Characterizations of weaving for g-frames by induced sequences (Q2071842): Difference between revisions

This paper is on the characterizations of weaving for g-frames by induced sequences. The paper first introduce the concept of g-frame: a collection of bounded linear operators \(\Lambda_j: \mathcal{U}\rightarrow {V}_j\), \(j\in J\) satisfying \[A\|f\|^2\le \sum_{j\in J} \|\Lambda_j f\|^2\le B\|f\|^2 \quad \forall f\in \mathcal{U}\] with constants (frame bounds) \(0<A\le B<\infty\). Then it considers two such g-frames \(\Lambda:=\{\Lambda_j: j\in J\}\) and \(\Gamma:=\{\Gamma_j: j\in J\}\) with same frame bounds \(A\) and \(B\). They are said to be woven on \(\mathcal{U}\) if for any partition of \(J=\sigma_1\cup\sigma_2\), the collection \(\{\Lambda_j: j\in \sigma_1\}\cup \{\Gamma_j: j\in\sigma_2\}\) is a g-frame for \(\mathcal{U}\) with same frame bound \(A\) and \(B\). The paper then turns to pointing out incorrectness of the theorem of \textit{Deepshikha} et al. [Result. Math. 72, No. 3, 1369--1391 (2017; Zbl 1385.42028)], which implies that ``\(\Lambda\) and \(\Gamma\) are woven for \(\mathcal{U}\) if and only if \(\{\Lambda_j^\ast f_{jk}: j\in N, k\in I_j\}\) and \(\{\Gamma^\ast _j g_{jk}: j\in N, k\in Q_j\}\) are woven on \(\mathcal{U}\)'', where \(\{f_jk\}\) and \(\{g_jk\}\) are frames for each subspaces \(V_j\). The paper shows that the necessity part is wrong by giving a counterexample, which demonstates that though \(\Lambda\) and \(\Gamma\) is woven but there exist \(\{f_{jk}\}\) and \(\{g_{jk}\}\) (orthonormal bases for \(\mathcal{U}\)) such that \(\{\Lambda_j^\ast f_{jk}: j\in N, k\in I_j\}\) and \(\{\Gamma^\ast_j g_{jk}: j\in N, k\in Q_j\}\) are NOT woven. The paper then shows that for the special case that \(\mathcal{V}_j\) is 1-dimensional, the result holds true. The paper next is on the charaterization of weaving frames using Type III induced sequences. That is, consider g-frames \(\Lambda:=\{\Lambda_j: j\in J\}\) and \(\Gamma:=\{\Gamma_j: j\in J\}\) as well as g-frames \(\Phi_j:=\{\Phi_{jk}\}_k\) and \(\Psi_j:=\{\Psi_{jk}\}_k\) for \(V_j\) w.r.t. \(W_{jk}\). Similarly, under some condition on the frame bounds, the paper shows that if \(\{\Phi_{jk}\Lambda_j\}_{j,k}\) and \(\{\Psi_{jk}\Gamma_j\}_j\) are woven, then \(\Lambda\) and \(\Gamma\) are woven. The converse is not true and the paper gives a similar counterexample for this. Under the special case that \(V_j\) is one-dimensional, the converse can hold.