2010
DOI: 10.5802/aif.2575
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Uniform minimality, unconditionality and interpolation in backward shift invariant subspaces

Abstract: We discuss relations between uniform minimality, unconditionality and interpolation for families of reproducing kernels in backward shift invariant subspaces. This class of spaces contains as prominent examples the Paley-Wiener spaces for which it is known that uniform minimality does in general neither imply interpolation nor unconditionality. Hence, contrarily to the situation of standard Hardy spaces (and other scales of spaces), changing the size of the space seems in this context necessary to deduce uncon… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
4
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
4
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In this generality, however, even the case of Kθp with 1<p< (or with p=2) cannot be viewed as completely understood. At least, the existing results (see for some of these) appear to be far less clear‐cut than in the current setting. By contrast, the difficulty we have to face here is entirely due to the endpoint position of KB within the KBp scale, the only enemy being the failure of the Riesz projection theorem.…”
Section: Introduction and Resultscontrasting
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this generality, however, even the case of Kθp with 1<p< (or with p=2) cannot be viewed as completely understood. At least, the existing results (see for some of these) appear to be far less clear‐cut than in the current setting. By contrast, the difficulty we have to face here is entirely due to the endpoint position of KB within the KBp scale, the only enemy being the failure of the Riesz projection theorem.…”
Section: Introduction and Resultscontrasting
confidence: 73%
“…While we are only concerned with the traces of functions from K ∞ B on {a j }, which is the zero sequence of B, an obvious generalization would consist in restricting our functions (or those from K ∞ θ , with θ inner) to an arbitrary interpolating sequence in D. In this generality, however, even the case of K p θ with 1 < p < ∞ (or with p = 2) cannot be viewed as completely understood. At least, the existing results (see [1,6,13] for some of these) appear to be far less clear-cut than in the current setting. By contrast, the difficulty we have to face here is entirely due to the endpoint position of K ∞ B within the K p B scale, the only enemy being the failure of the M. Riesz projection theorem.…”
Section: Introduction and Resultscontrasting
confidence: 65%
“…We shall be concerned with interpolation problems for functions in star-invariant subspaces-specifically, for those in K p B , where B is an interpolating Blaschke product. Some of the earlier results in this area can be found in [1,7,16,18], while others, more relevant to our current topic, will be recalled presently.…”
Section: Introduction and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…To describe the trace class K ∞ B | Z in the general case (i.e., when (1.7) no longer holds), we first introduce a bit of notation. Once the interpolating sequence Z = {z j } is fixed, we associate with each sequence W = {w j } from 1 1 (Z) the conjugate sequence W = { w k } whose elements are…”
Section: Introduction and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [AH10], the authors show that uniform minimality implies unconditionality in a bigger space for certain backward shift invariant spaces K p I := H p ∩ IH p 0 (considered here on the unit circle T) for which the Paley-Wiener spaces are a particular case. We will use here a different approach to obtain a stronger result.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%