format: text

text:
# The Local Trace Function of Shift Invariant Subspaces

## 1. Introduction

Shift invariant spaces are closed subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ that are invariant under all integer translations (also called shifts). They lie at the very heart of several areas such as the theory of wavelets, spline systems, Gabor systems or approximation theory. Thus, a good understanding of the shift invariant spaces can prove itself fruitful and give results in each of these areas. The local trace function is a new instrument for the analysis of shift invariant spaces. It is associated to a shift invariant subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and a positive operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$. And it confirms our expectations: when applied to a specific case it gives results. Several fundamental facts about wavelets can be deduced quite easily with the aid of the local trace function ( we mention some of these facts: the equations that characterize wavelets (remark 6.1), the equality between the dimension function and the multiplicity function (remark 6.3) and some new equations that relate multiscaling functions to multiwavelets (theorem 6.4 and corrolary 6.5)). Another nice thing about the local trace function is that it includes, as special cases, the dimension function and the spectral function introduced by M.Bownik and Z. Rzeszotnik in \[BoRz\] ( their paper was the main source of inspiration for us, several of the theorems and proofs presented here are just extensions of the theorems and proofs from \[BoRz\]). To get the dimension function, just compute the local trace function using the operator $`I`$-the identity on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$. The spectral function is just the local trace function associated to the projection $`P_{\delta _0}`$ onto the $`0`$-th component (see proposition 4.14).

The local trace function is based on two main concepts: the range function introduced by Helson (\[H\]) for shift invariant subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and the trace function for positive operators on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$. The definition of the local trace functions combines these concepts (see definition 4.1). Another key fact is a simple observation regarding the link between the trace function and normalized tight frames, namely that the trace function can be computed as in its definition but using a normalized tight frame instead of an orthonormal basis (see proposition 3.2). Moreover, the normalized tight frames are the only families of vectors that can be used to compute the trace (see proposition 3.5 and theorem 3.6).

We recall that a subset $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ of a Hilbert space $`H`$ is called a frame with positive constants $`A`$ and $`B`$ if

$$Af^2\underset{iI}{}|f|e_i|^2Bf^2,(fH).$$

If $`A=B=1`$ then it is called a normalized tight frame (or shortly NTF).

In this paper we define the local trace function, investigate some of its properties and apply it to wavelets to obtain, using only short arguments, some known and some new results. In section 2 and section 3 we recall some facts about the range function and the trace function, respectively. We establish the main properties of these functions, properties that we need for section 4 where we define and study the main character of our paper: the local trace function. Many properties shared by the range function and the trace function are inherited by the local trace function: additivity (proposition 4.9 and 4.10), monotony (proposition 4.12), nice behavior with respect to modulation and dilation (proposition 4.12 and 4.13).

Also, there is a strong connection between our trace function and the Gramian introduced and effectively used by A.Ron and Z.Shen in \[RS1\],\[RS2\], \[RS3\] (see the remarks 3.8 and 4.7).

Another fact that should be noticed is that the local trace function completely determines the shift invariant subspace: two shift invariant subspaces are equal if and only if their local trace functions are equal (proposition 4.11).

Section 5 contains some results about the behavior of the local trace function with respect to limits. That is, when a sequence of shift invariant spaces has a limit (which is also shift invariant), in some cases the local trace function of the limit space is the limit of the sequence of local trace functions. One of the conditions is that the convergence is in the strong operator topology, but we put restrictions on the operator (theorem 5.2); the other theorem is a monotone convergence theorem (theorem 5.3) and it works for any positive operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$.

In section 6, we apply the local trace function to wavelets. Some very simple arguments lead to important results: the equations that characterize wavelets (6.1), (6.2), the equality between the multiplicity function and the dimension function (remark 6.3) and the relation between scaling functions and wavelets (relation (6.9)-(6.11)) are obtained just by writing some local trace function in two ways.

Before we engage in the analysis of the local trace function, we have to recall some definitions and theorems.

The Fourier transform is given by

$$\widehat{f}(\xi )=_^nf(x)e^{ix|\xi }𝑑x,(\xi ^n).$$

If $`V`$ is closed subspace of a Hilbert space $`H`$ and $`fH`$ we denote by $`P_V`$ the projection onto $`V`$ and by $`P_f`$ the operator defined by:

$$P_f(v)=v|ff,(vH).$$

###### Definition 1.1.

A closed subspace $`V`$ of $`L^2\left(\right)`$ is called shift invariant (or shortly SI) if

$$T_kV=V,(k^n),$$

where $`T_k`$ is the translation by $`k`$ on $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$:

$$(T_kf)(\xi )=f(\xi k),(\xi ^n,fL^2\left(^n\right)).$$

If $`𝒜`$ is a subset of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ then we denote by $`S(𝒜)`$ the shift invariant space generated by $`𝒜`$,

$$S(𝒜)=\overline{span}\{T_k\phi |k^n,\phi 𝒜\}.$$

###### Definition 1.2.

Let $`V`$ be a shift invariant subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. A subset $`\varphi `$ of $`V`$ is called a normalized tight frame generator (or NTF generator) for $`V`$ if

$$\{T_k\phi |k^n,\phi \varphi \}$$

is a NTF for $`V`$.

We use also the notation $`S(\phi ):=S(\{\phi \})`$. $`\phi `$ is called a quasi-orthogonal generator for $`S(\phi )`$ if

$$\{T_k\phi |k^n\}$$

is a NTF for $`S(\phi )`$ and for all $`\xi ^n`$,

$$Per|\widehat{\phi }|^2(\xi ):=\underset{k^n}{}|\widehat{\phi }|^2(\xi +2k\pi )\{0,1\}.$$

(actually, the second condition is a consequence of the first but we include it anyway).

Several proofs are available in the literature for the next theorem which guarantees the existence of NTF generators (see \[Bo1\], \[B\], \[BMM\]).

###### Theorem 1.3.

Suppose $`V`$ is a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. Then $`V`$ can be decomposed as an orthogonal sum

$$V=\underset{i}{}S(\phi _i),$$

where $`\phi _i`$ is a quasi-orthogonal generator of $`S(\phi _i)`$. Moreover $`\{\phi _i|i\}`$ is a NTF generator for $`V`$.

In fact, it is possible to derive a choice for the generators $`\phi _i`$ in theorem 1.3 directly from the Stone-spectral multiplicity theorem, as explained in \[BMM\].

## 2. The range function

In this section we define the range function and state some of its properties. Some preliminary notations are needed.

The Hilbert space of square integrable vector functions $`L^2([\pi ,\pi ]^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ consists of all vector valued measurable functions $`\varphi :[\pi ,\pi ]^nl^2\left(^n\right)`$ with the norm

$$\varphi =\left(_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}\varphi (\xi )_{l^2\left(^n\right)}^2𝑑\xi \right)^{1/2}<\mathrm{}.$$

The scalar product is given by

$$\varphi |\psi :=_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}\varphi (\xi )|\psi (\xi )_{l^2\left(^n\right)}𝑑\xi .$$

The map $`𝒯:L^2\left(^n\right)L^2([\pi ,\pi ]^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ defined for $`fL^2\left(^n\right)`$ by

$$𝒯f:[\pi ,\pi ]^nl^2\left(^n\right),𝒯f(\xi )=(\widehat{f}(\xi +2k\pi ))_{k^n},(\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n)$$

is an isometric isomorphism (up to multiplication by $`1/(2\pi )^{n/2}`$) between $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and $`L^2([\pi ,\pi ]^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$.

We will need some variations of these maps because they will make the formulas nicer. We define $`L_{per}^2(^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ to be the space of measurable vector valued functions $`\varphi :^nl^2\left(^n\right)`$ with the property that $`\varphi |_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}`$ belongs to $`L^2([\pi ,\pi ]^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ and they are periodic in the following sense:

$$\varphi (\xi +2k\pi )=\lambda (k)^{}(\varphi (\xi )),(\xi ^n),$$

where, for every $`k^n`$, $`\lambda (k)`$ is the shift by $`k`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ that is

$$(\lambda (k)\alpha )(l)=\alpha (lk),(l^n,\alpha l^2\left(^n\right)).$$

The scalar product is defined by the same formula, the integral being taken over $`[\pi ,\pi ]^n`$.

The map $`𝒯_{per}:L^2\left(^n\right)L_{per}^2(^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ is defined by the same formula as $`𝒯`$,

$$𝒯_{per}f:^nl^2\left(^n\right),𝒯_{per}f(\xi )=(\widehat{f}(\xi +2k\pi ))_{k^n},(\xi ^n)$$

but notice that $`\xi `$ is now in $`^n`$. Also, observe the periodicity property of $`𝒯_{per}`$:

$$𝒯_{per}f(\xi +2s\pi )=\lambda (s)^{}(𝒯_{per}f(\xi )),(\xi ^n,s^n).$$

###### Definition 2.1.

A range function is a measurable mapping

$$J:[\pi ,\pi ]^n\{\text{ closed subspaces of }l^2\left(^n\right)\}.$$

Measurable means weakly operator measurable, i.e., $`\xi P_{J(\xi )}a|b`$ is measurable for any choice of vectors $`a,bl^2\left(^n\right)`$.

A periodic range function is a measurable function

$$J_{per}:^n\{\text{ closed subspaces of }l^2\left(^n\right)\},$$

with the periodicity property:

$$J_{per}(\xi +2k\pi )=\lambda (k)^{}\left(J_{per}(\xi )\right),(k^n,\xi ^n).$$

Sometimes we will use the same letter to denote the subspace $`J_{per}(\xi )`$ and the projection onto $`J_{per}(\xi )`$. In terms of projections, the periodicity can be written as:

$$J_{per}(\xi +2k\pi )=\lambda (k)^{}J_{per}(\xi )\lambda (k),(k^n,\xi ^n).$$

The next theorem due to Helson \[H\] establishes the fundamental connection between shift invariant spaces and the range function. The theorem appears in this form in \[Bo1\], proposition 1.5, the only modification needed is to work with the whole $`^n`$ instead of $`[\pi ,\pi ]^n`$ and use the periodicity.

###### Theorem 2.2.

A closed subspace $`V`$ of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ is shift invariant if and only if

$$V=\{fL^2\left(^n\right)|𝒯_{per}f(\xi )J_{per}(\xi )\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n\},$$

for some measurable periodic range function $`J_{per}`$. The correspondence between $`V`$ and $`J_{per}`$ is bijective under the convention that range functions are identified if they are equal a.e. Furthermore, if $`V=S(𝒜)`$ for some countable $`𝒜L^2\left(^n\right)`$, then

$$J_{per}(\xi )=\overline{span}\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi 𝒜\},\text{for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

###### Definition 2.3.

If $`V`$ is a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ then $`J_{per}`$ associated to $`V`$ as in theorem 2.2 is called the periodic range function of $`V`$.

The first elementary property of the range function that we will need is additivity. The range function is also unitary in the sense that it preserves orthogonality of subspaces. The precise formulation of these properties in given below.

###### Proposition 2.4.

Let $`(V_i)_{iI}`$ be a countable family of mutually orthogonal SI subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and denote by $`J_{V_i}`$ the periodic range function of $`V_i`$. If

$$V=\underset{iI}{}V_i$$

and $`J_V`$ is its periodic range function then

$$J_V(\xi )=\underset{iI}{}J_{V_i}(\xi ),\text{for a.e. }\xi ^n,$$

where the sum is an orthogonal one.

###### Proof.

Pick some countable $`\varphi _iV_i`$ such that $`\{T_k\phi |k^n,\phi \varphi _i\}`$ spans $`V_i`$. Then it is clear that $`\{T_k\phi |k^n,\phi \varphi \}`$ spans $`V`$, with the notation $`\varphi =_{iI}\varphi _i`$. Using Helson’s theorem 2.2 we can determine the periodic range functions:

$$J_{V_i}(\xi )=\overline{span}\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi _i\},(iI),$$

$$J_V(\xi )=\overline{span}\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi \},$$

for almost every point $`\xi ^n`$. This shows that, if we check the orthogonality of the subspaces $`J_{V_i}(\xi )`$, then we are done.

To check that these subspaces of $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ are mutually orthogonal, take two arbitrary $`ijI`$ and $`\phi _1\varphi _i`$,$`\phi _2\varphi _j`$. Then, since we are dealing with SI spaces, $`T_k\phi _1`$ is perpendicular to $`\phi _2`$ for any choice of $`k^n`$. Rewriting this in terms of the Fourier transform, we obtain

$$0=_^ne^{ik|\xi }\widehat{\phi }_1(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }_2}(\xi )𝑑\xi =_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}e^{ik|\xi }𝒯\phi _1(\xi )|𝒯\phi _2(\xi )𝑑\xi .$$

For the second equality we applied a periodization. But this shows that all Fourier coefficients of the map $`\xi 𝒯\phi _1(\xi )|𝒯\phi _2(\xi )`$ are 0 so the map itself is 0 which implies that $`𝒯_{per}\phi _1(\xi )`$ is perpendicular to $`𝒯_{per}\phi _2(\xi )`$ for a.e. $`\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n`$ and therefore, because of the periodicity, for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$. Consequently, the subspaces are mutually orthogonal and the proposition is proved. ∎

An easy consequence of the additivity of the range function is the following monotony property:

###### Proposition 2.5.

Let $`(V_j)_j`$ be an increasing sequence of SI subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. Denote by

$$V:=\overline{\underset{j}{}V_j}.$$

Then for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$, $`(J_{V_j}(\xi ))_j`$ is increasing and

$$J_V(\xi )=\overline{\underset{j}{}J_{V_j}(\xi )}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`W_j`$ be the orthogonal complement of $`V_j`$ in $`V_{j+1}`$, ($`j`$). Then $`W_j`$ are shift invariant too, $`V_{j+1}=V_jW_j`$ for all $`j`$ and

$$V=V_0\underset{j}{}W_j,V_l=V_0\underset{j=0}{\overset{l1}{}}W_j,(l).$$

The proposition then follows from the additivity property stated in proposition 2.4. ∎

The next proposition can also be found in \[H\] and \[Bo1\]. Again the only modification is that we use the periodic extension of the range function.

###### Proposition 2.6.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and $`J_{per}`$ its periodic range function. Then

$$𝒯_{per}(P_Vf)(\xi )=J_{per}(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi )),\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

###### Definition 2.7.

A subset $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ of a Hilbert space $`H`$ is called a Bessel sequence with constant $`B>0`$ if

$$\underset{iI}{}|e_i|f|^2Bf^2,(fH).$$

The next theorem will be extensively used in this paper. Its proof can be found in \[Bo1\].

###### Theorem 2.8.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`J_{per}`$ its periodic range function and $`\varphi `$ a countable subset of $`V`$. $`\{T_k\phi |k^n,\phi \varphi \}`$ is a frame with constants $`A`$ and $`B`$ for $`V`$ (Bessel family with constant $`B`$) if and only if $`\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi \}`$ is a frame with constants $`A`$ and $`B`$ for $`J_{per}(\xi )`$ (Bessel sequence with constant $`B`$) for almost every $`\xi ^n`$.

## 3. The trace function

In this section we recall the definition of the trace function and gather some of its properties, the main ones and also some others that we will need in the sequel.

###### Definition 3.1.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space and $`T`$ a positive operator on $`H`$. Then the trace of the operator $`T`$ is the positive number (can be also $`\mathrm{}`$) defined by

$$Trace(T)=\underset{iI}{}Te_i|e_i,$$

where $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for $`H`$.

The next proposition shows that the trace is well defined, that is it doesn’t depend on the choice of the orthonormal basis, and moreover, it can be computed with the same formula using a normalized tight frame.

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space, $`T`$ a positive operator on $`H`$ and $`\{f_j|jJ\}`$ a normalized tight frame for $`H`$. Then

$$Trace(T)=\underset{jJ}{}Tf_j|f_j.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H`$.

$`Trace(T)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}Te_i|e_i={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}T^{1/2}e_i|T^{1/2}e_i={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}T^{1/2}e_i^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}|T^{1/2}e_i|f_j|^2={\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}|T^{1/2}e_i|f_j|^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}|e_i|T^{1/2}f_j|^2={\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}T^{1/2}f_j^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}Tf_j|f_j.`$
The following proposition enumerates some of the elementary properties of the trace. For a proof look in any basic book on operator theory (e.g. \[StZs\]).

###### Proposition 3.3.

The trace has the following properties: for all $`a,b`$ positive operators and $`\lambda 0`$:

1. $`Trace(a+b)=Trace(a)+Trace(b)`$;
2. $`Trace(\lambda a)=\lambda Trace(a)`$;
3. If $`ab`$ then $`Trace(a)Trace(b)`$;
4. $`Trace(v^{}av)Trace(a)`$ whenever $`v`$ is a partial isometry;
5. $`Trace(u^{}au)=Trace(a)`$ for all unitary $`u`$;
6. $`Trace(x^{}x)=Trace(xx^{})`$ for every operator $`x`$ on $`H`$;
7. $`Trace(|x|)=Trace(|x^{}|)`$ for every operator $`x`$ on $`H`$ ( $`|x|:=(x^{}x)^{1/2}`$);
8. $`Trace(P)=dimPH`$ for any projection $`P`$ in $`H`$.

###### Proposition 3.4.

Let $`P`$ be a projection and $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ a NTF for its range. Then, for any positive operator $`T`$, and any vector $`fH`$.

$$Trace(TP)=\underset{iI}{}Te_i|e_i,$$

$$Trace(P_fP)=\underset{iI}{}|f|e_i|^2=Pf^2.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\{f_j|jJ\}`$ be an orthonormal basis for the orthogonal complement of the range of $`P`$. Then $`\{e_i|iI\}\{f_j|jJ\}`$ is a NTF for the entire Hilbert space. Using proposition 3.2, the formula for $`Trace(TP)`$ follows.

Particularize the formula for $`T=P_f`$:

$$Trace(P_fP)=\underset{iI}{}e_i|ff|e_i=\underset{iuI}{}|f|e_i|^2=Pf^2.$$

In fact even more is true: the equations of proposition 3.4 characterize the normalized tight frames for the range of $`P`$. This is described in the next statement.

###### Proposition 3.5.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space, $`H_0`$ a closed subspace and $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ a family of vectors from $`H`$. The following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a NTF for $`H_0`$;
2. For every positive operator $`T`$ on $`H`$,

$$Trace(TP_{H_0})=\underset{iI}{}Te_i|e_i;$$
3. For every vector $`vH`$,

$$Trace(P_vP_{H_0})=\underset{iI}{}|v|e_i|^2.$$

(Note that we do not require in (ii) and (iii) that the $`e_i`$’s be in $`H_0`$. This will follow from the formulas).

###### Proof.

(i) implies (ii) and (ii) implies (iii) according to proposition 3.5 and its proof. So we only have to worry about the implication from (iii) to (i). The hypotheses imply that, if $`vH_0`$, then $`P_vP_{H_0}=0`$ so $`v`$ is perpendicular to $`e_i`$ for every $`iI`$.

Also, for $`vH_0`$,

$$\underset{iI}{}|v|e_i|^2=v^2.$$

This shows that all $`e_i`$’s are in $`H_0`$ and they form a NTF for it. ∎

We can weaken the condition (iii) in proposition 3.5. The family of vectors is a NTF for the subspace if it satisfies the NTF condition just for some special vectors as shown below:

###### Theorem 3.6.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space and $`\{\delta _k|kK\}`$ a total subset of $`H`$ (i.e. its closed linear span is $`H`$). Let $`H_0`$ be a closed subspace for $`H`$ and $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ a family of vectors in $`H`$. The following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a NTF for $`H_0`$;
2. For every $`rsK`$ and $`\lambda \{0,1,i=\sqrt{1}\}`$

(3.1)
$$\underset{iI}{}|\delta _r+\lambda \delta _s|e_i|^2=P_{H_0}(\delta _r+\lambda \delta _s)^2.$$

###### Proof.

(i) implies (ii) clearly.

Assume (ii). Take $`\{f_j|jJ\}`$ a NTF for $`H_0`$. Then

(3.2)
$$P_{H_0}(v)^2=\underset{jJ}{}|v|f_j|^2,(vH).$$

Take $`\lambda =0`$ and use (3.1) and (3.2):

(3.3)
$$\underset{iI}{}|\delta _r|e_i|^2=\underset{jJ}{}|\delta _r|f_j|^2,(vH).$$

Now take $`rs`$ and $`\lambda \{1,i\}`$. From (3.1) and (3.2):

$$\underset{iI}{}(|\delta _r|e_i|^2+\delta _r|e_i\overline{\lambda }\overline{\delta _s|e_i}+\overline{\delta _r|e_i}\lambda \delta _s|e_i+|\lambda |^2|\delta _s|e_i|^2)=$$

$$\underset{jJ}{}(|\delta _r|f_j|^2+\delta _r|f_j\overline{\lambda }\overline{\delta _s|f_j}+\overline{\delta _r|f_j}\lambda \delta _s|f_j+|\lambda |^2|\delta _s|f_j|^2).$$

With (3.3) we can reduce this to

$$\overline{\lambda }\underset{iI}{}\delta _r|e_i\overline{\delta _s|e_i}+\lambda \underset{iI}{}\overline{\delta _r|e_i}\delta _s|e_i=$$

$$=\overline{\lambda }\underset{jJ}{}\delta _r|f_j\overline{\delta _s|f_j}+\lambda \underset{jJ}{}\overline{\delta _r|f_j}\delta _s|f_j$$

Now take $`\lambda =1`$ and $`\lambda =i`$ and the two resulting equation will yield:

(3.4)
$$\underset{iI}{}\delta _r|e_i\overline{\delta _s|e_i}=\underset{jJ}{}\delta _r|f_j\overline{\delta _s|f_j}$$

Next we prove that

$$\underset{iI}{}|v|e_i|^2=\underset{jJ}{}|v|f_j|^2$$

holds for all $`vS`$ where

$$S:=\{\underset{kK_0}{}v_k\delta _k|K_0K\text{ finite }\}.$$

For this take an arbitrary $`v=_{kK_0}v_k\delta _k`$, with $`K_0`$ finite. Then

$`{\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}|v|e_i|^2`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}|{\displaystyle \underset{kK_0}{}}v_k\delta _k|e_i|^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k,k^{}K_0}{}}v_k\overline{v}_k^{}\delta _k|e_i\overline{\delta _k^{}|e_i}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k,k^{}K_0}{}}v_k\overline{v}_k^{}{\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}\delta _k|e_i\overline{\delta _k^{}|e_i}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{k,k^{}K_0}{}}v_k\overline{v}_k^{}{\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}\delta _k|f_j\overline{\delta _k^{}|f_j}(\text{with (}\text{3.4}\text{)})`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{jJ}{}}|v|f_j|^2.`$
To prove the relation for arbitrary $`vH`$, define $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1:Sl^2(I)`$, $`T_2:Hl^2(J)`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_1v=(v|e_i)_{iI},(vS),T_2v=(v|f_j)_{jJ}.$$

Then $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1`$ is a well defined linear operator, $`T_2v^2=P_{H_0}v^2`$ for $`vH`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1v=T_2v`$ for $`vS`$. This shows that $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1v^2v^2`$ for $`vS`$. Hence, as $`S`$ is a dense subspace of $`H`$, we can extend $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1`$ to a linear operator $`T_1`$ on $`H`$ with

$$T_1v^2v^2,\text{for all }vH.$$

We claim that $`T_1v=(v|e_i)_{iI}`$ for any $`vH`$. Indeed, $`v`$ can be approximated by vectors $`v_n`$ in $`S`$. Then, for each $`iI`$,

$$(T_1v)_i=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}(T_1v_n)_i=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}v_n|e_i=v|e_i.$$

Also, taking the limit,

$$T_1v^2=T_2v^2=P_{H_0}v^2,(vH),$$

and this implies (i). ∎

###### Theorem 3.7.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space $`H_0`$ a closed subspace , $`\{\delta _k|kK\}`$ a total set for $`H`$, and $`\{f_j|jJ\}`$ a NTF for $`H_0`$. Let $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ be a family of vectors in $`H`$. The following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a NTF for $`H_0`$;
2. For all $`r,sH_0`$,

$$\underset{iI}{}\delta _r|e_i\overline{\delta _s|e_i}=\underset{jJ}{}\delta _r|f_j\overline{\delta _s|f_j}.$$

###### Proof.

Just examine the proof of theorem 3.6. ∎

###### Remark 3.8.

Theorem 3.7 shows that $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a NTF for $`H_0`$ if and only if it has the same Gramian as $`\{f_j|jJ\}`$. We recall briefly this notion. The Gramian was introduced by A.Ron and Z.Shen in a series of papers and they used it to analize the structure of shift invariant spaces (\[RS1\], \[RS2\], \[RS3\]).

For a given countable family of vectors $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ define the operator $`K:Hl^2(I)`$, initially on sequences $`f=(f_i)_{iI}`$ with compact support, by

(3.5)
$$K(f)=\underset{iI}{}f_ie_i.$$

If $`K`$ extends to a bounded operator (this is the case when $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ forms a Bessel family), then its adjoint $`K^{}:l^2(I)H`$ is given by

(3.6)
$$K^{}(v)=(v|e_i)_{iI},(vl^2\left(^n\right)).$$

Suppose $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a subset of $`H`$ and $`K`$ is defined as in (3.5). The Gramian of the system $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is $`G:l^2(I)l^2(I)`$ defined by $`G=K^{}K`$. The dual Gramian of the system $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is $`\stackrel{~}{G}:HH`$ defined by $`\stackrel{~}{G}=KK^{}`$.

Note that

(3.7)
$$\stackrel{~}{G}f|g=K^{}f|K^{}g=\underset{iI}{}f|e_i\overline{g|e_i}=:B(f,g).$$

The trace function involves expressions of the form

$$\underset{iI}{}|f|e_i|^2=B(f,f)=\stackrel{~}{G}f|f.$$

We can recuperate the dual Gramian if these expressions are given, because by polarization

$$B(f,g)=\frac{1}{4}\underset{k=0}{\overset{3}{}}i^kB(f+i^kg,f+i^kg).$$

$`B`$, as a sesquilinear form gives rise to an operator and this operator has to be the dual Gramian $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$. Another fact that is worth noticing is that, if $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ is a NTF for some subspace $`H_0`$ of $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, then the dual Gramian $`\stackrel{~}{G}`$ is the projection onto $`H_0`$, $`P_{H_0}`$. This is because $`P_{H_0}`$ verifies the equation (3.7).

###### Proposition 3.9.

Let $`(P_j)_{jJ}`$ be a family of mutually orthogonal projections in a Hilbert space $`H`$. Then

$$Trace(T\underset{jJ}{}P_j)=\underset{jJ}{}Trace(TP_j),$$

for any positive operator $`T`$ on $`H`$.

###### Proof.

Consider $`\{e_i|iI_j\}`$ an orthonormal basis for the range of $`P_j`$, ($`jJ`$). Then, $`\{e_i|iI_j\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for the range of $`_{jJ}P_j`$. The additivity property is now clear, if we use proposition 3.4. ∎

The next proposition is an easy consequence of the additivity of the trace mentioned in proposition 3.9.

###### Proposition 3.10.

Let $`(P_j)_j`$ be an increasing sequence of projections in some Hilbert space $`H`$, $`P=sup_jP_j`$ and $`T`$ a positive operator on $`H`$. Then
$`(Trace(TP_j))_j`$ increases to $`Trace(TP)`$.

###### Proposition 3.11.

Let $`T`$ be a positive operator on a Hilbert space $`H`$, $`P`$ a projection on $`H`$ and $`U`$ a unitary on $`H`$. Then

$$Trace(UTPU^{})=Trace(TP).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H`$ such that $`\{e_i|iI_0\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for $`UPH`$, with $`I_0I`$. Then $`\{U^{}e_i|iI_0\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for $`PH`$ and $`PU^{}e_i=0`$ for $`iII_0`$; so

$$Trace(UTPU^{})=\underset{iI_0}{}UTPU^{}e_i|e_i=\underset{iI_0}{}TPU^{}e_i|U^{}e_i=Trace(TP).$$

###### Lemma 3.12.

If $`H`$ is a Hilbert space, $`H_0`$ a closed subspace and $`fH`$, then $`Trace(P_fP_{H_0})f^2`$ with equality if and only if $`fH_0`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\{e_i|iI\}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H`$ such that $`\{e_i|iI_0\}`$ is an orthonormal basis for $`H_0`$ with $`I_0I`$. Then

$`f^2`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI_0}{}}|f|e_i|^2+{\displaystyle \underset{iII_0}{}}|f|e_i|^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI_0}{}}P_fe_i|e_i+{\displaystyle \underset{iII_0}{}}|f|e_i|^2`$
$`=Trace(P_fP_{H_0})+{\displaystyle \underset{iII_0}{}}|f|e_i|^2`$
Thus the inequality holds and $`Trace(P_fP_{H_0})=f^2`$ iff $`f|e_i=0`$ for all $`iII_0`$ which is equivalent to $`fH_0`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.13.

Let $`H`$ be a Hilbert space, $`H_1`$ and $`H_2`$ two closed subspaces. Then $`H_1H_2`$ if and only if $`Trace(P_fP_{H_1})Trace(P_fP_{H_2})`$ for all $`fH`$.

###### Proof.

If $`H_1`$ is contained in $`H_2`$ then, using proposition 3.9, the inequality between the traces is immediate.

For the converse, assume $`fH_1`$. Then, by lemma 3.12, $`Trace(P_fP_{H_1})=f^2`$ so $`f^2Trace(P_fP_{H_2})`$. But then, with the same lemma, $`Trace(P_fP_{H_2})=f^2`$ which implies that $`fH_2`$. As $`f`$ was arbitrary, the inclusion is proved. ∎

## 4. The local trace function

###### Definition 4.1.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`T`$ a positive operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and let $`J_{per}`$ be the range function associated to $`V`$. We define the local trace function associated to $`V`$ and $`T`$ as the map from $`^n`$ to $`[0,\mathrm{}]`$ given by the formula

$$\tau _{V,T}(\xi )=Trace\left(TJ_{per}(\xi )\right),(\xi ).$$

We define the restricted local trace function associated to $`V`$ and a vector $`f`$ in $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ by

$$\tau _{V,f}(\xi )=Trace\left(P_fJ_{per}(\xi )\right)(=\tau _{V,P_f}(\xi )),(\xi ^n),$$

where $`P_f`$ is the operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ defined by $`P_f(v)=v|ff`$.

###### Proposition 4.2.

For all $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$,

$$\tau _{V,f}(\xi )=J_{per}(\xi )(f)^2,(\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n).$$

###### Proof.

Use the proposition 3.4. ∎

###### Theorem 4.3.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and $`\varphi V`$ a NTF generator for $`V`$. Then for every positive operator $`T`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and any $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$,

(4.1)
$$\tau _{V,T}(\xi )=\underset{\phi \varphi }{}T𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi ),(\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n);$$

(4.2)
$$\tau _{V,f}(\xi )=\underset{\phi \varphi }{}|f|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|^2,\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n).$$

###### Proof.

According to theorem 2.8, $`\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi \}`$ is a NTF for $`J_{per}(\xi )`$ for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$. With the proposition 3.4 we obtain (4.1). Take $`T=P_f`$ and (4.1) becomes (4.2). ∎

###### Theorem 4.4.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`J_{per}`$ its periodic range function and $`\varphi `$ a countable subset of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. Then following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\varphi V`$ and $`\varphi `$ is a NTF generator for $`V`$;
2. For every $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$

(4.3)
$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}|f|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|^2=J_{per}(\xi )(f)^2,\text{for a.e. }\xi ^n$$
3. For every $`0l^n`$ and $`\alpha \{0,1,i\}`$,

(4.4)
$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}|\widehat{\phi }(\xi )+\overline{\alpha }\widehat{\phi }(\xi +2l\pi )|^2=J_{per}(\xi )(\delta _0+\alpha \delta _l)^2,\text{for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

###### Proof.

(i) implies (ii) just as an application of theorem 4.3 and proposition 4.2. (iii) is just a particular case of (ii), namely $`f=\delta _0+\alpha \delta _l`$. So assume (iii) holds. Then (4.4) can be rewritten as:

$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}\delta _0+\alpha \delta _l|𝒯_{per}(\xi )|^2=J_{per}(\delta _0+\alpha \delta _l)^2.$$

Now take $`rs^n`$ and apply this equation to $`l=sr`$, $`\xi =\xi +2\pi r`$. A short computation, that uses the periodicity of $`𝒯_{per}`$ and $`J_{per}`$ and the fact that $`\lambda (r)`$ is unitary, will lead to

$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}|\delta _r+\alpha \delta _s|𝒯_{per}(\xi )|^2=J_{per}(\xi )(\delta _r+\alpha \delta _s)^2,\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

Now we can use theorem 3.6 to conclude that, for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$,

$$\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi \}$$

is a NTF for $`J_{per}(\xi )`$. And, with theorem 2.8, (i) is obtained. ∎

Applying this theorem to $`V=L^2\left(^n\right)`$ we deduce the next corollary which can be found also in \[RS1\]:

###### Corollary 4.5.

A countable subset $`\phi `$ of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ is a NTF generator for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ if and only if the following equations hold for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$:

$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}|\widehat{\phi }(\xi )|^2=1,$$

$$\underset{\phi \varphi }{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2l\pi )=0,(l^n,l0).$$

###### Theorem 4.6.

Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`\varphi _1`$ a NTF generator for $`V`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ a countable family of vectors from $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. The following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\varphi _2V`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ is a NTF generator for $`V`$;
2. For every $`l^n`$,

$$\underset{\phi \varphi _2}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2l\pi )=\underset{\phi \varphi _1}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2l\pi ),\text{for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

###### Proof.

By theorem 2.8, (i) is equivalent to

(4.5)
$$\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi _2\}\text{ is a NTF for }J_{per}(\xi )\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

But we know that $`\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi _1\}`$ is a NTF for $`J_{per}(\xi )`$ (again, by theorem 2.8). Therefore, using theorem 3.7, (4.5) is equivalent to:

For every $`r,s^n`$ and a.e. $`\xi ^n`$,

$$\underset{\phi \varphi _2}{}\delta _r|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )\overline{\delta _s|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )}=\underset{\phi \varphi _1}{}\delta _r|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )\overline{\delta _s|𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )},$$

which is exactly

$$\underset{\phi \varphi _2}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi +2r\pi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2s\pi )=\underset{\phi \varphi _1}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi +2r\pi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2s\pi ),(r,s^n,\xi ^n).$$

This implies (ii) and (ii) implies this, because one can take $`l=sr`$, $`\xi =\xi +2r\pi `$. ∎

###### Remark 4.7.

Theorem 4.6 shows that $`\varphi _2`$ is a NTF generator for $`V`$ iff it has the same dual Gramian as $`\varphi _1`$. Recall, that the dual Gramian of a countable subset $`\varphi `$ of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ is defined as the function which assigns to each $`\xi ^n`$ the dual Gramian of the set $`\{𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )|\phi \varphi \}`$ (see remark 3.8 and \[RS1\], \[RS2\], \[RS3\], \[Bo1\] for details). The dual Gramian satisfies the equations:

$$\stackrel{~}{G}(\xi )\delta _r|\delta _s=\underset{\phi \varphi }{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi +2\pi r)\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2\pi s).$$

###### Proposition 4.8.

\[Periodicity\] Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace, $`T`$ a positive operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$. Then, for $`k^n`$

(4.6)
$$\tau _{V,T}(\xi +2k\pi )=\tau _{V,\lambda (k)T\lambda (k)^{}}(\xi ),(\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n);$$

(4.7)
$$\tau _{V,f}(\xi +2k\pi )=\tau _{V,\lambda (k)f}(\xi ),(\text{ for a.e. }^n),$$

where $`\lambda (k)`$ is the unitary operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ defined by $`(\lambda (k)\alpha )(l)=\alpha (lk)`$ for all $`l^n`$, $`\alpha l^2\left(^n\right)`$.

###### Proof.

The periodicity of the local trace function is a consequence of the periodicity of the range function. Indeed, by definition 2.1, we know that for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$ and every $`k^n`$,

$$J_{per}(\xi +2k\pi )=\lambda (k)^{}J_{per}(\xi )\lambda (k).$$

Apply this in the definition of the local trace function and use proposition 3.11:

$$\tau _{V,T}(\xi +2k\pi )=Trace(TJ_{per}(\xi +2k\pi ))=Trace(T\lambda (k)^{}J_{per}(\xi )\lambda (k))$$

$$=Trace(\lambda (k)T\lambda (k)^{}J_{per}(\xi ))=\tau _{V,\lambda (k)T\lambda (k)^{}}(\xi ).$$

Since $`\lambda (k)P_f\lambda (k)^{}=P_{\lambda (k)f}`$, (4.7) follows from (4.6). ∎

###### Proposition 4.9.

Let $`V`$ be a SI space, $`T,S`$ positive operators on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$

1. $`0\tau _{V,T}(\xi )\mathrm{}`$, $`0\tau _{V,f}f^2`$;
2. $`\tau _{V,T+S}=\tau _{V,T}+\tau _{V,S}`$;
3. $`\tau _{V,\lambda T}=\lambda \tau _{V,T},(\lambda >0)`$;
4. $`\tau _{V,\lambda f}=|\lambda |^2\tau _{V,f},(\lambda ).`$

###### Proof.

Everything follows from section 3. ∎

###### Proposition 4.10.

\[Additivity\] Suppose $`(V_i)_{iI}`$ are mutually orthogonal SI subspaces ($`I`$ countable) and let $`V=_{iI}V_i`$. Then, for every positive operator $`T`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and every $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$:

(4.8)
$$\tau _{V,T}=\underset{iI}{}\tau _{V_i,T},\text{a.e. on }^n;$$

(4.9)
$$\tau _{V,f}=\underset{iI}{}\tau _{V_i,f},\text{a.e. on }^n.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`J_i`$ be the periodic range function of $`V_i`$, ($`iI`$) and $`J`$ the periodic range function of $`V`$. The range function is additive (proposition 2.4) so

$$J(\xi )=\underset{iI}{}J_i(\xi ),\text{ a.e. on }^n.$$

Also the trace has additive properties (proposition 3.9) and these imply the additivity of the local trace function expressed in (4.8). Again (4.9) is just a particular case of (4.8). ∎

###### Proposition 4.11.

\[Monotony and injectivity\] Let $`V,W`$ be SI subspaces.

(i) $`VW`$ iff $`\tau _{V,T}\tau _{W,T}`$ a.e. for all positive operators $`T`$ iff $`\tau _{V,f}\tau _{W,f}`$ a.e. for all $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$.

(ii) $`V=W`$ iff $`\tau _{V,T}=\tau _{W,T}`$ a.e. for all positive operators $`T`$ iff $`\tau _{V,f}=\tau _{W,f}`$ a.e for all $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$.

###### Proof.

(i) It is clear that the first statement implies the second; just use the additivity property for the SI spaces $`V`$ and $`WV`$. The third statement is just a particular case of the second one. So the only interesting implication is from the third statement to the first one.

Let $`J_V`$ and $`J_W`$ be the corresponding periodic range functions for $`V`$ and $`W`$. The hypothesis implies, according to lemma 3.13, that

$$J_V(\xi )J_W(\xi ),(\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n),$$

and this implies in turn that $`VW`$ (just look at theorem 2.2).

(ii) is a consequence of (i) by a double inclusion argument. ∎

For $`a^n`$ we define the modulation of $`fL^2\left(^n\right)`$ by

$$M_a(f)(x)=e^{ia|x}f(x),(x^n).$$

The local trace function behaves nicely under modulation. This is expressed in the next proposition.

###### Proposition 4.12.

\[Modulation\] Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace and $`a^n`$. Then $`M_aV`$ is a SI subspace and for all positive operators $`T`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and all vectors $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$:

(4.10)
$$\tau _{M_aV,T}(\xi )=\tau _{V,T}(\xi a),\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n;$$

(4.11)
$$\tau _{M_aV,f}(\xi )=\tau _{V,f}(\xi a),\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n.$$

###### Proof.

The modulation and the translations satisfy a commutation relation: for $`k^n`$ and $`\phi L^2\left(^n\right)`$,

$$T_kM_a\phi (x)=e^{ia|xk}\phi (xk)=e^{ia|k}M_aT_k\phi (x),(x^n).$$

This relation shows that $`M_aV`$ is shift invariant.

Now take a NTF generator $`\varphi `$ for $`V`$ (it exists by theorem 1.3). Then, as $`M_a`$ is unitary,

$$\{M_aT_k\phi |\phi \varphi \}$$

is a NTF for $`M_aV`$. Using the commutation relation and the fact that $`e^{ia|k}`$ are just constants of modulus 1, we see that

$$\{T_kM_a\phi |\phi \varphi \}$$

is a NTF for $`M_aV`$. Therefore we can safely use theorem 4.3 and compute:

$$\tau _{M_aV,T}(\xi )=\underset{\phi \varphi }{}T𝒯_{per}(M_a\phi )(\xi )|𝒯_{per}(M_a\phi )(\xi ).$$

But

$$𝒯_{per}M_a\phi (\xi )=\left(\widehat{M_a\phi }(\xi +2k\pi )\right)_{k^n}=\left(\widehat{\phi }(\xi a+2k\pi )\right)_{k^n}$$

$$=𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi a),$$

and (4.10) follows with (4.11) as its consequence. ∎

The dilation by an $`n\times n`$ non-singular matrix $`A`$ is the unitary operator on $`L^2\left(\right)`$ defined by

$$D_Af(x)=|detA|^{\frac{1}{2}}f(Ax),(x^n,fL^2\left(^n\right)).$$

We will consider only matrices $`A`$ which preserve the lattice $`^n`$, because in this case $`D_AV`$ is shift invariant whenever $`V`$ is.

###### Proposition 4.13.

\[Dilation\] Let $`V`$ be a SI subspace and $`A`$ an $`n\times n`$ integer matrix with $`detA0`$. Then $`D_AV`$ is shift invariant and, for every positive operator $`T`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and every vector $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$:

(4.12)
$$\tau _{D_AV,T}(\xi )=\underset{d𝒟}{}\tau _{V,D_d^{}TD_d}\left(\left(A^{}\right)^1(\xi +2d\pi )\right),\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n,$$

(4.13)
$$\tau _{D_AV,f}(\xi )=\underset{d𝒟}{}\tau _{V,D_d^{}f}\left(\left(A^{}\right)^1(\xi +2d\pi )\right),\text{ for a.e. }\xi ^n,$$

where $`𝒟`$ is a complete set of representatives of the cosets $`^n/A^{}^n`$ and $`D_d`$ is the linear operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ defined by

$$(D_d\alpha )(k)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\alpha (l),& \text{if}& k=d+A^{}l\\ 0,& & otherwise\end{array},(k^n,\alpha l^2\left(^n\right)).$$

###### Proof.

The dilation and the translation satisfy the following commutation relation which can be easily verified:

$$T_kD_A=D_AT_{Ak},(k^n).$$

This shows that $`D_AV`$ is shift invariant.

We can decompose $`V`$ as the orthogonal sum $`V=_{iI}S(\phi _i)`$, where $`\phi _i`$ is a quasi-orthogonal generator of $`S(\phi _i)`$ (see theorem 1.3). Since $`D_A`$ is unitary, $`D_AV=_{iI}D_AS(\phi _i)`$ and, using the additivity property of the local trace function (proposition 4.10), it suffices to prove the formula (4.12) just for the case when $`V=S(\phi )`$ with $`\phi `$ quasi-orthogonal generator for $`S(\phi )`$. We will assume this is the case.

From the commutation relation we see that, if $``$ is a complete set of $`|detA|`$ representatives of the cosets $`^n/A^n`$, then

$$\{D_AT_l\phi |l\}$$

will span $`D_AV`$ by translations.

For $`l`$, consider

$`\varphi _l(\xi )`$ $`=𝒯_{per}(D_AT_l\phi )(\xi )`$
$`=\left(|detA|^{\frac{1}{2}}\widehat{\phi }\left(\left(A^{}\right)^1(\xi +2k\pi )\right)e^{i(A^{})^1(\xi +2k\pi )|l}\right)_{k^n}.`$
For $`d𝒟`$ define $`\psi _dL_{per}^2(^n,l^2\left(^n\right))`$ by

$`\psi _d(\xi )(k)`$ $`=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{\phi }((A^{})^1(\xi +2k\pi )),& \text{if}& kd+A^{}^n\\ 0,& & \text{otherwise}\end{array}`$
$`=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\widehat{\phi }((A^{})^1(\xi +2d\pi )+2\pi l),& \text{if}& k=d+A^{}l,\text{ with }l^n\\ 0,& & \text{otherwise}\end{array}`$
$`=D_d\left(𝒯_{per}\phi ((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))\right).`$
Then $`\varphi _l(\xi )`$ and $`\psi _d(\xi )`$ are related by the following linear equations:

$$\varphi _l(\xi )=e^{i(A^{})^1\xi |l}|detA|^{1/2}\underset{d𝒟}{}e^{i(A^{})^12\pi d|l}\psi _d(\xi ).$$

Since the $`|detA|\times |detA|`$ matrix

$$\left(|\mathrm{det}A|^{1/2}e^{i(A^{})^12\pi d|l}\right)_{d𝒟,l}$$

is unitary, it follows that $`\{\psi _d(\xi )|d𝒟\}`$ and $`\{\varphi _l(\xi )|l\}`$ span the same subspace of $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, namely $`J_{D_AV}(\xi )`$ (use theorem 2.2).

$`\phi `$ is a quasi-orthogonal generator so $`Per|\widehat{\phi }|^2`$ is a characteristic function that is $`𝒯_{per}\phi (\xi )_{l^2\left(^n\right)}`$ is either 0 or 1, and as $`D_d`$ is an isometry, $`\psi _d(\xi )_{l^2\left(^n\right)}\{0,1\}`$. Also $`\psi _d(\xi )`$ and $`\psi _d^{}(\xi )`$ are perpendicular when $`dd^{}`$ and, in conclusion $`\{\psi _d(\xi )|d𝒟\}`$ is a NTF for $`J_{D_AV}(\xi )`$. Therefore we can use these vectors to compute the local trace function (proposition 3.4):

$`\tau _{D_AV,T}(\xi )`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{d𝒟}{}}T\psi _d(\xi )|\psi _d(\xi )`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{d𝒟}{}}TD_d\left(𝒯_{per}\phi ((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))\right)|D_d\left(𝒯_{per}\phi ((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{d𝒟}{}}D_d^{}TD_d\left(𝒯_{per}\phi ((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))\right)|𝒯_{per}\phi ((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{d𝒟}{}}\tau _{V,D_d^{}TD_d}((A^{})^1(\xi +2\pi d))`$
This proves (4.12). (4.13) follows from (4.12) because $`D_d^{}P_fD_d=P_{D_d^{}f}`$. ∎

As we promised, the local trace function incorporates the dimension function and the spectral function defined by M.Bownik and Z.Rzeszotnik in \[BoRz\].

Recall that for a shift invariant subspace $`V`$ of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$, its dimension function is defined as

$$\underset{V}{dim}(\xi )=dimJ_{per}(\xi ),(\xi ^n),$$

where $`J_{per}`$ is the periodic function associated to $`V`$.

The spectral function introduced in \[BoRz\] is defined by

$$\sigma _V(\xi +2k\pi )=J_{per}(\xi )\delta _k^2,(\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n,k^n),$$

where $`\delta _kl^2\left(^n\right)`$, $`\delta _k(l)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}1,& \text{if}& k=l\\ 0,& & \text{otherwise}\end{array}`$ $`(k^n)`$.

For a similar treatment of the dimension function, using the Gramian the reader can also consult \[RS4\].

###### Proposition 4.14.

Let $`V`$ be a SI space.
(i)

(4.14)
$$\tau _{V,I}=\underset{V}{dim}.$$

(ii)

(4.15)
$$\tau _{V,\delta _0}=\sigma _V.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`J_{per}`$ be the periodic range function of $`V`$.

$$\tau _{V,I}(\xi )=Trace(IJ_{per}(\xi ))=dimJ_{per}(\xi )=dim_V(\xi ).$$

For $`\xi [\pi ,\pi )^n`$, by proposition 4.2,

$$\tau _{V,\delta _0}(\xi )=J_{per}(\xi )\delta _0^2=\sigma _V(\xi ).$$

If $`k^n`$ then, using the periodicity of the local trace function stated in proposition 4.8,

$$\tau _{V,\delta _0}(\xi +2k\pi )=\tau _{V,\lambda (k)\delta _0}(\xi )=\tau _{V,\delta _k}(\xi )=J_{per}(\xi )\delta _k^2=\sigma _V(\xi ).$$

## 5. Convergence theorems

In this section we study the behavior of the local trace function with respect to limits. More precisely, we consider the following question: if $`(V_j)_j`$ is a sequence of SI subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ such that $`P_{V_j}`$ converges in the strong operator topology to $`P_V`$ for some SI subspace $`V`$, what can be said about the convergence of the local trace functions $`\tau _{V_i,T}`$?

We begin with a lemma and then give some useful partial answers to this question.

###### Lemma 5.1.

Suppose $`(V_j)_j`$ and $`V`$ are SI subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ such that $`P_{V_j}`$ converges in the strong operator topology to $`P_V`$. Then for any $`fL^2\left(^n\right)`$ and any $`A>0`$

$$_{[A,A]^n}J_{V_j}(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi ))J_V(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi ))^2𝑑\xi \text{ converges to }0\text{ as }j\mathrm{},$$

where $`J_{V_j}`$ and $`J_V`$ are the corresponding periodic range functions.

###### Proof.

We can consider $`A=\pi `$ because then the result is obtained using the periodicity of the range function. With proposition 2.6,

$$J_{V_j}(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi ))=𝒯_{per}(P_{V_j}f)(\xi ),(\xi ^n).$$

And then

$$_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}J_{V_j}(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi ))J_V(\xi )(𝒯_{per}f(\xi ))^2𝑑\xi $$

$$=_{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}𝒯_{per}(P_{V_j}f)(\xi )𝒯_{per}(P_Vf)(\xi )^2𝑑\xi $$

$$=(2\pi )^nP_{V_j}fP_Vf_{L^2\left(^n\right)}^20,\text{ as }j\mathrm{}.$$

###### Theorem 5.2.

Let $`(V_j)_j`$ and $`V`$ be SI subspaces such that $`P_{V_j}`$ converges to $`P_V`$ in the strong operator topology. Then, for any bounded measurable set $`E`$ and every $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$

$$_E|\tau _{V_j,f}(\xi )\tau _{V,f}(\xi )|𝑑\xi 0,\text{ as }j\mathrm{}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`J_{V_j}`$ and $`J_V`$ be the corresponding periodic range function. We can assume $`E=[\pi ,\pi ]^n`$ because then the result is a consequence of the periodicity of the local trace function (proposition 4.8) and we can assume also $`f=1`$. Using lemma 5.1 for a $`gL^2\left(^n\right)`$ with $`𝒯g(\xi )=f`$ for all $`\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n`$, we have

$`0`$ $`=\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}}J_{V_j}(\xi )fJ_V(\xi )f^2𝑑\xi `$
$`\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}{\displaystyle _{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}}\left|J_{V_j}(\xi )fJ_V(\xi )f\right|^2𝑑\xi `$
$`=\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}{\displaystyle _{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}}|\tau _{V_j,f}^{1/2}(\xi )\tau _{V,f}^{1/2}(\xi )|^2𝑑\xi `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}{\displaystyle _{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}}|\tau _{V_j,f}(\xi )\tau _{V,f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\xi `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}(2\pi )^n\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}{\displaystyle _{[\pi ,\pi ]^n}}|\tau _{V_j,f}(\xi )\tau _{V,f}(\xi )|𝑑\xi ,`$
where for the third line we used proposition 4.2, for the fourth we used the fact that $`\tau _{V,f},\tau _{V_j,f}`$ are less then $`f^2=1`$ (proposition 4.9 (i)) and for the last one we used Holder’s inequality. ∎

###### Theorem 5.3.

Let $`(V_j)_j`$ be an increasing sequence of SI subspaces of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$,

$$V:=\overline{\underset{j}{}V_j},$$

$`T`$ a positive operator on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ and $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$. Then, for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$, $`\tau _{V_j,T}(\xi )`$ increases to $`\tau _{V,T}(\xi )`$ and $`\tau _{V_j,f}(\xi )`$ increases to $`\tau _{V,f}(\xi )`$.

###### Proof.

The monotony is a consequence of proposition 4.11.

Again, we denote by $`J_{V_j}`$ and $`J_V`$ the corresponding periodic range function. By proposition 2.5, $`(J_{V_j}(\xi ))_j`$ is increasing and

$$J_V(\xi )=\overline{\underset{j}{}J_{V_j}(\xi )},$$

for almost every $`\xi ^n`$.

Apply now proposition 3.10 to our situation to conclude that

$$\tau _{V,T}(\xi )=Trace(TJ_V(\xi ))=\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim}Trace(TJ_{V_j}(\xi ))=\underset{j\mathrm{}}{lim}\tau _{V_j,T}(\xi ).$$

The second statement is a particular case of the first. ∎

## 6. Wavelets and the local trace function

We reserved this section for applications of the local trace function to wavelets. Throughout this section $`A`$ will be an $`n\times n`$ dilation matrix (i.e all eigenvalues $`\lambda `$ have $`|\lambda |>1`$), and $`A`$ preserves the lattice $`^n`$ (i.e. $`A^n^n`$).

###### Remark 6.1.

The local trace function can be used to obtain the characterization of wavelets (see \[Bo2\] or \[Ca\]), namely:

A set $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\{\psi ^1,\mathrm{},\psi ^L\}`$ is a NTF wavelet (i.e. the set

$$X(\mathrm{\Psi }):=\{D_A^jT_k\psi ^l|j,k^n,l\{1,\mathrm{},L\}\}$$

is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$) if and only if the following equations hold for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$:

(6.1)
$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\widehat{\psi }|^2((A^{})^j\xi )=1,$$

(6.2)
$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j0}{}\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j\xi )\overline{\widehat{\psi }}((A^{})^j(\xi +2s\pi ))=0,(s^nA^{}^n).$$

The argument used here will be the same as the one used in \[Bo2\], the only difference is that, instead of the Gramian we employ the local trace function. Here is a sketch of the proof: It is known (see \[CSS\]) that $`X(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is an affine NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ if and only if the quasi-affine system $`X^q(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. Recall that

$$X^q(\mathrm{\Psi }):=\{\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{j,k}^l|j,k^n,l\{1,\mathrm{},L\}\},$$

with the convention

$$\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{j,k}(x)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}D_A^jT_k\psi (x),& \text{if}& j0,k^n\\ |detA|^{j/2}T_kD_A^j\psi (x)& \text{if}& j<0,k^n.\end{array}$$

This can be reformulated as

$$\{\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{j,0}^l|j<0\}\{\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{j,r}^l|j0,r_j\}$$

is a NTF generator for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ (here $`_j`$ is a complete set of representatives of $`^n/A^j^n`$.

Now use corollary 4.5, and all one has to do is a computation. The computation is done in lemma 2.3 in \[Bo2\] and one obtains, for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$,

$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\widehat{\psi }|^2((A^{})^j(\xi )=1,$$

$$t_{(A^{})^mp}((A^{})^m(\xi ))=0,(p^n,p0),$$

where

$$t_s(\xi ):=\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j0}{}\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j\xi )\overline{\widehat{\psi }}((A^{})^j(\xi +2s\pi )),(\xi ^n,s^nA^{}^n)$$

and $`m=\mathrm{max}\{j|(A^{})^jp^n\}`$. This leads immediately to the equivalence to (6.1) and (6.2).

Another observation is that, if we know that the equivalence ” $`X(\psi )`$ is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ iff (6.1) and (6.2) hold”, then the argument above also shows that the affine system $`X(\psi )`$ is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ iff $`X^q(\psi )`$ is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$.

###### Theorem 6.2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\{\psi ^1,\mathrm{},\psi ^L\}`$ be a semiorthogonal wavelet, i.e. the affine system

$$\{D_A^jT_k\psi |j,k^n,\psi \mathrm{\Psi }\}$$

is a NTF for $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$ and $`W_iW_j`$ for $`ij`$, where

$$W_j=\overline{span}\{D_A^jT_k\psi |k^n,\psi \mathrm{\Psi }\}=D_A^j(S(\mathrm{\Psi })),(j),$$

$$V_j=\underset{i<j}{}W_i.$$

Then
(i) The set

$$\{|detA|^{j/2}T_kD_A^j\psi |j<0,k^n\}$$

is a NTF for $`V_0`$.
(ii) For $`\psi \mathrm{\Psi }`$, $`j1`$ and $`\xi ^n`$, denote by $`f_\psi ^j(\xi )`$ the vector in $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$ defined by

$$f_\psi ^j(\xi )(k)=\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j(\xi +2k\pi )),(k^n).$$

Then, for almost every $`\xi ^n`$, the set

$$\{f_\psi ^j(\xi )|j1,\psi \mathrm{\Psi }\}$$

is a NTF for $`J_{V_0}(\xi )`$, where $`J_{V_0}`$ is the periodic range function of $`V_0`$.
(iii) For every positive operator $`T`$ on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, every $`fl^2\left(^n\right)`$ and almost every $`\xi ^n`$,

(6.3)
$$\tau _{V_0,f}(\xi )=\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}Tf_\psi ^j(\xi )|f_\psi ^j(\xi ),$$

(6.4)
$$\tau _{V_0,f}(\xi )=\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|\underset{k^n}{}\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j(\xi +2k\pi ))\overline{f}_k|^2.$$

###### Proof.

(i) follows, as we mentioned before, from the equivalence between affine frames and quasi-affine frames (see \[CSS\] or theorem 1.4 in \[Bo2\]) and the orthogonality relations given in the hypothesis.

(ii) If we compute the Fourier transform of $`|detA|^{j/2}D_A^j\psi `$ for $`j>0`$ we get $`\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j\xi )`$ and (ii) is obtained from (i) and theorem 2.8.

(iii) The fact asserted in (ii) shows that we can use the vectors $`f_\psi ^j`$ to compute the trace and the resulting formulas are exactly (6.3) and (6.4). ∎

###### Remark 6.3.

Another fundamental fact from the theory of wavelets can be obtained with the aid of the local trace function: the dimension function equals the trace function (see \[Web\]). Let’s recall some notions. Consider $`\mathrm{\Psi }:=\{\psi ^1,\mathrm{},\psi ^L\}`$ a semi-orthogonal wavelet (as in theorem 6.2). We keep the notations for $`V_j`$ and $`W_j`$. The dimension function associated to $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is

$$D_\mathrm{\Psi }(\xi )=\underset{k^n}{}\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j1}{}|\widehat{\psi }|^2\left((A^{})^j(\xi +2k\pi )\right).$$

The definition of the multiplicity function requires a little bit of harmonic analysis (for details look in \[BMM\] or \[B\]). The subspace $`V_0`$ in invariant under translations by integers (shift invariant). So one has a unitary representation of the locally compact abelian group $`^n`$ on $`V_0`$ by translations. The Stone-Mackey theory shows that this representation is determined by a projection-valued measure which in turn is determined by a positive measure class on the dual group $`\widehat{^n}`$ and a measurable multiplicity function $`m_{V_0}:\widehat{^n}\{0,1\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\}`$. $`\widehat{^n}`$ can be identified with $`[\pi ,\pi ]^n`$. In our case, the measure is the Lebesgue measure, so the determinant is the multiplicity function $`m_{V_0}`$. The beautiful result is

(6.5)
$$D_\mathrm{\Psi }(\xi )=m_{V_0}(\xi ),(\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n).$$

We use the local trace function to prove it. First, if we use the equation (6.3) with $`T=I`$, the identity on $`l^2\left(^n\right)`$, we obtain

(6.6)
$$dim_{V_0}(\xi )=\tau _{V_0,I}(\xi )=D_\mathrm{\Psi }(\xi ),(\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n).$$

To equate the local trace function with the multiplicity function we use a result from \[BM\]: if

$$S_j:=\{\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n|m_{V_0}(\xi )j\},(j,j1)$$

then there exist a NTF generator $`\{\phi _j|j1\}`$ for $`V_0`$ such that

(6.7)
$$\underset{k^n}{}\widehat{\phi }_i\overline{\widehat{\phi }}_j(\xi +2k\pi )=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\chi _{S_i}(\xi ),& \text{if}& i=j\\ 0,& \text{if}& ij.\end{array}$$

We can use theorem 4.3 for $`T=I`$ and we have for a.e. $`\xi `$:

$$\tau _{V_0,I}(\xi )=\underset{j1}{}𝒯_{per}\phi _j(\xi )|𝒯_{per}\phi _j(\xi )=\underset{j1}{}\underset{k^n}{}|\widehat{\phi }_j|^2(\xi )=\underset{j1}{}\chi _{S_j}(\xi ).$$

Therefore

(6.8)
$$dim_{V_0}(\xi )=\tau _{V_0,I}(\xi )=m_{V_0}(\xi ),(\xi [\pi ,\pi ]^n).$$

Consequently the multiplicity function and the dimension function are just two disguises of the local trace function at $`T=I`$.

The next theorem gives the equations that relates scaling functions (i.e NTF generators for $`V_0`$) wavelets.

###### Theorem 6.4.

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\{\psi ^1,\mathrm{},\psi ^L\}`$ be a semi-orthogonal wavelet as in theorem 6.2. Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be a countable subset of $`L^2\left(^n\right)`$. The following affirmations are equivalent:

1. $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is contained in $`V_0`$ and is a NTF generator for $`V_0`$;
2. The following equations hold: for every $`s^n`$,

(6.9)
$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\underset{j1}{}\widehat{\psi }((A^{})^j\xi )\overline{\widehat{\psi }}((A^{})^j(\xi +2s\pi ))=\underset{\phi \mathrm{\Phi }}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2s\pi ).$$

for a.e. $`\xi ^n`$.

###### Proof.

Use theorem 4.6 and theorem 6.2. ∎

###### Corollary 6.5.

Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }=\{\psi ^1,\mathrm{},\psi ^L\}`$ be a semi-orthogonal wavelet as in theorem 6.2 and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ a NTF generator for $`V_0`$. Then

(6.10)
$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}|\widehat{\psi }|^2(\xi )=\underset{\phi \mathrm{\Phi }}{}|\widehat{\phi }|^2((A^{})^1\xi )\underset{\phi \mathrm{\Phi }}{}|\widehat{\phi }|^2(\xi ),\text{a.e. on }^n;$$

For all $`s^nA^{}^n`$,

(6.11)
$$\underset{\psi \mathrm{\Psi }}{}\widehat{\psi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\psi }}(\xi +2s\pi )=\underset{\phi \mathrm{\Phi }}{}\widehat{\phi }(\xi )\overline{\widehat{\phi }}(\xi +2s\pi ),\text{a.e. on }^n.$$

###### Proof.

For (6.10), take $`s=0`$, write the equation (6.9) for $`\xi `$ and $`(A^{})^1\xi `$, and substract the first from the second. For (6.11), substract equation (6.9) from equation (6.2). ∎


text:
# Mixing and the 𝑠-process in rotating AGB stars

## 1. Introduction

The $`s`$-process is characterized by neutron captures that are immediately followed by $`\beta `$-decays. Unstable isotopes involved in the $`s`$-process path have typical life times of the order of hours; at neutron densities of $`\mathrm{N}_\mathrm{n}<10^{10}\mathrm{cm}^3`$ they decay rather than capture another neutron (see Busso etal., 1999, for a general review of the $`s`$-process). Current models (Gallino etal., 1998; Goriely & Mowlavi, 2000; Lugaro etal., 2002) favour low mass Asymptotic Giant Branch (AGB) stars as the dominant production site for the $`s`$-process nuclei with mass numbers $`A>90`$. In evolved AGB stars He-shell burning is periodically unstable and generates thermal pulse (TP) cycles. The main neutron producing reaction is $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}(\alpha ,n){}_{}{}^{16}\mathrm{O}`$ at temperatures as low as $`T=910^7\mathrm{K}`$. The neutrons are released under radiative conditions during the interpulse phase.

The necessary amount of $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ is produced if protons and $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ can partially mix at the core-envelope interface. This may happen after TP during the dredge-up phase during which a fraction of intershell material is carried into the envelope. The required extra-mixing is still uncertain. With the H/$`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$-ratio decreasing continuously from a few hundred in the envelope to zero in the intershell both a $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ as well as a $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ pocket forms. Herwig (2000) has described models with hydrodynamical, diffusive overshooting that leads to a partial mixing zone. However, stars rotate and in this paper we discuss the impact of rotationally induced mixing in AGB star models on the $`s`$-process. A more detailed discussion is available in Herwig etal. (2003).

## 2. Properties of the Partial Mixing Zone

The $`s`$-process abundances observed in AGB stars can be characterized by averaged abundance indicators. The index \[hs/ls\] describes the distribution of the $`s`$-process elements. Stars of solar metallicity show $`0.5<[\mathrm{hs}/\mathrm{ls}]<0.0`$, where \[ls/Fe\]=$`\frac{1}{2}`$(\[Y/Fe\]+\[Zr/Fe\]) and hs is the average of Ba, La, Nd and Sm. The total overproduction of $`s`$-process elements correlates with the index \[s/Fe\], which is the average of Y and Nd, and observationally $`0<[\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Fe}]<1`$ (Busso etal., 1995).

The observed overproduction factors in the envelope are related to the overproduction factors in the $`s`$-process zone by a number of dilution factors, which result from the subsequent mixing events: the He-flash convective mixing and the third dredge-up. The envelope abundance of any species in the envelope after dredge-up events in $`m`$ identical TP cycles is related to the abundance in the $`s`$-process zone (partial mixing zone, PM) by

$$Y_{\mathrm{env}}=qmY_{\mathrm{PM}}\frac{M_{\mathrm{PM}}M_{\mathrm{DUP}}}{M_{\mathrm{IS}}M_{\mathrm{env}}}$$
(1)
where $`M_{\mathrm{PM}}`$, $`M_{\mathrm{DUP}}`$, $`M_{\mathrm{IS}}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{env}}`$ are the masses of the partial mixing zone, the dredged up layer, the intershell zone covered by the He-flash convection and the envelope mass respectively. These quantities change with the pulse number, typical numbers in low mass stars are $`M_{\mathrm{DUP}}310^3\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`M_{\mathrm{IS}}10^2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`M_{\mathrm{env}}0.5\mathrm{M}_{}`$. The factor $`q`$ describes the effect of the overlapping of the He-flash convection zone in subsequent thermal pulses and can be estimated to be $`q=2.3`$ (see Herwig etal., 2003 for details). We may assume that not more than 20 thermal pulses with dredge-up contribute to the envelope enrichment with $`s`$-process material ($`m=20`$).

By evaluating Eq. (1) for the numbers specified above we can derive a logarithmic expression that relates the average $`s`$-process overabundance in the PM zone with the mass of that zone:

$$\mathrm{log}M_{\mathrm{PM}}=[s/Fe]_{\mathrm{PM}}+c$$
(2)
where $`Y_{\mathrm{env}}`$ in Eq. (1) is given by using $`[\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Fe}]_{\mathrm{env}}=1`$, and $`c=0.44`$ for $`m=20`$.

In Fig. 1 we show the variation of $`[\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Fe}]_{\mathrm{PM}}`$ and $`[\mathrm{hs}/\mathrm{ls}]_{\mathrm{PM}}`$ with the neutron exposure in a $`s`$-process one-zone model. As more neutrons are released the average $`s`$-process overabundance $`[\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Fe}]_{\mathrm{PM}}`$ increases. The partial mixing zone should not extend into the He-shell. This puts a lower limit on \[s/Fe\]PM and thus on the neutron exposure in the partial mixing zone. In Fig. 1 the dashed horizontal line corresponds to $`M_{\mathrm{PM}}<10^2\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`c=0.44`$, and according to Eq. (2) \[s/Fe\]PM above that line are allowed. From \[hs/ls\]$`{}_{\mathrm{obs}}{}^{}<0.0`$ (dotted line) it follows that the neutron exposure should not exceed $`0.45\mathrm{mbarn}^1`$ in the partial mixing zone. Otherwise the envelope $`s`$-process abundance distribution will eventually be top-heavy as well, and not in agreement with observations (Lugaro etal., 2003).

Thus, we estimate that the neutron exposure at the end of the interpulse phase should be in the range $`0.25\mathrm{mbarn}^1<\tau <0.45\mathrm{mbarn}^1`$. Using Eq. (2) and $`[\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Fe}]_{\mathrm{PM}}=4.0`$ at the upper $`\tau `$ limit, the mass of the partial mixing zone should obey $`\mathrm{log}M_{\mathrm{PM}}>4.44`$ (assuming $`m=20`$). These estimates are roughly in agreement with the much more detailed analysis of the partial mixing zone by Gallino etal. (1998).

## 3. $`s`$-Process nucleosynthesis in a rotating AGB model star

Rotation induces mixing in stars through a variety of processes (Maeder & Meynet, 2000). In rotating AGB stars a large angular velocity gradient develops at the interface of the compact and fast rotating core and the slow rotating envelope. For our analysis we take the corresponding mixing efficiencies and thermodynamic input from a 3$`\mathrm{M}_{}`$ stellar model sequence including rotation (Langer etal., 1999). These models predict that shear mixing is continuously present at the core-envelope interface throughout the interpulse phase. For the $`s`$-process the effective Lagrangian mixing efficiency is important. Note, that the partial mixing layer is contracting significantly during the interpulse phase. Around the time of $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}(\alpha ,n){}_{}{}^{16}\mathrm{O}`$ ignition (interpulse phase $`\varphi 0.3`$), the diffusion coefficient is $`D_{\mathrm{rot}}10^{13}\mathrm{M}_{}/\mathrm{yr}`$, which gives for a mixing timescale of $`1000\mathrm{y}\mathrm{r}`$ a mixing range of $`10^5\mathrm{M}_{}`$.

We use our *nuclear network and mixing post-processing* code to evaluate the effect of mixing on the $`s`$-process. This code solves simultaneously for mixing processes and all considered nuclear processes (charged particle reactions, neutron captures and $`\beta `$-decays). In the network all relevant charged particle reactions from hydrogen to $`{}_{}{}^{31}\mathrm{P}`$ have been considered with rates mainly taken from Angulo etal. (1999). Neutron captures for 15 light isotopes and 9 iron group species have been considered and most cross sections are from Bao etal. (2000). The neutron capture on species beyond $`{}_{}{}^{60}\mathrm{Ni}`$ are considered by a two step heavy neutron sink. We introduce two artificial particles ($`{}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{L}`$) with two extra reactions ($`{}_{}{}^{62}\mathrm{Ni}(\mathrm{n},\gamma ){}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}(\mathrm{n},{}_{}{}^{1}\mathrm{L}){}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}`$) which together give an estimate on $`s`$-process efficiency. For the Maxwellian averaged neutron capture cross section of $`{}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}`$ we take $`\sigma _{{}_{}{}^{63}\mathrm{G}}(8\mathrm{k}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})=120\mathrm{m}\mathrm{b}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{n}`$, which has been determined from extensive one-zone model tests with a full $`s`$-process network.

In Fig. 2 we show the abundance profiles around the core boundary at two times of the post-processing calculation of one interpulse phase of the model sequence with rotation. The top panel shows the initial condition where rotationally induced mixing has caused some diffusion of protons into the $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ rich core at the end of the (in this case shallow) third dredge-up. Goriely & Mowlavi (2000) have shown that in such a situation of a continuously decreasing proton abundance profile into the $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}`$ rich core the mass range with a proton abundance of $`2<\mathrm{log}X_\mathrm{p}<3`$ will eventually host $`s`$-process enriched material. According to this criterion, and given the required properties of the partial mixing zone as estimated in the previous section the partial mixing zone obtained in this rotating model is too thin.

The lower panel of Fig. 2 shows the situation when neutrons are beginning to be released by the $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}(\alpha ,n){}_{}{}^{16}\mathrm{O}`$ reaction. In models without rotation, where the partial mixing zone results for example from hydrodynamic overshooting, the $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ and the $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ pocket keep mainly separated. With rotation instead the $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ abundance exceeds that of $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ in the entire partial mixing zone. $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$ is an efficient neutron absorber, most notably through the $`(n,p)`$ reaction. The recycling effect of the protons released in this reaction and the subsequent $`{}_{}{}^{12}\mathrm{C}(\mathrm{p},\gamma ){}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ reaction does not balance the poison effect of $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$. As a result the neutron densities are low and the final maximum neutron exposure is much lower ($`\tau 0.04\mathrm{mbarn}^1`$)than our estimates from the previous section require.

## 4. Parametric Models and Discussion

It seems that current models of rotation in AGB stars predict interpulse mixing coefficients that could inhibit the $`s`$-process during the interpulse phase due to dilution of the $`{}_{}{}^{13}\mathrm{C}`$ pocket and admixture of the neutron poison $`{}_{}{}^{14}\mathrm{N}`$. In order to further study the effect of mixing during the interpulse we have constructed some parametric $`s`$-process models assuming a constant diffusive mixing coefficient $`D_\mathrm{m}`$ in Lagrangian coordinates during the interpulse phase. We start in all cases with abundance profiles at the core-envelope interface shaped by hydrodynamic overshooting as described in Herwig (2000). The final neutron exposure at the end of the interpulse phase is shown in Fig. 3 for several cases. The case without mixing shows a larger neutron exposure than allowed according to the estimates in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2. For the cases with constant $`D_\mathrm{m}`$ we find an anti-correlation of mixing efficiency and final neutron exposure. Mixing coefficients over a range of two orders of magnitude correspond to a large spread of neutron exposure. For larger mixing efficiencies the pocket containing $`s`$-process enriched material becomes broader. However, the mixing coefficients that reproduce neutron exposures estimated in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2. are much smaller than what is predicted by the full stellar evolution model with rotation. We attempt to attribute this to unaccounted processes of angular momentum transport like magnetic fields (see Heger etal., these proceedings) in the AGB models. The simple parametric models indicate a possible solution for the apparent spread in $`s`$-process efficiency reported from pre-solar grains (Lugaro etal., 2002a) as well as from AGB and post-AGB stellar observations (Van Winckel & Reyniers, 2000; Busso etal., 2001).

### Acknowledgements:

F.H. would like to thank D.A. VandenBerg for support through his Operating Grant from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

## References

Angulo, C., Arnould, M., & Rayet, M. et al. 1999, Nucl. Phys., A 656, 3, NACRE compilation

Bao, Z. Y., Beer, H., Käppeler, F., Voss, F., Wisshak, K., & Rauscher, T. 2000, ADNDT, 76, 70

Busso, M., Gallino, R., Lambert, D. L., Travaglio, C., & Smith, V. V. 2001, ApJ, 557, 802

Busso, M., Gallino, R., & Wasserburg, G. J. 1999, ARA&A, 37, 239

Busso, M., Lambert, D. L., Beglio, L., Gallino, R., Raiteri, C. M., & Smith, V. V. 1995, ApJ, 446, 775

Gallino, R., Arlandini, C., Busso, M., Lugaro, M., Travaglio, C., Straniero, O., Chieffi, A., & Limongi, M. 1998, ApJ, 497, 388

Goriely, S. & Mowlavi, N. 2000, A&A, 362, 599

Herwig, F. 2000, A&A, 360, 952

Herwig, F., Langer, N., & Lugaro, M. 2003, ApJ, submitted

Langer, N., Heger, A., Wellstein, S., & Herwig, F. 1999, A&A, 346, L37

Lugaro, M., Davis, A. M., Gallino, R., Pellin, M. J., Straniero, O., & K”appeler, F. 2002a, ApJ, accepted

Lugaro, M., Herwig, F., Lattanzio, J. C., Gallino, R., & Straniero, O. 2002b, ApJ, in press

Maeder, A. . & Meynet, G. 2000, ARA&A, 38, 143

Van Winckel, H. & Reyniers, M. 2000, A&A, 354, 135