Some Intrinsic Characterizations of Besov-Triebel-Lizorkin-Morrey-type Spaces on Lipschitz Domains
Abstract.
We give Littlewood-Paley type characterizations for Besov-Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces and Besov-Morrey spaces on a special Lipschitz domain : for a suitable sequence of Schwartz functions ,
We also show that , and have equivalent (quasi-)norms via derivatives: for , we have .
In particular .
Key words and phrases:
Rychkov’s extension operator, Lipschitz domains, Besov-type space, Triebel-Lizorkin-type space, Besov-Morrey space2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
46E35 (primary), 42B35 and 42B25 (secondary)1. Introduction
Let be a special Lipschitz domain, that is, is of the form where is a Lipschitz function such that . (See also [Tri06, Definition 1.103].)
In [Ryc99], based on the construction of his extension operator, Rychkov gave a Littlewood-Paley type intrinsic characterization of the Triebel-Lizorkin spaces on : for , and , has the following equivalent (quasi-)norm (see [Ryc99, Theorem 3.2]):
(1) |
We take obvious modification for . Here is a carefully chosen family of Schwartz functions such that the convolution is defined on , see Definition 4.
In [SY24, Proposition 6.6], we used Rychkov’s construction to prove that have equivalent (quasi-)norms via their derivatives. More precisely, let , for every , and there is a such that
(2) |
Both (1) and (2) miss the endpoint: do we have the analogy of (1) and (2) for ? In this paper, we give the positive answers to both cases, by using the recently developed Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces : we have the coincidences for (see (9)).
To make the results more general, we include the discussions of Besov-type spaces and the Besov-Morrey spaces , see Definition 6.
We denote by the set of dyadic cubes in , that is
(3) |
Our result for (1) is the following:
Theorem 1 (Littlewood-Paley type characterizations).
One can also get some characterizations on bounded Lipschitz domain, whose expressions are less elegant however. See Remark 24.
Similar to [Ryc99, Theorem 2.3], we also have the corresponding characterizations using Peetre maximal functions, see Proposition 21 and Corollary 23.
Our result for (2) is the following:
Theorem 2 (Equivalent norm characterizations via derivatives).
Let , , and ( for -cases). Let be either a special Lipschitz domain or a bounded Lipschitz domain. Then for any positive integer , the space has the following equivalent (quasi-)norm:
(4) |
In particular for all and .
The Besov-Morrey case of Theorem 2 was stated in [YSY15, Proposition 4.15]. However, the key step in their proof requires [Tri08, (4.70)] (see [YSY15, Remark 4.14]), which cannot be achieved.
Remark 3.
In the proof of [Tri08, Proposition 4.21], Triebel claimed the following statement:
(5) |
Here is an extension operator which is bounded on and .
However, the commutativity in (5) (see [Tri08, (4.70)]) cannot be achieved. In [SY24, Section 1.2] we borrowed some facts from several complex variables to show that can never be true: if it is true (even locally) then -equation for can gain 1 derivative. To prove Theorem 2 (also to fix the proof of [YSY15, Proposition 4.15]), simply using the boundedness of is not enough.
By observing (5) more carefully, the argument still works if hold for some extension operators . This can be done if is the standard half space extension111The half space extension works on . It has the form when . In this case has the similar expression to .. Using the operators Triebel proved the equivalent norms via derivatives for and for smooth domains, see [Tri10, Section 3.3.5].
In our case is Rychkov’s extension operator (see (31)). Even on special Lipschitz domain, it is not known to the author whether can be achieved (which in general should have the form (27)). Nevertheless, a weaker form is enough to fix (5). In the proof we introduce in (41) and get the proof using (42).
See also [SY24, Section 2.2 and Remark 6.5].
2. Function Spaces and Notations
Let be an open set, we define to be the space of restricted tempered distributions:
. See also [Ryc99, Proposition 3.1].
We use the notation to mean that where is a constant independent of . We use for “ and ”. And we use to emphasize that the constant depends on the quantity .
When or , we use “norms” (for etc.) as the abbreviation to the usual “quasi-norms”.
In the paper we use the following Littlewood-Paley family, whose elements do not have compact supports in the Fourier side. It is crucially useful in the construction of Rychkov’s extension operator.
Definition 4.
Let be a special Lipschitz domain, a Littlewood-Paley family associated with is a sequence of Schwartz functions that satisfies the following:
-
(P.a)
Moment condition: for all multi-indices .
-
(P.b)
Scaling condition: for all .
-
(P.c)
Approximate identity: is the Dirac delta measure.
-
(P.d)
Support condition: for all .
In the paper we use the sequence spaces , , given by the following:
Definition 5.
Let and . We denote by and the spaces of vector valued measurable functions such that the following (quasi-)norms are finite respectively:
We define the Morrey space222Our notation is different from the standard one, which can be found in for example [TX05, Definition 2.1]. to be the set of all whose (quasi-)norm below is finite:
We define with .
Our Besov-type spaces , Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces and Besov-Morrey spaces are given by the following:
Definition 6.
Let be a sequence of Schwartz functions satisfying:
-
(P.a’)
The Fourier transform satisfies and .
-
(P.b’)
for .
Let , and ( for -cases). We define the Besov-type Morrey space , the Triebel-Lizorkin-type Morrey space and the Besov-Morrey space , to be the sets of all tempered distributions such that the following norms are finite, respectively:
(6) |
Let . For an (arbitrary) open subset , we define ( for -cases) with the norm
(7) |
The definitions of the spaces do not depend on the choice of which satisfies (P.a’) and (P.b’). See [YSY10, Page 39, Corollary 2.1] and [TX05, Theorem 2.8].
Remark 7.
We remark some known results and different notations for these spaces in from the literature:
-
(i)
Clearly and (provided ).
- (ii)
- (iii)
- (iv)
- (v)
-
(vi)
We do not talk about the Triebel-Lizorkin-Morrey spaces in the paper, because they are special cases of the Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces: we have for all , , and . See [YSY10, Corollary 3.3].
- (vii)
3. Proof of the Theorems
The key ingredient is the Peetre maximal operators introduced in [Pee75].
Definition 8.
Let , be an open set and let be a sequence of Schwartz functions. The associated Peetre maximal operators are given by
Lemma 9.
Proof.
The assumptions for and imply , i.e. . We can take via the Fourier transforms:
See [Ryc99, Proposition 2.1] for details. ∎
Lemma 10 ([BPT96, Lemma 2.1]).
Lemma 11.
Let , and . There is a such that for every ,
(10) | ||||
(11) | ||||
(12) |
Lemma 12.
Proof.
The special case of (13) is proved in [Ryc99, Proof of Theorem 3.2, Step 1]. Namely, we have
(14) |
Also see [Ull12, Proof of Theorem 2.6, Step 1] for the argument. Thus it suffices to prove the case :
(15) |
Let satisfies the consequence of Lemma 9, so for . By assumption are supported in where is the defining function for . Using the property , we have
The elementary inequality yields
Recall the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function for .
Lemma 13.
Let . There is a such that for any ,
(17) |
Our lemma here is weaker than the corresponding estimate in [YY10, Proof of Theorem 1.2, Step 3].
Proof.
By taking a translation, it suffices to prove the estimate on , i.e for . Note that if , then and . Therefore
Proposition 14.
Keeping the assumptions of Lemma 12, for every , , and , there is a such that for every ,
(18) | ||||
(19) | ||||
(20) |
Remark 15.
It is possible that the assumption can be relaxed to . In applications, we only need a large enough that does not depend on .
Proof.
We use a convention for . Thus in the computations below every sequence is identical to .
By the assumption on we can take such that . We first prove (19).
Since . By Lemma 12 and using ,
By Lemma 11 and since ,
Applying Lemma 13 with for each and expanding the -norm,
Since the sum is finite.
Finally, applying Fefferman-Stein’s inequality to in for each (see [FS71, Theorem 1(1)] and also [Gra14, Remark 5.6.7]), since and ,
This completes the proof of (19).
The proof of (18) and (20) are similar but simpler: by assumption we have
(21) |
Therefore, we prove (18) by the following:
Taking , we have pointwise in .
When and , by [TX05, Lemma 2.5] we have
(23) |
We see that (23) is valid for all .
Proposition 16.
Proof.
The proof is the same as that for Proposition 14, except that we replace every by in the arguments. We leave the details to readers. ∎
Based on Proposition 14, we can prove a boundedness result of Rychkov-type operators on -spaces.
Proposition 17.
Proof.
Recall is defined via restrictions. We see that is well-defined in the sense that, for every extension of , the summation converges and does not depend on the choice of . See [SY24, Propositions 3.10 and 3.14] for example.
Let be as in Definition 6 that defines the -norms. By Lemma 10, for every , . Thus by the similar argument to (16), for every ,
Therefore, by Lemma 11, for any ,
(28) | ||||
(29) | ||||
(30) |
Remark 18.
Corollary 19 ([YSY15, ZHS20, Zhu21]).
Let be a special Lipschitz domain. Let and be as in the assumption and conclusion of Lemma 9 with respect to . Then the Rychkov’s extension operator
(31) |
is well-defined and has boundedness for and all , , ( for -cases).
Proof.
is an extension operator because by assumption . The boundedness is immediate since from (27). ∎
Remark 20.
Proposition 21 (Characterizations via Peetre’s maximal functions).
Let be a special Lipschitz domain and let be a Littlewood-Paley family associated with . Then for , and ( for -cases), we have the following intrinsic characterizations: for every ,
(32) | ||||
(33) | ||||
(34) |
Remark 22.
(32) and (33) are not new as well. The case is done in [SZ22, Theorem 1.7], where a more general setting is considered. See also [GHS23, Proof of Theorem 3.6, Step 2] for a proof of .
As already mentioned in Remark 15, it is possible that the assumption of can be weakened.
Proof of Proposition 21.
Let be as in Definition 6 that defines the -norms. We only prove (33) since the proof of (32) and (34) are the same by replacing with and , and including the discussion of .
() For , let be an extension of . We see that pointwisely
Thus by Proposition 14,
Taking infimum over all extensions of , we get .
Write . We define a “fold map” as
Recall . By direct computation, we have
(36) |
Therefore
Clearly for we have the following estimate for cube and function :
We can now prove Theorem 1:
Proof of Theorem 1.
The -cases follow immediately from the -cases using (9).
Fix a . We only prove the -cases. The proofs of the -cases and the -cases are the same, except that we replace every with and .
By Proposition 21 we have . Therefore, it suffices to show that .
Clearly since holds for all , and . The converse follows from (18). Thus, we prove the -cases. ∎
We have the immediate analogy of [YY10, Theorem 1.1] on Lipschitz domains:
Corollary 23.
Keeping the assumptions in Proposition 21, we have the following intrinsic characterizations: for every ,
Proof.
Remark 24.
By the standard partition of unity argument, we can give the analogy of Theorem 1 on a bounded Lipschitz domain. An example is the following:
(38) | ||||
(39) | ||||
(40) |
Here satisfy the following:
-
•
is an open cover of , and there are cones such that for each .
- •
-
•
for , and satisfy666In fact we can relax the condition to for some . .
To prove (38), (39) and (40) the only thing we need are the following standard results ( for -cases):
-
(.a)
Let . Then is bounded.
-
(.b)
Let be an invertible affine linear transform. Then is bounded.
-
(.c)
For every , we have equivalent norms .
One can see [YSY10, Sections 6.1.1 and 6.2], [WYY17, Theorem 1.6] and [ST07, Theorem 3.3] for their proof. See also [HT23, Sections 3.4, 4.2 and 4.3]. We remark that because of (8) it is enough to consider the case . We leave the details to the readers.
Finally, we prove Theorem 2 using the following fact:
Proposition 25 ([SY24, Theorem 1.5 (ii)]).
Proof of Theorem 2.
Once the case of special Lipschitz domains is done, the proof of the case of bounded Lipschitz domains follows from the standard partition of unity argument (one can read [SY24, Section 6] for details) along with the facts (.a), (.b) and (.c) mentioned in Remark 24.
Let be a special Lipschitz domain. Let and let be an extension of . By (.c) we have . Since is also an extension of , by (7) in Definition 5, taking the infimum over all extensions of we get .
To prove the converse inequality , let be as in (31).
We let () be given in Proposition 25. Thus for all .
We define a family of linear operators,
(41) |
For every and for every multi-index , we see that
(42) | ||||
By Proposition 17, are all bounded. Therefore
This completes the proof of (4) for the case of special Lipschitz domains.
The -cases follow immediately from (9) since we have . ∎
4. Further Open Questions
By the same method, using Lemma 10 - Proposition 14, it is possible for us to get the analogs of Theorems 1 and 2 on the so-called local spaces.
The local version of for , denoted by , is defined by replacing the supremum among the set of dyadic cubes with . See [Sic12, Section 3.4] for example. For an open subset we use similarly. For more details we refer [Tri13] to readers.
One can also consider the analog of Theorems 1 and 2 on , the spaces with variable exponents. For example [SZ22], which may require certain assumptions on the exponents.
In Definition 6, it is known that the norms are equivalent if only satisfies the scaling condition (P.b) and the Tauberian condition:
(43) |
See [WYY17, Theorems 2.5 and 2.6] and [Xu05, Theorem 1] for example.
It is not known to the author whether we can replace the assumption (P.c) for in Theorem 1 with the Tauberian condition (43).
Question 26.
Keeping the assumptions of Theorem 2, can we find a such that the following holds?
Cf. [WYY17, Theorem 1.6]. The question is open even for the classical Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces when is a (special or bounded) Lipschitz domain.
Acknowledgment.
I would like to thank Dorothee Haroske, Wen Yuan and Ciqiang Zhuo for their informative discussions and advice. I would also like to thank the referees for the comments and suggestions.
References
- [BPT96] Huy-Qui Bui, Maciej Paluszyński, and Mitchell H. Taibleson, A maximal function characterization of weighted Besov-Lipschitz and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces, Studia Math. 119 (1996), no. 3, 219–246. MR 1397492
- [FJ90] Michael Frazier and Björn Jawerth, A discrete transform and decompositions of distribution spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 93 (1990), no. 1, 34–170. MR 1070037
- [FS71] Charles Fefferman and Elias M. Stein, Some maximal inequalities, Amer. J. Math. 93 (1971), 107–115. MR 284802
- [GHS23] Helena F. Gonçalves, Dorothee D. Haroske, and Leszek Skrzypczak, Limiting embeddings of Besov-type and Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces on domains and an extension operator, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 202 (2023), no. 5, 2481–2516. MR 4634273
- [Gra14] Loukas Grafakos, Classical Fourier analysis, third ed., Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 249, Springer, New York, 2014. MR 3243734
- [HT23] Dorothee D. Haroske and Hans Triebel, Morrey smoothness spaces: a new approach, Sci. China Math. 66 (2023), no. 6, 1301–1358. MR 4596050
- [Maz03] Anna L. Mazzucato, Besov-Morrey spaces: function space theory and applications to non-linear PDE, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), no. 4, 1297–1364. MR 1946395
- [Pee75] Jaak Peetre, On spaces of Triebel-Lizorkin type, Ark. Mat. 13 (1975), 123–130. MR 380394
- [Ryc99] Vyacheslav S. Rychkov, On restrictions and extensions of the Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces with respect to Lipschitz domains, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 60 (1999), no. 1, 237–257. MR 1721827
- [Sic12] Winfried Sickel, Smoothness spaces related to Morrey spaces—a survey. I, Eurasian Math. J. 3 (2012), no. 3, 110–149. MR 3024132
- [ST07] Yoshihiro Sawano and Hitoshi Tanaka, Decompositions of Besov-Morrey spaces and Triebel-Lizorkin-Morrey spaces, Math. Z. 257 (2007), no. 4, 871–905. MR 2342557
- [SY24] Ziming Shi and Liding Yao, New estimates of Rychkov’s universal extension operator for Lipschitz domains and some applications, Math. Nachr. 297 (2024), no. 4, 1407–1443. MR 4734977
- [SZ22] Qi Sun and Ciqiang Zhuo, Extension of variable Triebel-Lizorkin-type space on domains, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 45 (2022), no. 1, 201–216. MR 4351129
- [Tri06] Hans Triebel, Theory of function spaces. III, Monographs in Mathematics, vol. 100, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2006. MR 2250142
- [Tri08] by same author, Function spaces and wavelets on domains, EMS Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 7, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2008. MR 2455724
- [Tri10] by same author, Theory of function spaces, Modern Birkhäuser Classics, Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2010, Reprint of 1983 edition [MR0730762], Also published in 1983 by Birkhäuser Verlag [MR0781540]. MR 3024598
- [Tri13] by same author, Local function spaces, heat and Navier-Stokes equations, EMS Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 20, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2013. MR 3086433
- [Tri14] by same author, Hybrid function spaces, heat and Navier-Stokes equations, EMS Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 24, European Mathematical Society (EMS), Zürich, 2014. MR 3308920
- [Tri20] by same author, Theory of function spaces. IV, Monographs in Mathematics, vol. 107, Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, [2020] ©2020. MR 4298338
- [TX05] Lin Tang and Jingshi Xu, Some properties of Morrey type Besov-Triebel spaces, Math. Nachr. 278 (2005), no. 7-8, 904–917. MR 2141966
- [Ull12] Tino Ullrich, Continuous characterizations of Besov-Lizorkin-Triebel spaces and new interpretations as coorbits, J. Funct. Spaces Appl. (2012), Art. ID 163213, 47. MR 2898467
- [WYY17] Suqing Wu, Dachun Yang, and Wen Yuan, Equivalent quasi-norms of Besov-Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces via derivatives, Results Math. 72 (2017), no. 1-2, 813–841. MR 3684461
- [Xu05] Jingshi Xu, A characterization of Morrey type Besov and Triebel-Lizorkin spaces, Vietnam J. Math. 33 (2005), no. 4, 369–379. MR 2200234
- [YSY10] Wen Yuan, Winfried Sickel, and Dachun Yang, Morrey and Campanato meet Besov, Lizorkin and Triebel, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 2005, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2010. MR 2683024
- [YSY15] by same author, Interpolation of Morrey-Campanato and related smoothness spaces, Sci. China Math. 58 (2015), no. 9, 1835–1908. MR 3383989
- [YY10] Dachun Yang and Wen Yuan, Characterizations of Besov-type and Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces via maximal functions and local means, Nonlinear Anal. 73 (2010), no. 12, 3805–3820. MR 2728556
- [YY13] by same author, Relations among Besov-type spaces, Triebel-Lizorkin-type spaces and generalized Carleson measure spaces, Appl. Anal. 92 (2013), no. 3, 549–561. MR 3021276
- [ZHS20] Ciqiang Zhuo, Marc Hovemann, and Winfried Sickel, Complex interpolation of Lizorkin-Triebel-Morrey spaces on domains, Anal. Geom. Metr. Spaces 8 (2020), no. 1, 268–304. MR 4178742
- [Zhu21] Ciqiang Zhuo, Complex interpolation of Besov-type spaces on domains, Z. Anal. Anwend. 40 (2021), no. 3, 313–347. MR 4284347