300 THE CONJUGATE OPERATOR METHOD

Proposition 6.17 with X == [w 1 (Q) + w2 (Q)](H + ()- 1 , R - (I+ IQI)- 1 and

S == I+ jDj. We have seen in the proof of Proposition 6.16 that X E TJ(H) and
(I+ IQI)- 1X(I + jDI) E B(H), and also that IIXII + II(I + IQI)- 1X(I + jDI)II <
c[llu;llloo + llw2!1p]. Thus (6.102) shows that

This inequality generalises ( 6.101) for values of v belonging to ( 1/2, 1), and the rea-
soning that follows (6.101) is again applicable.

6.6 Higher order resolvent estimates

We present here a generalisation of Theorem 6.3 and of its consequences for powers
of the resolvent (T- A- iJ-L)- 1 . This has important applications in scattering theory,
as seen for example in Section 7.2. To obtain a bound on (J, (T - A - it-L)-Nf)
for suitable vectors f, one assumes that the multiple commutators (up to order N)
ofT with iA belong to B(H) (in the sense explained before Theorem 6.3). We set
Bk == [[ · · · [T, iA], iA], ... , iA] (k commutators). Observe that B 1 coincides with the
operator Bused in Section 6.2 and that each Bk is formally self-adjoint. We then have
the following generalisation of Theorem 6.3:

Theorem 6.18. LetT and A be se(f-adjoint operators with T E TJ(H), and let N E
{2, 3, ... }. Assume that each o.f the operators Bk, k - 1, ... , N + 1, belongs to
B(H) and that a strict Mourre inequality (6.34) is satisfied on so1ne open interval J.
Let Jo be a bounded closed subinterval of J and v > N- (1/2). Then the norm limits
u-linlp,-++O(I +I 1)-u(T- A iJ-L)-N (I+ IAI)-u exist uniformly in A E Jo, and

sup I (I+ IAI)-u (T- A it-L)-N (I+ IAI)-u II < oo. (6.1 03)
>..EJo.J1>0

PROOF. The proof follows the lines of that of Theorem 6.3. We just indicate the ad-
justments that are necessary. First the term II [B, A] II in the constant c 1 in (6.36) should
I:~= 2 + [ I:~= 1 IIBk II]
2
be replaced by IIBk I .

( 1) Definition and properties of G s

• Points (i) and (ii). Here the appropriate definition of N(- is as follows:
N
Nt- == T A it-L + z±(c) with z±(c)- L [(±ic)k Bk/k!].
k=1

Hence GE- Gs(A + it-L) == [T A- it-L + z-(c)]- 1, withEE [0, 1]. The basic in-
equality (6.41) remains true, the only change in its verification occurs in the derivation
of (6.39) where ~icE must be replaced by _z±(c).
 HIGHER ORDER RESOLVENT ESTIMATES 301

• Point (iii). Here we have

N k
(g, (sB + J-L)g) == ±~(g, Nt-g) - L (-l)(k+l)/2 ~! (g,Bkg)
k=3,5,7, ...

(only odd values of k contribute to the preceding sum, because the terms in z± (E)
containing even powers of E are self-adjoint and thus do not occur in ~Nt-). If N > 2
this leads to an additional term on the right-hand side of (6.43) of the form cs 3 ll9ll 2
for some constant c < c 1 . By absorbing this additional term in the left-hand side, it
follows that, for sufficiently small E, the inequality (6.43) remains true provided that
its left-hand side is replaced by (as+ M)llgll 2 /4. Then the bound on IIGc(A + iM)II in
(6.44) obtains an additional factor 2 (and this unimportant factor should be taken into
account whenever this bound is used further on). Also the value of Eo may be smaller
than in the earlier proof.
• Point (iv). This remains unchanged, in particular (6.45) holds.
• Point (v). This is handled somewhat differently. We set G~ ) == T-A-itt- isB 1
1

and then have [using the equation x- 1 - y- 1 == x- 1 (Y- X)Y- 1 ]:

N . k N . k
G == Q(1) - " ' ( -~s) G B Q(1) == Q(1) - " ' ( -~s) Q(1) B ~G (6.1 04)
E E ~ k! E k E E ~ k! E k E•
k=2 k=2

Now G~ ) is just the operator GE used in Section 6.2, so that by (6.48), (6.49) and
1

(6.35): IIG~ ) (I+ IAI)- 1 11

1
II (I IAI)- 1 G~ 1 ) II < cs- 112 for some constant c and
all E E (0, co) (with c independent of A and J-L). Furthermore Ek liCE II < 8/ a if k > 1
and 0 < E < Eo [see (6.44)], and IIBk II < c 1 . By using these inequalities one obtains
from (6.104) that

(6.1 05)

for some constant c, all E E (0, s 0 ), A E J 0 and /-IE (0, 1 ).

(2) The differential inequality
• Point (i). Using the identity ak- bk ==
(a-b) (ak- 1 + ak- 2 b + ... + abk- 2 + bk- 1 ),
with a == -iT, b == -is, a calculation as in (6.50) shows that
N · k-1
G E' :=
- de
dG
E :=
·"' (-~s)
1} ~ ( k - 1)!
GE B k GE • (6.1 06)
k=1

19
On the other hand, the analogue of Eq. (6.51) is here as follows:
N . k N k
i'L: (-~~) -iL (-~~)
.r-

[A,Gc] = -iGc:BlGc:- Gc:Bk+lGc: = Gc:Bk+lGc:.

k=1 k=O

Comparison with (6.106) leads to

G~ (>.. + i!J) = [Gc(>.. + i!J), A] - i (-;:( Gc:(A + i!J )BN +I Gc (>.. + ifJ). (6.107)
19 We observe that, as in §6.3.2, the operators Gs map V(A) into V(A).
302 THE CONJUGATE OPERATOR METHOD

We also need a formula for (d/ de) [Gc:]N. By the Leibniz rule this is as follows:
N-1
d~ (Gc)"'v = L (GEfc;(Gc)N-k-1
k=O
N-1 N-1
= L (Gc)k[Gc, A](Gc)N-k- 1- i (-;:( L (Gc)k+l BN+1(Gc)N-k
k=O k=O
N-1
== [(G )N A] -i(-ic)N "'(G )k+1B (G )N-k (6.108)
c ' N! ~ c N+1 c .
k=O
• Point (ii). We replace Xc: simply by I and set Z == (I+ IAI)- 1 . We deduce a
differential inequality for the B(H)-valued function E r---+ <Pc: :== zv (Gc: )Nzv. For this
we observe that

N-1
_zv[(G )N A]zu_i(-ic)N '"""'zu(G )k+1B (G )N-kzu (6.109)
c ' N! ~ c N+1 c .
k=O
Now, since IIAZII < 1:
IIZl/[(Gc:)N,A]Zl/11 < IIZU(Gc:)Nzu- 1 . AZII + IIAZ. zu- 1(Gc:)Nzull
< IIZu(Gc:)Nzu- 111 + llzu- 1(Gc:)Nzull· (6.110)
The norms on the last line are treated as follows by an interpolation argument. In
Example 6.33 set B == z- 1 andY == (Gc:)N. Then (6.134), for~== v, leads to the
following bound on the first norm in (6.11 0):
IIZU(Gc:)N zu-111 < IIZl/(Gc:)NZl/111-(1/v) 11Zl/(Gc:)NII1/u.
Now, by (6.105) and (6.44), we have for j > 1:
IIZl/ (Gc: )j II < IIZl/ Gc: IIIIGc: llj- 1 < CjE- 1/ 2 E-(j- 1) - Cj E-(j-( 1/ 2 )]
for some constant Cj. Consequently, taking j == N:
IIZu(Gc:)Nzu- 111 < CNE-(N-( 1/ 2 )]/ui1Zu(Gc:)Nzull 1-( 1/u)- CNE- 13 II<Pc:ll 8 ,
with j3 == [N- (1/2)]/v and 8 == 1 - (1/v); observe that /3,8 E (0, 1) because
v > N- (1/2). The same bound holds for the second norm on the last line of (6.110)
(use the same argument with Gc: replaced by G;).
We next estimate the last term in (6.109). Its norm is majorised by
N N-1
~! L IIZuCciiiiCcllkiiBN+1IIIICciiN-k- 1IICcZvll
k=O
 HIGHER ORDER RESOLVENT ESTIMATES 303

for some constant c. Thus (6.109) leads to the following differential inequality:

(6.111)

for some constant c, with p E (0, 1) and 6 E (0, 1).

(3) Boundary values
The preceding differential inequality is of the form (6.24 ), except that the exponent
6 of the fractional power of II <I>c: II may be different from 1/2 (but less than 1). By a
straightforward adjustment of the proof of (6.25) given in §6.2.1 one finds that (Prob-
lem 6.3)

for some constant c that is independent of A and p. As before, the preceding inequality
implies the existence of u -lim,u-t+O zv (T- A- ip,) -N zv, and one obtains a bound
of the form IIZv(T- A- i{l)-Nzvll <canst. for all A E J 0 and all p E [0, 1]. 0

Corollary 6.19. Under the hypothesis of Proposition 6.18 [in particular v > N -
(1/2)], the operator-valuedfunction A ~ (I+ !AI)-v(T- A- iO) 1 (I + IA!)-v
is N - 1 times continuously differentiable in nann on the interval ~l, and for k
1, 2, ... , N- 1 one has

(d~)k(J + IAI)-v(T- A- i0)- 1 ( / + IAI)-v

== k! (J + IAI)-v(T- A- iO)-(k+l)(I + IAI)-v. (6.112)

Here (I+ IAI)-v(T- A- iO)-r;,(I + IAI)-v is aformal notation for the operator
u-limc:~+o(I + IAI) vcc:(A + iO)K,(I + IAI)-v, with Gc:(z) defined in the preceding
proof

PROOF. For c 0, the operators zv G c: (A + iO) zv are infinitely differentiable (in

-1
norm) with respect to A, with (d/ dA)k zvcE (A+ iO)zv == k! zvcE (A+ iO)k+l zv.
As c---+ +0, the derivative kzvcc(A + iO)k+lzv of zvcc(A + iO)kzz/ converges
in norm to kzv(T- A- iO)-Ck+l)zv on each closed bounded subinterval J 0 of J,
provided that k E {1, 2, ... , N -1 }. By a standard result from analysis 20 , this implies
that zv(T- A- iO)-kzv is differentiable with respect to A (in the interior of J 0 ) and
that its derivative is kzv(T- A- iO)-Ck+l) zv. Since J 0 can be any bounded closed
subinterval of J, one obtains in particular (6.112). D

By proceeding as in Section 6.4, one can extend the results of Theoretn 6.18 and
Corollary 6.19 to unbounded operators H satisfying p( H) n JR. -1 0. As in §6.4.2,
this is done by setting T == (Ao - H) - l , with Ao E p( H). One has to know that the
multiple commutators of (Ao- H)- 1 with A (up to order N + 1) belong to B(H). For
H of the form H 0 + V( Q), this is ensured by suitably generalising the condition (C)
of page 288. A convenient condition, sufficient for our applications in Chapter 7, is
to assume that vis of class cN+l and that Tk(akv;ark) belongs to L~(IRn) for
20
Interchange of limits with derivatives; see for example §9 in Chapter V of [L].
304 THE CONJUGATE OPERATOR METHOD

k == 0, 1, 2, ... , N + 1. When repeating the arguments of §6.4.2, one arrives at the

following generalisation of (6.82):
(I+ IAI)-v(H- z)-k(I + IAI)-v
== (Ao- z)-k(I + IAI)-v [(T- (Ao - z)- 1 ] -k (I+ IAI)-v
X (I+ jAj)vTk(I + jAj)-v.
Here one has to know that (I+ IAI)vTk(I + IAI)-v E B(H) fork < Nand u >
N - (1/2). This is easily obtained by interpolation (Example 6.32) by using the fact
that T maps V(AN) into itself (see Problem 6.4).
Under suitable assumptions it is again possible to replace (I + IA I)- v on the left-
hand side of (6.112) by some other operator. In particular, if His a Schrodinger op-
erator, one can control the derivatives of (I + !Q!)-v (H - A i0)- 1 (I+ IQI)-v
and similar expressions if the potential decays sufficiently rapidly, as explained in the
following two propositions.
Proposition 6.20. Let k E N. Let U, W: JRn --+ C be two functions of the form
[w1 (x) + w2(x)](1 + ixi)-u with w1 E L 00 (1Rn) and w2 E LP(JRn)for some p satisfy-
ing p E (n, x) and p > 2, and with u > k + 1/2. Then the operator-valued function
A r-t W(Q)(Ho -A- i0)- 1 U(Q)* is k times continuously norm d(fferentiable on
(O,x).
PROOF. Given an interval J == (a, !3) with 0 < a < f3 < x, we choose a function
¢ E C 0 (JR) such that ¢(1-I) == 1 for all II in (a- c5, f3 + c5) for some c5 > 0. If S<z =1- 0,
we have [setting U == U(Q) and W == W(Q)]

W(Ho- z)- 1 U* == W¢(Ho)(Ho- z)- 1 ¢(Ho)U* + W[I- ¢(Ho) 2 ](Ho- z)- 1 U*.
(6.113)
The second term on the right-hand side may be written as

+ 1)- 1/ 2 ·[I- ¢(Ho) 2 ][I + (1 + z)(H0 - z)- 1] · (Ho + 1)- 112U*.

TiV(Ho
Since W(Ho + 1)-J/ 2 and U(Ho + 1)- 1 12 are bounded operators (see the proof of
Proposition 6.16) and since 1 -¢(II) 2 == 0 for II E (a- c5, (3 + c5), this term is infinitely
differentiable in norm in the domain { z E C I Rz E J}.
To treat the first term on the right-hand side of (6.113), we express it in the form
TiV¢(Ho)(I +D 2)u/ 2 ·(I +D 2 )-vi 2 (Ho -z)- 1 (I +D 2)-u/ 2 ·(I +D 2 )v1 2 ¢(Ho)U*.
The function Ar-t (I+ D 2 )-vi 2 (H0 - A-io)- 1 (I+ D 2 )-u/ 2 is k times continuously
norm differentiable on J by Corollary 6.19, and the closures of (I+ D 2 )v1 2 ¢(H0 )U*
and W ¢(H0 )(I + D 2 )vl 2 are bounded. 21 0
21
We have (I+ D 2 )1/1 2 ¢(Ho)U* =(I+ D 2 )1/1 2 cp(Ho)(I + IQI)-1/ ·(I+ IQI)l/(Ho + 1)- 1 U*,
with <p given by cp(p,) = (fJ, + 1)¢(p,). Now (I+ IQI)l/(Ho + 1)- 1 U* is bounded (see Exmnple 6.23).
For N EN, the operator DNcp(Ho)(I + IQI)-N is bounded, which is easily seen by commuting all of
the operators QJ occurring in DN through cp(Ho) and noticing that prn'tjJ(Ho) E B(7-l) if 1/J E C0 (I~)
(Problen1 6. 9). By interpolation one finds that (I+ D 2 ) u 12 cp( H o) (I+ IQ I) - 1 / is bounded for each v > 0
[takeR= (I+ IQI)- 2 N, X= cp(Ho) and S =(I+ D 2 )N in Proposition 6.17, with N > v/2].
 HIGHER ORDER RESOLVENT ESTIMATES 305

Proposition 6.21 . Let k E N. Assume that V: JR.n --+ JR. satisfies condition (C) of
page 288 and may be written in the form V(x) == [v 1 (x) + v 2(x)](1 + jxj)-K with
VI E L
00
(JR.n ), v2 E Lq (JR.n) for some q satisfying q E ( n/2, oo) and q > 1, and with
f{; > k + 1. Let == Ho + V( Q) and let U, W: JR.n --+ C be as in Proposition
6.20. Then the operator-valuedfunction A~ W(Q)(H- A- i0)- 1 U(Q)* is k times
continuously differentiable in norm on (0, oo) \ O"p(H).

PROOF. The proof can be made inductively in k by using the result of the preceding
proposition. We discuss the cases k == 1 and k == 2. We put Rz == (H z)- 1 and
R~ == (Ho- z)- 1 .
(i) Let k - 1. By differentiating the second resolvent equation Rz == R~ - R~VRz
we get [' == d / dz]:

Thus (I+ R~V)R~ == R~'(I- VRz). Since (I- RzV)(I + R~V) ==I (by the
second resolvent equation), we then obtain

R~ == (I- Rz V)(I + R~V)R~ == (I- Rz V)R~' (I-V Rz)· (6.114)

We choose f\;1 > 1/2, f\;2 > 3/2 with f\;1 + f\;2 - f{;, set v(x) == v1(i) + v 2 (x)
and factor the function V into V V 1V2, with V 1(x) == jv(x) j 1 12 (1 + lxi)-K: 1 and
V2(i) == jv(x)l 1 12 [signv(x)](1 + lxi)-K: 2 • Then we have by (6.114):

WR~U* == WR~'U*- WR~'V2 · V1RzU* WRz V1 · V2R~'U*

+ WRz V1 · V2R~'V2 · V1RzU*. (6.115)

Let J be a bounded closed interval in (0, oo )\O"p (H) and let z == A+ ic in Eq. (6.115),
with A E J and c > 0. By taking into account Proposition 6.16(b) [for the operators
of the form X 1 (Q)R-\+ic:X2 (Q)] as well as Proposition 6.20 [for those of the form
X 1 ( Q)R~~ic: X 2( Q)], one sees that the right-hand-side of (6.115), for z == A+ is, is
norm convergent as c --+ +0, and that the convergence is uniform in A on J. So both
WR.A+ic:U* and its derivative with respect to A are convergent as c--+ +0, uniformly
in A E J. This implies that the limit WR.A+ioU* is differentiable in norm, and that its
derivative is given by the right-hand side of (6.115) with z - A+ iO (see for example
Theorem 12 in §9, Chapter V of [L]). So A ~ WR.A+ioU* is continuously norm
differentiable on J.
(ii) Let k - 2. By differentiating (6.115) one gets

WR"u*-
z WR z0 "u*- WR z0 "VR z u*- WR z0 'VR'u*
z
0 0 0
- WR'VR
z z 'U*- WR z VR z "U* WR'VR
z z 'VR z U*
+ WRz VR~"VRzU* + WRz VR~'VR~U*. (6.116)

Each operator V occurring on the right-hand side is factored into V1 V2, with V1 (x) and
v2 (x) of the same form as in (i) above but with the exponents f\;1 andf\;2 depending on
the position of V. If V stands next to an operator R~', we take f\; 1 == f\; 2 == f\;/2 > 3/2
306 THE CONJUGATE OPERATOR METHOD

(so that for example WR~'V1 and V2 R~U* converge as z ---+ J). If V stands on the left
of an operator RzO", we take ~1 > 1/2 and ~2 > 5/2 (so that for example V2RzO" U *
has boundary values on J), and if V stands on the right of an operator R~' ', we take
f1: 1 > 5/2 and ~ 2 > 1/2. Then, as in (i), the right-hand side of (6.116), for z == A+ ic,
is norm convergent as c ---+ +0, uniformly in A on each bounded closed subinterval J
of (0, oo )\o-P (H). Hence A ~ WR{+iO U* is differentiable in norm, and its derivative
is given by the right-hand side of (6.116) with z == A+ iO. So A ~ WR.A+iO U* is
twice continuously norm differentiable on each J. D

6. 7 Some commutators

6 . 7 .1 . As mentioned in the introduction to this chapter, the evaluation of commutators

involving unbounded operators requires care. In the present section we illustrate this
by means of examples the results of which are quoted in the text. The Hilbert space is
1-{ == L 2(JRn ), and we shall use the notations (P) == (I+ P2)1 12, (Q) == (I+ Q2 ) 1 12
a
and o1 == 1ox) (j == 1, ... , n).

Example 6 . 22. In various situations one can proceed by using scalar products with
vectors belonging to a suitable dense set V, chosen such that the commutator makes
sense on V, and then taking into account domain properties to transfer the operators
to the other argument in the scalar product. As a simple example, let us prove that
[P1 ~ <p(Q)] == -i(8.7<p)(Q) on V(P1 ) if <pis of class C 1 with <p and its first order
derivatives Oj4J bounded. Note that we must show in particular that iff E V(Pj ), then
<p( Q)f E D(P_7 ).
(i) We first let g, hE S(JRn ). Then

(P1 h, <p(Q)g) - i(o1 h, <pg) == -i(h, 4Ja.79 )- i(h, (oj<p)g)

== (h' <p (Q) pj g) - i ( h' (8 j <p) (Q) g) '

where the second equality is obtained upon integrating by parts. Since <p (Q) Pj g and
(8.7 <p) (Q)g belong to the Hilbert space, this implies that <p( Q)g E V(Pj) [remem-
ber that Pj is essentially self-adjoint on S(JRn)] and that Pj<p(Q)g == <p(Q)Pjg-
i(o1 <p)(Q)g.
(ii) Now let f E V(P1 ) and take V == S(JRn). ForgE S(JRn) we find by using the
final result of (i) (with <p in place of <p) that

(Pj g, 4J (Q) f) == (4J (Q) P.i g, f) == (Pj 4J (Q) g, f) - i ( (8j 4J) (Q) g, f)
== (g, <p(Q)Pj.f) i(g, (oj<p)(Q).f).

As in (i), this implies that <p(Q)f E V(Pj) and Pj<p(Q).f == <p(Q)Pjf- i(oj<p)(Q)f,
which completes the proof.
By setting f == (I + IPj I) - 1 h in the last relation above, one finds that the operator
P.7 <p (Q) (I + IP1 I) 1 belongs to B (H). In the same way as above one can obtain the