format: text

text:
# The approximation numbers of Hardy–type operators on trees.

## 1 Introduction.

In ,and  results were established for the Hardy operator

$$Tf(x)=v(x)_0^xf(t)u(t)𝑑t$$
(1. 1)
as a map from $`L^p(0,\mathrm{})`$ to $`L^p(0,\mathrm{})`$, for $`1p\mathrm{}`$. When $`p(1,\mathrm{})`$, it was proved in  that under appropriate conditions on $`u`$ and $`v`$ the approximation numbers $`a_n(T)`$ of $`T`$ satisfy

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}na_n(T)=\frac{1}{\pi }_0^{\mathrm{}}|u(t)v(t)|𝑑t$$
(1. 2)
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification : 47G10, 47B10

when p=2, and when $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _p}{4}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}|u(t)v(t)|𝑑t`$ $``$ $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}na_n(T)`$ (1. 3)
$``$ $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}na_n(T)\alpha _p{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}|u(t)v(t)|𝑑t`$
for a specified constant $`\alpha _p`$ depending on $`p`$. For the cases $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`p=1`$ similar estimates were derived in  but with $`v_s(t)=lim_{\epsilon 0}v_{\mathrm{},(t\epsilon ,t+\epsilon )}`$ instead of $`v(t)`$ when $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`u_s(t)`$ instead of $`u(t)`$ in the case $`p=1`$. Furthermore, in  and  two-sided estimates are given for the $`l^\alpha `$ and weak-$`l^\alpha `$ norms of the sequence of approximation numbers in the case when the Hardy operator is compact.

A special case of the main result in this paper is that the counterpart of (1.2) in $`L^p(0,\mathrm{})`$, namely

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}na_n(T)=\alpha _p_0^{\mathrm{}}|u(t)v(t)|𝑑t,$$
(1. 4)
holds for all  $`p(1,\mathrm{})`$; the general result is that the analogue of (1.4) when the interval $`(0,\mathrm{})`$ is replaced by a tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is true. Such Hardy operators on trees have already been investigated in  where it was shown that they occur naturally in spectral problems defined on domains with irregular boundaries. Necessary and sufficient criteria for the boundedness of Hardy operators between various Lebesgue spaces on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are established in , but the complex nature of the problem is such that the neat abstract result is difficult to apply even for the most elementary of trees. It is therefore to be expected that the problems of compactness and estimating the approximation numbers are likely to be much more complicated than in the interval case. This, confirmed in this paper, is what makes it so surprising that the analogue of (1.4) for a tree is established here when $`p2`$ before it was known for an interval. Estimates for $`l^q`$ and weak-$`l^q`$ norms of the approximation numbers of $`T`$ are also obtained.

In  the case $`p=2`$ of the problem subsequently studied in  and  for general $`p[1,\mathrm{}]`$ was considered and (1.2) proved, using Hilbert space methods which do not extend to general values of $`p`$. The same problem on a tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the subject of  where an intensive study is made of problems on trees which are closely related to those here, but in the case $`p=2`$ only, and using methods which are very different from those in this paper. The conditions imposed to ensure the validity of the analogue of (1.4) for a tree in  are similar to those here, but a comparison seems difficult in general (see Remark 6.12). The main difference is that in  they relate to arbitrary partitions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ into intervals, whereas our partitions are into connected subsets specifically determined by functions which have a fundamental role in the analysis.

## 2 Preliminaries.

In this section we recall the definition of a tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, introduce a Hardy–type operator on the tree and quote from  the criterion for the boundedness of the operator as a map from $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

A tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a connected graph without loops or cycles, where the edges are non-degenerate closed line segments whose end–points are the vertices. Each vertex of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is of finite degree, i.e. only a finite number of edges emanate from each vertex. For every $`x,y\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ there is a unique polygonal path in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which joins $`x`$ and $`y`$. The distance between $`x`$ and $`y`$ is defined to be the length of this polygonal path and in this way $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is endowed with a metric topology.

###### Lemma 2.1

Let $`\tau (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ be the metric topology on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then

a set $`A\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is compact if and only if it is closed and meets only a finite number of edges;

$`\tau (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is locally compact;

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the union of a countable number of edges. Thus if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is endowed with the natural 1-dimensional Lebesgue measure it is a $`\sigma `$-finite measure space.

Proof. See . $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`x,y\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and denote by $`(x,y)`$ the unique path joining $`x,y`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. For $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ we define $`t_ax`$ (or $`x_at`$) to mean that $`x`$ lies on the path $`(a,t)`$. We write $`x_at`$ for $`x_at`$ and $`xt`$. This is a partial ordering on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and the ordered graph so formed is referred to us a tree rooted at $`a`$ and denoted by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_a`$. If $`a`$ is not a vertex we make it one by replacing the edge on which it lies by two edges. In this way $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_a`$ is the unique finite union of subtrees $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a,i}`$ which intersect only at $`a`$.

Note that if $`x(a,b)`$ then $`x_ay`$ if and only if $`x_by`$.

We shall use the following notation. For a subtree $`K`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`V(K)`$, $`E(K)`$ will denote respectively the sets of vertices, edges of $`K`$ and $`K`$ will denote the set of boundary points of $`K`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The notation $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ will be used to mean that the closure of $`K`$ is a compact subset of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$; note that, from Lemma 2.1 (i) this implies that $`K`$ meets only a finite number of edges of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The characteristic function of a set $`E`$ will be denoted by $`\chi _E`$. The integral is interpreted in the following sense :

$$_Eg=\underset{e}{}_{eE}g$$

where

$$_{eE}g=_c^dg(x)\chi _E(x)𝑑x,$$

the integral $`_c^d`$ being over the set of points lying in the path $`(c,d)`$. For a measurable subset $`K`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ we define the norm

$$f_{p,K}=\left(_K|f|^p\right)^{1/p}$$

on $`L^p(K)`$. The $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ norm will be denoted by $`_p`$ if there is no chance of confusion. Also, if the value of $`p`$ is clear from the context, we shall write $`_K,`$ for the $`L^p`$ norms on $`K,\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ respectively. If $`A`$ is a bounded map between normed spaces $`X,Y`$ we denote its norm by

$$A|XY$$

This will be simplified to $`A`$ if the spaces $`X,Y`$ are unambiguous.

A connected subset of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a subtree if we add its boundary points to the set of vertices of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and hence form new edges from existing ones. Hereafter we shall always adopt this convention when we refer to subtrees.

###### Definition 2.2

Let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ containing $`a`$. A point $`tK`$ is said to be maximal if every $`x_at`$ lies in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }K`$. We denote by $`𝐈_a(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ (or simply $`𝐈_a`$) the set of subtrees $`K`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ containing a whose boundary points are all maximal.

We assume throughout, unless mentioned otherwise, that $`u,v`$ satisfy the following conditions:

$$uL^p^{}(K),vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }),\text{ for every }K\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(2. 5)
We may assume, without loss of generality, that $`u,v0`$. This is because multiplication by $`sgnu`$ and $`sgnv`$ are isometries on $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$; recall that $`sgnu=u/|u|`$ when $`u0`$ and $`1`$ otherwise.

###### Definition 2.3

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a tree, $`1p\mathrm{}`$, and let $`u`$ and $`v`$ be measurable functions on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which satisfy (2. 5). For $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`fL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ we define the Hardy operator by

$$T_af(x):=v(x)_a^xf(t)u(t)𝑑t,a\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(2. 6)
In  the following necessary and sufficient condition for the boundedness of $`T_a`$ was obtained.

###### Theorem 2.4

Let $`1p\mathrm{}`$, $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and suppose $`u`$ and $`v`$ satisfy (2. 5). For $`K𝐈_a`$ define

$$\alpha _K:=inf\{f_p:_a^t|f||u|=1\text{ for all }tK\}.$$
(2. 7)
Then $`T_a`$ is bounded from $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ if and only if

$$A:=\underset{K𝐈_a}{sup}\frac{v\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K}_p}{\alpha _K}<\mathrm{}.$$
(2. 8)
Moreover, $`AT_a4A`$.

## 3 Bounds for the approximation numbers

We recall that, given any $`m𝐍`$, the $`m`$–th approximation number of a bounded operator $`T:L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, $`a_m(T)`$, is defined by

$$a_m(T):=infTF|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }),$$

where the infimum is taken over all bounded linear maps $`F:L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ with rank less than $`m`$.

A measure of non-compactness of $`T`$ is given by

$$\beta (T):=infTP|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }),$$

where the infimum is taken over all compact linear maps $`P:L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Since $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ has the approximation property for $`1p\mathrm{}`$, $`T`$ is compact if and only if $`a_m(T)0`$ as $`m\mathrm{}`$, and $`\beta (T)=lim_n\mathrm{}a_n(T)`$.

###### Definition 3.1

Let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We define:

$$A(K)A(K,u,v):=\{\begin{array}{cc}sup_{fL^p(K),f0}inf_{\alpha 𝐂}\frac{T_{a,K}f\alpha v_{p,K}}{f_{p,K}}\hfill & \text{ if }\mu (K)>0,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{ if }\mu (K)=0,\hfill \end{array}$$

where

$$T_{a,K}f(x):=v(x)\chi _K(x)_a^xu(t)f(t)\chi _K(t)𝑑t,$$

and

$$\mu (K):=\{\begin{array}{cc}_K|v(t)|^p𝑑t\hfill & 1p<\mathrm{},\hfill \\ _K|v(t)|𝑑t\hfill & p=\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Lemma 3.2

The number $`A(K,u,v)`$ in Definition 3.1 is independent of $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Proof. Denote by $`S`$ the canonical map of $`L^p(K)`$ into its quotient by the space of scalar multiples of $`v`$. Then $`A(K)=ST_{a,K}|L^p(K)L^p(K)`$. For $`b\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ we have $`T_{b,K}f=v\chi _K_b^afu\chi _K𝑑t+T_{a,K}Uf`$, where $`Uf(t)=f(t)`$ if $`t`$ lies on the path $`(a,b)`$ and $`f(t)`$ otherwise. Clearly $`U`$ is a linear isometry of $`L^p(K)`$ onto itself and $`ST_{b,K}=ST_{a,K}U`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.3

For all subtrees $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$

$$A(K)\underset{a\mathrm{\Gamma }}{inf}T_{a,K}|L^p(K)L^p(K).$$

Note that if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`b`$ the nearest point of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`a`$ then $`T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}=T_{a,\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and $`T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}:=T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}|L^p(\mathrm{\Lambda })L^p(\mathrm{\Lambda })T_a=:T_a|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Moreover if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, with $`c`$ the nearest point of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ to $`a`$ and $`(b,c)`$ a subinterval of an edge of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ then $`T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}f=T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}(f\chi _{(b,c)})+T_{c,\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}}(f\chi _\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}),`$ whence $`0T_{b,\mathrm{\Lambda }}T_{c,\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}}u_{p^{},(b,c)}v_{p,(b,c)}`$. This remark yields

###### Lemma 3.4

For $`1p\mathrm{},T_{x,K}|L^p(K)L^p(K)`$ is continuous in $`x`$.

Let $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i}`$ $`i=1,\mathrm{},n_x`$ the non-overlapping subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which are the closures of the connected components of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\{x\}`$, and set $`T_{x,i}T_{x,\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i}}`$ and $`T_{x,i}T_{x,i}|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i})L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i})`$ . We suppose that the numbering is done in the order of descending norms of the $`T_{x,i}:L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i})L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,i})`$. Clearly $`T_x=\mathrm{max}_{i=1,\mathrm{},n_x}T_{x,i}`$.

Call a point $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ simple if there is just one $`T_{x,i}`$ with maximal norm, so that $`T_{x,1}>T_{x,2}.`$ If $`a`$ is a simple point and $`(a,y)`$ the first edge of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a,1}`$ then by continuity either there is a point $`z`$ of $`(a,y)`$ which is not simple or $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }_{y,1}`$. If the latter, continue the path beginning with $`(a,y)`$ along the initial edge of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{y,1}`$. By induction thus define a path $`l`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ satisfying one of the following:

$`l`$ is finite and its end $`b`$ is not simple;

$`l`$ is finite, its end $`b`$ is simple and $`\{x:x_ab\}=\mathrm{}`$;

$`l`$ is infinite.

Now (ii) is impossible since $`lim_{xb}T_{x,1}=0`$, and $`T_{x,1}A(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Also (iii) implies $`T`$ is not compact. For if $`x`$ is in $`l`$, $`T_{x,1}A(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and hence there is a compact subset $`K`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,1}`$ and a function $`f`$ supported in $`K`$ with $`f1`$ and $`T_af_K\frac{1}{2}A(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. It follows that there is a sequence of disjoint compact sets $`K_n`$ and functions $`f_n`$ with the same property. Then, if $`m>n,T_a(f_nf_m)_\mathrm{\Gamma }T_af_n_{K_n}\frac{1}{2}A(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Thus, if $`T_a`$ is compact, (i) holds. Moreover, $`T_b=\mathrm{min}_{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}T_x.`$ For if $`xb`$ then $`x`$ one of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b,1}`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b,2}`$, say $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b,2}.`$ Then if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{x,j}`$ is the subtree containing $`b`$, $`T_{x,j}T_{b,2}=T_{b,1}.`$ From this we have the following result which will be an important tool for determining a lower bound for $`A(K)`$ once Theorem 3.8 below is available.

###### Lemma 3.5

Suppose $`T_a`$ is compact and that there exist $`ij`$ such that $`T_{a,i},T_{a,j}T_a`$. Then

$$\mathrm{min}\{T_{a,i},T_{a,j}\}\underset{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{min}}T_x.$$

Proof. The result is a consequence of the discussion preceding the lemma if $`a`$ is not simple. If $`a`$ is simple, then, with $`b`$ the non-simple end-point of the path $`l`$ in (i) above, and $`\mathrm{min}\{T_{a,i},T_{a,j}\}=T_{a,i}`$, say, we have $`T_{a,i}<T_a`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{a,i}`$ is a subtree of some tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b,k}`$. Thus

$$T_{a,i}T_{b,k}T_b=\underset{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\mathrm{min}}T_x.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

In the next two lemmas $`_{p,\mu }`$ denotes the norm in $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma },d\mu )`$, where $`d\mu (t)=|v(t)|^pdt`$.

###### Lemma 3.6

If $`1<p\mathrm{}`$ there is a unique scalar $`c_f`$ such that $`fc_fe_{p,\mu }=inf_{c𝐂}fce_{p,\mu }`$ for $`e0,eL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma },d\mu )`$.

Proof. Since $`fce_{p,\mu }`$ is continuous in $`c`$ and tends to $`\mathrm{}`$ as $`c\mathrm{}`$, the existence of $`c_f`$ is guaranteed by the local compactness of $`𝐂`$. For $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$ the uniqueness follows from the uniform convexity of $`L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma },d\mu )`$. Let $`p=\mathrm{}`$, and suppose that there are two values of $`c_f,c_1c_2`$. This yields the contradiction $`f(1/2)(c_1+c_2)_{p,\mu }<fc_1_{p,\mu }`$.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.7

The map $`fc_f:L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma },d\mu )𝐂`$ is continuous for $`1<p\mathrm{}`$.

Proof. Suppose that $`c_{g_n}c`$ as $`g_nf`$. Then

$$g_nc_f_{p,\mu }g_nc_{g_n}_{p,\mu }$$

and so

$$fc_f_{p,\mu }fc_{p,\mu }$$

which gives $`c=c_f`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 3.8

Let $`1<p\mathrm{}`$. If $`T_a`$ is compact $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\mathrm{min}_{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}T_x|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

Proof. There is a non-simple point $`b`$ at which $`T_x`$ attains its minimum. If $`\alpha <T_b`$ there exist $`f_i,i=1,2`$, supported in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{b,i}`$ with $`f_i=1,T_bf_i>\alpha `$, and $`f_1`$ positive, $`f_2`$ negative. Clearly the same is true of the corresponding values of $`c_f`$, say $`c_1,c_2`$. Then by continuity there is a $`\lambda [0,1]`$ such that $`c_g=0`$ for $`g=\lambda f_1+(1\lambda )f_2`$, and $`T_bg^p=\lambda ^pT_bf_1^p+(1\lambda )^pT_bf_2^p>\alpha ^pg^p`$. Then, by Lemma 3.6,

$$A(\mathrm{\Gamma })\underset{c}{inf}(T_bcv)g/g=T_bg/g>\alpha .$$

Since $`\alpha <T_b`$ is arbitrary, $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma })T_b`$ and the result follows from Corollary 3.3.$`\mathrm{}`$

The next lemma establishes an important geometrical property of a tree which is an essential ingredient of the subsequent analysis. First we make some observations.

Suppose $`w`$ is a non–negative function defined on the set of all closed subtrees of a tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, satisfying

$$XYw(X)w(Y).$$
(3. 9)
Define

* $$N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })=\underset{𝒮_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mathrm{min}}\mathrm{\#}$$

where $`𝒮_\epsilon :=\{;\text{ is a set of non–overlapping closed subtrees of }\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{ such that }`$ $`i)_XX=\mathrm{\Gamma },ii)Xw(X)\epsilon \}`$;
* $$M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })=\underset{𝒢_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })}{\mathrm{max}}\mathrm{\#}𝒢$$

where $`_\epsilon :=\{𝒢;𝒢\text{ is a set of non–overlapping closed subtrees of }\mathrm{\Gamma }\text{ such that }`$ i) $`_{X𝒢}X=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ii) $`\mathrm{\#}\{X;X𝒢,w(X)\epsilon \}1\}`$

Two non–overlapping closed subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can have at most one point in common, for otherwise $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ would contain a cycle. A chain $`𝒞`$ of closed subtrees is a sequence $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_l`$ of closed subtrees such that $`X_iX_{i+1}=\{x_i\}`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},l1)`$ where the $`x_i`$ are distinct. The length of $`𝒞`$ is $`l`$.

There is a set $`𝒮_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ with $`\mathrm{\#}=N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ (possibly $`\mathrm{}`$). Let $`𝒞`$ be a chain of elements of $``$ of maximal length $`l`$. Then we have the following:

If $`l=1`$ then $`\mathrm{\#}=1`$ and so $`w(\mathrm{\Gamma })\epsilon `$.

If $`l=2`$ define $`Y=X_1X_2`$. Then if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o`$ is a closed subtree and $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)=N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })2`$. Moreover $`Y`$ is a closed subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`w(Y)>\epsilon `$. For since $`l`$ is maximal $`x_1`$ lies in every member of $``$ so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o`$ is a closed subtree. Also $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o=_X^{}X`$, where $`^{}=\{X_1,X_2\}`$, which implies that $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })2.`$ If $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)<N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })2`$, there exists $`^{\prime \prime }`$, a suitable covering of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o`$ with $`\mathrm{\#}^{\prime \prime }=N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)`$, and then $`^{\prime \prime }\{X_1,X_2\}𝒮_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ which contradicts the definition of $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Finally $`w(Y)>\epsilon `$ for if not, on taking $`^{\prime \prime \prime }=^{}\{Y\}`$ we have a contradiction.

If $`l3,`$ suppose $`Z_1,\mathrm{},Z_k`$ are the sets in $``$ which meet $`X_{l1}`$ in a point different from $`x_{l2}`$. Then since $`l`$ is maximal $`X_1,X_2,\mathrm{},X_{l1},Z_i`$, is a chain of maximal length for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},k`$. Either a) $`k=1`$ or b) $`k>1`$. If a), we have $`Z_i=X_l`$ and we take $`Y=X_lX_{l1}`$, so $`Y`$ is a closed subtree. Then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o`$ is a closed subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Moreover $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)=N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })2`$, $`w(Y)>\epsilon `$ by an argument similar to that of (i). If b), define $`a_i`$ by $`\{a_i\}=X_{ł1}Z_i`$ and, for $`ij,a_{ij}=a_ia_j=\mathrm{max}\{u:ua_i\text{ and }ua_j\}`$ in the ordering of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ arising from taking $`x_1`$ as root. Then $`a_{ij}X_{l1}.`$ Define $`\varrho _i:=\mathrm{\#}\{a_{jk};a_{jk}a_i\}.`$ Without loss of generality we may suppose $`\varrho _1=\mathrm{max}_i\varrho _i`$ and that $`a_{jk}a_{12}`$ for all $`a_{jk}a_1`$. Define $`Y=\{x;(u)a_{12}ua_1\text{ or }a_{12}ua_2\text{ and }ux\}\{a_{12}\}`$. Then $`Y`$ is a closed subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`YZ_1Z_2X_{l1}.`$ If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is a closed subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and it follows by arguments similar to those in (ii) that, since $`𝒞`$ is a chain of maximal length in $``$ and $``$ is a covering of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`w(Y)>\epsilon `$ and

$$N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })3N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })2.$$
(3. 10)
###### Lemma 3.9

If $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })<\mathrm{}`$ then $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })\frac{1}{3}N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

Proof. The proof is by induction on $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. If $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })=1,w(\mathrm{\Gamma })\epsilon `$ and $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })=1`$. If $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })=2,l=2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=X_1X_2`$ and $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })1`$. If $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })>2`$ the arguments of i) ii) iii) above and induction prove the result. For by i) $`l1`$ and by ii) or iii) $`N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)<N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ so we may suppose $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)1/3N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)`$ and then there exists $`𝒢^{}_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)`$ with $`\mathrm{\#}𝒢^{}=M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)`$. But then if $`𝒢=𝒢^{}\{Y\}`$, $`𝒢_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ since $`\omega (Y)>\epsilon `$ and $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })\mathrm{\#}𝒢=M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)+1\frac{1}{3}N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }Y^o)+1\frac{1}{3}N_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma }).`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.10

Let $`K`$ be a compact tree, let $`w`$ be a function satisfying (3. 9) and, for every $`(c,d)E(K)`$, suppose that $`w(c,.)`$ is a continuous function on $`(c,d)`$. Then there exists a set $`𝒢`$ of non-overlapping subtrees of $`K`$ with $`\omega (X)\epsilon `$ for $`X𝒢`$ and

$$\mathrm{\#}𝒢N_\epsilon (K)3\mathrm{\#}E(K).$$
(3. 11)
Proof. Let $`S_\epsilon (K)`$ and $`\mathrm{\#}=N_\epsilon (K)`$. For $`(c,d)E(K)`$ define $`𝒦:=\{X:X,|X(c,d)|>0\}`$ to be such that $`\mathrm{\#}𝒦>3`$. Set $`𝒦=\{X_1,\mathrm{},X_n\}`$, where $`n=\mathrm{\#}𝒦`$ and $`X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_n`$, where $`XY`$ means that $`xy`$ for all $`xX,yY`$. Then $`X_i=(a_i,b_i)(c,d)`$ for $`1<i<n`$. By the continuity of $`\omega `$ on $`(c,d)`$ and the minimality of $`\mathrm{\#}`$, there exists $`b_2^{}(b_2,b_3)`$ such that $`\omega (a_2,b_2^{})=\epsilon `$. It follows that there are non-overlapping sub-intervals $`X_2^{},\mathrm{},X_k^{}`$ of $`(c,d)`$, where $`k=n2`$, for which $`\omega (X_j^{})=\epsilon `$. The lemma follows from this.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 3.11

Let $`K`$ be a subtree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We denote by $`𝒫(K)`$ the set of partitions $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i:i=1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ of $`K`$ (i.e $`_{i=1}^n\mathrm{\Gamma }_i=K`$) by subtrees $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ of $`K`$ such that $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_j|=0`$ for $`ij`$. For a given $`\epsilon >0`$ we define

$`N(K,\epsilon )N(K,\epsilon ,u,v):=\mathrm{min}\{n:`$ $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i:i=1,\mathrm{},n\}𝒫(K)`$
$`\text{and }A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i,u,v)\epsilon \};`$
$`M(K,\epsilon )M(K,\epsilon ,u,v):=`$ $`\mathrm{max}\{m:\text{ non-overlapping subtrees }\mathrm{\Gamma }_iK,`$
$`i=1,\mathrm{},m,\text{ such that }A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i,u,v)>\epsilon \}.`$
Note that, with $`\omega ()=A()`$, $`M_\epsilon (\mathrm{\Gamma })M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )+1`$.

Hereafter we shall write $`T,T_K`$ for $`T_a,T_{a,K}`$ respectively, unless there is a possibility of confusion. The following lemma will yield a one-dimensional approximation to $`T`$ on a subtree $`K`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We recall the notation

$$\mu (K)=_K𝑑\mu ,d\mu =v^pdx.$$

###### Lemma 3.12

Let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`vL^p(K)`$, $`1p\mathrm{}`$, with $`\mu (K)0`$. Then there exists $`w_K\{L^p(K;d\mu )\}^{}`$ (in case $`p=\mathrm{}`$, $`w_K`$ is also from $`\{L^{\mathrm{}}(K)\}^{}`$ ) such that:

$$w_K(1)=1,$$

$$w_K_{\{L^p(K,d\mu )\}^{}}=\frac{1}{v_{p,K}},(w_K_{\{L^{\mathrm{}}(K)\}^{}}=1\text{ for }p=\mathrm{})$$

and

$$\underset{c𝐂}{inf}(\phi c)v_{p,K}(\phi w_K(\phi ))v_{p,K}2\underset{c𝐂}{inf}(\phi c)v_{p,K}$$
(3. 12)
for all $`\phi L^p(K,d\mu )`$. In the case $`p=2`$

$$\underset{c𝐂}{inf}(\phi c)v_{L^p(K)}=(\phi w_K(\phi ))v_{L^p(K)}$$
(3. 13)
where

$$w_K(\phi )=\frac{1}{\mu (K)}_K\phi 𝑑\mu .$$

Proof. Define the linear function $`w`$ on the constants in $`L^p(K,d\mu )`$ with $`w(c.1)=c`$. Then $`w(1)=1`$ and $`w^p=1/\mu (K)`$ for $`1p<\mathrm{}`$ while $`w=1`$ when $`p=\mathrm{}`$. The existence of $`w_K`$ follows by the Hahn-Banach theorem, and (3.4) is immediate. The case $`p=2`$ is obvious. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 3.13

For $`1p<\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(0,\mathrm{})`$ the choice $`w_K(\phi )=\frac{1}{\mu (K)}_K\phi 𝑑\mu `$ is appropriate, and was that used in . In  Lemma 2.4, when $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(a,b)`$, $`w_K`$ was defined as the limit along a filter base of subsets $`w_\beta `$ of the unit ball in $`\{L^{\mathrm{}}(K)\}^{}`$ defined by

$$w_\gamma (\phi ):=\frac{1}{|A_\gamma |}_{A_\gamma }\phi (x)𝑑x,\phi L^{\mathrm{}}(K).$$

###### Lemma 3.14

Let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma },aK,1<p\mathrm{}`$, and suppose that $`T_{a,K}`$ is compact. Then

$$A(K)=T_{a,K}v\varpi |L^p(K)L^p(K),$$

where $`\varpi `$ is the bounded linear functional

$$\varpi (f)=_a^bfu$$

and $`bK`$ is such that $`A(K)=T_{b,K}|L^p(K)L^p(K)`$.

Proof. We know from Theorem 3.8 that there exists a $`bK`$ such that

$$A(K,u,v)=T_{b,K}|L^p(K)L^p(K)=T_{b,K}U|L^p(K)L^p(K),$$

where $`U`$ is the linear isometry defined in the proof of Lemma 3.2, and with respect to which

$$T_{b,K}f=v\chi _K_b^afu\chi _K+T_{a,K}Uf.$$

Thus, if we define

$$Pf(x)=v(x)\chi _K(x)_a^bUfu\chi _K,$$

we have

$$T_{a,K}P|L^p(K)L^p(K)=A(K,u,v),$$

and the lemma follows.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.15

Let $`\epsilon >0`$, $`1p\mathrm{}`$ and let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. If $`N:=N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)<\mathrm{}`$ then

$$a_{N+1}(T_K)\gamma _p\epsilon ,$$

where $`\gamma _p=2`$ when $`p2`$ and $`\gamma _2=1`$.

Proof. Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\}_1^N`$ be the partition of $`K`$ which defines $`N:=N(K,\epsilon ,v,u)`$ in Definition 3.11 and set $`Pf=_{i=1}^NP_if`$ where

$$P_if(x):=\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}(x)v(x)\left[_a^{a_i}uf+w_i\left(_{a_i}^xuf\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}\right)\right],$$

$`T_KT_{a,K},a_i`$ is the point in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ nearest $`a`$ and $`w_iw_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}`$ is the linear function from Lemma 3.12. Then $`rankPN`$ and, on using Lemma 3.12, and setting $`T_iT_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}`$,

$`(T_KP)f_{p,K}^p`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(T_KPf)_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}^p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}T_iw_i\left({\displaystyle _{a_i}^{}}uf\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}𝑑t\right)v()_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}^p`$
$``$ $`\gamma _p^p\left(\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},N}{\mathrm{max}}A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i,u,v)\right)^pf_{p,K}^p`$
$``$ $`(\gamma _p\epsilon )^pf_{p,K}^p,`$
whence the lemma.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.16

Let $`1<p\mathrm{},\epsilon >0,`$ and suppose that $`T_K`$ is compact. Then, with $`N=N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)<\mathrm{}`$,

$$a_{N+1}(T_K)\epsilon .$$

Proof. The same argument as in Lemma 3.15 applies but with

$$P_if(x)=\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}(x)v(x)\left[_a^{a_i}uf+\varpi _i\left(_{a_i}^{b_i}uf\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}\right)\right],$$

where $`\varpi _i,b_i`$ are as in Lemma 3.14 corresponding to $`K=\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.17

Let $`\epsilon >0`$, $`1p\mathrm{}`$ and let $`K`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i;i=1,\mathrm{},M\}`$ be a set of non-overlapping subtrees of $`K`$ such that $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i)\epsilon `$ for all $`1iM`$. Then

$$a_M(T_K)\epsilon .$$

Proof. Let $`\lambda (0,1).`$ From the definition of $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i)`$ we know that for $`i=1,\mathrm{},M`$ there exist $`\varphi _iL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }),\varphi _i_p=1`$, with support in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ such that

$$\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}T_K\varphi _i\alpha v_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}>\lambda A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i)\lambda \epsilon .$$

Let $`P:L^p(K)L^p(K)`$ be bounded with $`rank(P)<M`$. Then, there are constants $`\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _M`$ not all zero, such that

$$P\varphi =0,\varphi :=\underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}\lambda _i\varphi _i.$$

Then, noting that the following summation is over $`\lambda _i0`$, and denoting by $`a_i`$ the point of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ nearest $`a`$, where $`T_K=T_{a,K}`$,

$`a_M^p\varphi _{p,K}^p`$ $``$ $`T_K\varphi P\varphi _{p,K}^p=T_K\varphi _{p,K}^p={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}}(T_K\varphi )\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}_{p,K}^p`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}(x)v(x)({\displaystyle _{a_i}^x}\lambda _i\varphi _i(t)u(t)\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}(t)dt`$
$`+{\displaystyle _a^{a_i}}\varphi (t)u(t)dt)^p_{p,K}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\left(T_K\varphi _i(x)+v(x){\displaystyle \frac{\eta _i}{\lambda _i}}\right)\lambda _i_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}^p,`$
$`\text{where }\eta _i:={\displaystyle _a^{a_i}}\varphi (t)u(t)𝑑t,`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}(T_K\varphi _i(x)v(x)\alpha )_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}^p|\lambda _i|^p`$
$``$ $`(\lambda \epsilon )^p{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\varphi _i_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}^p|\lambda _i|^p(\lambda \epsilon )^p\varphi _{p,K}^p.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 3.18

Let $`1p\mathrm{},\epsilon >0`$ and $`N=N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)<\mathrm{}`$(see Definition 3.11). Then

$$a_{N+1}(T)\gamma _p\epsilon $$

where $`\gamma _p=2`$ when $`p2`$ and $`\gamma _2=1`$, and

$$a_{[\frac{N}{3}]1}(T)>\epsilon .$$

The measure of non-compactness of $`T,\beta (T)`$, satisfies

$$\beta (T):=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}a_n(T)inf\{\epsilon :N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)<\mathrm{}\},$$

where the symbol $``$ means that the quotient of the two sides lies between positive constants. Hence, $`T`$ is compact if and only if $`N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`\epsilon >0`$. If $`T`$ is compact, $`\gamma _p=1`$ for $`1<p\mathrm{}`$.

Proof. The first inequality follows from Lemma 3.15. The second inequality follows from Lemmas 3.9 and 3.17 on putting $`w():=A()`$. The two inequalities imply the result about the measure of non-compactness, and hence the compactness, of $`T`$. The last statement is a consequence of Lemma 3.16.$`\mathrm{}`$

From Lemmas 3.10, 3.16, 3.17 and 3.18 with $`w(X):=A(X)`$ we derive

###### Lemma 3.19

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$, $`\epsilon >0`$, and let $`K`$ be a compact tree. Then

$$a_{N+1}(T_K)\epsilon $$

and

$$a_{M1}(T_K)>\epsilon ,$$

where $`N=N(K,\epsilon ,u,v),and`$ $`MN3\mathrm{\#}E(K).`$

Since, by Lemma 3.2, $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_a)`$ is independent of $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the approximation numbers are independent of $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Note that the above proof of Lemma 3.19 requires $`A(c,.)`$ to be continuous (see Lemma 3.10). This is not true for $`p=1`$ or $`\mathrm{}`$.

## 4 Local properties of $`A`$

In this section we establish properties of the function $`A`$ in Definition 3.1 which will be needed for the local asymptotic results in the next section.

###### Lemma 4.1

Let $`u,v`$ be constants over a real interval $`I=(a_1,b_1)`$ and $`1p\mathrm{}`$. Then $`A(I,u,v)=|v||u||I|\alpha _p`$, where $`\alpha _p=A((0,1),1,1)`$.

Proof. We have

$`A(I,u,v)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{f_{p,I}1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}v\left({\displaystyle _{a_1}^x}uf(t)𝑑t\alpha \right)_{p,I}`$
$`=`$ $`|v||u|\underset{f_{p,I}1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}{\displaystyle _{a_1}^x}f(t)𝑑t\alpha _{p,I}`$
$`=`$ $`|v||u||I|\underset{f_{p,(0,1)}1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}{\displaystyle _0^x}f(t)𝑑t\alpha _{p,(0,1)}`$
$`=`$ $`|v||u||I|A((0,1),1,1).`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

Note that $`\alpha _1=\alpha _{\mathrm{}}=1/2`$ and $`\alpha _2=1/\pi `$.

###### Lemma 4.2

Let $`1p\mathrm{}`$, $`u_1,u_2L^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then

$$|A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u_1,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u_2,v)|v_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }}u_1u_2_{p^{},\mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$

Proof. We have

$`A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u_1,v)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}v(x)\left({\displaystyle _a^x}(u_1(t)u_2(t)+u_2(t))f(t)𝑑t\alpha \right)_p`$
$``$ $`\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}[v(x){\displaystyle _a^x}(u_1(t)u_2(t))f(t)dt_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$
$`+`$ $`v(x)({\displaystyle _a^x}u_2(t)f(t)dt\alpha )_p]`$
$``$ $`\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}\left[v_pu_1u_2_p^{}+v(x)\left({\displaystyle _{a_1}^x}u_2(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha \right)_p\right]`$
$``$ $`v_pu_1u_2_p^{}+A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u_2,v).`$
The same holds with $`u_1,u_2`$ interchanged. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.3

Let $`1p\mathrm{}`$, $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, and $`v_1,v_2L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then

$$|A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u,v_1)A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u,v_2)|2v_1v_2_pu_p^{}.$$

Proof. We have

$`A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u,v_1)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}v_1(x)\left[{\displaystyle _a^x}u(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha \right]_p`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{|\alpha |u_p^{}f_p}{inf}v_1(x)\left[{\displaystyle _a^x}u(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha \right]_p.`$
Since

$$v_1(x)[_a^xu(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha ]_pv_1v_2_pu_p^{}f_p+(v_1v_2)\alpha _p+v_2[_a^xu(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha ]_p$$

it follows that

$`A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u,v_1)`$ $``$ $`2v_1v_2_pu_p^{}+\underset{f_p=1}{sup}\underset{|\alpha |u_p^{}}{inf}v_2(x)\left[{\displaystyle _a^x}u(t)f(t)𝑑t\alpha \right]_p`$
$`=`$ $`2v_1v_2_pu_p^{}+A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u,v_2).`$
Similarly with $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$ interchanged. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.4

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$ and suppose that $`K_1,K_2,K_1K_2`$, are compact subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then

$$|A(K_1)A(K_2)|0\text{ as }|K_2K_1|0$$

Proof. We see that $`A(K_1)=A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u\chi _{K_1},v\chi _{K_1})`$ and $`A(K_2)=A(\mathrm{\Gamma },u\chi _{K_2},v\chi _{K_2}).`$ The lemma then follows from Lemmas 4.2 and 4.3.$`\mathrm{}`$

In order to treat the cases $`p=1,\mathrm{}`$ we need the following terminology.

###### Definition 4.5

Let $`uL^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }).`$ Then

$$u_s:=\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}u\chi _{B(t,\epsilon )}_{\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Gamma }}$$

where $`B(t,\epsilon )`$ is the ball center $`t`$, radius $`\epsilon `$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Definition 4.6

Let $`g`$ be a function defined on a real interval $`I`$. Then

$$g^{}(x):=inf\{t;g_{}(t)x\},$$

where $`g_{}(t):=|\{xI;g(x)t\}|.`$ The function $`g^{}`$ is the non–increasing rearrangement of $`g`$.

Note that since we have $``$ in the definitions above, $`g_{}`$ and $`g^{}`$ are left–continuous functions. For the case $`p=\mathrm{}`$ we have the following two lemmas.

###### Lemma 4.7

Let $`I`$ be a bounded interval, $`\gamma ,\delta 𝐑`$ with $`\delta v_s(t)0`$ on $`I`$, and let $`p=\mathrm{}`$. Then

$$A(I;\gamma ,\delta )A(I;\gamma ,v_s)1/2|\gamma |(v_s\chi _I)^{}(t)t_{\mathrm{},(0,|I|)}.$$

Proof. See \[6; Lemma 4.5\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.8

Let $`I`$ be a bounded interval, $`\gamma ,\delta 𝐑`$ with $`\delta v_s(t)0`$ on $`I`$ and let $`p=\mathrm{}`$. Then for any $`\alpha >1`$

$$A(I;\gamma ,\delta )A(I;\gamma ,v_s)\frac{\alpha }{2}|\gamma |(\delta v_s(t))𝑑t+\frac{|\gamma |\delta |I|}{2\alpha }.$$

Proof. See \[6, Lemma 4.6\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

For the case $`p=1`$ we have

###### Lemma 4.9

Let $`I`$ be a bounded interval, $`\gamma ,\delta 𝐑`$ with $`\delta u_s(t)0`$ and $`\mathrm{}>u_1(t)u_2(t)0`$ on $`I`$. Then for $`p=1`$

$$A(I;u_1,\gamma )A(I;u_2,\gamma )$$

and

$$A(I;u_s,\gamma )1/4|\gamma |(u_s\chi _I)^{}(t)t_{\mathrm{},(0,|I|)}.$$

Proof. In the first inequality

$$A(I;u_1,\gamma )=|\gamma |\underset{f_{1,I}1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}\frac{_a^xu_1f\alpha _{1,I}}{f_{1,I}}.$$

For any $`f_2_{1,I}1`$ there exists $`f_1`$ such that $`f_1_{1,I}f_2_{1,I}1`$ and $`_a^xu_1f_1=_a^xu_2f_2`$. (Put $`f_1(t):=f_2(t)u_2(t)/u_1(t)`$ if $`u_1(t)0`$ and $`f_1(t):=f_2(t)`$ otherwise.) Then $`A(I;u_1,\gamma )A(I;u_2,\gamma )0`$.

In the second inequality, we have

$`A(I;u_s,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`|\gamma |\underset{f_{1,I}=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}{\displaystyle _a^x}u_sf\alpha _{1,I}`$
$``$ $`|\gamma |\underset{f_{1,I}=1}{sup}\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}{\displaystyle _a^x}\chi _{M_\beta }\beta f\alpha _{1,I}`$
where $`M_\beta :=\{yI;u_s(y)\beta \}`$ and $`0\beta u_s_{\mathrm{},I}`$. Put $`f=\delta _{x_\beta }`$, where $`x_\beta I=(a,b)`$ and $`|M_\beta (a,x_\beta )|=|M_\beta (x_\beta ,b)|=1/2|M_\beta |.`$ Then

$`A(I;u_s,\gamma )`$ $``$ $`|\gamma |\underset{\alpha 𝐂}{inf}\chi _{(x_\beta ,b)}\beta \alpha _{1,I}`$
$`=`$ $`|\gamma |\underset{\beta >\alpha >0}{inf}(\alpha (x_\beta a),(\beta \alpha )(bx_\beta ))`$
$`=`$ $`|\gamma ||\beta |\underset{1>\alpha >0}{inf}(\alpha (x_\beta a),(1\alpha )(bx_\beta ))`$
$`=`$ $`|\gamma ||\beta |{\displaystyle \frac{bx_\beta }{ba}}(x_\beta a)`$
$``$ $`|\gamma ||\beta ||{\displaystyle \frac{M_\beta }{2}}|{\displaystyle \frac{ba|M_\beta /2|}{ba}}`$
$``$ $`|\gamma ||\beta ||M_\beta |{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{ba(\frac{ba}{2})}{ba}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}|\gamma ||\beta ||M_\beta |.`$
Hence, we have for every $`0\beta u_s_{\mathrm{},I}`$

$$A(I;u_s,\gamma )|\gamma ||\beta ||M_\beta |\frac{1}{4}$$

and so

$$A(I;u_s,\gamma )|\gamma |\frac{1}{4}t(u_s\chi _I)^{}(t)_{\mathrm{},(0,|I|)}.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.10

Let $`I`$ be a bounded interval, $`\gamma ,\delta 𝐑`$ with $`\delta u_s(t)0`$ on $`I`$ and $`p=1`$. Then for any $`\alpha >1`$

$$A(I;\delta ,\gamma )A(I;u_s,\gamma )\frac{\alpha }{2}_I|\gamma |(\delta u_s(t))𝑑t+\frac{|\gamma |\delta |I|}{2\alpha }.$$

Proof. From Lemmas 4.9 and 4.1 we have

$$0A(I;\delta ,\gamma )A(I;u_s,\gamma )\frac{1}{2}|\gamma ||\delta ||I|\frac{1}{4}|\gamma |(u_s\chi _I)^{}(t)t_{\mathrm{}}.$$

The rest of the proof is similar to that in \[6, Lemma 4.6\] on using Lemma 4.8 instead of \[6, Lemma 4.5\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Local asymptotic results

5.1 Case $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 5.1

Let $`K`$ be a compact subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$. Then

$$\alpha _p_K|u||v|=\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon N(K,\epsilon ,u,v),$$

$$\alpha _p_K|u||v|=\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon M(K,\epsilon ,u,v),$$

where $`N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)`$ and $`M(K,\epsilon ,u,v)`$ are defined in Definition 3.11, and $`\alpha _p=A((0,1),1,1)`$ (see Lemma 4.1).

Proof. Since $`K`$ is a compact tree it has a bounded number of vertices, i.e. $`K`$ is a finite union of intervals. The argument in \[2, Theorem 5\], with A replacing the function $`L`$ there, continues to go through and yields the first equation of the lemma. The second identity follows from the first identity and Lemma 3.10 since $`A`$ is a continuous function on an interval. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 5.2

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$. Then

$$\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|\underset{\epsilon 0+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v).$$

Proof. There exist compact subtrees $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (i.e. $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_n|0`$) as $`n\mathrm{}`$. By Lemma 5.1 we have

$$\alpha _p_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_n}|u||v|=\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma }_n,\epsilon ,u,v)\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v),$$

whence the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 5.3

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$, $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then

$$\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|,$$

$$\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|.$$

Proof. Let $``$ be a maximal such that $`\mathrm{\#}=M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)`$ and $`𝒮`$ a minimal cover such that $`\mathrm{\#}𝒮=N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)`$.

Given $`\eta >0`$, choose a compact subtree $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`u\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K}_p^{}\eta `$ and $`v\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K}_p\eta `$.

Set

$`_1`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}:\mathrm{\Gamma }^{},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}K\},`$
$`_2`$ $`=`$ $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}:\mathrm{\Gamma }^{},\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }K\},`$
$`_3`$ $`=`$ $`\{_1_2\},`$
and similarly for $`𝒮_1,𝒮_2,𝒮_3`$ with respect to $`𝒮`$.

We know that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }K`$ is the union of disjoint connected components $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}\}`$ and $`\mathrm{\#}\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}\}\mathrm{\#}K`$. Also, if $`X_2𝒮_2`$ then $`X\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}`$ for some $`i`$. Thus $`\mathrm{\#}_2_iM(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{},\epsilon ).`$

Consider now the union of $`𝒮_1,𝒮_3`$ and those subtrees in the definition of the $`N(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{},\epsilon )`$. This covers $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and so

$$\mathrm{\#}𝒮_2\underset{i}{}N(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{},\epsilon )3\underset{i}{}M(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{},\epsilon )+3\mathrm{\#}K$$
(5. 14)
by Lemma 3.9. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j)`$ be the subtrees in the definition of $`M(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{},\epsilon )`$. Then

$$\epsilon \mathrm{\#}_2\underset{i,j}{}A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j))\underset{i,j}{}u_{p^{},\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j)}v_{p,\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j)}u\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K}_p^{}v\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K}_p\eta ^2.$$

Since $`\mathrm{\#}_1M(K,\epsilon )`$

$$M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )M(K,\epsilon )+\mathrm{\#}_2+\mathrm{\#}_3,$$

$$0<\epsilon [M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )M(K,\epsilon )]\epsilon (\mathrm{\#}_2+\mathrm{\#}_3)\eta ^2+\epsilon \mathrm{\#}K.$$

Then, by Lemma 5.1,

$$0\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim\; sup}\epsilon M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )\alpha _p_K|uv|\eta ^2.$$

Now let $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ($`\eta 0`$) to get

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim\; sup}\epsilon M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|uv|.$$

We get the same for $`lim\; inf`$ and so

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\epsilon M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|uv|.$$

Since $`N(K,\epsilon )+\mathrm{\#}𝒮_2+\mathrm{\#}𝒮_3N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ),`$

$$0N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )N(K,\epsilon )\mathrm{\#}𝒮_2+\mathrm{\#}𝒮_33\underset{i}{}M(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j),\epsilon )+3\mathrm{\#}K+\mathrm{\#}K$$

by (5.1). Hence, as before,

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|uv|.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 5.4

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$, $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}na_n(T)=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|.$$

Proof. Note that the application of Theorem 3.18 to Theorem 5.3 implies that $`lim_n\mathrm{}a_n(T)=0`$ and hence that $`T`$ is compact.

Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}_{l=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be as in the proof of Lemma 5.2, and set $`T_l=T_{a,\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}`$ for some $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$ is compact then from Lemma 3.19 and Theorem 5.1 we have

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}na_n(T_l)=\alpha _p_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}|u||v|.$$

An operator of rank $`<n`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$ can be considered as the restriction to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$ of such an operator on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and also $`T|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })T_l|L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)L^p(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$ if $`T=T_a`$ and $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$. It follows that $`a_n(T)a_n(T_l)`$ and so

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}na_n(T)\alpha _p_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}|u||v|.$$

But, we know from Lemma 5.3 that

$$\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|.$$

and so, by Lemma 3.16

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}na_n(T)\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|.$$

Hence the corollary is proved.$`\mathrm{}`$

5.2 The cases $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`p=1`$.

The analogies of Lemma 5.1 for $`p=\mathrm{}`$ and $`p=1`$ are, respectively

###### Lemma 5.5

Let $`K`$ be a compact subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ and $`p=\mathrm{}`$. Then

$$\frac{1}{2}_K|u||v_s|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{3}{2}_K|u||v_s|$$

where $`v_s`$ is defined in Definition 5.4.

###### Lemma 5.6

Let $`K`$ be a compact subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`p=1`$. Then

$$\frac{1}{2}_K|u_s||v|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(K,\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{3}{2}_K|u_s||v|.$$

Both lemmas follow from the results for intervals in  since $`K`$ is a finite union of intervals. Lemmas 5.5 and 5.6 yield, as in Lemma 5.2,

###### Lemma 5.7

For $`p=\mathrm{}`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)$$

and for $`p=1`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_s||v|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v).$$

###### Lemma 5.8

Let $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then for $`p=\mathrm{}`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{3}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|$$

and for $`p=1`$

$$\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_s||v|\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; inf}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{3}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_s||v|.$$

Proof. Let $`p=\mathrm{}`$. We need only prove the last inequality. Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}_{l=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be compact subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which are such that

$$\left|_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}|u||v_s|\right|\frac{1}{l}$$

and

$$u_{1,\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}\frac{1}{l}.$$

Fix $`l𝐍`$. There exist intervals $`W(j)`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$ and step functions $`u_n,v_n`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$,

$$u_n=\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\xi _j\chi _{W(j)},v_n=\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}\eta _j\chi _{W(j)},$$

which are such that

$$uu_n_{1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}<\frac{1}{n},_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}|u(t)|(v_n(t)v_s(t))dt<\frac{1}{n}$$

and $`v_s_{\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Gamma }}v_n(t)v_s(t)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$; cf \[6, Theorem 4.7\].

Let $`M:=M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )`$ and let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^M\}_{i=1}^M`$ be a maximal set of subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the definition of $`M`$ (see Definition 3.11). Then, because $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l`$ is a compact subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we have $`M2m\mathrm{\#}V(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\mathrm{\#}𝐊,`$ where

$$𝐊:=\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_j:\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M\}_{k=1}^M,\text{ and there exists }i\text{ such that }W(i)\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\text{ or }\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}.$$

On using Lemmas 4.6 and 4.7, we have

$`\epsilon (M2m`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\#}V(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)\mathrm{\#}\mathrm{\Gamma }_l){\displaystyle }_{k𝐊}A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u,v)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k𝐊}{}}(A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v_n)+[A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v)]`$
$`+[A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v_n)])`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}}|\xi _j||\eta _j||W(j)|`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{M}{}}}\left(uu_n_{1,\mathrm{\Gamma }_j^M}v_{\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Gamma }_J^M}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k𝐊;i,W(i)\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M}{}}\left[A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v_n)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k𝐊;\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}{}}\left[A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,u_n,v_n)\right]`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}|\xi _j||\eta _j||W(j)|+uu_n_1v_{\mathrm{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{kK;i,W(i)\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M}}(v_nv_s)|\xi _i|𝑑t+{\displaystyle \frac{|\xi _i||\eta _i|}{2\alpha }}|\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M|\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k𝐊,\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}{}}\left[A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,0,v)A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_k^M,0,0)\right]`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}|\xi _j||\eta _j||W(j)|+({\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l}})v_s_{\mathrm{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}(v_nv_s)|u_n|𝑑t`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\alpha }}{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}|u_n||v_n|𝑑t`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}|u||v_s|+c\left(\alpha {\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha }}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{l}}\right)`$
for some constant $`c`$ independent on $`\epsilon `$. We therefore conclude that

$$\frac{1}{3}\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|+K(\alpha \frac{1}{n}+\frac{1}{\alpha }),$$

whence

$$\frac{1}{3}\underset{\epsilon 0_+}{lim\; sup}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,u,v)\frac{1}{2}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|.$$

The case $`p=1`$ is similar. $`\mathrm{}`$

From Lemmas 5.8 and 3.18 we derive

###### Lemma 5.9

Let $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`vL^p(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Then for $`p=\mathrm{}`$

$$\frac{1}{6}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}na_n(T)\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}na_n(T)3_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v_s|$$

and for $`p=1`$

$$\frac{1}{6}_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_s||v|\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}na_n(T)\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}na_n(T)3_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u_s||v|.$$

## 6 The main results for $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$.

We suppose throughout this section that $`T:=T_a`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:=\mathrm{\Gamma }_a`$ for some $`a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Also we write $`T_K`$ for $`T|L^p(K)L^p(K)`$, for any $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

With $`U(x):=_a^x|u(t)|^p^{}𝑑t`$ $`(x\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ we define $`Z_k`$ to be the closure of

$$\{x:x\mathrm{\Gamma },2^{\frac{kp^{}}{p}}U(x)<2^{\frac{(k+1)p^{}}{p}}\}.$$
(6. 15)
Here $`k`$ may be any integer if $`uL_{loc}^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })L^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, while, if $`uL^p^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, $`2^ku_{p^{},\mathrm{\Gamma }}^p`$; we refer to these values of $`k`$ as the admissible values.

We have that $`Z_k=_{i=1}^{n_k}Z_{k,i}`$, where the $`Z_{k,i}`$ are the connected components of $`Z_k`$. Corresponding to each admissible $`k`$ we set

$$\sigma _{k,i}^p:=2^k\mu (Z_{k,i})\text{ for }i\{1,\mathrm{},n_k\}$$
(6. 16)
and

$$\sigma _k^p:=2^k\mu (Z_k).$$
(6. 17)
For non–admissible $`k`$ we set $`\sigma _k=0`$. We also set $`\sigma _{k,i}=0`$ for $`i\{1,\mathrm{},n_k\}`$.

Let

$$B_{k,i}:=\mathrm{\#}Z_{k,i}1;$$
(6. 18)
that is, $`B_{k,i}`$ is the number of boundary points of $`Z_{k,i}`$ excluding its root.

###### Lemma 6.1

$$\underset{k𝐙}{sup}\underset{1jn_k}{\mathrm{max}}\sigma _{k,i}T.$$
(6. 19)
Proof. This follows from \[7, Proposition 5.1\], which asserts that

$$\underset{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}{sup}u\chi _{(a,x)}_p^{}v\chi _{(a,x)^c}_pT,$$

where $`(a,x)^c=\{y\mathrm{\Gamma }:x_ay\}`$. For then, by (6. 15),

$`T`$ $``$ $`\underset{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}{sup}U(x)^{1/p^{}}\left({\displaystyle _{yx}}|v(y)|^p𝑑y\right)^{1/p}`$
$``$ $`\underset{k,i}{sup}2^{k/p}\mu (Z_{k,i})^{1/p}`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{k,i}{sup}\sigma _{k,i}.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.2

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ be a subtree of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }_a`$ and $`b=b(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ the nearest point of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ to $`a`$. Then, for any $`c>4`$, there exist $`X=X(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})𝐈_b(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ and $`k^{}=k^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})𝐙`$ such that, with $`T^{}=T_\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ and $`Y=Y(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}X,`$

$$T^{}2^{2/p}c\{\underset{iS}{}2^k^{}\mu (YZ_{k^{},i})\}^{1/p},$$
(6. 20)
where $`S=S(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})=\{i:\mu (YZ_{k^{},i})>0\}.`$

Proof. From Theorem 2.4, for $`c>4`$, there exists $`X𝐈_b(\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$ such that

$`T^{}`$ $``$ $`c{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (Y)^{1/p}}{\alpha _X}}`$
$``$ $`c\underset{tX\{b\}}{\mathrm{min}}({\displaystyle _b^t}|u|^p^{}dx)^{1/p^{}}\mu (Y)^{1/p}`$
$``$ $`c\underset{tX\{b\}}{\mathrm{min}}[U(t)U(b)]^{1/p^{}}[{\displaystyle \underset{i,k}{}}\mu (YZ_{k,i})]^{1/p}`$
$``$ $`c\underset{t(X\{b\})Z_{\gamma _o}}{\mathrm{min}}[U(t)U(b)]^{1/p^{}}[{\displaystyle \underset{i,k}{}}\mu (YZ_{k,i})]^{1/p},`$
where $`\gamma _0=\mathrm{min}\{k:\mu (YZ_k)>0\}`$. Since $`\mu (\mathrm{\Gamma })<\mathrm{}`$, we may assume that $`Y`$ is compact and hence

$$\underset{k\gamma _0}{\mathrm{max}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k}{}}2^k\mu (YZ_{k,i})$$

is attained, and so

$`{\displaystyle \underset{k,i}{}}\mu (YZ_{k,i})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k\gamma _0}{}}2^k{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k}{}}}2^k\mu (YZ_{k,i})`$
$``$ $`2^{1\gamma _0}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k^{}}{}}}2^k^{}\mu (YZ_{k^{},i})`$
say, for some $`k^{}\gamma _0.`$ Hence

$$T^{}c[2^{(\gamma _0+1)p^{}/p}2^{\gamma _0p^{}/p}]^{1/p^{}}[2^{1\gamma _0}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k^{}}{}}2^k^{}\mu (YZ_{k^{},i})]^{1/p},$$

whence (6. 20). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.3

Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\}_{}`$ be a finite set of non-overlapping subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and set $`T_l=T_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l}`$. Then,

$$\underset{l}{}T_l^q(2^{2/p+2})^q\underset{(k,i)\eta }{}B_{k,i}^{q/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}^q\text{ if }1qp$$
(6. 21)
and

$$\underset{l}{}T_l^q(2^{2/p+2})^q\underset{k\eta _0}{}\sigma _k^q\text{ if }pq<\mathrm{},$$
(6. 22)
where $`\eta `$ and $`\eta _0`$ are finite sets.

Proof. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\lambda \{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}_{}`$, and, in the notation of Lemma 6.2, set $`b_l=b(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l),`$ $`k_l=k^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$, $`Y_l=Y(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$ and $`S_l=S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)`$. There are two cases to consider for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\lambda `$:

$`b_\lambda Z_{k_\lambda }.`$ In this case $`b_\lambda Z_{k_\lambda ,i_\lambda },`$ $`S_\lambda =S(\mathrm{\Gamma }_\lambda )=\{i_\lambda \}`$ and, for any $`c>4`$,

$$T_\lambda (2^{2/p}c)\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i_\lambda }.$$

$`b_\lambda Z_{k_\lambda }.`$ Denote by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the subset of $``$ which is such that for $`l\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`b_lZ_{k_\lambda ,i_l}`$ for some unique $`i_lS_\lambda `$ and so $`S_l=\{i_l\}`$.

Set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_i=\{l\mathrm{\Lambda }:i_l=i\}.`$ Then, by (6. 20), for $`q1`$,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}T_l^q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}T_l^q`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}\left\{2^{k_\lambda }\mu (Y_łZ_{k_\lambda ,i})\right\}^{q/p}`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}\left[2^{k_\lambda }\mu (Y_łZ_{k_\lambda ,i})\right]^{1/p}\right\}^q`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\left[\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}2^{k_\lambda }\mu (Y_łZ_{k_\lambda ,i})\right\}^{1/p}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}1\right\}^{1/p^{}}\right]^q`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\left(B_{k_\lambda ,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}\right)^q.`$ (6. 24)
Also in case $`(ii)`$, from (6. 20),

$$T_\lambda (2^{2/p}c)(\underset{iS_\lambda }{}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}^p)^{1/p}.$$

Hence, if $`1qp`$,

$`T_\lambda ^q`$ $``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q({\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}^q)`$ (6. 25)
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\left(B_{k_\lambda ,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}\right)^q.`$
If $`qp`$, then from (6),

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}}T_l^q`$ $``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{l\mathrm{\Lambda }_i}{}}2^{k_\lambda }\mu (Y_lZ_{k_\lambda ,i})\right\}^{q/p}`$ (6. 26)
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q{\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}^q`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q\left({\displaystyle \underset{iS_\lambda }{}}\sigma _{k_\lambda ,i}^p\right)^{q/p}`$
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q\sigma _{k_\lambda }^q.`$
Also, by (6. 20),

$`T_\lambda ^q`$ $``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{lS_\lambda }{}}2^{k_\lambda }\mu (Y_\lambda Z_{k_\lambda ,i})\right\}^{q/p}`$ (6. 27)
$``$ $`(2^{2/p}c)^q\sigma _{k_\lambda }^q.`$
The lemma follows from (6. 24)-(6. 27) since $`c>4`$ is arbitrary. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 6.4

For $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$, let $`u,v`$ satisfy (2. 5) and suppose that $`B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}l^1(𝐙\times 𝐍)`$. Then

$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\epsilon M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|,$$
(6. 28)
$$\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\epsilon N(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon ,)=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|,$$
(6. 29)
and

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}na_n(T)=\alpha _p_\mathrm{\Gamma }|u||v|.$$
(6. 30)
Proof. Given $`\eta >0`$, we choose $`l`$ to be such that $`_{kl}_{i=1}^{n_k}B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}\eta `$ and set $`K=_{kl}Z_k`$. Then, in the notation of the proof of Theorem 5.3, we have by Corollary 3.3, that

$`\epsilon \mathrm{\#}_2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{(j)}){\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}T_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}(j)}`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle \underset{kl}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k}{}}}B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}`$
for some positive constant $`c`$, by Lemma 6.3 with $`q=1`$. The proofs of the first two identities then follow that of Theorem 5.3. Theorem 3.18 and Lemma 3.16 complete the proof.

Note that the convergence of $`_{k𝐙}_{i=1}^{n_k}B_{k,i}^p^{}\sigma _{k,i}<\mathrm{}`$ implies that $`T`$ is compact. To see this, let $`K_j=_{kj}Z_k`$, and so

$`(T_{K_j}f)(x)`$ $`=`$ $`v(x)\chi _{K_j}(x){\displaystyle _a^x}f(t)u(t)\chi _{K_j}(t)𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`v(x)\chi _{K_j}(x){\displaystyle _a^x}f(t)u(t)𝑑t.`$
Then

$$(TT_{K_j})f(x)=v(x)\chi _{\mathrm{\Gamma }K_j}(x)_a^xf(t)u(t)𝑑t$$

and, by Lemma 6.2, for some $`k^{}>j`$

$`TT_{K_j}`$ $``$ $`2^{2/p}c\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{iS}{}}2^k^{}\mu (Z_{k^{},i})\right\}^{1/p}`$
$``$ $`2^{2/p}c{\displaystyle \underset{iS}{}}\sigma _{k^{},i}2^{2/p}c{\displaystyle \underset{iS}{}}B_{k^{},i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k^{},i}.`$
Thus $`TT_{K_j}0`$ as $`j\mathrm{}`$, and $`T`$ is compact since the $`T_{K_j}`$ are compact.$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 6.5

Let $`1<qp`$. Then, for some positive constant $`c`$,

$$\{a_n(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}cB_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}\text{ if }1<qp$$
(6. 31)
Proof: Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_l,l=1,2,\mathrm{},M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )`$ be a maximal set of subtrees of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ from the definition of $`M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )`$, so that $`A(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)>\epsilon `$. Then, from (6. 21) and Corollary 3.3, for $`1qp`$,

$$\epsilon ^qM(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )\underset{l}{}T_l^qcB_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}^q.$$

Since $`a_{3M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )+4}(T)2\epsilon `$ by Lemma 3.9 and Theorem 3.18, it follows that

$`\mathrm{\#}\{m:a_m(T)>t\}`$ $``$ $`3M(\mathrm{\Gamma },t/2)+4`$
$``$ $`cM(\mathrm{\Gamma },t/2)`$
for $`c7`$. Thus

$$\mathrm{\#}\{m:a_m(T)>t\}ct^qB_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}^q.$$
(6. 32)
We now proceed as in the proof of the Marcinkiewicz Interpolation Theorem (see ); we give the proof for completeness.

Define

$$v_1:=\{\begin{array}{cc}v\hfill & \text{ on }Z_{k,i}\text{ if }B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}t/2,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{ otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$

and set $`v_2=vv_1.`$ Denote $`T,\sigma _{k,i},`$ etc by $`T(v),\sigma _{k,i}(v)`$ to indicate the dependence on $`v`$, and set $`T^j=T(v_j),j=1,2.`$ Then, by \[3, Proposition II.2.2\],

$$a_{2n1}(T)a_n(T_1)+a_n(T_2)$$

and so

$$\{n:a_{2n1}(T)>t\}\{n:a_n(T_1)>t/2\}\{n:a_n(T_2)>t/2\}$$

and

$$\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_{2n1}(T)>t\}\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_n(T_1)>t/2\}+\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_n(T_2)>t/2\}.$$
(6. 33)
Set $`S_{k,i}=B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}`$, and let $`1<q<q_1`$. Then, on using (6. 32) and (6. 33),

$`\{a_{2n1}(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}`$ $`=`$ $`q{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}t^{q1}\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_{2n1}(T)>t\}𝑑t`$
$``$ $`cq{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}t^{q1}\left\{t^{q_1}{\displaystyle \underset{S_{k,i}t/2}{}}S_{k,i}^{q_1}+t^1{\displaystyle \underset{S_{k,i}>t/2}{}}S_{k,i}\right\}𝑑t`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle \underset{k,i}{}}S_{k,i}^q,`$
whence (6. 31), since $`a_n(T)`$ decreases with $`n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 6.6

Let $`q(p,\mathrm{})`$. Then, for some positive constant $`c`$,

$$\{a_n(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}c\{\sigma _k\}_{l^q(𝐙)}.$$
(6. 34)
Proof. Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}_1^{M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )}`$ be as in the proof of Theorem 6.5 and define

$$F_j=\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l:k^{}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_l)=k_j\}$$

in the notation of Lemma 6.2. Then, from the proof of Lemma 6.3, for $`q(p,\mathrm{}),`$

$`\epsilon ^p\mathrm{\#}F_j`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }_lF_j}{}}T_l^p`$
$``$ $`c^p\sigma _{k_j}^p.`$
Thus, with $`m_j=[c^p\sigma _{k_j}^p/\epsilon ^p],`$

$$M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{m=1}{\overset{m_j}{}}1\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\mathrm{\#}\{j:c\sigma _{k_j}>m^{1/p}\epsilon \}.$$

Hence

$`\{a_n(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}`$ $`=`$ $`q{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}t^{q1}\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_n(T)>t\}𝑑t`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}t^{q1}M(\mathrm{\Gamma },t/2)𝑑t`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}t^{q1}\mathrm{\#}\{j:\sigma _j>m^{1/p}t\}dt`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}m^{q/p}\mathrm{\#}\{j:\sigma _j>t\}t^{q1}dt`$
$``$ $`c\{\sigma _k\}_{l^q(𝐙)}.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

In the next theorem $`l_\omega ^q`$ denotes weak-$`l^q`$, that is, the space of sequences $`\{x_k\}`$ such that

$$\{x_k\}_{l_\omega ^q}:=\underset{t>0}{sup}\{t(\mathrm{\#}\{k:|x_k|>t\})^{1/q}\}<\mathrm{}.$$

###### Theorem 6.7

For some positive constant $`c`$,

$$\{a_n(T)\}_{l_\omega ^q(𝐍)}c\underset{i=1}{\overset{n_k}{}}B_{k,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k,i}_{l_\omega ^q(𝐙)}\text{ if }1<qp,$$
(6. 35)
and

$$\{a_n(T)\}_{l_\omega ^q(𝐍)}c\{\sigma _k\}_{l_\omega ^q(𝐙)}\text{ if }p<q<\mathrm{}.$$
(6. 36)
Proof. Let $`\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_l\}_1^{M(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon )},F_j`$ be as in the proof of Theorem 6.6. Then, from the proof of Lemma 6.3,

$`\epsilon \mathrm{\#}F_j`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }_lF_j}{}}T_l`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n_{k_j}}{}}}B_{k_j,i}^{1/p^{}}\sigma _{k_j,i}=:N_j`$
say. Thus

$`\epsilon ^q\mathrm{\#}\{n:a_n(T)>\epsilon \}`$ $``$ $`c\epsilon ^qM(\mathrm{\Gamma },\epsilon /2)`$
$``$ $`c\epsilon ^q{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{[N_j/\epsilon ]}{}}}1`$
$``$ $`c\epsilon ^q{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\mathrm{\#}\{j:N_j>m\epsilon \}`$
$``$ $`c{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}m^qt^q\mathrm{\#}\{j:N_j>t\}`$
and hence (6. 35). The proof of (6. 36) is similar, starting from

$$\epsilon ^p\mathrm{\#}F_jc\sigma _{k_j}^p.$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

Let us now suppose that the tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ satisfies the following condition:

$$B_{k,i}<B<\mathrm{}\text{for each admissible }k\text{ and }i.$$
(6. 37)
Then with this condition we can get lower estimates in Theorems 6.5 and 6.6.

We need the following result which is similar to \[2,Lemma 20\].

###### Lemma 6.8

Suppose that (6.10) is satisfied. Let $`S(\epsilon ):=\{(k,i):\sigma _{k,i}>\epsilon \}`$. If $`M+1/2\mathrm{\#}S(\epsilon )/4B`$, then $`a_M(T)>c\epsilon `$, where $`c`$ is an absolute constant.

Proof. It is sufficient to prove the result for $`S(\epsilon )`$ finite, for this will imply the result when $`\mathrm{\#}S(\epsilon )=\mathrm{}`$. The elements of $`S(\epsilon )`$ fall into two subsets according as $`k`$ is odd or even. At least one of them, say $`S_1(\epsilon )`$, has cardinal at least half that of $`S(\epsilon )`$. Thus, we may suppose that $`\mathrm{\#}S_1(\epsilon )>B`$.

Denote by $`\zeta _{k,j}`$ the point of $`Z_{k,j}`$ nearest to $`a`$, and define $`n(x):=\mathrm{\#}\{(k,j):\zeta _{k,j}_ax,(k,j)S_1(\epsilon )\}`$. Let $`l`$ be a path in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ starting at $`a`$ and consisting of edges $`(x,y)`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`(x,y)`$ at each stage chosen so that $`n(y)`$ is as large as possible. Terminate the path at the point $`x=\zeta _{r,s}`$ at which $`n(x)=0`$. Define $`\xi l`$ by

$$\xi :=inf\{xl:n(x)=n(\zeta _{r1,j}),\zeta _{r1,j}l\},$$

( the infimum, which is being taken with respect to the total ordering on $`l`$ induced by $`_a`$, exists since $`n(a)>B`$ and $`n(\zeta _{r1,j})B`$ ). There are two possibilities : (i) $`\xi `$ may be a point $`\zeta _{k,j}`$, in which case define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1:=\{x:x_a\xi \}`$, or (ii) $`\xi `$ may be a vertex of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ joined by a path $`l_1`$ to a point $`\zeta _{m,n}_a\xi `$, where $`(m,n)S_1(\epsilon )`$. In the latter case we define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1:=\{x:x_ay,yll_1\}`$. Then, in both cases, the closure of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ is a subtree and so is its complement. Moreover, $`A(\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1})>c\epsilon `$, where $`c`$ is an absolute constant. For, in case (i), if $`b`$ is a point of $`l`$ with $`U(b)=2^{(r1/2)(p^{}/p)}`$ and $`T^1`$ is the restriction of $`T`$ to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$, then, in the notation of the discussion preceding Lemma 3.5,

$$T_{b,1}^1,T_{b,2}^1(2^{r(p^{}/p)}2^{(r1/2)(p^{}/p)})^{1/p^{}}(2^{r/p}\epsilon );$$

this follows from \[7, Proposition 5.1\] where it is shown that

$$T_a\underset{x\mathrm{\Gamma }}{sup}u\chi _(a,x)_p^{}v\chi _{(a,x)^c}_p.$$

In case (ii) a similar result holds if $`b`$ is a point of $`ll_1`$ with $`U(b)=2^{(t1/2)(p^{}/p)}`$ and $`t`$ the greater of $`r,m`$. The lower bound for $`A(\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }_1})`$ is then a consequence of Lemma 3.5. Note also that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ contains at most $`2B`$ elements of $`S_1(\epsilon )`$.

The result now follows by induction on $`\mathrm{\#}S(\epsilon )`$ and Lemma 3.17. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.9

Suppose that (6.10) is satisfied. Then, for all $`t>0`$,

$$\mathrm{\#}\{(k,i):\sigma _{k,i}>t\}4B\mathrm{\#}\{k𝐍:a_k(T)>ct\}+6B.$$

Proof. From Lemma 6.8,

$`\mathrm{\#}\{k𝐍:a_k(T)>ct\}`$ $``$ $`\left[\mathrm{\#}S(t)/4B1/2\right]`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{\#}S(t)/4B3/2,`$
whence the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.10

Suppose that (6.10) is satisfied. Then, for all $`q>0`$,

$$\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}^qc_1\{a_k(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}^q+c_2\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^{\mathrm{}}(𝐙\times 𝐍)}^q$$

Proof. Let $`\lambda =\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^{\mathrm{}}(𝐙\times 𝐍)}`$. Then, by Lemma 6.9,

$`\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}^q`$ $``$ $`q{\displaystyle _0^\lambda }t^{q1}\mathrm{\#}\{(k,i)𝐙\times 𝐍:\sigma _{k,i}>t\}𝑑t`$
$``$ $`4Bq{\displaystyle _0^\lambda }t^{q1}\mathrm{\#}\{k𝐍;a_k(T)>c\epsilon \}𝑑t+6B\lambda ^q`$
$``$ $`c_1\{a_k(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}^q+c_2\lambda ^q.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 6.11

Let $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$ and suppose that (6.10) is satisfied. Then, for any $`q>0`$, there exists a constant $`c>0`$ such that

$$\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}c\{a_k(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}.$$

Proof. By Lemma 6.1,

$$\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^{\mathrm{}}(𝐙\times 𝐍)}T=a_1(T)\{a_k(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}.$$

The result then follows from Lemma 6.10. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 6.12

(i) It follows from Theorem 6.5 and 6.11 that if (6. 37)is satisfied and $`1<qp`$, then

$$\{a_n(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}\{\sigma _{k,i}\}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}.$$

For $`q>p`$, we have from Theorems 6.11 and 6.6

$`c_1\sigma _{k_i}_{l^q(𝐙\times 𝐍)}`$ $``$ $`\{a_n(T)\}_{l^q(𝐍)}c_2\sigma _k_{l^q(𝐙)}`$ (6. 38)
$``$ $`\sigma _{k,i}_{l^p(𝐙\times 𝐍)}.`$
(ii) Naimark and Solomyak  take $`u=1`$, and in \[8,(4.8)\] they make the assumption that, for every edge $`y,zE(\mathrm{\Gamma }),`$

$$\mu _1|z|/|y|\mu _2,1<\mu _1\mu _2,$$
(6. 39)
where $`|y|,|z|`$ denote the lengths of the paths from the root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`y,z`$ respectively. Let $`y_jV(t),`$ $`j=0,1,\mathrm{},`$ and suppose that $`|y_0|2^k`$ and $`|y_1|2^k`$. Then (6. 39) implies that

$$|y_n|\mu _1^{n1}|y_1|\mu _1^{n1}2^k2^{k+1}$$

if $`n1+\mathrm{log}2/\mathrm{log}\mu _1`$. Hence, if each vertex has constant branching number $`b`$ (ie. degree $`b+1`$), then

$$B_{k,i}b^{[\mathrm{log}2/log\mu _1+1]}$$

and hence (6. 37) is satisfied.

(iii) Theorem 4.1 in  is valid under assumptions made on a sequence $`\{\eta _j\}`$ which is defined as follows : for any partition $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ into a countable union of non-overlapping segments $`I_j=y_j,z_j`$,

$$\eta _j:=|z_j|_{I_j}v^2𝑑t.$$

Note that in our notation, the case $`p=2,u=1`$ is what is considered in . It is proved in \[9, Theorem 4.1 (i)\] that (6.15) for $`p=2`$ holds if, for some $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$, $`\{\eta _j\}l_{1/2}.`$

Choose $`\mathrm{\Xi }=_{k𝐍}\mathrm{\Xi }_k`$, where $`\mathrm{\Xi }_k`$ is a partition of $`Z_k`$. Then,

$`\sigma _{k,j}^2`$ $`=`$ $`2^k{\displaystyle \underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}}{\displaystyle _{I_s}}v^2𝑑t{\displaystyle \underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}}\eta _s`$
$``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}}\eta _s^{1/2}\right)^2`$
and

$$\underset{k,j}{}\sigma _{k,j}\underset{s}{}\eta _s^{1/2}.$$

Thus, if (6. 37) is satisfied,

$$\underset{k,j}{}B_{k,j}^{1/2}\sigma _{k,j}B^{1/2}\underset{s}{}\eta _s^{1/2}.$$
(6. 40)
In the reverse directions we have

$$\sigma _{k,j}^21/2\underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}\eta _s$$

and so

$$\sigma _{k,j}2^{1/2}(\underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}\eta _s^{1/2})(\underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}1)^{1/2}.$$

Therefore

$$B_{k,j}^{1/2}\sigma _{k,j}2^{1/2}\left(\frac{B_{k,j}}{_{I_sZ_{k,j}}1}\right)^{1/2}\underset{I_sZ_{k,j}}{}\eta _s^{1/2}.$$

If

$$\underset{k,j}{inf}\left(\frac{B_{k,j}}{_{I_sZ_{k,j}}1}\right)=:c>0$$
(6. 41)
then

$$\underset{k,j}{}B_{k,j}^{1/2}\sigma _{k,j}(c/2)^{1/2}\underset{s}{}\eta _s^{1/2}.$$
(6. 42)
The condition (6. 41) is satisfied if the tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is, in the terminology of , $`b`$ regular of type $`(b,2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ consists of edges of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This means that every vertex of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has fixed branching number $`b`$, and any edge $`y,z`$ of the k-th generation is such that $`|y|=2^k,|z|=2^{k+1}.`$ Hence, in this case, (6. 41) is satisfied with $`c=1`$.

Acknowledgment. J. Lang wishes to record his gratitude to the Royal Society and NATO for support to visit the School of Mathematics at Cardiff during 1997/8, under their Postdoctoral Fellowship programmes. He also thanks the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic for partial support under grants 201/96/0431 and 201/98/P017.

REFERENCES

1. D.E.Edmunds, W.D.Evans and D.J.Harris. Approximation numbers of certain Volterra integral operators. J. London Math. Soc. (2) 37 (1988), 471–489.
2. D.E.Edmunds, W.D.Evans and D.J.Harris. Two–sided estimates of the approximation numbers of certain Volterra integral operators. Studia Math. 124 (1) (1997), 59–80.
3. D.E.Edmunds and W.D.Evans, Spectral Theory and Differential Operators, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 1987.
4. D.E.Edmunds, P.Gurka and L.Pick. Compactness of Hardy–type integral operators in weighted Banach function spaces. Studia Math. 109 (1) (1994), 73–90.
5. W.D.Evans and D.J.Harris, Fractals, trees and the Neumann Laplacian. Math. Ann. 296 (1993), 493-527.
6. W.D.Evans, D.J.Harris and J.Lang, Two–sided estimates for the approximation numbers of Hardy–type operators in $`L^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`L^1`$. Studia Math. 130 (2) (1998), 171-192.
7. Evans, W.D.; Harris, D.J.; Pick, L. Weighted Hardy and Poincar inequalities on trees. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 52 (2)(1995), 121-136.
8. K.Naimark and M.Solomyak, Eigenvalue Estimates for the weighted Laplacian on metric trees. Preprint.
9. J.Newman and M.Solomyak, Two–sided estimates of singular values for a class of integral operators on the semi–axis, Integral Equations Operator Theory, 20 (1994), 335–349.
10. B.Opic and A.Kufner, Hardy–type Inequalities, Pitman Res. Notes Math. Ser. 219, Longman Sci. & Tech., Harlow, 1990.
11. E.M.Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties of Functions, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1970

W. D. Evans, D. J. Harris
School of Mathematics
Cardiff University
Senghennydd Road
Cardiff CF24 4YH
Wales, UK
E-mail : EvansWD@cardiff.ac.uk
J. Lang
Mathematics Department
202 Mathematical Sciences Bldg
University of Missouri
Columbia, MO 65211 USA
(permanent address: Math. Inst. AV CR, Zitna 25, Prague 1, Czech Republic)
E-mail : langjan@math.missouri.edu