arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 29 Mar 2011

Transcription

1 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING arxiv: v [math.ca] 29 Mar 20 TUOMAS HYTÖNEN AND CARLOS PÉREZ Abstract. We improve on several weighted inequalities of recent interest by replacing a part of the bounds by weaker estimates involving Wilson s constant [w] := sup Mwχ. w In particular, we show the following improvement of the first author s A 2 theorem for Calderón Zygmund operators T: T BL 2 w c T [w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[w ] /2. Corresponding type results are obtained from a new extrapolation theorem with appropriate mixed bounds. This uses new two-weight estimates for the maximal function, which improve on Buckley s classical bound. We also derive mixed A type results of Lerner, Ombrosi and the second author Math. Res. Lett of the form: T BL p w cpp [w] /p A [w] /p, < p <, Tf L, w c[w] A loge+[w] f L w. An estimate dual to the last one is also found, as well as new bounds for commutators of singular integrals.. Introduction and statements of the main results The weights w for which the usual operators T of Classical Analysis like the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator, the Hilbert transform, and general classes of Calderón Zygmund operators act boundedly onl p w were identified in the 970 s in the works of Muckenhoupt, Hunt, Wheeden, Coifman and Fefferman [5, 5, 3]. This class consists of the Muckenhoupt weights, defined by the condition that see [3] [w] Ap := sup w w /p p <, p,, where the supremum is over all cubes in R d. Hence it is shown for any of these important operators T, whether it is linear or not, that is finite if and only if [w] Ap <. Tf L T BL p w := sup p w f 0 f L p w 200 Mathematics Subject Classification. 42B25 Primary; 42B20, 42B35 Secondary. Key words and phrases. Weighted norm inequalities, weights, sharp estimates, maximal function, Calderón Zygmund operators. T. H. was supported by the Academy of Finland, projects 3066, and C. P. was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation grant MTM and by the Junta de Andalucía, grant FM-4745.

2 2 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ.A. The theory. It is a natural question to look for optimal quantitative bounds of T BLp w in terms of [w] Ap. The first author who studied that question was S. Buckley in his 992 Ph.D. thesis see [3] who proved M BL p p w c p,d [w] < p <,. where M is the usual Hardy-Littlewood maximal function on R d. However, there has been a big impetus on finding such precise dependence for more singular operators after the work of Astala, Iwaniec and Saksman [] due to the connections with sharp regularity results for solutions to the Beltrami equation. The key fact was to prove that the operator norm of the Beurling-Ahlfors transform on L 2 w grows linearly in terms of the A 2 constant of w. This was proved by S. Petermichl and A. Volberg [43] and by Petermichl [4, 42] for the Hilbert transform and the Riesz transforms. To be precise, in these papers it has been shown that if T is any of these operators, then T BL p w c p,t [w] max{, p }..2 The exponents are optimal in the sense that the exponent cannot be replaced by any smaller quantity. It was conjectured then that the same estimate holds for any Calderón-Zygmund operator T. This was first proven for special classes of integral transforms [7, 23] and finally, for general Calderón Zygmund operators by the first author in [6], using the main result from [37] where it is shown that a weak type estimate is enough to prove the strong type. A direct proof of this result can be found in [20]. Other related work are [8, 9, 22, 24, 47]. The main purpose of this paper is to show that these results can be further improved. To do this, we recall the following definitions of the constant of a weight w: First, there is the notion introduced by Hruščev [4] see also [3]: [w] A := sup w exp logw, and second, the smaller as it turns out quantity, which appeared with a different notation in the work of Wilson [48, 49, 50] and was recently termed the constant by Lerner [24, Section 5.5]: Observe that [w] := sup c d [w] [w] A [w] Ap, Mwχ. w p [,, where the second estimate is elementary, and the first will be checked in Proposition 2.2. While the constant [w] A is more widely used in the literature, and also more flexible for our purposes, it is of interest to observe situations, where the smaller constant [w] is sufficient for our estimates, thereby giving a sharper bound. Now, if σ = w /p is the dual weight of w, we also have [σ] p [σ] p = [w] Ap. The point here is that these quantities can be much smaller for some classes

3 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 3 of weights. Our results will be of the form T BL p w c p,t [w] αp [w] βp [σ] p γp, sometimes even with the smaller [ ] constant instead of [ ] A, where the sum is over at most two triplets α,β,γ, and the exponents satisfy αp + βp + γp = τp, where τp is the exponent from the earlier sharp results, as it should. However, we will have αp < τp, which shows that part of the necessary control may in fact be replaced by weaker control. As in the usual case, a key point to understand our main result for Calderón Zygmund operators is to consider first the case p = Theorem. Let T be a Calderón Zygmund operator, w A 2 and σ = w. Then there is a constant c = c d,t such that T BL2 w c[w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[w ] /2 c[w] /2 A 2 [w]a +[w ] A /2..4 We will prove this by following the approach form [6, 20] to the A 2 theorem T BL2 w c T [w] A2, and modifying the proof at some critical points. Indeed, the original argument uses the A 2 property basically twice, each producing the factor[w] /2 A 2, and it suffices to observe that only the property is actually needed in one of these estimates. An interesting consequence of this theorem is the following: for any fixed Calderón Zygmund operator T, we have T inf BL2 w = 0..5 w A 2 [w] A2 This follows once we describe, in Section 8, a family of weights w A 2 for which both [w] and [σ] and even [w] A and [σ] A grow slower than [w] A2. In particular, the reverse A 2 conjecture [w] A2 c T T BL 2 w is false. The result for p 2 will be obtained by means of a new quantitative variant of the Rubio de Francia extrapolation theorem adapted to the control, which we discuss further below..6. Corollary. Let T be a Calderón Zygmund operator and let p,. Then if w and σ = w /p, we have T BLp w [w] 2/p /2 [w] /2 +[σ] p /2 [σ] 2/p and [w] 2/p [σ] 2/p for p,2], T BL p w [w] 2/p /[2p ] [w] /[2p ] +[σ] /2 [w] 2/p [w] 2/p [w] 2/p for p [2,..7.8 Here the simpler forms of the estimates in.7 and.8 are almost as good as the more complicated ones, since for many common weights, like power weights, we have [w] A +[σ] p [w] Ap ; see Section 8. These two statements.7 and.8 are actually equivalent to each other by using T BL p w = T BL p σ

4 4 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ and the fact that T is also a Calderón Zygmund operator..b. The maximal function and extrapolation with control. As mentioned above, a key point to understand Corollary.6 is to prove a version of the quantitative extrapolation theorem adapted to control. The proof of this theorem requires to study the corresponding question for the Hardy Littlewood maximal function, which we first do in a two-weight setting. We need a new two-weight constant B p [w,σ] defined by the functional pexp B p [w,σ] := sup w σ logσ..9 which clearly satisfies [w] Ap B p [w,σ] [w] Ap [σ] A..0. Theorem. Let M be the Hardy-Littlewood maximal operator and let p,. Then we have the estimates and Mfσ L p w C d p B p [w,σ] /p f L p σ,. Mfσ Lp w C d p [w] Ap [σ] /p f Lp σ..2 We refer to Section 4 for the proof and for more information and background about this two-weight estimate for M. By a well-known change-of-weight argument,.2 implies:.3. Corollary. For M and p as above, and σ = w /p, we have M BLp w C d p [w] Ap [σ] /p..4 This improves on Buckley s theorem M BLp w C d p [w] /p. Corollary.3, at least for p = 2, was also independently discovered by A. Lerner and S. Ombrosi [25]. We now recall the following quantitative version of Rubio de Francia s classical extrapolation theorem due to Dragičević, Grafakos, Pereyra, and Petermichl [0]: If an operator T satisfies T BL r w ϕ[w] Ar for a fixed increasing function ϕ and for all w A r, then it satisfies a similar estimate for all p, : T BLp w 2ϕ c p,r,d [w] max{,r /p } ; in particular, T BL r w [w] τr A r implies that T BL p w [w] τrmax{,r /p }. With our new quantitative estimates involving both and control, it seems of interest to extrapolate such bounds as well. Hence we consider weighted estimates of the form Tf L r w ϕ [w] Ar,[w] A,[w /r ] r f L r w.5

5 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 5 where ϕ : [, 3 [0, is an increasing function with respect to each of the variables. An example is our bound for singular integrals.3, where ϕx,y,z = Cx /2 y +z /2..6 We now aim to extrapolate bounds like.5 from the given r, to other exponents p,..7. Theorem Lower Extrapolation. Suppose that for some r and every w A r, an operator T satisfies.5. Then for every p,r, it satisfies Tf Lp w 2ϕ 2 M BLp w r p [w] Ar,[w] A,[w /p ] p f Lp w 2ϕ c d [w] Ap [w /p ] /p r p [w] Ap,[w] A,[w /p ] p f L p w In typical applications, like.6, the function ϕ will have a homogeneity of the form ϕλx,λy,λz = λ s ϕx,y,z, and hence the common factor 2 M BL p w r p c d [w] Ap [w /p ] /p r p may be extracted out of ϕ. Observe that the condition.5 is of course implied by the stronger inequality Tf L r w ϕ [w] Ar,c d [w],c d [w /r ] r f L r w; however, even if we have this stronger inequality to start with as is the case with the A 2 theorem for Calderón Zygmund operators, we do not know how to exploit it to get a stronger conclusion than what we can derive from.5. A related difficulty will be pointed out in the proof. This is why we restrict to the assumption.5 only..8. Theorem Upper Extrapolation. Suppose that for some r and every w A r, an operator T satisfies.5. Then for every p r,, it satisfies Tf L p w 2ϕ 2 M BL p w p p r/p [w] r /p,[w] r /p,[w /p ] r f Lp w cd 2ϕ [w] /p [w] /p p r/p [w] r /p,[w] r /p,[w /p ] r f L p w. It is immediate to check that Theorems.7 and.8, in combination with Theorem.3, give Corollary.6. In fact, thanks to the mentioned equivalence of the two parts.7 and.8 of Corollary.6, we would only need one of Theorems.7 and.8 to deduce this corollary. But for other classes of operators without a self-dual structure, it is useful to have both upper and lower extrapolation results available.

6 6 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ.C. The A theory. It is an interesting fact that if we assume that the weight satisfy the stronger condition w A, then the estimate.2 can be considerably improved. Indeed, if T is any Calderón Zygmund operator, then T is of course bounded on L p w, because A but with a much better bound, namely T BL p w cpp [w] A, < p <..9 Observe that the dependence on the A constant is linear for any p while in the case it is highly nonlinear for < p < 2, see.2. The result is sharp both in terms of the dependence on [w] A, and in terms of the dependence on p when taking w = by the classical theory. This fact was used to get the following endpoint result: Tf L, w c[w] A loge+[w] A f L w..20 See [27] and also [26] for these results and for more information about the problem. It was conjectured in [27] that the growth of this bound would be linear; however, it has been recently shown in [33] that the growth of the bound is worse than linear. It seems that most probably the LlogL result.20 is the best possible. On the other hand, in [28] a sort of dual estimate to the last bound was found, which is also of interest for related matters: Tf w c[w] A loge+[w] A f dx. L, w R d In this paper we improve these results following our new quantitative estimates involving this time A and control. To be precise, we will prove the following new results:.2. Theorem. Let T be a Calderón-Zygmund operator and let < p <. Then where c = cd,t. T BL p w cpp [w] /p A [w] /p We will prove this by following the approach from [26, 27] to.9, modifying the proof at several points. In analogy to.5, Theorem.2 disproves the reverse A conjecture [w] A c T T BLp w for all p, : considering a family of weights w A for which [w] A grow slower than [w] A, for any fixed Calderón Zygmund operator T, we have see Section 8 for details T inf BLp w = 0, < p <. w A [w] A Finally we will also use the approach from [27] and [28] to prove the following theorems respectively..22. Theorem. Let T be a Calderón-Zygmund operator. Then Tf L, w c d,t [w] A loge+[w] f L w..23. Theorem. Let T be a Calderón-Zygmund operator. Then Tf w c d,t [w] L, loge+[w] A f L w R. d

7 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 7.D. Commutators with BMO functions. We further pursue the point-of-view by proving a result in the spirit of Theorem.3 for commutators of linear operators T with BMO functions. These operators are defined formally by the expression [b,t]f = btf Tbf. More generally we can consider the kth order commutator defined by T k b := [b,t k b ]. When T is a singular integral operator, these operators were considered by Coifman, Rochberg and Weiss [6] and since then many results have been obtaind. We refer to [4] for more information about these operators. It is shown in [4] that if T is a linear operator bounded on L 2 w for any w A 2 with bound T BL 2 w ϕ[w] A2, where ϕ is an increasing function ϕ : [, [0,, then there is a dimensional constant c such that [b,t] BL 2 w cϕc[w] A2 [w] A2 b BMO. In particular, if T is any Calderón-Zygmund operator we can use the linear A 2 theorem for T to deduce [b,t] BL 2 w c[w] 2 A 2 b BMO, and the quadratic exponent cannot be improved. An analogous result adapted to the control reads as follows:.24. Theorem. Let T be a linear operator bounded on L 2 w for any w A 2 and let b BMO. Suppose further that there is a function ϕ : [, 3 [0,, increasing with respect to each component, such that T BL 2 w ϕ [w] A2,[w] A,[σ] A. then there is a dimensional constant c such that [w] [b,t] BL 2 w cϕ c[w] A2,c[w],c[σ] A +[σ] b BMO, or more generally [w] Tb k BL 2 w cϕ c[w] A2,c[w],c[σ] A +[σ] k b k BMO. We can now apply Theorem Corollary. Let T be any Calderón-Zygmund operator and let b BM O. Then [b,t] BL 2 w c[w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[w ] 3/2 b BMO, or more generally, T k b BL 2 w c[w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[σ] k+/2 b k BMO.

8 8 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ.E. An end-point estimate when p =. Having investigated the sharp bounds for Calderón-Zygmund operators T : L p w L p w for p, and w, we finally consider the end-point T : L w BMOw, w. ualitatively, this situation seems slightly uninteresting, as these end-point spaces simply reduce to their unweighted analogues: That L w = L with equal norms is immediate from the fact that w and the Lebesgue measure share the same zero sets for w. That the weighted norm f BMOw := supinf c w f c w <, is equivalent to the usual f BMO for w was proven by Muckenhoupt and Wheeden [32], Theorem 5. However, one may still investigate the quantitative bound of operators T : L BMO = BMOw, when the latter space is equipped with the norm BMOw. We start with:.26. Theorem. For w, we have a bounded embedding I : BMO BMOw of norm at most c[w], where c is dimensional. This estimate is sharp in the following sense: if the norm of the embedding is bounded by φ[w], or just by φ[w] A, for all w, then φt ct. The following corollary for Calderón Zygmund operators can be seen as an easy endpoint estimate of the bound T BL p w c p,t [w] Ap for p [2,..27. Corollary. Let T be any Calderón-Zygmund operator and let w, then T : L BMOw with norm at most c T [w]. Furthermore, this estimate is sharp in terms of the dependence on [w] in the same way as Theorem.26. We conclude the introduction by stating the following observation which may be of some interest..28. Proposition. If w, then logw BMO with logw BMO log2e[w] A. 2. The two different constants Before pursuing further our analysis of inequalities with control, we include this short section to compare the two constants [w] A := sup w exp logw, [w] := sup Mwχ. w We need the following auxiliary estimate, which is also used later in the paper: 2.. Lemma. The logarithmic maximal function M 0 f := supexp log f satisfies M 0 f L p c /p d f L p for all p 0,. For the dyadic version, we can take c d = e, independent of dimension d. χ

9 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 9 Proof. By Jensen s inequality and the basic properties of the logarithm, we have M 0 f Mf, M 0 f = M 0 f /q q M f /q q, q 0,, where M is the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator, or the dyadic maximal operator in the case of dyadic M 0. By the L q boundedness of the usual maximal function for q >, we have q q [M 0 f] p [M f p/q ] q C d q f p/q q = C d q f p. In the non-dyadic case, we simply take, say, q = 2, giving the claim with c d = 2C d 2. In the dyadic case, we have C d =, and we can take the limit q, which gives q q q q = = + q e, q q and hence M 0 f p L p e f p L p Proposition. We have [w] c d [w] A, where c d is as in Lemma 2.. Proof. For x, it is not difficult to see that for the computation of Mwχ x, it suffices to take the supremum over cubes R x with R : Mwχ x = sup w, x. R x R R By definition of [w] A, we have w [w] A exp and hence, taking the supremum over R, R R logw, Mwχ x [w] A M 0 wχ x, x. Integration over and application of Lemma 2. now give Mwχ [w] A M 0 wχ [w] A c d wχ = c d [w] A w; thus [w] c d [w] A. It is a well known fact that any weight satisfies a reverse reverse Hölder inequality playing a central role in the area. In this paper a sharp version of this property will also play a fundamental role. To be precise if w we define rw := + τ d [w] where τ d is a dimensional constant that we may take to be τ d = 2 +d. Note that rw [w]. The result we need is the following Theorem A new sharp reverse Hölder inequality. a If w, then w rw /rw 2 w.

10 0 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ b Furthermore, the result is optimal up to a dimensional factor: If a weight w satisfies the reverse Hölder inequality w r /r K w, then [w] c d K r. This result is new in the literature and has its own interest. In the classical situation most of the available proofs do not give such explicit constants, which are important for us. Only under the stronger condition of A was found and used in a crucial way in [27]. Very recently a very nice proof by A. de la Torre [46] for the case [w] A was sent to us. Another less precise proof and for the case, < p <, can be found in [34]. Part b follows from the boundedness of the maximal function inl r with constant c d r : Mχ w Mχ w r /r c d r w r /r cd r K w. 3. The A 2 theorem for Calderón Zygmund operators The purpose of this section is to prove Theorem.3, namely, the estimate T BL2 w c[w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[σ] /2, where c = c d,t is a constant depending on the dimension and the operator T. Here and throughout this section, σ = w. This improves on the A 2 theorem [6]: T BL2 w c[w] A2, and its proof follows the same outline, with the implementation of the philosophy at certain key points. 3.A. Reduction to a dyadic version. Fundamental to this proof strategy is the notion of dyadic shifts, which we recall. We work with a general dyadic system D, this being a collection of axis-parallel cubes, whose sidelengths l are of the form 2 k, k Z, where moreover R {,R, } for any two,r D, and the cubes of a fixed sidelength 2 k form a partition of R d. Given such a dyadic system, a dyadic shift with parameters m,n is an operator of the form Xf = K D A K f, A K f = K I,J D;I,J K li=2 m lk lj=2 n lk h J I,f k I J, where h J I is a generalized Haar function on I supported on I, constant on its dyadic subcubes, and normalized by h J I, and kj I on J. This implies that A K f χ K K f. For any subcollection D, we write K X f := K A K f, 3.

11 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING and we require that X f L 2 f L 2 for all D. This is automatic from straightforward orthogonality considerations in case we only have cancellative Haar functions with h J I = k I J = 0. Dyadic shifts with parameters 0, 0 are well known in dyadic harmonic analysis under different names. Auscher et al. [2] study such operators under the name perfect dyadic operators, which they decompose into a sum of a Haar multiplier or martingale transform, a paraproduct, and a dual paraproduct. These three types of operators are of course well-known since a long time. The first dyadic shift and this name with parameters 0, was introduced by Petermichl [40], and the definition in the above generality was given by Lacey, Petermichl and Reguera [23]. The importance of these dyadic shifts for the analysis of Calderón Zygmund operators comes from the following: 3.2. Theorem Dyadic representation theorem; [6, 20], Theorems 4.2 and 4.. Let T BL 2 R d be a Calderón Zygmund operator which satisfies the standard estimates with the Hölder continuity exponent α 0,]. Then it has the representation g,tf = c T,d E D m,n=0 2 m+nα/2 g,x mn D f, valid for all bounded and compactly supported functions f and g, where X mn D is a dyadic shift with parameters m,n related to the dyadic system D, and E D is the expectation with respect to a probability measure on the space of all generalized dyadic systems; see [6] for the details of the construction of this probability space. This result was preceded by several versions restricted to special operators T: the Beurling Ahlfors transform by Dragičević and Volberg [], the Hilbert transform by Petermichl [40], the Riesz transforms by Petermichl, Treil and Volberg [39], and all one-dimensional convolution operators with an odd, smooth kernel by Vagharshakyan [47]. An immediate consequence of the dyadic representation theorem is that Theorem.3 will be a consequence of the following dyadic version: Similarly, the special cases of the representation theorem all played a role in proving the A 2 theorem for the mentioned particular operators Theorem. Let X be a dyadic shift with parameters m,n, andr = max{m,n}. For w A 2 and σ = w, we have Xf L 2 w Cr + 2 [w] /2 A 2 [w] A +[σ] /2 f L 2 w. The weighted norm of the shifts, in turn, is most conveniently deduced with the help of the following characterization of their boundedness in a two-weight situation: 3.4. Theorem [20], Theorem 3.4. Let X be a dyadic shift with parameters m,n, and r = max{m, n}. If for all D and some B there holds /2 /2 Xχ σ w 2 Bσ /2, X χ w σ 2 Bw /2, then for a dimensional constant c, we have Xfσ L2 w c r +B +r+ 2 A 2 [w,σ] /2 f L2 σ, where A 2 [w,σ] is defined by the functional A 2 [w,σ] := sup w σ.

12 2 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ Observing that for σ = w, the last bound is equivalent to Xf L 2 w c r+b +r+ 2 [w] /2 A 2 f L 2 w, and [w] A,[σ] A, we are reduced to estimating the quantity B for σ = w. Since X and X are operators of the same form, and by the symmetry of w and σ, Theorem 3.4 shows that proving Theorem 3.3 amounts to showing that /2 Xwχ σ 2 cr+ [w]a2 [w] A w /2. We observe that Xwχ = K A K wχ + K A K wχ, and it suffices to consider the two parts separately. The big cubes are immediately handled by the maximal function estimate see Corollary.3: K wχ K A 2 w 2σ σ K χ K K 3.5 M d wχ 2 σ [σ] A2 [w] w = [w] A2 [w] w. Hence, to prove Theorem 3.3, we are reduced to showing that K A K wχ 2 /2 σ cr + [w]a2 [w] A w / This is the goal for the rest of this section. 3.B. Proof of the key estimate 3.6. We follow the key steps from [6, 20, 23]. The collection {K D : K } is first split into r+ subcollections according to the value of log 2 lk mod r+; we henceforth work with one of these subcollections, which we denote by K. This is the step which introduces the factor r +, and we will estimate X K wχ with a bound independent of r. The collection K is further divided into the sets K a of those cubes with 2 a < w σ 2 a+, 3.7 where a log 2 [w] A2. Among the cubes K K a, we choose the principal cubes S a = k=0 S k a so that S0 a consists of the maximal cubes in K a, and Sk a a the maximal cubes S K contained in some S Sk a with σs/ S > 2σS / S. Then K a = K a S, K a S := {K K a K S, S : K S S}. S S a It follows that X K wχ = a log 2 [w] A2 where we use the notation from 3.. To proceed, we recall the following distributional estimate: S S a X K a Swχ, 3.8

13 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING Lemma [20], Eq With notation as above, we have σ X K a Swχ > t w S Ce ct σs, S S a, 3.0 where the constants C and c are at worst dimensional. This is a powerful estimate which readily leads to norm bounds for 3.8. The following computation, simplifying the corresponding ones from [6, 20, 23], is borrowed from [8]: Denoting E j S := {j X K a Swχ / w S < j +} S, we have X K a Swχ j + w S χ EjS L2 σ L2 σ S S a j=0 S S a [ ] 2σxdx /2 = j + w S χ EjSx j=0 S S a /2 C j + w 2 S χ EjSxσxdx j=0 S S a /2 = C j + w 2 S σe j S j=0 S S a /2 C j + w 2 S Ce cj σs by 3.0 j=0 S S a C e cj j + 2 /2 a ws by 3.7 for S S a K a j=0 S S a C 2 a/2 /2. ws S S a In we used the fact that at a fixed x, the numbers w S for the principal cubes S E j S x increase at least geometrically, so their l and l 2 norms are comparable. We now come to the crucial point, where we can improve the earlier A 2 bounds to : 3.. Lemma. For the principal cubes as defined above, we have S S a ws 2 [w] w. Proof. Let ES := S \ S S The union is the union of its maximal members S, which satisfy S = S /ws ws 2 S /ws ws, S. 3.2 hence S 2 S, and thus ES 2 S. 3.3

14 4 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ Therefore ws ws = S ws 2 ES S S S S a S S a S S a 2 Mwχ = 2 Mwχ 2 [w] w, S S a ES where the last step was the definition of [w]. Substituting the obtained estimates back to 3.8, we conclude that X K wχ L2 σ X K a Swχ S S a C C a log 2 [w] A2 a log 2 [w] A2 2 a/2 S S a ws a log 2 [w] A2 2 a/2 [w] A w C[w] /2 A 2 [w] /2 w /2. /2 /2 L 2 σ Recalling the initial splitting of {K D : K } into r + subcollections of the same form as K, this concludes the proof of 3.6, and hence the proof of Theorem Two-weight theory for the maximal function 4.A. Background. The two-weight problem was studied in the 970 s by Muckenhoupt and Wheeden and fully solved by E. Sawyer in 982 in [44]. The general question is to find a necessary and sufficient condition for a pair of unrelated weights w and σ for which the following estimate holds Mfσ Lp w B f Lp σ. 4. for a finite constant B. Then the main result of E. Sawyer shows that this is the case if and only if there exists a finite c such that Mσχ y p wydy cσ for all cubes. Furthemore, it is shown in [30] that if B denotes the best constant then B sup Mσχ /p p wdx σ Since this condition is hard to verify in practice, the first author considered in [36] conditions closer in spirit to the classical two weight condition: p, [w,σ] := sup w σ

15 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 5 which reduces to [w] Ap if σ = w /p. A consequence of the main result from [36] establishes that if δ > 0 and the quantity sup w σ p 4.2 LlogL p +δ, is finite then the two weight norm inequality 4. holds. A recent result of the second author and M. Mastyło [29] allows to go beyond condition 4.2 and improve the main results from [36]. In this paper we consider a different new quantity, namely pexp B p [w,σ] := sup w σ logσ. To understand this new quantity we observe that it is simply the functional on defining the [w,σ] condition multiplied by σexp logσ. Then it is immediate that [w,σ] B p [w,σ] [w,σ] [σ], the difference of the last two being that [w,σ] [σ] involves two independent suprema, as opposed to just one in B p [u,v]. We will consider first the dyadic maximal operator M d, for which we can prove a dimension-free bound. Let us also introduce the weighted dyadic maximal function χ M d,σ f := sup D σ which controls M d fσ as follows: 4.3. Theorem. Let p,, then fy σydy, M d fσ L p w 4e B p [w,σ] /p Md,σ f L p σ and also 4e p B p [w,σ] /p f L p σ M d fσ L p w 4e [w] Ap [σ] /p Md,σ f L p σ 4e p [w] Ap [σ] /p f L p σ. The main estimate in both chains of inequalities is of course the first one, since the second is simply the universal estimate for the weighted dyadic maximal function on the weighted L p space with the same weight: M d,σ BL p σ p. Obviously, in this dyadic version, it suffices to have the supremum in the weight constants over dyadic cubes only, and to only use the dyadic square function in the definition of [σ]. And specializing to the case σ = w /p, by the standard dual weight trick, we also get the bounds { 4e p B p [w,w /p ] /p f Lp w, M d f L p w 4e p [w] Ap [w /p ] /p f L w. Let us also recall how such dyadic bounds yield corresponding results for the Hardy Littlewood maximal operator by a standard argument.

16 6 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ Proof of Theorem.0. Consider the 2 d shifted dyadic systems D α := {2 k [0, d +m+ k α : k Z,m Z d }, α {0, 3 }d. One can check perhaps best in dimension n = first that any cube is contained in a shifted dyadic cube α D α with l α 6l, for some α. Hence f 6 d f 6 d Md α f, α and therefore Mf 6 d α {0, 3 }d M α d f. Thus the norm bound for M d may be multiplied by 2 d to give a bound for M Remark. A recent result of the first author and A. Kairema [7] allows to perform a similar trick with adjacent dyadic systems even in an abstract space of homogeneous type. Thus, Corollary.0 readily extends to this generality as well. 4.B. Proof of Theorem 4.3. We start by observing that it suffices to have a uniform bound over all linearizations Mfσ = Dχ E fσ, where the sets E are pairwise disjoint. Here we using the following notation f = f = fx dx and f σ = fxσxdx σ where as usual σe = σx dx By this disjointness, Mfσ Lp w = we fσ p Now recall: D /p σ p f σ = we p /p D 4.5. Theorem Dyadic Carleson embedding theorem. Suppose that the nonnegative numbers a satisfy a AσR R D. R Then, for all p [, and f L p σ, a f σ p /p A /p M d,σ f L p σ D A /p p f L p σ if p >.

17 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 7 Since this is a slightly nonstandard formulation, although immediate by inspection of the usual argument, we provide a proof for completeness: Proof. We view the sum a f p as an integral on a measure space D,µ built over the set of dyadic cubes D, assigning to each D the measure a. Thus a f p = pλ p µ{ D : f > λ}dλ D =: 0 0 pλ p µ λ dλ Let λ be the set of maximal dyadic cubes R with the property that f R > λ. The cubes R λ are disjoint, and their union is equal to the set {M d,σf > λ}. Thus µ λ = a a AσR = AσM d,σ f > λ, λ R and hence D a f p A R λ 0 R λ pλ p σm d,σ f > λdλ = A M d,σ f p L p σ. If we apply the Carleson embedding with a = we σ/ p, we find that Mfσ L p w A /p M d,σ f L p σ 4.6 provided that σ p we AσR R D. 4.7 R Note that on E R, we have σ/ Mσχ R, and hence σ p σ pw we = χ E R R χ E Mχ R σ p w Mχ R σ p w. R So if χ R Mχ R σ L p u A /p σr /p, then 4.7 holds, hence by Carleson s embedding also 4.6, and therefore the original two-weight inequality Hence, we are reduced to proving that Mfσ L p u A /p M d,σ f L p σ. χ R Mχ R σ p L p u AσR, A = 4e/p B p [w,σ]. 4.8 In fact, the argument up to this point was essentially reproving Sawyer s two-weight characterization for the maximal function, paying attention to the constants. To prove 4.8, we exploit another linearization of M involving the principal cubes, as in the proof of the A 2 theorem: Let S 0 := {R} and recursively S k := S S k { S : σ > 2 σ S, is a maximal such cube}, R

18 8 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ and then S := k=0 S k. The pairwise disjoint subsetses S, defined in 3.2, satisfy ES 2 S by 3.3, and they partition R. If x ES and x, then σ 2 σ S, and hence χ R Mχ R σ 2 σ S on χ ES. So altogether χ R Mχ R σ p L p w p 2p χ ES σ S S S L p w p = 2 σs p wes S S S 2 p ws σs p S S S S S 2 p+ S S B p [w,σ]exp 2 p+ B p [w,σ] 2 p+ B p [w,σ] = 2 p+ B p [w,σ] R S S S exp R D R logσ ES S logσ χ ES sup χ exp logσχ R M 0 χ R σ, 4.9 where M 0 is the dyadic logarithmic maximal function introduced in Lemma 2.. By this lemma, we then have χ R Mχ R σ p L p u 4p B p [w,σ] e σr, which proves 4.8, and hence Theorem 4.3, upon taking the pth root. In order to prove the second version of Theorem 4.3, we only need to make a slight modification in the estimate 4.9. We then compute: χ R Mχ R σ p L p w ws σs p S 2p S S S S 2 p+ σs [w] Ap S ES S S 2 p+ [w] Ap Mσχ = 2 p+ [w] Ap S S ES Mσχ = 2 p+ [w] Ap [σ] σ, by a direct application of the definition of [σ] in the last step, and this completes the alternative argument. 4.C. Another proof of Theorem 4.3. We finish this section by providing yet another proof variant for Theorem 4.3. This proof is more elementary, since it does not need the reduction to the testing condition 4.8, and it uses the more standard Calderón Zygmund-type stopping

19 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 9 cubes, instead of the principal cubes. Its disadvantage is the fact the we cannot recover the dimension-independence by this argument. On the other hand, the proof may be extended to maximal functions defined in term of a general basis see [3] Section IV.4. A simpler proof of Theorem 4.3 with a dimension-dependent bound. Fixa > 2 d. For each integer k let Ω k = {x R d : M d f σx > a k }. By standard arguments we consider the Calderón Zygmund decomposition and there is a family of maximal non-overlapping dyadic cubes { k,j } for which Ω k = j k,j and a k < fy σydy 2 d a k. 4.0 k,j k,j Now, R d M d fσ p wdx = k Ω k \Ω k+ M d fσ p wdx a p a kp wω k = a p a kp w k,j k k,j a p p fy σydy w k,j k,j k,j k,j = a p p f σ p σk,j k,j w k,j k,j k,j a p B p [w,σ] f σ p k,j k,j exp logσtdt k,j k,j = a p B p [w,σ] D f σ pa, where { exp a = logσ if = k,j for some k,j, 0 else. By the dyadic Carleson embedding theorem, we can hence conclude that M d fσ p wdx a p B p [w,σ]a M d,σ f p σdx, R d R d provided that we check the condition a = k,j exp logσ A R. 4. k,j R k,j: k,j R To estimate the left side of 4., we do first the following: For eachk,j we set E k,j = k,j \Ω k+. Observe that the sets of the family E k,j are pairwise disjoint. We claim that k,j < a a 2 d E k,j 4.2

20 20 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ for each k,j. Indeed, by 4.0 and Hölder s inequality, k,j Ω k+ = k+,l k+,l k,j < a k+ k+,l k,j k+,l f σ a k,j k+ f σ 2d a k,j, which proves 4.2. With β = a a 2 d we can estimate the left side of 4. as follows: a β R β β k,j: k,j R k,j: k,j R R E k,j exp logσtdt k,j M 0 σ R xdx E k,j M 0 σ R xdx βeσr, where we used the definition and the L boundedness of the logarithmic dyadic maximal function. This proves 4. with A = βe, concluding the proof. 5. Proof of the extrapolation theorems We will prove in this section the Upper and Lower Extrapolation Theorems.7 and.8. Recall that the initial hypothesis is given by the expression: Tf L r w ϕ [w] Ar,[w] A,[w /r ] r A f L r w for some r,. Proof of Theorem.7. Our argument is modeled after a simplified proof of the Dragičević Grafakos Pereyra Petermichl [0] result due to Duoandikoetxea [2] see also [9]. Fix some p,r, w, f L p w and g := f / f Lp w. Let so that Rg := 2 k M k g M k k=0 BL p w g Rg, Rg Lp w 2 g Lp w = 2, [Rg] A 2 M Lp w. Then by Hölder s inequality /p Tf L p w = Tf p Rg r pp/r Rg r pp/r w /r /p /r Tf r Rg r p w Rg p w Tf L r W2 p /p /r 2 Tf L r W, W := Rg r p w.

21 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 2 By assumption, we have where Tf Lr W ϕ [W] Ar,[W] A,[W /r ] r f Lr W = f Lr W /r f f r Rf r p r p/r w L p w /r f f r f r p r p/r w L p w = f L p w, so it remains to estimate the weight constants [W] Ar, [W] A, [W /r ] A. Using sup Rg [Rg] A Rg appropriate, we compute or Hölder s or Jensen s inequality where and W /r r W = Rg r p w [Rg] r p A Rg r p w, = Rgr p/r w /r r Rg r p w /p p, exp logw = exp logrg r pexp logw exp logw /r r Rg r p exp logw, = exp logrg r p exp logw /r r [Rg] r p A Rg r p exp logw /p p. Multiplying the appropriate estimates and using the definition, we then have [W] Ar [Rg] r p A [w] Ap, [W] A [Rg] r p A [w] A, [W /r ] r [Rg] r p A [w /p ] p. We do not know whether it is possible to make similar estimates for [W] in terms of [w] ; this is the reason why we need to use the [ ] A constants in this proof. Next, recall that [Rg] A 2 M BL p w c d p [w] /p [w /p ] /p. Thus we conclude the proof with Tf Lp w 2 Tf Lr W 2ϕ [W] Ar,[W] A,[W /r ] r A f Lr W 2ϕ [Rg] r p A [w]ap,[w] A,[w /p ] p f L p w 2ϕ 2 r p M r p BL p w [w]ap,[w] A,[w /p ] p f L p w.

22 22 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ Proof of Theorem.8. Again, our argument is inspired by a simplified proof of the Dragičević Grafakos Pereyra Petermichl[0] result due to Duoandikoetxea [2] see also [9]. Fix some p r,, w, f L p w. By duality, we need have Tf L p w = sup h 0 h L p w= Tf hw. We fix one such h, and try to bound the expression on the right. Observe that the pointwise multiplication operators h wh : L p w L p w p, g w g : Lp w p L p w are isometric. Let R be as in the previous proof, except with p and σ = w p in place of p and w: 2 k M k g Rg :=, and R h := w Rwh. Then M k k=0 BL p σ h R h, R h L p w 2 h L p w = 2, [wr h] A 2 M BL p σ. Then by Hölder s inequality Tf hw Tf R hw = Tf R h p r/[rp ] R h r p/[rp ] w /r /r Tf r R h p r/p w R h p/p w By assumption, Tf L r W2 p /r, W := R h p r/p w. Tf Lr W ϕ [W] Ar,[W] A,[W /r ] r f Lr W 5. where, by Hölder s inequality with exponents p/r and its p/p r, f Lr W = f r w r/p R h p r/p w p r/p /r /p /r /p f p w R h w p/p f L p w2 p /r /p, so altogether, supressing the arguments of ϕ from 5., Tf hw Tf L r W2 p /r ϕ... f L r W2 p /r for It remains to estimate ϕ... 2 p /r /p f L p w2 p /r = 2ϕ... f L p w. [W] Ar, [W] A, [W /r ] r W = R h p r/p w = [R hw] p r/p w r /p.

23 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 23 and We thus compute W /r r W = R h p r/p w R hw p r/p w r /p, = wr h p r/[p r ] w /p r [wr h] p r/p A R hw p r/p w /p r, exp logw = exp logwr h p r/r exp logw r /p [R hw] p r/r A R hw p r/r r /p, exp logw exp logw /r r = exp logwr h p r/p exp logw /p r R hw p r/r exp logw /p r. Multiplying the relevant quantities, it follows that Also recall that [W] Ar [R hw] p r/p A [w] r /p, [W] A [R hw] p r/p A [w] r /p, [W /r ] r [R hw] p r/p [w /p ] r, A [R hw] A 2 M BL p w p c d[w p ] /p [w]/p = c d [w] /p [w] /p, and thus we conclude with Tf Lp w Tf hw 2ϕ 2ϕ [R hw] p r/p 2ϕ A 2 M BL p w p p r/p [w] r /p A r [W] Ar,[W] A,[W /r ] r f Lp w [W]Ar,[W] A,[W /r ] r f Lp w,[w] r /p,[w /p ] r f L p w. 6. The A theory, proof of Theorem.2 and its consequences 6.A. The main lemma. The proofs of the theorems will be based on the following lemma. 6.. Lemma. Let T be any Calderón-Zygmund singular integral operator and let w be any weight. Also let p,r,.then, there is a constant c = c d,t such that: Tf L p w cpp r /p f L p M rw where as usual we denote M r w = Mw r /r.

24 24 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ This is a consequence of the following estimate that can be found in [27] when r,2]: Tf Lp w cpp /pr f L r p M rw since /pr r /p+/pr 2r /p r and t /t 2, t. 6.B. Proof of the sharp reverse Hölder s inequality. We need the following lemma: 6.2. Lemma. For any cube and any measurable function w, w loge+ w dx 2 d+ Mwχ dx, 6.3 w Hence, if w sup wyloge+ wy dy 2 d+ [w] A w w 6.4 The essential idea of the proof can be traced back to the well known LlogL estimate for M in [45]. However these estimates are not homogeneus. roof of this lemma within the context of spaces of homogeneous type can essentially be found in [38, Lemma 8.5] see also [50, p. 7, inequality 2.5] for a different proof. Proof of Lemma 6.2. Fix a cube. By homogeneity we assume that w =. The key estimate follows from the reverse weak type, estimate : if w is nonnegative and t > w, Now, t {x :wx>t} wloge+wdx = wdx 2 d {x : Mwχ x > t}. 6.5 = and I For II we use estimate 6.5: II = 2d 2d = 2d w{x : wx > t}dt e+t + Mwχ dx. = I +II, w{x : wx > t}dt e+t t e+t {x : Mwχ x > t} dt {x : Mwχ x > t} dt Mwχ x dx.

25 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 25 This gives 6.3 and 6.4 follows from the definiton of [w]. The main use of the Lemma is the following key observation that we borrow from [50], p. 45: 6.6. Lemma. Let S and let λ > 0, then S < e λ implies ws w < 2d+2 [w] λ +e λ/2 6.7 Proof. Indeed, if E λ = {x : wx > e λ w } then we λ 2d+ λ w by 6.4. Therefore: ws ws E λ/2 +ws \E λ/2 2d+2 [w] λ w+e λ/2 w S 2d+2 [w] λ w+e λ/2 e λ w by the hypothesis in 6.7 = 2d+2 [w] λ and this proves the claim 6.7. w+e λ/2 w Proof of Theorem 2.3. Recall that we have to prove that w rw /rw 2 w. where rw := + τ d [w], and where τ d is a large dimensional constant. Observe that by homogeneity we can assume that w =. We use the dyadic maximal function on the dyadic subcubes of a given : w +ε M d wχ ε w = εt ε w{x : M d wχ > t}dt. 0 εt ε wdt+ε +ε k 0 +εa ε k 0 ak+ a k 0 εt ε w{x : M d wχ > t} dt t t ε w{x : M d wχ > t} dt t kε a k+ a a k = +εa ε loga k 0a kε wω k w{x : M d wχ > a k } dt, fora, t where Ω k = {x : M d wχ x > a k }. Since a k = w we can consider the Calderón Zygmund decomposition w adapted to. There is a family of maximal non-overlapping dyadic cubes { k,j }

26 26 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ strictly contained in for which Ω k = j k,j and a k < w 2 d a k. 6.8 k,j Now, k 0a kε wω k = a kε w k,j ε wydy w k,j k,j k,j k,j k,j To now need to estimate w k,j and we pursue similarly to Section 4.C, see in particular 4.2: For each k,j we set E k,j = k,j \Ω k+. Observe that the sets of the family E k,j are pairwise disjoint. But exactly as in 4.2 we have that for a > 2 d and for each k,j: k,j < a a 2 d E k,j. 6.9 I removed the repetition from Section 4.C. We now apply 6.7 with = k,j and S = k,j Ω k+. Choose λ such that e λ = 2d a, namely λ = log a 2 d. Then applying 6.7 we have that w k,j Ω k+ w k,j < 2d+2 [w] log a 2 d + 2d a /2. Since a > 2 d is available we choose a = 2 d e L[w] A, with L a large dimensional constant to be chosen. If in particular L 2 d+4 we have w k,j Ω k+ w k,j < 2d+2 L +e [w] A L/2 < = 2 This yields that w k,j 2wE k,j and we can continue with the sum estimate: ε k 0a kε wω k 2 wydy we k,j k,j k,j k,j 2 M d wχ ε wdx 2 M d wχ ε wdx k,j E k,j Combining estimates we end up with M d wχ ε w +2εa ε loga M d wχ ε wdx for any ε > 0. Recall that a = 2 d e L[w] A. Hence if we choose I wrote the same steps a bit more compactly: we can compute L = 2 d+4, ε = 2εa ε loga < 2, concluding the proof of the theorem. 2 7 L[w] = 2 +d [w], M d wχ ε w 2,

27 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 27 6.C. Proof of Theorem.2, the strong case. The proof is, as in [27], just an application of Lemma 6. with a specific parameter r coming from the sharp reverse Hölder inequality given by Theorem 2.3. Indeed, since w A and if we denote rw := + τ d [w], we have w rw /rw 2 Now by Lemma 6. with r = rw, we have w. 6.0 Tf Lp w cpp r /p f Lp M rw cpp [w] /p f Lp 2Mw cpp [w] /p [w] /p A f L p w using the standard notation M r w = Mw r /r. This concludes the proof of the theorem. 6.D. Proof of Theorem.22, the weak case. We follow here the classical method of Calderón-Zygmund with the modifications considered in [35]. Applying the Calderón-Zygmund decomposition to f at level λ, we get a family of pairwise disjoint cubes { j } such that λ < j j f 2 d λ Let Ω = j j and Ω = j 2 j. The good part is defined by g = j f j χ j x+fxχ Ω cx and the bad part b as b = j b j where b j x = fx f j χ j x Then, f = g +b. We split the level set as w{x R d : Tfx > λ} w Ω+w{x Ω c : Tbx > λ/2} + w{x Ω c : Tgx > λ/2} = I +II +III. Exactly as in [35], the main term is III. We first deal with the easy terms I and II, which actually satisfy the better bound I +II λ [w] A f L w. Indeed, the first term is essentially the level set of Mf: I = w{x R d : Mfx > c d λ} and the result follows by the classical Fefferman-Stein inequality: Mf L, w c d f L Mw,

28 28 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ For the second term we use the following estimate: there is a dimensional constantc such that for any cube and any function b supported onsuch that bx dx = 0 and any weight w we have Tby wydy c d by M wydy 6. R n \2 This can be found in Lemma 3.3, p. 43, of [3]. Now, using this estimate with w replaced by wχ Rn \2 j we have II c T by wydy λ R n \ Ω c Tb j y wydy c b j y Mwχ λ j R n \2 j λ R n \2j ydy j j c fy Mwydy + c Mwχ λ R λ d j R n \2j x dx fx dx j j j Now, to estimate the inner sum we use that Mχ R n \2µ is essentially constant on, namely Mχ R n \2µy Mχ R n \2 µz y,z, 6.2 where the constants are dimensional. This fact that can be found in [3] p. 59. Hence, the sum is controlled by c d inf Mwχ R x n \2 j x fx dx c d fx Mwxdx. j R n j This gives the required estimate. We now consider last term III, the singular term, to which we apply Chebyschev inequality and Lemma 6. with exponents p, r,, which will chosen soon, as follows III = w{x Ω c : Tgx > λ/2} Tg p L p wχ Ω c cpp p r p p λ p g p M r wχ Ω cdx R d = cpp p r p g M r wχ λ Ω cdx. R d Now, after using the definition of g we use the same argument as above using 6.2 with M replaced by M r. Then we have g M r wχ Ω cdx fx dx M r wχ Ω j j R n \2j x dx j j c d inf M rwχ R n \2j x fx dx c d fx M r wxdx, x j j and of course g M r wχ Ω cdx f M r wdx. Ω c Ω c Ω

29 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 29 Observe that r is not chosen yet, and we conclude by choosing as above the exponent from Theorem 2.3 r = rw := + τ d [w], namely the sharp reverse Hölder s exponent. We also choose p = + loge+[w] where p < 2 and p loge+[w]. Then we continue with w{x Ω c : Tgx > λ/2} c[w] A loge+[w] [w] 2p f 2Mwdx. λ R d c[w] A e+log[w] f wdx. λ R d This estimate combined with the previous ones for I and II completes the proof. 6.E. Proof of Theorem.23, the dual weak case. We adapt here the method from [28] where a variant of the Calderón-Zygmund decomposition is used, namely the Calderón-Zygmund cubes are replaced by the Withney cubes. Fix λ > 0, and set Ω λ = {x R d : M c wf/wx > λ}, where M c w denotes the weighted centered maximal function. Let j j be the Whitney covering of Ω λ and set the Calderón-Zygmund decomposition f = g + b with respect to these cubes: The good part is defined by g = j and then the bad part b is given by f j χ j x+fxχ Ω cx b = j b j where b j x = fx f j χ j x. By the classical Besicovitch lemma we have, Hence, we have to estimate { w x Ω λ : Tfx > λ wx wω λ c n λ f L R d } { w x Ω λ : Tbx + w } > λ/2 } wx { x Ω λ : Tgx > λ/2 wx I +I 2. By using again 6. with w =, we obtain I 2 Tbx dx c f f j dx c λ R d \Ω λ λ j λ f L R d, where c = c d,t. j

30 30 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ To estimate I 2, we will use the dual version of Lemma 6., namely: Tf L p M rw p cpp r /p f L p w p 6.3 As before we use Theorem 2.3 with such that r = rw := + w r /r 2 τ d [w], Then M r w 2Mw 2[w] A w where as usual M r w = Mw r /r. Now, combining Chebyschev inequality with 6.3 with parameter p, that will be chosen soon, we have I 2 2p Tg p w p dx λ p R [w] d 2p p A Tg p M r w p dx λ p R d cpp p r [w]p A g p w p dx λ p R d cp p p r [w]p A λ p w. f p w p dx+ p f j R d \Ω λ j We have that f λw a.e. on R d \Ω λ, and hence f p w p dx λ p f L R. d R d \Ω λ w p j dx. Next, following again [28], by properties of the Whitney covering, it is easy to see that for any cube j there exists a cube j such that j j, j c n j, and the center of j lies outside of Ω λ. Therefore, f j p w p dx [w] p A f j p Mw p dx j j [w] p A j which gives p f j j c f j w j w p j p cλ[w] A p j, dx cλ[w] A p j f j j cλ[w] A p f L R d. Combining the previous estimates, recalling that r [w] we obtain I 2 c p [w] pp p pp [w] 2p A λ f L R d,

31 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 3 and choosing now p such that we get p = + loge+[w] A 2, I 2 c[w] loge+[w] A f λ L R d. This, along with estimates for I and for wω λ, completes the proof of Theorem Commutators, proof of Theorem.24 and its consequences For the proof we need a sharp version of the John-Nirenberg Theorem, which can be essentialy found in [2] p Lemma Sharp John-Nirenberg. There are dimensional constants 0 α d < < β d such that αd sup exp by b dy β d. 7.2 b BMO In fact we can take α d = 2 d+2. A key consequence of this lemma for the present purposes is the fact that e Rezb w inherits the good weight properties of w when the complex number z is small enough. More precisely, for the A 2 constant we have: 7.3. Lemma. There are dimensional constants ǫ d and c d such that [e Rezb ǫ d w] A2 c d [w] A2 if z. b BMO [w] A +[w ] A Proof. From the reverse Hölder inequality with exponent r = +/τ d [w], and the John Nirenberg inequality, we have for an arbitrary /r /r we Rezb w r e r Rezb b e Rez b ǫ 2 w β d e Rez b d, if z b BMO [w]. By symmetry, we also have w e Rezb 2β d w e Rez b if z Multiplication of the two estimates gives we Rezb w e Rezb 4βd 2, for all z as in the assertion, and completes the proof. ǫ d b BMO [w ]. There is an analogous statement for the constant [ ]. A similar result for [ ] A is also true, and easier, but we will have no need for it, and it is therefore left as an exercise for the reader.

32 32 T. HYTÖNEN AND C. PÉREZ 7.4. Lemma. There are dimensional constants ǫ d and c d such that [e Rezb w] c d [w] ǫ d if z b BMO [w]. Proof. We know that w satisfies the reverse Hölder inequality w+3δ /+3δ 2 w with a constant δ = c d/[w] < 2, where c d is a small dimensional constant. We will prove that e Rezb w satisfies a reverse Hölder estimate e Rezb w +δ /+δ Cd e Rezb w, 7.5 for all z as in the assertion. This shows that [e Rezb w] 2C d /δ c d [w] by part b of Theorem 2.3. To prove 7.5, we first have e Rezb w +δ /+δ = e Rez b e Rezb b w +δ /+δ e δ/+δ 2 Rez b e Rezb b +δ2 /δ w +δ2 /+δ 2, where we applied Hölder s inequality with exponents +δ/δ and +δ. Now +δ 2 = +2δ +δ 2 +3δ, and hence the last factor is bounded by 2 w. Moreover, by Lemma 7., we have e Rezb b +δ2 /δ α d δ β d if z 4 b BMO So altogether e Rezb w +δ /+δ e Rez b β d 2 and we concentrate on the last factor. We observe that 2 w = w +δ/2 w δ/2 2 and hence w +δ w δ 2 w 2 +δ/ δ w δ / δ +δ w w δ, 8 w δ e Rezb δ e Rezb δ / δ 8 we Rezb e Rezb δ/δ δ/ δ, where we used Hölder s inequality with exponents / δ and /δ. w, 7.6

33 SHARP WEIGHTED BOUNDS INVOLVING 33 Combining with 7.6, we have shown that e Rezb w +δ /+δ e Rez b β d 6 = 6β d we Rezb 6β d we Rezb β d, we Rezb e Rezb δ/δ δ/ δ e Rezb b δ/δ δ/ δ provided that z α d δ/ b BMO in the last step. Altogether, we have proven 7.5 with C d = 6βd 2, under the condition that z α dδ/4 b BMO, and this completes the proof. Proof of Theorem.24. The proof is a revised version of that of [4] following the second proof in the classical L p theorem for commutators that can be found in [6]. Indeed, we begin by considering the conjugate of the operator given by T z f = e zb Te zb f. where z is any complex number. Then, a computation gives for instance for nice functions, [b,t]f = d dz T zf z=0 = T z f 2πi z =ǫ z 2 dz, ǫ > 0, by the Cauchy integral theorem. Now, by Minkowski s inequality [b,t]f L 2 w 2πǫ 2 T z f L 2 w dz, ǫ > 0, 7.7 z =ǫ all we need to do is estimate T z f L2 w = Te zb f L2 e w, for z = ǫ 2 Re z b with appropriate ǫ. By the main hypothesis of the theorem, we have Te zb f L 2 w ϕ [e 2Rezb w] A2,[e 2Rezb w] A,[e 2Rezb σ] A e zb f L2 e w, 2 Rez b where e zb f L 2 e 2 Re z b w = f L 2 w. By Lemmas 7.3 and 7.4 the latter applied to both w and w, we have provided that [we 2Rebz ] A2 C d [w] A2, [we 2Rebz ] C d [w], z = ǫ [w e 2Rebz ] C d [w ], ǫ d b BMO [w] A +[w ] Using this radius and the above estimates in 7.7, we obtain [b,t]f L2 w 2πǫ 2 ϕ C d [w] A2,C d [w],c d [w ] A f L2 w dz z =ǫ C d b BMO [w] A +[w ] ϕ C d [w] A2,C d [w],c d [w ] f L2 w. This concludes the proof of the main part of the theorem. The estimate for Tb k is deduced by iterating from the case k =.