REVIEW 5 minor 29 references
On the Hypercyclicity Criterion for operators of Read's type
T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read Every operator of Read's type with no non-trivial invariant subset satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion.
desk verdict Grivaux shows all known Read-type operators without invariant subsets satisfy the Hypercyclicity Criterion; a competent, modest note with a correct short proof. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The carrying object is the sequence of vectors $e_j=T^j e_0$ and the splitting of the special integers $c_n$ into two roughly equal halves inside a lay-off interval: $c_n=\lfloor c_n/2\rfloor+(c_n-\lfloor c_n/2\rfloor)$. Read-type constructions guarantee two quantitative facts: the approximation property that $\|T^{c_n}e_0-p(T)e_0\|$ can be made arbitrarily small for every polynomial $p$ (via a doubling argument from the restricted case $|p|\le 2$), and the lay-off decay formula that makes $\|T^{\lfloor c_n/2\rfloor}e_0\|\to 1$ and the complementary half also tend to norm one. These two facts turn the single hypercyclic vector $e_0$ into a pair of vectors whose joint orbit is dense under $T\oplus T$.
What would settle it
A single counterexample of the type asked in Question 3.1—an operator of Read's type with no non-trivial invariant closed subset whose direct sum $T\oplus T$ is not hypercyclic—would refute Theorem 3.2. A less decisive but concrete check is to compute $\|T^{\lfloor c_n/2\rfloor}e_0\|$ for a proposed Read-type construction: if it does not tend to 1 along the sequence selected to approximate $4^k e_0$, then the mechanism of this proof does not apply to that operator.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central claim is Theorem 3.2: for any operator $T$ of Read's type acting on a separable Banach space and having no non-trivial invariant subset, $T\oplus T$ is hypercyclic, equivalently $T$ satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion. The proof selects integers $n_k$ such that $T^{c_{n_k}}e_0$ approximates $4^k e_0$, splits each $c_{n_k}$ as $i_{n_k}+j_{n_k}$ with $i_{n_k}=\lfloor c_{n_k}/2\rfloor$, and uses the lay-off interval structure to show that $\|T^{i_{n_k}}e_0\|\to 1$ and $\|T^{j_{n_k}}e_0\|\to 1$. Setting $w_k=2^{-k}T^{i_{n_k}}e_0$ and $q_k(T)=2^{-k}T^{j_{n_k}}$ gives $q_k(T)e_0\to 0$, $w_k\to 0$, and $q_k(T)w_k\to e_0$, which by the paper's Proposition 4.2 forces the Hypercyclicity Criterion to hold.
Load-bearing premise
The proof rests on two structural guarantees in the construction of operators of Read's type: the orbit of the starting vector can be steered close to any polynomial in the operator at specially chosen times, and the vectors reached halfway through those special times stay close to norm one; if either guarantee fails for some candidate operator, the constructed pair of vectors may not produce a dense orbit for $T\oplus T$.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- All known operators without non-trivial invariant closed subsets built by Read-type constructions satisfy the Hypercyclicity Criterion, so none can serve as counterexamples to the equivalence between $T\oplus T$ being hypercyclic and $T$ satisfying the criterion.
- The hypercyclic operators discussed in Remark 4.3, which have few non-trivial invariant subsets but do have invariant subspaces, also satisfy the Hypercyclicity Criterion by the same argument.
- The proof uses only two structural properties, so the theorem potentially extends to any wider class of operators sharing those two properties, as the paper notes explicitly.
- For Read-type operators, having every nonzero vector hypercyclic is strong enough to force the stronger two-dimensional density property of $T\oplus T$, a regularity phenomenon not shared by all hypercyclic operators.
Reading between the lines
- A natural extension, not stated in the paper, is to test whether the recent quasinilpotent counterexamples to the invariant-subspace problem share the same two structural properties; if they do, their associated direct sums would also be hypercyclic.
- One could conjecture a general principle suggested by the proof: any bounded operator whose nonzero vectors are all hypercyclic and whose construction admits a midpoint splitting with norm-stable intermediate vectors should satisfy the Hypercyclicity Criterion.
- The paper's Question 4.4 points toward a sharper dichotomy: measure the size of the hypercyclic vector set for operators that fail the criterion; if those sets are small, the contrast with Read-type operators becomes a quantitative separation between two families of hypercyclic operators.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper proves Theorem 3.2: if T is a bounded operator of 'Read's type' on a separable real or complex Banach space and T has no non-trivial invariant closed subset, then T⊕T is hypercyclic, equivalently T satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion. The proof combines two structural properties of Read-type operators taken from [16, Sec. 2.2]—the approximation property of the exponents c_n and the norm behavior on the lay-off intervals—with a sufficient condition for the Hypercyclicity Criterion due to the author [14]. The argument produces sequences w_k and polynomials q_k satisfying the hypotheses of Proposition 4.2, and the paper concludes with remarks on known examples and an open question about hypercyclic vectors of operators that fail the criterion.
Significance. The result is a clean and elegant observation: every known operator without a non-trivial invariant closed subset (all of which are of Read's type) automatically satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion, so such operators cannot serve as counterexamples to Question 3.1. The proof is short, explicit, and identifies exactly which structural properties of Read's construction are needed. The paper also draws attention to an interesting question about the size of the set of hypercyclic vectors for operators failing the criterion. The main limitation is the dependence on the cited structural properties from [16] and the sufficient condition from [14], but these are published results and the paper uses them transparently. The stress-test concern about external dependence does not land as a fatal flaw, because the relevant properties are explicitly identified and cited.
minor comments (5)
- [Section 4, proof of Theorem 3.2] The displayed formula for ||e_{i_{n_k}}|| is difficult to parse as typeset; please rewrite it using unambiguous notation and explain how the limit 1 follows from the definition of lay-off intervals in [16, Sec. 2.2].
- [Section 4, proof of Theorem 3.2] The existence of a strictly increasing sequence (n_k) with ||T^{c_{n_k}}e0 - 4^k e0|| < 1 is asserted without justification; since for fixed n the vector T^{c_n}e0 cannot satisfy the inequality for all k, one can pass to a subsequence, but this should be stated.
- [Section 4, proof of Theorem 3.2] The condition that c_n is 'extremely large' relative to ν_n is not quantified; for the argument it suffices that c_n - ν_n → ∞ and c_n/2 ≥ ν_n + 1 eventually, and this should be stated explicitly.
- [Section 4, Proposition 4.2] Proposition 4.2 is stated as a 'rewriting' of Theorem 4.1 but no proof or precise pointer to the statement in [14] is given; please add a reference to the exact result or a short derivation.
- [Introduction] The sentence 'all the known examples of operators without non-trivial invariant closed subset do satisfy the Hypercyclicity Criterion' is slightly stronger than what is proved; Theorem 3.2 covers only operators of Read's type, so please qualify the statement accordingly.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: Theorem 3.2 follows from external Read-type structural properties and an independent hypercyclicity criterion, with no equation reducing to its own conclusion.
full rationale
The derivation in Section 4 is self-contained relative to the stated structural properties of Read-type operators imported from [16, Sec. 2.2]: the approximation property of the polynomials p_n and the extreme largeness of c_n relative to the preceding lay-off interval. These properties are definitional for the class and are not defined in terms of the target statement that T⊕T is hypercyclic. The proof's key estimates, namely ||T^{i_{n_k}}e0||→1 and ||T^{j_{n_k}}e0||→1, follow directly from the explicit lay-off formula, and the approximating sequence n_k is chosen from the stated polynomial approximation property. The use of Theorem 4.1 from the author's earlier paper [14] is a legitimate citation of an independent published sufficient condition whose assumptions do not include the conclusion of Theorem 3.2; it is not a uniqueness claim or an unverified self-citation. No fitted parameter is relabelled as a prediction, no ansatz is smuggled in via citation, and no known result is merely renamed. The only external risk, whether the structural properties of [16] actually hold for all operators called Read-type, lies outside the paper's argument and is not a circularity.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (3)
- standard math Theorem 4.1 (Grivaux 2005): a hypercyclic operator T satisfying the open-set polynomial hitting condition satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion.
- domain assumption Structural properties of operators of Read's type from [16, Sec. 2.2]: existence of basis (f_j), orbit vectors (e_j), working and lay-off intervals, and the polynomial approximation property for (c)-working intervals.
- standard math Bes-Peris theorem: T satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion if and only if T⊕T is hypercyclic.
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of On the Hypercyclicity Criterion for operators of Read's type." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NWA2ZGQ2
@misc{pith2026190806712,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: On the Hypercyclicity Criterion for operators of Read's type},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NWA2ZGQ2}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06712}
}
abstract
Let $T$ be a so-called operator of Read's type on a (real or complex) separable Banach space, having no non-trivial invariant subset. We prove in this note that $T\oplus T$ is then hypercyclic, i.e. that $T$ satisfies the Hypercyclicity Criterion.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[16]
S. Grivaux and M. Roginskaya, A general approach to Read’s type constructions of operator s with- out non-trivial invariant closed subspaces , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 109 (2014), no. 3, 596–652. MR3260288 ↑1, 2, 4, 5, 6
work page 2014
-
[14]
Grivaux, Hypercyclic operators, mixing operators, and the bounded s teps problem, J
S. Grivaux, Hypercyclic operators, mixing operators, and the bounded s teps problem, J. Operator The- ory 54 (2005), no. 1, 147–168. MR2168865 ↑3, 5
work page 2005
-
[1]
S. A. Argyros and R. G. Haydon, A hereditarily indecomposable L∞ -space that solves the scalar-plus- compact problem, Acta Math. 206 (2011), no. 1, 1–54. MR2784662 ↑2
work page 2011
-
[2]
S. A. Argyros and P. Motakis, A reflexive hereditarily indecomposable space with the here ditary in- variant subspace property , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 108 (2014), no. 6, 1381–1416. MR3218313 ↑2 OPERATORS OF READ’S TYPE AND THE HYPERCYCLICITY CRITERION 7
work page 2014
- [3]
- [4]
-
[5]
F. Bayart and ´E. Matheron, Hypercyclic operators failing the hypercyclicity criteri on on classical Banach spaces, J. Funct. Anal. 250 (2007), no. 2, 426–441. MR2352487 ↑3, 6
work page 2007
-
[6]
F. Bayart and ´E. Matheron, Dynamics of linear operators, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 179, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009. MR2533318 ↑3
work page 2009
Show all 29 references
-
[7]
B` es and A
J. B` es and A. Peris, Hereditarily hypercyclic operators , J. Funct. Anal. 167 (1999), no. 1, 94–112. MR1710637 ↑3
1999
-
[8]
Chalendar and J
I. Chalendar and J. R. Partington, Modern approaches to the invariant-subspace problem , Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 188, Cambridge University Pres s, Cambridge, 2011. MR2841051 ↑2
2011
-
[9]
Chevreau, I
B. Chevreau, I. B. Jung, E. Ko, and C. Pearcy, Operators that admit a moment sequence. II , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 135 (2007), no. 6, 1763–1767. MR2286086 ↑2
2007
-
[10]
de la Rosa and C
M. de la Rosa and C. Read, A hypercyclic operator whose direct sum T ⊕ T is not hypercyclic , J. Operator Theory 61 (2009), no. 2, 369–380. MR2501011 ↑3, 6
2009
-
[11]
Enflo, On the invariant subspace problem for Banach spaces , Acta Math
P. Enflo, On the invariant subspace problem for Banach spaces , Acta Math. 158 (1987), no. 3-4, 213–313. MR892591 ↑1
1987
-
[12]
Foias, C
C. Foias, C. Pearcy, and L. Smith, Weak orbit-transitivity on Hilbert space , Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 76 (2010), no. 1-2, 155–164. MR2668412 ↑2
2010
-
[13]
E. A. Gallardo-Guti´ errez and C. J. Read, Operators having no nontrivial closed invariant subspaces on ℓ1: a step further , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 118 (2019), no. 3, 649–674. ↑2
2019
-
[15]
Grivaux and M
S. Grivaux and M. Roginskaya, On Read’s type operators on Hilbert spaces, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2008), Art. ID rnn 083, 42. MR2439560 ↑4, 5, 6
2008
-
[17]
Grivaux, ´E
S. Grivaux, ´E. Matheron, and Q. Menet, Linear dynamical systems on Hilbert spaces: typ- ical properties and explicit examples , to appear in Mem. Amer. Math. Soc, available at http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/1703.01854 (2018). ↑3
2018 arXiv
-
[18]
Grosse-Erdmann and A
K.-G. Grosse-Erdmann and A. Peris Manguillot, Linear chaos, Universitext, Springer, London, 2011. MR2919812 ↑3
2011
-
[19]
Lindstr¨ om and G
M. Lindstr¨ om and G. Schl¨ uchtermann,Lomonosov’s techniques and Burnside’s theorem, Canad. Math. Bull. 43 (2000), no. 1, 87–89. MR1749953 ↑2
2000
-
[20]
V. I. Lomonosov, Invariant subspaces of the family of operators that commute with a completely con- tinuous operator, Funkcional. Anal. i Priloˇ zen. 7 (1973), no. 3, 55–56 (Russian). MR0420305 ↑2
1973
-
[21]
Lomonosov, An extension of Burnside’s theorem to infinite-dimensional spaces, Israel J
V. Lomonosov, An extension of Burnside’s theorem to infinite-dimensional spaces, Israel J. Math. 75 (1991), no. 2-3, 329–339. MR1164597 ↑2, 6
1991
-
[22]
Lomonosov, Positive functionals on general operator algebras , J
V. Lomonosov, Positive functionals on general operator algebras , J. Math. Anal. Appl. 245 (2000), no. 1, 221–224. MR1756586 ↑2
2000
-
[23]
Radjavi and P
H. Radjavi and P. Rosenthal, Invariant subspaces, 2nd ed., Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY,
-
[24]
C. J. Read, A solution to the invariant subspace problem , Bull. London Math. Soc. 16 (1984), no. 4, 337–401. MR749447 ↑1, 4
1984
-
[25]
C. J. Read, A solution to the invariant subspace problem on the space l1, Bull. London Math. Soc. 17 (1985), no. 4, 305–317. MR806634 ↑1, 4
1985
-
[26]
C. J. Read, A short proof concerning the invariant subspace problem , J. London Math. Soc. (2) 34 (1986), no. 2, 335–348. MR856516 ↑1, 4
1986
-
[27]
C. J. Read, The invariant subspace problem for a class of Banach spaces. II. Hypercyclic operators , Israel J. Math. 63 (1988), no. 1, 1–40. MR959046 ↑1, 4
1988
-
[28]
C. J. Read, The invariant subspace problem on some Banach spaces with se parable dual, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 58 (1989), no. 3, 583–607. MR988104 ↑1, 4
1989
-
[29]
C. J. Read, Quasinilpotent operators and the invariant subspace probl em, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 56 (1997), no. 3, 595–606. MR1610408 ↑1, 4 8 SOPHIE GRIV AUX August 20, 2019 Sophie Grivaux , CNRS, Univ. Lille, UMR 8524 - Laboratoire Paul Painlev´ e, F rance E-mail : sophie.g...
1997
Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.