 Research
 Open access
 Published:
On infinitedimensional dissipative quadratic stochastic operators
Advances in Difference Equations volume 2013, Article number: 272 (2013)
Abstract
The purpose of the paper is to extend the notion of dissipativity of maps on infinitedimensional simplex. We study the fixed points of dissipative quadratic stochastic operators on infinitedimensional simplex. Besides, we study the limit behavior of the trajectories of such operators. We also show the difference of dissipative operators defined on finite and infinitedimensional spaces. We obtain the results by using majorization for infinite vectors and {\ell}_{1} convergence.
MSC:15A51, 47H60, 46T05, 92B99.
1 Introduction
A quadratic stochastic operators (q.s.o. in short), firstly initiated by Bernstein [1], is a nonlinear difference equation, which has arisen from some problems of population genetics. Further development of this theory belongs to Lyubich [2, 3], Kesten [4, 5], Vallander [6], and Zakharevich [7], where the authors investigate the limit behavior of the trajectories (or dynamics) of q.s.o. It should be noted that the limit behavior of the trajectories of q.s.o. on 1D simplex was fully studied by Lyubich [2, 3], where it was shown that the ωlimit set (see definition below) of any initial point is a finite set. Vallander [6] studied the dynamics of some special q.s.o. on 2D simplex. Vallander’s result was later extended to any finitedimensional space by Ganikhodzhaev in [8, 9]. Later on, this special q.s.o. was called as Volterra q.s.o., which is, in fact the LotkaVolterra predator prey equation in discrete settings. The dynamics of Volterra q.s.o. was somehow studied successfully in [8]. However, not all q.s.o. are of Volterratype, and the dynamics of nonVolterra q.s.o. remains open. Notable results for nonVolterra q.s.o. were obtained by Rozikov and his students [10–13], who introduced different classes of q.s.o., such as ‘strictly nonVolterra,’ ‘Fq.s.o.’ (F stands for a ‘female’ due to its genetic interpretation), ‘separable q.s.o.,’ ‘ℓVolterra’ and studied the limit behavior of the trajectories. A manuscript [14] provides some results and open problem on q.s.o.
A majorization of vectors [15] turned out to be a useful tool for classifying q.s.o. into some of its subclasses. With the help of it, the definition of doubly stochastic and dissipative q.s.o. were introduced in papers [16] and [17], respectively. Further properties of such operators were studied in [18–20]. Of course, Volterra q.s.o. and classes considered in papers [10–13] are different from doubly stochastic and dissipative q.s.o. It is to note that the limit behavior of the trajectories of the dissipative q.s.o. on finitedimensional simplex (the set of vectors with nonnegative components summing up to 1) was fully classified in [20]. Note that a q.s.o. is just a discrete probability distribution of a finite population. However, there are models where the probability distribution is countably infinite, which means that a q.s.o. is defined on infinitedimensional space. In the simplest case, the infinitedimensional space should be the Banach space {\ell}_{1} of absolutely summable sequences. It is worth mentioning that Volterra q.s.o. and doubly stochastic q.s.o. on infinitedimensional space was introduced and studied in papers [21] and [22], respectively.
Therefore, the purpose of the present paper is to introduce a dissipative q.s.o. on infinitedimensional subspace of {\ell}_{1}, by using majorization for infinite vectors [23]. We show the difference between finite and infinitedimensional cases. While the existence of fixed point and convergence of Cesaro averages (that is an ergodic theorem) holds for finitedimensional dissipative operators, we show that it fails for infinitedimensional operators. We also provide some regular dissipative q.s.o. in infinitedimensional case.
The paper is organized as follows. The next chapter provides some preliminaries and results from finitedimensional cases. In Section 3, we introduce a dissipative q.s.o. in infinitedimensional simplex and study its properties. Finally, we study the limit behavior of the trajectories of dissipative q.s.o. in Section 4. We use notations and terminology as in [17, 20].
2 Preliminaries
In this section, we give some definitions and state some previous results. Let
be an (m1)dimensional simplex. Then the vectors
are its vertices. For \alpha \subset I=\{1,2,\dots ,m\}, the set {F}_{\alpha}=\{x\in {S}^{m1}:{x}_{i}=0,i\notin \alpha \} is called a face of the simplex.
For x=({x}_{1},{x}_{2},\dots ,{x}_{m})\in {S}^{m1}, let us put {x}_{\downarrow}=({x}_{[1]},{x}_{[2]},\dots ,{x}_{[m]}), where ({x}_{[1]},{x}_{[2]},\dots ,{x}_{[m]})nonincreasing rearrangement of ({x}_{1},{x}_{2},\dots ,{x}_{m}), that is, {x}_{[1]}\ge {x}_{[2]}\ge \cdots \ge {x}_{[m]}. We say [15] that x is majorized by y on {S}^{m1}, and write x\prec y (or y\succ x) if
It is easy to see that for any x\in {S}^{m1}, we have
Definition 1 An operator V:{S}^{m1}\to {S}^{m1} is called dissipative if
More information on dissipative operators on {S}^{m1} can be found in [17]. Now, let us recall some terminology. Let {x}^{0}\in {S}^{m1} and V:{S}^{m1}\to {S}^{m1} be an operator. Then the set \{{x}^{0},V{x}^{0},{V}^{2}{x}^{0},\dots \} is called the trajectory of V starting at the point {x}^{0}. The point {x}^{0} satisfying V{x}^{0}={x}^{0} is called fixed. The set of all fixed points of the q.s.o. V is denoted by Fix(V). A q.s.o. V:{S}^{m1}\to {S}^{m1} is called regular if the trajectory of any x\in {S}^{m1} converges to a unique fixed point. We may note that regular q.s.o. a priori must have a unique fixed point. Let V be a q.s.o. Then the set \omega ({x}^{0})={\bigcap}_{k\ge 0}\overline{{\bigcup}_{n\ge k}\{{V}^{n}{x}^{0}\}} is called an ωlimit set of trajectory of initial point {x}^{0}\in {S}^{m1}. From the compactness of the simplex, one can deduce that \omega ({x}^{0})\ne \mathrm{\varnothing} for all {x}^{0}\in {S}^{m1}. V is called ergodic if the following limit exists {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}\frac{x+Vx+\cdots +{V}^{n1}x}{n} for any x\in {S}^{m1}.
The following facts are known for dissipative q.s.o. on {S}^{m1}.

Any dissipative operator is ergodic.

Any dissipative q.s.o. has either unique or infinitely many fixed points.

One of the following statements always holds for a dissipative q.s.o.

The operator is regular. Its unique point is either a vertex of the simplex or the center of its face.

The operator has infinitely many fixed points. ωLimit set of any initial point is contained in the set of fixed points, i.e., \omega (x)\subset Fix(V).
In the next section, we define a dissipative operator on infinitedimensional simplex and study the statements above in infinitedimensional setting.
3 Infinitedimensional dissipative operators
In this section, we define dissipative quadratic stochastic operators on infinitedimensional simplex. We study some properties and examples of dissipative q.s.o.
Let {\ell}_{1} be the set of absolutely summable sequences. The set
is called an infinitedimensional simplex. The {\ell}_{1} norm is defined as {\parallel x\parallel}_{1}={\sum}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{i}. So, (1) can be rewritten as
It is known that S=\overline{co(Extr(S))}. Moreover, any extreme point of S has the following form
where 1 stands in k th position. That is, vertices of the simplex are extreme points of the simplex. An infinitedimensional quadratic stochastic operator (q.s.o. for shortness) V:S\to S is defined in the following way
where the coefficients {p}_{ij,k}, satisfy the following conditions
One can easily see that the sum (2) is convergent. It is also important to note that the operator (2) is well defined, that is, it maps simplex into itself.
For a point x=({x}_{1},{x}_{2},\dots ), from S, let {x}_{\downarrow}=({x}_{[1]},{x}_{[2]},\dots ) be a nonincreasing rearrangement of x, that is, {x}_{[1]}\ge {x}_{[2]}\ge \cdots . Recall that for two elements x, y, taken from the simplex S, we say that x is majorized by y, and write x\prec y if the following holds
This definition of majorization is given in [23]. General definition of majorization differs from the one that is given above in [23]; however, on {\ell}_{1}, we can give as above.
Definition 2 An operator V:S\to S is called dissipative if
Lemma 3.1 Let V be a linear dissipative operator, that is Vx=Ax, where A={({a}_{ij})}_{i,j\in N} is an infinite matrix. Then A is (0,1) column stochastic matrix.
Note that here and henceforth N denotes natural numbers.
Proof of Lemma 3.1 Since Vx\succ x, then by putting x={e}_{i} we have A{e}_{i}\succ {e}_{i}. At the same time, it is easy to see that A{e}_{i}\prec {e}_{i}. That is why {(A{e}_{i})}_{\downarrow}={({e}_{i})}_{\downarrow}, which means that only one component of the vector A{e}_{i} is 1, and the others are 0. Therefore, the matrix A is (0,1) column stochastic matrix. □
From this lemma, it follows that the class of linear dissipative operators on S is not large. Therefore, we are interested to study nonlinear (that is q.s.o.) dissipative operators. Let us provide some examples of dissipative quadratic operators.
Example 1 Let V:{S}^{m1}\to {S}^{m1} be a finitedimensional dissipative q.s.o., then the operator W:S\to S, given by
is an evidently infinitedimensional dissipative q.s.o. Because V is dissipative, then the conditions (4) can easily be verified.
Example 2 Let V:{S}^{m1}\to {S}^{m1} be a finitedimensional dissipative q.s.o., then the operator W:S\to S, given by
is a dissipative q.s.o. Dissipativity can be verified by using the fact that V is dissipative.
We can also provide some more examples of a dissipative q.s.o. by pointing out that if an operator is dissipative, then by rearranging its components, it preserves its dissipativity. Let us consider the operator V:S\to S, given as follows
One can see that this operator maps infinitedimensional simplex into itself, and since {(Vx)}_{\downarrow}={x}_{\downarrow}, then V is dissipative. One can see that V does not have nonzero fixed points. As we consider V acting on S, then V has no fixed points. Therefore, Theorem 2.1 fails in infinitedimensional setting.
Now, let us put x=(1,0,0,\dots ) and calculate the following Ceasaro mean
Let us consider {l}_{1} norm and denote it by {\parallel \cdot \parallel}_{1}. Note that if a sequence on {l}_{1} converges in its norm, then it converges componentwise. So, if the sequence (\frac{1}{n},\frac{1}{n},\dots ,\frac{1}{n},0,\dots ) converges, it converges to (0,0,\dots ). But it can easily be seen that
Therefore, the average
does not have a limit. Thus, for dissipative q.s.o., an ergodic theorem fails dramatically. In addition to that, one can see that the trajectory of certain point under V may not converge in general. Indeed, take x={e}_{1}=(1,0,0,\dots ), then {V}^{n}x={e}_{n} ({e}_{n} is n th vertex of the simplex S), and hence {\parallel {V}^{n}x{V}^{n+m}x\parallel}_{1}={\parallel {e}_{n}{e}_{n+m}\parallel}_{1}=2. So, the trajectory is divergent. We see that when we consider operators in infinitedimensional space, all the statements in Theorem 2.1 fail dramatically. This is the difference between finitedimensional and infinitedimensional cases.
We now study some properties of dissipative q.s.o.
Given q.s.o. V, we denote {a}_{ij}=({p}_{ij,1},{p}_{ij,2},\dots ,{p}_{ij,m},\dots ) \mathrm{\forall}i,j\in N, where {p}_{ij,k} are the coefficients of q.s.o. V. One can see that {a}_{ij}\in S, for all i,j\in N.
Lemma 3.2 Let V be a dissipative q.s.o. Then the following conditions hold
Proof Due to dissipativity of V one has Vx\succ x, \mathrm{\forall}x\in S. Now by putting x={e}_{i} we get {e}_{i}\prec V{e}_{i}. On the other hand, we have {e}_{i}\succ x, \mathrm{\forall}x\in S. That is why {(V{e}_{i})}_{\downarrow}={({e}_{i})}_{\downarrow}={e}_{1}. Then the equality V{e}_{i}={a}_{ii} implies the assertion. □
The lemma above implies that any dissipative q.s.o. can be written as
where
We call (5) a canonical form of dissipative q.s.o. V.
Lemma 3.3 Let (5) be a dissipative q.s.o.

(i)
If j\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{0}}, then {p}_{ij,{k}_{0}}={({a}_{ij})}_{[1]}\ge \frac{1}{2}, \mathrm{\forall}i\in N.

(ii)
For any k\ge 3, one has {({a}_{ij})}_{[k]}=0, \mathrm{\forall}i\in N.
Proof (i) Let j\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{0}} and x=(1\lambda ){e}_{j}+\lambda {e}_{i}, where {e}_{i}, {e}_{j} are the vertices of the simplex and 0\le \lambda \le 1. We can choose λ sufficiently small so that {x}_{[1]}=1\lambda and {(Vx)}_{[1]}={(Vx)}_{{k}_{0}}. Since Vx\succ x, then {x}_{[1]}\le {(Vx)}_{[1]}, so 1\lambda \le {(Vx)}_{{k}_{0}} or
The last inequality implies that {p}_{ij,{k}_{0}}\ge \frac{1}{2}. Since i is chosen arbitrary, then the above is true for all i\in N.

(ii)
Denote {p}_{ij,{k}^{\ast}}={max}_{t\ne {k}_{0}}{p}_{ij,t}. This maximum exists as the coefficients of q.s.o. are not greater than 1. One can see that {(Vx)}_{{k}^{\ast}}={({a}_{ij})}_{[2]}. Now, from
{x}_{[1]}+{x}_{[2]}\le {(Vx)}_{[1]}+{(Vx)}_{[2]},
we obtain
From this inequality, we get {p}_{ij,{k}_{o}}+{p}_{ij,{k}^{\ast}}\ge \frac{2\lambda {\lambda}^{2}}{2\lambda (1\lambda )}=\frac{2\lambda}{2(1\lambda )}=\frac{1}{2}(1+\frac{1}{1\lambda})\ge 1. This yields {p}_{ij,{k}_{o}}+{p}_{ij,{k}^{\ast}}=1 and {({a}_{ij})}_{[k]}=0 \mathrm{\forall}k\ge 3, \mathrm{\forall}i\in N. □
4 The limit behavior of the trajectories
In this section, we study the limit behavior of the trajectories of dissipative q.s.o. We study some criteria for the existence of fixed point. We also provide some examples of regular dissipative q.s.o.
Theorem 4.1 A dissipative q.s.o. V defined on infinitedimensional simplex S has either 0 or 1 or infinitely many fixed points.
The proof is based on expressing V in canonical form, dividing the proof into several cases and using proof method of its finitedimensional counterpart.
Proof of Theorem 4.1 First, we rewrite dissipative q.s.o. in its canonical form and correspond the partition \{{\alpha}_{k},k\in N\} of N to a dissipative q.s.o. V.
We need to know those numbers k for which k\in {\alpha}_{k}. Hence we consider the following possible cases

(1)
There is no k such that k\in {\alpha}_{k}, that is, k\notin {\alpha}_{k}, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N.

(2)
There exists numbers \{{k}_{i},i\in N\} such that {k}_{i}\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{i}}, \mathrm{\forall}i\in N.

(1)
Since there is no k with k\in {\alpha}_{k} and {\alpha}_{k} is a partition of N, then a particular number {k}_{1} must belong to one of the set other than {\alpha}_{{k}_{1}}, say {\alpha}_{{k}_{2}}. The number {k}_{2} belongs to some {\alpha}_{{k}_{3}} and so on. Therefore, there exists a sequence K=\{{k}_{l},l\in N\} such that {k}_{l}\in {\alpha}_{\pi ({k}_{l})}, where π is a bijection on the set K=\{{k}_{l},l\in N\}. In this case, the operators V can be written as follows
\begin{array}{l}{(Vx)}_{{k}_{l}}={x}_{\pi ({k}_{l})}^{2}+{\sum}_{i\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{l}}\setminus \{\pi ({k}_{l})\}}{x}_{i}^{2}+{\sum}_{i<j}2{p}_{ij,{k}_{l}}{x}_{i}{x}_{j},\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}{k}_{l}\in K,\\ {(Vx)}_{k}={\sum}_{i\in {\alpha}_{k}}{x}_{i}^{2}+2{\sum}_{i<j}{p}_{ij,k}{x}_{i}{x}_{j},\phantom{\rule{1em}{0ex}}k\in N\setminus K.\end{array}\}(7)
Taking into account {\sum}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{i}=1, one can rewrite (7) as
The set K can be finite or infinite. We assume that the set K is the largest set, for which {k}_{l}\in {\alpha}_{\pi ({k}_{l})}, \mathrm{\forall}{k}_{l}\in K. In this case, one can show that {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus K. Indeed, clearly numbers elements of K do not belong to any of the sets {\alpha}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in N. This implies that it is possible to find finite or infinite sequence {K}^{\prime}=\{{k}_{l}^{\prime},l\in N\} such that {k}_{l}^{\prime}\in {\alpha}_{{\pi}^{\prime}({k}_{l}^{\prime})}, where {\pi}^{\prime} is a bijection on {K}^{\prime}. But this implies that we found the set (K\cup {K}^{\prime}) larger than K with the property that {k}_{l}\in {\alpha}_{\pi ({k}_{l})} \mathrm{\forall}{k}_{l}\in K\cup {K}^{\prime}, which is the contradiction. Therefore, one can consider {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus K.
Now, if we define
then one can show that {L}_{{k}_{l}}\ge 0, \mathrm{\forall}{k}_{l}\in K. Indeed, since \pi ({k}_{l})\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in K, then Lemma 3.3 implies that 2{p}_{i\pi ({k}_{l}),{k}_{l}}\ge 1 for all i\in N\setminus \pi ({k}_{l}). Therefore,
Let Vx=x. Using {L}_{{k}_{l}}\ge 0, and summing up (8) for all values of {k}_{l}, one gets
Note that since \{{\alpha}_{k},k\in N\} is the partition of N, then
and since {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus K, one finds
Therefore,
which implies that {x}_{k}=0, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus K. In addition, from (8), it follows that all {x}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in K should be equal. So, if K is a finite set, then V has a unique fixed point, which is
If K is an infinite set, then all components of a fixed point should be 0, therefore, there are no fixed points.

(2)
Let F be the set of numbers {k}_{l} such that {k}_{l}\in {\alpha}_{{k}_{l}} for all {k}_{l}\in F.
Since there is no k\in N\setminus F with k\in {\alpha}_{k} and {\alpha}_{k} is a partition of N, then a particular number {k}_{1} must belong to one of the set other than {\alpha}_{{k}_{1}}, say {\alpha}_{{k}_{2}}. The number {k}_{2} belongs to some {\alpha}_{{k}_{3}} and so on. Therefore, there exists a sequence K=\{{k}_{i},i\in N\} such that {k}_{i}\in {\alpha}_{\pi ({k}_{i})}, where π is a bijection on the set K=\{{k}_{i},i\in N\}. In this case, the operators V can be written as follows
Taking into account {\sum}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{i}=1, one can rewrite (10) as:
Both sets F and K can be finite or infinite, and note that F\ne \mathrm{\varnothing}, otherwise, the case would coincide with the previous case. We also assume that the sets F and K are largest sets satisfying conditions given in their definitions. Therefore, similar to a previous case one can show that {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, k\in N\setminus F\cup K.
Now, if we define {L}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in F\cup K as in (9), one can show in the same way that {L}_{{k}_{l}}\ge 0, \mathrm{\forall}{k}_{l}\in F\cup K. Therefore, by letting Vx=x and summing up (10) for all values of {k}_{l}\in F\cup K, one gets
Note that \{{\alpha}_{k},k\in N\} is the partition of N, hence
taking into account {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus (F\cup K), we find
Therefore,
which implies that {x}_{k}=0, \mathrm{\forall}k\in N\setminus K. In addition, it follows that all {x}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in K are equal.
Due to the operator above, (11) can be simplified as follows
Using (12), one can find all the fixed points by putting Vx=x and solving the system of equations. We consider the following few cases. First of all, note that F>0 and K>1 (here F stands for the cardinality of F).
If F=1 (say, F=\{1\}) and K is finite (say, K=\{2,3,\dots ,k+1\}), then
where β appears k times.
If F=1 (say, F=\{1\}) and K is infinite, then since all {x}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in K are equal and {\sum}_{{k}_{l}\in K}{x}_{{k}_{l}}\le 1 implies that {x}_{{k}_{l}}=0 for all {k}_{l}\in K. Therefore, the operator has a unique fixed point (1,0,0,\dots ).
If F is finite (say, F=\{1,2,\dots ,k\}) and K is finite (say, K=k+1,k+2,\dots ,k+m), then
If F is finite (say, F=\{1,2,\dots ,k\}) and K is infinite, then the unique fixed point is (\frac{1}{k},\frac{1}{k},\dots ,\frac{1}{k},0,0,\dots ).
Finally, if both F and K are infinite, then the vertices {e}_{{k}_{l}}, {k}_{l}\in F of the simplex are fixed. So, in this case, there are infinitely many fixed points since F is infinite. □
Corollary 4.2 Let dissipative quadratic operator V be given in canonical form (5). Then V has a fixed point if and only if there exists a finite sequence {k}_{1},{k}_{2},\dots ,{k}_{l} (l\ge 1) such that {k}_{l}\in {\alpha}_{\pi ({k}_{l})} for some permutation π of the sequence \{{k}_{l},l\ge 1\}.
Proof follows from the prof of Theorem 4.1.
Now, we study the limit behavior of the trajectories. We have seen in Section 3 that the trajectory of the point under dissipative operator may not converge in general. Here, we consider a particular case, assuming that a dissipative operator has a unique fixed point.
Theorem 4.3 If dissipative q.s.o. V:S\to S has a unique fixed point, then the operator is regular at this point, i.e., the trajectory of any initial point tends to this unique point.
Proof Let us use the decomposition of V given by (11), and let F and K be the sets defined in (11). We have seen in the previous Theorem 4.1 that an operator has a unique fixed point if and only if one of the conditions is satisfied: (1) F=1, K=\mathrm{\varnothing}, (2) F=\mathrm{\varnothing}, K<\mathrm{\infty}.
Let us consider the case (1) and assume that F=\{1\}. Then V has a form
Since the sets F and K are chosen as largest, then we can simplify the operator as
Note that we set {\alpha}_{k}=\mathrm{\varnothing}, k\ge 2.
Let us set {x}^{(n)}={V}^{(n)}x and define \phi (x)={x}_{1}. Because Lemma 3.3 implies that {\sum}_{i,j=1}^{\mathrm{\infty}}2{p}_{ij,1}{x}_{i}{x}_{j}{\sum}_{i=2}^{\mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{1}{x}_{i}\ge 0, one can see that \phi ({x}^{(1)})\ge \phi (x), which means that \phi ({x}^{(n)}), n\in N is monotone and bounded sequence, and hence convergent. We put {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}\phi ({x}^{(n)})=C.
Note that from (13), by applying iterations n times to its first equation, we get
Now, since {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{1}^{(n+1)}={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{x}_{1}^{(n)}=C, then
hence {x}_{i}^{(n)}\to 0 for all i\ge 2 as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. From the last, one can find that {x}_{1}^{(n)}\to 1 as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Finally, from
as n\to \mathrm{\infty}, we find that the trajectory of any initial point converges to {e}_{1}.
Now, we turn to the other case. Let F=\mathrm{\varnothing} and K=\{1,2,\dots ,l\}. The unique point in this case is (\frac{1}{l},\frac{1}{l},\dots ,\frac{1}{l},0,0,\dots ). The operator has a form (7) or (8). Note that one can assume \pi (i)=i+1, \pi (k)=1. Therefore, the operator has a form
Define
Then
Here, {L}_{i} satisfy (9). Since {L}_{i}\ge 0, then from the above, it follows that \phi (Vx)\ge \phi (x). Hence, the sequence \{\phi ({x}^{(n)}):n=1,2,\dots \} is nondecreasing and bounded. That is why the limit {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}\phi ({x}^{(n)}) exists. Let us put C={lim}_{k\to \mathrm{\infty}}\phi ({x}^{(n)}).
Since K is chosen as largest, then one can rewrite the above as
From the last, we get
where
Since {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}\phi ({x}^{(n)})={lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}\phi ({x}^{(n)})=C and {L}_{s}^{(n)}\ge 0, then we get {\sum}_{i=l+1}^{m}{({x}^{(n)})}_{i}^{2}\to 0 as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Therefore, {({x}^{(n)})}_{i}\to 0 for all i=\overline{l+1,\mathrm{\infty}}, as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. Taking into account {\sum}_{i=1}^{m}{({V}^{k}x)}_{i}=1, we get C=1. Furthermore, if n\to \mathrm{\infty}, then {\sum}_{i\in {\alpha}_{s}\setminus \{s+1\}}{({x}^{(n)})}_{i}^{2}\to 0 for s=\overline{1,l} and {L}_{i}^{k}\to 0. Therefore, from
we get
which implies that {lim}_{n\to \mathrm{\infty}}{({x}^{(n)})}_{i}=\frac{1}{l}, \mathrm{\forall}i=\overline{1,l}.
Since {x}_{i}^{(n)}\to 0 as n\to 0 for all i>l, then one can assume that the initial point is taken in a small neighborhood of the set \{x\in S{\sum}_{1}^{l}{x}_{i}=1\}, and hence
as n\to \mathrm{\infty}. □
5 Conclusion
In this paper, we study dissipative q.s.o. defined on infinitedimensional simplex. In this case, we have some obstacles. First, an infinitedimensional simplex is not compact in {\ell}_{1} topology, nor it is compact in a weak topology, which makes the study of limit behavior harder. Moreover, the operator may not have fixed points at all. Despite this, we were able to define the dissipative q.s.o. in such space, and we classified the fixed points of dissipative operators. We also studied the limit behavior of the trajectories in some particular cases that can be an impetus to further studies of dissipative q.s.o. on infinitedimensional space. There are some questions left unanswered. First, note that simple examples can show that a dissipative q.s.o. is not nonexpansive operator, so we can not use the general theorems guaranteeing the convergence of Cesaro means. So the questions is: find necessary and sufficient conditions for a dissipative q.s.o. to be mean ergodic (i.e., Cesaro mean of any initial point converges in {\ell}_{1} norm). Second, investigate the limit behavior of the trajectories for arbitrary dissipative q.s.o.
References
Bernstein SN: The solution of a mathematical problem concerning the theory of heredity. UcheniyeZapiski N.I. Kaf. Ukr. Otd. Mat. 1924, 1: 83–115. (Russian)
Lyubich YI: Iterations of quadratic maps. In Math. Economics and Functional Analysis. Nauka, Moscow; 1974. (Russian)
Lyubich YI: Mathematical Structures in Population Genetics. Springer, Berlin; 1992.
Kesten H: Quadratic transformations: a model for population growth. I. Adv. Appl. Probab. 1970, 2: 1–82. 10.2307/3518344
Kesten H: Quadratic transformations: a model for population growth. II. Adv. Appl. Probab. 1970, 2: 179–228. 10.2307/1426318
Vallander SS: On the limit behavior of iteration sequence of certain quadratic transformations. Sov. Math. Dokl. 1972, 13: 123–126.
Zakharevich MI: On a limit behavior and ergodic hypothesis for quadratic mappings of a simplex. Russ. Math. Surv. 1978, 33: 207–208.
Ganikhodzhaev RN: Quadratic stochastic operators, Lyapunov functions and tournaments. Russian Acad. Sci. Sbornik. Math. 1993, 76: 489–506.
Ganikhodzhaev RN, Eshmamatova DB: Quadratic authomorphisms of a simplex and asymptotic behaviour of their trajectories. Vladikavkaz Mat. Zh. 2006, 2(8):12–28. (Russian)
Rozikov UA, Jamilov UU: On Fquadratic stochastic operators. Math. Notes 2008, 4(83):606–612.
Rozikov UA, Jamilov UU: The dynamics of strictly nonVolterra quadratic stochastic operators on 2D simplex. Mat. Sb. 2009, 9(200):81–94.
Rozikov UA, Nazir S: Separable quadratic stochastic operators. Lobachevskii J. Math. 2010, 3(31):215–221.
Rozikov UA, Zada A: On dynamics of ℓ Volterra quadratic stochastic operators. Int. J. Biomath. 2010, 2(3):143–159.
Ganikhodzhaev RN, Mukhamedov FM, Rozikov UA: Quadratic stochastic operators: results and open problems. Infin. Dimens. Anal. Quantum Probab. Relat. Top. 2011, 2(14):279–335.
Marshall A, Olkin I: Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications. Academic Press, New York; 1979.
Ganikhodzhaev RN: On the definition of quadratic bistochastic operators. Russ. Math. Surv. 1992, 48: 244–246.
Shahidi FA: On dissipative quadratic stochastic operators. Appl. Math. Inform. Sci. 2008, 2(2):211–223.
Ganikhodzhaev RN, Shahidi FA: Doubly stochastic quadratic operators and Birkhoff’s problem. Linear Algebra Appl. 2010, 1(432):24–35.
Shahidi FA: Doubly stochastic quadratic operators on finite dimensional simplex. Sib. Math. J. 2009, 2(50):463–468.
Shahidi FA, Abu Osman MT: The limit behavior of the trajectories of dissipative quadratic stochastic operators on finite dimensional simplex. J. Differ. Equ. Appl. 2013, 3(19):357–371.
Mukhamedov F, Akin H, Temir S: On infinite dimensional quadratic Volterra operators. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2005, 310: 533–556. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2005.02.022
Shahidi FA: Necessary and sufficient conditions for doubly stochasticity of infinitedimensional quadratic operators. Linear Algebra Appl. 2013, 438: 96–110. 10.1016/j.laa.2012.08.011
Markus AS: Eigenvalues and singular values of the sum and product of linear operators. Russ. Math. Surv. 1964, 19: 91–120. 10.1070/RM1964v019n04ABEH001154
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
The author declares that he has no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Shahidi, F. On infinitedimensional dissipative quadratic stochastic operators. Adv Differ Equ 2013, 272 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/168718472013272
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/168718472013272