arxiv:math/ v1 [math.fa] 5 Aug 2005

Transcription

1 arxiv:math/ v1 [math.fa] 5 Aug 2005 G-frames and G-Riesz Bases Wenchang Sun Department of Mathematics and LPMC, Nankai University, Tianjin , China sunwch@nankai.edu.cn June 28, 2005 Abstract G-frames are generalized frames which include ordinary frames, bounded invertible linear operators, as well as many recent generalizations of frames, e.g., bounded quasi-projectors and frames of subspaces. G-frames are natural generalizations of frames and provide more choices on analyzing functions from frame expansion coefficients. We give characterizations of g-frames and prove that g-frames share many useful properties with frames. We also give generalized version of Riesz bases and orthonormal bases. As an application, we get atomic resolutions for bounded linear operators. Keywords frames, g-frames, g-riesz bases, g-orthonormal bases, atomic resolution Mathematics Subject Classification. 41A58, 42C15, 42C40, 46C05. 1 Introduction Frames were first introduced in 1952 by Duffin and Schaeffer [9], reintroduced in 1986 by Daubechies, Grossman, and Meyer [6], and popularized from then on. Frames have many nice properties which make them very useful in the characterization of function spaces, signal processing and many other fields. We refer to [4, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 20] for an introduction to the frame theory and its applications. One of the main virtues of frames is that, given a frame, we can get properties of a function and reconstruct it only from the frame coefficients, a sequence of complex numbers. For example, let {a j/2 ψ l (a j bk) : 1 l r,j,k Z} be a multi-wavelet frame for L 2 (R). Then every f L 2 (R) can be reconstructed by the sequence { f,a j/2 ψ l (a j bk) : 1 l r,j,k Z} which satisfying A f 2 2 f,a j/2 ψ l (a j bk) 2 B f l r j,k Z This work was supported partially by the National Natural Science Foundation of China ( and ), the Program for New Century Excellent Talents in Universities, and the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education. 1

2 for some positive constants A and B. Put c j,k (f) = ( f,a j/2 ψ 1 (a j bk),, f,a j/2 ψ r (a j bk) ) T C r. Then the above inequalities turn out to be A f 2 2 c j,k (f) 2 B f 2 2. j,k Z This prompts us to give the following generalization of frames. Throughout this paper, U and V are two Hilbert spaces and {V j : j J} V is a sequence of Hilbert spaces, where J is a subset of Z. L(U, V j ) is the collection of all bounded linear operators from U into V j. Note that for any sequence {V j : j J} of Hilbert spaces, we can always find a big space V to contain all the V j by setting V = V j. Definition 1.1 We call a sequence {Λ j L(U, V j ) : j J} a generalized frame, or simply a g-frame, for U with respect to {V j : j J} if there are two positive constants A and B such that A f 2 Λ j f 2 B f 2, f U. (1.1) We call A and B the lower and upper frame bounds, respectively. We call {Λ j : j J} a tight g-frame if A = B. We call {Λ j : j J} an exact g-frame if it ceases to be a g-frame whenever anyone of its elements is removed. We say simply a g-frame for U whenever the space sequence {V j : j J} is clear. We say also a g-frame for U with respect to V whenever V j = V, j J. We observe that various generalizations of frames have been proposed recently. For example, bounded quasi-projectors [12, 13], frames of subspaces[2, 3], pseudo-frames[17], oblique frames[5, 10], and outer frames[1]. All of these generalizations are proved to be useful in many applications. Here we point out that they can be regarded as special cases of g-frames (see examples below) and many basic properties can be derived within this more general context. While we were preparing this paper we learned that another generalization of frames in the context of numerical analysis, called stable space splittings, have been studied in [18, 19]. We prove at the end of Section 3 that they are equivalent to g-frames. We point out that the approaches are quite different from each others. In particular, the adjoint operators of Λ j are used in the definition of stable space splittings. Moreover, we give a characterization of g-frames and studied g-riesz bases and g-orthonormal bases. 2

3 Example 1.1 Let H be a separable Hilbert space and {f j : j J} be a frame for H. Let Λ fj be the functional induced by f j, i.e., Λ fj f = f,f j, f H. It is easy to check that {Λ fj : j J} is a g-frame for H with respect to C. By Riesz Representation Theorem, to every functional Λ L(U, C), one can find some ϕ U such that Λf = f, ϕ, f U. Hence we have the following. Lemma 1.1 A frame is equivalent to a g-frame whenever V j = C, j J. Example 1.2 Pseudo-frames (Li and Ogawa[17]), or similar, oblique frames(christensen and Eldar [5, 10]) or outer frames (Aldroubi, Cabrelli, and Molter [1]) are studied recently in literature. Here we point out that they are a class of g-frames. Let H 0 be a closed subspace of H. Let {f j : j J} H be a Bessel sequence in H 0 and { f j : j J} H be a Bessel sequence in H. Recall that {f j : j J} is said to be a pseudo-frame for H 0 with respect to { f j : j J} [17, Definition 1] if f = f,f j f j, f H 0. Since both {f j : j J} and { f j : j J} are Bessel sequences in H 0, it is easy to check from the above equation that we can find some constants A,B > 0 such that A f 2 f,f j 2 B f 2, f H 0. Let Λ fj be the functional induced by f j, j J. Then we have A f 2 Λ fj f 2 B f 2, f H 0. In other words, {Λ fj : j J} is a g-frame for H 0 with respect to C. Example 1.3 Bounded quasi-projectors (Fornasier [12, 13]). It was shown in [12, Lemma 1] that if a system of bounded quasi-projectors {P j : j J} is self-adjoint and compatible with the canonical projections (see [12, 13] for details), then for any f H, A f 2 P j f 2 B f 2. In this case, {P j : j J} is a g-frame for H with respect to H. Example 1.4 Frames of subspaces (Casazza and Kutyniok [3] and Asgari and Khosravi[2]). 3

4 Let {W j : j J} be a sequence of subspaces of H and P Wj be the orthogonal projection on W j. {W j : j J} is called a frame of subspaces if there exist positive constants A and B such that A f 2 P Wj f 2 B f 2, f H. Obviously, a frame of subspaces is a g-frame for H with respect to {W j : j J}. Example 1.5 Time-frequency localization operators (Dörfler, Feichtinger and Gröchenig [8]). For f,g L 2 (R d ), define the windowed Fourier transform of f with respect to g by (V g f)(t,ω) = f(x)g(x t)e i2πxω dx. R d Let S 0 (R d ) := {g L 2 (R d ) : V g g L 1 (R 2d )} be the Feichtinger algebra. Take some ϕ S 0 (R d ) with ϕ 2 = 1. Let σ be a bounded function on R 2d with compact support and σ(x) 0. Define the time-frequency localization operator H σ corresponding to σ and ϕ by H σ f = V ϕ σv ϕf. If σ S 0 (R 2d ) and C 1 k Z 2d σ(x k) C 2, for some constants C 1,C 2 > 0, then it is shown in [8] that one can find some constants A,B > 0 such that A f 2 2 k Z 2d H σ( k) f 2 2 B f 2 2, f L 2 (R d ). Hence {H σ( k) : k Z 2d } is a g-frame for L 2 (R d ) with respect to L 2 (R d ). We refer to [8] for details. Example 1.6 Every bounded invertible linear operator itself forms a g-frame. We see from the above examples that g-frames are natural generalizations of frames and provide more choices on analyzing functions from frame expansion coefficients. In the following sections we first study g-frame operators and get the dual g-frames, then give definitions of g-riesz bases and g-orthonormal bases and present characterizations of generalized frames and bases. As an application of g-frames, we get atomic resolutions of bounded linear operators. 4

5 2 G-frame operators and dual g-frames Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J}. Define the g-frame operator S as follows: Sf = Λ jλ j f, f U, (2.1) where Λ j is the adjoint operator of Λ j. First of all, S is well defined on U. To see this, let n 1 < n 2 be integers. Then we have n 2 Λ jλ j f j=n 1 = sup n2 Λ jλ j f,h h U, h =1 j=n 1 n 2 = sup Λ j f,λ j h h =1 j=n 1 1/2 1/2 n 2 n 2 sup Λ j f 2 Λ j h 2 h =1 j=n 1 j=n 1 1/2 n 2 B 1/2. j=n 1 Λ j f 2 Now we see from (1.1) that the series in (2.1) are convergent. Therefore, Sf is well defined for any f U. On the other hand, it is easy to check that for any f 1,f 2 U, Sf 1,f 2 = Λ j Λ jf 1,f 2 = f 1,Λ j Λ jf 2 = f 1,Sf 2 and therefore, Hence S is a bounded self-adjoint operator. S = sup Sf,f = sup Λ j f 2 B. f =1 f =1 Since A f 2 Sf,f Sf f, we have Sf A f, which implies that S is injective and SU is closed in U. Let f 2 U be such that Sf 1,f 2 = 0 for any f 1 U. Then we have f 1,Sf 2 = 0, f 1 U. This implies that Sf 2 = 0 and therefore f 2 = 0. Hence SU = U. Consequently, S is invertible and For any f U, we have f = SS 1 f = S 1 Sf = S 1 1 A. Λ jλ j S 1 f = S 1 Λ jλ j f. 5

6 Let Λ j = Λ j S 1. Then the above equalities become f = Λ Λ j j f = Λ j Λ jf. (2.2) We now prove that { Λ j : j J} is also a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J}. In fact, for any f U, we have Λ j f 2 = Λ j S 1 f 2 = Λ j S 1 f,λ j S 1 f = Λ jλ j S 1 f,s 1 f = SS 1 f,s 1 f = f,s 1 f 1 A f 2. On the other hand, since f 2 = Λ jλ j f,f = Λ j f, Λ j f Λ j f 2 1/2 Λ j f 2 1/2 B 1/2 f Λ j f 2, 1/2 we have Λ j f 2 1 B f 2. Hence, { Λ j : j J} is a g-frame for U with frame bounds 1/B and 1/A. We call it the (canonical) dual g-frame of {Λ j : j J}. Let S be the g-frame operator associated with { Λ j : j J}. Then we have S Sf = S Λ j Λ j f = S S 1 Λ j Λ j S 1 f = Λ j Λ js 1 f = SS 1 f = f, f U. 6

7 Hence S = S 1 and Λ j S 1 = Λ j S 1 S = Λ j. In other words, {Λ j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} are dual g-frames with respect to each other. Remark. We see from the above arguments that g-frames behave very similarly to frames. For example, we can always get a tight g-frame from any g-frame {Λ j : j J}. In fact, put Q j = Λ j S 1/2. It is easy to check that {Q j : j J} is a tight g-frame with the frame bound 1. Moreover, the canonical dual g-frames give rise to expansion coefficients with the minimal norm. Lemma 2.1 Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J} and Λ j = Λ j S 1. Then for any g j V j satisfying f = Λ j g j, we have g j 2 = Λ j f 2 + g j Λ j f 2. Proof. It is easy to check that Λ j f 2 = j f,λ j S Λ 1 f = Λ j Λ j f,s 1 f = Λ j g j,s 1 f = g j,λ j S 1 f = g j, Λ j f, f U. Now the conclusion follows. In example 1.1, we show that every frame {f j : j J} for H induces a g-frame {Λ fj : j J} for H with respect to C via the induced functionals Λ fj. Let { f j : j J} be the canonical dual frame of {f j : j J}. We conclude that {Λ fj : j J} is the canonical dual g-frame of {Λ fj : j J}. In fact, it is easy to see that Λ f j c = cf j for any c C, which implies that the corresponding g-frame operator and frame operator are the same. Consequently, Λ fj S 1 f = S 1 f,f j = f,s 1 f j = f, f j = Λ fj f, f H. Hence Λ fj = Λ fj S 1. In other words, {Λ fj : j J} is the dual g-frame of {Λ fj : j J}. 7

8 3 Generalized Bessel sequences, Riesz bases and orthonormal bases Similarly to generalized frames, we can define generalized Bessel sequences, Riesz bases, and orthonormal bases. Definition 3.1 Let Λ j L(U, V j ), j J. (i). If the right-hand inequality of (1.1) holds, then we say that {Λ j : j J} is a g-bessel sequence for U with respect to {V j : j J}. (ii). If {f : Λ j f = 0,j J} = {0}, then we say that {Λ j : j J} is g-complete. (iii). If {Λ j : j J} is g-complete and there are positive constants A and B such that for any finite subset J 1 J and g j V j,j J 1, A g j 2 2 Λ j 1 g j B g j 2, (3.1) 1 1 then we say that {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis for U with respect to {V j : j J}. (iv). we say {Λ j : j J} is a g-orthonormal basis for U with respect to {V j : j J} if it satisfy the following. Λ j 1 g j1,λ j 2 g j2 = δ j1,j 2 g j1,g j2, j 1,j 2 J,g j1 V j1,g j2 V j2, (3.2) Λ j f 2 = f 2, f U. (3.3) Example 3.1 As in Example 1.1, the induced functionals of any Bessel sequence(resp. Riesz basis, orthonormal basis) form a g-bessel sequence(resp. g-riesz basis, g-orthonormal basis). Example 3.2 The sequence containing only the identity mapping {I U } is a g-bessel sequence, g-riesz basis, and a g-orthonormal basis for U with respect to U. Example 3.3 Let (X,B,m) be a measure space and {X j : j J} be a sequence of measurable sets. Let Λ j be the orthonormal projection from L 2 (X) onto L 2 (X j ), i.e., Λ j f = f χ Xj. Then we have (i). {Λ j : j J} is a g-frame for L 2 (X) with respect to {L 2 (X j ) : j J} if and only if X j = X and sup #{j : m(x j X j ) > 0} < +. (ii). {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis for L 2 (X) with respect to {L 2 (X j ) : j J} if and only if X j = X and m(x j X j ) = 0, j j. If it is the case, it is also a g-orthonormal basis. 8

9 3.1 Characterizations of g-frames, g-riesz bases and g-orthonormal bases Let Λ j L(U, V j ). We do not have other assumptions on Λ j at the moment. Suppose that {e j,k : k K j } is an orthonormal basis for V j, where K j is a subset of Z, j J. Then f Λ j f,e j,k defines a bounded linear functional on U. Consequently, we can find some u j,k U such that f,u j,k = Λ j f,e j,k, f U. (3.4) Hence Λ j f = k K j f,u j,k e j,k, f U. (3.5) Since k K j f,u j,k 2 = Λ j f 2 Λ j 2 f 2, {u j,k : k K j } is a Bessel sequence for U. It follows that for any f U and g V j, f,λ jg = Λ j f,g = f,u j,k e j,k,g = f, k Kj g,e j,k u j,k. k K j Hence In particular, Λ j g = k K j g,e j,k u j,k, g V j. (3.6) u j,k = Λ j e j,k, j J,k K j. (3.7) We call {u j,k : j J,k K j } the sequence induced by {Λ j : j J} with respect to {e j,k : j J,k K j }. With above representations of Λ j and Λ j, we get characterizations of generalized frames, Riesz bases, and orthonormal bases. Theorem 3.1 Let Λ j L(U, V j ) and u j,k be defined as in (3.7). Then we have the followings. (i). {Λ j : j J} is a g-frame (resp. g-bessel sequence, tight g-frame, g-riesz basis, g-orthonormal basis) for U if and only if {u j,k : j J,k K j } is a frame (resp. Bessel sequence, tight frame, Riesz basis, orthonormal basis ) for U. (ii). If {Λ j : j J} is a g-frame, then dim V j dim U and the equality holds whenever {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis. 9

10 (iii). Moreover, the g-frame operator for {Λ j : j J} coincides with the frame operator for {u j,k : j J,k K j }. (iv). Furthermore, {Λ j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} are a pair of (canonical) dual g-frames if and only if the induced sequences are a pair of (canonical) dual frames. Proof. (i). We see from (3.5) that Λ j f 2 = f,u j,k 2, f U. k K j Hence {Λ j : j J} is a g-frame (resp. g-bessel sequence, tight g-frame) for U if and only if {u j,k : j J,k K j } is a frame (resp. Bessel sequence, tight frame) for U. Next we assume that {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis for U. Since {e j,k : k K j } is an orthonormal basis for V j, every g j V j has an expansion of the form g j = k K j c j,k e j,k, where {c j,k : k K j } l 2 (K j ). It follows that A g j 2 Λ j 1 g j 1 is equivalent to A c j,k 2 c j,k u j,k 1 k K j k K j 1 2 B 1 g j 2 2 B 1 k K j c j,k 2. On the other hand, we see from Λ j f = k K j f,u j,k e j,k that {f : Λ j f = 0,j J} = {f : f,u j,k = 0,j J,k K j }. Hence {Λ j : j J} is g-complete if and only if {u j,k : j J,k K j } is complete. Therefore, {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis if and only if {u j,k : j J,k K j } is a Riesz basis. Now we assume that {Λ j : j J} is a g-orthonormal basis. It follows from (3.2) and (3.4) that u j1,k 1,u j2,k 2 = Λ j2 u j1,k 1,e j2,k 2 = Λ j 2 e j2,k 2,u j1,k 1 = Λ j1 Λ j 2 e j2,k 2,e j1,k 1 = Λ j 1 e j1,k 1,Λ j 2 e j2,k 2 = δ j1,j 2 δ k1,k 2, j 1,j 2 J, k 1 K j1,k 2 K j2. Hence {u j,k : j J,k K j } is an orthonormal sequence. Moreover, observe that f 2 = Λ j f 2 = f,u j,k 2, f U. k K j We have {u j,k : j J,k K j } is an orthonormal basis. 10

11 For the converse, we need only to show that (3.2) holds. In fact, we see from (3.6) that for any j 1 j 2 J, g j1 V j1 and g j2 V j2, Λ j 1 g j1,λ j 2 g j2 = g j1,e j1,k 1 u j1,k 1, g j2,e j2,k 2 u j2,k 2 = 0 k 1 K j1 k 2 K j2 and for g 1,g 2 V j, Λ jg 1,Λ jg 2 = Now the conclusion follows. k 1 K j g 1,e j,k1 u j,k1, k 2 K j g 2,e j,k2 u j,k2 = g 1,g 2. (ii). Since the cardinity of a frame is no less than that of a basis, we have #{u j,k : j J,k K j } dim U. Hence dim V j dim U. Moreover, we see from (i) that the equality holds whenever {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis. (iii). We see from (3.5) and (3.6) that Λ jλ j f = Λ j f,e j,k u j,k k K j = f,u j,k e j,k, e j,k k K j k K j = f,u j,k u j,k, f U. k K j Hence the g-frame operator for {Λ j : j J} coincides with the frame operator for {u j,k : j J,k K}. (iv). This is a consequence of (i) and (iii). The proof is over. The followings are immediate consequences. We leave the proofs to interested readers. u j,k Corollary 3.2 {Λ j : j J} is a g-bessel sequence with an upper bound B if and only if for any finite subset J 1 J, Λ jg j 1 2 B 1 g j 2, g j V j. Corollary 3.3 A g-riesz basis {Λ j : j J} is an exact g-frame. Moreover, it is g- biorthonormal with respect to its dual { Λ j : j J} in the following sense Λ j 1 g j1, Λ j 2 g j2 = δ j1,j 2 g j1,g j2, j 1,j 2 J, g j1 V j1, g j2 V j2. 11

12 Corollary 3.4 A sequence {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis for U with respect to {V j : j J} if and only if there is a g-orthonormal basis {Q j : j J} for U and a bounded invertible linear operator T on U such that Λ j = Q j T,j J. Proof. Let {e j,k : k K j } be an orthonormal basis for V j, j J. First, we assume that {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis for U. By Theorem 3.1, we can find some Riesz basis {u j,k : j J,k K j } for U such that Λ j f = f,u j,k e j,k. k K j Take an orthonormal basis {u j,k : j J,k K j} for U and define the operator T on U by T u j,k = u j,k. Obviously, T is a bounded invertible operator. Let Q j L(U, V j ) be such that Q j f = k K j f,u j,k e j,k. By Theorem 3.1, {Q j : j J} is a g-orthonormal basis. Moreover, for any f U, Q j Tf = Tf,u j,k e j,k = f,t u j,k e j,k = f,u j,k e j,k = Λ j f. k K j k K j k K j Hence Λ j = Q j T, j J. Next we assume that {Q j : j J} is a g-orthonormal basis and Λ j = Q j T for some bounded invertible operator T. Then {Λ j : j J} is g-complete in U and we can find some orthonormal basis {u j,k : j J,k K j} for U such that Q j f = k K j f,u j,k e j,k. Hence Λ j f = k K j Tf,u j,k e j,k = k K j f,t u j,k e j,k. Now we see from Theorem 3.1 that {Λ j : j J} is a g-riesz basis. 3.2 Excess of g-frames By Theorem 3.1, g-frames, g-riesz bases and g-orthonormal bases have similar properties as frames, Riesz bases and orthonormal bases, respectively. However, not all the properties are similar. For example, Riesz bases are equivalent to exact frames. But it is not the case for g-riesz bases and exact g-frames. In fact, we see from Theorems 3.1 that a g-riesz basis is also an exact g-frame while the converse is not true, which is not surprising since one element of a g-frame might correspond to several elements of the induced frame. Example 3.4 Let {ϕ j : j J} be a Riesz basis for some Hilbert space H. Define Λ j : H C 2 as follows: Λ j f = ( f,ϕ j,0) T. Then {Λ j : j J} is an exact g-frame. By Theorem 3.1, it is not a g-riesz basis for H with respect to C 2. However, it is a g-riesz basis for H with respect to C {0}. 12

13 The above example shows that an exact g-frame may be a g-riesz basis when we change the reference. Does this hold in general? The answer is negative. Example 3.5 Let {ϕ j : j Z} a Riesz basis for some Hilbert space H. Define Λ j : H C 3 as follows: Λ j f = ( f,ϕ 2j 1, f,ϕ 2j, f,ϕ 2j+1 ) T. Then {Λ j : j Z} is an exact g-frame. However, {Λ j : j Z} is not a g-riesz basis for H with respect to any {V j : j J}, thanks to Theorem 3.1. On the other hand, it is well known (e.g., see [20]) that a frame either remains a frame or is incomplete whenever any one of its elements is removed. It is neither the case for g-frames due to the same reason. The following is a counterexample. Example 3.6 Let g(x) = e x2 /2 be the Gaussian and {α m,n : m,n Z} be an orthonormal basis for l 2 (Z 2 ). Define Λ j f = f(x),e i2πmx g(x 2n j) α m,n, j = 1,2, m,n Z Λ 3 f = m,n Z f(x),e i2πmx g(x n + 1/2) α m,n, f L 2 (R). We see from Theorem 3.1 and the frame theory (e.g., see [7, p ]) that {Λ 1,Λ 2,Λ 3 } is a g-frame for L 2 (R) with respect to l 2 (Z 2 ). However, {Λ 1,Λ 2 } is not a g-frame but g-complete. A natural problem arises: in which case a subsequence of a g-frame for which only one element is removed is a g-frame or not? To this problem, we have the following. Theorem 3.5 Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} be the canonical dual g-frame. Suppose that j 0 J. (i). If there is some g 0 V j0 \ {0} such that Λ j0 Λ j 0 g 0 = g 0, then {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is not g-complete in U. (ii). If there is some f 0 U \ {0} such that Λ j 0 Λj0 f 0 = f 0, then {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is not g-complete in U. (iii). If I Λ j0 Λ j0 or I Λ j0 Λ j 0 is bounded invertible on V j0, then {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is a g-frame for U. Proof. (i). Since Λ j 0 g 0 U, we have Λ j 0 g 0 = Λ j Λ j Λ j 0 g 0 13

14 Hence, 0 =,j j 0 Λ j Λ j Λ j 0 g 0. Put v j0,j = δ j0,jg 0. We have Λ j 0 g 0 = Λ j v j 0,j. It follows from Lemma 2.1 that v j0,j 2 = Λ j Λ j 0 g Λ j Λ j 0 g 0 v j0,j 2 Consequently, g 0 2 = g j j 0 Λ j Λ j 0 g 0 2 Hence, Λj Λ j 0 g 0 = 0. Therefore, Λ j Λ j0 g 0 = Λ j S 1 Λ j 0 g 0 = Λ j Λ j 0 g 0 = 0, j j 0. But Λ j 0 g 0, Λ j 0 g 0 = Λ j0 Λ j 0 g 0,g 0 = g 0 2 > 0, which implies that Λ j 0 g 0 0. Hence {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is not g-complete in U. (ii) Since Λ j 0 Λj0 f 0 = f 0 0, we have Λ j0 f 0 0 and Λ j0 Λ j 0 Λj0 f 0 = Λ j0 f 0. Now the conclusion follows from (i). (iii). Since Λ j = Λ j S 1, where S is the g-frame operator for {Λ j : j J}, we have I Λ j0 Λ j0 = I Λ j0 S 1 Λ j 0 = I Λ j0 Λ j 0. Let A and B be the lower and upper frame bounds for {Λ j : j J}, respectively. For any f U, we have f = Λ jλ j f. Hence Therefore, Λ j0 f = Λ j0 Λ j Λ j f. (I Λ j0 Λ j0 )Λ j0 f = j j 0 Λ j0 Λ j Λ j f. (3.8) Note that Λ j0 Λ j Λ j f j j 0 2 = sup g V j0, g =1 = sup g =1 j j 0 Λ j f 2 sup j j g =1 0 Λ j0 Λ j Λ j f,g j j 0 Λ j f, Λ j Λ j 0 g 2 Λ j Λ j 0 g 2 1 A Λ j 0 2 j j 0 Λ j f

15 We see from (3.8) that Λ j0 f 2 (I Λ j0 Λ j0 ) A Λ j 0 2 j j 0 Λ j f 2. Hence Therefore, Λ j f 2 C Λ j f 2. j j 0 A C f 2 j j 0 Λ j f 2 B f 2, f U. This completes the proof. Corollary 3.6 Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J}. If dim V j < +, j J, then {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is either g-incomplete in U or a g-frame for U for any j 0 J. Proof. If there is some g 0 V j0 \ {0} such that Λ j0 Λ j 0 g 0 = g 0, then Theorem 3.5 (i) shows that {Λ j : j J,j j 0 } is not g-complete in U. Otherwise, I Λ j0 Λ j 0 is injective. Consequently, (I Λ j0 Λ j0 )V j0 is dense in V j0. Since dim V j0 < +, we have (I Λ j0 Λ j0 )V j0 = V j0. Therefore, I Λ j0 Λ j0 is bounded invertible. Now the conclusion follows from Theorem 3.5 (iii). 3.3 Equivalence between stable space splittings and g-frames Stable space splittings are generalizations of frames which lead to a better understanding of iterative solvers (multigrid/multilevel resp. domain decomposition methods) for largescale discretization of elliptic operator equations (see [19] and references therein). Here we prove that stable space splittings are equivalent to g-frames. Let V and V j,j J be Hilbert spaces. Let b j be a bilinear form on V j V j satisfying b j (u,u) C j u 2 andb j (u,v) = b j (v,u) C j u v, u,v V j. (3.9) Suppose that R j L(V j, V). Recall that a system {({V j,b j },R j ) : j J} is called a stable space splitting of V if there are some positive constants C,C such that C u 2 inf u= b j (u j,u j ) C u 2, u V, R ju j where u j V j. It was shown in [19, Theorem 4] (see also [18, Pages 73-75]) that a stable space splitting {({V j,b j },R j ) : j J} satisfies A R jrj B for some constants A,B > 0, which is equivalent to A u 2 R ju 2 B u 2, u V. 15

16 Hence {R j : j J} is a g-frame for V with respect to {V j : j J}. For the converse, we need b j (u,u) to be uniformly bounded, i.e., we assume that C 1 u 2 b j (u,u) C 2 u 2, u V. (3.10) Suppose that {Λ j : j J} is a g-frame for V with respect to {V j : j J}. Let A and B be the frame bounds and { Λ j : j J} be the canonical dual g-frame. Put R j = Λ j. We see from (3.10) and Lemma 2.1 that inf u= b j (u j,u j ) inf C 1 u j 2 R ju j Similarly we can prove that = u= R ju j C 1 Λ j u 2 C 1 B u 2. inf u= b j (u j,u j ) C 2 R ju j A u 2. Hence {({V j,b j },R j ) : j J} is a stable space splitting. 4 Applications of g-frames 4.1 Atomic resolution of bounded linear operators Here we give an application of g-frames. Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J}. Suppose that { Λ j : j J} is the canonical dual g-frame. Then for any f U, we have f = Λ j Λ j f = Λ j Λ jf, f U. It follows that I U = Λ j Λ j = Λ j Λ j, (4.1) where the convergence is in weak* sense. Let T be a bounded linear operator on U. We see from (4.1) that T = TΛ j Λ j = T Λ j Λ j = Λ j Λ j T = Λ j Λ jt. (4.2) We call (4.2) atomic resolutions of an operator T. 16

17 4.2 Construction of frames via g-frames Let {Λ j : j J} be a g-frame for U with respect to {V j : j J}. We see from Theorem 3.1 that {u j,k : j J,k K j } = {Λ j e j,k : j J,k K j } is a frame for U, where {e j,k : k K j } is an orthonormal basis for V j. However, it might be difficult to find an orthonormal basis for V j in practice. Fortunately, the orthonormality is not necessary to get a frame. In fact, we have the following. Theorem 4.1 Let {Λ j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} be a pair of dual g-frames for U with respect to {V j : j J} and {g j,k : k K j } and { g j,k : k K j } be a pair of dual frames for V j, respectively. Then {Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } and { Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } are a pair of dual frames for U. Moreover, suppose that {Λ j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} are canonical dual g-frames, {g j,k : k K j } and { g j,k : k K j } are canonical dual frames, and that {g j,k : k K j } is a tight g-frame with frame bounds A j = B j = A, j J. Then {Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } and { Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } are canonical dual frames. Proof. Note that f,λ jg j,k = Λ j f,g j,k. It is easy to see that both {Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } and { Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } are frames for U. On the other hand, For any f U, we have f,λ jg j,k Λ j g j,k = Λ j Λ j f,g j,k g j,k = Λ jλ j f = f. k K j k K j Similarly we can get that k K j f, Λ j g j,k Λ jg j,k = f. Hence {Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } and { Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j } are dual frames for U. Next we assume that {Λ j : j J} and { Λ j : j J} are canonical dual g-frames and {g j,k : k K j } is a tight frame with frame bounds A j = B j = A, j J. Then g j,k = 1 A g j,k. Let S Λ and S Λ,g be the frame operators associated with {Λ j : j J} and {Λ j g j,k : j J,k K j }, respectively. Then we have S Λ,g f = f,λ j g j,k Λ j g j,k k K j = Λ j Λ j f,g j,k g j,k k K j = A Λ jλ j f = AS Λ f, f U. 17

18 Hence This completes the proof. S 1 Λ,g Λ j g j,k = 1 A S 1 Λ Λ j g j,k = Λ j g j,k, j J,k K j. Acknowledgments Part of this work was done while the author was visiting NuHAG at the Faculty of Mathematics, University of Vienna and the Erwin Schrödinger International Institute for Mathematical Physics (ESI), Vienna. He thanks NuHAG and ESI for hospitality and support. At ESI the author met Peter Oswald who introduced him to the concept of stable space splittings. He thanks Ole Christensen for carefully reading the paper and for relevant comments and suggestions. Particular thanks go to Hans G. Feichtinger for many helpful suggestions and for introducing several other generalizations of frames. References [1] A. Aldroubi, C. Cabrelli, and U. Molter, Wavelets on irregular grids with arbitrary dilation matrices and frame atomics for L 2 (R d ), Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal., 17(2004), [2] M.S. Asgari and A. Khosravi, Frames and bases of subspaces in Hilbert spaces, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 308(2005), [3] P. Casazza and G. Kutyniok, Frames of subspaces, in: Wavelets, Frames and Operator Theory, Vol. 345, American Mathematical Society, 2004, [4] O. Christensen, An Introduction to Frames and Riesz Bases, Birkhäuser, Boston, [5] O. Christensen and Y.C. Eldar, Oblique dual frames and shift-invariant spaces, Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal., 17(2004), [6] I. Daubechies, A. Grossmann, and Y. Meyer, Painless nonorthogonal expansions, J.Math. Phys., 27(1986), [7] I. Daubechies, Ten Lectures on Wavelets, SIAM Philadelphia, [8] M. Dörfler, H.G. Feichtinger and K. Gröchenig, Time-frequency partitions for the Gelfand triple, preprint. [9] R.J. Duffin and A.C. Schaeffer, A class of nonharmonic Fourier series, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 72(1952),

19 [10] Y. Eldar, Sampling with arbitrary sampling and reconstruction spaces and oblique dual frame vectors, J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 9(2003), [11] H.G. Feichtinger and T. Strohmer, Eds., Gabor Analysis and Algorithms: Theory and Applications, Birkhäuser Inc., Boston, MA, [12] M. Fornasier, Quasi-orthogonal decompositions of structured frames, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 289(2004), [13] M. Fornasier, Decompositions of Hilbert spaces: local construction of global frames, Proc. Int. Conf. on Constructive function theory, Varna (2002), B. Bojanov Ed., DARBA, Sofia, 2003, [14] K. Gröchenig, Foundations of Time-Frequency analysis, Birkäuser, Boston, [15] D. Han, D.R. Larson, Frames, bases and group representations, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 147(2000), no.697. [16] C. Heil and D. Walnut, Continuous and discrete wavelet transforms, SIAM Review, 31(1989), [17] S. Li and H. Ogawa, Pseudoframes for subspaces with applications, J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 10(2004), [18] P. Oswald, Multilevel Finite Element Approximation: Theory and Application, Teubner Skripten zur Numerik, Teubner, Stuttgart, [19] P. Oswald, Frames and space splittings in Hilbert spaces, preprint, [20] R. Young, An Introduction to Non-Harmonic Fourier Series, Academic Press, New York,