Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Super-critical Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for multilinear forms

Abstract

The multilinear Hardy-Littlewood inequalities provide estimates for the sum of the coefficients of multilinear forms Tp1n× × pmnR( or C) when 1/p1× × 1/pm<1. In this paper we investigate the critical and super-critical cases; i.e., when1/p1× × 1/pm1

Key words
Multilinear forms; sequence spaces; inequalities; estimates

Introduction

Littlewood’s 4/3 theorem assures that for 𝕂= or , we have

( j 1 , j 2 = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , e j 2 ) | 4 / 3 ) 3 / 4 2 A

for all positive integers n and all bilinear forms A:n×n𝕂, where as usual

A = sup { | A ( x , y ) | : x 1 and y 1 }

and pn denotes 𝕂n with the p norm; the exponent 4/3 cannot be improved (i.e., cannot be replaced by a smaller one). Under an anisotropic viewpoint, the result can be generalized as follows (see Theorem 5.1 in Pellegrino et al. 2017PELLEGRINO D, SANTOS J, SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ DM & TEIXEIRA EV. 2017. A regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Bull Sci Math 141: 802-837.): the inequality

( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , e j 2 ) | a ) b a ) 1 b 2 A (1)

holds for all n whenever a,b[1,) satisfy

1 a + 1 b 3 2 .

Moreover, if a,b[1,) satisfy

1 a + 1 b > 3 2 ,

then (1) is not possible, i.e., if

(j1=1n(j2=1n|A(ej1,ej2)|a)ba)1bCA,
then the constant C must depend on n.

From now on, unless stated otherwise, the exponents involved in the inequalities are positive and can be even infinity (in this case the corresponding sum is replaced by the supremum). We also consider 1/:=0. The Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for bilinear forms were conceived in 1934 by Hardy and Littlewood (see Theorem 5 in Hardy & Littlewood 1934HARDY G & LITTLEWOOD JE. 1934. Bilinear forms bounded in space [p,q]. Quart J Math 5: 241-254.), as a natural generalization of Littlewood’s 4/3 inequality. The results of the seminal paper of Hardy and Littlewood, in a modern and somewhat more general presentation, can be summarized by the following two theorems:

Theorem 1. (see Osikiewicz & Tonge 2001OSIKIEWICZ B & TONGE A. 2001. An interpolation approach to Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for norms of operators on sequence spaces. Linear Algebra Appl 331: 1-9. and Aron et al. 2017ARON R, NÚÑEZ-ALARCÓN D, PELLEGRINO D & SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ D. 2017. Optimal exponents for Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for m-linear operators. Linear Algebra Appl 531: 399-422.) Let 1 <q2<p, with 1p+1q <1. The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , e j 2 ) | a ) b a ) 1 b C A
    for all bilinear forms A:pn×qn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. The exponents a,b satisfy

    ( a , b ) [ q q 1 , ) × [ 1 1 ( 1 p + 1 q ) , ) .
    Moreover, the optimal constant C is 1.

Theorem 2. (see Pellegrino et al. 2017PELLEGRINO D, SANTOS J, SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ DM & TEIXEIRA EV. 2017. A regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Bull Sci Math 141: 802-837.) Let p,q[2,], with 1p+1q <1. The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , e j 2 ) | a ) b a ) 1 b C A
    for all bilinear forms A:pn×qn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. The exponents a,b satisfy

    ( a , b ) [ q q 1 , ) × [ 1 1 ( 1 p + 1 q ) , )
    and
    1 a + 1 b 3 2 ( 1 p + 1 q ) . (2)

Since (2) is trivially verified under the conditions of Theorem 1 , we can unify the two theorems as follows:

Theorem 3. Let q(1,] and p[2,], with 1p+1q <1. The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , e j 2 ) | a ) b a ) 1 b C A
    for all bilinear forms A:pn×qn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. The exponents a,b satisfy

    ( a , b ) [ q q 1 , ) × [ 1 1 ( 1 p + 1 q ) , )
    and
    1 a + 1 b 3 2 ( 1 p + 1 q ) .

In 1981, Praciano-Pereira (see Praciano-Pereira 1981PRACIANO-PEREIRA T. 1981. On bounded multilinear forms on a class of ℓp spaces. J Math Anal Appl 81: 561-568.) extended the Hardy-Littlewood inequalities to m-linear forms as follows: if p1,...,pm[1,] and

1p1++1pm12,
there exists a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that
(j1,...,jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|2mm+12(1p1++1pm))m+12(1p1++1pm)2mCT,(3)
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and for all positive integers n.

When

121p1++1pm <1,
Dimant and Sevilla-Peris (see Dimant & Sevilla-Peris 2016DIMANT V & SEVILLA-PERIS P. 2016. Summation of coefficients of polynomials on ℓp spaces. Publ Mat 60: 289-310. and Cavalcante 2018CAVALCANTE W. 2018. Some applications of the regularity principle in sequence spaces. Positivity 22: 191-198.) have proved that there exists a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that
(j1,...,jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|11(1p1++1pm))1(1p1++1pm)CT,(4)
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and for all positive integers n.

Both in (3) and (4 the exponents are sharp, i.e., they cannot be replaced by smaller exponents keeping the constant C not depending on n (this terminology will be used throughout the paper). However, there still remains the question: what about anisotropic versions of (3) and (4) , i.e., variants with eventually different exponents associated to each index? Throughout this paper we shall address this question and related problems.

In Albuquerque et al. 2014ALBUQUERQUE N, BAYART F, PELLEGRINO D & SEOANE-SEPÚLVEDA JB. 2014. Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. J Funct Anal 266: 3726-3740., the anisotropic version of the result of Praciano-Pereira was finally settled (see also Santos & Velanga 2017SANTOS J & VELANGA T. 2017. On the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality for multilinear forms. Results Math 72: 239-244. for a more complete version for the case p1,...,pm=):

Theorem 4. (see Theorem 1.2 in Albuquerque et al. 2014ALBUQUERQUE N, BAYART F, PELLEGRINO D & SEOANE-SEPÚLVEDA JB. 2014. Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. J Funct Anal 266: 3726-3740. and Theorem 5.2 in Pellegrino et al. 2017) Let p1,...,pm[1,] be such that

1p1++1pm12
and
q1,...,qm[11(1p1++1pm),2].
The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C A ,
    for all m-linear forms A:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. The inequality

    1 q 1 + + 1 q m m + 1 2 ( 1 p 1 + + 1 p m )
    is verified.

The anisotropic version of (4) is still not completely solved, but in Aron et al. 2017ARON R, NÚÑEZ-ALARCÓN D, PELLEGRINO D & SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ D. 2017. Optimal exponents for Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for m-linear operators. Linear Algebra Appl 531: 399-422. the following partial answer (that also generalizes Theorem 1 ) was obtained:

Theorem 5. (see Theorem 3.2 in Aron et al. 2017) Let m2 and 1 <pm2<p1,...,pm1, with

1p1++1pm <1.
The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | A ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C A ,
    for all m-linear forms A:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. The exponents q1,...,qm satisfy

    q 1 δ m p 1 , . . . , p m , q 2 δ m 1 p 2 , . . . , p m , . . . , q m 1 δ 2 p m 1 , p m , q m δ 1 p m ,
    with
    δ m k + 1 p k , . . . , p m := 1 1 ( 1 p k + + 1 p m ) .

The attentive reader may wonder why the case

1 p 1 + + 1 p m 1 (5)

is not investigated in the previous results? The reason is simple, because in this case it is easy to prove that if there exists C (not depending on n) such that

( j 1 , . . . , j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | s ) 1 s C T , (6)

for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n, then s= (i.e., we are forced to deal with the sup norm, and the result becomes trivial). However, under the anisotropic viewpoint, as a matter of fact, there is no reason to avoid the case (5) and it constitutes a vast field yet to be explored. The first step in this direction is the following:

Theorem 6. (see Theorem 1 in Paulino 2019PAULINO D. 2019. Critical Hardy-Littlewood inequality for multilinear forms. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, II. 69 (2020), 369-380.) For all m2 we have

sup j 1 ( j 2 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 2 q 3 ) 1 q 2 2 m 2 2 T (7)

for all m-linear forms T:mn××mn𝕂, and all positive integers n, with

qk=2m(m1)mk2k+2
for all k=2,...,m. Moreover, q1= and q2=m are sharp and, for m>2 the optimal exponents qk satisfying (7) fulfill
qkmk1,k=2,...,m.

The case considered in Theorem 6 is called critical because it is a special case of (5), and from now on we shall call case (5) super-critical, which is the topic of the present paper. In the next sections we provide a partial solution to the super-critical case for 3-linear forms and we investigate what are the conditions needed to obtain m-linear Hardy-Littlewood inequalities in the super-critical case.

The 3-linear case

We begin this section by presenting two simple, albeit very useful, lemmas that will be used all along the paper.

Two multi-purpose lemmas

For S={s1,,sk}{1,,m}, we define

Ŝ:={1,,m}S
and by 𝐢S we shall mean (is1,,isk). If S={s1,,sk} and 𝐩=(p1,...,pm)(0,]m, we define
|1𝐩|S:=1ps1++1psk.
The lemmas read as follows:

Lemma 7. Let k{1,...,m} and 𝐩=(p1,...,pm)[1,]m. If there is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsm=1n|T(ejs1,...,ejsm)|qm)qm1qm)q1q2)1q1CT
for all m-linear forms T:ps1n××psmn𝕂 and all positive integers n, then
(jsk+1=1n(jsk+2=1n(jsm=1n|A(ejsk+1,...,ejsm)|qm)qm1qm)qk+1qk+2)1qk+1CA
for all (mk)-linear forms A:psk+1n××psmn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

Proof. To simplify the notation, we can suppose (s1,...,sm)=(1,...,m).

Let suppose that there is a constant C1 such that

(j1=1n(j2=1n(jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qm)qm1qm)q1q2)1q1CT
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂.

Given an (mk)-linear form S:pk+1n××pmn𝕂, we define the m-linear form T:p1n××pmn𝕂, given by

T(x(1),x(2),,x(m))=x1(1)x1(k)S(x(k+1),x(k+2),,x(m)).
It is obvious that T=S; then, by the above assumption there is a constant C1 such that
(jk+1=1n(jk+2=1n(jm=1n|S(ejsk+1,...,ejsm)|qm)qm1qm)qk+1qk+2)1qk+1=sup𝐢{k+1,...,m}̂(jk+1=1n(jk+2=1n(jm=1n|e1(1)e1(k)S(ejsk+1,...,ejsm)|qm)qm1qm)qk+1qk+2)1qk+1=sup𝐢{k+1,...,m}̂(jk+1=1n(jk+2=1n(jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejsm)|qm)qm1qm)qk+1qk+2)1qk+1(j1=1n(j2=1n(jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qm)qm1qm)q1q2)1q1CT=CS.

Lemma 8. Let k{1,...,m} and 𝐩=(p1,...,pm)[1,]m. Let S={s1,,sk}{1,,m}. If there is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|A(ejs1,...,ejsk)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)1q1CA
for all k-linear forms A:ps1n××pskn𝕂 and all positive integers n, then
sup𝐢Ŝ(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)1q1CT
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n. Moreover, if
|1𝐩|S <1
and, for every jŜ,
|1𝐩|S{j}1,
the sup cannot be improved (here and henceforth, this means that the sup cannot be replaced by any p-sum).

Proof. To simplify the notation, we can suppose (s1,...,sk)=(1,...,k).

Let us fix the last mk variables and work with k-linear forms A:p1n××pkn𝕂. Since

(j1=1n(j2=1n(jk=1n|A(ej1,...,ejk)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)1q1CA
for all k-linear forms A:p1n××pkn𝕂, we know that there is a constant C1, such that for any fixed vectors ejk+1,...,ejm, we have
(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)1q1CT(,,,ejk+1,...,ejm)
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂. Then, there is a constant C1, such that
sup𝐢Ŝ(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)1q1Csup𝐢ŜT(,,,ejk+1,...,ejm)CT
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂.

Now let us show that the sup cannot be improved. In fact, in this case we have mk suprema, none of which can be improved. Otherwise there will exist iŜ, r(0,) and C1 such that

sup𝐢S{i}̂(ji=1n(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)rq1)1rCT
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all n. Using the Lemma 7, this would imply the existence of a constant C1 such that
(ji=1n(js1=1n(js2=1n(jsk=1n|A(eji,ejs1,...,ejsk)|qk)qk1qk)q1q2)rq1)1rCA
for all (k+1)-linear forms A:pin×ps1n××pskn𝕂. Considering ρ=max{q1,...,qk,r}, by the monotonicity of the qnorms we conclude that there is a constant C1 such that
(ji,js1,...,jsk=1n|A(eji,ejs1,...,ejsk)|ρ)1ρCA
for all (k+1)-linear forms A:pin×ps1n××pskn𝕂. But this is impossible due to the hypothesis |1𝐩|S{i}1. ◻

In the next sections, using Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 , we obtain the super-critical versions of the Hardy-Littlewood inequalities presented in the introduction.

A first natural illustration of the usefulness of Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 leads us to an alternate proof of Proposition 6.3 in Pellegrino et al. 2017PELLEGRINO D, SANTOS J, SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ DM & TEIXEIRA EV. 2017. A regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Bull Sci Math 141: 802-837.. In fact, if q(1,], it is well known that

(j=1n|A(ej)|a)1aA
for all bounded linear forms A:q𝕂, if, and only if, aqq1. Thus, for a,b(0,], and p,q(1,] such that 1p+1q1, we invoke Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 to obtain:

Proposition 9. (see Proposition 6.3 in Pellegrino et al. 2017PELLEGRINO D, SANTOS J, SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ DM & TEIXEIRA EV. 2017. A regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Bull Sci Math 141: 802-837.) Let p,q(1,] be such that 1p+1q1. We have

(i=1n(j=1n|A(ei,ej)|a)ba)1bA
for all bilinear forms A:pn×qn𝕂 and all n if, and only if, the exponents a,b satisfy
b= and aqq1.

In this section we are mainly interested in the case of 3-linear forms.

By Theorem 6 used for 3-linear forms we have

supj1(j2=1n(j3=1n|T(ej1,ej2,ej3)|q3)q2q3)1q22T(8)
for all 3-linear forms T:3n×3n×3n𝕂, and all positive integers n, with q2=3 and q3=12/5. Moreover, the supremum cannot be replaced by an p-sum and q2=3 is sharp; besides, the optimal exponent q3 satisfying (8) fulfills q33/2.

As a consequence of Lemma 7 and Lemma 8, we complete the above result.

Proposition 10. Let p,r(1,) and q[2,] be such that 1q+1r <1 and 1p+1q+1r1. The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n ( j 3 = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , e j 2 , e j 3 ) | q 3 ) q 2 q 3 ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C T (9)
    for every 3-linear form T:pn×qn×rn𝕂 and all n.

  2. The exponents q1,q2,q3 satisfy

    q 1 = , q 2 1 1 ( 1 r + 1 q ) , q 3 r r 1 ,
    and
    1 q 2 + 1 q 3 3 2 ( 1 r + 1 q ) .

Proof. Since 1q+1r <1, by Theorem 3 there is a constant C1 such that

(j2=1n(j3=1n|A(ej2,ej3)|q3)q2q3)1q2CA
for all bilinear forms A:qn×rn𝕂 if, and only if,
q3rr1,q211(1r+1q)
and
1q3+1q232(1r+1q).
We combine this equivalence with the fact 1q+1r <1 and 1p+1q+1r1, and then, we invoke Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 to conclude the proof. ◻

Corollary 11. For all 3-linear forms T:3n×3n×3n𝕂 and all n, we have

(j1=1n(j2=1n(j3=1n|T(ej1,ej2,ej3)|q3)q2q3)q1q2)1q1CT
if, and only if, q1=, q23,q33/2, and 1q2+1q356.

The m-linear case

Now we use Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 to obtain super-critical versions of Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for m-linear forms. Our main result is the following Theorem. Below, we use the notation x to represent the smallest integer greater than to x, i.e., x=min{nn>x}.

Theorem 12. Let m2 be an integer, p(1,2m], k:=max{0,mp} and A={i{1,...,m1}:ik}. Then, there is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

supji,iA(jk+1,...jm=1n|T(ej1,...,ejm)|q)1qCT
for every m-linear form T:pn××pn𝕂 if, and only if,
qpp(mk).
Moreover, the sup cannot be improved.

Proof. The case k=0 is precisely (4) , so we shall assume k1. Since p(mk,mk+1] we have

1mk+11p <1mk
and thus
mkmk+1mkp <1.
On the other hand we also have
1mk+1p.
By (4) there is a constant C1 such that
(jk+1,...jm=1n|T(ejk+1,...,ejk)|q)1qCT
for every (mk)-linear form T:pn××pn𝕂 if, and only if,
qpp(mk).
By Lemma 8 with S={k+1,k+2,,m}{1,,m}, and Lemma 7 we conclude the proof. ◻

We finish this section with some super-critical results in the anisotropic setting, whose proofs we omit. We begin with a super-critical version of Theorem 5 :

Theorem 13. Let m2, k{1,...,m1}, p1,...,pk[1,], pk+1,...,pm1(2,] and pm(1,2], such that

1pk+1++1pm <1
and
1pj+1pk+1++1pm1
for all j{1,...,k}. The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C1 (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( j 2 = 1 n ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , . . . , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C T
    for all m-linear forms T:pn××pn𝕂 and all n.

  2. The exponents satisfy

    q 1 = = q k = and q i 1 1 ( 1 p i + + 1 p m ) , i = k + 1 , . . . , m .

Analogously, using Lemma 7, Lemma 8 and Theorem 4 we have:

Theorem 14. Let p1,...,pk[1,2] and pk+1,...,pm[2,] be such that

1pk+1++1pm12
and
1pj+1pk+1++1pm1
for all j{1,...,k}, and
qk+1,...,qm[11(1pk+1++1pm),2].
The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C T ,
    for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. q1==qk= and the inequality

    1 q k + 1 + + 1 q m ( m k ) + 1 2 ( 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m )
    is verified.

The next result shows that it is possible to avoid the condition 1pj+1pk+1++1pm1, for all j{1,...,k}:

Theorem 15. Let p1,...,pk[1,2] and pk+1,...,pm[2,] be such that

1pk+1++1pm12
and
qk+1,...,qm[11(1pk+1++1pm),2]
with
1qk+1++1qm=(mk)+12(1pk+1++1pm).
The following assertions are equivalent:

  1. There is a constant C (not depending on n) such that

    ( j 1 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 C T ,
    for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n.

  2. q1==qk=.

Proof. Suppose that (a) holds and qk <. In this case, Lemma 7 provides a constant C such that

( j k = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q k q k + 1 ) 1 q k C T
for all (mk+1)-linear forms T:pkn××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n. For any (mk+1)-linear form T:pkn××pmn𝕂, we define an (mk+1)-linear form S with the same rule of T, but different domain 2n×pk+1n××pmn. So, there is a constant C such that
( j k = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | S ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q k q k + 1 ) 1 q k = ( j k = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q k q k + 1 ) 1 q k C T C S . (10)
for all (mk+1)-linear forms S:2n×pk+1n××pmn𝕂, and the exponents satisfy
1 q k + 1 q k + 1 + + 1 q m = 1 q k + ( m k ) + 1 2 ( 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m ) > ( m k ) + 1 2 ( 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m ) = ( m k + 1 ) + 1 2 ( 1 2 + 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m ) .

On the other hand, replacing the unimodular (mk+1)-linear form of the Kahane-Salem-Zygmund inequality (see Lemma 6.1 in Albuquerque et al. 2014ALBUQUERQUE N, BAYART F, PELLEGRINO D & SEOANE-SEPÚLVEDA JB. 2014. Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. J Funct Anal 266: 3726-3740.) in (10) , we obtain

n1qk++1qmCmn(mk+1)+12(12+1pk+1++1pm).
Since this is valid for all n, we conclude that
1qk++1qm(mk+1)+12(12+1pk+1++1pm),
and this is a contradiction. Hence qk=. Finally, the fact that q1==qk1= is a consequence of Lemma 8, because
1pj+1pk+1pk+1++1pm1
for all j{1,...,.k1} (recall that p1,...,pk[1,2]).

Finally, using Theorem 4 and Lemma 8 we prove that (b) implies (a). ◻

Remark 16. It is worth mentioning that the above theorems are independent. For instance, if m=4, k=2, p1=p2=2 and p3=p4=8, nothing can be inferred by Theorem 14 . However, using Theorem 15, we conclude that if q3,q4[4/3,2] and 1q3+1q4=54 then there is a constant C (not depending on n) such that

(j1=1n((j4=1n|T(ej1,,ej4)|q4)q3q4)q1q2)1q1CT,
for all 4-linear forms T:2n×2n×8n×8n𝕂 and all positive integers n if, and only if, q1=q2=.

The following result was proved in Albuquerque & Rezende 2018ALBUQUERQUE N & REZENDE L. 2018. Anisotropic regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Comm Contemp Math 20: 1750087-1750100. (in Corollary 2):

Theorem 17. (see Corollary 2 in Albuquerque & Rezende 2018) Let m be a positive integer and p1,...,pm[1,2m] and 1p1++1pm <1. Then, there is a constant C (not depending on n) such that

(j1=1n((jm=1n|T(ej1,,ejm)|qm)qm1qm)q1q2)1q1CT(11)
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n, with
1qi=12+(mi+1)2m(1pi++1pm),
for all i=1,...,m.

Again, Lemma 7 and Lemma 8 combined with the Kahane-Salem-Zygmund inequality (see Lemma 6.1 in Albuquerque et al. 2014ALBUQUERQUE N, BAYART F, PELLEGRINO D & SEOANE-SEPÚLVEDA JB. 2014. Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. J Funct Anal 266: 3726-3740.) and Lemma 3.1 in Aron et al. 2017ARON R, NÚÑEZ-ALARCÓN D, PELLEGRINO D & SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ D. 2017. Optimal exponents for Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for m-linear operators. Linear Algebra Appl 531: 399-422. give us the following super-critical version of the Theorem 17 :

Theorem 18. Let m2, k{1,...,m1}, p1,...,pk[1,] and pk+1,...,pm[2,2(mk)], be such that

1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m < 1
and
1 p j + 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m 1 ,
for all j{1,...,k}. Then
( j 1 = 1 n ( ( j m = 1 n | T ( e j 1 , , e j m ) | q m ) q m 1 q m ) q 1 q 2 ) 1 q 1 2 m k 1 2 T (12)
for all m-linear forms T:p1n××pmn𝕂 and all positive integers n, with q1==qk= and
1 q i = 1 2 + ( m i + 1 ) 2 ( m k ) ( 1 p i + + 1 p m ) ,
for all i=k+1,...,m. Moreover, q1==qk=, and the optimal exponents qi satisfying (12) are such that
q i 1 1 ( 1 p i + + 1 p m ) , i = k + 1 , . . . , m ,
and the inequality
1 q k + 1 + + 1 q m ( m k ) + 1 2 ( 1 p k + 1 + + 1 p m )
is verified.

Remark 19. When k=1 and p1==pm=m we recover Theorem 6 .

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank the reviewers for his/her careful reading and important suggestions that helped to improve the paper. D. Pellegrino is supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) Grant 307327/2017-5 and by Fundação de Apoio à Pesquisa do Estado da Paraíba (FAPESQ) Grant 2019/0014.

  • 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 47B37, 47B10, 11Y60.
  • ALBUQUERQUE N, BAYART F, PELLEGRINO D & SEOANE-SEPÚLVEDA JB. 2014. Sharp generalizations of the multilinear Bohnenblust-Hille inequality. J Funct Anal 266: 3726-3740.
  • ALBUQUERQUE N & REZENDE L. 2018. Anisotropic regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Comm Contemp Math 20: 1750087-1750100.
  • ARON R, NÚÑEZ-ALARCÓN D, PELLEGRINO D & SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ D. 2017. Optimal exponents for Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for m-linear operators. Linear Algebra Appl 531: 399-422.
  • CAVALCANTE W. 2018. Some applications of the regularity principle in sequence spaces. Positivity 22: 191-198.
  • DIMANT V & SEVILLA-PERIS P. 2016. Summation of coefficients of polynomials on ℓp spaces. Publ Mat 60: 289-310.
  • HARDY G & LITTLEWOOD JE. 1934. Bilinear forms bounded in space [p,q] Quart J Math 5: 241-254.
  • OSIKIEWICZ B & TONGE A. 2001. An interpolation approach to Hardy-Littlewood inequalities for norms of operators on sequence spaces. Linear Algebra Appl 331: 1-9.
  • PAULINO D. 2019. Critical Hardy-Littlewood inequality for multilinear forms. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, II. 69 (2020), 369-380.
  • PELLEGRINO D, SANTOS J, SERRANO-RODRÍGUEZ DM & TEIXEIRA EV. 2017. A regularity principle in sequence spaces and applications. Bull Sci Math 141: 802-837.
  • PRACIANO-PEREIRA T. 1981. On bounded multilinear forms on a class of ℓp spaces. J Math Anal Appl 81: 561-568.
  • SANTOS J & VELANGA T. 2017. On the Bohnenblust-Hille inequality for multilinear forms. Results Math 72: 239-244.

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    20 Feb 2023
  • Date of issue
    2023

History

  • Received
    21 Feb 2020
  • Accepted
    20 Aug 2020
Academia Brasileira de Ciências Rua Anfilófio de Carvalho, 29, 3º andar, 20030-060 Rio de Janeiro RJ Brasil, Tel: +55 21 3907-8100, CLOCKSS system has permission to ingest, preserve, and serve this Archival Unit - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: aabc@abc.org.br