Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Given an integer $n\ge 1$ we say that $f\in C[z_1,\ldots,z_n]$ is stable if $f(z_1,\ldots,z_n)\neq 0$ whenever $\text{Im}\ z_i>0$ for all $1\leq i\leq n$.

Stable polynomials with all real coefficients are called real stable. We denote the sets of stable, respectively real stable polyonimals in n variables by $H_n(C)$, respectively $H_n(R)$.

Define the complex Laguerre-Pólya class $\overline{H}_n(C)$ as the class of entire functions in $n$ variables that are limits, uniformly on compact sets, of polynomials in $H_n(C)$. The usual (real) Laguerre-Pólya class $\overline{H}_n(R)$ consists of all functions in $\overline{H}_n(C)$ with real coefficients.

If $T : R[z_1,\ldots, z_n] \rightarrow R[z_1,\ldots,z_n]$, is a linear operator we define its transcendental symbol, $G_T(z,w)$, to be the formal power series in $w_1, \ldots, w_n$ with polynomial coefficients in $R[z_1,\ldots,z_n]$ given by $G_T(z,w) :=\sum_{\alpha \in N^n} (-1)^\alpha T(z^\alpha) \frac {w^\alpha}{\alpha!}.$

A (Weyl algebra) finite order linear partial differential operator with polynomial coefficients is an operator $T: R[z_1,\ldots, z_n] \rightarrow R[z_1,\ldots, z_n]$of the form $T= \sum_{\alpha \leq \beta} Q_\alpha(z) \frac{\partial^\alpha}{\partial z^\alpha}$, where $\beta \in N^n$ and $Q_\alpha\in R[z_1,\ldots, z_n]$, $\alpha\le \beta$.

The followings are two theorems obtained by J.Borcea and P. Brändén.

Theorem 1. Let $T : R[z_1,\ldots, z_n] \rightarrow R[z_1,\ldots, z_n]$ be a linear operator. Then $T$ preserves real stability if and only if either

(a) $T$ has at most $2$-dimensional range and is given by $T(f) = \alpha(f)P + \beta(f)Q,$ where $\alpha, \beta$ are real linear forms on $R[z_1,\ldots, z_n]$ and $P,Q\in H_n(R)$ are such that $P + iQ\in H_n(C)$, or

(b) Either $G_T(z,w)\in \overline{H}_{2n}(R)$ or $G_T(z,-w)\in \overline{H}_{2n}(R)$.

Theorem 2. Let $T: R[z_1,\ldots, z_n] \rightarrow R[z_1,\ldots, z_n]$ be a finite order linear partial differential operator and set $F(z,w) = \sum_{\alpha \leq \beta} Q_\alpha(z)w^\alpha \in R[z_1,\ldots z_n, w_1,\ldots, w_n]. $ Then

$T$ preserves real stability if and only if $F(z,-w)$ is real stable.

Question:

A finite order linear partial differential operator is obviously a linear operator and $G_T(z,w)=exp(-z > w)F(z,-w)$, $G_T(z,-w)=exp(z > w)F(z,w)$.

So, if $F(z,w)$ is real stable, does $T$ preserve real stability ? From Theorem 1, it seems that the answer is ture. However, the following counterexample denies it. Let $T: R[z] > \rightarrow R[z]$ be $z+ \frac{d}{d > z}$, then $G_T(z,-w)=exp(z w)F(z,w)$, thus by Theorem 1, $T$ should preserve real stability. But $T(z)=z^2+1$ is not real stable. I am utterly confused by this.

References

  1. Julius Borcea and Petter Brändén, Pólya-Schur master theorems for circular domains and their boundaries, Ann. of Math. (2) 170 (2009), no. 1, 465–492. MR 2521123 (2010g:30004), http://dx.doi.org/10.4007/annals.2009.170.465

  2. J. Borcea and P. Brändén, Multivariate Pólya-Schur classification problems in the Weyl algebra, Proc. London Math. Soc. 101 (2010), 73-104.

  3. Julius Borcea and Petter Brändén, The Lee-Yang and Pólya-Schur programs. I. Linear operators preserving stability, Invent. Math. 177 (2009), no. 3, 541–569. MR 2534100 (2011g:47069), http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00222-009-0189-3

  4. Julius Borcea and Petter Brändén, The Lee-Yang and Pólya-Schur programs. II. Theory of stable polynomials and applications, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 62 (2009), no. 12, 1595–1631. MR 2569072 (2011k:82026), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpa.20295

share|improve this question
    
Could you please give exact references for Thm 1 and 2? Which paper, which theorem. –  Alexandre Eremenko Mar 27 '13 at 20:12
    
Of course. Theorem 1 came from Theorem 5 of [1] and Theorem 1.4 of [3], while Theorem 2 from Theorem 1.3 of [2]. The connection between these theorems appeared in the section A.7 of [3]. I expect you could give me a clear answer. –  Pippo Mar 28 '13 at 7:06

1 Answer 1

Your operator $z+d/dz$ does not preserve real stability. For this operator $F(z,-w)=z-w$ is not real stable. This is consistent with Theorem 2. Concerning Theorem 1, you computed $G(z,w)$ incorrectly. If you compute it correctly, you will see that (b) in Theorem 1 does not hold. So this is not a counterexample.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.