arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 17 May PDF Free Download

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES S. J. DILWORTH AND DIVYA KHURANA arxiv:1805.06778v1 [math.fa] 17 May 2018 Abstract. We shall present new characterizations of partially greedy and almost greedy bases. A new class of basis (which we call reverse partially greedy basis) arises naturally from these characterizations of partially greedy bases. We also give characterizations for 1-partially greedy and 1-reverse partially greedy bases. 1. Introduction LetX bearealbanach spacewithaseminormalized basis(e n )andbiorthogonal functionals (e n). X is allowed to be finite-dimensional, in which case (e n ) is a finite algebraic basis for X. Foranyx X wedenotesupp(x) = {n : e n (x) 0}, P A(x) = i A e i (x)e i. IfA Nthen A denotes the cardinality of A, 1 A = i A e i, for A,B N we write A < B if max A < min B. In[8] Konyagin and Temlyakov introduced the Thresholding Greedy Algorithm (TGA) (G m ), where G m (x) is obtained by taking the largest m coefficients in the series expansion of x. For x X let Λ m (x) be a set of any m-indices such that min n Λ e n (x) max m(x) n Λ e n (x). m(x) The mth greedy approximation is given by G m (x) = n Λ m(x) e n (x)e n. Konyagin and Temlyakov in [8] defined a basis (e n ) to be greedy with constant C if for all x X, m N (1) x G m (x) Cσ m (x) where σ m (x) is the error in the best mth term approximation to x and is given by { } (2) σ m (x) = inf x a i e i : A = m, a i R, i A. i A They proved that a basis is greedy if and only if it is unconditional and democratic. Recall that a basis (e n ) of a Banach space is unconditional if any rearrangement of the series x = 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 46B15; 41A65. Key words and phrases. almost greedy basis, partially greedy basis, reverse partially greedy basis. The first author was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number DMS 1361461 and by the Workshop in Analysis and Probability at Texas A&M University in 2017. The second author was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (Grant Number 137/16). 1

2 DILWORTH AND KHURANA e n(x)e n converges in norm to x. A basis (e n ) is said to be democratic if there exists a n 1 constant Γ 1 such that 1 A Γ 1 B where A,B are finite subsets of N and A B. They also introduced the notion of quasi-greedy basis. A basis is said to be quasi-greedy with constant C if G m (x) C x for all x X and m N. Later, Wojtaszczyk [11] proved that a basis is quasi-greedy if G m (x) x as m for all x X. The class of almost greedy basis and partially greedy basis was considered in [7]. A basis (e n ) is said to be almost greedy with constant C if for all x X, m N (3) x G m (x) C σ m (x) where σ m (x) is the error in the best projection of x onto a subset of (e n ) with size at most m and is given by (4) σ m (x) = inf{ x P A (x) : A m}. A basis (e n ) is said to be partially greedy basis with constant C if for all x X and m N we have x G m (x) C e i (x)e i. n=m+1 In [7] the authors proved that almost greedy bases are characterized by quasi-greediness and democracy and partially greedy bases are characterized by quasi-greediness and the conservative property. A basis (e n ) of a Banach space is said to be conservative if there exists a constant Γ c such that 1 A Γ c 1 B whenever A < B and A B. Characterizations of greedy, almost greedy and quasi-greedy bases are known for the constant C = 1. Albiac and Wojtaszczyk [3] characterized 1-greedy bases. Later, Albiac and Ansorena [1], [2] characterized 1-quasi-greedy and 1-almost greedy bases. The Weak Thresholding greedy algorithm (WTGA) with weakness parameter τ, where 0 < τ < 1, was considered in [10]. For a given basis (e n ) of X and x X we denote by Λ τ m(x) any set of m-indices such that min n Λ τ m(x) e n(x) τ max n Λ τ m(x) e n(x). The mth weak greedy approximation is given by G m (x) = e n(x)e n. n Λ τ m(x) A more restrictive version of weak greedy algorithm known as the branch greedy algorithm (BGA) was considered in [6]. Throughoutthepaperwewill usethefollowing notations. For any x X, agreedy ordering for x is a 1 1 map ρ : N N such that supp(x) ρ(x) and if j < k, then e ρ(j) e ρ(k). If ρ is a greedy ordering for x X, set Λ m (x) := {ρ(1),,ρ(m)}, α m (x) := min Λ m (x), and β m (x) := max Λ m (x). We will work with the following weaker versions of (2) and (4):

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 3 (5) σ L m (x) = inf { x i e i : A = m, A < α m (x), a i R, i A, i Aa } (6) σ R m (x) = inf { x i e i : A = m, A > β m (x), a i R, i A, i Aa } (7) σ L m(x) = inf{ x P A (x) : A m, A < α m (x)}, (8) σ R m(x) = inf{ x P A (x) : A m, A > β m (x)}, for x X, m N. Remark 1.1. Note that liminf m σ L m(x) (1 + K b ) 1 x and liminf m σ R m(x) K 1 b x, where K b is the basis constant of (e n ), whereas lim m σ m (x) = lim m σ m (x) = 0. In this paper we will prove new characterizations of almost greedy and partially greedy bases. We will prove that a basis is almost greedy or partially greedy if and only if (1), (3) are satisfied where σ m (x), σ m (x) are replaced by suitable weaker notions. Precisely, for partially greedy bases we will prove that a basis is partially greedy if and only if (1), (3) are satisfied where σ m (x) and σ m (x) are replaced by the weaker notions σ L m(x) and σ L m(x) respectively. Motivated by these new characterizations of partially greedy bases we introduce the notion of reverse partially greedy basis. We say a basis is reverse partially greedy if it satisfies (3) where σ m (x) is replaced by σ R m(x). We will also prove characterizations of reverse partially greedy bases which are analogues of the characterizations of partially greedy bases mentioned above and proved in [7]. In section 3 we will study the characterizations of 1-partially greedy and 1-reverse partially greedy bases. In the last section we will study the weak and branch versions of the new characterizations of almost greedy bases. 2. Characterizations of partially greedy, reverse partially greedy and almost greedy bases First we recall a few results concerning quasi-greedy bases from [7]. In fact these results do not require the basis to be a Schauder basis and are valid, more generally, for biorthogonal systems ((e n ),(e n)) such that a < e n, e n < b for some positive constants a,b, (e n ) has dense linear span in X, and the map x (e n (x)) is injective. We say that (e n) is a bounded Markushevich basis. Set N m := {A N : A = m} and N < := m=0 Nm.

4 DILWORTH AND KHURANA Lemma 2.1. Suppose that (e n ) is a quasi-greedy basis with constant K and A N <. Then, for every choice of signs ε j = ±1, we have (9) 1 2K j A and hence for any scalars (a i ) i A, e j j A ε j e j 2K j Ae j, (10) j Aa j e j 2K max a j e j. j A j A Lemma 2.2. Suppose that (e n ) is a quasi-greedy basis with constant K and x X has greedy ordering ρ. Then (11) m e ρ(m) (x) e ρ(i) 4K 2 x. Recall that the fundamental function φ(n) of a basis (e n ) is defined by 1 φ(n) = sup 1 A. A n Note that φ is a subadditive function, i.e., φ(m + n) φ(m) + φ(n), and satisfies φ(m) (m/n)φ(n) for all positive integers m,n with m n. If (e n ) is an almost greedy basis then from (11) it follows that there exists a constant C such that (12) φ( A )min a i C i Aa i e i for all A N < and all scalars a i, i A. In [7] it was proved that a basis (e n ) of a Banach space X is partially greedy if and only if it is quasi-greedy and conservative. We now give another characterization of partially greedy bases. Theorem 2.3. Suppose (e n ) is a basis of a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is partially greedy. (b) (e n ) is quasi-greedy and conservative. (c) There exists a constant C such that (13) x G m (x) C σ L m(x), x X, m N. Proof. Equivalence of (a) and (b) was observed in [7]. Clearly (c) implies that G m (x) (1+C) x for all m 1 and for all x X, and hence that the basis is quasi-greedy. We now prove that (c) implies that the basis is conservative. Let A,B N < with A B = m, A 0. Then G m (x) = (1 + ε) i B e i. Now from (c), we have

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 5 1 A Cσ L m (x) C(1+ε) 1 B. Thus, by letting ε 0, we get (e n ) is conservative with constant C, and this gives (c) implies (a). Now we will prove that (b) implies (c). Let the basis (e n ) be quasi-greedy with constant K and conservative with constant Γ c. Let x X, m N and G m (x) = e i (x)e i. i Λ m(x) Now choose any A N with A m and A < α m (x). Then x G m (x) = x e i (x)e i i A i Λ m(x)e i (x)e i + e i (x)e i. i A We can write and hence From (10), (11) we have i Λ m(x) e i (x)e i = G m ( x i Ae i (x)e i i Λ m(x)e i(x)e i K x i A ) e i(x)e i. i Ae i (x)e i 2K max i A e i (x) 1 A 2K min i Λ e i (x) 1 A m(x) 8K 3 Γ c e i(x)e i i Λ m(x), 8K 4 Γ c x i Ae i(x)e i Thus x G m (x) (1+K +8K 4 Γ c ) x e i (x)e i. This completes the proof. i A Definition 2.4. A basis (e n ) of a Banach space X is said to be reverse conservative if there exists some constant Γ r such that 1 A Γ r 1 B if B < A and A B. Definition 2.5. We say that a basis (e n ) of a Banach space X is reverse partially greedy if there exists some constant C such that (14) x G m (x) C σ R m (x) for all x X and m N. Example 2.6. We present an example of a reverse conservative basis which is not democratic. For each n N, we define F n := {A N : A n!, n! A} and F := n 1 F n. Observe that the set F is closed under spreading to the right: in fact, if A,B N m, A F and mina minb, then B F.

6 DILWORTH AND KHURANA We define a norm on c 00 as follows x = max{( x,1 A ) : A F} for x c 00. Let X be the completion of c 00 in this norm. The canonical basis (e n ) of X is normalized and 1-unconditional. From the right spreading property of F, it follows that x y, where y = a i e ni is a spread of x = a i e i with n 1 < n 2 <... In particular, if A < B and A B then 1 A 1 B. Thus (e n ) is a 1-conservative basis. However, 1 [1,n!] = (n 1)!, while 1 [n!+1,2n!] = n!. So (e n ) is not a democratic basis. Now consider the dual norm. Since x y it follows easily that x y. In particular, is reverse conservative. But 1 [1,n!] = (n 1)! implies 1 [1,n!] n while 1 [n!+1,2n!] = 1 since [n!+1,2n!] F n. So the dual norm is not democratic. The proof of the following characterization of reverse partially greedy bases is similar to the proof of Theorem 2.3. Theorem 2.7. Let (e n ) be a basis of Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is reverse partially greedy. (b) (e n ) is quasi-greedy and reverse conservative. We now prove that if a basis (e n ) of a Banach space X is both conservative and reverse conservative then it is democratic. If X is an infinite-dimensional Banach space then for given A,B N m we can find C N m with A < C and B < C. Now by the conservative and reverse conservative properties of the basis we can easily conclude that the basis is democratic. We now give another proof of this fact which has the advantage of working for a finite basis as well. Lemma 2.8. Let (e n ) be a basis of Banach space X. If (e n ) is both conservative and reverse conservative then (e n ) is democratic. Proof. Let there exist a constant Γ such that for any two sets A,B N <, with A B, we have 1 A Γ 1 B if A B. Choose any two sets A,B N m. Let A = {a 1 < a 2 <... < a m } and B = {b 1 < b 2 <... < b m }. If A < B or B < A, then 1 A Γ 1 B and 1 B Γ 1 A. So, for the rest of the proof we assume that this is not the case. Hence a 1 b m. If a 1 = b m then we can write A = A 1 A 2, B = B 1 B 2 where A 1 = {a 1 }, A 2 = {a 2,...,a m }, B 1 = {b m }, B 2 = {b 1,...,b m 1 } and B 2 < A 2. Let K b be the basis constant for (e n ). Then 1 A 1 A1 + 1 A2 1 B1 +Γ 1 B2 (K b (1+Γ)+1) 1 B

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 7 and 1 B 1 B1 + 1 B2 1 A1 +Γ 1 A2 (K b (1+Γ)+Γ) 1 A. Now consider the case a 1 b m 1 or a 2 = b m 1. If a 2 > b m 1 or a 2 = b m 1 then we will stop the process; otherwise we will continue in the same manner. By the assumptions on the sets A,B we can find the first j, 1 j < m, such that either a j+1 > b m j or a j+1 = b m j. Thus we can write either A = A 1 A 2 and B = B 1 B 2 where A i = B i, A 1 B 2, A 1 = {a 1 <... < a j } B 2 = {b 1 <... B 2 = {b 1 <... < b m j 1 }. For the first case we have and and Now we can write 1 Ai Γ 1 Bi and 1 Bi Γ 1 Ai for i = 1,2. 1 A 1 A1 + 1 A2 Γ( 1 B1 + 1 B2 ) Γ(2K b +1) 1 B 1 B 1 B1 + 1 B2 Γ( 1 A1 + 1 A2 ) Γ(2K b +1) 1 A. For the second case we get 1 A 1 A1 + 1 A2 + 1 A3 Γ( 1 B1 + 1 B3 )+ 1 B2 (Γ(2K b +1)+2K b ) 1 B 1 B 1 B1 + 1 B2 + 1 B3 Γ( 1 A1 + 1 A3 )+ 1 A2 (Γ(2K b +1)+2K b ) 1 A. Next, we consider basis conditions that are formally stronger than (13) and (14). We will say that a basis (e n ) satisfies (a) property ( ) if there exists a constant C such that x G m (x) Cσm L (x), x X, m N (b) property ( ) if there exists a constant C such that x G m (x) Cσ R m(x), x X, m N.

8 DILWORTH AND KHURANA While properties ( ) and ( ) appear to be stronger than (13) and (14) respectively, the following results prove that this is not the case. Theorem 2.9. Let (e n ) be a basis of a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is partially greedy. (b) (e n ) satisfies property ( ). Proof. Theorem 2.3 shows that (b) implies (a). We now prove that (a) implies (b). Let K b,k,γ c be the basis constant, quasi-greedy constant and conservative constant respectively. Let x X and A {1,...,α m (x) 1} with A m. Consider y = e i (y)e i where e i (y) = e i (x) for all i A. To prove the theorem it is sufficient to show that (15) x G m (x) C y, where C depends only on K,K b and Γ c. We can write A = A 1 A 2, where and A 2 = A\A 1. Then Also from (10) and (11) we have Thus A 1 = {i A : e i(y) > e ρ(m) (x) } i A 1 e i(y)e i = G A1 ( α m(x) 1 i=1 e i(y)e i ) KK b y. e i(y)e i 2K max e i(y) 1 A2 i A 2 i A 2 2K min i Λ e i(x) 1 A2 m(x) 8K 3 Γ c e i (x)e i i Λ m(x) = 8K 3 Γ c G m ( 8K 4 Γ c = 8K 4 Γ c α m(x) α m(x) α m(x) e i (x)e i) e i(x)e i e i (y)e i 8K 4 Γ c (K b +1) y. i Ae i(y)e i (KK b +8K 4 Γ c (K b +1)) y.

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 9 Now we will find estimates of G m (x), e i (x)e i and x in terms of y. From (10) and (11) we can write Thus i A G m (x) = G m ( K = K α m(x) α m(x) α m(x) e i(x)e i ) e i (x)e i e i(y)e i K(K b +1) y. i Ae i(x)e i 2K max i A e i(x) 1 A x = y i A From these estimates we have 2K min i Λ e i(x) 1 A m(x) 8K 3 Γ c e i(x)e i i Λ m(x) = 8K 3 Γ c G m ( 8K 4 Γ c = 8K 4 Γ c y + i A x G m (x) x + G m (x) α m(x) α m(x) α m(x) e i (x)e i) e i(x)e i e i(y)e i 8K 4 Γ c (K b +1) y. e i(y)e i + i Ae i(x)e i e i(y)e i + i Ae i(x)e i (KK b +16K 4 Γ c (K b +1)+1) y. (KK b +16K 4 Γ c (K b +1)+K(K b +1)+1) y.

10 DILWORTH AND KHURANA Remark 2.10. The proof of Theorem 2.9 shows that for a partially greedy basis (e n ) we have x C 1 y for some constant C 1, which is stronger than (15). Similar proofs give the following characterizations of reverse partially greedy bases and almost greedy bases. Theorem 2.11. Let (e n ) be a basis of a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is quasi-greedy and reverse conservative. (b) (e n ) satisfies property ( ). Theorem 2.12. Let (e n ) be a basis of a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is almost greedy. (b) There exists a constant C such that for any x X, A {1,...,α m (x) 1} {β m (x)+1,...}, A m and a i R, i A, we have x G m (x) C x i Aa i e i. Note that (e n ) is required to be a Schauder basis in the proofs of the above results as the basis constant K b appears in certain estimates. However, by replacing (b) in Theorem 2.12 by a stronger condition we can get a characterization of almost greedy bounded Markushevic bases (see the first paragraph of Section 2). Theorem 2.13. Let (e n ) be a bounded Markushevich basis for a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is almost greedy. (b) Let 0 λ < 1. Then there exists a constant C such that for any x X, A N with A m and A Λ m (x) λm, and any a i R, i A, we have x G m (x) C x i Aa i e i. Proof. First we show that (b) implies (a). Setting λ = 0, (b) implies G m (x) (1+C) x for all m 1 and for all x X, and hence that (e n ) is quasi-greedy. Now we show, setting λ = 0 again, that (b) implies that (e n ) is democratic. Let A,B N m. First suppose that A and B are disjoint. Then, applying (b) to x = 1 B +(1+ε)1 A yields. 1 B C 1 A. For the general case, note that (b) implies 1 E (1+C) 1 A for all E A. Hence 1 B 1 A B + 1 B\A (1+C) 1 A +C 1 A\B (1+C) 2 1 A. Hence (e n ) is democratic. So (e n ) is quasi-greedy and democratic, and hence almost greedy. Now we show that (a) implies (b). Let φ(n) be the fundamental function for an almost greedy basis (e n ). In the following inequalities the constants C 1,C 2 etc. dependonly on λ and the quasi-greedy and democratic constants of (e n ). Let A N with A Λ m (x) λm and

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 11 A m. We may assume without loss of generality that λm N. Then for all coefficients (a i ) i A, x a i e i C 1 G (1 λ)m (x i e i ) i A i Aa C 2 e ρ(m) (x) φ((1 λ)m) C 2 (1 λ) e ρ(m) (x) φ(m) C 3 G 2m (x) G m (x) = C 3 (x G m (x)) (x G 2m (x)). The first inequality follows from quasi-greediness of (e n ). The second inequality follows from (12) and the fact that A Λ m (x) λm, so the largest (1 λ)m coefficients of x a i e i are at least e ρ(m) (x). The third inequality follows from the fact that φ(r) r φ(s) for positive s integers r s. The fourth inequality follows from (10). Now consider two cases. First suppose that x G 2m (x) 1 2 x G m(x). Then by the triangle inequality x a i e i C 3 ( (x G m (x) x G 2m (x) ) C 3 2 x G m(x). i A Now suppose x G 2m (x) > 1 2 x G m(x). Then by [7, Theorem 3.3], we have x G m (x) 2 x G 2m (x) C 4 σ m (x) C 4 x i Aa i e i. Thus in both the cases we get x G m (x) C x i Aa i e i i A for some constant C. Remark 2.14. Theorem 2.13 complements [5, Theorem 3.2] which states that if (e n ) is an almost greedy basis then there exists C > 0 such that for all x X and n 1 there exist scalars a i (i Λ n (x)) such that x a i e i Cσ n (x). i Λ n(x) The following characterization of greedy bases was proved in [4]. Theorem 2.15. Let (e n ) be a basis of a Banach space X. Then (e n ) is a greedy basis if and only if there exists some constant C such that for all x X and m N. x G m (x) C{d(x,a1 A ) : A N, a R, A = m} We now prove the similar result for almost greedy bases.

12 DILWORTH AND KHURANA Theorem 2.16. Let (e n ) be a basis of a Banach space X. Then the following assertions are equivalent: (a) (e n ) is almost greedy basis. (b) There exists some constant C such that for all x X, m N, a R, A N with A m, and either A < α m (x) or A > β m (x), we have (16) x G m (x) Cd(x,a1 A ). Proof. Theorem 2.12 shows that (a) implies (b). Now we prove that (b) implies (a). From (16) it follows that G m (x) (C + 1) x for all x X and m N. Hence (e n ) is quasi-greedy. For any ε > 0, A,B N < with A 0 is arbitrary, we get 1 A C 1 B. Similarly, if we consider any A,B N < with A > B and A B then we can prove that 1 A C 1 B. Thus from Lemma 2.8 it follows that the basis is democratic and this proves that (b) implies (a). 3. Characterization of 1-partially and 1-reverse partially greedy bases Lemma 3.1. A basis (e n ) of Banach space X satisfies (13) with C = 1 if and only if for any x X and j < α 1 (x) (17) x G 1 (x) min( x, x e j(x)e j ). Proof. If (13) is satisfied with C = 1 then (17) follows immediately. Conversely, suppose that (17) holds. Note that iterating (17) yields x G m (x) x G k (x) x for all m k 1. Suppose that A < α m (x) and 0 A = k m. Let A = {j 1,...,j k }, where j i < α m (x) for 1 i k. Let y = x k 1 j=1 e ρ(j) (x)e ρ(j). Then k 1 x G k (x) = (x e ρ(i) (x)e ρ(i)) e ρ(k) (x)e ρ(k) i=1 = y G 1 (y) y e j 1 (y)e j1 k 1 = x e ρ(i) (x)e ρ(i) e j 1 (x)e j1 i=1 since j 1 < α m (x) ρ(m). Continuing in this way we get x G k (x) x k e j i (x)e ji, i=1

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 13 and hence k x G m (x) x G k (x) x e j i (x)e ji. i=1 Thus, x G m (x) σ L m(x). Theorem 3.2. A basis (e n ) of a Banach space is 1-partially greedy (i.e., satisfies (13) with C = 1) if and only if for any x X and j,k N\supp(x), with j < k, (18) max( x, x+se j ) x+te k where s = t max e i (x). Proof. Suppose (e n ) satisfies (13) with C = 1. Let us verify (18). For any ε > 0 consider y = x+se j +(1+ε)te k where j,k N\supp(x), j < k and s = t max e i (x). Clearly, G 1 (y) = (1+ε)te k and thus x+se j = y G 1 (y) y e j (y)e j = x+(1+ε)te k. Letting ε 0, we get x+se j x+te k. Similarly, setting z = x+(1+ε)te k, x = z G 1 (z) z = x+(1+ε)te k, and hence x x+te k. Thus, (18) is satisfied. Conversely, suppose that (18) is satisfied. Let x X. Suppose that G 1 (x) = e k (x)e k and suppose j < k. Consider y = x G 1 (x). Then by (18), x G 1 (x) = y y +e k (x)e k = x. Now consider z = x e j (x)e j e k (x)e k. Then by (18) z ±se j z +se k, where s = e k (x). By convexity, since e j (x) s, z +e j (x)e j z +se k, i.e., x G 1 (x) x e j(x)e j. Hence (e n ) satisfies (17). So, by Lemma 3.1, (e n ) satisfies (13) with C = 1. Similar arguments yields the following results for 1-reverse partially greedy bases. Lemma 3.3. A basis (e n ) of Banach space X satisfies (14) with C = 1 if and only if for any x X and j > β 1 (x) (19) x G 1 (x) min( x, x e j (x)e j ).

14 DILWORTH AND KHURANA Theorem 3.4. A basis (e n ) of a Banach space is 1-reverse partially greedy (i.e., satisfies (14) with C = 1) if and only if for any x X and j,k N\supp(x), with j > k, (20) max( x, x+se j ) x+te k where s = t max e i (x). 4. Branch almost greedy and weak almost greedy bases In this section we will consider the WTGA and BGA. The BGA is a more restrictive form of WTGA. First we recall the definition of the BGA from [6]. Let X be a finite dimensional or separable infinite-dimensional Banach space. Let (e n ) be a bounded Markushevich basis. For a given weakness parameter τ, 0 < τ < 1 and 0 x X, define A τ (x) := {n N : e n (x) τmax n 1 e n (x) }. Let G τ : X \{0} N be any mapping satisfying the following conditions: (a) G τ (x) A τ (x) (b) G τ (λx) = G τ (x) for all λ 0 (c) if A τ (y) = A τ (x) and e i (y) = e i (x) for all i Aτ (x) then G τ (y) = G τ (x). In this algorithm G τ (x) is the index of first selected coefficient. The subsequent coefficients are selected by iterating the algorithm on the residuals. In [6] the authors defined the following notions of branch quasi-greedy (BQG(τ)) and branch almost greedy (BAG(τ)) for a given weakness parameter τ (a) (e n ) is said to be BQG(τ) with constant C such that G τ m(x) C x, x X, m N. (b) (e n ) is said to be BAG(τ) with constant C such that x G τ m(x) C σ m (x), x X, m N. They proved that if any algebraic basis (e i ) N i=1 of a N-dimensional normed space is BAG(τ) then the basis is both quasi-greedy and democratic. Now we will prove the similar results for the weaker notions than BAG(τ). For Theorem 4.4 we will consider the BGA and for Theorem 4.5 we will work with the WTGA. If Gm(x) τ = n Bm(x) τ e n(x)e n, then we denote α τ m(x) = min Bm(x) τ and βm(x) τ = max Bm τ (x). To prove Theorem 4.4 first we recall a few results from [6]. Definition 4.1. Let 0 < τ < 1. Then a basis (e i ) N i=1 is said to have property P(τ) if there exists some constant C such that for all sets A {1,...,N} and for all scalars (a i ) i A with 1 a i 1, we have τ 2 (21) max ±e i C i e i. ± i A i Aa

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 15 is quasi- Proposition 4.2. Let (e i ) N i=1 be BQG(τ) and have property P(τ). Then (e i) N i=1 greedy. Lemma 4.3. Let 0 < τ < 1. Suppose that (e i ) N i=1 is BQG(τ) and democratic. If (21) is satisfied for all A with A N/2 and all scalars (a i ) i A with 1 a i 1 then (e τ 2 i ) N i=1 has property P(τ). Theorem 4.4. Let 0 < τ < 1. Suppose that (e i ) N i=1 is a basis of X and there exists a constant C such that (22) x G τ m (x) C x P A(x) where x X, 0 k N, A N with A m, and either A < α τ m(x) or A > βm(x). τ Then (e i ) N i=1 is almost greedy. Proof. Clearly, it follows from (22) that (e i ) N i=1 is BQG(τ) with constant 1 + C. First we prove that (21) is satisfied for all A {1,,N} with A N/2 and all scalars (a i ) i A with 1 a i 1. Choose any A {1,,N} with A = n N/2 and scalars (a τ 2 i ) i A such that 1 a i 1/τ 2. Now choose D {1,...,N} disjoint from A and A = D. Let A = {a 1 <... < a k } and D = {d 1 <... < d k } and without loss of generality we can assume that a 1 < d k. Now by using the fact that A D = and arguments of Lemma 2.8 we can find j, 0 j k such that A = A 1 A 2, D = D 1 D 2 where A i = D i = k i fori = 1,2, A 1 = {a 1,...,a j }, A 2 = {a j+1,...,a k }, D 1 = {d k j+1,...,d k }, D 2 = {d 1,...,d k j }, A 1 < D 1 and A 2 > D 2. Consider x j = θ i D j e i + i A j a i e i where j = 1,2 and 0 < θ < τ. Then G τ k j (x j ) = i A j a i e i and thus for j = 1,2 (22) yields (23) θ e i C a i e i. i D j i A j If we consider y j = i D j e i + θ i A j ±e i, then G τ k j (y j ) = i D j e i and thus for j = 1,2 (22) yields (24) θ ±e i C e i. i A j i D j

16 DILWORTH AND KHURANA From (23) and (24) we have θ ±e i θ( ±e i + ±e i ) i A i A 1 i A 2 θc( e i + e i ) i D 1 i D 2 C 2 ( a i e i + a i e i ) i A 1 i A 2 C 2 (2K b +1) i e i i Aa where K b is the basis constant. Since θ < τ is arbitrary, so we can write (25) m ± ax i A ±e i C2 (2K b +1) i e i. τ i Aa Next we prove that (e i ) N i=1 is democratic. From Lemma 2.8 it follows that it is sufficient to show that (e i ) N i=1 is both conservative and reverse conservative. Choose A,B {1,...,N} with A < B and A B = k. Consider x = θ1 A +1 B, where 0 < θ < τ. Then Gk τ(x) = 1 B, so θ 1 A C 1 B. Since θ < τ is arbitrary, so we get (e i ) N i=1 is C τ conservative. By similar reasoning, (e i) N i=1 is C τ reverse conservative. Thus from Lemma 2.8 it follows that (e i) N i=1 is democratic. It follows from Proposition 4.2 and Lemma 4.3 that (e i ) N i=1 is quasi-greedy. We have proved that (e i) N i=1 is quasi-greedy and democratic, and hence almost greedy by [7]. To conclude this section we prove the converse of Theorems 4.4. in the more general setting of the WTGA. Theorem 4.5. Let (e n ) be almost greedy Markushevich basis of a Banach space X. Let 0 < τ < 1 be weakness parameter and 0 λ < 1 be any scalar. Then exists a constant C such that for any x X, A N with A Λ τ m(x) λm, A m and a i R, i A, we have x G τ m(x) C x i Aa i e i. Proof. It follows from [9] that for any x X, m N there exists a constant C(τ) such that (26) x G τ m(x) C(τ) x G m (x). The rest of the argument is very similar to Theorem 2.13. Let φ(n) be the fundamental function for an almost greedy Markushevich basis (e n ). In the following inequalities the constants C 1,C 2 etc. depend only on λ and the quasi-greedy and democratic constants of (e n ). Let A N with A Λ τ m (x) λm and A m. Then for all coefficients (a i) i A,

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF ALMOST GREEDY AND PARTIALLY GREEDY BASES 17 x a i e i C 1 G (1 λ)m (x i e i ) i A i Aa C 2 τ e ρ(m) (x) φ((1 λ)m) C 2 τ(1 λ) e ρ(m) (x) φ(m) C 3 τ G 2m (x) G m (x) = C 3 τ (x G m (x)) (x G 2m (x)). Here for the second inequality we used (12) and the fact that A Λ τ m λm, so the largest (1 λ)m coefficients of x a i e i are at least τ e ρ(m) (x). i A Now consider two cases, first suppose that x G 2m (x) 1 2 x G m(x). Then by the triangle inequality x i A a i e i C 3 τ (x G m (x)) (x G 2m (x)) C 3τ 2 x G m(x). Now suppose x G 2m (x) > 1 2 x G m(x), then by Theorem 3.3 [7], we have x G m (x) 2 x G 2m (x) C 3 τσ m (x) C 3 τ x i Aa i e i. Thus in both the cases we get x G m (x) C 1 (τ) x i Aa i e i for some constant C 1 (τ). Now the result follows from (26). Acknowledgements The second author would like to thank Gideon Schechtman for the invaluable discussions and suggestions while preparation of this paper. References [1] F. Albiac and J.L. Ansorena, Characterization of 1-quasi-greedy basis, J. Approx. Theory 201 (2016), 7 12. [2] F. Albiac and J.L. Ansorena, Characterization of 1-almost greedy basis, Rev. Mat. Complut. 30 (2017), 13 24. [3] F. Albiac and P.Wojtaszczyk, Characterization of 1-greedy basis, J. Approx. Theory 138 (2006), no. 1, 65 86. [4] P.M. Berna and O. Blasco, Characterization of greedy bases in Banach spaces, J. Approx. Theory 215 (2017), 28 39. [5] S.J. Dilworth, N.J. Kalton and Denka Kutzarova, On the existence of almost greedy bases in Banach spaces, Studia Math. 159 (2003), 67 101. [6] S.J. Dilworth, Denka Kutzarova, T. Schlumprecht and P.Wojtaszczyk, Weak thresholding greedy algorithms in Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 263 (2012), 3900 3921.

18 DILWORTH AND KHURANA [7] S.J. Dilworth, N.J. Kalton, D. Kutzarova and V.N. Temlyakov, The thresholding greedy algorithm, greedy basis, and duality, Constr. Approx. 19 (2003), no. 4, 575 597. [8] S.V. Konyagin and V.N.Temlyakov, A remark on greedy approximation in Banach spaces, East. J. Approx. 5 (1999), 365 379. [9] S.V. Konyagin and V.N.Temlyakov, Greedy approximation with regard to bases and general minimal systems, Serdics Math. J. (2002), 305 328. [10] V.N.Temlyakov, The best m-term approximation and Greedy Algorithms, Adv. Comput. Math. (1998), 249 265. [11] P.Wojtaszczyk, Greedy algorithm for general biorthogonal systems, J. Approx. Theory 107 (2000), 293 314. (S.J. Dilworth) Department of Mathematics, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, U.S.A., E-mail : dilworth@math.sc.edu (Divya Khurana) Department of Mathematics, The Wiezmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel, E-mail : divya.khurana@weizmann.ac.il, divyakhurana11@gmail.com

arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 17 May 2018