Show Summary Details

# Open Mathematics

### formerly Central European Journal of Mathematics

Editor-in-Chief: Gianazza, Ugo / Vespri, Vincenzo

1 Issue per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2015: 0.512

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.521
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 1.233
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 0.546

Mathematical Citation Quotient (MCQ) 2015: 0.39

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2391-5455
See all formats and pricing

# General numerical radius inequalities for matrices of operators

Mohammed Al-Dolat
• Corresponding author
• Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P.O.Box 3030, Irbid 22110, Jordan
• Email:
/ Khaldoun Al-Zoubi
• Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P.O.Box 3030, Irbid 22110, Jordan
• Email:
/ Mohammed Ali
• Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P.O.Box 3030, Irbid 22110, Jordan
• Email:
• Department of Mathematics, Hashemite University, Jordan
• Email:
Published Online: 2016-03-01 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/math-2016-0011

## Abstract

Let AiB(H), (i = 1, 2, ..., n), and $T=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& \cdots & 0& {A}_{1}\\ ⋮& ⋰& {A}_{2}& 0\\ 0& ⋰& ⋰& ⋮\\ {A}_{n}& 0& \cdots & 0\end{array}\right]$. In this paper, we present some upper bounds and lower bounds for w(T). At the end of this paper we drive a new bound for the zeros of polynomials.

MSC 2010: 47A05; 47A10; 47A12

## 1 Introduction

Let B(H) be the C*– algebra of all bounded linear operators on a complex Hilbert space H with inner product 〈.,.〉. The numerical range of TB(H); denoted by W(T), is the subset of complex numbers given by $W (T) = { 〈T x,x〉 : x ∈ H, ||x|| = 1}.$

The numerical radius of T, denoted by w(T), is given by $w (T) = { 〈T x,x〉 : x ∈ H, ||x|| = 1}.$

It is well-known that w(.) defines a norm on B(H), which is equivalent to the usual operator norm $||T||\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{sup}\\ ||x||\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=1\end{array}||Tx||$. In fact for TB(H), we have $12 || T || ≤ w(T) ≤ || T ||.$

Several numerical radius inequalities that provide alternative lower and upper bounds for w(.) have received much attention from many authors. We refer the readers to [1, 2] for the history and significance, and [37] for recent developments this area. Kittaneh [5] proved that for TB(H). $w( T ) ≤ 12 ( ||T|| + ||T2||12).$

So it is clear that if T2 = 0; then $w( T ) = 12 || T ||.$(1)

Also it is known that w(.) is weakly unitarily invariant, that is $w ( U T U*) = w( T ),$(2) for every unitary UB(H).

A fundamental inequality for the numerical radius is the power inequality, which says that for TB(H), we have $w ( Tn ) ≤ wn (T ),$ for n = 1, 2, 3, ... (see, e.g. [1, p. 118]).

Although some open problems related to the numerical radius inequalities for bound linear operators still remain open, the investigation to establish numerical radius inequalities for several bound linear operators has been started. For example, if T1, T2B(H), it is known [1] that $w (T1 T2 ) ≤ 4w (T1) w (T2).$

Moreover, in the case that T1, T2 = T2 T1, $w (T1 T2 ) ≤ 2w (T1) w (T2).$

However, the sharp inequality $w (T1 T2 ) ≤ w (T1) w (T2)$ still has not been reached. A useful result in this direction, which can be found in [8], says that for T1, T2B(H), $w ( T1 T2 ± T2 T1* ) ≤ 2|| T1 || w ( T2).$

If T1, T2B(H), and T1 is positive operator, Kittaneh in [9] showed that $w(T1T2−T2T1)≤12‖T1‖(‖T2‖+‖T22‖12).$

Recently, the authors of [10] applied a different approach to obtain a new numerical radius inequality for commutators of Hilbert space operators. They showed that for T1, T2, T3, T4B(H), $w ( T1 T3 T2* ± T2 T4 T1* ) ≤ 2 || T1 || || T2 || w ([0T3T40]) .$(3)

The following numerical radius inequality for certain 2 × 2 operator matrices is obtained in [11], $w([0XY0]) ≤ ||X|| + ||Y||2,$(4) where X, YB(H). Another results in the direction can be found in [12].

The purpose of this work is to present new numerical radius inequalities for n × n operator matrices. Also we deduce (3) and (4) as special cases. At the end of this paper, we give some new bounds for the zeros of any monic polynomial with complex coefficients.

## 2. Numerical radius inequalities for the n × n operator matrix

The aim of this section is to establish new numerical radius inequalities for matrices of operators and to generalize some known inequalities. In order to do this, we need the following well-known lemma.

Lemma 2.1: ([3]). Let X1, X2, ..., XnB(H). Then $w ([X10X2⋱0Xn]) = max { w ( X1 ), w ( X2 ),..., w ( Xn ) }$Let us use this lemma to generalize the inequality (4).

Theorem 2.2.: Let AiB(H), i = 1, 2,..., n and $T=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}& 0& & {A}_{1}\\ & & {A}_{2}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{n}& & 0& \end{array}\right]$Then if n is even, $w ( T ) ≤ 12 ∑i=1n || Ai ||$ and if n is odd, $w( T ) ≤ w (An + 12) + 12 ∑i​= 1n|| Ai ||.$

Proof.: Let $\begin{array}{ccc}{X}_{1}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{1}\\ & & 0& \\ & ⋰& & \\ 0& & & 0\end{array}\right],& {X}_{2\text{\hspace{0.17em}}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& & & & 0\\ & & & {A}_{2}& \\ & & 0& & \\ & ⋰& & & \\ 0& & & & 0\end{array}\right]& ,...,{X}_{n}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & 0\\ & & ⋰& \\ & 0& & \\ {A}_{n}& & & 0\end{array}\right]\end{array}$.Then if n is an even number we have ${X}_{i}^{2}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}0$ for all i = 1, 2,..., n and so $w ( T ) = w (∑i = 1nXi) ≤ ∑i=1nw (Xi) = 12∑i= 1n|| Xi ||.$On the other hand, if n is an odd number, then following the same manner used above we achieve that $w ( T ) = w (∑i = 1nXi) ≤ w(Xn +​12)+∑i≠n+12nw (Xi) =w(An +​12)+ 12∑i≠n+12n|| Ai ||.$

Applying Theorem 2.2 with n = 2, A1 = X, A2 = Y we reach the inequality (4). Let us use (2) to prove the following theorem.

Theorem 2.3.: Let AiB(H), (i = 1, 2, ..., n) where n ≥ 3 and 1, α, α2,..., αn − 1 are the roots of unity and $T=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{1}\\ & & {A}_{2}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{n}& & & 0\end{array}\right]$. Then $w(T) = w([0αn−1Anα2n−3An−1α3n−5An−2⋰α(n−1)2A10])=w([0αAnα3An−1α5An−2⋰α2n−1A10])=w([0⋯0α3An−100⋮⋰α5An−20⋰⋰⋰⋮α2n−3A2⋮000αn−1A10⋯0αn+1An0])$

Proof.: Let ${U}_{1}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {\alpha }^{2n-2}I\\ & & {\alpha }^{2n-3}I& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {\alpha }^{n-1}I& & & & 0\end{array}\right],\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}{U}_{2}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& & & & I\\ & & & \alpha I& \\ & & {\alpha }^{2}I& & \\ & ⋰& & & \\ {\alpha }^{n-1}I& & & & 0\end{array}\right]$ and $\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}0& & \cdots & 0& I& 0\\ & & & \alpha I& & \\ ⋮& ⋰& {\alpha }^{2}I& & & \\ 0& ⋰& ⋰& & & ⋮\\ {\alpha }^{n-2}I& & & & & 0\\ 0& & \cdots & & 0& {\alpha }^{n-1}I\end{array}\right]$Then it is easy to show that U1, U2 and U3 are unitary operators so by (2) we have $w\left(T\right)\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}w\left({U}_{1}T{U}_{1}^{*}\right)\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}w\left({U}_{2}T{U}_{2}^{*}\right)\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}w\left({U}_{3}T{U}_{3}^{*}\right)$, which completes the proof. □As a direct consequence of Theorem 2.3 we obtain the following corollary

Corollary 2.4.: Let X1, X2, X3B(H) and 1; α, α2 be the roots of x3 = 1. Then $w([X2α2X1αX3αX3X2α2X1α2X1αX3X3]) ≤ 3w([00X30X20X100])$

Proof.: For $T\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}{X}_{2}& {\alpha }^{2}{X}_{1}& \alpha {X}_{3}\\ \alpha {X}_{3}& {X}_{2}& {\alpha }^{2}{X}_{1}\\ {\alpha }^{2}{X}_{1}& \alpha {X}_{3}& {X}_{2}\end{array}\right]\text{\hspace{0.17em}}$, we have $w(T) ≤ ([00αX30X20α2X100]) + w([X20000α2X10αX30])+w([0α2X10αX30000X2])=2w ([00X30X20X100]) +w ([0α2X10αX30000X2]) =2w ([00X30X20X100]) +w ([00α2X10X20αX300]) =2w ([00X30X20X100]) +w ([00α2X3*0X2*0αX1*00]) =2w ([00X30X20X100]) +w ([00X30X20X100]*) =3w ([00X30X20X100]) .$

Another relation for the numerical radius of the operator $\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{1}\\ & & {A}_{2}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{n}& & & 0\end{array}\right]$ is as follows.

Theorem 2.5.: Let XiB(H), (i = 1, 2, ..., n) where n ≥ 3, $\begin{array}{cc}T\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{1}\\ & & {A}_{2}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{n}& & & 0\end{array}\right],& {T}_{1}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{2}\\ & & {A}_{3}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{n-1}& & & 0\end{array}\right]\end{array}$ and ${T}_{1}^{t}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& & & {A}_{n-1}\\ & & {A}_{n-2}& \\ & ⋰& & \\ {A}_{2}& & & 0\end{array}\right]$ Then $w(T) = w([00A10T10An00])=w([00An0T1t0A100]) =w([T10000An0A10]) = w([T1t0000A10An0])=w([0An0A10000T1]) =w([0A10An0000T1t]).$ An application of Theorem 2.5 yields

Corollary 2.6.: Let X1, X2, X3B(H). Then $w([X1X2X3X3X1X2X2X3X1]) ≤ 3w ([00X30X10X200]) .$Using a straightforward technique we derive the following lemma.

Lemma 2.7: Let Ai, XiB(H), i = 1, 2, ..., n. Then $w(∑i=1nAiXiAi*) ≤ ∑i=1n||Ai||2w(Xi)$

Proof.: Assume that xH is a unit vector. Then $|〈∑i=1nAiXiAi*x,x〉| = | ∑i=1n〈XiAi*x,Ai*x〉| ≤ ∑i=1n|〈XiAi*x,Ai*x〉| ≤ ∑i=1n||Ai*x||2w(Xi) ≤ ∑i=1n||Ai||2w(Xi).$We attain our theorem by taking the supremum over all unit vectors xH.

Our next result can be stated as follows.

Theorem 2.8.: Let Ai, Bi, Xi, YiB(H), i = 1, 2, ..., n. Then $w(∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1* ∓ BiYiAn−i+1*) ≤ 2 ((∑i=1n||Ai||2)(∑i=1n||Bi||2))w(T),$where $T\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}0& & & & & {X}_{1}\\ & & & & ⋰& \\ & & & {X}_{n}& & \\ & & {Y}_{1}& & & \\ & ⋰& & & & \\ {Y}_{n}& & & & & 0\end{array}\right]$

Proof.: Assume that $C\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccccccc}{A}_{1}& {A}_{2}& \cdots & {A}_{n}& {B}_{1}& {B}_{2}& \cdots & {B}_{n}\\ 0& & & \cdots & & & & 0\end{array}\right]$ and $Z\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}0& & & & & {X}_{1}\\ & & & & ⋰& \\ & & & {X}_{n}& & \\ & & {Y}_{1}& & & \\ & ⋰& & & & \\ {Y}_{n}& & & & & 0\end{array}\right]$Applying Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.7 we get $w(∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1*+BiYiAn−i+1*) = w([∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1*+BiYiAn−i+1*000])= w (CZC*)≤ ||C||2w(Z)=||∑i=1nAiAi*+BiBi*||w(Z)≤(∑i=1n||AiAi*+BiBi*||)w(Z)≤(∑i=1n||Ai||2 + ||Bi||2)w(Z).$ Now, if we replace Ai and Bi by t Ai and $\frac{1}{t}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}{B}_{i}$, t > 0, respectively, then we have $w (∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1*+BiYiAn−i+1*) ≤ w(Z)∑i=1n(t4||Ai||2+||Bi||2t2).$Also, since ${}_{t\text{\hspace{0.17em}}>0}^{\mathrm{min}}\left(\sum _{i=1}^{n}\frac{{t}^{4}||{A}_{i}||+||{B}_{i}||}{{t}^{2}}\right)\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}2\sqrt{\sum _{i=1}^{n}||{A}_{i}|{|}^{2}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\sum _{i=1}^{n}||{B}_{i}|{|}^{2}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}$ so we have $w (∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1*+BiYiAn−i+1*) ≤ 2w(Z)(∑i=1n||Ai||2∑i=1n||Bi||2).$Finally, replace Yi by −Yi to get $w (∑i=1nAiXiBn−i+1*+BiYiAn−i+1*) ≤ 2w(Z)(∑i=1n||Ai||2∑i=1n||Bi||2).$As an application of Theorem 2.8, we obtain the following result.

Corollary 2.9: If Ti B(H), i = 1, 2,..., n, then $w([0T1T2⋰Tn0]) ≥ 1nw(∑i=1nTi)$

Proof.: Let Xi = Yi = Ti and Ai = Bi = I. □

Based on the inequality (1) and Lemma 2.1, an upper bound for the numerical radius of the general n × n operator matrix can be derived.

Theorem 2.10: Let AijB(H) where 1 ≤ i, jn. Then $w([A11A12⋯A1nA21A22⋯A2n⋮⋮⋮⋮An1An2⋯Ann]) ≤ max {w(Aii) : 1 ≤ i ≤ n} + 12 ∑i,j=1,i≠jn||Aij||.$

Proof.: For 1 ≤ x, yn where xy. Define the operator matrix Txy = [tij] where $tij = {0 otherwise.Aij if i = x, j = y$Then ${T}_{xy}^{2}\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=0$ so $w([A11A12⋯A1nA21A22⋯A2n⋮⋮⋮⋮An1An2⋯Ann]) =w([A110A22⋱0Ann] + ∑x,y=1,x≠ynTxy) ≤w([A110A22⋱0Ann]) + ∑x,y=1,x≠ynw(Txy)=max{w(Aii): 1 ≤ i ≤ n}+12∑i,j=1,i≠jn||Aij||$

An application of Theorem 2.10 and Corollary 2.9 yields

Corollary 2.11: Let A, B, C, D = ∈ B(H). Then $max{max{w(A),w(D)}, 12w(A + D)} ≤ w ([ABCD]) ≤ max{w(A), w(D)}+||B||+||C||2$

## 3 A bound for the zeros of polynomials

Let p(z) = zn + anzn-1 + ... + a2z + a1 be a monic polynomial of degree n ≥ 3 with complex coefficients a1, a2, ..., an. Then the Frobenius companion matrix of p is the matrix $C(p) = [−an−an−1…−a2−a110⋯⋯001⋱⋮⋮⋱⋱⋱⋮0⋯010].$

It is well-known that the zero of p are exactly the eigenvalues of C(p) (see, e.g., [13, 14]). Since the spectral radius of a matrix is dominated by its numerical radius, it follows that if z is any zero of p, then $|z| ≤ w (C(p))$(5)

by the inequality (5) and Theorem 2.10 we can derive a new bound for the zeros of p.

Theorem 3.1: If z is any zero of p(z), then $|z| ≤ max{w(A),cos(πn+1)}+12(1+(∑i=1n−1|ai|2)12).$

Proof.: Partition C(p) as $C(p) = [ABCD],$where $\begin{array}{l}\begin{array}{ccc}A\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cc}-{a}_{n}& -{a}_{n-1}\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right],& B\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{cccc}-{a}_{n-2}& \cdots & -{a}_{2}& -{a}_{1}\\ 0& \cdots & \cdots & 0\end{array}\right],\text{\hspace{0.17em}}& C\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\end{array}\left[\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 0& 0\\ ⋮& ⋮\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right]\\ \end{array}$ and $D\text{\hspace{0.17em}}=\text{\hspace{0.17em}}\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& \cdots & \cdots & 0\\ 1& 0& \cdots & \ddots & ⋮\\ 0& 1& \ddots & \ddots & ⋮\\ ⋮& \ddots & \ddots & \ddots & 0\\ 0& \cdots & 0& 1& 0\end{array}\right]$Then we have $| z |​ ≤ ω (C(p)) = ω ([ABCD]) ≤max{ ω(A), cos (πn + 1) } + 12(1​+ (∑ | ai |2i = 1n − 1)12).$

It should be mentioned here that other bounds for the zeros of p(z) can be obtained by considering different partitions of C(p). Related bounds for the zeros of p that are based on the inequality (5) and various estimates of w(C(p)) can be found in [13, 14], and references therein.

## References

• 1

Bhatia R., Matrix Analysis, Berlin. Springer-Verlage, 1997.2

• 2

Dragomir S., A survey of some recent inequalities for the norm and numerical radius of operators in Hilbert spaces, Banach J. Math. Anal., 2007, 2(1), 154– 175.

• 3

Dragomir S., Inequalities for the norm and the numerical radius of linear operator in Hilbert spaces, Demonstatio Math., 2007, 2(40), 411– 417.

• 4

Dragomir S., Norm and numerical radius inequalities for sums of bounded linear operators in Hilbert spaces, Ser. Math. Inform., 2007, 1(22), 61– 75. General numerical radius inequalities for matrices of operators 117

• 5

Kittaneh F., A numerical radius inequality and an estimate for the numerical radius of the Frobenius companion matrix, Studia Math., 2003, 158(1), 11– 17.

• 6

Omidvar E., Moslehian M., Niknam A., Some numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators. Involve, a journal of mathematics, 2009, 4(2), 471– 478.

• 7

Kittaneh F., Numerical radius inequalities for Hillbert space operators, Studia Math., 2005, 168(1), 73– 80.

• 8

Fong C., Holbrook J., Unitarily invariant operator norms, Can. J. Math., 1983, 135, 274– 299.

• 9

Kittaneh F., Notes on some inequalities for Hilbert space operators, Pub1. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 1988, 24, 283– 293.

• 10

Hirzallah O., Kittaneh F., Shebrawi K., Numerical radius inequalities for commutators of Hilbert space operators, Num. Func. Anal. and Opti., 2011, 7(32), 739– 749.

• 11

Hirzallah O., Kittaneh F., Shebrawi K., Numerical radius inequalities for certian 2 × 2 operator matrices, Integr. Equ. Oper. Theory, 2011, 71, 129– 147.

• 12

Kittaneh F., Moslehian M. Takeaki Y., decommpostion and numerical radius inequalities. Linear Algebra 2015, 471, 46-53.

• 13

Horn R., Johnson C., Matrix Analysis, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1985.

• 14

Amer A.,Kittaneh F., Estimates for the numerical radius and the spectral radius of the Frobenius companion matrix and bound for the zeros of polynomials. Ann. funct. Anal. 5 2014, 1, 56-62.

Accepted: 2016-02-08

Published Online: 2016-03-01

Published in Print: 2016-01-01

Citation Information: Open Mathematics, ISSN (Online) 2391-5455, Export Citation