Abstract
This paper presents new lower and upper bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius of operator pairs in Hilbert spaces, demonstrating improvements over recent results by other authors. Additionally, we derive new inequalities for the numerical radius and the Davis–Wielandt radius as natural consequences of our findings.
Keywords:
Euclidean numerical radius; operator pairs; Hilbert spaces; Davis–Wielandt radius; numerical radius inequalities MSC:
47A30; 46C05; 47A63; 47A99
1. Introduction
Let H be a complex Hilbert space equipped with an inner product and the corresponding norm . The -algebra of bounded linear operators on H is denoted by . For any operator , the adjoint of A is denoted by , and represents the positive square root of . The numerical range of A, denoted by , is the set of values .
The operator norm and numerical radius of A are denoted by and , respectively. The operator norm is defined as
while the numerical radius is given by
It is known that the numerical radius defines a norm on that is equivalent to the operator norm . In particular, the following double inequality is valid:
for any operator . These inequalities are sharp. The first inequality becomes an equality if , while the second inequality becomes an equality if and only if A is a normal operator. An improvement to these inequalities was established by Kittaneh [1], who proved that
For further advancements related to inequalities (1) and (2), interested readers can refer to sources [2,3,4,5,6,7,8] and the references therein.
Let . The Euclidean operator radius is defined by
As pointed out in [9], is a norm and the following inequality holds:
for where the constants and 1 are best possible in (3).
In [10], the second author obtained the following lower bound:
The constant is best possible in the sense that it cannot be replaced by a larger constant. In the same paper, the following results were obtained as well:
with constant sharp in both inequalities,
with the inequality being sharp, and also
which is sharp as well.
By taking or for , where we recall that
the second author obtained in [10] several norm and numerical radius inequalities of interest for one operator A. Note that and refer to the real and imaginary parts of A, respectively.
For some recent results involving the estimation of the Euclidean numerical radius in terms of similar upper and lower bounds, see [11,12,13]. These estimations appear to be simpler to calculate when the involved operators are self-adjoint, since in that case, for instance, , , and Moreover, if B and C are projections orthogonal to each other, then , , and , which make the bounds even simpler to calculate.
The Davis–Wielandt radius of an operator , denoted by is defined as follows [14,15]:
It is evident that , and if and only if . For any , the following inequalities hold: if , if , and when . Note that the triangle inequality does not always hold for arbitrary operators . However, this inequality holds when , as shown in ([16], Corollary 2.2). It is also straightforward to verify that
and these inequalities are sharp, as noted in ([16], Corollary 2.2).
Additionally, observe that for and , we have
If we set and in (3), then we obtain
which provides the upper bound from (5) and a corresponding lower bound.
Zamani and Shebrawi ([17], Theorem 2.1) proved that
Furthermore, in ([17], Theorems 2.13, 2.14, and 2.17), they also established the following inequalities:
and
for any operator .
Recently, Bhunia et al. in ([16], Theorem 2.4) obtained the following upper bound:
for .
Additionally, in [18], the authors derived inequalities for the sum of operators. Specifically, we have
for .
Motivated by these results, we present new lower and upper bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius of operator pairs in this paper, demonstrating that some of these bounds improve upon those recently established by other authors.
2. Lower Bounds for the Euclidean Numerical Radius of Operator Pairs
In this section, we derive and establish several lower bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius of pairs of operators. Specifically, we present and prove the following lower bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius.
Theorem 1.
For any , we have
and
Proof.
Remark 1.
Several consequences of Theorem 1 can be drawn. We begin with the following corollary.
Corollary 1.
For any and , we have
and
Proof.
Remark 2.
If with then from Corollary 1, we derive the simpler inequalities
and
We also present the following corollary, which offers inequalities that improve upon the lower bound established in Corollary 2.4 of the recent paper [12].
Corollary 2.
For any self-adjoint operators we have the inequalities
and
Proof.
The proof follows directly from Theorem 1, noting that the numerical radius of a self-adjoint operator is equal to its norm. □
The following numerical example demonstrates that the first lower bound in (15) is significantly better than the second one, which was initially obtained in [10].
Example 1.
Consider the diagonal matrices
Then,
and
It is well known that if then Therefore,
and
for
Observe also that for we have that
Therefore,
for
and the right term
This numerically shows that the middle term in (15) provides a significantly better lower bound for the Euclidean numerical radius than the previous one from [10].
We also have the following corollary.
Corollary 3.
For any and we have
and
Proof.
We now present the following corollary, which offers an improvement of the lower bound from ([12], Corollary 2.5).
Corollary 4.
For any , we have
and
Proof.
We have the following lower bounds for the Davis–Wielandt radius. These lower bounds are better than the one offered by the first inequality in (4).
Corollary 5.
For any we have
and
Proof.
The proof follows by taking in Theorem 1. □
Further, we recall the following representation result obtained in ([11], Theorem 2.2).
Lemma 1.
Let Then,
By utilizing this result, we can prove the following lower bound for the Euclidean numerical radius.
Proposition 1.
For , we have
Proof.
Remark 4.
The following representation is also known (see, for instance, [19]).
Lemma 2.
Let Then,
We are able now to prove the following proposition.
Proposition 2.
For , we have
Proof.
By using (12) for and we obtain
for all .
3. Upper Bounds for the Euclidean Numerical Radius of Operator Pairs
In this section, we aim to establish several upper bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius of operator pairs in Hilbert spaces. To derive our first result, we recall two well-known inequalities. The first is the Kato inequality (see [20]), which is given by
for any , , and any
The second is the well-known McCarthy inequality (see [21]), which asserts that for any positive operator P and for , we have
With these preliminaries, we can now present the following result.
Theorem 2.
For any and , we have
and
Proof.
By (24), we have
for any and .
By the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we have
for where
By taking the supremum over we obtain
which proves (26).
By the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we also have
for where
By making a similar argument as above, we then derive (27).
Similarly,
which proves the last part of (26). □
Several consequences of Theorem 2 can be presented. We start with the following corollary.
Corollary 6.
For any and , we have
and
Proof.
The proof follows directly from Theorem 2 by setting . □
Remark 6.
In ([12], Theorem 2.2), the authors proved that for any , the following result holds:
This result can be derived from Corollary 6 by setting . The interested reader can derive other similar bounds by choosing some of to be .
We also present the following corollary, which, while straightforward, is of significant interest.
Corollary 7.
For any self-adjoint operators, and , we have
and
Remark 7.
For in the above corollary, we obtain
for
Another important consequence of Theorem 2 is derived in the next corollary.
Corollary 8.
For , and we have the numerical radius inequalities
and
Proof.
We take and in Theorem 2 to obtain the desired results. □
Remark 8.
We notice that for we obtain the simpler inequalities
and
We also have in the particular case of that
Remark 9.
Another significant consequence of Theorem 2 is presented in the following corollary.
Corollary 9.
For any and we have
and
Proof.
Let be the Cartesian decomposition of A, where
Remark 10.
For in Corollary 9, we obtain
for
This is another improvement of the second Kittaneh’s inequality in (2).
By taking in Theorem 2, we obtain
Corollary 10.
For any and , we have
and
In particular for , we have
for all .
We observe that, if namely is hyponormal operator, then
and by (35), we obtain
which is an improvement of inequality (5).
To obtain our next result, we make also use of the well-known McCarthy inequality (25).
Theorem 3.
For any and with , we have
and
Proof.
By Hölder’s inequality, we have for that
for and with
By making use of (28), we get
for , .
By taking the supremum over , we obtain (36).
We also have
for and with which gives in a similar way (37). □
Remark 11.
For in Theorem 3, we obtain the last upper bounds in Theorem 2, where
For in Theorem 3, we obtain
and
for with
Several consequences of Theorem 3 can be derived. As a first step, we present the following corollary.
Corollary 11.
For any and with , we have
and
In particular,
Proof.
It follows by taking in Theorem 3 and . □
Our next corollary follows by taking and in Theorem 3.
Corollary 12.
For any and with , we have
and
In particular,
We derive also the next corollary.
Corollary 13.
For any and with , we have
and
In particular,
Proof.
The proof follows by taking in Theorem 3. □
We also have the following theorem.
Theorem 4.
For any and we have
and
Proof.
One can see that
for
From (28), we obtain
for
By taking the supremum over , we obtain the desired result (39).
Inequality (40) follows by the fact that
for □
Remark 12.
If we take in Theorem 4, we obtain
and
The first consequence of Theorem 4 is presented in the following corollary.
Corollary 14.
For any and , we have
and
In particular,
Proof.
The proof follows by taking and in Theorem 4. □
The next corollary holds also.
Corollary 15.
For any we have
and
In particular,
Proof.
The proof follows by taking and in Theorem 4. □
Finally, by selecting and in Theorem 4, we can also state the following corollary.
Corollary 16.
For any we have
and
In particular
4. Conclusions
In this paper, we have presented new lower and upper bounds for the Euclidean numerical radius of operator pairs in Hilbert spaces, improving upon recent results in the literature. We also derived new inequalities for the numerical radius and the Davis–Wielandt radius as natural consequences of our findings.
This work lays a strong foundation for future research in this area. In particular, extending these results to the setting of semi-Hilbert spaces would be a valuable direction to explore (see [22,23,24] for a solid background on operators in semi-Hilbert spaces). Another interesting direction for future work is to study the Berezin number of operator pairs in reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (see [25,26] and the sources cited therein for background on reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces).
We hope this study will inspire further advancements in numerical radius inequalities and related concepts in operator theory.
Author Contributions
This article was the result of a collaborative effort among all of the authors, with each contributing equally and significantly to its writing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2024R187), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Data Availability Statement
No new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Acknowledgments
The authors sincerely thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions, which have significantly enhanced this paper. Furthermore, the first author wishes to express her deep appreciation for the support received from the Distinguished Scientist Fellowship Program under Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2024R187), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Kittaneh, F. Numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Studia Math. 2005, 168, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bag, S.; Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Bounds of numerical radius of bounded linear operators using t-Aluthge transform. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2020, 23, 991–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Furtherance of numerical radius inequalities of Hilbert space operators. Arch. Math. 2021, 117, 537–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Development of inequalities and characterization of equality conditions for the numerical radius. Linear Algebra Appl. 2021, 630, 306–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Proper improvement of well-known numerical radius inequalities and their applications. Results Math. 2021, 76, 177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. New upper bounds for the numerical radius of Hilbert space operators. Bull. Sci. Math. 2021, 167, 102959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kittaneh, F. A numerical radius inequality and an estimate for the numerical radius of the Frobenius companion matrix. Studia Math. 2003, 158, 11–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamazaki, T. On upper and lower bounds for the numerical radius and an equality condition. Studia Math. 2007, 178, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popescu, G. Unitary invariants in multivariable operator theory. In Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society; American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, USA, 2009; Volume 200, 91p. [Google Scholar]
- Dragomir, S.S. Some inequalities for the Euclidean operator radius of two operators in Hilbert spaces. Linear Algebra Its Appl. 2006, 419, 256–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ammar, A.; Frakis, A.; Kittaneh, F. New bounds for the Euclidean operator radius of two Hilbert space operators with applications. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mex. 2024, 30, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jana, S.; Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Euclidean operator radius inequalities of a pair of bounded linear operators and their applications. Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. New Ser. 2023, 54, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jana, S.; Bhunia, P.; Paul, K. Euclidean operator radius and numerical radius inequalities. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2308.09252. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, C. The shell of a Hilbert-space operator. Acta Sci. Math. 1968, 29, 69–86. [Google Scholar]
- Wielandt, H. On eigenvalues of sums of normal matrices. Pac. J. Math. 1955, 5, 633–638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Bhanja, A.; Bag, S.; Paul, K. Bounds for the Davis-Wielandt radius of bounded linear operators. Ann. Funct. Anal. 2021, 12, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zamani, A.; Shebrawi, K. Some upper bounds for the Davis-Wielandt radius of Hilbert space operators. Mediterr. J. Math. 2020, 17, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhunia, P.; Paul, K.; Batik, S. Further refinemenmts of Davis-Wieland radius inequalities. Oper. Matrices 2023, 17, 767–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hirzallah, O.; Kittaneh, F.; Shebrawi, K. Numerical radius inequalities for certain 2 × 2 operator matrices. Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory 2011, 71, 129–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kato, T. Notes on some inequalities for linear operators. Math. Ann. 1952, 125, 208–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sattari, M.; Moslehian, M.S.; Yamazaki, T. Some generalized numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Linear Algebra Appl. 2015, 470, 216–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arias, M.L.; Corach, G.; Gonzalez, M.C. Partial isometries in semi-Hilbertian spaces. Linear Algebra Appl. 2008, 428, 1460–1475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arias, M.L.; Corach, G.; Gonzalez, M.C. Metric properties of projections in semi-Hilbertian spaces. Integral Equ. Oper. Theory 2008, 62, 11–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arias, M.L.; Corach, G.; Gonzalez, M.C. Lifting properties in operator ranges. Acta Sci. Math. 2009, 75, 635–653. [Google Scholar]
- Altwaijry, N.; Feki, K.; Minculete, N. Some new estimates for the Berezin number of Hilbert space operators. Axioms 2022, 11, 683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guesba, M. Some Euclidean Berezin number inequalities of a pair of operators and their applications. Filomat 2023, 37, 8777–8790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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/).