One can easily construct an example of a measurable function $f:(a,b)\to \mathbb{R}$ which satisfies the following property:

$$\label{p}\tag{P} f\notin L^1(I),\ \mbox{for each interval}\ I\subset (a,b). $$

We know that a convex function $g:(a,b)\to \mathbb{R}$ is locally Lipschitz and its second derivative $g''$ exists a.e. $x\in (a,b)$.

Can we find a increasing convex function $g$, such that $g''$ satisfies the property \ref{p}?

If the answer is negative

What can we say about the set of intervals $I$ for which $g''\notin L^1(I)$?

Remark: I've asked a similar question on Math.stack with no answer.

  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Hint: If $g$ is a convex function, then $g'$ is an increasing function. So an equivalent question is: How bad can be the derivative of an increasing function? $\endgroup$ – Gerald Edgar Mar 22 '17 at 11:19
  • $\begingroup$ @GeraldEdgar Following your question The derivative of an increasing function is a Borel measure $\mu$ on the interval, so the question would be how bad such a measure could be? I think that $g''$ would be the density of the absolutely continuous part of $\mu$. This would be $L^1$ on each interval $I$ such that $\mu(I)<\infty$. $\endgroup$ – Liviu Nicolaescu Mar 22 '17 at 12:16
  • $\begingroup$ @LiviuNicolaescu ... correct. $g''$ (in the sense of a function) is in $L^1$ on every closed interval contained in the domain of $g$. If the OP means $g''$ is the distributional sense, he/she should see the answer of Denis. $\endgroup$ – Gerald Edgar Mar 22 '17 at 13:53
  • $\begingroup$ I mean g'' in the sense of a function @GeraldEdgar. $\endgroup$ – Tomás Mar 22 '17 at 14:41

The second derivative of a convex function, in the distributional sense, is a non-negative bounded measure. And conversely. If this measure $\mu$ contains a sum $\sum_na_n\delta_{x=x_n}$, where $(x_n)_n$ is dense and $a_n>0$, $\sum_na_n<\infty$, then $\mu|_I\not\in L^1(I)$ for every non-void open interval $I$. The corresponding $g$ is an example for the first question.

On the other hand $g''$ can be decomposed uniquely into a singular part $\mu_s$ and a part $\mu_a<\!<{\cal Leb}$. Because $\mu_s,\mu_a$ are non-negative, we have $$\int_c^dd\mu_a\le|g''|<\infty,$$ at least if $a<c<d<b$. Therefore $\mu_a\in L^1(I)$ for every $I\subset\!\subset(a,b)$.

| cite | improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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