Skip to content
Shadow Theory

The dissipative face and exact recovery

Contractions, Fejér transmission, exact carrier recovery, spectral budgets and Lambda profiles.

A full Fejér transmission at one positive time determines the dissipative generator exactly. A scalar budget or a compressed measurement supplies different information; this chapter tracks those distinctions.

5. The Dissipative / Lambda Face

We develop the first canonical functional-calculus face of KK. All objects are functions of KK alone.

5.1 Contraction semigroup and Fejér transmission

Definition 5.1. Contraction semigroup.

For K≥0K \ge 0 selfadjoint, St:=e−tK=∫0∞e−tλ dEK(λ)S_t := e^{-tK} = \int_0^\infty e^{-t\lambda}\, dE_K(\lambda), t≥0t \ge 0. (St)(S_t) is a strongly continuous semigroup of contractions, St=IS_t = I on ker⁡K\ker K.

Definition 5.2. Lambda / Fejér-averaged transmission.

For T>0T > 0,

ΛT(K)  :=  fT(K)  =  1−e−TKTK  =  1T∫0Te−tK dt.\Lambda_T(K) \;:=\; f_T(K) \;=\; \frac{1-e^{-TK}}{TK} \;=\; \frac{1}{T}\int_0^T e^{-tK}\, dt.

On ker⁡K\ker K, ΛT(K)\Lambda_T(K) is the identity. On Hdiss=(ker⁡K)⊥\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}= (\ker K)^\perp, nonzero point modes of KK are mapped into (0,1)(0,1). In general,

0≤ΛT(K)≤I,ker⁡ΛT(K)={0},0 \le \Lambda_T(K) \le I,\qquad \ker\Lambda_T(K) = \{0\},

but 00 or 11 may occur in the spectrum as non-eigen spectral/accumulation points when KK is unbounded or when 00 lies in the continuous spectrum of K∣HdissK|_{\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}}.

Proposition 5.3. Properties of ΛT\Lambda_T.

  1. ΛT(K)\Lambda_T(K) is bounded selfadjoint with 0≤ΛT(K)≤I0 \le \Lambda_T(K) \le I, and ker⁡ΛT(K)={0}\ker\Lambda_T(K) = \{0\}. It need not be bounded below when KK is unbounded.

  2. ΛT(K)∈W∗(K)\Lambda_T(K) \in W^*(K); commutes with KK.

  3. ΛT(K)→I\Lambda_T(K) \to I strongly as T↓0T \downarrow 0.

  4. ΛT(K)→Pker⁡K\Lambda_T(K) \to P_{\ker K} strongly as T→∞T \to \infty.

5.2 Exact recovery of the generator from the Lambda face

Theorem 5.4. Exact Fejér/Lambda recovery of the generator.

Fix T>0T>0 and define

fT(λ)  =  1−e−TλTλ,fT(0):=1.f_T(\lambda) \;=\; \frac{1-e^{-T\lambda}}{T\lambda},\qquad f_T(0):=1.

Then fT:[0,∞)→(0,1]f_T:[0,\infty)\to(0,1] is continuous, strictly decreasing, and Borel-invertible. Equivalently, it is a homeomorphism from [0,∞)[0,\infty) onto (0,1](0,1] with the subspace topology.

Let K≥0K\ge 0 be selfadjoint and set A:=ΛT(K)=fT(K)A := \Lambda_T(K) = f_T(K). Let ℓT:(0,1]→[0,∞)\ell_T:(0,1]\to[0,\infty) denote the inverse function of fTf_T, and extend it to a Borel function ψT:[0,1]→[0,∞)\psi_T:[0,1]\to[0,\infty) by assigning an arbitrary finite value at 00, e.g. ψT(0)=0\psi_T(0) = 0, and setting ψT(y)=ℓT(y)\psi_T(y) = \ell_T(y) for 0<y≤10 < y \le 1. Then

K  =  ψT(A).K \;=\; \psi_T(A).

Thus, with this harmless spectral convention at 00,

K  =  fT−1(ΛT(K)).K \;=\; f_T^{-1}(\Lambda_T(K)).

Moreover,

ker⁡K  =  ker⁡(I−ΛT(K)).\ker K \;=\; \ker(I - \Lambda_T(K)).

Consequently the stationary/dissipative splitting is recovered from the Lambda face alone:

H0  =  ker⁡K  =  EA({1})H,Hdiss  =  (ker⁡K)⊥  =  EA([0,1))H,\mathsf H_0\;=\; \ker K \;=\; E_A(\{1\})\mathsf H,\qquad \mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}\;=\; (\ker K)^\perp \;=\; E_A([0,1))\mathsf H,

where EAE_A is the spectral measure of A=ΛT(K)A = \Lambda_T(K).

Proof. The integral formula

fT(λ)  =  1T∫0Te−tλ dtf_T(\lambda) \;=\; \frac{1}{T}\int_0^T e^{-t\lambda}\,dt

holds for all λ≥0\lambda \ge 0, including λ=0\lambda = 0. Continuity follows from dominated convergence. If 0≤λ1<λ20 \le \lambda_1 < \lambda_2, then e−tλ2<e−tλ1e^{-t\lambda_2} < e^{-t\lambda_1} for every t∈(0,T]t \in (0,T], hence

fT(λ2)  =  1T∫0Te−tλ2 dt  <  1T∫0Te−tλ1 dt  =  fT(λ1).f_T(\lambda_2) \;=\; \frac{1}{T}\int_0^T e^{-t\lambda_2}\,dt \;<\; \frac{1}{T}\int_0^T e^{-t\lambda_1}\,dt \;=\; f_T(\lambda_1).

Thus fTf_T is strictly decreasing. Also fT(0)=1f_T(0) = 1, fT(λ)>0f_T(\lambda) > 0 for every finite λ≥0\lambda \ge 0, and lim⁡λ→∞fT(λ)=0\lim_{\lambda\to\infty}f_T(\lambda) = 0. Therefore fTf_T maps [0,∞)[0,\infty) bijectively onto (0,1](0,1]. Since it is continuous and strictly monotone, its inverse ℓT=fT−1:(0,1]→[0,∞)\ell_T = f_T^{-1}:(0,1]\to[0,\infty) is continuous, hence Borel.

Now let K≥0K \ge 0 be selfadjoint and let A=fT(K)A = f_T(K). By the spectral mapping and composition rules for the Borel functional calculus,

EA(B)  =  EK(fT−1(B))E_A(B) \;=\; E_K(f_T^{-1}(B))

for Borel sets B⊆[0,1]B \subseteq [0,1]. In particular,

EA({0})  =  EK(fT−1({0}))  =  EK(∅)  =  0.E_A(\{0\}) \;=\; E_K(f_T^{-1}(\{0\})) \;=\; E_K(\varnothing) \;=\; 0.

Thus the assigned value of ψT\psi_T at 00 is invisible to the functional calculus. Since (ψT∘fT)(λ)=λ(\psi_T \circ f_T)(\lambda) = \lambda for λ≥0\lambda \ge 0, the unbounded Borel functional calculus gives

ψT(A)  =  ψT(fT(K))  =  (ψT∘fT)(K)  =  K,\psi_T(A) \;=\; \psi_T(f_T(K)) \;=\; (\psi_T \circ f_T)(K) \;=\; K,

with equality of selfadjoint operators, including equality of domains.

For the kernel statement, since fT−1({1})={0}f_T^{-1}(\{1\}) = \{0\}, we have EA({1})=EK({0})E_A(\{1\}) = E_K(\{0\}). For a selfadjoint contraction AA, ker⁡(I−A)=EA({1})H\ker(I-A) = E_A(\{1\})\mathsf H, while ker⁡K=EK({0})H\ker K = E_K(\{0\})\mathsf H. Hence ker⁡(I−ΛT(K))=ker⁡K\ker(I - \Lambda_T(K)) = \ker K. The dissipative sector is the orthogonal complement of this stationary sector, equivalently

Hdiss  =  (ker⁡K)⊥  =  (I−EA({1}))H  =  EA([0,1))H.□\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}\;=\; (\ker K)^\perp \;=\; (I - E_A(\{1\}))\mathsf H\;=\; E_A([0,1))\mathsf H. \quad\square

 ◻

Corollary 5.5. Coherence recovery from the Lambda face.

Let K≥0K \ge 0 be selfadjoint, fix T>0T > 0, and set A:=ΛT(K)A := \Lambda_T(K). Let h:[0,∞)→Rh : [0,\infty)\to\mathbb R be a declared admissible coherence symbol. Then the coherent generator C=h(K)C = h(K) is determined by the Lambda face AA through

C  =  h(ψT(A))  =  (h∘ψT)(A),C \;=\; h\big(\psi_T(A)\big) \;=\; (h \circ \psi_T)(A),

where ψT\psi_T is the Borel inverse convention from Theorem 5.4. In particular, once hh is declared, the exact Lambda operator at one fixed scale determines the coherent functional-calculus face generated by h(K)h(K).

Proof. By Theorem 5.4, K=ψT(A)K = \psi_T(A). Applying the Borel functional calculus to the declared symbol hh gives h(K)=h(ψT(A))=(h∘ψT)(A)h(K) = h(\psi_T(A)) = (h \circ \psi_T)(A). The value of ψT\psi_T at 00 is again immaterial because EA({0})=0E_A(\{0\}) = 0. ◻

Theorem 5.4 is an exact operator-recovery statement from the full bounded operator ΛT(K)\Lambda_T(K) at a fixed scale. It is not a noisy finite empirical recovery theorem: finite samples, scalar determinants, matrix elements, or approximate readouts require separate inverse-problem and stability hypotheses. In particular, the inverse ψT\psi_T is unbounded near 00, so high-spectral recovery may be ill-conditioned without additional quantitative control.

5.3 The dissipative budget

Definition 5.6. Dissipative / lambda budget.

Under (D1)–(D2),

DT(K)  :=  −log⁡det⁡∗ ⁣(ΛT(K)∣Hdiss).\mathcal D_T(K) \;:=\; -\log\det\nolimits_*\!\big(\Lambda_T(K)\big|_{\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}}\big).

If Hdiss={0}\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}= \{0\}, we set DT(K)=0\mathcal D_T(K) = 0. For finite-rank KK with positive eigenvalues λ1,…,λr\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_r,

DT(K)  =  −∑j=1rlog⁡fT(λj)  =  ∑j=1rg(Tλj),g(s)=−log⁡ ⁣(1−e−ss).\mathcal D_T(K) \;=\; -\sum_{j=1}^r \log f_T(\lambda_j) \;=\; \sum_{j=1}^r g(T\lambda_j), \quad g(s) = -\log\!\Big(\tfrac{1-e^{-s}}{s}\Big).

Lemma 5.7. Fredholm determinant criterion and trace-log identity.

Let K≥0K\ge0 be selfadjoint, Kd=K∣HdissK_d=K|_{\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}}, and T>0T>0. Then

I−fT(Kd)∈L1(Hdiss)⟺Kd∈L1(Hdiss).I-f_T(K_d)\in\mathcal L^1(\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}) \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad K_d\in\mathcal L^1(\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}).

In either case KdK_d is bounded, fT(Kd)f_T(K_d) is bounded below by a positive constant, and

0≤I−fT(Kd)≤T2Kd,DT(K)=TrHdiss[−log⁡fT(Kd)]<∞.0\le I-f_T(K_d)\le \frac T2K_d, \qquad \mathcal D_T(K)=\mathop{\mathrm{Tr}}_{\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}}[-\log f_T(K_d)]<\infty.

The Fredholm condition at one positive scale therefore implies it at every positive scale.

Proof. Write rT(λ)=1−fT(λ)r_T(\lambda)=1-f_T(\lambda). From the time average,

rT(λ)=1T∫0T(1−e−tλ) dt≤Tλ2.r_T(\lambda)=\frac1T\int_0^T(1-e^{-t\lambda})\,dt \le\frac{T\lambda}{2}.

If KdK_d is trace class, positivity and heredity of the trace ideal show that rT(Kd)r_T(K_d) is trace class. Moreover KdK_d is bounded, and [−log⁡fT(λ)]/λ[-\log f_T(\lambda)]/\lambda extends continuously at zero with value T/2T/2. It is bounded on [0,∥Kd∥][0,\|K_d\|], so −log⁡fT(Kd)-\log f_T(K_d) is trace class as well.

Conversely suppose R=rT(Kd)R=r_T(K_d) is trace class. It is a positive compact contraction. Since ker⁡fT(Kd)=0\ker f_T(K_d)=0, the number one is not an eigenvalue of RR. Compactness implies ∥R∥<1\|R\|<1: otherwise the compact positive operator would have eigenvalue one. Hence fT(Kd)=I−R≥(1−∥R∥)If_T(K_d)=I-R\ge(1-\|R\|)I. As fT(λ)→0f_T(\lambda)\to0 at infinity, the spectral measure of KdK_d is supported in a bounded interval [0,M][0,M]. The function λ/rT(λ)\lambda/r_T(\lambda) extends continuously at zero with value 2/T2/T, so Kd≤cRK_d\le cR on this interval for a finite constant cc. Thus KdK_d is trace class. Also

0≤−log⁡(I−R)≤R1−∥R∥,0\le-\log(I-R)\le\frac{R}{1-\|R\|},

which gives trace class directly. The Fredholm determinant product for I−RI-R and the absolutely convergent sum of its logarithms yield

−log⁡det⁡∗(I−R)=∑j−log⁡fT(λj)=Tr[−log⁡fT(Kd)].-\log\det_*(I-R)=\sum_j-\log f_T(\lambda_j) =\mathop{\mathrm{Tr}}[-\log f_T(K_d)].

See [24] for the determinant identities used here. ◻

5.4 Asymptotic expansions

Proposition 5.8. Small-TT expansion.

Under (D1) with K 1K>0K\,\mathbf 1_{K>0} trace-class on Hdiss\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}},

DT(K)  =  T2 Tr(K 1K>0)  −  T224 Tr(K2 1K>0)  +  O(T3),T↓0.\mathcal D_T(K) \;=\; \frac{T}{2}\,\mathop{\mathrm{Tr}}(K\,\mathbf 1_{K>0}) \;-\; \frac{T^2}{24}\,\mathop{\mathrm{Tr}}(K^2\,\mathbf 1_{K>0}) \;+\; O(T^3),\quad T\downarrow 0.

Proof. The scalar expansion is g(s)=s/2−s2/24+O(s3)g(s)=s/2-s^2/24+O(s^3) near zero. Trace-class positivity implies that KdK_d is bounded and Kd3K_d^3 is trace class. On 0≤λ≤∥Kd∥0\le\lambda\le\|K_d\|, the scalar remainder is bounded by a constant times T3λ3T^3\lambda^3 for all sufficiently small TT. Summing the remainder proves the formula. ◻

Proposition 5.9. Large-TT expansion, finite rank.

For finite-rank KK with positive eigenvalues λ1,…,λr\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_r,

DT(K)  =  rlog⁡T  +  ∑j=1rlog⁡λj  +  o(1),T→∞.\mathcal D_T(K) \;=\; r\log T \;+\; \sum_{j=1}^r \log\lambda_j \;+\; o(1),\quad T\to\infty.

Proof. For every positive eigenvalue, g(Tλ)=log⁡T+log⁡λ−log⁡(1−e−Tλ)g(T\lambda)=\log T+\log\lambda-\log(1-e^{-T\lambda}). The last term tends to zero, and the sum is finite. ◻

5.5 Structural properties

Proposition 5.10. Structural properties of DT\mathcal D_T.

  1. Unitary invariance: DT(UKU∗)=DT(K)\mathcal D_T(UKU^*) = \mathcal D_T(K).

  2. Direct-sum additivity: DT(K1⊕K2)=DT(K1)+DT(K2)\mathcal D_T(K_1\oplus K_2) = \mathcal D_T(K_1) + \mathcal D_T(K_2).

  3. Spectral-measure dependence only.

  4. Strict monotonicity in TT when Hdiss≠{0}\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}}\ne\{0\} (since gg is strictly increasing).

  5. Spectral determinant form on finite rank.

Proof. Unitary covariance of the functional calculus gives invariance; Fredholm determinants multiply under direct sums, giving additivity. The spectral product gives the remaining dependence. Finally g′(s)=1/s−1/(es−1)>0g'(s)=1/s-1/(e^s-1)>0 for s>0s>0, since es>1+se^s>1+s. Every nonzero positive mode therefore increases its contribution with TT. ◻

5.6 The lambda profile

For a finite positive sector of rank r≥1r\ge1, define

λˉK:=1r∑jλj,NK(T)=1r∑j=1r[g(Tλj)−log⁡(Tλj)],N^K(τ)=NK(τ/λˉK).\bar\lambda_K := \tfrac{1}{r}\sum_j \lambda_j,\qquad \mathcal N_K(T) = \tfrac{1}{r}\sum_{j=1}^r [g(T\lambda_j) - \log(T\lambda_j)],\qquad \widehat{\mathcal N}_K(\tau) = \mathcal N_K(\tau/\bar\lambda_K).

5.7 Empirical spectral measures and Lambda distances

For finite-rank dissipative sector Hdiss\mathsf H_{\mathrm{diss}} with positive eigenvalues λ1,…,λr\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_r, define the empirical spectral measure

μK:=1r∑j=1rδλj.\mu_K := \frac{1}{r}\sum_{j=1}^r \delta_{\lambda_j}.

The rank-normalized Lambda profile may then be written as

NK(T)=∫[g(Tλ)−log⁡(Tλ)] dμK(λ).\mathcal N_K(T) = \int [g(T\lambda) - \log(T\lambda)]\,d\mu_K(\lambda).

Let λˉK=∫λ dμK(λ)\bar\lambda_K = \int\lambda\,d\mu_K(\lambda) and μ~K:=(λ↦λ/λˉK)#μK\widetilde\mu_K := (\lambda\mapsto\lambda/\bar\lambda_K)_\#\mu_K. The dimensionless profile is

N^K(τ)=∫[g(τx)−log⁡(τx)] dμ~K(x).\widehat{\mathcal N}_K(\tau) = \int [g(\tau x) - \log(\tau x)]\,d\widetilde\mu_K(x).

For a declared scale window I=[τ−,τ+]⊂(0,∞)I = [\tau_-,\tau_+]\subset(0,\infty), define the Lambda-profile distance

dΛ(K1,K2;I):=sup⁡τ∈I∣N^K1(τ)−N^K2(τ)∣.d_\Lambda(K_1,K_2;I) := \sup_{\tau\in I}\big|\widehat{\mathcal N}_{K_1}(\tau) - \widehat{\mathcal N}_{K_2}(\tau)\big|.

On compact spectral classes bounded away from 00, dΛd_\Lambda is Lipschitz controlled by Wasserstein-type distances between the normalized empirical spectral measures:

dΛ(K1,K2;I)≤CI W1(μ~K1,μ~K2),d_\Lambda(K_1,K_2;I) \le C_I\, W_1(\widetilde\mu_{K_1},\widetilde\mu_{K_2}),

where CIC_I depends on the declared spectral window and compact class. In fact, if both normalized measures are supported in [a,b]⊂(0,∞)[a,b]\subset(0,\infty), one may take CI=1/aC_I=1/a. To see this, put Fτ(x)=−log⁡(1−e−τx)F_\tau(x)=-\log(1-e^{-\tau x}). Then

∣Fτ′(x)∣=τeτx−1≤1x≤1a.|F_\tau'(x)|=\frac{\tau}{e^{\tau x}-1}\le\frac1x\le\frac1a.

For any coupling γ\gamma of the two measures, their profile difference is ∫(Fτ(x)−Fτ(y)) dγ(x,y)\int(F_\tau(x)-F_\tau(y))\,d\gamma(x,y), whose absolute value is at most a−1∫∣x−y∣ dγa^{-1}\int|x-y|\,d\gamma. Taking the infimum over couplings and the supremum over τ∈I\tau\in I proves the bound. Thus small Wasserstein perturbations of the normalized spectrum give small profile perturbations.

Proposition 5.11. Profile injectivity on compact positive spectral classes.

Let 0<a<b<∞0<a<b<\infty, and let μ1,μ2\mu_1,\mu_2 be finite positive Borel measures supported in [a,b][a,b]. If

∫[a,b]−log⁡(1−e−Tλ) dμ1(λ)  =  ∫[a,b]−log⁡(1−e−Tλ) dμ2(λ)for all T>0,\int_{[a,b]} -\log(1-e^{-T\lambda})\,d\mu_1(\lambda) \;=\; \int_{[a,b]} -\log(1-e^{-T\lambda})\,d\mu_2(\lambda) \qquad \text{for all }T>0,

then μ1=μ2\mu_1 = \mu_2.

Consequently, on compact positive spectral classes, the rank-normalized Lambda profile

NK(T)  =  ∫[g(Tλ)−log⁡(Tλ)] dμK(λ)  =  ∫−log⁡(1−e−Tλ) dμK(λ)\mathcal N_K(T) \;=\; \int [g(T\lambda) - \log(T\lambda)]\,d\mu_K(\lambda) \;=\; \int -\log(1-e^{-T\lambda})\,d\mu_K(\lambda)

determines the empirical spectral measure μK\mu_K. The dimensionless profile

N^K(τ)  =  ∫−log⁡(1−e−τx) dμ~K(x)\widehat{\mathcal N}_K(\tau) \;=\; \int -\log(1-e^{-\tau x})\,d\widetilde\mu_K(x)

determines the mean-normalized measure μ~K\widetilde\mu_K; it does not determine the absolute spectral scale unless λˉK\bar\lambda_K is also supplied.

Proof. This is Theorem B.1 in Appendix B. The identity

g(s)−log⁡s  =  −log⁡ ⁣(1−e−ss)−log⁡s  =  −log⁡(1−e−s)g(s) - \log s \;=\; -\log\!\Big(\tfrac{1-e^{-s}}{s}\Big) - \log s \;=\; -\log(1-e^{-s})

identifies the profile used here with the transform treated there. ◻

Proposition 5.11 is a compact-positive-support identifiability theorem. It applies to the declared finite-rank / compact-spectral setting and to compact spectral windows bounded away from 00. It does not assert that finitely many empirical samples of the profile determine an infinite-dimensional carrier, and it does not recover the absolute scale from the dimensionless profile without the mean scale λˉK\bar\lambda_K.

Published source: The Canonical Spectral-Curvature Field: A Unified Operator Origin for Coherence, Dissipation, and Spectral Budgets. Read the original PDF alongside the web treatment.