Paper detail

Two-weight estimates for sparse square functions and the separated bump conjecture

We show that two-weight $L^2$ bounds for sparse square functions, uniformly with respect to the sparseness constant of the underlying sparse family, and in both directions, do not imply a two-weight $L^2$ bound for the Hilbert transform. We present an explicit example, making use of the construction due to Reguera--Thiele from [18]. At the same time, we show that such two-weight bounds for sparse square functions do not imply both separated Orlicz bump conditions of the involved weights for $p=2$ (and for Young functions satisfying an appropriate integrability condition). We rely on the domination of $L\log L$ bumps by Orlicz bumps (for Young functions satisfying an appropriate integrability condition) observed by Treil--Volberg in [20].

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.