Abstract
The notion of p-summing Bloch mapping from the complex unit open disc \(\mathbb {D}\) into a complex Banach space X is introduced for any \(1\le p\le \infty .\) It is shown that the linear space of such mappings, equipped with a natural seminorm \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p,\) is Möbius-invariant. Moreover, its subspace consisting of all those mappings which preserve the zero is an injective Banach ideal of normalized Bloch mappings. Bloch versions of the Pietsch’s domination/factorization Theorem and the Maurey’s extrapolation Theorem are presented. We also introduce the spaces of X-valued Bloch molecules on \(\mathbb {D}\) and identify the spaces of normalized p-summing Bloch mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) into \(X^*\) under the norm \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p\) with the duals of such spaces of molecules under the Bloch version of the \(p^*\)-Chevet–Saphar tensor norms \(d_{p^*}.\)
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
The known concept of absolutely p-summing operator between Banach spaces, introduced by Grothendieck [10] for \(p=1\) and by Pietsch [18] for any \(p>0,\) can be adapted to address the property of summability in the setting of Bloch mappings from the complex unit open disc \(\mathbb {D}\) into a complex Banach space X as follows.
The study of summability has been addressed for different classes of mappings by some authors. For example, for multilinear operators by Achour and Mezrag [1] and Dimant [8], for Lipschitz mappings by Farmer and Johnson [9] and Saadi [20], and for holomorphic mappings by Matos [12] and Pellegrino [15], among other settings. See also the survey by Pellegrino et al. [16] for the summability on multilinear operators and homogeneous polynomials.
If \(\mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) denotes the space of all holomorphic mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) into X, let us recall that a mapping \(f\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is called Bloch if there exists a constant \(c\ge 0\) such that \((1-|z|^2)\left\| f'(z)\right\| \le c\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\)
The Bloch space \(\mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is the linear space of all those mappings \(f\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) such that
equipped with the Bloch seminorm \(p_{\mathcal {B}}.\) The normalized Bloch space \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is the Banach space of all Bloch mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) into X such that \(f(0)=0,\) equipped with the Bloch norm \(p_{\mathcal {B}}.\) In particular, we will write \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) instead of \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},{\mathbb {C}}).\) We refer the reader to [2, 21] for the scalar-valued theory, and to [4, 5] for the vector-valued theory on these spaces.
For any \(1\le p\le \infty ,\) we say that a mapping \(f\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is p-summing Bloch if there is a constant \(c\ge 0\) such that for any \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D},\) we have
The infimum of all the constants c for which such an inequality holds, denoted \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f),\) defines a seminorm on the linear space, denoted \(\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\) of all p-summing Bloch mappings \(f:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow X.\) Furthermore, this seminorm becomes a norm on the subspace \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) consisting of all those mappings \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) so that \(f(0)=0.\)
These spaces enjoy nice properties in both complex and functional analytical frameworks. In the former setting, we show that the space \((\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p)\) is invariant by Möbius transformations of \(\mathbb {D}.\) In the latter context and in a clear parallelism with the theory of absolutely p-summing linear operators (see [7, Chapter 2]), we prove that \([\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p,\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p]\) is an injective Banach ideal of normalized Bloch mappings whose elements can be characterized by means of Pietsch domination/factorization. Applying this Pietsch domination, we present a Bloch version of Maurey’s extrapolation Theorem [13].
On the other hand, the known duality of the Bloch spaces (see [2, 4, 21]) is extended to the spaces \((\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*),\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p)\) by identifying them with the duals of the spaces of the so-called X-valued Bloch molecules on \(\mathbb {D},\) equipped with the Bloch versions of the \(p^*\)-Chevet–Saphar tensor norms \(d_{p^*}.\) We conclude the paper with some open problems.
The proofs of some of our results are similar to those of their corresponding linear versions, but a detailed reading of them shows that the adaptation of the linear techniques to the Bloch setting is far from being simple. Our approach depends mainly on the application of some concepts and results concerning the theory on a strongly unique predual of the space \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D}),\) called Bloch-free Banach space over \(\mathbb {D}\) that was introduced in [11].
Notation. For two normed spaces X and Y, \({\mathcal {L}}(X,Y)\) denotes the normed space of all bounded linear operators from X to Y, equipped with the operator canonical norm. In particular, the topological dual space \({\mathcal {L}}(X,{\mathbb {C}})\) is denoted by \(X^*.\) For \(x\in X\) and \(x^*\in X^*,\) we will sometimes write \(\langle x^*,x\rangle =x^*(x).\) As usual, \(B_X\) and \(S_X\) stand for the closed unit ball of X and the unit sphere of X, respectively. Let \(\mathbb {T}\) and \(\mathbb {D}\) denote the unit sphere and the unit open disc of \({\mathbb {C}},\) respectively.
Given \(1\le p\le \infty ,\) let \(p^*\) denote the conjugate index of p defined by
2 p-Summing Bloch mappings on the unit disc
This section gathers the most important properties of p-summing Bloch mappings on \(\mathbb {D}.\) From now on, unless otherwise stated, X will denote a complex Banach space.
2.1 Inclusions
We will first establish some useful inclusion relations. See first [18, Satz 5].
The following class of Bloch functions will be used throughout the paper. For each \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) the function \(f_z:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) defined by
belongs to \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) with \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f_z)=1=(1-|z|^2)f_z'(z)\) (see [11, Proposition 2.2]).
Proposition 1.1
Let \(1\le p<q\le \infty .\) Then \(\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\subseteq \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_q(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_q(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) for all \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X).\) Moreover, \(\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (\mathbb {D},X)=\mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (f)=p_\mathcal {B}(f)\) for all \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (\mathbb {D},X).\)
Proof
Let \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D}.\) We will first prove the second assertion. Let \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (\mathbb {D},X).\) For all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) we have
hence \(f\in \mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(p_\mathcal {B}(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (f).\) Conversely, let \(f\in \mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X).\) For \(i=1,\ldots ,n,\) we have
this implies that
and thus \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (f)\le p_\mathcal {B}(f).\)
To prove the first assertion, let \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X).\) Assume \(q<\infty .\) Taking \(\beta _i=\left| \lambda _i\right| ^{q/p}\left\| f'(z_i)\right\| ^{(q/p)-1}\) for \(i=1,\ldots ,n,\) we have
Since \(q/p>1\) and \((q/p)^*=q/(q-p),\) Hölder Inequality yields
and thus we obtain
This shows that \(f\in \Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_q(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_q(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) if \(q<\infty .\) For the case \(q=\infty ,\) note that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) and thus \(f\in \mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X)=\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_\infty (f)=p_{\mathcal {B}}(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\) \(\square \)
2.2 Injective Banach ideal property
Let us recall (see [11, Definition 5.11]) that a normalized Bloch ideal is a subclass \(\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}\) of the class of all normalized Bloch mappings \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}\) such that for every complex Banach space X, the components
satisfy the following properties:
-
(I1)
\(\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is a linear subspace of \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X),\)
-
(I2)
For every \(g\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(x\in X,\) the mapping \(g \cdot x:z\mapsto g(z)x\) from \(\mathbb {D}\) to X is in \(\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X),\)
-
(I3)
The ideal property: if \(f\in \mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X),\) \(h:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {D}\) is a holomorphic function with \(h(0)=0\) and \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(X,Y)\) where Y is a complex Banach space, then \(T\circ f\circ h\) belongs to \(\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},Y).\)
A normalized Bloch ideal \(\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}\) is said to be normed (Banach) if there is a function \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}:\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}\rightarrow \mathbb {R}_0^+\) such that for every complex Banach space X, the following three conditions are satisfied:
-
(N1)
\((\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X),\Vert \cdot \Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}})\) is a normed (Banach) space with \(p_\mathcal {B}(f)\le \Vert f\Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}\) for all \(f\in \mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X),\)
-
(N2)
\(\Vert g\cdot x\Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}=p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x\right\| \) for all \(g\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(x\in X,\)
-
(N3)
If \(h:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {D}\) is a holomorphic function with \(h(0)=0,\) \(f\in \mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) and \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(X,Y)\) where Y is a complex Banach space, then \(\Vert T\circ f\circ h\Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}\le \Vert T\Vert \,\Vert f\Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}.\)
A normed normalized Bloch ideal \([\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}},\Vert \cdot \Vert _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}]\) is said to be:
-
(I)
Injective if for any mapping \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X),\) any complex Banach space Y and any isometric linear embedding \(\iota :X\rightarrow Y,\) we have that \(f\in \mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\left\| f\right\| _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}=\left\| \iota \circ f\right\| _{\mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}}\) whenever \(\iota \circ f\in \mathcal {I}^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}(\mathbb {D},Y).\)
We are now ready to establish the following result which can be compared to [18, Satzs 1–4].
Proposition 1.2
\([\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p,\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p]\) is an injective Banach normalized Bloch ideal for any \(1\le p\le \infty .\)
Proof
Note that \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\subseteq \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) for all \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) by Proposition 1.1.
We will only prove the case \(1<p<\infty .\) The cases \(p=1\) and \(p=\infty \) follow similarly. Let \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D}.\)
(N1) If \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) and \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)=0,\) then \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f)=0,\) and so \(f=0.\) Given \(f_1,f_2\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\) we have
and therefore \(f_1+f_2\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_1+f_2)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_1)+\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_2).\)
Let \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X).\) We have
and thus \(\lambda f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda f)\le |\lambda |\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\) This implies that \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda f)=0=\left| \lambda \right| \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) if \(\lambda =0.\) For \(\lambda \ne 0,\) we have \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)=\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda ^{-1}(\lambda f))\le \left| \lambda \right| ^{-1}\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda f),\) hence \(\left| \lambda \right| \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda f),\) and so \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\lambda f)=\left| \lambda \right| \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\) Thus we have proved that \(\left( \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p\right) \) is a normed space.
To show that it is a Banach space, it is enough to see that every absolutely convergent series is convergent. So let \((f_n)_{n\ge 1}\) be a sequence in \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) such that \(\sum \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_n)\) converges. Since \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f_n)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_n)\) for all \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) and \(\left( \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X),p_\mathcal {B}\right) \) is a Banach space, then \(\sum f_n\) converges in \(\left( \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X),p_\mathcal {B}\right) \) to a function \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X).\) Given \(m\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(z_1,\ldots ,z_m\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _m\in {\mathbb {C}},\) we have
for all \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) and by taking limits with \(n\rightarrow \infty \) yields
Hence \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\le \sum _{n=1}^\infty \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_n).\) Moreover, we have
for all \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) and thus f is the \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p\)-limit of the series \(\sum f_n.\)
(N2) Let \(g\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(x\in X.\) Note that \(g\cdot x\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(p_\mathcal {B}(g\cdot x)=p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x\right\| \) by [11, Proposition 5.13]. If \(g=0,\) there is nothing to prove. Assume \(g\ne 0.\) We have
and thus \(g\cdot x\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(g\cdot x)\le p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x\right\| .\) Conversely, we have
(N3) Let \(h:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {D}\) be a holomorphic function with \(h(0)=0,\) \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) and \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(X,Y)\) where Y is a complex Banach space. Note that \(T\circ f\circ h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},Y)\) by [11, Proposition 5.13]. We have
where we have used that \(p_\mathcal {B}(g\circ h)\le p_\mathcal {B}(g)\) by [11, Proposition 3.6]. Therefore \(T\circ f\circ h\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},Y)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(T\circ f\circ h)\le \left\| T\right\| \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\)
(I) Let \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X)\) and let \(\iota :X\rightarrow Y\) be a linear (not necessarily surjective) isometry. Assume that \(\iota \circ f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},Y).\) We have
and thus \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\iota \circ f).\) The reverse inequality follows from (N3). \(\square \)
2.3 Möbius invariance
The Möbius group of \(\mathbb {D},\) denoted \(\textrm{Aut}(\mathbb {D}),\) is formed by all biholomorphic bijections \(\phi :\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathbb {D}.\) Each \(\phi \in \textrm{Aut}(\mathbb {D})\) has the form \(\phi =\lambda \phi _a\) with \(\lambda \in \mathbb {T}\) and \(a\in \mathbb {D},\) where
Given a complex Banach space X, let us recall (see [3]) that a linear space \(\mathcal {A}(\mathbb {D},X)\) of holomorphic mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) into X, endowed with a seminorm \(p_\mathcal {A},\) is Möbius-invariant if it holds:
-
(i)
\(\mathcal {A}(\mathbb {D},X)\subseteq \mathcal {B}(\mathbb {D},X)\) and there exists \(c>0\) such that \(p_\mathcal {B}(f)\le cp_\mathcal {A}(f)\) for all \(f\in \mathcal {A}(\mathbb {D},X),\)
-
(ii)
\(f\circ \phi \in \mathcal {A}(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(p_\mathcal {A}(f\circ \phi )=p_\mathcal {A}(f)\) for all \(\phi \in \textrm{Aut}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(f\in \mathcal {A}(\mathbb {D},X).\)
By Proposition 1.1, each p-summing Bloch mapping \(f:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow X\) is Bloch with \(p_\mathcal {B}(f)\le \pi _p^{\mathcal {B}}(f).\) Moreover, following the argument of the proof of (N3) in Proposition 1.2, it is easy to prove that if \(f:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow X\) is p-summing Bloch and \(\phi \in \textrm{Aut}(\mathbb {D}),\) then \(f\circ \phi \) is p-summing with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f\circ \phi )\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f),\) and using this fact we also deduce that \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)=\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p((f\circ \phi )\circ \phi ^{-1})\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f\circ \phi ).\) In this way we have proved the following.
Proposition 1.3
\((\Pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p)\) is a Möbius-invariant space for \(1\le p\le \infty .\) \(\square \)
2.4 Pietsch domination
We establish a version for p-summing Bloch mappings on \(\mathbb {D}\) of the known Pietsch domination Theorem for p-summing linear operators between Banach spaces [18, Theorem 2].
Let us recall that \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) is a dual Banach space (see [2]) and therefore we can consider this space equipped with its weak* topology. Let \(\mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) denote the set of all Borel regular probability measures \(\mu \) on \((B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})},w^*).\)
Theorem 1.4
Let \(1\le p<\infty \) and \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X).\) The following statements are equivalent :
-
(i)
f is p-summing Bloch.
-
(ii)
(Pietsch domination). There is a constant \(c\ge 0\) and a Borel regular probability measure \(\mu \) on \((B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})},w^*)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \left\| f'(z)\right\| \le c\left( \int _{B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}}\left| g'(z)\right| ^{p}d\mu (g)\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}} \end{aligned}$$for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\)
In this case, \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) is the infimum of all constants \(c\ge 0\) satisfying the preceding inequality, and this infimum is attained.
Proof
\((\text {i}) \Rightarrow (\text {ii})\): We will apply an unified abstract version of Piestch domination Theorem (see [6, 17]). For it, consider the functions
and
Note first that for any \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {C}},\) the function \(R_{z,\lambda }:B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}\rightarrow [0,\infty [,\) given by
is continuous. For every \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D},\) we have
and therefore f is \(R-S\)-abstract p-summing. Hence, by applying [17, Theorem 3.1], there is a constant \(c\ge 0\) and a measure \(\mu \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) such that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {C}},\) and therefore
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) Furthermore, we have
for every \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) by taking, for example, \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1=1,\) \(\lambda _2=\cdots =\lambda _n=0\) and \(z_1=\cdots =z_n=z.\)
\((\text {ii})\Rightarrow (\text {i})\): Given \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D},\) we have
Hence \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\le c.\) \(\square \)
2.5 Pietsch factorization
We now present the analogue for p-summing Bloch mappings of Pietsch factorization theorem for p-summing operators (see [18, Theorem 3], also [7, Theorem 2.13]).
Given \(\mu \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) and \(1\le p<\infty ,\) \(I_{\infty ,p}:L_\infty (\mu )\rightarrow L_p(\mu )\) and \(j_{\infty }:C(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\rightarrow L_\infty (\mu )\) denote the formal inclusion operators. We will also use the mapping \(\iota _\mathbb {D}:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow C(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) defined by
and for a complex Banach space X, the isometric linear embedding \(\iota _X:X\rightarrow \ell _\infty (B_{X^*})\) given by
The following easy fact will be applied below.
Lemma 1.5
Let \(\mu \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}).\) Then there exists a mapping \(h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \(p_\mathcal {B}(h)=1\) such that \(h'=j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D}.\) In fact, \(h\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \(\pi _p^\mathcal {B}(h)=1\) for any \(1\le p<\infty .\)
Proof
Note that \(j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D}\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \((j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D})'=j_{\infty }\circ (\iota _\mathbb {D})',\) where \((\iota _\mathbb {D})'(z)(g)=g''(z)\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(g\in B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}.\) By [11, Lemma 2.9], there exists a mapping \(h\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \(h(0)=0\) such that \(h'=j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D}.\) In fact, \(h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \(p_\mathcal {B}(h)=1\) since
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) For the second assertion, given \(1\le p<\infty ,\) it suffices to note that
for any \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D}.\) \(\square \)
Theorem 1.6
Let \(1\le p<\infty \) and \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X).\) The following assertions are equivalent :
-
(i)
f is p-summing Bloch.
-
(ii)
(Pietsch factorization). There exist a regular Borel probability measure \(\mu \) on \((B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})},w^*),\) an operator \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(L_p(\mu ),\ell _\infty (B_{X^*}))\) and a mapping \(h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) such that the following diagram commutes :
In this case, \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)=\inf \left\{ \left\| T\right\| p_\mathcal {B}(h)\right\} ,\) where the infimum is taken over all such factorizations of \(\iota _X\circ f'\) as above, and this infimum is attained.
Proof
\((\text {i}) \Rightarrow (\text {ii})\): If \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\) then Theorem 1.4 gives a measure \(\mu \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) such that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) By Lemma 1.5, there is a mapping \(h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) with \(p_\mathcal {B}(h)=1\) such that \(h'=j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D}.\) Consider the linear subspace \(S_p:=\overline{\textrm{lin}}(I_{\infty ,p}(h'(\mathbb {D})))\subseteq L_p(\mu )\) and the operator \(T_0\in {\mathcal {L}}(S_p,\ell _\infty (B_{X^*}))\) defined by \(T_0(I_{\infty ,p}(h'(z)))=\iota _X(f'(z))\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) Note that \(\left\| T_0\right\| \le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) since
and
for any \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\alpha _1,\ldots ,\alpha _n\in {\mathbb {C}}^*\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D}.\) By the injectivity of the Banach space \(\ell _\infty (B_{X^*})\) (see [7, p. 45]), there exists \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(L_p(\mu ),\ell _\infty (B_{X^*}))\) such that \(\left. T\right| _{S_p}=T_0\) with \(\left\| T\right\| =\left\| T_0\right\| .\) This tells us that \(\iota _X\circ f'=T\circ I_{\infty ,p}\circ h'\) with \(\left\| T\right\| p_\mathcal {B}(h)\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\)
\((\text {ii})\Rightarrow (\text {i})\): By (ii), we have \(\iota _X\circ f'=T\circ I_{\infty ,p}\circ h'.\) Given \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D},\) it holds
Hence \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\le \left\| T\right\| p_\mathcal {B}(h).\) \(\square \)
The concept of holomorphic mapping with a relatively (weakly) compact Bloch range was introduced in [11]. The Bloch range of a function \(f\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is the set
A mapping \(f\in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X)\) is said to be (weakly) compact Bloch if \(\textrm{rang}_{\mathcal {B}}(f)\) is a relatively (weakly) compact subset of X.
Corollary 1.7
Let \(1\le p<\infty .\)
-
(i)
Every p-summing Bloch mapping from \(\mathbb {D}\) to X is weakly compact Bloch.
-
(ii)
If X is reflexive, then every p-summing Bloch mapping from \(\mathbb {D}\) to X is compact Bloch.
Proof
-
(i)
Assume first \(p>1.\) If \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X),\) then Theorem 1.6 gives a regular Borel probability measure \(\mu \) on \((B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})},w^*),\) an operator \(T\in {\mathcal {L}}(L_p(\mu ),\ell _\infty (B_{X^*}))\) and a map \(h\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) such that \(\iota _X\circ f'=T\circ I_{\infty ,p}\circ h',\) that is, \((\iota _X\circ f)'=T\circ (I_{\infty ,p}\circ h)'.\) Since \(L_p(\mu )\) is reflexive, it follows that \(\iota _X\circ f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},\ell _\infty (B_{X^*}))\) is weakly compact Bloch by [11, Theorem 5.6]. Since \(\textrm{rang}_{\mathcal {B}}(\iota _X\circ f)=\iota _X(\textrm{rang}_{\mathcal {B}}(f)),\) we conclude that f is weakly compact Bloch. For \(p=1,\) the result follows from Proposition 1.1 and from what was proved above.
-
(ii)
It follows from (i) that if \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X)\) and X is reflexive, then \(\textrm{rang}_{\mathcal {B}}(f)\) is relatively compact in X, hence f is compact Bloch.\(\square \)
2.6 Maurey extrapolation
We now use Pietsch domination of p-summing Bloch mappings to give a Bloch version of Maurey’s extrapolation Theorem [13].
Theorem 1.8
Let \(1<p<q<\infty \) and assume that \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)=\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},\ell _q).\) Then \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},X)=\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1(\mathbb {D},X)\) for every complex Banach space X.
Proof
Lemma 1.5 and Proposition 1.2 assures that for each \(\mu \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}),\) there is a mapping \(h_\mu \in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},L_\infty (\mu ))\) such that \(h_\mu '=j_{\infty }\circ \iota _\mathbb {D}\) and \(I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu \in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},L_q(\mu ))\) with \(\pi _q^\mathcal {B}(I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu )\le 1.\)
We now follow the proof of [7, Theorem 3.17]. Since \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)=\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)\) and \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_q\le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p\) on \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)\) by Proposition 1.1, the Closed Graph Theorem yields a constant \(c>0\) such that \(\pi _{p}^{\mathcal {B}}(f)\le c\pi _{q}^{\mathcal {B}}(f)\) for all \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},\ell _q).\) Since \(L_q(\mu )\) is an \({\mathcal {L}}_{q,\lambda }\)-space for each \(\lambda >1,\) we can assure that given \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D},\) the subspace
embeds \(\lambda \)-isomorphically into \(\ell _q,\) that is, E is contained in a subspace \(F\subseteq L_q(\mu )\) for which there exists an isomorphism \(T:F\rightarrow \ell _{q}\) with \(\left\| T\right\| \Vert T^{-1}\Vert <\lambda .\)
Since \(T\circ I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu \in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)=\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},\ell _q)\) and \((T\circ I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu )'=T\circ I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu ',\) we have
therefore \(\pi _p^{\mathcal {B}}(I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu )\le c\lambda \) for all \(\lambda >1,\) and thus \(\pi _p^{\mathcal {B}}(I_{\infty ,q}\circ h_\mu )\le c.\) Now, by Theorem 1.4, there exists a measure \(\widehat{\mu }\in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) such that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) In the last equality, we have used that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(g\in B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}.\)
Take a complex Banach space X and let \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_q(\mathbb {D},X).\) In view of Proposition 1.1, we only must show that \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1(\mathbb {D},X).\) Theorem 1.4 provides again a measure \(\mu _0\in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) such that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) We claim that there is a constant \(C>0\) and a measure \(\lambda \in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) such that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) Indeed, define \(\lambda =\sum _{n=0}^\infty (1/2^{n+1})\mu _n\in \mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}),\) where \((\mu _n)_{n\ge 1}\) is the sequence in \(\mathcal {P}(B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})})\) given by \(\mu _{n+1}=\widehat{\mu _n}\) for all \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}_0,\) where the measure \(\widehat{\mu _n}\) is defined using Theorem 1.4. Since \(1<p<q,\) there exists \(\theta \in (0,1)\) such that \(p=\theta \cdot 1+(1-\theta )q,\) and applying Hölder’s Inequality with \(1/\theta \) (note that \((1/\theta )^*=1/(1-\theta )\)), we have
for each \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}_0\) and all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) Using Hölder’s Inequality and the inequality
we now obtain
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) and thus
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) From above, we deduce that
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) and this proves our claim taking \(C=2(2c)^{\frac{1}{\theta }}.\) Therefore we can write
for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}.\) Hence \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1(\mathbb {D},X)\) with \(\pi _1^{\mathcal {B}}(f)\le C\pi _q^{\mathcal {B}}(f)\) by Theorem 1.4. \(\square \)
3 Banach-valued Bloch molecules on the unit disc
Our aim in this section is to study the duality of the spaces of p-summing Bloch mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) into \(X^*.\) We begin by recalling some concepts and results stated in [11] on the Bloch-free Banach space over \(\mathbb {D}.\)
For each \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) a Bloch atom of \(\mathbb {D}\) is the bounded linear functional \(\gamma _z:\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) given by
The elements of \(\textrm{lin}(\{\gamma _z:z\in \mathbb {D}\})\) in \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})^*\) are called Bloch molecules of \(\mathbb {D}.\) The Bloch-free Banach space over \(\mathbb {D},\) denoted \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D}),\) is the norm-closed linear hull of \(\left\{ \gamma _z:z\in \mathbb {D}\right\} \) in \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})^*.\) The mapping \(\Gamma :\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D}),\) defined by \(\Gamma (z)=\gamma _z\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) is holomorphic with \(\left\| \gamma _z\right\| =1/(1-|z|^2)\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) (see [11, Proposition 2.7]).
Let X be a complex Banach space. Given \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X,\) it is immediate that the functional \(\gamma _z\otimes x:\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) defined by
is linear and continuous with \(\left\| \gamma _z\otimes x\right\| \le \left\| x\right\| /(1-|z|^2).\) In fact, it is immediate that \(\left\| \gamma _z\otimes x\right\| =\left\| x\right\| /(1-|z|^2).\) Indeed, take any \(x^*\in S_{X^*}\) such that \(x^*(x)=\Vert x\Vert \) and consider \(f_z\cdot x^*\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*).\) Since \(p_\mathcal {B}(f_z\cdot x^*)=1,\) it follows that
We now present a tensor product space whose elements, according to [11, Definition 2.6], could be referred to as X-valued Bloch molecules on \(\mathbb {D}.\)
Definition 2.1
Let X be a complex Banach space. Define the linear space
Note that each element \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) is of the form
where \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _i\in {\mathbb {C}},\) \(z_i\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x_i\in X\) for \(i=1,\ldots ,n,\) but such a representation of \(\gamma \) is not unique.
The action of the functional \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n \lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) on a mapping \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) can be described as
3.1 Pairing
The space \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) is a linear subspace of \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)^*\) and, in fact, we have:
Proposition 2.2
\(\left\langle \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\right\rangle \) is a dual pair, via the bilinear form given by
for \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i \gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*).\)
Proof
Note that \(\langle \cdot ,\cdot \rangle \) is a well-defined bilinear map on \((\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X)\times \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) since \(\langle \gamma ,f\rangle =\gamma (f).\) On one hand, if \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and \(\langle \gamma ,f\rangle =0\) for all \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*),\) then \(\gamma =0,\) and thus \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) separates points of \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) On the other hand, if \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and \(\langle \gamma ,f\rangle =0\) for all \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\) then \(\left\langle f'(z),x\right\rangle =\left\langle \gamma _z\otimes x,f\right\rangle =0\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X,\) hence \(f'(z)=0\) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) therefore f is a constant function on \(\mathbb {D},\) then \(f=0\) since \(f(0)=0\) and thus \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) separates points of \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*).\) \(\square \)
Since \(\left\langle \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\right\rangle \) is a dual pair, we can identify \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with a linear subspace of \((\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X)'\) (the algebraic dual of \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\)) by means of the following easy result.
Corollary 2.3
For each \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*),\) the functional \(\Lambda _0(f):\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}},\) given by
for \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n \lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\) is linear. We will say that \(\Lambda _0(f)\) is the linear functional on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) associated to f. Furthermore, the map \(f\mapsto \Lambda _0(f)\) is a linear monomorphism from \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) into \((\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X)'.\) \(\square \)
3.2 Projective norm
As usual (see [19]), given two linear spaces E and F, the tensor product space \(E\otimes F\) equipped with a norm \(\alpha \) will be denoted by \(E\otimes _\alpha F,\) and the completion of \(E\otimes _\alpha F\) by \(E\widehat{\otimes }_\alpha F.\) An important example of tensor norm is the projective norm \(\pi \) on \(u\in E\otimes F\) defined by
where the infimum is taken over all the representations of u as above.
It is useful to know that the projective norm and the operator canonical norm coincide on the space \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\)
Proposition 2.4
Given \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\) we have \(\left\| \gamma \right\| =\pi (\gamma ),\) where
and
Proof
Let \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and let \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\) be a representation of \(\gamma .\) Since \(\gamma \) is linear and
for all \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*),\) we deduce that \(\Vert \gamma \Vert \le \sum _{i=1}^n|\lambda _i\Vert |x_i\Vert /(1-|z_i|^2).\) Since this holds for each representation of \(\gamma ,\) it follows that \(\Vert \gamma \Vert \le \pi (\gamma )\) and thus \(\left\| \cdot \right\| \le \pi \) on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\)
To prove the reverse inequality, suppose by contradiction that \(\left\| \mu \right\|<1<\pi (\mu )\) for some \(\mu \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) Denote \(B=\{\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X:\pi (\gamma )\le 1\}.\) Clearly, B is a closed convex subset of \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _\pi X.\) Applying the Hahn–Banach Separation Theorem to B and \(\{\mu \},\) we obtain a functional \(\eta \in (\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _\pi X)^*\) such that
Define \(F_\eta :\mathbb {D}\rightarrow X^*\) by
We now show that \(F_\eta \) is holomorphic. By [14, Exercise 8.D], it suffices to prove that for each \(x\in X,\) the function \(F_{\eta ,x}:\mathbb {D}\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) defined by
is holomorphic. Let \(a\in \mathbb {D}.\) Since \(\Gamma :\mathbb {D}\rightarrow \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\) is holomorphic, there exists \(D\Gamma (a)\in {\mathcal {L}}({\mathbb {C}},\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D})))\) such that
Consider the function \(T(a):{\mathbb {C}}\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) given by
Clearly, \(T(a)\in {\mathcal {L}}({\mathbb {C}},{\mathbb {C}})\) and since
it follows that
Hence \(F_{\eta ,x}\) is holomorphic at a with \(DF_{\eta ,x}(a)=T(a),\) as desired.
By [11, Lemma 2.9], there exists a mapping \(f_\eta \in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with \(f_\eta (0)=0\) such that \(f_\eta '=F_\eta .\) Given \(z\in \mathbb {D},\) we have
for all \(x\in X,\) and thus \((1-|z|^2)\left\| f_\eta '(z)\right\| \le 1.\) Hence \(f_\eta \in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f_\eta )\le 1.\) Moreover, \(\gamma (f_\eta )=\eta (\gamma )\) for all \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) Therefore \(\left\| \mu \right\| \ge |\mu (f_\eta )|\ge {\textrm{Re}}(\mu (f_\eta ))={\textrm{Re}}(\eta (\mu )),\) so \(\left\| \mu \right\| >1,\) and this is a contradiction. \(\square \)
3.3 p-Chevet–Saphar Bloch norms
The p-Chevet–Saphar norms \(d_p\) on the tensor product of two Banach spaces \(E\otimes F\) are well known (see, for example, [19, Section 6.2]).
Our study of the duality of the spaces \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) requires the introduction of the following Bloch versions of such norms defined now on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\)
The p-Chevet–Saphar Bloch norms \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p\) for \(1\le p\le \infty \) are defined on a X-valued Bloch molecule \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) as
where the infimum is taken over all such representations of \(\gamma \) as \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i.\)
Motivated by the analogue concept on the tensor product space (see [19, p. 127]), we introduce the following.
Definition 2.5
Let X be a complex Banach space. A norm \(\alpha \) on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) is said to be a Bloch reasonable crossnorm if it has the following properties:
-
(i)
\(\alpha (\gamma _z\otimes x)\le \left\| \gamma _z\right\| \left\| x\right\| \) for all \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X,\)
-
(ii)
For every \(g\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(x^*\in X^*,\) the linear functional \(g\otimes x^*:\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) defined by \((g\otimes x^*)(\gamma _z\otimes x)=g'(z)x^*(x)\) is bounded on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _\alpha X\) with \(\left\| g\otimes x^*\right\| \le p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x^*\right\| .\)
Theorem 2.6
\(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p\) is a Bloch reasonable crossnorm on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) for any \(1\le p\le \infty .\)
Proof
We will only prove it for \(1<p<\infty .\) The other cases follow similarly.
Let \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and let \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\) be a representation of \(\gamma .\) Clearly, \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma )\ge 0.\) Given \(\lambda \in {\mathbb {C}},\) since \(\sum _{i=1}^n (\lambda \lambda _i)\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\) is a representation of \(\lambda \gamma ,\) we have
If \(\lambda =0,\) we obtain \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda \gamma )=0=\left| \lambda \right| d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma ).\) For \(\lambda \ne 0,\) since the preceding inequality holds for every representation of \(\gamma ,\) we deduce that \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda \gamma )\le \left| \lambda \right| d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma ).\) For the converse inequality, note that \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma )=d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda ^{-1}(\lambda \gamma ))\le |\lambda ^{-1}|d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda \gamma )\) by using the proved inequality, thus \(\left| \lambda \right| d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma )\le d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda \gamma )\) and hence \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\lambda \gamma )=\left| \lambda \right| d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma ).\)
We now prove the triangular inequality of \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p.\) Let \(\gamma _1,\gamma _2\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and let \(\varepsilon >0.\) If \(\gamma _1=0\) or \(\gamma _2=0,\) there is nothing to prove. Assume \(\gamma _1\ne 0\ne \gamma _2.\) We can choose representations
so that
and
Fix arbitrary \(r,s\in \mathbb {R}^+\) and define
It is clear that \(\gamma _1+\gamma _2=\sum _{i=1}^{n+m}\lambda _{3,i}\gamma _{z_{3,i}}\otimes x_{3,i}\) and thus we have
An easy verification gives
and
Using Young’s Inequality, it follows that
Since r, s were arbitrary in \(\mathbb {R}^+,\) taking above
we obtain that \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _1+\gamma _2)\le d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _1)+d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _2)+2\varepsilon ,\) and thus \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _1+\gamma _2)\le d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _1)+d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma _2)\) by the arbitrariness of \(\varepsilon .\) Hence \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p\) is a seminorm. To prove that it is a norm, note first that
for any \(h\in B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}\) and \(x^*\in B_{X^*},\) by applying Hölder’s Inequality. Since the quantity \(\left| \sum _{i=1}^n \lambda _i h'(z_i)x^*(x_i)\right| \) does not depend on the representation of \(\gamma \) because
taking the infimum over all representations of \(\gamma \) we deduce that
for any \(h\in B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}\) and \(x^*\in B_{X^*}.\) Now, if \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma )=0,\) the preceding inequality yields
for all \(h\in B_{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})}\) and \(x^*\in B_{X^*}.\) For each \(x^*\in B_{X^*},\) this implies that \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i x^*(x_i)\gamma _{z_i}=0,\) and since \(\Gamma (\mathbb {D})\) is a linearly independent subset of \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\) by [11, Remark 2.8], it follows that \(x^*(x_i)\lambda _i =0\) for all \(i\in \{1,\ldots ,n\},\) hence \(\lambda _i=0\) for all \(i\in \{1,\ldots ,n\}\) since \(B_{X^*}\) separates the points of X, and thus \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i=0.\)
Finally, we will show that \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p\) is a Bloch reasonable crossnorm on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) Firstly, given \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X,\) we have
Secondly, given \(g\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(x^*\in X^*,\) we have
Taking infimum over all the representations of \(\gamma ,\) we deduce that \(\left| (g\otimes x^*)(\gamma )\right| \le p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x^*\right\| d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\gamma ).\) Hence \(g\otimes x^*\in (\text {lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p} X)^*\) with \(\left\| g\otimes x^*\right\| \le p_\mathcal {B}(g)\left\| x^*\right\| .\) \(\square \)
The next result shows that \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p\) can be computed using a simpler formula in the cases \(p=1\) and \(p=\infty .\) In fact, the 1-Chevet–Saphar Bloch norm is justly the projective norm.
Proposition 2.7
For \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\) we have
and
where the infimum is taken over all such representations of \(\gamma \) as \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i.\)
Proof
Let \(\gamma \in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\) and let \(\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\) be a representation of \(\gamma .\) We have
and therefore \(\pi (\gamma )\le d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1(\gamma ).\) Conversely, since \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1\) is a Bloch reasonable crossnorm, we have
and thus \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_1(\gamma )\le \pi (\gamma ).\)
On the other hand, we have
and taking the infimum over all representations of \(\gamma \) gives
Conversely, we can assume without loss of generality that \(x_i\ne 0\) for all \(i\in \{1,\ldots ,n\}\) and since \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\left\| x_i\right\| \gamma _{z_i}\otimes (x_i/\left\| x_i\right\| ),\) we obtain
and taking the infimum over all representations of \(\gamma ,\) we conclude that
\(\square \)
3.4 Duality
Given \(p\in [1,\infty ],\) we will show that the dual of the space \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X\) can be canonically identified as the space of p-summing Bloch mappings from \(\mathbb {D}\) to \(X^*.\)
Theorem 2.8
Let \(1\le p\le \infty .\) Then \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) is isometrically isomorphic to \((\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*,\) via the mapping \(\Lambda :\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\rightarrow (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*\) defined by
for \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) Furthermore, its inverse comes given by
for \(\varphi \in (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*,\) \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X.\)
Moreover, on the unit ball of \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) the weak* topology coincides with the topology of pointwise \(\sigma (X^*,X)\)-convergence.
Proof
We prove it for \(1<p<\infty .\) The cases \(p=1\) and \(p=\infty \) follow similarly.
Let \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and let \(\Lambda _0(f):\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}}\) be its associate linear functional given by
for \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X.\) Note that \(\Lambda _0(f)\in (\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*\) with \(\left\| \Lambda _0(f)\right\| \le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)\) since
and taking infimum over all the representations of \(\gamma ,\) we deduce that \(\left| \Lambda _0(f)(\gamma )\right| \le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f)d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}(\gamma ).\) Since \(\gamma \) was arbitrary, then \(\Lambda _0(f)\) is continuous on \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes _{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X\) with \(\left\| \Lambda _0(f)\right\| \le \pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f).\)
Since \(\textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\) is a norm-dense linear subspace of \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\) and \(d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}\) is a norm on \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\otimes X,\) then \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\otimes X\) is a dense linear subspace of \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\otimes _{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X\) and therefore also of its completion \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X.\) Hence there is a unique continuous mapping \(\Lambda (f)\) from \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X\) to \({\mathbb {C}}\) that extends \(\Lambda _0(f).\) Further, \(\Lambda (f)\) is linear and \(\left\| \Lambda (f)\right\| =\left\| \Lambda _0(f)\right\| .\)
Let \(\Lambda :\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\rightarrow (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*\) be the map so defined. Since \(\Lambda _0\) is a linear monomorphism from \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) to \((\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\otimes X)^*\) by Corollary 2.3, it follows easily that \(\Lambda \) is so. To prove that \(\Lambda \) is a surjective isometry, let \(\varphi \in (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*\) and define \(F_\varphi :\mathbb {D}\rightarrow X^*\) by
As in the proof of Proposition 2.4, it is similarly proved that \(F_\varphi \in \mathcal {H}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and there exists a mapping \(f_\varphi \in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with \(p_{\mathcal {B}}(f_\varphi )\le \left\| \varphi \right\| \) such that \(f_\varphi '=F_\varphi .\)
We now prove that \(f_\varphi \in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*).\) Fix \(n\in {\mathbb {N}},\) \(\lambda _1,\ldots ,\lambda _n\in {\mathbb {C}}\) and \(z_1,\ldots ,z_n\in \mathbb {D}.\) Let \(\varepsilon >0.\) For each \(i\in \{1,\ldots ,n\},\) there exists \(x_i\in X\) with \(\left\| x_i\right\| \le 1+\varepsilon \) such that \(\left\langle f_\varphi '(z_i),x_i\right\rangle =\left\| f_\varphi '(z_i)\right\| .\) It is clear that the map \(T:{\mathbb {C}}^n\rightarrow {\mathbb {C}},\) defined by
is linear and continuous on \(({\mathbb {C}}^n,\Vert \cdot \Vert _{p^*})\) with \(\left\| T\right\| =\left( \sum _{i=1}^n\left| \lambda _i\right| ^p\left\| f'_\varphi (z_i)\right\| ^{p}\right) ^{\frac{1}{p}}.\) For any \((t_1,\ldots ,t_n)\in {\mathbb {C}}^n\) with \(\Vert (t_1,\ldots ,t_n)\Vert _{p^*}\le 1,\) we have
therefore
and since \(\varepsilon \) was arbitrary, we have
and we conclude that \(f_\varphi \in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_\varphi )\le \left\| \varphi \right\| .\)
Finally, for any \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n \lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \textrm{lin}(\Gamma (\mathbb {D}))\otimes X,\) we get
Hence \(\Lambda (f_\varphi )=\varphi \) on a dense subspace of \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X\) and, consequently, \(\Lambda (f_\varphi )=\varphi ,\) which shows the last statement of the theorem. Moreover, \(\pi ^{\mathcal {B}}_p(f_\varphi )\le \left\| \varphi \right\| =\left\| \Lambda (f_\varphi )\right\| .\)
For the final assertion of the statement, let \((f_i)_{i\in I}\) be a net in \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*).\) Assume \((f_i)_{i\in I}\rightarrow f\) weak* in \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*),\) this means that \((\Lambda (f_i))_{i\in I}\rightarrow \Lambda (f)\) weak* in \((\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X)^*,\) that is, \((\Lambda (f_i)(\gamma ))_{i\in I}\rightarrow \Lambda (f)(\gamma )\) for all \(\gamma \in \mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes }_{d^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_{p^*}} X.\) In particular,
for every \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X.\) Given \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X,\) we have
for all \(i\in I\) and some \(w_z\in [0,z],\) and thus \((\left\langle f_i(z),x\right\rangle )_{i\in I}\rightarrow \left\langle f(z),x\right\rangle .\) This tells us that \((f_i)_{i\in I}\) converges to f in the topology of pointwise \(\sigma (X^*,X)\)-convergence. Hence the identity on \(\Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_p(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) is a continuous bijection from the weak* topology to the topology of pointwise \(\sigma (X^*,X)\)-convergence. On the unit ball, the first topology is compact and the second one is Hausdorff, and so they must coincide. \(\square \)
In particular, in view of Theorem 2.8 and taking into account Propositions 1.1, 2.4 and 2.7, we can identify the space \(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) with the dual space of \(\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes } X\subseteq \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)^*.\)
Corollary 2.9
\(\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) is isometrically isomorphic to \((\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes } X)^*,\) via the mapping \(\Lambda :\widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\rightarrow (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes } X)^*\) given by
for \(f\in \widehat{\mathcal {B}}(\mathbb {D},X^*)\) and \(\gamma =\sum _{i=1}^n\lambda _i\gamma _{z_i}\otimes x_i\in \mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\otimes X.\) Furthermore, its inverse is given by
for \(\varphi \in (\mathcal {G}(\mathbb {D})\widehat{\otimes } X)^*,\) \(z\in \mathbb {D}\) and \(x\in X.\) \(\square \)
We conclude this paper with some open questions we hope researchers will take up. In Theorem 1.6, note that if \(f\in \Pi ^{\widehat{\mathcal {B}}}_2(\mathbb {D},X),\) then
Hence \(\iota _X\circ f'\) factors in this way through the Hilbert space \(L_2(\mu ).\) It would be interesting to introduce and study the class of Bloch mappings whose derivatives factor through a Hilbert space.
Motivated by the seminal paper of Farmer and Johnson [9] that raised a similar question in the setting of Lipschitz p-summing mappings, what results about p-summing linear operators have analogues for p-summing Bloch mappings?
Data availability
Not applicable.
References
Achour, D., Mezrag, L.: On the Cohen strongly \(p\)-summing multilinear operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 327(1), 550–563 (2007)
Anderson, J.M., Clunie, J., Pommerenke, Ch.: On Bloch functions and normal functions. J. Reine Angew. Math. 270, 12–37 (1974)
Arazy, J., Fisher, S.D., Peetre, J.: Möbius invariant function spaces. J. Reine Angew. Math. 363, 110–145 (1985)
Arregui, J.L., Blasco, O.: Bergman and Bloch spaces of vector-valued functions. Math. Nachr. 261(262), 3–22 (2003)
Blasco, O.: Spaces of vector valued analytic functions and applications. Lond. Math. Soc. Lect. Notes Ser. 158, 33–48 (1990)
Botelho, G., Pellegrino, D., Rueda, P.: A unified Pietsch domination theorem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 365(1), 269–276 (2010)
Diestel, J., Jarchow, H., Tonge, A.: Absolutely Summing Operators. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 43. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1995)
Dimant, V.: Strongly \(p\)-summing multilinear mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 278, 182–193 (2003)
Farmer, J.D., Johnson, W.B.: Lipschitz \(p\)-summing operators. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 137(9), 2989–2995 (2009)
Grothendieck, A.: Produits tensoriels topologiques et espaces nucléaires, vol. 16. Memoirs American Mathematical Society, Providence (1955)
Jiménez-Vargas, A., Ruiz-Casternado, D.: Compact Bloch mappings on the complex unit disc. arXiv:2308.02461
Matos, M.C.: Absolutely summing holomorphic mappings. An. Acad. Bras. Cienc. 68, 1–13 (1996)
Maurey, B.: Théorèmes de factorisation pour les opérateurs linéaires à valeurs dans les espaces \(L_p\). Soc. Math. France, Asterisque 11, Paris (1974)
Mujica, J.: Complex Analysis in Banach spaces. Dover Publications, New York (2010)
Pellegrino, D.: Strongly almost summing holomorphic mappings. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 287(1), 244–252 (2003)
Pellegrino, D., Rueda, P., Sánchez-Pérez, E.A.: Surveying the spirit of absolute summability on multilinear operators and homogeneous polynomials. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fís. Nat. Ser. A Mat. RACSAM 110(1), 285–302 (2016)
Pellegrino, D., Santos, J.: A general Pietsch domination theorem. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 375, 371–374 (2011)
Pietsch, A.: Absolut \(p\)-summierende Abbildungenin normierten Räumen. Stud. Math. 28, 333–353 (1967)
Ryan, R.A.: Introduction to Tensor Products of Banach Spaces. Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Berlin (2002)
Saadi, K.: Some properties for Lipschitz strongly \(p\)-summing operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 423, 1410–1426 (2015)
Zhu, K.: Operator Theory in Function Spaces, 2nd edn. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 138. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2007)
Acknowledgements
Research partially supported by Junta de Andalucía grant FQM194. The first two authors were supported by grant PID2021-122126NB-C31 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and by “ERDF A way of making Europe”.
Funding
Funding for open access publishing: Universidad de Almería/CBUA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Communicated by Ngai-Ching Wong.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Cabrera-Padilla, M.G., Jiménez-Vargas, A. & Ruiz-Casternado, D. p-Summing Bloch mappings on the complex unit disc. Banach J. Math. Anal. 18, 9 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43037-023-00318-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43037-023-00318-6