Let $\Gamma = (G,E)$ be an undirected, infinite, connected graph with no multiple edges or loops. We equip $\Gamma$ with a set of edge weights $\pi_{xy}$, where, given $e=\{x,y\}\in E$, we write $\pi_{\{x,y\}} = \pi_{xy}=\pi_{yx}>0$. If $\{x,y\}\not\in E$, we set $\pi_{xy}=0$. We write $\pi_x$ for $\sum_{y\sim x} \pi_{xy}$. We also assign a set of positive vertex weights $(\theta_x)_{x\in G}$.

We consider the continuous time random walk on $\Gamma$ with generator $\mathcal{L}_\theta$ given by

\begin{equation*} (\mathcal{L}_\theta f)(x) = \frac{1}{\theta_x}\sum_{y\sim x}\pi_{xy}(f(y)-f(x)), \end{equation*}

and denote the resulting Markov process by $(X^\theta_t)_{t\geq 0}$. Roughly speaking, at a vertex $x$, this process waits an exponential time with mean $\theta_x/\pi_x$, and then jumps to one of its neighbors $y$ with probability $\pi_{xy}/\pi_x$. It's not hard to see that if one chooses the $\theta$ s and $\pi$ s in certain ways, the process can behave quite pathologically and run away from its starting point very quickly (e.g., the process may have a finite lifetime).

The function $p_t(x,y) := \frac{\mathbb{P}^x(X^\theta_t=y)}{\theta_y}$ is the called the heat kernel of the random walk.

I'm interested in some analytic aspects of the generator $\mathcal{L}\_\theta$. For example, $\mathcal{L}\_\theta$ is a bounded operator from $L^2(\theta)$ to $L^2(\theta)$ if and only if

\begin{equation*} \sup_{x\in G} \frac{\pi_x}{\theta_x}< \infty. \end{equation*}

Set $u(x) := p_t(x_0,x)$. Note that $u$ is always in $L^2(\theta)$, as

\begin{equation*} \sum_{x\in G} u^2(x)\theta_x = \sum_{x\in G} p_t(x_0,x)p_t(x,x_0)\theta_x = p_{2t}(x_0,x_0) \leq \frac{1}{\theta_{x_0}} \end{equation*}

Is it the case that $\mathcal{L}_\theta u$ is always in $L^2(\theta)$ also?


I was able to answer this question, although it didn't turn out to be useful in the way I thought it would be.

Let $P^\theta_t$ be the transition operator, $(P^\theta_tf)(x) = \sum_{y\in G} p_t(x,y)f(y)\theta_y$. Then a fairly easy computation shows that $P_t$ maps $L^2(\theta)$ to $L^2(\theta)$, and one can also show that if $v\in C_c(G)$, then $P_t(\mathcal{L}\_\theta v) = \mathcal{L}_\theta (P_tv)$, basically from a self-adjointness calculation. If one applies this to the function $u=\theta^{-1}_{x_0}\delta_{x_0}$, then we get $\mathcal{L}\_\theta u = \mathcal{L}_\theta (P_tv) = P_t(\mathcal{L}_\theta v)$, and the right-hand side of this is in $L^2(\theta)$.


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.