2001
DOI: 10.1006/jfan.2001.3759
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multipliers and Dual Operator Algebras

Abstract: In a previous paper we showed how the main theorems characterizing operator algebras and operator modules, fit neatly into the framework of the``noncommutative Shilov boundary,'' and more particularly via the left multiplier operator algebra of an operator space. As well as giving new characterization theorems, the approach of that paper allowed many of the hypotheses of the earlier theorems to be eliminated. Recent progress of the author with Effros and Zarikian now enables weak*-versions of these characteriz… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
40
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2006
2006

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
40
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Theorem 4.1 will also be an useful tool for future work on operator modules. For example, in [4] the first author was able to refine, in several ways, a theorem of Effros and Ruan characterizing certain operator modules over von Neumann algebras [12]. Theorem 4.1 allows precisely the same improvements for 'normal dual operator modules' over unital dual operator algebras.…”
Section: Proposition 49mentioning
confidence: 96%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Theorem 4.1 will also be an useful tool for future work on operator modules. For example, in [4] the first author was able to refine, in several ways, a theorem of Effros and Ruan characterizing certain operator modules over von Neumann algebras [12]. Theorem 4.1 allows precisely the same improvements for 'normal dual operator modules' over unital dual operator algebras.…”
Section: Proposition 49mentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Theorem 4.1 allows precisely the same improvements for 'normal dual operator modules' over unital dual operator algebras. In particular, Theorem 4.1 shows that the left normal hypothesis used in [4] is automatic, and may therefore be removed. We state a sample of other consequences:…”
Section: Proposition 49mentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Moreover note that condition (b) in Definition 2.2 is satisfied. In case (i), it follows by Theorem 2.1 in [Bl01] that the multiplication in A is separately weak * -continuous, hence A is actually a dual operator G-space. Now we see that in either of the cases (i) and (ii) it follows by Theorem 3.1 that there exists a completely bounded idempotent mapping P : A → A with Ran P = A G = ρ(G) ′ , and we are done.…”
Section: Assume That One Of the Following Hypotheses Holds: (A) X Is mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This hypothesis was removed by the first author in [11]. However, in fact, Proposition 5.1 gives a much simpler way to remove the hypothesis.…”
Section: Conditional Expectations and Noncommutative H ∞ Spacesmentioning
confidence: 99%