Table of Contents
Fetching ...

The commutator of the Cauchy--Szegő Projection for domains in $\mathbb C^n$ with minimal smoothness: weighted regularity

Xuan Thinh Duong, Loredana Lanzani, Ji Li, Brett D. Wick

TL;DR

The paper extends the CRW/KL2 framework to domains with minimal boundary smoothness by characterizing when the commutator [b,S_ω] is bounded or compact on weighted L^p spaces on the boundary. Using a robust comparison with explicit Cauchy-type operators C_ε and a Kerzman–Stein-type inversion, it establishes that BMO(bD,σ) controls weighted L^p boundedness for all A_p weights, with explicit bounds, and VMO yields compactness. A parallel p=2 theory is developed for S_{Ω_2}, connecting BMO/VMO to boundedness/compactness without dependence on p. The work relies on extrapolation across p, the structure of Leray Levi-like measures, and detailed kernel decompositions to overcome the lack of sharp Szegő kernel estimates in minimal smoothness.

Abstract

Let $D\subset\mathbb C^n$ be a bounded, strongly pseudoconvex domain whose boundary $bD$ satisfies the minimal regularity condition of class $C^2$, and let $S_ω$ denote the Cauchy--Szegő projection defined with respect to (any) positive continuous multiple $ω$ of induced Lebesgue measure for the boundary of $D$. We characterize compactness and boundedness (the latter with explicit bounds) of the commutator $[b, S_ω]$ in the Lebesgue space $L^p(bD, Ω_p)$ where $Ω_p$ is any measure in the Muckenhoupt class $A_p(bD)$, $1<p<\infty$. We next fix $p =2$ and we let $S_{Ω_2}$ denote the Cauchy--Szegő projection defined with respect to (any) measure $Ω_2 \in A_2(bD)$, which is the largest class of reference measures for which a meaningful notion of Cauchy-Leray measure may be defined. We characterize boundedness and compactness in $L^2(bD, Ω_2)$ of the commutator $\displaystyle{[b,S_{Ω_2}]}$.

The commutator of the Cauchy--Szegő Projection for domains in $\mathbb C^n$ with minimal smoothness: weighted regularity

TL;DR

The paper extends the CRW/KL2 framework to domains with minimal boundary smoothness by characterizing when the commutator [b,S_ω] is bounded or compact on weighted L^p spaces on the boundary. Using a robust comparison with explicit Cauchy-type operators C_ε and a Kerzman–Stein-type inversion, it establishes that BMO(bD,σ) controls weighted L^p boundedness for all A_p weights, with explicit bounds, and VMO yields compactness. A parallel p=2 theory is developed for S_{Ω_2}, connecting BMO/VMO to boundedness/compactness without dependence on p. The work relies on extrapolation across p, the structure of Leray Levi-like measures, and detailed kernel decompositions to overcome the lack of sharp Szegő kernel estimates in minimal smoothness.

Abstract

Let be a bounded, strongly pseudoconvex domain whose boundary satisfies the minimal regularity condition of class , and let denote the Cauchy--Szegő projection defined with respect to (any) positive continuous multiple of induced Lebesgue measure for the boundary of . We characterize compactness and boundedness (the latter with explicit bounds) of the commutator in the Lebesgue space where is any measure in the Muckenhoupt class , . We next fix and we let denote the Cauchy--Szegő projection defined with respect to (any) measure , which is the largest class of reference measures for which a meaningful notion of Cauchy-Leray measure may be defined. We characterize boundedness and compactness in of the commutator .

Paper Structure

This paper contains 9 sections, 7 theorems, 166 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

Let $D\subset \mathbb C^n$, $n\geq 2$, be a bounded, strongly pseudoconvex domain of class $C^2$. The following hold for any $b\in L^2(bD, \sigma )$ and for any Leray Levi-like measure $\omega$: $(1)$ if $b\in{\rm BMO}(bD,\sigma)$ then the commutator $[b, \EuScript S_\omega]$ is bounded on $L^p(bD, where the implied constant depends on $p$, $D$ and $\omega$ but are independent of $\Omega_p$. cmCo

Theorems & Definitions (14)

  • Theorem 1.1
  • Theorem 1.2
  • Lemma 2.1
  • proof
  • Definition 2.2
  • Theorem 3.1
  • Proposition 3.2
  • Theorem 3.3
  • proof
  • Remark 3.4
  • ...and 4 more