10
$\begingroup$

TL;DR: Is there a way to make Schur's (elegant) proof of Hilbert's inequality feel like less of a trick/miracle?

Longer version: Let me go quickly over Schur's proof to show what I mean. Actually, let me do it for Montgomery and Vaughan's generalized Hilbert inequality, since the idea is the same, and let me also change it a little, so as to have fewer sums floating around. (Perhaps I've already taken the first step towards answering my question by asking it.)


Let $\{r_i\}_{i\in I}$, $r_i$ real, $I$ an index set, be given. Our task is to bound the norm of the operator $A = (a_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$ given by $$a_{i,j} = \frac{1}{r_i-r_j}$$ for $i\ne j$, $a_{i,i}=0$, under the assumption that $|r_i-r_j|\geq \delta$ for all distinct $i,j\in I$ and some $\delta>0$.

Write $A^2 = (b_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$. Of course $b_{i,j} = \sum_{k\ne i,j} a_{i,k} a_{k,j}$, and so, for $i\ne j$, $$\begin{aligned}b_{i,j} &= \sum_{k\ne i,j} \frac{1}{(r_i-r_k) (r_k - r_j)} = \frac{1}{r_i-r_j} \sum_{k\ne i,j} \left(\frac{1}{r_i-r_k} + \frac{1}{r_k - r_j}\right)\\ &=\frac{1}{r_i-r_j} \left(\sum_{k\ne i} \frac{1}{r_i-r_k} + \sum_{k\ne j}\frac{1}{r_k - r_j}\right) - \frac{2}{(r_i-r_j)^2} \end{aligned}$$ (the second equality here is the tiny miracle) whereas $b_{i,i} = - \sum_k 1/(r_i-r_k)^2$. In other words, $$A^2 = J A - A J - D - S,$$ where $J$ and $D$ are diagonal matrices with $J_{i,i}=\sum_{k\ne i} 1/(r_i-r_k)$ and $D_{i,i} = \sum_{k\ne i} 1/(r_i-r_k)^2$, and $S$ is a matrix with $S_{i,j} = 1/(r_i-r_j)^2$ for $i\ne j$ and $S_{i,i}=0$.

Because $A$ is real antisymmetric, the spectral theorem holds. Hence, to bound the norm of $A$, it is enough to bound $|A v|_2/|v|_2$ for all eigenvectors $v$ of $A$. Again because $A$ is real antisymmetric, all of its eigenvalues are pure imaginary. Hence, for $v$ an eigenvector with eigenvalue $\lambda$, $$\langle v, J A v\rangle - \langle v, A J v\rangle = \lambda \langle v, J v\rangle + \langle A v, J v\rangle = (\lambda + \overline{\lambda}) \langle v, J v\rangle = 0,$$ and so $$|A v|_2^2 = -\langle v, A^2 v\rangle = \langle v, D v\rangle + \langle v, S v\rangle.$$

The norm of $D$ is clearly $\max_i |D_{i,i}| = \max_i \sum_{k\ne i} 1/(r_i-r_k)^2 \leq 2 \zeta(2)/\delta^2 = \pi^2/3 \delta^2$, whereas the norm of $S$ is $\leq \max_i \sum_j |S_{i,j}| = \max_i \sum_{j\ne i} 1/(r_i-r_j)^2\leq \pi^2/3 \delta^2$. Hence, $$|A v|_2^2 \leq \frac{\pi^2}{\delta^2} |v|_2^2$$ for any eigenvector $v$ of $A$. We conclude that the norm of $A$ is $$\leq \frac{\pi}{\delta}.$$


So, questions:

(a) Can this variant of the proof be shortened further, or made more natural?

(b) The above was closely inspired by Montgomery-Vaughan and the exposition in Iwaniec-Kowalski. I take the above may literally appear elsewhere?

(c) Are there other interesting matrices for which we have expressions such as $A^2 = J A - A J - D - S,$ with similar consequences?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ On (c): presumably one can proceed much as above for $a_{i,j} =1/\sin(\alpha_i-\alpha_j)$, where $\alpha_i\in \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}$ are separated by at least $\delta$ from each other. That would actually correspond to how Montgomery-Vaughan did things in their paper (in contrast to the exposition in Iwaniec-Kowalski, where bounding the norm of the operator is reduced to bounding the norm of the above). $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2022 at 22:37

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

When I was a graduate student, I worked out a more simple direct variant of this argument avoiding any use of matrics, bilinear forms, etc. It's so simple I can't imagine I was the first to do this.

https://lewko.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/the-sharp-large-sieve-inquality

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is a different (almost contrary, rather than orthogonal) sense of "simple": I am happy to use basic facts about operators and bilinear forms, as long as it makes everything more natural and the number of sums decreases. At any rate, how do you justify the third equality in the equation after "Evaluating the second term"? It seems to me you are tacitly using an assumption that $\{j_i\}_i$ is an eigenvector. That assumption is justified (i.e.: the maximum is reached at an eigenvector) only because of the spectral theorem, which is applicable because this is a real antisymmetric form. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 31, 2022 at 7:58
  • $\begingroup$ (The rest of the argument is close to the exposition in Iwaniec-Kowalski.) $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 11:30
1
$\begingroup$

One can even attempt the same argument to attempt to derive a bound of the form $$\left|\sum_{i\ne j} \frac{\overline{v_i} v_j}{r_i-r_j} \right| \leq C \sum_i \delta_i^{-1} |v_i|^2,$$ where $\delta_i = \max_{j\ne i} |r_j-r_i|$. Bounds of this form are known from Montgomery-Vaughan (with $C = (3/2) \pi$) and Preissmann (with $C = (4/3) \pi$; still suboptimal). The optimal value is conjectured to be $C=\pi$; there were rumors of an unpublished proof with $C=3.2$, but apparently they are unsubstantiated so far (see Does a proof of Selberg's 3.2 inequality exist?).


Our task is to bound the norm of the operator $A = (a_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$ given by $$a_{i,j} = \frac{\delta_i}{r_i-r_j}$$ for $i\ne j$, $a_{i,i}=0$, under the assumption that $|r_i-r_j|\geq \delta_i$ for all distinct $i,j\in I$. The norm here is to be understood with respect to the inner product $\langle v,w\rangle = \sum_{i} \delta_i^{-1} \overline{v_i} w_i$, both for the domain and for the image.

Write $A^2 = (b_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$. Of course $b_{i,j} = \sum_{k\ne i,j} a_{i,k} a_{k,j}$, and so, for $i\ne j$, $$\begin{aligned}b_{i,j} &= \sum_{k\ne i,j} \frac{\delta_i \delta_k}{(r_i-r_k) (r_k - r_j)} = \frac{\delta_i}{r_i-r_j} \sum_{k\ne i,j} \left(\frac{\delta_k}{r_i-r_k} + \frac{\delta_k}{r_k - r_j}\right)\\ &=\frac{\delta_i}{r_i-r_j} \left(\sum_{k\ne i} \frac{\delta_k}{r_i-r_k} + \sum_{k\ne j}\frac{\delta_k}{r_k - r_j}\right) - \frac{\delta_j^2 + \delta_i \delta_j}{(r_i-r_j)^2} \end{aligned}$$ (the second equality here is the tiny miracle) whereas $b_{i,i} = - \sum_k \delta_i \delta_k/(r_i-r_k)^2$. In other words, $$A^2 = J A - A J - D - S,$$ where $J$ and $D$ are diagonal matrices with $J_{i,i}=\sum_{k\ne i} \delta_k/(r_i-r_k)$ and $D_{i,i} = \sum_{k\ne i} \delta_i \delta_k/(r_i-r_k)^2$, and $S$ is a matrix with $S_{i,j} = (\delta_i \delta_j + \delta_i^2)/(r_i-r_j)^2$ for $i\ne j$ and $S_{i,i}=0$.

Perhaps contrary to appearances, $A$ is real antisymmetric with respect to our inner product: $$\langle v, A w\rangle = \sum_{i,j} \delta_i^{-1} \frac{\overline{v_i} \delta_i w_j}{r_i-r_j} = - \sum_{i,j} \delta_j^{-1} \frac{\overline{\delta_j v_i} w_j}{\overline{r_j-r_i}} = -\langle A v, w\rangle, $$ and so the spectral theorem holds. Hence, to bound the norm of $A$, it is enough to bound $|A v|_2/|v|_2$ for all eigenvectors $v$ of $A$. Again because $A$ is real antisymmetric, all of its eigenvalues are pure imaginary. Hence, for $v$ an eigenvector with eigenvalue $\lambda$, $$\langle v, J A v\rangle - \langle v, A J v\rangle = \lambda \langle v, J v\rangle + \langle A v, J v\rangle = (\lambda + \overline{\lambda}) \langle v, J v\rangle = 0,$$ and so $$|A v|_2^2 = -\langle v, A^2 v\rangle = \langle v, D v\rangle + \langle v, S v\rangle.$$

The norm of $D$ is clearly $$\max_i |D_{i,i}| = \max_i \sum_{k\ne i} \frac{\delta_i \delta_k}{(r_i-r_k)^2} \leq 2\cdot \left(1 + \max_{1<x_1<x_2<\dotsc} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{x_{n+1}-x_n}{x_{n+1}^2}\right)\leq 4,$$ since $1/x^2 = - (1/x)'$ and $x\mapsto 1/x$ is convex.

It only remains to bound $\langle v,S v\rangle$. Here I am a bit stuck. It is not as if there weren't plenty to work with -- $S$ is symmetric and positive definite with respect to $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle$, and so we can assume that $v$ is an eigenvector of $S$. (We can assume instead that $v$ is an eigenvalue of $A$, for that matter.)

If only we could bound the norm of $S$ by $2 \max_i \sum_{k\ne i} \frac{\delta_i \delta_k}{(r_i-r_k)^2}$, we would have a total bound of $|A v|_2^2\leq \frac{12}{\delta^2} |v|_2^2$, and so we would be able to conclude that the norm of $A$ is $\leq \sqrt{12}/\delta$; in other words, we would have $$\left|\sum_{i\ne j} \frac{\overline{v_i} v_j}{r_i-r_j} \right| \leq C \sum_i \delta_i^{-1} |v_i|^2$$ with $C = \sqrt{12} < 4\pi/3$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ By your definition, $S$ is not really symmetric, right? $\endgroup$
    – Zello
    Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 7:19
  • $\begingroup$ I think it is, with respect to the inner product given here: $\langle v,Sw\rangle = \langle Sv, w\rangle$, no? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 11:29
  • $\begingroup$ $$\langle v, S w\rangle = \sum_{i} \delta_i^{-1} \overline{v_i} \sum_{j\ne i} \frac{\delta_i^2+\delta_i \delta_j}{(r_i-r_j)^2} w_j = \sum_j \delta_j^{-1} w_j \overline{\sum_{i\ne j} \frac{\delta_i \delta_j+\delta_j^2}{(r_j-r_i)^2} v_i} = \langle Sv,w\rangle$$ $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 1, 2022 at 11:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .