Timeline for error estimates for multi-dimensional Riemann sums
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 20, 2020 at 16:40 | comment | added | Rajesh D | Related: mathoverflow.net/q/376145/134538 Is the answer $\sim \zeta_nV(f^2)$ or $\sim \zeta_n^m V(f^2)$. I am not sure about the exponent of $\zeta_n$. Is the dimension has any role? | |
| Aug 18, 2011 at 12:38 | comment | added | James Propp | I'll follow up on this branch of the question in a new thread: mathoverflow.net/questions/73142/… . | |
| Aug 18, 2011 at 5:14 | vote | accept | James Propp | ||
| Aug 16, 2011 at 5:48 | history | edited | James Propp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Aug 16, 2011 at 5:41 | history | edited | James Propp | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
I put in some dollar-signs to improve the formatting
|
| Aug 16, 2011 at 0:13 | comment | added | Phil Isett | By mollification one can see that a function is convex if and only if its second (distribution-theoretic) derivative is non-negative -- the point being that these two classes of functions are both invariant under translation and are closed under the limiting process. Non-negative distributions are all locally finite, non-negative measures. In frequency space, this observation gives a convex function a decay of $\frac{C}{|\xi|^2}$. We should be able to continue from here? (This is only using the fact that the function is subharmonic -- maybe there's a better way to use true convexity.) | |
| Aug 15, 2011 at 19:42 | history | edited | Terry Tao | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 302 characters in body
|
| Aug 15, 2011 at 19:34 | history | answered | Terry Tao | CC BY-SA 3.0 |