Positive Harmonic Functions on the Heisenberg group I
Yves Benoist

TL;DR
This paper classifies positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group specifically for the southwest measure, advancing understanding of harmonic analysis in non-commutative geometric settings.
Contribution
It provides a complete classification of positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group for a particular measure, which was previously uncharacterized.
Findings
Complete classification of positive harmonic functions for the southwest measure
New insights into harmonic analysis on the Heisenberg group
Foundation for further studies in non-commutative harmonic analysis
Abstract
We present the classification of positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group in the case of the southwest measure.
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.
Positive harmonic functions
on the Heisenberg group I
Yves Benoist
Abstract
We present the classification of positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group in the case of the southwest measure.
Contents
1 Introduction
In this self-contained paper, we present the classification of the positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group in the special case of the southwest measure. This example is striking because the famous partition functions occur as positive harmonic functions. In this case, our main result tells us that roughly all positive harmonic functions are combinations of characters and partition functions (Theorem 1.1).
We will also explain with no proof how this result can be extended to finite positive measures on (Theorem 3.9).
1.1 The partition function as a potential
We first introduce the “partition function” for any integers , , in .
1.1.1 The partition function
This function counts the “number of Young diagrams of area ”, also called “partitions of ”, included in a rectangle with side lengths and . More precisely, when , and are non-negative, one has
[TABLE]
and otherwise. The integers are the lengths of the rows of the partition. By convention, for , one has when , and .
This partition function satisfies the functional equation, for all in , ,
[TABLE]
One checks it by splitting this set of partitions according to the colour of the lower-left case of the rectangle as in Figure 2.
1.1.2 The Heisenberg group
Recall that the Heisenberg group is the set of triples seen as matrices (x,y,z):=\mbox{\scriptsize\left(!\begin{array}[]{ccc}1&x&z\ 0&1&y\ 0&0&1\end{array}!\right)}. It is endowed with the product
[TABLE]
Let be the southwest measure on . It is given by
[TABLE]
Let be the unity of and be the characteristic function of . Equation (1.2) can be rewritten as, for all in ,
[TABLE]
In particular, the function satisfies
[TABLE]
This inequality (1.6) tells us that the function is a -superharmonic function on the Heisenberg group .
1.1.3 The potential
More precisely, the partition function is the potential of at . This means that one has the equality
[TABLE]
Indeed, as can be seen in Figure 3, for in ,
[TABLE]
A function on is said to be -harmonic if it satisfies
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
1.2 Construction of positive -harmonic functions
We want to classify all the positive111A function on is said to be positive if for all in and . solutions of (1.6), i.e. all the positive -superharmonic functions on . We begin with five remarks.
1.2.1 Choquet Theorem
By a theorem of Choquet in [5], every positive superharmonic function is an average of extremal222A positive (super)harmonic function is said to be extremal if it cannot be written as the sum of two non-proportional positive (super)harmonic functions. positive superharmonic functions . Moreover when is harmonic the are harmonic. By Riesz decomposition theorem [13, Thm 2.1.4], every positive -superharmonic function can be written in a unique way as the sum of a potential333A potential is a function of the form for a positive function on . and a positive -harmonic function. Therefore it is enough to describe the extremal positive -harmonic functions on .
1.2.2 Choquet-Deny Theorem
If we look for a -harmonic function which does not depend on , Equation (1.9) becomes
[TABLE]
This equation tells us that the function is -harmonic on the abelian quotient of . According to a theorem of Choquet and Deny in [6], since the support of the measure spans the group , every extremal positive -harmonic function on this abelian group is proportionnal to a character444The proof is very short. One notices that Equality (1.10) gives a decomposition of as a sum of two positive harmonic functions and hence both of them are proportional to :
[TABLE]
1.2.3 The partition function as a harmonic function
If we look for a -harmonic function which does not depend on , Equation (1.9) becomes
[TABLE]
A nice example is given by the partition function where
[TABLE]
Hence the function is a -harmonic function on .
1.2.4 Margulis First Theorem
According to the first theorem of Margulis, a theorem he proved in [10] when he was not yet twenty, Choquet-Deny Theorem is still true on a finitely generated nilpotent group as soon as the support of the measure spans as a semigroup (See Fact 3.8). This is why it might look surprising at first glance, that there exists a positive -harmonic function on which is not invariant by the center. The reason it exists is that the support of spans as a group but not as a semigroup. What is more surprising is that this “new” positive harmonic function is given by the famous partition function .
1.2.5 Switching and translating harmonic functions
We denote by the automorphism of exchanging and . It is given by
[TABLE]
Since the function is -harmonic, the function
[TABLE]
is also -harmonic. For in , we denote by the right translation by on . The translated functions and are also -harmonic.
1.3 Classification of positive -harmonic functions
We can now state our main result for the southwest measure introduced in (1.4).
1.3.1 Main result and strategy
Theorem 1.1**.**
*Let be an extremal positive -harmonic function on the Heisenberg group . Then, up to a multiplicative scalar,
-
either is a -harmonic character as in (1.11),
-
or is a translate of the function ,
-
or is a translate of the function .*
This classification has been annouced on May 2019 in a short informal videotaped speech at the Cetraro Conference “Dynamics of group actions”.
As we will see the partition function will play a crucial role in the proof of Theorem 1.1. Indeed, in Chapter 2, we will prove a ratio limit theorem for the partition function . In Chapter 3, we will deduce from this ratio limit theorem the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Notice that the positive -harmonic function vanishes. In particular, it does not satisfy the Harnack inequality. This contrasts with the case studied in [10] where the support of spans as a semigroup.
In the last Section 3.4, we will present the classification of the positive -harmonic functions, for all finitely supported measures on .
1.3.2 Dealing with a probability measure
At first glance it might look a little bit weird to deal with -harmonic function for a measure which is not a probability measure. We could have worked instead with the probability measure
[TABLE]
which is the law for the southwest random walk on . The -harmonic functions on are the functions satisfying
[TABLE]
is the expected value of the function after one step of the random walk.
It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
Therefore, classifying positive -harmonic functions is equivalent to classifying positive -harmonic functions. The main reason we are using instead of is to get rid of all these factors .
1.3.3 Extremal superharmonic functions
We have seen in (1.5) that the partition function is -superharmonic and more precisely that it is the potential of at . For every in , the function is also a potential of at . By Riesz decomposition Theorem, those potentials are exactly the extremal positive -superharmonic functions on which are not harmonic. Therefore,
every extremal positive -superharmonic functions on which
is not harmonic is a translate of the function .
We would like to end this introduction by pointing out other limit theorems for random walks on the Heisenberg group and other nilpotent groups as [8], [3], [4],[7] eventhough we will not use them here.
2 The partition function
The aim of this chapter is to prove the ratio limit theorem (Proposition 2.2) for the partition function .
2.1 The unimodality of the partition functions
We recall that, for , the partition function counts the number of partitions of included in a rectangle with side lengths and . See Definition (1.1.1) and Figure 1.
This function is non-zero for and satisfies the equalities
[TABLE]
This function is well-studied. For instance one has
Fact 2.1**.**
(Cayley, Sylvester 1850)* The sequence is unimodal, i.e. it is increasing for .*
The proof below relies on the theory of finite dimensional representations of the Lie algebra . This proof is due to Hughes in [9]. See [12] for an elementary proof and [14, p. 522] for a survey of various generalizations.
Sketch of proof of Fact 2.1.
Let and be the principal -triple in the Lie algebra so that . This Lie algebra has a natural representation in the space . One checks that where denotes the eigenspace of in for the eigenvalue . The theory of representations of tells us that for , one always has . ∎
2.2 The ratio limit theorem
Here is the Ratio Limit Theorem for :
Proposition 2.2**.**
One has
This limit is taken along sequences of positive triples such that and .
With this generality this theorem seems to be new, eventhough there already exist very precise estimates of in certain ranges. For instance, when , the partition function depends only on . It is the classical partition function which admits a famous asymptotic expansion due to Hardy and Ramanujan in 1920 (See [1, Ch. 5]). These estimates have been extended to larger ranges of as in [15] and [11]. We will not use them.
The proof of Proposition 2.2 is tricky but elementary. The rough idea is to introduce a relation between the set of partitions of and the set of partitions of such that “most of the time” when and are related, they are related to approximately the same number of partitions (see Lemma 2.5).
Because of (2.1), we can assume that and .
2.3 When the height of the rectangles is bounded
In this section, we deal with the easy case when the height remains bounded.
Lemma 2.3**.**
For all , one has
Note that in this limit is fixed, and , go to with .
Proof of Lemma 2.3.
This follows from Lemma 2.4 and the inequalities
[TABLE]
The first inequality is the unimodality of the partition function.
For the second inequality, just notice that one can inject the set of partitions of of height exactly inside the set of partitions of of height at most by removing the last square in the bottom row of each partition. ∎
We have used the following Lemma.
Lemma 2.4**.**
* For all , one has .
For all , there exists such that, for all with , one has *
Proof of Lemma 2.4.
The lengths of the last rows of the partition are bounded by and the first row is deduced from the others.
Choose integers in the interval . and keep only those for which the system
[TABLE]
has a solution in . But then one has
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
This gives about partitions of with . ∎
2.4 Inner and outer corner of a partition
We now introduce notations that will stengthen the connection between partitions and words in the Heisenberg group.
We recall that and are the generators of the Heisenberg group . Let
[TABLE]
be the semigroup generated by and and let
[TABLE]
be the generator of the center of .
Let be the set of finite words in , of length and let . Using the product law in , to each word , we can associate an element in . The partition function gives the size of the fibers of this map :
[TABLE]
Indeed, as explained in Figure 3, when , each word in corresponds uniquely to a partition of included in a rectangle with side lengths and . We introduce now the following relation on ,
[TABLE]
Let and be the two projections
[TABLE]
For , in , the cardinality of the fiber is the number of pairs occuring in the word . The size is also the number of inner corners of the partition associated to . See Figure 5. Similarly the cardinality of the fiber is the number of pairs occuring in the word . It is equal to the number of outer corners of the partition associated to .
The following lemma compares the size of these fibers.
Lemma 2.5**.**
* For all , one has .
For all , one has .
In particular, one also has .*
Proof of Lemma 2.5.
This follows from the equality .
Comparing the number of pairs and pairs occuring in and in , one gets and . ∎
2.5 Partitions with bounded number of corners
We will need to control the number of partitions of included in a rectangle with side length , that have at most inner corner.
The following Lemma 2.6 tells us that is negligeable compared to the total number of partitions .
Lemma 2.6**.**
For all , one has
The limit is taken along sequences where all coordinates , , go to and .
Proof of Lemma 2.6.
Use the following slight upgrade of Lemma 2.4. ∎
Lemma 2.7**.**
* For all , one has .
For all , there exists such that, for all with and , one has *
Proof of Lemma 2.7.
It is similar to Lemma 2.4.
We can assume . We want to choose integers and , bounded by such that . There are at most possibilities.
We give a rough count. Choose as large as possible such that, setting and , one has . There exists a partition of with rows and all of whose rows have length or . For every sequence , we can modify this partition by adding spots to the highest row of and removing spots to the lowest row of , for all . This gives different partitions of where . Hence, one has .
First case : when . In this case, we have .
One gets .
Second case : when . In this case, we have .
If , one gets .
If , one gets . ∎
2.6 When the height of the rectangles is unbounded
We can now explain the proof of the ratio limit theorem.
Proof of Proposition 2.2.
By (2.1) and Lemma 2.3, we can assume that are going to with and . For in , one sets and one computes
[TABLE]
where if and otherwise. Similarly, by Lemma 2.5., one has
[TABLE]
where or . Combining (2.4), (2.5) and Lemma 2.5., one gets
[TABLE]
We recall that is the number of with . Therefore, one has
[TABLE]
We let go to infinity with . According to Lemma 2.6, for all , the ratios converge to [math]. Therefore
[TABLE]
and therefore the sequence converges to as required. ∎
3 Positive harmonic functions
We now start the classification of extremal positive -harmonic functions . In Section 3.1, we deal with the case where has a non-zero limit along an orbit of or . In Sections 3.2 and 3.3, we deal with the case where goes to zero along all orbits of and . In Section 3.4 we present the generalization of this classification to any finitely supported measure on .
3.1 The function as an harmonic function
In this section we characterize the functions and among extremal positive -harmonic functions by their behavior along the orbits and of .
We recall that and are the generators of the Heisenberg group , that , and that and are the -harmonic functions and .
We first begin by an alternative construction of the function . Let be the abelian subgroup of generated by and let be the characteristic function of . One has
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.1**.**
One has the equality
Remark 3.2*.*
Since the function is -subharmonic, i.e. the sequence is increasing.
Proof of Lemma 3.1.
One can compute explicitely this function . It does not depend on . Indeed is the number of ways of writing the element as a word of length in and . This proves the equality, involving the partition function,
[TABLE]
Letting go to , we conclude using (1.2.3). ∎
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let and be an extremal positive -harmonic function on such that . Then one has with .
In particular, the positive -harmonic function is extremal.
Proof of Lemma 3.3.
We can assume that . Since the function is positive and -harmonic, the sequence is decreasing. Hence it has a limit . By assumption, this limit is positive. By construction, one has the equality . Since is -harmonic, one also has the inequality for all . Therefore, by Lemma 3.1, one gets . Since is extremal, it has to be proportional to and therefore one has .
It remains to check that is extremal. If one can write with both and positive -harmonic, for at least one of them, say , the sequence does not converge to [math] for . Hence, by the previous discussion, is proportional to . This proves that is extremal. ∎
Exchanging the role of and we get
Corollary 3.4**.**
Let be an extremal positive -harmonic function on such that . Then one has for some .
In particular, the positive -harmonic function is extremal.
3.2 Harmonic functions that decay on cosets
We now discuss positive harmonic functions on that decay to [math] along the orbits and .
Let be the subset of consisting of elements of “degree” ,
[TABLE]
By definition and by (1.7), a positive -harmonic function on satisfies the equality, for all ,
[TABLE]
For an integer , we set
[TABLE]
The following lemma tells us when the contributions of and in Formula (3.1) is negligeable.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let be a positive -harmonic function on such that,
[TABLE]
Then, for all and in , one has
[TABLE]
Proof of Lemma 3.5.
It is enough to prove (3.4) with . Moreover, since is the image of by the involution which exchanges and , it is enough to prove (3.4) with . Equivalently, it is enough to prove
[TABLE]
Note that, when , every word can be written as
[TABLE]
with a word of length . See Figure 6.
One splits the set according to or . Therefore, for , one has the inclusion
[TABLE]
Therefore, using (3.1), one gets the inequalities
[TABLE]
For all , we choose large enough so that, by the second assumption (3.3), one has . Then the last sum is a sum over the fixed finite set , and, by the first assumption (3.3), this last sum converges to [math] when goes to infinity. This proves (3.5) as required. ∎
3.3 Using the ratio limit theorem
Combining Lemma 3.5 with the ratio limit theorem we can finish the last case of the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let be a positive -harmonic function on such that, for all in , . Then is invariant by the center of .
Proof of Lemma 3.6.
Using (3.1) with and , we compute,
[TABLE]
We fix . According to the ratio limit theorem (Proposition 2.2), there exists an integer such that, for all in with and , one has
[TABLE]
Therefore, using (3.6), (3.7) and Definition (3.2), one gets
[TABLE]
By (3.1), the first term is equal to . Therefore using twice Lemma 3.5 and letting go to infinity, one gets . Since is arbitrary small, this proves that as required. ∎
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let be an extremal positive -harmonic function on such that, for all in , . Then is a character of .
In particular, every -harmonic character of is an extremal positive -harmonic function.
Proof of Corollary 3.7.
By Lemma 3.6, the function is -harmonic on the abelian group . By Choquet-Deny Theorem, it is a character.
It remains to check that a -harmonic character is extremal. Assume that with both and positive -harmonic. For all in , the sequences and converge to [math] for . Hence, by the previous discussion and by Choquet Theorem, the function is an integral where is a finite positive measure on the set of (harmonic) character of . Since , the measure must be supported by . This proves that is extremal. ∎
This ends the proof of Theorem 1.1.
3.4 Extension to finitely supported measures
In this section we give the classification of the positive -harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group for all finitely supported measure .
Let be the Heisenberg group and be a finite subset of . We denote by the subgroup of generated by . Let be a positive measure on with support .
We recall that a function on is said to be -harmonic if
[TABLE]
We want to describe the cone of positive -harmonic functions on . By Choquet Theorem, it is enough to describe the extremal rays of this cone .
There are two constructions of extremal positive -harmonic functions.
3.4.1 The harmonic characters
The -harmonic characters are the characters of such that . Such a function is an extremal positive -harmonic function on which is invariant by the center of .
We now recall Margulis Theorem which tells us that this first construction is the only possible when .
Fact 3.8**.**
(Margulis)* Let be a finite positive measure on a finitely generated nilpotent group . If the semigroup generated by the support of is equal to , then every extremal positive -harmonic function on is a character.*
Sketch of proof of Fact 3.8 for .
Because of the assumption , we can assume that and . The first part of the argument is as in the abelian case : since , these two -harmonic functions are proportional and we get that, for some , one has . We now want to prove that .
Let be the set of positive harmonic functions with . Since , the convex set is compact for the pointwise convergence. The element acts continuously by “right-translation and renormalization” on . By Schauder fixed point theorem, this action has a fixed point in . It can be written as with . But then one writes for all in , or equivalently for all . This proves that . ∎
When , a second construction is possible.
3.4.2 The functions
induced from a harmonic character
Let be an abelian subset. Denote by the measure restriction of to . Let be a -harmonic character of . We extend as a function
[TABLE]
on which is [math] outside . This function is -subharmonic, so that the sequence is increasing. We set
[TABLE]
We can tell exactly for which pairs the function is finite. In this case the function is an extremal positive -harmonic function on .
We can now state the extension of Theorem 1.1 to a more general finitely supported measure on .
Theorem 3.9**.**
Let and be a positive measure on whose finite support generates the group . Then every extremal positive -harmonic function on is proportional either to a character of or to a translate of a function induced from a harmonic character.
Corollary 3.10**.**
*Let , its center and a probability measure on whose finite support generates the group . The following are equivalent:
Every positive -harmonic function on is -invariant.
contains two non-central elements whose product is in .*
Theorem 3.9 and Corollary 3.10 will be proven in the sequel paper [2].
We will also see that on the nilpotent group of rank 4 with cyclic center, there exist extremal positive harmonic functions which are neither an harmonic character nor a function induced from a harmonic character.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] G. E. Andrews. The theory of partitions . Addison-Wesley, 1976.
- 2[2] Y. Benoist. Positive harmonic functions on the Heisenberg group II. En cours.
- 3[3] E. Breuillard. Local limit theorems and equidistribution of random walks on the Heisenberg group. Geom. Funct. Anal. , 15:35–82, 2005.
- 4[4] E. Breuillard. Equidistribution of dense subgroups on nilpotent Lie groups. Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems , 30:131–150, 2010.
- 5[5] G. Choquet. Représentations intégrales dans les cônes convexes sans base compacte. C. R. Acad. Sci. , 253:1901–1903, 1961.
- 6[6] G. Choquet and J. Deny. Sur l’équation de convolution μ = μ ∗ σ 𝜇 ∗ 𝜇 𝜎 \mu=\mu\ast\sigma . C. R. Acad. Sci. , 250:799–801, 1960.
- 7[7] P. Diaconis and B. Hough. Random walk on unipotent matrix groups. ar Xiv: 1512.06304.
- 8[8] Y. Guivarc’h. Groupes nilpotents et probabilité. C. R. Acad. Sci. , 273:997–998, 1971.
