---
abstract: |
    Let $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ be frames for $\cal H$ and let $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ be a frame multiplier with the symbol $m$. In this paper, we restrict our investigation to show that the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ are stable under the perturbations of $\Phi$, $\Psi$ and $m$. Also, special attention is devoted to the study of invertible frame multipliers. These results are not only of interest in their own right, but also they pave the way for obtaining some new results for Gabor multipliers which have been studied mostly by Hans Georg Feichtinger and his coauthors in recent years.\
    [**Mathematics Subject Classification**]{}: Primary: 42C15; Secondary: 47A55, 47A58.

    [**Key words**]{}: Multiplier, perturbation, invertibility, frame, (canonical) dual frame.\
author:
- '[H. Javanshiri]{}'
title: '[**Invariances of the operator properties of frame multipliers under perturbations of frames and symbol**]{}'
---

\[section\] \[theorem\][**Proposition**]{} \[theorem\][**Lemma**]{} \[theorem\][**Corollary**]{} \[theorem\][**Proof**]{} \[theorem\][**Note**]{} \[theorem\][**Remark**]{} \[theorem\][**Definitions**]{} \[theorem\][**Definition**]{}

**Introduction**
================

Throughout this paper, we denote by $\cal H$ a separable Hilbert space with the inner product “$\big<\cdot,\cdot\big>"$. Also, $\ell^2$ and $\ell^\infty$ have their usual meanings and $(\delta_n)_n$ refers to the canonical orthonormal basis of $\ell^2$. Moreover, our notation and terminology are standard and, concerning frames in Hilbert spaces, they are in general those of the book [@c] of Christensen. All over in this paper $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are sequences $(\varphi_n)_n$ and $(\psi_n)_n$ in $\cal
H$, and in the case where $\Phi$ is a Bessel sequence, the analysis operator is denoted by $U_\Phi$, the synthesis operator by $T_\Phi$ and the frame operator by $S_\Phi$. The canonical dual of the frame $\Phi$ is denoted by $\widetilde{\Phi}=(\widetilde{\varphi}_n)_n$, and we denote by $A_{\Phi}$ and $B_{\Phi}$ the lower and upper frame bounds of $\Phi$, respectively. The notation $m$ is used to denote a complex scalar sequence $(m_n)_n$, $1/m=(1/m_n)_n$ and $\overline{m}=(\overline{m}_n)_n$, where ${\overline{m}}_n$ denotes the complex conjugate of $m_n$. The sequence $m$ is called semi-normalized if $0<\inf_n|m_n|\leq\sup_n|m_n|<\infty$. For $m\in \ell^\infty$, ${\cal M}_m$ denotes the mapping defined by ${\cal M}_m(c_n)_n=(m_nc_n)_n$ from $\ell^2$ into $\ell^2$. Also, the main object of study of this work is the operator $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ which denotes the map defined by the equality $$M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}(f)=T_\Phi{\cal M}_m U_\Psi(f)=
\sum_{n=1}^\infty m_n\big<f,\psi_n\big>\phi_n
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(f\in {\cal H});$$ this operator is called multiplier with symbol $m$. In particular, the adjoint of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$, denoted by $(M_{m,\Phi,\Psi})^*$, is equal to $M_{\overline{m},\Psi,\Phi}$.

The notions of Bessel multiplier, frame multiplier and Riesz multiplier, as an extension of Gabor multipliers [@feichmulti1], were introduced and first studied by Balazs [@balaz3] for Hilbert space. As far as we know the subject, the starting point of the study of such operators is Schatten’s paper [@scha], and in the works [@feichmulti0; @feichmulti; @feichmulti1], they are considered in Fourier and Gabor analysis. In particular, this class of operators has been extensively studied and has many applications in different contexts. The reader can find in the papers \[1–3\] and \[5–12\] a lot of information about the history of this class of operators, some of their properties and their applications in scientific disciplines and in modern life.

For some applications it is important to consider the stability of the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ under perturbations of $\Phi$, $\Psi$ and $m$. For this purpose, we restrict our investigation to the study of the effect of perturbations of $\Phi$, $\Psi$ and $m$ on the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$. Among other things, we obtain some conditions under which the inverse of an invertible frame multiplier can be represented as a multiplier with the reciprocal symbol and canonical dual frames of the given ones.

**Main results**
================

Let us commence with the following result, which provides some equivalent conditions for those invertible frame multipliers $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ whose inverses is $M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\widetilde{\Phi}}$.

Suppose that $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are frames for $\cal H$, and that $m$ is a semi-normalized sequence for which $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is invertible. Suppose also that $A_\Phi$ and $A_\Psi$ are the optimal lower frame bounds of $\Phi$ and $\Psi$, respectively, and $|m|$ refers to the sequence $(|m_n|)_n$. Then $M^{-1}_{m,\Phi,\Psi}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\widetilde{\Phi}}$ if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied:

[()]{}

$\|S^{-1}_{\Psi}\|=\|M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}\,T_\Phi{\cal
M}_{|m|}\|^2$.

The optimal upper frame bound of the frame $(M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}(m_n\varphi_n))_n$ is $A^{-1}_\Psi$.

$\|S^{-1}_{\Phi}\|=\|(M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1})^*T_\Psi{\cal
M}_{|m|}\|^2$.

The optimal upper frame bound of the frame $(M_{\overline{m},\Psi,\Phi}^{-1}(\overline{m}_n\psi_n))_n$ is $A^{-1}_\Phi$.

[Proof.]{} Denote $M:=M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ and suppose that $$\psi_n^\dagger=M^{-1}(m_n\varphi_n)\quad\quad
{\hbox{and}}\quad\quad
\varphi_n^\dagger=(M^{-1})^*(\overline{m}_n\psi_n)
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(n\in{\Bbb N}).$$ As was shown in [@balaz3 Theorem 1.1], $\Psi^\dagger=(\psi_n^\dagger)$ and $\Phi^\dagger=(\varphi_n^\dagger)$ are the unique dual frames of $\Psi$ and $\Phi$, respectively, such that $$M^{-1}=M_{1/m,\Psi^\dagger,\widetilde{\Phi}}\quad\quad\quad{\hbox{and}}
\quad\quad\quad M^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\Phi^\dagger}.$$ First observe that $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\Psi^\dagger}=M^{-1}T_\Phi{\cal M}_{|m|}(M^{-1}T_\Phi{\cal
M}_{|m|})^*~~~~\quad\quad\quad{\hbox{and}}\quad\quad\quad
S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}=S^{-1}_{\Psi},\end{aligned}$$ and $$\begin{aligned}
S_{\Phi^\dagger}=(M^{-1})^*T_\Psi{\cal
M}_{|m|}{\Big(}(M^{-1})^*T_\Psi{\cal
M}_{|m|}{\Big)}^*\quad\quad{\hbox{and}}\quad\quad\quad
S_{\widetilde{\Phi}}=S^{-1}_{\Phi}.\end{aligned}$$ From these, by [@mur Theorem 2.3.1], we have $$\|S_{\Psi^\dagger}\|=\|M^{-1}T_\Phi{\cal M}_{|m|}\|^2\quad\quad
{\hbox{and}}\quad\quad
\|S_{\Phi^\dagger}\|=\|(M^{-1})^*T_\Psi{\cal M}_{|m|}\|^2.$$ Hence, if $\Psi^\dagger=\widetilde{\Psi}$ \[respectively, $\Phi^\dagger=\widetilde{\Phi}$\], then the condition (i) \[respectively, (iii)\] is satisfied.

Conversely, if condition (i) is satisfied, then, by using [@c Theorem 5.7.4] and its proof, there exists a bounded operator $W:\ell^2\rightarrow{\cal H}$ such that $$\label{parsaj}
\psi_n^\dagger=\widetilde{\psi}_n+V\delta_n\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad(n\in{\Bbb
N}),$$ where $V=W(Id_{\cal H}-U_\Psi S^{-1}_\Psi T_{\Psi})$. Now, it is not hard to check that $T_{\Psi^\dagger}=T_{\widetilde{\Psi}}+V$, $U_{\Psi^\dagger}=U_{\widetilde{\Psi}}+V^*$, $T_{\widetilde{\Psi}}V^*=0$ and $VU_{\widetilde{\Psi}}=0$. It follows that $S_{\Psi^\dagger}=S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}+VV^*$. This, together with the positivity of the operators $S_{\Psi^\dagger}$, $S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}$ and $VV^*$ imply that $$\begin{aligned}
\label{gelarj}
\|S_{\Psi^\dagger}\|=\sup_{\|f\|\leq
1}\big<S_{\Psi^\dagger}f,f\big>=\|S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}\|+\sup_{\|f\|\leq
1}{\|}V^*f{\|}^2.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, by Eq. (\[parsaj\]) and (\[gelarj\]), we get $V=0$ and thus $\Psi^\dagger=\widetilde{\Psi}$. Similarly, if condition (ii) is satisfied, the inverse of $M$ is $M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\widetilde{\Phi}}$ either.

Finally, to prove condition (ii) \[respectively, (iv)\] is equivalent to the equality $M^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\widetilde{\Phi}}$, it will be enough to note that, by [@c Lemma 5.1.6 and Proposition 5.3.8], $\|S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}\|=A^{-1}_\Psi$ \[respectively, $\|S_{\widetilde{\Phi}}\|=A^{-1}_\Phi$\]; this is because of, as seen above $\|S_{\Psi^\dagger}\|=\|S_{\widetilde{\Psi}}\|$ \[respectively, $\|S_{\Phi^\dagger}\|=\|S_{\widetilde{\Phi}}\|$\] if and only if $\Psi^\dagger=\widetilde{\Psi}$ \[respectively, $\Phi^\dagger=\widetilde{\Phi}$\], and on the other hand $\|S_{\Psi^\dagger}\|$ \[respectively, $\|S_{\Phi^\dagger}\|$\] is equal to the optimal upper frame bound of ${\Psi^\dagger}$ \[respectively, ${\Phi^\dagger}$\].${\hfill\blacksquare}$\
For the formulation of the following statements, which guarantee the stability of the operator properties of a frame multiplier under the perturbations of frames, we need the following definition. Some basic properties of multipliers can be found in [@balaz3 Theorem 6.1] and [@feichmulti1].

Let $\Phi$ be a sequence in $\cal H$, $m\in\ell^\infty$ and $\mu,
\varepsilon>0$.

[()]{}

We say that a sequence $\Phi'=(\varphi'_n)_n$ in $\cal H$ is a $\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$ if $\|T_\Phi-T_{\Phi'}\|\leq\mu$.

We call the sequence $m'=(m_n)_n$ a $\varepsilon$-perturbation of $m$ whenever $\|m-m'\|_\infty\leq\varepsilon$.

In what follows, for closed subspace $X$ of $\ell^2$, the notation $\pi_X$ is used to denote the orthogonal projection of $\ell^2$ onto $X$. Moreover, the range of the operator $Q$ is denoted by ${\cal R}(Q)$.

\[per1\] Let $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ be frames for $\cal H$ with frame bounds $A_\Phi, B_\Phi$ and $A_\Psi, B_\Psi$, respectively, and let $m$ be a semi-normalized symbol. If $\Phi'$ is a $\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$ which $\mu<\sqrt{A_\Phi}$, then there exists a frame $\Psi'=(\psi'_n)_n$ which is a $\lambda\mu$-perturbation of $\Psi$ for some $\lambda>0$ and $M_{m,\Phi',\Psi'}=M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$. In particular, the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ [(]{}such as compactness, invertibility, surjectivity and etc.[)]{} are stable under the perturbations of $\Phi$.

[Proof.]{} First note that [@c Theorem 5.6.1] together with the fact that $\Phi'$ is a $\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$, where $\mu<\sqrt{A_\Phi}$, implies that $\Phi'$ is a frame for $\cal H$ with lower frame bound $A_{\Phi'}=(\sqrt{A_\Phi}-\mu)^2$. Hence, since $m$ is a semi-normalized sequence, we can deduce that $m\Phi'$ is a frame for $\cal H$ with lower frame bound $A_{m\Phi'}=(\inf_n|m_n|)^2(\sqrt{A_\Phi}-\mu)^2$. In particular, it is easy to see that $$\ell^2={\cal R}(U_{m\Phi'})\oplus\ker(T_{m\Phi'})\quad\quad\quad
{\hbox{and}}\quad\quad\quad
U_{m\Phi'}T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}=U_{m\Phi'}S^{-1}_{m\Phi'}T_{m\Phi'}=\pi_{{\cal
R}(T_{m\Phi'})}.$$ Now, if we set $$\Psi':={\Big(}M_{\overline{m},\Psi,\Phi}\,S^{-1}_{m\Phi'}(m_n\varphi'_n)+
T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}(\delta_n){\Big)}_n\quad\quad\quad(n\in{\Bbb
N}),$$ then, for each sequence $c=(c_n)\in\ell^2$, we have $$\begin{aligned}
T_{\Psi'}c&=&\sum_{n=1}^\infty c_nM_{\overline{m},
\Psi,\Phi}\,S^{-1}_{m\Phi'}(m_n\varphi'_n)+\sum_{n=1}^\infty c_n
T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}(\delta_n)\\
&=&T_\Psi
U_{m\Phi}T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}c+T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}c.\end{aligned}$$ Therefore, we observe $$\begin{aligned}
T_\Psi(U_{m\Phi}-U_{m\Phi'})T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}&=&T_\Psi
U_{m\Phi}T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}-T_\Psi
U_{m\Phi'}T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}+T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}-
T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}\\
&=&T_\Psi
U_{m\Phi}T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}+T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}-
(T_\Psi\pi_{{\cal R}(T_{m\Phi'})}+T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})})\\
&=&T_{\Psi'}-T_{\Psi}.\end{aligned}$$ It follows that $$\begin{aligned}
\|T_\Psi'-T_\Psi\|&\leq&\|T_\Psi\|\,\|U_{m\Phi}-U_{m\Phi'}\|
\,\|T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}\|\\
&\leq&\|T_\Psi\|\,\|m\|_\infty\,\|U_{\Phi}-U_{\Phi'}\|
\,\|T_{\widetilde{m\Phi'}}\|\\
&\leq&\mu\frac{\|m\|_\infty\sqrt{B_\Psi}}{(\inf_n|m_n|)(\sqrt{A_\Phi}-\mu)},\end{aligned}$$ and thus $\Psi'$ is a $\lambda\mu$-perturbation of $\Psi$, where $\lambda:=\|m\|_\infty\sqrt{B_\Psi}/(\inf_n|m_n|)(\sqrt{A_\Phi}-\mu)$. Finally, we note that $$\begin{aligned}
M_{m,\Phi',\Psi'}(f)&=&\sum_{n=1}^\infty\big<f,M_{\overline{m},
\Psi,\Phi}S^{-1}_{m\Phi'}(m_n\varphi'_n)\big>m_n\varphi'_n+
\sum_{n=1}^\infty\big<f,T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}(\delta_n)\big>m_n\varphi'_n\\
&=&M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}(f),\end{aligned}$$ for all $f\in{\cal H}$. We have now completed the proof of the theorem.${\hfill\blacksquare}$\
The following remark is now immediate:

[Let $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ be frames for $\cal H$ with frame bounds $A_\Phi, B_\Phi$ and $A_\Psi, B_\Psi$, respectively, and let $m$ be a semi-normalized symbol. With an argument similar to the proof of Theorem \[per1\] and using the adjoint of the frame multiplier $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ one can show that if $\Psi'$ is a $\mu$-perturbation of $\Psi$ which $\mu<\sqrt{A_\Psi}$, then there exists a frame $\Phi'$ which is a $\lambda\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$ for some $\lambda>0$ and $M_{m,\Phi',\Psi'}=M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$. In particular, the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ are stable under the perturbations of $\Psi$.]{}

It is notable that a $\varepsilon$-perturbation of a sequence $m\in\ell^\infty$ is not necessarily a semi-normalized sequence even if $m$ is semi-normalized. In the case where $m$ is a sequence in $\ell^\infty$ for which the inequality $\inf_n|m_n|>
0$ is not necessarily valid, we have the following result. The reader will remark that a result similar to the following theorem, which is stated for $\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$, can be formulated for $\mu$-perturbation of $\Psi$, and so the details are omitted here.

\[per2\] Let $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ be frames for $\cal H$ with frame bounds $A_\Phi, B_\Phi$ and $A_\Psi, B_\Psi$, respectively, and let $m$ be a sequence in $\ell^\infty$ such that the frame multiplier $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is invertible. If $\Phi'$ is a $\mu$-perturbation of $\Phi$ which $\mu\|m\|_\infty<(\sqrt{B_\Phi}\,\|M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}\|)^{-1}$, then there exists a frame $\Psi'$ which is a $\lambda\mu$-perturbation of $\Psi$ for some $\lambda>0$ and $M_{m,\Phi',\Psi'}=M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$. In particular, the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ are stable under the perturbations of $\Phi$.

[Proof.]{} First note that, it is not hard to check that $m\Phi$ is a frame with lower frame bound $A_{m\Phi}:=(B_\Phi\|M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}\|^2)^{-1}$. Moreover, we observe that $$\|T_{m\Phi}-T_{m\Phi'}\|\leq\|m\|_\infty\|T_{\Phi}-T_{\Phi'}\|\leq\mu\|m\|_\infty.$$ Hence, [@c Theorem 5.6.1] implies that $m\Phi'$ is a frame for $\cal H$, and thus if we set $$\psi'_n:=M_{\overline{m},\Psi,\Phi}\,S^{-1}_{m\Phi'}(m_n\varphi'_n)+
T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m\Phi'})}(\delta_n)\quad\quad\quad\quad(n\in {\Bbb N}),$$ then with an argument similar to the proof of Theorem \[per1\] one can show that $\Psi'$ is the desired frame.${\hfill\blacksquare}$\
Next we turn our attention to the perturbations of the symbol of a frame multiplier whose proof is omitted for conciseness, since it can be obtained with an argument similar to the proof of Theorems \[per1\] and \[per2\].

\[per3\] Let $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ be frames for $\cal H$ with frame bounds $A_\Phi, B_\Phi$ and $A_\Psi, B_\Psi$, respectively, and let $m'$ be a $\varepsilon$-perturbation of $m\in\ell^\infty$. If either

$\bullet$ the frame multiplier $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is invertible and $\varepsilon
B_\Phi<1/\|M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}\|$;

$\bullet$ or $m$ is semi-normalized and $\varepsilon\sqrt{B_\Phi}<(\inf_n|m_n|)\sqrt{B_\Phi}$.

Then in both cases, $\Psi':={\Big(}M_{\overline{m},\Psi,\Phi}\,S^{-1}_{m'\Phi}(m'_n\varphi_n)+
T_\Psi\pi_{\ker(T_{m'\Phi})}(\delta_n){\Big)}_n$ is a $\delta\varepsilon$-perturbation of $\Psi$ for some $\delta>0$ and $M_{m',\Phi,\Psi'}=M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$. In particular, the operator properties of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ are stable under the perturbations of $m$.

The next result gives a new representation for the inverse of any invertible frame multiplier with semi-normalized symbol. In particular, this proposition shows that the inverse of invertible frame multiplier $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ has a decomposition into a sum of $M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\widetilde{\Phi}}$ and $\Gamma^*U_{\widetilde{\Phi}}$, where $\Gamma$ is uniquely determined.

\[main\] Suppose that $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are frames for $\cal H$, and that the symbol $m$ is semi-normalized. If $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is an invertible multiplier, then there exists a unique bounded operator $\Gamma:{\cal H}\rightarrow \ell^2$ such that $$M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},{\Phi^d}}+
\Gamma^*U_{\Phi^d},$$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d=(\varphi_n^d)_n$ of $\Phi$.

[Proof.]{} Define $\Gamma:{\cal H}\rightarrow\ell^2$ by $$\label{1}
\Gamma(f):=U_\Phi(M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1})^*(f)-{\cal M}_{1/\overline{m}}U_\Psi
S^{-1}_\Psi(f)\quad\quad\quad(f\in {\cal H}).$$ Then it is not hard to check that the operator $\Gamma$ is bounded. In particular, $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}T_\Phi=\Gamma^*+S^{-1}_\Psi T_\Psi{\cal
M}_{1/m}$. Using any dual frame $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$ we get $$\label{2}
M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=S^{-1}_\Psi T_\Psi{\cal M}_{1/m}U_{\Phi^d}+
\Gamma^*U_{\Phi^d}.$$ It follows that $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},{\Phi^d}}+
\Gamma^*U_{\Phi^d}$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$. Finally, the proof will be completed by showing that the operator $\Gamma$ is uniquely determined. To this end, suppose on the contrary that Eq. (\[2\]) are hold for two operators $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$. Hence, we have $\Gamma_1^*U_{\Phi^d}=
\Gamma_2^*U_{\Phi^d}$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$. We now invoke part (i) of [@balaz11 Theorem 1.2] to conclude that $\Gamma_1=\Gamma_2$.${\hfill\blacksquare}$\
The following remark is now immediate:

Suppose that $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are frames for $\cal H$, and that the symbol $m$ is semi-normalized. If $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is an invertible multiplier, then

[()]{}

For operator $\Gamma$ in Proposition \[main\] it is not hard to check that $T_\Psi\Gamma=0$. It follows that in the case where $\Psi$ is a Riesz basis, then $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},{\Phi^d}}$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$.

It can be shown by routine calculations that if $\Psi$ is equivalent to $m\Phi$, then for each dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$ the inverse of $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}$ is $M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\Phi^d}$. Conversely, if $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=M_{1/m,\widetilde{\Psi},\Phi^d}$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$, then Proposition \[main\] implies that $\Gamma^*U_{\Phi^d}=0$ for all dual frames $\Phi^d$ of $\Phi$. This together with [@balaz11 Theorem 1.2(i)] implies that $\Gamma=0$. From this, by Eq. (\[1\]), we deduce that ${\cal M}_{\overline{m}}U_\Phi
(M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1})^*=U_\Psi S^{-1}_\Psi$. It follows that $$\big<f,m_n\phi_n\big>=\big<f,M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}S^{-1}_\Psi \psi_n\big>\quad\quad\quad
\quad\quad\quad{\Big(}f\in {\cal H}~ {\hbox{and}}~ n\in {\Bbb
N}{\Big)},$$ and thus the frames $\Psi$ and $m\Phi$ are equivalent.

With an argument similar to the proof of Proposition \[main\] above one can show that $\Theta=U_\Psi
M^{-1}_{m,\Phi,\Psi}-{\cal M}_{1/m}U_\Phi S^{-1}_\Phi$ is the unique bounded operator such that $$M^{-1}_{m,\Phi,\Psi}=M_{1/m,{\Psi^d},\widetilde{\Phi}}+T_{\Psi^d}\Theta,$$ for all dual frames $\Psi^d$ of $\Psi$. In particular, $T_\Phi\Theta=0$. Hence, if $\Phi$ is a Riesz basis, then $M^{-1}_{m,\Phi,\Psi}=M_{1/m,{\Psi^d},\widetilde{\Phi}}$ for all dual frames $\Psi^d$ of $\Psi$. Moreover, for each dual frames $\Psi^d$ of $\Psi$ $M_{m,\Phi,\Psi}^{-1}=M_{1/m,{\Psi^d},\widetilde{\Phi}}$ if and only if $\Phi$ is equivalent to $\overline{m}\Psi$.\

[HD]{}

, Basic definition and properties of Bessel multipliers, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*]{} [**325**]{} (2007), 571-–85.

, Representation of the inverse of a frame multiplier, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*]{} [**422**]{} (2015), 981–994.

, Frame expansions for Gabor multipliers, [*Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.*]{} [**20**]{} (2006), 26–40.

Introduction to frames and Riesz bases, Birkhäuser, (2003).

, Remarks on Fourier multipliers and applications to the wave equation, [*J. Math. Anal. Appl.*]{} [**353**]{} (2009), 583–591.

, Necessary conditions for Schatten class localization operators, [*Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.*]{} [**133**]{} (2005), 3573–3579

, Approximation of Fourier integral operators by Gabor multipliers, [*J. Fourier Anal. Appl.*]{} [**18**]{} (2012), 661–684.

, Representation of operators in the time-frequency domain and generalized Gabor multipliers, [*J. Fourier Anal. Appl.*]{} [**16**]{} (2010), 261–293.

Approximation of matrices by Gabor multipliers, [*IEEE Signal Process. Lett.*]{} [**11**]{} (2004), 883–886.

, Fourier multipliers of classical modulation spaces, [*Appl. Comput. Harmon. Anal.*]{} [**21**]{} (2006), 349–359.

, A first survey of Gabor multipliers. Advances in Gabor analysis. Appl. Numer. Harmon. Anal., pp. 99–128. Birkhäuser, Boston (2003).

, [Representation and approximation of pseudodifferential operators by sums of Gabor multipliers,]{} [*Appl. Anal.*]{} [**90**]{} (2011), 385–401.

, C$^*$-Algebras and Operator Theory, Academic Press, London (1990).

, Norm Ideals of Completely Continuous Operators, Springer, Berlin, (1960).

[Hossein Javanshiri]{}\
Department of Mathematics, Yazd University, P.O. Box: 89195-741, Yazd, Iran\
E-mail: h.javanshiri@yazd.ac.ir\
