This paper extends the concept of Gromov-Hausdorff distances to dynamical systems with continuous actions, establishing stability results for expansive actions with pseudo-orbit tracing, and explores convergence in Wasserstein spaces using optimal transport.
Contribution
It introduces an adapted equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distance for continuous actions and proves stability under this topology for expansive systems with pseudo-orbit tracing.
Findings
01
Expansive actions with pseudo-orbit tracing are stable under the new topology.
02
Established convergence criteria for group actions on Wasserstein spaces.
03
Connected curvature-dimension conditions with equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff convergence.
Abstract
We study equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances for general continuous actions which are not necessarily isometric as Fukaya introduced. We prove that if an action is expansive and has pseudo-orbit tracing property then it is stable under our adapted equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff topology. Finally, using Lott and Villani's ideas of optimal transport in studying curvature-dimension conditions, we investigate equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff convergence for actions of locally compact amenable groups on Wasserstein spaces.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Gromov-Hausdorff distances for dynamical systems
Nhan-Phu Chung
Nhan-Phu Chung, Department of Mathematics, Sungkyunkwan University, 2066 Seobu-ro, Jangan-gu, Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea 16419.
We study equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances for general actions which are not necessarily isometric as Fukaya introduced. We prove that if an action is expansive and has the pseudo-orbit tracing property then it is stable under our adapted equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff topology. Finally, using Lott and Villani’s ideas of optimal transport, we investigate equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff convergence for actions of locally compact amenable groups on Wasserstein spaces.
Gromov-Hausdorff distance on spaces of metric spaces was introduced by Gromov in his pioneering work in 1981 [Gromov]. Gromov used it to prove his celebrated theorem: a finitely generated group is virtually nilpotent if and only it has polynomial growth. After that Gromov-Hausdorff distance has been extensively used to study in convergence and collapsing of Riemannian manifolds by Cheeger, Colding, Fukaya, Gromov, and Yamaguchi [CC, CFG, Fu86, Fu88, Fu90, FY]. In particular, in 1980s-1990s [Fu86, Fu88, Fu90, FY], Fukaya introduced the notion of equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff convergence for isometric actions of topological groups on Riemannian manifolds to study collapsing of Riemannian under bounded curvature and diameter, and fundamental groups of almost negatively curved manifolds. Here we would like to study distances on the space of continuous actions, which may be not isometric, a systematic study of adapted versions of equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distance would be needed.
Recently, Arbieto and Morales used techniques of [Walters78] to establish stability under Gromov-Hausdorff topology for expansive maps having pseudo-orbit tracing property [AM]. After that, combining ideas of [AM] and [ChungLee], Arbieto and Morales’ result has been extended for expansive actions of finitely generated groups with POTP in [DLM] and [KDD]. In another side, several stability results of equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff topology also have been proved for certain isometric actions [Fu88, Harvey16, Harvey17].
In this paper, we establish a result of stability under equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distance for non-isometric actions of countable groups G and H. More precisely, we prove
Theorem 1.1**.**
If an action α of a countable group G on a proper metric space (X,dX) is expansive and satisfies POTP then it is strongly GH-stable. More precisely,
(1)
if c>0 is an expansive constant of α then for every 0<ε<c there exists δ>0 such that if β is a continuous action of a topological group H on a metric space (Y,dY) with dGH,1(α,β)<δ then there exist an ε-isometry h:Y→X and a homomorphism ρ:G→H satisfying αg∘h=h∘βρ(g) for every g∈G.
2. (2)
if furthermore Y is compact then the ε-isometry h can be chosen to be continuous.
Lastly, using ideas of Lott and Villani in [LV], we establish two equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff convergence results for induced actions on Wassertein spaces (Pp(X),Wp) of continuous actions of topological groups on compact metric spaces X.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let {αn} be a sequence of continuous actions of a topological group G on compact metric spaces {(Xn,dn)} and for every p≥1, let (αn)∗ be the induced action of αn on Pp(Xn) for every n∈N. If limn→∞dmGH(αn,α)=0 for some action α of G on a compact metric space (X,d) then limn→∞dmGH((αn)∗,α∗)=0.
Theorem 1.3**.**
Let {αn} be a sequence of isometric actions of a locally compact, σ-compact amenable group G on compact metric spaces {(Xn,dn)} and for every p≥1, let (αn)∗ be the induced action of αn on Pp(Xn) for every n∈N. If dGH(αn,α)→0 as n→∞ for some action α of G on a compact metric space (X,d) then α is an isometric action and
[TABLE]
Here PpG(X) is the space of G-invariant measures on X. As a consequence, we get
Corollary 1.4**.**
Let G be a σ-compact, locally compact amenable group and let {αn} be a sequence of isometric actions of G on compact metric spaces {(Xn,dn)}. Assume that limn→∞dGH(αn,α)=0 for some action α of G on a compact metric space (X,d). If α is uniquely ergodic then limn→∞diam(PpG(Xn))=0 for every p≥1.
The paper is organized as following. In Section 2, we review Gromov-Hausdorff distance for the space of all metric spaces, and Wasserstein spaces. In Section 3, we define our adapted definitions for equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances for group actions and present their basic properties: the subsections 3.1 and 3.2 are for the cases of actions of a topological group G, and actions of topological groups G and H, respectively. We also prove in this section theorem 1.1 and illustrate examples that it can apply. Finally, in Section 4, we will explain whenever Gromov-Hausdorff approximations can be approximated by measurable ones and then prove theorems 1.2, 1.3.
Acknowledgements: Part of this paper was carried out when the author visited University of Science, Vietnam National University at Hochiminh city on July 2018. I am grateful to Dang Duc Trong for his warm hospitality. The author was partially supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grants funded by the Korea government(MSIP) (No. NRF- 2016R1A5A1008055, No. NRF-2016R1D1A1B03931922 and No. NRF-2019R1C1C1007107). We thank the anonymous referees for their useful comments which vastly improve the paper.
2. Preliminaries
First, we recall definition of Gromov-Hausdorff distance and its basic properties. For more details, the readers are referred to [BBI, Rong, Shioya]. Let (X,d) be a metric space and let ε>0. A subset S of X is called an ε-net if Bε′(S)=X, where Bε′(S):={y∈X:\mboxthereexistss∈S,d(y,s)≤ε}.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let (Z,d) be a metric space and X,Y be subsets of Z. The Hausdorff distance between X and Y, denoted by dH(X,Y), is the infimum of ε>0 such that X⊂Bε′(Y) and Y⊂Bε′(X).
Definition 2.2**.**
Let X and Y be metric spaces. The Gromov-Hausdorff (GH) distance between X and Y, denoted by dGH(X,Y), is defined as the infimum of r>0 such that there exist a metric space (Z,d) and its subspaces X′ and Y′ being isometric to X and Y respectively such that dH(X′,Y′)<r.
The GH-distance dGH is a metric on the space of all isometry classes of compact metric spaces [BBI, Theorem 7.3.30].
Definition 2.3**.**
Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces and let ε>0. An ε-isometric map between X and Y is a map f:X→Y satisfying
[TABLE]
We call a map f:X→Y is an ε-isometry if it is an ε-isometric map and Y=Bε′(f(X)). In this case the map f is also called an ε-GH approximation from X to Y.
Definition 2.4**.**
An ε-GH approximation f:X→Y has an approximation inverse f′:Y→X constructed as following. Given y∈Y, we choose x∈X such that dY(f(x),y)≤ε and we define f′(y):=x. Then f′:Y→X is a 3ε-GH approximation. From the construction of f′ it is clear that supx∈XdX(x,(f′∘f)(x))≤2ε and supy∈YdY(y,(f∘f′)(y))≤ε.
For every ε>0, if dGH(X,Y)<ε then there exists a 2ε-GH approximation from X to Y; and if there exists an ε-GH approximation f:X→Y then dGH(X,Y)<2ε [BBI, Corollary 7.3.28].
Definition 2.5**.**
Let X and Y be metric spaces. We define an alternative GH-distance between X and Y, denoted by d^GH(X,Y), as the following.
[TABLE]
if the infimum exists, and d^GH(X,Y) is ∞ if the infimum does not exist.
From [Rong, Lemma 1.3.4], we know that 32dGH≤d^GH≤2dGH.
Definition 2.6**.**
Let X and Y be metric spaces and let ε,δ>0. We say that X and Y are (ε,δ)-approximations of each other if there exist an ε-net {x1,⋯,xm} in X and an ε-net {y1,⋯,ym} in Y satisfying
[TABLE]
From the proof of [BBI, Proposition 7.4.11] we get the following lemma
Lemma 2.7**.**
Let X and Y be metric spaces. If X and Y are (ε,δ)-approximations of each other then dGH(X,Y)<2ε+δ.
Now, we review Wasserstein spaces and optimal transport. The standard references for them are [Villani03, Villani09]. Let (X,d) be a metric space. For every p≥1, we denote by Pp(X) the set of all probability Borel measures μ satisfying that there exists for some (and therefore for every) x0∈X such that ∫Xdp(x,x0)dμ(x)<∞. It is clear that if X is bounded then Pp(X) coincides with P(X), the set of all probability Borel measures of X. For every probability Borel measures μ,ν on X, we denote by ∏(μ,ν) the set of all probability Borel measures on X×X with marginals μ and ν. This means that π∈∏(μ,ν) if and only if π is a Borel probability measure satisfying
[TABLE]
for every Borel subsets A,B of X.
For every p>0, every μ,ν∈Pp(X), and π∈∏(μ,ν), we define
[TABLE]
and then define the map Wp on Pp(X)×Pp(X) by
Wp(μ,ν):=Tp1/p(μ,ν), where Tp(μ,ν):=infπ∈∏(μ,ν)Ip(π) for every μ,ν∈Pp(X). The map Wp defines a metric on Pp(X) [Villani03, Theorem 7.3]. If X is compact then Pp(X) is also compact [Villani09, Remark 6.19].
For every μ,ν∈Pp(X), we denote by Optp(μ,ν) the set of all π0∈∏(μ,ν) such that Ip(π0)=Tp(μ,ν).
If X is a Polish space endowed with a metric d, i.e. the space (X,d) is complete and separable, then Optp(μ,ν)=∅ for every μ,ν∈Pp(X) [Villani03, Theorem 1.3].
Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces and φ:X→Y be a Borel map. Then we have the induced map φ∗:P(X)→P(Y),μ↦φ∗μ, where φ∗μ(A):=μ(φ−1(A)), for every Borel subset A of Y.
The following observation would be a basic fact in optimal transport, however we have not found a reference. Therefore, we give a simple proof for completeness.
Lemma 2.8**.**
Let (X1,d1) and (X2,d2) be compact metric spaces and f,g:X1→X2 be measurable maps. Then for every p≥1, every μ∈P(X1), we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let π:=(f×g)∗μ be the Borel probability measure on X2×X2 defined by
[TABLE]
for every Borel sets A,B⊂X2. Then π∈∏(f∗μ,g∗μ) and for every non-negative measurable function ζ on X2×X2, one has
[TABLE]
Choose ζ=dX2p we get the result.
∎
3. Equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances for group actions
3.1. Equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distances for actions of a topological group G
For a topological group G and a metric space (X,d), we denote by Act(G,X) the space of all actions of G on (X,d). Before defining equivariant GH-distances, we recall the C0 distance between two maps f,g:(X,d)→(X,d) as follows
[TABLE]
Let α and β be actions of G on metric spaces (X,dX) and (Y,dY) respectively. Let S be a generating set of G and let ε>0. When referring to a map f:X→Y satisfying suitable properties related to the given actions of G, by abuse of notion we shall write f:G↷X→G↷Y. We then say that a map f:G↷X→G↷Y is an (ε,S)-GH approximation (GHA) from α to β if it is an ε-isometry satisfying that
dsup(βs∘f,f∘αs)≤ε for every s∈S. If f is furthermore Borel we say that f is an (ε,S)-measurable GHA.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let α and β be actions of G on metric spaces (X,dX) and (Y,dY) respectively. Let S be a generating set of G. The equivariant GH-distances dGH,S and dmGH,S between α and β with respect to S are defined by
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
if the above inf exist with the usual convention that inf∅=+∞.
The definition of dGH,S was introduced by Abrieto and Morales [AM] when G is the semigroup N and S={1}. After that, it has been extended for actions of a finitely generated group G with S is a finite generating set of G in [DLM] and [KDD]. Note that when S=G, the definition of dGH,S(α,β) coincides with the [Fu90, Definition 6.8].
If S=G we will write dGH(α,β) and dmGH(α,β) instead of dGH,G(α,β) and dmGH,G(α,β), respectively; and we also write ε-GHA for (ε,G)-GHA.
Remark 3.2**.**
We shall see later in Lemma 4.2 that for certain actions, given ε>0, we can replace an ε-GHA by a D(ε)-measurable GHA, where D(ε)→0 as ε→0. Therefore, in such cases, convergences in dGH,S and dmGH,S are the same.
For α∈Act(G,X) and β∈Act(G,Y), we say that α and β are isometric if there exists an isometry f:X→Y such that f∘αg=βg∘f for every g∈G.
Similar to [AM, Theorem 1] for the map case, here are basic properties of dGH,S.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let α, β and γ be actions of a topological group G on metric spaces (X,dX), (Y,dY) and (Z,dZ) respectively. Let S be a finitely generating set of G. The map dGH,S satisfies the following properties
(1)
dGH,S(α,β)≥0* and dGH,S(α,β)=dGH,S(β,α);*
2. (2)
d^GH(X,Y)≤dGH,S(α,β)* and d^GH(X,Y)=dGH,S(α0,β0), where α0 and β0 are trivial actions of G on X and Y respectively;*
3. (3)
If X=Y then dGH,S(α,β)≤dS(α,β), where dS(α,β):=sups∈S,x∈XdX(αsx,βsx);
4. (4)
If X and Y are bounded then dGH,S(α,β)<∞;
5. (5)
dGH,S(α,β)≤2(dGH,S(α,γ)+dGH,S(γ,β));**
6. (6)
If S is symmetric, i.e. S=S−1, and X,Y are compact then dGH,S(α,β)=0 if and only if α is isometric to β.
Proof.
(1), (2), (3) and (4) are clear from the definitions.
(5) If one of dGH,S(α,γ),dGH,S(γ,β) is ∞ then we are done. Now we assume that dGH,S(α,γ)<∞ and dGH,S(γ,β)<∞. This case is proved in [KDD, Theorem 4.1].
(6) Suppose that there exists an isometry f:X→Y such that f∘αg=βg∘f for every g∈G. Then f−1:Y→X is also an isometry and therefore for every ε>0f,f−1 are ε-isometries satisfying dsup(αg∘f−1,f−1∘βg)=dsup(f∘αg,βg∘f)=0 for all g∈G. Thus, dGH,S(α,β)=0.
Now suppose that dGH,S(α,β)=0. Then there exists a sequence of n1-isometries fn:X→Y and gn:Y→X such that for every n∈N,
[TABLE]
As X is separable we can find a countable dense subset A={an} of X. Since Y is compact, there exists a subsequence {fn1} of {fn} such that fn1(a1) converges to f(a1)∈Y, and we can assume that dY(fn1(a1),f(a1))<1 for every n1. Similarly for a2 and {fn1} we can get a subsequence fn2(a2) converging to f(a2)∈Y and dY(fn2(a2),f(a2))<1/2 for every n2. Repeating this process we get a subsequence of {fn} which we still denoted by {fn} such that for every i∈N, f(ai):=limn→∞fn(ai) and dY(fn(ai),f(ai))<1/i for every n. Therefore, we have the map f:A→Y defined by f(a):=limn→∞fn(a) for every a∈A , and furthermore fn→f uniformly. On the other hand, for every ai,aj∈A and n∈N, one has
[TABLE]
Hence, we get dX(ai,aj)=dY(f(ai),f(aj)) for every ai,aj∈A. Let x∈X. As A is dense in X, there exists a sequence {xn} in A such that xn converges to x. It is a Cauchy sequence and hence {f(xn)} is also a Cauchy sequence and therefore has a limit f(x):=y.
Then the extension map f:X→Y also satisfies dX(x1,x2)=dY(f(x1),f(x2)), for every x1,x2∈X. As fn is an n1-isometry for every n, we obtain that f is onto and therefore f is an isometry.
Next we will prove that βg∘f=f∘αg for every g∈G. As S is a symmetric generating set of G, it suffices to prove that βs∘f=f∘αs for every s∈S. Fix s∈S. Since fn→f uniformly on A and fn is an n1-isometry for every n∈N, one has limn→∞fn(x)=f(x) for every x∈X. Therefore from dY(βs∘fn(x),fn∘αs(x))≤n1 for every n∈N,x∈X, we get dY(βs∘f(x),f∘αs(x))=0. Hence βs∘f=f∘αs.
∎
Remark 3.4**.**
After this paper has been finished, I received the preprint [DLM] in which a similar result of Lemma 3.3 (6) also has been proved for the case G is a finitely generated group.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let G be a topological group and let S be a symmetric generating set of G. Assume that for each n we have an isometric action of G on a metric space (Xn,dXn). Assume further that there exists an action of G on a metric space (X,d) such that
dGH,S(αn,α)→0 as n→∞. Then α is an isometric action.
Proof.
From the assumptions, there exist a sequence εn→0 and εn-isometries fn:X→Xn and gn:Xn→X such that
[TABLE]
Then for every s∈S, x1,x2∈X, n∈N, one has
[TABLE]
Therefore, for every s∈S, x1,x2∈X, dX(αs(x1),αs(x2))≤dX(x1,x2). This means that for every s∈S, the map αs is contracting. As S is symmetric we obtain that for every s∈S, both αs and αs−1 are contracting and then they are isometries.
∎
Now let G be a countable group. We recall the definitions of expansive actions and the pseudo-orbit tracing property (or shadowing property).
Let α be a continuous action of G on a metric space (X,d).
Definition 3.6**.**
For a subset S of G and δ>0, a (δ,S)\mboxpseudo−orbit of α is a sequence {xg}g∈G such that d(αs(xg),xsg)<δ for every s∈S,g∈G.
Definition 3.7**.**
([Mey, Definition 2.2])
The action α has the pseudo-orbit tracing property (POTP) if for every ε>0 there exist δ>0 and a finite subset S of G such that every (δ,S) pseudo-orbit {xg}g∈G is ε-traced by some point x∈X, i.e. d(αg(x),xg)<ε for every g∈G.
POTP was introduced firstly by Rufus Bowen [Bowen75, Bowen75b] when G=Z, and has been extended for G=Zd [PT, Oprocha] and in the case G is a finitely generated group [OT]. Note that the definition of POTP in [OT] is a special case of Definition 3.7 because if G is generated by a finite set S then α∈Act(G,X) has POTP (with respect to S) in the sense of [OT] if for every ε>0 there exists δ>0 such that every (δ,S) pseudo-orbit {xg}g∈G is ε-traced by some point x∈X.
Definition 3.8**.**
The action α∈Act(G,X) is expansive if there exists an expansive constant c>0 such that for every x=y∈X, supg∈Gd(αgx,αgy)>c.
Remark 3.9**.**
Let α be an expansive action of a countable group G on a metric space (X,d) with an expansive constant c. Let ε<c/2 and δ,S corresponds to ε as in Definition 3.7. Then every (δ,S) pseudo-orbit of α is ε-traced by a unique point in X.
Definition 3.10**.**
An action α of a topological group G on a metric space X is GH-stable if for every ε>0, there is δ>0 such that for every continuous action β of G on a metric space Y with dGH(α,β)<δ, there is a continuous ε-isometry h:Y→X such that αg∘h=h∘βg for every g∈G.
The first result of topological stability for maps which are expansive and have POTP was established by Walters in [Walters78]. And in [ChungLee], Chung and Lee proved a group action version of Walters’ topological stability result. On the other hand, in 2017, Arbieto and Morales used techniques of [Walters78] to establish stability under GH-topology for expansive maps having pseudo-orbit tracing property [AM]. After that, combining ideas of [AM] and [ChungLee], a version of GH-stability for such actions of a finitely generated group G has been established in [DLM] and [KDD]. Following the proofs of [ChungLee] and [KDD, Theorem 4.6], we can see that the finitely generating condition of G is not necessary.
Theorem 3.11**.**
If an action α of a countable group G on a proper metric space (X,d) is expansive and satisfies POTP then it is topologically GH-stable with respect to S. More precisely,
(1)
if c>0 is an expansive constant of α then for every 0<ε<c there exists δ>0 such that if β is another continuous action of G on a metric space (Y,dY) with dGH,S(α,β)<δ then there exists an ε-isometry h:Y→X satisfying αg∘h=h∘βg for every g∈G.
2. (2)
if furthermore Y is compact then the ε-isometry h can be chosen to be continuous.
As Theorem 3.11 is a special case of Theorem 1.1, we skip its proof now. Instead, we present an example to illustrate Theorem 3.11.
Example 3.12**.**
Given two metric spaces (M,dM),(N,dN), we equip the product space M×N with the standard metric d by setting
[TABLE]
for every (x1,x2),(y1,y2)∈M×N.
For every r>0 we denote Sr1:={(x1,x2)∈R2:x12+x22=r2}. We endow Sr1 with the canonical metric dr, i.e. for every s1,s2∈Sr1, dr(s1,s2) is the length of the smallest arc connecting s1 and s2. When r=1 we write S1 instead of S11. We denote by dR/Z the canonical metric on R/Z defined by dR/Z(t+Z,s+Z):=minm∈Z∣t−s−m∣.
Let X=T2=R/Z×R/Z be the torus and dX be its canonical product metric. Put Y=S1/n1×S1/n1×X and endows it with the product metric dY. We define the map h:Y→X by h(s1,s2,x):=x for every s1,s2∈S1/n1,x∈T2. Let A,B∈M2(R) be two invertible matrices such that AB=BA, A does not have eigenvalues of modulus 1 and Bm=I2 for every m∈N, where I2 is the 2×2 identity matrix. For example, we choose
A=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}1&3\\
2&4\end{array}\right),B=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}-3&3\\
2&0\end{array}\right). Then the group G generated by {A,B} is isomorphic to Z2. Let α be the natural action of G on T2 and let γ be an arbitrary action of G on S1/n1×S1/n1. Let β be the product action of G on (Y,dY) induced from the actions γ and α. Then we will have
αg∘h=h∘βg for every g∈G. On the other hand, for every (s1,s2,x1),(t1,t2,x2)∈Y we have
[TABLE]
Therefore, the map h:Y→X is n2π-isometric. As h is also surjective we get that h is a n2π-isometry. Fix sˉ∈S1/n1, we define the map f:X→Y by f(x):=(sˉ,sˉ,x) for every x∈X. Then f is isometric. In addition to, for every (s1,s2,x)∈Y, we have dY((s1,s2,x),f(x))≤n2π and hence Bn2π′(f(X))=Y. Therefore f is a n2π-isometry. On the other hand, for every g∈G,x∈X we have
[TABLE]
Therefore dGH(α,β)≤n2π. By the choice of A we get that αA is expansive and hence α is expansive. As αA also has POTP and G is nilpotent, applying [ChungLee, Lemma 2.13] we get that the action α has POTP.
Definition 3.13**.**
Let αn be a sequence of actions of a topological group G on compact metric spaces (Xn,dn). We say that {αn} is equicontinuous if for every ε>0, there exists δ>0 such that for every g∈G, n∈N, and for every xn,yn∈Xn with dn(xn,yn)<δ, one has dn(αn,g(xn),αn,g(yn))≤ε.
Following the ideas in [Gromov, page 66], [GP, Appendix] and [Petersen, Lemma 11.1.9] we obtain a compactness result for equicontinuous actions.
Lemma 3.14**.**
Let {(Xn,dn)} be a sequence of metric spaces such that dGH(Xn,X)→0 for some compact metric space (X,d). Then we can assume there exist sequences of 1/n-isometry maps fn:Xn→X, hn:X→Xn such that for every x∈X,xn∈Xn, one has
[TABLE]
Assume that for each n we have an action αn of G on Xn. Assume further that {αn} is equicontinuous. Then there exist a subsequence {Xnk} of {Xn} and an action α of G on X such that
αnk→α as nk→∞ in the sense that
[TABLE]
for every x∈X,g∈G.
Proof.
Let A={an} be a countable and dense subset of X. Fix g∈G. As X is compact there exists a subsequence {n1} such that limn1→∞fn1∘αn1,g∘hn1(a1) converges to some point in X, denoted by αg(a1). Using a standard diagonal argument, we can assume that there exists a subsequence {nk} such that αg(am)=limnk→∞fnk∘αnk,g∘hnk(am), for every am∈A.
Then for every i,j,
[TABLE]
Since fn and hn are 1/n-isometries and by equicontinuity of {αn}, we see that the map αg:A→X is uniformly continuous and fnk∘αnk,g∘hnk→αg uniformly on A as k→∞. Therefore, we can extend it to a continuous map αg:X→X.
As d(x,fn∘hn(x))≤1/n and dn(y,fn∘hn(y))≤1/n for every n∈N, x∈X,y∈Xn, and αn is a family of equicontinuous actions, for every s,t∈G,a∈A, we have
[TABLE]
and αeG(a)=limk→∞fnk∘αnk,eG∘hnk(a)=a, where eG is the identity element of G.
Therefore αeG=IdX and αs∘αt=αst for every s,t∈G. For every g∈G, the continuity of the map αg:X→X is clear. Hence α is an action of G on X we are looking for.
∎
3.2. Equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff distance for actions of G and H
Let G and H be topological groups. Let α and β be actions of G and H on metric spaces (X,dX) and (Y,dY), respectively. For ε>0, an ε-equivariant Gromov-Hausdorff approximation/equivariant Fukaya-Gromov-Hausdorff approximation (abbreviated, respectively, eGHA/eFGHA) (ρ,f):α→β is a couple of maps f:Y→X, ρ:G→H such that ρ is a homomorphism/ρ is a general map (not necessarily a homomorphism), and f is an ε-GH approximation satisfying
supg∈Gdsup(αg∘f,f∘βρ(g))≤ε.
We define GH-distances of α and β by setting
[TABLE]
if the above infimum exist and ∞ otherwise.
Remark 3.15**.**
(1)
The distances dGH,1 and dGH,2 were introduced by Fukaya for isometric actions [Fu86, Fu88, Fu90, FY] and in his definitions he does not require ρ:G→H be a homomorphism. To study stability of general continuous actions which may be non-isometric, we adapt definitions of Fukaya to dGH,1 and dGH,2 by adding the homomorphism property of ρ.
2. (2)
In the case G=H, we see that dGH,2(α,β)≤dGH(α,β) where dGH is the GH-distance dGH,G defined in Definition 3.1.
Definition 3.16**.**
A continuous action of a topological group G on a metric space X is topologically free if for every g∈G∖{eG}, the set {x∈X:gx=x} is dense in X.
For every metric space (X,d), we denote by Isom(X) the group of all isometry f:X→X, and endow it with the compact-open topology. We recall that a sequence {fn}⊂Isom(X) converges to f∈Isom(X) in the compact-open topology if and only if for every compact subset K of X, fn converges uniformly to f on K.
Now we present several basic properties of dGH,1 and dGH,2.
Lemma 3.17**.**
Let α,β,γ be actions of topological groups G,H,K on metric spaces (X,dX),(Y,dY) and (Z,dZ) respectively. The maps dGH,1 and dGH,2 satisfy
(1)
dGH,1(α,β)≥0, dGH,2(α,β)≥0 and dGH,2(α,β)=dGH,2(β,α);
2. (2)
Assume that G and H are closed in Isom(X) and Isom(Y), respectively, and assume further that α and β are topologically free isometric actions. Then dGH,2(α,β)=0 if and only if there exist an isometry f:Y→X and an isomorphism ρ:G→H such that αg∘f=f∘βρ(g) for every g∈G;
3. (3)
Assume that X,Y are compact and H is closed in Isom(Y). Assume further that β is a topologically free isometric action. Then dGH,1(α,β)=0 if and only if there exist an isometry map f:Y→X and a homomorphism ρ:G→H such that αg∘f=f∘βρ(g) for every g∈G;
4. (4)
(2) and (3) are proved in the proof of [Fu86, Proposition 1.5].
(4) We only need to prove dGH,1(α,β)≤2(dGH,1(α,γ)+dGH,1(γ,β)). The remaining case is similar. If one of dGH,1(α,γ),dGH,1(γ,β) is ∞ then we are done. Now we assume that dGH,1(α,γ)<∞ and dGH,1(γ,β)<∞. Fix ε>0. Then there exist an ε1-isometry f:Z→X, an ε2-isometry v:Y→Z, and homomorphisms ρ:G→K, φ:K→H such that ε1<dGH,1(α,γ)+ε, ε2<dGH,1(γ,β)+ε and
[TABLE]
Hence, for every y∈Y and g∈G, one has
[TABLE]
Thus, supg∈Gdsup(f∘v∘βφ∘ρ(g),αg∘f∘v)≤2(ε1+ε2).
On the other hand, it is clear that the map f∘v:Y→X is an (ε1+ε2)-isometry and therefore it is also a 2(ε1+ε2)-isometry. Hence
An action α of a topological group G on a metric space X is strongly GH-stable if for every ε>0, there is δ>0 such that for every continuous action β of a topological group H on a metric space Y with dGH,1(α,β)<δ there are a continuous ε-isometry h:Y→X and a homomorphism ρ:G→H such that αg∘h=h∘βρ(g) for every g∈G.
Before proving Theorem 1.1, let us present a version of [ChungLee, Lemma 2.10] and [KDD, Lemma 4.5] for an expansive action of a general countable group on a proper metric space. We recall that a metric space X is proper if every closed ball is compact.
Lemma 3.19**.**
Let α be an expansive action of a countable group G on a proper metric space (X,d) and let c be an expansive constant of α. Then, for every x∈X and every ε>0, there exists a non-empty finite subset F of G such that whenever supg∈Fd(αgx,αgy)≤c, one has d(x,y)<ε.
Proof.
We will prove by contradiction. Fix x∈X. Assume that there exists an ε>0 such that for every non-empty finite subset F of G, there exists yF∈X such that supg∈Fd(αgx,αgyF)≤c and d(x,yF)≥ε. Choose a sequence of finite subsets Fn of G such that {eG}⊂F1⊂F2⊂⋯ and G=⋃n∈NFn. Then for every n∈N, there exists yn∈X such that supg∈Fnd(αgx,αgyn)≤c and d(x,yn)≥ε. As X is proper, after taking a subsequence, we can assume that yn→y. Then we have d(αgx,αgy)≤c for all g∈G and d(x,y)≥ε which contradicts expansiveness of α.
∎
(1) Let ε>0 with ε<c and take 0<ε1<ε/4. As α has POTP there exist δ>0 and a finite subset S of G such that every (δ,S)-pseudo-orbit is ε-traced by some point x∈X. We can choose δ<ε1. Let β be a continuous action of a topological group H on a metric space Y such that dGH,1(α,β)<δ. Then there are a δ-isometry u:Y→X and a homomorphism ρ:G→H such that dsup(u∘βρ(t),αt∘u)<δ for every t∈G. Hence, for every y∈Y and every s∈S,t∈G, one has
[TABLE]
Thus for every y∈Y, {u(βρ(t)y)}t∈G is a (δ,S)-pseudo-orbit for α. Hence, there exists x∈X such that dX(αtx,u(βρ(t)y))<ε1 for every t∈G. By expansiveness of α and the choice of ε1, it follows from Remark 3.9 that such an x is unique denoted by h(y). Then we get the map h:Y→X satisfying
[TABLE]
In particular, we have supy∈YdX(h(y),u(y))≤ε1. Therefore, for every y1,y2∈Y, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, one has
[TABLE]
Therefore the map h:Y→X is an ε-isometry.
Now we will prove that αt∘h=h∘βρ(t) for every t∈G.
By (*), for every y∈Y and t1,t2∈G, one has
[TABLE]
Hence applying Remark 3.9, we get αt2∘h=h∘βρ(t2) for every t2∈G.
(2) Let ε2>0. As c is an expansive constant of α, applying Lemma 3.19, there exists a non-empty finite subset A of G such that whenever supt∈AdX(αtx,αty)≤c one has dX(x,y)<ε2. As Y is compact and β is a continuous action, we can choose δ1>0 such that for every y1,y2∈Y with dY(y1,y2)<δ1, one has dY(βρ(t)y1,βρ(t)y2)<c/4 for every t∈A. Then for every y1,y2∈Y with dY(y1,y2)<δ1 and t∈A, applying (*) we get
[TABLE]
Hence dX(h(y1),h(y2))<ε2 for y1,y2∈Y with dY(y1,y2)<δ1, showing that h is continuous.
∎
Remark 3.20**.**
It would be interesting to inquire whether or not we have a version of Theorem 1.1 for actions of a general topological group G. If the group G is not countable, the Definition 3.8 is not good to define expansiveness for an action of G. For example, in the case G=R, if we define expansiveness for a continuous action α of G on a compact metric space X as that there exists a constant c>0 such that supt∈Rd(αtx,αty)<c implies x=y, then no such actions exist [BW, page 181].
Now we illustrate some examples of expansive actions having POTP.
Example 3.21**.**
Let A∈GLn(R) and define the map T:Tn→Tn,x↦Ax\mbox(modZn). If A does not have eigenvalues of modulus 1 then T is expansive and has POTP.
Example 3.22**.**
We endow Rn with the usual Euclidean metric. Let A∈GLn(R) and define the map T:Rn→Rn,x↦Ax. If A does not have eigenvalues of modulus 1 then T is expansive and has POTP [AH, Lemma 2.2.33,Theorem 2.3.15].
Example 3.23**.**
Let G be a finitely generated virtually nilpotent group, i.e. G has a nilpotent subgroup with finite index. Let α be an action of G on a compact metric space X. If there is some g∈G such that αg is expansive and has POTP then the action α is expansive and has POTP [ChungLee, Lemma 2.13].
Combining with the previous example, we see that if we choose a finitely generated nilpotent subgroup G of GLn(R) such that there exists g∈G which does not have eigenvalues of modulus 1, then the natural action of G on Tn is expansive and has POTP.
Example 3.24**.**
Let G be a countable group. Then every subshift G↷X, where X⊂AG for some finite set A, is expansive. Furthermore, the subshift G↷X has POTP if and only if it is of finite type [ChungLee, Theorem 3.2].
Example 3.25**.**
Let G be a countable group. We denote by ZG the group ring of G with coefficients in Z. It consists of finitely supported Z-valued functions
f
on G, which we shall write as ∑s∈Gfss. The algebraic structure of ZG is defined by (∑s∈Gfss)+(∑s∈Ggss)=∑s∈G(fs+gs)s and (∑s∈Gfss)(∑s∈Ggss)=∑s∈G(∑t∈Gftgt−1s)s.
We denote by ℓ1(G) the Banach algebra of all absolutely summable R-valued functions on G, equipped with
the ℓ1-norm ∥⋅∥1. We shall write f∈ℓ1(G) as ∑s∈Gfss. Note that ℓ1(G) has an involution f↦f∗ defined by
(∑s∈Gfss)∗=∑s∈Gfss−1.
For every k∈N, we denote by Mk(ℓ1(G)) the space of all k×k matrices with entries in ℓ1(G).
The involution of ℓ1(G) also extends naturally to an isometric linear map on Mk(ℓ1(G)) given
by
[TABLE]
For a locally compact abelian group X, we denote by X its Pontryagin dual.
Note that for each k∈N, we may identify the Pontryagin dual (ZG)k of (ZG)k with ((R/Z)k)G=((R/Z)G)k naturally. Under this identification,
the canonical action of G on (ZG)k is just the left shift action on ((R/Z)k)G.
For A∈Mk(ZG), we denote XA:=(ZG)k/(ZG)kA then
[TABLE]
Let αA be the natural left action of G on XA, i.e. αA,g((x)h∈G)=(xg−1h)h∈G, for every g∈G. If A is invertible in Mk(ℓ1(G)) then αA is expansive [ChungLi, Lemma 3.7] and has POTP [Mey, Theorem 3.4].
Example 3.26**.**
Let G be the Baumslag-Solitar group ⟨a,b∣ba=anb⟩, where n≥2. Let λ>n and consider the action α of G on R2 generated by two maps αa(x):=Ax, and αb(x):=Bx, where
[TABLE]
As BA=AnB, the action α is well defined. Since the map αb is expansive the action α is also. And the POTP of α is from [OT, Theorem 2].
Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be metric spaces and the maps h:Y→X, f:X→Y as in Example 3.12. Let A=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}1&2\\
3&4\end{array}\right)\in GL_{2}({\mathbb{R}}) and G be the group generated by A. Then G is isomorphic to Z. Let ρ:G→Z2 be the homomorphism defined by ρ(An)=(n,0) for every n∈Z. Let α be the natural action of G on X=T2. Let γ be an arbitrary action of Z2 on S1/n1×S1/n1 and let αˉ be an action of Z2 on T2 such that αˉ(1,0)=αA. Let βˉ be the product action of Z2 on (Y,dY) induced from the actions γ and αˉ. Then for every n∈Z,s∈S1/n1×S1/n1,x∈T2, we have αAn(h(s,x))=αAn(x)=αˉ(n,0)(x)=h(βˉρ(An)(s,x)). Because h:Y→X is a n2π-isometry, we get that dGH,1(α,βˉ)≤n2π.
Now let ρ1:Z2→G be a homomorphism such that ρ1((1,0))=A. Let γ be an arbitrary action of Z2 on S1/n1×S1/n1 and let α~ be an action of Z2 on T2 defined by α~g1:=αρ1(g1) for every g1∈Z2. Let β~ be the product action of Z2 on (Y,dY) induced from the actions γ and α~.
Then for every n∈Z,s∈S1/n1×S1/n1,x∈X, we have
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for every g1∈Z2,x∈X, we have
[TABLE]
As f:Y→X is a n2π-isometry, we get that dGH,2(α,β~)≤n2π. Because A does not have eigenvalues of modulus 1 we know that α is expansive and has POTP.
Example 3.28**.**
If we replace (X,dX) by R2 with the usual Euclidean metric and use the same arguments as in Example 3.27 then we can construct an action α of Z on R2, which is expansive and has POTP, and two actions βˉ,β~ of Z2 on Y=S1/n1×S1/n1×X
such that
[TABLE]
4. Actions on Wasserstein spaces
As in this section we deal with induced actions on Wasserstein spaces, we need GH-approximations be measurable. We first prove that for certain actions we can replace eGHAs by measurable ones.
The following lemma should be well known, however we have not found it in the literature. Therefore, for completeness we give a simple proof here which follows from the idea of the proof of [Shioya, Lemma 3.5].
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let (X,dX) and (Y,dY) be Polish metric spaces. Let ε>0 and f:X→Y be an ε-GH approximation. Let f′:Y→X be the inverse 3ε-GH approximation of f as in Definition 2.4. Then
(1)
There exists a 5ε-GH approximation f1:X→Y such that f1 is measurable and dY(f(x),f1(x))≤2ε for every x∈X.
2. (2)
There exists a 9ε-GH approximation f1′:Y→X such that f1′ is measurable, supy∈YdX(f′(y),f1′(y))≤2ε, supx∈XdX(x,(f1′∘f)(x))≤4ε and supy∈YdY(y,(f∘f1′)(y))≤4ε.
Proof.
(1) As X is separable, there exists a countable dense subset {xn}n∈N of X. We put B1:=Bε′(x1)\mboxandBn+1:=Bε′(xn+1)∖⋃j=1nBε′(xj),\mboxforn≥1.
Then {Bn}n∈N is a disjoint covering of X and Bn is measurable for every n∈N. For every x∈X, there exists a unique n such that x∈Bn. We define the map f1:X→Y by f1(x):=f(xn) where x∈Bn. Then f1 is measurable. For every x∈Bn,
we have dY(f(x),f1(x))=dY(f(x),f(xn))≤dX(x,xn)+ε≤2ε. Therefore, for every x,x′∈X, we obtain
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for every y∈Y, there exists x∈X such that dY(y,f(x))≤ε and hence dY(y,f1(x))≤dY(y,f(x))+dY(f(x),f1(x))≤3ε. Therefore, f1 is a measurable 5ε-GH approximation from X to Y.
(2) Similarly to (1), we can find a 9ε-GH approximation f1′:Y→X such that f1′ is measurable, supy∈YdX(f′(y),f1′(y))≤2ε. For every x∈X,
[TABLE]
And for every y∈Y,
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 4.2**.**
(1)
Let α and β be actions of topological groups G and H on Polish metric spaces (X,dX) and (Y,dY), respectively. Let ε>0 and (ρ,f):α→β be an ε-eFGHA. Assume that β is an isometric action. Then there exists a 5ε-eFGHA (ρ,f1):α→β such that f1 is measurable.
2. (2)
Let α and β be actions of a finitely generated group G on Polish metric spaces (X,dX) and (Y,dY) respectively, and let S be a finitely generating subset of G. Let ε>0 and choose ε′>0 such that for every y,y′∈Y with dY(y,y′)<3ε′ one has dY(βs(y),βs(y′))<ε for every s∈S. Let f:G↷X→G↷Y be an (ε′,S)-GH approximation. Then there exists a (5ε,S)-GH approximation f1:G↷X→G↷Y such that f1 is measurable.
Proof.
(1) From Lemma 4.1, there exists a 5ε-GH approximation f1:X→Y such that f1 is measurable and dY(f(x),f1(x))≤2ε for every x∈X. On the other hand, for every x∈X, g∈G, one has
[TABLE]
(2) The proof is similar to that for (1).
∎
Using the idea in the proof of [LV, Proposition 4.1], we get the following lemma.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let α1 and α2 be actions of a topological group G on compact metric spaces (X1,d1) and (X2,d2), respectively. If f:X1→X2 is an ε-measurable GH approximation from α1 to α2 then for every p≥1, the map f∗:Pp(X1)→Pp(X2) is an ε~-measurable GH approximation from (α1)∗ and (α2)∗, where ε~=8ε+(9p(diam(X1)p−1+diam(X2)p−1)ε)1/p.
Proof.
Let μ1,μ1′∈Pp(X1) and let π1∈Optp(μ1,μ1′). Then (f×f)∗π1∈∏(f∗μ1,f∗μ1′) and hence
[TABLE]
As the function h(x)=xp,x≥0 has h′(x)=pxp−1, we have for every x,y≥0,
[TABLE]
Therefore, for every x1,y1∈X,
[TABLE]
And hence,
[TABLE]
where M=diam(X1)p−1+diam(X2)p−1. It follows that
[TABLE]
and hence Wp(f∗μ1,f∗μ1′)≤(Wpp(μ1,μ1′)+pMε)1/p≤Wp(μ1,μ1′)+(pMε)1/p.
Let f′:X2→X1 be the measurable GH-approximate inverse of f as in Lemma 4.1. Then f′ is a 9ε-Gromov-Hausdorff approximation from X2 to X1, and
[TABLE]
Applying the same process as above we get
[TABLE]
As supx1∈X1d1(x1,f′∘f(x1))≤4ε, applying Lemma 2.8, we get
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
On the other hand, given μ2∈Pp(X2), since supx2∈X2d2(x2,f∘f′(x2))≤4ε, applying Lemma 2.8, we get Wp((f∘f′)∗μ2,μ2))≤4ε. Therefore, f∗:Pp(X1)→Pp(X2) is an ε~-GH approximation.
Finally, for every μ1∈Pp(X1),g∈G, let π∈∏((α2,g∘f)∗μ1,(f∘α1,g)∗μ1)).
Since for every g∈G, dsup(f∘α1,g,α2,g∘f)≤ε, applying Lemma 2.8 again we get
From Lemma 4.2, we see that if αn, α are isometric actions then the conclusion of Theorem 1.2 still holds for dGH instead of dmGH. Similarly, if αn, α are continuous actions of a finitely generated group G and S is a finitely generating set of G, then the result is also true for dGH,S.
Now before proving Theorem 1.3, let us recall the definition of a locally compact amenable group via Følner’s property [EW, Section 8.4]. Let G be a locally compact group and let λ be a left Haar measure of G. We say G is amenable if for every compact subset K of G and every ε>0, there exists a Borel subset F of G such that 0<λ(F)<∞ and
[TABLE]
where Δ denotes the symmetric difference of sets. For more details on amenable groups, see [P, Pier].
Compact groups, locally compact solvable groups, and locally compact groups of polynomial growth are standard examples of amenable groups [Pier, Corollary 13.5], [P, Proposition 0.13].
Let G be a locally compact amenable group and assume that G is σ-compact, i.e. G=⋃n=1∞Vn, where Vn is a compact subset of G for every n∈N. We can consider G=⋃n=1∞Kn, where Kn is a compact subset of G and Kn⊂Kn+1, for every n∈N. As G is amenable, there exists a sequence of Borel subsets {Fn}n∈N of G such that for every n∈N, 0<λ(Fn)<∞ and
[TABLE]
Therefore, limn→∞λ(Fn)λ(gFnΔFn)=0, for every g∈G. A such sequence {Fn}n∈N is called a left Følner sequence of G.
Another characterization of amenability of a locally compact group G is that every continuous action of G on a compact metric space X always has an invariant probability measure, i.e. PG(X)=∅ [Pier, Theorem 5.4].
Let α and α1 be continuous actions of a locally compact, σ-compact amenable group G on compact metric spaces (X,d) and (X1,d1), respectively. Let λ be a left Haar measure of G and let {Fn}n∈N be a left Følner sequence of G.
Fix p>1 and ε>0. Let T={μ1,⋯,μN} be an ε-net of PpG(X) and let f:X→X1 be an ε-measurable GH approximation. As Pp(X1) is compact in the weak*-topology, passing to a subsequence if necessary, we assume that λ(Fn)1∫Fnα1(g)∗(f∗μ1)dλ(g)→φT(μ1) in the weak*-topology as n→∞. Do the same process for μ2,μ3,⋯, we can define that for every 1≤k≤N, φT(μk):=limn→∞λ(Fn)1∫Fnα1(g)∗(f∗μk)dλ(g).
Now we prove that φT(μk)∈PpG(X1) for every 1≤k≤N. Given u∈C(X1), μk∈T, and h∈G, one has
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Let f′:X1→X be the 9ε-measurable GH approximation inverse of f as in Lemma 4.1. Similarly as above, we can also define that for every 1≤k≤N,
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let α and α1 be isometric actions of a locally compact amenable, σ-compact group G on compact metric spaces (X,d) and (X1,d1) respectively. Let ε>0 and let f:X→X1 be an ε-measurable GH-approximation from α1 to α2. Let T={μ1,⋯,μN} be an ε-net of PpG(X). Then for every p≥1, the set φT(T) is a D(ε)-net of PpG(X1) and
Let μi,μj∈T and let π∈Optp(μi,μj) then one has
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
where M=diam(X1)p−1+diam(X2)p−1. Thus,
[TABLE]
As f′:X1→X is a 9ε-measurable GH approximation, similar as above, we get that Wp(φT′(φT(μi)),φT′(φT(μj)))≤Wp(φT(μi),φT(μj))+(9pMε)1/p, for every i,j.
On the other hand, for every i, one has
[TABLE]
Since f is an ε-GH approximation from α to α1, for every h∈G, we get
[TABLE]
In another side, because supx∈Xd(x,f′(f(x))≤4ε, and f′:X1→X is a 9ε-GH approximation, for every g,h∈G, x∈X, one has
[TABLE]
Therefore, applying Lemma 2.8, for every g,h∈G, 1≤i≤N, we get
[TABLE]
For every g,h∈G,1≤i≤N, let πgh,i∈Optp(μi,α(g)∗f∗′α1(h)∗f∗μi) then
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
And hence for every μi,μj∈T,
[TABLE]
Combining with (1) we get that ∣Wp(φT(μi),φT(μj))−Wp(μi,μj)∣≤D(ε), for every μi,μj∈T.
Finally, we will prove that φT(T) is a D(ε)-net of PpG(X1). Let μ∈PpG(X1). There exists a subsequence {n1} such that limn1→∞λ(Fn1)1∫Fn1α(g)∗(f∗′μ)dλ(g) exists in the weak*-topology of Pp(X), and we denote this limit as φT∪{μ}′(μ). Then there exists a subsequence {n2} of {n1} such that
[TABLE]
exists in the weak*-topology of Pp(X1), and we denote this limit as φT∪{μ}(φT∪{μ}′(μ)). Similar as above, we get
[TABLE]
As T is an ε-net in PpG(X), there exists μi∈T such that Wp(μi,φT∪{μ}′(μ))≤ε. Then
From Lemma 3.5 we obtain that the action α is an isometric action. Then applying Lemma 2.7, Lemma 4.2 and Lemma 4.5 we get the result.
∎
Now we illustrate examples satisfying our assumptions of Theorems 1.2, 1.3 and Corollary 1.4.
Example 4.6**.**
We consider Sr1={z∈C:∣z∣=r} with the usual distance and S1=S11. For every n∈N, let Xn=S1/n1×S1 with the canonical product metric dXn and let αn be the action of S1 on Xn defined by αn,a(s,z)=(as,az) for every s∈S1/n1,a,z∈S1. Let α be the action on X=S1 by setting αa(z)=az for every a,z∈S1. Then αn, α are isometric actions. We define the map hn:Xn→X by hn(s,z):=z for every s∈S1/n1,z∈X. For every n∈N, fix snˉ∈S1/n1, we define the map fn:X→Xn by fn(z)=(snˉ,z) for every z∈X. Then for every n∈N,s∈S1/n1,z∈X,a∈S1, we have
[TABLE]
Similarly to the arguments in Example 3.12 we get that the maps hn:Xn→X,fn:X→Xn are nπ-isometry. On the other hand, for every n∈N, a∈S1, x∈X, we also have
[TABLE]
Therefore dGH(αn,α)→0 as n→∞.
Now we will prove that α is uniquely ergodic. Let μ be a probability S1-invariant measure of α. Then for every g∈S1 and every Borel subset A of X we have
μ(αg−1A)=μ(A) and hence μ(g−1A)=μ(A). Therefore, μ must coincide with the normalized Haar measure of X.
Example 4.7**.**
We choose (Xn,dXn),(X,d) as in the previous example. Let a∈S1 such that am=1 for every m∈N. Let α be the action of Z on X defined by αm(x)=amx for every m∈Z,x∈X. For every n∈N, let αn be the action of Z on Xn defined by αn,m(s,z)=(ams,amz) for every s∈S1/n1,z∈X,m∈Z. Then αn, α are isometric actions. Similar as Example 4.6, we have dGH(αn,α)→0 as n→∞. On the other hand, applying [Walters82, Theorem 6.18] we get that α is uniquely ergodic.
Example 4.8**.**
Let X=S1×S1 with its canonical metric dX. For every n∈N let Xn=S1/n1×X with its usual product metric dXn. Let a1,a2,a3∈S1 such that a1m=1,a3m=1 for every m∈N and a25=1. We define the action α of Z on X by αm(s2,s3):=(a2ms2,a3ms3) for every m∈Z,s2,s3∈S1, and the action
αn of Z on Xn by αn,m(s1,s2,s3):=(a1ms1,a2ms2,a3ms3) for every m∈Z,s1∈S1/n1,s2,s3∈S1.
Then α, αn are isometric actions and limn→∞dGH(αn,α)=0. As the action α is not minimal, applying [Walters82, Theorem 6.20] we get that α is not uniquely ergodic.