Nacional de La Pampa, Santa Rosa, La Pampa, Argentina b Instituto de Matemática Aplicada San Luis, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas

This article was downloaded by: [Sonia Acinas] On: 28 June 2015, At: 17:05 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lnfa20 Extended est Polynomial Approximation Operator in Orlicz Spaces Sonia Acinas a, Sergio Favier b & Felipe Zó b a Departamento de Matemática, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Naturales, Universidad Nacional de La Pampa, Santa Rosa, La Pampa, Argentina b Instituto de Matemática Aplicada San Luis, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) and Departamento de Matemática, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, San Luis, Argentina Accepted author version posted online: 21 Apr 2015. Click for updates To cite this article: Sonia Acinas, Sergio Favier & Felipe Zó (2015) Extended est Polynomial Approximation Operator in Orlicz Spaces, Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization, 36:7, 817-829, DOI: 10.1080/01630563.2015.1040161 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01630563.2015.1040161 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content ) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization, 36:817 829, 2015 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0163-0563 print/1532-2467 online DOI: 10.1080/01630563.2015.1040161 EXTENDED EST POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION OPERATOR IN ORLICZ SPACES Sonia Acinas, 1 Sergio Favier, 2 and Felipe Zó 2 1 Departamento de Matemática, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Naturales, Universidad Nacional de La Pampa, Santa Rosa, La Pampa, Argentina 2 Instituto de Matemática Aplicada San Luis, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) and Departamento de Matemática, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, San Luis, Argentina In this article we consider the best polynomial approximation operator, defined in an Orlicz space L (), and its extension to L () where is the derivative function of A characterization of these operators and several properties are obtained. Keywords est polynomial -approximation operators; Extended best polynomial approximation from L to L ; Orlicz spaces. Mathematics Subject Classification 41A10; 41A50; 41A45. 1. INTRODUCTION In this article we set I for the class of all continuous and nondecreasing functions defined for all real number t 0, with (0 + ) = 0, (t) as t and (t) >0 for x > 0. We also assume a 2 condition for the functions, which means that there exists a constant = > 0 such that (2a) (a) for all a 0. Now, given I, we consider (x) = x (t) dt Observe that : 0 [0, ) [0, ) is a convex function such that (a) = 0 iff a = 0 For such a function, we have (x) 0asx 0 and (x) as x, and, x x according to [9], a function with this property is called an N function. Observe that the function satisfies a 2 condition if and only if the function satisfies a 2 condition. Received 10 February 2014; Revised 8 April 2015; Accepted 8 April 2015. Address correspondence to Sergio Favier, Instituto de Matemática Aplicada San Luis, CONICET and Departamento de Matemática, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, (5700) San Luis, Argentina; E-mail: sfavier@unsl.edu.ar 817

818 S. Acinas et al. If I, then it satisfies a 2 condition. Thus, the next inequality holds 1 2 ( (a) + (b)) (a + b) ( (a) + (b)) (1.1) for every a, b 0 Also, note that the 2 condition on implies x 2 (x) (x) x (x), (1.2) for every x 0 Let be a bounded measurable set in n.if I, we denote by L () the class of all Lebesgue measurable functions f defined on n such that (t f ) dx < for some t > 0 and where dx denotes the Lebesgue measure on n. Note that as I and it satisfies a 2 condition then L () is the space of all measurable functions f defined on n such that ( f ) dx <. For the convex function, L () is the classic Orlicz space that was very well studied in [9] and [14]. Let m be the space of algebraic polynomials, defined on n, of a degree at most m Then a polynomial P m is called a best approximation of f L () if and only if ( f P ) dx = inf ( f Q ) dx (1.3) Q m Definition 1. For f L (), we set (f ) for the set of all polynomials P that satisfy (1.3). In the following, we also refer to (f ) as the multivalued operator defined for functions in L () and images on m In this article, we study the nature of this best polynomial approximation for functions in L () and we extend, in a continuous way, the definition of best polynomial approximation for functions belonging to L () where =. These results extend those obtained in [3] for the L p case. We point out that the conditional expectation is the most well-known example of an extension of the best approximation operator. Originally, we think of the conditional expectation as the projection of a function f L 2 on a probability space (,, P ) onto the subspace of 0 measurable functions which are in L 2, where 0 denotes a sub sigma-algebra of Using the fact that this projection is a monotone operator we can extend this best approximation operator from L 2 to L 1 and thus we obtain the well known conditional expectation operator. For (t) = t p,1< p <, a similar best approximation operator is considered in L p and then extended

est Approximation Operator 819 to L p 1, see [11]. In that article, the approximation class is the set of all the 0 measurable functions in L p, where now 0 is a sub-sigma lattice of This best approximation operator and other classical operators in harmonic analysis are also considered in a general Orlicz spaces L, see [10], [1] or [8]. For the special case of 0 =,, that is, when the approximation class is the set of constant functions in, the extension of the best approximation operator was detailed studied in several articles, see [12], [5] and [6]. Also, the extension of the best approximation operator in L for a general sub sigma-lattice 0 was treated in [2]. In all of these cases, the monotonicity of the best approximation operator was strongly used in the space where it was originally defined. If the approximation class is the algebraic polynomials, we lose the monotonicity of the best approximation operator and the extension has to be treated in a different way. For the L 2 case see [13], and for the L p case we refer to [3]. In Section 2, we define the best polynomial approximation operator for each f L () and we characterize this best approximation in a similar way as has been done in [7] for functions of L () in the case that the approximation class is a lattice instead of the space of polynomials. We also get a strong type inequality for f L () which generalizes Theorem 2.1 in [4], where the extended best polynomial approximation operator is considered for functions in L p (). In Section 3, we use this inequality to extend the best polynomial approximation from L () to L (), where = This is done in an easier way than the one developed in [3], where the existence of the extension is proved without using the inequality in Theorem 2.4. At the end of this section, we prove the uniqueness and a continuity property for the extended best polynomial approximation of f L () for a strictly increasing functions I 2. EXISTENCE AND UNIQUENESS OF THE EST POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION OPERATOR IN L () For P m,weset P = max x P (x) and P 1 = P dx We begin with the existence of the best polynomial approximation operator of functions in L () We start with the next lemma. Lemma 2.1. Let I, (x) = x (t) dt and let P 0 n be a sequence in m, such that there exists a constant C that satisfies ( P n ) dx C Then, the sequence P n is uniformly bounded. Proof. From Jensen s inequality, we have ( ) 1 P n dx ( P n ) dx C (2.1)

820 S. Acinas et al. Then, since P 1 is equivalent to P, for P m and using the 2 condition on, we obtain ( P n ) M, for some constant M Then, as (x) goes to when x goes to the lemma follows. The next two theorems follow standard techniques. However, for the sake of completeness detailed proofs of them are included. Theorem 2.2. Let I, (x) = x 0 L (). Then, there exists P m such that ( f P ) dx = inf ( f Q ) dx Q m Proof. Let I = inf Q m ( f Q ) dx, then there exists a sequence P n n m such that ( f P n ) dx I as n (2.2) Due to the monotonicity and convexity of on [0, ), weget ( ) ( Pn 1 2 2 P n f + f ) 1 2 2 ( P n f ) + 1 ( f ) 2 Thus, ( ) Pn dx 1 ( P n f ) dx + 1 ( f ) dx, 2 2 2 and then ( ) Pn 2 dx ( f ) dx + I + 1 (2.3) 2 Now, Lema 2.1 implies P n K Hence, there exists a subsequence P nk P n n such that P nk converges uniformly on m. Let P = lim nk P nk Since satisfies the 2 condition, we have ( f P nk ) ( ( f ) + ( P nk )) ( ( f ) + (K )) Then, by the Lebesgue Dominated Convergence Theorem, we have I = ( f P ) dx.

est Approximation Operator 821 The next theorem gives a characterization of the best polynomial approximation of functions in L (). Theorem 2.3. Let I, (x) = x (t) dt and let f 0 L () Then P m is in (f ) if and only if ( f P )sgn(f P )Q dx= 0, (2.4) for every Q m Proof. For P in (f ) and Q m we set F Q ( ) = ( f P + Q ) dx Next, we prove that F Q is a convex function defined on [0, ) For a, b 0 such that a + b = 1, we have F Q (a 1 + b 2 ) = ( (a + b)(f P ) + (a 1 + b 2 )Q ) dx (a (f P ) + 1 Q +b (f P ) + 2 Q ) dx a ( (f P ) + 1 Q ) dx + b ( (f P ) + 2 Q ) dx = af Q ( 1 ) + bf Q ( 2 ), for every 1, 2 0 Then and this identity holds if and only if 0 F Q (0+ ). Now, using the Mean Value Theorem we have F Q (0) = min [0, ) F Q ( ), (2.5) ( f P + Q ) ( f P ) Q Q ( ( f P ) + ( Q )), for 0 1 Then, since Q ( ( f P ) + ( Q )) is an integrable function, we are allowed to differentiate inside the integral in the formula of F Q ( ), and therefore 0 F Q (0+ ) = ( f P )sgn(f P )Q dx, (2.6) for any Q m.

822 S. Acinas et al. Now for any polynomial Q m, we take the polynomial Q in (2.6) and this completes the proof. The following result, similar to Theorem 2.1 in [4], provides us an inequality that we will need below. Theorem 2.4. Let I, (x) = x (t) dt and let f 0 L () Suppose the polynomial P m satisfies ( f P )sgn(f P )Q dx= 0, (2.7) for every Q m Then ( P ) Q dx 5 ( f ) Q dx, (2.8) for every Q m satisfying sgn(q (t)p (t)) = ( 1) at any t such that Q (t)p (t) = 0 and where = 0 or = 1. Proof. Suppose first let Q m such that Q (x)p (x) >0. Let N = x : f (x) >P (x) and L = x : f (x) P (x). Then 0 = ( f P ) sgn(f P )Q dx N L = ( f P ) sgn(f P )Q dx+ ( f P ) sgn(f P )Q dx Thus, N N ( f P ) Qdx= L L ( f P ) Qdx (2.9) Let H (x) = ( P (x) f (x) )Q (x) and consider the sets U 1 = N x : P (x) 0, U 3 = L x : P (x) 0, U 2 = N x : P (x) <0, U 4 = L x : P (x) <0 Then by (2.9), we get Hdx= Hdx, U 1 U 2 U 3 U 4

est Approximation Operator 823 and therefore Hdx U 1 Hdx= U 4 Hdx U 3 Hdx U 2 (2.10) Due to the monotonicity of, we have ( P ) Q dx ( P f + f ) Q dx, and using (1.1) we get ( P f + f ) Q dx = 4 = ( P f ) Q dx + 4i=1 U i H dx + i=1 U i H dx + ( f ) Q dx ( f ) Q dx ( f ) Q dx = (I 1 + I 2 ) Now, we will find an upper bound of I 1 = 4 i=1 U i H dx. Note that we have P f f on U 1 and U 4. Next, since the monotonicity of, we obtain H dx = H dx + H dx U 1 U 4 U 1 U 4 ( f ) Q dx + ( f ) Q dx 2 ( f ) Q dx (2.11) U 1 U 4 Since sgnq = sgnp, from (2.10) and (2.11), we get H dx + H dx = ( H ) dx + Hdx U 2 U 3 U 2 U 3 = Hdx Hdx= H dx + H dx U 1 U 4 U 1 U 4 = H dx 2 ( f ) Q dx (2.12) U 1 U 4 Therefore, I 1 4 ( f ) Q dx and ( P ) Q dx 5 ( f ) Q dx (2.13)

824 S. Acinas et al. Now if Q m satisfies Q (x)p (x) <0, we proceed in an analogous way to obtain (2.12), then H dx + H dx = Hdx Hdx U 2 U 3 U 2 U 3 = Hdx+ Hdx= H dx + H dx U 1 U 4 U 1 U 4 = H dx 2 ( f ) Q dx, U 1 U 4 and thus ( P ) Q dx 5 for Q m such that Q (x)p (x) <0 Finally, (2.8) follows from (2.13) and (2.14). The next corollary will be useful in the following. ( f ) Q dx (2.14) Corollary 2.5. Let I, (x) = x (t) dt and let f 0 L () If P is the best polynomial approximation of f L (), then ( P ) P dx 5 P ( f ) dx (2.15) Proof. It follows for Q = P in (2.8) of Theorem 2.4 and employing P P. Remark 2.6. In order to obtain Theorem 2.4, we have used that the polynomial P is a solution of (2.7) for f in L () Thus, the inequality (2.15) holds for any polynomial P that satisfies identity (2.7) and f belonging to L () 3. EXTENSION OF THE EST POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION TO L () In order to get a continuous extension of (f ) for functions in the bigger space L (), we need the following auxiliary results. Throughout this section, we will consider Iand (x) = x (t) dt 0 Lemma 3.1. Let f n be a sequence in L () such that there exists a constant C that satisfies ( f n ) dx C Then P : P (f n ), n = 1, 2, is bounded.

est Approximation Operator 825 Proof. Using Corollary 2.5, we have ( P ) P dx 5 P ( f n ) dx 5C P, (3.1) for each P (f n ) and for every all n Thus, using (1.2) we get ( P ) dx 5 C P Then, from Jensen s inequality, we obtain ( ) 1 P dx ( P ) dx Now, since P 1 is a norm which is equivalent to P, for P m,we obtain for a suitable constant K, ( ) K P C 5 2 P Thus, taking into account that (x) goes to as x tends to the lemma x is proved. Lemma 3.2. Let f n, f be functions in L () such that ( f n f ) dx 0 (3.2) as n Also let g n, g be measurable functions such that g n C for all n and g n g a.e. for x f = 0, as n Then there exists a subsequence n k such that ( f nk )g nk dx ( f )g dx (3.3) as k Proof. Since is a non-decreasing function and (x) >0 for x > 0, there exists a subsequence f nk which converges to f a.e. We will now use the sequence ( f n ) that has equiabsolutely continuous integrals. That means, for every >0 there exists >0 such that ( f E n ) dx, for any E, E, and for every n This fact follows at once from ( f f n ) dx 0, and ( f n ) ( f f n ) dx + ( f ) dx E E

826 S. Acinas et al. Now, by Egorov s theorem, given >0 there exists F, F < such that the subsequence ( f nk )g nk uniformly converges to ( f )g on F Then ( f nk )g nk dx ( f )g dx = ( ( f nk )g nk ( f )g ) dx + ( ( f nk )g nk ( f )g ) dx F = I k + J k Now, using the uniform convergence of the sequence on F we have that J k goes to 0 as k goes to On the other hand, since we are dealing with equiabsolutely continuous integrals we get I k < for every k F Theorem 3.3. for every Q m And If f L (), then there exists P m such that ( f P )sgn(f P )Q dx= 0, (3.4) for a suitable constant K ( P ) dx K P ( f ) dx, (3.5) Proof. Set the sequence of functions f n = min(max(f, n), n) which are in L () Then, by Theorem 2.3, there exists P n (f n ) such that ( f n P n )sgn(f n P n )Qdx= 0, (3.6) for every Q m Observe that ( f n f ) dx 0, as n Now, by Lemma 3.1, the sequence P n is bounded. Then there exists a subsequence P nk which uniformly converges on to a polynomial P m Thus, by Lemma 3.2, we get for every Q m 0 = lim ( f nk P nk )sgn(f nk P nk )Qdx k = ( f P )sgn(f P )Q dx,

est Approximation Operator 827 Now, by Remark 2.6 and (1.2), we also get ( P ) dx ( P ) P dx 5 P ( f ) dx, and the proof is completed. Now Theorem 3.3 allows us to extend the definition of the best approximation operator for functions in L () Definition 2. For f L (), we set (f ) for the set of polynomials P m that satisfies (3.4) and we refer to this set as the extended best approximation operator. Next, we list some properties of this best approximation operator. Theorem 3.4. If is a strictly convex function, then there exists a unique extended best polynomial approximation for every f L (). Proof. For f L () we consider P 1, P 2 (f ), P 1 = P 2, then ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Qdx = ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Qdx= 0, (3.7) for every Q m. Set the polynomial R = P 1 P 2 m and the pairwise disjoint sets à = x : P 2 (x) >P 1 (x) = x : P 1 (x) >P 2 (x) C = x : P 1 (x) = P 2 (x) then à C = and C =0. Since is a strictly convex function, we have that ( x )sgn(x) is a strictly increasing function. Consider R < 0 and f P 2 < f P 1 on the set Ã, then and thus ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )< ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 ), ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )R < ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )R

828 S. Acinas et al. Hence, ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Rdx ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Rdx (3.8) à à Analogously, if R > 0 and f P 1 < f P 2 on the set, then ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )R < ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )R Therefore, ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Rdx ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Rdx (3.9) Now, since P 1 and P 2 are continuous functions and P 1 = P 2 on, then à > 0or > 0 Thus, at least one of the inequalities (3.8) or (3.9) must be strict. From (3.7), (3.8) and (3.9) we get 0 = ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Rdx = ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Rdx+ ( f P 1 )sgn(f P 1 )Rdx à < ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Rdx+ ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Rdx à = ( f P 2 )sgn(f P 2 )Rdx= 0, which is a contradiction, and the proof is completed. Proposition 3.5. P m. For any f L () it satisfies (f + P ) = (f ) + P for all Proof. It follows directly from the definition of the extended best approximation operator (f ) Theorem 3.6. Let be a strictly convex function and h n, h L () such that ( h n h ) dx 0 as n (3.10) Then (h n ) (h) as n Proof. Set P n = (h n ). y inequality (3.5), the sequence P n is uniformly bounded. We consider a subsequence P nk which converges to

est Approximation Operator 829 a polynomial P. Now, we select a subsequence of h nk, which will be also called by h nk, that converges to h a.e; we also have, for any Q m, ( h nk P nk )sgn(h nk P nk )Qdx= 0 (3.11) Now, by Lemma 3.2, we get ( h P )sgn(h P )Q dx= 0, (3.12) and taking into account Theorem 3.4, P = (f ) and the whole sequence P n converges to P Thus the proof is completed. FUNDING This article was supported by Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas and Universidad Nacional de San Luis (grants 100033CO and 22F223). REFERENCES 1. H. D. runk and S. Johansen (1970). A generalized radon-nikodym derivative. Pacific J. Math. 34(3):585 617. 2. I. Carrizo, S. Favier, and F. Zó (2008). Extension of the best approximation operator in Orlicz spaces. Abstr. Appl. Anal., Article ID 374742, 15 pp. 3. H. Cuenya (2011). Extension of the operator of best polynomial approximation in L p (). J. Math. Anal. Appl. 376:565 575. 4. H. Cuenya, S. Favier, and F. Zó (2012). Inequalities in L p 1 for the extended L p best approximation operator. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 393:80 88. 5. S. Favier and F. Zó (2005). A Lebesgue type differentiation theorem for best approximations by constants in Orlicz spaces. Real Anal. Exchange 30:29 42. 6. S. Favier and F. Zó (2011). Maximal inequalities for a best approximation operator in Orlicz spaces. Comment. Math. 51(1):3 21. 7. S. Favier and F. Zó (2001). Extension of the best approximation operator in Orlicz spaces and weak-type inequalities. Abstr. Appl. Anal. 6:101 114. 8.. Kokilashvili and M. Krbec (1991). Weighted Inequalities in Lorentz and Orlicz Spaces. World Scientific, Singapore. 9. M. A. Krasnosel skiï and J.. Rutickiï (1958). Convex Functions and Orlicz Spaces. P. Noordhoff, Groningen, 1961, translated from the first Russian edition by Leo F. oron. MR 23A4016. Zbl 095.09103, Moskva. 10. D. Landers and L. Rogge (1980). est approximants in L -spaces. Z. Wahrsch. Verw. Gabiete 51:215 237. 11. D. Landers and L. Rogge (1981). Isotonic approximation in L s J. Approx. Theory 31:199 223. 12. F. Mazzone and H. Cuenya (2001). Maximal inequalities and Lebesgues differentiation theorem for best approximant by constants over balls. J. Approx. Theory 110:171 179. 13. F. Mazzone and H. Cuenya (2001). On best local approximants in L 2 ( n ) Revista de la Unión Matemática Argentina 42(2):51 56. 14. M. M. Rao and Z. D. Ren (1991). Theory of Orlicz Spaces. Marcel Dekker, New York.