Rectangular summation of multiple Fourier series and multi-parametric capacity
Karl-Mikael Perfekt

TL;DR
This paper studies the summability and divergence of multiple Fourier series in the Dirichlet space of the polydisc, characterizing exceptional sets via multi-parametric logarithmic capacity and extending results to vector-valued functions.
Contribution
It establishes the summability of multiple Fourier series outside sets of zero capacity and constructs divergent series on such sets, also extending results to vector-valued functions.
Findings
Fourier series are summable outside zero capacity sets.
Constructs divergent Fourier series on zero capacity sets.
Characterizes exceptional sets for Dirichlet space functions.
Abstract
We consider the class of multiple Fourier series associated with functions in the Dirichlet space of the polydisc. We prove that every such series is summable with respect to unrestricted rectangular partial sums, everywhere except for a set of zero multi-parametric logarithmic capacity. Conversely, given a compact set in the torus of zero capacity, we construct a Fourier series in the class which diverges on this set, in the sense of Pringsheim. We also prove that the multi-parametric logarithmic capacity characterizes the exceptional sets for the radial variation and radial limits of Dirichlet space functions. As a by-product of the methods of proof, the results also hold in the vector-valued setting.
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.
Rectangular summation of multiple Fourier series and multi-parametric capacity
Karl-Mikael Perfekt
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6AX, United Kingdom
(Date: March 17, 2024)
Abstract.
We consider the class of multiple Fourier series associated with functions in the Dirichlet space of the polydisc. We prove that every such series is summable with respect to unrestricted rectangular partial sums, everywhere except for a set of zero multi-parametric logarithmic capacity. Conversely, given a compact set in the torus of zero capacity, we construct a Fourier series in the class which diverges on this set, in the sense of Pringsheim. We also prove that the multi-parametric logarithmic capacity characterizes the exceptional sets for the radial variation and radial limits of Dirichlet space functions. As a by-product of the methods of proof, the results also hold in the vector-valued setting.
1. Introduction
This article will consider unrestricted rectangular summation and other multi-parameter summation methods of the multiple Fourier series
[TABLE]
To clarify this objective, note that there are several natural ways to form the partial sums of a multiple Fourier series. For example, one can attempt to sum the series via square partial sums,
[TABLE]
spherical partial sums,
[TABLE]
or unrestricted rectangular partial sums,
[TABLE]
where means that , with no assumption made on the relationship between and , . These three modes of convergence behave quite differently, and typically require different techniques to treat. The first two summation methods only depend on one parameter ( or ), while the the third is an example of a multi-parameter summation method. We refer to [4] and [23, Ch. XVII] for an introduction to multi-parameter summation methods for Fourier series.
Carleson [10] famously proved that the Fourier series of a function converges for almost every . This can be exploited to show that the Fourier series of a function , , converges with respect to square partial sums for almost every [2, 12, 21, 22]. On the other hand, C. Fefferman [13] constructed a continuous function whose Fourier series diverges with respect to unrestricted rectangular sums for every . Under spherical summation, the convergence question is still open for Fourier series of , , but we refer to [16] for some related negative results.
Let us now bring potential theory into the discussion. For a series such that , Beurling [8] showed that is summable for every , where is a set of zero logarithmic capacity. This was given a one-parameter generalization to multiple Fourier series by Lippman and Shapiro [17]. They proved that if , , is as in (1) and satisfies that , then is summable with respect to spherical partial sums, except for on a set of zero ordinary capacity (logarithmic capacity for and Newtonian capacity for , under the identification ).
An interest in the multi-parameter summation method (2) thus leads us to seek a suitable concept of capacity. A notion of multi-parametric logarithmic capacity has appeared recently in function-theoretic investigations of the Dirichlet space of the polydisc [5, 6, 7, 15]. In particular, in [3], it was proven that bi-parameter logarithmic capacity characterizes the Carleson measures of . It is therefore natural to generalize Beurling’s result to this context.
Before stating the main results, let us fix some notation. For a positive integer , consider the multiple Fourier series
[TABLE]
where , , and the coefficients belong to some Hilbert space , . We say that belongs to the Dirichlet space of the -disc, , if
[TABLE]
If , we simply write . Occasionally, it will be very useful for us to view for example the Dirichlet space of the bidisc as a Dirichlet space-valued one-variable Dirichlet space,
[TABLE]
This is the reason that we consider the vector-valued setting.
Through iterated Poisson extension, any defines an -valued holomorphic function in ,
[TABLE]
We will freely identify with the -torus .
For a positive measurable function on , let
[TABLE]
where denotes the normalized Lebesgue measure on . For a set in the -torus, we then define the following outer capacity:
[TABLE]
When and is a Borel set (or more generally a capacitable set, see Section 2), is equivalent to the usual (gently modified) logarithmic capacity of . For , is a multi-parameter analogue of logarithmic capacity. The capacity fits the general theory of [1, Ch. 2.3–2.5], allowing us to access certain basic tools of potential theory such as equilibrium measures. However, we warn the reader that a number of familiar properties from the one-parameter setting do not hold. Notably, the associated -logarithmic potentials defined in Section 2 generally fail to satisfy any kind of boundedness principle [3].
We shall actually prove convergence in a stronger sense than that given by (2). We say that the series converges in the sense of Pringsheim if it converges with respect to unrestricted rectangular partial sums,
[TABLE]
and it holds that
[TABLE]
Finally, we say that a property holds quasi-everywhere if it holds everywhere on but for a set of capacity 0. Our first main result is the following.
Theorem 1**.**
If , then for quasi-every , converges in the sense of Pringsheim.
Our second main theorem shows that Theorem 1 is sharp.
Theorem 2**.**
If is compact and , then there exists a function such that diverges in the sense of Pringsheim for .
To prove Theorems 1 and 2, we will first prove that multi-parametric logarithmic capacity characterizes the exceptional sets for the radial variation of ,
[TABLE]
where and .
Theorem 3**.**
If , then is finite for quasi-every .
Remark*.*
When and , this theorem is an immediate corollary of the work in [3]. In that paper, the Carleson measures for , which also turn out to be embedding measures for the radial variation, were given a potential-theoretic characterization. However, the characterization of Carleson measures is a much more complicated problem than the characterization of exceptional sets for the radial variation – see [14, 18].
Applying Theorem 3, we obtain the following corollary on unrestricted iterated Abel summation, that is, on the radial limits of a function .
Corollary 4**.**
If , then for quasi-every it holds that
[TABLE]
exists, and furthermore that
[TABLE]
The value of coincides with the Pringsheim sum quasi-everywhere.
Theorem 3 is also sharp.
Theorem 5**.**
If is compact and , then there exists a function such that
[TABLE]
To complete the analogy with Beurling’s work [8], we shall also prove the following result on the strong differentiability of the integral of . For and , let
[TABLE]
Theorem 6**.**
If , then
[TABLE]
for quasi-every .
Acknowledgments. The author is grateful to the anonymous referee for their suggestions, which helped to improve the exposition. This research was partially supported by EPSRC grant EP/S029486/1.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Multi-parametric capacity
First, let us slightly modify the kernel of (without otherwise changing the notation). Letting
[TABLE]
we note that is convergent and continuous for , and that
[TABLE]
See [23, Ch. V.1–V.2]. Hence, if we let , and for positive finite Borel measures on define
[TABLE]
this only changes the definition of in (3) up to constants.
Note that the convolution of with itself satisfies that
[TABLE]
The kernel defines the -logarithmic potential,
[TABLE]
The energy of a measure is thus given by
[TABLE]
Since is lower semi-continuous on , the theory of [1, Ch. 2.3–2.5] applies to , as was mentioned in the introduction. In particular, every Borel set is capacitable, that is,
[TABLE]
For any capacitable set , can be computed through the dual definition of capacity, which might give the reader a more familiar definition in the case of logarithmic capacity. More precisely,
[TABLE]
In particular, the set has capacity [math], , if and only if every non-zero positive finite measure with support in has infinite energy,
[TABLE]
Furthermore, the following simple lemma, which we shall use without mention, is clear from (3) and (6).
Lemma 7**.**
If are Borel sets, then
[TABLE]
The final piece of information that we require is the existence of equilibrium measures. For any compact set , the extremal to the capacity problem is generated by a measure such that: , for , for quasi-every and
[TABLE]
2.2. -harmonic functions
A continuous function on is -harmonic if it is harmonic in each variable separately, . For a finite measure on , we denote by the -harmonic function
[TABLE]
where and denotes the usual Poisson kernel,
[TABLE]
We refer to [19, Ch. 2] for the fundamentals of -harmonic functions and multiple Poisson integrals. We only need to know the following, which can be extracted from Theorems 2.1.3 and 2.3.1 in [19].
Lemma 8**.**
If is -harmonic and non-negative on , then there exists a function and a singular measure on such that
[TABLE]
Furthermore, for almost every , it holds that
[TABLE]
Remark*.*
Since we will prove theorems about unrestricted summation and strong differentiability, we note that unlike the one-variable setting, the proof of the lemma does not specify for which points the limit exists. In general, localization fails for multiple Poisson integrals. In fact, let be such that for , for some , and such that there is a sequence for which . Let be any function such that . Let
[TABLE]
Then the Fourier coefficients of satisfy that
[TABLE]
and vanishes in an open neighborhood of [math], but still
[TABLE]
In fact, the limit does not exist.
3. Convergence theorems
We begin by proving Theorem 3. Given , note that
[TABLE]
is a -set, hence capacitable. The following proof is in the spirit of Salem and Zygmund’s approach to exceptional sets for one-variable Dirichlet spaces [20].
Proof of Theorem 3.
We may assume that the Fourier coefficients of are supported in , . For , let
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
see [23, Ch. V.2]. Note that is another uniformly positive function with the same singular behavior as . Let . Then for some , and by (8) we see that has the same logarithmic singularity as , when . Let , , and for ,
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
We will also rely on the estimate
[TABLE]
Suppose now that the set of (7) has positive capacity. Then there exists a non-zero finite measure , supported in , such that
[TABLE]
where . Let be the -valued series
[TABLE]
The coefficients of are square-summable, by (8), (9), and the fact that . Thus has meaning for almost every , and
[TABLE]
By our assumption on the support of the Fourier coefficients of we have that
[TABLE]
and therefore by (10) that
[TABLE]
But then, by the assumption of finite energy,
[TABLE]
This is obviously a contradiction. ∎
Proof of Corollary 4.
We give the proof for . The proof is the same for , but the notation is more difficult. Given , define by
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let . Then , by three applications of Theorem 3. Suppose now that , and for , write by analyticity
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
Since , , and are all finite, it follows that
[TABLE]
Hence exists, for every outside the capacity zero set . Letting in the estimate also shows that is uniformly bounded in .
We postpone the proof that coincides with the sum quasi-everywhere to the proof of Theorem 1. ∎
For and , a series is summable at if and only if it is Abel summable at . This is sometimes known as Fejér’s Tauberian theorem. Thus, in this case Theorem 3 immediately implies Theorem 1. To prove Theorem 1 for , we begin by stating a vector-valued version of Fejér’s theorem.
Lemma 9**.**
For and , define by
[TABLE]
Then there is an absolute constant such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, for every fixed we have that
[TABLE]
uniformly in .
Proof.
Let , and note that , to see that
[TABLE]
For , we estimate
[TABLE]
By first choosing large, and then , we see that as . For the second term we have that
[TABLE]
and thus this term also tends to [math] as . This second estimate, together with the first estimate for , also shows the uniform bound of the operator norm of . ∎
In the proof of Theorem 1 we will consider tensors of the operators and , interpreted in the obvious way. For instance, if , , and , then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Similarly, we consider mixed tensor products, such as
[TABLE]
Proof of Theorem 1.
We will deduce the result from Theorem 3, Lemma 9, and an inductive procedure which exploits the fact that
[TABLE]
We already know that Theorem 1 is true for , precisely by Theorem 3 and Lemma 9.
Thus we first consider the case . By Corollary 4, there is a Borel set such that , and for every we have that is uniformly bounded in and convergent to as . To prove the theorem, it is thus sufficient to provide a set such that and such that for every it holds that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Constructing such a set of course also proves that quasi-everywhere, as claimed in Corollary 4.
We write
[TABLE]
Now, by the case of the theorem, applied to , there is a set such that , and such that for every we have the existence of
[TABLE]
Next, for , note that
[TABLE]
Thus, by Lemma 9 and (13) it follows that, for any fixed , the term is uniformly bounded in and tends to [math] as .
By a very similar argument (after reordering the variables and ), there is a set such that , and such that for every and , the term is uniformly bounded in and tends to zero as . Thus the proof for is finished by letting
[TABLE]
Note that in the course of the proof we have also established that is uniformly bounded in and converges to as , for .
For , Corollary 4 gives us a set such that and on which converges and is uniformly bounded. We then write
[TABLE]
Now we apply the case of the theorem, together with the remark at the end of its proof, three separate times to . Arguing with Lemma 9 as before, this produces three sets such that , and such that, for , the :th term is uniformly bounded in and converges to zero as . Thus is uniformly bounded and converges as , for . Furthermore, the same is true of and .
It is now clear how the construction extends by induction to . ∎
To conclude this section, we consider Theorem 6. One potential approach is to use a capacitary weak type inequality for the strong maximal function, or for the iterate of one-variable maximal functions. See [1, Theorem 6.2.1] for the one-parameter case. Instead of pursuing this, we will give a different argument which directly connects Theorem 6 with Theorem 1.
Proof of Theorem 6.
Note first that
[TABLE]
This is obviously true for polynomials, and for all by continuity. For this last statement, note that, with continuous dependence on , the values are square-integrable on , and the right-hand side of (14) is absolutely convergent.
The argument is now very similar to the proof of Theorem 1. First we consider the case , letting
[TABLE]
for and . Let be such that , and let . Then
[TABLE]
By this estimate, is uniformly bounded in and converges pointwise to [math] as , as long as . Thus Theorem 1 implies Theorem 6 in the case that .
For we proceed precisely as in the proof of Theorem 1. For instance, for we write
[TABLE]
where is related to by the facts that , . The rest of the proof is essentially repetition. ∎
4. Sharpness of results
To prove Theorem 5 in the multi-parameter setting, we adapt a one-variable construction of Carleson which is well described for example in [11, Theorem 3.4.1].
Proof of Theorem 5.
Since is outer and , we may choose a sequence of open sets such that , for all , and
[TABLE]
Since is compact, we may additionally assume that for every . Letting , we thus have a decreasing sequence of compact sets containing , such that
[TABLE]
Let be the equilibrium measure of , and define by the relationship
[TABLE]
for . Let
[TABLE]
It is key to the proof that if we choose sufficiently large, then
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
for and , since the left-hand side is the Poisson integral of . Therefore we fix as a constant such that (16) holds. The choice of only depends on .
With , we then have that
[TABLE]
where the last step follows by a computation with coefficients (including a straightforward approximation argument). A computation with Fourier coefficients also yields that
[TABLE]
In view of (15) we may therefore define the function
[TABLE]
We will demonstrate that , for every .
Since is -harmonic and non-negative, there is by Lemma 8 a measure such that , is singular, and for . By Corollary 4 the limit exists for quasi-every, and thus almost every, . Furthermore, by Fatou’s lemma and the properties of an equilibrium measure, we have that
[TABLE]
for quasi-every . On the other hand, by Lemma 8, we have that
[TABLE]
for almost every . We conclude that there is a constant , independent of , such that for almost every in the open set .
Note that . Given and , let
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where . Thus
[TABLE]
as . We conclude, for , that
[TABLE]
Hence, for ,
[TABLE]
Proof of Theorem 2.
This follows at once from Theorem 5 and the fact that a multiple series which converges in the sense of Pringsheim has uniformly bounded and convergent iterated Abel means. This can be deduced from the standard proof of Abel’s theorem, see for example [9].
For completeness, let us sketch a proof for our setting, in the case that . Hence assume that and that is Pringsheim convergent. Without loss of generality, we may suppose that . Then the summation by parts formula
[TABLE]
is clearly justified, since both sides are absolutely convergent. Indeed, by assumption,
[TABLE]
The formula (17) immediately shows that . Furthermore, for any , splitting the summation into the four index regions
[TABLE]
yields the estimate
[TABLE]
This evidently implies that as . ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] David R. Adams and Lars Inge Hedberg, Function spaces and potential theory , Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 314, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996.
- 2[2] N. Yu. Antonov, Convergence of Fourier series , Proceedings of the XX Workshop on Function Theory (Moscow, 1995), vol. 2, 1996, pp. 187–196.
- 3[3] Nicola Arcozzi, Pavel Mozolyako, Karl-Mikael Perfekt, and Giulia Sarfatti, Bi-parameter potential theory and Carleson measures for the Dirichlet space on the bidisc , preprint, ar Xiv:1811.04990 (2018).
- 4[4] J. Marshall Ash and Grant V. Welland, Convergence, uniqueness, and summability of multiple trigonometric series , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 163 (1972), 401–436.
- 5[5] Catherine Bénéteau, Alberto A. Condori, Constanze Liaw, Daniel Seco, and Alan A. Sola, Cyclicity in Dirichlet-type spaces and extremal polynomials II: Functions on the bidisk , Pacific J. Math. 276 (2015), no. 1, 35–58.
- 6[6] Catherine Bénéteau, Greg Knese, Łukasz Kosiński, Constanze Liaw, Daniel Seco, and Alan Sola, Cyclic polynomials in two variables , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 368 (2016), no. 12, 8737–8754.
- 7[7] Linus Bergqvist, A note on cyclic polynomials in polydiscs , Anal. Math. Phys. 8 (2018), no. 2, 197–211.
- 8[8] Arne Beurling, Ensembles exceptionnels , Acta Math. 72 (1940), 1–13.
