Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 51 references

Lexicographic functional calculus and its application to functional calculus calculus

T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper introduces lexicographic functional calculus and proves one derivative formula that makes the three known regularity results for operator functions corollaries of a single theorem.

desk verdict Lexicographic functional calculus is a new and mostly solid construction with a real unifying derivative formula, but the advertised Besov recovery rests on an under-justified step in Theorem 4.4 that needs repair. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08404 v1 pith:LKJZKWHR submitted 2026-08-09 math.FA math.OA

Evangelos A. Nikitopoulos This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.FAmath.OA MSC 47A6047A1326E1547L2046E1046E35
keywords lexicographicfunctionalcalculusdivideddifferencessymmetricallynormedidealsC*-algebraFréchetderivativesVaropoulosalgebraBesovspaces
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper introduces lexicographic functional calculus (LFC), a multivariate functional calculus for tuples of noncommuting self-adjoint elements in which the variables act left to right and chosen elements of an ideal are inserted between consecutive actions. Its purpose is to prove one derivative formula for the map $b \mapsto f(a+b)-f(a)$: when a norm family $\alpha$ controls polynomial LFC in a symmetrically normed ideal $I$, every $f \in C^k_\alpha(\mathbb{R})$ makes this map a $C^k$ map from $I_{\mathrm{sa}}$ into $I$, and its $k$th Fréchet derivative is a permutation sum of the $k$th divided difference $f^{[k]}$ applied through LFC to the directions. The formula is established on polynomials by direct computation and extended by approximation, so no multiple-operator-integral machinery is needed. A single theorem (4.13) then contains the three known smoothness results as corollaries: commutative $C^*$-algebras with $f \in C^k$, finite-dimensional $C^*$-algebras with $f \in C^k$, and arbitrary $C^*$-algebras with $f$ slightly better than $C^k$. This is what the author means by supplying a single framework for 'functional calculus calculus.'

What carries the argument

The central object is lexicographic functional calculus: for a function $\varphi$ of $m$ variables and a tuple $a=(a_1,\ldots,a_m)$ of self-adjoint elements, the expression $\varphi_{A,\alpha}(a)\sharp b$ is built to mean that $a_1$ acts first, then the perturbation $b_1$ is inserted, then $a_2$ acts, and so on, ending with $a_m$. The construction starts from the polynomial rule $P_\otimes(a)\sharp b=\sum c_\delta a_1^{\delta_1}b_1\cdots a_{m-1}^{\delta_{m-1}}b_{m-1}a_m^{\delta_m}$ and extends it by continuity to $\alpha$-continuous functions once the norm family $\alpha$ controls the size of these polynomial evaluations. The same expression, with the $k$th divided difference $f^{[k]}$ in place of $P$ and all $k+1$ entries set to $a+b$, gives the $k$th derivative after symmetrizing over the $b_i$'s. The paper's examples are the uniform family, the finite-dimensional scaled uniform family, and the Varopoulos family, whose norm is the projective tensor-product norm on continuous functions over spectra and which is defined in every $C^*$-algebra.

What would settle it

Take any explicitly given function in the homogeneous Besov space $\dot{B}^{1,\infty}_1(\mathbb{R})$ that is $C^1$ but not $C^2$, and compute whether its first divided difference restricted to $[-1,1]^2$ has finite projective tensor norm; if it does not, the embedding $\dot{B}^{1,\infty}_1(\mathbb{R})\subseteq V C^1(\mathbb{R})$ is false and the Besov recovery through Varopoulos LFC fails. The same derivative formula can be tested directly in $M_2(\mathbb{C})$ with $f(t)=t^4$ and a noncommuting self-adjoint pair $a,b$ to check Theorem 4.13 in a finite-dimensional setting.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The load-bearing claim is Theorem 4.13. For a unital $C^*$-algebra $A$, a symmetrically normed ideal $I$ of $A$, and a family $\alpha$ of possibly infinite norms that controls polynomial lexicographic functional calculus in $I$, the paper proves that $f(a+b)-f(a)\in I$ for all $b\in I_{\mathrm{sa}}$, that $f_{a,I}:I_{\mathrm{sa}}\to I$ is Fréchet $C^k$ with respect to the ideal norm, and that $\partial_{b_k}\cdots\partial_{b_1}f_{a,I}(b)=\sum_{\pi\in S_k} f^{[k]}_{I,\alpha}(a+b,\ldots,a+b)\sharp[b_{\pi(1)},\ldots,b_{\pi(k)}]$. The proof first verifies the formula for polynomials, using the holomorphic perturbation formula, and then extends it by continuity to $C^k_\alpha(\mathbb{R})$. The paper shows that the uniform family controls LFC in commutative and finite-dimensional algebras, and that the Varopoulos family controls LFC in every $C^*$-algebra, so each of the three classical regularity statements follows from the same theorem by checking the relevant divided-difference class.

Load-bearing premise

The proof that Besov-class functions are Varopoulos-$C^k$ rests on an external theorem, quoted without proof, that every function in $B^{k,\infty}_1(\mathbb{R})$ has its $k$th divided difference represented as an integral of $k+1$ bounded measurable functions with finite projective-type norm; if that representation failed, the claimed Besov recovery through Varopoulos LFC would collapse, although the abstract LFC framework and derivative formula would remain intact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In every commutative unital $C^*$-algebra, $f\in C^k(\mathbb{R})$ implies that $a\mapsto f(a)$ is Fréchet $C^k$, with derivative $f^{(k)}(a+b)b_1\cdots b_k$.
  • In every finite-dimensional unital $C^*$-algebra, the same $C^k$ regularity holds and the derivative is an explicit sum over the spectral projections of $a+b$ with the $b_i$'s inserted between them.
  • For every unital $C^*$-algebra, membership in the homogeneous Besov space $\dot{B}^{k,\infty}_1(\mathbb{R})$ or in $C^{k,\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R})$ suffices for $f_A$ to be Fréchet $C^k$.
  • For any symmetrically normed ideal $I$, $f(a+b)-f(a)$ lies in $I$ for every self-adjoint perturbation $b\in I_{\mathrm{sa}}$, and the map $b\mapsto f(a+b)-f(a)$ is $C^k$ with respect to the ideal norm.
  • The derivative formula is explicit enough to serve as a computation rule: symmetrize the $k$th divided difference evaluated at $a+b$ through LFC over the $k$ directions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The norm-control condition is the actual engine: any new family $\alpha$ satisfying it automatically yields a regularity theorem, so the three cases treated in the paper are the first instances of a general recipe rather than isolated results.
  • Identifying $V C^k(\mathbb{R})$ with functions whose $k$th divided difference is Varopoulos-continuous gives an explicit, checkable description of an abstract noncommutative $C^k$ completion; this characterization should transfer to settings where divided differences are already the natural language, such as free probability.
  • A direct next step the paper itself leaves open is whether a scaled uniform family controls polynomial LFC in the Schatten ideals $S_q$; if it does, Theorem 4.13 would immediately reproduce higher-order $S_q$-differentiability without Besov assumptions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a 'lexicographic functional calculus' (LFC) for tuples of noncommuting self-adjoint elements of a unital C*-algebra, with elements of a symmetrically normed ideal I inserted between the variables. For a family α of possibly infinite norms that controls polynomial LFC and is finite on polynomials, the calculus extends from polynomials to the closure C_α(R^m), with norm estimates in I. Three main examples are developed: the uniform family in commutative algebras, a scaled uniform family in finite-dimensional algebras, and the (A-)Varopoulos family in arbitrary C*-algebras, plus an MOI-based example. The main application, Theorem 4.13, asserts that if f belongs to the α-C^k closure C^k_α(R) and α controls polynomial LFC in I, then the map b ↦ f(a+b)−f(a) sends I_sa into I and is Fréchet C^k, with the k-th derivative expressed as a symmetrized LFC applied to the k-th divided difference f^[k]. Corollaries recover the commutative, finite-dimensional, and Besov/Hölder regularity results of Theorem 1.1 and generalize several results on differentiable operator functions in ideals.

Significance. If the proof gaps are repaired, this is a valuable unifying framework: Theorem 4.13 yields a single derivative formula whose commutative, finite-dimensional, and Varopoulos specializations reproduce three previously separate regularity statements, with explicit norm-control hypotheses. The paper gives detailed proofs of the main theorem by polynomial approximation, supplies concrete evaluation formulas in the commutative, finite-dimensional, and Varopoulos settings, and offers a new characterization of Jekel's noncommutative C^k space. It also recovers Peller's Besov regularity theorem and the author's earlier results as corollaries, and it is transparent about which supporting results are sketches or left to the reader. These are concrete, falsifiable claims, and the central derivative theorem is supported by explicit norm estimates rather than by heuristic arguments.

major comments (1)
  1. [§4.1, proof of Theorem 4.4; used in Corollary 4.10 and Theorem 1.12] The final step of the proof of Theorem 4.4 is invalid as written. The text asserts: 'since C^{k+1}(R)⊆C^k_β(R) by Lemma 4.6, it is automatic that if f∈C^k(R), then f^[i]∈VC(R^{i+1}) ...'. Lemma 4.6 only establishes that C^{k+1}(R) is contained in the closure of W^k(R) in C^k_α(R); it does not establish that every f∈C^{k+1} has all divided differences in the Varopoulos algebra. In fact, for k=1 the asserted implication would make every C^2 function operator Lipschitz (equivalently, f^[1]∈VC(R^2)), a much stronger statement than anything proved or cited in the paper. This step is load-bearing: Corollary 4.10 combines Peller's Theorem 4.9 (which gives only f^[k]∈VC(R^{k+1})) with Theorem 4.4 to conclude B^{k,∞}_1⊆VC^k, and Theorem 1.12 uses Corollary 4.10 for the Besov recovery advertised in Theorem 1.1(iii). The abstract LFC framework and Theorem 4.13 are not affected, since they use the closure space C^k_α(R) directly. Note that Remark 4.11 sketches an alternative proof of ˙B^{k,∞}_1⊆VC^k that avoids this disputed implication; if that route is promoted to a formal proof, the Besov recovery can be salvaged. Please either supply a correct proof of the implication in Theorem 4.4 or restructure §4.1 so that Theorem 1.12 depends on the Remark 4.11 argument.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Throughout §4.1] The notation C^k_α(R) and C^k_α(R) is nearly indistinguishable in plain text; in Lemma 4.6 and Theorem 4.4 this ambiguity appears to have contributed to the invalid inference discussed above. Please use an unambiguous notation, e.g., \(\overline{C^k_\alpha}(\mathbb{R})\), throughout.
  2. [Lemma 3.10] Lemma 3.10 is stated without proof, although Theorem 3.11's extension argument relies on it. Since the proof is a straightforward polynomial estimate, it should be included or sketched in the paper.
  3. [Lemma A.4] Lemma A.4 is only sketched. For a self-contained appendix, please expand the proof that the divided-difference map sends Hol(U) into Hol_0(U^{k+1}).
  4. [Theorem 3.30] Theorem 3.30 is presented as a sketch and depends on external MOI facts. If it is to be used as a main example, please supply the details of the closure argument and explicitly state the precise role of [32, Thm. 4.2.4(iii)] and [30, Prop. 4.1.7].
  5. [Lemma 4.6] The case j=0 in formula (4.2) uses Δ_0 and ρ_0, but Notation 4.5 defines Δ_k and ρ_k only for k∈N. Please handle k=0 separately or extend the notation.
  6. [Proof of Theorem 1.12] In the case ε>1, the inclusion 'C^{k,ε}_loc(R)⊆P' is unexplained. Please spell out that a locally Hölder-continuous k-th derivative with exponent greater than 1 is locally constant, hence the function is locally polynomial.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: LFC is extended from polynomial functional calculus, and the headline recoveries are benchmarked against independent external results (Daletskii–Krein, Peller), with self-citations used only as routine citations or reproofs.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing construction is Theorem 1.9/3.11: polynomial LFC is extended continuously to C_alpha spaces, with hypotheses checked directly for the uniform, Varopoulos, A-Varopoulos, and MOI families. The main derivative formula, Theorem 4.13, is proved by polynomial approximation: for polynomials it follows from the independently developed holomorphic functional calculus version (Theorem A.10), and the general case is obtained by continuity in C^k_alpha; it does not assume the Besov, finite-dimensional, or commutative conclusions it later recovers. Theorem 1.1 is recovered by combining Theorem 4.13 with explicitly verified LFC instances, and the Besov case depends on Peller's theorem (Theorem 4.9), an external result cited to [38], [39], and to [30, App. A] only as a proof source. Self-citations appear as reproofs or corollaries (e.g., Corollary 4.19 recovers [32, Thm. 1.2.3] and [30, Thm. 1.2.2]) and as citations of elementary or auxiliary inclusions ([32, Prop. 2.1.3(ii)], [32, Lem. 3.2.3(iii)]), none of which states the target formula or the LFC existence theorem. The apparently abrupt step at the end of the proof of Theorem 4.4 is not circular: for i<k, Lemma 4.6 applied at order i supplies the lower-order divided-difference membership, so the reduction to top-order divided differences is supported; even if that step were faulty, it would be a correctness concern about the Besov recovery, not an instance of the derivation reducing to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters and no new postulated physical or mathematical entities in the graviton sense. Its main theorem carries two kinds of input: the definitional framework of α-controlled LFC (a hypothesis proven for the specific families of interest) and standard external results including Stone-Weierstrass, Bochner integration, and Peller's theorem. The self-cited results in [30] and [32] are used as benchmarks to be recovered or as strict-containment facts, not as premises for the derivative formula.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Stone-Weierstrass theorem and density of polynomials in C([-r,r]^m) and in C^k(R) with the C^k topology
    Used throughout: Proposition 2.4, Corollary 2.5, and the density of P in C^k_u(R) in Section 1.2.
  • standard math Pettis measurability theorem and Bochner integration in Fréchet spaces
    Used in Lemma 2.6, Theorem 2.7, and Lemma 4.7 for the integral description of the Varopoulos algebra and convolution approximation.
  • standard math Isometric identification of the Varopoulos algebra with the projective tensor product C(Ω_1) ⊗_π ... ⊗_π C(Ω_m)
    Theorem 2.9 and Corollary 2.10 prove this using standard projective tensor product facts; it underlies the key bound in Lemma 3.18.
  • domain assumption Peller's theorem (Theorem 4.9): representation of k-th divided differences of B^{k,∞}_1 functions as integral projective products
    External deep result, stated without proof in Section 4.1; needed for Theorem 1.12 (B^{k,∞}_1 ⊆ V C^k). Cited to [38], [39], and [30, App. A].
  • standard math Interchange-of-limits criterion in [24, Thm. 1.85] for nets of C^k functions
    Used in the proof of Theorem 4.13 to pass from polynomial approximation to the Fréchet differentiability of f_{a,I}.
  • domain assumption Strict containment N C^k(R) ⊊ C^k(R) from [32, Thm. 4.4.1]
    Self-cited prior result used in Corollary 4.12 to show V C^k(R) ⊊ C^k(R). This is an external benchmark from the author's earlier published work, not a premise for the main theorem.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lexicographic functional calculus and its application to functional calculus calculus." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LKJZKWHR

@misc{pith2026260808404,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lexicographic functional calculus and its application to functional calculus calculus},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LKJZKWHR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08404}
}
abstract

Let $A$ be a unital $C^*$-algebra and $I$ be a symmetrically normed ideal of $A$. I introduce and study lexicographic functional calculus (LFC), a kind of multivariate functional calculus for tuples $(a_1,\ldots,a_m)$ of noncommuting self-adjoint elements of $A$ ''acting in lexicographic order,'' i.e., from left to right, with an element $b_i \in I$ ''inserted'' between the action of $a_i$ and $a_{i+1}$ for each $i=1,\ldots,m-1$. The reason for its introduction is an application to ''functional calculus calculus,'' the differential calculus of maps induced by single-variate (continuous) functional calculus. Specifically, I prove that if $f\colon\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{C}$ is sufficiently regular and $a\in A_{\mathrm{sa}}:=\{c\in A:c^*=c\}$, then $f_{a,I}(b):=f(a+b)-f(a)\in I$ for all $b\in I_{\mathrm{sa}}:=I\cap A_{\mathrm{sa}}$, the map $f_{a,I}\colon I_{\mathrm{sa}}\to I$ is Fr\'echet $C^k$, and the $k^{\text{th}}$ Fr\'echet derivative of $f_{a,I}$ may be written in terms of LFC applied to the $k^{\text{th}}$ divided difference of $f$, a function of $k+1$ variables. This result recovers or vastly generalizes nearly all comparable results in the literature. For example, it simultaneously recovers the following three highly related results on the regularity of the function $f_A\colon A_{\mathrm{sa}}\to A$ defined by $a\mapsto f(a)$: (1) If $A$ is commutative and $f\in C^k(\mathbb{R})$, then $f_A$ is Fr\'echet $C^k$; (2) if $A$ is finite dimensional and $f\in C^k(\mathbb{R})$, then $f_A$ is Fr\'echet $C^k$; and (3) if $f\colon\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{C}$ is ''slightly better than $C^k$,'' e.g., belongs to the homogeneous Besov space $\dot{B}_1^{k,\infty}(\mathbb{R})$, then $f_A$ is Fr\'echet $C^k$ no matter the choice of $A$. Before LFC, there was no unifying framework for results (1)--(3); in particular, there was no single result of which they were all corollaries.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. B. Aleksandrov and V. V. Peller,Operator Lipschitz functions, Uspekhi Matematicheskikh Nauk71(2016), 3–106 (Russian), English translation: Russian Mathematical Surveys71 (2016), 605–702

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    N. A. Azamov, A. L. Carey, P. G. Dodds, and F. A. Sukochev,Operator integrals, spectral shift, and spectral flow, Canadian Journal of Mathematics61(2009), 241–263

    work page 2009

  3. [3]

    N. P. Brown and N. Ozawa,C∗-Algebras and Finite-Dimensional Approximations, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 88, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Trace formulas for $\mathcal{S}^p$-perturbations and extension of Koplienko-Neidhardt trace formulas

    A. Chattopadhyay, C. Coine, S. Giri, and C. Pradhan,Trace formulas forSp-perturbations and extension of Koplienko-Neidhardt trace formulas, preprint, arXiv:2411.16426 [math.FA], 2024. 55

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    ,NoncommutativeL p-differentiability and trace formulae, preprint, arXiv:2602.10694 [math.OA], 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  6. [6]

    Differentiation, Taylor series, and all order spectral shift functions, for relatively bounded perturbations

    A. Chattopadhyay, T. D. H. van Nuland, and C. Pradhan,Differentiation, Taylor series, and all order spectral shift functions, for relatively bounded perturbations, preprint, arXiv:2404.18422 [math.FA], 2024

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    D. L. Cohn,Measure Theory, 2nd ed., Birkhäuser Advanced Texts Basler Lehrbücher, Birkhäuser, New York, NY, 2013

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    C.Coine,Perturbation theory and higher orderSp-differentiability of operator functions, Revista Matemática Iberoamericana (2022), 189–221

    work page 2022

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Coine, C

    C. Coine, C. Le Merdy, A. Skripka, and F. Sukochev,Higher orderS 2-differentiability and application to Koplienko trace formula, Journal of Functional Analysis276(2019), 3170–3204

    2019

  2. [10]

    R. E. Curto,Applications of several complex variables to multiparameter spectral theory, Sur- veys of Some Recent Results in Operator Theory, Vol. II (J. B. Conway and B. B. Morrel, eds.), Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, vol. 192, Longman Scientific & Technical, H...

    1988

  3. [11]

    Yu. L. Daletskii and S. G. Krein,Integration and differentiation of functions of Hermitian operators and applications to the theory of perturbations, Voronezh. Gos. Univ. Trudy Sem. Funktsional. Anal.1(1956), 81–105, English translation: Thirteen Papers on Functional Anal- ysi...

    1956

  4. [12]

    Deya and R

    A. Deya and R. Schott,On the rough-paths approach to non-commutative stochastic calculus, Journal of Functional Analysis265(2013), 594–628

    2013

  5. [13]

    Dixmier,Von Neumann Algebras, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1981

    J. Dixmier,Von Neumann Algebras, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1981

    1981

  6. [14]

    P. G. Dodds and B. de Pagter,Normed Köthe spaces: A non-commutative viewpoint, Indaga- tiones Mathematicae25(2014), 206–249

    2014

  7. [15]

    P. G. Dodds, B. de Pagter, and F. A. Sukochev,Noncommutative Integration and Operator Theory, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 349, Springer, Cham, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Continuity of the product map

    C. Eckhardt,Answer to “Continuity of the product map”,https://mathoverflow.net/ questions/171624/continuity-of-the-product-map/171683#171683, 2014

    2014

  9. [17]

    Yu. B. Farforovskaya,Example of a Lipschitz function of self-adjoint operators that gives a nonnuclear increment under a nuclear perturbation, Zap. Naučn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (LOMI)30(1972), 146–153 (Russian), English translation: Journal of Soviet Mathe...

    1972

  10. [18]

    ,An estimate of the norm of|f(B)−f(A)|for self-adjoint operatorsAandB, Zap. Naučn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (LOMI)56(1976), 143–162 (Russian), English translation: Journal of Soviet Mathematics14(1980), 1133–1149

    1976

  11. [19]

    R.FerydouniandD.D.Spiegel,Foundations of double operator integrals with a variant approach to the nonseparable case, preprint, arXiv:2510.25789 [math-ph], 2025

    2025

  12. [20]

    Fürst,Higher order spectral shift of Euclidean Callias operators, preprint, arXiv:2506.01647 [math.SP], 2025

    O. Fürst,Higher order spectral shift of Euclidean Callias operators, preprint, arXiv:2506.01647 [math.SP], 2025

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Harte,The spectral mapping theorem in several variables, Bulletin of the American Mathe- matical Society78(1972), 871–875

    R. Harte,The spectral mapping theorem in several variables, Bulletin of the American Mathe- matical Society78(1972), 871–875

    1972

  14. [22]

    R. E. Harte,Spectral mapping theorems, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences72(1972), 89–107

    1972

  15. [23]

    Hiai,Matrix analysis: Matrix monotone functions, matrix means, and majorization, Inter- disciplinary Information Sciences16(2010), 139–248

    F. Hiai,Matrix analysis: Matrix monotone functions, matrix means, and majorization, Inter- disciplinary Information Sciences16(2010), 139–248. 56

    2010

  16. [24]

    Hájek and M

    P. Hájek and M. Johanis,Smooth Analysis in Banach Spaces, De Gruyter Series in Nonlinear Analysis and Applications, vol. 19, De Gruyter, Berlin, 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    D. A. Jekel,Evolution equations in non-commutative probability, UCLA Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2020, ProQuest ID: Jekel_ucla_0031D_18879, Merritt ID: ark:/13030/m5cp2c1f, retrieved fromhttps://escholarship.org/uc/item/8n39f7mt

    2020

  18. [26]

    D. A. Jekel, T. A. Kemp, and E. A. Nikitopoulos,A martingale approach to noncommutative stochastic calculus, Journal of Functional Analysis290(2026), 111200

    2026

  19. [27]

    Le Merdy and E

    C. Le Merdy and E. McDonald,Necessary and sufficient conditions forn-times Fréchet differ- entiability onS p,1< p <∞, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society149(2021), 3381–3887

    2021

  20. [28]

    Le Merdy and A

    C. Le Merdy and A. Skripka,Higher order differentiability of operator functions in Schatten norms, Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu19(2020), 1993–2016

    2020

  21. [29]

    E. A. Nikitopoulos,Itô’s formula for noncommutativeC 2 functions of free Itô processes, Doc- umenta Mathematica27(2022), 1447–1507, Erratum: Documenta Mathematica28(2023), 1275–1277

    2022

  22. [30]

    ,Higher derivatives of operator functions in ideals of von Neumann algebras, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications519(2023), 126705

    2023

  23. [31]

    ,Multiple operator integrals in non-separable von Neumann algebras, JournalofOperator Theory89(2023), 361–427

    2023

  24. [32]

    ,NoncommutativeC k functions and Fréchet derivatives of operator functions, Exposi- tiones Mathematicae41(2023), 115–163

    2023

  25. [33]

    ,On differentiating maps induced by functional calculus and applications to free stochas- tic calculus, UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2024, ProQuest ID: Niki- topoulos_ucsd_0033D_23382, Merritt ID: ark:/13030/m5tz4pr4, retrieved fromhttps:// escholarship.or...

    2024

  26. [34]

    T. D. H. van Nuland and A. Skripka,Spectral shift for relative Schatten class perturbations, Journal of Spectral Theory (2022), 1347–1382

    2022

  27. [35]

    ,Higher-order spectral shift function for resolvent comparable perturbations, Journal of Operator Theory (2025), 3–36

    2025

  28. [36]

    de Pagter and F

    B. de Pagter and F. A. Sukochev,Differentiation of operator functions in non-commutative Lp-spaces, Journal of Functional Analysis212(2004), 28–75

    2004

  29. [37]

    V. V. Peller,Hankel operators in the perturbation theory of unitary and self-adjoint operators, Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen.19(1985), 37–51 (Russian), English translation: Functional Analysis and Its Applications19(1985), 111–123

    1985

  30. [38]

    ,Multiple operator integrals and higher operator derivatives, Journal of Functional Anal- ysis233(2006), 515–544

    2006

  31. [39]

    ,Multiple operator integrals in perturbation theory, Bulletin of Mathematical Sciences6 (2016), 15–88

    2016

  32. [40]

    Potapov, A

    D. Potapov, A. Skripka, and F. Sukochev,Spectral shift function of higher order, Inventiones mathematicae193(2013), 501–538

    2013

  33. [41]

    Pradhan and A

    C. Pradhan and A. Skripka,Positivity of spectral shift functions and infinite-dimensional BMV conjecture, preprint, arXiv:2512.05587 [math.FA], 2025

    2025

  34. [42]

    Putinar,Uniqueness of Taylor’s functional calculus, Proceedings of the American Mathe- matical Society89(1983), 647–650

    M. Putinar,Uniqueness of Taylor’s functional calculus, Proceedings of the American Mathe- matical Society89(1983), 647–650

    1983

  35. [43]

    J. C. Quigg,Approximately periodic functionals onC ∗-algebras and von Neumann algebras, Canadian Journal of Mathematics37(1985), 769–784. 57

    1985

  36. [44]

    Rudin,Functional Analysis, 2nd ed., International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1991

    W. Rudin,Functional Analysis, 2nd ed., International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1991

    1991

  37. [45]

    R. A. Ryan,Introduction to Tensor Products of Banach Spaces, Springer Monographs in Math- ematics, Springer, London, 2002

    2002

  38. [46]

    Skripka and A

    A. Skripka and A. Tomskova,Multilinear Operator Integrals: Theory and Applications, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 2250, Springer, Cham, 2019

    2019

  39. [47]

    Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 1979

    M. Takesaki,Theory of Operator Algebras I, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY, 1979

    1979

  40. [48]

    J. L. Taylor,The analytic-functional calculus for several commuting operators, Acta Mathemat- ica125(1970), 1–38

    1970

  41. [49]

    ,A joint spectrum for several commuting operators, Journal of Functional Analysis6 (1970), 172–191

    1970

  42. [50]

    Treves,Topological Vector Spaces, Distributions and Kernels, Pure and Applied Mathemat- ics, vol

    F. Treves,Topological Vector Spaces, Distributions and Kernels, Pure and Applied Mathemat- ics, vol. 25, Academic Press Inc., New York, NY, 1967

    1967

  43. [51]

    N. Th. Varopoulos,Tensor algebras and harmonic analysis, Acta Mathematica119(1967), 51–112. 58

    1967

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.