J-fusion frame operator for Krein spaces
Shibashis Karmakar

TL;DR
This paper characterizes $J$-fusion frames in Krein spaces, provides bounds approximation, and explores conditions for operators preserving $J$-fusion frame structure, advancing the understanding of frame theory in indefinite inner product spaces.
Contribution
It establishes necessary and sufficient conditions for $J$-fusion frames, approximates frame bounds, and characterizes operators that preserve $J$-fusion frames in Krein spaces.
Findings
Characterization of $J$-fusion frames in Krein spaces.
Approximation of $J$-fusion frame bounds.
Conditions for operators preserving $J$-fusion frames.
Abstract
In this article we find a necessary and sufficient condition under which a given collection of subspace is a -fusion frame for a Krein space . We also approximate -fusion frame bounds of a -fusion frame by the upper and lower bounds of the synthesis operator. Then, we obtain the -fusion frame bounds of the cannonical -dual fusion frame. Finally, we address the problem of characterizing those bounded linear operators in for which the image of -fusion frame is also a -fusion frame.
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
TopicsDermatological and Skeletal Disorders · Cell Adhesion Molecules Research · Organometallic Compounds Synthesis and Characterization
-fusion frame operator for Krein spaces
Shibashis Karmakar1*∗*
1Department of Mathematics, South Malda College,
Pubarun, Malda, West Bengal 732215, India.
(Date: Received: xxxxxx; Revised: yyyyyy; Accepted: zzzzzz.
*∗*Corresponding author)
Abstract.
In this article we find a necessary and sufficient condition under which a given collection of subspace is a -fusion frame for a Krein space . We also approximate -fusion frame bounds of a -fusion frame by the upper and lower bounds of the synthesis operator. Then, we obtain the -fusion frame bounds of the cannonical -dual fusion frame. Finally, we address the problem of characterizing those bounded linear operators in for which the image of -fusion frame is also a -fusion frame.
Key words and phrases:
Krein Space, -fusion frame, Gramian operator, uniformly -definite subspace, -projection.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 46C20; Secondary 46C05, 47B50.
1. Introduction
The study of frames for Krein spaces was originally initiated by Giribet et al. [9] in 2012. However, apart from the work by Giribet et al. recently, in 2015 an independent work in this direction by Esmeral et al. [7] had been reported. The idea to extend the notion of frame theory from definite inner product spaces to indefinite inner product spaces is certainly an interesting research area which is vastly under-developed. Krein spaces has rich applications in modern mathematics [4, 1]. Therefore, study of frame theory for Krein spaces is useful for solving problems in Krein spaces. In [13] Karmakar et al. pointed a flaw in the definition of [7] by providing an example to establish the claim. To study frame theory for Krein spaces we will use the definition of Giribet et al. [9] as the basic definition since this definition is motivated purely from the geometric intuition.
Fusion frame in Hilbert spaces has many important and fascinating applications such as distributed processing in sensor networks, Filter Bank theory, communications in packet based system etc. [5, 3], Motivated by the fact we studied -fusion frames in [14].
This article is organized as follows. At first we give a very brief overview of the basic notations and terminologies and then in the main results we introduce some operators corresponding to -fusion frames. In the next subsection we prove that if is a -fusion frame for a Krein space , then is also a -fusion frame for , which is followed by a subsection consists of an example to point out an error in [14] and here we introduce -fusion frame equations and also two theorems containing a necessary and sufficient condition under which a fusion frame for is a -fusion frame for the Krein space . In the succeeding subsection we approximate -fusion frame bounds of a -fusion frame by the upper and lower bounds of the fusion frame operator. -frame operator and -fusion frame operator discussed in the subsequent subsection and also in this section we calculate the -fusion frame bounds of the cannonical -dual fusion frame. In the last subsection we address the problem of characterizing those bounded linear operators in for which the image of -fusion frame is again a -fusion frame by providing another necessary and sufficient condition.
In the following paragraphs we briefly recapitulate the basic notations and terminologies.
1.1. Backgrounds and terminologies
Here we introduce some notations very briefly. For a more detailed version of the definitions and notations we refer [12]. Let be a closed subspace of a Krein space and be an orthogonal projection from onto . So, we have and . Here the range of the projection, and Null space of , . Now if is a projectively complete subspace of then the -orthogonal projection from onto exists. Let be the -orthogonal projection from onto . Here range of the -projection , and Null space, .
Let be the -adjoint of . Then we have and since , thus we have .
Let be a subspace of a Krein space . Also, let us assume that denotes the set of all -positive subspaces of while denotes the set of all -non-negative subspaces of . Similarly, let and respectively denote the set of all -negative and -non-positive subspaces of . Also let be the set of all neutral subspaces of . Then, . Throughout in our work we consider either or . Without any loss of generality, we assume to establish our results.
Let be a collection of subspaces of the Krein space such that . We consider the space \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}. If f\in\big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)} then , where for each . Let and . We define , where f,g\in\big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}. If the series is unconditionally convergent then defines an inner product on \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}. Now consider the space \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}_{\ell_{2}}=\Big{\{}f:\big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}:\sum_{i\in{I}}\|f_{i}\|_{J}^{2}<\infty\Big{\}}. We will use this space frequently in our work.
The definition of -fusion frame is already given in [14] but we have observed that the Theorem 2.4 in [14] is not always true. So, in this article we deduce -fusion frame equations (correcting from our earlier results) for Krein spaces to obtain more important results. For the sake of completeness of this article the definition of -fusion frame is given below.
Let be a Bessel family of closed subspaces of a Krein space with synthesis operator T_{W,v}\in{L\Big{(}\big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}_{\ell_{2}},\mathbb{K}\Big{)}} such that . Let and . Now consider the orthogonal decomposition of \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}_{\ell_{2}} given by
[TABLE]
and denote by the orthogonal projection onto . Also, let . If , notice that and .
Definition 1.1**.**
The Bessel family of closed subspaces is a -fusion frame for if is a maximal uniformly -positive subspace of and is a maximal uniformly -negative subspace of .
Let be a -fusion frame for then \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}},[\cdot,\cdot]\big{)} is a Krein space. The fundamental symmetry, denoted by , is defined as for all . Also .
2. Main results
2.1. Operators corresponding -fusion frame
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space . Then is a collection of uniformly -positive subspaces of and is a collection of uniformly -negative subspaces of . Let be the -adjoint operator of the synthesis operator which is called the analysis operator of the -fusion frame . Now, and .
We know that for all . Similarly as above we have for all . So, for all . Here if and if .
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space . Then is also a -fusion frame for .
Proof.
Let and . Then for all and for all . Then we have for all and for all . Since be a -fusion frame for , so and . From these it readily follows that and .
Let be the synthesis operator for the -frame then . So is the synthesis operator for the collection . So . Now the subspaces is closed for all and are maximal uniformly -positive (-negative) subspaces of respectively. So from the definition 1.1 we can say that is a -fusion frame for . ∎
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space . Then and . The linear operator defined by , is said to be the -fusion frame operator for the -fusion frame . Here if and if . From the above it readily follows that . Also is the sum of two -positive operators. Let is defined by . Then . So, is a -positive operator and also . Similarly, let . Then is also a -positive operator. We have . If is a -fusion frame for the Krein space with synthesis operator T_{W,v}\in{L\Big{(}\big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}_{\ell_{2}},\mathbb{K}\Big{)}} then the -fusion frame operator is bijective and -selfadjoint.
Given a closed subspace of , the Gramian operator is defined as . If is -non-negative then the Gramian operator is -selfadjoint, bounded and positive.
2.2. -fusion frame equation
In [14] Karmakar et al. assumed that , but it is wrong as we can see from the following example.
Example 2.2**.**
Let
[TABLE]
in and let , where . Then is uniformly -positive and so is its subspace , where . Now let and . Then and , for . Hence for we get,
[TABLE]
. So, .
Now, according to the definition of -fusion frame the collection must be a fusion frame for .
Let us consider the operator , for . For the purpose of our work let us assume that is a subspace of , where is uniformly -positive, hence is projectively complete. Hence and also . It is easy to see that and . Also, we have i.e. is -selfadjoint.
With respect to the above observations we have the following result.
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space . Then is a fusion frame for i.e.
[TABLE]
where are constants.
Proof.
Since be a -fusion frame for the Krein space , so is maximal uniformly -positive (-negative) subspaces of , hence closed. So, are surjection from \big{(}\sum_{i\in{I}}\oplus{W_{i}}\big{)}_{\ell_{2}} onto the Hilbert spaces . Therefore, are fusion frames for . So . Similarly . Hence we have the above inequality. ∎
The main result of this section is the converse problem which we will prove in the following theorem.
Theorem 2.4**.**
Let be a frame for . If and then is a -frame if and there exist constants such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be non-degenerated subspace of and there exist constants such that
[TABLE]
then, by Theorem 3.15 of [14], is uniformly -positive. So, a real number such that
[TABLE]
Therefore we can say that there exist constants such that
[TABLE]
The above equation can be written as
[TABLE]
Then by Douglas theorem [6] we have . Furthermore, . So, we have . Therefore, taking the pre-image of by , we have
[TABLE]
Thus, and is a frame for . Analogously, is a frame for . Finally since is a frame for ,
[TABLE]
, which proves the maximality of . Hence, is a -frame for . ∎
Remark 2.5*.*
From lemma 2.1 we know that if is a -fusion frame for then is also a -fusion frame for . Now let , then . So,
[TABLE]
In terms of the inequality (2.1) we have
[TABLE]
So, we can say that is a -fusion frame for with the same -fusion frame bounds.
2.3. Bounds of -fusion frame
Definition 2.6**.**
Let be a -fusion frame for , then there exist constants , , and such that . These constants are the -fusion frame bounds of the -fusion frame in . If these bounds are optimal then they are called optimal -fusion frame bounds.
Definition 2.7**.**
The reduced minimum modulus of an operator is defined by
[TABLE]
It is well known that .
We want to calculate -fusion frame bounds of a -fusion frame in a Krein space. Let be a -frame of subspaces for the Krein space . Then for all we have
[TABLE]
Comparing with the inequality (2.1), we have .
Now, since , if ,
Hence,
[TABLE]
Comparing with the inequality (2.1) we have . Similarly we have and .
Here of course the -fusion frame bounds calculated above are not optimal.
The above discussion can be summerized as follows
Theorem 2.8**.**
Let be a -frame of subspaces for the Krein space with optimal -fusion frame bounds , , and . Then we have the following inequality: .
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space . Then according to our definition and . So, and are closed uniformly -positive and -negative subspaces respectively. Now, since be a Krein space, so let be the cannonical decomposition of . Let be the angular operator of with respect to . Then , and also the domain of definition of is . Similarly, let be the angular operator of with respect to . Then , and also the domain of definition of is .
2.4. -frame operator and -fusion frame operator
Let be a Krein space and be a -frame in . Then a careful investigation reveals that the family of vectors is not arbitrarily scattered in the Krein space (In a sense that for a finite dimensional Hilbert space any set of spanning set is a frame). In fact the set of all positive elements form a maximal uniformly -positive subspace and the set of all negative elements form a maximal uniformly -negative subspace . Now, if we apply the -frame operator on the -frame vectors then we know that the corresponding image set also decomposes the Krein space into two parts namely and . So, we have a nice distribution for the family of vectors .
Now, let be the optimal -frame bounds for the -frame . Let be the cannonical -dual frame for in . Therefore, the optimal frame bounds of this frame also exists. The next theorem provide us with a relation between the optimal bounds of a given -frame and the corresponding cannonical -dual frame.
Theorem 2.9**.**
Let be a -frame for the Krein space with optimal frame bounds . Then the cannonical -dual frame has optimal frame bounds .
Proof.
Let be the -frame operator for the -frame . Now, consider the operator , it is a bijective, -positive and -selfadjoint. Also, it is a frame operator for in the Hilbert space . So, . Hence, . But we know that (This follows from [9], Section ). Hence, from the definition of -frame it easily follows that and are the optimal frame bounds of the frame . Similarly, we can show that and are the optimal frame bounds of the frame . Hence, we establish the result. ∎
The following theorem is the generalization of the fundamental identity for frames in Hilbert spaces [3].
Theorem 2.10**.**
Let be a -frame for the Krein space with cannonical -dual frame . Then for all and for all we have
[TABLE]
where if and if .
Proof.
Let denotes the frame operator for . Then we have . Also since , then . From the operator theory we have . Then for every , we have
[TABLE]
Now if we choose , then the above equation reduces to
[TABLE]
Now replacing by we can have the other part of the equality. Combining we finally get
[TABLE]
∎
Theorem 2.9 can easily be generalized in the setting for -fusion frame. We only state the result in the following theorem. We note that Casazza et al. [5] calculated the cannonical fusion frame bounds for Hilbert spaces in a more general setting, however, an error was pointed out by Gavruta [8]. But in the current work we calculated the cannonical -fusion frame bounds in the following theorem different from their approaches due to the nice structure of -fusion frame for Krein spaces.
Theorem 2.11**.**
Let be a -fusion frame for the Krein space with optimal frame bounds . Then the cannonical -dual fusion frame has optimal frame bounds .
2.5. Bounded linear operators acting on -fusion frames
In this section we want to address the problem of characterizing those bounded operators , such that is a -fusion frame for , if is a -fusion frame for . Now to form -fusion frame, the subspaces must be uniformly definite. The image of a closed, uniformly definite subspace under a bounded invertible linear operator may be a neutral subspace.
We have the following example.
Example 2.12**.**
We define an inner product on the sequence space in the following way. Let be the countable orthonormal basis where for all , and also for . The fundamental symmetry is defined by , where and , if is odd, , if is even. Then the triple forms a Krein space. Consider the invertible linear operator defined by . Now if , then is a uniformly -positive definite subspace. But is a neutral subspace of .
Now we consider some restrictions on the linear operator , so that is also a -fusion frame for . Before we proceed any further we need the following notations.
The set of all neutral vectors in is called the neutral part of and will be denoted by . The symbol will stand for
[TABLE]
We denote by (respectively, ) the set consisting of the zero element together with all positive (negative) elements of and by (respectively, ) the set of all non-negative (non-positive) elements of . Thus e.g.
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Also, let (respectively, ) be the set of all uniformly -positive (-negative) subspaces for . The set of all maximal subspaces of is denoted by and the set of all regular subspaces of is denoted by . Here we would like to mention that .
We need the following definitions.
Definition 2.13**.**
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Krein space . We say that preserves definiteness if whenever , where is a subspace of . We also say that preserves definiteness with sign if the linear operator preserves definiteness and also the sign of the subspaces and remains same i.e. either , or , .
Definition 2.14**.**
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Krein space . We say that preserves maximality if whenever .
Definition 2.15**.**
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Krein space . We say that preserves regularity if if .
Theorem 2.16**.**
*Let be a bounded surjective linear operator on a Krein space . Also, let
preserves definiteness with sign.
preserves maximality.
preserves regularity.
Then is a -fusion frame for the Krein space , if be a -fusion frame for .*
Proof.
Let and . For we choose where each is a closed, definite subspace of . Since, preserves definiteness with sign, hence, is also positive definite for . Further, is also closed since the image of closed subspace is also closed as is bounded and linear. Now is a maximal uniformly -positive subspace of . Also, we have . By virtue of our assumptions, is a positive subspace of . But, since preserves maximality, hence, . Similarly, for we can show that is a maximal negative subspace of . Now, we use our regularity assumption. Since, preserves regularity, hence, and are also regular. Using the corollary 7.17 of [11] we have and are maximal uniformly -positive and -negative subspaces respectively. So, we have a decomposition of , i.e. . Now, let be the synthesis operator for the Bessel sequence of subspaces . Hence, is a surjective bounded linear operator. Then the mapping is well defined and surjective. Now, from the definition of -fusion frame, it easily follows that is also a -fusion frame for the Krein space . ∎
Remark 2.17*.*
Let the linear operator considered above is also injective. Then from [1] we know that is a scaler multiple of -isometry. Therefore, the class of operators are just -unitary operators modulo multiplication by non-zero scalers.
Remark 2.18*.*
The conditions of the above theorem are sufficient but not necessary. In fact we can get necessary conditions on which we thought worth mentioning.
From the above discussions we can formulate a necessary condition on . The proof the following theorem easily follows from the previous discussions.
Theorem 2.19**.**
Let be a -fusion frame for a Krein space and be a bounded surjective linear operator on such that is also a -fusion frame for . Then there exists a index set such that and where . Also and are maximal uniformly -definite subspaces but of course with opposite signs.
The proof of the above theorem easily follows from the discussion above. So we omit the proof.
Acknowledgments: The author gratefully acknowledge the facilities provided by South Malda College, Malda. Also the author indebted to Prof. Kallol Paul, Jadavpur University and Prof. Sk. Monowar Hossein, Aliah University for their continuous support in preparing this article.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Ando T., Linear operators on Krein spaces , Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan, (1989).
- 2[2] Ando T., Projections in Krein spaces , Linear Algebra Appl. 431 , (2009), 2346–2358.
- 3[3] Balan R., Casazza P. G., Edidin D. and Kutyniok G., A New Identity for Parseval Frames , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 135 , no. 4, (2007), 1007–1015.
- 4[4] Bognar J., Indefinite inner product spaces , Springer Berlin, 1974.
- 5[5] Casazza P. G., Kutyniok G. and Li S., Fusion Frames and Distributed Processing , Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal., 25(1) , (2008), 114–132.
- 6[6] Douglas R. G., On majorization, factorization and range inclusion of operators in Hilbert space , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 17 (1966), 413–416.
- 7[7] Esmeral K., Ferrer O. and Wagner E., Frames in Krein spaces arising from a non-regular W 𝑊 W -metric , Banach J. Math. Anal., 9 , no.1, (2015), 1–16.
- 8[8] Gavruta P., On the duality of fusion frames , J. Math. Anal. Appl., 333(2) , (2007), 871–879.
