Open MathsAll courses
Positive maps and finite-dimensional approximation · Prerequisite proofs · Sources and terms

Repairing small matrix corners

AI-generated exposition by OpenAI GPT models. CC0-1.0 to the extent of rights held.

Almost-orthonormal compressed vectors determine a Gram matrix. One spectral cut controls all its entries, and inverse-square-root normalization produces exact matrix units with a common initial projection. A scalar polar-repair construction gives a second proof with an explicit recursive error bound. Both constructions control matrix coefficients for a finite operator family.

The Gram and single-vector constructions allow every finite von Neumann algebra MM with faithful normal tracial state τ\tau, with no factor or separability assumption. We use bounded polar and spectral calculus, trace cyclicity, and the tracial multiplication bounds ∥axb∥2≤∥a∥∥x∥2∥b∥\|axb\|_2\le\|a\|\|x\|_2\|b\|. The spectral foundations and trace Hilbert-space products supply these arguments, including the complete trace Hilbert space and positive cyclic pairing. The near-covering corollary uses the pinched corner selection, which retains a separable type II1\mathrm{II}_1 factor. All norms below are the ambient trace norms.

Near-covering matrix coordinates

Corollary 3.1. In a separable II1\mathrm{II}_1 factor, let x1,…,xmx_1,\ldots,x_m be L2L^2-orthonormal and finite F⊂U(M)F\subset\mathcal U(M) contain 11. Fix B≥max⁡(1,∥x1∥,…,∥xm∥)B\ge\max(1,\|x_1\|,\ldots,\|x_m\|). For sufficiently small b>0b>0, there are nonzero mutually orthogonal initial projections eke_k and partial isometries wi(k)w_i(k) such that

wi(k)∗wj(k)=δijek,∥xiek−wi(k)∥2≤Dm(b)τ(ek),∥wi(k)∗vwj(k)−Aij(v)ek∥2≤dm(b)τ(ek),Aij(v)=τ(xi∗vxj),∑kτ(ek)>1−b21+Dm(b)2.(19)\begin{aligned} w_i(k)^*w_j(k)&=\delta_{ij}e_k,\\ \|x_i e_k-w_i(k)\|_2&\le D_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e_k)},\\ \|w_i(k)^*v w_j(k)-A_{ij}(v)e_k\|_2 &\le d_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e_k)},\\ A_{ij}(v)&=\tau(x_i^*v x_j),\\ \sum_k\tau(e_k)&>\frac{1-b^2}{1+D_m(b)^2}. \end{aligned} \tag{19}

Put Eij(k)=wi(k)wj(k)∗E_{ij}(k)=w_i(k)w_j(k)^* and sk=∑iEii(k)s_k=\sum_i E_{ii}(k). Then

∥skvsk−∑i,jAij(v)Eij(k)∥2≤m dm(b)τ(sk).(20)\left\|s_k v s_k-\sum_{i,j}A_{ij}(v)E_{ij}(k)\right\|_2 \le\sqrt m\,d_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(s_k)}. \tag{20}

Proof. The Gram theorem used here is proved in the next section. Select the fkf_k's of the preceding lesson and apply Theorem 2.1 to each one. Every individual squared error is bounded by their nonnegative sum, so (10) and (12) hold. Since ek≤fke_k\le f_k, the eke_k's are orthogonal. The trace bound follows by summing τ(fk)≤(1+Dm(b)2)τ(ek)\tau(f_k)\le(1+D_m(b)^2)\tau(e_k).

In the matrix coordinates wi(k)w_i(k), the squared norm on the left of (20) is the sum of the m2m^2 squared coefficient errors in (19). Its bound is m2dm(b)2τ(ek)m^2d_m(b)^2\tau(e_k). As τ(sk)=mτ(ek)\tau(s_k)=m\tau(e_k), taking square roots gives (20). □\square

The range projections sks_k need not be mutually orthogonal. Their initial projections eke_k are; that is the orthogonality used in the next selection argument. Also A(v)A(v) is a contraction: it is the compression of the unitary LvL_v to the span of the orthonormal xix_i's.

Simultaneous normalization of a finite Gram system

The simultaneous proof gives an explicit modulus by normalizing the whole Gram matrix. The recursive alternative gives another admissible modulus and uses the scalar repair lemmas proved in the following section. The coefficient estimate and the near-covering corollary apply with either proved choice.

Theorem 2.1. Fix m≥1m\ge1 and B≥1B\ge1. For sufficiently small b>0b>0 there is Dm(b)→0D_m(b)\to0 as b↓0b\downarrow0 with the following property. If f≠0f\ne0, ∥xi∥≤B\|x_i\|\le B, and

∥fxi∗xjf−δijf∥2≤bτ(f)(1≤i,j≤m),(10)\|f x_i^*x_j f-\delta_{ij}f\|_2\le b\sqrt{\tau(f)} \qquad(1\le i,j\le m), \tag{10}

there are e≤fe\le f and partial isometries w1,…,wmw_1,\ldots,w_m such that

wi∗wj=δije,τ(f−e)≤Dm(b)2τ(e),∥xie−wi∥2≤Dm(b)τ(e).(11)w_i^*w_j=\delta_{ij}e,\qquad \tau(f-e)\le D_m(b)^2\tau(e),\qquad \|x_i e-w_i\|_2\le D_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e)}. \tag{11}

If also ∥v∥≤1\|v\|\le1 and

∥fxi∗vxjf−λijf∥2≤bτ(f),(12)\|f x_i^*v x_j f-\lambda_{ij}f\|_2\le b\sqrt{\tau(f)}, \tag{12}

then

∥wi∗vwj−λije∥2≤dm(b)τ(e),dm(b)=(1+B)Dm(b)+b1+Dm(b)2.(13)\|w_i^*v w_j-\lambda_{ij}e\|_2 \le d_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e)},\qquad d_m(b)=(1+B)D_m(b)+b\sqrt{1+D_m(b)^2}. \tag{13}

Proof by simultaneous Gram normalization. Fix

0<b<14m2,Dm(b)2=m2b1−m2b.(QG1)0<b<\frac{1}{4m^2}, \qquad D_m(b)^2=\frac{m^2b}{1-m^2b}. \tag{QG1}

This admissible modulus tends to zero for every fixed mm. We construct all mm partial isometries together.

Work first in the corner fMffMf, whose identity is ff. For 1≤i,j≤m1\le i,j\le m, set

Aij=fxi∗xjf−δijf,T=∑i,j=1mAij∗Aij∈(fMf)+.A_{ij}=f x_i^*x_j f-\delta_{ij}f, \qquad T=\sum_{i,j=1}^m A_{ij}^*A_{ij}\in(fMf)_+.

Hypothesis (10) gives

τ(T)=∑i,j=1m∥Aij∥22≤m2b2τ(f).(QG2)\tau(T)=\sum_{i,j=1}^m\|A_{ij}\|_2^2 \le m^2b^2\tau(f). \tag{QG2}

Use one spectral projection of this positive operator:

e=1[0,b] fMf(T).e=1_{[0,b]}^{\,fMf}(T).

The superscript specifies functional calculus with identity ff, so e≤fe\le f, including the kernel of TT inside this corner. Spectral integration on f−ef-e gives

b τ(f−e)≤τ(T)≤m2b2τ(f).b\,\tau(f-e)\le\tau(T)\le m^2b^2\tau(f).

Consequently

τ(e)≥(1−m2b)τ(f)>0,τ(f−e)≤m2b1−m2bτ(e),τ(f)≤τ(e)1−m2b.(QG3)\tau(e)\ge(1-m^2b)\tau(f)>0, \qquad \tau(f-e)\le\frac{m^2b}{1-m^2b}\tau(e), \qquad \tau(f)\le\frac{\tau(e)}{1-m^2b}. \tag{QG3}

In particular the selected projection is nonzero. Since each Aij∗Aij≤TA_{ij}^*A_{ij}\le T, compression gives

(Aije)∗(Aije)=eAij∗Aije≤eTe≤be.(A_{ij}e)^*(A_{ij}e) =eA_{ij}^*A_{ij}e \le eTe\le b e.

Thus ∥Aije∥≤b\|A_{ij}e\|\le\sqrt b, and also ∥eAije∥≤b\|eA_{ij}e\|\le\sqrt b.

Let 1e=diag⁡(e,…,e)\mathbf1_e=\operatorname{diag}(e,\ldots,e), and consider the row and its Gram matrix

X=(x1e,…,xme),G=X∗X=[exi∗xje]i,j=1m∈Mm(eMe).X=(x_1e,\ldots,x_me), \qquad G=X^*X=[e x_i^*x_j e]_{i,j=1}^m \in M_m(eMe).

Every entry of G−1eG-\mathbf1_e has norm at most b\sqrt b. Hence

∥G−1e∥≤mb<12.(QG4)\|G-\mathbf1_e\|\le m\sqrt b<\tfrac12. \tag{QG4}

For completeness, if ξ=(ξj)\xi=(\xi_j) is in a Hilbert-space representation of (eMe)m(eMe)^m, then each row of (G−1e)ξ(G-\mathbf1_e)\xi has norm at most b∑j∥ξj∥\sqrt b\sum_j\|\xi_j\|. Squaring, summing the mm rows, and applying scalar Cauchy--Schwarz proves this matrix-norm bound. It uses no commutation of the Gram entries.

The positive matrix GG is therefore invertible in Mm(eMe)M_m(eMe). Bounded continuous functional calculus defines G−1/2G^{-1/2} there. Put

W=XG−1/2=(w1,…,wm).(QG5)W=XG^{-1/2}=(w_1,\ldots,w_m). \tag{QG5}

Each entry is an element of MeMe, and direct matrix multiplication gives

W∗W=G−1/2GG−1/2=1e,wi∗wj=δije.(QG6)W^*W=G^{-1/2}GG^{-1/2}=\mathbf1_e, \qquad w_i^*w_j=\delta_{ij}e. \tag{QG6}

In particular each wiw_i is a partial isometry with initial projection ee. Their range projections are mutually orthogonal, and wiwj∗w_iw_j^* satisfy the matrix-unit relations.

We next prove the full trace error estimate. On Mm(eMe)M_m(eMe), use the unnormalized finite trace

Tr⁡m([zij])=∑i=1mτ(zii).\operatorname{Tr}_m([z_{ij}])=\sum_{i=1}^m\tau(z_{ii}).

Since X=WG1/2X=WG^{1/2} and W∗W=1eW^*W=\mathbf1_e,

∑i=1m∥wi−xie∥22=Tr⁡m((W−X)∗(W−X))=Tr⁡m((1e−G1/2)2)≤Tr⁡m((1e−G)2)=∑i,j=1m∥eAije∥22≤∑i,j=1m∥Aij∥22≤m2b2τ(f).(QG7)\begin{aligned} \sum_{i=1}^m\|w_i-x_i e\|_2^2 &=\operatorname{Tr}_m\bigl((W-X)^*(W-X)\bigr)\\ &=\operatorname{Tr}_m\bigl((\mathbf1_e-G^{1/2})^2\bigr)\\ &\le\operatorname{Tr}_m\bigl((\mathbf1_e-G)^2\bigr)\\ &=\sum_{i,j=1}^m\|eA_{ij}e\|_2^2\\ &\le\sum_{i,j=1}^m\|A_{ij}\|_2^2 \le m^2b^2\tau(f). \end{aligned} \tag{QG7}

The scalar inequality ∣1−t∣≤∣1−t∣|1-\sqrt t|\le|1-t| for t≥0t\ge0, applied by functional calculus to GG, proves the middle inequality. The next identity is the entrywise trace expansion of the square of the self-adjoint matrix G−1eG-\mathbf1_e; all products lie in the finite matrix algebra. Trace multiplication bounds prove the compression inequality.

Every nonnegative individual squared error is bounded by the sum in (QG7). With (QG3) and b<1b<1, this yields

∥wi−xie∥22≤m2b21−m2bτ(e)≤Dm(b)2τ(e).(QG8)\|w_i-x_i e\|_2^2 \le\frac{m^2b^2}{1-m^2b}\tau(e) \le D_m(b)^2\tau(e). \tag{QG8}

Together with the trace loss in (QG3) and the relations (QG6), this proves every assertion in (11).

Finally suppose (12) holds and ∥v∥≤1\|v\|\le1. Expand

wi∗vwj−λije=(wi∗−exi∗)vwj+exi∗v(wj−xje)+e(xi∗vxj−λijf)e.\begin{aligned} w_i^*v w_j-\lambda_{ij}e ={}&(w_i^*-e x_i^*)v w_j\\ &+e x_i^*v(w_j-x_j e)\\ &+e(x_i^*v x_j-\lambda_{ij}f)e . \end{aligned}

Here ∥wj∥=1\|w_j\|=1, ∥xi∥≤B\|x_i\|\le B, and the last term has L2L^2 norm at most bτ(f)b\sqrt{\tau(f)}. Equations (QG3) and (QG8) therefore give

∥wi∗vwj−λije∥2≤((1+B)Dm(b)+b1+Dm(b)2)τ(e).(QG9)\|w_i^*v w_j-\lambda_{ij}e\|_2 \le\left((1+B)D_m(b) +b\sqrt{1+D_m(b)^2}\right)\sqrt{\tau(e)}. \tag{QG9}

Indeed 1+Dm(b)2=(1−m2b)−11+D_m(b)^2=(1-m^2b)^{-1}. This is exactly (13). All constructions occur in an arbitrary finite von Neumann algebra with the stated faithful normal trace. Neither a factor nor a separable-predual assumption was used. □\square

Second proof, by successive polar repairs. Replace xix_i by xifx_i f; the hypotheses are unchanged and so are the final xiex_i e's. For m=1m=1, Lemma 1.1 permits D1(b)2=b/(1−b)D_1(b)^2=b/(1-b). Suppose k−1k-1 vectors have been repaired with error D=Dk−1(b)D=D_{k-1}(b) and initial projection f′≤ff'\le f. Then

τ(f)≤(1+D2)τ(f′),∥f′xk∗xkf′−f′∥2≤b1+D2τ(f′).(14)\tau(f)\le(1+D^2)\tau(f'),\qquad \|f'x_k^*x_k f'-f'\|_2\le b\sqrt{1+D^2}\sqrt{\tau(f')}. \tag{14}

For an old partial isometry wjw_j,

∥wj∗xkf′∥2≤(BD+b1+D2)τ(f′).(15)\|w_j^*x_k f'\|_2 \le\bigl(BD+b\sqrt{1+D^2}\bigr)\sqrt{\tau(f')}. \tag{15}

Expand wj∗=(wj∗−f′xj∗)+f′xj∗w_j^*=(w_j^*-f'x_j^*)+f'x_j^*, using the old error and the off-diagonal condition (10). Apply Lemma 1.2 with

β=BD+b1+D2,α=(2(k−1)B+1)β.(16)\beta=BD+b\sqrt{1+D^2},\qquad \alpha=\bigl(2(k-1)B+1\bigr)\beta. \tag{16}

For small bb, α<1/4\alpha<1/4. Its new initial projection e≤f′e\le f' satisfies τ(f′)≤τ(e)/(1−α)\tau(f')\le\tau(e)/(1-\alpha). Retain the old operators as wjew_j e. Projection differences are orthogonal, so

τ(f−e)≤D2+α1−ατ(e).(17)\tau(f-e)\le\frac{D^2+\alpha}{1-\alpha}\tau(e). \tag{17}

Old errors have squared bound D2τ(e)/(1−α)D^2\tau(e)/(1-\alpha), and the new error has bound ατ(e)\alpha\tau(e). Thus the recursive choice

Dk(b)2=Dk−1(b)2+α1−α(18)D_k(b)^2=\frac{D_{k-1}(b)^2+\alpha}{1-\alpha} \tag{18}

proves (11). For fixed m,Bm,B, induction shows every term tends to zero; all finitely many smallness conditions can therefore be met.

For (13), insert xie,xjex_i e,x_j e between the repaired operators. The two replacement errors are bounded by Dm(b)τ(e)D_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e)} and BDm(b)τ(e)B D_m(b)\sqrt{\tau(e)}. The compressed coefficient error is at most bτ(f)b\sqrt{\tau(f)}, which is at most b1+Dm(b)2τ(e)b\sqrt{1+D_m(b)^2}\sqrt{\tau(e)}. Their sum proves (13). □\square

Single-vector repairs and orthogonal ranges

Lemma 1.2. Suppose u1,…,ulu_1,\ldots,u_l are partial isometries with ui∗uj=δijfu_i^*u_j=\delta_{ij}f, f≠0f\ne0, and y∈My\in M, ∥y∥≤B\|y\|\le B. Assume

∥fy∗yf−f∥2≤βτ(f),∥uj∗yf∥2≤βτ(f).(6)\|f y^*y f-f\|_2\le\beta\sqrt{\tau(f)},\qquad \|u_j^*y f\|_2\le\beta\sqrt{\tau(f)}. \tag{6}

Put C=2lB+1C=2lB+1, and suppose 0≤β<1/(4C)0\le\beta<1/(4C). There are e≤fe\le f and uu with

u∗u=e,uj∗u=0,∥ye−u∥22≤Cβτ(e),τ(f−e)≤Cβ1−Cβτ(e).(7)\begin{aligned} u^*u&=e,&u_j^*u&=0,\\ \|ye-u\|_2^2&\le C\beta\tau(e),& \tau(f-e)&\le\frac{C\beta}{1-C\beta}\tau(e). \end{aligned} \tag{7}

The old partial isometries ujeu_j e, together with uu, give an (l+1)(l+1)-matrix system.

Proof. The scalar polar-repair lemma used here is proved below. The ranges ujuj∗u_j u_j^* are orthogonal. Let P=∑jujuj∗P=\sum_j u_j u_j^* and x=(1−P)yfx=(1-P)yf. Then ∥x∥≤B\|x\|\le B,

∥x−yf∥2≤lβτ(f),∥x∗x−f∥2≤(2lB+1)βτ(f).(8)\|x-yf\|_2\le l\beta\sqrt{\tau(f)},\qquad \|x^*x-f\|_2\le(2lB+1)\beta\sqrt{\tau(f)}. \tag{8}

For the second inequality expand the difference from fy∗yff y^*y f and use the two operator norm bounds. Apply Lemma 1.1 with α=Cβ<1/4\alpha=C\beta<1/4. Its polar range lies in 1−P1-P, so uj∗u=0u_j^*u=0.

To bound ye−uye-u, its components PyePye and xe−uxe-u have orthogonal ranges. Equations (5)–(6) give

∥ye−u∥22≤lβ2τ(f)+α2τ(f).(9)\|ye-u\|_2^2\le l\beta^2\tau(f)+\alpha^2\tau(f). \tag{9}

If β>0\beta>0, compression of the first condition in (6) and Cauchy–Schwarz imply ∥y∥2≥1−β>3/4\|y\|^2\ge1-\beta>3/4. Thus B>3/2B>\sqrt3/2, and C2≥lC^2\ge l. Consequently the right side in (9) is at most

2α2τ(f)≤2α21−ατ(e)≤ατ(e).2\alpha^2\tau(f)\le\frac{2\alpha^2}{1-\alpha}\tau(e) \le\alpha\tau(e).

For β=0\beta=0, yfyf already has orthogonal range and initial projection ff. The trace defect follows from Lemma 1.1. Setting wj=ujew_j=u_j e and wl+1=uw_{l+1}=u gives wi∗wj=δijew_i^*w_j=\delta_{ij}e; their products wiwj∗w_iw_j^* satisfy all matrix-unit identities. □\square

Spectral polar repair

Lemma 1.1. Let f≠0f\ne0 be a projection, x∈Mx\in M, and 0≤α<1/40\le\alpha<1/4. If

∥fx∗xf−f∥2≤ατ(f),(1)\|f x^*x f-f\|_2\le\alpha\sqrt{\tau(f)}, \tag{1}

there are e≤fe\le f and a partial isometry uu such that

u∗u=e,uu∗≤sℓ(xf),∥xe−u∥22≤ατ(e),τ(f−e)≤α1−ατ(e),τ(f)≤τ(e)1−α.(2)\begin{aligned} u^*u&=e,& uu^*&\le s_\ell(xf),\\ \|xe-u\|_2^2&\le\alpha\tau(e),& \tau(f-e)&\le\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha}\tau(e),\\ \tau(f)&\le\frac{\tau(e)}{1-\alpha}. \end{aligned} \tag{2}

In addition ∥xe−u∥22≤α2τ(f)\|xe-u\|_2^2\le\alpha^2\tau(f).

Proof. Put y=xf=vhy=xf=v h in polar form inside the right support ff, and take

e=1[1−α, 1+α](h)(3)e=1_{[1-\sqrt\alpha,\,1+\sqrt\alpha]}(h) \tag{3}

when α>0\alpha>0. Off this interval, ∣h2−f∣≥α(2−α)|h^2-f|\ge\sqrt\alpha(2-\sqrt\alpha). Spectral integration of (1) gives

τ(f−e)≤α(2−α)2τ(f)≤ατ(f).(4)\tau(f-e)\le\frac{\alpha}{(2-\sqrt\alpha)^2}\tau(f) \le\alpha\tau(f). \tag{4}

Thus τ(e)≥(1−α)τ(f)>0\tau(e)\ge(1-\alpha)\tau(f)>0. The projection ee is below the support of hh, so u=veu=ve has the stated supports. On ee, ∣h−f∣≤α|h-f|\le\sqrt\alpha, proving the first error bound in (2). Also the scalar inequality ∣t−1∣≤∣t2−1∣|t-1|\le|t^2-1| for t≥0t\ge0 gives

∥xe−u∥22=τ((h−f)2e)≤∥h2−f∥22≤α2τ(f).(5)\|xe-u\|_2^2=\tau((h-f)^2e)\le\|h^2-f\|_2^2 \le\alpha^2\tau(f). \tag{5}

Rearrange (4) to obtain the two trace bounds. If α=0\alpha=0, then y∗y=fy^*y=f; take e=fe=f, u=yu=y. □\square

4. Exercises with complete solutions

Matrix coordinates and trace budgets

Exercise 6. Verify the matrix multiplication rule for wiwj∗w_iw_j^*.

Solution. Since wj∗wk=δjkew_j^*w_k=\delta_{jk}e and wie=wiw_i e=w_i, (wiwj∗)(wkwl∗)=δjkwiwl∗(w_iw_j^*)(w_kw_l^*)=\delta_{jk}w_iw_l^*. Taking adjoints exchanges the indices. The diagonal projections are orthogonal and sum to the identity ss of this finite-dimensional algebra.

Exercise 7. Why must the trace conversion in (13) use 1+Dm(b)2\sqrt{1+D_m(b)^2}?

Solution. Equation (11) says τ(f−e)≤Dm(b)2τ(e)\tau(f-e)\le D_m(b)^2\tau(e), so τ(f)≤(1+Dm(b)2)τ(e)\tau(f)\le(1+D_m(b)^2)\tau(e). The coefficient estimate is a norm, and therefore converts by the square root of that trace ratio.

Exercise 8. Prove the matrix-coordinate squared norm identity used in (20).

Solution. For zij∈eMez_{ij}\in eMe, expand z=∑i,jwizijwj∗z=\sum_{i,j}w_i z_{ij}w_j^*. In τ(z∗z)\tau(z^*z), the relations wi∗wk=δikew_i^*w_k=\delta_{ik}e, followed by cyclicity and wj∗wl=δjlew_j^*w_l=\delta_{jl}e, remove all cross terms. What remains is ∑i,jτ(zij∗zij)\sum_{i,j}\tau(z_{ij}^*z_{ij}).

Exercise 9. Why can the sks_k's not generally be treated as an orthogonal partition?

Solution. Each has trace mτ(ek)m\tau(e_k). If they were orthogonal, their total trace would be at most one. For m>1m>1, the lower bound in (19) makes ∑kτ(sk)\sum_k\tau(s_k) arbitrarily close to mm, contradicting that bound. Only the initial projections form the almost-covering orthogonal family.

Exercise 10. Which statements in this lesson require factoriality or separable predual?

Solution. The polar repairs, Gram induction and coefficient transfer in Sections 1–2 use only a faithful normal finite trace. Corollary 3.1 uses the scalar pinching theorem, so its factor and separability hypotheses are retained. Those hypotheses do not enter the individual repair lemmas.

Scalar and range repairs

Exercise 1. Explain why the spectral projection in (3) lies in the support of hh.

Solution. The interval's lower endpoint 1−α1-\sqrt\alpha is positive. Thus it excludes zero, and its spectral projection is below 1(0,∞)(h)1_{(0,\infty)}(h). The polar isometry vv is isometric on that support, giving (ve)∗(ve)=e(ve)^*(ve)=e.

Exercise 2. Derive (4) with one lower bound for both bad spectral tails.

Solution. On the lower tail, 1−t2>2α−α1-t^2>2\sqrt\alpha-\alpha; on the upper tail, t2−1>2α+αt^2-1>2\sqrt\alpha+\alpha. Both exceed α(2−α)\sqrt\alpha(2-\sqrt\alpha). Integrating their squared lower bound against the spectral trace measure and applying (1) gives (4).

Exercise 3. Why are both estimates for xe−uxe-u useful?

Solution. The pointwise cutoff gives the relative bound ατ(e)\alpha\tau(e). The global estimate gives the smaller squared quantity α2τ(f)\alpha^2\tau(f). In Lemma 1.2 this second estimate leaves enough room for the additional discarded-range component PyePye, so the final bound still has coefficient CβC\beta.

Exercise 4. Verify the orthogonal decomposition in (9).

Solution. The vector PyePye has left support in PP. Both xexe and uu have left support in 1−P1-P. Their trace inner product is therefore zero. Pythagoras gives the sum of squared norms. Furthermore ∥Pye∥22=∑j∥uj∗ye∥22≤lβ2τ(f)\|Pye\|_2^2=\sum_j\|u_j^*ye\|_2^2\le l\beta^2\tau(f).

Exercise 5. Check why C2≥lC^2\ge l follows from the hypotheses of Lemma 1.2.

Solution. Compress the self-Gram error to ff and pair with ff. This gives τ(fy∗yf)≥(1−β)τ(f)\tau(fy^*yf)\ge(1-\beta)\tau(f), hence B2≥1−β>3/4B^2\ge1-\beta>3/4. Therefore C=2lB+1≥l+1C=2lB+1\ge l+1 for l≥1l\ge1, which implies C2≥lC^2\ge l. For l=0l=0 it is immediate.

References and proof scope

Claire Anantharaman and Sorin Popa, An introduction to II₁ factors, author draft, Lemmas 11.1.12–11.1.16 and Remark 11.1.13, pp.180–181. The scalar spectral and polar estimates lead there to a successive range-removal induction for an almost orthonormal family. The full recursive proof here includes the discarded-range estimate, its trace-loss recurrence and the coefficient-transfer bound with the square-root trace ratio.

The simultaneous proof cuts the sum of the squared Gram defects inside the original corner. It then normalizes the full compressed Gram matrix by its inverse square root. A finite matrix-trace identity bounds the sum of all column errors. For 0<b<1/(4m2)0<b<1/(4m^2), the explicit choice Dm(b)2=m2b/(1−m2b)D_m(b)^2=m^2b/(1-m^2b) satisfies every original trace-loss, vector-error and coefficient-transfer requirement. The construction applies to arbitrary finite faithfully tracial algebras.

Sorin Popa, A short proof of “injectivity implies hyperfiniteness” for finite von Neumann algebras, Journal of Operator Theory 16 (1986), 261–272. Its deformation of almost orthonormal vectors is part of the same matrix-corner method. Its initial vectors are orthonormal over an abelian algebra. The almost-covering initial projections of Corollary 3.1 here instead come from the complete global scalar-pinching selection, with its separable II1\mathrm{II}_1 factor hypotheses retained. Only the initial projections are asserted orthogonal across the family; the matrix range supports may overlap.