2
$\begingroup$

Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are Banach spaces. Let $F:X \rightarrow Y$ be a function and $U \subset X$ be an open set.

The Gâteaux derivative of $F$ at $u \in U$ in the direction $\phi \in X$ is given by

$$\lim_{t \rightarrow 0}\dfrac{F(u+t \phi) - F(u)}{t}.$$

In the Wikipedia article on the Gâteaux derivative, there is this sentence in the section 'definition'

In some cases, a weak limit is taken instead of a strong limit, which leads to the notion of a weak Gâteaux derivative.

Question: How should one write out the definition of the weak Gâteaux derivative? Since we are talking about weak limit, I suppose we need to talk about the weak topology.

EDIT: Suppose $X$ is a Banach space and $\gamma$ is a Gaussian probability measure on $X$. Define a map $$(F * \gamma) (x) = \int \limits _X{F(x+t) \Bbb d\gamma(t)}$$ What is its weak Gâteaux derivative?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ what is wrong with saying that the weak Gateaux derivative at position $u$ in direction $\phi$ is given by $y \in Y$ if $\lim_{t \rightarrow 0} y'(\dfrac{F(u+t \phi) - F(u)}{t}-y)=0$ for all $y' \in Y'$? $\endgroup$ – Zimkovic Dec 6 '15 at 15:02
  • $\begingroup$ So I suppose weak Gateaux derivative of $F * \gamma$ is $\lim_{t \rightarrow 0}{y^{\prime}(\dfrac{\int_X{F(u+t \phi + h)-F(u+ h)d\gamma(h)}}{t}}-y)=0$? $\endgroup$ – Idonknow Dec 6 '15 at 17:07
  • $\begingroup$ yes that seems correct to me $\endgroup$ – Zimkovic Dec 6 '15 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ Why did the answer get the bounty but wasn't accepted? $\endgroup$ – Viktor Glombik Apr 14 at 11:27
2
+100
$\begingroup$

In general, we say that a net $(x_i) _{i \in I} \subset X$ converges weakly to $x \in X$ if and only if $\omega (x_i) \to \omega (x) \ \forall \omega \in X^*$.

In your case, the role of $x_i$ is played by the fraction $\dfrac {F(u + t \phi) - F(u)} {t}$ (the role of $i$ is played by $t$ and the role of $X$ is now taken by $Y$). The existence of a weak Gâteaux derivative of $F$ at the point $u \in X$ in the direction $\phi \in X$ (let's call it $WD(F, u, \phi)$ - "$W$" stands for "weak") means that there exist $WD(F, u, \phi) \in Y$ (because $F$ takes its values in $Y$) such that

$$\lim \limits _{t \to 0} \ \omega \left( \frac {F(u + t \phi) - F(u)} {t} \right) = \omega (WD(F, u, \phi)) \ \forall \omega \in Y^* .$$

Applying this to your particular case of $F*\gamma$,

$$\lim \limits _{t \to 0} \ \omega \left( \frac {(F*\gamma) (u + t \phi) - (F*\gamma) (u)} {t} \right) = \lim \limits _{t \to 0} \frac 1 t \omega \left( \int \limits _X F(u + t\phi + y) \Bbb d \gamma(y) - \int \limits _X F(u + y) \Bbb d \gamma(y) \right) = \lim \limits _{t \to 0} \ \omega \left( \int \limits _X \frac {F(u + t\phi + y) - F(u + y)} t \Bbb d \gamma(y) \right) = \omega \left( \lim \limits _{t \to 0} \int \limits _X \frac {F(u + t\phi + y) - F(u + y)} t \Bbb d \gamma(y) \right).$$

(The limit "jumps" inside $\omega$ because $\omega$ is a continuous functional.)

In principle, everything stops here because you do not give any information about $F$. Judging by your other related questions, though, it seems reasonable to assume that $F$ is Lipschitz, in which case we may go further. In order to "slip" the limit inside the integral, we think about applying Lebesgue's dominated convergence theorem; since $\gamma$ is a Gaussian measure (and thus is finite), it will suffice to show that the integrand is bounded (being Lipschitz, therefore continuous, it is already measurable). This is easy to show:

$$\left\| \frac {F(u + t\phi + y) - F(u + y)} t \right\| \le \dfrac {Lip(F) |t| \| \phi \|} {|t|} = Lip(F) \| \phi \| ,$$

from which Lebesgue's theorem transforms the expression where we had stopped into

$$\omega \left( \int \limits _X \lim \limits _{t \to 0} \frac {F(u + t\phi + y) - F(u + y)} t \Bbb d \gamma(y) \right) .$$

Again, this does not seem to be enough, so let us now assume that $F$ is Gâteaux derivable at every point of $X$, in the direction $\phi$ (call this derivative $D$, not to be confused with the weak derivative $WD$ defined above). Then the above expression finally becomes

$$\omega \left( \int \limits _X D(F, u+y, \phi) \Bbb d \gamma(y) \right) = \omega ( D(F, u, \phi) * \gamma ) .$$

We may therefore conclude that if $F$ is Gâteaux derivable at every point in the direction $\phi$, then $F * \gamma$ is weakly Gâteaux derivable at every point in the direction $\phi$ and $WD (F * \gamma, x, \phi) = D(F, u, \phi) * \gamma$, i.e. the $*$ operation "weakens" your Gâteaux derivability.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.