Abstract
Let \(S_{\alpha }\) be the multilinear square function defined on the cone with aperture \(\alpha \ge 1\). In this paper, we investigate several kinds of weighted norm inequalities for \(S_{\alpha }\). We first obtain a sharp weighted estimate in terms of aperture \(\alpha \) and \(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {p}}\). By means of some pointwise estimates, we also establish two-weight inequalities including bump and entropy bump estimates, and Fefferman–Stein inequalities with arbitrary weights. Beyond that, we consider the mixed weak type estimates corresponding Sawyer’s conjecture, for which a Coifman–Fefferman inequality with the precise \(A_{\infty }\) norm is proved. Finally, we present the local decay estimates using the extrapolation techniques and dyadic analysis respectively. All the conclusions aforementioned hold for the Littlewood–Paley \(g^*_{\lambda }\) function. Some results are new even in the linear case.
We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.
Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Given \(\alpha >0\), let \(S_{\alpha }\) be the square function defined by
where \(\psi _t(x)=t^{-n} \psi (x/t)\) and \(\Gamma _{\alpha }(x)\) is the cone at vertex x with aperture \(\alpha \). Lerner [30], by applying the intrinsic square function introduced in [46], proved sharp weighted norm inequalities for \(S_{\alpha }(f)\). Later on, he improved the result in the sense of determination of sharp dependence on \(\alpha \) in [32] by using the local mean oscillation formula. More precisely,
The preceding result is among the plenty important results in the fruitful realm of weighted inequalities concerning the precise determination of the optimal bounds of the weighted operator norm of different singular integral operators. We refer the interested reader to [24, 25, 27, 31] and the references therein for a survey on the advances on the topic.
Let us recall the definition of multilinear square functions considered in this paper. The standard kernel for multilinear square functions was introduced in [45]. Let \(\psi (x,\vec {y}):=\psi (x, y_1, \ldots , y_m)\) be a locally integrable function defined away from the diagonal \(x =y_1=\cdots =y_m\) in \(({\mathbb {R}}^n)^{m+1}\). We assume that there are positive constants \(\delta \) and A so that the following conditions hold:
-
Size condition:
$$\begin{aligned}|\psi (x, \vec {y})| \le \frac{A}{\left( 1+\sum _{i=1}^m |x-y_i|\right) ^{mn+\delta }}.\end{aligned}$$ -
Smoothness condition: There exists \(\gamma >0\) so that
$$\begin{aligned} |\psi (x, \vec {y})-\psi (x', \vec {y})| \le \frac{A|x-x'|^\gamma }{\left( 1+\sum _{i=1}^m |x-y_i|\right) ^{mn+\delta +\gamma }}, \end{aligned}$$whenever \(|x-x'|< \frac{1}{2}\max _j|x-y_j|\), and
$$\begin{aligned} \left| \psi (x, \vec {y})-\psi (x,y_1,\ldots ,y'_i,\ldots ,y_m)\right| \le \frac{A|y_i-y'_i|^\gamma }{\left( 1+\sum _{i=1}^m |x-y_i|\right) ^{mn+\delta +\gamma }}, \end{aligned}$$whenever \(|y_i-y'_i|< \frac{1}{2}\max _j|x-y_j|\) for \(i=1,2,\dots ,m\).
For \(t>0\), denote \(\psi _t\)
for all \(x\notin \bigcap _{j=1}^m \mathrm{supp}\, f_j\) and \(\vec {f}=(f_1,\ldots ,f_m)\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n) \times \cdots \times {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\).
Given \( \alpha >0\) and \(\lambda >2m\), the multilinear square functions \(S_{\alpha }\) and \(g^*_{\lambda }\) are defined by
where \(\Gamma _\alpha (x)=\{(y,t)\in {\mathbb {R}}^{n+1}_+: |x-y|<\alpha t\}\), and
Hereafter, we assume that for \(\lambda >2m\) there exist some \(1\le p_1,\dots , p_m\le \infty \) and some \(0<p<\infty \) with \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\), such that \(g^*_{\lambda }\) maps continuously \(L^{p_1}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\) to \(L^p({\mathbb {R}}^n)\). Under this condition, it was proved in [45] that \(g^*_{\lambda }\) maps continuously \(L^1({\mathbb {R}}^n) \times \cdots \times L^1({\mathbb {R}}^n) \rightarrow L^{1/m,\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^n)\) provided \(\lambda > 2m\). Moreover, since \(S_{\alpha }\) is dominated by \(g_{\lambda }^{*}\), we also get that \(S_\alpha \) maps continuously \(L^1({\mathbb {R}}^n) \times \cdots \times L^1({\mathbb {R}}^n) \rightarrow L^{1/m,\infty }({\mathbb {R}}^n)\).
These two mutilinear square functions were introduced and investigated in [45, 47]. Indeed, the theory of multilinear Littlewood–Paley operators originated in the works of Coifman and Meyer [14]. The multilinear square functions has important applications in PDEs and other fields. In particular, Fabes, Jerison, and Kenig brought very important applications of multilinear square functions in PDEs to the attention. In [21], they studied the solutions of Cauchy problem for non-divergence form parabolic equations by obtaining some multilinear Littlewood–Paley type estimates for the square root of an elliptic operator in divergence form. Also, the necessary and sufficient conditions for absolute continuity of elliptic-harmonic measure were achieved relying upon a multilinear Littlewood–Paley estimate, in [22]. Moreover, in [23], they applied a class of multilinear square functions to Kato’s problem. For further details on the theory of multilinear square functions and their applications, we refer to [8, 12,13,14, 21, 23] and the references therein.
In this paper, we investigate some weak and strong type estimates for multilinear Littlewood–Paley operators. This kind of inequalities has its origin in classical potential theory. A big breakthrough in understanding Poisson’s equation, made by Lichtenstein [37] in 1916, raised problems that have been central to analysis over the past decades. The theory of singular integral operators owes its impetus to the change of point of view of potential theory generated by this work. The action of singular integral operators on the standard Lebesgue spaces \(L^p({\mathbb {R}}^n)\) was for a long time the main object of study. But these operators have natural analogs in which \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) is replaced by a Lie group or Lebesgue measure on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) is replaced by a weighted measure. It is in the setting that our work is focused on.
The contributions of this paper are as follows. Based on the ideas from Fefferman’s celebrated paper [19], in this work, we first prove the upper bound for \(S_\alpha \) is sharp in the aperture \(\alpha \) on all class \(A_{\vec {p}}\) which proves a conjecture given in [2]. Secondly, we focus on bump and entropy bump estimates, mixed weak type estimates, local decay estimates, and multilinear version of Fefferman–Stein inequality with arbitrary weights for multilinear square functions respectively. These interesting estimates have aroused the attention of many researchers. For example, \(A_p\) bump conditions may be thought of as the classical two-weight \(A_p\) condition with the localized \(L^p\) and \(L^{p'}\) norms "bumped up" in the scale of Orlicz spaces. These conditions have a long history, we refer to [20, 43]. Muckenhoupt and Wheeden [38] first formulated the mixed weak type estimates for Hardy–Littlewood maximal function and the Hilbert transform on the real line although Sawyer [44] considered a more singular case, namely he showed that if \(\mu \in A_1\) and \(\nu \in A_\infty \), then
and conjectured that such an inequality should hold with M replaced by the Hilbert transform. Later on Cruz-Uribe et al. [15] extended Sawyer’s result to higher dimensions and also settled Sawyer’s conjecture and extended that result for general Calderón–Zygmund operators reducing it to the case of maximal functions via an extrapolation argument. That extrapolation argument allowed them to take \(\mu \in A_1\) and \(\nu \in A_\infty \). That led them to conjecture that (1.2) should hold \(\mu \in A_1\) and \(\nu \in A_\infty \). Recently, that conjecture was settled by Li, Ombrosi and Pérez [36]. That result was extended to maximal operators with Young functions [3]. Analogous results were obtained for commutators [4], fractional operators [5] or in the multilinear setting [35]. Also quantitative estimates have been studied in [6, 39]. Local exponential decay estimates for CZOs and square functions, multilinear pseudo-differential operators and its commutator were studied in [7, 40] respectively.
The main results of this paper can be stated as follows. We begin with a sharp weighted inequality in terms of both \(\alpha \) and \([\vec {w}]_{A_{\vec {p}}}\).
Theorem 1.1
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\) and \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1<p_1,\ldots ,p_m<\infty \). If \(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {p}}\), then
where the implicit constant is independent of \(\alpha \) and \(\vec {w}\). Moreover, (1.3) is sharp in \(\alpha \) on all class \(A_{\vec {p}}\).
In order to present two-weight inequalities for square functions, we give the definition of bump conditions. Given Young functions A and \(\vec {B}=(B_1,\ldots ,B_m)\), we denote
Theorem 1.2
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\), \(\lambda >2m\), and \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1<p_1,\dots ,p_m<\infty \). If the pair \((u, \vec {v})\) satisfies \(\Vert (u, \vec {v})\Vert _{A,\, \vec {B},\, \vec {p}}<\infty \) with \({\bar{A}} \in B_{(p/2)'}\ (2<p<\infty )\) and \(\bar{B_j} \in B_{p_j}\), then
where
For arbitrary weights, we have the following Fefferman–Stein inequalities.
Theorem 1.3
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\) and \(\lambda >2m\). Then for all exponents \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(0<p\le 2\) and \(1<p_1,\ldots , p_m<\infty \), and for all weights \(\vec {w}=(w_1, \ldots , w_m)\),
where \(\nu _{\vec {w}}=\prod _{i=1}^m w_i^{p/p_i}\).
We are going to establish entropy bump estimates. See Sect. 5 for the entropy bump conditions \(\lfloor \vec {\sigma },\nu \rfloor _{\frac{2}{\vec {p}'},\vec {p},\varepsilon ,\frac{2}{p},m+1}\) and \(\lfloor \vec {\sigma },\nu \rfloor _{\vec {p},2,\varepsilon }\).
Theorem 1.4
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\), \(\lambda >2m\), and let \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1<p_1,\ldots , p_m<\infty \). Let \(\nu \) and \(\vec {\sigma }=(\sigma _1,\dots ,\sigma _m)\) weights. Assume that \(\varepsilon \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\) satisfying \( \int _{1}^{\infty }\frac{dt}{\varepsilon (t)t}<\infty \). Then,
where
with \(\vec {p}=(p_1,\dots ,p_m,p')\) and \(\frac{2}{\vec {p}'}=\big (\frac{2}{p'_1},\ldots ,\frac{2}{p'_m},\frac{2}{p}\big )\).
Next, we turn to the weak type estimates for Littlewood–Paley operators.
Theorem 1.5
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\) and \(\lambda >2m\). Let \(\vec {w}=(w_1,\ldots ,w_m)\) and \(u=\prod _{i=1}^m w_i^{1/m}\). If \(\vec {w}\) and v satisfy
then we have
In particular, both \(S_{\alpha }\) and \(g_{\lambda }^{*}\) are bounded from \(L^1(w_1) \times \cdots \times L^1(w_m)\) to \(L^{1/m, \infty }(\nu _{\vec {w}})\) for every \(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {1}}\).
Theorem 1.6
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\) and \(\lambda >2m\). Let Q be a cube and every function \(f_j \in L^{\infty }_c({\mathbb {R}}^n)\) with \({\text {supp}}(f_j) \subset Q\), \(j=1,\ldots ,m\). Then there exist constants \(c_1>0\) and \(c_2>0\) such that
for all \(t>0\), where \(\beta _1=\alpha ^{-2mn}\) and \(\beta _2=(1-2^{-n(\lambda -2m)/2})^2\).
2 Preliminaries
2.1 Multiple Weights
The multilinear maximal operators \({\mathcal {M}}\) are defined by
where the supremum is taken over all the cubes containing x. The corresponding theory of weights for this new maximal function gives the right class of multiple weights for multilinear Calderón-Zygmund operators.
Definition 2.1
Let \(1\le p_1,\ldots ,p_m<\infty .\) Given a vector of weights \(\vec {w}=(w_1,\cdots , w_m)\), we say that \(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {p}}\) if
where \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) and \(\nu _{\vec {w}}=\prod _{i=1}^m w_i^{p/p_i}\). When \(p_i=1,\) \(\big (\fint _Q w_i^{1-p'_i} dx\big )^{1/p'_i}\) is understood as \((\inf _Q w_i)^{-1}.\)
The characterizations of multiple weights were given in [10, 33] .
Lemma 2.2
Let \(\frac{1}{p} = \frac{1}{p_{1}} + \cdots + \frac{1}{p_{m}}\) with \(1 \le p_1, \ldots , p_m < \infty \), and \(p_0=\min \{p_i\}_i\). Then the following statements hold :
-
(1)
\( A_{r_1 \vec {p}} \subsetneq A_{r_2 \vec {p}}, \ \ \text {for any} \ \ 1/p_0 \le r_1< r_2 < \infty .\)
-
(2)
\(A_{\vec {p}}=\bigcup _{1/p_0 \le r < 1} A_{r \vec {p}}\).
-
(3)
\(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {p}}\) if and only if \(\nu _{\vec {w}} \in A_{mp}\) and \(w_i^{1-p_i'} \in A_{mp_i'}\), \(i=1,\ldots ,m\). Here, if \(p_i=1\), \(w_i^{1-p_i'} \in A_{mp_i'}\) is understood as \(w_i^{1/m} \in A_{1}\).
2.2 Dyadic Cubes
Denote by \(\ell (Q)\) the sidelength of the cube Q. Given a cube \(Q_0 \subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\), let \({\mathcal {D}}(Q_0)\) denote the set of all dyadic cubes with respect to \(Q_0\), that is, the cubes obtained by repeated subdivision of \(Q_0\) and each of its descendants into \(2^n\) congruent subcubes.
Definition 2.3
A collection \({\mathcal {D}}\) of cubes is said to be a dyadic grid if it satisfies
-
(1)
For any \(Q \in {\mathcal {D}}\), \(\ell (Q) = 2^k\) for some \(k \in {\mathbb {Z}}\).
-
(2)
For any \(Q,Q' \in {\mathcal {D}}\), \(Q \cap Q' = \{Q,Q',\emptyset \}\).
-
(3)
The family \({\mathcal {D}}_k=\{Q \in {\mathcal {D}}; \ell (Q)=2^k\}\) forms a partition of \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) for any \(k \in {\mathbb {Z}}\).
Definition 2.4
A subset \({\mathcal {S}}\) of a dyadic grid is said to be \(\eta \)-sparse, \(0<\eta <1\), if for every \(Q \in {\mathcal {S}}\), there exists a measurable set \(E_Q \subset Q\) such that \(|E_Q| \ge \eta |Q|\), and the sets \(\{E_Q\}_{Q \in {\mathcal {S}}}\) are pairwise disjoint.
By a median value of a measurable function f on a cube Q we mean a possibly non-unique, real number \(m_f (Q)\) such that
The decreasing rearrangement of a measurable function f on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) is defined by
The local mean oscillation of f is
Given a cube \(Q_0\), the local sharp maximal function is defined by
Observe that for any \(\delta > 0\) and \(0< \lambda < 1\)
The following theorem was proved by Hytönen [25, Theorem 2.3] in order to improve Lerner’s formula given in [30] by getting rid of the local sharp maximal function.
Lemma 2.5
Let f be a measurable function on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) and let \(Q_0\) be a fixed cube. Then there exists a (possibly empty) sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}(Q_0) \subset {\mathcal {D}}(Q_0)\) such that
2.3 Orlicz Maximal Operators
A function \(\Phi :[0,\infty ) \rightarrow [0,\infty )\) is called a Young function if it is continuous, convex, strictly increasing, and satisfies
Given \(p \in [1, \infty )\), we say that a Young function \(\Phi \) is a p-Young function, if \(\Psi (t)=\Phi (t^{1/p})\) is a Young function.
If A and B are Young functions, we write \(A(t) \simeq B(t)\) if there are constants \(c_1, c_2>0\) such that \(c_1 A(t) \le B(t) \le c_2 A(t)\) for all \(t \ge t_0>0\). Also, we denote \(A(t) \preceq B(t)\) if there exists \(c>0\) such that \(A(t) \le B(ct)\) for all \(t \ge t_0>0\). Note that for all Young functions \(\phi \), \(t \preceq \phi (t)\). Further, if \(A(t)\le cB(t)\) for some \(c>1\), then by convexity, \(A(t) \le B(ct)\).
A function \(\Phi \) is said to be doubling, or \(\Phi \in \Delta _2\), if there is a constant \(C>0\) such that \(\Phi (2t) \le C \Phi (t)\) for any \(t>0\). Given a Young function \(\Phi \), its complementary function \({\bar{\Phi }}:[0,\infty ) \rightarrow [0,\infty )\) is defined by
which clearly implies that
Moreover, one can check that \({\bar{\Phi }}\) is also a Young function and
In turn, by replacing t by \(\Phi (t)\) in first inequality of (2.4), we obtain
Given a Young function \(\Phi \), we define the Orlicz space \(L^{\Phi }(\Omega , \mu )\) to be the function space with Luxemburg norm
Now we define the Orlicz maximal operator
where the supremum is taken over all cubes Q in \({\mathbb {R}}^n\). When \(\Phi (t)=t^p\), \(1\le p<\infty \),
In this case, if \(p=1\), \(M_{\Phi }\) agrees with the classical Hardy–Littlewood maximal operator M; if \(p>1\), \(M_{\Phi }f=M_pf:=M(|f|^p)^{1/p}\). If \(\Phi (t) \preceq \Psi (t)\), then \(M_{\Phi }f(x) \le c M_{\Psi }f(x)\) for all \(x \in {\mathbb {R}}^n\).
The Hölder inequality can be generalized to the scale of Orlicz spaces [16, Lemma 5.2].
Lemma 2.6
Given a Young function A, then for all cubes Q,
More generally, if A, B and C are Young functions such that \(A^{-1}(t) B^{-1}(t) \le c_1 C^{-1}(t), \) for all \(t \ge t_0>0\), then
The following result is an extension of the well-known Coifman–Rochberg theorem. The proof can be found in [26, Lemma 4.2].
Lemma 2.7
Let \(\Phi \) be a Young function and w be a nonnegative function such that \(M_{\Phi }w(x)<\infty \) a.e.. Then
Given \(p \in (1, \infty )\), a Young function \(\Phi \) is said to satisfy the \(B_p\) condition (or, \(\Phi \in B_p\)) if for some \(c>0\),
Observe that if (2.11) is finite for some \(c>0\), then it is finite for every \(c>0\). Let \([\Phi ]_{B_p}\) denote the value if \(c=1\) in (2.11). It was shown in [16, Proposition 5.10] that if \(\Phi \) and \({\bar{\Phi }}\) are doubling Young functions, then \(\Phi \in B_p\) if and only if
Let us present two types of \(B_p\) bumps. An important special case is the “log-bumps" of the form
Another interesting example is the “loglog-bumps" as follows:
Then one can verify that in both cases above, \({\bar{A}} \in B_{p'}\) and \({\bar{B}} \in B_p\) for any \(1<p<\infty \).
The \(B_p\) condition can be also characterized by the boundedness of the Orlicz maximal operator \(M_{\Phi }\). Indeed, the following result was given in [16, Theorem 5.13] and [26, eq. (25)].
Lemma 2.8
Let \(1<p<\infty \). Then \(M_{\Phi }\) is bounded on \(L^p({\mathbb {R}}^n)\) if and only if \(\Phi \in B_p\). Moreover, \(\Vert M_{\Phi }\Vert _{L^p({\mathbb {R}}^n) \rightarrow L^p({\mathbb {R}}^n)} \le C_{n,p} [\Phi ]_{B_p}^{\frac{1}{p}}\). In particular, if the Young function A is the same as the first one in (2.12) or (2.13), then
Definition 2.9
Given \(p \in (1, \infty )\), let A and B be Young functions such that \({\bar{A}} \in B_{p'}\) and \({\bar{B}} \in B_p\). We say that the pair of weights (u, v) satisfies the double bump condition with respect to A and B if
where the supremum is taken over all cubes Q in \({\mathbb {R}}^n\). Also, (u, v) is said to satisfy the separated bump condition if
Note that if \(A(t)=t^p\) in (2.17) or \(B(t)=t^p\) in (2.18), each of them actually is two-weight \(A_p\) condition and we denote them by \([u, v]_{A_p}:=[u, v]_{p,p'}\). Also, the separated bump condition is weaker than the double bump condition. Indeed, (2.16) implies (2.17) and (2.18), but the reverse direction is incorrect. The first fact holds since \({\bar{A}} \in B_{p'}\) and \({\bar{B}} \in B_p\) respectively indicate A is a p-Young function and B is a \(p'\)-Young function. The second fact was shown in [1, Section 7] by constructing log-bumps.
Lemma 2.10
Let \(1<p<\infty \), let A, B and \(\Phi \) be Young functions such that \(A \in B_p\) and \(A^{-1}(t)B^{-1}(t) \lesssim \Phi ^{-1}(t)\) for any \(t>t_0>0\). If a pair of weights (u, v) satisfies \([u, v]_{p, B}<\infty \), then
Moreover, (2.19) holds for \(\Phi (t)=t\) and \(B={\bar{A}}\) satisfying the same hypotheses. In this case, \({\bar{A}} \in B_p\) is necessary.
The two-weight inequality above was established in [16, Theorem 5.14] and [17, Theorem 3.1]. The weak type inequality for \(M_{\Phi }\) was also obtained in [16, Proposition 5.16] as follows.
Lemma 2.11
Let \(1<p<\infty \), let B and \(\Phi \) be Young functions such that \(t^{\frac{1}{p}} B^{-1}(t) \lesssim \Phi ^{-1}(t)\) for any \(t>t_0>0\). If a pair of weights (u, v) satisfies \([u, v]_{p, B}<\infty \), then
Moreover, (2.20) holds for M if and only if \([u, v]_{A_p}<\infty \).
3 Sharpness in Aperture \(\alpha \)
The goal of this section is to give the proof of Theorem 1.1. To this end, we establish some fundamental estimates.
Lemma 3.1
\(\psi (x,\vec {y})\) is continuous at \((x_0,y_{1,0},\dots , y_{m,0})\) with \(x_0 \ne y_{j, 0}\), \(j=1,2,\dots ,m.\)
Proof
Let \(x_0\ne y_{j, 0}\) for \(j=1,2,\dots ,m,\) and let
Then we get
and
and so
which implies
Therefore, we have
This shows \(\psi (x, \vec {y})\) is continuous at \((x_0,y_{1,0},\dots , y_{m,0})\in {\mathbb {R}}^{n(m+1)}\) with \(x_0 \ne y_{j,0}\), \(j=1,2,\dots ,m.\) \(\square \)
Lemma 3.2
There exist \(x_0 \in {\mathbb {R}}^n\), \(r_0>0\), \(t_0>1\) and \(f_j\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\), \(j=1,\ldots ,m\), such that
where \(\Omega _0:=B(0, |x_0|+r_0) \times [1, t_0]\).
Proof
Since \(\psi \) is a non-zero function in \({\mathbb {R}}^{n(m+1)}\), there exist \(x_0,y_{1,0},\dots ,y_{m,0} \in {\mathbb {R}}^n\) such that \(x_0\ne y_{i,0}(i=1,\dots ,m)\) and \(\psi (x_0,y_{1,0},\dots ,y_{m,0})\ne 0\). By Lemma 3.1, there exists \(r_0>0\) such that \(\psi (x,\vec {y})>0\) or \(\psi (x,\vec {y})<0\) for all \(x\in B(x_0,r_0)\) and \(y_j\in B(y_{j,0},r_0)\), \(j=1,\dots ,m\). Without loss of generality, we assume the case \(\psi (x,\vec {y})>0\). Keeping these notations in mind, we set
We claim that
for all \(1<t<t_0\), \(|x-x_0|<\frac{r_0}{2}\) and \(|y_i-y_{i, 0}|<\frac{r_0}{2}\), \(i=1,\ldots ,m\). Indeed, if \(\max \{|x_0|, |y_{1,0}|,\dots ,|y_{m,0}|\} < r_0\), it follows
and similarly we get \(|\frac{y_i}{t}-y_{i,0}|<r_0\), \(i=1,\ldots ,m\). In the case
we have
and
As a consequence,
Similarly, we get \(|\frac{x}{t}-x_0|<r_0\). This shows (3.2).
Thus, we have \(\psi (\frac{x}{t}, \frac{\vec {y}}{t})>0\) for \(1<t<t_0\) and \(|x-x_0|<\frac{r_0}{2}\), \(|y_i-y_{i,0}|<\frac{r_0}{2}\), \(i=1,\ldots ,m\). Pick non-negative valued \(f_j\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\), \(j=1,\ldots ,m\) such that \({\text {supp}}f_j \subset B(y_{j,0},\frac{r_0}{2})\) and \(f_j(y_j)>0\) for \(|y_j-y_{j,0}|<\frac{r_0}{2}\), \(j=1,2,\dots ,m\). Then it follows from (3.2) that
for all \(1<t<t_0\) and \(|x-x_0|<\frac{r_0}{2}\). Therefore,
In particular, since \(B(x_0,\frac{r_0}{2} )\subset B(0, |x_0|+r_0)\), we have
On the other hand, by using the size condition of \(\psi \), we obtain for every \((y, t) \in \Omega _0\),
This immediately yields that
Consequently, the desired result follows from (3.3) and (3.4). \(\square \)
Lemma 3.3
Let \(0<\lambda <2m\) and \(\frac{1}{m}<p<\frac{2}{\lambda }\). Then \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is not bounded from \(L^{p_1}\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}\) to \(L^p\), where \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1\le p_1,\ldots , p_m<\infty \).
Proof
By Lemma 3.2, there exist \(x_0 \in {\mathbb {R}}^n\), \(r_0>0\), \(t_0>1\) and \(f_j\in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\), \(j=1,\ldots ,m\), such that \(0<A_0<\infty \), where \(A_0\) is defined in (3.1). Write \(R_0:=2(|x_0|+r_0+t_0)\). Then for all \(|x|>R_0\) and \((y, t) \in \Omega _0\),
Thus, \(t+|x-y| \simeq |x|.\) This gives that for all \(|x|>R_0\),
Therefore, for any \(\lambda \le \frac{2}{p}\),
On the other hand, for \(\vec {f} \in {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\times \cdots \times {\mathcal {S}}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\), we have \(\prod _{j=1}^m \Vert f_j\Vert _{L^{p_j}}<\infty \). As a consequence, \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is not bounded from \(L^{p_1}\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}\) to \(L^p\) whenever \(\lambda \le \frac{2}{p}\).
In particular, for \(0<\lambda <2m\) (equivalently \(\frac{1}{m}<\frac{2}{\lambda }\)), and \(p\in (\frac{1}{m},\frac{2}{\lambda })\), \(1<p_1,\ldots ,p_m<\infty \) with \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m},\) \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is not bounded from \(L^{p_1}\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}\) to \(L^p\). \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.1
It follows from [2] that
for all \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1<p_1,\ldots ,p_m<\infty \), and for all \(\vec {w} \in A_{\vec {p}}\), where the implicit constant is independent of \(\alpha \) and \(\vec {w}\). Now, we seek for \(\gamma (\alpha )=\alpha ^r\) such that
We follow Lerner’s idea to show \(r\ge mn\) for any \(1/m<p<\infty .\) In fact, for the case \(r<mn\) we can reach a contradiction as follows. This means that the power growth \(\gamma (\alpha )=\alpha ^{mn}\) in (3.5) is sharp.
Using the standard estimate
we get for some fixed \(\frac{1}{q}=\frac{1}{q_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{q_m}\) with \(1<q_1,\ldots ,q_m<\infty \), and \(\gamma (\alpha )=\alpha ^{r_0}\)
This means that if \(\lambda > \frac{2r_0}{n}\), \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is bounded from \(L^{q_1}(w_1)\times \cdots \times L^{q_m}(w_m)\) to \(L^q(\nu _{\vec {w}})\). From this, by extrapolation(see [34]), we get \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is bounded from \(L^{p_1}\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}\) to \(L^p\) for any \(p>1/m\), whenever \(\lambda > \frac{2r_0}{n}\). But by Lemma 3.3, we know \(g^*_{\lambda }\) is not bounded from \(L^{p_1}\times \cdots \times L^{p_m}\) to \(L^p\) for \(\lambda <2m\) and \(\frac{1}{m}<p<\frac{2}{\lambda }\). If \(r_0<mn,\) we would obtain a contradiction to the latter fact for p sufficiently close to 1/m. \(\square \)
4 Bump and Fefferman–Stein Inequalities
In this section, we will prove bump inequalities (Theorem 1.2) and Fefferman–Stein inequalities (Theorem 1.3). Our strategy is to use the sparse domination for the multilinear Littlewood–Paley operators.
Proof of Theorem 1.2
Given \(r \ge 1\) and a sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\), we denote
The sparse domination below will provide us great convenience:
where \({\mathcal {S}}_j\) is a sparse family for each \(j=1,\ldots ,3^n\). These results are explicitly proved in [2]. By (4.1) and (4.2), the inequalities (1.4) and (1.5) follow from the following
for every sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\), where the implicit constant does not depend on \({\mathcal {S}}\).
To show (4.3), we begin with the case \(1<p \le 2\). Actually, the Hölder inequality (2.7) gives that
where Lemma 2.8 is used in the last step.
Next let us deal with the case \(2<p<\infty \). By duality, one has
Fix a nonnegative function \(h \in L^{(p/2)'}(u)\) with \(\Vert h\Vert _{L^{(p/2)'}(u)}=1\). Then using Hölder’s inequality (2.7) and Lemma 2.8, we obtain
where
and
Therefore, (4.3) immediately follows from (4.4), (4.5) and (4.6). \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.3
Fix exponents \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(1<p_1,\ldots , p_m<\infty \), \(0<p\le 2\) and weights \(\vec {w}=(w_1, \ldots , w_m)\). Note that \(v_i(x):=Mw_i(x) \ge \langle w_i \rangle _{Q}\) for any dyadic cube \(Q \in {\mathcal {S}}\) containing x. For each i, let \(A_i\) be a Young function such that \({{\bar{A}}}_i \in B_{p_i}\). By Lemma 2.8, we have
Thus, using sparse domination (4.1), Hölder’s inequality and (4.7), we deduce that
This shows (1.6). Likewise, one can obtain (1.7). \(\square \)
5 Entropy Bumps
In this section, we will prove entropy bump inequalities (Theorem 1.4). By the sparse domination for Littlewood–Paley operators, see (4.1) and (4.2), it suffices to prove the results for \({\mathcal {A}}_{{\mathcal {S}}}^{r}\), \(r\ge 1\).
Let us call \((\alpha _i)=(\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\dots ,\alpha _m)\). We will denote \((\alpha _{i})_{i\ne j}=(\alpha _1,\dots ,\alpha _{j-1},\alpha _{j+1},\dots , \alpha _m)\). Having that notation at our disposal we define the following sub-multilinear maximal function.
and given \(\vec {p}=(p_{1},\dots ,p_{m})\)
Let \(1<p_{1},\dots ,p_{m}<\infty \) and \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_{1}}+\dots +\frac{1}{p_{m}}\). We define
In the scalar case we shall denote just
Given an increasing function \(\varepsilon :[1,+\infty )\rightarrow (0,+\infty )\) let us denote
With the notation we have just fixed, we are in the position to introduce the entropy bump conditions. For weights \(\vec {\sigma }=(\sigma _1,\ldots ,\sigma _m)\) and \(\nu \), we define
Also, if \(\vec {\sigma }=(\sigma _1,\dots ,\sigma _{m})\), we denote
Denote \(\overrightarrow{f\sigma } :=(f_{1}\sigma _{1},\dots ,f_{m}\sigma _{m})\). Armed with the notation and the definitions of the entropy bumps just introduced, we can finally state and prove the main theorems of this section.
Theorem 5.1
Let \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(p>r\) and \(1<p_1,\dots ,p_m<\infty \). Let \(\sigma _{1},\dots ,\sigma _{m}\) and \(\nu \) be weights. Assume that \(\varepsilon \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\) satisfying \( \int _{1}^{\infty }\frac{dt}{\varepsilon (t)t}<\infty \). Then
Note that the theorem above extends to the multilinear setting [28, Theorem 3.2].
Theorem 5.2
Let \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_1}+\cdots +\frac{1}{p_m}\) with \(p\le r\) and \(1<p_1,\dots ,p_m<\infty \). Let \(\sigma _{1},\dots ,\sigma _{m}\) and \(\nu \) be weights. Assume that \(\rho \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\) satisfying \(\int _{1}^{\infty }\frac{dt}{\rho ^{\frac{p}{r}}(t)t}<\infty \) and \(\rho (2t)\le C \rho (t)\) for \(t\ge 1\). Then
where \(\vec {p}=(p_1, \dots , p_m, p')\) and \(\frac{r}{\vec {p}'}=\big (\frac{r}{p'_1},\ldots ,\frac{r}{p'_m},\frac{r}{p}\big )\).
Note that in this case the linear version of the estimate obtained is slightly different from [28, Theorem 3.3] since the entropy bump constant involved in that case is the following
Also the integrability condition imposed on \(\rho \) does not match the one in [28, Theorem 3.3].
5.1 Proof of Theorem 5.1
We need a multilinear version of Carleson embedding theorem from [11].
Lemma 5.3
Let \(\vec {\sigma }=(\sigma _1, \ldots , \sigma _m)\) be weights. Let \(1<p_{i}<\infty \) and \(p\in (1,\infty )\) satisfying \(\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1}{p_{1}}+\dots +\frac{1}{p_{m}}\). Assume that \(\{a_Q\}_{Q \in {\mathcal {D}}}\) is a sequence of non-negative numbers for which the following condition holds
Then for all \(f_{i}\in L^{p_{i}}(\sigma _{i})\),
With this result in hand, we are in the position to settle Theorem 5.1 following ideas in [29].
Proof of Theorem 5.1
First we split the sparse family as follows. We say that \(Q\in {\mathcal {S}}_a\) if and only if
Let us begin providing a suitable estimate for each of those pieces of the sparse family. Given a weight \(\gamma \) let us denote \(\langle h\rangle _Q^\gamma :=\frac{1}{\gamma (Q)}\int _Q|h(x)|\gamma (x)dx\). Assume that \(g\in L^{(p/r)'}(\nu )\). By duality we can write
For the second term, we would like to get that
We omit the proof of (5.6) and focus on the first term above, since the argument that we are going provide, essentially contains the linear case. For the first term, it needs to show
Taking into account Lemma 5.3, it suffices to verify that (5.4) holds with
Indeed, let us call \({\mathcal {S}}_a(R)\) the set of cubes of \({\mathcal {S}}_a\) that are contained in \(R\in {\mathcal {D}}\). Then
This provides the desired bound.
Collecting (5.6) and (5.7), we have shown that
Since for the largest a for which \({\mathcal {S}}_a\) is not empty we have that \(\lfloor \vec {\sigma },\nu \rfloor _{\vec {p},r,\varepsilon }^{\frac{r}{p}}\simeq 2^a\), summing in a yields
Consequently,
This shows Theorem 5.1. \(\square \)
5.2 Proof of Theorem 5.2
To settle Theorem 5.2 we are going to follow the scheme in [48]. First we borrow a result from [9].
Lemma 5.4
For every \(1<s<\infty \) we have that for every positive locally finite measure \(\sigma \) on \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) and any positive numbers \(\lambda _{Q}\), \(Q\in {\mathcal {D}}\), we have
Given a sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\) contained in a dyadic grid \({\mathcal {D}}\), for every \(Q\in {\mathcal {S}}\) we will denote \({\mathcal {S}}(Q)\) the family of cubes of \({\mathcal {S}}\) that are contained in Q. For \({\mathcal {S}}\) and \(\vec {\omega }=(\omega _1,\dots ,\omega _{m})\), we denote
The following lemma is a particular case of [48, Lemma 2.3]. The proof is also essentially contained in the earlier work [18, Proposition 4.8].
Lemma 5.5
Let \(\beta _{1},\dots ,\beta _{m}\ge 0\) be such that \(\beta :=\sum _{i=1}^{m}\beta _{i}<1\). Let \({\mathcal {S}}\subset {\mathcal {D}}\) be a sparse family. Then for every cube \(Q \in {\mathcal {S}}\) and all functions \(w_{1},\dots ,w_{m}\),
The following lemma will be one of the fundamental pieces to settle Theorem 5.2.
Lemma 5.6
Let \(j\in \{1,\dots ,m\}\), \(s_{1},\dots ,s_{m}\in {\mathbb {R}}\) with \(s_{i}>0\) for each \(i\in \{1,\dots ,m\}\) with \(i\ne j\), and \(q_{1},\dots ,q_{m}>0\) with \(q_{j}=1+s_{j}\) be such that
Let \({\mathcal {S}}\) be a sparse family such that for every \(Q\in {\mathcal {S}}\) and some \(\theta >0\)
where \(p_{i}\in (0,+\infty )\). Then, if \(\rho \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\), for every \(0<\alpha <\infty \) we have that
Proof
The left-hand side of the conclusion is monotonically decreasing in \(\alpha \) and the right-hand side does not depend on \(\alpha \), so it suffices to consider small \(\alpha \), in particular we may assume \(\alpha <1\).
It follows from the hypothesis that for sufficiently small \(\alpha \) there exists an \(\epsilon \) such that
where as usual \(\delta _{ij}=1\) if \(i=j\) or 0 otherwise. By the assumption \(\alpha <1\) and Lemma 5.4,
Taking into account the definition of \(\left\lfloor \vec {\omega }\right\rfloor _{\vec {q},\vec {p},\rho ,\theta ,j,{\mathcal {S}}}\) and (5.8), we get
Observe that \(\alpha s_{i}+\delta _{ij}-\epsilon q_{i}\ge 0\) and \(\sum _{i}(\alpha s_{i}+\delta _{ij}-\epsilon q_{i})<1\). Hence, Lemma 5.5 implies that
By construction \(1-\epsilon (1/\alpha -1)\ge 0\), and again by the definition of \(\left\lfloor \vec {\omega }\right\rfloor _{\vec {q},\vec {p},\rho ,\theta ,j,{\mathcal {S}}}\) and (5.8), we conclude that
and we are done, since \(q_j=1+s_j.\) \(\square \)
Now we present a stopping time condition. Let \({\mathcal {S}}\subset {\mathcal {D}}\) be a finite sparse family and let \(\lambda _{i}:{\mathcal {S}}\rightarrow [0,\infty )\), \(Q\mapsto \lambda _{i,Q}\) be a function that takes a cube to a non-negative real number. Then we have that \({\mathcal {F}}_{i}\) is the minimal family of cubes such that the maximal members of \({\mathcal {S}}\) are contained in \({\mathcal {F}}_{i}\), and if \(F\in {\mathcal {F}}_{i}\), then every maximal subcube \(F'\subset F\) with \(\lambda _{i,F'}\ge 2\lambda _{i,F}\) is also a member of \({\mathcal {F}}_{i}\).
For each cube Q, let \(\pi _{i}(Q)\) (the parent of Q in the stopping family \({\mathcal {F}}_{i}\)) be the smallest cube with \(Q\subseteq \pi _{i}(Q)\in {\mathcal {F}}_{i}\). We write \(\sum _{F_{1},\dots ,F_{m}}\) for the sum running over \(F_{i}\in {\mathcal {F}}_{i}\). We also write
Lemma 5.7
Let \(m\ge 2\), \(0<p_{1},\dots ,p_{m-1}<\infty \). Define \(\alpha :=\sum _{i=1}^{m-1}1/p_{i}\) and assume
Assume that \({\mathcal {S}}\) is a sparse family such that for every \(Q\in {\mathcal {S}}\),
Then, if \(\rho \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\) and \(\rho (2t)\le C \rho (t)\) for \(t\ge 1\), one has
where
Proof
We will estimate \({\mathscr {B}}\) by means of Lemma 5.6 letting \(s_i\rightarrow {\tilde{s}}_i=(s_i-\delta _{im})/\alpha \), \(i\le m\), \(q_i\rightarrow {\tilde{q}}_{i}=q_{i}/\alpha \) and \(\theta \rightarrow \alpha \). We can provide such an estimate since
This yields that the first inequality in the hypothesis of the lemma holds, and for \(i<m\) we have \({\tilde{q}}_i<{\tilde{s}}_i\), verifying the second inequality. Then, there holds
Note that
The sparseness of \({\mathcal {S}}\) enables us to continue as follows
Thus, it follows from (5.9) and Hölder’s inequality that
We end the proof noticing that
since at each point, the sum on the left-hand side is geometrically increasing and, consequently, it is comparable to the last term. \(\square \)
Lemma 5.8
Let \(m\ge 2\) and \(0<p_{i},s_{i}<\infty \), \(1\le i<m\), and let \(\alpha :=\sum _{i=1}^{m-1}1/p_{i}\). Suppose \(q_{i}:=s_{i}-1/p_{i}>0\) for \(i<m\) and let \(q_{m}:=\alpha \). Then for every sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\) and \(\alpha \ge 1\),
provided that \(\rho \) is a monotonic increasing function on \((1,\infty )\), \(\int _{1}^{\infty }\frac{dt}{\rho ^{\frac{1}{\alpha }}(t)t}<\infty \) and \(\rho (2t)\le C \rho (t)\) for \(t\ge 1\).
Proof
First we split \({\mathcal {S}}\) as follows
where
Then one has
Note that each term in the right-hand side of the preceding equation can be estimated by
By subadditivity of the function \(x\mapsto x^{1/\alpha }\), this is bounded by
Therefore, Lemma 5.7 applied with \(s_{m}=1\) gives
Consequently
and (5.11) holds as desired. \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 5.2
We rewrite
For \(m+1\), \(w_{i}=\sigma _{i}\), \(w_{m+1}=\nu \), \(\lambda _{i,Q}=\left( \langle f_{i}\rangle _{Q}^{\sigma _{i}}\right) ^{r}\), \(s_{i}=r\) , and \(\alpha =\frac{r}{p}=\sum _{i=1}^{m}\frac{r}{p_i}\), we have \({q_{i}}:=r-r/p_{i}\) and by Lemma 5.8
Hence,
as we wanted to show. \(\square \)
6 Mixed Weak Type Estimates
The goal of this section is devoted to presenting the proof of Theorem 1.5. To this end, we first establish a Coifman–Fefferman inequality with the precise \(A_{\infty }\) weight constant.
6.1 A Coifman–Fefferman Inequality
Theorem 6.1
Let \(\alpha \ge 1\). Then for every \(0<p<\infty \) and for every \(w\in A_{\infty }\),
\(\bullet \) Sparse approach for \(p\ge 2\). Considering (4.1), we are going to show that
Without loss of generality, we shall assume that \(f_{i}\ge 0\), \(i=1,\ldots ,m\). Note that
Fix \(0 \le g \in L^{(p/2)'}(w)\) with \(\Vert g\Vert _{L^{(p/2)'}(w)}=1\). We are going to split the sparse family in terms of principal cubes. Set
and consider \({\mathcal {F}}_{0}\) the family of maximal cubes of \({\mathcal {S}}\). We define
For this family of cubes, we have that
Thus, (6.3) and (6.4) immediately lead (6.2). \(\square \)
\(\bullet \) \(M_{\delta }^{\sharp }\) approach. We next deal with the general case \(0<p<\infty \). Recall that the sharp maximal function of f is defined by
It was proved in [41] that for every \(0<p<\infty \) and \(\delta \in (0,1)\),
Let \(\Phi \) be a fixed Schwartz function such that \({\mathbf {1}}_{B(0, 1)}(x) \le \Phi (x) \le {\mathbf {1}}_{B(0, 2)}(x)\). We define
It is easy to verify that
We note here that
In fact, by [2, Lemma 3.1] and the endpoint estimate for \(S_1\), we get
Now, combining (6.7), (6.5) and Lemma 6.2 below, we conclude that
where we have used that for suitable choices of \(\gamma \),
Hence to end the proof of Theorem 6.1, it remains to settle that pointwise estimate.
Lemma 6.2
For every \(\alpha \ge 1\) and \(0<\gamma <\frac{1}{2m}\), we have
Proof
Let \(x \in Q\). It suffices to show that for some \(c_{Q}\) chosen later
For a cube \(Q\subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\), we set \(T(Q)=Q\times (0,\ell (Q))\). We then write
where
Let us choose \(c_{Q}=F(\vec {f})(x_{Q})\) where \(x_{Q}\) is the center of Q. Then we have that
Let us first focus on \({\mathcal {J}}_1\). Set \(\vec {f}^0:=(f^0_1,\dotsc ,f^0_m)\), \(f_{i}^{0}=f_{i}\chi _{Q^{*}}\), and \(f_{i}^{\infty }=f_{i}\chi _{(Q^{*})^{c}}\), \(i=1,\dots ,m\), where \(Q^{*}=8Q\). Then we have
where \({\mathcal {I}}_{0}:=\{\alpha =(\alpha _{1},\dots ,\alpha _{m}):\,\alpha _{i}\in \{0,\infty \},\ \text { and at least one }{\alpha _{i}\ne 0}\}\). Using Kolmogorov’s inequality and (6.8), we have
On the other hand, for each \(\alpha \in {\mathcal {I}}_{0}\),
since \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}^{n}}\Phi \big (\frac{x-y}{\alpha t}\big )dx\le c_{n}(\alpha t)^{n}\). By size estimate, for \(y\in 2Q\) and \(\alpha \in {\mathcal {I}}_{0}\), one has
Then, (6.14) and (6.15) give that for every \(\alpha \in {\mathcal {I}}_{0}\),
where the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality was used in the last inequality. Gathering (6.12), (6.13) and (6.16), we obtain
To complete the proof it remains to provide a bound for \({\mathcal {J}}_2\). From [2, eq. (4.6)], we have that for any \(x\in Q\),
Hence, (6.10) is a consequence of (6.11), (6.17) and (6.18). \(\square \)
6.2 Proof of Theorem 1.5
In view of (3.6) and \(\lambda >2m\), it is enough to present the proof of (1.10). We use a hybrid of the arguments in [15] and [35]. Define
where \(K_0>0\) will be chosen later and \(T_{u}f(x) := M(f u)(x)/u(x)\) if \(u(x) \ne 0\), \(T_{u}f(x)=0\) otherwise. It immediately yields that
Moreover, we claim that for some \(r>1\),
The proofs will be given at the end of this section.
Note that
This implies that
Invoking Theorem 6.1 and Hölder’s inequality, we obtain
where we used (6.21) and (6.20) in the last inequality. Here we need to apply the weighted mixed weak type estimates for \({\mathcal {M}}\) proved in Theorems 1.4 and 1.5 in [35]. Consequently, collecting the above estimates, we get the desired result
It remains to show our foregoing claim (6.20). The proof follows the same scheme of that in [15]. For the sake of completeness we here give the details. Together with Lemma 2.2, the hypothesis (1) or (2) indicates that \(u \in A_1\) and \(v^{\frac{1}{m}} \in A_{\infty }\). The former implies that
The latter yields that \(v^{\frac{1}{m}} \in A_{q_0}\) for some \(q_0>1\). It follows from \(A_p\) factorization theorem that there exist \(v_1,v_2 \in A_1\) such that \(v^{\frac{1}{m}}=v_1 v_2^{1-q_0}\).
Additionally, it follows from Lemma 2.3 in [15] that if \(v_1,v_2 \in A_1\), then there exists \(\epsilon _0=\epsilon _0([v_1]_{A_1},[v_2]_{A_1}) \in (0,1)\) such that \(v_1 u_1^{\epsilon } \in A_{p_1}\) and \(v_2 u_2^{\epsilon } \in A_{p_2}\) for any \(0< \epsilon < \epsilon _0\), \(u_1 \in A_{p_1}\) and \(u_2 \in A_{p_2}\), \(1 \le p_1,p_2 < \infty \). Then \(u v_2^{\frac{q_0-1}{p_0-1}} \in A_1\) if we set \(p_0>1+(q_0-1)/{\epsilon _0}\). Thus, we have
It immediately implies that
By (6.22), (6.23) and Marcinkiewicz interpolation in [15, Proposition A.1], we have \(T_u\) is bounded on \(L^{p,1}(u v^{\frac{1}{m}})\) for all \(p \in (p_0,\infty )\) with the constant
and \(c_2:=[v]_{A_1}\). Note that K(p) is decreasing with respect to p. Hence, we obtain
where \(K_0 := 4p_0(c_1+c_2) > K(2p_0) \ge K(p)\).
The inequality (6.19) indicates that \({\mathcal {R}}h \cdot u \in A_1\) with \([{\mathcal {R}}h \cdot u]_{A_1} \le 2K_0\). Let \(0<\epsilon <\min \{\epsilon _0,\frac{1}{2p_0}\}\), and \(r=(\frac{1}{\epsilon })'\). Then \(({\mathcal {R}}h \cdot u) v_1^{\epsilon } \in A_1\), and the second inequality in (6.20) follows from (6.24). By \(A_p\) factorization theorem again, we obtain
The proof is complete. \(\square \)
7 Local Decay Estimates
To show Theorem 1.6, we need the following Carleson embedding theorem from [26, Theorem 4.5].
Lemma 7.1
Suppose that the sequence \(\{a_Q\}_{Q \in {\mathcal {D}}}\) of nonnegative numbers satisfies the Carleson packing condition
Then for all \(p \in (1, \infty )\) and \(f \in L^p(w)\),
We also need a local version of Coifman–Fefferman inequality with the precise \(A_p\) norm.
Lemma 7.2
For every \(1<p<\infty \) and \(w \in A_p\), we have
for every cube Q and \(f_j\in L_c^\infty \) with \({\text {supp}}f_j\subset Q\) \((j=1,\dots ,m)\).
Proof
Let \(w \in A_p\) with \(1<p<\infty \). Fix a cube \(Q \subset {\mathbb {R}}^n\). Recall the definition of \({\widetilde{S}}_{\alpha }\) in (6.6). Pick \(0<\epsilon <\frac{1}{2m}\). By (2.1), Kolmogorov’s inequality, (6.8) and \(f_j\in L_c^\infty \) with \({\text {supp}}f_j\subset Q\), \(j=1,\dots ,m\), we have
which implies that
On the other hand, from [2, Proposition 4.1], one has for every cube \(Q'\),
where \(0<\delta _0<\min \{\delta , \frac{1}{2}\}\). Thus, together with (7.3) and (7.4), the estimate (2.2) applied to \(Q_0=Q\) and \(f={\widetilde{S}}_{\alpha }(\vec {f})^2\) gives that
From this and (6.7), we see that to obtain (7.1), it suffices to prove
Recall that a new version of \(A_{\infty }\) was introduced by Hytönen and Pérez [26]:
By [26, Proposition 2.2], there holds
Observe that for every \(Q'' \in {\mathcal {D}}\),
where we used the disjointness of \(\{E_{Q'}\}_{Q' \in {\mathcal {S}}(Q)}\) and (7.6). This shows that the collection \(\{w(Q')\}_{Q' \in {\mathcal {S}}(Q)}\) satisfies the Carleson packing condition with the constant \(c_n [w]_{A_p}\). As a consequence, this and Lemma 7.1 give that
where the above implicit constants are independent of \([w]_{A_p}\) and Q. This shows (7.5) and completes the proof of (7.1).
Finally, the estimate (7.2) immediately follows from (7.1) and the fact that
This completes the proof. \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.6
Let \(p>1\) and \(r>1\) be chosen later. Define the Rubio de Francia algorithm:
Then it is obvious that
Moreover, for any nonnegative \(h \in L^{r'}({\mathbb {R}}^n)\), we have that \({\mathcal {R}}h \in A_1\) with
By Riesz representation theorem and the first inequality in (7.7), there exists some nonnegative function \(h \in L^{r'}(Q)\) with \(\Vert h\Vert _{L^{r'}(Q)}=1\) such that
where \(w=w_1 w_2^{1-p}\), \(w_1= {\mathcal {R}}h\) and \(w_2 = {\mathcal {M}}(\vec {f})^{2(p'-1)}\). Recall that the m-linear version of Coifmann–Rochberg theorem [40, Lemma 1] asserts that
In view of (7.8) and (7.10), we see that \(w_1, w_2 \in A_1\) provided \(p>2m+1\). Then the reverse \(A_p\) factorization theorem gives that \(w=w_1 w_2^{1-p} \in A_p\) with
Thus, gathering (7.1), (7.9) and (7.11), we obtain
Consequently, if \(t> \sqrt{c_n e}\,\alpha ^{mn}\), choosing \(r>1\) so that \(t^2/e = c_n \alpha ^{2mn}r\), we have
If \(0<t \le \sqrt{c_n e}\alpha ^{mn}\), it is easy to see that
Summing (7.12) and (7.13) up, we deduce that
This proves (1.12).
To obtain (1.13), we use the same strategy and (7.2) in place of (7.1). \(\square \)
Next we present another proof of Theorem 1.6. In view of (4.1) and (4.2), following the approach in [42], it suffices to prove the following.
Lemma 7.3
There exist \(c_1>0\) and \(c_2>0\) such that for every sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\subset {\mathcal {D}}\) and for every cube \(Q_0\),
where \(\vec {f}=(f_1,\ldots ,f_m)\) are supported on \(Q_0\).
Proof
Fix a sparse family \({\mathcal {S}}\subset {\mathcal {D}}\) and a cube \(Q_0\). First we observe that
Now we consider the family of at most \(3^n\) cubes \(Q_{j}\in {\mathcal {D}}\) such that \(|Q_{j}|\simeq |Q_{0}|\) and \(|Q_{j}\cap Q_{0}|>0\). We have that adding those cubes to \({{\mathcal {S}}}\) it remains a sparse family, we shall assume then that \(Q_{j}\in {\mathcal {S}}\). For such \(Q_j\), we define
Then, one has
We recall that in [41, Theorem 2.1], it was established that
For \({\mathcal {K}}^1_j\), taking into account (7.14), we obtain
For \({\mathcal {K}}^1_j\), since \(\vec {f}\) is supported in \(Q_0\), we deduce that
Observe that if t is large enough, then
Consequently,
We are done. \(\square \)
References
Anderson, T., Cruz-Uribe, D., Moen, K.: Logarithmic bump conditions for Calderón–Zygmund operators on spaces of homogeneous type. Publ. Mat. 59, 17–43 (2015)
Bui, T.A., Hormozi, M.: Weighted bounds for multilinear square functions. Potential Anal. 46, 135–148 (2017)
Berra, F.: From to: new mixed inequalities for certain maximal operators, Available online in Potential Anal. (2021)
Berra, F., Carena, M., Pradolini, G.: Mixed weak estimates of Sawyer type for commutators of generalized singular integrals and related operators. Mich. Math. J. 68, 527–564 (2019)
Berra, F., Carena, M., Pradolini, G.: Mixed weak estimates of Sawyer type for fractional integrals and some related operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 479, 1490–1505 (2019)
Caldarelli, M., Rivera-Ríos, I.P.: A sparse approach to mixed weak type inequalities. Math. Z. 296, 787–812 (2020)
Cao, M., Xue, Q., Yabuta, K.: Weak and strong type estimates for the multilinear pseudo-differential operators. J. Funct. Anal. 278, 108454 (2020)
Cao, M., Yabuta, K.: The multilinear Littlewood–Paley operators with minimal regularity conditions. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 25, 1203–1247 (2019)
Cascante, C., Ortega, J.M., Verbitsky, I.E.: Nonlinear potentials and two weight trace inequalities for general dyadic and radial kernels. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 53, 845–882 (2004)
Chen, S., Wu, H., Xue, Q.: A note on multilinear Muckenhoupt classes for multiple weights. Studia Math. 223, 1–18 (2014)
Chen, W., Damián, W.: Weighted estimates for the multisublinear maximal function. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo 62, 379–391 (2013)
Coifman, R.R., Deng, D., Meyer, Y.: Domains de la racine carrée de certains opérateurs différentiels accrétifs. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 33, 123–134 (1983)
Coifman, R.R., McIntosh, A., Meyer, Y.: L’integrale de Cauchy definit un operateur borne sur \(L^2\) pour les courbes lipschitziennes. Ann. Math. 116, 361–387 (1982)
Coifman, R., Meyer, Y.: On commutators of singular integral and bilinear singular integrals. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 212, 315–331 (1975)
Cruz-Uribe, D., Martell, J.M., Pérez, C.: Weighted weak-type inequalities and a conjecture of Sawyer. Int. Math. Res. Not. 30, 1849–1871 (2005)
Cruz-Uribe, D., Martell, J.M., Pérez, C.: Weights, Extrapolation and the Theory of Rubio de Francia, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications. Springer, Basel (2011)
Cruz-Uribe, D., Pérez, C.: Sharp two-weight, weak-type norm inequalities for singular integral operators. Math. Res. Lett. 6, 1–11 (1999)
Damián, W., Hormozi, M., Li, K.: New bounds for bilinear Calderón-Zygmund operators and applications. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 34(3), 1177–1210 (2018)
Fefferman, C.: Inequalities for strongly singular convolution operators. Acta Math. 124, 9–36 (1970)
Fefferman, C.: The uncertainty principle. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 9, 129–206 (1983)
Fabes, E.B., Jerison, D., Kenig, C.: Multilinear Littlewood–Paley estimates with applications to partial differential equations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 79, 5746–5750 (1982)
Fabes, E.B., Jerison, D., Kenig, C.: Necessary and sufficient conditions for absolute continuity of elliptic harmonic measure. Ann. Math. 119, 121–141 (1984)
Fabes, E.B., Jerison, D., Kenig, C.: Multilinear square functions and partial differential equations. Am. J. Math. 107, 1325–1368 (1985)
Hytönen, T.: The sharp weighted bound for general Calderón–Zygmund operators. Ann. Math. 175, 1473–1506 (2012)
Hytönen, T.: The \(A_2\) theorem: remarks and complements, Contemp. Math. 612, Am. Math. Soc., 91–106, Providence (2014)
Hytönen, T., Pérez, C.: Sharp weighted bounds involving \(A_{\infty }\). Anal. PDE 6, 777–818 (2013)
Lacey, M.T.: An elementary proof of the \(A_2\) bound. Isr. J. Math. 217, 181–195 (2017)
Lacey, M.T., Li, K.: On \(A_p\)-\(A_{\infty }\) type estimates for square functions. Math. Z. 284(3–4), 1211–1222 (2016)
Lacey, M.T., Spencer, S.: On entropy bumps for Calderón–Zygmund operators. Concr. Oper. 2, 47–52 (2015)
Lerner, A.K.: Sharp weighted norm inequalities for Littlewood–Paley operators and singular integrals. Adv. Math. 226, 3912–3926 (2011)
Lerner, A.K.: A simple proof of the \(A_2\) conjecture. Int. Math. Res. Not. 14, 3159–3170 (2013)
Lerner, A.K.: On sharp aperture-weighted estimates for square functions. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 20, 784–800 (2014)
Lerner, A.K., Ombrosi, S., Pérez, C., Torres, R.H., Trujillo-González, R.: New maximal functions and multiple weights for the multilinear Calderón–Zygmund theory. Adv. Math. 220, 1222–1264 (2009)
Li, K., Martell, J.M., Ombrosi, S.: Extrapolation for multilinear Muckenhoupt classes and applications. Adv. Math. 373, 107286 (2020)
Li, K., Ombrosi, S., Picardi, B.: Weighted mixed weak-type inequalities for multilinear operators. Studia Math. 244, 203–215 (2019)
Li, K., Ombrosi, S., Pérez, C.: Proof of an extension of E. Sawyer’s conjecture about weighted mixed weak-type estimates. Math. Ann. 374, 907–9029 (2019)
Lichtenstein, L.: Über die erste Randwertaufgabe der Potentialtheorie Sitzungsber. Berlin Math. Gesell. 15, 92–96 (2017)
Muckenhoupt, B., Wheeden, R.: Some weighted weak-type inequalities for the Hardy–Littlewood maximal function and the Hilbert transform. Indiana Math. J. 26, 801–816 (1977)
Ombrosi, S., Perez, C., Recchi, J.: Quantitative weighted mixed weak-type inequalities for classical operators. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 65, 615–640 (2016)
Ortiz-Caraballo, C., Pérez, C., Rela, E.: Exponential decay estimates for singular integral operators. Math. Ann. 357, 1217–1243 (2013)
Ortiz-Caraballo, C., Pérez, C., Rela, E.: Improving bounds for singular operators via sharp reverse Hölder inequality for \(A_{\infty }\), Advances in harmonic analysis and operator theory, pp. 303–321, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., 229, Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel (2013)
Pérez, C., Rivera-Ríos, I.P.: Three observations on commutators of singular integral operators with BMO functions. Harmonic analysis, partial differential equations, Banach spaces, and operator theory. Vol. 2, 287–304, Assoc. Women Math. Ser., 5, Springer, Cham (2017)
Pérez, C., Wheeden, R.: Uncertainty principle estimates for vector fields. J. Funct. Anal. 181, 146–188 (2001)
Sawyer, E.T.: Norm inequalities relating singular integrals and maximal function. Studia Math. 75, 254–263 (1983)
Shi, S., Xue, Q., Yabuta, K.: On the boundedness of multilinear Littlewood–Paley \(g^{*}_{\lambda }\) function. J. Math. Pures Appl. 101, 394–413 (2014)
Wilson, J.M.: The intrinsic square function. Rev. Mat. Iberoam. 23, 771–791 (2007)
Xue, Q., Yan, J.: On multilinear square function and its applications to multilinear Littlewood–Paley operators with non-convolution type kernels. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 422, 1342–1362 (2015)
Zorin-Kranich, P.: \(A_p\)-\(A_{\infty }\) estimates for multilinear maximal and sparse operators. J. Anal. Math. 138, 871–889 (2019)
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her careful reading that helped improving the quality of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Loukas Grafakos.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
M. C. acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, through the “Severo Ochoa Programme for Centres of Excellence in R&D” (SEV-2015-0554) and from the Spanish National Research Council, through the “Ayuda extraordinaria a Centros de Excelencia Severo Ochoa” (20205CEX001). M. H. is supported by a grant from IPM. G. I.-F. is partially supported by CONICET and SECYT-UNC. I. P. R.-R. is partially supported by CONICET PIP 11220130100329CO and Agencia I+D+i PICT 2018-02501 and PICT 2019-00018. Z. S. is supported partly by Natural Science Foundation of Henan(No. 202300410184), the Key Research Project for Higher Education in Henan Province(No. 19A110017) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Universities of Henan Province(No. NSFRF200329).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cao, M., Hormozi, M., Ibañez-Firnkorn, G. et al. Weak and Strong Type Estimates for the Multilinear Littlewood–Paley Operators. J Fourier Anal Appl 27, 62 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00041-021-09870-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00041-021-09870-x
Keywords
- Multilinear square functions
- Bump conjectures
- Mixed weak type estimates
- Local decay estimates
- Sharp aperture dependence