arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 20 Dec 2018

Transcription

1 A thought on generalized Morrey spaces arxiv: v [math.fa] 20 Dec 208 Contents Yoshihiro Sawano December 2, 208 Introduction 2 2 Preliminaries 4 2. Lebesgue spaces and integral ineualities Integral operators Generalized Morrey spaces 9 3. Definition of generalized Morrey spaces The class G Boundedness properties of the operators in generalized Morrey spaces Maximal operator in generalized Morrey spaces and the class Z Singular integral operators on generalized Morrey spaces Generalized fractional integral operators in generalized Morrey spaces Generalized fractional maximal operators in generalized Morrey spaces Overview of other types of generalizations Morrey spaces for general Radon measures and Morrey spaces over metric measure spaces Local generalized Morrey spaces Generalized Orlicz Morrey spaces Generalization of to the function depending also on x

2 5.5 Martingale Morrey spaces Replacing sup in the Morrey norm by other norms Grandification of the parameter The case of the variable expoenent Abstract Morrey spaces can complement the boundedness properties of operators that Lebesgue spaces can not handle. Morrey spaces which we have been handling are called classical Morrey spaces. However, classical Morrey spaces are not totally enough to describe the boundedness properties. To this end, we need to generalize parameters p and, among others p. Introduction This note studies the function spaces which Guliyev, Mizuhara and Nakai defined in [29, 70, 76]. Let 0 < p <. We define the classical Morrey space M p (R n ) to be the set of all measurable functions f for which the uantity f M p sup Q(x,r) p x R n,r>0 ( f(y) dy Q(x,r) is finite, where Q(x,r) = {y R n : x y, x 2 y 2,..., x n y n r}. This space goes back to the papers [74, 75] by Morrey and the subseuent paper [87] by Peetre. To describe the endpoint case or to describe the intersection space, sometimes it is useful to generalize the parameter p: let us suppose that p comes from the function t n p. So, we envisage the situation where t n p is replaced by a general function. More precisely, itisknownastheadamstheoremthati α mapsm p (R n )tom s t(r n )whenever < p < and < t s < satisfy s = p α n, p = t s. Here I α is the fractional integral operator given by (2.2) for a nonnegative measurable function f : R n [0, ]. However, it is known that we can not take s =. In fact, I α fails to be bounded from M n/α (R n ) to L (R n ) for all n α. To compensate for this failure, we can use generalized Morrey spaces. We will define the generalized Morrey norm by f M sup x R n,r>0 ( (r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy ) ) <. Here : (0, ) [0, ) is a function which does not vanish at least at some point. Another advantage of generalized Morrey spaces is that we can cover many function spaces related to Lebesgue spaces. 2

3 Although we do not consider the direct applications of generalized Morrey spaces to PDEs, generalized Morrey spaces can be applied to PDEs. Applications to the nondivergence elliptic differential euations can be found in [2, 36, 60, 7, 26]. Applications to the parabolic differential euations can be found in [3]. See [43, 6] for the parabolic obliue derivative problem. See [62] for applicatitons to Schrödinger euations. We refer to [65] for the application to singular integral euations. This note is organized as follows: We collect some preliminary facts in Section 2 In Section 3, we define generalized Morrey spaces and then discuss the structure of generalized Morrey spaces. The conditions on will be important. So we discuss them uite carefully. Section 4 is a detailed discusssion of the boundedness properties of the operators. Here we handle the Hardy Littlewood maximal operators, the Riesz potentails, the Riesz transforms and the fractional maximal operators as well as their generalizations. Section 5 is a survey of other related function spaces. Here we list a series of (somewhat standard) notation we use in this note.. Let (X,d) beametric space. We denote by B(x,r) the ball centered at x of radius r. Namely, we write B(x,r) {y R n : d(x,y) < r} when x R n and r > 0. Given a ball B, we denote by c(b) its center and by r(b) its radius. In the Euclidean space R n, we write B(r) instead of B(o,r), where o (0,0,...,0). 2. A metric measure space is a pair of a metric space (X,d) and a measure µ such that any open set is measurable. 3. By a cube we mean a compact cube in R n whose edges are parallel to the coordinate axes. The metric closed ball defined by l is called a cube. If a cube has center x and radius r, we denote it by Q(x,r). Namely, we write { } Q(x,r) y = (y,y 2,...,y n ) R n : max x j y j r j=,2,...,n when x = (x,x 2,...,x n ) R n and r > 0. From the definition of Q(x,r), its volume is (2r) n. We write Q(r) instead of Q(o,r). Given a cube Q, we denote by c(q) the center of Q and by l(q) the sidelength of Q: l(q) = Q /n, where Q denotes the volume of the cube Q. 4. Given a cube Q and k > 0, kq means the cube concentric to Q with sidelength kl(q). Given a ball B and k > 0, we denote by kb the ball concentric to B with radius kr(b). 5. Let A,B 0. Then A B and B A mean that there exists a constant C > 0 such that A CB, where C depends only on the parameters of importance. The symbol A B means that A B and B A happen simultaneously, while A B means that there exists a constant C > 0 such that A = CB. 6. When we need to emphasize or keep in mind that the constant C depends on the parameters α,β,γ etc Instead of A B, we write A α,β,γ,... B. 3

4 2 Preliminaries 2. Lebesgue spaces and integral ineualities Here we recall Lebesgue spaces and the integral ineualities. Definition 2. (Lebesgue space). Let (X,B,µ) be a measure space and 0 < p.. The Lebesgue norm L p (µ)-(uasi-)norm of a measurable function f is given by 2. Define ( f p f L p (µ) X f(x) p dµ(x) ) p, p < f f L (µ) sup{λ > 0 : f(x) λ for µ-a.e. x X }, p =. L p (µ) {f : X K : f is measurable and f p < }/. Here the euivalence relation is defined by: f g f = g a.e. (2.) and below omit this euivalence in defining function spaces. As usual if (X,B,µ) is the Lebesgue measure, then we write L p (R n ) = L p (µ) and WL p = WL p (µ). Theorem 2.2 (Hölder s ineuality). Let 0 < p,,r satisfy r = p +. Then for f L p (µ) and g L (µ), fg L r (µ) f L p (µ) g L (µ). See [, Theorem 2.4] for example. In addition to L p (µ) with 0 < p, it is convenient to define L 0 (µ): The space L 0 (µ) denotes the set of all measurable functions considered modulo the difference on the set of measure zero. 2.2 Integral operators We will study the Hardy Littlewood maximal operators, the Riesz potentails, the Riesz transforms and the fractional maximal operators. So we recall the definition together with the boundedness properties on L p (R n ). For Theorems 2.4, 2.5, 2.9, 2.0, 2. we refer to [25, 95, 9, 8]. Definition 2.3 (Hardy Littlewood maximal operator). For f L 0 (R n ), define a function Mf by χ B (x) Mf(x) sup f(y) dy (x R n ). (2.2) B B B B The mapping M : f Mf is called the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator. 4

5 We have the weak-(,) boundedness of M. Theorem 2.4 (Hardy Littlewood maximal ineuality). For f L (R n ),λ > 0, λ {Mf > λ} 3 n f. For < p we have the strong-(p,p) boundedness. Theorem 2.5 (L p (R n )-ineuality). Let < p <. Then for all f L 0 (R n ). ( p2p 3 n ) p Mf p f p p We move on to the singular integral operators. Among others we consider the Calderón Zygmund operators. Here we are interested in the following type of the singular integral operators: Definition 2.6 (Singular integral operator). A singular integral operator is an L 2 (R n )- bounded linear operator T that comes with a function K C (R n \{0}) satisfying the following conditions:. (Size condition) For all x R n, K(x) x n. (2.3) 2. (Gradient condition) For all x R n, K(x) x n. (2.4) 3. Let f be an L 2 (R n )-function. For almost all x / supp(f), Tf(x) = K(x y)f(y)dy. (2.5) R n The function K is called the integral kernel of T. More generally we consider the following type of singular integral operators: Definition 2.7. A (generalized) Calderón-Zygmund operator is an L 2 (R n )-bounded linear operator T, if it satisfies the following conditions:. There exists a measurable function K such that for all L (R n )-functions f with compact support we have Tf(x) = K(x,y)f(y)dy for all x / suppf. (2.6) R n 5

6 2. The kernel function K satisfies the following estimates. if x y and if 0 < 2 x y < z x. K(x,y) x y n, (2.7) K(x,z) K(y,z) + K(z,x) K(z,y) x y, (2.8) x z n+ As a typical example we consider the Riesz transform: Example 2.8. Let j =,2,...,n. The singular integral operators, which are represented by the j-th Riesz transform given by, x j y j R j f(x) lim ε 0 x y n+f(y)dy, (2.9) are integral operators with singularity. R n \B(x,ε) We have the weak-(, ) boundedness as before. Theorem 2.9. Suppose that T is a CZ-operator. Then T is weak-(, ) bounded, that is { Tf > λ} f(x) dx (2.0) λ R n for all f L (R n ) L 2 (R n ). We have the strong boundedness for < p <. Theorem 2.0. Let < p < and T be a generalized singular integral operator, which is initially defined on L 2 (R n ). Then T can be extended to L p (R n ) for all < p < so that Tf p p f p (2.) for all f L p (R n ). As a different type of singular integral operators, we consider the fractional integral operators. Let 0 < α < n. Let I α be the fractional maximal operator given by f(y) I α f(x) x y n αdy (x Rn ) (2.2) for a nonnegative measurable function f : R n [0, ]. R n The following theorem is known as the Hardy Littlewood Sobolev theorem. Generalized Morrey spaces can be used to refine this theorem. Theorem 2. (Hardy Littlewood Sobolev). [55, 56, 4] Let 0 < α < n. 6

7 . We have for all f L (R n ) and λ > 0. λ n n α {x R n : I α f(x) > λ} f (2.3) 2. Assume that the parameters < p < n α and = p α n. Then we have I αf f p for all f L p (R n ). Let 0 α < n. The fractional maximal operator M α of order α is defined by M α f(x) sup l(q) α n χ Q (x) f(y) dy Q Q for a measurable function f. Note that M α maps M n/α (R n ) boundedly to L (R n ). As an opposite endpoint case, we have the following boundedness: Theorem 2.2. Let 0 < α < n. Then for all f L (R n ). Q λ n n α {x R n : M α f(x) > λ} f (2.4) Using the boundedess of M, we can prove the boundedness of M α. Here for the sake of convenience for readers we supply the proof. Theorem 2.3. Let < p < < and 0 < α < n satisfy = p α n. Then M α f L f L p for all f L p (R n ). Proof. By the monotone convergence theorem we may assume that f L c (R n ). For λ > 0 we let Ω λ {M α f > λ}. We observe that ( M α f L ) = 0 λ Ω λ dλ 0 λ n n α ( fχωλ L ) n n α dλ. We choose u > 0 so that n( u) = pα. Then we have ( u( f L fχ Ωλ L fχ Ωλ nu L n α) p) u. Thus, we have ( M α f L ) Observe that ( n ) n α 0 ( λ n n α ( f L p) n( u) n α ( (n α)p nu fχ Ωλ L nu n α ) nu n α ( f L p) n( u) n α dλ R n f(x) nu n α Mα f(x) n n α dx. ) = ( n = n α (n α)p np (n α)p nu = (p )n (p )n. ) (n α)p (n α)p nu 7

8 By the Hölder ineuality, we obtain As a result, R n f(x) nu n α Mα f(x) n n α dµ(x) ( f L p) nu n α ( Mα f L ) n n α. ( M α f L ) ( f L p) n n α ( Mα f L ) n n α. If we arrange this ineuality, we obtain M α f L f L p. In addition to the linear operators above we sometimes consider the commutator generated by BMO and these operators. Here we recall the BMO (bounded mean oscillation) as follows: Definition 2.4 (BMO(R n ) (space)). Define f BMO sup f(y) m Q (f) dy = sup m Q ( f m Q (f) ) Q Q Q Q Q Q for f L loc (Rn ). The norm BMO is called the BMO(R n ) norm. The space BMO(R n ) collects all f L loc (Rn ) such that f BMO is finite. Usually BMO(R n ) is considered modulo the constant functions. As the following theorem shows, the BMO functions have high local integrability. Theorem 2.5 (John Nirenberg ineuality). For any λ > 0, a cube Q and a nonconstant BMO(R n )-function b, ( {x Q : b(x) m Q (b) > λ} n exp Dλ ), b BMO where D depends only on the dimension. We will consider the commutators generated by BMO and these operators. For the properties of these commutators we refer to [26]. Let a BMO(R n ). Then the we can consider the operators f L c (Rn ) [a,t]f = a Tf T[a f], [a,i α ]f = a I α f I α [a f] despite the ambiguity which the definition of BMO(R n ) causes. Thanks to the following theorem, we can extend our results of generalized Morrey spaces by mimicking the proof of the boundedness for the similar operators. However, due to the similarity we do not consider the boundedness and the definition of these operators. Instead, we give some references when needed. 8

9 Theorem 2.6. Let 0 < α < n, a BMO(R n ) and T be a generalized Calderón Zygmund operator.. Let < p <. We have [a,t]f L p a BMO f L p for all f L c (R n ). 2. Let < p < < satisfy = p α n. Then we have [a,i α]f L a BMO f L p for all f L c (Rn ). For the proof of Theorem 2.6 we refer to [26]. 3 Generalized Morrey spaces Likewise we can replace by a function Φ. 3. Definition of generalized Morrey spaces From the observation above, we are led to the following definition: Definition 3.. Let 0 < < and : (0, ) [0, ) be a function which does not satisfy 0.. [76] Define the generalized Morrey space M (R n ) to be the set of all measurable functions f such that f M sup (r) x R n,r>0 ( Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy ) <. (3.) 2. [29] Define the weak generalized Morrey space wm (R n ) to be the set of all measurable functions f such that f wm sup λχ (λ, ) ( f ) M <. λ>0 Although we torelate the case where (t) = 0 for some t > 0, it turns out that there is no need to consider such possibility. Before we go into more details, clarifying remarks may be in order. Remark 3.2. In [76] Nakai defined the generalized Morrey space M (R n ) to be the set of all measurable functions f such that f M sup x R n,r>0 ( (r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy ) <, (3.2) 9

10 or more generally f M sup x R n,r>0 ( (x, r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy ) <. See also [9, 30, 34, 6, 79, 23, 26]. Here we follow the notation by Sawano, Sugano and Tanaka [03, 04, 05], for example. See also [72]. See [3, 2, 89, 9, 92, 2] for another notation of generalized Morrey spaces, for example. Despite the difference of the notation, the idea of defining the predual space depends on [6, 2]. Remark 3.3. Someprefer to call the weight (see [27] for example), while some prefer to call w M the weighted generalized Morrey norm (see [42] for example). We can recover the Lebesgue space L (R n ) by letting (t) t n for t > 0 as we have mentioned. To compare Morrey spaces with generalized Morrey spaces, we sometimes call Morrey spaces classical Morrey spaces. In addition to the function (t) = t n p, we consider the following typical functions: Example The function generates L (R n ) thanks to the Lebesgue convergence theorem. 2. Let 0 < < and a R. Define (t) = t n (log(e+t)) a for t > 0. We remark that M (R n ) {0} if and only if a 0. In fact, we have f M = sup (log(e+r)) a f L (Q(x,r)). x R n,r>0 Thus, if f is a measurable function such that f M < and if a > 0, then we have f L (Q(x,r)) = 0 for any cube Q(x,r). Thus, f = 0 a.e.. Convesely if a 0, then L (R n ) M (R n ). 3. Let 0 < p < p 2 <. Then (t) = t n p + t n p 2, t > 0 can be used to express the intersection of M p (R n ) M p 2 (R n ). In general, for 0 < < and, 2 : (0, ) [0, ) satisfying (t ) 0 and (t 2 ) 0 for some t,t 2 > 0 M (R n ) M 2 (R n ) = M + 2 (R n ) with euivalence of norms. 4. Let 0 < p < p 2 <. Let (t) = χ Q (0, ) (t)t n p +χ (0, )\Q (t)t n p 2 for t > 0. Then we have M (R n ) = M p (R n ) M p 2 (R n ) and for any f L 0 (R n ) 5. We can consider the norm f M = max{ f M p, f M p 2 }. sup Q(x,r) p x R n,r (0,) ( Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy for 0 < < p <. In fact, we take (t) = t n pχ [0,] (t) for t > 0. ) 0

11 6. Likewise we can consider the norm ( sup Q(x,r) p x R n,r [, ) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy for 0 < < p <. In fact, we take (t) = t n pχ [, ) (t) for t > Let 0 < < The uniformly locally L -integrable space L uloc (Rn ) is the set of all measurable functions f for which sup x R n,r (0,) ( f(y) dy Q(x,r) ) = sup x R n ( ) f(y) dy Q(x,) is finite. As before, if we let (t) = t n χ (0,] (t) for t > 0, then we obtain L uloc (Rn ) = M (R n ). We can define the weak uniformly locally L -integrable space wl uloc (Rn ) similarly. For f L 0 (R n ), the norm is given by f wl sup λ χ uloc (λ, ] ( f ) L. uloc λ>0 The fifth example deserves a name. We define the small Morrey space as follows: Definition 3.5. Let 0 < < p <. The small Morrey space m p (R n ) is the set of all measurable functions f for which the uantity f m p sup Q(x,r) p x R n,r (0,) ( Q(x, r) Q(x,r) f(y) dy is finite. The weak small Morrey space wm p (R n ) is defined similarly. For f L 0 (R n ), the norm is given by f wm p supλ χ (λ, ] ( f ) m p. λ>0 Example 3.6. [4, Proposition A] Let x R n and r > 0. Then In fact, simply observe that χ Q(x,r) M = sup(t)min(t n,r n ). t>0 χ Q(x,r) M sup(r) R>0 ( Q(x,R) Q(x,r) Q(x, R) = sup(t)min(t n,r n ). t>0 The following min(, )-triangle ineuality holds: Lemma 3.7. Let 0 < < and : (0, ) (0, ) be a function. Then for all f,g M (R n ). ) f +g M min(,) f M min(,) + g M min(,) ) )

12 Proof. This is similar to classical Morrey spaces: Use the min(, )-triangle ineuality for the Lebesgue space L (R n ). Proposition 3.8. Let 0 < <, and let : (0, ) [0, ) be a function satisfying (t 0 ) 0 for some t 0 > 0. Then M (R n ) is a uasi-banach space and if, then M (R n ) is a Banach space. Proof. The norm ineuality follows from Lemma 3.7. The proof of the completeness is a routine, which we omit. Proposition 3.8 guarantees that the (uasi-)norm of M (R n ) is complete. However, it may happen that M (R n ) = {0}. We check that this extraordinary thing never happens if satisfies a mild condition. Proposition 3.9. [83, Lemma 2.2(2)] Let 0 < <, and let : (0, ) [0, ) be a function satisfying (t 0 ) 0 for some t 0 > 0. Then the following are euivalent: (a) L c (R n ) M (R n ). (b) M (R n ) {0}. (c) sup t>0 (t)min(t n,) <. Proof. It is clear that (a) implies (b). Assume (b). Then there exists f M (R n )\{0}. We may assume that f(0) 0 and that x = 0 is the Lebesgue point of f. Then since f L loc (Rn ), by the Lebesgue differential theorem, f(y) dy Q(r) Q(r) for all 0 < r <. Here the implicit constants depend on f. Thus, sup (t) sup (t) 0<t 0<t ( Q(t) Q(t) f(y) dy Here the implicit constants depend on f again. Meanwhile sup t t n (t) sup(t) t Thus we conclude (c). ( f M <. Q((t+,0,0,...,0),t) ) f M <. Q((t+,0,0,...,0),t) f(y) dy Finally, if (c) holds, then χ Q(x,) M (R n ) for any x R n. Since M (R n ) is a linear space, χ Q(x,m) M (R n ) for anyx R n. Sinceanyfunction g L c (Rn ) admits the estimate of the form g Nχ Q(x,m) for some m,n N, we conclude (a). ) 2

13 Here we consider the case where M (R n ) is close to M p (R n ) in a certain sense. Example 3.0. Let 0 < p < and B = (β,β 2 ) R 2. We write { l B (r) = l (β,β 2 ) (+ logr ) β (0 < r ), (r) (+ logr ) β 2 ( < r < ).. We set (t) = t n l B (t) (t > 0). Note that M (R n ) {0} if and only if β 2 0. Indeed, according to Proposition 3.9 the case β 2 < 0 must be excluded in order that M (R n ) {0}. Convesely if β 2 0, then L c (Rn ) M (R n ). 2. Let 0 < < p <. We set Then L c (R n ) M (R n ). 3. We set (t) = t n pl B (t) (t > 0). (t) = l B (t) (t > 0). For a R, we set f(x) = (+ x ) a, x R n. Let us see that M (R n ) is close to L (R n ) if β 0. (a) By the Lebesgue differentiation theorem, f 0 if β < 0, so that f = 0 a.e.. So, if β < 0, then M (R n ) = {0}. (b) Let β 0 > β 2. Then f M (R n ) if and only if a < 0. (c) Let β,β 2 0. Then f M (R n ) if and only if a 0. We have the following scaling law: Lemma 3.. [83, Lemma 2.5] Let 0 < η, < and : (0, ) (0, ) be a function. Then f M (R n ) if and only if f η M η /η (Rn ). Furthemore in this case f η M η = f M η. /η Proof. We content ourselves with showing the euality f η M η /η calculate f η (r) η f L M η = sup (Q) η η = f /η Q=Q(a,r) Q η M by using f η η = f η. = f M η. We The nesting property holds like classical Morrey spaces. Lemma 3.2. Let 0 < 2 < and : (0, ) (0, ) be a function. Then M 2 (R n ) M (R n ). 3

14 Proof. The proof of Lemma 3.2 hinges on the Hölder ineuality. Let f L 0 (R n ). We write out the norms fully: ( f M p sup (r) x R n,r>0 B(x, r) ( f M p 0 = sup (r) x R n,r>0 B(x, r) B(x,r) B(x,r) By the Hölder ineuality (for probability measure), we have ( B(x, r) B(x,r) f(y) dy ) ( B(x, r) B(x,r) f(y) dy f(y) 0 dy ) ) f(y) 0 dy (3.3) 0 (3.4) ) 0. (3.5) Thus by inserting ineuality (3.5) into (3.3) and (3.4), we obtain M 2 (R n ) M (R n ). Remark 3.3. See [76, 78, 05] for the discussion of generalized Morrey spaces. 3.2 The class G It will turn out demanding to consider all possible functions. We will single out good functions. We answer the uestion of what functions are good. Definition 3.4. An increasing function : (0, ) (0, ) is said to belong to the class G if t n (t) s n (s) for all 0 < t s <. Remark that G G 2 if 0 < 2 < <. Here we list a series of the functions in G. Example 3.5. Let 0 < <.. Let u R, and let (t) = t u for t > 0. Then belongs to G if and only if 0 u n. 2. Let 0 < u n, L and let (t) = t u 3. If, 2 G, then + 2,max(, 2 ) G. 4. Let 0 u, and let (t) = increasing. log(l+t) for t > 0. Then belongs to G. t u log(e+t) for t 0. Then / G because is not We start with a simple observation that any function in G enjoys the doubling property: 4

15 Proposition 3.6. If G with 0 < <, then (r) (2r) 2 n (r) for all r > 0. Proof. The left ineuality is a conseuence of the fact that is increasing, while the right ineuality follows from the fact that t t n (t) is decreasing. The next proposition justifies that we can naturally use the class G. Proposition 3.7. [77, p. 446] Let 0 < <. Then for any function : (0, ) [0, ) satisfying 0 < sup(t)min(t n,) <, there exists a function : (0, ) t>0 (0, ) G such that M (R n ) = M (R n ) with euivalence of norms. Proof. Let f be a measurable function. We claim that Q Q f(x) dx 2 n sup Q Q:Q Q,l(Q )=t Q f(x) dx (3.6) Q for any cube Q Q and any positive number t l(q). In fact, let [ N = + l(q) ] t [, ). We write Q = Define n [a j,a j +l(q)], so that (a,a 2,...,a n ) is the bottom corner of Q. j= for m j {,2,...,N} and Q m = δ mj = { 0 m j < N, Nt l(q) m j = N n [ aj +(m j )t δ mj,a j +m j t ] δ mj j= for m = (m,m 2,...,m n ) {,2,...,N} n. Then χ Qm 2 n m=(m,m 2,...,m n) {,2,...,N} n almost everywhere. As a conseuence, f(x) dx f(x) dx Q Q Q m=(m,m 2,...,m n) {,2,...,N} n Q m f(x) dx. Q Q m Q m m=(m,m 2,...,m n) {,2,...,N} n t n 5

16 Since it follows that Q t [ N l(q) = t + l(q) ] ( l(q) t t + l(q) ) l(q) t t + 2, l(q) Q Thus, (3.6) follows. If we let f(x) dx 2 n max f(x) dx. m=(m,m 2,...,m n) {,2,...,N} n Q m Q m (t ) inf t t (t) then it is easy to see that (t) (t) for all t > 0 and hence f M Furthermore, ( ) sup (l(q)) f(x) dx Q Q Q Q 2 n sup 2 n sup = 2 n sup = 2 n sup inf Q Qt (0,l(Q)] inf Q Qt (0,l(Q)] inf Q Qt (0,l(Q)] inf Q Qt (0,l(Q)] 2 n f M. Thus it follows that Next, if we let ( sup (l(q)) Q Q:Q Q,l(Q )=t Q f(x) dx Q ( ) sup (l(q)) Q Q:l(Q )=t Q f(x) dx Q ( ) sup (t ) Q Q:l(Q )=t Q f(x) dx Q ( ) sup (l(q )) Q Q:l(Q )=t Q f(x) dx Q f M (t) t n sup t t f M 2 n f M. (t )t n = sup (st)s n (t > 0), s ) f M. then f M = f M. In fact, since is increasing, is increasing. From the definitoin of, (t) (t) for all t > 0 and thus f M f M. On the other hand, for any r > 0 and ε > 0, we can find r r such that (r) (+ε)r n (r )r n. 6

17 Thus for any cube Q(x,r), ( (r) f(y) dy Q(x, r) Q(x,r) ( (+ε) (r ) Q(x,r ) ( (+ε) (r ) Q(x,r ) (+ε) f M. Q(x,r) ) Q(x,r ) f(y) dy f(y) dy Taking the supremum over x and r, we have f M (+ε) f M. Since ε > 0 is arbitrary, we conclude f M f M. In view of Proposition 3.7, it follows that we can always suppose that G. Remark 3.8. Some authors suppose that there exists δ > 0 such that ) ) (r) δ (0 < r ) (3.7) and that r n p(r) > δ ( < r < ). (3.8) As the next proposition shows, G is a good class in addition to the nice property that it naturally arises in generalized Morrey spaces. Proposition 3.9. Let G with 0 < <. Then we can find a continuous function G such that is strictly increasing and that. Proof. We look for in a couple of steps.. Consider 2t 0 (t) t n ds 2 (s) t s n + = ds (ts) s n + (t > 0). Since is increasing, the function 0 is increasing. Also, by the fact that is doubling, we see that 0 and are euivalent. Thus, we may assume that is continuous. 2. We define ( )n e t ψ(t) = (t)χ (0,] (t)+ ()χ(, ) e (t) (t > 0), Since we can check that t (0,] t n ψ(t) and t [, ) t n ψ(t) is both decreasing, t (0, ) t n ψ(t) is decreasing. Likewise we can check that ψ is increasing. Thus, ψ G. Since ψ +, we can assume that is strictly increasing in (, ) and that is continuous. 7

18 3. Finally, we consider (t) = k=0 (2 k t) 2 kn (t > 0), where N = n +. Then it is easy to check that is euivalent to since each term is dominated by 2 k. Likewise since G, G. Finally since is strictly increasing in (, ), the function (2 k t) is strictly increasing on (2 k, ) for any k N. Since k N is arbitrary, is strictly increasing. Thus, we are led to the following definition: Definition The class W stands for the set of all continuous functions : (0, ) (0, ). That is, W = C((0, ),(0, )). We apply what we have obtained to small Morrey spaces. Example 3.2. Let 0 < <. Let us see how we modify ψ in M ψ (R n ) to obtain the euivalent space M (R n ) with G.. Let (t) = max(t n p,) and ψ(t) = t n pχ (0,] (t) for t > 0. Then with the euivalence of norms m p (R n ) = M ψ (R n ) = M (R n ). 2. Let (t) = max(t a,) with a n and ψ(t) = χ tn (0,] (t) for t > 0. Then with the euivalence of norms L uloc (Rn ) = M ψ (R n ) = M (R n ). Note that G W but that ψ G \W in both cases. So far we have shown that we may assume that G. As a result, we may assume that is doubling. This observation makes the definition of the norm M more flexible. Remark In (3.), cubes can be replaced with balls; an euivalent norms will be obtained. Precisely use the norm given by f M sup (r) x R n,r>0 ( B(x, r) B(x,r) f(y) dy to go through the same argument given for the norm defined by means of cubes. ) Related to this definition, we give some definitions related to the class G. Although we show that it is sufficient to limit ourselves to G, we still feel that this class is too narrow as the function of (t) = tlog(e+t ) shows. So, it is convenient to relax the condition on. The following definition will serve to this purpose. 8

19 Definition Let l > 0.. A function : (0,l] (0, ) is said to be almost decreasing if (s) (t) for all 0 t < s l. 2. A function : (0,l] (0, ) is said to be almost increasing if (s) (t) for all 0 t < s l. 3. A function : (0, ) (0, ) is said to be almost decreasing if (s) (t) for all 0 t < s <. 4. A function : (0, ) (0, ) is said to be almost increasing if (s) (t) for all 0 t < s <. The implicit constants in these ineuality are called the almost decreasing/increasing constants. Example Leta,b bereal parameterswithb 0. Let a,b (t) = t a (log(e+t)) b fort > 0. Then a,b is almost increasing for any a > 0. If a < 0, then a,b is almost decreasing. 2. The function (t) = t+sin2t, t > 0 is almost increasing but not increasing. 3. The function (t) = + e t ( cost), t > 0 is not almost increasing because (2πm) = and (2πm+π) = +2e 2πm+π for all m N. 4. Let 0 < p, < and β,β 2 R. We write { l B (+ logr ) β (0 < r ), (r) (+ logr ) β 2 ( < r < ). We set (t) = t n pl B (t) (t > 0) as we did in Example 3.0. We observe that is almost increasing for all p > 0 and β,β 2 R. We also note that t (t)t n is almost decreasing if and only if p = and β 0 β 2 or p >. Note that is an euivalent to a function ψ G if and only if either p =, β 0 β 2 or p > since we can neglect the effect of log. 5. Let E (0, ) be a non-lebegsgue measurable set. Then = +χ E is almost increasing and almost decreasing. Note that is not measurable. 6. A simple but still standard example is as follows: Let m N and define (t) tn l m (t) where l m (t) is given inductively by: (t > 0), l 0 (t) t, l m (t) log(3+l m (t)) (m =,2,...) for t > 0. The for all 0 < < and m N, G. 9

20 As the following lemma shows, we can always replace an almost increasing function with an increasing function. Lemma If a function : (0, ) (0, ) is almost increasing with the almost increasing constant C 0 > 0, then there exists an increasing function ψ : (0, ) (0, ) such that (t) ψ(t) C 0 (t) for all t > 0. Proof. Simply set ψ(t) = sup 0<s t (s),t > 0. Having set down the condition of, we move on to the norm estimate of the function. The lemma below gives an estimate for the norm of χ B(R) in M (R n ). Lemma [6, Lemma4.] Let 0 < < and G. Then χ Q(x,R) M = (R) for all R > 0. Proof. One method is to reexamine Example 3.6. Here we give a direct proof. It is easy to see that χ Q(x,R) M (R). To prove the opposite ineuality we consider (r) χ Q(y,r) Q(y,r) Q(x,R) for any cube Q = Q(y,r). When R r, then (r) χ Q(y,r) Q(x,R) Q(y,r) (r) χ Q(x,R) Q(y,r) (R) χ Q(x,R) Q(y,R) = (R). since G. When R > r, then (r) χ Q(y,r) Q(x,R) Q(y,r) (r) χ Q(y,r) Q(y,r) = (r) (R) again by virtue of the fact that G. A direct conseuence of the above uantitative information is: Corollary [83, Corollary 2.3] Let 0 < < and : (0, ) (0, ) be a function in the class G. If N 0 > n/, then (+ ) N 0 M (R n ). Proof. Since G, we have (t)t n () for all t. we have (+ ) N 0 M j= χ Q(j) M max(,j ) N (j) 0 max(,j ) N <. 0 j= Here for the second ineuality we invoked Lemma

21 Now we consider the role of. We did not tolerate the case where p = when we define M p (R n ). If we define M (Rn ) similar to M p (R n ), then we have M (Rn ) = L (R n ) by the Lebesgue differentiation theorem. The next theorem concerns a situation close to this. Theorem [78, Proposition 3.3] Let 0 < < and G. Then, the following are euivalent:. inf t>0 (t) > 0, 2. M (R n ) L (R n ). If these conditions are satisfied, then M (R n ) = L (R n ) M inf t>0(t) (R n ) with euivalence of norms. Proof. If inf t>0 (t) > 0, then by the Lebesgue differentiation theorem we get f(x) = lim f(y) dy r 0 B(x, r) B(x,r) inf t>0 (t) lim (r) f(y) dy r 0 B(x, r) B(x,r) inf t>0 (t) f M for all f M (R n ) and all Lebesgue points x of f. Therefore, f L. Assume that M (R n ) L (R n ). Then by the closed graph theorem, f f M for all f M (R n ). If we choose f = χ B(a,r), then we have (r). This shows that inf t>0 (t) > 0. Finally, by taking = inf t>0 (t) and 2 =, we obtain M = L (R n ) M inf t>0(t) (R n ) with euivalence of norms from the general formula M + 2 (R n ) = M (R n ) M 2 (R n ) with euivalence of norms. We also investigate the reverse inclusion to Theorem Theorem [78, Proposition 3.3] Let 0 < < and G. Then, the following are euivalent:. sup t>0 (t) <, 2. M (R n ) L (R n ). Proof. If sup t>0 (t) <, then by letting ψ(t) sup s>0 (s),t > 0 we have L (R n ) = M ψ (R n ) with euivalence of norms. Since ψ, we have M ψ (R n ) M (R n ). Thus L (R n ) M (R n ). 2

22 Conversely, ifl (R n ) M (R n ), thenbytheclosed graphtheorem theembedding norm is finite and hence (r) = χ Q(r) M χ Q(r) L = for all r > 0. Then sup <. By combining these two theorems, we obtain the following result. Corollary [78, Proposition 3.3] Let 0 < < and G. Then, the following are euivalent:. log L (0, ), i.e., 0 < inf t>0 (t) sup t>0 (t) <. 2. L (R n ) = M (R n ), So, if log grows or decays slowly we can say that M (R n ) is close to L (R n ). The next example shows that when the support of the functions are torn apart, the norm does not increase even in the case of generalized Morrey spaces. Example 3.3. Let 0 < < and G. Suppose that we have a collection of cubes {Q j } j= = {Q(a j,r j )} j= such that {3Q j} j= = {Q(a j,3r j )} j= is disjoint and is contained in Q = Q(a 0,r 0 ). Let {f j } j= be a collection of functions in M (R n ) satisfying for each j N. Then f f j (r 0 ) n r j, supp(f j ) Q j, (3.9) f j M (3.0) f j M (R n ). Since f is supported in Q, we have only j= to consider cubes contained in 3Q; if a cube Q intersects both Q and R n \3Q, then its triple 3Q engulfs Q and the radius of Q is smaller than that of Q. Thus we have f M sup (r) x R n,r>0,q(x,r) 3Q We fix a cube Q(x,r) and estimate We let ( (r) Q(x, r) ( Q(x,r) Q(x, r) f(y) dy Q(x,r) ) J {j N : Q(x,r) Q(a j,r j ), r j r}, J 2 {j N : Q(x,r) Q(a j,r j ), r j > r}.. f(y) dy ). Accordingly we set I i (r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) 22 f j (y) j J i dy

23 for i =,2. As for I, we use (3.9) and the fact that {Q(a j,r j )} j= is disjoint: I (r) Q(x, r) j J (r 0 ) r j n Q(x, r) n r j j J. As for I 2, we have only to consider only one summand, since Q(a j,3r j ) engulfs Q(x,r) if j H 2 : we can deduce I 2 using (3.0). As an application of Example 3.3, we present another example. Denote by [t] the integer part of t R. For positive seuences {A k } k= and {B k} k= A k B k as k means that {log(a k /B k )} k= is a bounded seuence. Example [78, Lemma 4.] Let G with 0 < <. We fix a R n. Let {s k } k= (0,] be a seuence which decreases to 0. Keeping in mind inf 0<t (t)/n t = () /n, inf 0<t< (t) /n = () /n, we let l k [+(s k ) /n s k ]( (s k ) /n s k ) m k [+(s k ) /n ]( (s k ) /n ). Then as k. Hence l k s k m k (s k ) ns k s k (s k ) n =, s k 0 (3.) ((l k m k ) ) m k n (s k ) s k n l k n (3.2) as k. Devide eually a+[0,] n into l k n cubes to have a non-overlapping collection {b k,j +[0,l k ] n } j=,2,...,lk n. Furthermore, we devide [0,l k ] n eually into m k n cubes to obtain a collection of cubes. Then b k,j +[0,l k ] n = {e k,j +[0,m k ] n } j=,2,...,mk n m n k i= (b k,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n ). 23

24 If we set and g k,i,j,a = f k,i,a = f k,i = ((l k m k ) ) χ b k,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n. l k n j= χ bk,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n ((l k m k ) ) l k n = g k,i,j,a. (3.3) Then,eachf k,i,a issupportedina+[0,] n andeachg k,i,j,a issupportedinb k,j +[0,l k ] n. We will show that {f k,i,a } a R n,k N,i=,2,...,m n k forms a bounded set in M (R n ). This is achieved by verifying the assumption of Example 3.3. Let F,F 2,...,F 3 n be a partition of {,2,...,l n k } such that {b k,j + [ l k,2l k ] n } j Fl n is not overlapping for each l =,2,...,3 n. To check this we need to verify (3.9) and (3.0). From Lemma 3.26, we have (3.9). Meanwhile, Thus for each l =,2,...,3 n ((l k m k ) ) j= g k,i,j,a = ((l k m k ) )(l k m k ) n l k n. j F l χ bk,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n a R n,k N,i=,2,...,m k n is a bounded set. So {f k,i,a } a R n,k N,i=,2,...,m k n forms a bounded set in M (R n ). From these examples, we obtain the following conclusion: Corollary [78, Corollary 4.] Let 0 <, 2 <, and let G and 2 G 2. Assume in addition that inf t>0 (t) = 0. Then M (R n ) M 2 2 (R n ) if and only if 2 and 2. Furthemore, if < 2, there exists a compactly supported function f M 2 2 (R n )\M (R n ). In particular, for 0 < p < and 0 < 2 p 2 <, M p (R n ) M p 2 2 (R n ) if and only if 2 and p = p 2. Proof. The if part is trivial thanks to Lemma 3.2. Let us concentrate on the only if part. Assume < 2. We employ Example 3.32 with = and =. Then χ bk,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n ( l n k (l k m k ) n) 2 = m n k 2. L 2 As a result, j F l ((l k m k ) ) j F l χ bk,j +e k,i +[0,(l k m k ) ] n L 2 ((l k m k ) )m k n 2 = m k n n 2, since inf t>0 (t) = 0. Thus, M (R n ) contains a function which does not belong to L 2 loc (Rn ). Conseuently, if M (R n ) M 2 2 (R n ), then 2. Finally, we must have 2 from Lemma 3.26 if M (R n ) M 2 2 (R n ). 24

25 When inf t>0 (t) > 0, the situation is different. Example When is constant, we use Theorem 3.29 to have the following characterization. Let 0 <, 2 <, and let = G and 2 G 2. Then L (R n ) = M (R n ) M 2 2 (R n ) if and only if sup t>0 (t) 2 <. For the later purpose we use the following characterization of defined to be the closure of M (R n ) L 0 c (Rn ) in M (R n ). Lemma For 0 < p <, we have M (R n ) = Proof. Assume that f M (R n ) satisfies { f M (R n ) : lim R χ R n \B(R)f M = 0 lim χ R R n \B(R)f M = 0. M (R n ), which is }. (3.4) Then f = lim R χ B(R)f in M (R n ). Conversely, if f M (R n ) and ε > 0, then we can find g M (R n ) L 0 c (Rn ) such that f g M < ε. By the triangle ineuality χ R n \B(R)f M χ R n \B(R)g M + f g M. Let R > 0 be large enough as to have supp(g) B(R). Then the above ineuality reads as: χ R n \B(R)f M f g M (< ε), as reuired. We also have the following characterization of the space M (R n ), the closure of L (R n ) M (R n ) in M (R n ): Lemma Let 0 < < and G. If f M (R n ), then lim R χ { f >R}f M = 0. (3.5) Proof. Let ε > 0 be fixed. Since f M (R n ), we can choose g L (R n ) M (R n ) so that g f M < ε. Let R > g We estimate χ { f >2R} f M f g M + χ { f >2R} g M If g R and f > 2R, then g R f g. Thus As a result (3.5) holds. χ { f >2R} f M 2 f g M + χ { g >R} g M = 2ε. 25

26 Thegeneralized tilde subspace M (R n ) is definedto bethecompletion of L (R n ) M (R n ) in M (R n ). Proposition Let 0 < < and G. Then M (R n ) = M (R n ) M (R n ). Proof. It is easy to show that M (R n ) M (R n ) M (R n ). Let f M (R n ) M (R n ). By Lemmas 3.35 and 3.36, we see that Thus f M (R n ). f = lim R χ B(R) { f >R}f. Although we can define many other closed subspaces as we did for Morrey spaces, we content ourselves with these three definitions, which we actually use. Remark Here the space M (R n ) is introduced. See [3, 2, 67, 9, 92] for a different class of closed subspaces. 4 Boundedness properties of the operators in generalized Morrey spaces Having set down the boundedness properties of generalized Morrey spaces, we are now interested in the boundedness properties of the operators. 4. Maximal operator in generalized Morrey spaces and the class Z 0 After we generalize the parameter p in the space M p (R n ), we realize that the boundedness of the maximal operator is obtained due to the condition on (, ). Theorem 4.. [76, Theorem ], [78, Corollary 5.6], [94, Theorem 2.3] Let < < and G. Then Mf M f M for all measurable functions f. We observe that we did not reuere anything other than G as an evidence of the fact that the parametre play a central role for the boundedness of the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator. Theorem 4. extends the result in [0] from Morrey spaces to generalized Morrey spaces. Proof. Once we assume G, the proof of this theorem will be an adaptation of the classical case. Fix a cube Q(x,r). We need to prove ( ) (r) Mf(y) dy f Q(x, r) M. Q(x,r) 26

27 We let f χ Q(x,5r) f and f 2 f f. We need to prove and ( (r) Q(x, r) ( (r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) Q(x,r) Mf (y) dy Mf 2 (y) dy ) ) f M (4.) f M. (4.2) The proof of (4.) follows from the boundedness of the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator and the fact that (5r) (r) for any r > 0. As for (4.2), we use M[χ R n \5Qf](y) sup f(z) dz (y Q) R:Q R Q R with Q = Q(x,r). Then by virtue of the fact that is increasing, we obtain ( (r) Q(x, r) Q(x,r) Mf 2 (y) dy ) R (r) sup R:Q R Q R sup (r) R:Q R Q R f M f M, R R f(z) dz f(z) dz where for the last ineuality, we used the nesting property of M (R n ), <. As we have seen, any function : (0, ) (0, ) will do. So we have the following boundedness for small Morrey spaces. Example 4.2. Let < p <. Then M is bounded on m p (R n ) and hence L uloc (Rn ). In fact, M is bounded on M (R n ) m p (R n ) thanks to Theorem 4., where (t) = max(t n p,), t > 0. Similar to Theorem 4., we can prove the following theorem: Theorem 4.3. [76, Theorem ], [78, Corollary 6.2] Let < and G. Then for all measurable functions f. Mf wm f M Once again any function G will do as long as G. Theorem 4.3 extends the result in [0] from Morrey spaces to generalized Morrey spaces. Proof. Simply resort to the weak-(, ) boundedness of M and modify the proof of Theorem

28 We move on to the vector-valued ineuality. We use the following estimate: Lemma 4.4. For all measurable functions f and cubes Q, we have M[χ R n \5Qf](y) sup m R ( f ) (y Q). (4.3) Q R Q Proof. We write out M[χ R n \5Qf](y) in full: M[χ R n \5Qf](y) = sup R Q χ R (y) f R L (R\5Q), where R runs over all cubes. In order that χ R (y) f L (R\5Q) be nonzero, we need to have y R and R \ 5Q. Thus, R meets both Q and R n \ 5Q. If R Q is a cube that meets both Q and R n \ 5Q, then l(r) 2l(Q) and 2R Q. Thus, (4.3) follows. Unlike the usual maximal ineuality, we need the integral condition (4.4). Theorem 4.5. Let < <, < u and G. Assume in addition that r ds (s)s (r) (r > 0). (4.4) Then for all {f j } j= M (R n ), j= Mf j u u f j u j= M u. (4.5) M Proof. When u =, the result is clear from (4.). The proof is essentially the same as the classical case except that we truly use (4.4). The proof of the estimate of the inner term remains unchanged except in that we need to generalize the parameter p to the function. Let f j, = χ 5Q f j and f j,2 = f j f j,. We can handle f j, s in a standard manner as before. Going through a similar argument to the classical case and using Lemma 4.4, we will have (l(q)) Q Q Mf j,2 (y) u j= u dy k= (l(q)) 2 k Q If we use the definition of the Morrey norm, we obtain (l(q)) Q Q Mf j,2 (y) u j= u dy k= (l(q)) (2 k l(q)) 2 k Q f j (z) u j= f j u j= u u dz.. (4.6) M 28

29 Since G, we obtain k= If we use (4.4) and G, then we have (l(q)) (2 k l(q)) (l(q)) dt. l(q) (t)t k= (l(q)) (2 k. l(q)) Inserting this estimate into (4.6), we obtain the counterpart to the classical case. Since (4.4) is an important condition, we are interested in its characterization. In fact, we have the following useful one. Theorem 4.6. Assume that : (0, ) (0, ) is an almost increasing function. Then the following are euivalent:. satisfies (4.4). 2. There exists m 0 N such that (2 m 0 r) > 2(r) (4.7) for all r > 0. Proof. Assume that (4.4) holds. Let m 0 be a positive integer such that (2m 0 r) 2(r) for all r > 0. Thus since is almost increasing, logm 2 m 0 r 0 2(r) ds r (s)s (r). Since (r) > 0, we have an upper bound M for m 0. Thus if we set m 0 = M +, we obtain the desired number m 0. If (4.4) holds, then as reuired. r ds (s)s = j= 2 m 0 j r 2 m 0 (j ) r ds (s)s j= 2 m 0 j r 2 m 0 (j ) r ds 2 j (r)s (r), As we have mentioned, we need (4.4) for the vector-valued maximal ineuality. We give an example showing that (4.4) is absolutely necessary: By no means (4.4) is artificial as the following proposition shows: 29

30 Proposition 4.7. Let < <, < u < and G. Assume in addition that u u u Mf j f j u. (4.8) j= j= wm M holds for all seuences of measurable functions {f j } j=. Then (4.4) holds. We exclude the case where u =, where (4.8) still holds without (4.4). Proof. Assume to the contrary; for all m N [2, ), there would exist r m > 0 such that (2 m r m ) 2(r m ) for r = r m. Let us consider f j = χ [,j] (m)χ B(2 j r m)\b(2 j r m) for j N. Observe u u f j u m = χ B(2 j r m)\b(2 j r m). j= j= M M As a result, f j u j= u χ B(2 m r m) M (2 m r m ) (r m ). M Let x B(r m ). For j > m, we have Mf j (x) = 0. Meanwhile for j m, we have Mf j (x) B(x,2 j+ f j (y) dy r m ) B(x,2 j+ r m) B(x,2 j+ χ r m ) B(2 j r m)\b(2 j r m)(y) dy B(2 j r m) = 2n 4 n 4 n. Conseuently, u u Mf j m ( ) u (r m ) 4 j= n (r m ) m u. j= wm By our assumption, we have (r m )m u j= or euivalently Mf j u u f j u j= wm m D u (r m ), M where D does not depend on m. This contradicts to the fact that m N [2, ) is arbitrary. 30

31 Example 4.8. Let p <. Then u u Mf j f j u j= j= wm p fails. In particular, u Mf j j= u wl uloc f j u j= u u ({f j } j= mp (Rn )) m p L uloc ({f j } j= L uloc (Rn )) fails. Infact, let(t) = max(t n p,) asbefore. Thenfails(4.4)because dr (r) =. Proposition 4.7 led us to the conclusion that (4.4) is fundamental. The following proposition will be fundamental in the study of the boundedness of the operators in generalized Morrey spaces. Theorem 4.9. [76, Lemma 2] If a nonnegative locally integrable function ψ and a positive constant D > 0 satisfy then r ψ(t)t ε dt t rε Dε r ψ(t) dt t r Dψ(r) (r > 0) ψ(t)t dt D Dε ψ(r)rε (r > 0) (4.9) for all 0 < ε < D. Proof. Let For 0 < r < R Ψ(r) = r ψ(t)t dt (r > 0). R r Therefore ψ(t)t ε dt t = [ Ψ(t)tε ] R r + R It remains to let R. r R r Ψ(t)εt ε dt t Ψ(r)rε +εd ψ(t)t ε dt t εd Ψ(r)rε D εd ψ(r)rε. R r ψ(t)t ε dt t. We change variables to have the following variant: 3

32 Theorem 4.0. [76, Lemma 2] Let ψ : (0, ) (0, ) be a measurable function satisfying r ψ(t) dt Dψ(r) (r > 0) t 0 for some D > 0 independent of r > 0. If 0 < ε < D, then r 0 ψ(t) dt t +ε Dε r ε r 0 ψ(t) dt t D Dε r ε ψ(r). Proof. Set Then our assumption reads as: η(t) = ψ ( ) t (t > 0). Thus, r r η(t) dt t η(t) dt t ε Dε rε r Dη(r) (r > 0). η(t) dt t D Dε rε η(r) (r > 0) according to Theorem 4.9. If we express this ineuality in terms of ψ, we obtain the desired result. In the next proposition, we further characterize and apply our key assumption(4.4). Proposition 4.. [83, Proposition 2.7] Let be a nonnegative locally integrable function such that (s) (r) for all r,s > 0 with 2 r 2. There exists a constant s ε > 0 such that t ε rε (t r) (4.0) (t) (r) holds if and only if holds (4.4), or euivalently, satisfies (4.9) for some ε > 0. If one of these conditions is satisfied, then r ds (s) u s (r) u (r > 0) (4.) for all 0 < u <, where the implicit constant depends only on u. Proof. The implication (4.4) = (4.9) follows from Proposition 4.9. Assume (4.9). Then we have t ε 2t (t) dv rε t v ε (v) (r) thanks to the doubling property of, proving (4.0). 32

33 If we assume (4.0), then we have r ds (s)s = r s ε ds (s) s +ε r r ε ds (r) s +ε = ε(r), which implies (4.4). Note that (4.0) also implies (4.) because u satisfies (4.0) as well. Let 0 < u < be fixed. Ineuality (4.) is necessary for (4.4); simply apply Proposition 4. to u. Example 4.2. Let G satisfy (4.). Then we have Hence whenever 0 < r s <. As a result, r rε ds (s)s ε (r) s ε rε (s) (r) (r > 0). 0 (r) dr r <. We generalize condition (4.4) as follows: Definition 4.3. Let γ R.. The (upper) Zygmund class Z γ is defined to be the set of all measurable functions : (0, ) (0, ) for which lim r 0 (r) = 0 and r 0 (t)t γ dt (r)r γ (r > 0), 2. The (lower) Zygmund class Z γ is defined to be the set of all measurable functions : (0, ) (0, ) for which lim r 0 (r) = 0 and r (t)t γ dt (r)r γ (r > 0). Note that (4.4) reads as Z 0. Example 4.4. Let (t) = t p with < p <, and let γ R.. Z γ if and only if p > γ. 2. Z γ if and only if p < γ. 33

34 3. / Z γ if and only if γ < 0. We present an example of the functions in M (R n ). Let 0 < η <. We define the powered Hardy Littlewood maximal operator M (η) by M (η) f(x) sup R>0 ( B(x, R) B(x,R) f(y) η dy ) η (x R n ). Example 4.5. [83, Proposition 2.] Let 0 < < and G. Define f j= χ [2 j,2 j ] n (2 j ) We claim that the following are euivalent; χ [0,2, g sup j ] n j Z (2 j ). (a) f M (R n ), (b) g M (R n ), (c) Zn. Let 0 < u <. Note that f g 2 n M (u) f, where M (u) denotes the powered Hardy Littlewood maximal operator. Observe that M (u) is bounded on M (R n ). Thus (a) and (b) are euivalent. Since f is expressed as f = f 0 ( ), that is, there exists a function f 0 : [0, ) R such that f(x) = f 0 ( x ) for all x R n, where denotes the l -norm, it follows that (a) and (c) are euivalent. Example 4.6. [83, Proposition 2.] Let 0 < < and G. Define a decreasing function by: (t) (t)t n (4.2) for t > 0. Define h j= χ [0,2 j ] n (2 j ). Then (2 j ) (2 l ) l j= for all l Z if and only if h M (R n ). j=l (2 j ) (2 l ) and that To verify this, we let f,g be as in Example 4.5. Suppose first h M (R n ). Then (2 l ) [0,2 l ] n [0,2 l ] n (2 j ) j=l dx h M. 34

35 Thus (2 j ) h M (2 l for all l Z. This implies that f g h f, where f ) j=l and g are defined in Example 4.5. Thus from Example 4.5, holds as well. Conversely, assume that l j= (2 j ) (2 l ) l j= (2 j ) (2 l ) (4.3) and j=l (2 j ) (2 l ) (4.4) hold for all l Z. Then we have h f from (4.4). Thus f M (R n ) by (4.3), from which it follows that h M (R n ). We further present some examples of the functions in M p(r n ). Lemma 4.7. [8, Lemma 2.4] Let 0 < < and G Z n. Then the function ψ(x) = ( x ) belongs to M (R n ). Proof. First note that Z n is euivalent to r n r 0 (t) t n dt (r) (r > 0). (4.5) Note that ( ) is radial decreasing, so that for all a R n and r > 0, ( B(a, r) B(a,r) ( x ) dx ) ( B(r) B(r) ( x ) dx ). (4.6) Combining (4.5) and (4.6) and using the spherical coordinate, we obtain the desired result. Remark 4.8. See [3, Theorem 2.] for the weak boundedness of the maximal operators, where the integral conditions is assumed. Remark 4.9. See [30, Theorem 4.2] and [2, Theorem 3.4] for the strong boundedness of the maximal operators, where the integral conditions is assumed. See [82, 78, 94] for the strong boundedness of the maximal operators, where the integral conditions is not assumed. Remark See [7, Theorem ], [, Theorem 2.9], [23, Theorem.9] and [30, Theorem 2.] for the boundedness of the maximal operator on generalized Morrey spaces in the multilinear setting. 35

36 4.2 Singular integral operators on generalized Morrey spaces Let T be a singular integral operator. To define the function Tf for f M (R n ) we follow the same strategy as the one for f M p (R n ). To this end, we need to establish the following estimate: Lemma 4.2. Let < < and G satisfy Z 0. Then Tf M f M for all f L c (Rn ). We note that Z 0 appeared once again. Proof. Let Q be a fixed cube. Then we need to prove ( ) (l(q)) Tf(y) dy f M Q. Q To this end, we decompose f according to 2Q: f = χ 2Q f, f 2 = f f. As for f, we have ( ) ( ) (l(q)) Tf (y) dy (l(q)) Tf (y) dy Q Q Q R n ( ) (l(q)) f (y) dy Q R n ( ) (l(q)) f(y) dy Q f M. As for f 2, we use the size condition of K, the integral kernel of T, to have the local estimate: ( f(y) dy ) Tf 2 (y) R n \2Q y c(q) n l(q) l n+ f(y) dy dl. B(c(Q),l) By the definition of the norm, Lemma 3.2 and (4.4), we obtain Tf 2 (y) l(q) It remains to integrate this pointwise estimate. 2Q r(r) dr f M (l(q)) f M. To carry out our program of proving the boundedness of the singular integral operators, we need to investigate the predual and its predual. Definition Let < < and G.. [6, Definition 2.3], [2, Definition 4] A (,)-block is said to be a measurable function A supported on a cube Q satisfying A L Q (l(q)). In this case A is said to be a (,)-block supported on Q. 36