Abstract
In this work, some numerical radius inequalities based on the recent Dragomir extension of Furuta’s inequality are obtained. Some particular cases are also provided. Among others, the celebrated Kittaneh inequality reads: . It is proved that , which improves on the Kittaneh inequality for symmetric and non-symmetric Hilbert space operators. Other related improvements to well-known inequalities in literature are also provided.
MSC:
47A30; 47A12; 15A60; 47A63
1. Introduction
Let be the Banach algebra of all bounded linear operators defined on a complex Hilbert space with the identity operator in . When , we identify with the algebra of n-by-n complex matrices. The cone of n-by-n positive semidefinite matrices is then . This is adopted for all matrices, whether self-adjoint (symmetric) or not.
The numerical range of a bounded linear operator T on a Hilbert space is the image of the unit sphere of associated with the operator under the quadratic form . More precisely, we have
Furthermore, the numerical radius is
The spectral radius of an operator T is indicated as
We recall that the usual operator norm of an operator T is defined as
and
It is well-known that the numerical radius is not submultiplicative, but it satisfies
for all . In particular, if T and S commute, then
Moreover, if T and S are normal, then is submultiplicative .
The absolute value of the operator T is denoted by . Then we have It is convenient to mention that the numerical radius norm is weakly unitarily invariant, i.e., for all unitary U. Furthermore, let us not miss the chance to mention the important properties that and for every .
A popular problem is the following: does the numerical radius of the product of operators commute, i.e., for any operators ?
This problem has been given serious attention by many authors and in several resources (see [1], for example). Fortunately, it has been shown recently that for any bounded linear operators , and always have the same numerical radius for all rank one if and only if is a multiple of a unitary operator for some . This fact was proved by Chien et al. in [2]. For other related problems involving numerical ranges and radiuses, see [2,3] as well as the elegant work of Li [4] and the references therein. For more classical and recent properties of numerical range and radiuses, see [2,3,4] and the comprehensive books [5,6,7].
On the other hand, is well-known to define an operator norm on , which is equivalent to the operator norm . Moreover, we have
for any . The inequality is sharp.
After that, in 2005, the same author in [9] proved that
These inequalities were also reformulated and generalized in [10] but in terms of Cartesian decomposition. Both of them have been generalized recently in [11,12], respectively.
This result was also recently generalized by Sattari et al. in [15]. This result was also recently generalized by Sattari et al. in [15] and Alomari in [16,17,18,19]. For more recent results about the numerical radius, see the recent monograph study in [14,20,21,22].
According to the Schwarz inequality for positive operators, for any positive operator A in , we have
for any vectors .
In 1951, Reid [23] proved an inequality, which in some senses considered a variant of the Schwarz inequality. In fact, he proved that for all operators such that A is positive and is self-adjoint, then
for all . In [24], Halmos presented his stronger version of the Reid inequality (7) by substituting for .
In 1952, Kato [25] introduced a companion inequality of (6), called the mixed Schwarz inequality, which asserts
for every operators and any vectors , where .
In 1988, Kittaneh [26] proved a very interesting extension combining both the Halmos–Reid Inequality (2) and the mixed Schwarz Inequality (3). His result says that
for any vectors , where such that and are nonnegative continuous functions defined on satisfying that . Clearly, if we choose and with , then we may refer to (8). Moreover, choosing , some manipulations refer to the Halmos version of the Reid inequality. The cartesian decomposition form of (9) was recently proved by Alomari in [16].
In 1994, Furuta [27] proved another attractive generalization of Kato’s inequality (3), as follows:
for any and with .
The inequality (5) was generalized for any with by Dragomir in [22]. Indeed, as noted by Dragomir, the condition was assumed by Furuta to fit with the Heinz–Kato inequality, which reads:
for any and , where A and B are positive operators such that and for any .
In the same work [22], Dragomir provides a useful extension of Furuta’s inequality, as follows:
for any and any vectors . The equality in (11) holds iff the vectors and are linearly dependent in .
Indeed, since and , the Inequality (11) can be rewritten as
If one setting (U is unitary), , and such that , then we recapture (10).
Based on the most recent Dragomir extension of Furuta’s inequality, various numerical radius inequalities are derived in this paper. Additionally, several specific examples are given.
2. Lemmas
2.1. Preliminaries
In order to prove our main result, we need the following Lemmas:
Lemma 1.
Let , and be a unit vector. Then, the operator Jensen’s inequality states that
Kittaneh and Manasrah [28] obtained the following result, which is a refinement of the scalar Young inequality.
Lemma 2.
Let and such that Then we have
Manasrah and Kittaneh have generalized (15) in [29], as follows:
Lemma 3.
If , and such that then for
where . In particular, if , then we have
For , we obtain
Lemma 4
([30]). Let f be a twice differentiable function on . If f is convex such that , then we have
Lemma 5
([31]). Let f be a convex function defined on a real interval I. Then for every self-adjoint operator whose , we have
for all vectors .
2.2. Extensions of the Dragomir—Furuta Inequality
In this section, we provide some key lemmas that play the main role in the proof of our main results.
Lemma 6.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then
for all vectors .
Proof.
Employing the monotonicity and convexity of f for the Inequality (6), we have
for all vectors , which proves the result. □
Corollary 1.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then we have
for all vectors and all such that .
Proof.
Let , , and such that in (17), then we have
also, we have and , and this proves the required result. □
Lemma 7.
Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then we have
for all vectors .
Proof.
From (6), we obtain
for all vectors . □
Corollary 2.
Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then, we have
for all vectors .
Proof.
The proof proceeds similarly to the proof of Corollary 1, taking into account Lemma 7. □
Lemma 8.
Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then, we have
for all . In particular, we have
for all vectors .
Proof.
Since f is increasing and convex, then by applying Lemma 3, with and , we obtain
for all vectors . □
Corollary 3.
Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then, we have
As a particular case, we have
for all vectors .
Proof.
The proof of (19) proceeds similarly to the proof of Corollary 1, taking into account Lemma 8. □
3. Numerical Radius Inequalities
In this section, we provide some numerical radius inequalities. Let us begin with the following key result.
Theorem 1.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then
where .
Proof.
Let in (17), then we obtain
Taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 4.
Let . Then we have
Proof.
Take in Theorem 1, in such a way that the required would be ‘2’. □
Corollary 5.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then we have
where , for all such that .
Proof.
Let in (18), we obtain
Taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 6.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then we have
where .
Proof.
Setting and in (25), we establish the stated result. □
Corollary 7.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then we have
where .
Proof.
Setting and in (25), we obtain the desired result. □
Corollary 8.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing and convex function on . If f is twice differentiable such that , then we have
where .
Proof.
Setting in (25), the desired result follows. □
Theorem 2.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then, we have
For all such that and all such that , where
Proof.
Let in (19), we obtain
Taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 9.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then we have
For all such that and all such that , where
Proof.
Let in (20), and then taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 10.
Let . Then we have
for all such that , where
for all such that .
Proof.
Applying Corollary 9 for the convex increasing function , , we obtain the stated result. □
Remark 1.
In particular, for , we have
for all .
Example 1.
Theorem 3.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then we have
where
As a special case, we have
Proof.
Let in (21), we obtain
Taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the required result. The particular case follows by setting in (22) and then taking the supremum over all unit vectors . □
Corollary 11.
Let . Then, we have
where
In this particular case, we have
Proof.
Applying Theorem 3 for , we obtain the required result. □
Corollary 12.
Let . Let f be a positive, increasing, convex and supermultiplicative function on , i.e., for all . Then we have
where
Proof.
The proof follows by considering , , and such that in (32). □
Corollary 13.
Let . Then we have
for all such that , where
Proof.
Setting in Corollary 12, we obtain the required result. □
Remark 2.
Example 2.
The numerical radius inequality of special type of Hilbert space operators for commutators can be established as follows:
Lemma 9.
Let . Then, for all , the following inequality:
holds for all vectors .
Proof.
Employing the triangle inequality and the Inequality (6), we have
for all vectors , which proves the result. □
Corollary 14.
Let . Then, the following inequality:
holds for all .
Proof.
Let in (40) and then taking the supremum over all unit vectors , we obtain the mentioned result. □
Corollary 15.
Let . Then we have
for all vectors .
Proof.
In special cases, a particular choice of in the Corollaries 14 and 15 would give the following result:
Corollary 16.
Let , such that and . Then we have
for all .
Proof.
Let , , and such that in (42), then we have
also, we have and . □
Corollary 17.
Let , such that and . Then we have
Proof.
It is enough to consider , , and such that in (42). □
Remark 3.
Setting in (44), we obtain
In particular, take , we obtain
Example 3.
Remark 4.
Setting in (45), we obtain
In particular, take , we obtain
4. Conclusions
In this work, some numerical radius inequalities based on the recent Dragomir extension of Furuta’s inequality are obtained. Some particular cases are also provided. Among others, the celebrated Kittaneh inequality reads:
It is proven that
which improves the Kittaneh inequality for symmetric and non-symmetric Hilbert space operators. Other related improvements to well-known inequalities in literature are also provided. Namely, inequalities for the numerical radius of the product of several Hilbert space operators are refined and improved.
Author Contributions
Methodology, M.W.A., G.B. and C.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
The funds are given by “Dunǎrea de Jos” University of Galati, Romania.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Acknowledgments
Warm thanks are given to the two reviewers for the constructive comments and overall improvement of the paper.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Gustafson, K.E.; Rao, D.K. Numerical Range; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Chien, M.-T.; Gau, H.-L.; Li, C.-K.; Tsai, M.-C.; Wang, K.-Z. Product of operators and numerical range. Linear Multilinear Algebra 2016, 64, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chien, M.-T.; Ko, C.-L.; Nakazato, H. On the numerical ranges of matrix products. Appl. Math. Lett. 2010, 23, 732–737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.-K.; Tsai, M.-C.; Wang, K.-Z.; Wong, N.-C. The spectrum of the product of operators, and the product of their numerical ranges. Linear Algebra Appl. 2015, 469, 487–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhatia, R. Matrix Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Horn, R.A.; Johnson, C.R. Matrix Analysis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Horn, R.A.; Johnson, C.R. Topics in Matrix Analysis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1991. [Google Scholar]
- Kittaneh, F. A numerical radius inequality and an estimate for the numerical radius of the Frobenius companion matrix. Stud. Math. 2003, 158, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kittaneh, F. Numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Stud. Math. 2005, 168, 73–80. Available online: https://eudml.org/doc/284514 (accessed on 1 June 2022). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- El-Haddad, M.; Kittaneh, F. Numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. II. Stud. Math. 2007, 182, 133–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alomari, M.W. On the Davis—Wielandt radius inequalities of Hilbert space operators. Linear Multilinear Algebra 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alomari, M.W.; Shebrawi, K.; Chesneau, C. Some generalized Euclidean operator radius inequalities. Axioms 2022, 11, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamazaki, T. On upper and lower bounds of the numerical radius and an equality condition. Stud. Math. 2007, 178, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dragomir, S.S. Some inequalities for the norm and the numerical radius of linear operator in Hilbert spaces. Tamkang J. Math. 2008, 39, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sattari, M.; Moslehian, M.S.; Yamazaki, T. Some genaralized numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Linear Algebra Appl. 2014, 470, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Alomari, M.W. On the generalized mixed Schwarz inequality. PIMM 2020, 46, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alomari, M.W. Refinements of some numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Linear Multilinear Algebra 2021, 69, 1208–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alomari, M.W. Numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 2021, 15, 111. Available online: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.05710 (accessed on 1 June 2022). [CrossRef]
- Alomari, M.W.; Chesneau, C. Bounding the zeros of polynomials using the Frobenius companion matrix partitioned by the Cartesian decomposition. Algorithms 2022, 15, 184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dragomir, S.S. Inequalities for the Numerical Radius of Linear Operators in Hilbert Spaces; Briefs in Mathematics; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Dragomir, S.S. Power inequalities for the numerical radius of a product of two operators in Hilbert spaces. Sarajevo J. Math. 2009, 5, 269–278. [Google Scholar]
- Dragomir, S.S. Some inequalities generalizing Kato’s and Furuta’s results. Filomat 2014, 28, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reid, W. Symmetrizable completely continuous linear tarnsformations in Hilbert space. Duke Math. 1951, 18, 41–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halmos, P.R. A Hilbert Space Problem Book; Van Nostrand Company, Inc.: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1967. [Google Scholar]
- Kato, T. Notes on some inequalities for linear operators. Math. Ann. 1952, 125, 208–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kittaneh, F. Notes on some inequalities for Hilbert Space operators. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 1988, 24, 283–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Furuta, T. An extension of the Heinz—Kato theorem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1994, 120, 785–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kittaneh, F.; Manasrah, Y. Improved Young and Heinz inequalities for matrices. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2010, 361, 262–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Al-Manasrah, Y.; Kittaneh, F. A generalization of two refined Young inequalities. Positivity 2015, 19, 757–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moradi, H.R.; Furuichi, S.; Mitroi, F.C.; Naseri, R. An extension of Jensen’s operator inequality and its application to Young inequality. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fs. Nat. Ser. A Mat. 2019, 113, 605–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pećarixcx, J.; Furuta, T.; Hot, J.M.; Seo, Y. Mond-Pečarić Method in Operator Inequalities; Inequalities for Bounded Selfadjoint Operators on a Hilbert Space, Monographs in Inequalities; Element: Zagreb, Croatia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Aujla, J.; Silva, F. Weak majorization inequalities and convex functions. Linear Algebra Appl. 2003, 369, 217–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).