I'm trying to prove the next inequality $$\|AB\|_1\leq\|A\|_2\,\|B\|_{2},$$ where $\|\cdot\|_1$ denotes the norm for trace-class operators, and $\|\cdot\|_2$ is the norm of Hilbert-Schmidt operators.

I'm stuck proving this; I've tried to use polar decomposition but I don't get any useful. In a book I've seen a proof using singular values but it uses many tools and corollaries.

Is there an easier proof of this?

  • $\begingroup$ Did you try to use the definition ? $\endgroup$ – Youem Apr 5 '18 at 6:05
  • $\begingroup$ @Youem yes. The definition together polar decomposition, but I don't get anu useful. $\endgroup$ – Squird37 Apr 5 '18 at 14:42

I don't know of an easy way around singular values. Henceforth, let $\mathcal F,\mathcal G,\mathcal H$ be arbitrary complex Hilbert spaces.

The only Lemma we need is the following (cf. Proposition 16.3 in "Introduction to Functional Analysis" by Meise & Vogt (1997)).

Lemma. Let $T\in\mathcal B(\mathcal H,\mathcal G)$ be compact. Then there exists a uniquely determined decreasing null sequence $(s_n(T))_{n\in\mathbb N_0}$ (singular values) in $[0,\infty)$ and orthonormal systems $(e_n)_{n\in\mathbb N_0}$ in $\mathcal H$ and $(f_n)_{n\in\mathbb N_0}$ in $\mathcal G$ such that

$$ T=\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(T)\langle e_n,\cdot\rangle f_n $$

where the series converges in the operator norm.

Using this approach, the trace-class $\mathcal B^1(\mathcal H,\mathcal G)$ is given by all compact operators $T$ such that $\Vert T\Vert_1=\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(T)<\infty$. Analogously, the Hilbert-Schmidt class $\mathcal B^2(\mathcal H,\mathcal G)$ is given by all compact operators $T$ such that $\Vert T\Vert_2=\big(\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n^2(T)\big)^{1/2}<\infty$.

In separable Hilbert spaces, this is equivalent to the usual definition of the trace-class $(\operatorname{tr}(\sqrt{T^\dagger T})<\infty)$ and Hilbert-Schmidt operators $(\sqrt{\operatorname{tr}(T^\dagger T)}<\infty)$, cf. Chapter 6.6 of "Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics. I: Functional Analysis" Reed & Simon (1980). Now we get the desired result somewhat easily.

Theorem. Let $A\in\mathcal B^2(\mathcal G,\mathcal H)$, $B\in\mathcal B^2(\mathcal F,\mathcal G)$. Then

$$ \Vert AB\Vert_1\leq\Vert A\Vert_2\Vert B\Vert_2\,. $$

Proof. We orient ourselves towards the proof of Lemma 16.21 in the book of Meise & Vogt. Apply the above Lemma to $B$, e.g. $B=\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(B)\langle e_n,\cdot\rangle f_n$ and thus $AB=\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(B)\langle e_n,\cdot\rangle Af_n$. Note that $\Vert\langle x,\cdot\rangle y\Vert_1=\Vert x\Vert\Vert y\Vert$ for any $x\in\mathcal G,y\in\mathcal F$ (e.g. see edit below) so by the triangle inequality

$$ \Vert AB\Vert_1\leq\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(B)\Vert \langle e_n,\cdot\rangle Af_n\Vert_1=\sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(B)\Vert Af_n\Vert\,. $$

This is just the $\ell_2$ scalar product of $(s_n(B))_n$ and $(\Vert Af_n\Vert)_n$ so the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality yields

$$ \Vert AB\Vert_1\leq\Big( \sum_{n=0}^\infty s_n(B)^2 \Big)^{1/2}\Big( \sum_{n=0}^\infty \Vert Af_n\Vert^2 \Big)^{1/2}=\Vert B\Vert_2\Big( \sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle f_n,A^\dagger Af_n\rangle \Big)^{1/2}. $$

As $(f_n)_{n\in\mathbb N_0}$ is an orthonormal system in $\mathcal F$ one has $\sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle f_n,A^\dagger Af_n\rangle \leq\operatorname{tr}(A^\dagger A)$ as all summands are non-negative (this can be seen by extending $(f_n)_{n\in\mathbb N_0}$ to an orthonormal basis of $\mathcal F$ with respect to which one then computes the trace). In total we get

$$ \Vert AB\Vert_1\leq\Vert B\Vert_2\Big( \sum_{n=0}^\infty \langle f_n,A^\dagger Af_n\rangle \Big)^{1/2}\leq(\operatorname{tr}(A^\dagger A))^{1/2}\Vert B\Vert_2=\Vert A\Vert_2\Vert B\Vert_2.\tag*{$\square$} $$

Edit: To see $\Vert\langle x,\cdot\rangle y\Vert_1=\Vert x\Vert\Vert y\Vert$, consider

$$ T:=\langle x,\cdot\rangle y=\| x\|\| y\|\Big\langle\frac{x}{\| x\|},\cdot\Big\rangle\frac{y}{\| y\|} $$

where the latter is a Schmidt decomposition of $T$ (as $\frac{x}{\| x\|}$ and $\frac{y}{\| y\|}$ obviously are orthonormal systems and $\| x\| \| y\|\geq 0$). Now

$$ \Vert\langle x,\cdot\rangle y\Vert=\Vert T\Vert_1=\sum_{n} s_n(T)=\Vert x\Vert\Vert y\Vert $$

as $T$ only has one non-vanishing singular value. Alternatively, one can just compute

$$ \operatorname{tr}(\sqrt{(\langle y,\cdot\rangle x)(\langle x,\cdot\rangle y)})=\| y\|\operatorname{tr}(\sqrt{\langle x,\cdot\rangle x})=\Vert x\Vert\| y\|\underbrace{\operatorname{tr}\Big(\Big\langle \frac{x}{\Vert x\Vert},\cdot\Big\rangle \frac{x}{\Vert x\Vert}\Big)}_{=1}=\| x\|\| y\|. $$

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Many thanks @FrederikvomEnde. It was so helpful! $\endgroup$ – Squird37 Apr 6 '18 at 3:32
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry for comment again. I thought I had understood each step. My doubt is why $\Vert\langle x,\cdot\rangle y\Vert_1=\Vert x\Vert\Vert y\Vert?$ $\endgroup$ – Squird37 Apr 6 '18 at 7:46
  • $\begingroup$ Edited my original answer, hope it helps. $\endgroup$ – Frederik vom Ende Apr 6 '18 at 8:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Many thanks @FrederikvomEnde! $\endgroup$ – Squird37 Apr 6 '18 at 8:35

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.