alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Ultrametric Bourgain-Figiel-Milman, Enflo Type and Mendel-Naor Cotype Problems

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

We ask for ultrametric version of following three: (1) Bourgain-Figiel-Milman Theorem, (2) Enflo Type, (3) Mendel-Naor Cotype.

Ultrametric Bourgain-Figiel-Milman Problem

Let X\mathcal{X} and Y\mathcal{Y} be finite dimensional normed linear spaces such that dim⁡(X)=dim⁡(Y)\dim(\mathcal{X}) = \dim(\mathcal{Y}). The Banach-Mazur distance between X\mathcal{X} and Y\mathcal{Y} is defined as

dBM(X,Y):=inf⁡{∥T∥∥T−1∥:T:X→Y is invertible linear operator}.d_{BM}(\mathcal{X},\mathcal{Y}) := \inf\{\lVert T\rVert\lVert T^{-1}\rVert: T:\mathcal{X}\to\mathcal{Y}\text{ is invertible linear operator}\}.

For n∈Nn \in\mathbb{N}, let (Rn,⟨⋅,⋅⟩)(\mathbb{R}^{n},\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle) be the standard Euclidean Hilbert space. Following wonderful result says that every finite dimensional Banach space has a subspace which is close (in the Banach-Mazur distance) to the Euclidean space.

Theorem 1.1. [1, 6] (Dvoretzky-Milman Theorem) There is a universal constant C>0C > 0 satisfying the following property: If X\mathcal{X} is any nn-dimensional real Banach space and 0<ε<130 < \varepsilon< \frac{1}{3}, then for every natural number

k≤Cε2∣log⁡ε∣log⁡n,k \le C\frac{\varepsilon^{2}}{\lvert\log\varepsilon\rvert}\log n,

there exists a kk-dimensional Banach subspace Y\mathcal{Y} of X\mathcal{X} such that

dBM(Y,(Rk,⟨⋅,⋅⟩))<1+ε.d_{BM}(\mathcal{Y},(\mathbb{R}^{k},\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle)) < 1+\varepsilon.

We refer [8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34] for more information on Dvoretzky-Milman theorem. With Theorem 1.1, we ask about the metric space version of that. Let M\mathcal{M} and N\mathcal{N} be finite metric spaces with o(M)=o(N)o(\mathcal{M}) = o(\mathcal{N}). Given a map f:M→Nf:\mathcal{M}\to\mathcal{N}, define

∥f∥Lip:=sup⁡{d(f(x),f(y))d(x,y):x,y∈M,x≠y}.\lVert f\rVert_{\mathrm{Lip}} := \sup\left\{\frac{d(f(x),f(y))}{d(x,y)}:x,y\in\mathcal{M},x\ne y\right\}.

The Bourgain-Figiel-Milman distance between M\mathcal{M} and N\mathcal{N} is defined as

dBFM(M,N):=inf⁡{∥f∥Lip∥f−1∥Lip:f:M→N is injective}.d_{BFM}(\mathcal{M},\mathcal{N}) := \inf\{\lVert f\rVert_{\mathrm{Lip}}\lVert f^{-1}\rVert_{\mathrm{Lip}}:f:\mathcal{M}\to\mathcal{N}\text{ is injective}\}.

In 1986, Bourgain, Figiel and Milman proved the following nonlinear Dvoretzky theorem [3].

Theorem 1.2. [3] (Bourgain-Figiel-Milman Theorem) For every ε>0\varepsilon> 0, there is a universal constant C(ε)>0C(\varepsilon) > 0 satisfying the following: Every finite metric space M\mathcal{M} contains a subset N\mathcal{N} satisfying following conditions.

(i) There is an injective map f:N→ℓ2(N,R)f : \mathcal{N} \to\ell^2(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{R}) such that

dBFM(N,f(N))≤1+ε.d_{BFM}(\mathcal{N},f(\mathcal{N})) \leq1+\varepsilon.

(ii)

o(N)≥C(ε)log⁡(o(M)).o(\mathcal{N}) \geq C(\varepsilon)\log(o(\mathcal{M})).

Further, following holds: If ε<1\varepsilon< 1, then we can take

C(ε)=c1εlog⁡(c2ε)C(\varepsilon) = \frac{c_1\varepsilon}{\log\left(\frac{c_2}{\varepsilon}\right)}

for some c1>0,c2>0c_1 > 0,c_2 > 0.

We will formulate problem based on Theorem 1.2 to ultrametric spaces.

Definition 1.3. [33] Let M\mathcal{M} be a set. A map d:M×M→[0,∞)d : \mathcal{M} \times\mathcal{M} \to[0,\infty) is said to be an ultrametric if it satisfies following conditions.

(i) d(z,z)=0d(z,z)=0 for all z∈Mz \in\mathcal{M}. If x,y∈Mx,y \in\mathcal{M} are such that d(x,y)=0d(x,y)=0, then x=yx=y.

(ii) d(x,y)=d(y,x)d(x,y)=d(y,x) for all x,y∈Mx,y \in\mathcal{M}.

(iii) d(x,y)≤max⁡{d(x,z),d(z,y)}d(x,y) \leq\max\{d(x,z),d(z,y)\} for all x,y,z∈Mx,y,z \in\mathcal{M}.

In this case, (M,d)(\mathcal{M},d) is called as an ultrametric space.

Let K\mathbb{K} be a non-Archimedean valued field. We define

c0(N,K):={{an}n:an∈K, ∀n∈N, lim⁡n→∞an=0}c_0(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{K}) := \left\{\{a_n\}_n : a_n \in\mathbb{K},\ \forall n \in\mathbb{N},\ \lim_{n\to\infty} a_n=0\right\}

equipped with the ultra-norm

∥{an}n∥:=max⁡n∈N∣an∣,∀{an}n∈c0(N,K)\left\|\{a_n\}_n\right\| := \max_{n\in\mathbb{N}} |a_n|,\quad\forall\{a_n\}_n \in c_0(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{K})

and the p-adic inner product

⟨{an}n,{bn}n⟩:=∑n=1∞anbn,∀{an}n,{bn}n∈c0(N,K).\langle\{a_n\}_n,\{b_n\}_n\rangle:= \sum_{n=1}^{\infty}a_nb_n,\quad\forall\{a_n\}_n,\{b_n\}_n \in c_0(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{K}).

Then c0(N,K)c_0(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{K}) is a non-Archimedean Banach space which is also a p-adic Hilbert space [17, 29]. We now ask for ultrametric version of Bourgain-Figiel-Milman theorem.

Problem 1.4. (Ultrametric Bourgain-Figiel-Milman Problem) K\mathbb{K} be a non-Archimedean valued field. For every ε>0\varepsilon> 0, whether there is a universal constant C(ε,K)>0C(\varepsilon,\mathbb{K}) > 0 satisfying the following: Every finite ultrametric space M\mathcal{M} contains a subset N\mathcal{N} satisfying following conditions.

(i) There is an injective map f:N→c0(N,K)f : \mathcal{N} \to c_0(\mathbb{N},\mathbb{K}) such that

dBFM(N,f(N))≤1+ε.d_{BFM}(\mathcal{N},f(\mathcal{N})) \leq1+\varepsilon.

(ii)

o(N)≥C(ε,K)log⁡(o(M)).o(\mathcal{N}) \geq C(\varepsilon,\mathbb{K})\log(o(\mathcal{M})).

Ultrametric Enflo Type and Mendel-Naor Cotype Problems

Let H\mathcal{H} be a Hilbert space, n∈Nn \in\mathbb{N}. Recall that for any nn points h1,…,hn∈Hh_1,\ldots,h_n \in\mathcal{H}, we have

12n∑ε1,…,εn∈{−1,1}∥∑j=1nεjhj∥2=∑j=1n∥hj∥2.(1)\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_{\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n\in\{-1,1\}}\left\|\sum_{j=1}^{n}\varepsilon_jh_j\right\|^2=\sum_{j=1}^{n}\|h_j\|^2. \tag*{(1)}

Equality (1) motivated the definition of Type and Cotype for Banach spaces.

Definition 2.1. [1] Let 1≤p≤21 \le p \le2. A Banach space X\mathcal{X} is said to be of (Rademacher) Type pp if there exists Tp(X)>0T_p(\mathcal{X}) > 0 such that

(12n∑ε1,…,εn∈{−1,1}∥∑j=1nεjxj∥p)1p≤Tp(X)(∑j=1n∥xj∥p)1p,∀x1,…,xn∈X, ∀n∈N.\left(\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_{\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n\in\{-1,1\}}\left\|\sum_{j=1}^{n}\varepsilon_jx_j\right\|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}\le T_p(\mathcal{X})\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n}\|x_j\|^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}},\qquad\forall x_1,\ldots,x_n\in\mathcal{X},\ \forall n\in\mathbb{N}.

Definition 2.2. [1] Let 2≤q<∞2 \le q < \infty. A Banach space X\mathcal{X} is said to be of (Rademacher) Cotype qq if there exists Cq(X)>0C_q(\mathcal{X}) > 0 such that

(∑j=1n∥xj∥q)1q≤Cq(X)(12n∑ε1,…,εn∈{−1,1}∥∑j=1nεjxj∥q)1q,∀x1,…,xn∈X, ∀n∈N.\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n}\|x_j\|^q\right)^{\frac{1}{q}}\le C_q(\mathcal{X})\left(\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_{\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n\in\{-1,1\}}\left\|\sum_{j=1}^{n}\varepsilon_jx_j\right\|^q\right)^{\frac{1}{q}},\qquad\forall x_1,\ldots,x_n\in\mathcal{X},\ \forall n\in\mathbb{N}.

There is a vast literature on Type-Cotype of Banach spaces, see [1, 5, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 24, 35].

In 1970, Enflo introduced the notion of Type for metric spaces [7, 25].

Definition 2.3. [7, 25] Let p>0p > 0. A metric space (M,d)(\mathcal{M},d) is said to be of Enflo Type pp if there exists Ep(M)>0E_p(\mathcal{M}) > 0 satisfying following conditions: For every n∈Nn \in\mathbb{N} and for every f:{−1,1}n→Mf:\{-1,1\}^n \to\mathcal{M} it holds

(12n∑ε1,…,εn∈{−1,1}d(f(ε1,…,εn),d(−ε1,…,−εn))p)1p≤Ep(M)(∑j=1n12n∑ε1,…,εn∈{−1,1}d(f(ε1,…,εj−1,εj,εj+1,…,εn),d(ε1,…,εj−1,−εj,εj+1,…,εn))p)1p.\left(\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_{\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n\in\{-1,1\}}d\bigl(f(\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n),d(-\varepsilon_1,\ldots,-\varepsilon_n)\bigr)^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}} \le E_p(\mathcal{M})\left(\sum_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_{\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n\in\{-1,1\}}d\bigl(f(\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_{j-1},\varepsilon_j,\varepsilon_{j+1},\ldots,\varepsilon_n),d(\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_{j-1},-\varepsilon_j,\varepsilon_{j+1},\ldots,\varepsilon_n)\bigr)^p\right)^{\frac{1}{p}}.

In 2008, Mendel and Naor introduced the notion of Cotype for metric spaces [25].

Definition 2.4. [25] Let q>0q > 0. A metric space (M,d)(\mathcal{M},d) is said to be of Mendel-Naor Cotype qq if there exists Γq(M)>0\Gamma_q(\mathcal{M}) > 0 satisfying following conditions: For every n∈Nn \in\mathbb{N}, there exists an even integer m∈Nm \in\mathbb{N} such that for every f:Zmn→Mf:\mathbb{Z}_m^n \to\mathcal{M} it holds

∑j=1n1mn∑x∈Zmnd(f(x+m2ej),f(x))q≤Γq(M)qmq1mn∑x∈Zmn∑ε∈{−1,0,1}nd(f(x+ε),f(x))q,ε=(ε1,…,εn),\sum_{j=1}^{n}\frac{1}{m^n}\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}_m^n}d\left(f\left(x+\frac{m}{2}e_j\right),f(x)\right)^q \le\Gamma_q(\mathcal{M})^q m^q\frac{1}{m^n}\sum_{x\in\mathbb{Z}_m^n}\sum_{\varepsilon\in\{-1,0,1\}^n}d(f(x+\varepsilon),f(x))^q,\qquad\varepsilon=(\varepsilon_1,\ldots,\varepsilon_n),

where {ej}j=1n\{e_j\}_{j=1}^n is the standard basis for Rn\mathbb{R}^n.

We now ask for ultrametric versions of Enflo Type and Mendel-Naor Cotype.

Problem 2.5. (Ultrametric Enflo Type Problem) Whether there is a way to define ultrametric Enflo Type?

Problem 2.6. (Ultrametric Mendel-Naor Cotype Problem) Whether there is a way to define ultrametric Mendel-Naor Cotype?

Note that there are also notions of Type for metric spaces by Bourgain, Milman and Wolfson [4] and by Ball [2]. These lead to following problems.

Problem 2.7. (Ultrametric Bourgain-Milman-Wolfson Type Problem) Whether there is a way to define ultrametric Bourgain-Milman-Wolfson Type?

Problem 2.8. (Ultrametric Markov/Ball Type Problem) Whether there is a way to define ultrametric Markov/Ball Type?

Remark 2.9. In 2026, we formulated non-Archimedean John, non-Archimedean Dvoretzky-Milman, non-Archimedean Type-Cotype and non-Archimedean Kwapien problems which are still open [18].

References

References

  1. [1]Fernando Albiac and Nigel J. Kalton. Topics in Banach space theory, volume 233 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, [Cham], 2016.
  2. [2]K. Ball. Markov chains, Riesz transforms and Lipschitz maps. Geom. Funct. Anal., 2(2):137–172, 1992.DOI
  3. [3]J. Bourgain, T. Figiel, and V. Milman. On Hilbertian subsets of finite metric spaces. Isr. J. Math., 55:147–152, 1986.DOI
  4. [4]J. Bourgain, V. Milman, and H. Wolfson. On type of metric spaces. Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 294:295–317, 1986.DOI
  5. [5]Joe Diestel, Hans Jarchow, and Andrew Tonge. Absolutely summing operators, volume 43 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
  6. [6]Aryeh Dvoretzky. Some results on convex bodies and Banach spaces. In Proc. Internat. Sympos. Linear Spaces (Jerusalem, 1960), pages 123–160. Jerusalem Academic Press, Jerusalem; Pergamon, Oxford, 1961.
  7. [7]Per Enflo. On the nonexistence of uniform homeomorphisms between Lp-spaces. Ark. Mat., 8:103–105, 1970.DOI
  8. [8]T. Figiel. Some remarks on Dvoretzky’s theorem on almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Colloq. Math., 24:241–252, 1971/72.DOI
  9. [9]T. Figiel. A short proof of Dvoretzky’s theorem. In Séminaire Maurey-Schwartz 1974–1975: Espaces Lp, applications radonifiantes et géométrie des espaces de Banach, Exp. No. XXIII, pages 6 pp. (erratum, p. 3). 1975.
  10. [10]T. Figiel. A short proof of Dvoretzky’s theorem on almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Compositio Math., 33(3):297–301, 1976.
  11. [11]T. Figiel, J. Lindenstrauss, and V. D. Milman. The dimension of almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Acta Math., 139(1-2):53–94, 1977.
  12. [12]Y. Gordon, O. Guedon, and M. Meyer. An isomorphic Dvoretzky’s theorem for convex bodies. Studia Math., 127(2):191–200, 1998.DOI
  13. [13]Yehoram Gordon. Gaussian processes and almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Ann. Probab., 16(1):180–188, 1988.DOI
  14. [14]Paata Ivanisvili, Ramon van Handel, and Alexander Volberg. Rademacher type and Enflo type coincide. Ann. Math. (2), 192(2):665–678, 2020.DOI
  15. [15]W. B. Johnson and J. Lindenstrauss, editors. Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces. Vol. 1. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 2001.
  16. [16]W. B. Johnson and J. Lindenstrauss, editors. Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces. Vol. 2. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2003.
  17. [17]G. K. Kalisch. On p-adic Hilbert spaces. Ann. Math. (2), 48:180–192, 1947.DOI
  18. [18]K. Mahesh Krishna. Non-Archimedean John, non-Archimedean Dvoretzky-Milman, non-Archimedean type-cotype and non-Archimedean Kwapien problems. hexagon:2610.00653v1, 2026.
  19. [19]Rafal Latala and Krzysztof Oleszkiewicz. On the best constant in the Khinchin-Kahane inequality. Studia Math., 109(1):101–104, 1994.
  20. [20]Daniel Li and Herve Queffelec. Introduction to Banach spaces: analysis and probability. Vol. 1, volume 166 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018.
  21. [21]Daniel Li and Herve Queffelec. Introduction to Banach spaces: analysis and probability. Vol. 2, volume 167 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2018.
  22. [22]J. Matousek. Lectures on discrete geometry, volume 212 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002.
  23. [23]Ivan Matsak and Anatolij Plichko. Dvoretzky’s theorem by Gaussian method. In Functional analysis and its applications, volume 197 of North-Holland Math. Stud., pages 171–184. Elsevier Sci. B. V., Amsterdam, 2004.DOI
  24. [24]Bernard Maurey. Type, cotype and K-convexity. In Handbook of the geometry of Banach spaces. Volume 2, pages 1299–1332. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 2003.DOI
  25. [25]Manor Mendel and Assaf Naor. Metric cotype. Ann. Math. (2), 168(1):247–298, 2008.
  26. [26]V. Milman. Dvoretzky’s theorem—thirty years later. Geom. Funct. Anal., 2(4):455–479, 1992.DOI
  27. [27]V. D. Milman. A new proof of A. Dvoretzky’s theorem on cross-sections of convex bodies. Funkcional. Anal. i Priložen., 5(4):28–37, 1971.
  28. [28]Vitali D. Milman and Gideon Schechtman. Asymptotic theory of finite-dimensional normed spaces, volume 1200 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986.
  29. [29]C. Perez-Garcia and W. H. Schikhof. Locally convex spaces over non-Archimedean valued fields, volume 119 of Camb. Stud. Adv. Math. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  30. [30]Gilles Pisier. Probabilistic methods in the geometry of Banach spaces. In Probability and analysis (Varenna, 1985), volume 1206 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 167–241. Springer, Berlin, 1986.DOI
  31. [31]Gilles Pisier. The volume of convex bodies and Banach space geometry, volume 94 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989.DOI
  32. [32]Gideon Schechtman. A remark concerning the dependence on ε in Dvoretzky’s theorem. In Geometric aspects of functional analysis (1987–88), volume 1376 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 274–277. Springer, Berlin, 1989.
  33. [33]W. H. Schikhof. Ultrametric calculus. An introduction to p-adic analysis, volume 4 of Camb. Stud. Adv. Math. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
  34. [34]Andrzej Szankowski. On Dvoretzky’s theorem on almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Israel J. Math., 17:325–338, 1974.DOI
  35. [35]S. J. Szarek. On the best constants in the Khinchin inequality. Studia Math., 58(2):197–208, 1976.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_es9tagk3
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — published within the last 30 days

Usage

views · 8

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents