arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 29 Nov 2012

Transcription

1 BOUNDEDNESS AND OMPATNESS OF OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 29 Nov 2012 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU ABSTRAT. We obtain sufficient conditions for a densely-defined oerator on the Fock sace to be bounded or comact. Under the boundedness condition we then characterize the comactness of the oerator in terms of its Berezin transform. 1. INTRODUTION Let be the comlex lane and be a ositive arameter that is fixed throughout the aer. Let dλ (z) = π e z 2 da(z) be the Gaussian measure, where da is the Euclidean area measure. A calculation with olar coordinates shows that dλ is a robability measure. The Fock sace F 2 consists of all entire functions f in L 2 (,dλ ). It is easy to show thatf 2 is a closed subsace ofl2 (,dλ ) and so is a Hilbert sace with the inherited inner roduct f,g = f(z)g(z)dλ (z). In fact, F 2 is a reroducing kernel Hilbert sace whose kernel function is given by K w (z) = K(z,w) = e zw. The norm of functions in L 2 (,dλ ) will simly be denoted by f. The norm of functions in f L (,dλ ) will be denoted by f. We study linear oerators (not necessarily bounded) on the Fock sace. Throughout the aer we let D denote the set of all finite 2010 Mathematics Subject lassification. Primary 30H20, 47B38. Secondary 47B35, 47B07. Key words and hrases. Fock sace, Bergman sace, Toelitz oerator, Schatten class, Berezin transform, Gaussian measure, Hilbert-Schmidt oerator. Research of Wang and ao suorted by the hina NNSF Grant

2 2 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU linear combinations f of kernel functions in F 2 : f(z) = N c k e zw k. k=1 It is well known that D is a dense linear subsace of F 2. See [7] for examle. We also assume that the domain of every linear oerator that aears in the aer containsd. Using the relation SK z,k w = K z,s K w we see that we can also assume that the domain of S containsd as well. One additional standing assumtion we make is that the function z SK z is conjugate analytic. Our main focus here is the boundedness and comactness of oerators onf. 2 To state our main results, we need to introduce a class of unitary oerators on F. 2 More secifically, for any z, let ϕ z denote the analytic self-ma of defined by ϕ z (w) = z w, let k z denote the normalized reroducing kernel defined by k z (w) = K(w,z)/ K(z,z) = e 2 z 2 +zw, and letu z denote the oerator onf 2 defined byu zf = f ϕ z k z. Each k z is a unit vector in F 2. It follows easily from a change of variables that each U z is a self-adjoint unitary oerator on F. 2 See [7]. For any z and any linear oerator S on F 2 let S z = U z SU z. It is easy to check that each U z mas D onto D (see Lemma 7), so the domain of eachs z containsdwhenever the domain ofs containsd. Each oerator S on F 2 also induces a function S on, namely, S(z) = Sk z,k z, z. We call S the Berezin transform ofs. Since eachk z is a unit vector, S is bounded whenever S is bounded, and S S. Also, k z 0 weakly in F 2 as z, so S(z) 0 as z whenever S is comact on F 2. We can now state the main results of the aer. Theorem A. If there exist some > 2 and > 0 such that S z 1 for all z, then the oerator S is bounded on F 2. Theorem B. If there exists some > 2 such that S z 1 0 asz, thens is comact onf 2. Theorem. Suose that there exist some > 2 and > 0 such that S z 1 for all z. Then S is comact if and only if S(z) 0 as z.

3 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 3 As an examle, we will aly these results to the study of Toelitz oerators on F 2. The condition S z 1 was first introduced in [1] and further studied in [4]. An analogue of Theorem was roved in [4] in the context of Bergman saces on the unit disk. The aers [2, 3, 8] also exlore the condition S z 1. Our aroach here is different from those in the aers mentioned above, although a key idea from [1, 4] will be used. One of the novelties here is that there is no need for us to use Schur s test. A major difference exists between the Bergman sace setting and the current one. More secifically, in the Bergman sace setting, there is a certain cut-off requirement, namely,cannot be too close to 2. In fact, it was shown in [4] thatmust be greater than3in the case of oerators on the Bergman sace of the unit disk. However, the cut-off requirement disaears in the Fock sace setting; any > 2 will work. This is not entirely surrising; some similar situations were ointed out and exlained in the book [7]. This work was done while the first named author was visiting the State University of New York at Albany. He wishes to thank the Deartment of Mathematics and Statistics at SUNY-Albnay for hosting his visit. The authors would also like to thank Josh Isralowitz and Haiying Li for helful discussions. 2. A SUFFIIENT ONDITION FOR BOUNDEDNESS We rove Theorem A in this section. The following lemma will be used several times in the aer. Lemma 1. For any > 0 we have ( )1 β f(z) f e β 2 z 2 for all entire functions f L (,dλ ) and z, whereβ = 2/. Proof. It is clear that f = f(z) e z 2 da(z) = π β β π f(z)e β 2 z 2 da(z). The desired estimate then follows from orollary 2.8 in [7]. We will also need the following estimate several times later on. Lemma 2. Suose > 2 and S is a linear oerator onf 2. Then SK w,k z S w 1 e 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) σ z w 2

4 4 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU for all w and z in the comlex lane, whereβ = 2/ and σ = ( β)/2. onsequently, if S w 1 for some constant > 0 and allw, then for the same constant we have for all z and w in. Proof. Recall that SK w,k z e 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) σ z w 2 S w 1(z) = (U w SU w 1)(z) = (U w Sk w )(z) = k w (z)(sk w )(w z). By Lemma 1, we have k w (z)(sk w )(w z) ( )1 β Sw 1 e β 2 z 2 S w 1 e β 2 z 2 for all z and w, where β = 2/ <. Relacing z by w z, using Sk w (z) = e 2 w 2 SK w (z) = e 2 w 2 SK w,k z, and simlifying the result, we obtain for all z andw. SK w,k z S w 1 e 2 z w 2 σ z w 2 The following lemma shows that every linear oerator on F 2 can be reresented as an integral oerator in a canonical way. Lemma 3. Let S be a linear oerator on F 2 and let T be the integral oerator defined on L 2 (,dλ ) by Tf(z) = f(w) SK w,k z dλ (w). (1) Then S is bounded on F 2 if and only if T is bounded on L2 (,dλ ). Furthermore, when either of them is bounded, S is equal to the restriction of T tof 2. Proof. For any fixed z, the function w K z,sk w = S K z,k w = (S K z )(w) is entire and belongs tof 2 for any fixedz. Therefore, Tf = 0 for everyf L 2 (,dλ ) F 2. If S is bounded on F 2 and f = K a is the reroducing kernel at some ointa, then by the reroducing roerty ofk a, Tf(z) = K(w,a) SK w,k z dλ (w)

5 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 5 = S K z,k w K(a,w)dλ (w) = S K z,k a = SK a,k z = SK a (z) = Sf(z). It follows that Tf = Sf on D and Tf S f for all f D. ombining this with the conclusion of the revious aragrah, we conclude that T is bounded on L 2 (,dλ ) and S is equal to the restriction oft to F 2. onversely, ift is bounded on L 2 (,dλ ) and f D, then Tf(z) = f(w)s K z (w)dλ (w) = f,s K z = Sf,K z = Sf(z) for all z. This shows that the restriction of T on D coincides with action of S there. Since D is dense in F 2 and T is bounded, we conclude that S extends to a bounded linear oerator on F. 2 We can now rove Theorem A which is the main result of this section. Theorem 4. Let S be a linear oerator on F 2. If there are constants > 2 and > 0 such that S z 1 for all z, then S is bounded onf 2 with S (2)/( 2). Proof. By Lemma 3, it suffices for us to show that the integral oerator T defined by (1) is bounded on L 2 (,dλ ). By Lemma 2, for the same constant and we have Tf(z) σ = β 2 = ( 2), 2 f(w) e 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) σ z w 2 dλ (w) for all z. Rewrite this as F(z) 1 f(w) e 2 w 2 e σ z w 2 da(w), where 1 = /π and F(z) = Tf(z) e 2 z 2. By Hölder s inequality F(z) f(w)e 2 2 w 2 e σ z w 2 da(w) e σ z w 2 da(w)

6 6 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU where = 2 f(w)e 2 2 w 2 e σ z w 2 da(w), 2 = 1 2 e σ u 2 da(u) = 2 1 π σ. It follows from Fubini s theorem and a change of variables that Tf(z)e 2 2 z 2 da(z) 3 f(w)e 2 w 2 2 da(w), where 3 = 2 e σ u 2 da(u) = ( ) 2 2π 2 σ =. 2 This shows that the oerator T is bounded on L 2 (,dλ ) and T 2 2. RestrictingT to the sacef 2 then yields the desired result fors. Note that the roof above only deends on the ointwise estimate derived in Lemma 2, not the full assumtion about the norms S z SUFFIIENT ONDITIONS FOR OMPATNESS In this section we resent two sufficient conditions for an oerator on F 2 to be comact. The first condition is the little oh version of the condition in Theorem A, while the second condition is a natural deviation of the first one. We begin with Theorem B, the comanion result of Theorem A, which we restate as follows. Theorem 5. LetS be a linear oerator on F 2 and > 2. If S z 1 0 asz, thens is comact onf 2. Proof. It follows from our standing assumtions on S that the condition S z 1 0 as z imlies that S z 1 is bounded in z. Therefore, by Theorem 4, S is already bounded on F. 2 By Lemma 3, it suffices for us to show that the integral oerator T defined by (1) is comact on L 2 (,dλ ). We do this using an aroximation argument. For any r > 0 let us consider the integral oerator T r defined on L 2 (,dλ ) by T r f(z) = f(w) SK w,k z dλ (w) w <r

7 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 7 = f(w)χ r (w) SK w,k z dλ (w), whereχ r is the characteristic function of the disk{z : z < r}. It follows easily from Lemma 2 that χ r (w) SK w,k z 2 dλ (z)dλ (w) <. Thus eacht r is Hilbert-Schmidt. In articular, eacht r is comact on L 2 (,dλ ). LetD r = T T r. Then D r f(z) = f(w)(1 χ r (w)) SK w,k z dλ (w) = f(w) SK w,k z dλ (w). w >r We are going to show that D r 0 as r, which would imly thatt is comact. Given anyε > 0, choose a ositive numberrsuch that S w 1 < ε for all w > R. By Lemma 2, for anyr > R we have 1 χ r (w) SK w,k z εe 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) σ z w 2 for all z and w in (just consider the cases w r and w > r searately). It follows from the roof of Theorem 4 that there is a ositive constant, indeendent ofεandr, such that D r ε for all r > R. This shows that D r 0 as r and comletes the roof of the theorem. Recall from the definition of S z and U z that S z 1 = U z SU z 1 = U z Sk z, z. Since eachu z is a unitary oerator onf 2, the condition S z 1 is the same as Sk z. However, U z is not isometric on L (,dλ ) when 2, so it is natural for us to consider the condition Sk z. Proosition 6. Let S be a linear oerator on F 2 and > 2. If there is a constant > 0 such that Sk z and S k z for all z, thens is Hilbert-Schmidt on F. 2 In articular,s is comact. Proof. By Lemma 1, the assumtion on Sk w imlies that there exists another ositive constant such that (Sk w )(z) e β 2 z 2, z,w,

8 8 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU where β = 2/ <. This can be rewritten as SK w,k z e 2 w 2 + β 2 z 2 (2) for all z andw. Similarly, the assumtion on S k w imlies that SK w,k z e 2 z 2 + β 2 w 2 (3) for all z andw. Multily the inequalities in (2) and (3) and then take the square root on both sides. The result is SK w,k z e δ 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) for all z andw, where δ = (+β)/2 < /2. It follows from this that SK w,k z 2 dλ (w)dλ (z) <, so that the integral oerator T defined by Tf(z) = f(w) SK w,k z dλ (w) is Hilbert-Schmidt on L 2 (,dλ ). Since S is the restriction of T on F, 2 we conclude thats is Hilbert-Schmidt on F. 2 Once again, we only used the ointwise estimates deduced from the assumtions on Sk z and S k z. 4. OMPATNESS VIA THE BEREZIN TRANSFORM In this section we show that, under the assumtion of Theorem A, the comactness of a linear oerator on F 2 can be characterized in terms of its Berezin transform. Lemma 7. For any a and w in the comlex lane we have U a K w = k a (w)k ϕa(w), U a k w = βk ϕa(w), S ϕa = S a, whereβ is a unimodular constant deending onaand w. Proof. The first identity follows from the definition of U a and the exlicit form of the kernel function. The second identity follows from the first one with β = e 2 (aw aw). By the definition of the Berezin transform, the definition of S a, and the second identity that we have already roved, we have S a (w) = S a k w,k w = U a SU a k w,k w = SU a k w,u a k w = β 2 Sk ϕa(w),k ϕa(w)

9 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 9 = S(ϕ a (w)). This roves the third identity. Lemma 8. Let S be a linear oerator on F 2. Suose that there are constants > 2 and > 0 such that S z 1 for all z. Then S(w) 0 as w if and only if for every (or some)2 < < we have S w 1 0 as w. Proof. If for some (2,) we have S w 1 0 asw, then by Hölder s inequality, S(w) = S w 1,1 S w 1 0 asw. Next, suose S(w) 0 as w and fix any (2,). We roceed to show that S w 1 0 asw. For anyaand z we have where S(ϕ z (a)) = S z (a) = e a 2 S z K a,k a, K a (u) = e ua = k=0 k k! uk a k. By the roof of Lemma 6.26 in [7], starting at line 4 from the bottom of age 240 and finishing at line 3 from the to of age 242, with f relaced by S and T f ϕz relaced by S z, we will have lim S z1,z n = 0 z for everyn 0. Since the olynomials are dense in F 2, we conclude that S z 1 0 weakly in F 2 as z. In articular, for every w, S z 1(w) 0 asz. Let s = / > 1 and choose t > 1 such that 1/s+1/t = 1. For any measurable set E we have E S z 1(w) dλ (w) [ E S z 1(w) dλ (w) S z 1 [λ (E)] 1 t. ]1 s [ E dλ (w) Since S z 1 for all z, this shows that the family { S z 1 : z } is uniformly integrable. By Vitali s Theorem, S z 1(w) dλ (w) = 0. lim z This comletes the roof of the lemma. ]1 t

10 10 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU We can now rove Theorem, the main result of this section, which we restate as follows. Theorem 9. Suose S is a linear oerator on F 2, > 2, > 0, and S z 1 for allz. ThenS is comact onf 2 if and only if S(z) 0 asz. Proof. By Theorem 4, S is bounded on F 2. If S is further comact, then S(z) = Sk z,k z 0 asz, because k z 0 weakly in F 2 as z. onversely, if S(z) 0 as z, it follows from Lemma 8 that S z 1 0 asz, where is any fixed number strictly between 2 and. This together with Theorem 5 then imlies thats is comact. 5. AN APPLIATION TO TOEPLITZ OPERATORS Let P : L 2 (,dλ ) F 2 denote the orthogonal rojection. If ψ L (), we can define a linear oerator T ψ on F 2 by T ψf = P(ψf). It is clear thatt ψ is bounded and T ψ ψ. It is also easy to verifty that (T ψ ) z = U z T ψ U z = T ψ ϕz for all z. In articular, (T ψ ) z 1 = P(ψ ϕ z ), or (T ψ ) z 1(w) = K(w,u)ψ(z u)dλ (u), w. It follows that (T ψ ) z 1(w) ψ = ψ e wu dλ (u) e (w/2)u 2 dλ (u) = ψ e w/2 2 = ψ e 4 w 2 for all w. This shows that (T ψ ) z 1 dλ < su z whenever 0 < < 4. Therefore, the assumtion in Theorem 9 is satisfied for each (2, 4). onsequently, we arrive at the wellknown result that such a Toelitz oerator is comact if and only if its Berezin transform vanishes at. See [2, 7]. Using the integral reresentation for the orthogonal rojection, it is ossible to define Toelitz oeratorst ψ for functionsψthat are not necessarily bounded. In articular,t ψ is well defined ond whenever

11 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 11 ψ belongs to the sace BMO used in Section 6.4 of [7]. For such a symbol function ψ, Lemma 6.25 of [7] states that (T ψ ) z 1(w) e 4 w 2, w, whenever ψ is bounded, which imlies that (T ψ ) z 1 for 2 < < 4. This together with the arguments in the revious aragrah shows that, for such ψ, the oerator T ψ is bounded if and only if its Berezin transform is bounded; and T ψ is comact if and only if its Berezin transform vanishes at. See [2, 7] again. The Berezin transform of T ψ is usually written as ψ or B ψ. It is easy to see that B ψ(z) = w)dλ (w) = ψ(z ψ(w)e z w 2 dλ (w) π for z. See [7] for more information about the Berezin transform which is also called the heat transform in many articles. The arguments above can also be extended to oerators of the form T = T ψ1 T ψn, where each ψ k belongs to L (). In fact, in the case S = T ψ1 T ψ2, we have S z 1 = P [ψ 1 ϕ z (T ψ2 ) z 1]. Using the integral reresentation for the outside P and the ointwise estimate we already obtained for (T ψ2 ) z 1, we arrive at S z 1(w) e 4 u 2 K(w,u) dλ (u) 1 e 3 w 2. This imlies that su S z 1 <, 2 < < 3. z More generally, ifσ > 2, then e σ u 2 K(w,u) dλ (u) e σ w 2, with ( σ = ) > 2. σ So by mathematical induction, each oerators = T ψ1 T ψn satisfies the ointwise estimate for some σ > 2. It follows that S z 1(w) e σ w 2, w, su S z 1 <, z (2,σ).

12 12 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU Going one ste further, we can also extend the arguments above to oerators on F 2 that are finite sums of finite roducts of Toelitz oerators. 6. FURTHER RESULTS AND REMARKS For any > 0 the Fock sacef is defined to be the set of all entire functions f such that f(z)e 2 z 2 belongs to L (,da). The norm in F is defined by f, = f(z)e 2 z 2 da(z). 2π It is clear that when = 2, the definition here is consistent with the definition of F 2 in the Introduction. More generally, we have F = H() L (,dλ β ), β = 2, where H() is the sace of all entire functions. Equivalently, H() L (,dλ ) = F β, β = 2. Although both F and H() L (,dλ ) are natural extentions of the Fock sace F 2, in most cases it is much more beneficial, more convenient, and more natural to use F instead of the other one. Of course there are excetions, the results of this aer being one of them. Nevertheless, the following question still seems natural: What haens if we relaced the condition S z 1 by the condition S z 1,? We do not know the answer. But the techniques used in the aer would certainly not work, because the otimal ointwise estimate for functions in F is given by f(z) f, e 2 z 2, z. See orollary 2.8 in [7]. We needed a certain decrease in the exonent in order to erform the analysis in Sections 2 4. In the case ofs = T ψ, where ψ L (), we already showed that su (T ψ ) z 1 <, z su (Tψ) z 1 <, z for 0 < < 4. On the other hand, for every [1, ), the rojection P is bounded from the sace } L {f () = : f(z)e 2 z 2 L (,da)

13 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 13 onto the sace F ; see [7] for examle. It follows from this and the identity(t ψ ) z 1 = P(ψ ϕ z ) that su (T ψ ) z 1, <, z su (Tψ ) z1, <, z for all 1 <. Thus the condition S z 1 aears stronger (or more difficult to satisfy) than the condition S z 1,. This is easily confirmed by the elementary continuous embedding H() L (,dλ ) = F β F, where β = (2)/ < for > 2. The examle in the revious section of Toelitz oerators on F 2 induced by bounded symbols shows that the condition S z 1 is a meaningful one. We just do not know what the weaker condition S z 1, would imly. But there is more we can say. For each z the oerator U z is actually a surjective isometry on each F, and k z is actually a unit vector in F. Therefore, the condition S z 1, is the same as Sk z,. If there exists a bounded linear oerator S on F, 2 < <, such that S is not bounded on F 2, then the condition S z1, would not imly the boundedness of S on F 2. Although we do not have an examle at hand, this seems very lausible to us. Note that the roof of Theorem 4 amounts to showing that the integral oerator T defined by Tf(z) = f(w)h(z,w)dλ (w) is bounded on L 2 (,dλ ), where H(z,w) = e 2 ( z 2 + w 2 ) σ z w 2. Since f L 2 (,dλ ) if and only if the function f(w)e 2 w 2 is in L 2 (,da), and since e 2 z 2 Tf(z) = [ f(w)e w 2] 2 e σ z w 2 da(w), π we see that the oeratort onl 2 (,dλ ) is unitarily equivalent to the Berezin transform B σ as an oerator on L 2 (,da). Recall that B σ f(z) = σ f(w)e σ z w 2 da(w). π The boundedness of B σ on L 2 (,da) is actually a known result. See [7] for examle. A natural question here is the following: is the Berezin transform B σ comact on L 2 (,da)? Since the roof of Theorem 4 along with

14 14 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU the fact that (T ψ ) z 1 for 2 < < 4 shows that every Toelitz oerator T ψ on F 2, ψ L (), is dominated by B σ as an oerator on L 2 (,da), and it is very easy to see that there are such Toelitz oerators that are not comact, we see that B σ cannot ossibly be comact on L 2 (,da). To see this more directly, we consider the sequence {χ n } of characteristic functions of the disks B(n,1). It is easy to see that {χ n } converges to 0 weakly inl 2 (,da). But B σ χ n (z) = σ e σ z n w 2 da(w) = g(z n), π where B(0,1) g(z) = σ π B(0,1) e σ z w 2 da(w). By translation invariance, the norm of each B σ χ n in L 2 (,da) is equal to that of g. Thus B σ χ n L 2 (,da) 0 as n, so B σ is not comact on L 2 (,da). Our arguments can also be adated to work for Bergman saces on the unit ball B n in n. More secifically, for any > 1 we consider the weighted volume measure dv (z) = c (1 z 2 ) dv(z), where dv is ordinary volume measure on B n and c is a normalizing constant chosen so that v (B n ) = 1. For any > 0 the saces A = H(B n) L (B n,dv ) are called (weighted) Bergman saces, where H(B n ) is the sace of all holomorhic functions on B n. The sace A 2 is a reroducing kernel Hilbert sace whose reroducing kernel is given by K(z,w) = 1 (1 z,w ) n+1+. The normalized reroducing kernels are still defined by k z (w) = K(w,z) = (1 z 2 ) n+1+ 2 K(z,z) (1 z,w ) n+1+. For every z B n there is also a canonical involutive automorhism ϕ z of the unit ball B n, and an associated self-adjoint unitary oerator U z can be defined on A 2 by U zf = f ϕ z k z. If S is a linear oerator ona 2, not necessirly bounded, whose domain contains all finite linear combinations of kernel functions, then we can still considers z = U z SU z.

15 OPERATORS ON THE FOK SPAE 15 The otimal ointwise estimate for functions in Bergman saces is given by f f(z) A. (1 z 2 ) n+1+ See [6] for this and the results quoted in the revious two aragrahs. It follows from the roof of Lemma 2 that the condition su S z 1 A <, z B n where > 2, imlies the inequality SK w,k z 1 z,w (2 1)(n+1+). (1 z 2 ) n+1+ (1 w 2 ) n+1+ Our techniques here can be adated to show that for > 2+ 2n +1, (4) the condition S z 1 A imlies that the oerator S is bounded on A 2. Similarly, the condition lim z 1 S z1 A = 0 imlies that the oerator S is not only bounded but also comact on A 2. Furthermore, under the assumtion S z1 A, the comactness of S on A 2 is equivalent to the vanishing of the Berezin transform of S on the unit shere z = 1. We leave the details to the interested reader. We oint out that in the case whenn = 1 and = 0, the restriction > 4 in (4) is not as good as the otimal restriction > 3 obtained in [4]. The discreancy stems from the fact that our aroach here only uses ointwise estimates derived from the assumtion about norms, while the aroach in [4] made full use of the assumtion about norms. We also mention that the conditions su Sk z A <, su S k z A <, (5) z B n z B n where > 2, imly the inequality SK w,k z, (1 z 2 ) n+1+ q (1 w 2 ) n+1+ q

16 16 XIAOFENG WANG, GUANGFU AO, AND KEHE ZHU where q (2,) is the exonent given by 1 q = 1 ( ). Ifand satisfy +1 > ( ) (n+1+), then the conditions in (5) imly thats is Hilbert-Schmidt ona 2. Obviously, the deendence on and in the Bergman sace theory is much more delicate. Again, the interested reader can easily work out the details by following arguments in revious sections of this aer. REFERENES [1] S. Axler and D. Zheng, omact oerators via Berezin tranforms, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 47 (1998), [2] L. oburn, J. Isralowitz, and Bo Li, Toelitz oerators with BMO symbols on the Segal-Bargmann sace, Tran. Amer. Math. Soc. 363 (2011), [3] A. Dieudonne and E. Tchoundja, Toelitz oerators with L 1 symbols on Bergman saces in the unit ball of n, Adv. Pure Al. Math. 2 (2010), [4] J. Miao and D. Zheng, omact oerators on Bergman saces, Integr. Equat. Oer. Th. 48 (2004), [5] K. Zhu, Oerator Theory in Function Saces (2nd edition), American Mathematical Society, [6] K. Zhu, Saces of Holomorhic Functions in the Unit Ball, Sringer Verlag, New York, [7] K. Zhu, Analysis on Fock Saces, Sringer Verlag, New York, [8] N. Zorboska, Toelitz oerators with BMO symbols and the Berezin transform, Intern. J. Math. Sci. 46 (2003), WANG AND AO: SHOOL OF MATHEMATIS AND INFORMATION SIENE AND KEY LABORATORY OF MATHEMATIS AND INTERDISIPLINARY SIENES OF THE GUANGDONG HIGHER EDUATION INSTITUTE, GUANGZHOU UNIVER- SITY, GUANGZHOU , HINA address: wangxiaofeng514@hotmail.com address: guangfucao@163.com ZHU: DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATIS AND STATISTIS, STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, ALBANY, NY 12222, USA address: kzhu@math.albany.edu