Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Factorization of operators on Banach (function) spaces
Emiel Lorist
Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
Madrid, Spain
September 9, 2019
Joint work with Nigel Kalton and Lutz Weis
Euclidean structures• Project started in the early 2000s
• Understand the role R-boundedness from anabstract operator-theoretic viewpoint
• Connected to completely bounded maps
• Project on hold since Nigel passed away
• Studied and improved/extended parts of themanuscript in 2016
• Joined the project in 2018, rewrote and modernizedthe manuscript
• Euclidean structures• Part I: Representation of operator families
on a Hilbert space• Part II: Factorization of operator families• Part III: Vector-valued function spaces• Part IV: Sectorial operators and H∞-calculus• Part V: Counterexamples
• Project to be finished this fall
Nigel Kalton
Lutz Weis
1 / 12
Euclidean structures• Project started in the early 2000s
• Understand the role R-boundedness from anabstract operator-theoretic viewpoint
• Connected to completely bounded maps
• Project on hold since Nigel passed away
• Studied and improved/extended parts of themanuscript in 2016
• Joined the project in 2018, rewrote and modernizedthe manuscript
• Euclidean structures• Part I: Representation of operator families
on a Hilbert space• Part II: Factorization of operator families• Part III: Vector-valued function spaces• Part IV: Sectorial operators and H∞-calculus• Part V: Counterexamples
• Project to be finished this fall
Nigel Kalton
Lutz Weis
1 / 12
Euclidean structures• Project started in the early 2000s
• Understand the role R-boundedness from anabstract operator-theoretic viewpoint
• Connected to completely bounded maps
• Project on hold since Nigel passed away
• Studied and improved/extended parts of themanuscript in 2016
• Joined the project in 2018, rewrote and modernizedthe manuscript
• Euclidean structures• Part I: Representation of operator families
on a Hilbert space• Part II: Factorization of operator families• Part III: Vector-valued function spaces• Part IV: Sectorial operators and H∞-calculus• Part V: Counterexamples
• Project to be finished this fall
Nigel Kalton
Lutz Weis
1 / 12
Euclidean structures• Project started in the early 2000s
• Understand the role R-boundedness from anabstract operator-theoretic viewpoint
• Connected to completely bounded maps
• Project on hold since Nigel passed away
• Studied and improved/extended parts of themanuscript in 2016
• Joined the project in 2018, rewrote and modernizedthe manuscript
• Euclidean structures• Part I: Representation of operator families
on a Hilbert space• Part II: Factorization of operator families• Part III: Vector-valued function spaces• Part IV: Sectorial operators and H∞-calculus• Part V: Counterexamples
• Project to be finished this fall
Nigel Kalton
Lutz Weis
1 / 12
R-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say that Γ is R-bounded if forany finite sequences (Tk)nk=1 in Γ and (xk)nk=1 in X(
E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkTkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
≤ C(E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
,
where (εk)nk=1 is a sequence of independent Rademacher variables.
• R-boundedness is a strengthening of uniform boundedness.• Equivalent to uniform boundedness on Hilbert spaces.
• R-boundedness plays a (key) role in e.g.• Schauder multipliers• Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theory• Functional calculus• Maximal regularity of PDE’s• Stochastic integration in Banach spaces
•(E∥∥∑n
k=1 εkxk∥∥2)1/2
is a norm on X n.• A Euclidean structure is such a norm with a left and right ideal property.
2 / 12
R-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say that Γ is R-bounded if forany finite sequences (Tk)nk=1 in Γ and (xk)nk=1 in X(
E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkTkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
≤ C(E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
,
where (εk)nk=1 is a sequence of independent Rademacher variables.
• R-boundedness is a strengthening of uniform boundedness.• Equivalent to uniform boundedness on Hilbert spaces.
• R-boundedness plays a (key) role in e.g.• Schauder multipliers• Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theory• Functional calculus• Maximal regularity of PDE’s• Stochastic integration in Banach spaces
•(E∥∥∑n
k=1 εkxk∥∥2)1/2
is a norm on X n.• A Euclidean structure is such a norm with a left and right ideal property.
2 / 12
R-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say that Γ is R-bounded if forany finite sequences (Tk)nk=1 in Γ and (xk)nk=1 in X(
E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkTkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
≤ C(E∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk
∥∥∥2
X
)1/2
,
where (εk)nk=1 is a sequence of independent Rademacher variables.
• R-boundedness is a strengthening of uniform boundedness.• Equivalent to uniform boundedness on Hilbert spaces.
• R-boundedness plays a (key) role in e.g.• Schauder multipliers• Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theory• Functional calculus• Maximal regularity of PDE’s• Stochastic integration in Banach spaces
•(E∥∥∑n
k=1 εkxk∥∥2)1/2
is a norm on X n.• A Euclidean structure is such a norm with a left and right ideal property.
2 / 12
Euclidean structures
Definition
Let X be a Banach space. A Euclidean structure α is a family of norms ‖·‖α on X n
for all n ∈ N such that
‖(x)‖α = ‖x‖X , x ∈ X ,
‖Ax‖α ≤ ‖A‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, A ∈ Mm,n(C),
‖(Tx1, · · · ,Txn)‖α ≤ C ‖T‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, T ∈ L(X ),
A Euclidean structure induces a norm on the finite rank operators from `2 to X .
3 / 12
Euclidean structures
Definition
Let X be a Banach space. A Euclidean structure α is a family of norms ‖·‖α on X n
for all n ∈ N such that
‖(x)‖α = ‖x‖X , x ∈ X ,
‖Ax‖α ≤ ‖A‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, A ∈ Mm,n(C),
‖(Tx1, · · · ,Txn)‖α ≤ C ‖T‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, T ∈ L(X ),
A Euclidean structure induces a norm on the finite rank operators from `2 to X .
Non-example:
• On a Banach space X :
‖x‖R :=(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12, x ∈ X n,
is not a Euclidean structure. It fails the right-ideal property.
3 / 12
Euclidean structures
Definition
Let X be a Banach space. A Euclidean structure α is a family of norms ‖·‖α on X n
for all n ∈ N such that
‖(x)‖α = ‖x‖X , x ∈ X ,
‖Ax‖α ≤ ‖A‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, A ∈ Mm,n(C),
‖(Tx1, · · · ,Txn)‖α ≤ C ‖T‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, T ∈ L(X ),
A Euclidean structure induces a norm on the finite rank operators from `2 to X .
Examples:
• On any Banach space X : The Gaussian structure
‖x‖γ :=(E∥∥ n∑k=1
γkxk∥∥2
X
) 12, x ∈ X n,
where (γk)nk=1 is a sequence of independent normalized Gaussians.
• On a Banach lattice X : The `2-structure
‖x‖`2 :=∥∥∥( n∑
k=1
|xk |2)1/2
∥∥∥X, x ∈ X n.
3 / 12
Euclidean structures
Definition
Let X be a Banach space. A Euclidean structure α is a family of norms ‖·‖α on X n
for all n ∈ N such that
‖(x)‖α = ‖x‖X , x ∈ X ,
‖Ax‖α ≤ ‖A‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, A ∈ Mm,n(C),
‖(Tx1, · · · ,Txn)‖α ≤ C ‖T‖‖x‖α, x ∈ X n, T ∈ L(X ),
A Euclidean structure induces a norm on the finite rank operators from `2 to X .
Examples:
• On any Banach space X : The Gaussian structure
‖x‖γ :=(E∥∥ n∑k=1
γkxk∥∥2
X
) 12, x ∈ X n,
where (γk)nk=1 is a sequence of independent normalized Gaussians.
• On a Banach lattice X : The `2-structure
‖x‖`2 :=∥∥∥( n∑
k=1
|xk |2)1/2
∥∥∥X, x ∈ X n.
3 / 12
α-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space, α an Euclidean structure and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say thatΓ is α-bounded if for any T = diag(T1, · · · ,Tn) with T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ
‖Tx‖α ≤ C‖x‖α, x ∈ X n.
• α-boundedness implies uniform boundedness
• On a Banach space X with finite cotype
‖x‖γ =(E∥∥ n∑k=1
γkxk∥∥2
X
) 12 '
(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so γ-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness
• On a Banach lattice X with finite cotype
‖x‖`2 =∥∥( n∑
k=1
|xk |2)1/2∥∥
X'(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so `2-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness.
4 / 12
α-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space, α an Euclidean structure and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say thatΓ is α-bounded if for any T = diag(T1, · · · ,Tn) with T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ
‖Tx‖α ≤ C‖x‖α, x ∈ X n.
• α-boundedness implies uniform boundedness
• On a Banach space X with finite cotype
‖x‖γ =(E∥∥ n∑k=1
γkxk∥∥2
X
) 12 '
(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so γ-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness
• On a Banach lattice X with finite cotype
‖x‖`2 =∥∥( n∑
k=1
|xk |2)1/2∥∥
X'(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so `2-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness.
4 / 12
α-boundedness
Definition
Let X be a Banach space, α an Euclidean structure and Γ ⊆ L(X ). Then we say thatΓ is α-bounded if for any T = diag(T1, · · · ,Tn) with T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ
‖Tx‖α ≤ C‖x‖α, x ∈ X n.
• α-boundedness implies uniform boundedness
• On a Banach space X with finite cotype
‖x‖γ =(E∥∥ n∑k=1
γkxk∥∥2
X
) 12 '
(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so γ-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness
• On a Banach lattice X with finite cotype
‖x‖`2 =∥∥( n∑
k=1
|xk |2)1/2∥∥
X'(E∥∥ n∑k=1
εkxk∥∥2
X
) 12
= ‖x‖R,
so `2-boundedness is equivalent to R-boundedness.
4 / 12
Factorization through a Hilbert space
Theorem (Kwapien ’72 and Maurey ’74)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces and T ∈ L(X ,Y ). If X has type 2 and Y cotype2, then there is a Hilbert space H and operators S ∈ L(X ,H) and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.
T = US .
Corollary (Kwapien ’72)
Let X be a Banach space. X has type 2 and cotype 2 if and only if X is isomorphicto a Hilbert space.
5 / 12
Factorization through a Hilbert space
Theorem (Kwapien ’72 and Maurey ’74)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces and T ∈ L(X ,Y ). If X has type 2 and Y cotype2, then there is a Hilbert space H and operators S ∈ L(X ,H) and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.
T = US .
Corollary (Kwapien ’72)
Let X be a Banach space. X has type 2 and cotype 2 if and only if X is isomorphicto a Hilbert space.
5 / 12
Factorization through a Hilbert space
Theorem (Kwapien ’72 and Maurey ’74)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces and T ∈ L(X ,Y ). If X has type 2 and Y cotype2, then there is a Hilbert space H and operators S ∈ L(X ,H) and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.
T = US .
Corollary (Kwapien ’72)
Let X be a Banach space. X has type 2 and cotype 2 if and only if X is isomorphicto a Hilbert space.
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces, Γ1 ⊆ L(X ,Y ) . If X has type 2, Ycotype 2 and Γ1 is γ-bounded, then there is a Hilbert space H, aT ∈ L(X ,H) for every T ∈ Γ1 and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.the following diagram commutes:
X Y
H
T
T
U
5 / 12
Factorization through a Hilbert space
Theorem (Kwapien ’72 and Maurey ’74)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces and T ∈ L(X ,Y ). If X has type 2 and Y cotype2, then there is a Hilbert space H and operators S ∈ L(X ,H) and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.
T = US .
Corollary (Kwapien ’72)
Let X be a Banach space. X has type 2 and cotype 2 if and only if X is isomorphicto a Hilbert space.
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X and Y be a Banach spaces, Γ1 ⊆ L(X ,Y ) and Γ2 ⊆ L(Y ). If X has type 2, Ycotype 2 and Γ1 and Γ2 are γ-bounded, then there is a Hilbert space H, aT ∈ L(X ,H) for every T ∈ Γ1, a S ∈ L(H) for every S ∈ Γ2 and U ∈ L(H,Y ) s.t.the following diagram commutes:
X Y Y
H H
T
T S
U
S
U
5 / 12
Factorization through weighted L2
For a measure space (S ,Σ, µ) and a weight w : S → R+ let L2(S ,w) be the space ofall measurable f : S → C such that
‖f ‖L2(S,w) :=(∫
S
|f |2w dµ)1/2
<∞
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be an order-continuous Banach function space over (S , µ) and let Γ ⊆ L(X ).Γ is `2-bounded if and only if for any g0, g1 ∈ X there is a weight w : S → R+ s.t.
‖Tf ‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(S,w), f ∈ X ∩ L2(S ,w), T ∈ Γ
‖g0‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖X ,
‖g1‖X ≤ C ‖g1‖L2(S,w).
The if statement is trivial. Indeed for f1, · · · , fn ∈ X and T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ set
g0 :=( n∑k=1
|fk |2) 1
2 , g1 :=( n∑k=1
|Tk fk |2) 1
2
Then we have
‖Tf ‖2`2 = ‖g1‖2
X ≤ C 2n∑
k=1
∫S
|Tk fk |2w dµ ≤ C 4n∑
k=1
∫S
|fk |2w dµ ≤ C 6‖g0‖2X = ‖f ‖2
`2
6 / 12
Factorization through weighted L2
For a measure space (S ,Σ, µ) and a weight w : S → R+ let L2(S ,w) be the space ofall measurable f : S → C such that
‖f ‖L2(S,w) :=(∫
S
|f |2w dµ)1/2
<∞
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be an order-continuous Banach function space over (S , µ) and let Γ ⊆ L(X ).Γ is `2-bounded if and only if for any g0, g1 ∈ X there is a weight w : S → R+ s.t.
‖Tf ‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(S,w), f ∈ X ∩ L2(S ,w), T ∈ Γ
‖g0‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖X ,
‖g1‖X ≤ C ‖g1‖L2(S,w).
The if statement is trivial. Indeed for f1, · · · , fn ∈ X and T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ set
g0 :=( n∑k=1
|fk |2) 1
2 , g1 :=( n∑k=1
|Tk fk |2) 1
2
Then we have
‖Tf ‖2`2 = ‖g1‖2
X ≤ C 2n∑
k=1
∫S
|Tk fk |2w dµ ≤ C 4n∑
k=1
∫S
|fk |2w dµ ≤ C 6‖g0‖2X = ‖f ‖2
`2
6 / 12
Factorization through weighted L2
For a measure space (S ,Σ, µ) and a weight w : S → R+ let L2(S ,w) be the space ofall measurable f : S → C such that
‖f ‖L2(S,w) :=(∫
S
|f |2w dµ)1/2
<∞
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be an order-continuous Banach function space over (S , µ) and let Γ ⊆ L(X ).Γ is `2-bounded if and only if for any g0, g1 ∈ X there is a weight w : S → R+ s.t.
‖Tf ‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(S,w), f ∈ X ∩ L2(S ,w), T ∈ Γ
‖g0‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖X ,
‖g1‖X ≤ C ‖g1‖L2(S,w).
The if statement is trivial. Indeed for f1, · · · , fn ∈ X and T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ set
g0 :=( n∑k=1
|fk |2) 1
2 , g1 :=( n∑k=1
|Tk fk |2) 1
2
Then we have
‖Tf ‖2`2 = ‖g1‖2
X ≤ C 2n∑
k=1
∫S
|Tk fk |2w dµ ≤ C 4n∑
k=1
∫S
|fk |2w dµ ≤ C 6‖g0‖2X = ‖f ‖2
`2
6 / 12
Factorization through weighted L2
For a measure space (S ,Σ, µ) and a weight w : S → R+ let L2(S ,w) be the space ofall measurable f : S → C such that
‖f ‖L2(S,w) :=(∫
S
|f |2w dµ)1/2
<∞
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be an order-continuous Banach function space over (S , µ) and let Γ ⊆ L(X ).Γ is `2-bounded if and only if for any g0, g1 ∈ X there is a weight w : S → R+ s.t.
‖Tf ‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(S,w), f ∈ X ∩ L2(S ,w), T ∈ Γ
‖g0‖L2(S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖X ,
‖g1‖X ≤ C ‖g1‖L2(S,w).
The if statement is trivial. Indeed for f1, · · · , fn ∈ X and T1, · · · ,Tn ∈ Γ set
g0 :=( n∑k=1
|fk |2) 1
2 , g1 :=( n∑k=1
|Tk fk |2) 1
2
Then we have
‖Tf ‖2`2 = ‖g1‖2
X ≤ C 2n∑
k=1
∫S
|Tk fk |2w dµ ≤ C 4n∑
k=1
∫S
|fk |2w dµ ≤ C 6‖g0‖2X = ‖f ‖2
`2
6 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞). For f ∈ Lp(R) define the Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.1
π
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R,
= F−1(ξ 7→ −i sgn(ξ)F f (ξ))(x).
For f ∈ Lp(Rd) define the Hardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd .
• Very important operators in harmonic analysis.
• Both H and M are bounded on Lp for p ∈ (1,∞).
• We are interested in the tensor extensions of H and M onthe Bochner space Lp(Rd ;X ).
• These have numerous applications in both harmonic analysis and PDE.
7 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞). For f ∈ Lp(R) define the Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.1
π
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R,
= F−1(ξ 7→ −i sgn(ξ)F f (ξ))(x).
For f ∈ Lp(Rd) define the Hardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd .
• Very important operators in harmonic analysis.
• Both H and M are bounded on Lp for p ∈ (1,∞).
• We are interested in the tensor extensions of H and M onthe Bochner space Lp(Rd ;X ).
• These have numerous applications in both harmonic analysis and PDE.
7 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞). For f ∈ Lp(R) define the Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.1
π
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R,
= F−1(ξ 7→ −i sgn(ξ)F f (ξ))(x).
For f ∈ Lp(Rd) define the Hardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd .
• Very important operators in harmonic analysis.
• Both H and M are bounded on Lp for p ∈ (1,∞).
• We are interested in the tensor extensions of H and M onthe Bochner space Lp(Rd ;X ).
• These have numerous applications in both harmonic analysis and PDE.
7 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞). For f ∈ Lp(R) define the Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.1
π
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R,
= F−1(ξ 7→ −i sgn(ξ)F f (ξ))(x).
For f ∈ Lp(Rd) define the Hardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd .
• Very important operators in harmonic analysis.
• Both H and M are bounded on Lp for p ∈ (1,∞).
• We are interested in the tensor extensions of H and M onthe Bochner space Lp(Rd ;X ).
• These have numerous applications in both harmonic analysis and PDE.
7 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞) and let X be a Banach space. For f ∈ Lp(R;X ) define thevector-valued Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R
where the integral is interpreted in the Bochner sense.
Let X be a Banach function space. For f ∈ Lp(Rd ;X ) define the latticeHardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd ,
where the supremum is taken in the lattice sense.
• Boundedness of H is independent of p ∈ (1,∞)(Calderon–Benedek–Panzone ’62).
• Boundedness of M is independent of p ∈ (1,∞) and d ∈ N(Garcıa-Cuerva–Macias–Torrea ’93).
• Boundedness of H and M depends on the geometry of X .
8 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞) and let X be a Banach space. For f ∈ Lp(R;X ) define thevector-valued Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R
where the integral is interpreted in the Bochner sense.
Let X be a Banach function space. For f ∈ Lp(Rd ;X ) define the latticeHardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd ,
where the supremum is taken in the lattice sense.
• Boundedness of H is independent of p ∈ (1,∞)(Calderon–Benedek–Panzone ’62).
• Boundedness of M is independent of p ∈ (1,∞) and d ∈ N(Garcıa-Cuerva–Macias–Torrea ’93).
• Boundedness of H and M depends on the geometry of X .
8 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Let p ∈ [1,∞) and let X be a Banach space. For f ∈ Lp(R;X ) define thevector-valued Hilbert transform
Hf (x) := p. v.
∫R
1
x − yf (y) dy , x ∈ R
where the integral is interpreted in the Bochner sense.
Let X be a Banach function space. For f ∈ Lp(Rd ;X ) define the latticeHardy–Littlewood maximal operator
Mf (x) := supr>0
1
|B(x , r)|
∫Rd
|f (y)| dy , x ∈ Rd ,
where the supremum is taken in the lattice sense.
• Boundedness of H is independent of p ∈ (1,∞)(Calderon–Benedek–Panzone ’62).
• Boundedness of M is independent of p ∈ (1,∞) and d ∈ N(Garcıa-Cuerva–Macias–Torrea ’93).
• Boundedness of H and M depends on the geometry of X .
8 / 12
Theorem (Burkholder ’83 and Bourgain ’83)
Let X be a Banach space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following are equivalent:
(i) X has the UMD property.
(ii) H is bounded on Lp(R;X ).
• X has the UMD property if any finite martingale (fk)nk=0 in Lp(Ω;X ) hasUnconditional Martingale Differences (dfk)nk=1.
Theorem (Bourgain ’84 and Rubio de Francia ’86)
Let X be a Banach function space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following is equivalent to (i)and (ii)
(iii) M is bounded on Lp(Rd ;X ) and on Lp(Rd ;X ∗).
• (iii)⇒(ii) is “easy” and quantitative.
• (ii)⇒(iii) is very involved and technical.
9 / 12
Theorem (Burkholder ’83 and Bourgain ’83)
Let X be a Banach space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following are equivalent:
(i) X has the UMD property.
(ii) H is bounded on Lp(R;X ).
• X has the UMD property if any finite martingale (fk)nk=0 in Lp(Ω;X ) hasUnconditional Martingale Differences (dfk)nk=1.
• That is, if for some p ∈ (1,∞) and all signs εk = ±1 we have∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkdfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
.∥∥∥ n∑k=1
dfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
,
Theorem (Bourgain ’84 and Rubio de Francia ’86)
Let X be a Banach function space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following is equivalent to (i)and (ii)
(iii) M is bounded on Lp(Rd ;X ) and on Lp(Rd ;X ∗).
• (iii)⇒(ii) is “easy” and quantitative.
• (ii)⇒(iii) is very involved and technical.
9 / 12
Theorem (Burkholder ’83 and Bourgain ’83)
Let X be a Banach space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following are equivalent:
(i) X has the UMD property.
(ii) H is bounded on Lp(R;X ).
• X has the UMD property if any finite martingale (fk)nk=0 in Lp(Ω;X ) hasUnconditional Martingale Differences (dfk)nk=1.
• Reflexive Lebesgue, Lorentz, (Musielak)-Orlicz, Sobolev, Besov spaces andSchatten classes have the UMD property.
• L1 and L∞ do not have the UMD property.
• Linear constant dependence is an open problem
Theorem (Bourgain ’84 and Rubio de Francia ’86)
Let X be a Banach function space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following is equivalent to (i)and (ii)
(iii) M is bounded on Lp(Rd ;X ) and on Lp(Rd ;X ∗).
• (iii)⇒(ii) is “easy” and quantitative.
• (ii)⇒(iii) is very involved and technical.
9 / 12
Theorem (Burkholder ’83 and Bourgain ’83)
Let X be a Banach space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following are equivalent:
(i) X has the UMD property.
(ii) H is bounded on Lp(R;X ).
• X has the UMD property if any finite martingale (fk)nk=0 in Lp(Ω;X ) hasUnconditional Martingale Differences (dfk)nk=1.
• Reflexive Lebesgue, Lorentz, (Musielak)-Orlicz, Sobolev, Besov spaces andSchatten classes have the UMD property.
• L1 and L∞ do not have the UMD property.
• Linear constant dependence is an open problem
Theorem (Bourgain ’84 and Rubio de Francia ’86)
Let X be a Banach function space and p ∈ (1,∞). The following is equivalent to (i)and (ii)
(iii) M is bounded on Lp(Rd ;X ) and on Lp(Rd ;X ∗).
• (iii)⇒(ii) is “easy” and quantitative.
• (ii)⇒(iii) is very involved and technical.
9 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Harmonic analysis
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space on (S , µ) and p ∈ (1,∞). If H is bounded on
Lp(R;X ), then M is bounded on Lp(R;X ) with
‖M‖Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖H‖2Lp(R;X )→Lp(R;X )
• Apply factorization theorem with Γ = H and g1 = Mg0 to transfer thequestion from Lp(R;X ) to L2(R× S ,w):For any g0 ∈ Lp(R;X ) there is a weight w : R× S → R+ such that
‖Hf ‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖f ‖L2(R×S,w), f ∈ Lp(R;X ) ∩ L2(R× S ,w)
‖g0‖L2(R×S,w) ≤ C ‖g0‖Lp(R;X ),
‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) ≤ C ‖Mg0‖L2(R×S,w).
• By Fubini it suffices to show the boundedness of M on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S .
• For a weight v : R→ R+, M is bounded on L2(R, v) if and only if H is boundedon L2(R, v) (Muckenhoupt ’72,...).
• As H is bounded on L2(R,w(·, s)) for s ∈ S , M is as well.
• Thus ‖Mg0‖Lp(R;X ) . ‖g0‖Lp(R;X )
10 / 12
Application: Banach space geometryLet X be a Banach space and p ∈ (1,∞). Let (fk)nk=0 be a finite martingale inLp(Ω;X ) with difference sequence (dfk)nk=1. Then X has the UMD property if andonly if for all signs εk = ±1 we have∥∥∥ n∑
k=1
εkdfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
(1)
.∥∥∥ n∑k=1
dfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
,
if and only if∥∥∥ n∑k=1
dfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
(2)
.∥∥∥ n∑k=1
εkdfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω×Ω′;X )
(3)
.∥∥∥ n∑k=1
dfn∥∥∥Lp(Ω;X )
,
where (ε)nk=1 is a Rademacher sequence on Ω′.
• (2) does not imply (1).
• It is an open question whether (3) implies (1)
Theorem (Kalton–L.–Weis ’19)
Let X be a Banach function space. Then (3) implies (1).
• Proof similar to previous slide.
11 / 12
Outlook
• In the Euclidean structures manuscript:
• More factorization theorems.
• Representation of an α-bounded family of operators on a Hilbert space.
• Applications to interpolation, function spaces, functional calculus.
• More applications of factorization through weighted L2:
• Show the necessity of UMD for the R-boundedness of certain operators
• Potentially many more applications!
• To appear on arXiv before Christmas!
12 / 12
Outlook
• In the Euclidean structures manuscript:
• More factorization theorems.
• Representation of an α-bounded family of operators on a Hilbert space.
• Applications to interpolation, function spaces, functional calculus.
• More applications of factorization through weighted L2:
• Show the necessity of UMD for the R-boundedness of certain operators
• Potentially many more applications!
• To appear on arXiv before Christmas!
12 / 12
Outlook
• In the Euclidean structures manuscript:
• More factorization theorems.
• Representation of an α-bounded family of operators on a Hilbert space.
• Applications to interpolation, function spaces, functional calculus.
• More applications of factorization through weighted L2:
• Show the necessity of UMD for the R-boundedness of certain operators
• Potentially many more applications!
• To appear on arXiv before Christmas!
12 / 12
Thank you for your attention!
12 / 12