Research Article | Open Access

Zhuanxi Ren, Shuangping Tao, "Weighted Estimates for Commutators of -Dimensional Rough Hardy Operators", *Journal of Function Spaces*, vol. 2013, Article ID 568202, 13 pages, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/568202

# Weighted Estimates for Commutators of -Dimensional Rough Hardy Operators

**Academic Editor:**Lars Diening

#### Abstract

We establish the weighted estimates for the commutators and which are generated by the -dimensional rough Hardy operators and central BMO functions on the weighted Lebesgue spaces, the weighted Herz spaces and the weighted Morrey-Herz spaces. Furthermore, the weighted Lipschitz estimates are also obtained.

#### 1. Introduction

The classical Hardy operator and its adjoint operator are defined, respectively, by Hardy proved the following most celebrated inequality in [1]: Moreover, where . Hardy’s inequality has received considerable attention. In 1995, Christ and Grafakos obtained it on . Firstly, we recall that the definitions of the -dimensional Hardy operator and its adjoint operator given by Christ and Grafakos are as follows: Let , . Then Christ and Grafakos’s results in [2] are where and the constant is the best.

Let be a nonnegative integrable function on . The -dimensional rough Hardy operator and its adjoint operator are defined, respectively, by where , , is homogeneous of degree zero. Then the commutators generated by or and a locally integrable function are defined, respectively, as follows:

In [3], it was proved that the commutators were bounded on the Lebesgue spaces and Herz spaces if . Recently, Gao obtained in [4] that is also bounded from the Morrey-Herz spaces to if . On the other hand, Gao and Wang in [5] had established the weighted estimates on weighted Lebesgue and Herz-type spaces for the commutators and which are generated by -dimensional Hardy operator and and . It is easy to see that and when . A natural question is whether commutators of -dimensional standard rough Hardy operators and also have boundedness on these weighted spaces. The answer is affirmative. The main purpose of this paper is to generalize the above results on the weighted Lebesgue spaces, the weighted Herz spaces, and the weighted Morrey-Herz spaces.

First let us recall some standard definitions and notations before introducing our main results. The classical weighted theory was first introduced by Muckenhoupt in the study of weighted boundedness of the Hardy-Littlewood maximal functions in [6]. A weight is a locally integrable function on which takes values in at almost everywhere. Let denote the ball with the center and radius . is a constant which may vary from line to line. For , let and . We use to denote the characteristic functions of the set . We also denote the weighted measure of by ; that is, . And let be the conjugate index of whenever , .

*Definition 1. * We say that , , if
where is a positive constant which is independent of the choice of .

For the case , , if A weight function if it satisfies the condition for some .

*Definition 2 (see [7]). * Let , , , and and a weighted function. Then the homogeneous weighted Herz space is defined by
where
with the usual modification made when or .

Obviously, when , ; when , , .

*Definition 3 (see [8]). *Let , , , , and and a weighted function. Then the homogeneous weighted Morrey-Herz space is defined by
where
with the usual modification made when or .

Obviously, when , ; when , .

*Definition 4 (see [9]). *Let , , and a weighted function. We say that a locally integrable function belongs to the weighted Lipschitz space if
where .

The smallest bound satisfying conditions above is then taken to be the norm of in this space and is denoted by . We also put . Obviously, for the case , the space is the classical Lipschitz space . If , then García-Cuerva in [9] proved that the space coincide for any and the norms of are equivalent with respect to different values of . That is .

*Definition 5 (see [5]). *Let , and a weighted function. A function is said to belong to the weighted central BMO space if
where .

Obviously, . When , .

The organization of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, we shall present our main results. Finally, in Section 3, we shall give the proofs of theorems.

#### 2. Main Results

Now, we present our main results as follows.

Theorem 6. * Let , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that and are defined by (9) and ; then and are bounded from to .*

Theorem 7. * Let , , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that ; then*(a)* is bounded from to if ;*(b)* is bounded from to if .*

*Remark 8. * appearing in Theorem 7 and the following theorems is defined by the Lemma 16 in the next section.

*Remark 9. *Let and in Theorem 7; then Theorem 6 can be obtained.

Theorem 10. *Let , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that and , then*(a)* is bounded from to if ;*(b)* is bounded from to if .*

Theorem 11. *Let , , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that for ; then and are bounded from to .*

Theorem 12. * Let , , , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that for ; then*(a)* is bounded from to if ;*(b)* is bounded from to if .*

*Remark 13. *Let , , and in Theorem 12; then Theorem 11 can be obtained.

Theorem 14. *Let , , , , , and with homogeneous of degree zero for some . Suppose that for and ; then*(a)* is bounded from to if ;*(b)* is bounded from to if .*

*Remark 15. *As , our results are consistent with the main results in [5].

#### 3. Proofs of the Main Results

In this section, we shall give the proofs of Theorems 7, 10, 12, and 14. In order to do this, we shall need the following lemmas.

Lemma 16 (see [10]). * Let . Then there exist constants , , and depending only on -constant of , such that for any measurable subset of a ball ,
*

*Remark 17. *If , it is easy to see from Lemma 16 that there exists a constant and such that as and as .

Lemma 18 (see [5]). * Let and . Then there exists a constant such that, for any ,
*

Lemma 19 (see [11]). * Let and . Then there exists a constant such that, for any ,
*

Lemma 20 (see [11]). *Let . Then, for any ,
**
where .*

We are now in a position to give the proof of Theorem 7.

*Proof of Theorem 7. *(a) From the definition in (9), we readily see that

For , noticing that and then by Lemma 20 and Hölder’s inequality it follows that
When , by inequality (23) and Remark 17, we have
When , , also by inequality (23) and Remark 17 we can obtain that
Hence, for , applying inequalities (24) and (25), we have
Now we turn our attention to the estimate of . According to the conditions, we can further decompose as
Below we shall give the estimates of . By Hölder’s inequality, we can deduce
When , using Lemma 20, we can obtain the following result by inequality (28) and Remark 17 that
When , , noticing inequality (28) and then by using Hölder’s inequality, Lemma 20, and Remark 17, we can obtain that
Hence, for , by estimates (29) and (30), we get that
Now, let us deal with the last term . When , noting inequality (23), by using Lemma 18, Lemma 20, and Remark 17, we have that
When , , by using Lemma 18, inequalities (21) and (23), Remark 17, and an application of Hölder’s inequality give us that
As before, for , using inequalities (32) and (33), we can get
Summing up the above estimates for , , and , it is true that

Consequently,
We shall consider two cases. As , noticing that , we can deduce
For the case of , it follows from Hölder’s inequality and that
Therefore, we conclude the proof of Theorem 7(a).

(b) Following the same procedure as that of Theorem 7(a), we can also show the conclusion of (b); the details are omitted here.

*Proof of Theorem 10. *We only give the proof of (a) as . The proof of (b) is similar to that for (a). By using (15) and the above estimates for , , and as those of the proof of Theorem 7, we can obtain that
This completes the proof of Theorem 10.

*Proof of Theorem 12. *(a) Let . We follow the strategy of the proof of Theorem 7; we can also write
For , when , noticing that and , by inequality (23) and Remark 17, we obtain that
As , , observing that and , by the inequality (23) and Remark 17, again using Hölder’s inequality, we can obtain that
Therefore, for , by estimates (41) and (42), we obtain
Now we come to estimate the other term . Again, we shall further decompose as
We first turn to deal with the term . By Hölder’s inequality, we can obtain that