Do semicircular families exist?

58 Views Asked by At

Let $(A,\varphi)$ be a $^*$-probability space, i.e.,

  • $A$ is a unital $^*$-algebra, and
  • $\varphi$ is a $^*$-preserving unital linear functional.

Let $(c_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$ be a positive definite matrix.

A centered semicircular family in $(A,\varphi)$ of covariance $(c_{i,j})_{i,j\in I}$ is a family $(s_i)_{i\in I}$ of selfadjoint elements in $A$ such that

  1. each $s_i$ is centered, i.e., $\varphi(s_i) = 0$ for each $i\in I$, and
  2. the distribution of $(s_i)_{i\in I}$ satisfies \begin{equation*} \varphi(s_{i(1)}\cdots s_{i(m)}) = \sum_{\pi\in\text{NC}_2(m)}\kappa_{\pi}(s_{i(1)},\ldots,s_{i(m)}) \end{equation*} for all positive integers $m$ and $i(1),\ldots,i(m)\in I$, where $\text{NC}_2(m)$ is the set of all noncrossing pair (i.e., blocks of size 2) partitions of $\{1,\ldots,m\}$, and $\kappa_{\pi}(s_{i(1)},\ldots,s_{i(m)})$ is a free cumulant.

See e.g. Lectures on the Combinatorics of Free Probability by Nica and Speicher, page 128. The definition of free cumulants can also be found there (page 175): \begin{equation*} \kappa_{\pi}(a_1,\ldots,a_m) = \sum_{\substack{ \sigma\in\text{NC}(m)\\ \sigma\leq\pi}} \mu(\sigma,\pi) \prod_{V\in\sigma} \varphi\bigg( \prod_{i\in V}a_i \bigg) \end{equation*} for any positive integer $m$ and any $a_1,\ldots,a_m\in A$ and any noncrossing partition $\pi$ of $\{1,\ldots,m\}$, where $\mu$ is the Mobius function on the lattice $\text{NC}(m)$ of noncrossing partitions of $\{1,\ldots,m\}$.

The first condition of each $s_i$ being centered is no issue: each $s_i$ can be made centered by substracting its mean $\varphi(s_i)$. But what about the second one? Does there always exist a centered family $(s_i)_{i\in I}$ satisfying \begin{equation*} \varphi(s_{i(1)}\cdots s_{i(m)}) = \sum_{\pi\in\text{NC}_2(m)}\kappa_{\pi}(s_{i(1)},\ldots,s_{i(m)}) \end{equation*} for all positive integers $m$ and $i(1),\ldots,i(m)\in I$?

This second condition is very similar to the free moment-cumulant formula, with the only difference that in the latter the sum runs over all noncrossing partitions, not just the ones whose blocks are sets of cardinality 2: \begin{equation*} \varphi(a_1\cdots a_m) = \sum_{\pi\in\text{NC}(m)}\kappa_{\pi}(a_1,\ldots,a_m) \end{equation*} for all positive integers $m$ and elements $a_1,\ldots,a_m\in A$, where $\text{NC}(m)$ is the set of all noncrossing partitions of $\{1,\ldots,m\}$.

The second condition will in particular be satisfied if all cumulants $\kappa_{\pi}(s_{i(1)},\ldots,s_{i(m)})$ vanish in case the noncrossing partition $\pi$ is not a pair partition. This is of course a stronger condition. If $\pi$ is a noncrossing partition containing a block with just one element $j$, then it vanishes as a result of $s_{i(j)}$ being centered: free cumulants are multiplicative, in the sense that $\kappa_{\pi}(a_1,\ldots,a_m)$ for any $a_1,\ldots,a_m\in A$ factorizes over the blocks $V$ in $\pi$, i.e., \begin{equation*} \kappa_{\pi}(a_1,\ldots,a_m) = \prod_{V\in\pi} \kappa_{\{V\}}(a_k:k\in V), \end{equation*} where each $\kappa_{\{V\}}(a_k:k\in V)$ is the free cumulant restricted to the partition consisting of just the block $V$, and the free cumulant $\kappa_{\{j\}}(a)$ for any $a\in A$ and $j\in\{1,\ldots,m\}$ is just $\varphi(a)$, so $\kappa_{\{j\}}(s_{i(j)}) = \varphi(s_{i(j)}) = 0$. But this still leaves the noncrossing partitions $\pi$ with no blocks of size 1 and at least one block of size greater than 2. What about their free cumulants? Are there any families $(s_i)_{i\in I}$ for which these free cumulants vanish, making $(s_i)_{i\in I}$ a semicircular family?

In the case where the index set $I$ consists of just one element, the definition reduces to that of a centered semicircular element, which is no issue. So what is of interest is the case where $I$ has cardinality greater than one.

1

There are 1 best solutions below

3
On BEST ANSWER

Yes, such semicircular families exist. In fact, they can be represented by bounded operators. This construction came at the very beginning of free probability theory.

Let $H$ be a real Hilbert space with vectors $\xi_i\in H$ such that $\langle\xi_i,\xi_j\rangle=c_{i,j}$. Define $\mathcal F(H)=\mathbb C\Omega\oplus \bigoplus_{n=1}^\infty H_\mathbb C^{\otimes n}$, where $\Omega$ is some fixed unit vector and $H_{\mathbb C}$ is the complexification of $H$. For $\xi\in H$ define $$ a(\xi)\Omega=\xi,\quad a(\xi)(\eta_1\otimes\dots\otimes\eta_n)=\xi\otimes \eta_1\otimes\dots\otimes\eta_n\\ a^\ast(\xi)\Omega=0,\quad a^\ast(\xi)(\eta_1\otimes\dots\otimes\eta_n)=\langle\xi,\eta_1\rangle\eta_2\otimes\dots\otimes\eta_n. $$ These operators extend to bounded linear operators on $\mathcal F(H)$, which are adjoint to each other. Let $s(\xi)=a(\xi)+a^\ast(\xi)$ and $\phi=\langle\Omega,\cdot\,\Omega\rangle$.

Note that $\phi(s(\xi_i))=\langle\Omega,\xi_i\rangle=0$ and $$ \phi(s(\xi_i)s(\xi_j))=\langle s(\xi_i)\Omega,s(\xi_j)\Omega\rangle=\langle\xi_i,\xi_j\rangle=c_{i,j}. $$

For the joint moments, we have $$ \phi(s(\xi_{j(1)})\dots s(\xi_{j(n)}))=\langle\Omega,(a(\xi_{j(1)})+a^\ast(\xi_{j(1)}))\dots (a(\xi_{j(n)})+a^\ast(\xi_{j(n)}))\Omega\rangle. $$ The creation operator $a(\xi)$ maps $H^{\otimes n}$ to $H^{\otimes(n+1)}$, i.e., one step up, and the annihilation operator $a^\ast(\xi)$ maps $H^{\otimes n}$ to $H^{\otimes(n-1)}$, i.e., one step down. Hence, if we expand the sum on the right side, we only get a non-zero contribution if the number of annihilation and creation operators in the product is the same. In particular, the joint moment is zero if $n$ is odd. Moreover, the first factor has to be an annihilation operator and the last factor has to be a creation operator to get non-zero contributions.

Now, products of this form can be reduced using the identity $a^\ast(\xi)a(\eta)=\langle \xi,\eta\rangle \mathrm{id}$, which allows to show inductively $$ \phi(s(\xi_{j(1)})\dots s(\xi_{j(n)}))=\sum_{\sigma\in \mathrm{NC}_2(n)}\prod_{\substack{\{k,l\}\in\sigma\\k<l}}\langle\xi_{j(k)},\xi_{j(l)}\rangle. $$ This "taking steps up and down" is nicely illustrated by (rotated) Dyck paths, which are closely related to noncrossing pair partitions.

As a reference, this is all pretty nicely explained in Section 6.1 here: https://www.math.tamu.edu/~manshel/m689/Free-probability-notes.pdf.