Abstract
Time–frequency (or space–phase) analysis plays a key role in signal analysis. In particular, signals that have a very concentrated time–frequency content are of great importance. However, the uncertainty principle sets a limitation to the possible simultaneous concentration of a function and its Dunkl–Bessel transform. For this purpose, we introduce and study a new transformation called Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform. For this transformation, we define the Toeplitz-type (or time–frequency localization) operators, in order to localize signals on the time–frequency plane. We study these operators; in particular, we give criteria for their boundedness and Schatten class properties. Then, using the special class of concentration operators, which are compact and self-adjoint, we show that their eigenfunctions are maximally time–frequency-concentrated in the region of interest.
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
The Gabor theory has gained respectable status in the field of time–frequency analysis in a short period of time, since the Gabor transform is superior to the Fourier transform, because of its ability to measure the time–frequency variations of a signal at different time–frequency resolutions.
However, the uncertainty principles in Fourier analysis set a limit to the maximal time–frequency resolution. To overcome this problem, Daubechies [1] introduced the concept of localization operators, which have been shown to be effective in localizing signals on the time–frequency plane. These operators are also called Toeplitz operators or short-time Fourier multipliers.
Extensive research on localization operators has been conducted, notably by Slepian and Pollak [2] in the classical setting, with further contributions by Landau and Pollak [3,4], as well as by Slepian [5,6]. Many generalizations and extensions can be found in the literature, such as for the Dunkl transform, the Weinstein transform [7,8,9,10] and the multivariable Bessel transform [11].
To be more precise, we first recall some results related to the Dunkl theory (see [12,13,14]). Let be the Euclidean space equipped with a scalar product and let . For in , let be the reflection in the hyperplane orthogonal to , i.e., for ,
A finite set is called a root system if and for all . For a given root system R, reflections , generate a finite group , called the reflection group associated with R. We fix and define a positive root system . We normalize each as .
A function is called a multiplicity function if it is invariant under the action of W, and we introduce the index as
Throughout this paper, we will assume that for all , and we will denote by the weight function on given by
which is invariant and homogeneous of degree .
The Dunkl operators , , on related to the multiplicity function k and the positive root system are as follows:
Specifically, we see that the Dunkl operators commute pairwise and are skew-symmetric with respect to the W-invariant measure .
If , then the Dunkl–Laplace operator is defined by:
where ∇ and Δ are, respectively, the nabla and Euclidean Laplacian operators.
Like spherical functions on a Riemannian symmetric space, for all , the following system
has a unique analytic solution . This solution is known as the Dunkl kernel (also called nonsymmetric generalized Bessel function). Observe, moreover, that the Dunkl kernel has symmetric arguments and is holomorphic on . This kernel is explicitly known only in very few cases, that include, for example, the rank-one case and the symmetric group .
The Dunkl–Bessel transform [15] is defined by
where
and is the measure on defined by
Here, is the normalized Bessel function and K is the Dunkl kernel.
This transformation generalizes the Fourier transform, the Weinstein transform and the multivariable Bessel transform, and has been studied in several mathematical problems, such as the mean value theorem [15], uncertainty principles [16], wavelet theory [17] and so on.
As for the Fourier transform, the Dunkl–Bessel transform has shown some weakness in the study of signals on the time–frequency plane, and this fact has been illustrated by the various formulations of the uncertainty principle in this setting.
The aim of this paper is to follow Daubechies’ approach, by studying first the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform, and then introducing the Toeplitz operator in this context. We will show some harmonic analysis results for the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform, such as a Parseval-type equality and an inversion formula. Then, we will give criteria on the compactness and boundedness of the introduced Toeplitz operators. As a special case of these operators, we will focus on concentration operators, which are compact and self-adjoint and even trace-class. As in the case of the prolate spheroidal wave functions, we will show that their eigenfunctions are maximally time–frequency-concentrated on the region of interest from the time–frequency plane.
Typical examples of higher dimensional signals include image and video signals. Indeed, a video signal is a sequence of individual video frames, or images. Unlike one-dimensional signals, there are special problems that arise in higher dimensional signals, such as edge detection, target detection and tracking, and special techniques are required to deal with such problems. It is therefore worthwhile to delve into the field of higher dimensional time–frequency analysis both from theoretical and applied perspectives. The theoretical considerations in the proposal shall encompass the formulation of novel tools of time–frequency analysis, particularly well suited for higher dimensional signals arising in numerous scientific pursuits. The application areas shall be primarily within the field of signal and image processing, with special emphasis on distinct sectors such as energy and economics.
The structure of this manuscript is as follow: In Section 2, we define the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform and study its harmonic analysis. Then, we introduce and study the Toeplitz operators in Section 3. Next, we examine the -boundedness and compactness of these operators, under some appropriate conditions on the symbol and the window function. Finally, in Section 4, we investigate some spectral analysis issues related to concentration operators.
2. The Dunkl–Bessel Gabor Transform
We will first recall the basic results on the Dunkl–Bessel transform (cf. [15]). To do this, let and let .
If , then for all we define:
where is the space of functions of class on , even with respect to the last variable. This operator is known as the Dunkl–Bessel–Laplace operator, where is the Dunkl–Laplace operator on and the Bessel operator on given by
The Dunkl–Bessel kernel is given by
where is the normalized Bessel function and K is the Dunkl kernel.
This kernel satisfies the following properties:
- For all and for all , we have
- For all and , we havewhere and
In particular, for all ,
We denote by the space of measurable functions on such that:
where is the measure on defined by
and
If , this space is provided with the following scalar product:
For , the Dunkl–Bessel transform is defined by:
This transformation satisfies the following properties:
- For any ,
- For all such that belongs to , we have
- If we definethen
where is the Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions on , even with respect to the last variable.
Moreover we have the following Plancherel-type and Parseval-type formulas for the Dunkl–Bessel transform.
Proposition 1.
- 1.
- Plancherel’s formula: The Dunkl–Bessel transform is a topological isomorphism from onto itself and for all f in ,In particular, the Dunkl–Bessel transform can be uniquely extended to an isometric isomorphism on .
- 2.
- Parseval’s formula: For all , we have
Next, we will introduce the generalized translation and the convolution operator by the use of the Dunkl–Bessel kernel. That is, the Dunkl–Bessel translation is defined by:
In the following theorem, we recall the main properties of established on the subspace of radial functions in , (see [15]).
Theorem 1.
- 1.
- Let be a nonnegative function. Then, we haveand
- 2.
- For all , , we have
The Dunkl–Bessel convolution product of the two functions is defined by:
This convolution is commutative, associative and satisfies the following properties.
Proposition 2.
Let such that
- 1.
- For all , belongs to and
- 2.
- If and is radial, then such that
- 3.
- If , then the function belongs to if and only if the function belongs to and (19) holds.
- 4.
- If , thenwhere both members are finite or infinite.
Now, to introduce the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform, we will fix some notation: Let and we will denote by , , the space of measurable functions f on satisfying
where .
Definition 1.
For , we define the modulation of any function by
where is the generalized translation operator.
Equality (22) may be easily confirmed by the positivity of the translation operator on radial functions, as shown by Theorem 1. Furthermore, based on (13) and (16), we have for all
For and , we define a new family of functions as follows:
Then,
Definition 2.
Let . Then, the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform , with respect to h, is defined by
for any function .
It can also be expressed via the convolution product (18) as
where for , .
One can easily see that for any and , we have
where
Theorem 2.
Let . Then, for all we have:
- 1.
- The function belongs to such that
- 2.
- A Plancherel-type formula:
- 3.
- A Parseval-type formula:
- 4.
- For any ,
Proof.
Proposition 3.
Let . Then, is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space embedded as a subspace of , with kernel
It is pointwise bounded, that is:
Proof.
By Parseval’s formula (31), we obtain
Then, by Proposition 2, we can easily deduce that for every , the function
belongs to . This achieves the proof. □
Now, in order to state an inversion formula for the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform, we need to establish a few lemmas.
Lemma 1.
For a nonzero function and N a positive integer, we define the functions and by:
and
where
Then, we have
Proof.
By Cauchy–Schwarz’s inequality, the sequence satisfies
Then, by (22),
This achieves the proof. □
Lemma 2.
The function can be written as
Proof.
By Proposition 2, we have
This gives the desired result. □
Lemma 3.
Let h be in and N be any positive integer. Then, for all , we have
where is defined by
Proof.
For all ,
Since by Proposition 2 we have , then by using Young’s inequality and Parseval’s formula, we obtain
and
The proof is complete. □
We will now state the main result of this section.
Theorem 3
(inversion formula). Let such that . Then, for all , the function belongs to and satisfies
3. Toeplitz Operators for the Dunkl-Bessel Gabor Transform
We begin this section by recalling some notions on Schatten–von Neumann classes. We will denote by the set of all infinite sequences of real (or complex) numbers , such that
For , we provide the space with the scalar product
If we denote by the space of bounded operators from into itself, then the singular values of the compact operator are the eigenvalues of the positive self-adjoint operator . In particular, for , the Schatten class is the space of all compact operators whose singular values lie in . This space is equipped with the norm
Notice that is the space of trace-class operators, and is the space of Hilbert–Schmidt operators. Thus, if T is an operator in , and is an orthonormal basis of , then the trace of T is defined by:
In particular, if T is positive, then its trace satisfies
Furthermore, if the positive operator is in , then any compact operator T on is Hilbert–Schmidt. Following that, for any orthonormal basis of , we have
We set , the space of bounded operators equipped with the standard norm:
Now, in order the prove the main results of this section, we will introduce the Toeplitz (or time–frequency) operator into our setting. To do this, let be a measurable function on and h be a radial measurable function on ; then, the Toeplitz operator related to the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform on , is defined by
The last relation is often better understood in a weak sense, that is, for any and , ,
For , the adjoint of the operator is such that
In the remaining part of this section, h is a function in such that
Proposition 4.
If , then is in with
Proposition 5.
If , then the Toeplitz operator is in and we have
Theorem 4.
Let and let . Then, there is a unique bounded linear operator such that
Proof.
For , we consider the operator defined by
Then, by Propositions 4 and 5, we obtain
and
Thus, by the Riesz–Thorin interpolation theorem (see [18] [Theorem 2] and [19] [Theorem 2.11]),
Since (52) is true for arbitrary function f in , then we obtain the desired result. □
The second aim of this section is to prove that the Toeplitz operator
is in the Schatten class .
Proposition 6.
If , then is a Hilbert–Schmidt operator such that
Proof.
Assume that is an orthonormal basis for . Next, by using Parseval’s identity and relations (26), (47) and (48), we obtain
Hence, according to (53) and [19] [Proposition 2.8], the operator belongs to and is then compact. □
Proposition 7.
Let and let Then, the operator is compact.
Proof.
Let be a sequence in that converges to in . Then, Theorem 4 implies
Therefore, in , we have as . Thus, for all j, the operator is compact by Proposition 6. Given that compact operators form a closed subspace of , it follows that is also compact. □
Theorem 5.
Let . Then,
- 1.
- The operator belongs to andwhere is given by
- 2.
- This trace formula occurs:
Proof.
If , then, according to Proposition 6, we have . Moreover, by [19] [Theorem 2.2]), the kernel’s orthogonal complement of has an orthonormal basis , which is made up of eigenvectors of and an orthonormal set in , such that
where the positive singular values of corresponding to are . Next, we obtain
Therefore, using Bessel and Cauchy–Schwarz’s inequalities together with relations (25) and (26), we obtain
Thus,
On the other hand, we have that belongs to , and by (56), we have
Then, using Fubini’s theorem
Thus, by (30),
This allows us to conclude.
Now, assume that is an orthonormal basis for . Then, the operator . Therefore, using (42) and Parseval’s identity,
This achieves the proof. □
Involving Theorem 5 and Proposition 5 and using an interpolation argument (see [19] [Theorems 2.10 and 2.11]), we deduce the following result.
Corollary 1.
If , then the Toeplitz operator belongs to and
Remark 1.
Corollary 2.
If are positive and real-valued, then the trace-class operators are positive, such that for all :
Proof.
If are positive, then (see [20] [Theorem 1]),
Let and . Then, by Remark 1, we obtain the desired result. □
4. Spectral Analysis for the Generalized Concentration Operator
In this section, h will be any function of such that . We define the adjoint of by
We denote by the orthogonal projection from onto and the orthogonal projection from onto the subspace of functions supported in the subset , that is,
where denotes the characteristic function of U.
We define the concentration operator by
where , and U is a subset of with finite measure .
We have , and by (33), the operator can be written as follows
On the other hand, since is the integral kernel of an orthogonal projection, then we have . Therefore,
Moreover, for any orthonormal basis of , the kernel can be represented as follows
4.1. Dunkl–Bessel Gabor Toeplitz Operator
Definition 3.
If is the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform of the function with respect to the window function , then the spectrogram of f is defined by
From the Plancherel-type formula for , we have
Spectrogram (60) is interpreted as a time–frequency energy density of the function , and by (47), we have
Definition 4.
We define the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor Toeplitz operator
by
Proposition 8.
The operator is bounded and positive, satisfying
and
Proof.
For any F in , we have
Since the operator can be written as
then we obtain
Thus,
The proof is complete. □
Proposition 9.
The operator is compact and trace-class, satisfying
where
Proof.
We know that is a positive bounded operator. If is any orthonormal basis for , then is an orthonormal basis for , where . Thus, by (47) and the Fubini’s theorem, we obtain
This gives the desired result. □
Let be the operator defined by . This operator is more convenient than the operator , since its domain is the whole space , and then its spectral properties can be obtained from its integral kernel.
As is positive and trace-class, then by the following decomposition:
it follows that is also positive and trace-class, satisfying
Proposition 10.
The trace of is given by the following relation
Proof.
Since is positive, then
Moreover, as is a reproducing kernel Hilbert space with kernel , then for ,
Therefore, has the integral kernel:
Thus,
where
Hence, by (58), we have
This completes the proof. □
4.2. Eigenvalues and Eigenfunctions
Since the concentration operator is compact and self-adjoint, then the spectral theorem gives the following spectral representation:
where denotes the positive eigenvalues arranged in a non-increasing way and its corresponding orthonormal set of eigenfunctions. As , then by (49) we obtain
Then, by (65), we obtain that the operator can be diagonalized as
where .
Lemma 4.
For all we have
Proof.
By Proposition 3, we have that for any , the function belongs to . Therefore,
If is an orthonormal basis for . Then, is an orthonormal basis of , and then the reproducing kernel can be written as follows
Thus,
The proof is complete. □
Proposition 11.
Let . Define
Then, the eigenvalue distribution has the following estimate:
Proof.
The proof is obtained directly by adaptation of the proof of Lemma 3.3 in [21]. □
4.3. Spectrogram of a Subspace
Given V as a N-dimensional subspace of , then the orthogonal projection onto V, with projection kernel is given by:
where the kernel is defined by
for any orthonormal basis of V.
Definition 5.
The spectrogram of the subspace V of , with respect to the window function h, is denoted by , and is defined by
Lemma 5.
If V is a subspace of , then the spectrogram can be written as
Proof.
We have
That achieves the proof. □
Let be the time–frequency regional concentration of the subspace V in U. Then, it is defined by
By Lemma 5, it can be written as follows
Theorem 6.
The regional concentration is maximized by the N-dimensional signal space , which is composed of the first N eigenfunctions of corresponding to the N greatest eigenvalues , and we have
Proof.
Using the min-max lemma for self-adjoint operators (see [22] [Section 95]), we obtain
Therefore, the number of orthogonal functions with a well-concentrated spectrogram in U is determined by the eigenvalues of . Then, we obtain
The first N eigenfunctions of the time–frequency operator have the best cumulative time–frequency concentration inside U, according to the min-max characterisation of the eigenvalues of compact operators. That is,
Consequently, can be more concentrated in U than any N-dimensional subset V of ; that is,
The proof is complete. □
Remark 2.
The time–frequency concentration of a subspace in U satisfies
4.4. Accumulated Spectrogram
We define the accumulated spectrogram by
where is the smallest integer greater than or equal to and
Then, we obtain
Therefore,
Since
then
satisfies
Consequently, we obtain the following result.
Lemma 6.
If , then we have
Proof.
For , we define . Then, it follows that
Now, since , then
Thus, it follows that
Hence, since , we derive the desired result. □
Notice that when the eigenvalues are around 1. Furthermore, the error bounding the difference between and is given as follows.
Proposition 12.
The following error estimate holds:
Proof.
For any , Lemma 4 implies
where is given by
Since
then
that achieves the proof. □
5. Conclusions and Perspectives
In the present paper, we studied the harmonic analysis related to the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform and proved in particular a Plancherel-type formula and an inversion formula. Next, we introduced the Toeplitz operator in the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor setting, and studied its boundedness, compactness and Schatten class properties. Finally, we studied the spectral analysis of the generalized concentration operator, which is compact and self-adjoint. This allowed us to study the optimization problem, which aims to look for functions that have a well-concentrated spectrogram in a subset of the time–frequency plane. Then, we showed that the N-dimensional signal space, consisting of the first N eigenfunctions of the generalized concentration operator corresponding to the N largest eigenvalues, maximizes the concentration of the region of interest.
In this paper, we showed that there is a limitation of maximal time–frequency resolution. As a perspective, one can prove some qualitative or quantitative uncertainty principles for the Dunkl–Bessel Gabor transform, that set restrictions to the possible concentration of a function on the time–frequency plane.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, N.S. and H.M.; methodology, N.S. and H.M.; Validation, S.G.; Formal analysis, S.G. and H.M.; Investigation, S.G. and H.M.; Resources, N.S. and H.M.; Writing original draft preparation, N.S. and H.M.; writing-review and editing, S.G.; Visualization, S.G. and H.M.; Supervision, S.G.; Project administration, S.G.; Funding acquisition, S.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia [GRANT No. KFU242059].
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Daubechies, I. Time-frequency localization operators: A geometric phase space approach. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 1988, 34, 605–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slepian, D.; Pollak, H.O. Prolate spheroidal wave functions Fourier analysis and uncertainty I. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1961, 40, 43–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Landau, H.J.; Pollak, H.O. Prolate spheroidal wave functions Fourier analysis and uncertainty II. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1961, 40, 65–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Landau, H.J.; Pollak, H.O. Prolate spheroidal wave functions Fourier analysis and uncertainty III. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1962, 41, 1295–1336. [Google Scholar]
- Slepian, D. Prolate spheroidal wave functions Fourier analysis and uncertainty IV. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1964, 43, 3009–3057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slepian, D. Prolate spheroidal wave functions Fourier analysis and uncertainty V: The Discrete case. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 1978, 57, 1371–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ben Nahia, Z.; Ben Salem, N. Spherical harmonics and applications associated with the Weinstein operator. Potential Theory-ICPT 1996, 94, 235–241. [Google Scholar]
- Ben Nahia, Z.; Ben Salem, N. On a mean value property associated with the Weinstein operator. Potential Theory-ICPT 1996, 94, 243–253. [Google Scholar]
- Ben Salem, N.; Nasr, A.R. Heisenberg-type inequalities for the Weinstein operator. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 2015, 26, 700–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ben Salem, N.; Nasr, A.R. Shapiro type inequalities for the Weinstein and the Weinstein-Gabor transforms. Konuralp Math. 2017, 1, 68–76. [Google Scholar]
- Mejjaoli, H.; Jelassi, M.; Othmani, Y. Multivariable Bessel Gabor transform and applications. Oper. Matrices 2015, 9, 637–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dunkl, C.F. Differential-difference operators associated to reflection groups. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1989, 311, 167–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunkl, C.F. Hankel transforms associated to finite reflection groups. Contemp. Math. 1992, 1992 138, 123–138. [Google Scholar]
- Trimèche, K. Paley-Wiener theorems for Dunkl transform and Dunkl translation operators. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 2002, 13, 17–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mejjaoli, H.; Trimèche, K. Harmonic Analysis associated with the Dunkl-Bessel Laplace operator and a mean value property. Fract. Calc. Appl. Anal. 2001, 4, 443–480. [Google Scholar]
- Mejjaoli, H.; Trimèche, K. An Lp-Lq-version of Morgan’s theorem for the Dunkl-Bessel transform. Integral Transform. Spec. Funct. 2006, 17, 591–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hassini, A.; Trimèche, K. Wavelet and generalized windowed transforms associated with the Dunkl-Bessel operator on Rd×R+. Mediterr. J. Math. 2015, 12, 1323–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Slepian, D. Interpolation of linear operators. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1956, 83, 482–492. [Google Scholar]
- Wong, M.W. Wavelet transforms and localization operators. In Operator Theory Advances and Applications; Birkhäuser: Basel, Switzerland, 2002; Volume 136, pp. 1–164. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, L. A trace class operator inequality. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2007, 328, 1484–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Abreu, D.; Gröchenig, K.; Romero, J.L. On accumulated spectrograms. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 2016, 368, 3629–3649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Riesz, F.; Nagy, B.S. Functional Analysis; Frederick Ungar Publishing Co.: New York, NY, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 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/).