every we define the function by the formula
[TABLE]
It follows from Corollary 2.19 that
[TABLE]
In particular, if the field of endomorphisms generated by is trivial, i.e , , then and therefore
[TABLE]
This motivates Definition 4.2. In addition it also indicates why in the case when the field is non-trivial, deriving formulas for is much harder and requires extra work and this will be our aim.
Let be the unit ball in the dual space equipped with ∗-weak topology. In order to deal with the potential discontinuity of , cf. Example 1.13 and Remark 1.15, we will consider a quotient of by the following equivalence relation:
[TABLE]
Note that if and only if as functions. We will write for the equivalence class of . Thus . In what follows we denote by the factor space .
Lemma 4.4**.**
The space is compact and Hausdorff.
Proof.
is compact as a continuous image of the compact space . Now, take any , with . Then there is such that . We may assume that . Take and put
[TABLE]
Then and are open neighbourhoods of and in . Moreover, if we assume that , then there are , such that . This implies
[TABLE]
a contradiction. Hence and are disjoint, and is Hausdorff. ∎
By Lemma 4.4 the space equipped with the product topology is a compact Hausdorff space. Construction described in the next definition plays the principal role in variational principles under study.
Definition 4.5**.**
We say that a triple admits a continuous linear extension if the set
[TABLE]
is open in , and the maps and given by
[TABLE]
are continuous.
Clearly, admits a continuous extension whenever is continuous, that is when . However, it may occur that admits a continuous extension even when is not measurable: for instance, take in Example 1.13.
Theorem 4.6** (Variational principle using linear extension).**
Let be a partial dynamical system and let a bounded function such that admits the continuous linear extension (this holds, e.g., when ). Then
[TABLE]
where is the essential domain of . We assume here that and if (this is the case when and all the more when ).
Proof.
Let be the domain of . Simple calculation gives that
[TABLE]
whenever and otherwise. Moreover, by (14) we have . Thus we get
[TABLE]
where is the empirical average corresponding to and , see (13). Thus the assertion follows from Theorem 3.5.
∎
Remark 4.7**.**
Note that where is the unit sphere in , and thus is the projective space of . Lemma 3.3 implies that
[TABLE]
In particular, in Theorem 4.6 one could replace with . Moreover, the projection onto the first coordinate induces a natural projection of measures: for each Borel measure on , is a Borel measure on where , By definitions of and it follows that
[TABLE]
Moreover, if the weight has some zeros we may replace with
[TABLE]
which is an open subset of . Denoting by the essential domain of , we get and Sometimes the system might be much smaller than , cf. Proposition 6.1 below.
Corollary 4.8**.**
Retain the notation and assumptions of Theorem 4.6. There is and a subset , , such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
In the last step in the proof of Theorem 4.6 instead of Theorem 3.5 apply Corollary 3.6. and use that , cf. (16). ∎
We will define Lyapunov exponents with respect to a partial dynamical system as the corresponding objects with respect to the (full) dynamical system .
Definition 4.9**.**
Let be a function. Lyapunov exponent of at a point in direction is given by the formula
[TABLE]
The maximal Lyapunov exponent of at is
[TABLE]
We also put .
For any function , for which the corresponding Lyapunov exponents exist, we clearly have
[TABLE]
Note that the left most expression involves the least number of conditions, and hence is the easiest to calculate. The chief importance of backward cocycles associated with operator valued functions lies in that for such cocycles the three above expressions are equal. Moreover, exploiting the ergodic properties of the considered systems we may substantially decrease the domains of the suprema:
Theorem 4.10** (Variational principle using Lyapunov exponents I).**
Let be a partial dynamical system and let a bounded function such that admits the continuous linear extension (this holds, e.g., when ). Let be any set such that for every . Then
[TABLE]
where is the unit sphere in . The set above can be replaced by the essential domain of .
Proof.
By (14) and the definition of for any we have
[TABLE]
Thus it suffices to find with . To this end, take and as in Corollary 4.8. That is, we have and for every . Using the projection , we get , cf. Remark 4.7. Since we have . For every there is such that and therefore . ∎
Remark 4.11**.**
In the above assertion one can take to be the set of non-wandering points for the partial map or even better the corresponding set for the restricted partial map .
We may rephrase the above theorem in more appealing (but slightly weaker) form, using measure exponents:
Lemma 4.12**.**
Let be such that is bounded and measurable, for every . For any there exists a number such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
The sequence of functions is subadditive in the sense that . Thus the assertion follows from Kingman’s subadditive theorem, see for instance [Rue82, Theorem A.1]. ∎
Definition 4.13**.**
We call the number defined in Lemma 4.12 the (maximal) measure exponent of with respect to the ergodic (partial) system .
Corollary 4.14** (Variational principle using Lyapunov exponents II).**
Let be a partial dynamical system and let a bounded function such that admits the continuous linear extension (this holds, e.g., when ). Then
[TABLE]
That is, the spectral exponent is the maximum of measure exponents. The set above can be replaced by the essential domain of .
Proof.
It follows from Theorem 4.10 along with Lemma 4.12. ∎
Remark 4.15**.**
The above variational principles are closely related with Multiplicative Ergodic Theorems (MET). The first MET was established by Oseledets [Ose68] and various generalizations keep appearing until the present times, see [GTQ15] and references therein. All MET’s apply to backwards cocycles and require some compacntess assumptions. In particular, if one wants to combine them with the formula for the spectral exponent one needs to pass to duals. For our purposes versions of MET’s in [Thi87] and [GTQ15] seem the most relevant. They imply that if is asymptotically compact, and either is separable ([GTQ15, Theorem 14]) or is continuous and is a complete metric space ([Thi87, Theorem 2.3]), then for every we have Oseledets filtrations of for the cocycle . That is, for every there exists a decrising sequence of numbers , where , such that for -almost every there is a measurable filtration of closed subspaces, satisfying , the codimension of is finite and does not depend on , for every , and
[TABLE]
In particular, realizes as a Lyapunov exponent in the direction for every and -almost every . We stress that by Theorem 4.10 the spectral exponent always realizes as a Lyapunov exponent for some direction and some measure , without any compactness assumption on !
5. Spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms of
In this section, we use VPs obtained in the previous section, to give formulae for the spectral radii , , under the following assumptions:
- •
where is a unial Banach algebra;
- •
is contractive and . Then by Proposition 1.3, generates a partial dynamical system , see Definition 1.4.
As we have seen in Proposition 2.18, the spectral radius of an abstract weighted shift operator coincides with the spectral radius of the associated weighted endomorphism . In particular, the situation where is a vector-valued function space, is a composition operator, and consists of operators of multiplication by operator-valued functions in , where . But the developed formulae can also be applied when is not a priori a composition operator.
We start with two extremal cases, when is trivial or is trivial. Then we get, respectively: the formula for where is a commutative uniform algebra (subsection 5.1), and a ’Dynamical Variational Principle’ and an intriguing version of Gelfand’s formula for the spectral radius of an arbitrary operator (subsection 5.2).
In subsection 5.3 we consider the case where and the associated field of endomorphisms consists of inner endomorphism of . Finally, in subsection 5.4 we derive formulas for spectral radius where is arbitrary. We achieve this by reducing the general case to the special one treated in subsection 5.3.
5.1. Variational principle for commutative algebra of weights
Here we assume that is a uniform algebra, sometimes also called function algebra [Żel68, 30.1]. Thus is a commutative Banacha algebra such that for every . Equivalently, this means that the Gelfand transform on is an isometry, and we may view as a closed subalgebra of . The following variational principle generalizes and unifies the corresponding results in [Kit79], [Leb79], [AL94, 4], [Ant96, 5], [Kwa09]. We could deduce it either from one of Theorems 4.6, 4.10 or from the formula for spectral radius of a weighted unital endomorphism on [Ant96, 5]. We give a short proof based on Theorem 3.5:
Theorem 5.1**.**
Let be an endomorphism of a uniform algebra . Let be the partial dynamical system dual to , see Definition 1.2. Then for any the spectral radius of the weighted endomorphism is given by
[TABLE]
where , and if . For a fixed , the set above can be replaced by the essential domain of .
Proof.
We have by Proposition 2.18. Using this and that the Gelfand transform is isometric on we get
[TABLE]
Thus the assertion follows from Theorem 3.5. ∎
Remark 5.2**.**
Formula (18) can be improved in the following sense, cf. [Kit79]. A closed subset is called a maximizing set for algebra if for every . There exists a uniquely defined minimal maximizing set for which is called Shilov boundary and is denoted by . If a map preserves , which is always the case when is an epimorphism (one can apply [Żel68, Theorem 15.3]), then for every , preserves where is the essential domain for and
[TABLE]
Example 5.3** (Classical weighted shift operators).**
In this example we show the relation between the above considered variational principle (Theorem 5.1), Banach limits and the known formula for the spectral radius of the classical weighted shift operator. Also variational principle (Theorem 3.5) arises herewith naturally. Namely, let be the classical weighted shift operator with a weight acting in one of the spaces , , or , cf. Example 2.16. In this case, the spectrum of is the Stone-Čech compactification of , and generates on the map such that for . In particular, the set is the corona and every -invariant measure is contained in . In other words, the functional \phi_{\mu}\in\big{(}C(\beta(\mathbb{N})\big{)}^{*} corresponding to a measure satisfies conditions
[TABLE]
Hence it is a Banach limit on . Moreover, each Banach limit is of this form. Therefore, denoting by BL the set of all Banach limits, the variational principle in Theorem 5.1, formula (18), in this case assumes the form:
[TABLE]
where is treated as the integral with respect to the corresponding measure, when does not belong to . This formula is the most effective for the so-called almost convergent sequences, that is elements for which the value does not depend on the choice of a Banach limit . As examples of sequences of this sort one can take convergent sequences, periodic sequences and their sums. In general, as shown by G. G. Lorentz [Lor48], a sequence is almost convergent iff the sequence of means is convergent in to a constant sequence and in this case the value of this constant is equal to the Banach limit for each Banach limit of . This statement readily follows from the formula
[TABLE]
which in turn follows from our variational principle (Theorem 3.5). Thus our results recover Lorentz’s theorem. Combining the above expression with (19) we get
[TABLE]
which is the standard formula (see [Hal82, Problem 77]). Formula (19) seem more abstract but also more efficient. For instance, if is such that the sequence is almost convergent, then in (19) it is enough to apply any Banach limit, for example, taking Cesàro mean one obtains
5.2. Dynamical variational principle for an arbitrary operator
Let be an arbitrary operator acting on an arbitrary Banach space . Let be the projective space associated to the dual space , cf. Remark 4.7. Consider the partial mapping given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 5.4**.**
Let be a Banach space. Then for every
[TABLE]
where is given by (20), and if .
Proof.
Note that where is a singleton and is the identity map on , cf. Remark 4.3. Hence the assertion follows from Theorem 4.6 and Remark 4.7. ∎
Obviously, one should not expect that the formula (21) simplifies calculation of the spectral radius of . Nevertheless, it allows intriguing dynamical interpretations and has interesting consequences:
Example 5.5**.**
Let us consider an invertible operator acting on a two-dimensional complex space. So that we may identify it with a matrix \mathbb{A}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}a&b\\ c&d\end{array}\right). The corresponding projective space can be identified with the Riemann sphere , and then becomes the Möbius transformation and (21) assumes the form
[TABLE]
where , for , and . One may verify that either has exactly one attracting point , or it has at least two neutral fixed points. In the first case is the unique ergodic measure for which the above maximum is attained, and so . In the second case the maximum is attained in for every neutral fixed point and so for any such point. In both cases Möbius transformation has topological entropy zero. Thus the spectral exponent is equal to the topological pressure of with potential .
We obtained Theorem 5.4 as a special case of Theorem 4.6. Applying in the same manner Corollary 4.14 one gets nothing but . However, applying formula (17) in Theorem 4.10 gives an interesting improvement of the Gelfand’s formula:
Corollary 5.6** (refined Gelfand’s formula).**
For every operator on a Banach space we have
[TABLE]
where is the unit sphere in the dual space . Thus if is a reflexive space, the spectral exponent is always the Lyapunov exponent in some direction :
[TABLE]
Proof.
The first part follows from Theorem 4.10 applied to the case and . This implies that , for some . And if is reflexive we may assume identifications and . ∎
5.3. Variational principles in the case
In this subsection we make the following standing assumptions
- •
where is a Banach space;
- •
is an endomorphism such that the corresponding field of (non-zero) endomorphisms of consists of inner isometric monomorphisms.
Then by Propositions 1.11, 1.7 we have
[TABLE]
where is a continuous partial map and are such that and is an isometry, for every . In this situation we may extend Remark 4.3 and express the spectral radius of by a spectral exponent of a forward cocycle associated with :
Proposition 5.7**.**
With the above assumptions, for every we have
[TABLE]
where denotes the function , and is the associated forward cocycle.
Proof.
We introduce the following notation: for any sequence of points and any field of operators we put Thus for every , and we have
[TABLE]
Note that for implies for . Thus putting for , cf. Remark 4.3, for every we get
[TABLE]
As , are contractions it follows that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we have
[TABLE]
Combining the above inequalities we get
[TABLE]
However, by Corollary 4.3. Thus inequalities (23) give . ∎
In general the map may be far from being continuous, cf. Example 1.13 and Remark 1.15. Nevertheless, as we show now, the triple admits the continuous linear extension in the sense of Definition 4.5. To this end recall that is the unit ball in the dual space equipped with ∗-weak topology, and is the factor space where is the equivalence class of .
Lemma 5.8**.**
For every and , the map is continuous.
Proof.
The topology in is generated by sets
[TABLE]
where , and .
Let us take any and suppose that for some . That is, there is such that
[TABLE]
Let be arbitrary. Let be an open neighbourhood of such that . By Lemma 1.14(2) we may find an open neighbourhood of contained in and numbers such that . Then for every we have
[TABLE]
Clearly, we may assume that . Then we put
[TABLE]
If this already gives . If , then putting
[TABLE]
we also get . Thus for every we get . This gives the assertion. ∎
Lemma 5.9**.**
For every and , the map is continuous.
Proof.
Recall that is an isometry from onto and is a norm one projection. Hence
[TABLE]
Thus the assertion follows from the continuity of . ∎
Theorem 5.10**.**
Let where is a Banach space and suppose that is an endomorphism of such that the generated field of endomorphisms consists of isometric inner endomorphism of . Then there is a dual partial dynamical system and a family of isometries satisfying for . For any the map admits the linear extension in the sense of Definition 4.5. In particular, fixing and defining
- (1)
* where is a projective space of the dual Banach space ,* 2. (2)
* and*
[TABLE]
we get
[TABLE]
where is the essential domain of .
Proof.
Let us fix and define the triple as in the assertion, but with defined as where is the unit ball in the dual space . By Lemma 5.8, the set is open in . In view of Lemmas 5.8 and 5.9 the maps and are continuous. Hence is the continuous linear extension of . By Proposition 5.7, where , . Thus applying Theorem 4.6 gives . In view of Remark 4.7, essential domains for the systems and are the same. This gives the assertion. ∎
Now we are ready to describe relationships between Lyapunov exponents and spectral radius of weighted endomorphisms of . The forthcoming result generalizes variational principle of Latushkin and Stepin [LS91], [LS91’], established in the case where is a Hilbert space, takes values in compact operators, is a homeomorphism and .
Theorem 5.11**.**
Let where is a Banach space and suppose that is an endomorphism of such that the generated field of endomorphisms consists of isometric inner endomorphism of . For every we have
[TABLE]
where is the partial dynamical system dual to , and for , where a family of isometries such that for . Moreover, for any set such that for every , we have
[TABLE]
where is the unit sphere in , and . For a fixed , the set above can be replaced by the essential domain of .
Proof.
By Lemmas 5.8 and 5.9, admits a continuous linear extension. Hence we get the assertion by Theorem 4.10 and Corollary 4.14. ∎
Corollary 5.12**.**
Retain the notation and assumptions of Theorem 5.11. In particular, let be such that for every . Then
[TABLE]
where , cf. Remark 4.3.
Proof.
The first equality follows from Theorem 5.11 and the second from (23). ∎
Remark 5.13**.**
If is finite dimensional, then every endomorphism is of the form (22), by Corollary 1.12. Thus assumptions of Theorems 5.10, 5.11 are satisfied whenever the induced endomorphisms are isometric (they are necessarily automorphisms). In particular, if is a finite dimensional Hilbert space, then every -endomorphism satisfies the assumptions of Theorems 5.10, 5.11. Moreover, in the Hilbert space case we have and thus the above results can be phrased without passing to dual spaces.
5.4. Variational principle in the case
In this final subsection we consider the case when and are arbitrary endomorphisms of . We show that by an adequate choice of a cocycle with values in we may reduce the general problem to the situation already treated in previous sections.
To this end, let be a contractive endomorphism of that generates a partial dynamical system . Thus is given by formula (8) where is a continuous field of endomorphisms of . We also assume that is a unital Banach algebra (the unit has norm one). This allows us to treat as a subalgebra of . Namely, we have an isometric homomorphism where , for . We may extend this embedding to an isometric homomorphism where , for . Moreover, each , , is contractive and in particular . In fact, we may treat as an element where
[TABLE]
We denote by an endomorphism associated with :
[TABLE]
Since is clopen for any the map , which we denote by , can be treated as an element of . Formally, .
Proposition 5.14**.**
With the above notation for every we have
[TABLE]
That is, the spectral radii of weighted endomorphisms and do coincide, and their logarithms are equal to the spectral exponent of the function with respect to .
Proof.
We have by Remark 4.3. By Corollary 2.19, where we treat as a weighted endomorphism of . By the same corollary we have r(\overline{\alpha}T_{\varphi}(\overline{a})T_{\varphi})=\lim_{n\to\infty}\|\overline{\alpha}T_{\varphi}(\overline{a})\cdot{\dots}\cdot T_{\varphi}^{n-1}\Big{(}\overline{\alpha}T_{\varphi}(\overline{a})\Big{)}\|^{1/n}. Thus it suffices to show that, for every ,
[TABLE]
To this end, we note that for each the operator acts according to the formula [\alpha_{x}\overline{a(\varphi(x))}]d=\alpha_{x}\big{(}a(\varphi(x))d\big{)} for . Having this in mind we obtain
[TABLE]
∎
The theory developed in previous sections give formulas for , which in view of Proposition 5.14 are also formulas for . For the sake of completeness we state them explicitly:
Theorem 5.15**.**
Let be a contractive endomorphism of generating a partial dynamical system and let . Let be any set such that for every . Then
[TABLE]
where denotes the function , denotes the function and is the unit sphere in .
Proof.
In view of Proposition 5.14, the assertion follows from Theorem 5.11 applied to a weighted endomorphism with a weight equal to and trivial field of endomorphisms of . Alternatively, one can apply Corollary 4.14, Theorem 4.10 and Remark 4.7. ∎
Remark 5.16**.**
Variational principles obtained in Theorem 5.15 exploit the operator algebra and the dual space of a Banach algebra . As a rule these spaces are rather bulky. For example, if for some Banach space then and which are huge in comparison to and , respectively. Thus Theorems 5.10, 5.11 are much more efficient, but we can apply them only under the assumption that the associated field consists of isometric inner endomorphisms of .
6. Concluding remarks and potential applications
The variational principles established in this paper have a flavor of Dinaburg-Goodman variational principle linking the topological entropy with measure theoretical entropies, and more generally Ruelle-Walters variational principle (2) expressing the topological pressure is terms of free energy. These celebrated results have a deep theoretical meaning. We have expressed spectral radii of a wide class of operators in terms of measure Lyapunov exponents for ergodic measures for a given topological dynamical system. Thus our formulas establish strong explicit link between theory of operators and dynamical systems. They are far reaching generalizations, and in the noncommutative case improvements, of a number of previous results of this type, see [Kit79], [Leb79], [LS91], [LS91’], [AL94], [CL99]. One of the immediate interesting consequences is the improved Gelfand’s formula which states that the spectral exponent of every operator is a Lyapunov exponent in some direction (Corollary 5.6). We believe that the results of the present paper can be used to prove a very general continuous Multiplicative Ergodic Theorem for arbitrary (not necessarily quasi-compact) cocycles taking values in operators on a reflexive Banach space, cf. Remark 4.15.
Calculation of ergodic measures is one of the most important problems in ergodic theory. As a rule, for a non-trivial irreversible dynamical system , invariant measures form a Poulsen symplex, which means that the set of ergodic measures is large. Therefore in general one can not expect our formulas to give immediate and explicit answers. Nevertheless, the presented theory gives a clear procedure how to approach the problem and significantly simplifies general calculations (one of the main improvements is the change from to , cf. Corollary 3.6) We illustrate this on some examples. We start with operators associated to weighted endomorphisms which are not far from being compact. Symptomatically, it seems that the only ‘explicit’ results about spectra of weighted composition operators on concern the compact case, see [JR88], [Kam81]. We generalize formulas for spectral radii appearing there:
Proposition 6.1**.**
Suppose that , , are abstract weighted shift operators such that the associated endomorphism consists of isometric inner endomorphisms. So that is of the form (22) for a partial map and a field of isometries . Suppose also that is such that
- (1)
** 2. (2)
* is compact for every in the essential domain for *
(these are necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for to be compact, cf. [JR88]). Then putting , , we have
[TABLE]
The norm of each of the operators , in the above formula, realizes on an eigenvector.
Proof.
By [JR88, Lemma] condition (1) holds if and only if every connected component of is contained in an open set such that is constant. This readily implies that the set of non-wandering points for consists only of periodic points. Thus every ergodic measure is supported on a periodic orbit. That is, . Hence by Theorem 5.11 we get
[TABLE]
Using the submultiplicativity of operator norm, for every and with we get . By (2) this inequality is in fact an equality. Indeed, since is compact, there is a norm one eigenvector for such that
[TABLE]
This reduces the above formula for to the one stated in the assertion. ∎
The above proposition and the following example indicate that when the dynamics of is not complicated or not far from being reversible, then there is a chance for more explicit formulas for the spectral radius.
Example 6.2**.**
Let us consider generalisations of compression of unitaries studied in [Kwa12]. Namely, we put , where , is a Banach space and is equipped with the Lebesgue measure. We fix a continuous monotonically increasing function satisfying the condition , , and use it to define an operator by the formula
[TABLE]
exists almost everywhere because is monotone and we put when . Note that is not invertible, unless . It is adjoint, in the sense of Definition 2.2, to an isometry given by , for and for . We let to be the algebra of operators of multiplication by periodic functions in with period . Then and one readily sees that , , are abstract weighted shifts associated with the authomorphism given by composition with the homeomorphism where , . We recall that the rotation number for is defined as the fractional part
[TABLE]
where does not depend on , and the number depends only on . We have the following cases, see for instance [BS03, Section 7]:
- (1)
If , where is an irreducible fraction, then and therefore . In particular, if we form a set by choosing a single point from every periodic orbit then And if attains values in compact operators, then similarly as in the proof of Proposition 6.1 we get
[TABLE] 2. (2)
If is irrational, then is uniquely ergodic, that is , and either in which case is equivalent to the Lebesgue measure on , or is homeomorphic to a Cantor set and then is equivalent to the singular measure with Cantor distribution. In the first case with we have for almost any . Thus we may choose a point randomly and with probability one we get
[TABLE]
In the second case, one needs to first detect the Cantor set and then check the above limits in points of . Fortunately, by Denjoy theorem [BS03, Theorem 7.2.1] this singular second case can not occur if (or equivalently ) is of -class (in fact it suffices that is continuous and of bounded variation).
Non-trivial complicated irreversible dynamics come from expanding maps. If for a given the restricted map is expanding, then so is the map extended in the linear extension. Then the dynamics and ergodic measures for both of the systems and can be analyzed using symbolic dynamics - fixing Markov partitions we may reduce the analysis to topological Markov chains, cf. [Bow74], [Rue78], [Rue89]. The topological Markov chain with the set of states and transition matrix , , is the map where and The elements of are in one-to-one correspondence with collections of nonnegative numbers such that ,
[TABLE]
and only if is a path in the directed graph given by , cf., for instance, [Wal82]. Using this, and perhaps employing computer calculations, one can obtain good lower bounds for the corresponding spectral radius, but the thorough discussion of these issues is beyond the scope of the present paper. In the simplest situation, when , , and depends only on first coordinates: for all , then
[TABLE]
where is a finite set and the maximum is taken over all positive numbers such that .
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[Ant 96] A. B. Antonevich, Linear Functional Equations. Operator Approach , Birkhauser Verlag, Operator Theory Advances and Applications, V. 83, 1996.
- 2[ABL 11] A.B. Antonevich, V.I. Bakhtin, A.V. Lebedev, On t-entropy and variational principle for the spectral radii of transfer and weighted shift operators , Ergod. Th. & \& Dynam. Sys., 31 (2011), 995–1042.
- 3[ABL 12] A.B. Antonevich, V.I. Bakhtin, A.V. Lebedev, A road to the spectral radius , Contemporary Mathematics, 567 (2012), 17–51.
- 4[AL 94] A. Antonevich, A. Lebedev, Functional differential equations: I. C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} -theory , Longman Scientific & Technical, Pitman Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics 70, 1994.
- 5[Bow 74] R. Bowen, Equilibrium states and the ergodic theory of Anosov diffeomorphisms, Lect. Math. 470 Spring 1974 and second revised edition 2008
- 6[BJP 96] O. Bratteli, P. E. T. Jorgensen, G. Price, Endomorphisms of L ( H ) 𝐿 𝐻 L(H) , Proc. of Symposia in Pure Math., V. 59 (1996), 93–138.
- 7[BS 03] M. Brin, G. Stuck, Introduction to Dynamical Systems , Cambridge University Press, 2003.
- 8[CL 99] C. Chicone, Yu. Latushkin, Evolution Semigroups in Dynamical Systems and Differential Equations , Math. Surv. Monogr. 70 AMS, Providence, RI, 1999.
