Toeplitz operators on generalized Bergman spaces

We start by applying (r@nIdentnIdent) and then think of the integral over \mathbb{B}^{d} as the limit as r approaches 1 of the integral over a ball of radius r<1. On the ball of radius r, we write out \partial/\partial z_{j} in terms of \partial/\partial x_{j} and \partial/\partial y_{j}. For, say, the \partial/\partial x_{j} term we express the integral as a one-dimensional integral with respect to x_{j} (with limits of integration depending on the other variables) followed by an integral with respect to the other variables. We then use ordinary integration by parts in the x_{j} integral, and similarly for the \partial/\partial y_{j} term.

The integration by parts will yield a boundary term involving z_{j} \psi(z)(1-|z|^{2})^{\lambda-d}; this boundary term will vanish as r tends to 1, because we assume \lambda>d. In the nonboundary term, the operator N applied to (1-|z|^{2})^{\lambda-d} will turn into the operator -\sum _{j=1}^{d}\partial/\partial z_{j}\circ z_{j}=-(dI+N) applied to \psi. Computing from (r@clambdaclambda) that c_{\lambda}/c_{\lambda+1}=(\lambda -d)/\lambda, we may simplify and let r tend to 1 to obtain the desired result involving N. The same reasoning gives the result involving \bar{N} as well.

Recalling the formula ([email protected]) for the measure \tau, we apply Lemma [email protected] with \psi(z)=\overline{f(z)}g(z) with f and g holomorphic. Observing that N(\bar{f}g)=\bar{f}Ng gives the first equality and observing that \bar{N}(\bar{f}g)=\overline{(Nf)}g gives the second equality.

If, say, \lambda_{1}>d, then we have the following simple argument:

Unfortunately, c_{\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}}/c_{\lambda_{1}} tends to infinity as \lambda_{1} approaches d from above, so we cannot expect this simple inequality to hold for \lambda_{1}<d.

For any \lambda_{1},\lambda_{2}>0, choose n so that \lambda_{1}+n>d and \lambda_{2}+n>d. Then fg belongs to H(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{1} +\lambda_{2}) provided that N^{n}(fg) belongs to \mathcal{H} L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}+2n). But

Using Theorem [email protected], it is easy to see that if f belongs to H(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{1}) then N^{k}f belongs to H(\mathbb{B} ^{d},\lambda_{1}+2k). Thus,

Now, for each term in (r@ktermkterm) with k\leq n/2, we then obtain the following norm estimate:

Since k\leq n/2, we have \lambda_{2}+2n-2k\geq\lambda_{2}+n>d. We are assuming that g is in H(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{2}), so that N^{n-k}g is in H(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{2}+2n-2k), which coincides with \mathcal{H} L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\mu_{\lambda_{2}+2n-2k}). Thus, under our assumptions on f and g, each term in (r@ktermkterm) with k\leq n/2 belongs to \mathcal{H}L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda_{1}+\lambda_{2}+2n). A similar argument with the roles of f and g reversed takes care of the terms with k\geq n/2.

The result is a is a special case of a result of Arazy and Zhang cite AZ and also of the results of Section r@bddopbddop, but it is easy to give a direct proof. It suffices to show that M_{z_{j}} is bounded for each j. Since M_{z_{j}} preserves the orthogonality of the monomials, we obtain

Note that m_{j}\leq\left\vert m\right\vert with equality when m_{k}=0 for k\neq j. Thus the supremum is finite and is easily seen to have the value of 1 if \lambda\geq1 and 1/\lambda if \lambda<1.

Assume at first that f and g are polynomials, so that f and g and all of their derivatives are bounded. We use ([email protected]) and apply the first equality in Lemma [email protected] with \psi=\bar{f}\phi g. We then apply the first equality in the lemma again with \psi=(I+N/\lambda)[\bar {f}\phi g]. We continue on in this fashion until we have applied the first equality in Lemma [email protected] n times and the second equality n times. This establishes the desired equality in the case that f and g are polynomials. For general f and g in \mathcal{H}L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\mu_{\lambda}), we approximate by sequences f_{a} and g_{a} of polynomials. From Theorem [email protected] we can see that convergence of f_{a} and g_{a} in \mathcal{H}L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\mu_{\lambda}) implies convergence of N^{j}f_{a} and N^{k}g_{a} to N^{j}f and N^{k}g, so that applying (r@cexpandedcexpanded) to f_{a} and g_{a} and taking a limit establishes the desired result for f and g.

We give two proofs of this result; the first generalizes more easily to other bounded symmetric domains, whereas the second relates A_{\lambda} to the Laplacian for \mathbb{B}^{d} (compare cite E).

First Proof. We let

i.e., F_{\lambda} is the integral kernel of the operator A_{\lambda}. A key property of F_{\lambda} is its invariance under automorphisms: F_{\lambda}(\psi(z),\psi(w))=F_{\lambda}(z,w) for each automorphism (biholomorphism) \psi of \mathbb{B}^{d} and all z,w\in\mathbb{B}^{d}. To establish the invariance of F_{\lambda}, let

According to Lemma 1.2 of cite Z, F_{\lambda}(z,w)=f_{\lambda}(\phi _{w}(z)), where \phi_{w} is an automorphism of \mathbb{B}^{d} taking 0 to w and satisfying \phi_{w}^{2}=I. Now, if \psi is any automorphism, the classification of automorphisms (Theorem 1.4 of cite Z) implies that \psi\circ\phi_{w}=\phi_{\psi(w)}\circ U for some unitary matrix U. From this we can obtain \phi_{\psi(w)}=U\circ\phi_{w}\circ\psi^{-1}, and so

i.e., F_{\lambda}(\psi(z),\psi(w))=F_{\lambda}(z,w).

The invariance of F_{\lambda} under automorphisms means that A_{\lambda }\phi can be thought of as a convolution (over the automorphism group PSU(d,1)) of \phi with the function f_{\lambda}. What this means is that

where g\in G is chosen so that g\cdot0=z. Here G=PSU(d,1) is the group of automorphisms of \mathbb{B}^{d} (given by fractional linear transformations) and dh is an appropriately normalized Haar measure on G. Furthermore, L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau) can be identified with the right-K-invariant subspace of L^{2}(G,dg), where K:=U(d) is the stabilizer of 0.

If \lambda>d, then f_{\lambda} is in L^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau), in which case it is easy to prove that A_{\lambda} is bounded; see, for example, Theorem 2.4 in cite B1. This argument does not work if \lambda\leq d. Nevertheless, if \lambda>d/2, an easy computation shows that f_{\lambda} belongs to L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau) and also to L^{p}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau) for some p<2. We could at this point appeal to a general result known as the Kunze–Stein phenomenon cite KS. The result states that on connected semisimple Lie groups G with finite center (including PSU(d,1)), convolution with a function in L^{p}(G,dg), p<2, is a bounded operator from L^{2}(G,dg) to itself. (See cite Cow for a proof in this generality.) However, the proof of this result is simpler in the case we are considering, where the function in L^{p}(G,dg) is bi-K -invariant and the other function is right-K-invariant. (In our case, the function in L^{p}(G,dg) is the function g\rightarrow f_{\lambda}(g\cdot0) and the function in L^{2}(G,dg) is g\rightarrow\phi(g\cdot0).) Using the Helgason Fourier transform along with its behavior under convolution with a bi-K-invariant function (cite He3), we need only show that the spherical Fourier transform of f_{\lambda} is bounded. (Helgason proves Lemma III.1.4 under the assumption that the functions are continuous and of compact support, but the proof also applies more generally.) Meanwhile, standard estimates show that for every \varepsilon>0, the spherical functions are in L^{2+\varepsilon}(G/K), with L^{2+\varepsilon}(G/K) norm bounded independent of the spherical function. (Specifically, in the notation of cite He2, for all \lambda\in\relax{a}^{\ast}, we have \left\vert \phi_{\lambda}(g)\right\vert \leq\phi_{0}(g), and estimates on \phi_{0} (e.g., cite AJ) show that \phi_{0} is in L^{2+\varepsilon} for all \varepsilon>0.)

Choosing \varepsilon so that 1/p+1/(2+\varepsilon)=1 establishes the desired boundedness.

Second proof. If c_{\lambda}=0 (i.e., if \lambda\in\mathbb{Z} and \lambda\leq d), then there is nothing to prove. Thus we assume c_{\lambda} is nonzero, in which case c_{\lambda+1} is also nonzero. The invariance of F_{\lambda} under automorphisms together with the square-integrability of the function (1-|z|^{2})^{\lambda} for \lambda>d/2 show that the integral defining A_{\lambda}f(z) is absolutely convergent for all z.

We introduce the (hyperbolic) Laplacian \Delta for \mathbb{B}^{d}, given by

(This is a negative operator.) This operator commutes with the automorphisms of \mathbb{B}^{d}. It is known (e.g., cite Str) that \Delta is an unbounded self-adjoint operator on L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\tau), on the domain consisting of those f’s in L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\tau) for which \Delta f in the distribution sense belongs to L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau). In particular, if f\in L^{2}(\mathbb{B} ^{d},\tau) is C^{2} and \Delta f in the ordinary sense belongs to L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau), then f\in Dom(\Delta).

We now claim that

where \Delta_{z} indicates that \Delta is acting on the variable z with w fixed. Since \Delta commutes with automorphisms, it again suffices to check this when w=0, in which case it is a straightforward algebraic calculation. Suppose, then, that \phi is a C^{\infty} function of compact support. In that case, we are free to differentiate under the integral to obtain

Now, the invariance of F_{\lambda} tells us that L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\tau) norm of F_{\lambda}(z,w) as a function of z is finite for all w and independent of w. Putting the L^{2} norm inside the integral then shows that A_{\lambda}\phi and A_{\lambda+1}\phi are in L^{2} (\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau). This shows that A_{\lambda}\phi is in Dom(\Delta). Furthermore, the condition \lambda>d/2 implies that \lambda(\lambda -d/2)>-d^{2}/4. It is known that the L^{2} spectrum of \Delta is (-\infty,-d^{2}/4]. For general symmetric space of the noncompact type, the L^{2} spectrum of the Laplacian is (-\infty,-\left\Vert \rho\right\Vert ^{2}], where \rho is half the sum of the positive (restricted) roots for G/K, counted with their multiplicity. In our case, there is one positive root \alpha with multiplicity (2d-2) and another positive root 2\alpha with multiplicity 1. (See the entry for A IV in Table VI of Chapter X of cite He1.) Thus, \rho=d\alpha. It remains only to check that if the metric is normalized so that the Laplacian comes out as in (r@laplacelaplace), then \left\Vert \alpha\right\Vert ^{2}=1/4. This is a straightforward but unilluminating computation, which we omit.

Since \lambda(\lambda-d) is in the resolvent set of \Delta, we may rewrite ([email protected]) as

Suppose now that \lambda+1>d, so that (as remarked above) A_{\lambda+1} is bounded. Since [\Delta-cI]^{-1} is a bounded operator for all c in the resolvent of \Delta, we see that A_{\lambda} has a bounded extension from C_{c}^{\infty}(\mathbb{B}^{d}) to L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau). Since the integral computing A_{\lambda}\phi(z) is a continuous linear functional on L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau) (integration against an element of L^{2} (\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau)), it is easily seen that this bounded extension coincides with the original definition of A_{\lambda}.

The above argument shows that A_{\lambda} is bounded if \lambda>d/2 and \lambda+1>d. Iteration of the argument then shows boundedness for all \lambda>d/2.

We wish to show that for all \lambda>d/2, if \phi is in L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau), then there is a unique Hilbert–Schmidt operator T_{\phi} with matrix entries given in (r@hsmatrixhsmatrix) for all polynomials, and furthermore, \left\Vert T_{\phi }\right\Vert _{HS}^{2}=\left\langle \phi,A_{\lambda}\phi\right\rangle _{\lambda}. At the beginning of this section, we had an calculation of \left\Vert T_{\phi}\right\Vert in terms of A_{\lambda}, but this argument relied on writing T_{\phi} as P_{\lambda}M_{\phi}P_{\lambda}, which does not make sense for \lambda\leq d.

We work with an orthonormal basis for H(\mathbb{B}^{d},\lambda) consisting of normalized monomials, namely,

for each multi-index m. Then we want to establish the existence of a Hilbert–Schmidt operator whose matrix entries in this basis are given by

There will exist a unique such operator provided that \sum_{l,m}|a_{lm} |^{2}<\infty.

If we assume, for the moment, that Fubini’s Theorem applies, we obtain

where l and m range over all multi-indices of length d.

We now apply the binomial series

for r\in\mathbb{C} with \left\vert r\right\vert <1, where

(This is the so-called negative binomial series.) We apply this with r=\sum_{j}\bar{z}_{j}w_{j}, and we then apply the (finite) multinomial series to the computation of (\bar{z}\cdot w)^{k}. The result is that

where the sum is over all multi-indices l. Applying this result, (r@normsumnormsum) becomes

which is what we want to show.

Assume at first that \phi is nice, say, continuous and supported in a ball of radius r<1. This ball has finite measure and \phi is bounded on it. Thus, if we put absolute values inside the sum and integral on the right-hand side of (r@normsumnormsum), finiteness of the result follows from the absolute convergence of the series (r@kernelSerieskernelSeries). Thus, Fubini’s Theorem applies in this case.

Now for a general \phi\in L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau), choose \phi_{j} converging to \phi with \phi_{j} nice. Then (r@normsum2normsum2) tells us that T_{\phi_{j}} is a Cauchy sequence in the space of Hilbert–Schmidt operators, which therefore converges in the Hilbert–Schmidt norm to some operator T. The matrix entries of T_{\phi _{j}} in the basis \{e_{m}\} are by construction given by the integral in (r@almalm). The matrix entries of T are the limit of the matrix entries of T_{\phi_{j}}, hence also given by (r@almalm), because e_{l} and e_{m} are bounded and (1-|z|^{2})^{\lambda} belongs to L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\tau) for \lambda>d/2.

We can now establish that (r@hsmatrix2hsmatrix2) in Theorem [email protected] holds for all bounded holomorphic functions f and g in H(\mathbb{B}^{d} ,\lambda) by approximating these functions by polynomials.

In the proof of Theorem [email protected], we did not use the assumption \lambda>d/2 until the step in which we approximated arbitrary functions in L^{2}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau) by nice functions. In particular, if \phi is nice, then (r@almalm) makes sense for all \lambda>0, and (r@normsum2normsum2) still holds. Now, since F_{\lambda}(z,w)=f_{\lambda}(\phi_{w}(z)), where f_{\lambda} is given by ([email protected]), we see that \left\vert F_{\lambda }(z,w)\right\vert \leq c_{\lambda}^{2} for all z,w\in\mathbb{B}^{d}. Thus,

for all nice \phi. An easy approximation argument then establishes the existence of a Hilbert–Schmidt operator with the desired matrix entries for all \phi\in L^{1}(\mathbb{B}^{d},\tau), with the desired estimate on the Hilbert–Schmidt norm.