This paper studies when operators on L2 spaces over open sets have continuous kernels, focusing on conditions like mapping into continuous functions and analyzing the regularity of powers of such operators.
Contribution
It establishes conditions under which operators have continuous kernels, especially relating to their powers and self-adjointness, and explores Mercer's theorem in this context.
Findings
01
Operators with $T L_2(\Omega) o C(ar{\Omega})$ have continuous kernels for their third power if self-adjoint and $\Omega$ is bounded.
02
The condition $T L_2(\Omega) o C(ar{\Omega})$ is central to kernel regularity.
03
The paper analyzes the applicability of Mercer's theorem for these operators.
Abstract
Let Ω⊂Rd be open. We investigate conditions under which an operator T on L2(Ω) has a continuous kernel K∈C(Ω×Ω). In the centre of our interest is the condition TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω), which one knows for many semigroups generated by elliptic operators. This condition implies that T3 has a kernel in C(Ω×Ω) if T is self-adjoint and Ω is bounded, and the power 3 is best possible. We also analyse Mercer's theorem in our context.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering · Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations · Spectral Theory in Mathematical Physics
Full text
Operators with continuous kernels
W. Arendt1 and A.F.M. ter Elst2
Abstract
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open.
We investigate conditions under which an operator T on L2(Ω)
has a continuous kernel K∈C(Ω×Ω).
In the centre of our interest is the condition
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω), which one
knows for many semigroups generated by elliptic operators.
This condition implies that T3 has a kernel in
C(Ω×Ω) if T is self-adjoint
and Ω is bounded, and the power 3 is best possible.
We also analyse Mercer’s theorem in our context.
Institute of Applied Analysis
2.
Department of Mathematics
University of Ulm
University of Auckland
Helmholtzstr. 18
Private Bag 92019
89081 Ulm
Auckland 1142
Germany
New Zealand
1 Introduction
Kernel operators play an important role in analysis.
For example, the kernels of diffusion semigroups (heat kernels)
are of considerable interest to analyse the evolution (see Davies [Dav]
and Ouhabaz [Ouh]).
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be an open bounded set and T∈L(L2(Ω)).
In many cases one is able to prove that T has a measurable kernel
via the Dunford–Pettis criterion or by showing that T is Hilbert–Schmidt.
But then it is frequently not easy to decide whether the kernel is continuous.
The results in the literature mainly establish stronger results such as
Hölder continuity under quite strong hypotheses.
But just continuity is important.
For example, it is required for the trace formula in the context of Mercer’s theorem.
A property which is frequently obtained automatically for semigroups
or resolvents, is that the operator maps L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
It is this property that we investigate in the present paper.
One of our main results is the following.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T be a self-adjoint bounded operator on L2(Ω) such that
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Then T3 has a kernel in C(Ω×Ω).
Of course, to say that K∈C(Ω×Ω)
is a kernel of T3 means that
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈Ω.
We show by an example that T2 does not need to have a kernel
in C(Ω×Ω),
even if T is positive (in the sense of Hilbert spaces).
The optimal power 3 demands some particular efforts.
In a previous paper [AE2] we proved that
T4 has a kernel in C(Ω×Ω).
If T is a positive operator on L2(Ω) such that
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω),
then we shall show that T2+ε
has a kernel in C(Ω×Ω)
for all ε>0
(and this is optimal by what we said above).
Conversely, if a positive operator T has a kernel in
C(Ω×Ω), then
Mercer’s theorem shows that T is trace class
and we shall show that T1/2L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω)
and that this result is optimal.
We also present results on unbounded domains.
Here our arguments give a nice result for a semigroup S on L2(\mathdsRd)
which has Gaussian bounds.
If both StL2(\mathdsRd)⊂C(\mathdsRd) and
St∗L2(\mathdsRd)⊂C(\mathdsRd) for all t>0, then
St has a continuous kernel.
Finally we present a version of Mercer’s theorem which is more
general than the classical result and which fits well with our results.
In the last section examples are given.
2 Continuous kernels, general Ω
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
We provide C(X) with the Fréchet topology
of uniform convergence on compact subsets of X.
Then an operator T:L2(Ω)→C(X) is
compact if and only if for every sequence (un)n∈\mathdsN in L2(Ω)
such that limn→∞un=0 weakly in L2(Ω) it follows
that limn→∞supx∈F∣(Tun)(x)∣=0 for all non-empty
compact F⊂X.
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let T1,T2∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that T1L2(Ω)⊂C(X) and
T2L2(Ω)⊂C(X).
Then the following are valid.
(a)
There exists a measurable, separately continuous
function K:X×X→\mathdsC
such that K is bounded on compact subsets of X×X,
the function K(x,⋅)∈L2(Ω) for all x∈X and
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈X.
(b)
If in addition T1:L2(Ω)→C(X) is compact
or T2:L2(Ω)→C(X) is compact,
then the kernel K in Statement (a) is continuous.
Proof*.*
‘(a)’.
If F⊂X is compact, then the operator u↦(T1u)∣F is
bounded from L2(Ω) into C(F) by the closed graph theorem.
Hence it follows
from the Riesz representation theorem that for all x∈X
there exists a kx(1)∈L2(Ω) such that
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω).
Then x↦kx(1) is bounded from compact subsets of
X into L2(Ω).
Clearly the map x↦kx(1) is continuous from X
into (L2(Ω),w), the space L2(Ω) provided with the weak topology.
We can define similarly the functions kx(2)
with respect to T2.
Define K:X×X→\mathdsC by
[TABLE]
Then K is bounded on compact subsets of X×X and separately continuous.
Hence K is measurable by [AlB] Lemma 4.51.
If u∈L2(Ω) and x∈X, then
[TABLE]
since
(T1kx(2))(y)=(kx(2),ky(1))L2(Ω)=K(x,y) for all y∈Ω.
Moreover, K(x,⋅)=T1kx(2)∈L2(Ω).
‘(b)’.
Suppose that the operator T2:L2(Ω)→C(X) is compact.
(The proof for T1 is similar.)
Let x,x1,x2,…,y,y1,y2,…∈X and
suppose that limxn=x and limyn=y in X.
Let F={x,x1,x2,…}.
Then F is compact and F⊂X.
Now limkyn(1)=ky(1) weakly in L2(Ω).
Hence by assumption
limn→∞T2kyn(1)=T2ky(1)
uniformly on F.
If n∈\mathdsN, then
[TABLE]
for all n∈\mathdsN and the continuity of K follows.
∎
A special case of Proposition 2.1(a) has been proved by
[KLVW] Proposition 3.3, where positivity improving self-adjoint semigroups
given by kernels are investigated.
For completeness we mention the following uniqueness for separately
continuous functions.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let K:X×X→\mathdsC be separately continuous
and suppose that K=0 almost everywhere on Ω×Ω.
Then K=0 pointwise on X×X.
Proof*.*
This follows from Fubini’s theorem.
∎
Hence a separately continuous kernel is unique if it exists.
This means: let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω, let
K:X×X→\mathdsC be separately continuous with K(x,⋅)∈L2(Ω)
and ∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy=0 for almost every x∈Ω and
u∈L2(Ω), then K=0 pointwise on X×X.
Without the additional compactness condition the joint continuity
fails in general.
We next give an example of a bounded set Ω and a positive operator
T on L2(Ω) such that TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω),
but the kernel of the operator T2=TT∗ is not (jointly) continuous,
even not on Ω×Ω.
Example 2.3**.**
Choose Ω=(−1,1).
We first construct an operator T∈L(L2(Ω)) such that
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω) and
T∗L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω), but
the kernel of the operator TT∗ is not (jointly) continuous,
since it is not continuous at (0,0).
We then construct a self-adjoint counter-example and finally a
positive (self-adjoint) counter-example.
Step 1 Fix τ∈Cc∞((−1,1)×(−1,1))
such that 0≤τ≤\mathds1 and
τ[−21,21]×[−21,21]=\mathds1.
Define K:[−1,1]×[−1,1]→\mathdsR by
[TABLE]
Then K is continuous on ([−1,1]×[−1,1])∖{(0,0)} and
[TABLE]
Moreover,
[TABLE]
Hence one can define the Hilbert–Schmidt operator T:L2(Ω)→L2(Ω)
by
Then K(2) is continuous on
(Ω×Ω)∖{(0,0)}.
Moreover,
(TT∗u)(x)=∫ΩK(2)(x,y)u(y)dy
for all u∈L2(Ω) and almost every x∈Ω.
Note that
[TABLE]
for all n∈\mathdsN and K(2)(0,0)=0=limn→∞K(2)(−2−n,−2−n).
So K(2) is not continuous at (0,0).
Let u∈L2(Ω) and y∈Ω.
We shall show that Tu is continuous at y.
This is trivial if y<0 and it easily follows from the Lebesgue dominated
convergence theorem if y>0.
So it remains to show continuity of Tu at [math].
Let x∈Ω∖{0}.
There is at most one n∈\mathdsN such that
x∈[2−n−10−n,2−n+10−n].
Then
[TABLE]
where fn=2⋅3n\mathds1[3−n−9−n,3−n+9−n].
Since the family (fk)k∈\mathdsN is orthonormal, it follows that
limk→∞(fk,∣u∣)L2(Ω)=0.
Hence limx→0(Tu)(x)=0.
We proved that TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Finally we show that T∗L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Let u∈L2(Ω).
Again it is easy to show continuity on Ω∖{0},
so we have to show continuity at [math].
Let x∈Ω∖{0}.
There is at most one n∈\mathdsN such that
x∈[3−n−9−n,3−n+9−n].
Then
[TABLE]
So limx→0(T∗u)(x)=0.
Hence T∗L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Step 2 Define T=T+T∗.
Then T is self-adjoint and TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Define K:Ω×Ω→\mathdsR by
[TABLE]
Then (TT∗u)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy
for all u∈L2(Ω) and almost every x∈Ω.
As before K(−2−n,−2−n)=0=K(0,0) for all n∈\mathdsN.
Also K≥K(2).
So K(2−n,2−n)≥K(2)(2−n,2−n)≥1
for all n∈\mathdsN and K is not continuous.
Step 3 Define T=∣T∣.
Then T is positive and T2=T2 does
not have a continuous kernel on Ω×Ω.
Since T is self-adjoint, there exists a unitary operator
U such that ∣T∣=T∘U.
Then
TL2(Ω)=T(UL2(Ω))=TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω)
as required.
For three operators and a compactness condition we next deduce
joint continuity of the kernel on Ω×Ω,
even if Ω is unbounded.
Theorem 2.4**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let T1,T2,T3∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that T1L2(Ω)⊂C(X)
and T3L2(Ω)⊂C(X).
Moreover, suppose that T2 is a compact operator from L2(Ω) into L2(Ω).
Then there exists a kernel K∈C(X×X)
such that K(x,⋅)∈L2(Ω) for all x∈X and
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈X.
Proof*.*
Note that T3T2T1∗=T3(T1T2∗)∗.
Since T2∗:L2(Ω)→L2(Ω) is compact, the
operator T1T2∗:L2(Ω)→C(X) is compact.
Now it follows from Proposition 2.1(b)
that T3(T1T2∗)∗ has a kernel in
C(X×X).
∎
Finally we present an application for semigroups.
Note that by Proposition 2.1 the hypotheses in the next result
imply that each semigroup operator St has a separately continuous kernel.
Under the additional hypothesis of Gaussian bounds we show that this
kernel is jointly continuous.
Second-order elliptic operators under diverse boundary conditions are known
to generate semigroups with Gaussian bounds
(see [AE1], [Dan] and [Ouh]).
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open, non-empty and let X be a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let S be a semigroup in L2(Ω)
such that StL2(Ω)⊂C(X) and
St∗L2(Ω)⊂C(X) for all t>0.
Suppose the semigroup satisfies Gaussian bounds, that is
there are b,c,ω>0 such that the separately continuous
kernel Kt:X×X→\mathdsC of St
satisfies
[TABLE]
for all x,y∈Ω and t>0.
Then Kt is continuous for all t>0.
Proof*.*
Since S2t=St(St∗)∗ it follows from
Proposition 2.1(a) that the operator
S2t has a separately continuous kernel on
Ω×Ω for all t>0.
So we may assume that Kt is separately continuous for all t>0.
The semigroup property gives
[TABLE]
for all x,y∈Ω.
Then the Gaussian bounds together with the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem
first give that (2) extends to all x,y∈X
and then give the continuity of K2t.
∎
3 Continuous kernels, bounded Ω
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Then one can easily characterise the operators T∈L(L2(Ω))
which map L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
Note that if TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω), then the operator
T:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is bounded by the closed
graph theorem.
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)).
Then the following are equivalent.
(i)
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
(ii)
There exists a continuous k:Ω→(L2(Ω),w)
such that
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈Ω.
If both conditions are valid, then
∥T∥L2(Ω)→C(Ω)=supx∈Ω∥kx∥L2(Ω).
We leave the easy proof to the reader.
If k:Ω→(L2(Ω),w) is as in Condition (ii),
then we frequently write kx=k(x) for all x∈Ω.
For convenience of the reader we include the following.
Corollary 3.2**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) and suppose that TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Then T is Hilbert–Schmidt and in particular
T is compact from L2(Ω) into L2(Ω).
Proof*.*
Let k:Ω→(L2(Ω),w) be as in Condition (ii)
of Proposition 3.1.
Let (en)n∈\mathdsN be an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω).
Then
[TABLE]
Hence T is Hilbert–Schmidt and consequently compact.
∎
In general the operator in Corollary 3.2 is not trace class,
see Example 4.2 below.
Also in general the operator in Corollary 3.2
is not compact from L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
This is a stronger property that we descibe now.
Corollary 3.3**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) and suppose that TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Let k:Ω→(L2(Ω),w) be as in Proposition 3.1.
Then the following are equivalent.
(i)
The operator T is compact from L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
(ii)
The map x↦∥kx∥L2(Ω) from
Ω into \mathdsR is continuous.
(iii)
The map k:Ω→L2(Ω) is continuous.
(iv)
N→∞limx∈Ωsupn=N∑∞∣(en,kx)∣2=0.
Proof*.*
‘(i)⇒(ii)’.
Proposition 3.1(ii) gives that the
map x↦kx is continuous from
Ω into (L2(Ω),w).
Since T is compact from L2(Ω) into C(Ω),
it follows that the map
x↦Tkx is continuous from
Ω into C(Ω).
Hence the map x↦(Tkx)(x) is continuous from
Ω into \mathdsC.
Because (Tkx)(x)=(kx,kx)L2(Ω)=∥kx∥L2(Ω)2
for all x∈Ω,
the implication follows.
‘(ii)⇒(iii)’.
Let x,x1,x2,…∈Ω and suppose that
limn→∞xn=x in Ω.
Then limn→∞kxn=kx in (L2(Ω),w)
by Proposition 3.1(ii).
Since limn→∞∥kxn∥L2(Ω)=∥kx∥L2(Ω)
by assumption, one deduces that
limn→∞kxn=kx in L2(Ω).
‘(iii)⇒(iv)’.
For all N∈\mathdsN define QN:L2(Ω)→L2(Ω) by
QNu=∑n=N∞(u,en)L2(Ω)en.
Then limN→∞QNu=0 in L2(Ω) for all u∈L2(Ω).
Hence if F is a compact subset of L2(Ω), then
limN→∞supu∈F∥QNu∥L2(Ω)=0.
By assumption the map k:Ω→L2(Ω) is continuous.
Since Ω is compact, the set
F={kx:x∈Ω} is compact in L2(Ω).
So limN→∞supx∈Ω∥QNkx∥L2(Ω)=0.
This is Condition (iv).
‘(iv)⇒(i)’.
For all N∈\mathdsN define TN:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) by
(TNu)(x)=∑n=1N−1(u,en)(en,kx).
Then TN has finite rank, hence it is compact.
Let N∈\mathdsN and u∈L2(Ω).
Then
[TABLE]
for all x∈Ω.
So
[TABLE]
and limN→∞TN=T in L(L2(Ω),C(Ω)).
∎
In view of Corollary 3.2,
Theorem 2.4 takes a very simple form if Ω is bounded.
Corollary 3.4**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T1,T2,T3∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that TkL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω) for all k∈{1,2,3}.
Then there exists a K∈C(Ω×Ω)
such that
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈Ω.
The following theorem is in the spirit of Mercer’s theorem.
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T1,T2∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that T1L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω) and
T2L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Moreover, suppose in addition that
T1:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact
or T2:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact.
Let K∈C(Ω×Ω)
be the kernel of the operator T2T1∗.
Let (en)n∈\mathdsN be an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω).
For all n∈\mathdsN define un=T2en and vn=T1en.
Note that un,vn∈C(Ω).
Then
[TABLE]
and the series converges in C(Ω×Ω).
Proof*.*
We use the notation as in the proof of Proposition 2.1.
If x,y∈Ω, then
[TABLE]
So it remains to show the convergence in C(Ω×Ω).
Suppose that T2:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact.
(The proof is similar in the other case.)
Let N∈\mathdsN and let x,y∈Ω.
Then
[TABLE]
where we used the end of Proposition 3.1 in the last step.
Hence
[TABLE]
by Corollary 3.3(i)⇒(iv)
and the result follows.
∎
Under the same conditions a trace formula is valid.
Theorem 3.6**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T1,T2∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that T1L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω) and
T2L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Moreover, suppose in addition that
T1:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact
or T2:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact.
Let K∈C(Ω×Ω)
be the kernel of the operator T2T1∗.
Then T2T1∗ is trace class and
[TABLE]
Proof*.*
Clearly T2T1∗ is trace class since it is the product
of two Hilbert–Schmidt operators.
Let (en)n∈\mathdsN be an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω).
Then Theorem 3.5 gives
[TABLE]
as required.
∎
We next give an example of a bounded set Ω and a positive (self-adjoint)
operator T which maps L2(Ω) into C(Ω)
such that the kernel of T is not bounded.
Example 3.7**.**
Choose Ω=(−1,1) and for all n∈\mathdsN0 let Pn be the
n-th Legendre polynomial.
For all n∈\mathdsN0 define en=22n+1Pn.
Then (en)n∈\mathdsN0 is an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω).
Define T∈L(L2(Ω)) by
[TABLE]
Clearly T is positive.
Let u∈L2(Ω).
Then
[TABLE]
Since \Big{(}\frac{1}{n^{2}}\,\sqrt{\frac{2n+1}{2}}\Big{)}_{n\in\mathds{N}_{0}}\in\ell_{2}(\mathds{N}_{0})
it follows that
\Big{(}\frac{1}{n^{2}}\,\sqrt{\frac{2n+1}{2}}\,(u,e_{n})_{L_{2}(\Omega)}\Big{)}_{n\in\mathds{N}_{0}}\in\ell_{1}(\mathds{N}_{0}).
Moreover ∥Pn∥C(Ω)=Pn(1)=1 for all n∈\mathdsN0.
Therefore
[TABLE]
and Tu∈C(Ω).
Define K:Ω×Ω→\mathdsC by
[TABLE]
Note that the series converges by [Sze] Theorem 8.21.2.
Then (Tu)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for all u∈L2(Ω)
and x∈Ω.
Finally,
[TABLE]
Hence the kernel of T is not bounded.
We next derive a kind of converse of Proposition 2.1(b)
for self-adjoint operators.
Proposition 3.8**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be a self-adjoint operator.
Suppose there exists a K∈C(Ω×Ω)
such that (T2u)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for all u∈L2(Ω)
and almost every x∈Ω.
Then TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Moreover, the operator T:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact.
Proof*.*
Since K is continuous it follows that T2L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Hence T2 is compact and consequently T is compact.
There exists an orthonormal basis (en)n∈\mathdsN for L2(Ω) and
λ1,λ2,…∈\mathdsR such that Ten=λnen
for all n∈\mathdsN.
We assume that λn=0 for all n∈\mathdsN.
(The other case is similar.)
Then λn2en=T2en∈C(Ω) and en∈C(Ω)
for all n∈\mathdsN.
It follows from Mercer’s theorem (see Theorem 5.2)
that the series ∑λn2∣en∣2
converges uniformly on Ω.
Let u∈L2(Ω).
Then Tu=∑n=1∞λn(u,en)en in L2(Ω).
Now
[TABLE]
for all N∈\mathdsN.
Since ∑n=1∞∣λnen∣2 is bounded, it follows that
∑λn(u,en)en converges in C(Ω).
So Tu∈C(Ω).
Finally we prove compactness.
Let (um)m∈\mathdsN be a sequence in L2(Ω) which converges
weakly to zero.
We shall show that limm→∞Tum=0 in C(Ω).
Let ε>0.
Since ∑λn2∣en∣2
converges uniformly on Ω, there exists an N∈\mathdsN
such that
∑n=N∞λn2∣en(x)∣2≤ε2 for all
x∈Ω.
There exists an M∈\mathdsN such that
∣(um,en)∣∥λnen∥∞≤Nε
for all n∈{1,…,N} and m∈\mathdsN with m≥M.
Let m∈\mathdsN with m≥M.
Then
[TABLE]
for all x∈Ω.
Since (um)m∈\mathdsN is bounded in L2(Ω) one deduces
that limm→∞Tum=0 in C(Ω).
∎
Theorem 3.9**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be a self-adjoint operator.
Then the following are equivalent.
(i)
There exists a K∈C(Ω×Ω)
such that (T2u)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for all u∈L2(Ω)
and almost every x∈Ω.
(ii)
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω)* and
the operator T:L2(Ω)→C(Ω) is compact.*
‘(ii)⇒(i)’.
This is a special case of Proposition 2.1(b).
∎
4 Positive operators
For positive operators one can improve Corollary 3.4.
Theorem 4.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open and bounded.
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be positive and suppose that
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Then for all ε>0 there exists a
K∈C(Ω×Ω)
such that
[TABLE]
for all u∈L2(Ω) and x∈Ω.
Proof*.*
The operator T is compact from L2(Ω) into L2(Ω)
by Corollary 3.2.
Hence Tε/2 is compact from L2(Ω) into L2(Ω).
The closed graph theorem implies that the
operator T is bounded from L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
Therefore the operator T1+ε/2 is compact
from L2(Ω) into C(Ω).
Since T2+ε=(T1+ε/2)(T1+ε/2)∗
the result follows from Proposition 2.1(b).
∎
In Example 2.3 we constructed a positive operator T on a bounded open
set Ω⊂\mathdsRd such that TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω),
but T2 does not have a kernel in C(Ω×Ω).
Hence the power 2+ε in Theorem 4.1 is optimal.
In the situation of Theorem 4.1 one has in
general TαL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω) for all
α∈(0,1).
We show this by an example.
Example 4.2**.**
Let Ω=(0,2π) and for all n∈\mathdsZ define en∈C(Ω)
by en(x)=einx.
Then (en)n∈\mathdsZ is an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω).
For all n∈\mathdsN let λn∈[0,∞) be such that
∑n=1∞λn<∞, but
∑n=1∞λnα=∞
for all α∈(0,1) (such a sequence exists).
Define K∈C(Ω×Ω) by
[TABLE]
Let S∈L(L2(Ω)) be the associated operator.
Then S is positive.
Define T=S1/2.
One deduces from Theorem 3.9 that
T1/2L2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Let α∈(0,1) and suppose that
TαL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
Then Tα is Hilbert–Schmidt by Corollary 3.2,
so Sα=(Tα)2 is trace class
and ∑n=1∞λnα<∞.
This is a contradiction.
5 A variation of Mercer’s theorem
In Mercer’s theorem a continuous kernel K is given on
Ω×Ω,
where Ω is bounded.
In this section we wish to consider continuous kernels which may be
merely defined on Ω×Ω.
If they are Hilbert–Schmidt then we investigate the
associated operator T.
A central role is played again by the condition
TL2(Ω)⊂C(Ω).
For continuous kernels the inclusion can be characterised in terms of the
kernel what we do in the next lemma.
In fact, we want to be slightly more general.
Recall, if Ω⊂\mathdsR is open, non-empty and X⊂\mathdsRd is a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω, then we provide C(X)
with the Fréchet topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets of X.
We emphasise that Ω does not need to be bounded.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsR be open, non-empty and X⊂\mathdsRd a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let K∈C(X×Ω) and T∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that for all u∈Cc(Ω) the equality
[TABLE]
is valid for almost every x∈Ω.
Then the following are equivalent.
(i)
TL2(Ω)⊂C(X).
(ii)
supx∈F∫Ω∣K(x,y)∣2dy<∞* for every compact F⊂X.*
Proof*.*
‘(i)⇒(ii)’.
Let F⊂X be compact.
Then the operator u↦(Tu)∣F∈C(F) is continuous by the closed graph theorem.
Hence there exists a c>0 such that
[TABLE]
for all u∈Cc(Ω) and x∈F.
Then ∥K(x,⋅)∥L2(Ω)≤c for all x∈F and the implication follows.
‘(ii)⇒(i)’.
If u∈Cc(Ω), then the continuity of Tu follows from the Lebesgue dominated
convergence theorem.
Next, let u∈L2(Ω) and let x,x1,x2,…∈X with limn→∞xn=x.
Choose F={x,x1,x2,…}.
Then F is compact.
So by assumption there exists a c>0 such that
∫Ω∣K(z,y)∣2dy≤c2 for all z∈F.
Let ε>0.
There exists a v∈Cc(Ω) such that ∥u−v∥L2(Ω)≤ε.
Then
[TABLE]
for all n∈\mathdsN.
Hence limsupn→∞∣(Tu)(xn)−(Tu)(x)∣≤2cε
and limn→∞(Tu)(xn)=(Tu)(x).
∎
The main theorem of this section is as follows.
Note that Mercer’s theorem is a special case if one chooses Ω bounded
and X=Ω.
Theorem 5.2**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsR be open, non-empty and X⊂\mathdsRd a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let K∈C(X×X).
Further, let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be a compact positive operator
such that TL2(Ω)⊂C(X)
and such that
[TABLE]
for all x∈Ω and u∈Cc(Ω).
Then there exist an orthonormal basis
(en)n∈\mathdsN in L2(Ω)
and for all n∈\mathdsN there is a λn∈[0,∞) such that λnen∈C(X)
and Ten=λnen for all n∈\mathdsN.
In particular, en∈C(X) if λn=0, and
λnen⊗en∈C(X×X)
for all n∈\mathdsN.
Moreover,
[TABLE]
for all x,y∈X and the series
∑λn∣en⊗en∣ converges
uniformly on compact subsets of X×X.
Finally, K(x,x)≥0 for all x∈X
and
[TABLE]
In particular, T is trace class if and only if ∫ΩK(x,x)dx<∞.
Proof*.*
Since T is a compact positive operator
there exists an orthonormal basis (en)n∈\mathdsN
for L2(Ω) of eigenfunctions of T.
For all n∈\mathdsN let λn∈[0,∞) be such that
Ten=λnen.
Then λnen=Ten∈C(X)
for all n∈\mathdsN, and in particular en∈C(X) if λn=0.
For all N∈\mathdsN define KN∈C(X×X)
by
[TABLE]
and define TN∈L(L2(Ω)) by
[TABLE]
Then TNu=∑n=1Nλn(u,en)en
and (T−TN)(u)=∑n=N+1∞λn(u,en)en
for all u∈L2(Ω).
Hence T−TN is positive.
If x∈Ω, then
[TABLE]
and therefore KN(x,x)≤K(x,x).
By continuity
[TABLE]
for all x∈X.
So the series ∑λn∣en∣2 is pointwise convergent
and ∑n=1∞λn∣en(x)∣2≤K(x,x) for all x∈X.
If x,y∈X, then
[TABLE]
Define K:X×X→\mathdsC by
[TABLE]
Then ∣K(x,y)∣≤K(x,x)1/2K(y,y)1/2 for all
(x,y)∈X×X, so K is bounded on compact subsets
of X×X.
It will take quite some effort to show that K=K.
Let x∈X.
Let F⊂X be compact.
We shall show that the series ∑λnen(x)en
converges uniformly on F.
Let ε>0.
There exists an N∈\mathdsN such that
∑n=N∞λn∣en(x)∣2<ε2.
Then
[TABLE]
for all y∈F.
So the series ∑λnen(x)en
converges uniformly on F.
Consequently the function K(x,⋅) is continuous on F and then
also on X.
Similarly, the function K(⋅,y) is continuous for all y∈X.
Therefore K is separately continuous.
Let u∈Cc(Ω).
Then for all x∈X the series ∑λnen(x)enu
is uniformly convergent on suppu.
Hence
[TABLE]
for all x∈X.
On the other hand,
Tu=∑n=1∞λn(u,en)L2(Ω)en in L2(Ω),
so (Tu)(x)=∑n=1∞λn(u,en)L2(Ω)en(x)
for almost every x∈Ω.
Also (Tu)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for all x∈X.
Therefore
[TABLE]
for almost every x∈Ω.
Since K is bounded on compact subsets of X×X it follows
from the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem that
x↦∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy is continuous on X.
Hence (3) is valid for all x∈X.
Now let x∈X.
Then (3) implies that K(x,⋅)=K(x,⋅)
almost everywhere on Ω.
So by continuity one concludes that K(x,⋅)=K(x,⋅)
pointwise on X, that is K(x,y)=K(x,y) for all y∈X.
Hence K=K.
We proved that
∑n=1∞λn∣en(x)∣2=K(x,x)=K(x,x)
for all x∈X.
So ∑n=1∞λn∣en∣2 is continuous by the
assumption that K is continuous.
Let F⊂X be compact.
Then by Dini’s theorem the series ∑λn∣en∣2
converges uniformly on F.
Since
[TABLE]
for all x∈F and y∈X, the series
∑λn∣en⊗en∣
is uniformly convergent on compact subsets of X×X.
Finally, the monotone convergence theorem gives
[TABLE]
So the operator T is trace class if and only if ∫ΩK(x,x)dx<∞.
∎
Corollary 5.3**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsR be open, non-empty and X⊂\mathdsRd a set such that
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
Let K∈C(X×X)
and suppose that K∣Ω×Ω∈L2(Ω×Ω).
Let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be the Hilbert–Schmidt operator
with kernel K∣Ω×Ω.
Suppose that T is positive and TL2(Ω)⊂C(X).
Every Hilbert–Schmidt operator is compact.
Let u∈Cc(X).
Then (Tu)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for almost
every x∈Ω, since T is the Hilbert–Schmidt operator
with kernel K∣Ω×Ω.
But Tu is continuous on Ω by assumption and also
x↦∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy is continuous by the Lebesgue
dominated convergence theorem.
Therefore (Tu)(x)=∫ΩK(x,y)u(y)dy for all x∈Ω
and the conditions of Theorem 5.2 are satisfied.
∎
Corollary 5.4**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsR be open and bounded.
Let K∈Cb(Ω×Ω) and
let T∈L(L2(Ω)) be the Hilbert–Schmidt operator
with kernel K.
Suppose that T is positive.
Then T is trace class.
We remark that the positivity of T can be characterised if the kernel is continuous,
as is well known (cf. [BCR] Chapter 3, Exercise 1.24).
Lemma 5.5**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsR be open,
let K∈C(Ω×Ω) and T∈L(L2(Ω)).
Suppose that for all u∈Cc(Ω) the equality
[TABLE]
is valid for almost every x∈Ω.
Then the following are equivalent.
(i)
T* is positive.*
(ii)
∑k,l=1NckclK(xk,xl)≥0*
for all N∈\mathdsN, x1,…,xN∈Ω and c1,…,cN∈\mathdsC.*
Our arguments in the proof of Theorem 5.2 stem from the
classical result where K∈C(Ω×Ω)
and Ω is bounded, see for example Werner [Wer] Satz VI.4.2.
Theorem 5.2 is covered by [Sun] Theorem 2, where
reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces are used for the proof of identity (3),
but the trace formula is missing.
Ferreira, Menegatto and Oliveira use the same arguments as we for proving
[FMO] Theorem 2.6, but the statement is different.
6 Examples
In this section we give examples which illustrate our results.
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be open connected and bounded.
Depending on the problem one might obtain kernels in
C(X×X) for different choices of X with
Ω⊂X⊂Ω.
The first example is with Neumann boundary conditions.
Example 6.1**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be an open connected bounded set
with continuous boundary.
Further let Γ⊂∂Ω be a relatively open set
such that for all z∈Γ there is an r>0 such that
B(z,r)∩Γ is a Lipschitz graph with B(z,r)∩Ω
on one side.
Consider the Neumann Laplacian ΔN in L2(Ω) and let
S be the C0-semigroup generated by ΔN.
Choose X=Ω∪Γ.
Then St is self-adjoint and StL2(Ω)⊂C(X)
for all t>0 by [ER] Lemmas 5.1 and 6.7.
Since Ω has continuous boundary, the operator ΔN has compact resolvent.
Denote by 0=λ1<λ2≤λ3≤… the
eigenvalues of −ΔN repeated with multiplicity and
by (en)n∈\mathdsN an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω)
satisfying −ΔNen=λnen for all n∈\mathdsN.
We may choose e1=\mathds1Ω.
Then en∈C(X) for all n∈\mathdsN.
It follows from Corollary 3.4 that
St=(St/3)3 has a kernel Kt∈C(X×X) for all t>0.
Moreover, Theorem 5.2 gives
[TABLE]
for all t>0 and x,y∈X.
Furthermore, for all t>0 the series ∑e−λnt∣en⊗en∣
converges uniformly on compact subsets of X×X.
Example 6.2**.**
Let Ω⊂\mathdsRd be an open connected bounded set.
Consider the Dirichlet Laplacian ΔD in L2(Ω).
Let Γ be the set of all regular points in the sense of Wiener.
Choose X=Ω∪Γ.
We first show that
[TABLE]
Let u∈D(ΔD) and suppose that f=ΔDu∈L∞(Ω).
Clearly u∈C(Ω) by elliptic regularity.
It sufficies to show that limx→z,x∈Ωu(x)=0
for all z∈Γ.
Denote by Ed the Newtonian potential on \mathdsRd and write
w=Ed∗f~, where f~∈L∞(\mathdsRd) is the extension
of f by [math].
Then w∈C(\mathdsRd)∩H1(\mathdsRd).
Moreover, Δ(w∣Ω)=f=Δu∈H−1(Ω) as distributions.
Write h=w∣Ω−u and φ=w∣∂Ω.
Then h is the Perron solution of φ by [AD] Theorem 1.1.
In particular limx→z,x∈Ωh(x)=φ(z)
for all z∈Γ since z is a regular point.
Because φ(z)=w(z) this implies that
limx→z,x∈Ωu(x)=0 as required
and (4) follows.
Let S be the C0-semigroup generated by ΔD.
Then St is self-adjoint for all t>0.
Let t>0 and u∈L2(Ω).
Then Stu∈D(ΔD) by holomorphy of the semigroup S and
ΔDStu=St/2ΔDSt/2u∈L∞(Ω) by
ultracontractivity of S.
Hence Stu∈C(X) by (4).
Since Ω is bounded, the operator ΔD has compact resolvent.
Denote by 0<λ1<λ2≤λ3≤… the
eigenvalues of −ΔD repeated with multiplicity and
by (en)n∈\mathdsN an orthonormal basis for L2(Ω)
satisfying −ΔDen=λnen for all n∈\mathdsN.
As in the previous example one deduces that en∈C(X) for all n∈\mathdsN
and the operator
St=(St/3)3 has a kernel Kt∈C(X×X) for all t>0.
Moreover, Theorem 5.2 implies that
[TABLE]
for all t>0 and x,y∈X.
Finally, for all t>0 the series ∑e−λnt∣en⊗en∣
converges uniformly on compact subsets of X×X.
Acknowledgements
The first-named author is most grateful for the hospitality extended
to him during a fruitful stay at the University of Auckland and the
second-named author
for a wonderful stay at the University of Ulm.
This work is supported by the Marsden Fund Council from Government funding,
administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand.
Bibliography14
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[AD] Arendt, W. and Daners, D. , The Dirichlet problem by variational methods. Bull. London Math. Soc. 40 (2008), 51–56.
2[AE 1] Arendt, W. and Elst, A. F. M. ter , Gaussian estimates for second order elliptic operators with boundary conditions. J. Operator Theory 38 (1997), 87–130.
3[AE 2] , The Dirichlet-to-Neumann operator on C ( ∂ Ω ) 𝐶 Ω C(\partial\Omega) . Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. (2019). ar Xiv:1707.05556. In press.
4[Al B] Aliprantis, C. D. and Border, K. C. , Infinite Dimensional Analysis . Third edition. Springer, Berlin, 2006.
5[BCR] Berg, C., Christensen, J. P. R. and Ressel, P. , Harmonic analysis on semigroups . Graduate Texts in Mathematics 100. Springer, Berlin, 1984.
6[Dan] Daners, D. , Heat kernel estimates for operators with boundary conditions. Math. Nachr. 217 (2000), 13–41.
7[Dav] Davies, E. B. , Heat kernels and spectral theory . Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics 92. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge etc., 1989.
8[ER] Elst, A. F. M. ter and Rehberg, J. , Hölder estimates for second-order operators on domains with rough boundary. Adv. Diff. Equ. 20 (2015), 299–360.