On the range of the derivative of Gateaux-smooth

functions on separable Banach spaces

Robert Deville
Mathematiques Pures de Bordeaux, Universite de Bordeaux
351, cours de la liberation, 33400, Talence, France
email : deville@math.u-bordeaux.fr
Petr H

ajek
1
Mathematical Institute, Czech Academy of Science

Zitna 25, Prague, Czech republic

email : hajek@math.cas.cz
Abstract : We prove that there exists a Lipschitz function from
1
into
IR
2
which is G ateaux-dierentiable at every point and such that for every
x, y
1
, the norm of f

(x) f

(y) is bigger than 1. On the other hand,

for every Lipschitz and G ateaux-dierentiable function from an arbitrary
Banach space X into IR and for every > 0, there always exists two points
x, y X such that f

(x)f

(y) is less than . We also construct, in every

innite dimensional separable Banach space, a real valued function f on
X, which is G ateaux-dierentiable at every point, has bounded non-empty
support, and with the properties that f

is norm to weak

continuous and
f

(X) has an isolated point a, and that necessarily a = 0.

1991 Mathematics Subject Classication : primary : 46 B 20,
secondary : .
Key words : G ateaux-derivatives, bump functions, geometry of Banach
spaces.
1
Supported by grants A1 019 205 and GA

CR 201/01/11098.
1
2
1) Introduction.
Let f be a mapping from a Banach space X into a Banach space Y which
is G ateaux-dierentiable at every point. Our purpose is the study of the
range of the derivative of f. We denote this range f

(X). Let us recall that

sucient conditions on a subset A of a dual Banach space X

so that it
is the range of a real valued function on X which is Frechet-dierentiable
at each point have been obtained in [BFKL], [BFL], [AFJ] and [G1]. In
this case, it was noticed in [AD] that whenever X is an innite dimen-
sional Banach space with separable dual, there exists a C
1
-smooth real
valued function on X with bounded support and such that f

(X) = X

.
On the other hand, it follows from [H] that if f is a function on c
0
with
locally uniformly continuous derivative, then f

(c
0
) is included in a count-
able union of norm compact subsets of
1
. The structure of the range of
f

whenever f

satises a Holder condition has been investigated in [G2].

In the case of functions or mappings which are G ateaux-dierentiable at
each point, it was observed in [ADJ] that f

(X) can coincide with L(X, Y ).

We shall investigate here phenomena which can occur when f is G ateaux-
dierentiable, but not when f is Frechet-dierentiable. In particular, for
each innite dimensional separable Bananach space X, we shall construct
in section 2 a G ateaux-dierentiable function f on X, with bounded sup-
port, and such that for all x = 0, f

(x) f

(0) 1. In section 3, we
shall consider the following question : let X, Y be two Banach spaces. Is it
possible to construct a Lipschitz continuous mapping f : X Y , G ateaux-
dierentiable at each point, and such that, for all x, y X, x = y, we have
f

(x) f

(y) 1? Clearly, this is not possible whenever L(X, Y ) is sep-

arable. We shall prove that this is not possible either whenever Y = IR,
but such a construction will be carried out whenever (X, Y ) = (
1
, IR
2
)
and whenever (X, Y ) = (
p
,
q
) with 1 p q < +.
2) Isolated points in the range of the derivative of a function.
Let X be a Banach space, and f be a real valued function dened on X. If
f is Frechet-dierentiable at every point, then Malys Theorem asserts that
the range of f

, denoted f

(X), is connected. If f is G ateaux-dierentiable

at every point of X and if f

is norm to weak

continuous, then f

(X) is
weak

connected. Therefore, if f is not ane, no point of f

(X) is isolated
in f

(X) endowed with the weak

-topology. This result remains true even

if f

is not assumed to be norm to weak

continuous, as shown by the

following proposition. We shall see later that in this case f

(X) is not
necessarily norm connected.
Proposition : Let X be an innite dimensional Banach space, and let
f be a real valued locally Lipschitz and G ateaux-dierentiable function on
X. Then either f is ane, or, for every x X, f

(x) lies in the weak

closure of f

(X)\{f

(x)}.
3
Remark : J. Saint Raymond constructed a mapping f from IR
2
into IR
2
,
Frechet-dierentiable at each point, and so that
_
det(f

(x)); x IR
2
_
=
{0, 1}. Therefore f

(IR
2
) is not connected and for every x IR
2
, f

(x) /
f

(X)\{f

(x)}. Consequently, there is no analog of Malys theorem and

of the above proposition for vector valued mappings.
Proof : Let f be a real valued locally Lipschitz and G ateaux-dierentiable
function on X which is not ane. Therefore, Card
_
f

(X)
_
2. In order
to get a contradiction, assume moreover that f

(X) = A{y}, where A =

and y / A
w

. Since y f

(X), there exists x X such that y = f

(x).
Replacing f by f(x +.), we can assume that x = 0. Fix also x
0
X such
that f

(x
0
) A. Since y / A
w

, there exists x
1
, x
2
, ..., x
n
X and > 0
such that, if we denote
y =
_
y(x
1
), y(x
2
), ..., y(x
n
)
_
IR
n
and

A =
__
z(x
1
), z(x
2
), ..., z(x
n
)
_
; z A
_
IR
n
then, for every z

A, z y > . If we denote

y =
_
y(x
0
), y
_
IR
n+1
and

A =
_
z(x
0
), z(x
1
), z(x
2
), ..., z(x
n
)
_
; z A
_
IR
n+1
, then we also
have that, for every

z

A,

y > . Dene F : IR
n+1
IR by
F(t
0
, t
1
, t
2
, ..., t
n
) = f
_
n

i=0
t
i
x
i
_
Since F is Lipschitz continuous and G ateaux-dierentiable on IR
n+1
, it is
Frechet-dierentiable on IR
n+1
and
F

(t
0
, t
1
, t
2
, ..., t
n
) =
_
f

_
n

i=0
t
i
x
i
_
(x
j
)
_
n
j=0

A {

y}
Moreover F

(0, 0, ..., 0) =

y, F

(1, 0, ..., 0)

A. Therefore F

(IR
n+1
) is not
connected and this contradicts the Theorem of Maly.
From now on, we say that a real valued function on an innite dimensional
Banach space X is a bump function if it has bounded non empty support.
We shall denote B(r) the set of all x

such that x

< r. If E is
a Banach space, x E and r > 0, we denote B
E
(x, r) (resp. B
E
(x, r))
the open ball (resp. closed ball) in E of center x and radius r. If f
is a continuous and G ateaux-dierentiable bump function on X, then,
according to the Ekeland variational principle, the norm closure of f

(X)
contains a ball B(r) for some r > 0. A natural conjecture would be that
the norm closure of f

(X) is norm connected, or at least that f

(X) does
4
not contain an isolated point. This is not so as shown by the following
construction.
Theorem 1 : Let X be an innite dimensional separable Banach space.
Then, there exists a bump function f on X such that f is G ateaux-dieren-
tiable at every point, f

is norm to weak

continuous and f

(0)f

(x) 1
whenever x = 0. If X

is separable, we can assume moreover that f is C

1
on X\{0}.
Remark : According to the above discussion, 0 is not an isolated point
of f

(X), so necessarily f

(0) = 0.
Proof : We shall use two lemmas.
Lemma 1 : Let X be a Banach space, U be an open connected subset of
X

such that 0 U and x

U. Assume there exists on X a Lipschitz

continuous bump function which is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-
dierentiable) at every point. Then there exists a Lipschitz continuous
bump function on X which is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-
dierentiable) at every point, such that

(X) U and

(x) = x

for all
x in a neighbourhood of 0.
Proof of lemma 1 : Since U is connected, there exists nitely many points
x

0
, x

1
, ..., x

n
U such that x

0
= 0, x

n
= x

, and the segments [x

i
, x

i+1
]
are included in U. The polygonal line R =
n1

i=0
[x

i
, x

i+1
] is compact,
therefore there exists > 0 such that R + B() U. Let b be a Lip-
schitz bump function on X which is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-
dierentiable) at every point of X. By translation, we can assume that
b(0) = 0. Replacing b(x) by
1
b(
2
x), we can also assume that there exists
0 < < 1 such that b(x) 1 whenever x and that the support of
b is included in the unit ball. Composing b with a suitable C

-smooth
function from IR into IR, we can assume moreover that b(x) = 1 whenever
x , and that 0 b(x) 1 for all x X. By adding if necessary
points on the polygonal line R, we can assume that for all i {1, 2, ..., n},
x

i
x

i1
< /b

. Dene
b
i
(x) = b(x).(x

i
x

i1
)(x)
We have b

i
(x) = (x

i
x

i1
)(x).b

(x)+b(x).(x

i
x

i1
), with b(x).(x

i
x

i1
)
[0, x

i
x

i1
] and (x

i
x

i1
)(x).b

(x) < for all x X, therefore

b

i
(X) [0, x
i
x
i1
] +B(). Finally, set
(x) =
n

i=1

i1
b
i
_
x/
i1
_
5
is a Lipschitz continuous bump function on X which is G ateaux-dieren-
tiable (resp. Frechet-dierentiable) at every point. Let x X and as-
sume that
i
< x
i1
for 1 i n. If j > i, x/
j1
> 1, so
b
j
_
y/
j1
_
= 0 for all y in a neighbourhood of x and b

j
_
x/
j1
_
= 0. If
j < i, x/
j1
, so b

j
_
x/
j1
_
= x

j
x

j1
. Therefore

(x) =
i1

j=1
(x

j
x

j1
) +b

i
_
x/
i
_
= x

i1
+b

i
_
x/
i
_
[x
i1
, x
i
] +B()
Moreover, if x
n
, then

(x) = x

n
= x

. Thus

(x) = x

for all x in
a neighbourhood of 0 and

(X) R +B() U.
Lemma 2 : Let X, Y be two Banach spaces, a X, V be an open
neighbourhood of a, and f : V Y be continuous on V and G ateaux-
dierentiable at every point of V \{a}. If f

(x) has a weak

limit as x
tends to a, then f is G ateaux-dierentiable at a and f

(a) = .
Proof of lemma 2 : Fix h X. The mapping
h
dened on the real
line by
h
(t) = f(a + th) whenever t = 0,

h
(t) = f

(a + th).h tends to
.h as t tends to 0. Therefore f is dierentiable at a in the direction h
and f

(a).h = .h. This proves that f is G ateaux-dierentiable at a and

f

(a) = .
In order to prove the theorem, let aX

such that 1 < a < 2. Let (u

n
)
be a dense sequence in X and
V
n
=
_
x

; |x

(u
i
) a(u
i
)| < 1/2
n
for all i {1, ..., n}
_
(V
n
)
n0
be a decreasing sequence of weak

open subsets contaning a so

that, if y
n
V
n
and if (y
n
) is bounded, then (y
n
) converges to a for the
weak

-topology. Moreover, W
n
= V
n
{x

; 1 < x

a < 2} is
connected for each n. Let (x
n
) X

be a sequence such that x

1
= 0
and for every n, x
n
W
n
. For each n, 1 < x
n
a < 2 and (x
n
)
converges to a for the weak

topology. W
n
x
n
= {x x
n
; x W
n
} is a
norm open connected subset of X

containing 0. Since x
n+1
W
n+1

W
n
, we also have x
n+1
x
n
W
n
x
n
. Since X is separable (resp.
X

is separable) there exists on X a Lipschitz continuous bump function

which is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-dierentiable) at each point.
According to lemma 1, there exists a Lipschitz continuous bump b
n
which
is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-dierentiable) at every point, such
that b

n
(X) W
n
x
n
, with support in the unit ball and such that b

n
(x) =
x
n+1
x
n
for all x satisfying x <
n
. Denote c
1
= 1 and, for n 2,
c
n
=
n1

i=1

n
. Dene
b(x) =
+

n=1
c
n
b
n
_
x/c
n
_
6
b has bounded support since b(x) = 0 whenever x 1. On X\{0}
this sum is locally nite, so b is G ateaux-dierentiable (resp. Frechet-
dierentiable) at each point of X\{0}. If
n
x <
n+1
, then we
have b

(x) = x
n
+ b

n
(x) W
n
, so b

(x) is uniformly bounded in x,

b

(X\{0}) X

\B(a, 1), and b

(x)
w

a as x 0. Lemma 2 then shows

that b is G ateaux-dierentiable at 0 and that b

(0) = a.
3) Can all the derivatives be far away from each other?
We rst notice that, under mild regularity assumptions, the answer to the
above question is negative for functions.
Proposition : Let X be a Banach space and f : X IR be a Lipschitz
continuous, everywhere G ateaux-dierentiable function. Then, for every
x X and every > 0, there exists y, z B
X
(x, ) such that f

(y)
f

(z) .
Proof : We shall actually show that if f : X IR is locally uniformly
continuous and everywhere G ateaux-dierentiable, then, for every x X
and for every > 0, there exists > 0 such that for every h X, h ,
there exists y B
X
(x, ) such that f

(y +h) f

(y) .
Fix x X and
0
> 0 such that f is uniformly continuous on B
X
(x, 2
0
).
Fix also 0 < <
0
. By uniform continuity, there exists > 0 such
that |f(z) f(y)| <
2
/4 whenever y, z B
X
(x, 2
0
) and z y .
Without loss of generality, we can assume that < /2. Take any h X
such that h . Dene : X IR by (y) = f(y + h) f(y) if
y x
0
and (y) = + otherwise. The function is lower semi-
continuous on X and, for all y B
X
(x,
0
),
2
/4 < (y) <
2
/4. In
particular, (x) < inf
yX
(y) +
2
/2. The Ekeland variational principle
then tells us the existence of y X such that y x /2 and for all
u X, (u) (y)uy. Since yx /2 <
0
, the function is
G ateaux dierentiable at y and we obtain

(y) . Hence, if we denote

z = y +h, f

(y) f

(z) , and we have z x h +y x < .

The derivatives of a Frechet dierentiable mapping cannot be far away
from each other for mappings which are everywhere Frechet-dierentiable.
Proposition : Let X, Y be separable Banach spaces and f : X Y be
an everywhere Frechet-dierentiable locally uniformly continuous mapping.
Then, for every x X and every > 0, there exists y, z B
X
(x, ), y = z,
such that f

(y) f

(z) .
Proof : Fix > 0 and n
0
> 0 such that f is uniformly continuous on
B
X
(x, + 1/n
0
). For each n 1, dene
A
n
=
_
y B
X
(x, ), f(y+h)f(y)f

(y).h h whenever h1/n

_
7
Since B
X
(x, ) =
_
nn
0
A
n
, there exists n
1
n
0
and u B
X
(x, ) such
that u is an accumulation point of A
n
1
. Pick y, z A
n
1
such that y = z
and yz < , where is chosen so that f(u)f(v) /n
1
whenever
u, v B(x, + 1/n
0
) and u v < . We have
f(y+h)f(y)f

(y).h /n
1
and f(z+h)f(z)f

(z).h /n
1
So, for all h such that h 1/n
1
,
_
_
_
f(y +h) f(z +h)
_

_
f(y) f(z)
_

_
f

(y) f

(z)
_
.h
_
_
2/n
1
Therefore,
_
_
_
f

(y) f

(z)
_
.h
_
_
4/n
1
Since this is satised for for all h such that h 1/n
1
, we obtain that
f

(y) f

(z) 4.
In view of the above propositions, one could believe that whenever X, Y
are Banach spaces (or vector normed spaces) and f : X Y is a mapping
G ateaux-dierentiable at each point of X, then for every > 0, there
exists y, z X such that f

(y) f

(z) . Our next result proves that

this is not so.
Theorem 2 : 1) There exists a Lipschitz mapping F :
1
IR
2
, G ateaux-
dierentiable at each point of
1
, such that for every x, y
1
, x = y, then
F

(x) F

(y)
L(
1
,IR
2
)
1. Moreover, for each h
1
, x F

(x).h is
continuous from
1
into IR
2
.
2) Let us denote D the vector normed space of elements of
1
with -
nite support. There exists a Lipschitz function G :
1
IR, G ateaux-
dierentiable at each point of
1
, such that for every x, y D, x = y, then
G

(x) G

(y)

1.
We shall construct F and G with the properties of theorem 2 using se-
ries. We were inspired by a construction from [DI]. We need an auxiliary
construction.
Lemma 3 : Given = (a

, a, b, b

) IR
4
such that a

< a < b < b

and
> 0, there exists a C

-function =
,
: IR
2
IR
2
such that :
(i) |(x, y)| for all (x, y) IR
2
,
(ii) (x, y) = 0 whenever x / [a

, b

],
(iii)
_
_

x
(x, y)
_
_
for all (x, y) IR
2
,
(iv)
_
_

y
(x, y)
_
_
= 1 whenever x [a, b],
(v)
_
_

y
(x, y)
_
_
1 for all (x, y) IR
2
,
8
(vi) If we denote (x, y) =
_

1
(x, y),
2
(x, y)
_
, then

1
y
(x, 0) = 1
whenever x [a, b].
Proof of Lemma 3 : Let b : IR IR be a C

-smooth function such that

0 b(x) 1 for all x, b(x) = 0 whenever x / [a

, b

] and b(x) = 1
whenever x [a, b]. If n 1 is large enough, the function dened by
(x, y) =
b(x)
n
_
sin(ny), cos(ny)
_
satises the desired properties.
We shall also use the following criterium of G ateaux-dierentiability of the
sum of a series :
Lemma 4 : Let X and Y be Banach spaces and, for all n, let f
n
: X Y
be G ateaux-dierentiable mappings. Assume that
_
f
n
_
converges point-
wise on X, and that there exists a constant K > 0 so that for all h,
(1)

n1
sup
xX
_
_
f
n
h
(x)
_
_
Kh
Then the mapping f =

n1
f
n
is G ateaux-dierentiable on X, for all x,
f

(x) =

n1
f

n
(x) (where the convergence of the series is in L(X, Y ) for
the strong operator topology), and f is K-Lipschitz. Moreover, if each f

n
is continuous from X endowed with the norm topology into L(X, Y ) with
the strong operator topology, then f

shares the same continuity property.

Proof of Lemma 4 : Fix x X. First observe that condition (1) im-
plies that for all h, the series
_
f
n
h
(x)
_
=
_
f

n
(x).h
_
converges in Y .
Therefore, the series
_
f

n
(x)
_
converges in L(X, Y ) for the strong oper-
ator topology, to some operator T L(X, Y ), and by (1), T K. For
each h X, we dene g
n
: IR Y by g
n
(t) = f
n
(x + th). The function
g =

n1
g
n
is well dened. Since

n1
g

n1
sup
xX
_
_
f
n
h
(x)
_
_
Kh
the mapping g is dierentiable and g

(0) =

n1
g

n
(0) =

n1
f
n
h
(x) = T(h).
Thus we have proved that f is dierentiable along every direction h and
that
f
h
(x) = T(h). In other words, f is G ateaux-dierentiable at x and
f

(x) = T. Since for all x, f

(x) K, the mean value theorem implies

that f is K-Lipschitz.
Proof of Theorem 2, part 1) : Fix an enumeration
k
= (a

k
, a
k
, b
k
, b

k
),
k N, of all quadruples of dyadic numbers such that a

k
< a
k
< b
k
< b

k
.
9
Select integers m
n
k
such that for each n, n < m
n
k
and (m
n
k
)
k
is an increasing
sequence, and satisfying
(2) m
n
k
= m
p

n = p and k =
Fix > 0 and let
n
k
be positive real numbers such that

n=1

k=1

n
k
= . We
shall notice
k
=

n=1

n
k
, so that

k=1

k
= . Put f
n,k
:
1
IR
2
such that,
if x = (x
i
)
1
, then f
n,k
_
x
_
=

k
,
n
k
_
x
n
, x
m
n
k
_
: f
n,k
is a C

function
on
1
. The function F :
1
IR
2
we are looking for is dened by :
F(x) =

nIN

kIN
f
n,k
(x)
Claim 1 : F is well-dened. Indeed, according to condition (i) of the
lemma, f
n,k

k
,
n
k

=
n
k
, so the series dening F converges
uniformly.
Claim 2 : F is G ateaux-dierentiable on
1
and F is (1 + )-Lipschitz-
continuous on
1
. To see this, we apply Lemma 4 : let h=(h
1
, ..., h
n
, ...)

1
. By (iii) and (v), we have for all n, k :
sup
xX
_
_
f
n,k
h
(x)
_
_
|h
m
n
k
| +
n
k
|h
n
| |h
m
n
k
| +
n
k
h
1
So, because of condition (2),

n,k
sup
xX
_
_
f
n,k
h
(x)
_
_
(1 +)h
1
We have proved that condition (1) of Lemma 4 is satised with K = 1+,
thus F is G ateaux-dierentiable on
1
and F is (1+)-Lipschitz-continuous
on
1
.
Claim 3 : If x = y
1
, then F

(x) F

(y)
L(
1
,IR
2
)
1 2.
Indeed, let n IN such that x
n
= y
n
. Let k such that x
n
[a
k
, b
k
] and
y
n
/ [a

k
, b

k
]. According to (ii) and (iv) of Lemma 3,
_
_
_
f
n,k
x
m
n
k
(x)
_
_
_ = 1 and
f
n,k
x
m
n
k
(y) = 0
On the other hand, for all r,
_
_
_
f
m
n
k
,r
x
m
n
k
(x)
_
_
_
r
and
_
_
_
f
m
n
k
,r
x
m
n
k
(y)
_
_
_
r
and, if = m
n
k
and (, r) = (n, k),
f
,r
x
m
n
k
(x) = 0 and
f
,r
x
m
n
k
(y) = 0
10
Therefore,
F

(x) F

(y)
L(
1
,IR
2
)

_
_
_
F
x
m
n
k
(x)
F
x
m
n
k
(y)
_
_
_
1

(,r)=(n,k)
_
_
f
,r
x
m
n
k
(x)
f
,r
x
m
n
k
(y)
_
_
1 2
Let us now prove part 2) of Theorem 2. Since F :
1
IR
2
, we can
write F = (G, H), where G, H :
1
IR. We shall also denote f
n,k
=
(g
n,k
, h
n,k
). G :
1
IR is Lipschitz continuous, G ateaux-dierentiable at
each point of
1
. Let x = (x
i
), y = (y
i
) D and n such that x
n
= y
n
. Let
k such that x
n
[a
k
, b
k
], y
n
/ [a

k
, b

k
] and x
m
n
k
= 0. According to (vi) of
Lemma 3, we have
_
_
_
g
n,k
x
m
n
k
(x)
_
_
_ = 1 and
g
n,k
x
m
n
k
(y) = 0
We conclude, as in the proof of Claim 3 of part 1), that
G

(x) G

(y)

1 2
Remark : 1) If we set =
f
1 2
, we have obtained for every > 0, the
construction of a function :
1
IR
2
, G ateaux-dierentiable at every
point of
1
, satisfying :
(i) for all x, y
1
, (x) (y) (1 +)x y
1
,
(ii) for all x = y
1
,

(x)

(y)
L(
1
,IR
2
)
1.
2) Fix h
1
. Since x F

(x).h is continuous from

1
into IR
2
, the set
_
F

(x).h; x
1
_
is connected. This is in contrast with the fact that
_
F

(x) ; x
1
_
is discrete in L(
1
, IR
2
).
3) A carefull look at the above construction shows that f is uniformly
G ateaux-dierentiable.
4) Observe that for cardinality reasons, whenever L(X, Y ) is separable,
then for every G ateaux-dierentiable mapping from X into Y , and for
every > 0, there exists y, z X such that f

(y)f

(z) . Therefore,
it is not possible to replace
1
by
p
(p > 1) in Theorem 2. However, there
exists a Lipschitz function H :
2

2
, G ateaux-dierentiable at each
point of
2
, such that for every x, y
2
, if x = y, then
H

(x) H

(y)
L(
2
)
1
This will follow from the following more general result :
11
Theorem 3 : Let X
p
=
p
if 1 p < + and X

= c
0
. Let us x
1 p, q +. The following assertions are equivalent :
(1) There exists a Lipschitz function H : X
p
X
q
, G ateaux-dierentiable
at each point of X
p
, such that for every x, y X
p
, x = y, then
H

(x) H

(y)
L(X
p
,X
q
)
1.
(2) p q.
(3) L(X
p
, X
q
) is not separable.
Proof of Theorem 3 : According to Remark 4) above, (1) implies (3). If
p > q, then by Pitts theorem, all operators from X
p
to X
q
are compact,
hence L(X
p
, X
q
) is separable. Therefore (3) implies (2). So it remains to
prove that (2) implies (1). Assume that p q and let (e
n
) be the usual
basis of X
p
. Let T
k
L(IR
2
, X
q
) dened by T
k
(x, y) = xe
2k
+ ye
2k+1
.
Denote a
q
the common norm of the operators T
k
. Let
k
,
n
k
, m
n
k
and

k
,
n
k
dened as in the proof of Theorem 2. Put f
n,k
: X
p
X
q
such that,
if x = (x
i
) X
p
, then f
n,k
_
x
_
= T
m
n
k

k
,
n
k
_
x
n
, x
m
n
k
_
: the functions
f
n,k
is a C

mapping from X
p
into X
q
. The function H : X
p
X
q
we
are looking for is dened by :
H(x) =

nIN

kIN
f
n,k
(x)
As in the proof of Theorem 2, H is well-dened. Lemma 4 is no longer
applicable in order to show that H is G ateaux-dierentiable at each point
of X
p
. But lemma 4 remains true if the hypothesis (1) from lemma 4 is
replaced by condition (2) below :
(2) for all h,
_

f
n
h
(x)
_
converges uniformly with respect to x
So, x h=(h
1
, ..., h
n
, ...) X
p
. We have
f
n,k
h
(x) = h
n
u
k,n
(x) +h
m
n
k
v
k,n
(x)
with u
k,n
(x)
q

n
k
a
q
, v
k,n
(x)span{e
2m
n
k
, e
2m
n
k
+1
} and v
k,n
(x)
q
a
q
.
We claim that both series
_
k,n
h
n
u
k,n
(x)
_
and
_
n

k
h
m
n
k
v
k,n
(x)
_
are uni-
formly converging with respect to x. Indeed, for the rst one, this fol-
lows from the fact that for each x, h
n
u
k,m
(x)
q
h
p
.a
q
.
n
k
, and that

n=1

k=1

n
k
< +. For the second one,
_
k
h
m
n
k
v
k,m
(x)
_
converges uni-
formly because it satises the uniform Cauchy condition. Indeed, x > 0
and a nite set A IN IN such that

(k,n)/ A
h
p
m
n
k
<
p
. For xed x,
the v
k,n
(x) are elements of X
q
with disjoint supports, so, for any nite
subset F of (IN IN)\A,
_
_

(n,k)F
h
m
n
k
v
k,m
(x)
_
_
X
q
=
_

(n,k)F
_
_
h
m
n
k
v
k,m
(x)
_
_
q
X
q
_
1/q
a
q
_

(n,k)F
h
q
m
n
k
_
1/q
a
q
_

(n,k)F
h
p
m
n
k
_
1/p
< a
q

12
Notice that we used in the above chain of inequalities the fact that p q.
The above estimate is uniform in x, therefore the series
_
k
h
m
n
k
v
k,m
(x)
_
satises the uniform Cauchy condition. Applying the variant of lemma 4
mentioned above, we get that H is Lipschitz continuous and G ateaux-
dierentiable at each point of
2
. As in the proof of theorem 2, one sees
that there exists a > 0 such that for every x, y
2
, if x = y, then
H

(x) H

(y)
L(
p
,
q
)
a.
References
[AD] D. Azagra and R. Deville, James theorem fails for starlike bodies, J.
Funct. Anal. 180 (2001), 328-346.
[ADJ] D. Azagra, R. Deville and M. Jimenez-Sevilla, On the range of the
derivatives of a smooth function between Banach spaces, to appear in
Math Proc. .
[AFJ] D. Azagra, M. Fabian and M. Jimenez-Sevilla, Exact lling of gures
with the derivatives of smooth mappings between Banach spaces, to
appear.
[BFKL] J. M. Borwein, M. Fabian, I. Kortezov and P. D. Loewen, The range
of the gradient of a continuously dierentiable bump, J. Nonlinear and
Convex Anal. 2 (2001), 1-19.
[BFL] J. M. Borwein, M. Fabian and P. D. Loewen, The range of the gradient
of a Lipschitzian C
1
-smooth bump in innite dimensions, to appear.
[DI] R. Deville and M. Ivanov, Smooth variational principle with con-
straints, Math. Nachriten 69 (1997) 418-426.
[G1] T. Gaspari, On the range of the derivative of a real valued function
with bounded support, to appear.
[G2] T. Gaspari, Bump functions with Holder derivatives, to appear.
[H] P. Hajek, Smooth functions on c
0
, Israel J. Math., 104 (1998), 17-27.
[M] J. Maly, The Darboux property for gradients, Real Anal. Exch. 22,
No.1, 167-173 (1996).
[M] J. Saint-Raymond, Local Inversion for Dierentiable Functions and
Darboux Property, to appear in Mathematika.