mathematics
Article
Generalization of the Lieb–Thirring–Araki Inequality and
Its Applications
Yonggang Li 1 , Jing Wang 2, * and Huafei Sun 3






Citation: Li, Y.; Wang, J.; Sun, H.
Generalization of the
Lieb–Thirring–Araki Inequality and
Its Applications. Mathematics 2021, 9,
723. https://doi.org/10.3390/
math9070723
Academic Editor: Gabriel Eduard
Vilcu
Received: 9 February 2021
Accepted: 22 March 2021
Published: 26 March 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9070723
1 College of Science, Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics, Zhengzhou 450015, China; liyonggang914@126.com
2 School of Information, Beijing Wuzi University, Beijing 101149, China
3 School of Mathematics and Statistics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China;
huafeisun@bit.edu.cn
* Correspondence: wangjing3@bwu.edu.cn
Abstract: The matrix eigenvalue is very important in matrix analysis, and it has been applied to
matrix trace inequalities, such as the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem and Thompson–Golden theorem.
In this manuscript, we obtain a matrix eigenvalue inequality by using the Stein–Hirschman operator
interpolation inequality; then, according to the properties of exterior algebra and the Schur-convex
function, we provide a new proof for the generalization of the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem and
Furuta theorem.
Keywords: Thompson–Golden theorem; Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem; matrix eigenvalue
MSC: 15A42; 15A16; 47A56
1. Introduction
As an important branch of mathematics, matrix theory has been widely applied in
the fields of mathematics and technology, such as optimization theory ([1]), differential
equations ([2]), numerical analysis, operations ([3]) and quantum theory ([4]).
In this manuscript, let Cn be an n-dimensional complex vector space with the inner
product h~x, ~yi = ~x ∗~y = ∑in=1 xi∗ yi for ~x = ( x1 , · · · , xn )> , ~y = (y1 , · · · , yn )> ∈ Cn , where
the superscripts ~x ∗ and > denote the conjugated transpose of ~x and the matrix transpose,
respectively. Let Mn denote the whole set of n × n matrices with complex entries, and we
call ~x ∈ Cn the eigenvector of A ∈ Mn when A~x = λ~x (where λ is called the eigenvalue of
A). We denote Hn the set of all Hermitian matrices. For any A ∈ Hn , we have A = ∑in=1 λi Pi ,
where λi is the eigenvalue of A and ∑in=1 Pi = Id, Pi Pj = 0(i 6= j); specially, when ~x ∗ A~x ≥ 0
for any ~x ∈ Cn , we denote A ∈ Hn+ (Hn+ is the set of n × n positive-definite Hermitian
matrices whose eigenvalues are nonnegative). Let f be a function with the domain (0, +∞);
for any A ∈ Hn+ , the matrix function is defined as
n
f ( A) = ∑ f (λi ) Pi .
i =1
On the basis of this definition, we have a formula relating the trace of matrix A and
the eigenvalue of A:
n
Tr[ A] = ∑ λ i ( A ),
i =1
where λi ( A) is the eigenvalue of A. It is well known that Tr[ AB] = Tr[ BA] for any
A, B ∈ Hn+ . However, Tr[e A+ B ] = Tr[e A e B ] only if AB = BA. Fortunately, in 1965,
Thompson and Golden independently discovered an inequality called the Thompson–
Golden theorem (refer to [5–7]):
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/mathematics
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 2 of 11

Tr[e A+ B ] ≤ Tr[e A e B ].
In general, the following limit holds (called the Lie–Trotter formula [8]):
 pA 1
pA  p
lim Tr[ e 2 e pB e 2 ] = Tr[e A+ B ].
p →0

Furthermore, the following inequality holds when p ≥ 1:


1 1 1
 
ln A ln B ln A
  ln A ln A
1  1 1
1
p p
Tr[ A B A
2p p 2p ] = Tr[ e 2p e p e 2p ] ≤ Tr[ e 2 eln B e 2 ] = Tr[ A 2 BA 2 ],

which is the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem ([9,10]). Since the function F ( A) = Tr e B+ln A is a

Fréchet differential function for any A ∈ Hn , the concavity of F ( A) implies the Thompson–
Golden theorem. At the same time, one can also obtain the Thompson–Golden theo-
α α 1 β β 1
rem by using the relationship λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α and λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β ([11]). It is known that
1 1 1 1 1 1
det( A 2p B p A 2p ) = [det( A 2 BA 2 )] p . By using the matrix exterior algebra, we have
α α 1
h α α 1
i
det( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α = Tr ∧n ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α .

According to the convexity of Tr ∧k e A , Huang proved the following inequality ([12]):

 

h i h α α 1
i
Tr ∧k e A+ B ≤ Tr ∧k ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α .

With this motivation, we utilize the Stein–Hirschman operator interpolation inequality

α α 1
to show that λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α is a monotone increasing function for any α > 0. Then,
we generalize the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem and provide a new proof of the Furuta
theorem ([13]). The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, some general
definitions and important conclusions are introduced. In Section 3, a new proof of the
α α 1
monotonicity of λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α and some general results are offered.

2. Preliminary
In this section, we recall some notions and definitions from matrix analysis, and
introduce some important results of the matrix-monotone function, which are used through
the article (refer to [14–17]).

2.1. Tensor Product and Exterior Algebra

The tensor product, denoted by ⊗, is also called the Kronecker product. It is a
generalization of the outer product from vectors to matrices, so the tensor product of
matrices is referred to as the outer product as well in some contexts. For an m × n matrix A
and a p × q matrix B, the tensor product of A and B is defined by

· · · a1n B
 
a11 B
 .. .. ..
A⊗B =  . ,

. .
am1 B · · · amn B


where A = aij 1≤i≤m,1≤ j≤n .
The tensor product is different from matrix multiplication, and one of the differences
is commutativity:
( I ⊗ B)( A ⊗ I ) = ( A ⊗ I )( I ⊗ B) = A ⊗ B.
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 3 of 11

From this relation, one can obtain

AC ⊗ BD = ( AC ⊗ I )( I ⊗ BD )
= ( A ⊗ I )(C ⊗ I )( I ⊗ B)( I ⊗ D )
= ( A ⊗ I )( I ⊗ B)(C ⊗ I )( I ⊗ D )
= ( A ⊗ B)(C ⊗ D ).

For convenience, we denote

⊗k A = |A ⊗ A ⊗
{z
· · · ⊗ A} .
k

In addition to the tensor product, there is another common product named exterior
algebra ([18]). Exterior algebra, denoted by ∧, is a binary operation for any An×n that is

( A1 ∧ A2 ∧ · · · ∧ Ak )(ξ i1 ∧ ξ i2 · · · ∧ ξ ik )1≤i1 <···<ik ≤n

| {z }
k
= ( A1 ξ i1 ∧ A2 ξ i2 · · · ∧ Ak ξ ik )1≤i1 <···<ik ≤n ,

where {ξ j }nj=1 is an orthogonal basis of Cn and

1
ξ i1 ∧ ξ i2 · · · ∧ ξ i k = √
n!
∑ (−1)π ξ π(i1 ) ⊗ ξ π(i2 ) · · · ⊗ ξ π(ik ) ,
π ∈σn

where σn is the family of all permutations on {1, 2, · · · , n}.

Let k Cn be the span of the {ξ i1 ∧ ξ i2 · · · ∧ ξ ik }1≤i1 <···<ik ≤n ; a simple calculation
V

shows that
k
λ1 (∧k A) = ∏ λ i ( A ). (1)
i =1

2.2. Schur-Convex Function

Let ~x = ( x1 , · · · , xn )> , ~y = (y1 , · · · , yn )> ∈ Rn and denote

x [1] = max { xi }, · · · , x[i] = max { xi /x[i] i=1,2,··· ,i−1 }, · · · , x[n] = min { xi },

i =1,2,··· ,n i =1,2,··· ,n i =1,2,··· ,n
y [1] = max {yi }, · · · , y[i] = max {yi /y[i] i=1,2,··· ,i−1 }, · · · , y[n] = min {yi }.
i =1,2,··· ,n i =1,2,··· ,n i =1,2,··· ,n

If ~x and ~y satisfy 
k k
 ∑ x [i ] ≤ ∑ y [i ] , k ≤ n − 1;


i =1 i =1
n n
 ∑ x [i ] = ∑ y [i ] , k = n.


i =1 i =1

then ~x is said to be majorized by ~y, denoted by ~x ≺ ~y. Meanwhile, we denote ~x ≺w ~y if

k k
∑ x[i] ≤ ∑ y[i] for any k ≤ n.
i =1 i =1
Suppose f is a real-valued function defined on a set A ⊆ Rn ; then, f is said to be a
Schur-convex function on A if, for any ~x, ~y ∈ Rn and ~x ≺ ~y, one obtains f (~x ) ≤ f (~y) ([11]).
If f is differentiable and defined on I n (I ⊂ R being an open interval), then the
following lemma holds (refer to [11]).

Lemma 1. f is Schur-convex on I n ⊂ Rn if and only if

∂f ∂f
( xi − x j )( − ) ≥ 0 f or all ~x ∈ I n .
∂xi ∂x j
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 4 of 11

2.3. The Matrix-Monotone Function

For a matrix A ∈ Hn+ , according to the spectral theorem ([19]), it can be decomposed as

A = P∗ Λ A P,

where P is the unitary matrix and Λ A := diag{λ1 , ..., λn } is a diagonal matrix with eigen-
values as elements. When ~x ∗ ( A − B)~x > 0 for any ~x ∈ Cn , we denote A ≥ B.
Associated with a function f ( x ) on (0, +∞), the matrix function f ( A) is defined as

f ( A) = P∗ f (Λ A ) P,

where f (Λ A ) = diag{ f (λ1 ), ..., f (λn )}. Then, the function f is said to be matrix-monotonic
if it satisfies
f ( A) ≥ f ( B) for all A ≥ B > 0.
Since the matrix-monotone function is a special type of operator monotone function,
we present the following general conclusion about the operator-monotone function, which
can be found in [20,21].

Lemma 2. The following statements for a real-valued continuous function f on (0, +∞) are equiv-
alent:
( i) f is operator-monotone;
( ii) f admits an integral representation

Z0
f (λ) = α + βλ + (1 + λt)(t − λ)−1 d µ(t), f or any λ > 0, (2)
−∞

where α is a real number, β is non-negative and µ is a finite positive measure on (−∞, 0).

3. The Main Results

For any A, B ∈ Mn , it is known ln AB is not equal to ln A + ln B in general when
1 1 α α
AB 6= BA. Generally, ( A 2 BA 2 )α is not equal to A 2 Bα A 2 . Therefore, many people pay
1 1 α α
much attention to studying the relation between ( A 2 BA 2 )α and A 2 Bα A 2 . A famous result
regarding the trace inequality is the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem:
1 1 α α
Tr[( A 2 BA 2 )α ] ≤ Tr[( A 2 Bα A 2 )],
1 1
where α ≥ 1. In the following, we further study the relation between ( A 2 BA 2 )α and
α α
A 2 Bα A 2 and provide the main results.

Theorem 1. For any 0 < α ≤ β and A, B ∈ Hn+ , the following inequality holds
α α 1 β β 1
λ1 ( A 2 B α A 2 ) α ≤ λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β . (3)

Proof. By using the Cauchy inequality, we have

| ~x ∗ AB~x |2 =|< ~x, AB~x >|2 ≤ (~x ∗ A∗ A~x )(~x ∗ B∗ B~x ), ~x ∈ Cn .

If we denote
max {< ~x, A~x >}
x ∈Cn
λ1 ( A ) = = max {< ~x, A~x >}
< ~x, ~x > ~x ∈Cn ,<~x,~x >=1
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 5 of 11

as the maximum eigenvalue of A, then we can obtain

1 1 1 1 1
λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 ) = max {< ~x, A 2 BABA 2 ~x >} 2
~x ∈Cn
1
= max{< AB~x, BA~x >} 2
~x ∈Cn
1 1
≤ max{< AB~x, AB~x > 4 < BA~x, BA~x > 4 }
~x ∈Cn
1 1
≤ max{< ~x, BA2 B~x > 4 } max {< ~x, AB2 A~x > 4 }
~x ∈Cn ~x ∈Cn
2 1
= λ1 ( AB A) , 2

Here, we use the fact that λ1 ( AB) = λ1 ( BA).

k −1 k −1 1 k k 1
Through a simple deformation, we have λ1 ( A 2 Bk−1 A 2 ) k −1 ≤ λ 1 ( A 2 B k A 2 ) k .
From this inequality, we have the expression
k −1 k −1
k k
h k +1 k +1
i
λ1 ( A 2 B k A 2 ) = λ1 ( A 2 B 2 B 2 A 2 )
h k +1 k +1
i1 h k −1 k −1
i1
2 2
≤ λ 1 ( A 2 B k +1 A 2 ) λ 1 ( A 2 B k −1 A 2 )
h k +1 k +1
i1 h k k
i k −1
2 2k
≤ λ 1 ( A 2 B k +1 A 2 ) λ1 ( A 2 B k A 2 ) .

Furthermore,
h k k
i1 h k +1 k +1
i 1
k k +1
λ1 ( A 2 B k A 2 ) ≤ λ 1 ( A 2 B k +1 A 2 ) .

This implies
h m1 n2 m1 n2 i 1 h m2 n1 m2 n1 i m 1n
m1 n2
λ1 ( A 2 B m1 n2 A 2 ) ≤ λ 1 ( A 2 B m2 n1 A 2 ) 2 1 ,

1 1
for any m1 , m2 , n1 , n2 > 0 and m1 n2 ≤ m2 n1 . Let A = A n1 n2 , B = B n1 n2 ; we obtain
 m1 m1 m1
 n1  m2 m2 m2
 n2
m1 m2
λ1 ( A 2n1
B n1
A 2n1
) ≤ λ1 ( A 2n2
B n2
A 2n2
) .

Namely, for 0 < α ≤ β, we obtain

α α 1 β β 1
λ1 ( A 2 B α A 2 ) α ≤ λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β .

This completes the proof of Theorem 1.

Although Theorem 1 has been obtained from the Cauchy inequality, the frequency
of retractions improves the inequality. In the following, we obtain Theorem 1 by using
operator interpolation. First, let us introduce the Stein–Hirschman operator interpolation
inequality ([12]).

Lemma 3. Supposing Gz tobe an analytic family of linear operators of admissible growth defined
in the strip 0 ≤ R(z) ≤ 1 and 1 ≤ p1 , p2 , q1 , q2 ≤ ∞, when 1p = 1p−t + pt2 , 1q = 1q−t + qt2 (0 ≤
1 1
t ≤ 1) , k Giy ( f ) kq1 ≤ A0 (y) k f k p1 and k G1+iy ( f ) kq2 ≤ A1 (y) k f k p2 , we can obtain
Z
ln k Gt ( f ) kq ≤ (ω (1 − t, y) ln A0 (y) + ω (t, y) ln A1 (y)) d y + ln k f k p , (4)
R

tan( tπ
2 )
where ln | A0 (y) |, ln | A1 (y) |≤ Aeα|y| (α < π ) and ω (t, y) = tπ yπ yπ .
2[tan ( 2 )+tanh2 ( 2 )]cosh2 ( 2 )
2
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 6 of 11

From Lemma 3, we can improve the result in Theorem 1 and obtain the following the-
orem.

Theorem 2. For any A, B ∈ Hn+ , the following inequality holds

ω (t, y)
Z
t t 1 1 1 1 1 1
λ1 ( A 2 B t A 2 ) t ≤ ( λ1 (( A 2 B1−iy AB1+iy A 2 )) 2 ) d y ≤ λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 ). (5)
R t

Proof. Firstly, let f be an analytic function in C. When A, B ∈ Hn+ , let Gz ( A, B) =

z z
λ1 ( A 2 Bz A 2 ); obviously, Gz ( A, B) is an analytic function for any z in strip 0 ≤ R(z) ≤ 1.
Since
iy iy
| Giy ( A, B) | =| λ1 ( A 2 Biy A 2 ) |
−iy −iy iy iy 1
≤| λ1 (( A 2 B−iy A 2 )( A 2 Biy A 2 )) | 2
= 1,
and
1+iy 1+iy
| G1+iy ( A, B) | =| λ1 ( A 2 B1+iy A 2 )|
1+iy 1+iy
=| λ1 ( A B )|
1−iy 1−iy 1+iy 1+iy 1
≤| λ1 (( A 2 B1−iy A 2 )( A 2 B1+iy A 2 )) | 2
1 1 1
=| λ1 (( A 2 B1−iy AB1+iy A 2 )) | 2
1 1 1 1 1
=| λ1 (( B 2 AB 2 B 2 −iy AB 2 +iy )) | 2
1 1 1 1 1
≤| λ1 ( B 2 AB 2 )λ1 ( B 2 −iy AB 2 +iy ) | 2
1 1
=| λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 ) |,
and the formula Z
ω (1 − t, y) d y = 1 − t,
R
then, for any f ∈ L 1 (C), we can obtain
t

t t
ln k Gt ( f ) k 1 = ln | λ1 ( A 2 Bt A 2 ) | + ln k f k 1
t t
Z
≤ (ω (1 − t, y) ln A0 (y) + ω (t, y) ln A1 (y)) d y + ln k f k 1
t
ZR
1 1 1
≤ (ω (1 − t, y) ln A0 (y) + ω (t, y) ln λ1 (( A B1−iy AB1+iy A 2 )) 2 ) d y + ln k f k 1 2
R t
Z
1 1
≤ (ω (1 − t, y) ln 1 + ω (t, y) ln | λ1 ( A BA ) | d y + ln k f k 1 2 2
R t
1 1
= t ln | λ1 ( A BA ) | + ln k f k 1 .
2 2
t

This implies

ω (t, y)
Z
t t 1 1 1 1 1 1
λ1 ( A 2 B t A 2 ) t ≤ ( λ1 (( A 2 B1−iy AB1+iy A 2 )) 2 ) d y ≤ λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 )
R t
or
ω (t, y)
Z
t t 1 1 t 1 1
λ1 ( A 2 B t A 2 ) ≤ ( λ1 (( A 2 B1−iy AB1+iy A 2 )) 2 ) d y ≤ λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 )t ,
R t
for any 0 < t < 1, and the first ”≤“ is obtained by the Jensen inequality ([22]). This
completes the proof of Theorem 2.
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 7 of 11

Theorem 2 is very useful. On one hand, when α < β, letting t = αβ , we can obtain
Theorem 1. On the other hand, using the matrix exterior algebra, we obtain

k 1
k 1
∏ λi ( A 2 B α A 2 ) α ≤ ∏ λi ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β .
α α β β

i =1 i =1

Furthermore, we can deduce the following inequality

h α α 1
i β β 1
Tr ∧k ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≤ Tr[∧k ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β ],

whether it is true or not for any k ≤ n, and this inequality can be regarded as a generaliza-
tion of the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem.

3.1. Generalization of Lieb–Thirring–Araki Theorem

According to Theorem 1 and Formula (1), we can show that

k α α 1 k β β 1
 ∑ ln λi ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≤ ∑ ln λi ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β , k ≤ n − 1;


i =1 i =1
n α α 1 β β 1 n
 ∑ ln λi ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α = ∑ ln λi ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β .


i =1 i =1

Furthermore, we have
β 1 β 1
 α α 1 α α 1
  β β

ln λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α , · · · , ln λn ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≺ ln λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β , · · · , ln λn ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β .

n
Let f ( x1 , x2 · · · , xn ) = ∑ e xi ; direct calculations show that
i =1

∂f ∂f
( xi − x j )( − ) = ( xi − x j )(e xi − e x j ) ≥ 0,
∂xi ∂x j

n
which implies f ( x1 , x2 · · · , xn ) = ∑ e xi is a Schur-convex function. Hence, we have the
i =1
Thompson–Golden theorem

1
n 1
n 1 1
∑ λi ( A 2 B α A 2 ) α ∑ λi ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β
α α α α β β β β
Tr[( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ] = ≤ = Tr[( A 2 B β A 2 ) β ], (6)
i =1 i =1

1 1
when α ≤ β. Specially, when β = 1 and A = A α , B = B α , we have the Lieb–Thirring–Araki
theorem
1 1 1 1 1 1
Tr[( A 2 BA 2 ) α ] ≤ Tr[( A 2α B α A 2α )]. (7)
We know that the Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem can be obtained from the Schur-convex
n
function f ( x1 , x2 · · · , xn ) = ∑ e xi . Generally, we can prove the following conclusion.
i =1

Theorem 3. For any xi ≥ 0, the function

∑
γxi
g ( x1 , x2 · · · , x n ) = eγxi1 eγxi2 · · · e k

1≤i1 <i2 <···<ik ≤n

is Schur-convex for any γ > 0.

Proof. Since
∑
γxi
g ( x1 , x2 · · · , x n ) = eγxi1 eγxi2 · · · e k ,
1≤i1 <i2 <···<ik ≤n
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 8 of 11

we have !
∂g
∑ γxi1 γxi2 γxi
= γeγxi e e ···e k ,
∂xi 1≤i1 <···<<ik ≤n,x̂i

where x̂i denotes the removal of xi .

This implies
 
∂g ∂g
( xi − x j )(
∂xi
−
∂x j
γxi γx j 
) = γ( xi − x j )(e − e ) ∑ e γxi1 γxi2
e ···e γxik 
≥ 0.
1≤i1 <···<ik ≤n,x̂i ,x̂ j

This completes the proof of Theorem 3.

From Theorem 3, we can deduce the following inequality immediately.

Corollary 1. For any α ≥ 1 and A, B > 0, the following inequality holds

h 1 1
i h α α
i
Tr ∧k ( A 2 BA 2 )αγ ≤ Tr ∧k ( A 2 Bα A 2 )γ , (8)

or
h i  α α γ
 h i
1 1 1 α−iαy α α+iαy 2
R α α
Tr ∧k ( A 2 BA 2 )αγ ≤ Tr ∧k eα R ω ( α ,y) ln( A 2 B A B A )) 2 dy
, ≤ Tr ∧k ( A 2 Bα A 2 )γ (9)

for any γ > 0.

From (8), it can behseen that, when

1 1
i k = h1, Corollary
α α
1 iis just the Lieb–Thirring–Araki
theorem. Especially, Tr ∧k ( A 2 BA 2 ) ≤ Tr ∧k ( A 2 B A 2 ) when γ = 1 ([12]).
α α

Using Theorem 1, we can obtain

h α α γ
i h β β γi
Tr ∧k ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≤ Tr ∧k ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β . (10)

for any 0 ≤ α ≤ β, and this is a generalization of the Thompson–Golden theorem. For

some other generalizations of the Thompson–Golden theorem, see [8,23]. Moreover, since
r r r r 1 1 1 1
λ( A 2 ( A− 2 Br A− 2 )α A 2 ) ≺ λ[( A 2 ( A− 2 BA− 2 )α A 2 )r ], (11)

where 0 < α ≤ 1 and r ≥ 1, we can obtain the following corollary.

Corollary 2. For any r ≥ 1 and A, B > 0, the following inequality holds:

h 1 1 1 1
i h r r r r
i
Tr ∧k ( A 2 ( A− 2 BA− 2 ) A 2 )r ≥ Tr ∧k ( A 2 ( A− 2 Br A− 2 ) A 2 ) . (12)

3.2. Applications in Matrix-Monotone Function

In this subsection, we obtain some other corollaries from Theorem 1 associated with
the matrix-monotone function. Since
α α 1 β β 1
λ1 ( A 2 B α A 2 ) α ≤ λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β ,
1 1 β β
we can obtain λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 ) β ≥ λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) for any 0 < β ≤ 1. While A ≤ Id is equivalent
1 1
to λ1 ( A) ≤ 1, using this fact, for A ≤ B, we have B− 2 AB− 2 ≤ I. For 0 < β ≤ 1, we have
β β 1 1
λ1 ( B− 2 A β B− 2 ) ≤ λ1 ( B− 2 AB− 2 ) β ≤ 1.

Hence, we obtain the Löwner–Heinz Theorem ([4]).

Corollary 3. For 0 < α ≤ 1 and A ≤ B, Aα ≤ Bα .

Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 9 of 11

Unfortunately, when α > 1, Corollary 3 is false. However, we can use Theorem 1 to

obtain the Furuta theorem [13].

Corollary 4. Let 0 ≤ B ≤ A; then

p+2r 1
A q ≥ ( Ar B p Ar ) q , (13)

p+2r
where p, r ≥ 0, q ≥ 1 and q ≥ 1+2r .

Proof. When 0 ≤ p ≤ 1, we know that B p ≤ A p from Corollary 3; this implies

1 1 p+2r
( Ar B p Ar ) q ≤ ( Ar A p Ar ) q = A q .

p+2r
Hence, we suppose p ≥ 1. Meanwhile, we know (1+2r )q
≤ 1, so we only consider
p+2r 1
1+2r = q. Firstly, when 0 ≤ r ≤ 2, we have
 
1
− 12 −r r p r −r − 12
λ1 B A ( A B A ) A B q

 
p p p 1 p
− 12 2 − 2 −2r − 2 1− q 2 − 12
= λ1 B B ( B A B ) B B
 
p+2r p−1 p p p −1 p+2r p−1
− 2 −2r − 2 p+2r
= λ1 ( B 2 ) p + 2r (B A B ) (B 2 ) p + 2r

h p+2r p −1
p p p+2r i p+2r
≤ λ1 B 2 ( B− 2 A−2r B− 2 ) B 2
h i p −1
p+2r
= λ1 ( A−r B2r A−r )
≤ 1.

This implies
1
A−r ( Ar B p Ar ) q A−r ≤ B ≤ A.
That is,
1
( Ar B p Ar ) q ≤ A1+2r .
1
Secondly, let A1 = A1+2r , B1 = ( Ar B p Ar ) q ; then
1 1 1
q
( A12 B1 A12 ) q1 ≤ A21 .

1 1 1
p+4r +1
That is, ( A2r+ 2 B p A2r+ 2 ) q ≤ A2(1+2r) , where q1 = 1+4r +1 .
This implies
1
( As B p As ) q ≤ A1+2s ,
where s = 2r + 12 ∈ [ 12 , 32 ].
Repeating this process, we have finished the proof.

3.3. Some Other Applications

In this subsection, we obtain a corollary associated with the matrix determinant. We
A A
suppose A, B ∈ Hn and λn (e 2 e B e 2 ) ≥ 1; then, from Theorem 1, we have
βA 1 βA 1
 αA αA 1 α α 1
  βA βA

ln λ1 (e 2 eαB e 2 ) α , · · · , ln λn ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≺ ln λ1 (e 2 e βB e 2 ) β , · · · , ln λn (e 2 e βB e 2 ) β ,
Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 10 of 11

A A
where 0 < α ≤ β and ln λi (e 2 e B e 2 ) ≥ 0 (i = 1, 2 · · · , n). Let
n
d ( x1 , · · · , x n ) = ∏ xi , ( x i ≥ 0).
i =1

Then, a straightforward calculation indicates

∂d( x1 , · · · , xn ) ∂d( x1 , · · · , xn )
( xi − x j )( − ) ≤ 0.
∂xi ∂x j

Hence, d( x1 , · · · , xn ) is a Schur-concave function and the following inequality holds ([8]).

A A
Corollary 5. Supposing A, B ∈ Hn and λn (e 2 e B e 2 ) ≥ 1,
αA αA 1 βA βA 1
det( A + B) ≥ det(ln(e 2 eαB e 2 ) α ) ≥ det(ln(e 2 e βB e 2 ) β ), (14)

the first ”≥“ obtained by using the Lie–Trotter formula, and 0 < α ≤ β.

In fact, for any A ∈ Hn , we have

det( A) = Tr[∧n A].

Hence, Corollary 5 can be generalized as the following corollary.

A A
Corollary 6. Supposing A, B ∈ Hn and λn (e 2 e B e 2 ) ≥ 1,
αA αA 1 βA βA 1
Tr[∧k ln(e 2 eαB e 2 ) α ] ≥ Tr[∧k ln(e 2 e βB e 2 ) β ], (15)

where 1 ≤ k ≤ n and 0 < α ≤ β.

Proof. Since
β 1 β 1
 α α 1 α α 1
  β β

ln λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α , · · · , ln λn ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) α ≺ ln λ1 ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β , · · · , ln λn ( A 2 B β A 2 ) β ,

we can finish the proof if we show that the function

a ( x1 , x2 · · · , x n ) = ∑ x i1 x i2 · · · x i k
1≤i1 <i2 <···<ik ≤n

is Schur-concave for any xi ≥ 0. In fact, we have

∂a( x1 , · · · , xn ) ∂a( x1 , · · · , xn )
( xii − xi j )( − )
∂xii ∂xi j
= ( xik − xi j )( ∑ x i1 · · · c
x ii · · · x i k − ∑ xi1 · · · xci j · · · xik )
1≤i1 <···ibi <···<ik ≤n 1≤i1 <···ibj <···<ik ≤n

= −( xik − xi j )2 ( ∑ x i1 · · · c
xii xci j · · · xik )
1≤i1 <···ibi ,ibj <···<ik ≤n

≤ 0.

Hence, we know
αA αA 1 βA βA 1
Tr[∧k ln(e 2 eαB e 2 ) α ] ≥ Tr[∧k ln(e 2 e βB e 2 ) β ].

This completes the proof of Corollary 6.

Mathematics 2021, 9, 723 11 of 11

4. Conclusions
1 1 α α
In the paper, we discuss the relationship between λ1 ( A 2 BA 2 )α and λ1 ( A 2 Bα A 2 ) by
using the Stein–Hirschman operator interpolation inequality. Through in-depth study, we
obtain some eigenvalue inequalities such as the generalization Golden–Thompson theorem
and Lieb–Thirring–Araki theorem. Moreover, the Furuta theorem is also shown by using
the eigenvalue inequality. At last, we generalize an important determinant inequality by
using the matrix exterior algebra.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, H.S.; writing-original draft, Y.L.; writing-review and

editing, J.W.; funding acquisition, J.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the General Project of Science and Technology Plan of
Beijing Municipal Education Commission (Grant No. KM202010037003).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: J.W. gratefully thank Editors and Reviewers for their comments and suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the
design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the
manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References
1. Treanta, S.; Arana-Jimenez, M.; Antczak, T. A necessary and sufficient condition on the equivalence between local and global
optimal solutions in variational control problems. Nonlinear Anal. 2020, 191, 111640. [CrossRef]
2. Bellman, R. Introduction to Matrix Analysis; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1960.
3. Anderson, W.N., Jr. Shorted operators. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 2006, 20, 520–525. [CrossRef]
4. Carlen, E. Trace inequalities and quantum entropy: An introductory course. Contemp. Math. 2010, 529, 73–140.
5. Golden, S. Lower bounds for Helmholtz function. Phys. Rev. 1965, 137, 1127–1128. [CrossRef]
6. Thompson, C.J. Inequality with applications in statistical mechanics. J. Math. Phys. 1965, 6, 1812–1813. [CrossRef]
7. Lenard, A. Generalization of the Golden-Thompson inequality Tr (e A e B ) ≥ Tre A+ B . Zndiana Univ. Math. 1971, 21, 457–467.
[CrossRef]
8. Ando, T.; Hiai, F. Log majorization and complementary Golden-Thompson type inequalities. Linear Algebra Appl. 1994, 197–198,
113–131. [CrossRef]
9. Araki, H. On an inequality of Lieb and Thirring. Lett. Math. Phys. 1990, 19, 167–170. [CrossRef]
10. Lieb, E.H.; Thirring, W. Inequalities for the moments of the eigenvalues of the Schrodinger Hamiltonian and their relation to
Sobolev inequalities. In Studies in Mathematical Physics; Lieb, E.H., Simon, B., Wightman, A., Eds.; Princeton University Press:
Princeton, NJ, USA, 1976; pp. 269–303.
11. Marshall, A.W.; Olkin, I.; Arnold, B.C. Inequalities: Theory of Majorization and Its Applications; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011.
12. Huang, D. Generalizing Lieb’s concavity theorem via operator interpolation. Adv. Math. 2020, 369, 107208. [CrossRef]
1 p+2r
13. Furuta, T. A ≥ B ≥ 0 assures ( Br A p Br ) q ≥ B q for r ≥ 0, p > 0, q ≥ 1 with 1+q2r ≥ p + 2r. Proc. Am. Math. Sot. 1987, 101,
85–88.
14. Bhatia, R. Matrix Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997.
15. Bhatia, R. Positive Definite Matrices; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA; Oxford, UK, 2007.
16. Hall, B. Lie Groups, Lie Algebras, and Representations: An Elementary Introduction; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2003.
17. Zhang, F. Matrix Theory: Basic Results and Techniques; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1999.
18. Simon, B. Trace Ideals and Their Applications, 2nd ed.; Math. Surveys and Monographs. A.M.S.: Cambridge, UK, 2005.
19. Tropp, J.A. An introduction to matrix concentration inequalities. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 2015, 8, 1–2. [CrossRef]
20. Davis, C. Notions generalizing convexity for functions defined on spaces of matrices. In Proceedings of the Symposia in Pure
Mathematics; American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, USA, 1963; Volume 7, pp. 187–201.
21. Donogue, W. Monotone Matrix Functions and Analytic. Continuution; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1974.
22. Bellman, R. Inequalities; Springer Verlag: Berlin/Gottingen/Heidelberg, Germany, 1961.
23. Hansen, F. Golden-Thompson’s inequality for deformed exponentials. J. Stat. Phys. 2015, 159, 1300–1305. [CrossRef]