Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 43 references

Multilinear operator-valued Calder\'on-Zygmund theory

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 This paper proves a T(1)-type boundedness theorem for multilinear singular integrals whose kernels take values in spaces of operators between UMD Banach spaces; in the bilinear case no Rademacher maximal function assumption is needed.

desk verdict A serious, novel bilinear operator-valued T(1) theorem whose proof omits the key reduction that removes a priori boundedness. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07233 v2 pith:EDLSTVTT submitted 2019-08-20 math.CA math.FA

Francesco Di Plinio , Kangwei Li , Henri Martikainen , Emil Vuorinen This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.CAmath.FA MSC 42B20
keywords operator-valuedCalderón-ZygmundtheoryUMDspacesR-boundednessT(1)theoremdyadicshiftsparaproductsRademachermaximalfunctionnoncommutativeLp
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 develops a multilinear, operator-valued analogue of Calderón–Zygmund theory, extending the linear operator-valued T(1) theorem to n-linear singular integrals acting on tuples of UMD Banach spaces. It proves that if the kernel smoothness, weak boundedness, and T1-type pairings satisfy suitable randomized (R-bounded) hypotheses, then the operator is controlled by a sparse form, and therefore its Lp bounds follow in the full expected range of exponents. The bilinear case is unconditional beyond UMD: no Rademacher maximal function assumption is required. For n≥3 the theorem relies on a new multilinear Rademacher maximal function condition, which the paper verifies for UMD function lattices and for tuples with at most three noncommutative Lp spaces, and it applies the shift theory to bilinear multi-parameter settings under Pisier's property (α).

What carries the argument

The argument runs through operator-valued multilinear dyadic shifts and paraproducts, defined from Haar projections and averages of the input functions with coefficients in spaces of multilinear operators. The representation theorem (Theorem 6.3) decomposes any $T$ satisfying the testing conditions into a random average of such shifts plus paraproducts built from the T1 pairings. Shift boundedness is obtained from an $R_{\varrho}$-boundedness condition on normalized coefficients via decoupling and the RMF condition (Theorem 4.1); paraproduct boundedness uses the UMD subspace condition and a BMO norm of the coefficients (Theorem 5.3). A sparse-form lemma converts these estimates into the final $L^p$ bounds.

What would settle it

Construct a concrete trilinear operator-valued singular integral, say with Schatten-class target spaces, for which the kernel smoothness, weak boundedness, and BMO norms are finite. If the T1 pairings cannot be placed in the required UMD subspaces and the $L^p$ bounds fail, the UMD subspace condition is the true boundary, while if the bounds still hold, the condition is superfluous for that example. Alternatively, test the RMF hypothesis by checking whether the sparse bound persists for a tuple of four noncommutative $L^p$ spaces, where the paper does not establish the RMF property.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Theorem 6.4 is the central claim: let $X_1,\ldots,X_n,Y_{n+1}$ be UMD spaces, and let $T$ be an n-linear singular integral with an operator-valued basic kernel $K$ taking values in $L(X_1\times\cdots\times X_n,Y_{n+1})$. If $T$ satisfies $R_{\varrho}$-bounded versions of kernel smoothness and weak boundedness, and if the T1-type coefficients $\langle T^{m*}1,h_Q\rangle$ satisfy a BMO condition together with a UMD subspace condition, then the form $\langle T(f_1,\dots,f_n),f_{n+1}\rangle$ is bounded by a sparse form with constant $\|K\|_{CZ_{\alpha},\varrho}+\|T\|_{WBP,\varrho}+\sum_{m=0}^n\|T^{m*}1\|_{BMO}$. Consequently $T$ is bounded from $L^{p_1}(X_1)\times\cdots\times L^{p_n}(X_n)$ to $L^q(Y_{n+1})$ whenever $1/p_1+\cdots+1/p_n=1/q>0$. In the bilinear case $n=2$ the theorem needs no Rademacher maximal function assumption; for $n\geq 3$ the tuple of spaces must satisfy the multilinear RMF$_{\varrho}$ property.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the T1-type pairings $\langle T^{m*}1,h_Q\rangle$, viewed as multilinear operators, sit inside a chain of UMD subspaces of the operator spaces; this is an extra structural condition on $T$ rather than a consequence of UMD, and for $n\geq 3$ the tuple must also satisfy the multilinear Rademacher maximal function property.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The bilinear T(1) theorem holds for all tuples of UMD spaces without any Rademacher maximal function assumption, matching the linear operator-valued theory in full generality.
  • For $n\geq 3$, the theorem gives $L^p$ bounds for operator-valued multilinear singular integrals on UMD function lattices and on tuples containing at most three noncommutative $L^p$ spaces, extending the previously known bilinear noncommutative case.
  • The sparse-form conclusion yields the full range of exponents $1/p_1+\cdots+1/p_n=1/q>0$, including the quasi-Banach range $q<1$ when needed, with constants expressed only through $R$-bounds and BMO norms.
  • In the multi-parameter setting, the $R$-boundedness of families of bilinear shifts follows from the $R$-boundedness of their normalized coefficient operators when the spaces have Pisier's property $(\alpha)$, giving bounded bilinear multi-parameter operator-valued shifts.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A decisive next test would be whether the RMF condition for $n\geq 3$ is necessary: constructing a canonically defined operator-valued multilinear singular integral on four noncommutative $L^p$ spaces that fails the sparse bound would show the theorem's restriction is genuine rather than technical.
  • The UMD subspace condition is the least verified hypothesis; concrete operators beyond abstract verification, or a counterexample where the T1 pairings cannot be embedded in UMD subspaces, would sharpen the statement.
  • Because the paper proves boundedness for shifts but stops short of a full multi-parameter representation theorem, completing that representation should yield bilinear multi-parameter operator-valued T(1) theorems directly.
  • The purely $R$-bound and BMO form of the sparse constant suggests that vector-valued weighted theory, once formulated with appropriate Muckenhoupt classes, may follow from the same sparse bound.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a multilinear, operator-valued Calderón-Zygmund theory on tuples of UMD Banach spaces. It introduces a multilinear analogue of R-boundedness (denoted R̟) together with a new Rademacher maximal function condition (RMF̟) needed for multilinearity degree at least three, and it proves boundedness and sparse domination for operator-valued dyadic shifts and paraproducts. The central result is a T(1)-type representation theorem (Theorem 6.3) that decomposes an n-linear operator-valued singular integral into operator-valued dyadic shifts and paraproducts under R-bounded kernel smoothness, R-bounded weak boundedness, and T1-type BMO conditions with UMD subspace hypotheses; Theorem 6.4 then derives sparse domination and Lp bounds. The bilinear case is claimed to be free of any RMF assumptions, and an application to bilinear multi-parameter settings is given for UMD spaces with Pisier's property (α).

Significance. If fully established, this paper is a substantial contribution to Banach space-valued harmonic analysis: it generalizes the operator-valued T(1) theorem of Hytönen--Weis to the multilinear setting and goes beyond existing vector-valued multilinear results by treating operator-valued kernels on UMD spaces, with concrete coverage of noncommutative Lp spaces for multilinearity degree three (under restrictions). The paper contains a considerable amount of explicit and technically demanding work: the shift bounds (Theorem 4.1), the paraproduct bounds (Theorem 5.3), and the main decomposition steps are carried out in detail with transparent constants, and the overall architecture of the proof is natural. The main caveat is that a key reduction in the proof of Theorem 6.3 is asserted without proof, and a supporting proposition on the noncommutative RMF property also omits cases. These gaps are local but load-bearing for the advertised claims.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6.7 (Step VI)] The proof of Theorem 6.3 is incomplete at the point where the a priori boundedness assumption is removed. The proof begins by explicitly assuming T is a priori bounded, and Step VI then states that a representation theorem can first be proved in a finite setup where no a priori boundedness is needed, with the technical details 'similar' to [9,20] and omitted. This reduction is load-bearing: the martingale-difference expansion, the telescoping identity (6.13), and the limits E_{2^k}T(...)→0 used in Sections 6.1–6.6 all rely on a priori boundedness. A finite-cube truncation must produce sparse bounds with constants independent of the truncation parameter and must control all boundary terms arising from cutting the dyadic grid, using only the hypotheses of Definition 6.2. The cited references are scalar-valued and do not cover multilinear operator-valued kernels. Please supply a complete proof of this reduction, or a fully matching reference, before the main theorem can be accepted.
  2. [Section 3.2, Proposition 3.29] The proof of the RMF̟ property for noncommutative Lp spaces omits several cases. In the case #J∩{1,...,κ}=1, the text states for κ=2 that the details are omitted; in the case J∩{1,...,κ}=∅, it asserts for κ=2 a proof 'similar as the previous case (even easier...)' and for κ=3 'similarly as at the very beginning'. Since the abstract and introduction explicitly advertise that the RMF condition covers suitable tuples of noncommutative Lp spaces, these omissions leave the supporting example class insufficiently documented. Please complete the proof or state precisely which cases are covered and at least outline the arguments for the remaining ones.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Theorem 4.1] The statement of Theorem 4.1 includes the RMF̟ hypothesis for n=2, although the RMF̟ condition is defined only for n>2. Please state explicitly that for n=2 this hypothesis is vacuous and not needed.
  2. [Section 2.7, Lemma 2.15] The proof of Lemma 2.15 is deferred to 'the multilinear version of [35]' with no further detail. Since this lemma is a key technical tool for the sparse domination results, a short proof or a more precise statement of the version being used would help the reader.
  3. [Equation (2.16) and Theorem 6.4] The notation ⟨|f_m|_{X_m}⟩_Q is used for the sparse form. As written, this is ambiguous for vector-valued functions; it should be ⟨‖f_m‖_{X_m}⟩_Q or the convention should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Sections 6.3 and 6.5] Some estimates in Steps III and V are justified by 'similarly as in (6.22)' or by 'similar' arguments. While these are plausible and likely correct, at least a sentence indicating the needed modifications (e.g. the role of the common parent K) would improve verifiability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: testing constants are independent hypotheses; Step VI is an omitted technical reduction, not a self-referential one.

full rationale

The main result (Theorem 6.4) is obtained by combining the representation theorem (Theorem 6.3) with boundedness theorems for dyadic shifts and paraproducts (Theorems 4.1 and 5.3). The constants in the sparse-form estimate are exactly the inputs ||K||_{CZα,̟}, ||T||_{WBP,̟} and ||T^{m*}1||_{BMO}, which are defined from the kernel, the weak boundedness pairings, and the T1 pairings; none of these is fitted to the Lp bound being proved. The RMF̟ and UMD-subspace conditions are additional hypotheses, verified for concrete examples (3.27, 3.28), not consequences of the target estimate. Self-citations to [10], [11], and [35] provide a standard sparse-to-Lp reduction, the origin of RMF notions, and the scalar bilinear template, but the operator-valued shift and paraproduct estimates are proved in the present paper, so the derivation does not reduce to those citations. The only explicit gap is in Section 6.7 ('Step VI: T is not a priori bounded'), where the removal of the a priori boundedness assumption is asserted with 'We omit the technical details in our setting as they are similar' and citations [9], [20] to prior finite-setup reductions. This is an omitted proof affecting completeness and correctness risk, not a circularity: the finite-setup representation is claimed to be provable without assuming the target boundedness, and there is no equation or definition in which the conclusion is identified with a hypothesis. Therefore no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central theorem assumes a UMD setting plus a custom UMD subspace condition and, for n ≥ 3, a custom RMF̟ condition. No free parameters are fitted to data; all constants are derived in proofs. The RMF̟ condition is new to this paper and is the main extra input for high multilinearity.

assumptions (8)
  • standard math The tuple spaces are reflexive UMD Banach spaces where stated, and Lp(X) spaces inherit UMD when X is UMD.
    Invoked throughout Sections 2-8; UMD is used for decoupling, Stein inequality, John-Nirenberg, and Kahane contraction.
  • standard math Decoupling inequality of Hänninen-Hytönen, equation (2.6).
    Used in Theorem 4.1 to compare martingale difference sums with randomized sums; quoted from Hänninen-Hytönen.
  • standard math X-valued John-Nirenberg inequality, equation (2.9).
    Used to transfer BMO norms across exponents r in Theorem 5.3 and Definition 6.2.
  • standard math Bourgain-Stein inequality for UMD-valued functions.
    Used in the paraproduct proof in Section 5, citing Theorem 4.2.23 of Hytönen et al.
  • domain assumption Junge's factorization (3.31) for noncommutative Lp martingales.
    Used in Proposition 3.29 to prove the RMF̟ property for noncommutative Lp tuples with κ ≤ 3.
  • ad hoc to paper RMF̟ property of the tuple (X1,...,Xn+1) for n ≥ 3.
    Defined in Section 3.2 and assumed in Theorems 4.1 and 6.4 for higher multilinearity; verified for specific examples but not shown necessary.
  • domain assumption UMD subspace condition on T1 data, Definition 6.2(3).
    Required for paraproduct boundedness and for the representation theorem; not derived from UMD of the underlying spaces.
  • domain assumption Pisier's property (α) for the multi-parameter results.
    Assumed in Theorem 7.2 and Section 8 for the R-boundedness of bilinear shifts in product spaces.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multilinear operator-valued Calder\'on-Zygmund theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EDLSTVTT

@misc{pith2026190807233,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multilinear operator-valued Calder\'on-Zygmund theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EDLSTVTT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07233}
}
abstract

We develop a general theory of multilinear singular integrals with operator-valued kernels, acting on tuples of UMD Banach spaces. This, in particular, involves investigating multilinear variants of the $\mathcal R$-boundedness condition naturally arising in operator-valued theory. We proceed by establishing a suitable representation of multilinear, operator-valued singular integrals in terms of operator-valued dyadic shifts and paraproducts, and studying the boundedness of these model operators via dyadic-probabilistic Banach space-valued analysis. In the bilinear case, we obtain a $T(1)$-type theorem without any additional assumptions on the Banach spaces other than the necessary UMD. Higher degrees of multilinearity are tackled via a new formulation of the Rademacher maximal function (RMF) condition. In addition to the natural UMD lattice cases, our RMF condition covers suitable tuples of non-commutative $L^p$-spaces. We employ our operator-valued theory to obtain new multilinear, multi-parameter, operator-valued theorems in the natural setting of UMD spaces with property $\alpha$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Jean Bourgain, Some remarks on Banach spaces in which martingale di fference sequences are unconditional , Ark. Mat. 21 (1983), no. 2, 163–168. MR 727340 1

    work page 1983

  2. [2]

    Donald L. Burkholder, A geometric condition that implies the existence of certain singular integrals of Banach- space-valued functions, Conference on harmonic analysis in honor of Antoni Zygmund, Vol. I, II (Chicago, Ill., 1981), Wadsworth Math. Ser., Wadsworth, Belmont, CA, 1983, pp. 270–286. MR 730072 1

    work page 1981

  3. [3]

    Castro and Tuomas Hytönen, Bounds for partial derivatives: necessity of UMD and sharp constants, Math

    Alejandro J. Castro and Tuomas Hytönen, Bounds for partial derivatives: necessity of UMD and sharp constants, Math. Z. 282 (2016), no. 3-4, 635–650. MR 3473635 1

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    159 (1987), no

    Michael Christ and Jean-Lin Journé, Polynomial growth estimates for multilinear singular inte gral operators, Acta Math. 159 (1987), no. 1-2, 51–80. 2

    work page 1987

  5. [5]

    Coifman and Yves Meyer, Au delà des opérateurs pseudo-différentiels, Astérisque, vol

    Ronald R. Coifman and Yves Meyer, Au delà des opérateurs pseudo-différentiels, Astérisque, vol. 57, Société Mathématique de France, Paris, 1978, With an English summar y .2

    work page 1978

  6. [6]

    Amalia Culiuc, Francesco Di Plinio, and Yumeng Ou, Domination of multilinear singular integrals by positive sparse forms , J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 98 (2018), no. 2, 369–392. MR 3873113 2, 11

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    , Uniform sparse domination of singular integrals via dyadic shifts, Math. Res. Lett. 25 (2018), no. 1, 21–42. MR 3818613 11

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    1, 168–184

    Amalia Culiuc, Francesco Di Plinio, and Yumeng Ou, A sparse estimate for multisublinear forms involving vector-valued maximal functions , Bruno Pini Mathematical Analysis Seminar 8 (2018), no. 1, 168–184. 12, 19

    work page 2018

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Ana Grau de la Herrán and Tuomas Hytönen, Dyadic representation and boundedness of nonhomogeneous Calderón-Zygmund operators with mild kernel regularity , Michigan Math. J. 67 (2018), no. 4, 757–786. MR 3877436 44

    2018

  2. [10]

    2, 3, 4, 12

    Francesco Di Plinio, Kangwei Li, Henri Martikainen, an d Emil Vuorinen, Multilinear singular integrals on non-commutative L p spaces, preprint, arXiv:1905.02139 (2019). 2, 3, 4, 12

    2019 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Francesco Di Plinio and Yumeng Ou, Banach-valued multilinear singular integrals , Indiana Univ . Math. J. 67 (2018), no. 5, 1711–1763. MR 3875242 2, 19, 22

    2018

  4. [12]

    Tadeusz Figiel, Singular integral operators: a martingale approach , Geometry of Banach spaces (Strobl, 1989), London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 158, Cambri dge Univ . Press, Cambridge, 1990, pp. 95–

    1989

  5. [13]

    Stefan Geiss, Stephen Montgomery-Smith, and Eero Saks man, On singular integral and martingale trans- forms, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), no. 2, 553–575. MR 2551497 1

    2010

  6. [14]

    Loukas Grafakos and José María Martell, Extrapolation of weighted norm inequalities for multivari able operators and applications , J. Geom. Anal. 14 (2004), no. 1, 19–46. MR 2030573 2

    2004

  7. [15]

    Torres, Multilinear Calderón-Zygmund theory , Adv

    Loukas Grafakos and Rodolfo H. Torres, Multilinear Calderón-Zygmund theory , Adv . Math. 165 (2002), no. 1, 124–164. MR 1880324 2

    2002

  8. [16]

    Hänninen and Tuomas Hytönen, Operator-valued dyadic shifts and the T (1) theorem, Monatsh

    Timo S. Hänninen and Tuomas Hytönen, Operator-valued dyadic shifts and the T (1) theorem, Monatsh. Math. 180 (2016), no. 2, 213–253. MR 3502626 4, 7, 8, 28

    2016

  9. [17]

    Tuomas Hytönen, The sharp weighted bound for general Calderón-Zygmund oper ators, Ann. of Math. (2) 175 (2012), no. 3, 1473–1506. MR 2912709 4

    2012

  10. [18]

    , The vector-valued nonhomogeneous Tb theorem , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2014), no. 2, 451–511. MR 3159078 5, 7

    2014

  11. [19]

    , Representation of singular integrals by dyadic operators, and the A 2 theorem, Expo. Math. 35 (2017), no. 2, 166–205. MR 3654073 36

    2017

  12. [20]

    , The two-weight inequality for the Hilbert transform with ge neral measures , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 117 (2018), no. 3, 483–526. MR 3857692 44

    2018

  13. [21]

    Tuomas Hytönen and Mikko Kemppainen, On the relation of Carleson’s embedding and the maximal theorem in the context of Banach space geometry , Math. Scand. 109 (2011), no. 2, 269–284. MR 2854692 3

    2011

  14. [22]

    Tuomas Hytönen, Henri Martikainen, and Emil Vuorinen, Multi-parameter estimates via operator-valued shifts, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 119 (2019), no. 6, 1560–1597. 4

    2019

  15. [23]

    Tuomas Hytönen, Alan McIntosh, and Pierre Portal, Kato’s square root problem in Banach spaces , J. Funct. Anal. 254 (2008), no. 3, 675–726. MR 2381159 2, 3, 19

    2008

  16. [24]

    Tuomas Hytönen, Jan van Neerven, Mark V eraar, and Lutz W eis, Analysis in Banach spaces. Vol. I. Martingales and Littlewood-Paley theory , Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folg e. A MULTILINEAR OPERATOR-V ALUED CALDERÓN-ZYGMUND THEORY 51 Series of Modern S...

    2016

  17. [25]

    , Analysis in Banach spaces. Vol. II , Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folg e. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathem atics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics], vol. 67, Springer , Cham, 2017, Pro...

    2017

  18. [26]

    Reine Angew

    Tuomas Hytönen and Lutz Weis, A T 1 theorem for integral transformations with operator-value d kernel , J. Reine Angew . Math.599 (2006), 155–200. MR 2279101 2, 3

    2006

  19. [27]

    Jean-Lin Journé, Calderón-Zygmund operators on product spaces , Rev . Mat. Iberoamericana 1 (1985), no. 3, 55–91. 4

    1985

  20. [28]

    Reine Angew

    Marius Junge, Doob’s inequality for non-commutative martingales , J. Reine Angew . Math. 549 (2002), 149–

    2002

  21. [29]

    Marius Junge and Quanhua Xu, Representation of certain homogeneous Hilbertian operato r spaces and appli- cations, Invent. Math. 179 (2010), no. 1, 75–118. MR 2563760 1

    2010

  22. [30]

    Nigel Kalton and Lutz Weis, The H ∞-calculus and sums of closed operators , Math. Ann. 321 (2001), no. 2, 319–345. MR 1866491 1

    2001

  23. [31]

    203 (2011), no

    Mikko Kemppainen, On the Rademacher maximal function , Studia Math. 203 (2011), no. 1, 1–31. MR 2776106 3, 19

    2011

  24. [32]

    , Some remarks on the dyadic Rademacher maximal function , Colloq. Math. 131 (2013), no. 1, 113–128. MR 3078975 3, 18, 19

    2013

  25. [33]

    Kangwei Li, José María Martell, Henri Martikainen, She ldy Ombrosi, and Emil Vuorinen, End-point estimates, extrapolation for multilinear Muckenhoupt cla sses, and applications , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., to appear. 2

  26. [34]

    Kangwei Li, José María Martell, and Sheldy Ombrosi, Extrapolation for multilinear Muckenhoupt classes and applications, preprint. 2

  27. [35]

    Kangwei Li, Henri Martikainen, Yumeng Ou, and Emil Vuor inen, Bilinear representation theorem, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 371 (2019), no. 6, 4193–4214. MR 3917220 4, 11, 12

    2019

  28. [36]

    McConnell, Decoupling and stochastic integration in UMD Banach spaces , Probab

    Terry R. McConnell, Decoupling and stochastic integration in UMD Banach spaces , Probab. Math. Statist. 10 (1989), no. 2, 283–295. MR 1057936 7

    1989

  29. [37]

    190 (2003), no

    Fedor Nazarov , Sergei Treil, and Alexander V olberg, The Tb-theorem on non-homogeneous spaces , Acta Math. 190 (2003), no. 2, 151–239. MR 1998349 4, 5, 32

    2003

  30. [38]

    Bas Nieraeth, Quantitative estimates and extrapolation for multilinear weight classes, Math. Ann. 375 (2019), no. 1-2, 453–507. MR 4000248 2

    2019

  31. [39]

    Stefanie Petermichl, Dyadic shifts and a logarithmic estimate for Hankel operato rs with matrix symbol , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math. 330 (2000), no. 6, 455–460. MR 1756958 4

    2000

  32. [40]

    , The sharp bound for the Hilbert transform on weighted Lebesg ue spaces in terms of the classical A p characteristic, Amer. J. Math. 129 (2007), no. 5, 1355–1375. MR 2354322 4

    2007

  33. [41]

    155, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016

    Gilles Pisier, Martingales in Banach spaces , Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 155, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016. MR 3617459 22

    2016

  34. [42]

    2, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003, pp

    Gilles Pisier and Quanhua Xu, Non-commutative Lp-spaces, Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces, Vol. 2, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003, pp. 1459–1517. MR 1 999201 22

    2003

  35. [43]

    Lutz Weis, Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems and maximal L p-regularity, Math. Ann. 319 (2001), no. 4, 735–758. MR 1825406 1, 2 (F. D. P .) Department of Mathematics, Washington University in St. L ouis, O ne Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899, USA E-mail addr...

    2001

Pith tools

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