Ergodicity Optimizing in Dynamical Systems

Abstract
Ergodic optimization refers to the study of problems that relate maximizing orbits, maximum
ergodic averages, and maximizing invariant measures. A dynamical
system’s orbit is called f -maximizing if the average time of the real-valued f function along its
orbit exceeds all other orbits. An invariant measure of probability is termed f -maximizing if it
results in f having a bigger space average compared to any other invariant
measure of probability. This dissertation considered and studied the main aspects of ergodic
optimization, starting with a common and influential model problem, and interpreted ergodic
optimization as a zero temperature limit for thermodynamic formalism. The typical maximizing
measures for a variety of specific functions are described. The classes of functions in which the
maximizing measures are known to be Sturmian are also described.
 Introduction
A dynamical ergodic system, based on probability theory, refers to a system that has similar
behavior, in broad terms, averaged over a given time period as that averaged over the space o all the
states of a system in its phase space. The ergodic theory is a dynamical systems branch with strict
connections to probability theory analysis. Ergodic optimization refers to the study of problems that
relates to orbits maximization, maximum ergodic averages, and the maximizing f invariant
measures. The ergodic optimization topic, for real value functions defined based on the dynamical
system state space, revolves around comprehending its largest possible ergodic average. For a
discrete dynamical system f : X → X investigated in topological dynamics are continuous f maps on
the metric space X – Based on ergodic theory, f : X → X is a measure-preserving map on the
measure space X. If the dynamical system is taken as a map T : X → X, denoted by f : X → R, the
focus of attention is on the time averages spectrum limn→∞ Σ n-1 i=0 f (T i x) over the x ∈ X for which a
limit exists. Alternatively on the space averages spectrum Z f d μ over μ probability measures that
are invariant under T. A random process is considered erdogic it has the same time average over the
probability space, a concept termed ensemble average in thermodynamic theory. After a long time,
the state of an erdogic process is almost independent of its initial state. Dynamical systems refer to
systems where a function describes time dependence for a point in geometric space. A tuple of real
numbers provide a state to a dynamical system at any given time and this can be represented by a
suitable state space in a given point. The dynamical system has an evolution rule describing the
future states that follow the current state. This dissertation is about erdogic optimization in a
dynamical system where model problems are used as the basis for applying the erdogic theory to
solve for a dynamical system.
Basics
The theory of Ergodic Optimization gives expression to the least reaction theory in dynamical
systems; it is also strongly connected to other systems, for instance the ground state theory of multi-
fractal analysis and thermodynamics formalism, the Anbry-Mather theory used in Langrarian
Mechanics, and in control theory to control chaos (Liao and Rams, 2014). Ergodic optimization
refers to the study of problems dealing with the maximization of orbits and invariant measures, as
well as the maximum Ergodic averages. The orbit in a dynamical system is termed f-maximizing
when the average time of the real valued function f along that orbit is greater than along all the other
orbits. An invariant probability measure is termed f-maximizing if it confers on f a larger space
average compared to all other invariant probability measures (Jenkinson, 2018). In the classical
topological dynamical system setting, where X is a compact metric space and T : X → X is
continuous, if f is continuous then there is coincidence in the suprema. The common value is a
maximum because the compactness of the MT of the T-invariant Borel probability measures, which
is weak, guarantees that m ∈ MT that satisfies the condition

Further, x ∈ X exists with limn→∞ Σ n-1 i=0 f (T i x) = β (f), because m can be considered as being
erdogic with x being an m-generic point. The m ∈ MT is termed a maximizing measure for f while
β (f) becomes the maximum erdogic average. Erdogic optimization has its origins in the 90s where
much of the early work was focused on fixing specific T map and studying the maximizing measure
dependency of a function f that varied within the dimensional finite space V. A model problem made
up of T doubling a circle map with V being the 2-dimensional vector space of 1-degree
trigonometric polynomial- this turned to be an influential assertion. In the model, a function that is
non-zero, for instance V has a maximizing measure that is unique and is normally supported at a
single periodic orbit, although it is not usually periodic. Natural occurrence of maximizing
measures that are non-periodic is a little surprising but has ramifications for the concept. Non-
periodic maximization is apparently rare anticipates erdogic maximization in dynamical systems.
For the model problem, the specific maximizing measures, known as the Sturmian measures, have
turned to be unexpectedly ubiquitous in several erdogic maximization problems that encompass
similar function spaces that are low-dimension, joint spectral radii or matrix pair problems, and
specific infinite dimensional function cones. The model problem has been resolved using various
ideas and these have been researched extensively, for instance, the prospect of adding co-boundaries
to f so that its maximizing measure properties can be revealed and this has formed the apex of
much of recent research in the area with the Lagrangian dynamical systems providing much of the
inspiration for further research.
Another area of research in erdogic optimization is its interpretation as a limiting zero-temperature
variety of the thermodynamic formalism, which is more classical, with maximizing measures
arising as accumulation points of the zero-temperature equilibrium measures. In this area, research
work has mainly focused upon the understanding of non-convergence and convergence within the
limits of the zero temperature. A measure μ on the space X is a function derived by collating X
measurable subsets that assign every measurable set A its measure which is μ (A), a positive
number that can go to infinity. Assuming D denotes the pair set T : X → X in which X = (X, d)
becomes a compact metric space while T : X → X becomes continuous. For (X,T) ∈ D, the MT set
of T-invariant Borel measure of probability is compact if equipped with the weak topology.
If C denotes the triplets set (X, T, f) in which (X,T) ∈ D and the function f : X → R is continuous;

And, for a compact metric space, X C(X) denotes a continuous set of real value functions on the
space X, having the supremum norm |f |∞ = max x∈X |f (x)|. If the set of Lipschitz real value functions
is denoted by Lip on X, in which Lip (f) = sup x≠ y | f (x) − f (y)|/d(x, y), while |f| Lip = |f|∞ + Lip (f).

For (X, T, f) ∈ C, The β (f) quantity equals β T,f = β (X,T,f) which is defined by th function

And this is the maximum ergodic average. For any instance where m ∈ MT satisfies cf dm = β(f )
where f is a maximizing measure, and Mmax (f) = Mmax (T,f) which is again equivalent to M max(X,T, f)
denotes such measures collection. Conventionally, maximization should denote maximization, but
the minimum erdogic average is also mentioned occasionally, represented as

M min (f) is set as being equivalent to { m ∈ MT : f dm = α (f) of f minimizing measures. In this case,
the closed interval [α (f), β(f )] = {c f dμ : μ ∈ MT} is the erdogic averages set. A number of
alternative characterizations are admitted by the maximum erdogic averages that involves time
averages.
The second presupposition is that for (X,T,f) ∈ C, the maximum erdogic average value β(f ) satisfies
the condition
β(f ) = sup x∈XT,f lim n →∞ 1/n S nf (x) = sup x∈X lim n →∞ sup 1/n Snf (x) = lim n →∞ sup 1/n Snf
(x)
Where Snf equals Σ n-1 i=0 f o Ti:
XTf equals {x ∈ X : then it is said that there is existence of lim n →∞ sup 1/n.
The erdogic theory also posits that for an instance that If (X,T,f) ∈ C
Then the following conditions hold true;
M max remains compact
There is at least a single f- maximizing measure
The extreme M max (f) points are exactly erdogic f-maximizing measures and there is at least a single
erdogic f-maximizing measure.
M max is a convex simplex
maximizing measures in erdogic systems are typically unique such that
If (X,T) ∈D and V are continuously and densely embedded topological vector spaces in C(X), then
{ If ∈ V : M max (f) is a residual V subset, where M max (f) is a singleton. If f and T are continuous
values while X is not compact, there are a possible number of difficulties that can arise. Taking MT
as not being empty, β(f ) can be defined as being equal to sup μ∈ MT C f dμ although in the general
sense, there does not to be the existence any minimizing measures such that any of the available
equalities can fail to hold. The example of the most commonly studied of non-compact X is an
alphabet that is countable and a finite sub shift type where several sufficient conditions are given for
maximizing measures existence. Other versions of Ergodic optimization have been investigated
previously in discrete time settings that differ slightly from the focus of this study such as where MT
is singleton. Ergodic optimization generalizations include dynamical systems optimal tracking and
Ergodic dominance.
Model problem

A standard hyperbolic dynamical system example is the mat T(x) = 2x on a circle X = R/Z; the
function f(x) =cos 2πx and g(x) = sin2πx are among the most non-constant natural functions of X.
The f-maximizing measure is seen easily as being the Dirac measure at the 0 fixed point, however,
less obvious is the g-maximizing measure. The naturalness of f and g and the standard choice T has
prompted researchers to investigate the maximizing T-invariant measures for functions in the two
dimensional vector space, denoted V, and which is spanned by g and f. The trigonometric
polynomial V has a two dimensional space degree, however, it is rendered as a one-dimensional
problem due to the fact that there is a maximizing measure for v ∈ V only when it is maximizing for
cv, in which case c > 0. as such, to determine the functions in V and its maximizing measures,
determining the maximizing measures suffices for functions on the V unit sphere of the form
vθ (x) = (cos2πθ) f (x) + sin2πθ g(x) equals cos2π (x-θ) for the range θ∈ R/Z. Apparently, each vθ has
a maximizing measure that is unique as well as typically being periodic. For θ∈ R/Z, almost each
vθ- maximizing measure is supported in one periodic orbit. In a topological sense, periodic
maximizing measures also become typical, for instance, for the set { θ∈ R/Z : Mmax (v θ) is a
singleton that is periodic} has a dense V ≡ R2 subset that is open. This model problem demonstrates
a typically periodic optimization, a phenomenon that has been established for a variety of natural V
function spaces.
The only maximizing periodic measures for a number of degree one trigonometric polynomials are
those where the T action is equivalent, in a combinatorial manner, to a rational rotation. Non-
specific maximizing measures for some v ∈ V correlate with irrational rotations. The maximizing
for the non-zero functions in V therefore, become Sturmian measures- Sturmian measures of the
rotation number p∈ R/Z is the Lebesgue push forward measure of X in the map x →Σ n≥0χ [1-p,] ({x +
np}) / 2n+1, where {.} is the reduction module 1. The periodic orbits that support Sturmian measures
progressive become rare with growth in the period and has bee demonstrated by Bosch that each
Sturmian measure does arise as the maximizing vθ measure. If p is irrational, then the outcome is
that θ = θ(p) becomes unique. Given that Sturmian measures are exactly the maximizing measures
for the model problem relies, to a large extent, on the particular f and g choices though the Sturmian
measures presence is not surprising. It has been demonstrated that Sturmian measures naturally
arise as maximizing measures in various similar settings.

Zero temperature Thermodynamic Formalism Erdogic Optimization

Consider the values (X,T, f) ∈ C; the pressure P (f) = P(T, f) for such a system is defined as

P(f) = supm∈MT ( f dm + h (m) )

Where h(m) is the entropy of m. Any m ∈ M T that attains the suprenum is an equilibrium measure
for the function f . Replacing f by tf for t∈ R, then there is relative loss of importance of the entropy
term at t→∞ is termed the zero temperature limit. For large t values, the equilibrium tf measure is
almost maximizing for f because it has an integral very close to the maximum erdogic average β(f).
The family (mtf), observed by other authors, has, as a bare minimum, a single accumulation point m
as t→∞ so the f-maximizing measure is m so that the lim t→∞ h(mt) equals h(m), which also equals
max{h(μ) : μ∈ Mmax (f)}. If X is compact while the entropy map μ→h ( μ) is an upper semi
continuous value, then each continuous function possesses, as a minimum, one equilibrium measure
and the subsequent result is not difficult to establish.
Theory 1- Zero temperature limits as the maximizing measures for maximal entropy
Assuming (X,T,f) ∈ C so that the MT entropy map becomes the upper semi continuous; for t∈R,
when mt is the equilibrium tf measure, then (mt) at least has a single accumulation point m∈Mt
because t→∞
 m is the f-maximizing measure
 limt→∞ h(mt) = h(m)
 h(m) = max{h(μ)
If Mmax (f) equals [m], then mt →m because t→∞ so that for f, the the weak limit limt→∞ mt exists as
a unique f-maximizing measure. Limits limt→∞ mtf are generally neither ergodic nor the evenly
weighted ergodic maximizing centroid measures of maximal entropy. The convergence issue was
resolved by Bremont; the zero temperature limit always exist, even if Mmax (f) is not singleton.
Theorem 2- Convergence for zero temperature for locally constant functions
Taking (X,T) as a sub-shift of the finite type and f:X→R as a local constant, limt→∞ mtf exists and
subsequently Lp (X) = {limt→∞ mtf: f ∈ C(X) is dependent on the p coordinates and is finite for every
p∈ N. For instance, if (X,T) is the full shift for two symbols, then the set L2(X) has a cardinality of 7
and it is possible to explicitly list all its elements. For large p, as well as other (X,T) sub-shifts, the
possible set of Lp(X) are harder to describe.
Theorem 3- Zero temperature limit description for functions that are locally constant
Consider (X,T) as being a finite type sub-shift and F: X→R is constant locally, then m = limt→∞ mtf
and is concentrated on a specific finite type sub-shift Xf that in itself is a transitite union finite type
sub-shifts. The mi of m = Σ ni=1 q αimi are unique auxiliary equilibrium potential function measures
and the potentials as well as their weights αi can be algorithmically constructed.
Theorem 4- Non convergence of zero temperature
For the two full shift symbols (X,T), the Lipschitz functions f : X → R exist for which the limt→∞ mtf
is non existent and such an f can be defined as f(x) - dist(x,Y) where Y ⊂ is a sub-shift that has
been carefully constructed. The zero temperature limit non-convergence can arise for certain full
two shift functions that can take only values that are countably many, and where th Dirac measures
are the only ergodic maximizing measures at two fixed points.
Theorem 5- Zero temperature non-convergence persistence
There is a Lipschitz function fo : X→R for a full finite alphabet shift (X,T), and complimentary open
U+ and U- subsets of X so that for any positive reals sequence ti → ∞, an arbitrary small Lipschitz
pertubation f of fo exists so that the mtif sequence possesses an accumulation point with its support
lying in U+: it also has an accumulation point with its support lying in U-.
Theorem 6- Non-convergence of zero temperature for locally constant higher dimension shift
functions
Taking d ≥3, only locally constant functions exist, i.e f on [0,1) Zd, so that for each (mt) t>0 family,
where mt is a tf equilibrium measure and there is non-existence of the limit limt→∞ mt. For the
countable alphabet (X,T) case finite type sub-shift, in which X is not compact and the μ→ h(μ)
entropy map is non upper semi-continuous, extra boundedness and summability hypotheses on the
function f : X → R, as well as the primitivity X assumptions ensure the uniqueness and existence of
equilibrium measures mtf. As such, the family (mtf) has an accumulation point (m) ; further, h(m) =
limt→∞ h(mtf ) = which is itself equal to max{h(μ) : μ ∈ M max (f )}
In addition, if f is constant locally, the analogue guarantees the weak convergence of (mtf) as being t
→ ∞.
There have been evaluations of zero temperature limits for specific function families such as for T,
the doubling map and for f a degree one trigonometric polynomial. A major source of zero
temperature limits interest equilibrium measures is the multifactal analysis that studies the form Kγ
= {x ∈ X : lim n→∞ 1/n Snf (x) = γ}. Every Kγ is a T-invariant and the Birkhoff averages entropy
spectrum H : [α(f ), β(f )] → R ≥0 which is defined by the relation H(γ) = h top (K γ ) is described
by the equilibrium measures (mtf)t∈R in some hyperbolic settings. As such, if Γ : t s→ f dm tf is
equivalent to the homeomorphism R → (α(f ), β(f )), then
H(γ) = h(m Γ −1 (γ)f ) = max h(μ) : μ ∈ M T , f dμ = γ} and this holds true for all γ ∈ (α(f ), β(f ))
The H function is concave and continuously extends to the [α(f ), β(f )] boundary, although the
absence of the mtf equilibrium measures with [ f dmtf has led to interest in extremeal measures as
well as the typical values H(β(f ) and H(α(f ).
Outcomes
The elemental ergodic optimization problem is concerned with the maximization of measures and
the resolution that is most satisfactory is the explicit identification of the f-maximizing measures for
a given (X, T, f ) ∈ D although is some cases, approximation to f-maximizing measures can be
sufficient. Alternatively, a result that assets that Mmax (f) is fund in a particular MT subset. For any
given (X, T, f ) ∈ D with a subset U ⊂ C(X) a subset N ⊂ MT can be identified so that Mmax (f)⊂ N
for all values of f ∈ U. in various similar settings, it has been established that a major technical tool
is the revelation function: it is an associated result that is termed the revelation theorem.
Given the function (X, T ) ∈ D, it can be stated that f ∈ C(X) is revealed when its maxima set f-1
(max f) contains the compact T-invariant set. When the f function is revealed, the maximum ergodic
average β(f ) = max f and the set of f-maximizing measures is the non empty T-invariant measures
that have their support contained within f-1 (max f). ψ ∈ C(X) can be established to satisfy the
function [ ψ dμ = 0 for μ ∈ M T
If f + ψ is revealed, β(f ) = β(f + ψ) becomes equivalent to max (f + ψ) while max (f) = Mmax (f + ψ)
becomes the T-invariant set of measures whose support is found in the set (f + ψ) −1 (max(f + ψ). A
natural ψ function satisfying theorem 4 is a continuous coboundary where ψ = φ − φ ◦ T for the
function φ ∈ C(X).
For the function (X, T, f ) ∈ D, the continuous coboundary φ is termed a revelation if f + φ
becomes a revealed function;
(f + ψ) −1 (max(f + ψ)) has the invariant compact T-invariant . Based on this assertion, it is stated
that if ψ is a (X, T, f ) ∈ D revelation, then β(f ) = max(f + ψ); further,
Mmax (f ) = Mmax (f + ψ) = {μ ∈ M : supp(μ) ⊂ (f + ψ) −1 (max(f + ψ)} = ∅
Consequently, if (X, T, f ) ∈ D has a revelation, it fulfills the subordination principle so that if μ ∈
MT maximizes f and also supports ν ∈ M T being contained in the μ support, then it can be
concluded that v is equally f-maximizing.
Example
If T(x) = 2x, then the function f(x) = 2cos 2 πx−1)(sin 2πx+1)is not revealed; however, it can be
expressed as f = g- ψ where ψ(x) = sin 2πx- 4πx and g(x) = 2 cos 2πx 1, which is revealed and
given there is a continuous coboundary, it is a revelation for f. The f-maximizing measure that is
unique is thus the g-maximizing measure, known as the Dirac measure δ0.
If (X,T) is the alphabet full shift [0,1] and fθ (x) = fθ ((xi) ∞i=1 ) =θx1 + x2 − (θ + 2)x1 x2 define (fθ)
θ∈R, then fθ is revealed only when θ =1. For all functions c ∈ R, the ψ c (x) = c(x 1 − x 2 )
function is coboundary. If If θ > −1, ψ(1−θ)/2 becomes a revelation that reveals the uniqueness of the
invariant measure supported in period-2 orbit as the fθ-maximizing measure. On the contrary, if θ <
-1, then ψ1 becomes a revelation with the fθ -maximizing measure being a unique Dirac measure
concentrated at the fixed point 0. If θ= 1, then it can be assumed that ψ (1−θ)/2 = ψ 1 is also a
revelation that reveals the f-1 maximizing measure are ones with their support found in the golden
mean finite type sub-shift.
Optimization in this dissertation has been interpreted as maximization, conscious of the fact that
minimizing f measures are maximizing -f measures, and the minimum ergodic average expressed as
α (f) = min μ∈ M T [ fd μ is equivalent to – β – f = max μ∈ MT [ (-f ) d μ. There is some interest in
simultaneous research on the minimization and maximization problems and the preceding
discussion demonstrates the possibility of revealing the maximizing and minimizing measures
simultaneously. Bousch has considered this possibility and demonstrated that if it is possible to
reveal the f-minimizing measures, then it is very possible that both the minimizing and maximizing
measures can be simultaneously revealed (Liao and Rams, 2014). As such, a revelation for f, for a
dynamical system T : X → X is also called a maximizing revelation while the minimizing
revelation for f is denoted by -f. Based on this, ψ is said to be a bilateral revelation for f if its
simultaneously a maximizing and minimizing revelation.
Bilateralizing the minimizing and maximizing revelations
If there is both a maximizing and minimizing revelation for (X, T, f ) ∈ D, then there is a bilateral
revelation such that for (fθ ) θ∈R , if -3 ≤ θ ≤ -2, then ψc is taken as being a bilateral revelation for fθ
for all values that satisfy c ∈ [−θ − 1, 2].
Revelation Theorems
Theorem 1- Model version of the Revelation Theorem
For any given dynamical system type (X,T) ∈ D and given the function type f ∈ C(X), a revelation
φ − φ ◦ T because f + φ − φ ◦ T is the revealed function. For th typical theorem of revelation (X,T),
there is an assumption that it enjoys some hyperbolicity although the modulus of continuity for f
has some restrictions, reminiscent of Livsic’s theory, which posits that if (X,T) is suitably
hyperbolic while f remains suitably regular so that [ f d μ = 0 for μ ∈ MT, then f is considered a
continuous boundary (Aleman, Martin and Ross, 2013). this type of theorem is a special case since
it follows a revelation theorem appropriate to both f and -f . The common work on the revelation
theories posit that T is expanding while f is Lipschitz or Holder (Pemantle and Peres, 2013).
Theorem 2 – Lipschitz f, Expanding T
There is a Lipschitz revelation for each Lipschitz function f : X → R for expanding (X,T) ∈ D
because the α-Hölder function for metric d is, for the metric dα,a Lipschitz function and is defined
by the relation dα (x, y) = d(x, y)α
Theorem 3- Holder f, Expanding T
Every Holder function of the form f : X → R contains an α-Hölder revelation for the expanding (X,
T ) ∈ D, for all α ∈ (0, 1] (Nguyen, 2014).
The function φ, which is defined by φ(x) = sup/n≥1 y∈T −n (x) sup (S n f (y) − nβ(f )
Such that φ − φ ◦ T is interpreted as a Lipschitz revelation and it can also be assumed, without
losing generality, that β(f ) = 0 so that
φ(x) = sup/n≥1 y∈ sup/T −n (x) S n f (y)
It can be demonstrated that φ − φ ◦ T is a revelation by claiming first that f + φ − φ ◦ T ≤ 0,
implying that (f + φ − φ ◦ T )−1 (0) has a compact T-invariant set, because there would not otherwise
be any m∈MT satisfying [ f dm = 0 = β(f), since T-(n-1) (x) ⊂ T-n (T (x). It follows that S n f (y) = f (x)
+ S n−1 f (y) for all conditions where n ≥ , meaning that
φ(T x) ≥ f (x) + sup n≥1 y∈T −(n−1) (x) supS n−1 f (y). When these are combined, the final value
becomes φ(T x) ≥ f (x) + φ(x), and this is the inequality that is desired. The theorem is proven by
demonstrating that φ is Lipschitz which means there is the existence of K > 0 so that for all x, x ′ ∈
X, it is taken as φ(x) − φ(x ′ ) ≤ Kd(x, x ′ )
If there is N ≥ 1 in conditions of y ∈ T −N (x) then φ(x) ≤ S N f (y) + ε
This then becomes φ(x) + β(f ) =sup y∈T −1 (x)(f + φ) (y) . This equation can indeed be interpreted to
be an eigen-equation for an operator defined by the right hand side with the role of the eigen-value
being played by the maximum ergodic average denoted β(f). The nonlinear operator is considered
as being analogue of the Ruelle classical transfer operator with respect to max plus algebra. T : X →
X is defined as being weakly expanding when its inverse (-1) is equivalent to 1-Lipschitz when
acting on X compact set of subjects provided it has the induced Hausdorff metric such that Id(x,x1)
≤ d(T x, T xi) (Cioletti and O. Lopes, 2017; Aydi, Abbas and Vetro, 2012).
Theorem 4- Weakly expanding T, Walters f
Each Walters function f : X → R contains a revelation if there is a weakly expanding (X, T ) ∈ D;
for all e > 0 there is η>0 so that if orbits (yi ) i≥0 and (xi ) i≤0 fulfill d(x0 , y0 ) ≤ η then there is an
orbit (zi ) i∈Z having d(xi , zi ) ≤ e for the condition i ≥ 0.
Theorem 5- T with a local product structure that is weak
Every Walters function possesses a revelation oif (X, T ) ∈ D is transitive and also possesses a local
product structure that is weak. In such a case, the Holder continuous function is basically Walters
and this implies that there is a revelation.
Theorem 6 – f Holder, T Anosov
There is a revelation φ − φ ◦ T if f is a Holder and when (X, T ) ∈ D is a transitic Anosov that is
diffeomorphism; in this case φ is a Holder.
Typically periodic Optimization
If given a dynamical system (X, T ) ∈ D of a specific kind, for a topological vector space denoted V,
with real value functions on X, there is a topologically large V ′ ⊂ V such that all the f ∈ V1 contain
maximizing measures within a given property that is specified. The maximized measure of the
specified property must be periodic although a simple consequence is followed by a weaker
property; (X,T) is considered to be Anosov and so V= Lip.
Because of this, measures that are maximizing are not supported fully: if (X, T ) ∈ D is either
Anosov or expanding, and is also transitive but not reduced to one orbit, the dense set Lip1 is such
that if f ∈ Lip1 then there is no f-maximizing measure that is supported fully.
Sturmian Optimization
In ergodic optimization, the Sturmian measures were observed first in the context of the model
problem described in the previous section; it is maximizing measures for functions of the form vθ
(x) = cos 2π(x−θ), having an underlying dynamical system denoted as T (x) = 2x on a circle R/Z.
Sturmian measures can be identified precisely as the T-invariant measures of probability whose
support is found within sub-intervals of the form [γ, γ + ½]. The Sturmian measures are maximizing
measures for specific functions that are naturally occurring and have been identified subsequently
as maximizing measures for functions except those in the family vθ. For this family of functions,
the Sturmian measures are exactly the maximizing measures for functions vθ with every non-
periodic Sturmian measure getting maximized for each vθ function. However, Sturmian measures
that are periodic, and corresponding to positive length closed θ interval parameters. There are
infinite dimensional function cones in which the Sturmian measures in which maximization is
guaranteed.
In achieving ergodic maximization, there are transformations that are measure preserving. Measure
preserving transformations refer to those that preserve natural measures. Consider a case like (X, β,
λ) where X equals [0,1] while λ is a Lebesgue measure for the Borel σ−algebra β for X. Assuming
f(x) = 2x, it can be proven that λ is preserved by f.
f -1 [a,b] = [a/2, b/2] ∪ [a+1/2, b+1/2]
= λ([a, b])
This relation therefore, holds for all intervals since if I equals ∪iIi then there are disjointed intervals
union Ii = (ai, bi) so that

λ(I) equals Σi | bi-ai|

The result means that λ(f (I)) = λ(I) and this also holds true for all I belonging to the finite unions
algebra.
 References
Addas-Zanata & F. A. Tal, Support of maximizing measures for typical C 0 dynamics on compact
manifolds, Discr. & Cont. Dyn. Syst., 26 (2010), 795–804.
Aleman, A., Martin, R. and Ross, W. (2013). On a theorem of Livsic. Journal of Functional
Analysis, 264(4), pp.999-1048.
Aydi, H., Abbas, M. and Vetro, C. (2012). Partial Hausdorff metric and Nadlerʼs fixed point
theorem on partial metric spaces. Topology and its Applications, 159(14), pp.3234-3242.
Anagnostopoulou, K. Dı́az-Ordaz Avila, O. Jenkinson & C. Richard, Sturmian maximizing mea-
sures for the piecewise-linear cosine family, Bull. Braz. Math. Soc., 43 (2012), 285–302.
Aubrun & M. Sablik, Simulation of effective subshifts by two-dimensional subshifts of finite type,
Acta Appl. Math., 126 (2013), 35–63.
Baraviera, L. Cioletti, A. O. Lopes, J. Mohr & R. Souza, On the general one-dimensional XY
model: positive and zero temperature, selection and non-selection, Rev. Math. Phys., 23 (2011),
1063–1113.
Baraviera, R. Leplaideur & A. O. Lopes, Selection of ground states in the zero temperature
limit for a one-parameter family of potentials, SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst., 11 (2012), 243–260.
Batista, J. Gonschorowski & F. Tal, Density of the set of endomorphisms with a maximizing
measure supported on a periodic orbit, Discr. & Cont. Dyn., 35 (2015), 3315–3326.
Cioletti, L. and O. Lopes, A. (2017). Interactions, specifications, DLR probabilities and the Ruelle
operator in the one-dimensional lattice. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 37(12),
pp.6139-6152.
Contreras, A. O. Lopes, & Ph. Thieullen, Lyapunov minimizing measures for expanding maps of
the circle, Ergod. Th. & Dyn. Sys., 21 (2001), 1379–1409.
Durand, A. Romashchenko, A. Shen, Fixed-point tile sets and their applications, J. Comput. System
Sci., 78 (2012), 731–764.
Fathi, Orbites hétéroclines et ensemble de Peierls, C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris, Ser. I, Math. 326,
No.10, (1998), 1213–1216.
Jenkinson, O. (2018). Ergodic optimization in dynamical systems. Ergodic Theory and Dynamical
Systems, 39(10), pp.2593-2618.
Liao, L. and Rams, M. (2014). Multifractal Analysis of Some Multiple Ergodic Averages for the
Systems with Non-constant Lyapunov Exponents. Real Analysis Exchange, 39(1), p.1.
Liao, L. and Rams, M. (2014). Multifractal Analysis of Some Multiple Ergodic Averages for the
Systems with Non-constant Lyapunov Exponents. Real Analysis Exchange, 39(1), p.1.
Nguyen, N. (2014). Hölder Continuous Solutions to Complex Hessian Equations. Potential
Analysis, 41(3), pp.887-902.
Pemantle, R. and Peres, Y. (2013). Concentration of Lipschitz Functionals of Determinantal and
Other Strong Rayleigh Measures. Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, 23(1), pp.140-160.