---
abstract: 'We prove qualitatively sharp estimates of the potential kernel for the harmonic oscillator. These bounds are then used to show that the $L^p-L^q$ estimates of the associated potential operator obtained recently by Bongioanni and Torrea [@BT] are in fact sharp.'
address:
- 'Adam Nowak, Instytut Matematyczny, Polska Akademia Nauk, Śniadeckich 8, 00–956 Warszawa, Poland '
- 'Krzysztof Stempak, Instytut Matematyki i Informatyki, Politechnika Wrocławska, Wyb[.]{} Wyspiańskiego 27, 50–370 Wrocław, Poland, and Katedra Matematyki i Zastosowań Informatyki, Politechnika Opolska, Mikołajczyka 5, 45–271 Opole, Poland'
author:
- Adam Nowak
- Krzysztof Stempak
title: Sharp estimates of the potential kernel for the harmonic oscillator with applications
---

Introduction {#sec:intro}
============

The study of the potential theory for the $d$-dimensional harmonic oscillator $$\mathcal{H}=-\Delta+\|x\|^2,$$ has recently been initiated by Bongioanni and Torrea [@BT]. The multi-dimensional Hermite functions $h_k$ are eigenfunctions of $\mathcal{H}$ and we have $\mathcal{H} h_k = (2|k|+d) h_k$. The operator $\mathcal{H}$ has a natural self-adjoint extension, here still denoted by $\mathcal{H}$, whose spectral decomposition is given by the $h_k$.

The integral kernel $G_t(x,y)$ of the Hermite semigroup $\{\exp({-t\mathcal{H}}): t>0\}$ is known explicitly to be (see [@ST2] for this symmetric variant of the formula) $$\begin{aligned}
G_t(x,y)&=\sum_{n=0}^\infty e^{-(2n+d)t}\sum_{|k|=n}h_k(x)h_k(y)\\
&=\big(2\pi\sinh(2t)\big)^{-d/2}\exp\bigg(-\frac14\Big[\tanh( t)\|x+y\|^2+\coth(t)\|x-y\|^2 \Big]\bigg).\end{aligned}$$

Given $\sigma>0$, consider the negative power $\mathcal{H}^{-\sigma}$, which is a contraction on $L^2({\mathbb{R}^d})$. It is easily seen that $\mathcal{H}^{-\sigma}$ coincides in $L^2({\mathbb{R}^d})$ with the *potential operator* $$\label{int}
\mathcal{I}^\sigma f(x)=\int_{{\mathbb{R}^d}}\mathcal{K}^{\sigma}(x,y)f(y)\,dy,$$ where the *potential kernel* is given by $$\label{ker}
\mathcal{K}^{\sigma}(x,y)= \frac1{\Gamma(\sigma)}\int_0^\infty G_t(x,y) t^{\sigma-1}\,dt.$$ Note that all the spaces $L^p(\mathbb R^d)$, $1\le p\le\infty$, are contained in the natural domain of $\mathcal{I}^\sigma$ consisting of those functions $f$ for which the integral in converges $x$-a.e., see [@NS3 Section 2].

The main result of the paper, Theorem \[main1\] below, provides qualitatively sharp estimates of the potential kernel . As an application of this result, we prove sharpness of the $L^p-L^q$ estimates for the potential operator obtained recently by Bongioanni and Torrea [@BT Theorem 8], see Theorem \[thm:LpLq\].

Recall that an operator $T$ defined on $L^p(\mathbb R^d)$ for some $1\le p\le\infty$, with values in the space of measurable functions on $\mathbb{R}^d$, is said to be of weak type $(p,q)$, $1\le q<\infty$, provided that $$\label{weak}
|\{x\in \mathbb R^d\colon |Tf(x)|>\lambda\}|\le C \Big(\|f\|_p\slash \lambda\Big)^q,$$ with $C>0$ independent of $f\in L^p(\mathbb R^d)$ and $\lambda>0$. The restricted weak type $(p,q)$ of $T$ means that holds for $f=\chi_E$, where $E$ is any measurable subset of $\mathbb R^d$ of finite measure. By definition, weak type $(p,\infty)$ coincides with strong type $(p,\infty)$, [i.e[.]{}]{} the estimate $\|Tf\|_\infty\le C\|f\|_p$, $f\in L^p(\mathbb R^d)$. In terms of Lorentz spaces, the weak type $(p,q)$ is equivalent to the boundedness from $L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$ to $L^{q,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$, and the restricted weak type $(p,q)$ is characterized by the boundedness from $L^{p,1}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ to $L^{q,\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$, see [@BS Chapter 4, Section 4]. Strong type $(p,q)$ means of course the $L^p$-$L^q$ boundedness.

The notation $X\lesssim Y$ will be used to indicate that $X\leq CY$ with a positive constant $C$ independent of significant quantities; we shall write $X \simeq Y$ when simultaneously $X \lesssim Y$ and $Y \lesssim X$. We will also use the notation $X\simeq\simeq  Y\exp(-cZ)$ to indicate that there exist positive constants $C, c_1$ and $c_2$, independent of significant quantities, such that $$C^{-1}\,Y\exp(-c_1Z)\le X\le C\,Y\exp(-c_2Z).$$ Further, in a number of places, we will use natural and self-explanatory generalizations of the $\simeq \simeq$ relation, for instance in connection with certain integrals involving exponential factors. In such cases the exact meaning will be clear from the context. By convention, $\simeq \simeq$ is understood as $\simeq$ whenever there are no exponential factors involved.

We write $\log^+$ for the positive part of the logarithm, and $\vee,\wedge$ for the operations of taking maximum and minimum, respectively.

Estimates of the potential kernel {#sec:asym}
=================================

We begin with two technical results describing the behavior of the integrals $$\begin{aligned}
 I_A(T) & = \int_T^{\infty}t^A\exp(-t)\,dt, \qquad T>0, \\
 J_A(T,S) & = \int_T^St^A\exp(-t)\,dt, \qquad 0<T<S<\infty.\end{aligned}$$ Notice that $I_A(T)$ dominates $J_A(T,S)$. The lemma below is a refinement of [@NS3 Lemma 2.1], see also [@ST1 Lemma 1.1].

\[lem:le1\] Let $A\in\mathbb R$ and $\gamma > 0$ be fixed. Then $$\label{estea}
 I_A(\gamma T)\simeq T^A\exp(-\gamma T), \qquad T \ge 1,$$ and for $0<T<1$ $$I_A(\gamma T)\simeq  
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}, & \quad A<-1 \\
\log (2\slash T), & \quad A=-1 \\
1, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases} \;\;.$$

We assume that $\gamma =1$. From the proof it will be clear that the estimates are true for any $\gamma >0$. The case $0<T<1$ was treated in the proof of [@NS3 Lemma 2.1], so we consider $T \ge 1$ and focus on showing . The lower bound in is straightforward, we have $$I_A(T) > \int_T^{2T}t^Ae^{-t}\,dt\gtrsim T^A \int_T^{2T} e^{-t} \, dt =
T^A\big(e^{-T}-e^{-2T}\big)\gtrsim T^A e^{-T}, \qquad T \ge 1.$$ It remains to prove the upper bound, $$\label{aa}
\int_T^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt\lesssim  T^A e^{-T}, \qquad T \ge 1,$$ and here we assume that $A>0$, since for $A\le0$ we have $t^A \le T^{A}$, $t > T \ge 1$, and the conclusion is trivial. Choosing $T_A$ such that for $T\ge T_A$ one has $$\int_{2T}^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt\le \frac12\int_{T}^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt,$$ we can write $$\int_T^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt\le \int_T^{2T} t^Ae^{-t}\,dt+\int_{2T}^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt\le
 C\,T^Ae^{-T}+\frac12\int_{T}^\infty t^Ae^{-t}\,dt, \qquad T \ge T_A.$$ This implies for $T\ge T_A$ and consequently for all $T\ge1$.

\[lem:le2\] Let $A\in\mathbb R$ and $\gamma > 0$ be fixed. Then for $0<T<S\le 2T$ we have $$\label{estea2}
T^A(S-T)\exp(-2\gamma T) \lesssim J_A(\gamma T,\gamma S)\lesssim T^A(S-T)\exp(-\gamma T),$$ while for $S>2T>0$ we have $J_A(\gamma T,\gamma S)\simeq I_A(\gamma T)$ when $S\ge2$, and $$J_A(\gamma T,\gamma S)\simeq  
\begin{cases}
 T^{A+1}, & \quad A<-1\\
\log (S\slash T), & \quad A=-1 \\
S^{A+1}, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases}\;\;$$ when $0<S<2$.

As in the proof of Lemma \[lem:le1\], it is enough to deal with the case $\gamma =1$. The bounds for $T<S\le 2T$ follow since then $\int_T^St^Ae^{-t}\,dt\simeq T^A\int_T^Se^{-t}\,dt$ and $$(S-T)e^{-2T}\le \int_T^Se^{-t}\,dt\le (S-T)e^{-T}.$$

Assume now that $S > 2T$. Clearly, $J_A(T,S) < I_A(T)$. On the other hand, if $T \ge 1$ then $$J_A(T,S) > \int_T^{2T} t^A e^{-t}\, dt \gtrsim T^A \int_T^{2T} e^{-t}\, dt \gtrsim T^A e^{-T}
\gtrsim I_A(T),$$ the last estimate being a consequence of . When $0< T < 1$, we distinguish two subcases. If $S \ge 2$, then again $J_A(T,S) \gtrsim \int_T^2 t^A\, dt \gtrsim I_A(T)$. If $2T<S<2$, then $J_A(T,S) \simeq \int_T^S t^A \, dt$, and evaluating the last integral we arrive at the claimed bounds for $J_A(T,S)$.

We note that and may be written slightly less precisely as $$\begin{aligned}
I_A(\gamma T) & \simeq\simeq \exp(-cT), \qquad T \ge 1, \\
J_A(\gamma T,\gamma S) & \simeq\simeq T^A (S-T)\exp(-cT), \qquad 0<T<S\le 2T,\end{aligned}$$ respectively. This fact will be used in the sequel without further mention.

We now apply Lemmas \[lem:le1\] and \[lem:le2\] to prove qualitatively sharp estimates of the integral $$E_A(T,S)=\int_0^1t^A\exp\big(-Tt^{-1}-St\big)\,dt, \qquad 0<T,S<\infty.$$ The following result provides, in particular, a refinement and generalization of [@NS2 Lemma 2.4].

\[pro:comp\] Let $A \in \mathbb{R}$ be fixed. Then $$E_A(T,S)\simeq\simeq\exp\Big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\Big)\times \begin{cases}
T^{A+1}, & \quad A<-1 \\
1+\log^+\frac1{T(T\vee S)}, & \quad A=-1 \\
(S\vee 1)^{-A-1}, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases}\;\; ,$$ uniformly in $T,S>0$.

We first estimate $E_A(T,S)$ in terms of the integrals $I_A$ and $J_A$. For $0<S\le 2T$ we have $$E_A(T,S)\simeq\simeq \int_0^1 t^A\exp(-cTt^{-1})\,dt
    \simeq T^{A+1}\int_{cT}^\infty u^{-A-2}e^{-u}\,du=T^{A+1}I_{-A-2}(cT),$$ where the second relation follows by the change of variable $t=cT\slash u$. When $S>2T$ we change the variable $t=u\sqrt{T\slash S}$ and get $$E_A(T,S)=\Big(\frac TS\Big)^{(A+1)\slash2}
\int_0^{\sqrt{S\slash T}}u^A\exp\big(-\sqrt{TS}(u+u^{-1})\big)\,du\equiv \mathcal J_1+\mathcal J_2,$$ where $\mathcal J_1$ and $\mathcal J_2$ come from splitting the integration over the intervals $(0,1)$ and $(1,\sqrt{S/T})$, respectively. Then $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal J_1\simeq\simeq \Big(\frac TS\Big)^{(A+1)\slash2}
\int_0^1 u^A\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}u^{-1}\big)\,du&\simeq T^{A+1}
\int_{c\sqrt{TS}}^\infty z^{-A-2}e^{-z}\,dz \\
& =T^{A+1}I_{-A-2}\big(c\sqrt{TS}\big)\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal J_2\simeq\simeq \Big(\frac TS\Big)^{(A+1)\slash2}
\int_1^{\sqrt{S\slash T}} u^A\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}u\big)\,du&
\simeq S^{-A-1}\int_{c\sqrt{TS}}^{cS} z^{A}e^{-z}\,dz\\
&=S^{-A-1}J_{A}\big(c\sqrt{TS},cS\big).\end{aligned}$$ Summing up, we have $$E_A(T,S)\simeq\simeq T^{A+1}I_{-A-2}\big(c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big)
    + \chi_{\{S>2T\}}S^{-A-1}J_{A}\big(c\sqrt{TS},cS\big),$$ uniformly in $S,T>0$. In the next step we describe the behavior of the two terms here by means of Lemmas \[lem:le1\] and \[lem:le2\].

From Lemma \[lem:le1\] it follows that $$T^{A+1}I_{-A-2}\big(c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big) \simeq\simeq 
    T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), \qquad T(T\vee S)\ge1,$$ (here, and also in analogous places below, $c$ on the left-hand side should be understood as a *given* constant) and $$T^{A+1}I_{-A-2}\big(c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big)\simeq
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}, & \quad A<-1 \\
\log (\frac4{T(T\vee S)}), & \quad A=-1 \\ 
\big(\frac T{T\vee S}\big)^{(A+1)\slash2}, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases} \;\; , \qquad T(T\vee S)\le1.$$ The term $S^{-A-1}J_{A}(c\sqrt{TS},cS)$ comes into play when $S>2T$, and in this case we use Lemma \[lem:le2\] to write the bounds $$S^{-A-1}J_{A}\big(c\sqrt{TS},cS\big) \simeq \chi_{\{S\ge 2\}}\Phi_1+\chi_{\{S<2\}}\Phi_2,$$ where $$\Phi_1 = S^{-A-1}I_{A}\big(c\sqrt{TS}\big), \qquad \qquad
\Phi_2=
\begin{cases}
(T\slash S)^{(A+1)\slash2}, & \quad A<-1 \\
\log (\frac ST), & \quad A=-1 \\ 
1, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases}\;\; .$$ By Lemma \[lem:le1\], $$\begin{aligned}
\Phi_1 & \simeq\simeq S^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), \qquad TS\ge1, \\
\Phi_1 & \simeq 
\begin{cases}
(T\slash S)^{(A+1)\slash2}, & \quad A<-1\\
\log (\frac 4{TS}), & \quad A=-1\\ 
S^{-A-1}, & \quad A>-1
\end{cases}\;\; , \qquad TS\le1.\end{aligned}$$ To proceed, it is convenient to consider each of the cases $A<-1$, $A=-1$, and $A>-1$ separately.

If $A<-1$, then $$\begin{aligned}
E_{A}(T,S) & \simeq\simeq \chi_{\{2>S> 2T\}} \Big(\frac TS\Big)^{(A+1)\slash2} +
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)\ge1\\
T^{A+1}, &\quad T(T\vee S)<1\\ 
\end{cases} \\
& \qquad
+\chi_{\{S>2T\}} \chi_{\{S\ge 2\}}
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), &\quad TS\ge1\\
\big(\frac TS\big)^{(A+1)\slash2}, &\quad TS<1
\end{cases}\;\; .\end{aligned}$$ Here the first and third terms are insignificant in comparison to the second one. In case of the third summand, this is because $A<-1$ and $\big(\frac TS\big)^{(A+1)\slash2}<T^{A+1}$ for $TS<1$. A similar argument is used for the first one. The required estimates of $E_{A}(T,S)$ follow.

If $A=-1$, then $$\begin{aligned}
E_{-1}(T,S) & \simeq\simeq \chi_{\{2>S> 2T\}} \log \frac ST +
\begin{cases}
\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)\ge1\\
\log \big(\frac4{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)<1
\end{cases} \\
& \qquad +\chi_{\{S>2T\}} \chi_{\{S\ge 2\}}
\begin{cases}
\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), &\quad TS\ge1\\
\log \big(\frac4{TS}\big), &\quad TS<1\\ 
\end{cases}\;\; .\end{aligned}$$ Similarly as in the case of $A<-1$, here also the first and third terms are insignificant in comparison to the second one. This is clear for the third summand, and for the first one this is because $\log \frac ST < \log (\frac4{TS})$ when $S<2$. Thus the desired bounds of $E_{-1}(T,S)$ also follow.

Finally, we consider the case $A>-1$, which is less direct than the previous two. We have $$\begin{aligned}
E_{A}(T,S) & \simeq\simeq \chi_{\{2>S> 2T\}} + 
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)\ge1\\
 \big(\frac T{T\vee S}\big)^{(A+1)\slash2} , &\quad T(T\vee S)<1\\ 
\end{cases} \\
& \qquad +\chi_{\{S>2T\}} \chi_{\{S\ge 2\}} 
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), &\quad TS\ge1\\
S^{-A-1}, &\quad TS<1\\ 
\end{cases}\;\; .\end{aligned}$$ Observe that here the relation $\simeq \simeq$ remains valid if the sum of the first and the third terms is replaced by the comparable (in the sense of $\simeq$) expression $$\chi_{\{S>2T\}}
\begin{cases}
T^{A+1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), &\quad TS\ge1\\
 (S\vee 1)^{-A-1} , &\quad TS<1\\ 
\end{cases} \;\; .$$ Taking into account that $T^{A+1}\exp(-c\sqrt{TS})\simeq\simeq S^{-A-1}\exp(-c\sqrt{TS})$ for $TS\ge1$, we conclude that $$\begin{aligned}
E_{A}(T,S) & \simeq\simeq 
\begin{cases}
(T\vee S)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)\ge1\\
 \big(\frac T{T\vee S}\big)^{(A+1)\slash2} , &\quad T(T\vee S)<1\\ 
\end{cases} \\
& \qquad + \chi_{\{S>2T\}}
\begin{cases}
S^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big), &\quad TS\ge1\\
(S\vee 1)^{-A-1}, &\quad TS<1 
\end{cases}\;\; .\end{aligned}$$ Now, if $T\ge S$ and $T(T\vee S)=T^2<1$, then $(\frac T{T\vee S}\big)^{1\slash2}=1\simeq 1\slash (S\vee 1)$, while for $T < S$ and $T(T\vee S)=TS<1$, we have $(\frac T{T\vee S}\big)^{1\slash2}=(\frac TS\big)^{1\slash2} < 1\slash (S\vee 1)$. Therefore, $$E_{A}(T,S)\simeq\simeq 
\begin{cases}
(T\vee S)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big), &\quad T(T\vee S)\ge1\\
 (S\vee 1)^{-A-1},  &\quad T(T\vee S)<1 
\end{cases}\;\; .$$ We claim that this implies $$E_{A}(T,S)\simeq\simeq (S\vee 1)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big),$$ which are precisely the required estimates.

To justify the claim, it is enough to recall that $A>-1$ and observe that if $T\ge S$ and $T(T\vee S) = T^2 \ge 1$, then $$\begin{aligned}
(T\vee S)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big)=T^{-A-1}\exp(-cT)&\simeq (T\vee 1)^{-A-1}\exp(-cT)\\
&\simeq\simeq (S\vee 1)^{-A-1}\exp(-cT),\end{aligned}$$ while if $T < S$ and $T(T\vee S)=TS\ge 1$ (this forces $S>1$), then $$(T\vee S)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{T(T\vee S)}\big)=
S^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big)\simeq (S\vee 1)^{-A-1}\exp\big(-c\sqrt{TS}\big).$$

The proof is finished.

We are now in a position to prove qualitatively sharp estimates of the potential kernel.

\[main1\] For $\sigma>0$ we have $$\mathcal K^\sigma(x,y)\simeq\simeq\exp\big(-c\|x-y\|(\|x\|+\|y\|)\big)\times 
\begin{cases}
\|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d}, &\quad \sigma<d\slash2 \\
1+\log^+\frac1{\|x-y\|(\|x\|+\|y\|)}, &\quad \sigma=d\slash2 \\
(1+\|x+y\|)^{d-2\sigma}, &\quad\sigma>d\slash2
\end{cases}\;\; ,$$ uniformly in $x,y\in\mathbb R^d$.

We decompose $$\Gamma(\sigma)\mathcal K^\sigma(x,y)=\int_0^1G_t(x,y)\,t^{\sigma-1}\,dt+
\int_1^\infty G_t(x,y)\,t^{\sigma-1}\,dt\equiv \mathcal J^\sigma_0(x,y)+\mathcal J^\sigma_\infty(x,y).$$ For $0<t<1$ we have $\tanh t \simeq t$, $\coth t \simeq t^{-1}$, $\sinh 2t \simeq t$, and therefore $$\mathcal J^\sigma_0(x,y)\simeq\simeq E_{\sigma-d\slash2-1}\big(c\|x-y\|^2,c\|x+y\|^2\big).$$ This combined with Lemma \[pro:comp\] shows that the estimates from the statement hold with $\mathcal{K}^{\sigma}(x,y)$ replaced by $\mathcal{J}^{\sigma}_0(x,y)$. Further, taking into account that $\tanh t \simeq 1 \simeq \coth t$ for $t > 1$, we see that $$\mathcal J^\sigma_\infty(x,y) \simeq\simeq \exp\big(-c(\|x\|^2+\|y\|^2)\big).$$ Thus $\mathcal J^\sigma_0(x,y)$ dominates $\mathcal J^\sigma_\infty(x,y)$ in the above decomposition, in the sense that $$\mathcal J^\sigma_\infty(x,y) \lesssim E_{\sigma-d\slash2-1}\big(c\|x-y\|^2,c\|x+y\|^2\big)$$ for a sufficiently small constant $c>0$. The conclusion follows.

Sharpness of the $L^p$-$L^q$ boundedness of the potential operator {#sec:sharp}
==================================================================

Given $0<\sigma<d/2$, define the region $$\begin{aligned}
R & =\bigg\{\Big(\frac1p,\frac1q\Big)\colon 0\le\frac1p\le1\,\,\,{\rm and}\,\,\, 0
\vee \Big(\frac1p-\frac{2\sigma}d\Big)\le\frac1q\le 1 \wedge\Big(\frac1p+\frac{2\sigma}d\Big)\bigg\} \\
& \qquad \Big\backslash 
\bigg(\bigg\{\Big(\frac1p,\frac1q\Big)\colon 0\le\frac1p\le1-\frac{2\sigma}d\,\,\,{\rm and}\,\,\, 
 \frac1q = \frac1p+\frac{2\sigma}d\bigg\} \cup 
    \bigg\{\Big(\frac{2\sigma}d,0\Big),\Big(1,1-\frac{2\sigma}d\Big)\bigg\}\bigg)\end{aligned}$$ contained in the unit $(\frac1p,\frac1q)$-square $[0,1]^2$, see Figure \[fig1\].

![Mapping properties of $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ for $0 < \sigma < d/2$.[]{data-label="fig1"}](fig1.eps){width="60.00000%"}

The following result enhances [@BT Theorem 8], see also [@NS3 Theorem 2.3].

\[thm:LpLq\] Let $d\ge1$, $0<\sigma<d\slash2$ and $1\le p,q\le\infty$. Then $\mathcal{I}^\sigma\colon L^p(\mathbb R^d)\to L^q(\mathbb R^d)$ boundedly if and only if $(\frac 1p,\frac1q)$ lies in the region $R$.

On the other hand, $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is not even of restricted weak type $(p,q)$ when $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q)$ is not in the closure of $R$. Moreover, $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is of weak type $(p,q)$ for $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q) = (0,\frac{2\sigma}d)$ and $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q) = (1,1-\frac{2\sigma}d)$. For $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q) = (\frac{2\sigma}d,0)$ the restricted weak type is true, whereas weak type fails.

Before giving the proof we take the opportunity to present a short argument showing [@BT (21) and (41)], the result we will apply in a moment.

\[lem:le3\] Given $\sigma>0$, $$\|\mathcal K^\sigma(x,\cdot)\|_1\simeq (1\vee \|x\|)^{-2\sigma}, \qquad x \in \mathbb{R}^d.$$

Using the identity (see [@ST2 Proposition 3.3]) $$\exp({-t\mathcal H}) \boldsymbol{1}(x)=\int_{\mathbb R^d}G_t(x,y)\,dy= 
(\cosh 2t)^{-d/2}\exp\Big(-\frac12\tanh(2t)\|x\|^2\Big), \qquad x\in\mathbb R^d,$$ we may write $$\begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathbb R^d}\mathcal K^\sigma(x,y)\,dy
& = \frac1{\Gamma(\sigma)}\int_0^\infty\int_{\mathbb R^d}G_t(x,y)\,dy\,t^{\sigma-1}\,dt\\
& = \frac{1}{\Gamma(\sigma)} \int_0^{\infty} (\cosh 2t)^{-d/2}\exp\Big(-\frac12\tanh(2t)\|x\|^2\Big)
    t^{\sigma -1}\, dt.\end{aligned}$$ Here we split the integration to the intervals $(0,1)$ and $(1,\infty)$ and denote the resulting integrals by $\mathcal{J}_0$ and $\mathcal{J}_{\infty}$, respectively. Then, uniformly in $x\in \mathbb{R}^d$, $$\mathcal{J}_0 \simeq \simeq \int_0^{1} \exp\big(-ct\|x\|^2\big) t^{\sigma-1}\, dt
    = \|x\|^{-2\sigma} \int_0^{\|x\|^2} e^{-ct} s^{\sigma-1}\, dt 
    \simeq \|x\|^{-2\sigma} \big( \|x\|^{2\sigma} \wedge 1\big)$$ and $$\mathcal{J}_{\infty} \simeq \simeq \int_1^{\infty} e^{-td} \exp\big(-c\|x\|^2\big) t^{\sigma-1}\, dt
    = C_{d,\sigma} \exp\big(-c\|x\|^2\big).$$ The conclusion follows.

We first focus on strong type inequalities. Then, in view of [@BT Theorem 8], what remains to prove are the following two items.

-   $\mathcal{I}^\sigma$ is not $L^p-L^q$ bounded for $\frac{2\sigma}d<\frac1p<1$ and $0<\frac1q<\frac1p-\frac{2\sigma}d$.

-   $\mathcal{I}^\sigma$ is not $L^p-L^q$ bounded for $0<\frac1p<1-\frac{2\sigma}d$ and $\frac1p+\frac{2\sigma}d\le\frac1q<1$.

To justify (a), we fix $p$ and $q$ satisfying the assumed conditions and define $$f(y) = \chi_{\{\|y\|<1\}} \|y\|^{-2\sigma -d/q}.$$ This function is in $L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$ since $-(2\sigma + d/q)p+d>0$. However, $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f \notin L^q(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Indeed, considering $x$ such that $\|x\|<1$ and using the lower bound from Theorem \[main1\] we get $$\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f(x) \gtrsim \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|/2} \|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d} \|y\|^{-2\sigma-d/q}\, dy
    \gtrsim \|x\|^{2\sigma-d} \int_{\|y\|<\|x\|/2} \|y\|^{-2\sigma-d/q}\, dy = C \|x\|^{-d/q},$$ and the function $x \mapsto \chi_{\{\|x\|< 1\}} \|x\|^{-d/q}$ does not belong to $L^q(\mathbb{R}^d)$.

Proving (b) we may assume that $(\frac{1}{p},\frac{1}{q})$ lies on the critical segment $\frac1q=\frac1p+\frac{2\sigma}d$, $0<\frac1p<1-\frac{2\sigma}d$. The case when $\frac1q>\frac1p+\frac{2\sigma}d$ is contained below, in the negative result concerning the restricted weak type estimate. Define $$f(y) = \chi_{\{\|y\|>e\}} \|y\|^{-d/p} \big( \log\|y\|\big)^{-1/p-2\sigma/d}.$$ We have $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^d} |f(y)|^p\, dy = C_d \int_e^{\infty} r^{-1} (\log r)^{-1-2\sigma p/d}\, dr < \infty,$$ so $f \in L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$. We claim that $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f \notin L^q(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Assuming that $\|x\| > 2e$ and using the lower bound from Theorem \[main1\] we write $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f(x) & \gtrsim \int_{\|x\|/2 < \|y\| < \|x\|} \|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d}
    \exp\big(-c\|x-y\|(\|x\|+\|y\|)\big) \|y\|^{-d/p} \big(\log\|y\|\big)^{-1/p-2\sigma/d}\, dy \\
& \gtrsim \|x\|^{-d/p} \big(\log\|x\|\big)^{-1/p-2\sigma/d}
    \int_{\|x\|/2 < \|y\| < \|x\|} \|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d} \exp\big(-2c\|x-y\| \|x\|\big)\, dy.\end{aligned}$$ As we shall see in a moment, the last integral is comparable with $\|x\|^{-2\sigma}$. Thus $$\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f(x) \gtrsim \|x\|^{-d/p-2\sigma} \big(\log\|x\|\big)^{-1/p-2\sigma/d}
    = \|x\|^{-d/q} \big(\log\|x\|\big)^{-1/q}, \qquad \|x\| > 2e,$$ and the claim follows.

It remains to analyze the last integral, which we denote by $\mathcal{J}$. Changing the variable $y=x - z/\|x\|$ we get $$\mathcal{J} = \|x\|^{-2\sigma} \int_{{D}_x} \|z\|^{2\sigma-d} e^{-2c\|z\|}\, dz,$$ where the set of integration is ${D}_x = \{z \in \mathbb{R}^d : \|x\|^2/2 < \|\,x\|x\|-z\| < \|x\|^2\}$. We now observe that ${D}_x$ contains the ball $B_x = \{z \in \mathbb{R}^d : \|\,x\|x\|/4-z\| < \|x\|^2/4\}$. Indeed, if $z \in B_x$ then $$\frac{\|x\|^2}2 < \Bigg| \bigg\| \frac{x\|x\|}4-z\bigg\| - \bigg\|\frac{3}4 x\|x\|\bigg\| \Bigg|
\le \big\| \,x\|x\|-z\big\| \le \bigg\| \frac{x\|x\|}4 - z\bigg\| + \bigg\|\frac{3}4 x \|x\|\bigg\| 
< \|x\|^2.$$ Thus we have $$\|x\|^{-2\sigma} \int_{{B}_x} \|z\|^{2\sigma-d} e^{-2c\|z\|}\, dz \le \mathcal{J} \le
\|x\|^{-2\sigma} \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \|z\|^{2\sigma-d} e^{-2c\|z\|}\, dz.$$ Clearly, the integral over $\mathbb{R}^d$ here is finite. The integral over $B_x$ depends on $x$ only through $\|x\|$. Since the balls $B_x$ are increasing in the sense of $\subset$ when $x$ is moved away from the origin along a fixed line passing through the origin, we see that the integral over $B_x$ is an increasing function of $\|x\|$, which is positive and finite. We conclude that $\mathcal{J} \simeq \|x\|^{-2\sigma}$, $\|x\| > 1$, as desired.

We pass to weak type and restricted weak type inequalities. Consider first the three ‘corners’ of the boundary of $R$ from the statement of Theorem \[thm:LpLq\]. If $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q) = (1,1-\frac{2\sigma}d)$, then the weak type $(1,\frac{d}{d-2\sigma})$ holds by [@NS3 Theorem 2.3]. Notice that this property can be expressed in terms of Lorentz spaces by saying that $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is bounded from $L^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$ to $L^{d/(d-2\sigma),\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Then $(\mathcal{I}^{\sigma})^*$ (the adjoint operator in the Banach space sense) maps boundedly $(L^{d/(d-2\sigma),\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d))^*$ into $(L^1(\mathbb{R}^d))^* = L^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Further, the associate space of $L^{d/(d-2\sigma),\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ in the sense of [@BS Chapter 1, Definition 2.3] is $L^{d/(2\sigma),1}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ (cf. [@BS Chapter 4, Theorem 4.7]), and by [@BS Chapter 1, Theorem 2.9] it can be regarded as a subspace of the dual of $L^{d/(d-2\sigma),\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$. Since $(\mathcal{I}^{\sigma})^* = \mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ by symmetry of the kernel, we infer that $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is of restricted weak type $(\frac{d}{2\sigma},\infty)$. On the other hand, weak type $(\frac{d}{2\sigma},\infty)$ coincides, by definition, with the strong type, so $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is not of weak type $(\frac{d}{2\sigma},\infty)$ in view of the strong type results we already know. This clarifies the situations related to the ‘corners’ $(1,1-\frac{2\sigma}d)$ and $(\frac{2\sigma}d,0)$.

Taking into account $(\frac{1}p,\frac{1}q) = (0,\frac{2\sigma}d)$, we will show that $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ is of weak type $(\infty, \frac{d}{2\sigma})$. To do that, it is enough to verify the estimate $$\label{w}
\big|\big\{x\in \mathbb{R}^d : |\mathcal{I}^\sigma f(x)|>\lambda\big\}\big|
\lesssim \bigg(\frac{\|f\|_{\infty}}{\lambda}\bigg)^{d\slash(2\sigma)}, 
\qquad \lambda>0,\quad f\in L^\infty(\mathbb{R}^d).$$ But this is immediate in view of the bound, see Lemma \[lem:le3\], $$\|\mathcal K^\sigma(x,\cdot)\|_1\le C\|x\|^{-2\sigma}, \qquad x\in\mathbb{R}^d,$$ since then it follows that $|\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f(x)| \le C \|x\|^{-2\sigma} \|f\|_{\infty}$ and consequently $$\big\{x\in \mathbb{R}^d : |\mathcal I^\sigma f(x)|>\lambda\big\}\subset 
\bigg\{x\in \mathbb{R}^d : \|x\|<\bigg(C\frac{\|f\|_\infty}{\lambda}\bigg)^{1/{2\sigma}}\bigg\}.$$ This inclusion leads directly to .

Finally, we disprove the restricted weak type in the two triangles, see Figure \[fig1\]. In the lower triangle we use an *au contraire* argument involving an extension of the Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem for Lorentz spaces due to Stein and Weiss [@BS Chapter 4, Theorem 5.5]. Indeed, if $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ were of restricted weak type $(p,q)$ for some $p$ and $q$ such that $\frac{1}q < \frac{1}p - \frac{2\sigma}d$, then by interpolation with a strong type pair satisfying $\frac{1}q = \frac{1}p-\frac{2\sigma}d$, $p>1$, $q < \infty$, $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ would be of strong type $(\widetilde{p},\widetilde{q})$ for some $\widetilde{p}$ and $\widetilde{q}$ corresponding to a point in the lower triangle, a contradiction with $(a)$ above.

To treat the upper triangle, we will give an explicit counterexample. Let for large $r$ $$f_{r}(y) = \chi_{\{\|y\|<r\}}.$$ Clearly, we have $\|f_r\|_{p} \simeq r^{d/p}$. Estimating as in the proof of (b) above, we get $$\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f_r(x) & \gtrsim \int_{\|x\|/2 < \|y\| < \|x\|} \|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d}
    \exp\big(-c\|x-y\|(\|x\|+\|y\|)\big) \chi_{\{\|y\|<r\}} \, dy \\
& \ge \chi_{\{\|x\|<r\}}
    \int_{\|x\|/2 < \|y\| < \|x\|} \|x-y\|^{2\sigma-d} \exp\big(-2c\|x-y\| \|x\|\big)\, dy \\
& \gtrsim \chi_{\{1 < \|x\| < r\}} \|x\|^{-2\sigma},\end{aligned}$$ uniformly in large $r$ and $x \in \mathbb{R}^d$. Consequently, $$\big| \big\{ x \in \mathbb{R}^d : \mathcal{I}^{\sigma}f_r(x) > \lambda \big\}\big| \ge
\big|\big\{ 1 < \|x\| < r : \|x\| < (C\lambda)^{-1/(2\sigma)} \big\}\big|$$ for some $C>0$ independent of $r$ and $\lambda > 0$. Taking $\lambda = r^{-2\sigma}$ we conclude that the weak type $(p,q)$ estimate for $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ implies $r^d \lesssim r^{dq/p + 2\sigma q}$. This bound, however, fails when $\frac{1}q > \frac{1}p + \frac{2\sigma}d$ and $r\to \infty$.

The proof is finished.

For completeness, we remark that in the context of Theorem \[thm:LpLq\] the question of weak/restricted weak type $(p,q)$ inequalities related to the segment $\frac{1}q = \frac{1}p+\frac{2\sigma}d$, $1 \le q < \frac{2\sigma}d$, is more subtle and remains open. Considering the case $\sigma>d/2$, the operator $\mathcal{I}^\sigma$ is bounded from $L^p(\mathbb R^d)$ to $L^q(\mathbb R^d)$ for every $1\le p,q\le\infty$, see [@NS3 Theorem 2.3]. The behavior of $\mathcal{I}^{\sigma}$ in the limiting case $\sigma = d/2$ is described by the theorem below. This result enhances [@NS3 Theorem 2.3] when $\sigma = d/2$.

Let $d \ge 1$ and $1 \le p,q \le \infty$. Then $\mathcal{I}^{d/2}$ is bounded from $L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$ to $L^q(\mathbb{R}^d)$ except for $(p,q)=(\infty,1)$ and $(p,q)=(1,\infty)$. Considering the two singular cases, we have:

-   $\mathcal{I}^{d/2}$ is of weak type $(\infty,1)$, but not of strong type $(\infty,1)$;

-   $\mathcal{I}^{d/2}$ is not of restricted weak type $(1,\infty)$.

The $L^p$-$L^q$ boundedness is contained in [@NS3 Theorem 2.3]. To show (i), we observe that the weak type $(\infty,1)$ holds true since the proof of covers also the case $\sigma = d/2$. The strong type $(\infty,1)$ fails because $\mathcal{I}^{d/2}\boldsymbol{1} \notin L^1(\mathbb{R}^d)$, as easily seen by means of Lemma \[lem:le3\].

It remains to verify (ii). For $0< \varepsilon < 1/e$, let $f_{\varepsilon}(x) = \chi_{\{\|x\|<\varepsilon\}}$. By the lower bound of Theorem \[main1\] it follows that $$\mathcal{I}^{d/2}f_{\varepsilon}(x) \gtrsim \int_{\|y\|< \varepsilon}
    \log \frac{1}{\|x-y\|(\|x\|+\|y\|)} \, dy, \qquad \|x\|< 1/e,$$ uniformly in $\varepsilon < 1/e$. Therefore, $$\big\|\mathcal{I}^{d/2}f_{\varepsilon}\big\|_{\infty} \gtrsim \int_{\|y\|<\varepsilon} -\log \|y\|\,dy
    = C_d \int_0^{\varepsilon} -r^{d-1}\log r \, dr \gtrsim \varepsilon^d \log\frac{1}{\varepsilon},
        \qquad 0 < \varepsilon < 1/e,$$ and we conclude that $$\frac{\|\mathcal{I}^{d/2}f_{\varepsilon}\|_{\infty}}{\|f_{\varepsilon}\|_1} \gtrsim 
    \log\frac{1}{\varepsilon}, \qquad 0 < \varepsilon < 1/e.$$ Letting $\varepsilon \to 0^+$, we see that $\mathcal{I}^{d/2}$ is not of restricted weak type $(1,\infty)$.

[999]{}

C[.]{} Bennett and M[.]{} Sharpley, *Interpolation of operators*, Academic Press Professional, Inc[.]{}, San Diego, 1987.

B[.]{} Bongioanni and J[.]{} L[.]{} Torrea, *Sobolev spaces associated to the harmonic oscillator*, Proc[.]{} Indian Acad[.]{} Sci[.]{} Math[.]{} Sci[.]{} 116 (2006), 337–360.

A[.]{} Nowak and K[.]{} Stempak, *Riesz transforms and conjugacy for Laguerre function expansions of Hermite type*, J[.]{} Funct[.]{} Anal[.]{} 244 (2007), 399–443.

A[.]{} Nowak and K[.]{} Stempak, *Riesz transforms for multi-dimensional Laguerre function expansions*, Adv[.]{} Math[.]{} 215 (2007), 642–678.

A[.]{} Nowak and K[.]{} Stempak, *Negative powers of Laguerre operators*, Canad[.]{} J[.]{} Math[.]{} 64 (2012), 183–216.

K[.]{} Stempak and J[.]{} L[.]{} Torrea, *Poisson integrals and Riesz transforms for Hermite function expansions with weights*, J[.]{} Funct[.]{} Anal[.]{} 202 (2003), 443–472.

K[.]{} Stempak and J[.]{} L[.]{} Torrea, *BMO results for operators associated to Hermite expansions*, Illinois J[.]{} Math[.]{} 49 (2005), 1111–1131.
