2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2017.02.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Stability constants of the weak⁎ fixed point property for the space ℓ1

Abstract: The main aim of the paper is to study some quantitative aspects of the stability of the weak * fixed point property for nonexpansive maps in ℓ 1 (shortly, w * -fpp). We focus on two complementary approaches to this topic. First, given a predual X of ℓ 1 such that the σ(ℓ 1 , X)-fpp holds, we precisely establish how far, with respect to the Banach-Mazur distance, we can move from X without losing the w * -fpp. The interesting point to note here is that our estimate depends only on the smallest radius of the bal… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is worth emphasizing that this estimate is optimal (see Remark 2.8). This result is a generalization of Theorem 3.7 in [6], where some 1 -preduals X isomorphic to c 0 , for which r * (X) = 1, are considered. Moreover, this result complements Theorem 2.1 in [8] and Theorem 4.1 in [8].…”
mentioning
confidence: 62%
“…It is worth emphasizing that this estimate is optimal (see Remark 2.8). This result is a generalization of Theorem 3.7 in [6], where some 1 -preduals X isomorphic to c 0 , for which r * (X) = 1, are considered. Moreover, this result complements Theorem 2.1 in [8] and Theorem 4.1 in [8].…”
mentioning
confidence: 62%
“…We conclude our paper by pointing out that some other equivalent conditions for the weak * -FPP are known in the literature. We refer the interested reader to [2,4,5,11,12].…”
Section: Weak * Fixed Point Property In the Dual Of Separable Lindens...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If in Theorem 4.1 we put e * = e * 1 , then we get the statement of [10, Theorem 2.1].Remark 4.3. From the proof of[7, Proposition 3.8] we have d(W e * , c 0 ) ≤ ln(1 + 2 e * ). It was unknown to the authors of[7] whether this estimate is sharp except for the case when e * = 1.…”
mentioning
confidence: 92%
“…From the proof of[7, Proposition 3.8] we have d(W e * , c 0 ) ≤ ln(1 + 2 e * ). It was unknown to the authors of[7] whether this estimate is sharp except for the case when e * = 1. However, by applying Theorem 4.1 we immediately conclude that d(W e * , c 0 ) = ln(1 + 2 e * ) for every e * ∈ B 1 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation