Abstract
For nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames in a pair of dual spaces \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\) with \(s\neq 0\), smoothness and vanishing moment requirements are separated from each other, that is, one system is for smoothness and the other one for vanishing moments. This gives us more flexibility to construct nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames than in \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). In this paper, we introduce the reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces, and characterize the nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames under the setting of a general pair of dual reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces.
Similar content being viewed by others
1 Introduction
Most classical nonhomogeneous wavelet systems are derived from a refinable structure (see [2, 5, 7, 9, 21] and the references therein). To obtain the stability of frames or bi-frames, some technical restrictions are imposed on refinable masks in this literature. Observe that for wavelet systems derived from refinable structures, one of the most important features is their associated fast wavelet transform. Due to lack of a refinable function, the correspondence between the homogeneous systems and fast wavelet transforms is not exact, while the nonhomogeneous systems are different. Moreover, Han in [12] showed that nonhomogeneous wavelet systems are closely related to nonstationary wavelets (see [6, 14]). Based on these considerations, in this paper, we will dicuss the nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames under the setting of the reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces.
The notion of frames was first introduced in [10], which dealt with nonharmonic Fourier series. Let \({\mathcal{I}}\) be a countable set, and \({\mathcal{H}}\) be a separable Hilbert space. The sequence \(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} } \subset {\mathcal{H}}\) is called a Bessel sequence in \({\mathcal{H}}\) if there exists \(C>0\) such that
this is called a frame for \({\mathcal{H}}\) if there exist \(0< C_{1} \leq C_{2}<+\infty \) such that
Given two frames \(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) and \(\{\tilde{e}_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) for \({\mathcal{H}}\), we call \(\{\tilde{e}_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) a dual of \(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) if
It is easy to check that (1.1) is equivalent to
So, in the case, we also say (\(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\), \(\{\tilde{e}_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\)) is a pair of bi-frames. It is well known that (\(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\), \(\{\tilde{e}_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\)) is a pair of bi-frames for \(\mathcal{H}\) if \(\{e_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) and \(\{\tilde{e}_{i}\}_{i\in {\mathcal{I}} }\) are Bessel sequences satisfying (1.1).
Let d be a positive integer. The Fourier transform of an integrable function \(f\in L^{1}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) is defined by
and is naturally extended to the tempered distribution spaces, where \(\langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle \) means the Euclidean inner product in \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\). Similarly, its inverse Fourier transform is defined as
For functions f and g on \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\), we define
if it is well-defined in some sense, where \(\vert \cdot \vert \) denotes its Euclidean norm. We denote by \(\chi _{E}\) the characteristic function of a Lebesgue measurable set E and by δ the Dirac sequence. The support of a distribution f on \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) is defined by
which is well-defined up to a null set. Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), let \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) be the Sobolev space consisting of all tempered distributions f such that
It is easy to check that \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) is a Hilbert space under the inner product:
In particular, \(H^{0}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) is the usual Hilbert space \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) by the Plancherel theorem. Moreover, for every \(g \in H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\),
defines a continuous linear functional on \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). So the spaces \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) constitute a pair of dual spaces.
We say that an integer matrix A is expansive if all its eigenvalues are greater than 1 in module. Throughout this paper, we always assume that A is isotropic, i.e. A is similar to a diagonal matrix \(\operatorname{diag}(\lambda _{1}, \lambda _{2},\cdot , \lambda _{d})\) satisfying \(\vert \lambda _{1} \vert = \vert \lambda _{2} \vert =\cdot = \vert \lambda _{d} \vert = \vert \det A \vert ^{ \frac{1}{d}}\). We always denote by \(A^{*}\) its conjugate transpose for a matrix A. Define a function \(\kappa : \mathbb{Z}^{d} \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}\) by
where \(\mathbb{Z}_{+}\) denotes the set of the natural integers. It is obvious that \(\kappa (0)=+\infty \). Define the shift operator \(T_{k}\) with \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\) and the dilation operator by
for a distribution f, respectively. For convenience, we write \(m= \vert \det A \vert ^{\frac{1}{d}}\), and write
for \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), \(j\in \mathbb{Z}\) and \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\). Given \(L \in \mathbb{N}\). Let \(\psi _{0} \in H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) be a tempered distribution, and \(\Psi =\{\psi _{1},\ldots ,\psi _{L} \} \subset H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) a finite set of tempered distributions, we denote the homogeneous wavelet system \(X^{s}(\Psi )\) and the nonhomogeneous wavelet system \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively, by
and
In particular, we write
for simplicity.
Han in [15] studied nonhomogeneous wavelet frames in \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\). In particular, when \(s \neq 0\) and A is the dyadic matrix \(2I_{d}\), [15, Theorem 1.1], not only established the mixed extension principle for nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames in \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\), but also characterized the functions in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) using such bi-frames. The characterization is different from the one in [3, 4], using homogeneous wavelet bi-frames in \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). The homogeneous wavelet bi-frames used in [3, 4] are required to have vanishing moments and positive regularity simultaneously, however, this pair of competing requirements can be completely separated for two wavelet systems in nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames used in [15, Theorem 1.1]. Without loss of generality, assuming that \(s>0\), then one can demand the synthesis system to adapt the desired order of regularity, while requiring the analysis system to have the desired order of vanishing moments to achieve the sparsity. This gives great flexibility in constructing bi-frames in \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\). Two variations of [15, Theorem 1.1] are obtained in [11, Theorem 2.1] and [20, Theorem 4.1]. Li and Zhang in [18] obtained the following characterization for a nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames of \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\).
Proposition 1.1
Let \(X^{s}(\psi _{0};\Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) be Bessel sequences in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively. Then \((X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi ), X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi }) )\) is a nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames in \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\) if and only if, for every \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\),
In particular, when \(s\neq 0\), Proposition 1.1 reduces to the one in [19, Lemma 2.5], with taking \(\Omega =\mathbb{R}^{d}\). [19, Lemma 2.5], is a variation of [13, Theorems 9, 11] and [1, Proposition 2.3]. [13, Theorems 9, 11] are for frequency-based nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames in space of distribution. And [1, Proposition 2.3], is for wavelet bi-frames in \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Observe that all the above work concerns the whole space \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) or \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). This paper addresses nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames under the setting of reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) which is more general than \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Now, we introduce the definition of reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\).
Definition 1.1
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\) and a \(d\times d\) expansive matrix A, a nonzero closed linear subspace X of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) is called a reducing subspace if \(DX=X\) and \(T_{k}X=X\) for every \(k\in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\), and
where \(\widehat{X}=\{\hat{f}:f\in X \}\).
Observe that (1.6) is trivial if \(s=0\). Definition 1.1 is a generalization of the notion of reducing subspaces of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). The following proposition gives a Fourier-domain characterization for reducing subspaces of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\).
Proposition 1.2
([8, Theorem 1])
For a \(d\times d\) expansive matrix A, X is a reducing subspace of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) if and only if \(X=FL^{2}(\Omega )\) for some \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}\) with nonzero measure satisfying \(\Omega =A^{*}\Omega \), where
Before proceeding, let us introduce some notations and notions. For \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}\) with nonzero measure, we write
and \(FH^{0}(\Omega )=FL^{2}(\Omega )\). Then \(FH^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})=H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Obviously, for each \(g \in FH^{-s}(\Omega )\),
defines a continuous linear functional on \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\). Then \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ))\) constitutes a pair of dual spaces, as we discussed above as regards \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\).
Theorem 2.1 in Sect. 2 claims that X is a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) if and only if \(X=FH^{s}(\Omega )\) for some nonzero measure set \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}\) satisfying \(\Omega =A^{*}\Omega \). So, specifically, we denote as \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) in place of X.
Next, we introduce the definition of a nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames in reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces. Let \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(FH^{-s}(\Omega )\) be reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively. \(\psi _{0} \in FH^{s}(\Omega )\), \(\tilde{\psi }_{0} \in FH^{-s}(\Omega )\), Ψ and Ψ̃ be finite subsets of \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(FH^{-s}(\Omega )\), respectively. We say that \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) is a nonhomogeneous wavelet frame (Bessel sequence) in \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) if it is a frame (Bessel sequence) in \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\), and that \((X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi ), X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi }) )\) is a nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames (NWBFs) in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ) )\) if
-
(1)
\(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) is a frame for \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) is a frame in \(FH^{-s}(\Omega )\);
-
(2)
the identity
$$\begin{aligned} \langle f, g \rangle =\sum _{k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}} \langle f, \tilde{\psi }_{0, 0, k} \rangle \langle \psi _{0, 0, k}, g \rangle +\sum_{l=1}^{L} \sum_{j=0}^{\infty }\sum _{k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}} \bigl\langle f, \tilde{\psi }^{-s}_{l, j, k} \bigr\rangle \bigl\langle \psi ^{s}_{l, j, k}, g \bigr\rangle \end{aligned}$$(1.7)holds for all \(f \in FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(g \in FH^{-s}(\Omega )\).
The notion of NWBFs herein is a direct generalization of the one in [16], which deals with \((H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}), H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d}))\). Observe that \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) cannot be replaced by \(X(\psi _{0}, \Psi )\) and \(X(\tilde{\psi }_{0}, \tilde{\Psi })\) in the above definitions when \(s\ne 0\). An argument for this can be found in [17].
Denote
It is well known that \({\mathcal{D}}\) is dense in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \({\mathcal{D}}\cap FH^{s}(\Omega )\) is dense in \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) for every \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), respectively.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we characterize the reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and give some auxiliary lemmas used later. In Sect. 3, we establish a characterization of a NWBFs in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ))\) via a pair of equations.
2 Reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and some auxiliary lemma
In this section, we characterize the reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces, and give some auxiliary lemmas used later.
By a careful computation, we get the following lemma.
Lemma 2.1
Let \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), and let Ω be a measurable set in \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) with nonzero measure. Define λ by
for \(f \in H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Then
(i) λ and \(\lambda ^{2}\) are unitary operators from \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) onto \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and onto \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively;
(ii) \(\lambda (FH^{s}(\Omega ))=FL^{2}(\Omega )\), and \(\lambda ^{2}(FH^{s}(\Omega ))=FH^{-s}(\Omega )\);
(iii)
for \(f\in H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\).
Theorem 2.1
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\) and a \(d\times d\) expansive matrix A, X is a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) if and only if \(X=FH^{s}(\Omega )\) for some \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}\) with nonzero measure satisfying \(\Omega =A^{*}\Omega \).
Proof
Necessity. Suppose X is a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Defined λ as in Lemma 2.1, and denote \(X_{1}=\lambda X\)., Then we only need to prove that
for some measurable set Ω in \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) with \(\Omega =A^{*}\Omega \) by Lemma 2.1. By the unitarity of λ, \(X_{1}\) is a linear closed subspace of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). So it is sufficient to prove that
by Proposition 1.2. A simple computation shows that
according to Definition 1.1 and the fact that X is a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Hence (2.1) holds.
Sufficiency. Assume that \(X=FH^{s}(\Omega )\), \(A^{*}\Omega =\Omega \). Obviously, (1.6) holds. By Lemma 2.1, λ is a unitary operator, \(FH^{s}(\Omega )=\lambda ^{-1}(FL^{2}(\Omega ))\). Furthermore, \(FL^{2}(\Omega )\) is a linear closed subspace of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). So X is a linear closed subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). For \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\), we have
due to the fact that \(A^{*}\Omega =\Omega \). It follows that
Therefore, X is a reducing subspace of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). The lemma is proved. □
The following three lemmas are borrowed from [18, Lemmas 3.6, 3.9 and 3.11].
Lemma 2.2
Let \(s \in \mathbb{R}\) and \(\phi \in H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Then
(i) \(\{T_{k}\phi : k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\}\) is a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) if and only if
In this case, \(\Vert [\hat{\phi }, \hat{\phi }]_{s} \Vert _{L^{\infty }(\mathbb{T}^{d})}\) is a Bessel bound.
(ii) If \(\{T_{k}\phi : k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\}\) is a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), then \(\{\phi ^{s}_{j, k}: k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\}\) is a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\).
Lemma 2.3
Let \(s \in \mathbb{R}\) and \(j \in \mathbb{Z}\). Given \(\phi \in H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(f \in H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Then the kth Fourier coefficient of \([ \vert \det A \vert ^{\frac{j}{2}}\hat{f}((A^{*})^{j}\cdot ), \hat{\phi }(\cdot )]_{0}( \xi )\) is \(\langle f, \phi _{j, k}\rangle \) for \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\). In particular,
if \(\{T_{k}\phi : k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\}\) is a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\).
Lemma 2.4
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), let \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) be a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Then
holds a.e. on \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\).
Lemma 2.5
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\). If \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\), then \([\hat{g}, \hat{g}]_{s}(\cdot ) \leq C\).
Proof
By \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\), we have \(\hat{g} \in L^{\infty }(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(\operatorname{supp}(\hat{g})\subset K\) for some bounded set K. Observe that
is \(\mathbb{Z}^{d}\)-periodic. So we only need to prove that \([\hat{g}, \hat{g}]_{s}(\cdot ) \leq C\) on \(\mathbb{T}^{d}\). Combining this with the boundedness of \(\operatorname{supp}(\hat{g})\), we can deduce that there are only finitely many nonzero terms \(\vert \hat{g}(\xi +k) \vert ^{2}(1+ \vert \xi +k \vert ^{2})^{s}\) in \(\sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}} \vert \hat{g}(\xi +k) \vert ^{2}(1+ \vert \xi +k \vert ^{2})^{s}\) for \(\xi \in \mathbb{T}^{d}\) and thus \([\hat{g}, \hat{g}]_{s}(\cdot ) \leq C\). The lemma is completed. □
Lemma 2.6
Let \(K \subset \mathbb{R}^{d}\) be a bounded set. Then there exist finite sets \(F_{1} \subset \mathbb{Z}_{+}\) and \(F_{2} \subset \mathbb{Z}^{d}\setminus \{0\}\) such that
for \((j, k) \notin F_{1} \times F_{2}\) with \(k \neq 0\).
Proof
Since A is expansive, we have
Take \(\delta > \operatorname{diamter}(K)\). It follows that there exists \(J_{0}>-\log _{r}\delta \) such that
So \(1\leq \vert k \vert < r^{j} \vert (A^{*})^{j}k \vert \) and it leads to
for \(j>J_{0}\) and \(0 \neq k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\). Below we consider the case \(0 \leq j \leq J_{0}\). By the definition of the operator norm, we get
for \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\). Again using (2.5), we have
if \(\vert k \vert >(\max_{0 \leq j \leq J_{0}} \Vert (A^{*})^{-j} \Vert )\delta \). Take
and
3 The characterization of NWBFs
In this section, we focus on characterizing a NWBFs in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ))\). For this purpose, we first give two lemmas.
Lemma 3.1
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), let \(\{T_{k}\psi _{0}: k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\} \cup \{T_{k}\psi _{l}: k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}, 1 \leq l \leq L\}\) be a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\). Then
for \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\).
Proof
Applying Lemma 2.3, we obtain
where \(E_{0}(\cdot )=\sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}}\hat{g}(\xi +k) \overline{\hat{\psi }_{0}(\xi +k)}\) and \(E_{l, j}(\cdot )=\sum_{k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}}\hat{g}((A^{*})^{j}( \xi +k))\overline{\hat{\psi }_{l}(\xi +k)}\). Note that \(\{T_{k}\psi _{0}: k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\}\) is a Bessel sequence in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\), then we have \(\vert E_{0}(\cdot ) \vert \leq [\hat{g}, \hat{g}]^{\frac{1}{2}}_{-s}(\cdot )[ \hat{\psi }_{0}, \hat{\psi }_{0}]^{\frac{1}{2}}_{s}(\cdot )<\infty \) by Lemma 2.2 (i) and Lemma 2.5. It follows that
and thus
by the Fubini–Tonelli theorem. Furthermore, we have
since \([\hat{g}, \hat{g}]_{-s}(\cdot )[\hat{\psi }_{0}, \hat{\psi }_{0}]_{s}( \cdot )\) is essentially bounded by Lemma 2.2. It follows that
Below we calculate \(I_{2}\) to finish the proof. Define g̃ by \(\hat{\tilde{g}}(\cdot )=\hat{g}((A^{*})^{j}\cdot )\), then we deduce that
by \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\) and Lemma 2.5. So \(\vert E_{l, j}(\cdot ) \vert \leq [\hat{g}((A^{*})^{j}\cdot ), \hat{g}((A^{*})^{j} \cdot )]^{\frac{1}{2}}_{-s}(\cdot ) [\hat{\psi }_{l}, \hat{\psi }_{l}]^{ \frac{1}{2}}_{s}(\cdot )<\infty \) and thus
Take K as a bounded set in \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) such that \(\operatorname{supp}(\hat{g}) \subset K\). By Lemma 2.6, we have
where \(F_{1} \subset \mathbb{Z}_{+}\) and \(F_{2} \subset \mathbb{Z}^{d}\setminus \{0\}\) are two finite sets. It follows that
Denote \(S=\bigcup_{k \in F_{2} \cup \{0\}} (\bigcup_{j \in F_{1}}(A^{*})^{-j}K+k )\). Then we deduce that
for each \((j, k) \in F_{1} \times F_{2}\). Also observe the fact \(1 \leq (\max_{\xi \in S}(1+ \vert \xi \vert ^{2})^{-s} )(1+ \vert \xi \vert ^{2})^{s}\) for \(\xi \in S\). It follows that
Combining the above formula, then we have
by the definition of \(\kappa (k)\). It leads to (3.1) by (3.2), (3.3) and (3.4). The lemma is proved. □
Lemma 3.2
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), let \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) be Bessel sequences in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively. Then
for \(f, g \in {\mathcal{D}}\).
Proof
Since \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) are Bessel sequences in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively, the expression of (3.5) is meaningful. According to an argument similar to Lemma 3.1, we can deduce that
Observe that
which is bounded by Lemma 2.2 (i). Then we deduce that
and thus
Next we discuss \(J_{2}\) into two parts: the \(k=0\) term and \(k \neq 0\) term. By Lemma 2.4 and the Cauchy–Schwartz inequality, we have
It follows that
Take a compact set \(K \in \mathbb{R}^{d}\) such that \(\operatorname{supp}(\hat{f})\cap \operatorname{supp}(\hat{g})\subset K\). Applying Lemma 2.6, we have
where \(F_{1}\subset \mathbb{Z}_{+}\) and \(F_{2}\subset \mathbb{Z}^{d}\setminus \{0\}\) are two finite sets. Using an argument similar to \(I_{2}\) in Lemma 3.1, we obtain
for \((j, k) \in F_{1}\times F_{2}\), where \(S=\bigcup_{k \in F_{2} \cup \{0\}} (\bigcup_{j \in F_{1}}(A^{*})^{-j}K+k )\). According to (3.8) and (3.10), we have
where we replace \((A^{*})^{j}k\) by \(k^{\prime }\) in the last step. Collecting (3.6), (3.7) and (3.11), we obtain (3.5). The lemma is completed. □
The next theorem presents a characterization of NWBFs in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ) )\) via a pair of equations.
Theorem 3.1
Given \(s \in \mathbb{R}\), let \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(FH^{-s}(\Omega )\) be reducing subspaces of \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively, \(\psi _{0} \in FH^{s}(\Omega )\), \(\tilde{\psi }_{0} \in FH^{-s}(\Omega )\), and \(\Psi \subset FH^{s}(\Omega )\), \(\tilde{\Psi }\subset FH^{-s}(\Omega )\). Suppose that \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) are Bessel sequences in \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(FH^{-s}(\Omega )\), respectively. Then \((X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi ), X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi }) )\) is an NWBFs in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ) )\) if and only if
Proof
Since \({\mathcal{D}} \cap FH^{s}(\Omega )\) is dense in \(FH^{s}(\Omega )\),
is an NWBFs in \((FH^{s}(\Omega ), FH^{-s}(\Omega ) )\) if and only if
for \(f \in {\mathcal{D}}\cap FH^{s}(\Omega )\) and \(g \in {\mathcal{D}}\cap FH^{-s}(\Omega )\), equivalently,
for \(f, g \in {\mathcal{D}}\) due to the fact \({\mathcal{D}}\cap FH^{s}(\Omega )=\{(\hat{h}\chi _{\Omega })^{\vee }: h \in {\mathcal{D}}\}\). In view of \(X^{s}(\psi _{0}; \Psi )\) and \(X^{-s}(\tilde{\psi }_{0}; \tilde{\Psi })\) being Bessel sequences in \(H^{s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) and \(H^{-s}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\), respectively, we know that the expression of (3.13) is well-defined. By Lemma 3.2, (3.13) can be rewritten as
for \(f,g \in {\mathcal{D}}\). Obviously, (3.12) leads to (3.14). Now, to finish the proof, we prove the converse statement. Assume that (3.14) holds. Applying the Cauchy–Schwartz inequality, we get
for each \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\) by Lemma 2.4. Thus the series \(\hat{\psi }_{0}(\cdot )\overline{\hat{\tilde{\psi }}_{0}(\cdot +k)}+ \sum_{l=1}^{L}\sum_{j=0}^{\kappa (k)} \hat{\psi }_{l}((A^{*})^{-j} \cdot ) \overline{\hat{\tilde{\psi }}_{l}((A^{*})^{-j}(\cdot +k))}\) converges absolutely a.e. on \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) and belongs to \(L^{\infty }(\mathbb{R}^{d})\) for every \(k \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\). So almost all points in \(\mathbb{R}^{d}\) are its Lebesgue points. Next, we deal with it for two cases. When \(k=0\). Let \(\xi _{0}\neq 0\) be a Lebesgue point of \(\hat{\psi }_{0}(\cdot )\overline{\hat{\tilde{\psi }}_{0}(\cdot )}+\sum_{l=1}^{L}\sum_{j=0}^{\infty }\hat{\psi }_{l}((A^{*})^{-j} \cdot )\overline{\hat{\tilde{\psi }}_{l}((A^{*})^{-j}\cdot )}\) and \(\chi _{\Omega }(\cdot )\). For \(0 <\epsilon <\frac{1}{2}\), take f and g such that
in (3.14), where \(B(\xi _{0}, \epsilon )=\{\xi \in \mathbb{R}^{d}: \vert \xi -\xi _{0} \vert < \epsilon \}\). Then
and letting \(\epsilon \rightarrow 0\) we obtain
The case of \(k \neq 0\): we fix \(0 \neq k_{0} \in \mathbb{Z}^{d}\), take f and g such that
in (3.14), where \(0 < \epsilon <\frac{1}{2}\). Then
letting \(\epsilon \rightarrow 0\) and applying the Lebesgue differentiation theorem, we obtain
Due to the arbitrariness of \(\xi _{0}\) and \(k_{0}\), we obtain (3.12). The theorem is proved. □
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
References
Atreas, N., Melas, A., Stavropoulos, T.: Affine dual frames and extension principles. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 36, 51–62 (2014)
Benedetto, J., Li, S.: The theory of multiresolution analysis frames and applications to filter banks. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 5, 389–427 (1998)
Borup, L., Gribonval, R., Nielsen, M.: Tight wavelet frames in Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces. J. Funct. Spaces Appl. 2, 227–252 (2004)
Borup, L., Gribonval, R., Nielsen, M.: Bi-framelet systems with few vanishing moments characterize Besov spaces. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 17, 3–28 (2004)
Bownik, M.: Tight frames of multidimensional wavelets. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 3, 525–542 (1997)
Chui, C.K., He, W., Stockler, J.: Nonstationary tight wavelet frames. II. Unbounded intervals. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 18, 25–66 (2005)
Cohen, A., Daubechies, I., Feauveau, J.-C.: Biorthogonal bases of compactly supported wavelets. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 45, 485–560 (1992)
Dai, X., Diao, Y., Gu, Q., Han, D.: Frame wavelets in subspaces of \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R} ^{d})\). Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 130, 3259–3267 (2002)
Daubechies, I., Han, B., Ron, A., Shen, Z.: Framelets, MRA-based constructions of wavelet frames. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 14, 1–46 (2003)
Duffin, R.J., Scaeffer, A.C.: A class of nonharmonic Fourier series. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 72, 341–366 (1952)
Ehler, M.: The multiresolution structure of pairs of dual wavelet frames for a pair of Sobolev spaces. Jaen J. Approx. 2, 193–214 (2010)
Han, B.: Pairs of frequency-based nonhomogeneous dual wavelet frames in the distribution space. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 29, 330–353 (2010)
Han, B.: Nonhomogeneous wavelet systems in high dimensions. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 32, 169–196 (2012)
Han, B., Shen, Z.: Compactly supported symmetric \(C^{\infty }\) wavelets with spectral approximation order. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 40, 905–938 (2008)
Han, B., Shen, Z.: Dual wavelet frames and Riesz bases in Sobolev spaces. Constr. Approx. 29, 369–406 (2009)
Han, B., Shen, Z.: Characterization of Sobolev spaces of arbitrary smoothness using nonstationary tight wavelet frames. Isr. J. Math. 172, 371–398 (2009)
Jia, R.-Q., Wang, J.Z., Zhou, D.-X.: Compactly supported wavelet bases for Sobolev spaces. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 15, 224–241 (2003)
Li, Y.-Z., Zhang, J.-P.: Nonhomogeneous dual wavelet frames and mixed oblique extension principles in Sobolev spaces. Appl. Anal. 97, 1049–1073 (2018)
Li, Y.-Z., Zhang, J.-P.: Extension principles for affine dual frames in reducing subspaces. Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal. 46, 177–191 (2019)
Li, Y.F., Yang, S.Z., Yuan, D.H.: Bessel multiwavelet sequences and dual multiframelets in Sobolev spaces. Adv. Comput. Math. 38, 491–529 (2013)
Ron, A., Shen, Z.: Affine systems in \(L^{2}(\mathbb{R}^{d})\): the analysis of the analysis operator. J. Funct. Anal. 148, 408–447 (1997)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the reviewers for carefully reviewing this manuscript and for providing valuable comments, which greatly improve its quality.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11601290, 11961072).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally in the writing this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Jia, HF., Zhang, J. A characterization of nonhomogeneous wavelet bi-frames for reducing subspaces of Sobolev spaces. J Inequal Appl 2021, 55 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-021-02586-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-021-02586-y