An extremal composition operator on the Hardy space of the bidisk with small approximation numbers (Q2297377)

Let \(H_1\) and \(H_2\) be two Hilbert spaces, and \(T:H_1\to H_2\) an operator. The \(n\)th approximation number \(a_n(T)\) of \(T\), \(n=1,2,\dots\), is defined as the distance (for the operator norm) of \(T\) to operators of rank \(<n\): \[ a_n(T):=\inf_{\operatorname{rank}R<n}\|T-R\|.\tag{1} \] The approximation numbers have the ideal property: \[ a_n(ATB)\leq \|A\| a_n(T) \|B\|. \] The \(n\)th Gelfand number \(C_n(T)\) of \(T\) is defined by: \[ C_n(T):=\inf_{\operatorname{codim}E<n}\|T|_E\|. \] As a consequence of the Schmidt decomposition, we have for any compact operator between Hilbert spaces that \(C_n(T)=a_n(T)\). Recall that the Hardy space of the polydisk \(\mathbb{D}^N:=\mathbb{D} \times\dots\times\mathbb{D}\) is the space \[ H^2(\mathbb{D}^N)= \left\{f:\mathbb{D}^N\to\mathbb{C}: f(z)=\sum_{\alpha\in \mathbb{N}^N}a_\alpha z^\alpha\text{ and }\|f\|^2_2:=\sum_{\alpha \in\mathbb{N}^N}|a_\alpha|^2<\infty\right\}. \] If \(\Phi:\mathbb {D}^N\to\mathbb{D}^N\) is an analytic map, the associated composition operator \(C_\Phi\) (which is not always bounded on \(H^2(\mathbb {D}^N)\) for \(N\ge 2\)) is defined by \(C_\Phi f:=f\circ \Phi\). For \(N=1\), the composition operator \(C_\Phi:H^2(\mathbb{D})\to H^2(\mathbb {D})\) on the Hardy space of the unit disk is always bounded, and it is known that the decay of their approximation numbers cannot be arbitrarily fast; actually, they cannot supersede a geometric speed, that is, there exists a positive constant \(c\) such that \[a_n(C_\Phi)\gtrsim e^{-cn},\ n=1,2,\dots\] In the present paper, the authors construct an analytic self-map \(\Phi:\mathbb{D}^2\to\mathbb{D}^2\) of the bidisk whose image touches the distinguished boundary, but whose approximation numbers of the associated composition operator on \(H^2(\mathbb {D}^2)\) are small in the sense that \[ \limsup_{n\to\infty} [a_{n^2}(C_\Phi)]^{\frac 1n}<1. \] This is the main result of the paper (Section 5, Theorem 5.1 (4)). The proof is based on some auxiliary lemmas some of which improve similar previous results of authors. The paper is well organized and well written.