Bounded symbols and reproducing kernel thesis for truncated Toeplitz operators (Q709226)

Let \(H^2\) denote the Hardy space of the unit disk. For any non-constant inner function \(\Theta\), let \(K_{\Theta}\) be the shift-coinvariant subspace of \(H^2\) generated by \(\Theta\), that is, \(K_{\Theta}=H^2\ominus\Theta H^2\). \textit{D.\,Sarason} [Oper.\ Matrices 1, No.\,4, 491--526 (2007; Zbl 1144.47026)] initiated a systematic study of a special class of operators on \(K_{\Theta}\) called truncated Toeplitz operators. For any function \(\varphi\in L^2\), the truncated Toeplitz operator \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}\) is densely defined, possibly unbounded, on \(K_{\Theta}\) by the formula \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}f = P_{\Theta}(\varphi f)\) for \(f\in K_{\Theta}\cap H^{\infty}\). Here, \(P_{\Theta}\) is the orthogonal projection from \(L^2\) onto \(K_{\Theta}\). The function \(\varphi\) is called a symbol of \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}\). It is not unique; it was shown by Sarason that \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}=0\) if and only if \(\varphi\) belongs to \(\Theta H^2 + \overline{\Theta H^2}\). It is immediate from the definition that, if \(\varphi\) is a bounded function, then \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}\) is a bounded operator on \(K_{\Theta}\). Sarason asked whether the converse is true, that is, whether a bounded truncated Toeplitz operator necessarily has a bounded symbol. In the paper under review, the authors show that this question has a negative answer in general. In fact, under the assumption that \(\Theta\) has an angular derivative at a point \(\zeta\) on the unit circle, they give a necessary condition for the existence of a bounded symbol for certain rank-one truncated Toeplitz operator associated with \(\zeta\). From this, counterexamples to Sarason's question are easily constructed. On the other hand, the authors prove, for certain classes of \(\Theta\) (for example, \(\Theta=b_{\alpha}^N\) where \(b_{\alpha}\) is the Möbius transform that interchanges \(0\) and \(\alpha\) in the unit disk), any bounded truncated Toeplitz operator admits a bounded symbol. For any \(\lambda\in\mathbb{D}\), let \(h^{\Theta}_{\lambda}\) be the normalized reproducing kernel for \(K_{\Theta}\) at \(\lambda\). For any operator \(A\) on \(K_{\Theta}\) whose domain contains the linear span of all reproducing kernels, define \(\rho_{r}(A)=\sup\{\|Ah^{\Theta}_{\lambda}\|: \lambda\in\mathbb{D}\}\). The second question that the authors of the paper under review are concerned with is the Reproducing Kernel Thesis for truncated Toeplitz operators: if \(\rho_{r}(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi})<\infty\), is \(A^{\Theta}_{\varphi}\) bounded on \(K_{\Theta}\)? They show that the answer to this question is again negative in general but is positive for special classes of \(\Theta\).