6
$\begingroup$

Let $(X,d)$ be a compact metric space and $f:X \to \mathbb{R}$ a real valued continuous function. Let us agree that a modulus of continuity means concave, nondecreasing, uniformly continuous function $\omega$ such that $\omega(0)=0$ and $|f(x)-f(y)| \leq \omega(d(x,y))$ for $x,y \in X$. Let $\delta(s)$ be a distance of $f$ from the set of all functions satisfying Lipschitz condition with a constant $s$. According to wikipedia, it can be shown, using Legendre transform, that if $\omega$ is a minimal concave modulus of continuity for $f$ then the following formulas holds: $$2\delta(s)=\sup_{t \geq 0}\{\omega(t)-st\},$$ and $$\omega(t)=\inf_{s \geq 0}\{2\delta(s)+st\}.$$ I would be grateful if anybody could give me reference, where I can find the proof of that fact.
PS. I need this result in order to justify some construction in the world of $C^*$-algebras-otherwise this construction would be somehow artificial.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

These are somehow folk results. Here's a proof.

Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space, $f$ a function on $X$ which admits a concave modulus of continuity, and $g$ any $s$-Lipschitz function on $X$ with $\|f-g\|_\infty<\infty$. Then, for all $x$ and $y$ in $X$ $$|f(x)-f(y)|\le|f(x)-g(x)|+|g(x)-g(y)|+|g(y)-f(y)|\le$$ $$\le2\|f-g\|_\infty+sd(x,y)\,. \qquad(1) $$

The minimum concave modulus of continuity of $f$ is the inferior envelope of all increasing affine functions whose graphs are above the set of points $$\{(d(x,y),|f(x)-f(y)|)\in [0,\infty]\times[0,\infty] \;:\; x\in X,y\in X\}$$ that is, for any $t\ge0$
$$\omega(t)=\inf\{at+b\; :\;a\ge0,\,b\ge0,\forall x\;\forall y\; |f(x)-f(y)|\le a|x-y|+b \}\, .$$ So by (1) also $\omega(t)\le 2\|f-g\|_\infty +st$, and since this is true for all $s$ and $g$ $s$-Lipschitz, $$\omega(t)\le\inf_{s\ge0} \{ 2\delta(s) +st\}\,.\qquad(2)$$

Keeping $f,g,s$ as above, it is straightforward to check that the inferior envelope $$f^*_s(x):=\inf_{y\in X}\{f(y)+sd(x,y)\}$$ is the largest $s$-Lipschitz function below $f$ (note that the infimum is finite because it is larger than $g-\|f-g\|_\infty$, which is itself an $s$-Lipschitz function below $f$). This implies that the minimal distance $\delta(s)$ is realized by the $s$-Lipschitz function $f^*_s+\delta(s)$ and that $$2\delta(s)=\|f-f^*_s\|_\infty= \sup_{x,y\in X}\{f(x)-f(y)-sd(x,y)\}\,.$$ Since $f(x)-f(y)\le\omega(d(x,y))$, we also have $$2\delta(s)\le\sup_{t\ge0}\{\omega(t)-st\}\,.\qquad(3)$$

One may analogously prove that (2) and (3) are indeed equalities, by similar arguments, but note that, introducing the convex function $\alpha(t):=-\omega(-t)$ for $t\le0$ and $+\infty$ for $t>0$, and also putting $\delta(t)=+\infty$ for $t<0$, the stated inequalities (2) and (3) reads, in terms of Legendre transforms $$\alpha\ge (2\delta)^*,\qquad 2\delta\le \alpha^*.$$ Since the Legendre transform reverses the inequalities and is involutory we conclude that these inequalities are indeed equalities, that is, $\alpha$ and $2\delta$ are a pair of convex conjugate functions.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Many thanks for your proof: however I'm also interested in knowing the reference for the fact that Legendre transform is involutory. I would be very grateful for giving me such reference $\endgroup$
    – truebaran
    Feb 4, 2015 at 16:19
  • $\begingroup$ It's Fenchel–Moreau theorem, which you can find in any textbook on convex analysis. $\endgroup$ Feb 4, 2015 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ (here it's the just the one variable case) $\endgroup$ Feb 4, 2015 at 18:04
  • $\begingroup$ @PietroMajer Doesn't the def of $\omega$ imply that its linear? Since the condition $|f(x)-f(y)|\le a|x-y|+b$ does not involve the parameter $t$. $\endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 18 at 9:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Actually no: the constraint does not depend on $t$, but the quantity $at+b$ does. So for a given $t$ the infimum is reached by a pair $(a,b)$ (or by a minimising sequence) that in general does depend on $t$ —consider e.g. the case of the constraint being just a set of two pairs $(a,b)$, like $\{(1,0), (0,1)\}$, so $\omega(t)=\min(t,1)$ $\endgroup$ Mar 18 at 10:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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