Hindawi

International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

Volume 2022, Article ID 4672957, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4672957

Research Article
A Note about Young’s Inequality with Different Measures

Saba Mehmood , Eridani Eridani , and Fatmawati Fatmawati

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia

Correspondence should be addressed to Eridani Eridani; eridani@fst.unair.ac.id

Received 26 March 2022; Revised 11 June 2022; Accepted 18 June 2022; Published 13 July 2022

Academic Editor: Nawab Hussain

Copyright © 2022 Saba Mehmood et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.

The key purpose of this paper is to work on the boundedness of generalized Bessel–Riesz operators defined with doubling
measures in Lebesgue spaces with different measures. Relating Bessel decaying the kernel of the operators is satisfying some
elementary properties. Doubling measure, Young’s inequality, and Minköwski’s inequality will be used in proofs of boundedness
of integral operators. In addition, we also explore the relation between the parameters of the kernel and generalized integral
operators and see the norm of these generalized operators which will also be bounded by the norm of their kernel with
different measures.

1. Introduction The boundedness of the Riesz potential in Lebesgue and

Suppose we are given Kα : (0, ∞) ⟶ (0, ∞), with
Kα (t) : � tα− n , 0 < α < n. Fractional integral operator, one
of integral operators, is often studied since early last century.
This operator is defined by
Tα f(x): � 􏽚 n Kα (|x − y|)f(y)dy, (1)
R operators.
p Since 1930s, some researchers [2,3] have studied the
for every f ∈ Lloc (Rn ), with 1 ≤ p < ∞. Here, Kα is called
fractional integral kernel or Riesz kernel [1].
Studies about Riesz potentials Tα were started since
1920’s. Hardy-Littlewood [2,3] proved the boundedness of
Riesz potentials on Lebesgue spaces for n � 1. After 50’s,
Hardy-Littlewood and Sobolev [4] proved the boundedness
of Tα for n ∈ N. [5] (see also D. Edmunds [[6], Chapter 6])
Kokilashvili had a complete description of nondoubling
measure μ guaranteeing the boundedness of fractional in-
tegral operator Tα from Lp (μ, X) to Lq (μ, X), 1 < p < q < 1.
We notice that this result was derived in [7] for potentials on
Euclidean spaces. In [4], theorems of Sobolev and Adams
type for fractional integrals defined on quasimetric measure
spaces were established.
Some two-weight norm inequalities for fractional op-
erators on Rn with nondoubling measure were studied in [8].
Morrey spaces defined on Euclidean spaces was studied in
Peter and Adams’s paper [9,10]. The same problem for
fractional integrals on Rn with nondoubling measure was
investigated by Sawano in [11]. Eridani ([12], Theorem 4,
Theorem 3.1, Theorem 3.3) established the boundedness of
fractional integral operators and mention the necessary and
sufficient conditions for the boundedness of maximal
boundedness of Tα on some function spaces.
Theorem 1 (Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev) (see [4]). If
f ∈ Lp (Rn ), with 1 < p < n/α, then there exists Cp,q > 0 such
that
�� � � �
��Tα f: Lq Rn 􏼁��� ≤ Cp,q ���f: Lp Rn 􏼁���, 1 � 1 − α. (2)
q p n
From now on, C, Cp,q , Cp,q,s > 0 will be serve as a positive
constant, not necessarily the same one.
The purpose of this paper is to work on the boundedness
of generalized Bessel–Riesz operators defined in Lebesgue
spaces with different measures. Role of Young’s inequality
and Minköwski’s inequality will be used in proofs of
boundedness of integral operators.
2 International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

Here, we define We will also mention the case when the measure satisfies
�� � 1/p the doubling condition. The derived conditions are simul-
��f: Lp ��� :� 􏼔􏽚 |f(t)|p dt􏼕 , 1 ≤ p < ∞, (3) taneously necessary and sufficient for appropriate inequal-
n
R ities that were derived in [18,19]. We also have the following
and f ∈ Lp � Lp (Rn ), as a collection of f such that result [14] about the boundedness of such an operator as
‖f: Lp ‖ < ∞. Next, for a given Kα,c : (0, ∞) ⟶ (0, ∞), follows:
with
tα− n Theorem 2 (Idris–Gunawan–Lindiarni–Eridani). If f ∈ Lp
Kα,c (t): � , 0 < α < n, 0 ≤ c. (4) and Kα,c ∈ Lq , then there exists Cp,q,s > 0 such that
[1 + t]c
�� � � �
We define Bessel-Riesz operator as ��T f: Ls ��� ≤ C ���K : Lq ��� · ����f: Lp ����, 1 � 1 + 1 − 1.
� α,c � p,q,s � α,c � s p q
Tα f(x): � 􏽚 n Kα,c (|x − y|)f(y)dy, (5) (6)
R
p For some functions f: Rn ⟶ R and g: Rn ⟶ R, we
For every f ∈ Lloc (Rn ), with 1 ≤ p < ∞. Here, Kα,c is define
called Bessel–Riesz kernel.
The origin of Bessel–Riesz operators is Schröndinger (f⋆g)(x): � 􏽚 n g(x − y)f(y)dy, x ∈ Rn . (7)
equation. The Schrödinger equation is a linear partial dif- R
ferential equation that describes the wave function or state
We know that f⋆g is a generalization of Tα and Tα,c .
function of a quantum-mechanical system. In quantum
Moreover, the above result is a particular case of the fol-
mechanics, the analogue of Newton’s law is Schrödinger’s
lowing [20].
equation. In 1999, Kazuhiro Kurata, Seiichi Nishigaki, and
Satoko Sugano [13] studied boundedness of integral oper-
ators on Lebesgue and generalized Morrey spaces and its Theorem 3 (Young’s inequality). If f ∈ Lp and g ∈ Lq , then
application to estimate in Morrey spaces for the Schrödinger there exists C∗p,q,s > 0 such that
operator L2 � −Δ + V(x) + W(x) with nonnegative �� � � � � �
V ∈ (RH)∞ (reverse Hölders class) and small perturbed ��f⋆g: Ls ��� ≤ C∗ ���g: Lq ��� · ���f: Lp ���, 1 � 1 + 1 − 1. (8)
p,q,s
s p q
potentials W.
In a recent previous year 2016, Idris et al. ([14], Theorem Kurata et al. [16] have shown that W · Tα,c is bounded on
6, pp. 3) presented the boundedness of Bessel–Riesz oper- generalized Morrey spaces where W is any real functions.
ators. They obtained results that were similar to Chiar- For applications of the above operators in Euclidean spaces
enza–Frasca’s result [15] for the boundedness of fractional setting, see [16].
integral operators.
Eridani et al. [12] presented the boundedness of frac-
tional integral operators defined on quasimetric measure 2. The Kernel
spaces. Moreover, Idris et al. [14] have investigated the
For 1 ≤ s < ∞, 0 < c < ∞, and R+ : � (0, ∞), we define
boundedness of generalized Morrey spaces with weight and
functions ρ: R+ ⟶ R+ , with the following conditions:
presented the boundedness of these operators on Lebesgue
spaces and Morrey spaces for Euclidean spaces. 1 a 1 ρ(a)
(ρI). ≤ ≤ 2⇒ ≤ ≤ C1 ;
Since Euclidean spaces are the simplest example of 2 b C1 ρ(b)
measure metric spaces. Kurata et al. [16] have investigated
the boundedness of Bessel–Riesz operators on generalized r ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s
(ρII). 􏽚 dt + 􏽚 dt < ∞, r > 0; (9)
Morrey spaces with weight. The boundedness of these op- 0 t n(s−1)+1
r tn(s−1)+sc+1
erators on Lebesgue spaces in Euclidean settings will be
proved using Young’s inequality and Minköwski’s 1 ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s
inequality. (ρIII). 􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt + 􏽚 dt ≤ C2 < ∞.
0 t 1 tn(s−1)+sc+1
Moreover, we will also find the norm of the generalized
Bessel–Riesz operators bounded by the norm of the kernels. From (ρI) we will have
Saba et al. [17] used Young’s inequality, to prove the 2r ρ(t)
boundedness of Bessel–Riesz operators on Lebesgue spaces 􏽚 dt ∼ ρ(r). (10)
r t
in measure metric spaces, which are easy consequences of
Young’s inequality. The second consequence after the fact That is, there exists 0 < c1 ≤ c2 such that
Bessel–Riesz operator is bounded on Lebesgue spaces; we 2r ρ(t)
entered to next phenomena of Morrey spaces. In Young’s c1 ρ(r) ≤ 􏽚 dt ≤ c2 ρ(r), r > 0. (11)
inequality, we have the best constant known as 1. But at this r t
point, we still have no information about the best constant in Since
Morrey spaces. So in this paper, we move towards gener-
alized Bessel–Riesz operators in Lebesgue spaces.
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 3

1 1 ρ(t)s 1 ρ(t)s On the other hand, for 1 < r < ∞, then

sc 􏽚 n(s−1)+1 dt ≥ 􏽚 n(s−1)+sc+1 dt, 0 < r < 1,
r 0t rt ∞ ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s
(12) 􏽚 n(s−1)+sc+1
dt < 􏽚 n(s−1)+sc+1
dt < C2 < ∞,
r s ∞ s r t 1 t
ρ(t) ρ(t)
􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt ≤ rsc 􏽚 n(s−1)+sc+1
dt, 1 < r < ∞, r ρ(t)s 1 r ∞ ρ(t)s
1 t 1 t 􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt � 􏽚 + 􏽚 ≤ C2 + rsc 􏽚 dt < ∞,
0 t 0 1 1 tn(s−1)+sc+1
then (ρII) and (ρIII) are equivalent, with the following (14)
explanations.
It is easy to see that (ρII)⇒(ρIII). Suppose (ρIII) is true. and we already prove that both of the conditions are
Then, for 0 < r < 1, we have equivalent.
We define
r ρ(t)s 1 ρ(t)s
􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt ≤ 􏽚 dt < ∞, ρ(|x|)
0 t 0 tn(s−1)+1 Kρ,c (|x|): � , x ∈ Rn . (15)
|x| [1 +|x|]c
n
∞ s 1 ∞ 1
ρ(t)
􏽚 n(s−1)+sc+1
dt � 􏽚 + 􏽚 ≤ C2 + 􏽚 (13) Using (ρII) with 1 ≤ s < ∞, and any R > 0, then
r t r 1 r

1 1 ρ(t)s
≤ C2 + 􏽚 dt < ∞.
rsc 0 tn(s−1)+1

􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s ρ(|x|)s
􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dx � 􏽚 sn sc dx
R 0≤|x| |x| [1 +|x|]

ρ(|x|)s
� 􏽘􏽚 sn sc dx
k∈Z 2k R ≤ |x| < 2k+1 R |x| [1 +|x|]

s s
−1 ρ􏼐2k R􏼑 ∞ ρ􏼐2k R􏼑
∼ 􏽘 n(s−1) sc
+􏽘 n(s−1) sc
k
k�−∞ 􏼐2 R􏼑 􏽨1 + 2k R􏽩 k�0 􏼐2
k
R􏼑 k
􏽨 1 + 2 R􏽩
(16)
s s
−1 ρ􏼐2k R􏼑 ∞ ρ􏼐2k R􏼑
≤ 􏽘 n(s−1)
+􏽘 n(s−1)+sc
k k
k�−∞ 􏼐2 R􏼑 k�0 􏼐2 R􏼑

−1 2k+1 R ρ(t)s ∞ 2 R
ρ(t)s
k+1

∼ 􏽘 􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt + 􏽘 􏽚 1+n(s−1)+sc
dt
k�−∞ 2k R t k�0 2 R t
k

R ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s
�􏽚 dt + 􏽚 1+n(s−1)+sc
dt < ∞.
0 tn(s−1)+1 R t

By (ρII), then Kρ,c ∈ Ls , for 1 ≤ s < ∞.

If k ∈ {−1, −2, −3, . . .}, then 0 < 2k < 1 and
k nc nc
[1 + 2 ] < 2 . On the other hand, we can also have for
k ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3, . . .}, then 1 ≤ 2k , and 2k < 1 + 2k < 2k+1 .
Finally, we will have
4 International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

1 ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s [α + 1]
􏽚 dt + 􏽚 dt ρ(t) :� t[α+n(s− 1)]/s , 1≤ < s < ∞. (20)
0 t n(s−1)+1
1 t 1+n(s−1)+sc c
−1 2k+1 ρ(t)s ∞ 2k+1 ρ(t)s If we consider
� 􏽘 􏽚 n(s−1)+1
dt + 􏽘 􏽚 1+n(s−1)+sc
dt
k�−∞ 2k t k�0 2k t Tρ,c f(x) :� 􏽚 n Kρ,c (|x − y|)f(y)dy, x ∈ Rn , (21)
R
s s
−1 ρ􏼐2k 􏼑 ∞ ρ􏼐2k 􏼑 then as a consequences of Young’s inequality, we also have
∼ 􏽘 n(s−1)
+􏽘 the following.
k k n(s−1)+sc
k�−∞ 􏼐2 􏼑 k�0 􏼐2 􏼑
(17)
k s k n k s k n
Lemma 2. If 1/q � 1/p + 1/s − 1 and f ∈ Lp , then there
−1 ρ􏼐 2 􏼑 􏼐 2 􏼑 ∞ ρ􏼐2 􏼑 􏼐2 􏼑
⎝ 􏽘 ⎠ exists C > 0 such that
≤ C⎛ k ns k nc
+􏽘 k ns nc
⎞
k�−∞ 􏼐2 􏼑 􏽨1 + 2 􏽩 k�0 􏼐2 􏼑 􏽨1 + 2k 􏽩 �� � � �
��T f: Lq ��� ≤ C���K : Ls ��� · ����f: Lp ����, 1 < p, q, r < ∞. (22)
� ρ,c � � ρ,c �
ρ(|x|)s
�C􏽘􏽚 sn sc dx From the above lemma, there exists C > 0 such that
k k+1 |x| [1 +|x|]
k∈Z 2 ≤ |x| < 2 �� � � � � �
��T f: Lp ��� ≤ C���K : Lp ��� · ����f: L1 ����, or ���T f: Lp ���
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s � ρ,c � � ρ,c � � ρ,c �
ρ(|x|)s 􏼌 􏼌 �� � �� �� (23)
� C􏽚 sc dx � 􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x|)􏼌􏼌 dx. � 1�� p
sn
0≤|x| |x| [1 +|x|] R ≤ C��Kρ,c : L �� · ��f: L ��, 1 ≤ p < ∞.
After the above estimates, we conclude. Suppose μ is an arbitrary measure on Rn . We define
μ ∈ (GC) (growth condition), if and only if there exists
Lemma 1. For 1 ≤ s < ∞, we will have C2 > 0 such that
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1 ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s μ(B(a, R)) ≤ C2 Rn , (24)
􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dx ∼ 􏽚 n(s−1)+1 dt + 􏽚 1+n(s−1)+sc dt.
R 0t 1 t
ror every open balls B(a, R): � {x ∈ Rn : |x − a| < R} in Rn .
(18) For more information about this kind of measure, see [21].
With the same technique as used to estimate the kernel Based on the above definitions, we try to estimate
defined by equation (15) or every y ∈ Rn , we also have �� � 􏼌 􏼌 1/s
��K : Ls (μ)��� :� 􏼒􏽚 􏼌􏼌􏼌K (|x|)􏼌􏼌􏼌s dμ(x)􏼓 , 1 ≤ s < ∞.
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1 ρ(t)s � ρ,c � 􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌
∞ ρ(t)s n
R
􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dx ∼ 􏽚 n(s−1)+1 dt + 􏽚 1+n(s−1)+sc dt. (19)
R 0t 1 t (25)
As a classical example, we can consider the following: For 1 ≤ s < ∞, and R > 0, we consider the following:

ρ(|x|)s −1
ρ(|x|)s
􏽚 sn sc dμ(x) � 􏽘 􏽚 sn sc dμ(x)
|x|<R |x| [1 +|x|] k k+1 |x| [1 +|x|]
k�−∞ 2 R ≤ |x| < 2 R

s s
−1 ρ􏼐2k R􏼑 μ􏼐B􏼐0, 2k R􏼑􏼑 −1 ρ􏼐2k R􏼑
≤C 􏽘 k snk sc ≤C 􏽘 (s−1)n (26)
􏼐 2 R 􏼑 􏽨 1 + 2 R􏽩 k
k�−∞ k�−∞ 􏼐2 R􏼑

−1 2k+1 R ρ(t)s R ρ(t)s

≤C 􏽘 􏽚 (s−1)n+1
dt � C 􏽚 dt,
k�−∞ 2k R t 0 t(s−1)n+1

and also
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 5

ρ(|x|)s ∞
ρ(|x|)s
􏽚 sn sc dμ(x) � 􏽘 􏽚 sn sc dμ(x)
R≤|x| |x| [1 +|x|] k k+1 |x| [1 +|x|]
k�1 2 R ≤ |x| < 2 R

s s
∞ ρ􏼐2k R􏼑 μ􏼐B􏼐0, 2k R􏼑􏼑 ∞ ρ􏼐2k R􏼑
≤C􏽘 k sn
k sc ≤C􏽘 (s−1)n+sc (27)
􏼐 2 R 􏼑 􏽨 1 + 2 R􏽩 k
k�0 k�0 􏼐2 R􏼑

∞ 2k+1 R ρ(t)s ∞ ρ(t)s

≤C􏽘􏽚 (s−1)n+sc+1
dt � C 􏽚 dt,
k�0 2k R t R t(s−1)n+sc+1
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌p 1/p
􏼌 􏼌
where letter C > 0 shall always denote a constant, not nec- 􏼢􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌􏼌􏽚 n F(x, y)d](y)􏼌􏼌􏼌􏼌 dμ(x)􏼣
R R
essarily the same one. (30)
At this point, for 1 ≤ s < ∞, and μ ∈ (GC), we define 1/p
p
≤ 􏽚 n 􏼔􏽚 n |F(x, y)| dμ(x)􏼕 d](y).
�� � s 1/s R R
R
��K : Ls (μ)��� � sup 􏼠􏽚 ρ(t) dt + 􏽚
∞ ρ(t)s
� ρ,c � dt 􏼡 .
R>0 t(s−1)n+1
0 t(s−1)n+sc+1
R Now, we state the following:
(28)
Theorem 4. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] is any measure on Rn .
3. Main Results If f ∈ L1 (]) and Kρ,c ∈ Ls (μ), then there exists Cs > 0
such that
For any measure ] on Rn , any measurable functions �� � � �
f: Rn ⟶ R, and x ∈ Rn , we define ��T f: Ls (μ)��� ≤ C ���K : Ls (μ)��� · ����f: L1 (])����, 1 ≤ s < ∞.
� ρ,c � s � ρ,c �

Tρ,c f(x) : � 􏽚 n Kρ,c (|x − y|)f(y)d](y). (29) (31)

R

Before we state our main results, about the boundedness

of Tρ,c , we consider the following simple result [13]. Proof. By Minköwski’s inequality, with 1 ≤ s < ∞, then

Lemma 3 (Minköwski’s inequality). Suppose 1 ≤ p < ∞, and

we are given F: Rn × Rn ⟶ R. For any measure ] and μ on
Rn , then

􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1/s 􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1/s

􏼌􏼌 􏼌
􏼒􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Tρ,c f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dμ(x)􏼓 � 􏼒􏽚 􏼌􏼌􏽚 Kρ,c (|x − y|)f(y)d](y)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dμ(x)􏼓
n􏼌 n 􏼌
R R R
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1/s
≤ 􏽚 n 􏼒􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)f(y)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dμ(x)􏼓 d](y)
R R (32)
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌s 1/s
≤ 􏽚 n 􏼒􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 dμ(x)􏼓 |f(y)|d](y)
R R
�� �� �� ��
≤ C���Kρ,c : Ls (μ)��� · ��f: L1 (])��.

As a corollary of the above result, we also have □ It is noted that

p
Corollary 1. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] is any measure on Rn . p � q′ 􏼒1 − 􏼓,
s
If f ∈ L1 (]) and Kρ,c ∈ L1 (μ), then there exists C > 0 (35)
q
such that q � p′ 􏼒1 − 􏼓.
�� � � � s
��T f: L1 (μ)��� ≤ C���K : L1 (μ)��� · ����f: L1 (])����. (33)
� ρ,c � � ρ,c � After the above simple calculations, we have
Suppose we have the
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Theorem 5. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] any measure on Rn
� + − 1, or 1 � + 1 − + 1 − � + + . (34)
s p q s p q s p ′ q′ such that
6 International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

�� � � �
](B) ≤ C∗ μ(B), (36) ��T f: Ls (μ)��� ≤ C���K : Lq (μ)��� · ����f: Lp (])����, 1 1 1
� + − 1.
� ρ,c � � ρ,c � s p q
for some C∗ > 0 and for every open balls B on Rn . (37)
If f ∈ Lp (]) and Kρ,c ∈ Lq (μ), then there exists C > 0
such that
Proof. With Hölder’s inequality, we start with the following:

􏼌􏼌 􏼌 􏼌 􏼌
􏼌􏼌T f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌 ≤ 􏽚 |f(y)|p/s+(1− p/s) 􏼌􏼌􏼌K (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌q/s+(1− p/s) d](y)
􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌 n
􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌
R
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌q 1/s 1/q′
≤ 􏼔􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 |f(y)|p d](y)􏼕 􏼔􏽚 n |f(y)|q (1− p/s) d](y)􏼕
′

R R
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌p′ (1− q/s) 1/p′
× 􏼔􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 d](y)􏼕 (38)
R
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌q 1/s 1/q′
� 􏼔􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 |f(y)|p d](y)􏼕 􏼔􏽚 n |f(y)|p d](y)􏼕
R R
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌q 1/p′
× 􏼔􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 d](y)􏼕 .
R

∞
q
If we define 􏽚 ∼ C 􏽘 Kρ,c 􏼐2k R􏼑 ]􏼐B􏼐x, 2k+1 R􏼑􏼑
|x−y|≥R k�0
Tp,q
ρ,c f(x): � 􏽚 n Kρ,c (|x − y|) |f(y)| d](y),q p
(39) q
R ∞ ρ􏼐2k R􏼑 ∞ ρ(t)q (43)
≤C􏽘 k nq−n+qc ≤C􏽚 n(q−1)+qc+1
dt
then for every x, we come to k�0 􏼐2 R􏼑 R t
􏼌􏼌 􏼌 􏼌 􏼌 􏼌 􏼌
􏼌􏼌T f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌s ≤ ����f: Lp (])����sp/q′ · 􏼌􏼌􏼌Tp,q f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌􏼔􏽚 􏼌􏼌􏼌K (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌q d](y)􏼕 .
s/p′
􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌 􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌 􏼌 􏼌
�� ��q
≤ C���Kρ,c : Lq (μ)��� .
n
ρ,c
R

(40)
Now, we want to estimate the right hand side, especially, Up to now, for every x ∈ Rn , we already have
for x ∈ Rn and R > 0, we will have 􏼌􏼌 􏼌 � � 􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌
􏼌􏼌T f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌s ≤ C���K : Lq (μ)���qs/p′ · ����f: Lp (])����qs/p′ · 􏼌􏼌􏼌Tp,q 􏼌􏼌
􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌 � ρ,c � ρ,c f(x)􏼌.
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌q
􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Kρ,c (|x − y|)􏼌􏼌􏼌 d](y) � 􏽚 +􏽚 . (41) (44)
R |x−y|<R |x−y|≥R
By the previous fact, we know that
We start with �� � � �
��T f: L1 (μ)��� ≤ C ���K : L1 (μ)��� · ����f: L1 (])����, (45)
−1
� ρ,c � 1 � ρ,c �
􏽚 � 􏽘 􏽚
|x−y|<R 2k R ≤ |x−y| < 2k+1 R and after this, we come to
k�−∞
􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌 ��􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌q �� ��
􏽚 n 􏼌􏼌􏼌Tp,q 􏼌􏼌 ��􏼌􏼌 􏼌􏼌 1 �� � p 1 ���
ρ,c f(x)􏼌dμ(x) ≤ C1 �􏼌Kρ,c 􏼌 : L (μ)� · �|f| : L (])�
−1
q
∼ C 􏽘 Kρ,c 􏼐2k R􏼑 ]􏼐B􏼐x, 2k+1 R􏼑􏼑 R
�� ��q �� ��p
k�−∞
(42) � C1 ���Kρ,c : Lq (μ)��� · ��f: Lp (])�� .
k q
−1 ρ􏼐2 R􏼑 R ρ(t) q (46)
≤C 􏽘 (q−1)n
≤C􏽚 (q−1)n+1
dt
k 0 t And finally,
k�−∞ 􏼐2 R􏼑

�� ��q
≤ C���Kρ,c : Lq (μ)��� ,

and also
International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 7

�� � � � � �
�� � � �
��T f: Ls (μ)���s ≤ C���K : Lq (μ)���qs/p′ ��W · T f: L1 (μ)��� ≤ C ���W: Ls′ (μ)��� · ���K : Ls (μ)��� · ����f: L1 (])����.
� ρ,c � � ρ,c � � ρ,c � s� � � ρ,c �
�� � 􏼌􏼌 􏼌 (54)
�sp/q′
· ��f: Lp (])�� 􏽚 􏼌􏼌Tp,q f(x)􏼌􏼌􏼌dμ(x)
n
􏼌 ρ,c 􏼌
R
�� ��q+qs/p′ �� ��p+sp/q′ Corollary 4. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] any measure on Rn
≤ C���Kρ,c : Lq (μ)��� · ��f: Lp (])�� .
such that
(47)
](B) ≤ C∗ μ(B), (55)
Since q + qs/p′ � s � p + sp/q′ , then we are done.
As a corollary, we also have: □ for some C∗ > 0 and for every open balls B on Rn .
If f ∈ Ls (]), W ∈ Ls′ (μ), and Kρ,c ∈ L1 (μ), then
Corollary 2. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] any measure on Rn
such that W · Tρ,c : Ls (]) ⟶ L1 (μ), (56)

](B) ≤ C∗ μ(B), (48) is a bounded operator. That is, for every s ∈ [1, ∞], there
exists Cs > 0 such that
for some C∗ > 0 and for every open balls B on Rn . �� � � � � �
��W · T f: L1 (μ)��� ≤ C���K : L1 (μ)��� · ���W: Ls′ (μ)��� · ����f: Ls (])����.
s 1
If f ∈ L (]) and Kρ,c ∈ L (μ), then there exists C > 0 � ρ,c � � ρ,c � � �
such that (57)
�� � � �
��T f: Ls (μ)��� ≤ C���K : L1 (μ)��� · ����f: Ls (])����, 1 ≤ s < ∞. Next, this will be served as our last corollary.
� ρ,c � � ρ,c �
(49)
Corollary 5. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] any measure on Rn
such that
4. Pointwise Multiplier Operators ](B) ≤ C∗ μ(B), (58)

Suppose f ∈ Lp (μ) and g ∈ Lp′ (μ), with 1 < p < ∞ and
1 � 1/p + 1/p′ . Then, by Hölder inequality, we will have
‖f · g: L1 (μ)‖ ≤ ‖f: Lp (μ)‖ · ‖g: Lp′ (μ)‖.
Next, we consider a pointwise multipliers operator W by
W: f↦W · f, with [W · f](x) ≔ W(x) · f(x), x ∈ Rn . (50)
So, from Hölder inequality, if W ∈ Lp′ (μ), then W is a
bounded operators from Lp (μ) to L1 (μ), with
‖W · f: L1 (μ)‖ ≤ ‖W: Lp′ (μ)‖ · ‖f: Lp (μ)‖, 1 < p < ∞.
Another example is the following equation. Suppose, we
consider a fractional integral operators Tα , and we define
W · Tα : f↦W · Tα f, with 􏼂W · Tα f􏼃(x)
(51)
≔ W(x) · Tα f(x), x ∈ Rn .
Again, since 1 < p < n/α and 1/q + α/n � 1/p, in view of
Hölder inequality, then
�� � � � � �
��W · Tα f: Lp ��� ≤ ���W: Ln/α ��� · ���Tα f: Lq ���
�� �� �� �� (52)
≤ C��W: Ln/α �� · ��f: Lp ��.
So, if W ∈ Ln/α , then W · Tα : Lp ⟶ Lp is a bounded
operator.
From our main results, we also have:
Corollary 3. Suppose μ ∈ (GC) and ] is any measure on R .
If f ∈ L1 (]), W ∈ Ls′ (μ), and Kρ,c ∈ Ls (μ), then
W · Tρ,c : L1 (]) ⟶ L1 (μ), (53)
is a bounded operator. That is, for every s ∈ [1, ∞], there
exists Cs > 0 such that
for some C∗ > 0 and for every open balls B on Rn .
If f ∈ Lp (]), W ∈ Lq′ (μ), and Kρ,c ∈ Lq (μ), then
1 1 1
W · Tρ,c : Lp (]) ⟶ Lp (μ), + � , (59)
s q′ p
is a bounded operator. That is, there exists C > 0 such that
�� � � � � �
��W · T f: Lp (μ)��� ≤ C���K : Lq (μ)��� · ���W: Lq′ (μ)��� · ����f: Lp (])����.
� ρ,c � � ρ,c � � �
(60)
5. Conclusions
From the result of this study, we have seen the boundedness
of the generalized Bessel–Riesz operators in Lebesgue spaces,
in the framework of different measures (Theorem 3.1,
Theorem 5) by using, as tools, an estimate of the Lebesgue
norm of the Bessel–Riesz kernel (Theorem 2), the Young
inequality (Theorem 3), and functions with doubling con-
ditions. In the future, we shall continue this study to prove
the boundedness of generalized Bessel–Riesz operators on
Morrey spaces and generalized Morrey spaces.
Data Availability
The data used to support the findings of this study are
n currently under embargo while the research findings are
commercialized. Requests for data, after the publication of
this article, will be considered by the corresponding author.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
8 International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences

Acknowledgments Morrey-type spaces,” Studia Mathematica, vol. 163, no. 2,

pp. 157–176, 2004.
Part of this work was carried out during the second author’s [19] V. I. Burenkov, H. V. Guliyev, and V. S. Guliyev, “Necessary
visit to the Faculty of Engineering Sciences, Bahria Uni- and sufficient conditions for the boundedness of fractional
versity Islamabad in 2019, under Staff Exchange Program, maximal operators in local Morrey-type spaces,” Journal of
Universitas Airlangga 2019. Department of Mathematics, Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 208, no. 1,
pp. 280–301, 2007.
Faculty of Science and Technology, Universitas Airlangga,
[20] F. Jones, Lebesgue Integration on Euclidean Space, Jones and
Surabaya, Indonesia. Bartlett Learning, Massachusetts, United States, 2001.
[21] G. H. Eridani and E. Nakai, “On generalized fractional in-
References tegral operators,” Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae, vol. 60,
no. 3, pp. 539–550, 2004.
[1] E. M. Stein, Singular Integrals and Differentiability Properties
of Functions, Vol. 2, Princeton university press, New Jersey,
United States, 1970.
[2] G. H. Hardy and J. E. Littlewood, “Some properties of frac-
tional integrals. I,” Mathematische Zeitschrift, vol. 27, no. 1,
pp. 565–606, 1928.
[3] G. H. HardyHardy and J. E. Littlewood, “Some properties of
fractional integrals. II,” Mathematische Zeitschrift, vol. 34,
no. 1, pp. 403–439, 1932.
[4] S. Sobolev, “On a theorem of functional analysis,” Eleven
Papers on Analysis, vol. 34, pp. 39–68, 1963.
[5] V. Kokilashvili and M. Alexander, “Fractional integrals on
measure spaces,” Fractional calculus and Applied Analysis,
vol. 4, pp. 1–24, 2001.
[6] D. E. Edmunds, V. Kokilashvili, and A. Meskhi, “Bounded
and Compact Integral Operators,” Math. Appl.”, vol. 543,
p. 3440, 2002.
[7] V. Kokilashvili, “Weighted estimates for classical integral
operators,” Nonlinear Analysis, Function Spaces and Appli-
cations, Vieweg+ Teubner Verlag, vol. 4, pp. 86–103,
Wiesbaden, 1990.
[8] J. Garcı́a-CuervaGarcı́a-Cuerva and A. E. Gatto, “Bounded-
ness properties of fractional integral operators associated to
non-doubling measures,” Studia Mathematica, vol. 162, no. 3,
pp. 245–261, 2004.
[9] J. Peetre, “On the theory of Lp,λ spaces,” Journal of Functional
Analysis, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 71–87, 1969.
[10] D. R. Adams, “A note on Riesz potentials,” Duke Mathe-
matical Journal, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 765–778, 1975.
[11] Y. Sawano and H. Tanaka, “Morrey Spaces for non-doubling
measures,” Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series, vol. 21,
no. 6, pp. 1535–1544, 2005.
[12] A. Eridani, V. Kokilashvili, and A. Meskhi, “Morrey spaces
and fractional integral operators,” Expositiones Mathematicae,
vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 227–239, 2009.
[13] L. Grafakos, “Classical Fourier Analysis,” Graduate Texts in
Mathematics, Vol. 2, Springer, New York, 2008.
[14] M. Idris, H. Gunawan, J. Lindiarni, and Eridani, “The
boundedness of Bessel-Riesz operators on Morrey spaces,”
AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1729, no. 1, p. 020006, 2016.
[15] F. Chiarenza, “Morrey spaces and Hardy-Littlewood maximal
function,” Rend. Mat. Appl.vol. 3, no. 7, pp. 273–279, 1987.
[16] K. Kurata, S. Nishigaki, and S. Sugano, “Boundedness of
integral operators on generalized Morrey spaces and its ap-
plication to Schrodinger operators,” Proceedings of the
American Mathematical Society, vol. 128, no. 4, pp. 1125–
1134, 2000.
[17] S. Mehmood, Eridani, and Fatmawati, “Morrey spaces and
boundedness of Bessel-Riesz operators,” AIP Conference
Proceedings, vol. 2329, no. 1, Article ID 030001, 2021.
[18] V. I. Burenkov and H. V. Guliyev, “Necessary and sufficient
conditions for boundedness of the maximal operator in local