Some results on almost L-weakly and almost M-weakly compact operators
Hui Li, Zili Chen

TL;DR
This paper characterizes when semi-compact operators are almost L-weakly or M-weakly compact, linking these properties to the order continuity of the involved Banach space norms and exploring their relation to Dunford-Pettis operators.
Contribution
It provides necessary and sufficient conditions for semi-compact operators to be almost L-weakly or M-weakly compact, based on the order continuity of Banach space norms.
Findings
Semi-compact operators are almost L-weakly compact iff the target space's norm is order continuous.
Positive semi-compact operators are almost M-weakly compact iff the dual space's norm is order continuous.
Relationships between almost L-weakly compact and Dunford-Pettis operators are examined.
Abstract
In this paper, we present some necessary and sufficient conditions for semi-compact operators being almost L-weakly compact (resp. almost M-weakly compact) and the converse. Mainly, we prove that if is a nonzero Banach space, then every semi-compact operator is almost L-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous. And every positive semi-compact operator is almost M-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous. Moreover, we investigate the relationships between almost L-weakly compact operators and Dunford-Pettis (resp. almost Dunford-Pettis) operators.
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
TopicsAdvanced Banach Space Theory · Holomorphic and Operator Theory · Approximation Theory and Sequence Spaces
Some results on almost L-weakly and almost M-weakly compact operators
Hui Li
School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610000.
and
Zili Chen
School of Mathematics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 610000.
Abstract.
In this paper, we present some necessary and sufficient conditions for semi-compact operators being almost L-weakly compact (resp. almost M-weakly compact) and the converse. Mainly, we prove that if is a nonzero Banach space, then every semi-compact operator is almost L-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous. And every positive semi-compact operator is almost M-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous. Moreover, we investigate the relationships between almost L-weakly compact operators and Dunford-Pettis (resp. almost Dunford-Pettis) operators.
Key words and phrases:
semi-compact operator, almost L-weakly compact operator, almost M-weakly compact operator.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
46A40, 46B42
1. introduction
Throughout this paper, and will denote real Banach spaces, and will denote real Banach lattices. (resp. ) is the closed unit of Banach space (resp. Banach lattice ) and denotes the solid hull of a subset of a Banach lattice.
Recall that a continuous operator from a Banach space to a Banach lattice is said semi-compact if and only if for each there exists some such that . In recent years, K. Bouras et al. [4] introduced two classes of operators of almost L-weakly and almost M-weakly compact. Recall that an operator from a Banach space into a Banach lattice is called almost L-weakly compact if carries relatively weakly compact subsets of onto L-weakly compact subsets of . An operator from a Banach lattice into a Banach space is called almost M-weakly compact if for every disjoint sequence in and every weakly convergent sequence of , we have .
They proved in [4] that an operator from a Banach space into a Banach lattice is almost L-weakly compact if and only if for every weakly convergent sequence of and every disjoint sequence of ([4, Theorem 2.2]). After that, A. Elbour et al. [6] gave a useful characterization of almost L-weakly compact operator. An operator from a Banach space into a Banach lattice is almost L-weakly compact if and only if and for every weakly null sequence of and every disjoint sequence of ([6, Proposition 1]).
Recall that a norm of a Banach lattice is order continuous if for each net in with , one has . It is easy to see that if has an order continuous norm, . A Banach lattice is said to have weakly sequentially continuous lattice operations whenever implies . Every -space has this property. A Banach space is said to have the ** Schur property** whenever every weakly null sequence is norm null, i.e., whenever implies . A Banach space is said to have the ** positive Schur property** whenever every disjoint weakly null sequence is norm null. In [4], it was proved that the identity operator is almost L-weakly compact if and only if has the positive Schur property ([4, Proposition 2.2]). And the identity operator is almost M-weakly compact if and only if has the positive Schur property ([4, Corollary 2.1]).
Following from these conclusions, it is easy to see that there exist operators which are semi-compact but not almost L-weakly compact or almost M-weakly compact. And there also exist operators which are almost L-weakly compact (resp. almost M-weakly compact) but not semi-compact.
In this paper, we establish some necessary and sufficient conditions for semi-compact operator being almost L-weakly compact (resp. almost M-weakly compact) and the converse. More precisely, we prove that every semi-compact operator from a nonzero Banach space to a Banach lattice is almost L-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous (Theorem 2.1). And every positive semi-compact operator from a Banach lattice into a nonzero Banach lattice is almost M-weakly compact if and only if the norm of is order continuous (Theorem 2.2). We also investigate the conditions under which each almost L-weakly compact operator is semi-compact (Theorems 2.3, 2.5). Moreover, we show each positive almost Dunford-Pettis operator is almost L-weakly compact if and only if has an order continuous norm (Proposition 2.8).
All operators in this paper are assumed to be continuous. We refer to [1, 7] for all unexplained terminology and standard facts on vector and Banach lattices. All vector lattices in this paper are assumed to be Archimedean.
2. main results
There exist operators which are semi-compact but not almost L-weakly compact. For example, the identity operator is semi-compact since is an AM-space with unit. But it is not almost L-weakly compact since doesn’t have the positive Schur property.
The following Theorem gives a necessary and sufficient condition under which every semi-compact operator is almost L-weakly compact.
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let be a nonzero Banach space and be a Banach lattice. Then the following statements are equivalent:
- (1)
Every semi-compact operator is almost L-weakly compact;
- (2)
The norm of is order continuous.
Proof.
If the norm of is order continuous, then by Corollary 3.6.14 of [7], semi-compact operator is L-weakly compact. It is obvious that every L-weakly compact operator is almost L-weakly compact. Hence is almost L-weakly compact.
Assume by way of contradiction that the norm of is not order continuous, we need to construct an operator which is semi-compact but not almost L-weakly compact.
Since the norm of is not order continuous, by Theorem 4.14 of [1], there exists a vector and a disjoint sequence such that . On the other hand, as is nonzero, we may fix and pick a such that holds.
Now, we consider operator defined by
[TABLE]
for each . Obviously, is semi-compact as it is compact (its rank is one). But it is not an almost L-weakly compact operator. If not, as the singleton is a weakly compact subset of , and , the singleton is an L-weakly compact subset of . Since disjoint sequence , we have , which is a contradiction. ∎
There exist operators which are semi-compact but not almost M-weakly compact. For example, the operator defined by
[TABLE]
for each , where is the constant sequence with value 1 [1, p. 322 ]. Obviously, is semi-compact as it is compact (its rank is one). But based on the argument in [6, p. 3], we know that is not an almost M-weakly compact operator.
The following Theorem gives a necessary and sufficient condition under which every semi-compact operator is almost M-weakly compact.
Theorem 2.2**.**
Let and be two nonzero Banach lattices. Then the following statements are equivalent:
- (1)
Every positive semi-compact operator is almost M-weakly compact;
- (2)
The norm of is order continuous.
Proof.
Since positive operator is semi-compact, following from Corollary 3.3 of [2], is an almost Dunford-Pettis operator. As the norm of is order continuous, by Proposition 2.4 of [4], is an almost L-weakly compact operator. Following from Theorem 2.5(1) of [4], is almost M-weakly compact.
Assume by way of contradiction that the norm of is not order continuous, we need to construct a positive operator which is semi-compact but not almost M-weakly compact.
Since the norm of is not order continuous, by Theorem 4.14 of [1], there exists a vector and a disjoint sequence such that . On the other hand, as is nonzero, we may fix and pick a vector such that holds.
Now, we consider operator defined by
[TABLE]
for each . Obviously, is positive and semi-compact operator as it is compact (its rank is one). But it is not an almost M-weakly compact operator. In fact, by Theorem 2.5(1) of [4], we only need to show that its adjoint defined by
[TABLE]
for any is almost L-weakly compact. If not, as the singleton is a weakly compact subset of , and , the singleton is an L-weakly compact subset of . Since disjoint sequence , we have , which is a contradiction. ∎
There also exist operators which are almost L-weakly compact but not semi-compact. For instance, the identity operator is almost L-weakly compact since has the positive Schur property. But it is not semi-compact. If not, as is discrete with order continuous norm, is compact, which is impossible.
Next, denote as a continuous operator , we investigate the conditions under which each almost L-weakly compact operator is semi-compact.
Based on Theorem 4 of [6], we know that if has an order continuous norm, then each positive almost L-weakly compact operator is M-weakly compact, hence semi-compact. Now, we claim that if is reflexive then each almost L-weakly compact operator is semi-compact. In fact, if is reflexive, then is a relatively weakly compact subset of . As is almost L-weakly compact, is an L-weakly compact subset of . By Proposition 3.6.2 of [7], for every , there exists a vector such that . So is semi-compact.
The following Theorem gives the conditions under which each positive almost L-weakly compact operator from to is semi-compact.
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let be a Banach lattice with an order continuous norm. Then the following assertions are equivalent:
- (1)
Each positive almost L-weakly compact operator from to is semi-compact.
- (2)
The norm of is order continuous.
Proof.
Follows from Theorem 4 of [6].
Assume by way of contradiction that the norm of is not order continuous. To finish the proof, we need to construct a positive almost L-weakly compact operator which is not semi-compact.
Since the norm of is not order continuous, it follows from Theorem 116.1 of [8] that there exists a norm bounded disjoint sequence of positive elements in which does not weakly convergence to zero. Without loss of generality, we may assume that for any . And there exist and such that for all . Then by Theorem 116.3 of [8], we know that the components of in the carriers form an order bounded disjoint sequence in such that
for all and if
Define the positive operator as follows:
[TABLE]
for all . Since
[TABLE]
holds for all , the operator is well defined and it is also easy to see that is a positive operator.
Now define the operator as follows:
[TABLE]
for all . As , is well defined and is positive.
Next, we consider the composed operator defined by
[TABLE]
for all . Now we claim is an almost L-weakly compact operator. Since has an order continuous norm, . It suffices to show that satisfies the condition (b) of Proposition 1 of [6]. Let in and be a disjoint sequence in . It is obvious that is a weakly null sequence in . As has the Schur property, \bigl{\lVert}S_{1}x_{n}\bigr{\rVert}\rightarrow 0. Hence \lVert T(x_{n})\rVert=\bigl{\lVert}S_{2}(S_{1}(x_{n}))\bigr{\rVert}\rightarrow 0. Now following from the inequality
[TABLE]
we obtain that is an almost L-weakly compact operator.
But is not a semi-compact operator. In fact, note that and for all following from . So, if is semi-compact, then is almost order bounded in . Hence, is also almost order bounded. So, in , which is a contradiction. ∎
To investigate the necessary and sufficient conditions under which each almost L-weakly compact operator is semi-compact, we first give the following useful Lemma.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let be a Banach lattice with an order continuous norm. If is a norm bounded disjoint sequence of such that the set is almost order bounded in , then converges to zero in norm.
Proof.
Since is almost order bounded, there exists some such that
\bigl{\lVert}(\lvert u_{n}\rvert-u)^{+}\bigr{\rVert}\leq\varepsilon for all .
On the other hand, since is an order bounded disjoint sequence in and the norm of is order continuous, following from Theorem 4.14 of [1], converges to zero in norm . Hence, there exists some such that
\bigl{\lVert}\lvert u_{n}\rvert\wedge u\bigr{\rVert}\leq\varepsilon for all .
Now, following from the equality , we obtain that
[TABLE]
holds for all . So, in norm. ∎
Theorem 2.5**.**
Let and be two Banach lattices such that the norm of is order continuous. Then the following assertions are equivalent:
- (1)
Each positive almost L-weakly compact operator is semi-compact;
- (2)
One of the following conditions is valid:
- (a)
The norm of is order continuous;
- (b)
* or is finite dimensional.*
Proof.
Assume and are both infinite dimensional. We have to show that the norm of is order continuous. If not, to finish the proof, we need to construct a positive almost L-weakly compact operator which is not semi-compact.
Since the norm of is not order continuous, similarly with the proof of Theorem 2.3, we define the positive operator as follows:
[TABLE]
for all . And the operator is well defined.
On the other hand, since is infinite dimensional, by Lemma 2.3 of [3], there exists a disjoint sequence such that . Now define the operator as follows:
[TABLE]
for all . As , is well defined and is positive.
Next, we consider the composed operator defined by
[TABLE]
for all . Now we claim is an almost L-weakly compact operator. Since has an order continuous norm, . It suffices to show that satisfies the condition (b) of Proposition 1 of [6]. Let in and be a disjoint sequence in . It is obvious that is a weakly null sequence in . As has the Schur property, \bigl{\lVert}S_{1}x_{n}\bigr{\rVert}\rightarrow 0. Hence \lVert T(x_{n})\rVert=\bigl{\lVert}S_{3}(S_{1}(x_{n}))\bigr{\rVert}\rightarrow 0. Now following from the inequality
[TABLE]
we obtain that is an almost L-weakly compact operator.
But is not a semi-compact operator. In fact, note that and for all following from . So, if is semi-compact, then is almost order bounded in . Hence, is almost order bounded. By Lemma 2.4, in norm, which is a contradiction.
Follows from Theorem 4 of [6].
Let be a positive operator. If is finite dimensional, is M-weakly compact. Also, if is finite dimensional, is L-weakly compact. Hence, is semi-compact. ∎
There exist operators which are almost M-weakly compact but not semi-compact. For instance, the identity operator is almost M-weakly compact since has the Positive Schur property. But it is not semi-compact. If not, as is discrete with order continuous norm, is compact, which is impossible. Following by Corollary 5 of [6], we have the following assertion.
Theorem 2.6**.**
Let and be two Banach lattices. And let be an order bounded almost M-weakly compact operator. If has order continuous norm, then is semi-compact.
By Theorem 1 of [6], we know that every Dunford-Pettis operator is almost L-weakly compact if and only if has an order continuous norm. Next, we investigate the conditions under which each almost L-weakly compact operator is Dunford-Pettis.
There exist operators which are almost L-weakly compact but not Dunford-Pettis. For example, the identity operator is almost L-weakly compact as has the positive Schur property. But it is not Dunford-Pettis as does not have the Schur property. However, we have the following result.
Proposition 2.7**.**
Let be a Banach space and be a Banach lattice. If has weakly sequentially continuous lattice operations, then each almost L-weakly compact operator is Dunford-Pettis.
Proof.
Let be a weakly null sequence, we have to show that in norm. Based on Corollary 2.6 of [5], it suffices to show in and for each positive disjoint sequence in .
As , then . Since the lattice operations of are weakly sequentially continuous, in . On the other hand, as in and is an almost L-weakly compact operator, for each positive disjoint sequence in , . Hence, we get that is Dunford-Pettis. ∎
At last, we give a conclusion about the relationships between almost L-weakly compact operators and almost Dunford-Pettis operators. K. Bouras et al. show that if has an order continuous norm, each positive almost Dunford-Pettis operator is almost L-weakly compact ([4, Proposition 2.4]). We show that the condition of “ has an order continuous norm” is also necessary.
Proposition 2.8**.**
Let and be two nonzero Banach lattices. Then the following statements are equivalent:
- (1)
Each positive almost Dunford-Pettis operator is almost L-weakly compact.
- (2)
The norm of is order continuous.
Proof.
Follows from Proposition 2.4 of [4].
Assume by way of contradiction that the norm of is not order continuous. we need to construct a positive operator which is almost Dunford-Pettis but not almost L-weakly compact.
Similarly with the proof of Theorem 2.1. Since the norm of is not order continuous, by Theorem 4.14 of [1], there exists a vector and a disjoint sequence such that . On the other hand, as is nonzero, we may fix and pick a such that holds.
Now, we consider operator defined by
[TABLE]
for each . Obviously, is a positive operator and is compact (its rank is one). Hence, it is almost Dunford-Pettis. But it is not an almost L-weakly compact operator. If not, as the singleton is a weakly compact subset of , and , the singleton is an L-weakly compact subset of . Since disjoint sequence , we have , which is a contradiction.
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] C. D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw, Positive Operators , Springer, 2006.
- 2[2] B. Aqzzouz and A. Elbour, Some characterizations of almost Dunford-Pettis operators and application, Positivity (2011) 15: 369-380.
- 3[3] B. Aqzzouz, A. Elbour and J. Hmichane, On some properties of the class of semi-compact operators, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc. Simon Stevin (2011) 18: 761-767.
- 4[4] K. Bouras, D. Lhaimer and M. Moussa, On the class of almost L-weakly and almost M-weakly compact operator, Positivity (2018) 22: 1433-1443.
- 5[5] P. G. Dodds and D. H. Fremlin, compact operators on Banach lattices, Israel J. Math. (1979) 34, 287-320.
- 6[6] A. Elbour, F. Afkir, and M. Sabiri, Some properties of almost L-weakly and almost M-weakly compact operators, Positivity, preprint.
- 7[7] P. Meyer-Nieberg, Banach lattices , Universitext, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.
- 8[8] A. C. Zaanen, Riesz spaces II , North Holland Publishing Companyt, Amsterdam, 1983.
