Partial difference equations over compact Abelian groupstim/PDceEnotes.pdf · 2017. 7. 17. · dz...
Transcript of Partial difference equations over compact Abelian groupstim/PDceEnotes.pdf · 2017. 7. 17. · dz...
-
Partial difference equations over compact Abelian
groups
Tim Austin
Courant Institute, NYUNew York, NY, [email protected]
-
SETTING
Z a compact (metrizable) Abelian groupU1, . . . , Uk closed subgroups of Z
F(Z) {measurable functions Z −→ T = R/Z}(up to equality a.e.)∫
Z
· dz integral w.r.t. Haar probability measure
If w ∈ Z, f ∈ F(Z) then dwf(z) := f(z − w)− f(z)— discrete analog of directional derivative.
If f : Z −→ C, then ∇wf(z) := f(z − w)f(z)— multiplicative variant
-
PARTIAL DIFFERENCE EQUATION
Describe those f ∈ F(Z) for which
du1 · · · dukf(z) ≡ 0 ∀u1 ∈ U1, . . . , uk ∈ Uk.
ZERO-SUM PROBLEM
Describe those f1, . . . , fk ∈ F(Z) s.t.
duifi(z) ≡ 0 ∀ui ∈ Ui, i = 1,2, . . . , k
and
f1(z) + f2(z) + · · ·+ fk(z) ≡ 0.
Will focus on PDceEs in this talk.
-
MOTIVATION: SZEMERÉDI’S THEOREM
A k-AP in Z is a set of the form
{z, z + r, . . . , z + (k − 1)r} for some z, r ∈ Z.
It is non-degenerate if all k entries are distinct.
Theorem (Szemerédi ’75).∀δ > 0 ∀k ≥ 1 ∃N0 = N0(δ, k) ≥ 1 such that if N ≥ N0 and E ⊆ ZNwith |E| = δN , then
E ⊇ some non-degenerate k-AP.
-
MULTI-DIMENSIONAL ANALOG
Fix F = {v1, . . . , vk} ⊂ Zd, all vi distinct.
If z ∈ ZdN and r ∈ ZN , let
z + r · F = {z + rv1, . . . , z + rvk} mod N.Call this an F -constellation. It is non-degenerate if |z + r · F | = k.
Theorem (Furstenberg and Katznelson).∀δ > 0 ∀d, k ≥ 1 ∃N0 = N0(δ, k, d) ≥ 1 such that if N ≥ N0 andE ⊆ ZdN with |E| = δN
d then
E ⊇ some non-degenerate F -constn.
Szemerédi’s Theorem is special case
F = {0,1, . . . , k − 1} ⊂ Z.
-
Many proofs now known, using graph theory (Szemerédi), ergodic theory(Furstenberg), hypergraph theory (Nagle-Rödl-Schacht, Gowers, Tao) orharmonic analysis/additive combinatorics (Roth, Gowers).
Roth’s and Gowers’ harmonic-analysis proof gives much the best boundon N0(δ, k).
Some proofs generalize to higher dimensions. Roth-Gowers approach hasnot been generalized, and the known dependence of N0(δ, k, d) is gener-ally much worse when d ≥ 2.
-
SKETCH OF ROTH-GOWERS APPROACH
Will formulate this for multi-dimensional theorem as far as possible.
Important idea: estimate the fraction of all F -constellations that are con-tained in E. Let Z = ZdN .
Suppose φ1, . . . , φk : Z −→ C, and set
Λ(φ1, . . . , φk) :=∫ZN
∫ZdN
φ1(z + rv1)φ2(z + rv2) · · ·φk(z + rvk) dzdr.
Interpretation: if E ⊆ Z and φ1 = . . . = φk = 1E, then
Λ(1E, . . . ,1E) = P(random F -constn. lies in E
).
-
Idea is to show that if |E| = δN then
Λ(1E, . . . ,1E) ≥ const(δ, k) > 0.
Since
P(randomly-chosen F -constn. is degenerate
)−→ 0
as N −→∞, this proves the theorem.
-
Key tool for estimating Λ: directional Gowers uniformity norms.
Can formulate these for any compact U1, . . . , Uk ≤ Z:
If φ : Z −→ C, then
‖φ‖U(U1,...,Uk) :=( ∫U1
∫U2
· · ·∫Uk
∫Z
∇u1 · · ·∇ukφ(z) dzduk · · ·du1)2−k
.
-
For example,
‖φ‖4U(U1,U2) =∫U1
∫U2
∫Z
φ(z − u1 − u2)φ(z − u1)φ(z − u2)φ(z) dzdu1du2.
-
Theorem (Gowers-Cauchy-Schwartz inequality).
|Λ(φ1, . . . , φk)| ≤ ‖φ1‖U(V12,...,V1k) · ‖φ2‖∞ · · · ‖φk‖∞,
where Vij := ZN · (vi − vj) ≤ ZdN for 1 ≤ i, j ≤ k.
Proved by repeated use of Cauchy-Schwartz inequality.
Corollary. If
‖1E − δ‖U(V12,...,V1k) ≈ 0,‖1E − δ‖U(V21,V23...,V2k) ≈ 0,
...
‖1E − δ‖U(Vk1,...,Vk,k−1) ≈ 0,
then Λ(1E, . . . ,1E) ≈ δk, =⇒ many F -constellations in E if N is large.
-
Intuition: in this case, E ‘behaves like a random set’, and therefore ‘con-tains many F -constellations by chance’.
Idea for full proof: if
‖1E − δ‖U(U1,...,Uk−1) 6≈ 0
for one of the lists of subgroups above, then deduce some special ‘struc-ture’ for E, which implies positive probability of F -constellations for a dif-ferent reason (not ‘by chance’). Proof is finished once have result for both‘random’ and ‘structured’ E.
-
In one-dimension, have: Inverse Theorem for Gowers norms.
In that case, Vij = ZN = Z for every i, j.
Roughly: If ‖φ‖∞ ≤ 1 and ‖φ‖U(Z,...,Z) ≥ η > 0, then ∃ a ‘locally polyno-mial phase function’ ψ : Z −→ S1 s.t.∣∣∣∣ ∫
Z
φ(z)ψ(z) dz∣∣∣∣ ≥ const(η) > 0.
Won’t define ‘locally polynomial phase functions’ here.
-
Related toy problem: suppose |φ(z)| ≤ 1 ∀z but∫Z
· · ·∫Z
∇u1 · · ·∇uk−1φ(z) dzdu1 · · ·duk−1 = 1.
This is possible only if φ : Z −→ S1 and
∇w1 · · ·∇wk−1φ(z) ≡ 1.
Exercise: ifZ = ZN ,N � k andN prime, this occurs iff φ = exp(2πif/N)for some polynomial f : ZN −→ ZN of degree ≤ k − 2.
There are more technical wrinkles for other Z, but still get some slightly-generalized notion of ‘polynomial of degree ≤ k − 2’.
-
In higher dimensions no good inverse theorem known for directional Gow-ers norms.
Simplest toy case: describe those φ for which |φ(z)| ≤ 1 and
‖φ‖U(U1,...,Uk) = 1.
As before, this is equivalent to φ : Z −→ S1 and
∇u1 · · ·∇ukφ ≡ 1 ∀u1 ∈ U1, . . . , uk ∈ Uk.
Writing φ = exp(2πif) with f : Z −→ T, this is exactly the partial differ-ence equation we started with.
-
EXAMPLES OF PDceEs AND SOLUTIONS
Let us write our partial difference equation as
dU1 · · · dUkf ≡ 0.
Example 1 If U1 = . . . = Uk = Z, then this is the case of ‘polynomialphase functions’ mentioned before.
Example 2 There are always some obvious solutions: can take
f = f1 + . . .+ fk,
where dUifi = 0 (equivalently, fi is lifted from Z/Ui −→ T).
-
Definition. If f solves
dU1 · · · dUkf ≡ 0,
then let’s say f is degenerate if can decompose it as
f = f1 + · · ·+ fk,
where
dU2dU3 · · · dUkf1 = dU1dU3 · · · dUkf2 = . . . = dU1 · · · dUk−1fk = 0.
– that is, each fi satisfies a simpler (and stronger) equation.
One is interested in classifying non-degenerate solutions, modulo degen-erate ones.
-
Example 3 On Z = T3, let f(θ1, θ2, θ3) = b{θ1}+ {θ2}c · θ3.
(For θ ∈ T, {θ} is its unique representative in [0,1), and b·c = integer part.)
Then
f(θ1, θ2, θ3)− f(θ1, θ2, θ3 + θ4) + f(θ1, θ2 + θ3, θ4)− f(θ1 + θ2, θ3, θ4) + f(θ2, θ3, θ4) = 0
Think of these as five different functions of (θ1, θ2, θ3, θ4) ∈ T4.
By differencing, we can annihilate the last four terms, leaving
dU1dU2dU3dU4f = 0
for suitable U1, . . . , U4 ≤ T4.
-
f(θ1, θ2, θ3)− f(θ1, θ2, θ3 + θ4) + f(θ1, θ2 + θ3, θ4)− f(θ1 + θ2, θ3, θ4) + f(θ2, θ3, θ4) = 0
Disclosure: this equation is not arbitrary. It is the equation for a 3-cocyclein group cohomology H3m(T,T).
One can prove that if f were degenerate, then it would be a coboundary:i.e., represent the zero class in H3m(T,T).
But H3m(T,T) ∼= Z, and I chose f above to be a generator. Hence non-degenerate.
-
More generally, Hpm(T,T) ∼= Z for all odd p. For each odd p, choosinga generator gives a non-degenerate solution to a PDceE with p + 1 sub-groups.
This leads to many new ‘cohomological’ examples.
-
Example 4 Let Z = T2 × T2, and define σ, c : Z −→ T by
σ(s, x) = {s1}{x2} − b{x2}+ {s2}c{x1 + s1} mod 1and
c(s, t) = {s1}{t2} − {t1}{s2} mod 1
Then
σ(s, x+ t)− σ(s, x) = σ(t, x+ s)− σ(t, x) + c(s, t).Interpret this as a zero-sum problem on T2 × T2 × T2.
As for Example 3, repeated differencing annihilates all but one term, leav-ing a new PDceE for the subgroups
U1 = {(s, t, x) | s = x+ t = 0}, U2 = {(s, t, x) | s = x = 0},
U3 = {(s, t, x) | x+ s = t = 0}, U4 = {(s, t, x) | s = t = 0}.
-
σ(s, x+ t)− σ(s, x) = σ(t, x+ s)− σ(t, x) + c(s, t).
The reveal:
Written multiplicatively (i.e., for maps Z −→ S1), this equation becomes
σ(s, x+ t)
σ(s, x)= c(s, t)
σ(t, x+ s)
σ(t, x).
This is the Conze-Lesigne equation, important in the study of two-stepnilrotations.
Now a more complicated argument shows that σ is a non-degenerate solu-tion to the PDceE. Also: not obtained from a cocycle in group cohomology.
-
SOME POSITIVE RESULTS
Assume U1 + . . . + Uk = Z. (Otherwise, just work on each coset ofU1 + . . .+ Uk separately.)
Let M ⊆ F(Z) be the subgroup of solutions to the PDceE associated toU1, . . . , Uk. It is globally invariant under rotations of Z.
Let M0 ⊆ M be the further subgroup of degenerate solutions. It is alsoglobally Z-invariant.
Lastly, let | · | : T −→ [0,1/2] be distance from 0 in T.
-
Theorem (Small solutions are always degenerate).∀k ≥ 1 ∃η > 0 such that
f ∈M and∫Z|f | < η =⇒ f ∈M0.
Corollary. The quotient M/M0 is a countable discrete group.
-
Theorem (Stability for approximate solutions).∀k ≥ 1 ∀ε > 0 ∃δ > 0 such that if
f ∈ F(Z) and∫U1· · ·∫Uk
∫Z|du1 · · · dukf(z)| < δ
then
∃g ∈M s.t.∫Z|f − g| < ε.
-
Lastly, suppose Z = Td. A function f : Td −→ T is step-polynomial if ∃a partition
Z = P1 ∪ · · · ∪ Pm
such that
• each Pi is defined by linear inequalities in {θi} for (θ1, . . . , θd) ∈ Td,and
• each restriction f |Pi is some polynomial function of ({θi})di=1, evalu-ated mod 1.
-
Theorem (Basic solns are step-polynomial, mod M0). If f ∈M , then
f = f1 + g
for some step-polynomial f1 ∈ M and some g ∈ M0. Also, have boundson ‘complexity’ of f1 that depend only on ‘quantitative smoothness’ of f ,not on choice of Z: this gives a nontrivial result even for Z finite.