arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 2 Apr 2013

Transcription

1 arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 2 Apr 2013 Restriction results for multilinear multipliers on weighted settings Salvador Rodríguez-López Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University Sweden salvador@math.uu.se) Abstract We obtain restriction results of K. de Leeuw s type for maximal operators defined through multilinear Fourier multipliers of either strong or wea type acting on weighted Lebesgue spaces. We give some application of our development. In particular we obtain periodic weighted results for Coifman-Meyer, Hörmander and Hörmander-Mihlin type multilinear multipliers. 1 Introduction The study of multilinear Fourier multipliers has it origins in the wor of R. Coifman and Y. Meyer see for instance [8]) and it has been a prolific and active area of research since the innovative wor of M. Lacey and C. Thiele see e.g. [19]) on the boundedness of the bilinear Hilbert transform. The literature in this subect is currently vast, so we will confine the references to those wors in direct connection with the contents of this paper. The main body of activity in multilinear theory have consisted of proving multilinear counterparts of classical linear results. Such is the case of the theory of multilinear Calderón-Zygmund operators see the seminal paper [15]), and of Hörmander-Mihlin multilinear multipliers see [17, 23]). More recently, a weighted theory for such operators is being developed see [11, 14, 16, 20, 21] and the references therein). Within the development of the multilinear theory, and of direct relevance to this paper, there has been quite a few studies in establishing multilinear versions of de Leeuw s type restriction results [9] on Lebesgue and Lorentz spaces [4, 5, 10, 24]. More specifically D. Fan and S. Sato [10, Theorem 3] developed a multilinear counterpart of C. Kenig and P. Tomas [18] generalisation of de Leeuw s result for maximal operators associated to a family of multipliers given by the dilations of a given one. To be more precise, they prove, in the particular bilinear case, the following: 2010 Mathematics Subect Classification: 42B15,42B35 Key words and phrases: Weighted L p spaces, Multilinear Fourier multipliers The author has been partially supported by the Grant MTM

2 Theorem 1.1. Let m be for a given continuous function inr 2d and let T r denote the bilinear Fourier multiplier operator associated to mrξ,rη). Suppose that sup r>0 T r f 1, f 2 )x) is a bounded operator mapping L p 1R d ) L p 2R d ) to L p R d ), with 1 p p 2 = 1 p, with 1 p 1, p 2 <. Then, the same holds for the maximal operator on L p 1T d ) L p 2T d ) associated to the multipliers given by{mr 1,r 2 )} 1, 2 Z d. The authors developed also similar results for operators of wea type. Moreover, L. Grafaos and P. Hondí [13] obtained a generalisation of Fan and Sato s results for general families of multipliers. In the linear setting, weighted linear extensions of de Leeuw s results have been developed by E. Berson and T.A. Gillespie [3], K. Andersen and P. Mohanty [1] and by M. Carro and the author [6, 7] for certain type of weights. The purpose of this paper is to extend the transference results of Fan and Sato [10] and Grafaos Hondzí [13] to multilinear maximal operators associated to a family of multipliers of either strong or wea type, acting on products of weighted Lebesgue spaces. In particular, we generalise Theorem 1.1 to weighted settings for a certain family of weights. Note that many interesting cases of multilinear operators can map Banach Lebesgue spaces into L p spaces with 0< p<1. This is an obstruction whenever one tries to study certain properties of multilinear operators, as it prevents to use arguments where the Banach structure is crucial. The methods developed in this paper allow to get around the difficulties that can arise from lac of convexity in the target spaces. The paper is organised as follows: In 2 we introduce the basic notation and state our main result Theorem 2.3 below), whose proof we develop in 3. Finally, in the last section, to illustrate the applications of our main result, we give periodic counterparts of the results of L. Grafaos and R. Torres [16] on Coifman-Meyer multipliers, M. Fuita and N. Tomita [11] regarding Hörmander-Mihlin type multilinear multipliers and N. Michalowsi, D. Rule and W. Staubach [21] regarding multipliers in the bilinear Hörmander class S m ρ,0. 2 Notations and main result We shall denote by T d the topological group R d /Z d, which can be identified with the cube [0,1) d or the cube [ 1 2, 1 2 )d eventually. Functions on T d will be identified with functions onr d which are 1-periodic in each variable. When 0< p< the Lebesgue spaces L p R d ) and L p T d ) will be the usual spaces corresponding, respectively, to Lebesgue measure onr d and tot d. A weight on R d is a locally integrable function with respect to the Lebesgue measure w :R d [0, ) such that 0<w< a.e. We shall write L p R d,w) for the space of functions f defined by the quasi-norm f L p R d,w) = fx) p wx)dx) 1 p. By abuse of notation, for any measurable set E, we will write we) = E wx)dx. We consider the wea-lebesgue space L p, R d,w) to be the space of functions defined by 2

3 the quasi-norm f L p, = suptw{x : fx) > t}) 1/p. t>0 Whenever w is 1-periodic on each variable, similar definitions hold for the spaces L p T d,w) and L p, T d,w). We shall designate by C c R d ), C R d ) and Cc R d ) the spaces of continuous functions with compact support, the space of infinitely differentiable functions, and the space of infinitely differentiable functions with compact support respectively. A function g : T d C such that for a finitely supported sequence {a } Z d of complex numbers is written as gx)= a e 2πix, Z d is called a trigonometric polynomial and we write g PT d ). As is well nown Cc Rd ) is a dense subset in L p R d,w) for any weight w and any 1 p<, and also that PT d ) is dense in L p T d,w) for any weight w 1-periodic on each coordinate. Observe that for such weight the local integrability implies that w L 1 T d ). For any function f, we shall denote by f the Fourier transform of f, whenever it is well defined. By abuse of notation, we will represent also by ĝ the Fourier transform for any periodic function g. Thus, for f L 1 R d ) fξ)= fx)e2πiξ x dx, for all ξ R d R d and for g L 1 T d ) ĝ)= gx)e2πix dx, for all Z d. [0,1) d From now on, N stands for a natural number greater or equal to 2. For a given function m L R Nd ), we denote by T m the N-linear operator given by T m f 1,..., f N )x)= mξ 1,...,ξ N ) R Nd N fl ξ l )e 2πiξ ξ N )x d ξ, x R d, for f 1,... f N C c R d ). We say that T m is a N-linear) multiplier. Similarly, for a given m L Z Nd ), we denote byt m the N-linear operator defined by T m g 1,...,g N )x)= 1,..., N Z d m 1,..., N ) N ĝ l l )e 2πi N )x, x T d, for g 1,...,g N PT d ). Let F denote a countable fixed set of indices. For a given family {m } F of bounded functions in R Nd, we consider the maximal operators associated given by M f 1,..., f N )x)= sup F 3 Tm f 1,..., f N )x). 2.1)

4 Observe that if there exists a function K L 1 R 2d ) such that m= K, then T m coincides with the operator given by B K f 1,..., f N )x)= Kx 1,...,x N ) R Nd N =1 f x x )dx 1...dx N. 2.2) Similarly, we define for{m } F L Z Nd ) the associated maximal operator as Mg 1,...,g N )x)= sup Tm g 1,...,g N ). 2.3) F For simplicity on the notation, we will omit the dependency on F and{m } F of the definition of M and M. From now on, unless stated to the contrary, we will restrict our attention to indices 1 p 1,... p N < and 0< p< satisfying 1 p p N = 1 p. 2.4) Definition 2.1. We say that m L R dn ) is normalized if for any ξ 1,...,ξ N R d, lim n m Φ n ξ 1,...,ξ N )=mξ 1,...,ξ N ), where ϕ n x)=ϕx/n), ϕ C c R d ), ϕ 0 and ϕ 1 = 1, Φ n ξ 1,...,ξ N )= N ϕ nξ l ) and denotes the usual convolution inr Nd. Observation 2.2. It is easy to see that any continuous and bounded function is also normalized. Observe that in particular, for any normalized function m, the point-wise evaluation m Z Nd ={m 1,..., N )} 1,..., N Z d, maes sense as the point-wise limit of continuous functions. The main results of this paper concerns transference of the boundedness of maximal normalized multipliers acting on weighted Lebesgue space and can be stated as follow. Theorem 2.3. Let w,w l for l = 1,...,N be 1-periodic weights and let { } m F be a family of normalized functions. Let M be the associated maximal operator defined as in 2.1) and let M be the maximal operator as in 2.3) associated to { } m Z Nd 1. If there exists a constantnsuch that F. M f 1,..., f N ) Lp R d,w) N N f l L p lr d,w l), 2.5) for any f l L p lr d,w l ), l = 1,...,N, then Mg 1,...,g N ) Lp T d,w) c pn for any g l L p lt d,w l ), l = 1,...,N. N g l L p lt d,w l) 2.6) 4

5 2. If there exists a constantnsuch that M f 1,..., f N ) L p, R d,w) N N f l L p lr d,w l), 2.7) for any f l L p lr d,w l ), l = 1,...,N, then Mg 1,...,g N ) L p, T d,w) c pn for any g l L p lt d,w l ), l = 1,...,N. N g l L p lt d,w l), 2.8) In both cases, c p is a constant depending only on p=p, p 1,..., p N ). Definition 2.4. For a given family of normalized functions { } m, we shall denote F by N { } m F ),respect. Nw { } m )) the least constant satisfying 2.5) resp. F 2.7)). Observation 2.5. Observe that the previous result can be applied also to the case of a single multiplier by taing F to consist in one element. Observe also that for w=w l = 1 the previous result recovers Fan and Sato s [10, Theorem 3] and Grafaos and Honzí [13, Thm. 2.2]. 3 Proof of Theorem 2.3 For the sae of simplicity, in the exposition, we shall restrict our proofs to the bilinear case N = 2) as it contains the main ideas of the development and the arguments can be easily extended to any N 2. We start by proving a weaer version of Theorem 2.3, where we assume stronger conditions on the multipliers. To this end, we need to recall the so called Kolmogorov condition see [12, p. 485]). Let M ber d ort d. For any q< p, we have the inequalities f L p, M,w) sup f χ E L q M,w) we)1/p 1/q c p,q f L p, M,w), 3.1) where the supremum is taen on the family of sets E with 0 < we) < and c q p,q = p/p q). Theorem 3.1. Let w,w l for l = 1,2 be 1-periodic weights and let { } m F satisfying that, for each, there exists K L 1 R Nd ) with compact support such that K ξ) = m ξ) for every ξ R Nd. Let M be the associated maximal operator defined as in 2.1) and let M be the maximal operator as in 2.3) associated to { } m Z 2d F. Assume that there exists a constant N such that 2.5) respectively 2.7)) holds. Then 2.6) resp. 2.8)) holds wherec p = 1 resp. c p = inf q<p c p,q ). 5

6 Proof. By Fatou s Lemma, without loss of generality we can assume that F is a finite family of indices F = {1,...,J}, where J N. By sae of brevity we are going to prove only the wea case. The strong case is obtained in a similar way with minor modifications in the proof, so we omit the details. It is easy to see that 2.7) yields that for every θ [0,1) d sup BK f 1, f 2 ) N f l L p R d,w l +θ)). 3.2) 1 J,2 L p, R d,w +θ)) where B K f 1, f 2 )x)= R 2d K x 1,x 2 ) f 1 x x 1 ) f 2 x x 2 )dx 1 dx 2 as in 2.2). Let g l θ)= a l e2πiθ PT d ) for l = 1,2. Consider T K g 1,g 2 )θ)= K x 1,x 2 ) g l θ x l )dx 1 dx 2. R 2d,2 Observe that T K coincides with the bilinear multiplier operatort m, where m Z 2d Z 2d is the sequence given by{m 1, 2 )} 1, 2 Z d. Let r > 0 big enough such that supp K Q r Q r for = 1,...,J where Q r = r,r) d. Fix any q< p and for any measurable E [0,1) d, define Ẽ = Z d E+ as its 1-periodic extension and, fixed θ T d let E θ = { x R d : x+θ Ẽ }. Denote by R x gθ)=gθ+ x). The translation invariance of the Lebesgue measure yields sup T K g 1,g 2 ) q χ E = 1 J = sup T d 1 J L q T d,w) Rx T K g 1,g 2 )θ) q wx+θ)χẽx+θ) dθ. for every x R d. Therefore, for every s>0, integration yields sup T K g 1,g 2 ) q χ E 1 J = 1 2s) d T d L q T d,w) sup Q s E θ 1 N R x T K g 1,g 2 )θ) q wx+θ)dxdθ. Since supp K Q r Q r for = 1,...,J, it follows that we can write R x T K g 1,g 2 )θ)=b K R ) g 1 θ)χ Qr+s,R ) g 2 θ)χ Qr+s ) x), 3.3) for any x Q s. Therefore, by 3.2) and 3.1), the term in 3.3) is bounded by c p,q N) q { } 1 q { p } q 2s) d wx+θ)dx T d E θ Q s R x g l θ) p p l l w l x+θ) dx dθ.,2 Q r+s ) 1 q p + p p 1 2, Hölder s inequality yields that the previous term is Since 1 = bounded by c q p,qn q { 2s) d T d Q s E θ wx+θ)dxdθ } 1 q p { } q R x g l θ) p p l l w l x+θ)dtdθ,2 T d Q r+s 6

7 Exchanging the order of integration, the term in the first curly bracet is equal to and we have { { T d T d } 1 q p χẽx+θ)wx+θ)dxdθ = we) 1 q p2s) d1 q p ), Q s } q R x g l θ) p p q l w l x+θ)dtdθ =2r+s)) p l g l q Q L p lt d,w). r+s Thus, for any s>0, sup TK g 1,g 2 ) ) d r+s p 1 χ E c p,q N we) q 1 J L 1 p qt d,w) s g l L p T d,w l ).,2 Therefore, taing s + and using 3.1) we have sup TK g 1,g 2 ) c p,q N g 1 L p 1T d,w 1 ) g 2 L p 2T d,w 2 ), 1 J L p, T d,w) from where the result follows considering inf q<p c p,q. The next step is to weaen the hypothesis assumed on the multipliers m. To this end we shall give some previous technical lemmas. The following result holds for general measure spacesm, µ) andm, µ ) = 1,2. Theorem 3.2. Let {T } be a countable family of bilinear operators which satisfies that there exists a constantn such that for any f l L p lm l, µ l ) with l = 1,2 sup T f 1, f 2 ) N f 1 L p 1M1,dµ 1 ) f 2 L p 2M2,dµ 2 ), 3.4) L p M,dµ) where p 1, p 2 p. Then ) 1/2 sup T f 1,, f 2,l ) 2,l c p,p1,p 2 N L p M,dµ) wherec p,p1,p 2 is a constant depending on p, p 1, p 2.,2 ) 1/2 f l, 2, 3.5) L p lml,dµ l ) Proof. Without loss of generality we can reduce us to prove the result for in a finite set of indices {1,...,J}, and for { f l, } with a finite number of elements for l = 1,2. Khintchine s bilinear inequality [22, Appendix D], bilinearity and 3.4) yield that the 7

8 left hand side term in 3.5) is bounded by 1 A 2 sup p [0,1] 2 p 1/p r s)r l t)t f 1,, f 2,l ) dsdt),l L p 1 ) p ) 1/p A 2 p [0,1] 2 sup T r s) f 1,,r l t) f 2,l dsdt l L p N 1 p ) 1/p A 2 p 0 1 p 1/p r s) f 1, ds 0 r t) f 2, dt), L p 1 for a certain universal constant A p depending only on p. Since for l = 1,2, p l p, Hölder inequality and Khintchine s inequality yield 1p 1 p 0 1 r s) f l, ds) L p 0 R d p l ) 1 pl r s) f l, x) dµ l x)ds l 1/2 B pl fl, 2), L p l for a certain constant B pl depending only on p l. Hence the result follows withc p,p1,p 2 = B p1 B p2 /A p. A direct application of the previous theorem in combination with 3.1) yields the following result. Corollary 3.3. Let {T } be a countable family of bilinear operators which satisfies that there exists a constantn such that for any f l L p l with l = 1,2 sup T f 1, f 2 ) N f 1 L p 1R d,dµ 1 ) f 2 L p 2R d,dµ 2 ), where p 1, p 2 p. Then ) 1/2 sup T f 1,, f 2,l ) 2,l L p, R d,dµ) L p, R d,dµ) wherec p,p1,p 2 is a constant depending on p, p 1, p 2. c p,p1,p 2 N,2 L p 2 ) 1/2 f l, 2 L p lr d,dµ l ) Lemma 3.4. Let 0 < p, p 1, p 2 < such that 1 p = 1 p p 2. Let T be any bounded operator from L p 1R d,w 1 ) L p 2R d,w 2 ) to L p R d,w) resp. L p, R d,w)), with norm N. Suppose that T satisfies that τ y T f 1, f 2 )=Tτ y f 1,τ y f 2 ), for any y R d. Then, for any nonnegative function ψ C c R d ), T is bounded from L p 1R d,ψ w 1 ) L p 2R d,ψ w 2 ) to L p R d,ψ w) resp. L p, R d,ψ w)) with norm bounded by N resp. inf q<p c p,q N)., 8

9 Proof. We ll prove only the wea case as the argument can be easily adapted to cover the strong case. Let E be any measurable set in R d such that 0 < ψ we) < +. Then, for any q< p, Tf 1, f 2 )χ E q L q R d,ψ w) = T f 1, f 2 )x) q ψ wx)dx= ψy) Tf 1, f 2 )x) q wx y)dxdy E E = ψy) Tτ y f 1,τ y f 2 )x) q wx)dxdy, E y with τ y fz) = fz+y). Thus, by the boundedness hypothesis, 3.1) and Hölder s inequality, the last term in the previous expression is bounded by N q ψy)we y) 1 q p c q p,q Nq ψ we)) 1 q p τ y fx) ) q/pl pl w l x)dx dy,2 f l q L p lr d,g w l ).,2 Then, the result follows by 3.1) and by taing the infimum for q < p. Observation 3.5. Although we are not going to use this property here, let us observe that the previous lemma implies that if w,w 1,w 2 ) A p then, g w,g w 1,g w 2 ) A p for any g C c R d ) see [20] for the definiton and properties of these classes of weights). The next lemma is the maximal multilinear counterpart of [3, Theorem 2.8]. We shall mention that it is an immediate consequence of Minowsii s inequality, as long as the target space is normable, but for the general set of indices considered the convexity of the target space fails. Proposition 3.6. Let ϕ L 1 R d ) and { } m L R d ). Then { } ϕ ϕ m satisfies {ϕ } {m N ϕ) m ) c p ϕ 2L 1R d) N } ), 3.6) N w { } ϕ ϕ) m ) c p ϕ 2L 1R d) Nw { } ) m 3.7) wherec p is a constant depending only on p=p, p 1, p 2 ). Proof. For simplicity we will prove only the wea case as it contains the main ideas of the proof. We leave the details of the strong case to the reader. Without loss of generality, we can assume that{m } is a finite family of bilinear multipliers of cardinal say J N. Fixed f 1, f 2 Cc Rd ), ϕ ϕ) m )ξ,η) f 1 ξ) f 2 η)e 2πiξ+η)x dξ = ϕξ)ϕη)e 2πixy+z) T m e 2πiξ f 1,e 2πiη f 2 )x) dξ dη. 9

10 Hence, T ϕ ϕ) m f 1, f 2 )x) S ϕ f 1, f 2 )x) := ϕξ) ϕη) T m e 2πiξ f 1,e 2πiη f 2 )x) dξ dη. 3.8) Observe that if p > 1, since L p, is a Banach space, Minowsi integral inequality applied to the last expression would conclude the result withc p = 1. So, we can assume without loss of generality that 0 < p 1. Let us first assume that ϕ L 1 R d ) is supported on a compact set K. Let F,x ξ,η)=t m e 2πiξ f 1,e 2πiη f 2 )x), ξ,η R d. It is easy to see that ξ,ζ,η,γ R d, x R d F,x ξ,η) F,x ζ,γ) ) m L L f 1 τ ξ ζ f 1 f 2 + L L f 2 τ η γ f 2 f 1, 1 R d ) 1 R d ) 1 R d ) 1 R d ) where τ ξ stands for the translation operator. Then the uniform continuity of translations in L 1 R d ) and a compactness argument yield that, for each N\{0}, there exists a finite family { Vl } I of pairwise disoint covering of K given by measurable sets such that K I Vl and, if l = 1,...,I and ξ,ζ Vl then sup 1 J sup F,x ξ,η) F,x ζ,η) + F,x η,ξ) F,x η,ζ) 1/. 3.9) x,η R d For each 1 let {Vl }I be the family of pairwise disoint sets given above. For each l, select ξl Vl. Then, for every ξ K and any 1, there exists a unique l {1,...,I } such that ξ Vl and hence 3.9) yields sup sup F,x ξ,η) F,x ξl,η) 1. Thus, by 3.8), 1 J x,η R d S ϕ f 1, f 2 )x) ϕ 2 L 1 R d ) I + λl ϕη) T m e 2πiξ l f 1,e 2πiη f 2 )x) dη, where λl = V ϕξ) dξ. Repeating the same argument we obtain that l S ϕ f 1, f 2 )x) 2 ϕ 2 L 1 R d ) which yields sup 1 J S ϕ f 1, f 2 )x) liminf + I λl λ m l,m=1 I sup λl λ m 1 J l,m=1 10 T m T m e 2πiξ l f 1,e 2πiξ m f 2 )x), e 2πiξ l f 1,e 2πiξ m f 2 )x)

11 Chauchy-Schwarz inequality yields that the term in the right hand side is bounded by ϕ 2 L 1 R d ) I l,m=1 T m λl e 2πiξ l f 1, λl e 2πiξ m f 2 )x) 2 ) 1/2 where we have used that I λl = Vl ϕy) dy = ϕ L 1 R d ). Fatou s lemma yields that sup S ϕ f 1, f 2 ) ϕ L 1 R d ) 1 J L p, R d,w) liminf sup 1 J I Tm l,m=1 λl e 2πiξ l f 1, λl e 2πiξ m 2 f 2 )x) ) 1/2 Theorem 3.2 yields that the last term in the right hand side is bounded by the factor {m c p,p1,p 2 N w } ) which multiplies I λ l e 2πiξ ) 2 1/2 l I f 1 L p1rd,w) = ϕ L 1 R d ) f 1 L p 1w1 ) f 2 L p 2w2 ). Using 3.8) and monotonicity, this implies that sup T ϕ ϕ) m f 1, f 2 ) 1 J c p,p1,p 2 N w { m } L p, R d,w) λ l e 2πiξ l f 2 2 ) 1/2 L p2rd,w) ) ϕ 2 L 1 R d ) f 1 L p 1R d,w 1 ) f 2 L p 2R d,w 2 ), 3.10), L p, R d,w) which implies 3.7). For the general case, if we consider ϕ n = ϕχ B0,n), we have that{sup 1 J S ϕ n f 1, f 2 )} n is an increasing sequence of functions which pointwise converges to sup 1 J S ϕ f 1, f 2 ). Then, the monotone convergence, 3.8) and the previous argument yields the result. We will need also the two following technical lemma which proof can be found in [7]. Lemma 3.7. Let w be 1-periodic. If ψ C c R d ) is nonnegative, Rd g=1and supp ψ [ 1/2,1/2] d, then inf x R d ψ wx)>0. Lemma 3.8. Let w CT d ) such that inf x T d wx) > 0. Consider h C c R d ) satisfying 0 h 1 and R d h=1 and define h nx)=n d hnx). Then, 1. There exists n 0 = n 0 w) N such that sup n n0 ĥn Mp,w R d ) 21/p, for any 1 p<, where ĥn Mp,w R d ) stands for the norm of the convolution operator given by h n f on L p R d,w).. 11

12 2. sup n ĥn L R d ) For every ξ R d, lim n ĥ n ξ)=1. So, at this stage we have all the ingredients for proving our main theorem. Proof of Theorem 2.3. Without loss of generality we can assume that {m } is a finite family with cardinal J N. We are going to prove the wea case. The strong case can be obtained with minor modifications in the argument. Let{ψ m } m be a family of nonnegative functions in Cc Rd ), supported in the cube [ 1/2,1/2] d such that is an approximation of the identity in L 1 T d ). We can also assume that lim m ψ m w l x)=w l x) a.e. x [ 1/2,1/2] d for l = 0,1,2 where w 0 = w. Fixed m N, Lemma 3.4 yields M f 1, f 2 ) L p, R d,ψ m w) c pn f l L p lr d,ψ m w). 3.11),2 Lemma 3.7 yields that for any h Cc R d ) such that 0 h 1 and Rd h = 1, there exists an n m such that, for any n n m, the conclusions of Lemma 3.8 hold for the periodic weight ψ m w l with l = 1,2. Consider now m,n ξ)= K,n ξ 1,ξ 2 )= Φ n m )ξ)ĥnξ 1 )ĥnξ 2 ), for,n N, where Φ n = ϕ n ϕ n and ϕ n are functions as in Definition 2.1. Since ϕ n and h n are compactly supported it follows that K,n C c R 2d ). We also have that lim n K,n ξ 1,ξ 2 )=m ξ 1,ξ 2 ) for every ξ 1,ξ 2 R d, 3.12) as m is normalized and ĥn 1. Furthermore m L,n R 2d ) m L R 2d, for any ) as ϕ L n 1 R d ) 1 and ĥn L R d ) 1. With these notations we have that B K,n f 1, f 2 )=T ϕn ϕ n ) m h n f 1,h n f 2 ) for any f 1, f 2 C c R d ). with B K,n defined as in 2.2). Then, 3.11), Proposition 3.6 and Lemma 3.8 yield sup BK,n f 1, f 2 ) 2 1 pc p N f l L p lr d,ψ m w l ) for every n n m. 1 J,2 L p, R d,ψ m w) Thus, Theorem 3.1 yields that, for any n n m and any g 1,g 2 PT d ) sup T m,n g 1 J Z 2d 1,g 2 ) 2 1 pc p N g l L prt d,ψ m w l ).,2 Since 3.12) implies that L p, T d,ψ m w) lim n T m,n g 1,g 2 )θ)=lim n Z d m,n 1, 2 )ĝ 1 )ĝ 2 )e 2πi 1+ 2)θ =T m g 1,g 2 )θ), 12

13 Fatou s lemma yields sup Tm g 1,g 2 ) 1 J L p, T d,ψ m w) liminf n sup Tm,n g 1,g 2 ) 1 J 2 1 pc p N g l L p lt d,ψ m w l ).,2 L p, T d,ψ m w) We can now let m in the previous inequality to obtain 2.8) by recourse to the fact that g l L p lt d,ψ m w l ) g l L T d ) ψ m w l w l L 1 T d ) + g l L p lt d,w) and that lim m g m w l w l L 1 T d ) = 0, for l = 1,2. 4 Consequences and applications In this section we give some applications of Theorem 2.3. We start by recalling the definition of weights belonging to the A p R d ) class. We refer the reader to [12] for other properties and generalities of these weights. Definition 4.1. We say that a weight w belongs to the class A p R d ), and we write w A p R d ) if, ) 1 1 p 1 sup wx) dx wx) dx) 1/1 p <, Q Q Q Q Q for 1< p<, and 1 sup wx) dx) w 1 χ Q <+, Q Q Q where the supremum is taen over the family of cubes Q with sides parallel to the coordinate axis. We denote by A p T d ) the family of weights belonging to A p R d ) such that are 1- periodic in each variable. 4.1 Multilinear Coifman-Meyer symbols We can apply our results to multilinear multipliers that give rise to multilinear Calderón- Zygmund operators. More precisely, as an immediate corollary of our Theorem 2.3 we obtain the following periodic counterpart of L. Grafaos and R. Torres result [16, Corollary 3.2 and Remar 3.6] for multipliers. Corollary 4.2. Let 1 < p 1,..., p N <, 1/p /p N = 1/p and define p 0 = minp 1,..., p N ). Let w A p0 T d ) and let m C R Nd \{0}) CR Nd ) satisfying α 1... α N mξ ξ 1 ξ N 1,...,ξ N ) C α1,...,α N ξ ξ N ) α α N ), 13

14 for any multi-indices α 1,...,α N. Let Kx)= m x) and, for each 0, let m be the Fourier transform of the truncated ernel Kχ { y >2 }. Define T to be the multiplier operator associated to m Z Nd. Consider T g 1,...,g N )x)=sup T g 1,...,g N )x), 0 Then we have T : L p 1 T d,w)... L p N T d,w) L p T d,w), and the same holds fort m Z Nd. Moreover, if w A 1T d ) then T m Z Nd : L1 T d,w)... L 1 T d,w) L 1/m, T d,w). 4.2 Hörmander-Mihlin type multilinear multipliers We start by recalling the definition of Sobolev-type spaces. To this end, let ψ Cc R d ) be such that supp ψ For m L R d ) let { } ξ R Nd : 1/2 ξ 2, ψξ 2 )=1, ξ R Nd \{0}. Z m ξ 1,...,ξ N )=m2 ξ 1,...,2 ξ N )ψξ 1,...,ξ N ), Z, ξ 1,...,ξ N R d. With this notation define, for s,s 1,...,s N 0 m H s R Nn ) = 1+ ξ 2) s 1/2, m ξ) dξ) 2 and m H s 1,...,sm) R Nn ) = R Nn N =1 R Nn 1+ ξ 2 ) s m ξ 1,...,ξ N ) 2 dξ 1...dξ N ) 1/2. We can apply our Theorem 2.3 to transfer the results of M. Fuita and N. Tomita [11, Theorem 1.2 and Theorem 6.2] to the periodic case. Corollary 4.3. Let 1< p 1,..., p N <, 1/p /p N = 1/p, Nd/2<s Nd and r=min{p 1,..., p N }. Assume that either 1. r> Nn/s and w A sr/n T d ), or 2. r<nn/s), 1< p< and w 1 p A p s/ndt d ). If m L R Nd ) is normalized and satisfies sup Z m H s R Nd ) <, then T m is Z Nd bounded from L p 1T n,w)... L p NT d,w) to L p T d,w). Corollary 4.4. Let 1< p 1,..., p N <, 1/p /p N = 1/p and n/2<s n for 1 N. Assume that p > d/s and w A p s /dt d ) for 1 N. If m L R Nd ) is normalized and satisfies sup Z m H s 1,...s N ) R Nd ) <, thent m Z Nd is bounded from L p 1T d,w 1 )... L p NT d,w N ) to L p T d,w) with w= N =1 wp/p. 14

15 4.3 Multipliers in Hörmander multilinear class S m ρ,0 We can obtain the following periodic counterparts of N. Michalowsi, D. Rule and W. Staubach [21, Theorem 3.3] for multipliers in a Hörmander class S m ρ,0 RNd ) that is multipliers satisfying 4.1) below). Theorem 4.5. Fix p [1,2] for = 1,...,N and let m C R Nd ) satisfying α 1 ξ 1... α N ξ N mξ 1,...,ξ N ) C α1,...,α N 1+ ξ ξ N ) m ρ α α N ), 4.1) for any multi-indices α 1,...,α N, with 0 ρ 1 and m<ρ 1) N =1 n p. Then for p < q < and r> 0 such that 1 r = N =1 q 1, T m Z is a bounded operator from L q 1 T d ) Nd,w 1 L q N T d ),w N to L r T d,w ) whenever w A q /p T d ) if q < for = 1,...,N, and w= N =1 wr/q. It is well now that any amplitude in the multilinear Hörmander class S 0 1,0 determines a multilinear Calderón-Zygmund operator see [15]). Then we can transfer the results in [20, Corollary 3.9] to the periodic case for obtaining the following result for multipliers in that class and weights satisfying 4.2) below. These weights are said to belong to the so called A p class see [20, Theorem 3.6]). Corollary 4.6. Let 1 p 1,..., p N <, 1/p /p 2 = 1/p and m C R Nd ) satisfying 4.1) with m=0 and ρ = 1. Let w 1,...,w N be 1-periodic weights satisfying w 1 p A N p T d ) = 1,...,N, v w A N p T d ), 4.2) where v w = N =1 wp/p as w 1/N A 1 T d ). and, when p = 1, the condition w 1 p A N p is understood 1. If 1< p <, = 1...,N, then T g m Z Nd 1...,g N ) L p T d,v w ) C N =1 g L p T d,w ). 2. If 1 p <, = 1...,N, and at least one of the p = 1, then T g m Z Nd 1...,g N ) L p, T d,v w ) C N =1 g L p T d,w ). References [1] K. Andersen and P. Mohanty, Restriction and extension of Fourier multipliers between weighted L p spaces on R n and T n, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc ), no. 5,

16 [2] E. Berson, O. Blasco, M. Carro, and T. A. Gillespie, Discretization and transference of bisublinear maximal operators, J. Fourier Anal. Appl ), no. 4, [3] E. Berson and T. A. Gillespie, On restrictions of multipliers in weighted settings, Indiana Univ. Math. J ), no. 4, [4] O. Blasco, M. Carro, and T. A. Gillespie, Bilinear Hilbert transform on measure spaces, J. Fourier Anal. Appl ), no. 4, [5] O. Blasco and F. Villarroya, Transference of bilinear multiplier operators on Lorentz spaces, Illinois J. Math ), no. 4, [6] M. J. Carro and S. Rodríguez-López, Transference results on weighted Lebesgue spaces, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A ), no. 2, [7], On restriction of maximal multipliers in weighted settings, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc ), no. 5, [8] R. R. Coifman and Yves Meyer, On commutators of singular integrals and bilinear singular integrals, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc ), [9] K. de Leeuw, On L p multipliers, Ann. of Math. 2) ), [10] D. Fan and S. Sato, Transference on certain multilinear multiplier operators, J. Aust. Math. Soc ), no. 1, [11] M Fuita and N. Tomita, Weighted norm inequalities for multilinear Fourier multipliers, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc ), no. 12, [12] J. García-Cuerva and J. L. Rubio de Francia, Weighted norm inequalities and related topics, North- Holland Mathematics Studies, vol. 116, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, [13] L. Grafaos and P. Honzí, Maximal transference and summability of multilinear Fourier series, J. Aust. Math. Soc ), no. 1, [14] L. Grafaos and J. M. Martell, Extrapolation of weighted norm inequalities for multivariable operators and applications, J. Geom. Anal ), no. 1, [15] L. Grafaos and R. Torres, Multilinear Calderón-Zygmund theory, Adv. Math ), no. 1, [16], Maximal operator and weighted norm inequalities for multilinear singular integrals, Indiana Univ. Math. J ), no. 5, [17] L. Grafaos and Z. Si, The Hörmander multiplier theorem for multilinear operators, J. Reine Angew. Math ), [18] C. E. Kenig and P. A. Tomas, Maximal operators defined by Fourier multipliers, Studia Math ), no. 1, [19] M. Lacey and C. Thiele, On Calderón s conecture, Ann. of Math. 2) ), no. 2, [20] A. Lerner, S. Ombrosi, C. Pérez, R. Torres, and R. Truillo-González, New maximal functions and multiple weights for the multilinear Calderón-Zygmund theory, Adv. Math ), no. 4, [21] N. Michalowsi, D. Rule, and W. Staubach, Multilinear pseudodifferential operators beyond Calderón- Zygmund theory, Preprint, [22] E. M. Stein, Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions, Princeton Mathematical Series, No. 30, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., [23] N. Tomita, A Hörmander type multiplier theorem for multilinear operators, J. Funct. Anal ), no. 8, [24] Francisco Villarroya, Bilinear multipliers on Lorentz spaces, Czechoslova Math. J ) 2008), no. 4,