1: \documentclass[11pt]{sat}

2: 

3: \usepackage{amstext}

4: \usepackage{amsthm}

5: \usepackage{amsopn}

6: \usepackage{amsfonts}

7: \usepackage{amsmath}

8: \usepackage{amssymb}

9: \usepackage{amsfonts}

10: 

11: %\textwidth6.5truein

12: %\hoffset=-.5truein

13: %\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

14: %\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

15: %\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

16: 

17: %\theoremstyle{definition}

18: %\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}

19: %\newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}

20: %\newtheorem{xca}[theorem]{Exercise}

21: 

22: %\theoremstyle{remark}

23: %\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}

24: 

25: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

26: 

27: %\newtheorem{cor}[theorem]{Corollary}

28: %\newtheorem{lem}[theorem]{Lemma}

29: %\newtheorem{prop}[theorem]{Proposition}

30: %\newtheorem{defn}[theorem]{Definition}

31: %\newtheorem{rem}[theorem]{Remark}

32: %\newtheorem{ques}[theorem]{Question}

33: 

34: 

35: %\font\eightrm=cmr8

36: %\font\bbigbf=cmbx10 scaled \magstep2

37: %\font\bigbf=cmbx10 scaled\magstep1

38: %\abovedisplayskip=15pt plus 3pt minus 3pt

39: %\abovedisplayshortskip=10pt plus 3pt

40: %\belowdisplayskip=15pt plus 3pt minus 3pt

41: %\belowdisplayshortskip=10pt plus 3pt minus 2pt

42: 

43: 

44: \title{Polynomial Approximation and $\omega^r_\varphi  (f,t)$\\

45: Twenty Years Later}

46: \def\shorttitle{Polynomial Approximation}

47: 

48: \author{Z. Ditzian}

49: \def\shortauthor{Z. Ditzian}

50: 

51: \def\versiondate{16 September 2007}

52: 

53: \def\abstracttext{

54: About twenty years ago the measure of smoothness $\omega  ^r_\varphi

55:  (f,t)$ was introduced and related to the rate of polynomial

56: approximation. In this article we survey developments about this and

57: related concepts since that time.}

58: 

59: \def\MSCnumbers{41A10, 41A17, 41A25, 41A27, 41A30, 41A36, 41A40,

60: 41A50, 41A63, 26A15, 26B35, 26B05, 42C05, 26A51, 26A33, 46E35} % see http://www.ams.org/msc/

61: 

62: \def\keywords{Moduli of smoothness, $K$-functionals, realization

63: functionals, polynomial approximation,

64: direct and converse inequalities, Bernstein, Jackson, Marchaud,

65: Nikol'skii and Ul'yanov type inequalities.} % Insert keywords and/or phrases, if you like

66: 

67: 

68: \def\q{\quad}

69: \def\qed{\hfill $\square$}

70: \def\Qbar{\text{\sl Q\kern-.45em{\vrule height.63em width.05em

71: depth-.033em}}~}

72: \def\qbar{{{\scriptstyle Q}\kern-.45em{\vrule height.41em width.035em

73: depth-.03em}}~}

74: \def\Cbar{\text{\sl C\kern-.35em{\vrule height.63em width.05em

75: depth-.033em}}~}

76: \def\cbar{{{\scriptstyle C}\kern-.41em{\vrule height.42em width.035em

77: depth-.03em}}~}

78: \def\ibid{\hbox to .5truein{\hrulefill}}

79: \def\IH{\text{{\rm I}\kern-.13em{\rm H}}}

80: \def\Z{\Bbb Z}

81: %\def\z{{\scriptstyle{{\itsf z}\kern-.30em{\itsf z}}}}

82: \def\IR{\text{{\rm I}\kern-.13em{\rm R}}}

83: \def\pd#1#2{\frac{\partial#1}{\partial#2}}

84: \def\twoheaddown{\downarrow\kern-0.78em\raise0.25em\hbox{$\downarrow$}}

85: \def\headtaildown{\downarrow\kern-0.79em\raise 0.5em\hbox{$\ssize\curlyvee$}}

86: 

87: \def\vs{\vskip.3cm}

88: \def\vsk{\vskip.5cm}

89: \def\vvs{\vspace{2\jot}}

90: \def\noi{\noindent}

91: \def\npb{\nopagebreak}

92: \def\pr{\prime}

93: \def\bs{\backslash}

94: \def\adb{\allowdisplaybreaks}

95: \def\la{\langle}

96: \def\ra{\rangle}

97: \def\wt{\widetilde}

98: \def\wh{\widehat}

99: \def\ol{\overline}

100: \def\os{\overset}

101: \def\us{\underset}

102: \def\CN{{\cal N}}

103: \def\CA{{\cal A}}

104: \def\SD{{\cal D}}

105: \def\SO{{\cal O}}

106: \def\CR{{\cal R}}

107: \def\grad{\text{\rm grad}}

108: \def\Re{\text{\rm Re}}

109: \def\arg{\text{\rm arg}}

110: \def\loc{\ell\text{oc}}

111: \def\pv{\text{\rm P.V.}}

112: \def\sgn{\text{\rm sgn}}

113: \def\spa{\text{\rm span}}

114: 

115: \def\elra{\hbox to 2in{\rightarrowfill}}

116: \def\ella{\hbox to 2in{\leftarrowfill}}

117: \def\hrf{\hbox to 2in{\hrulefill}}

118: \def\hdotfill{\leaders\hbox to 1em{\hss .\hss}\hfill}

119: \def\bal{\pmb\alpha  }

120: \def\bbe{\pmb \beta  }

121: \def\bh{\pmb h}

122: \def\bk{\pmb k}

123: \def\bpi{\pmb \Pi}

124: \def\bR{\pmb R}

125: \def\bT{\pmb T}

126: \def\bu{\pmb u}

127: \def\bv{\pmb v}

128: \def\bx{\pmb x}

129: \def\bxi{\pmb \xi  }

130: \def\by{\pmb y}

131: \def\dim{\text{\rm dim}}

132: \def\AC{\text{\rm A.C.}}

133: 

134: \def\floor#1{\lfloor#1\rfloor}

135: 

136: \def\startpagenumber{106}

137: \def\volumenumber{3}

138: \def\year{2007}

139: 

140: 

141: \setcounter{page}{\startpagenumber}

142: \pagestyle{myheadings}

143: \newcommand{\beginddoc}{\begin{document}

144: \maketitle

145: \begin{abstract}

146: \abstracttext

147: \vskip1pt MSC: \MSCnumbers

148: \ifx\keywords\empty\else\vskip1pt keywords: \keywords\fi

149: \end{abstract}

150: \insert\footins{\scriptsize

151: \medskip

152: \baselineskip 8pt

153: \leftline{Surveys in Approximation Theory}

154: \leftline{Volume \volumenumber, \year. pp.~\thepage--\pageref{endpage}.}

155: \leftline{\copyright\ \year\ Surveys in Approximation Theory.}

156: \leftline{ISSN 1555-578X}

157: \leftline{All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.}

158: \smallskip

159: \par\allowbreak}

160: \tableofcontents}

161: \renewcommand\rightmark{\ifodd\thepage{\it \hfill\shorttitle\hfill}\else {\it \hfill\shortauthor\hfill}\fi}

162: \markboth{{\it \shortauthor}}{{\it \shorttitle}}

163: \markright{{\it \shorttitle}}

164: \def\endddoc{\label{endpage}\end{document}}

165: \date{{\small \versiondate}}

166: \setlength\oddsidemargin{0pc}

167: \setlength\evensidemargin{0pc}

168: \setlength\topmargin{0in}

169: \setlength\textwidth{6.5in}

170: \setlength\textheight{8.6in}

171: \beginddoc

172: 

173: \section{Introduction}\label{Sec1}

174: 

175: It was observed long ago (see \cite{Ni}) that for investigating the rate of

176: algebraic polynomial approximation the ordinary moduli of smoothness

177: are not completely satisfactory. For $C[-1,1]$ it was shown that

178: near the boundary the rate of pointwise approximation was better for

179: a given degree of smoothness than at other points such as those

180: further away from the boundary.  The model of the relation between

181: the ordinary moduli of smoothness and the rate of best trigonometric

182: approximation (i.e. direct and weak converse inequalities) could not

183: be followed.  Characterization of the class of functions for which

184: the rate of best polynomial approximation is prescribed cannot be

185: described by the ordinary moduli of smoothness.

186: 

187: About twenty years ago the moduli $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)$ were

188: introduced (see \cite{Di-To87}) to deal with this problem. There were other

189: attempts made, the most notable being the works of K.~Ivanov (see

190: \cite{Iv} for additional references) on the average moduli of smoothness.

191:  The measure of smoothness $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ on $[-1,1]$

192: (for example) is given by

193: \begin{equation}\label{Eq1.1}

194: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p = \;\sup_{\vert  h\vert  \le t}\, \Vert  \Delta  ^r_{h\varphi

195: }f\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}

196: \end{equation}

197: where

198: \begin{equation}\label{Eq1.2}

199: \Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  }f(x) =\begin{cases}

200: \overset r{\us{k=0}\sum}\; (-1)^k \binom {r}{k} f\big(x+(\frac r2

201: -k)h\varphi  (x)\big), \\

202: {}\q\q\q\q\q \text{\rm if}\q [x-\frac r2\, h\varphi  (x),x+\frac r2\,

203: h\varphi  (x)]\subset [-1,1]\\

204: \\

205: 0 \;\q\q\q\q\text{\rm otherwise,}

206: \end{cases}

207: \end{equation}

208: $\varphi  (x)^2 = 1-x^2$ and

209: $$

210: \Vert  g\Vert _{L _p[a,b]} = \Big\{\int^b_a \vert  g(x)\vert  ^p

211: dx\Big\}^{1/p}, \q p<\infty;  \q\q\q \Vert  g\Vert  _{L_\infty[a,b]}  =\us{a\le

212: x\le b}{\text{\rm ess sup}} \;\vert  g(x)\vert  .

213: $$

214: 

215: Many properties of $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ and

216: related measures were studied in \cite{Di-To87} as well as the basic relation with

217: polynomial approximation.  In the last two decades numerous articles

218: were written using $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)$ or competing with it.

219:  In this paper I will give a

220: survey of what I believe to be the main advances made in the last

221: twenty years connecting the rate of approximation of functions by

222: algebraic polynomials with measures of smoothness of these functions.

223: In \cite{Di-To87} the ``step weight'' function $\varphi  $

224: was just a function satisfying very mild conditions. Here $\varphi

225: $ will be a function that is directly used in applications to

226: approximation and in particular to polynomial approximation and to

227: some common linear processes.  Unless otherwise specified, when we

228: write $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p,$ we assume the definition in

229: (\ref{Eq1.1}) and (\ref{Eq1.2}) on $[-1,1]$ but we will deal also with related

230: concepts as well as other domains and ``step weights'' $\varphi  .$

231: 

232: We will be discussing relations among different concepts of

233: smoothness which include $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t),$ various

234: $K$-functionals, realization functionals, rate of best

235: approximation, strong converse inequalities as well as the $\tau  $

236: modulus by Ivanov, moduli given by generalized translations and

237: others.  Results on the rate of weighted and multivariate polynomial

238: approximation in relation to various measures of smoothness will also

239: be described.

240: 

241: The topics are itemized in the Contents (at the

242: beginning);

243: however, inevitably some remarks

244: relating to one topic may appear in a section dedicated to another.

245: In particular, when a concept or result is introduced in some section, its

246: relation to items in later sections will be presented in those

247: sections.

248: 

249: 

250: \section{Jackson-type estimates}\label{Sec2}

251: 

252: It is well-known that for $L_p(T),$ where $T$ is the ``circle''

253: $[-\pi,\pi]$ and

254: $0<p\le \infty  $,

255: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.1}

256: %E^*_n(f)_{L_p(T)} \equiv E^*_n(f)_p \le C\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_{L_p(T)}

257: E^*_n(f)_p \equiv E^*_n(f)_{L_p(T)} \le C\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_{L_p(T)}

258: \end{equation}

259: where

260: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.2}

261: E^*_n(f)_{L_p(T)} = \,\text{\rm inf}\, (\Vert  f-T_n\Vert

262: _{L_p(T)}:T_n\in {\pmb{\cal T}}  _n),

263: \end{equation}

264: %${\pmb{\cal T}}  _n =\;\text{\rm span}\, \{e^{ikx}:\vert k\vert  <

265:  ${\pmb{\cal T}}  _n \equiv\;\text{\rm span}\, \{e^{ikx}:\vert k\vert  <

266: n\}$ is the set of trigonometric polynomials of degree less than $n$

267: for $n=1,2,\dots$,

268: and

269: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.3}

270: \begin{aligned}

271: \omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(T)} &= \us{\vert  h\vert\le t}\sup\;\Vert

272: \Delta  ^r_h f\Vert  _{L_p(T)}, \\

273: \Delta  ^r_h f(x) &=\sum^r_{k=0}

274: (-1)^k\binom{r}{k} f\Big(x+\big(\frac r2-k\big)h\Big),

275: \end{aligned}

276: \end{equation}

277: for $r=0,1,2,\dots$ are the ordinary $L_p$ moduli of smoothness.

278: In fact (\ref{Eq2.1}) is valid also if $L_p(T)$ is replaced by a

279: Banach space $B$ of functions on $T$

280: satisfying

281: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.4}

282: \Vert  f(\cdot + a)\Vert  _B = \Vert  f(\cdot)\Vert  _B \q\q \forall

283: \; a \in \IR

284: \end{equation}

285: and

286: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.5}

287: \Vert  f(\cdot + h) -f(\cdot)\Vert  _B = o(1), \q h\to 0 ;

288: \end{equation}

289: that is,

290: $$

291: E^*_n(f)_B = \;\text{\rm inf}\, (\Vert  f-T_n\Vert  _B:T_n\in

292: {\pmb{\cal T}}

293: _n)\le C\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_B \eqno(2.1)^\pr

294: $$

295: where $E^*_n(f)_B$ and $\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_B$ are given by

296: (\ref{Eq2.2}) and (\ref{Eq2.3}) with $B$ replacing $L_p(T).$  (See

297: Appendix for a proof of $(2.1)^\pr.)$

298: 

299: 

300: For $L_p[-1,1],$ $1\le p\le \infty , $ it was proved in \cite[Theorem

301: 7.2.1]{Di-To87} that

302: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.6}

303: E_n(f)_p\equiv E_n(f)_{L_p[-1,1]} \le C\omega  ^r_\varphi

304: (f,1/n)_{L_p[-1,1]}

305: \end{equation}

306: where

307: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.7}

308: E_n(f)_{L_p[-1,1]} = \;\text{\rm inf}\, (\Vert  f-P_n\Vert

309: _{L_p[-1,1]} :P_n\in {\Pi}_n),

310: \end{equation}

311:  ${\Pi}_n \equiv\;\text{\rm span}\, (1,x,\dots,x^{n-1})$ is the

312: set of algebraic polynomials of degree at most $n-1$

313: and $\omega

314: ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ is given by (\ref{Eq1.1}) and (\ref{Eq1.2}).

315: 

316: DeVore, Leviatan and Yu \cite[Theorem 1.1]{De-Le-Yu} showed that

317: (\ref{Eq2.6}) is valid for $0<p<1$ as well.  The method of their

318: proof uses a Whitney-type estimate by polynomials of degree $r-1$

319: and ``patching'' them up by polynomials of degree $n$ that form a

320: partition of unity, (see also the remark in \cite[p.~74]{Di-Hr-Iv}

321: about the necessity of Lemma~5.2 there for their proof). This

322: type of argument is used in \cite{De-Lo} to prove the result for

323: $1\le p\le \infty  $ as well.

324: 

325: For $L_p[-1,1]$ and other spaces a Jackson-type estimate using a

326: measure of smoothness given by a $K$-functional which is not always

327: equivalent to $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)$ but is still optimal (in

328: the same sense) will be discussed in Section \ref{Sec4}.  However,

329: (\ref{Eq2.6}) was not extended to a form which follows $(2.1)^\pr.$

330: That is, we do not have (\ref{Eq2.6}) with $B$ (satisfying some

331: general conditions) replacing $L_p[-1,1].$

332: 

333: It was proved by M. Timan [Ti,M,58] that for trigonometric

334: polynomials a sharper (than (\ref{Eq2.1})) Jackson-type inequality holds,

335: i.e. for $E^*_k(f)_p$ of (\ref{Eq2.2})

336: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.8}

337: \begin{gathered}

338: n^{-r}\Big\{\sum^n_{k=0} k^{sr-1} E^*_k(f)^s_p\Big\}^{1/s} \le

339: C(r,s,p)\omega  ^r(f,n^{-1})_p, \\

340: s=\max(p,2), \q 1<p<\infty  .

341: \end{gathered}

342: \end{equation}

343: This result, which is best possible for $1<p<\infty  ,$ has rarely

344: been cited in literature in the English language

345: and I could find it only in a text by Trigub and Belinsky

346: \cite[p.~191, 4.8.8]{Tr-Be} (and there without proof and with

347: $n^{-r}$ missing on the left of ({\ref{Eq2.8})).

348: 

349: Recently, an analogue of this result was proved in \cite{Da-Di-Ti},

350: that is

351: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.9}

352: \begin{gathered}

353: n^{-r}\Big\{\sum^n_{k=r} k^{sr-1}E_k(f)^s_p\Big\}^{1/s}

354: \le C(r,s,p)\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,n^{-1})_p,\\

355: s = \max (p,2), \q 1<p<\infty

356: \end{gathered}

357: \end{equation}

358: where $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ and $E_k(f)_p$ are given in

359: (\ref{Eq1.1}) and (\ref{Eq2.7}).

360: 

361: We note that in \cite{Da-Di-Ti} (\ref{Eq2.9}) is just one of many

362: related formulae and the treatment in \cite{Da-Di-Ti} uses best

363: approximation by various systems of functions and various measures

364: of smoothness.

365: 

366: We also note that for $1<p<\infty  $ (\ref{Eq2.9}) was shown in

367: \cite{Da-Di-Ti}

368: to be

369: equivalent to

370: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.10}

371: t^r\Big\{\int^{1/2}_t\, \frac{\omega  ^{r+1}_\varphi

372: (f,u)^s_p}{u^{sr+1}}\;du\Big\}^{1/s}\le C\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p,

373: \end{equation}

374: for $1<p<\infty  $ and $s=\max\,(p,2).$

375: 

376: Examples were given in \cite[Section 10]{Da-Di-Ti} to show that (as

377: far as $s$ is concerned) the inequalities (\ref{Eq2.9}) and

378: (\ref{Eq2.10}) are optimal for $1<p<\infty  .$

379: 

380: The inequality

381: (\ref{Eq2.10}) is sharper than the inequality

382: \begin{equation}\label{Eq2.11}

383: \omega  ^{r+1}_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le C\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p

384: \end{equation}

385: for the range $1<p<\infty  .$  The inequality (\ref{Eq2.11}),

386: however, is valid for the bigger range $0<p\le \infty$ (see \cite

387: [Chapter 7]{Di-To87} and \cite{Di-Hr-Iv}).

388: 

389: 

390: \section{$K$-functionals}\label{Sec3}

391: As an alternative to $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)$ one can measure

392: smoothness using $K\text{-functionals}.$

393: 

394: It was shown in \cite[Theorem 2.1.1]{Di-To87} (not just for the case

395: $\varphi  (x)^2=1-x^2)$ that

396: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.1}

397: K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p\approx \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p, \q 1\le

398: p\le \infty,

399: \end{equation}

400: that is

401: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.2}

402: C^{-1}K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p\le \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le

403: CK_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p, \q 1\le p\le\infty  ,

404: \end{equation}

405: where

406: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.3}

407: K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p = \inf\big(\big\Vert  f-g\big\Vert

408: _{L_p[-1,1]} + t^r\big\Vert  \varphi  ^rg^{(r)}\big\Vert

409: _{L_p[-1,1]}: g,\dots, g^{(r-1)}\in A.C._{\ell\text{\rm oc}}\big).

410: \end{equation}

411: In fact, it is known that in (\ref{Eq3.3}) $g,\dots, g^{(r-1)}\in

412: A.C._{\ell\text{\rm oc}}$ can be further restricted using instead $g\in C^r[-1,1]$ or

413: even $g\in C^\infty  [-1,1]$ without any effect on (\ref{Eq3.1}).

414: One could have observed that $g\in C^r[-1,1]$ is sufficient

415: already from the proof in \cite{Di-To87}.  That it is sufficient to

416: consider $g$ in the class $C^\infty  [-1,1]$ follows from the

417: realization results mentioned in Section \ref{Sec5}.  We note also

418: that for $p=\infty  $ the result is of significance only when $f\in

419: C[-1,1]$ as otherwise neither side of (\ref{Eq3.1}) is small when

420: $t$ is.

421: 

422: For the well-studied analogue on the circle $T$ one has

423: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.4}

424: \omega  ^r(f,t)_B\approx \inf \big(\big\Vert  f-g\big\Vert  _B +

425: t^r\big\Vert  g^{(r)}\big\Vert  _B:\,g^{(r)}\in B\big) =

426: K_r(f,t^r)_B

427: \end{equation}

428: where $B$ is any Banach space of functions on $T$ in which

429: translations are  continuous isometries, that is  translations

430: satisfy (\ref{Eq2.5}) and (\ref{Eq2.4}) respectively.

431: The notation $g^{(r)} \in B$ means that the $r\text{\rm -th}$ derivative in

432: ${\cal S}^\pr$ (the space of tempered distributions) is in $B.$

433: 

434: We will often use the notation $A(t)\approx B(t)$ and, following

435: (\ref{Eq3.2}), we mean $C^{-1}B(t)\le A(t)\le CB(t)$ for all relevant

436: $t.$

437: 

438: We do not have

439: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.5}

440: K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_B\approx \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_B

441: \end{equation}

442: where $\Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}$ is replaced by $\Vert  f\Vert

443: _B$ for a ``general'' Banach space on $[-1,1].$

444: 

445: For an Orlicz space

446: of functions on $[-1,1]$ this was done in \cite{Wa} in his thesis in

447: Chinese (and I believe also earlier).  Not being able to read that

448: work, I cannot describe it.  I learned about it from its

449: extension to the multivariate situation in \cite{Zh-Ca-Xu} where the

450: univariate case is taken for granted.

451: 

452: In the next section different

453: but related $K\text{-functionals}$ will be described for which the

454: treatment for various spaces is given.

455: 

456: %For $L_p[-1,1]$ when $0<p<1$ it was shown \cite{Di-Hr-Iv} that for

457: For $L_p[-1,1]$ when $0<p<1$ it was shown in \cite{Di-Hr-Iv} that for

458: all $f$ in $L_p[-1,1],$ \; $0<p<1,$

459: \begin{equation}\label{Eq3.7}

460: K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p = 0

461: \end{equation}

462: where $K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p$ is defined by (\ref{Eq3.3}) with

463: the quasinorm $\Vert  \cdot\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}.$ The proof in

464: \cite{Di-Hr-Iv} is univariate and local and applies to the circle

465: $T$ as well, that is

466: $$

467: f\in L_p

468: (T) \q\text{\rm implies}\q

469: K_r(f,t^r)_p = 0 \q\text{\rm for}\q 0<p<1. \eqno(3.6)^\pr

470: $$

471: 

472: The identity (\ref{Eq3.7}) implies that we cannot have (\ref{Eq3.2})

473: for $0<p<1$ as $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ is not always zero.

474: (Clearly, $\vert  x\vert  \in L_p[-1,1]$ and $\omega  _\varphi

475: (f,t)_p\equiv \omega  ^1_\varphi  (f,t)_p\ne 0.)$ Even before

476: (\ref{Eq3.7}) was proved, it was

477: clear that $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ cannot be equivalent to

478: $K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p$ when $0<p<1,$ as the saturation rate of

479: $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ is $O(t^{r-1+\frac 1p}

480: )$ for that

481: range and $K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p$ as a $K$-functional

482: cannot tend to zero at a rate

483: faster than $t^r$ unless it equals $0.$

484: 

485: 

486: \section{$K$-functionals (second approach)}\label{Sec4}

487: 

488: For a Banach space $B$ of functions on domain $\SD$ and a

489: differential operator $P_r(D)$ of degree $r$ we define the

490: $K\text{\rm -functional}$

491: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.1}

492: K_{rm}\big(f,P_r(D)^m,t^{rm}\big)_B\equiv \inf \big(\Vert  f-g\Vert

493: _B + t^{rm}\Vert  P_r(D)^mg\Vert  _B: P_r(D)^mg\in B\big).

494: \end{equation}

495: One can assume $P_r(D)^mg $ is defined as a distributional derivative,

496: and in most cases we deal with we may assume $g\in C^{rm}(\SD)$

497: without changing the asymptotic behaviour of

498: $K_{rm}\big(f,P_r(D)^m,t^{km}\big)_B$ given in (\ref{Eq4.1}). The

499: $K\text{\rm -functional}$ $K_{r,\varphi  }(f,t^r)_p$ of (\ref{Eq3.3}) is

500: $K_r\big(f,P_r(D),t^r\big)_p$ with $P_r(D) = \varphi

501: ^r\big(\frac{d}{dx}\big)^r$ on $L_p[-1,1].$  In relation to

502: polynomials on $[-1,1]$ it is natural to study the $K\text{\rm

503: -functional}$

504: given in (\ref{Eq4.1}) with $P_2(D) =\frac{d}{dx}\,

505: (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,.$ It was essentially shown in \cite[Theorem

506: 5.1]{Ch-Di94}, using a maximal function estimate, that

507: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.2}

508: K_{2,\varphi  }(f,t^{2})_{L_p[-1,1]} \le

509: CK_{2}\Big(f,\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}, t^2\Big)_{L_p[-1,1]}\q\text{\rm for}\q 1<p\le \infty  .

510: \end{equation}

511: It follows from \cite[Chapter 9, 135-6]{Di-To87} which uses

512:  the Hardy inequality, that for $1\le p <\infty  $

513: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.3}

514: K_{2r}\Big(f,\big(\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,\big)^r, t^{2r}\Big)

515: _{L_p[-1,1]} \le CK_{2r,\varphi  }(f,t^{2r})_p + t^{2r}

516: E_1 (f)_p\,.

517: \end{equation}

518: %It can easily be deduced from \cite[Thoerem 7.1]{Da-Di05} that

519: It can easily be deduced from \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Da-Di05} that

520: for $1<p<\infty  $

521: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.4}

522: K_{2r}\Big(f,\big(\frac{d}{dx}\,

523: (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^r,t^{2r}\Big)_{L_p[-1,1]} \approx

524: K_{2r,\varphi  }(f,t^{2r})_p + t^{2r} E_1(f)_p\,.

525: \end{equation}

526: For $p=1$ and $p=\infty  $ (\ref{Eq4.4}) does not hold, as shown in

527: \cite[Remark 7.9, p.88]{Da-Di05}.

528: 

529: We observe that for $r=1$ (\ref{Eq4.4}) is a corollary of

530: (\ref{Eq4.2}) and (\ref{Eq4.3}), whose proof is more elementary.

531: (It does not use the Muckenhoupt transplantation theorem nor the

532: H\"ormander-type multiplier theorem used for the proof of

533: \cite[Theorem7.1]{Da-Di05}.)  It would be nice if we had a proof for

534: (\ref{Eq4.2}) with $2$ replaced by $2r$ and could deduce

535: (\ref{Eq4.4}) directly from it and (\ref{Eq4.3}).

536: 

537: For an orthonormal sequence of functions $\{\varphi  _n\}$ on some

538: set $D$ the

539: Ces\`aro summability of order $\ell$ is given by

540: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.5}

541: C^\ell_n(f,x) =\sum^n_{k=0} \,\Big(1-\frac{k}{n+1}\Big)\cdots

542: \Big(1-\frac{k}{n+\ell}\Big)P_k(f,x)

543: \end{equation}

544: where the $(L_2$ type) projection $P_kf$ is given by

545: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.6}

546: P_k(f,x) = \varphi  _k(x)\int_D \varphi  _k(y)f(y)dy.

547: \end{equation}

548: Here $D = [-1,1]$ and $\varphi  _k(x)$ are the eigenvectors of

549: $\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}$ satisfying

550: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.7}

551: \frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,\varphi  _k (x) =

552: -k(k+1)\varphi  _k(x), \q \int^1_{-1} \varphi  _k(x)\varphi  _\ell

553: (x)dx = \begin{cases} 0, &k\ne \ell,\\ 1, &k=\ell.\end{cases}

554: \end{equation}

555: In later sections we deal with weights in (\ref{Eq4.6}) and

556: (\ref{Eq4.7}) when we discuss progress made for measures of

557: smoothness and polynomial approximation in weighted $L_p$ and in

558: other related Banach spaces. Furthermore, it will be crucial to

559: examine (\ref{Eq4.5}) when the projection is on a finite dimensional

560: orthonormal space which is needed for the multivariate situation

561: (and has the precedent of projection on $\text{span}\,(\sin

562: kx,\,\cos kx)).$

563: 

564: The Legendre operator $\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}$ has as

565: eigenvectors the Legendre orthogonal polynomials.  It was shown

566: in \cite[Theorem 4.1 and (6.13)]{Ch-Di97} and \cite{Di98} that for $B$ a Banach space of

567: functions on $[-1,1]$ for which

568: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.8}

569: \Vert  C^\ell _n (f,\cdot)\Vert  _B\le C\Vert  f\Vert  _B

570: \end{equation}

571: is satisfied for some $\ell,$ one has

572: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.9}

573: E_n(f) _B =\underset{P\in \Pi_n}\inf\;\Vert  f-P\Vert  _B \le

574: CK_{2r}\Big(f,\big(\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^r,t^{2r}

575: \Big)_B.

576: \end{equation}

577: 

578: It is known that $B= L_p[-1,1]$ satisfies (\ref{Eq4.8}) (see for

579: discussion and references of more general results \cite[Theorem A,

580: page 190]{Ch-Di97})

581: and perhaps this

582: should be an incentive to investigate for which class of Banach

583: spaces (\ref{Eq4.8}) is valid (with respect to eigenfunctions of

584: $\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}),$ and hence imply

585: (\ref{Eq4.9}) which is a Jackson-type result for a different measure

586: of smoothness.

587: 

588: For $\alpha  >0,$ the operator

589: $\big(-\;\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha  g$ is

590: defined by

591: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.10}

592: \Big(-\;\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}\Big)^\alpha  g\sim

593: \sum^\infty  _{k=1} \lambda  (k)^\alpha  P_k g, \q \lambda  (k) =

594: k(k+1)

595: \end{equation}

596: 

597: and we say $\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}

598: \,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha  g\in B$ if there exists a

599: function $G_\alpha  \in B$ which satisfies $P_k G_\alpha  = \lambda

600: (k)^\alpha  P_kg.$

601: We may define the $K\text{\rm -functional}$ (see \cite[p.~324]{Di98}) by

602: %\begin{equation}\label{Eq4.10}

603: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.11}

604: K_{2\alpha  }\Big(f,\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

605: (1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx  }\big)^\alpha  ,t^{2\alpha  }\Big)_B =

606: \inf\, \Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _B + t^{2\alpha  }\Big\Vert

607: \big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha  g\Big\Vert

608: _B\Big)

609: \end{equation}

610: where the infimum is taken on $g$ such that $g\in B$ and

611: $\big(-\frac{d}{dx}(1-x^2)\frac{d}{dx} g\big)^\alpha  \in

612: %B.$  For integer $r$ (\ref{Eq4.10}) and (\ref{Eq4.1}) with $P_r(D)

613: B.$  For integer $\alpha=r$, (\ref{Eq4.11}) and (\ref{Eq4.1}) with $P_r(D)

614: =\big(\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}\big)^r$ are the same

615: concept.  In \cite[Theorem 6.1]{Di98} it was shown for $B$ such

616: that (\ref{Eq4.8}) is satisfied that

617: %\begin{equation}\label{Eq4.11}

618: \begin{equation}\label{Eq4.12}

619: E_n (f)_B \le CK_{2\alpha

620: }\Big(f,\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha

621: ,1/n^{2\alpha  }\Big)_B.

622: \end{equation}

623: 

624: \section{Realization}\label{Sec5}

625: Realization functionals were introduced by Hristov and Ivanov

626: \cite{Hr-Iv} in order to characterize $K$-functionals.  As it

627: happened, this concept gained in usefulness when it was observed

628: that certain $K$-functionals are always equal to zero for $0<p<1$

629: (see (\ref{Eq3.7}) or $(3.6)^\pr),$ and one needs an expression that

630: will replace the $K$-functional and will yield a meaningful measure

631: of smoothness for all $0<p\le \infty  .$  Realization functionals

632: were shown in \cite{Di-Hr-Iv} to be such a concept.  It is a

633: mistake, however, to think that realizations are useful only for

634: $0<p<1.$  Many articles, starting with \cite{Hr-Iv}, utilized

635: properties of realizations for various applications.  We will

636: present here realization-functionals that are measures of smoothness

637: related to polynomial approximation and $\omega  ^r_\varphi

638: (f,t)_p\,.$

639: 

640: The most common realization related to $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$

641: is

642: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.1}

643: R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p = \Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]} +

644: n^{-r}\Vert  \varphi  ^r P^{(r)}_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}

645: \end{equation}

646: where $P_n\in \Pi_n$ is the best polynomial approximant from

647: $\Pi_n$ to $f$ in $L_p,$ that is

648: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.2}

649: E_n(f)_p = \us{P\in \Pi_n}{\text{\rm inf}} \; \Vert  f-P\Vert

650: _{L_p[-1,1]} = \Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]},\qquad P_n\in \Pi_n

651: \end{equation}

652: or a near best polynomial approximant

653: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.3}

654: \Vert  f-P_n\Vert_{L_p[-1,1]} \le AE_n(f)_p,\qquad P_n\in \Pi_n

655: \end{equation}

656: with $A$ independent of $n$ and $f.$  Sometimes it is convenient to

657: use $P_n$ as a polynomial of degree $mn$ which satisfies

658: (\ref{Eq5.3}).  A particularly convenient polynomial of this nature

659: for $1\le p\le \infty  $ is the de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type operator

660: on $f$ given by

661: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.4}

662: \eta  _n f =\sum^{2n}_{k=0}\eta  \Big(\frac kn\Big)P_kf

663: \end{equation}

664: where $P_kf$ is given by (\ref{Eq4.6}) and (\ref{Eq4.7}), $\eta

665: (y)\in C^\infty  [0,\infty  ),$ $\eta  (y)=1$ for $y\le 1$ and $\eta

666:  (y) =0$ for $y\ge 2.$  Clearly, $\eta  _n f\in \Pi_{2n},$ $\eta

667: % now \Pi_n seems to denote pols of degree \le n

668: _nP=P$ for $P\in \Pi_n,$ and it is known that $\Vert  \eta  _n

669: f\Vert  _p \le C\Vert  f\Vert  _p$ for $1\le p\le \infty  .$

670: The inequality $\Vert \eta  _nf\Vert  _B \le C\Vert  f\Vert  _B$ for

671: $B= L_p[-1,1]$ (and in fact for any $B$ satisfying (\ref{Eq4.8}))

672: follows the same method used in \cite[p.~192]{Ch-Di97} and

673: \cite[p.~326--327]{Di98} (using the Abel tranformation and $P_k f =

674: \os\leftarrow\Delta  ^{\ell+1} \begin{binom}{k+\ell}{\ell}\end{binom} C^\ell_k f$

675: where $\os\leftarrow\Delta  a_k = a_k - a_{k-1}$ and

676: $\os\leftarrow\Delta  ^m a_k = \os\leftarrow\Delta

677: \,(\os\leftarrow\Delta  ^{m-1}a_k)).$  Other de~la~Vall\'ee

678: Poussin-type operators (or delayed means) were also used for

679: realizations (see for instance \cite{Ch-Di97} and \cite{Di98}.

680: The

681: advantage of using a de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type operator (in some

682: form) over using the best approximant is threefold: it is given by a

683: linear operator, it is often independent of $1\le p\le

684: \infty , $ and it commutes with the differential operator

685: $\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}\,.$

686: 

687: We can also define (as was originally done)

688: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.5}

689: R^*_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p = \us{P\in \Pi_n}{\text{\rm

690: % pols of degree \le n or <  n?

691: inf}}\;\big(\Vert  f-P\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]} + n^{-r}\Vert  \varphi  ^r

692: P^{(r)}\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}\big).

693: \end{equation}

694: 

695: It is known and easy to show that (\ref{Eq5.1}) with $P_n$ of

696: (\ref{Eq5.2}) or (\ref{Eq5.3}) and (\ref{Eq5.5}) are equivalent for

697: $0<p\le\infty  ,$ that is, $R^*_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-1})_p\approx

698: R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-1})_p.$  If we use $\eta  _nf$ of

699: (\ref{Eq5.4}) in (\ref{Eq5.1}) for $P_n,$ the equivalence holds only

700: for $1\le p\le \infty  .$ ((\ref{Eq5.4}) is not defined for $0<p<1.)$

701: 

702: It was proved in \cite{Di-Hr-Iv} that

703: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.6}

704: R^*_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p \approx \omega  ^r_\varphi

705: (f,n^{-1})_p

706: \end{equation}

707: for $0<p\le \infty,  $ and hence $R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p\approx

708: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,n^{-1})_p$ for $0<p\le \infty  $ if $P_n$ is

709: given by (\ref{Eq5.2}) or (\ref{Eq5.3}), and for $1\le p\le \infty

710: $ if for $P_n$ we write $\eta  _n f$ given in (\ref{Eq5.4}).

711: 

712: We note (see \cite{Di-Hr-Iv}) that an analogous result to

713: (\ref{Eq5.6}) is known for $L_p(T)$ where $T_n,$ an $n\text{\rm

714: -th}$ degree trigonometric polynomial, replaces $P_n,$ and $\omega

715: ^r(f,t)_p$ replaces $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p.$  The equivalence

716: (\ref{Eq5.6}) was also extended to other realizations and measures

717: of smoothness.

718: 

719: For $L_p[-1,1],$ $1\le p\le\infty  $ and other Banach spaces some

720: sequences of linear operators $A_nf$ other than $\eta  _n f$ given

721: in (\ref{Eq5.4}) were used for defining the realization

722: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.7}

723: \wt R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_{L_p[-1,1]} = \Vert  f-A_nf\Vert

724: _{L_p[-1,1]} + n^{-r}\Vert  \varphi  ^r(A_nf)^{(r)}\Vert

725: _{L_p[-1,1]}

726: \end{equation}

727: (see, for instance, \cite{Ch-Di97} and \cite{Di98}).

728: 

729: Of course for $\wt R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_{L_p[-1,1]},$ $A_n$

730: may depend on $r.$  We will encounter some natural expressions of

731: the form (\ref{Eq5.7}) in this survey.  In most situations here when

732: dealing with (\ref{Eq5.7}) either the choice (\ref{Eq5.1}) where

733: $P_n = \eta  _nf$

734: with

735: $\eta  _nf$ of (\ref{Eq5.4})

736: (which is a near best approximant)

737: is more useful or

738: we have a linear

739: approximation process

740: $A_nf$ which satisfies a relation with $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ that

741: is superior to $\wt R_{r,\varphi  }(f)_p\approx \omega  ^r_\varphi

742: (f,n^{-r})_p$ (see Section~8).  The conditions that $P_n$ satisfies,

743: (\ref{Eq5.2}), (\ref{Eq5.3}) or (\ref{Eq5.4}), are independent of $r$

744: and this fact has proved useful in many applications. We note that in

745: the expression $R^*_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p,$ $P_n$ depends on $r$

746: and hence in applications it is sometimes more advantageous to use

747: the equivalent form $R_{r,\varphi}  (f,n^{-1})_p.$

748: 

749: For a general Banach space $B$ on $[-1,1]$

750: it is convenient to deal with

751: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.8}

752: R_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,n^{-2\alpha  }\big)_B = \Vert  f-P_n\Vert

753:  _B +\frac{1}{n^{2\alpha  }}\;\big\Vert  \big(P(D)\big)^\alpha

754: P_n\big\Vert  _B

755: \end{equation}

756: where $P(D)$ is the Legendre operator $P(D) = -\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

757: (1-x^2)\, \frac{d}{dx}\,,$ $P_n$ is given by (\ref{Eq5.2}),

758: (\ref{Eq5.3}) or (\ref{Eq5.4}), and $\big(P(D)\big)^\alpha  $ is

759: given by (\ref{Eq4.9}).

760: We have (see \cite{Da-Di05})

761: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.9}

762: R_{2r}\big(f,P(D)^r,n^{-2r}\big)_p\approx R_{2r,\varphi

763: }(f,n^{-2r})_p + n^{-2r}\,E_1(f)_p\q\text{\rm for}\q

764: 1<p<\infty  .

765: \end{equation}

766: However, (\ref{Eq5.9}) is not valid for $p=1$ and $p=\infty  $ since

767: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.10}

768: R_{2r}\big(f,P(D)^r,n^{-2r}\big)_p\approx

769: K_{2r}\big(f,P(D)^r,n^{-2r}\big)_p, \q 1\le p\le \infty  ,

770: \end{equation}

771: and also since (\ref{Eq4.4}) is not valid for $p=1$ and $p=\infty  .$ In

772: fact, for any Banach space $B$ for which (\ref{Eq4.8}) is satisfied

773: we have

774: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.11}

775: R_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,n^{-2\alpha  }\big)_B\approx

776: K_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,n^{-2\alpha  }\big)_B

777: \end{equation}

778: (see also \cite[Theorem 6.2]{Di98}).

779: 

780: In the following sections we will mention the results for which

781: realization functionals were used. We will also present extensions

782: to weighted spaces and to spaces of multivariate functions.

783: 

784: Like most interesting concepts, realizations were discussed before

785: the concept was introduced formally.  For instance, the equivalence

786: \begin{equation}\label{Eq5.12}

787: R_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_p\approx \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p

788: \q\q 1\le p\le\infty

789: \end{equation}

790: with $P_n$ of (\ref{Eq5.2}) or (\ref{Eq5.3}) was shown already in

791: \cite{Di-To87} and its trigonometric analogue much earlier.  This

792: should not diminish the significance of the systematic treatment of

793: realizations and their importance for various spaces and

794: applications (not only in relation to algebraic polynomial

795: approximation).

796: 

797: \section{Sharp Marchaud and sharp converse inequalities}\label{Sec6}

798: 

799: The converse inequality of (\ref{Eq2.6}) is given by

800: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.1}

801: %\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le M(r)t^r \sum^{[\frac 1t]}_{n=1}

802: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le M(r)t^r \sum^{\floor{\frac 1t}}_{n=1}

803: n^{r-1}E_n(f)_p, \q 1\le p\le \infty

804: \end{equation}

805: with $E_n(f)_p$ given in (\ref{Eq2.7}) was proved in \cite[Theorem

806: 7.2.4]{Di-To87}.  (Note that we write here $n$ instead of $n+1$ in

807: \cite{Di-To87} as here $\Pi_n =\;\text{\rm span}\,

808: (1,\dots,x^{n-1}).)$ The Marchaud inequality

809: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.2}

810: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le Ct^r \Big\{\int^c_t \;\frac{\omega

811: ^r_\varphi  (f,u)_p}{u^{r+1}}\; du +\Vert  f\Vert  _p\Big\}, \q 1\le

812: p\le \infty

813: \end{equation}

814: was proved in \cite[Theorem 4.3.1]{Di-To87} for a general class of

815: step weights $\varphi  (x).$ (Not just $\varphi  (x)

816: =\sqrt{1-x^2}\,.)$

817: 

818: For trigonometric polynomials A.~Zygmund \cite{Zy} and M.~Timan

819: \cite{TiM58} proved

820: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.3}

821: %\omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(T)} \le M(r)t^r \Big\{\sum_{n=1}^{[\frac 1t]}

822: \omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(T)} \le M(r)t^r \Big\{\sum_{n=1}^{\floor{\frac 1t}}

823: n^{rq-1} E^*_n(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}, \q 1\le p<\infty  , \q q=\min\,(p,2)

824: \end{equation}

825: where $\omega  ^r(f,t)_p$ and $E^*_n(f)_p$ are given by (\ref{Eq2.3})

826: and (\ref{Eq2.4}) respectively.  In addition, it was shown in

827: \cite{Zy} and \cite{TiM58} that for $1\le p <\infty  $

828: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.4}

829: \omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(T)} \le Ct^r \Big[\Big\{\int^c_t\;\frac{\omega

830: ^{r+1}(f,u)^q_{L_p(T)}}{u^{qr+1}} \; du\Big\}^{1/q} +\Vert  f\Vert

831: _{L_p(T)}\Big] ,  \q q=\;\min\,(p,2).

832: \end{equation}

833: (The term $\Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p(T)}$ in (\ref{Eq6.4}) is redundant.)

834: The classic converse and Marchaud inequalities, i.e. (\ref{Eq6.3})

835: and (\ref{Eq6.4}) for $1\le p\le \infty  $ when $q=1$

836: replaces $q=\min(p,2)$,

837: are clearly

838: weaker for $1<p<\infty  $ than (\ref{Eq6.3}) and (\ref{Eq6.4}) with

839: $q=\,\min\, (p,2).$  Moreover, $q=\,\min\, (p,2)$ is the optimal

840: power in (\ref{Eq6.3}) and (\ref{Eq6.4}) for $1\le p<\infty  .$

841: Using partially a new proof and extension of (\ref{Eq6.4}) given in

842: \cite{Di88}, Totik proved in \cite{To88} for $1<p<\infty  $ that

843: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.5}

844: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le Ct^r\Big[\Big\{\int^c_t\,

845: \frac{\omega  ^{r+1}_\varphi  (f,u)^q_p}{u^{rq+1}}\, du\Big\}^{1/q}

846: +\Vert  f\Vert  _p\Big]\q\text{\rm where} \q q=\,\min\,(p,2)

847: \end{equation}

848: (here $\Vert  f\Vert  _p$ can be replaced by $E_{r-1}(f)_p$ but not

849: eliminated), and he deduced from it for $1<p<\infty  $

850: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.6}

851: %\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p \le M(r) t^r \Big[\sum^{[\frac 1t]}_{n=1} \,

852: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p \le M(r) t^r \Big[\sum^{\floor{\frac 1t}}_{n=1} \,

853: n^{rq-1}E_n(f)^q_p\Big]^{1/q} \q \text{where} \q q=\,\min\,(p,2).

854: \end{equation}

855: In Totik's paper (see \cite{To88}) (\ref{Eq6.5}) is given for $1<

856: p\le 2$ with a more general step weight $\varphi  .$ For $2<p<\infty

857:  $ he gave (\ref{Eq6.5}) and (\ref{Eq6.6}) only for $\varphi  (x)

858: =\sqrt{1-x^2}\,.$

859: 

860: Examples were given in \cite[Section 10]{Da-Di-Ti} to show that the

861: power $q$ in (\ref{Eq6.5}) and (\ref{Eq6.6}) is optimal for $1<p<4.$

862: (The power $q$ is probably optimal in (\ref{Eq6.5}) and

863: (\ref{Eq6.6}) for all $1<p<\infty  .)$

864: 

865: Later it was shown in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Di-Ji-Le} that

866: (\ref{Eq6.6}) is valid for $0<p<1$ as well.  Using (\ref{Eq2.6})

867: which was proved in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{De-Le-Yu} for $0<p<1$ and

868: applying it to $k+1$ (instead of $k),$ one has (\ref{Eq6.5}) also for

869: $0<p<1.$

870: 

871: Recently, (see \cite[Theorem 6.2]{Da-Di05}) it was shown that for

872: $\alpha  <\beta  ,$ $1\le p<\infty  ,$ $q=\,\min\,(p,2)$ and $P(D) =

873: -\,\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\, \frac{d}{dx}$ (among other operators)

874: one has

875: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.7}

876: K_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,t^{2\alpha  })_p\le Ct^{2\alpha

877: }\Big\{\int^c_t \;\frac{K_{2\beta  }\big(f,P(D)^\beta  ,u^{2\beta

878: }\big)^q_p}{u^{2\alpha  q+1}} \;du\Big\}^{1/q}

879: \end{equation}

880: with $K_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,t^{2\alpha  }\big)_p$ given

881: in (\ref{Eq4.10}).

882: 

883: As we have for $1\le p\le \infty  $ and all $\gamma  >0$

884: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.8}

885: K_{2\gamma  }\big(f,P(D)^\gamma  ,n^{-2\gamma  }\big)_p \le

886: Cn^{-2\gamma  }\,\sum^n_{k=1} \, k^{2\gamma  -1}E_k(f)_p,

887: \end{equation}

888: the inequality (\ref{Eq6.7}) used for $\gamma  =\beta  $ implies

889: \begin{equation}\label{Eq6.9}

890: K_{2\alpha  }\big(f,P(D)^\alpha  ,t^{2\alpha  }\big)_p \le

891: Ct^{2\alpha  }\Big\{\sum_{1\le k\le 1/t} k^{2\alpha  q-1}

892: E_k(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}.

893: \end{equation}

894: For $1<p<\infty  $ and $2\ell =r$ we have

895: $$

896: K_{2\ell}\big(f,P(D)^\ell,t^{2\ell}\big)_p \approx \omega

897: ^{2\ell}_\varphi  (f,t)_p

898: $$

899: (see \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Da-Di05} and \cite[Chapter 9]{Di-To87}).  In

900: fact, one can use (\ref{Eq6.8}) and (\ref{Eq6.9}) to obtain

901: (\ref{Eq6.5}) and (\ref{Eq6.6}).  However, in my opinion, the main

902: advantage of the technique in \cite{Da-Di05} for polynomial

903: approximation is not its

904: applicability to fractional $\alpha  $ but that this method is

905: applicable to $L_p[-1,1]$ with Jacobi-type weights (see Section~10).

906: 

907: \section{Moduli of smoothness of functions and of their derivatives}\label{Sec7}

908: 

909: For $f,f^{(k)}\in L_p(T),$ $1\le p\le\infty  ,$ it is well-known

910: %(see \cite[p.~46]{De-Lo} that

911: (see \cite[p.~46]{De-Lo}) that

912: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.1}

913: \omega  ^r(f,t)_p \le Ct^k \omega

914: ^{r-k}\big(f^{(k)},t\big)_p\q\text{\rm where}\q 1\le k\le r

915: \end{equation}

916: and that (see \cite[p.~178]{De-Lo})

917: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.2}

918: \omega  ^{r-k}\big(f^{(k)},t\big)_p \le C\int^t_0\;\frac{\omega

919: ^r(f,u)_p}{u^{k+1}}\;du\q\text{\rm where}\q 1\le k< r.

920: \end{equation}

921: It was shown recently (see \cite{Di-Ti}) that the converse-type

922: inequality (\ref{Eq7.2}) can be improved for $1<p<\infty  $ and has

923: an analogue for $0<p<1.$

924: 

925: For $\omega  ^r_\varphi

926: (f,u)_{L_p[-1,1]}$ it was proved in \cite[Theorem 6.2.2 and Theorem

927: 6.3.1]{Di-To87} that

928: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.3}

929: \Omega  ^{r}_\varphi  \big(f,t\big)_p \le Ct^k \omega

930: ^{r-k}_\varphi  \big(f^{(k)},t\big)_{p,\varphi  ^k}\q\text{\rm for}\q

931: 1\le p\le \infty  \q\text{\rm and}\q r>k

932: \end{equation}

933: and

934: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.4}

935: \Omega  ^{r-k}_\varphi  \big(f^{(k)},t\big)_{p,\varphi  ^k} \le

936: C\,\int^t_0\;\frac{\Omega  ^{r}_\varphi  (f,u)_p}{u^{k+1}}\;

937: du\q\text{\rm for}\q 1\le p\le \infty  \q\text{\rm and} \q r>k

938: \end{equation}

939: where

940: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.5}

941: \Omega  ^\ell_\varphi  (g,t)_{p,\varphi  ^m} =\us{\vert  h\vert

942: <t}\sup\; \Vert  \Delta  ^\ell_{h\varphi  }g\Vert  _{L_{p,\varphi

943:  ^m}[I(h,\ell)]},

944: \end{equation}

945: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.6}

946: I(h,\ell) = [-1+2h^2\ell^2,1-2h^2\ell^2]

947: \end{equation}

948: and

949: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.7}

950: \Vert  F\Vert  _{L_{p,w}(D)} =\Big\{\int_D \vert  F(x)\vert  ^p

951: w(x)dx\Big\}^{1/p}

952: \end{equation}

953: (and $\Delta  ^\ell_{h\varphi  }f(x)$ is still defined by

954: (\ref{Eq1.2}) with the underlying interval $[-1,1]).$  In

955: \cite[Section~5]{Di-Ti}, generalization of (\ref{Eq7.4}) was

956: achieved, i.e. for $0< p<\infty  $ and $r>k$

957: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.8}

958: \Omega  ^{r-k}_\varphi  \big(f^{(k)},t\big)_{p,\varphi  ^k} \le

959: C\,\Big\{\,\int^t_0\,\frac{\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,u)^q_{p}}{u^{qk+1}}\;

960: du\Big\}^{1/q}

961: \end{equation}

962: where $q=\min\,(p,2).$  Simple examples can be given to show that

963: (\ref{Eq7.3}) does not hold for $0<p<1.$  It can be noted that a

964: best approximation version of (\ref{Eq7.8}) follows from the proof

965: in \cite[Section~5]{Di-Ti}, that is,

966: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.9}

967: \Omega  ^{r-k}_\varphi  \big(f^{(k)},t\big)_{p,\varphi  ^k} \le

968: %C\Big\{\sum_{\ell \ge [1/t]} \,\ell^{qk-1} E_\ell(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}

969: C\Big\{\sum_{\ell \ge \floor{1/t}} \,\ell^{qk-1} E_\ell(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}

970: \end{equation}

971: where $f\in L_p[-1,1],$ $r>k,$ $0<p<\infty  $ and $q=\min\,(p,2).$

972: In \cite[Section 5]{Di-Ti} it was shown that

973: $$

974: \Omega  ^{r-k}_\varphi  \big(f^{(k)},t\big)_{p,\varphi  ^k}\le C

975: %\Big\{\sum_{2^m\ge [1/t]} \,

976: \Big\{\sum_{2^m\ge \floor{1/t}} \,

977: 2^{mkq}E_{2^m}(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}\,,\eqno{(7.9)^\pr}

978: $$

979: which is equivalent to (\ref{Eq7.9}).

980: 

981: Another approach to this question which is applicable to Banach

982: spaces satisfying (\ref{Eq4.8}) (see (\ref{Eq4.5}), (\ref{Eq4.6})

983: and (\ref{Eq4.7})) is implied by the results in \cite[Sections 6 and

984: 7]{Di98}.  We note that the result below applies to $L_p[-1,1]$ with

985: $1\le p\le \infty  $ but not with $0< p<1.$

986: 

987: We have for $P(D) =-\,\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}$ and $B$

988: satisfying (\ref{Eq4.8})

989: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.10}

990: \begin{aligned}

991: E_{2\lambda  }(f)_B &\le

992: \Vert  f-\eta  _\lambda  f\Vert _B\le C E_\lambda  (f)_B,\q

993: \text{\rm and}\\

994: E_{2\lambda  } \big( P(D)^\alpha  f\big)_B

995: &\le \Vert   P(D)^\alpha

996: f -\eta  _\lambda  \big(P(D)^\alpha  f\big)\Vert  _B \le

997: C E_\lambda  \big(P(D)^\alpha    f\big)_B

998: \end{aligned}

999: \end{equation}

1000: where $\eta  _\lambda  $ is the

1001:  de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type operator defined

1002: by (\ref{Eq5.4})

1003: using (\ref{Eq4.6}) and  (\ref{Eq4.7}).  (Other de~la~Vall\'ee

1004: Poussin-type operators will yield a result similar to (\ref{Eq7.10}).)

1005: 

1006: Using the realization theorem (see \cite[Theorem

1007: 7.1]{Di98}) given by

1008: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.11}

1009: K_{2\alpha  }

1010: \Big(f,\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha

1011: ,\frac{1}{n^{2\alpha  }}\Big)_B\approx \Vert  f-V_nf\Vert  _B

1012: + \frac{1}{n^{2\alpha  }} \;\Big\Vert  \Big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

1013: (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\Big)^\alpha  V_nf\Big\Vert  _B,

1014: \end{equation}

1015: with $V_nf = \eta  _{1/n}  f$ or other de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type

1016: operators,

1017: one has the following result:

1018: 

1019: For $\alpha  <\beta  $ and

1020: $\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha  f\in B$ we

1021: have, using

1022: \cite[Theorem 7, (7.10) and (5.11)]{Di98},

1023: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.12}

1024: \begin{aligned}

1025: K_{2\beta  }

1026: &\Big(f,\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\beta

1027: ,t^{2\beta  }\Big)_B  \\

1028: &\le Ct^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )} K_{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}

1029: \,\Big(\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx} \,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^\alpha

1030: f,\big(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,(1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}\big)^{\beta  -\alpha

1031: },t^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}\Big)_B.

1032: \end{aligned}

1033: \end{equation}

1034: 

1035: For $\alpha  <\beta  $ and $P(D) =-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

1036: (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx}$ we also have, using \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Di98},

1037: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.13}

1038: K_{2(\beta  -\alpha  )} \Big(P(D)^\alpha  f,\big(P(D)\big)^{\beta

1039: -\alpha  },t^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}\Big)_B

1040: \le C\int^{t}_0\;\frac{K_\beta  \big(f,P(D)^\beta  ,u^{2\beta

1041: }\big)_B}{u^{2\alpha  +1}}\;du.

1042: \end{equation}

1043: 

1044: For $B=L_p[-1,1],$ $1<p<\infty  $ one can follow \cite{Da-Di05} and

1045: obtain a sharper version of (\ref{Eq7.13}), that is

1046: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.14}

1047: \begin{aligned}

1048: K_{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}& \big(P(D)^\alpha  f,P(D)^{\beta

1049: -\alpha  },t^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}\big)_{L_p[-1,1]}\\

1050: &\le C\Big\{\int^{t}_0\;\frac{K_\beta  \big(f,P(D)^\beta  ,u^{2\beta

1051: }\big)^q_{L_p[-1,1]}}{u^{2\alpha q+1}}\Big\}^{1/q}, \q

1052: q=\min\,(p,2).

1053: \end{aligned}

1054: \end{equation}

1055: 

1056: For the rate of best approximation $E_n(f)_B$ given in (\ref{Eq2.7})

1057: or (\ref{Eq4.9}) (when (\ref{Eq4.8}) is satisfied),

1058: (\ref{Eq7.13}) and (\ref{Eq7.14}}) take the forms

1059: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.15}

1060: K_{2(\beta  -\alpha  )} \Big(P(D)^\alpha  f,\big(P(D)\big)^{\beta

1061: -\alpha  },t^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}\Big)_B

1062: %\le C\sum_{\ell\ge [1/t]} \ell^{2\alpha  -1} E_\ell (f)_B,

1063: \le C\sum_{\ell\ge \floor{1/t}} \ell^{2\alpha  -1} E_\ell (f)_B,

1064: \end{equation}

1065: and for $1<p<\infty  $

1066: \begin{equation}\label{Eq7.16}

1067: \begin{aligned}

1068: K_{2(\beta  -\alpha  )} \Big(P(D)^\alpha  f,& P(D)^{\beta  -\alpha

1069: },t^{2(\beta  -\alpha  )}\Big)_{L_p[-1,1]}\\

1070: %&\le C\Big\{\sum_{\ell \ge [1/t]} \ell^{2\alpha  q-1} E_\ell

1071: &\le C\Big\{\sum_{\ell \ge \floor{1/t}} \ell^{2\alpha  q-1} E_\ell

1072: (f)^q_{L_p[-1,1]}\Big\}^{1/q}\q \text{\rm where}\q

1073: q = \min\, (p,2)

1074: \end{aligned}

1075: \end{equation}

1076: respectively.

1077: 

1078: 

1079: 

1080: 

1081: \section{Relations with Bernstein polynomial approximation and

1082: other linear\\ operators}\label{Sec8}

1083: 

1084: Chapters 9 and 10 of \cite{Di-To87} were dedicated to relations

1085: between $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ (with appropriate $\varphi  $

1086: and domain) and the rate of convergence of Bernstein, Szasz and

1087: Baskakov operators (including appropriate combinations and

1088: modifications).

1089: 

1090: We remind the reader that the Bernstein operator is given by

1091: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.1}

1092: B_n(f,x) =\sum^n_{k=0} \binom{n}{k} x^k(1-x)^{n-k} f\Big(\frac

1093: kn\Big) \equiv \sum^n_{k=0} P_{n,k} (x)f\Big(\frac

1094: kn\big)\q\text{\rm for} \q x\in [0,1].

1095: \end{equation}

1096: 

1097: Perhaps the first real progress in the last twenty years was the

1098: general group of concepts called strong converse inequalities S.C.I.

1099: (see \cite{Di-Iv}).  In \cite[Section 8]{Di-Iv} it was shown as

1100: one of the applications of the general method given in \cite[Section

1101: 3]{Di-Iv} that

1102: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.2}

1103: \omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,n^{-1/2})_{C[0,1]} \le

1104: C\Big(\Vert  B_n f-f\Vert  _{C[0,1]} + \Vert  B_{An} f-f\Vert

1105: _{C[0,1]}\Big)

1106: \end{equation}

1107: for some $A>1$ where $\omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,t)_{C[0,1]}$ (in

1108: relation to Bernstein polynomials) is a copy of $\omega  ^2_\varphi

1109: (f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ given by (\ref{Eq1.1}) and (\ref{Eq1.2}) in which

1110: $[0,1]$ replaces $[-1,1]$ and $\varphi  (x) =\sqrt{x(1-x)}$ replaces

1111: $\sqrt{1-x^2}\,.$  The inequality (\ref{Eq8.2}) is a strong converse

1112: inequality of type $B$ (with two terms on the right hand side) and

1113: is called ``strong'' as it matches the direct result (see

1114: \cite{Di-To87}) given by

1115: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.3}

1116: \Vert  B_nf - f\Vert  _{C[0,1]} \le C\omega  ^2_\varphi

1117: \Big(f, n^{-1/2}\Big)_{C[0,1]}.

1118: \end{equation}

1119: One observes that (\ref{Eq8.2}) implies

1120: $$

1121: \omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,n^{-1/2})_{C[0,1]} \le C\,\us{k\ge

1122: n}\sup\;\Vert  B_kf-f\Vert  _{C[0,1]}, \eqno{(8.2)^\pr}

1123: $$

1124: which is a strong converse inequality of type $D$ in the terminology

1125: of \cite{Di-Iv}.  Combining $(8.2)^\pr$ with (\ref{Eq8.3}), one has

1126: $$

1127: \omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,n^{-1/2})_{C[0,1]} \approx \us{k\ge n}\sup\;

1128: \Vert  B_nf -f \Vert  _{C[0,1]}\,.

1129: $$

1130: 

1131: 

1132: 

1133: In \cite[Remark 8.6]{Di-Iv} it was conjectured that the superior

1134: strong converse inequality of type A is also valid, that is, that

1135: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.4}

1136: \omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,n^{-1/2})_{C[0,1]} \le

1137: C\Vert  B_n f-f\Vert  _{C[0,1]}

1138: \end{equation}

1139: which, together with (\ref{Eq8.3}), implies

1140: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.5}

1141: \Vert  B_n f-f\Vert  _{C[0,1]} \approx \omega  ^2_\varphi

1142: \Big(f,n^{-1/2}\Big)_{C[0,1]}.

1143: \end{equation}

1144: 

1145: In a remarkable paper (see \cite{To94}) V. Totik gave the first proof of

1146: (\ref{Eq8.4}). He used an intricate modification of the parabola

1147: technique.  Totik's method is applicable to Bernstein, Szasz and

1148: Baskakov operators.  Explicitly, Totik treated the Szasz-Mirakian

1149: operator given by

1150: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.6}

1151: S_n (f,x) =\sum^\infty  _{k=0} e^{-nx} \,\frac{(nx)^k}{k!}\,

1152: f\big(\frac kn\big),

1153: \end{equation}

1154: for which he showed

1155: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.7}

1156: \Vert  S_n(f,x) -f(x)\Vert  _{C[0,\infty  )} \approx \omega

1157: ^2_\varphi  \Big(f, n^{-1/2}\Big)_{C[0,\infty  )}

1158: \end{equation}

1159: where $\omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,t)_{C[0,\infty  )}$ is defined on

1160: $[0,\infty  )$ (instead of $[-1,1])$ and $\varphi  (x) = \sqrt x$

1161: (instead of $\sqrt{x(1-x)}$ or $\sqrt{1-x^2}\,).$  The proof of

1162: (\ref{Eq8.7}) is neater than that of (\ref{Eq8.4}) as $[0,\infty  )$

1163: has only one finite endpoint and $\sqrt x$ is simpler than

1164: $\sqrt{x(1-x)}\,.$  Totik stated that the proof in the case of

1165: Bernstein and Baskakov operators is essentially the same.  To prove

1166: (\ref{Eq8.4}) directly would be just a bit longer, more cluttered

1167: and would perhaps obscure the idea.

1168: 

1169: The second proof of (\ref{Eq8.4}) was given by Knopp and Zhou (see

1170: \cite{Kn-Zh94}), who used the fact that

1171: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.8}

1172: \frac 1n\;\Big\Vert  \varphi  ^2\Big(\frac{d}{dx}\Big)^2 B^m_n

1173: f\Big\Vert  _{C[0,1]} \le C(m)\Vert  f\Vert  _{C[0,1]}

1174: \end{equation}

1175: with $C(m)$ small enough for some $m$ (independent of $n$ and $f)$

1176: being sufficient. $(B^m_n f =

1177: B_n B^{m-1}_nf$ and $B^1_n f = B_n f.)$

1178: It was shown in \cite[Section 4]{Di-Iv} for a large class of

1179: operators $O_n$ and an appropriate differential operator $P(D)$ that a condition like

1180: $\Vert  P(D)O^m_n f\Vert  _B \le C(m)\Vert  f\Vert  _B$ would be

1181: sufficient for proving S.C.I. of type A provided that $C(m)$ is

1182: small enough.  In \cite{Kn-Zh95} (which precedes \cite{Kn-Zh94}) a

1183: general ingenious method was given to show that under some

1184: conditions $C(m)\to 0$ as $m\to\infty  $ for many operators. This

1185: technique is useful and the conditions necessary are easy to verify

1186: when the various operators treated commute, and it is applicable to

1187: many spaces (not just $L_\infty  ).$  However, as $B_n B_m f\ne B_m

1188: B_n f$ and $\varphi  ^2\big(\frac{d}{dx}\big)^2 B_n (f,x)\ne B_n

1189: (\varphi  ^2 f^{\pr\pr}, x)$ even for very smooth functions, the

1190: proof in \cite{Kn-Zh94} becomes extremely complicated.  I note that

1191: in papers of X.~Zhou with Knoop and others strong converse

1192: inequalities are called lower estimate (to match the direct result

1193: like (\ref{Eq8.3}) which Zhou et~al. call the upper estimate).

1194: Besides this linguistic innovation, and their new idea to show $C(m)

1195: =o(1)$ as $m\to\infty  ,$ they also repeated  the

1196: arguments of \cite[Sections 3-4]{Di-Iv}, perhaps because they felt

1197: they could explain things better.

1198: 

1199: The third proof of (\ref{Eq8.4}), given by C.~Sanguesa (see \cite{Sa}), uses

1200: probabilistic ideas to show that $C(m)$ of (\ref{Eq8.8}) is

1201: sufficiently small for $m=3.$  The ideas of \cite{Sa} can be

1202: translated from probabilistic to classical analytic.

1203: 

1204: While S.C.I. of type B are now quite easy to prove and yield most

1205: results about the relation between the $K\text{\rm -functional}$ and

1206: $\Vert  O_nf-f\Vert  ,$ S.C.I. of type A are much more elegant and

1207: hence more desirable.  (They are also more amenable to iterations.)

1208:  I still would like to see a new simple proof of (\ref{Eq8.4}) which

1209: I am sure will have implications for other operators. One wonders

1210: what condition on the sequence of operators (not just the Bernstein

1211: polynomials), which is easy to verify, is sufficient to guarantee

1212: that a S.C.I. of type B implies a S.C.I. of type A.

1213: 

1214: As the Bernstein operators are not defined on $L_p[0,1]$ for $1\le

1215: p<\infty  ,$ their Kantorovich modification given by

1216: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.9}

1217: K_n(f,x) =\sum^n_{k=0} \,\binom{n}{k} \,x^k(1-x)^{n-k}

1218: \Big[(n+1)\int^{(k+1)/(n+1)}_{k/(n+1)} f(u)du\Big]

1219: \end{equation}

1220: was extensively used. (Similar extensions were given to Szasz and Baskakov

1221: operators.)

1222: 

1223: In \cite{Go-Zh} the following S.C.I. of type A is claimed for $1\le

1224: p\le \infty  :$

1225: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.10}

1226: \Vert  K_n f-f\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} \approx \inf \Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert

1227: _{L_p[0,1]} +\frac 1n\,\Big\Vert  \frac{d}{dx}\,

1228: x(1-x)\,\frac{d}{dx}\, g\Big\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]}\Big).

1229: \end{equation}

1230: 

1231: One recalls that the affine transformation $[-1,1]\to [0,1]$ and

1232: (\ref{Eq4.2}), (\ref{Eq4.3}) and

1233: (\ref{Eq4.4}) here imply for $1<p<\infty  $

1234: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.11}

1235: \omega  ^2_\varphi  \Big(f,\,\frac{1}{\sqrt n}\Big)_{L_p[0,1]}

1236: +\frac 1n\;\Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} \approx \inf \,\Big(\Vert

1237: f-g\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} +\frac 1n\, \Big\Vert  \frac{d}{dx}\,

1238: x(1-x)\;\frac {d}{dx}\,g\Big\Vert   _{L_p[0,1]} \Big).

1239: \end{equation}

1240: For $p=1$ and $p=\infty  $ (\ref{Eq8.11}) is not valid (see

1241: \cite[p.~88]{Da-Di05}).

1242: 

1243: Most of the (multitude of) papers on Bernstein-type operators deal

1244: with:

1245: 

1246: \vs

1247: \begin{description}

1248: \item  {(a)} Combinations (for higher levels of smoothness).

1249: 

1250: \item  {(b)} Weighted approximation of the operators (see also

1251: Sections

1252: \ref{Sec10} and \ref{Sec14}).

1253: 

1254: \item  {(c)} Different step-weights (see also Section \ref{Sec14}).

1255: 

1256: \item  {(d)} Multivariate analogues (see also Section \ref{Sec12}).

1257: 

1258: \item  {(e)} Simultaneous approximation.

1259: 

1260: \item {(f)} Shape-preserving properties (see also Section

1261: \ref{Sec15}).

1262: 

1263: \item  {(g)} Other modifications and generalizations.

1264: \end{description}

1265: 

1266: If I describe all related results on the subject, I will exhaust

1267: both myself and the reader (who is probably tired already), and

1268: therefore I will try to be somewhat more selective in this survey.

1269: Even after remarks in the following sections, the treatment is by no

1270: means complete and many, perhaps most, results on the topics

1271: (a) -- (g) are not described.

1272: 

1273: The Bernstein polynomial operator preserves many properties. Its

1274: rate of convergence is equivalent to $\omega  ^2_\varphi

1275: \big(f, n^{-1/2}\big)_{C[0,1]}.$  Realization results using

1276: it are valid (and weaker than (\ref{Eq8.5})).  Moreover, the

1277: Bernstein polynomial operator is a model for many other operators,

1278: mostly yielding similar or weaker results for $C[0,1].$  Therefore,

1279: it was a surprise that a modification emerged that had many ``nice''

1280: properties, some different from those of $B_nf,$ yet extremely

1281: useful.  Such an operator, introduced by Durrmeyer (see \cite{Du}

1282: and \cite{De81}), is now called the Durrmeyer-Bernstein polynomial

1283: operator and is given by

1284: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.12}

1285: M_n(f,x) =\sum^n_{k=0} P_{n,k}(x)(n+1)\int^1_0 P_{n,k}(y)f(y)dy, \q

1286: P_{n,k}(x) =\binom{n}{k}\,x^k(1-x)^{n-k}.

1287: \end{equation}

1288: 

1289: Among the properties of $M_n(f,x)$ we state:

1290: 

1291: \begin{description}

1292: \item  {I.} $M_nf = M_n(f,x): L_p[0,1]\to \Pi_{n+1}$ for $1\le p\le

1293: \infty  .$

1294: \item  {II.} $\Vert  M_nf\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} \le \Vert  f\Vert

1295: _{L_p[0,1]}$ for $1\le p\le \infty  .$

1296: \item  {III.} $\la M_n f,g\ra = \la f,M_n g\ra$ where $\la F,G\ra

1297: =\int^1_0 F(x)G(x)dx.$

1298: %\item  {IV.} For $f\sim \overset\infty  {\us{k=0}\sum} P_k f\q \q M_nf\sim

1299: \item  {IV.} For $f\sim \overset\infty  {\us{k=0}\sum} P_k f,\q M_nf\sim

1300: \overset n{\us{k=0}\sum} a_k P_k f$

1301:  where $P_kf$ is given by (\ref{Eq4.6}) with ${\cal D}=[0,1]$ and

1302: (\ref{Eq4.7}) is replaced by

1303: \end{description}

1304: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.13}

1305: \frac{d}{dx}\,x(1-x)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,\varphi  _k(x) = -k(k+1)\varphi

1306: _k(x), \q \int^1_0 \varphi  _k(x)\varphi  _\ell (x)dx =

1307: \begin{cases} 0 &k\ne\ell,\\ 1 & k=\ell.\end{cases}

1308: \end{equation}

1309: 

1310: \noi

1311: As a result of IV one has:

1312: 

1313: \begin{description}

1314: \item  {V.} $M_nM_kf = M_k M_n f.$

1315: \item  {VI.} $\frac{d}{dx}\,\big(x(1-x)\big)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,M_nf =

1316: M_n\big(\frac{d}{dx}\,x(1-x)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,f\big)$ for $f$ smooth

1317: enough.

1318: \item  {VII.} $M_n f - f =\overset\infty  {\us{k=n+1}\sum}

1319: \,\frac{1}{k(k+1)}\,\frac{d}{dx}\,\big(x(1-x)\big)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

1320: M_kf.$

1321: \end{description}

1322: 

1323: 

1324: Using all these properties, it was shown in \cite[Theorem

1325: 6.3]{Ch-Di-Iv} for $1\le p\le \infty  $ that

1326: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.14}

1327: \Vert  M_n f-f\Vert  _p\approx \inf \Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _p +\frac

1328: 1n\,\Big\Vert  \frac{d}{dx}\,

1329: \big(x(1-x)\big)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,g\Big\Vert  _p\Big).

1330: \end{equation}

1331: 

1332: Many properties of $M_nf$ were investigated and the proof did not

1333: always use the obvious advantages enumerated above (by I $\to$ VII).

1334: 

1335: Other multiplier-type polynomial approximation processes are the

1336: Ces\`aro means $C^\ell_n(f,x)$ given in (\ref{Eq4.5}) with

1337: $P_kf = P_k(f,x)$ given in (\ref{Eq4.6}) and

1338: $\varphi

1339: _k(x)$ given above (in (\ref{Eq8.11})) and the Riesz means

1340: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.15}

1341: R_{\lambda  ,\alpha  ,\ell}f =\sum_{\lambda  (k)<\lambda  }

1342: \Big(1-\big(\frac{\lambda  (k)}{\lambda  }\big)^\alpha  \Big)^\ell

1343: P_k f, \q \lambda  (k) =k(k+1).

1344: \end{equation}

1345: 

1346: F. Dai proved in \cite{Da} for $\ell\ge 1$ and $1\le p\le\infty  $

1347: that

1348: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.16}

1349: \Vert  C^\ell_n f-f\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} \approx \inf \,\Big(\Vert

1350: f-g\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} +\frac 1n\, \big\Vert

1351: \big(P(D)\big)^{1/2}g\big\Vert_{L_p[0,1]}\Big)

1352: \end{equation}

1353: and

1354: \begin{equation}\label{Eq8.17}

1355: \Vert  R_{n^2,\alpha  ,\ell} f-f\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} \approx

1356: \inf\,\Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{L_p[0,1]} +\frac {1}{n^{2\alpha  }}\,

1357: \big\Vert  \big(P(D)\big)^\alpha  g\big\Vert \Big) _{L_p[0,1]}

1358: \end{equation}

1359: with $P(D) = -\,\frac{d}{dx}\,\big(x(1-x)\big)\,\frac{d}{dx}\,.$

1360: 

1361: We note that in this section we use linear operators and S.C.I.

1362: which, when applicable, are more powerful than results on

1363: $K\text{\rm-functionals}$ or realizations.

1364: 

1365: 

1366: \section{Weighted moduli of smoothness, doubling weights}\label{Sec9}

1367: 

1368: In a series of articles Mastroianni and Totik introduced the concept

1369: of doubling weights and showed that many results about trigonometric

1370: polynomials on $T$ and about algebraic polynomials on $[-1,1]$ can

1371: be extended (or modified) to include weighted $L_p$ versions with such

1372: weights.  I will deal here only with results for algebraic polynomials

1373: on $[-1,1].$

1374: 

1375: Mastroianni and Totik also gave results related to

1376: earlier concepts such as the Muckenhoupt $A_p$ condition and

1377: others.  Let me now briefly describe the concepts involved.

1378: 

1379: A doubling weight on $[-1,1]$ is a non-negative measurable function

1380: $w(x)$ satisfying

1381: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.1}

1382: w(2I) \equiv \int_{2I\cap[-1,1]} w(t)dt \le L\int_I w(t)dt \equiv

1383: Lw(I)

1384: \end{equation}

1385: where $I\subset [-1,1],$ $2I$ is the interval with the same

1386: midpoint and twice the length of $I,$ and $L$ is the doubling

1387: constant.  In \cite[Lemma 2.1]{Ma-To00} many definitions equivalent

1388: to (\ref{Eq9.1}) were given.

1389: 

1390: A non-negative measurable function $w(x)$ is a weight satisfying the

1391: $A_\infty  $ condition if for any set $E,$ $E\subset I\subset

1392: [-1,1]$ with $m(E)\equiv \vert  E\vert  \ge \alpha  \vert  I\vert  $

1393: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.2}

1394: w(E) \equiv \int_E w(t)dt\ge \beta  w(I)

1395: \end{equation}

1396: with $\beta  =\beta  (\alpha  ).$

1397: 

1398: A non-negative measurable weight function $w(x)$ satisfies the $A_p$

1399: condition, for some $p,$ $1\le p<\infty  ,$ if for $q= p/(p-1)$

1400: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.3}

1401: \Big(\frac{1}{\vert  I\vert  }\,\int_I

1402: w(t)dt\Big)\,\big(\frac{1}{\vert  I\vert  }\, \int_I w(t)^{-q/p}

1403: dt\Big)^{p/q} \le A

1404: \end{equation}

1405: for all $I\subset [-1,1].$

1406: 

1407: A non-negative measurable weight function $w(x)$ satisfies the $A^*$

1408: condition if

1409: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.4}

1410: w(x)\le L\;\frac{1}{\vert  I\vert  }\, \int_I w(t)dt

1411: \end{equation}

1412: for $x\in I\subset [-1,1]$ and $L$ independent of $x$ and $I.$

1413: (Note that satisfying the $A^*$ condition implies that $w(x)$ is

1414: bounded.)

1415: 

1416: Clearly, the conditions are ordered in increasing strength and the

1417: doubling weight condition is the most general (weakest).

1418: 

1419: In the next section we will describe results for the Jacobi weights

1420: which are not known, not valid, or just not applicable to the

1421: classes of weights mentioned above.  We note that except for $A^*$

1422: the above-mentioned classes of weights contain the Jacobi weights

1423: treated

1424: in

1425: Section \ref{Sec10}, and $A^*$ contains the bounded Jacobi weights.

1426: Furthermore, we note that, for example, the weight

1427: $$

1428: w(t) = h(t)\,\prod^k_{j=1}\,\vert  t-x_j\vert  ^{\gamma  _j},

1429: $$

1430: with $\gamma  _j >-1,$ $x_j\in [-1,1],$ $x_j <x_{j+1}$  and $h(t)$ a positive measurable

1431: function satisfying $0 <A\le h(t)\le B<\infty  ,$ is a doubling

1432: weight.

1433: 

1434: One defines $w_n(x)$ by

1435: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.5}

1436: w_n(x) =\frac{1}{\Delta  _n(x)}\,\int_{\big(x-\Delta  _n(x),x+\Delta

1437:  _n(x)\big)\cap[-1,1]} w(u)du, \q \Delta  _n(x) =\frac{\sqrt{1-x^2}}{n} +

1438: \frac{1}{n^2}

1439: \end{equation}

1440: and notes that $w_n(x)$ is a doubling weight whenever $w(x)$ is.

1441: 

1442: We denote (as usual)

1443: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.6}

1444: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p(w)} = \Vert  f\Vert  _{w,p} =\Big\{\int^1_{-1}

1445: \vert  f(x)\vert  ^p w(x)dx\Big\}^{1/p}, \q 0<p<\infty  ,

1446: \end{equation}

1447: $$

1448: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_\infty  (w)} = \Vert  f\Vert  _{w,\infty  } =

1449: \;\us{x\in [-1,1]} {\text{\rm ess sup}}\,\vert  f(x)w(x)\vert

1450: ,\eqno(9.6)^\pr

1451: $$

1452: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.7}

1453: E_n(f)_{w,p} \equiv \us{P_n\in \Pi_n}{\text{\rm inf}}\, \Vert

1454: f-P_n\Vert  _{w,p}, \q \Pi_n = \;\text{\rm span}\, (1,\dots,x^{n-1})\, ,

1455: \end{equation}

1456: and

1457: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.8}

1458: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_{w,p} =\us{\vert  h\vert  \le t}{\text{\rm

1459: sup}}\, \Vert  \Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  }f\Vert  _{w,p}

1460: \end{equation}

1461: where $\Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  }f$ is given in (\ref{Eq1.2}).

1462: 

1463: A Jackson-type result for general doubling weights and $1\le

1464: p<\infty  $ was given

1465: (see \cite[Theorem 3.2]{Ma-To98}) by

1466: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.9}

1467: E_n(f)_{w,p}\le \frac{C}{n^r} \,\Vert  f^{(r)}\varphi  ^r_n\Vert

1468: _{w_n,p}\,, \q \varphi  _n(x) = \sqrt{1-x^2} +\frac 1n

1469: \end{equation}

1470: where $w_n$ is given in (\ref{Eq9.5}) and $f,\dots,f^{(r-1)}\in

1471: \;\text{\rm A.C.}_{\ell\text{\rm oc}}.$  For a weight $w$ satisfying

1472: the $A_p$ condition $w$ can replace $w_n$ in (\ref{Eq9.9}) (see

1473: \cite[Theorem 3.4]{Ma-To98}), and when $w(x)\approx w_n(x)$ for

1474: $x\in [-1+\frac{1}{n^2}, 1-\frac{1}{n^2}],$ both $w_n$ and $\varphi

1475: _n$ can be replaced by $w$ and $\varphi  $ in (\ref{Eq9.9}) (see

1476: \cite[Theorem 3.6]{Ma-To98}).  For $p=\infty  $ a Jackson-type

1477: result was given by

1478: $$

1479: E_n(f)_{w_n,\infty  } \le \frac{C}{n^r} \, \Vert  f^{(r)}\varphi

1480: ^r\Vert  _{w_n,\infty  } \eqno(9.9)^\pr

1481: $$

1482: (see \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Ma-To99}).

1483: 

1484: Clearly, (\ref{Eq9.9}) and $(9.9)^\pr$ imply

1485: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.10}

1486: E_n(f)_{w,p} \le C\;\us g{\text{\rm inf}}\, (\Vert  f-g\Vert

1487: _{w_n,p} + n^{-r}\Vert  g^{(r)} \varphi  ^r_n\Vert  _{w_n,p})

1488: \equiv CK_{r,\varphi  _n}(f,n^{-r})_{w_n,p}

1489: \end{equation}

1490: for $1\le p<\infty  ,$ and

1491: $$

1492: E_n(f)_{w_n,\infty  } \le C\;\us g{\text{\rm inf}}\, (\Vert  f-g\Vert

1493: _{w_n,\infty  } + n^{-r}\Vert  g^{(r)} \varphi  ^r\Vert  _{w_n,\infty

1494:  }) \equiv CK_{n,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_{w_n,\infty  }.

1495: \eqno(9.10)^\pr

1496: $$

1497: 

1498: We note that the price for dealing with such general weights as the

1499: doubling weight is that in (\ref{Eq9.10}) and $(9.10)^\pr$ we do

1500: not have one $K\text{\rm -functional}$ but a sequence of (somewhat)

1501: different ones which depend on $n.$  (Recall that for $w=1,$

1502: (\ref{Eq2.6}) and (\ref{Eq3.2}) imply $E_n(f)_p \le CK_{r,\varphi

1503: }(f,n^{-r})_p$ for $1\le p \le \infty  .)$  Using \cite[Theorem

1504: 3.6]{Ma-To98} and \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Ma-To99}, we also have one

1505: $K\text{\rm -functional}$ when $w_n(x)\approx w(x)$for $x\in

1506: [-1+\frac{1}{n^2}, 1-\frac{1}{n^2}]$

1507: and for the class of weights given by $A^*$

1508: as in these cases $w_n$ and $\varphi  _n$

1509: are replaced by $w$ and $\varphi  $ in (\ref{Eq9.9}).

1510: 

1511: Following the proof in \cite[Theorem 2.1.1]{Di-To87}, one has

1512: $$

1513: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_{w_n,\infty  } \approx K_{r,\varphi

1514: }(f,t^r)_{w_n,\infty  } \q\text{\rm and} \q \omega  ^r_{\varphi _n}

1515: (f,t)_{w_n,p} \approx K_{r,\varphi  _n}(f,t^r)_{w_n,p}

1516: $$

1517: (see \cite[p.~188]{Ma-To01}).

1518: 

1519: The converse result

1520: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.11}

1521: \omega  ^{r+2}_\varphi  \Big(f,\frac 1n\Big)_{w_n,\infty  } \le

1522: Cn^{-r}\sum^n_{k=1} k^{r-1}E_k(f)_{w_k,\infty  }

1523: \end{equation}

1524: was proved in \cite[(1.8)]{Ma-To01} where it was shown that in

1525: general $r+2$ on the left of (\ref{Eq9.11}) cannot be improved. For

1526: $w$ satisfying the $A^*$ condition, $\omega  ^r_\varphi

1527: (f,1/n)_{w_n,\infty  }$ can replace $\omega  ^{r+2}_\varphi

1528: (f,1/n)_{w_n,\infty  }$ in (\ref{Eq9.11}).

1529: 

1530: Some questions such as: estimating $E_n(f)_{w_n,p}$ by $\omega

1531: ^r_{\varphi  _n}(f,t)_{w_n,p}$ for $0<p<1,$ the connection between

1532: $\omega  ^r_{\varphi  _n}(f,t)_{w_n,p}$ and appropriate

1533: realizations, and whether $r+2$ on the left of (\ref{Eq9.11}) is

1534: still necessary for $1\le p <\infty  ,$ were not considered as far

1535: as I know.

1536: 

1537: A wealth of results about inequalities concerning polynomials on

1538: $[-1,1]$ in weighted $L_p$ norms were given in the series of papers

1539: mentioned and in particular in \cite{Ma-To00}.  These inequalities

1540: will be crucial for further investigations.

1541: 

1542: For a doubling weight $w$ and for $w_n(x)$ given by (\ref{Eq9.5})

1543: it was shown \cite[Theorem 7.2]{Ma-To00} that for $P_n\in \Pi_n$ and

1544: $1\le p<\infty  $ one has

1545: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.12}

1546: \frac 1C \, \int^1_{-1} \,\vert  P_n\vert  ^p w\le \int^1_{-1}\,

1547: \vert  P_n\vert  ^p w_n \le C\,\int^1_{-1} \,\vert  P_n\vert  ^pw.

1548: \end{equation}

1549: The Bernstein and Markov inequalities  for a doubling weight (see \cite[Theorem

1550: 7.3 and 7.4]{Ma-To00}) were given for $1\le p<\infty  $ and $P_n\in \Pi_n$ by

1551: \begin{equation}\label{Eqnew}

1552: \int^1_{-1} \varphi  ^p \vert  P^\pr_n\vert  ^p w\le C

1553: n^p\int^1_{-1}\vert  P_n\vert  ^p w

1554: \end{equation}

1555: and

1556: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.13}

1557: \int^1_{-1} \, \vert  P^\pr_n\vert  ^pw\le C

1558: n^{2p}\int^1_{-1}\,\vert  P_n\vert  ^p w, \q 1\le p<\infty

1559: \end{equation}

1560: respectively.

1561: 

1562: The Nikol'skii inequality was given in two different forms for $1\le

1563: p<q<\infty  $ and $P_n\in \Pi_n$ (see \cite[p.~67]{Ma-To00}) by

1564: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.14}

1565: \Big(\int^1_{-1} \vert  P_n\vert  ^qw\Big)^{1/q} \le Cn^{\frac 2p

1566: -\frac 2q} \Big(\int^1_{-1} \vert  P_n\vert  ^p w^{p/q}\Big)^{1/p}

1567: \end{equation}

1568: and by

1569: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.15}

1570: \Big(\int^1_{-1} \vert  P_n\vert  ^q w\Big)^{1/q} \le

1571: Cn^{\frac1p-\frac 1q} \Big(\int^1_{-1} \vert  P_n\vert  ^p w^{p/q}

1572: \varphi  ^{\frac pq-1}\Big)^{1/p}.

1573: \end{equation}

1574: Note that for the special case of Jacobi weights a third different

1575: form will be presented in the next section, and while (\ref{Eq9.14})

1576: and (\ref{Eq9.15}) are best possible of their type, the third form

1577: (for Jacobi weights) will also be best possible. I find it amusing

1578: to see three different Nikol'skii-type inequalities for algebraic

1579: polynomials, all best possible in their way, which treat the weight

1580: on the right hand side differently.

1581: 

1582: For $w$ satisfying the $A^*$ condition one has (\cite[p.

1583: 69]{Ma-To00}) the Bernstein inequality

1584: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.16}

1585: \Vert  \varphi  P^\pr_n w\Vert  _{L_\infty  [-1,1]} \le Cn\Vert  P_n

1586: w\Vert  _{L_\infty  [-1,1]},

1587: \end{equation}

1588: the Markov-Bernstein inequality

1589: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.17}

1590: \Vert  P^\pr_n w\Vert  _{L_\infty  [-1,1]} \le Cn^2 \Vert  P_n

1591: w\Vert  _{L_\infty  [-1,1]} ,

1592: \end{equation}

1593: and the Nikol'skii-type inequality

1594: \begin{equation}\label{Eq9.18}

1595: \Vert  P_n w\Vert  _{L_\infty  [-1,1]} \le Cn^{2/p} \Vert  P_n

1596: w\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}, \q p <\infty  .

1597: \end{equation}

1598: For Jacobi-type weights (\ref{Eq9.18}) is improved on in the next

1599: section, but as applicable to all $w$ satisfying the $A^*$

1600: condition, the inequality (\ref{Eq9.18}) is best possible as well.

1601: 

1602: The multivariate analogues were not considered for algebraic

1603: polynomials. (For the multivariate situation on the sphere results

1604: using spherical harmonic polynomials are treated in \cite{Da06}.)

1605: The case $0<p<1$ for algebraic polynomials was not considered

1606: explicitly.  For trigonometric polynomials analogues of Bernstein,

1607: Marcinkiewicz, Nikol'skii and Schur type inequalities (but not the

1608: Jackson-type inequality) are given for $0<p$ and doubling weights or

1609: $A^*$ weights in \cite{Er}.  These results can probably be extended

1610: to algebraic polynomials with appropriate modifications but Erd\'elyi

1611: states ``For technical reasons we discuss only the trigonometric

1612: cases''.

1613: 

1614: 

1615: \section{Weighted moduli, Jacobi-type weights}\label{Sec10}

1616: 

1617: The Jacobi weights  given by

1618: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.1}

1619: w(x) = w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(x) = (1-x)^\alpha  (1+x)^\beta  , \q

1620: \alpha  >-1, \q \beta  >-1,

1621: \end{equation}

1622: are doubling weights, (that is, they satisfy (\ref{Eq9.1})), and for

1623: $\alpha  \ge 0,$ $\beta  \ge 0$ they are also $A^*$ type weights

1624: (i.e. satisfying (\ref{Eq9.4})).  Moreover, for $x\in

1625: [-1+\frac{1}{n^2}, 1-\frac{1}{n^2}]$ they satisfy $w(x)\approx

1626: w_n(x),$ and hence the discussion in the last section implies for

1627: $1\le p<\infty  $ and $w(x)$ (see \cite[Theorem 3.6]{Ma-To98})

1628: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.2}

1629: \begin{aligned}

1630: E_n(f)_{w,p} &\le C\;\us g{\text{inf}} \,\big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{w,p} +

1631: n^{-r}\Vert  g^{(r)}\varphi  ^{r}\Vert  _{w,p}\big)\\

1632: &\equiv CK_{r,\varphi  }(f,n^{-r})_{w,p}.

1633: \end{aligned}

1634: \end{equation}

1635: For $\alpha  \ge 0,$ $\beta  \ge 0$ (\ref{Eq10.2}) follows for

1636: $p=\infty  $ as well (see \cite[Theorem 1.2]{Ma-To99}.

1637: 

1638: For the Jacobi weights different $K\text{\rm -functionals}$

1639: (see \cite{Ch-Di97}, \cite{Di98} and

1640: \cite{Da-Di05}), which are given for $\alpha  >-1,$ $\beta  >-1$ by

1641: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.3}

1642: K_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,t^{2\gamma

1643: }\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} = \;\text{\rm inf}\, \big(\Vert

1644: f-g\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} + t^{2\gamma  }\Vert  P_{\alpha

1645: ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma   g\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}\big)

1646: \end{equation}

1647: where

1648: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.4}

1649: P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D) = -w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(x)^{-1} \,

1650: \frac{d}{dx}\; w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(x) (1-x^2)\;\frac{d}{dx}

1651: \end{equation}

1652: were shown to be useful.

1653: 

1654: We note that for integer $\gamma  $ the differential operator $\big(P_{\alpha  ,\beta

1655: }(D)\big)^\gamma  $ is defined in the usual way, and we describe it

1656: below for other $\gamma  $ in a manner similar to the way

1657: $P(D)^\gamma  $ was described in (\ref{Eq4.9}) (for the special case

1658: $\alpha  =\beta  =0).$  First, we recall the normalized Jacobi

1659: polynomial $\varphi  _n$ given by

1660: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.5}

1661: P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)\varphi  _n = n(n+\alpha  +\beta  +1)\varphi  _n, \q

1662: \int^1_{-1} \varphi  _n(x)\varphi  _k(x)w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(x)dx =

1663: \begin{cases}

1664: 1, &n=k\\

1665: 0, &n\ne k\end{cases}

1666: \end{equation}

1667: and the expansion of $f$ given by

1668: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.6}

1669: f(x)\sim \sum^\infty  _{k=0} a_k \varphi  _k \q\text{\rm where} \q a_k

1670: =\int^1_{-1} \varphi  _k(y)f(y)w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(y)dy, \q P_k

1671: f\equiv P^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_k f\equiv

1672: a_k\varphi  _k\,.

1673: \end{equation}

1674: 

1675: We now define $P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  $ by

1676: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.7}

1677: P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma   f\sim \sum^\infty  _{k=1}

1678: \big(k(k+\alpha  +\beta  +1)\big)^\gamma  P_k f,

1679: \end{equation}

1680: with $P_k f$ given in (\ref{Eq10.6})

1681: and $P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  f \in B$ whenever there exists

1682: $g\in B$ which satisfies $P^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_k g\equiv P_k g =

1683:  \big(k(k+\alpha  +\beta  +1)\big)^\gamma  P_k f.$

1684: 

1685: In \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Da-Di05} it was shown for $1<p<\infty  $ that

1686: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.8}

1687: \Vert  \varphi  ^r g^{(r)}\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} \approx

1688: \big\Vert  P_{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}(D)^{r/2} \big(g-S^{(\alpha  ,\beta

1689: )}_{r-1}g\big)\big\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1690: \end{equation}

1691: where $S^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_{r-1} g =\overset{r-1}{\us{k=0}{\sum}}

1692: P^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_k g.$

1693: 

1694: Clearly, for $1<p<\infty  $ (\ref{Eq10.8}) implies

1695: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.9}

1696: \begin{aligned}

1697: \big[\text{\rm inf}\, \big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1698: },p} &+ t^r\Vert  \varphi  ^r g^{(r)}\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1699: },p}\big)\big] + t^r E_1(f)  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}\\

1700: & \approx\;\text{\rm inf}\, \big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1701: },p} + t^r \Vert  P_{(\alpha  ,\beta  )} (D)^{r/2}g\Vert

1702: _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}\big).

1703: \end{aligned}

1704: \end{equation}

1705: For $p=1$ and $p=\infty  $ (\ref{Eq10.9}) is not valid in the case

1706: $\alpha  =\beta  =0.$

1707: 

1708: For smoothness given by $K  _\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta

1709: }(D)^\gamma  ,t^{2\gamma  }\big)_{L_p(w)}$ many results related to

1710: approximation were proved.  (Some are valid for all Banach spaces of

1711: functions for which the Ces\`aro summability of some order of the

1712: Jacobi expansion is bounded.)  The boundedness of the Ces\`aro summability of order

1713: $r,$ $r>\max\, (\alpha  +\frac 12,\beta  +\frac 12)$ for

1714: $L_{p,w}[-1,1]$ (with $w=w_{\alpha  ,\beta  })$

1715: was given in \cite[p.~190]{Ch-Di97} as a corollary of

1716: earlier results (see also \cite{Du-Xu} for the multivariate case),

1717: that is

1718: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.10}

1719: \Vert  C  ^r_nf\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} \le C\Vert

1720: f\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p},

1721: \end{equation}

1722: (where $C^r_nf \equiv C^r_n(f,x)$ is given by (\ref{Eq4.5}) with

1723: $\varphi_k  $ of (\ref{Eq10.5})).  Therefore,

1724: many theorems on polynomial approximation are valid.

1725: 

1726: The inequality (\ref{Eq10.10}) for $\alpha  >-1,$ $\beta  >-1$ and

1727: $1\le p\le \infty  $ yields the following results:

1728: 

1729: \vs\noi

1730: (A) A Bernstein-type inequality  given by

1731: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.11}

1732: \Vert  P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1733: },p} \le Cn^{2\gamma  }\Vert  P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1734: \end{equation}

1735: where $\gamma  >0$ (see \cite[(1.9)]{Ch-Di97} and \cite[(3.5)]{Di98}).

1736: 

1737: \vs

1738: \noi

1739: (B)  A direct or Jackson-type result  given by

1740: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.12}

1741: E_n(f)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} \le CK_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha

1742: ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,{n^{-2\gamma }}\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1743: },p}

1744: \end{equation}

1745: where $\gamma  >0$ (see \cite[(4.2)]{Ch-Di97} and \cite[(5.8) and

1746: (5.22)]{Di98}).

1747: 

1748: \vs\noi

1749: (C) A realization result  given by

1750: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.13}

1751: K_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,

1752: {n^{-2\gamma  }}\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1753: \approx \Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} +

1754: n^{-2\gamma  }\Vert  P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  P_n\Vert

1755: _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1756: \end{equation}

1757: where $P_n$ is the best approximant to $f$ (i.e. satisfies $E_n (f)_{w_{\alpha

1758: ,\beta  },p} = \Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p})$ or

1759: $P_n = V_n f$ where $V_n$ is a de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type operator

1760: (see \cite[(7.2)]{Di98}).  We remark that there are many operators

1761: of the de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin type and we may choose

1762: $$

1763: V_n f\sim \sum^\infty  _{k=0}  \eta  \Big(\frac kn\Big) P_k

1764: f\q\text{for} \q f\sim \sum^\infty  _{k=0}  P_k f

1765: $$

1766: where $\eta  (t) \in C^\infty  [0,\infty  ),$ $\eta  (t) =1$ for

1767: $t\le 1,$ and $\eta  (t) =0$ for $t\ge 2$ for example.

1768: 

1769: \vs\noi

1770: (D) The Marchaud-type inequality  given by

1771: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.14}

1772: K_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,t^{2\gamma

1773: }\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1774: \le Ct^{2\gamma  }\,\int^1_t\;\frac{K_\eta  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta

1775:  }(D)^\eta  , u^{2\eta  })_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}}{u^{2\gamma  +1}}\; du, \q \eta  >\gamma

1776: >0

1777: \end{equation}

1778: (see \cite[(5.25)]{Ch-Di97} and \cite[(6.7)]{Di98}).

1779: 

1780: \vs\noi

1781: (E)  The converse-type inequality  given by

1782: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.15}

1783: K_\gamma  \Big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,

1784: \frac{1}{n^{2\gamma  }}\Big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1785: \le Cn^{-2\gamma  } \sum^n_{k=1} k^{2\gamma  -1}E_k(f)_{w_{\alpha

1786: ,\beta  },p}

1787: \end{equation}

1788: (see \cite[(5.23)]{Ch-Di97} and \cite[(6.6)]{Di98}).

1789: 

1790: \vs\noi

1791: (F) As a result of simultaneous approximation, one has

1792: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.16}

1793: E_n (f)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} \le Cn^{-2\gamma

1794: }E_n\big(P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  f\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1795: },p}

1796: \end{equation}

1797: whenever $P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma   f\in L_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1798:  },p} $ (see \cite[(7.3)]{Di98}).

1799: 

1800: In addition, we have the sharp Marchaud-type inequality

1801: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.17}

1802: K_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,t^{2\gamma

1803: }\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1804: \le Ct^{2\gamma  }\,\Big\{\int^1_t\;\frac{K_\eta  \big(f,P_{\alpha

1805: ,\beta  }(D)^\eta  ,u^{2\eta  })^q_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}} {u^{2\gamma  q+1}}

1806: \,du \Big\}^{1/q}

1807: \end{equation}

1808: for $0<\gamma  <\eta  ,$ $1<p<\infty  $ and $q=\min\, (p,2),$ which

1809: was proved in \cite[(6.8)]{Da-Di05} and we also have the corresponding

1810: sharp converse result

1811: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.18}

1812: K_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,t^{2\gamma

1813: }\big)_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1814: \le Ct^{2\gamma  }\Big(\sum_{1\le n<1/t}\, n^{2\gamma  q-1}

1815: E_n(f)^q_{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p} \Big)^{1/q}

1816: \end{equation}

1817: for $0<\gamma  ,$ $1<p<\infty  $ and $q=\,\min\,(p,2)$ (see

1818: \cite[(6.10)]{Da-Di05}).

1819: 

1820: Another inequality related to Jacobi weights is the Nikol'skii-type

1821: inequality

1822: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.19}

1823: \Vert  P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },q} \le Cn^{\gamma  (\frac

1824: 1p-\frac 1q)} \Vert  P_n\Vert  _{w_{\alpha  ,\beta  },p}

1825: \q\text{for} \q P_n\in \Pi_n,

1826: \end{equation}

1827: where $\gamma  =\,\max\,\big(2+2\,\max\,(\alpha  ,\beta  ),1\big)$

1828: and $0<p<q\le \infty  $ (see \cite[Theorem 6.6]{Di-Ti05} for a

1829: somewhat more general result and a simple proof).  The inequality

1830: (\ref{Eq10.19}) is also best possible (like (\ref{Eq9.14}) and

1831: (\ref{Eq9.15})) as equality holds for $p=2$ and $q=\infty  .$

1832: 

1833: Recently (see \cite[Theorem 6.1]{Da-Di-Ti}) a sharp version of the

1834: Jackson inequality (\ref{Eq10.12}) for $1<p<\infty  $ $(p\ne

1835: 1,\infty  )$ was given by

1836: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.20a}

1837: 2^{-2n\gamma  } \Big\{\sum^n_{j=1} 2^{2j\gamma  s}

1838: E_{2^j}(f)^s_{L_{p,w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }}[-1,1]} \Big\}^{1/s}

1839: \le CK_\gamma  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,2^{-2n\gamma

1840: }\big)_{L_{p,w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }}[-1,1]}

1841: \end{equation}

1842: where $s=\max\,(p,2)$ and $\gamma  >0.$  Similarly, a form

1843: equivalent to (\ref{Eq10.20a}) comparing $K$-functionals and

1844: extending (\ref{Eq10.14}) for $1<p<\infty  $ was achieved (see

1845: \cite[(6.3)]{Da-Di-Ti}) and is given for $\zeta  >\gamma  $ and

1846: $s=\max\,(p,2)$ by

1847: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.21a}

1848: \begin{aligned}

1849: 2^{-nr} \Big\{\sum^n_{j=1} &2^{2j\gamma  s} K_\zeta  \big(f,P_{\alpha

1850:  ,\beta  } (D)^\zeta  ,2^{-2j\zeta  }\big)^s_{L_{p,w_{\alpha  ,\beta

1851:  }}[-1,1]} \Big\}^{1/s}\\

1852: &\le CK_{\gamma}  \big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D)^\gamma  ,2^{-2n\gamma

1853: }\big)_{L_{p,w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }}[-1,1]}.

1854: \end{aligned}

1855: \end{equation}

1856: 

1857: For Jacobi weights the Durrmeyer operator

1858: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.20}

1859: M^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_n f\equiv M^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_n(f,x)

1860: =\sum^n_{k=1} \big(A^{(\alpha  ,\beta

1861: )}_{n,k}\big)^{-1}P_{n,k}(x)\int^1_{0}P_{n,k}(y)f(y)w_{\alpha

1862: ,\beta  }(y)dy

1863: \end{equation}

1864: where $P_{n,k}$ is given in (\ref{Eq8.1}) and $ A_{n,k}

1865: =\int^{1}_{0} P_{n,k}(y)w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(y)dy$

1866: satisfies a strong converse inequality with the $K\text{\rm

1867: -functional}$ given in (\ref{Eq10.3}).

1868: That is,

1869: \begin{equation}\label{Eq10.21}

1870: \Vert  f-M^{(\alpha  ,\beta  )}_n f\Vert  _p \approx

1871: K_1\Big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D),\,\frac 1n\Big)_p

1872: \end{equation}

1873: where $K_1\big(f,P_{\alpha  ,\beta  }(D),\,\frac 1n\big)_p$ is given

1874: in (\ref{Eq10.3}) (with $\gamma  =1$ and $t^2=n^{-1}).$

1875: This will be discussed, together with

1876: its multivariate analogues, in Section \ref{Sec12}.

1877: 

1878: For more information on weighted approximation with Jacobi weights

1879: see Section \ref{Sec18}.

1880: 

1881: 

1882: 

1883: \section{Weighted moduli, Freud weights}\label{Sec11}

1884: 

1885: To approximate functions on ${\IR}$ by polynomials, one needs to consider

1886: weighted approximation.  A detailed discussion of this problem

1887: appears in the major survey on that topic by Lubinsky \cite{Lu}.

1888: Other important sources on the subject are the books by Levin and

1889: Lubinsky \cite{Le-Lu} and by Mhaskar \cite{Mh}.  Here we just

1890: briefly outline the results related to polynomial approximation and

1891: put them in the context of this survey.

1892: 

1893: To investigate the rate of approximation by polynomials to a

1894: function in $L_{p}(W,\IR)$ given by the norm or quasinorm $\Vert

1895: Wf\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)},$

1896: one must first ascertain for which type of

1897: weights $W(x)$  polynomials are dense in $L_{p}(W,\IR).$  Necessary

1898: and sufficient conditions on $W(x)$ were given by Akhieser,

1899: Carleson, Mergelian and Pollard.  (For a more detailed discussion

1900: see \cite[Section 1]{Lu}).

1901: 

1902: We deal here with Freud weights (see \cite{Fr}, \cite{Lu} and

1903: \cite{Mh}) which are given by

1904: $W(x) =$

1905: \newline $\exp\,\big(-Q(x)\big)$ with $Q(x)$ an even continuous

1906: function, with

1907: $Q^{\pr\pr}(x)$ continuous, $Q^\pr(x)$ positive in $(0,\infty  ),$ and

1908: for some $a,b>0$

1909: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.1}

1910: a\le \frac{xQ^{\pr\pr}(x)}{Q^\pr(x)} \le b\q\text{\rm for}\q x\in

1911: (0,\infty  ).

1912: \end{equation}

1913: In fact, the results are valid for somewhat more general $Q(x),$ but

1914: the most prominent cases, that is, when $Q(x) = \vert  x\vert

1915: ^\alpha  ,$ $\alpha  >1$ already satisfy the above conditions. To

1916: define moduli of smoothness, $K$-functionals, and realization

1917: functionals for the spaces $L_{p,W}(\IR)$ of functions satisfying

1918: $Wf\in L_p(\IR),$

1919: one needs to define the

1920: Mhaskar-Rahmanov-Saff number $a_n$ which is the root of

1921: \begin{equation} \label{Eq11.2}

1922: n =\frac 2\pi \;\int^1_0 \;\frac{a_n tQ^\pr(a_nt)dt}{\sqrt{1-t^2}}

1923: \,, \q n>0.

1924: \end{equation}

1925: The number $a_n$ gives rise to the crucial Remez-type inequalities

1926: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.3}

1927: \Vert  PW\Vert  _{L_\infty  (\IR)} \le \Vert  PW\Vert  _{L_\infty

1928: (-a_n,a_n)} \q\text{\rm for}\q  P\in \Pi_n,

1929: \end{equation}

1930: and for $0<p<\infty  $

1931: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.4}

1932: \Vert  PW\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)} \le (1+e^{-Cn}) \Vert  PW\Vert

1933: _{L_p(\vert  x\vert  <a_n+\varepsilon  )} \q\text{\rm for}\q  P\in \Pi_n

1934: \end{equation}

1935: where $C=C(p,\varepsilon  ,W)$ does not depend on $n.$

1936: 

1937: The modulus of smoothness is given by

1938: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.5}

1939: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p =\us{0<h\le t}\sup\; \Vert  W\Delta  ^r_h f\Vert

1940:  _{L_p[-\sigma  (h),\sigma  (h)]} + \us{P\in \Pi_r}\inf\;\Vert

1941: W(f-P)\Vert  _{L_p[\vert  x\vert  \ge \sigma  (t)]}

1942: \end{equation}

1943: where

1944: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.6}

1945: \sigma  (h) =\,\inf\,\Big\{a_n:\,\frac{a_n}{n}\le h\Big\}

1946: \end{equation}

1947: and

1948: $$

1949: \Delta  ^r_h f(x) = \sum^r_{i=0} \,\binom r i (-1)^i

1950: f\big(x+\frac{rh}{2} - ih\big).

1951: $$

1952: We observe that for $W_\alpha  (x) = e^{-\vert  x\vert  ^\alpha  }$

1953: with

1954: $\alpha  >1,$ $a_n\approx n^{1/\alpha  }$ and $\sigma

1955: \big(\frac{a_n}{n}\big)\approx a_n.$  We also note that, following

1956: \cite{Di-Lu}, the second term on the right of (\ref{Eq11.5}) is

1957: different from that in \cite[Chapter 11, (11.2.2)]{Di-To87} to

1958: accommodate the space $L_{p,W}(\IR)$

1959: of functions for which $Wf\in L_p(\IR)$

1960: with $0<p<1.$  (For $1\le p\le

1961: \infty  $ the two forms are equivalent.)

1962: 

1963: The rate of best polynomial approximation is given by

1964: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.7}

1965: E_n(f)_{W,p} =\,\inf\,(\Vert  W(f-P)\Vert  _{L_p(R)}: P\in \Pi_n).

1966: \end{equation}

1967: 

1968: The $K$-functional is given by

1969: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.8}

1970: K_r(f,W,t^r)_p =\,\us g\inf\, \big(\Vert  (f-g)W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)} +

1971: t^r\Vert  g^{(r)}W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}\big),

1972: \end{equation}

1973: which, following the technique in \cite{Di-Hr-Iv}, satisfies

1974: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.9}

1975: K_r(f,W,t^r)_p =0 \q \text{\rm for} \q Wf\in L_p(\IR) \q \text{\rm

1976: when}\q  0<p<1.

1977: \end{equation}

1978: The realization functional $\wt{R}_r(f,W,t^r)_p$ is given by

1979: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.10}

1980: \wt{R}_r (f,W,t^r)_p = \inf\Big\{\Vert  (f-P)W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}

1981: + t^r\Vert  P^{(r)}W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}: P\in \Pi_n,

1982:  \; n = \inf\,\big(k: \frac{a_k}{k}\le t\big)\Big\}

1983: \end{equation}

1984: (see \cite{Di-Lu}), or by its equivalent form

1985: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.11}

1986: R_r(f,W,t^r)_p = \Vert  (f-P_n)W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)} + t^r \Vert

1987: P^{(r)}_nW\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}

1988: \end{equation}

1989: where

1990: $ n = \,\inf\,\big(k:\,\frac{a_k}{k}\le t\big)$ for $P_n$

1991: satisfying $E_n(f)_{W,p} = \Vert  (f-P_n)W\Vert  _p,$ and $P_n\in \Pi_n.$

1992: 

1993: For $1\le p\le \infty  $ a de la Vall\'ee Poussin-type expression

1994: $V_nf$ can replace $P_n$ in (\ref{Eq11.11}).  We note that because

1995: of the boundedness of the Ces\`aro summability of order $1,$ $V_n$

1996: may be given by the classical form

1997: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.12}

1998: V_n(f,x) = 2C_{2n}(f,x) - C_n(f,x), \q C_n(f,x) = C^1_n(f,x)

1999: \end{equation}

2000: where $C^\ell_n(f,x)$ is given by (\ref{Eq4.5})

2001: $\big(C_n(f,x) = C^1_n(f,x)\big)$

2002: with $\varphi

2003: %_k\in \Pi_{k+1}\,,$  orthonormal polynomials with respect to $W,$ i.e

2004: _k\in \Pi_{k+1}\,,$  orthonormal polynomials with respect to $W,$ i.e.

2005: $$

2006: \int_{\IR} \varphi  _k\varphi  _\ell W^2=\begin{cases} 1, &k= \ell\\ 0, &k\ne

2007: \ell.\end{cases}

2008: $$

2009: The properties $V_nf\in \Pi_{2n},$ $V_n P = P$ for $P\in \Pi_n$ and

2010: $\Vert W V_nf\Vert  _p \le A\Vert W f\Vert  _p$ are clear and given

2011: for instance in \cite[p.~70]{Mh}.  We note that $\eta  _n f$ given

2012: by (\ref{Eq5.4}) is also a de~la~Vall\'ee Poussin-type operator, and

2013: $\Vert  W\eta  _n f\Vert  _p\le C\Vert W f\Vert  _p$ follows from

2014: $\Vert  WC_n f\Vert  _p\le A_1\Vert W f\Vert  _p$ and summation by

2015: parts (Abel transformation).

2016: 

2017: We define the realization with $V_n$ by

2018: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.13}

2019: R^*_r(f,W,t^r)_p = \Vert  (f-V_nf)W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)} + t^r\,\Big\Vert

2020: W\Big(\frac{d}{dx}\Big)^r V_nf\Big\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}\,,

2021: \end{equation}

2022: where $n= \inf\,(k:\frac{a_k}{k}\le t)$

2023: and we note that as $V_nf$ and $R^*_r$ are not defined for

2024: $0<p<1,$ the equivalence

2025: $R^*_r(f,W,t^r)_p \approx R_r(f,W,t^r)_p$ is valid only for

2026: $1\le p\le \infty  .$

2027: 

2028: For $0<p\le \infty  $ one has

2029: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.13a}

2030: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p\approx R_r(f,W,t^r)_p\approx

2031: \wt{R}_r(f,W,t^r)_p\,.

2032: \end{equation}

2033: For $1\le p\le \infty  $ one has

2034: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.14}

2035: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p\approx K_r(f,W,t^r)_p \approx R^*_r(f,W,t^r)_p\,.

2036: \end{equation}

2037: 

2038: The Markov-Bernstein inequality is given by

2039: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.15}

2040: \Vert  P^\pr W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)} \le C\,\frac{n}{a_n}\, \Vert  PW\Vert

2041:  _{L_p(\IR)}, \q P\in \Pi_n, \q 0<p\le \infty

2042: \end{equation}

2043: where $C=C(p,W)$ does not depend on $n$ or $P$ (see the discussion in

2044: \cite{Le-Lu}).  The Jackson inequality (see \cite[p.~102]{Di-Lu}) is

2045: given by

2046: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.16}

2047: E_n (f) _p\le C_1 \omega  ^r\big(f,W,C_2(a_n/n)\big)_p, \q 0<p\le \infty  ,

2048: \end{equation}

2049: where $C_i$ are independent of $n$ and $f.$ Also $C_2$ can be

2050: replaced by $1$ for $1\le p\le \infty  $ (see \cite[p.~104]{Di-Lu}).

2051:  Furthermore, we have the converse (to (\ref{Eq11.16})) result (see

2052: \cite[p.~105]{Di-Lu}) given by

2053: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.17}

2054: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)^q_p \le C\Big(\frac{a_n}{n}\Big)^{rq}

2055: \,\sum^\ell_{j=0}\,\Big(\frac{2^j}{a_{2^j}}\Big)^{rq}

2056: E_{2^j}(f)^q_{w,p}, \q 0<p\le \infty  ,\q q=\,\min\,(p,1)

2057: \end{equation}

2058: for $t$ small enough and $n=\,\inf\,\big(k:\frac{a_k}{k}\le t\big).$

2059: As a corollary of (\ref{Eq11.16}) and (\ref{Eq11.17}), we have the

2060: Marchaud-type inequality (see \cite[p.~105]{Di-Lu}) for $0<p\le \infty

2061: ,$ $q=\,\min\,(p,1)$ given by

2062: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.18}

2063: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p \le C_1 t^r\,\Big\{\int^1_t\;\frac{\omega

2064: ^{r+1}(f,W,t)^q_p}{u^{rq+1}}\;du +\Vert  fW\Vert  ^q_p\Big\}^{1/q}.

2065: \end{equation}

2066: For $1\le p\le \infty  $ one has

2067: \begin{equation}\label{Eq11.19}

2068: \omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p\le Ct^r\Vert  f^{(r)}W\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}\,.

2069: \end{equation}

2070: As the saturation class of $\omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p$ for $0<p<1$ is

2071: $O(t^\gamma  )$ with $\gamma  >r,$ (\ref{Eq11.19}) is not useful for

2072: that range.

2073: 

2074: I conjecture that for $1<p<\infty  $ a sharp Marchaud and a sharp

2075: Jackson inequality will eventually be established.  That is, for

2076: $1<p<\infty , $ (\ref{Eq11.17}) and (\ref{Eq11.18}) will be proved

2077: with $q=\,\min\,(p,2)$ rather than with $q=\,\min\,(p,1),$ and

2078: an analogue of (\ref{Eq2.8}) with

2079: $s=\,\max\,(p,2)$ will replace (\ref{Eq11.16}).

2080: 

2081: I will deal with Nikol'skii and Ul'yanov-type inequalities in Section

2082: \ref{Sec13} and with multivariate analogues (essentially the lack

2083: thereof) in Section \ref{Sec12}.

2084: 

2085: 

2086: \section{Multivariate polynomial

2087: approximation}\label{Sec12}

2088: 

2089: The space of polynomials of total degree smaller than $n,\Pi_n$ is

2090: given by

2091: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.1}

2092: \Pi_n =\;\spa\,\Big\{x^{\alpha  _1}_1 \cdots x^{\alpha  _d}_d: \,

2093: \alpha  _i=0,1,2,\dots, \,\alpha _1+\dots +\alpha  _d <n\Big\}.

2094: \end{equation}

2095: 

2096: It is a natural question to ask for what spaces of functions and on

2097: what domains one can extend the Bernstein, Jackson, Marchaud and

2098: other inequalities.  In this section we will outline the progress

2099: made after the text \cite{Di-To87} appeared.

2100: 

2101: For a convex set $S$ in $\IR^d$ it was shown in \cite[Theorem2.1]{Di92}

2102: that the Bernstein inequality on the interval can be copied to read

2103: for $0<p\le \infty  $ and $r=1,2,\dots$

2104: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.2}

2105: \Big\Vert  \wt d(\bx,\bxi  )^{r/2}\Big(\pd{}{\bxi  }\Big)^r

2106: P_n(\bx)\Big\Vert  _{L_p(S)} \le Cn^r \Vert  P_n\Vert  _{L_p(S)}

2107: \q\text{\rm for}\q P_n\in \Pi_n

2108: \end{equation}

2109: with $C$ independent of $\bxi  ,n,P_n$ and $S$ and with $\wt d(\bx,\bxi

2110: )$ which was introduced in \cite{Di92} and given by

2111: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.3}

2112: \varphi  _{\bxi}  (\bx)^2\equiv \wt d(\bx,\bxi  ) \equiv \wt d_S(\bx,\bxi  ) =

2113: \us{\bx+\lambda  \bxi  \in S}{\sup\,\lambda} \;  \us{\bx-\mu  \bxi  \in

2114: S}{\sup\, \mu}  , \q \bx\in S, \q \vert  \bxi  \vert  =1.

2115: \end{equation}

2116: 

2117: We note that when $S$ is unbounded, (\ref{Eq12.2}) is meaningless,

2118: and the same is true when the interior of $S$ is empty and $p<\infty

2119:  ,$ so we may as well consider only bounded convex sets $S$ with

2120: non-empty interior. The introduction of $\varphi  _{\bxi}  (\bx)^2 =

2121: \wt d(\bx,\bxi)$ in \cite{Di92}, which in (\ref{Eq12.2}) yields a

2122: constant independent of $S,$ is natural since for $S=[-1,1]\subset

2123: \IR,$ (for which only $\xi  $ is equal to $\pm e$ where $e= (0,1)$

2124: is possible), $\varphi  (x) =\wt d_S(x,\xi  )^{1/2} = \sqrt{1-x^2}\,.$

2125: 

2126: The Markov-type inequality for a bounded convex set with non-empty

2127: interior $S\subset R^d$ was given by (see \cite[Theorem 4.1]{Di92})

2128: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.4}

2129: \Big\Vert  \Big(\pd{}{\bxi  }\Big)^r P_n \Big\Vert  _{L_p(S)} \le

2130: Cn^{2r}\Vert  P_n\Vert  _{L_p(S)}, \q P_n \in \Pi_n

2131: \end{equation}

2132: where $C$ depends on $S$ and $\bxi$ but not on $n$ or $P_n.$

2133: 

2134: The Remez-type inequality (see \cite[Theorem 3.1]{Di92}) for a

2135: bounded convex set $S$ with non-empty interior is given by

2136: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.5}

2137: \Vert  P_n\Vert  _{L_p(S)} \le C(p,L,S)\Vert  P_n\Vert

2138: _{L_p(S(L,n))},

2139: \end{equation}

2140: where $S(L,n) =\{\bu:B(\bu,L/n^2)\subset S\}$ and $B(\bx,r)$ is the

2141: ball of center $\bx$ and radius $r.$

2142: 

2143: Inequalities like (\ref{Eq12.4}) were studied extensively and for

2144: various more general multivariate domains, but the polynomial

2145: approximation and its relations to concepts of smoothness

2146: generalizing $\omega

2147:  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)$ were not tackled even if one assumes that we are

2148: dealing with a general bounded convex set with non-empty interior.

2149: 

2150: In \cite[Chapter 12]{Di-To87} the direct and the weak converse

2151: inequalities were proved for $L_p(S)$ (when $1\le p\le \infty  )$

2152: and where $S$ is a simple polytope.  We recall that a polytope is

2153: the convex hull of finitely many points in $\IR^d,$ and a simple

2154: polytope is a polytope all of whose vertices are joined to other

2155: vertices by exactly $d$ edges.  A simplex and a box or a cube are

2156: perhaps the most familiar simple polytopes. The Egyptian pyramid is

2157: not a simple polytope.

2158: 

2159: The moduli of smoothness on a polytope $S$

2160: can be given by

2161: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.6}

2162: \wt\omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)} =

2163: \us{ {{\vert  h\vert  <t}\atop{\bu \in E(S)}}\atop{\bv = \bu/\vert

2164: \bu\vert   }}{\text{\rm sup}}

2165: \,\Vert  \Delta  ^r_{h

2166: \wt d(\bx,\bv)^{1/2}\bv}f(\bx)\Vert  _{L_p(S)}

2167: \end{equation}

2168: where $E(S)$ is the set of edges of $S$ and

2169: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.7}

2170: \Delta  ^r_{h\wt d(\bx,\bv)^{1/2}\bv} f(\bx)

2171: = \begin{cases} \os r{\us{k=0}\sum} (-1)^k\binom rk f\Big(\bx + \big(\frac

2172: r2-k\big)h\wt d(\bx,\bv)^{1/2}\bv\Big), &\bx\pm\frac r2 h\wt

2173: d(\bx,\bv)^{1/2}\bv\in S\\

2174: 0\;, &\text{\rm otherwise}.\end{cases}

2175: \end{equation}

2176: 

2177: We may also define $\omega  ^r_S(f,t)_p$ as

2178: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.8}

2179: \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)} =\us{ {\vert  h\vert  \le

2180: t}\atop{\vert  \bv\vert  =1 \; \bv \in \IR^d}}\sup \;\Vert

2181: \Delta  ^r_{h\wt d(\bx,\bv)^{1/2}\bv} f(\bx)\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\,,

2182: \end{equation}

2183: which is defined for all convex sets $S.$  It is known that for

2184: $p=1$ and $p=\infty  $ and for a simple polytope $S,$  $\wt \omega

2185: _S(f,t)_p$ is not equivalent to $\omega  _S(f,t)_p$ (see

2186: \cite[Remark 12.2.1]{Di-To87}).  I expect that for $1<p<\infty  $ and a

2187: simple polytope $S,$ $\omega  _S(f,t)_p\approx \wt\omega  _S(f,t)_p,$

2188: though this was not yet proved.  The definition of the moduli of

2189: smoothness in (\ref{Eq12.6}) and (\ref{Eq12.8}) are different from

2190: those in \cite{Di-To87} only in style, using here the somewhat more

2191: convenient concept $\wt d(\bx,\bxi  )$ given in (\ref{Eq12.3}).  For a

2192: simple polytope $S$ the Jackson inequality, given by

2193: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.9}

2194: E_n(f)_{L_p(S)} \equiv \us{P\in \Pi_n}{\text{\rm inf}}\;\Vert

2195: f-P\Vert  _{L_p(S)} \le C\wt \omega  ^r_S\Big(f,\frac

2196: 1n\Big)_{L_p(S)}, \q 0<p\le \infty

2197: \end{equation}

2198: was proved in \cite[Chapter 12]{Di-To87} for $1\le p\le \infty  $ and

2199: in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Di96} for $0<p<1.$

2200: 

2201: If the boundary effect is ignored, a Jackson-type estimate is

2202: possible for a much more general domain $\SD.$  We define the

2203: modulus $\omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(D)}$ by

2204: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.10}

2205: \omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(\cal D)} =\us{\vert  \bh\vert  \le t}\sup\, \Vert

2206: \Delta  ^r_{\bh}f\Vert  _{L_p(\cal D)}

2207: \end{equation}

2208: where

2209: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.11}

2210: \Delta  ^r_{\bh} f(\bx) =\begin{cases}

2211: \os r{\us{k=0}\sum} (-1)^k \binom rk f\Big(\bx +\bh \big(\frac r2

2212: -k\big)\Big), &\Big\{\bx + \tau  \bh:\vert  \tau  \vert  \le \frac

2213: r2\Big\}\subset \cal D\\

2214: 0, &\text{\rm otherwise.}

2215: \end{cases}

2216: \end{equation}

2217: 

2218: If one can extend $f$ to be defined on a cube $Q$ in such a way that

2219: $g= Ef$ defined on $Q$ satisfies

2220: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.12}

2221: \omega  ^r(g,t)_{L_p(Q)} \le C\omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(D)} \q\text{\rm

2222: and}\q

2223: f(\bx)

2224: =g(\bx)\q\text{\rm for}\q \bx\in \cal D,

2225: \end{equation}

2226: and if $Q\supset Q^*\supset D$ where $Q^*+\bxi \subset Q$ for $\vert

2227:  \bxi \vert  \le 1,$ then (\ref{Eq12.9}) clearly implies

2228: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.13}

2229: E_n (f) _{L_p(\cal D)} \le C\omega  ^r(f,t)_{L_p(\cal D)}.

2230: \end{equation}

2231: Such an extension of $f$ on $\cal D$ is discussed for instance in

2232: \cite{De-Sh}, and the results there are given for all $p$ and for

2233: many bounded domains.

2234: 

2235: However, formulae like (\ref{Eq12.13}) are a departure from the topic

2236: of this survey, as the effect of being near the boundary is

2237: neglected.  Moreover, there is no hope of having a matching converse

2238: result to (\ref{Eq12.13}) as the results described below will imply.

2239: 

2240: For a simple polytope $S$ the converse result (see \cite[Theorem

2241: 12.2.3]{Di-To87} for $1\le p\le \infty  $ and \cite{Di96} for

2242: $0<p<1)$ is given by

2243: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.14}

2244: \begin{aligned}

2245: \wt \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)} &\le \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}\\

2246: &\le Mt^r \Big\{\us{1\le k\le \frac 1t}\sum\,k^{rq-1}

2247: E_k(f)^q_{L_p(S)}\Big\}^{1/q}

2248: \end{aligned}

2249: \end{equation}

2250: with $q=\min\,(p,1).$

2251: 

2252: The Marchaud-type variation of (\ref{Eq12.14}) given by

2253: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.15}

2254: \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)} \le

2255: C\Big\{\int^1_t\,\frac{\omega  ^{r+1}_S(f,u  )^q_p }{u^{rq+1}}\;du +

2256: \Vert  f\Vert  ^q_{L_p(S)}\Big\}^{1/q}

2257: \end{equation}

2258: for $0<p\le \infty  ,$ $q=\min \,(p,1)$ and $C=C(r,p,S)$ independent

2259: of $f$ and $t$ was proved for a simple polytope $S$ and $1\le p\le

2260: \infty  $ in \cite{Di-To87} and for $0<p<1$ in \cite[Theorem

2261: 5.1]{Di96}.

2262: 

2263: We note that one does not have the sharp versions of the Jackson,

2264: Marchaud and the (weak) converse inequality, that is, the

2265: analogues of (\ref{Eq2.8}), (\ref{Eq6.6}) and (\ref{Eq6.4}) to

2266: replace (for simple polytopes and $1<p<\infty  )$ the inequalities

2267: (\ref{Eq12.9}), (\ref{Eq12.14}) and (\ref{Eq12.15}) respectively. I

2268: believe that such results will eventually be proved.  For the

2269: simplex (see \cite{Da-Di07}) (\ref{Eq12.10}) was extended, and that

2270: result will be described later in this section.

2271: 

2272: For $1\le p\le \infty  $ and a simple polytope $S,$ $\wt \omega

2273: ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}$ and $\omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)} $ are equivalent

2274: to the $K$-functionals $\wt K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)}$ and

2275: $K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)}$ respectively as stated in the following

2276: formulae:

2277: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.16}

2278: \begin{aligned}

2279: \wt K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)}

2280: &\equiv \,\us g{\text{\rm inf}}\;\Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{L_p(S)} +

2281: t^r \,\us{\bxi  \in E(S)}\sup\;\Big\Vert  \varphi  ^r_{\bxi }

2282: \Big(\pd{}{\bxi  }\Big)^r g\Big\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\Big)\\

2283: &\approx \wt \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}

2284: \end{aligned}

2285: \end{equation}

2286: and

2287: $$

2288: \begin{aligned}

2289: K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)}

2290: &\equiv \;\us g{\text{\rm inf}}\;\Big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{L_p(S)} +

2291: t^r \,\us \bv{\text{\rm sup}}\, \Big\Vert  \varphi  ^r_{\bv}

2292: \Big(\pd{}{\bv}\Big)^r g\Big\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\Big)\\

2293: &\approx \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}

2294: \end{aligned}\eqno{(12.16)^\prime}

2295: $$

2296: where $\varphi  _\xi  $ is given by (\ref{Eq12.3}).

2297: 

2298: While it was not shown explicitly in \cite{Di-Hr-Iv}, the method

2299: there for $f\in L_p(S)$ with $0<p<1$ implies the equality

2300: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.17}

2301: K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)} = \wt K_{r,S}(f,t^r)_{L_p(S)} = 0.

2302: \end{equation}

2303: This just adds to the interest in the realization concept.

2304: 

2305: It was shown in \cite[(4.4)]{Di96} that

2306: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.18}

2307: \wt \omega  ^r_S \big(f,\frac 1n\big)_{L_p(S)}

2308: \approx \wt R_{r,S}(f,n^{-r})_{L_p(S)} \equiv \Vert  f-P_n\Vert  +

2309: n^{-r}\,\us{\bxi  \in E_S}{\text{\rm sup}}\, \Big\Vert  \varphi

2310: ^r_{\bxi}  \Big(\pd{}{\bxi  }\Big)^r P_n\Big\Vert  _{L_p(S)}

2311: \end{equation}

2312: where $0<p\le \infty  ,$ $r=1,2,\dots,$ $S$ is a simple polytope and

2313: $P_n$ a near best $n$-th degree polynomial approximant of $f$ in

2314: $L_p(S).$  (A similar result holds for $\omega  ^r_S\big(f,\frac

2315: 1n\big)_{L_p(S)}.)$

2316: 

2317: The multivariate Bernstein polynomials on a simplex $S\subset \IR^d$ where

2318: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.19}

2319: S=\Big\{(x_1,\dots,x_d):\, 0\le x_i,\, 0\le x_0 = 1 -\sum^d_{i=1}

2320: x_i\Big\}

2321: \end{equation}

2322: is given by

2323: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.20}

2324: B_n(f,\bx) = \sum_{\vert  \bk\vert  \le n} P_{n,\bk} (\bx)

2325: f\Big(\frac \bk n\Big)

2326: \end{equation}

2327: where $\bk = (k_1,\dots,k_d), $\; $\vert  \bk\vert  =\os

2328: d{\us{i=1}\sum} k_i,$\; $k_0= 1-\vert  \bk\vert  ,$ \; $x_0 = 1-\vert

2329:  \bx\vert  ,$ and

2330: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.21}

2331: P_{n,\bk} (\bx) =\frac{n!}{k_0! k_1! \dots k_d!} \, x^{k_0}_0

2332: x^{k_1}_1 \dots x^{k_d}_d\,.

2333: \end{equation}

2334: 

2335: The Bernstein polynomial is a contraction operator on $C(S)$ with

2336: the Voronovskaja

2337: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.22}

2338: n\big(B_n f(\bx) - f(\bx)\big) \to \frac 12\;\sum_{\bxi  \in

2339: E_S,\,\bxi ={\pmb\zeta}  /\vert {\pmb \zeta}  \vert  } \wt

2340: d_S(\bx,\bxi)\Big(\pd{}{\bxi  }\Big)^2 f(\bx) \equiv P_S(D).

2341: \end{equation}

2342: In earlier texts a long form of (\ref{Eq12.22}) was discussed, but

2343: the use of (\ref{Eq12.3}) yields the compact expression

2344: (\ref{Eq12.22}), which also demonstrates the intrinsic symmetry among

2345: the edges.

2346: 

2347: The strong converse inequality

2348: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.23}

2349: \Vert  B_n f-f\Vert  _{C(S)} \approx

2350: K\big(f,P_S(D),n^{-1}\big)_{C(S)}

2351: =\us g{\text{\rm inf}}\, \big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{C(S)} + n^{-1}\Vert

2352:  P_S(D)g\Vert  _{C(S)}\big)

2353: \end{equation}

2354: for $S,$ $B_nf\equiv B_n(f,x)$ and $P_S(D)$ given in

2355: (\ref{Eq12.19}), (\ref{Eq12.20}) and (\ref{Eq12.22}) respectively

2356: was claimed in \cite{Zh}.

2357: 

2358: For $\alpha  <2$ one has

2359: $$

2360: E_n(f)_{C(S)} = O\Big(\frac{1}{n^\alpha  }\Big) \Longleftrightarrow \Vert

2361:  B_nf-f\Vert  _{C(S)} = O\Big(\frac{1}{n^{\alpha  /2}}\Big)\,,

2362: $$

2363: which was known earlier.

2364: 

2365: The multivariate Durrmeyer-Bernstein polynomial approximation on the

2366: simplex $S$ (given by (\ref{Eq12.19})) with the Jacobi weight

2367: $w_{\bal}(\bx)$ given by

2368: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.24}

2369: w_{\bal}(\bx) = \big(1-\vert  \bx\vert  \big)^{\alpha  _0} x^{\alpha

2370: _1}_1 \dots x^{\alpha  _d}_d, \q \alpha  _i >-1, \q \bx \in S

2371: \end{equation}

2372: for $\bal = (\alpha  _0,\alpha  _1,\dots,\alpha  _d),$ $\bx =

2373: (x_1,\dots,x_d  )$ and $x_0 = 1-\vert  \bx\vert  $ is defined by

2374: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.25}

2375: M_{n,\bal}(f,\bx) = \sum_{\vert  \bk\vert  \le n} P_{n,\bk} (\bx)

2376: A^{-1}_{n,\bk,\bal} \int_S P_{n,\bk}(\by) f(\by) w_{\bal}(\by)d\by

2377: \end{equation}

2378: where $\int_S P_{n,\bk}(\by) w_\alpha  (\by) dy = A_{n,\bk,\bal}\,.$

2379: 

2380: The behaviour of $M_{n,\bal}(f,\bx)$ and its rate of approximation

2381: in $L_{p,W_{\bal}  }(S)$ were studied in many articles (see

2382: \cite{Ch-Di-Iv}, \cite{De85}, \cite{Di95}, \cite{Zh} and others).

2383: 

2384: The Voronovskaja of $M_{n,\bal}f$ is given by

2385: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.26}

2386: \begin{aligned}

2387: n\big(M_{n,\bal}f(\bx) - f(\bx)\big) &\to \frac 12\, \sum_{\xi  \in

2388: E_S} \,\frac{1}{w_{\bal}  (\bx)}\; \pd{}{\bxi  }\; \wt d_S(\bx,\bxi  )

2389: w_{\bal}  (\bx)\;\pd{}{\bxi  }\; f(\bx)\\

2390: &= \frac 12\; \wt P_{S,\bal  }(D),

2391: \end{aligned}

2392: \end{equation}

2393: which clearly exhibits both its self-adjointness and dependence on

2394: $w_{\bal}(\bx).$  In \cite{Di95} the technique of Knoop and Zhou is

2395: used (and modified) to obtain the strong converse inequality

2396: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.27}

2397: \begin{aligned}

2398: \Vert  M_{n,\bal  }f-f\Vert  _{L_{w_{\bal},p }(S)}

2399: &\approx \,\text{inf}\,\big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{L_{w_{\bal},p  }(S)}

2400: +\frac 1n\, \Vert  \wt P_{S,\bal}(D)g\Vert  _{L_{w_{\bal},p

2401: }(S)}\big)\\

2402: &\equiv K\big(f,\wt P_{S,\bal }(D), n^{-1}\big)_{L_{w_{\bal},p}(S)}

2403: \end{aligned}

2404: \end{equation}

2405: where $\wt P_{S,\bal} $ is given by (\ref{Eq12.25}).  For

2406: $w_{\bal}(\bx) = 1$ we denote $M_{n,\bal} \equiv M_n$ and $\wt

2407: P_{S,\alpha  }(D) \equiv \wt P_S(D).$  Berens et~al. (see

2408: \cite{Be-Sc-Xu}) conjectured that for $\bxi \in E_S$

2409: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.28}

2410: \Big\Vert  \pd{}{\bxi  }\;\wt d_S(\bx,\bxi  )\;\pd{}{\bxi  }\; f\Big\Vert

2411: _{L_p(S)} \le C\Vert  \wt P_S(D)f\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\q\text{\rm for} \q 1<p<\infty

2412: \end{equation}

2413: and proved (\ref{Eq12.28}) for $p=2.$  In fact, for $p=2$

2414: (\ref{Eq12.28}) was proved for the weighted case as well (see

2415: \cite{Ch-Di93}).  I believe that (\ref{Eq12.28}) is valid for

2416: $1<p<\infty  $ even for the weighted case.  The inequality

2417: (\ref{Eq12.28}) would have some worthwhile applications if proved.

2418: (For instance, the equivalence between the $K$-functional in

2419: (\ref{Eq12.27}) when $w_{\bal}  =1$ and $\wt \omega

2420: ^2_S\big(f,\frac{1}{\sqrt n}\,\big)_p.)$

2421: 

2422: The sharp Marchaud inequality on the simplex with the $K$-functional

2423: given in (\ref{Eq12.27}) was proved in \cite[Theorem 5.1]{Da-Di07}

2424: and is given by

2425: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.29}

2426: K_{2\beta  }\big(f,\wt P_{S,\bal}(D)^\beta  ,t^{2\beta  }\big)_p \le

2427: Ct^{2\beta  } \Big\{\int^C_t\;\frac{K_{2\gamma

2428: }\big(f,P_{S,\bal}(D)^\gamma  ,u^{2\gamma  }\big)^q_p}{u^{2\beta

2429: q+1}} \;du\Big\}^{1/q}

2430: \end{equation}

2431: for $1<p<\infty  ,$ $\beta  <\gamma  $ and $q=\min\,(p,2)$ where

2432: $\wt P_{S,\bal}(D)$ is given in (\ref{Eq12.22}) and the

2433: $K$-functionals are defined following (\ref{Eq4.10}).

2434: 

2435: The Nikol'skii inequality on $I_d = [-1,1]\times \dots \times

2436: [-1,1]$ (see \cite[6.9]{Di-Ti}) is given by

2437: \begin{equation}\label{Eq12.30}

2438: \Vert  P_n\Vert  _{L_{w_{\bal,\bbe},q}(I_d)} \le Cn^{\gamma  (\frac

2439: 1p-\frac 1q)}\Vert  P_n\Vert  _{L_{w_{\bal,\bbe},p}(I_d)}

2440: \end{equation}

2441: for $0<p<q\le \infty  ,$ $w_{\bal,\bbe}(\bx) = \os{d}{\us{i=1}\prod}

2442: (1-x_i)^{\alpha  _i}(1+x_i)^{\beta  _i}$  with $\alpha

2443: _i,\beta  _i >-1$

2444: and

2445: \newline $\gamma  =\os

2446: d{\us{i=1}\sum}\,\max\big(2+2\,\max(\alpha  _i,\beta  _i),1\big).$

2447: 

2448: The results (\ref{Eq12.19}) - (\ref{Eq12.29}) can  easily be extended

2449: to replace $S$ with a cube.  In fact, following remarks in

2450: \cite[Section 5]{Di95I}, these results can be extended to Cartesian

2451: products of simplices.  The multivariate Jackson result for weighted

2452: doubling or for Freud-type weights was not studied.

2453: 

2454: 

2455: 

2456: 

2457: \section{Ul'yanov-type result}\label{Sec13}

2458: For trigonometric polynomials Ul'yanov established relations between

2459: moduli of smoothness in $L_p(T)$ and moduli of smoothness in

2460: $L_q(T),$ $p<q.$ (For the most general form of these types of

2461: relations on $T^d$ see \cite[Section 2]{Di-Ti05}.)

2462: A Ul'yanov-type inequality shows quantitatively how measures of

2463: smoothness of $f$ in $L_p$ influence the measure of smoothness or

2464: the norm of $f$ in $L_q$ when $q>p.$

2465: Here we present

2466: first the analogous relations for $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$

2467: proved in \cite{Di-Ti05}.

2468: 

2469: For $f\in L_p[-1,1],$ $0<p<q\le \infty  ,$ $\omega  ^r_\varphi

2470: (f,t)_p$ and $E_n(f)_p$ given by (\ref{Eq1.1}) and (\ref{Eq2.7})

2471: respectively, we have (see \cite[Section3]{Di-Ti05})

2472: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.1}

2473: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_q[-1,1]} \le C\Big[\Big\{\int^1_0 \big(u^{-\theta  }

2474: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,u)_p\big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big\}^{1/q_1} +

2475: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}\Big],

2476: \end{equation}

2477: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.2}

2478: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_q\le C\Big(\int^t_0 \big(u^{-\theta

2479: }\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,u)_p\big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big)^{1/q_1},

2480: \end{equation}

2481: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.3}

2482: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_q[-1,1]} \le C\Big[\Big\{\sum^\infty  _{k=1}

2483: k^{q_1\theta  -1} E_k(f)^{q_1}_p\Big\}^{1/q_1} + \Vert  f\Vert

2484: _{L_p[-1,1]}\Big],

2485: \end{equation}

2486: and

2487: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.4}

2488: E_n(f)_q \le C\Big\{\sum^\infty  _{k=n} k^{q_1\theta  -1}

2489: E_k(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q_1}

2490: \end{equation}

2491: where

2492: $$

2493: q_1 =\begin{cases} q, &q<\infty  \\ 1, &q=\infty  \end{cases}

2494: \q

2495: \text{\rm and}\q

2496: \theta  = 2\big(\frac 1p - \frac 1q\big).

2497: $$

2498: While (\ref{Eq13.1}) and

2499: (\ref{Eq13.2}) are valid for $r=1,2,\dots$ they are useful only for

2500: $r$ big enough $(r> 2(\frac 1p -\frac 1q)$ for $p\ge 1$ and $r+\frac

2501: 1p - 1>2(\frac 1p - \frac 1q)$ for $0<p<1).$

2502: 

2503: For a simple polytope $S\subset \IR^d$ (see Section \ref{Sec12}) the

2504: inequalities (\ref{Eq13.1})~-~(\ref{Eq13.4}) were generalized in

2505: \cite[Section 8]{Di-Ti05}.  It was proved that for $0<p<q\le \infty  ,$

2506: $\wt \omega  ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}$ and $E_n(f)_{L_p(S)}$ given by

2507: (\ref{Eq12.6}) and (\ref{Eq12.9}) respectively, one has

2508: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.5}

2509: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_q(S)} \le C\Big[\Big\{\int^1_0 \big(u^{-\theta

2510: }\wt \omega

2511: ^r_S(f,u)_{L_p(S)}\Big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big\}^{1/q_1} + \Vert

2512: f\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\Big],

2513: \end{equation}

2514: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.6}

2515: \wt \omega  \,^r_S(f,t)_{L_q(S)} \le C\Big(\int^t_0 \big(u^{-\theta

2516: } \,\wt\omega

2517: \,^r_S(f,u)_{L_p(S)}\big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big)^{1/q_1},

2518: \end{equation}

2519: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.7}

2520: \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_q(S)} \le C\Big[\Big\{\sum^\infty  _{k=1}

2521: k^{q_1\theta  -1} E_k(f)^{q_1}_{L_p(S)}\Big\}^{1/q_1} + \Vert

2522: f\Vert  _{L_p(S)}\Big],

2523: \end{equation}

2524: and

2525: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.8}

2526: E_n(f)_{L_q(S)} \le C\Big\{\sum^\infty  _{k=n} k^{q_1\theta  -1}

2527: E_k(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q_1}

2528: \end{equation}

2529: where

2530: $$

2531: q_1 = \begin{cases} q , &q<\infty  \\ 1, &q=\infty

2532: \end{cases}\q \text{\rm and}\q \theta  = 2d\big(\frac 1p - \frac 1q\big).

2533: $$

2534: 

2535: In fact, (\ref{Eq13.5}) - (\ref{Eq13.8}) contain (\ref{Eq13.1}) -

2536: (\ref{Eq13.4}) (when $d=1)$ and (\ref{Eq13.1}) - (\ref{Eq13.4}) were

2537: presented here explicitly for those interested mainly in the

2538: one-dimensional case and in the moduli defined by $\omega

2539: ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p,$ which is less intricate than  $\wt\omega

2540: ^r_S(f,t)_{L_p(S)}.$

2541: 

2542: %For the weighted $\L_p(IR)$ with the Freud weight $W_\alpha  (x) =

2543: For the weighted $L_p(\IR)$ with the Freud weight $W_\alpha  (x) =

2544: \;\exp(-\vert  x\vert  ^\alpha  )$ a set of Ul'yanov-type inequalities was given

2545: in \cite[Section 9]{Di-Ti05}.  For $0<p<q\le \infty  ,$ $W_\alpha

2546: =\;\exp (-\vert  x\vert  ^\alpha  )$ $(\alpha  >1),$

2547: $E_n(f)_{W_\alpha  ,p}$ and $\omega  ^r(f,W_\alpha  ,t)_p$ given by

2548: (\ref{Eq11.9}) and (\ref{Eq11.5}) respectively, we have

2549: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.9}

2550: \Vert  W_\alpha  f\Vert  _{L_q(\IR)} \le C\Big[\Big\{\sum^\infty

2551: _{k=1} k^{q_1\theta  -1} E_k(f)^{q_1}_{W_\alpha  ,p}\Big\}^{1/q_1} +

2552: \Vert  W_\alpha  f\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}\Big],

2553: \end{equation}

2554: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.10}

2555: E_n(f) _{W_\alpha  ,q} \le C\Big\{\sum^\infty  _{k=n} k^{q_1\theta

2556: -1}E_k(f)^{q_1}_{W_\alpha  ,p}\Big\}^{1/q_1},

2557: \end{equation}

2558: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.11}

2559: \Vert  W_\alpha  f\Vert  _{L_q(\IR)} \le C\Big[\Big\{\int^1_0

2560: \big(u^{-\eta  }\omega  ^r (f,W_\alpha

2561: ,t)_p\big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big\}^{1/q_1} + \Vert  W_\alpha

2562: f\Vert  _{L_p(\IR)}\Big],

2563: \end{equation}

2564: and

2565: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.12}

2566: \omega  ^r(f,W_\alpha  ,t)_q \le C\Big\{\int^t_0 \big(u^{-\eta

2567: }\omega  ^r(f,W_\alpha  ,t)_p\big)^{q_1}\;\frac{du}{u}\Big\}^{1/q_1}

2568: \end{equation}

2569: where

2570: $$

2571: q_1 =\begin{cases} q, &q<\infty  \\ 1, &q=\infty

2572: \end{cases},\q \theta   = \frac{\alpha  -1}{\alpha  } \,\big(\frac

2573: 1p -\frac 1q\big)\q \text{\rm and} \q \eta  =\frac 1p - \frac 1q\,.

2574: $$

2575: It turns out that the Nikol'ski-type inequalities and realization

2576: results using best approximants following (\ref{Eq5.5}),

2577: (\ref{Eq11.11}) or (\ref{Eq12.18}) are crucial for the proof of the

2578: above-mentioned Ul'yanov-type inequalities.

2579: 

2580: We note that an inequality like (\ref{Eq13.1}) can be stated using

2581: Besov spaces terminology.  The Besov space $B^\theta

2582: _{p,q}(\varphi,r  )$ is given by the norm or quasi-norm

2583: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.13}

2584: \Vert  f\Vert  _{B^\theta  _{p,q}(\varphi,r  )} =

2585: \Big(\int^1_0\big(u^{-\theta  }\omega  ^r_\varphi

2586: (f,u)_p\big)^{q}\,\frac{du}{u}\Big)^{1/q} + \Vert  f\Vert

2587: _{L_p[-1,1]}.

2588: \end{equation}

2589: 

2590: The inequality (\ref{Eq13.1}) means that for $\theta  =2\big(\frac

2591: 1p - \frac 1q\big)$ and $0<p<q<\infty  ,$ $B^\theta  _{p,q}(\varphi

2592: ,r)$ is continuously embedded in $L_q[-1,1],$ which can be written as

2593: \begin{equation}\label{Eq13.14}

2594: B^\theta  _{p,q}(\varphi  ,r) \hookrightarrow L_q[-1,1].

2595: \end{equation}

2596: 

2597: In \cite{Di-Ti05} examples are given to show that the power $q_1=q$ is

2598: optimal when $q<\infty  .$

2599: 

2600: 

2601: 

2602: \section{$\omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_\infty  ,$ $0\le

2603: \lambda  \le 1,$ filling the gap}\label{Sec14}

2604: For $C[-1,1]$ and $\omega  ^r(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ the classical

2605: ``pointwise estimate'' theory established by Dzyadic, Timan, Brudnyi

2606: and others (see \cite{TiA}) yields a complete (pointwise)

2607: description of polynomial approximation on $C[-1,1].$  Estimates

2608: using $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ yield a complete (norm)

2609: description of polynomial approximation on $C[-1,1].$  While the

2610: estimates using $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ are applicable to all

2611: $p,$ $0<p\le \infty  ,$ one has two different ways to characterize

2612: polynomial approximation when $p=\infty  $ (for which the relevant

2613: theory is on $C[-1,1]).$  In an effort to unify these two theories

2614: (for $C[-1,1]),$ one can use the moduli $\omega  _{\varphi ^ \lambda

2615: }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ given for $0\le \lambda  \le 1$ and $\varphi  (x)

2616: = \sqrt{1-x^2}$ by

2617: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.1}

2618: \omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]} = \us{\vert  h\vert

2619: \le t}\sup\;\Vert  \Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  ^\lambda  }f\Vert

2620: _{C[-1,1]}

2621: \end{equation}

2622: where

2623: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.2}

2624: \Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  ^\lambda  }f(x) = \begin{cases}

2625: \os r{\us{k=0}\sum} (-1)^k\binom rk f\big(x+(\frac r2-k)h\varphi

2626: ^\lambda  (x)\big) &\text{\rm when}\q x\pm \frac r2\,h\varphi

2627: ^\lambda  (x) \in [-1,1]\\

2628: 0 &\text{\rm otherwise}

2629: \end{cases}

2630: \end{equation}

2631: (see \cite{Di-Ji}).

2632: 

2633: Clearly, $\omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ is

2634: $\omega  ^r(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ when $\lambda  =0$ and it is $\omega

2635: ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ when $\lambda  =1.$

2636: 

2637: The direct estimate using $\omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda

2638: }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ proved in \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Di-Ji} states that

2639: for

2640: \newline $f\in C[-1,1]$ there exists a sequence of polynomials $P_n$ that

2641: satisfies

2642: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.3}

2643: \vert  f(x)-P_n(x)\vert  \le C(r,\lambda  )\omega  ^r_{\varphi

2644: ^\lambda  }\big(f,n^{-1}\delta  _n(x)^{1-\lambda  }\big)_{C[-1,1]}

2645: \end{equation}

2646: where $\delta  _n(x) =n^{-1} +\sqrt{1-x^2}$ and $C(r,\lambda  )$ is

2647: independent of $f$ and $n.$  The inequality (\ref{Eq14.3}) fills the

2648: gap between (\ref{Eq2.6}) for $C[-1,1]$ (when $\lambda  =1)$ and the

2649: classical estimate (when $\lambda  =0).$  The converse result with

2650: $\omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ was given in

2651: \cite[Theorem 5.1]{Di-Ji} as follows.  For $f\in C[-1,1]$ and

2652: $\omega  (t)$ an increasing function satisfying for some $s$

2653: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.4}

2654: \omega  (\mu  t) \le C(\mu  ^s+1)\omega  (t),

2655: \end{equation}

2656: the existence of a sequence of polynomials $P_n$ satisfying

2657: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.5}

2658: \vert  f(x) - P_n(x)\vert  \le M\omega  \big(n^{-1}\delta

2659: _n(x)^{1-\lambda  }\big)

2660: \end{equation}

2661: implies

2662: \begin{equation}\label{Eq14.6}

2663: \omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t) \le Mt^r \sum_{0<n\le 1/t}

2664: n^{r-1}\omega  (n^{-1}).

2665: \end{equation}

2666: Other estimates were given as well, and results using $\omega

2667: ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_{C[-1,1]}$ were followed in many

2668: papers which are not referenced here.

2669: 

2670: The results mentioned in this section, particularly (\ref{Eq14.3})

2671: and (\ref{Eq14.6}), answer a natural question, and filling the gap

2672: was a necessary endeavor.  However, I feel that one is better off

2673: dealing with either $\lambda  =1$ (and the norm estimate) or with

2674: $\lambda  =0$ (and the pointwise estimate).

2675: 

2676: 

2677: \section{Shape-preserving polynomial approximation}\label{Sec15}

2678: Sometimes it is desirable that the polynomial approximating a function

2679: on a given interval have the same shape there as the function

2680: itself.  For example, one may want to approximate a nondecreasing or

2681: convex function on $[-1,1]$ by a nondecreasing or convex polynomial

2682: on $[-1,1].$  This aspect of polynomial approximation has attracted

2683: much attention and dozens of papers have been published, mostly in

2684: the last twenty years, covering its many variations.  It is clear to me

2685: that in this survey, I will not be able to do justice to the topic,

2686: which may require a separate survey.  I refer the reader to a survey

2687: by Leviatan (see \cite{Le}) and two subsequent papers by Kopotun,

2688: Leviatan and Shevchuk (see \cite{Ko-Le-Sh05} and \cite{Ko-Le-Sh06})

2689: where many of the related results are described. (The words

2690: ``final frontier'' and ``conclusion'' in the last two articles do

2691: not mean that the whole subject of shape-preserving polynomial

2692: approximation

2693: is to be abandoned by these

2694: authors.)  One can probably consider this section as an introduction

2695: to the subject, rather than a survey of the main results.

2696: 

2697: For a long time it was known that if $f(x)$ satisfies $\Delta  ^k_hf

2698: (x)\ge 0$ on $\big[\frac{kh}{2},\,1-\frac{kh}{2}\big ]$ for some $k$ $(k=0,1,2,\dots),$ then its

2699: Bernstein polynomials, $B_n(f,x)$ given in (\ref{Eq8.1}) satisfy

2700: $\Delta  ^k_h B_n(f,x)\ge 0$ (or $(\frac{d}{dx})^k B_n(f,x)\ge 0)$ for

2701: that $k.$  We recall that $\Delta  ^k_h f(x)> 0$ represents a

2702: condition on the shape of $f;$ for example, when $k=0,$ then $f$ is

2703: positive, when $k=1,$ $f$ is nondecreasing, and when $k=2,$ then $f$ is convex

2704: etc. (Recall $\Delta  ^k_h f(x)$ is given by (\ref{Eq2.3}).)

2705: 

2706: It is known that

2707: $$

2708: \vert  B_n(f,x) - f(x)\vert  \le C\omega

2709: ^2\big(f,\sqrt{\frac{x(1-x)}{n}}\,\big)_{C[0,1]}

2710: $$

2711: (the pointwise

2712: estimate) and

2713: $$\Vert  B_nf-f\Vert  _{C[0,1]} \le C\omega  ^2_\varphi

2714: (f,1/\sqrt n)_{C[0,1]}\q\text{\rm with}\q\varphi  ^2 = x(1-x)

2715: $$

2716: (the norm

2717: estimate).

2718: 

2719: The approximation by a general polynomial gives rise to

2720: faster convergence, that is $n^{-1/2}$ is replaced by $n^{-1}$ and a

2721: higher degree of smoothness may be considered.  The problem of

2722: shape-preserving polynomial approximation is the relation between

2723: the shape that is preserved and the rate of approximation achievable

2724: under this constraint.

2725: 

2726: One defines the best constrained polynomial approximation of $f$

2727: satisfying $\Delta  ^k_h f(x)\ge 0$ on $[-1,1]$ by

2728: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.1}

2729: E^{(k)}_n (f)_{p} = E^{(k)}_n(f)_{L_p[-1,1]} = \;\inf\,\Big(\Vert

2730: f-P_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}:\Delta  ^k_h P_n(x)\ge 0\;\text{\rm in}\;

2731: [-1,1], \; P_n\in \Pi_n\Big),

2732: \end{equation}

2733: where $\Delta  ^r_hf(x)\ge 0$ in $[-1,1]$ means that for all $x$ and

2734: $h$

2735: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.2}

2736: \Delta  ^r_h f(x) = \sum^r_{\ell=0} (-1)^\ell \binom r\ell

2737: f\big(x+(\frac r2-\ell)h\big) \ge 0\q\text{\rm where}\q x\pm \frac

2738: {rh}{2} \in [-1,1].

2739: \end{equation}

2740: 

2741: Shvedov proved (see \cite[Theorem 3]{Sh}) that for any constant $A>0$

2742: and $1\le p\le \infty  $ there exists a function $f\in

2743: C^{(k)}[-1,1]$ such that $\Delta  ^k_hf(x)\ge 0$ in $[-1,1]$ and

2744: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.3}

2745: E^{(k)}_n (f) _{L_p[-1,1]} \ge A\omega

2746: ^{k+2}(f,1/n)_{L_p[-1,1]}\;\text{\rm for}\; n\ge k+2

2747: \end{equation}

2748: where

2749: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.4}

2750: \omega  ^r(f,h)_{L_p[-1,1]} = \;\sup\, \Vert  \Delta  ^r_h

2751: f(\cdot)\Vert  _{L_p[-1+\frac{rh}{2}\,, 1-\frac{rh}{2}\,]}.

2752: \end{equation}

2753: The inequality (\ref{Eq15.3}) shows that not all Jackson-type

2754: results can be followed.  As $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\le C\omega

2755:  ^r(f,t)_p,$ Shvedov's negative result applies to $\omega

2756: ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ as well, though at the time of publication of

2757: Shvedov's article, estimates of polynomial approximation by $\omega

2758: ^r_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p$ were not known.  The knowledge that (as

2759: expected) not all Jackson-type estimates for polynomial

2760: approximation can be followed for shape-preserving polynomial

2761: approximation made the pursuit of the remaining possible estimates

2762: more interesting. Recently, (see \cite[Theorems 1 and 2]{Bo-Pr}) it was

2763: shown (in addition to (\ref{Eq15.3})) that for the function

2764: $$

2765: f(x) =

2766: x^{k-1}_+ =\begin{cases} x^{k-1}, &x\ge 0\\ 0, &x<0\end{cases}

2767: $$

2768: which clearly satisfies $\Delta  ^k_h f(x)\ge 0$ (everywhere) one has

2769: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.5}

2770: E^{(k)}_n(x^{k-1}_+)_{L_p[-1,1]} \ge \frac{C(k,p)}{n^2} \q\text{\rm

2771: for}\q k>3,

2772: \end{equation}

2773: and, as

2774: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.6}

2775: \omega  ^3_\varphi  (x^{k-1}_+,t)_p\approx \omega

2776: ^3(x^{k-1}_+,t)_p \approx t^{3} \q\text{\rm for} \q k>3,

2777: \end{equation}

2778: it follows that $E^{(k)}_n (x^{k-1}_+)_p\ge C\omega

2779: ^3(x^{k-1}_+,1/n)_p$ for $n\ge n_0(C),$ $k>3,$ and $p\le \infty  .$  The

2780: same method (see \cite[Remark 5]{Bo-Pr}) shows that

2781: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.7}

2782: E^{(3)}_n(x^2_+)_p\ge C\omega  ^3(x^2_+,1/n)_p\;\text{\rm for} \;

2783: n\ge n_0(C)\;\text{\rm and}\; p<\infty  .

2784: \end{equation}

2785: 

2786: For monotonic functions on $[-1,1]$ satisfying $f\in L_p[-1,1],$ the

2787: Jackson theorem for $0<p\le \infty  $ is given in \cite{De-Le-Yu}

2788: by

2789: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.8}

2790: E^{(1)}_n (f)_p \le C(p)\omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p\,.

2791: \end{equation}

2792: 

2793: For convex functions on $[-1,1]$, i.e. when $\Delta  ^2_h f(x)\ge 0,$

2794: it was shown that

2795: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.10}

2796: E^{(2)}_n(f)_p \le C\omega  ^3_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p, \;\text{\rm

2797: for}\; 0<p\le \infty  .

2798: \end{equation}

2799: 

2800: In fact, it was known earlier that $E^{(2)}_n(f)_p \le C\omega

2801: ^2_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p,$ and it was clear that a gap existed between

2802: that result and (\ref{Eq15.3}).  This gap was closed for $p=\infty

2803: $ by Kopotun (see \cite{Ko94}), and following much of his method, for

2804: $0<p<\infty  $ in \cite{De-Hu-Le}.  Kopotun (see \cite[p.~156]{Ko94}) also

2805: gave the analogue for the pointwise Jackson inequality. That is, he

2806: %showed that there exists a sequence of convex polynomials $P_n(x)\in

2807: showed that there exists a sequence of convex polynomials $P_n\in

2808: \Pi_n$ such that

2809: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.11}

2810: \vert  f(x) - P_n(x)\vert  \le C\omega  ^3\Big(f,\,\frac{1}{n^2}

2811: +\frac 1n\;\sqrt{1-x^2}\,\Big)_{C[-1,1]}\,.

2812: \end{equation}

2813: 

2814: Recently  Bondarenko (see \cite{Bo}) showed that when $\Delta

2815: ^3_h f(x)\ge 0$ in $[-1,1],$ one has

2816: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.12}

2817: E^{(3)}_n(f)_\infty  \le C\omega  ^3_\varphi  (f,1/n)_\infty  .

2818: \end{equation}

2819: In addition, many other related questions were answered, for

2820: instance, simultaneous approximation of a function and its

2821: derivatives under a shape-preserving constraint or the analogous

2822: pointwise estimate under such constraints. As there were over fifty

2823: articles on the subject of this section, I could not describe all

2824: the results or even just quote them.  (At the beginning of this

2825: section, I already referred to other sources, i.e. \cite{Le},

2826: \cite{Ko-Le-Sh05} and \cite{Ko-Le-Sh06}.) Perhaps I will mention

2827: what might be some  unanswered questions:

2828: 

2829: \vs\noi

2830: {\bf (I)} Is

2831: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.13}

2832: E^{(k)}_n (f)_p \le C(p,k)\omega  ^2_\varphi  (f,1/n)_p

2833: \end{equation}

2834: valid for all $k,$ $0<p\le \infty  $ and $n\ge n_0(k,p)?$ (This is

2835: known for $k=1,2,3$ see (\ref{Eq15.8}), (\ref{Eq15.10}) and

2836: (\ref{Eq15.12}).)

2837: 

2838: \vs\noi

2839: {\bf (II)} Can one obtain the estimate

2840: \begin{equation}\label{Eq15.14}

2841: E^{(3)}_n(f)_\infty  \le C\omega  ^4_\varphi  (f,1/n)_\infty

2842: \;\text{\rm for}\; n\ge n_0?

2843: \end{equation}

2844: 

2845: 

2846: \section{Average moduli of smoothness (Ivanov's moduli)}\label{Sec16}

2847: In the text by Sendov and Popov (see \cite{Se-Po}) an alternative to

2848: the moduli of smoothness on $[a,b],$ $T$ or $\IR$ is given and is

2849: called averaged moduli of smoothness. These moduli are defined there

2850: (see \cite[p.~7]{Se-Po}) by

2851: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.1}

2852: \tau  _k(f,t)_{L_p[a,b]} = \Vert  \omega  _k(f,\cdot;t)\Vert

2853: _{L_p[a,b]}

2854: \end{equation}

2855: for a bounded measurable function $f$ where

2856: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.2}

2857: \omega  _k(f,x,\delta  ) =\us{\vert  h\vert  \le \delta

2858: }{\sup}\,\Big\{\vert  \vec\Delta  ^k_h f(\zeta  )\vert

2859: :\,\zeta  ,\zeta  +kh\in \Big[x-\frac{k\delta

2860: }{2}\,,x+\frac{k\delta  }{2}\Big]\cap [a,b]\Big\}

2861: \end{equation}

2862: and

2863: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.3}

2864: \vec\Delta  ^k_h f(x) =\begin{cases}

2865: \os k{\us{\ell=0}\sum}

2866: (-1)^{k-\ell}\binom k\ell f(x+\ell h), &x,x+kh \in [a,b]\\

2867: 0, &\text{\rm otherwise}.

2868: \end{cases}

2869: \end{equation}

2870: 

2871: We note that $\tau  _k(f,t)_{L_p[a,b]}$ given above is not

2872: necessarily finite for all $f\in L_p[a,b].$

2873: 

2874: In a series of articles (see \cite{Iv}) K.~Ivanov introduced

2875: averaged moduli to deal with algebraic polynomial approximation. The

2876: moduli introduced for $1\le p,$ $q\le \infty  $ are given by (see

2877: \cite[p.~187]{Iv})

2878: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.4}

2879: \tau  _k\big(f;\psi  (t,\cdot)\big)_{q,p} = \Vert  \omega

2880: _k\big(f;\psi  (t,\cdot)\big)_q\Vert  _p

2881: \end{equation}

2882: where

2883: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.5}

2884: \omega  _k\big(f,x;\psi  (t,x)\big)_q

2885: = \Big[\frac{1}{2\psi  (t,x)} \;\int^{\psi  (t,x)}_{-\psi  (t,x)}

2886: \,\vert  \vec\Delta  ^k_u f(x)\vert  ^qdu\Big]^{1/q}, \; q<\infty

2887: \end{equation}

2888: and

2889: \begin{equation}

2890: \omega  _k\big(f,x;\psi  (t,x)\big)_\infty   =\sup\,(\vert

2891: \vec\Delta  ^k_h f(x)\vert  ;\vert  h\vert  \le \psi  (t,x)\big).

2892: \end{equation}

2893: 

2894: The restriction $1\le p,q$ is not necessary, and some results in

2895: case $0<p= q<1$ were discussed in \cite{Ta90}, \cite{Ta91},

2896: \cite{Ta}

2897: and \cite{Di-Hr-Iv}.  We note that

2898: (\ref{Eq16.4}) is finite for any $f\in L_q$ for a fixed $t$ and $p.$

2899: Moreover,

2900: for

2901: $f\in L_p,$ $0<p\le \infty  ,$ $\tau  _k\big(f;\psi

2902: (t,\cdot)\big)_{p,q}$ is finite whenever $q\le p.$

2903: 

2904: For $\psi  (t,x) = t^2+t\,\sqrt{1-x^2}$ and $[a,b] = [-1,1]$ Ivanov

2905: proved \cite[Corollary 5.2]{Iv} that

2906: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.7}

2907: \tau  _r\big(f,\psi  (t,\cdot)\big)_{p,p} \approx K_{r,\varphi

2908: }(f,t^r)_p\q\text{\rm for}\q 1\le p\le \infty  .

2909: \end{equation}

2910: 

2911: One also has

2912: \begin{equation}\label{Eq16.8}

2913: \tau  _r\big(f,\psi  (t,\cdot)\big)_{p,p} \approx \omega  ^r_\varphi

2914:  (f,t)_p\q\text{\rm for}\q 0<p\le \infty  ,

2915: \end{equation}

2916: which, for $0<p<1$ was proved by Tachev (see \cite{Ta}) and also

2917: follows from \cite[Section 7]{Di-Hr-Iv}.

2918: Ivanov also treated the weighted $\tau  $ moduli with weights $w$

2919: and $\psi  $ satisfying some mild conditions (see

2920: \cite[(3.9), (3.10) and (3.11)]{Iv}).

2921: 

2922:  The moduli $\tau  _r\big(f;\psi  (t,\cdot)\big)_{q,p}$

2923: given by (\ref{Eq16.4}) are a somewhat more cumbersome method to

2924: describe smoothness than $\omega ^r _\varphi  (f,t)_p,$ and their

2925: computation is more difficult. However, they have some advantages.  For

2926: instance, the versatility of having separate $q$ and $p$ may prove

2927: useful. Also in many proofs one resorts to local averages for

2928: obtaining results, and in that direction the averaged moduli may

2929: also be helpful. Many of the results of this paper follow for the

2930: averaged moduli because of (\ref{Eq16.8}), and some were proved

2931: by Ivanov directly for the $\tau  $ moduli independent of

2932: (\ref{Eq16.7}) and (\ref{Eq16.8}).

2933: 

2934: In conclusion, one should keep in mind the concept given in

2935: (\ref{Eq16.4}) and tools developed by K.~Ivanov for possible use in

2936: polynomial approximation and other problems.

2937: 

2938: 

2939: \section{Algebraic addition (Felten's moduli)}\label{Sec17}

2940: In the definition of $\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ it was clear from

2941: the start that $x\pm h\varphi  (x)$ may not be in the interval

2942: $[-1,1]$ and that $\Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  }f\ne \Delta  _{h\varphi

2943: }(\Delta  ^{r-1}_{h\varphi  }f)$ (where $\Delta  ^r_{h\varphi  }$ is

2944: defined by (\ref{Eq1.2})).  With his goal to alleviate those two

2945: inconveniences (or difficulties) M.~Felten (see [Fe,97,I]

2946: and

2947: %[Fe,97,II] defined the elegant addition

2948: [Fe,97,II]) defined the elegant addition

2949: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.1}

2950: a\oplus b = a\,\sqrt{1-b^2} + b\,\sqrt{1-a^2}\q\text{\rm for}\q

2951: a,b\in [-1,1].

2952: \end{equation}

2953: Felten introduced the difference

2954: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.2}

2955: _*\Delta  _h f(x) = f(x\oplus h)-f(x), \q _*\Delta  ^r_h f(x) = \;

2956: _*\Delta _h\big(\,_*\Delta  ^{r-1}_h f(x)\big).

2957: \end{equation}

2958: He then dealt with the space $L_{p,\varphi  ^{-1}}[-1,1]$ given by

2959: the norm

2960: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.3}

2961: \Vert  f\Vert  _{p,\varphi  ^{-1}} = \Big\{\int^1_{-1} \vert

2962: f(x)\vert  ^p\;\frac{dx}{\varphi  (x)}\,\Big\}^{1/p}, \q \Vert

2963: f\Vert  _{\infty  ,\varphi  ^{-1}}\equiv \Vert  f\Vert  _\infty   =

2964: \us{-1\le x\le 1}\sup\;\vert  f(x)\vert

2965: \end{equation}

2966: where $\varphi  (x)^2 = 1-x^2.$ (For $p=\infty  $ he considered

2967: $f\in C[-1,1].)$

2968: 

2969: He defined the moduli of smoothness

2970: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.4}

2971: W^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p =\us{0<h\le t}\sup\;\Vert  \,_*\Delta  ^r_h

2972: f\Vert  _{p,\varphi  ^{-1}}.

2973: \end{equation}

2974: 

2975: Felten proved that $x\oplus h \in [-1,1]$ if $x,h\in [-1,1]$ and

2976: used (\ref{Eq17.2}) for iteration, thus overcoming the inconveniences

2977: mentioned above.

2978: 

2979: For $W^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p$ Felten proved that

2980: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.5}

2981: E_n(f)_{p,\varphi  ^{-1}} = O(n^{-\alpha  }) \Longleftrightarrow

2982: W^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p = O(n^{-\alpha  })

2983: \end{equation}

2984: for $0<\alpha  <r$ and $1\le p\le \infty  $ where

2985: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.6}

2986: E_n(f)_{p,\varphi  ^{-1}} =\us{P\in \Pi_n}\inf\,\Vert  f-P\Vert

2987: _{p,\varphi  ^{-1}}\, .

2988: \end{equation}

2989: Furthermore, he showed that

2990: \begin{equation}\label{Eq17.7}

2991: W^r_\varphi  (f,t)_p\approx \inf\,\big(\Vert  f-g\Vert  _{p,\varphi

2992: ^{-1}} + t^r\Vert  D^r g\Vert  _{p,\varphi  ^{-1}}\big)

2993: \end{equation}

2994: where $Dg=\varphi  g^\pr$ and $D^r g = D(D^rg)$ and the infimum is

2995: taken on the class of functions for which $\Vert  D^r g\Vert

2996: _{p,\varphi  ^{-1}}$ is bounded and $g^{(r-1)}$ is locally

2997: absolutely continuous.  (One might as well assume that $g^{(r)}$ is

2998: continuous in $(-1,1)$ with no ill effect on (\ref{Eq17.7}) .)

2999: 

3000: If not for the fact that the weight in (\ref{Eq17.3}), (\ref{Eq17.6})

3001: and (\ref{Eq17.7}) has to be $(1-x^2)^{-1/2},$ this could have been a

3002: very important development. Unfortunately though, that weight seems

3003: to be crucial (it does not work for the weight 1) and that was

3004: perhaps the justified reason why this direction was not pursued.

3005: Still I feel this was an interesting effort.

3006: 

3007: 

3008: \section{Generalized translations}\label{Sec18}

3009: For functions on $T$ the translations $T_tf(x) = f(x+t)$ are

3010: multiplier operators given by

3011: \begin{equation}\label{Eq18.1}

3012: T_t f^\wedge (n) = e^{int}\wh f(n) \q\text{\rm where} \q \wh

3013: g(n) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \, \int^\pi_{-\pi} g(x)e^{-inx}dx.

3014: \end{equation}

3015: As trigonometric polynomial approximation is the model for

3016: investigation of algebraic polynomial approximation in so many

3017: directions, translations using multiplier operators have been

3018: examined for this purpose over the last forty years (see

3019: \cite{Lo-Pe}).  Much work was done by Butzer and mathematicians working with him and under his direction. A survey of those works

3020: including some new results was published in 1992 (see

3021: \cite{Bu-Ja-St}).  The Jacobi translation $\tau  _t$ is given in

3022: \cite{Bu-Ja-St} by

3023: \begin{equation}\label{Eq18.2}

3024: (\tau  _t f)^\wedge (k) = \psi  _k (t) \wh f(k)

3025: \end{equation}

3026: where $\psi_k(t) = \varphi  _k(t)/\varphi  _k(1)$ and

3027: $\varphi  _k(t)$ is given by (\ref{Eq10.5}) and $\wh f(k) =

3028: a_k$ of (\ref{Eq10.6}) for $\alpha  ,\beta  >-1$ as described by

3029: (\ref{Eq10.1}), (\ref{Eq10.5}) and (\ref{Eq10.6}).

3030: 

3031: The moduli of smoothness were given (see \cite[(3.7),

3032: p.171]{Bu-Ja-St}) by

3033: \begin{equation}\label{Eq18.3}

3034: \omega  ^J_s (f,t)_X = \us{{1-t\le h_j<1}\atop{j=1,\dots,s}}{\sup}

3035: \;\Vert  \Delta  ^J_{h_1}\dots \Delta  ^J_{h_s} f\Vert  _X

3036: \end{equation}

3037: where $X$ is an underlying Banach space (mainly $L_{p,w}[-1,1],$ $1\le p\le

3038: \infty  ,$ with $w=w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }$ of (\ref{Eq10.1})) and

3039: $\Delta  ^J_hf$ is given by

3040: \begin{equation}\label{Eq18.4}

3041: \Delta  ^J_h f(x) = \tau  _h f(x) -f(x).

3042: \end{equation}

3043: Properties of $\omega  ^J_s(f,t)_X$ and their relation to best

3044: weighted algebraic approximation are described in \cite{Bu-Ja-St}.

3045: In that investigation a class of sequences $\{\phi(n)\}$

3046: $(\phi(n)\to 0)$ is given for which $E_n(f),$ $\omega  ^J_s(f,1/n)_X$

3047: and the appropriate $K$-functionals behave like $\phi(n)$ (see for

3048: instance \cite[Theorem 4.1, p.~183]{Bu-Ja-St}).  In fact, the natural

3049: gap between $E_n(f)_X$ and other measures of smoothness is left

3050: bigger than necessary and $E_n(f)_X$ and $\omega  ^J_s(f,t) _X$ are

3051: related via some selected sequences and not by direct and weak

3052: converse inequalities.

3053: 

3054: The advantage of using generalized translation is that

3055: one has the multiplier operators (\ref{Eq18.2}) which yield

3056: commutativity and other nice properties.  The disadvantages are that

3057: the computation of $\tau  _tf(x)$ and $\omega  ^J_s(f,t)_X$ for a

3058: given $f$ is prohibitive.  In fact, rather than learning about the

3059: behaviour of $E_n(f)_X$ using that of $\omega  ^J_s(f,t)_X,$ it is

3060: actually the behaviour of $\omega  ^J_s(f,t)_X$ that we learn about by using

3061: $E_n(f)_X.$  The rate of convergence of $E_n(f)_X$ now has to be

3062: investigated using other moduli of smoothness.

3063: 

3064: For $f\in L_p,$

3065: $0<p<1,$ $\tau  _tf$ and $\omega  ^J_s(f,t)_p$ cannot be defined.

3066: 

3067: M.K. Potapov continued to explore relations between the rate of

3068: approximation by algebraic polynomials and generalized translations,

3069: and has published (together with some coauthors) over twenty

3070: articles on the subject in the last twenty years.  Potapov described

3071: in detail generalized translation as an integral operator for

3072: various situations.  This description is far too long and involved

3073: to give here.  Another feature of Potapov's investigation is that a

3074: relation is given between algebraic polynomial approximation in

3075: $L_{p,w_{\alpha  ,\beta  }}[-1,1]$ and a translation induced by the

3076: weight $w_{\mu  ,\nu  }$ and the differential operator $w_{\mu  ,\nu

3077:  }^{-1} \,\frac{d}{dx}\, (1-x^2) w_{\mu  ,\nu  }\,\frac{d}{dx}\,.$

3078: (Relations are given between the pairs $(\mu  ,\nu  )$ and $(\alpha

3079: ,\beta  )$ for which the results are valid.) Potapov and his

3080: coauthors in the situation they investigated achieved a direct

3081: (Jackson-type) and a weak converse result, which is an improvement

3082: on proving that for a sequence $\varphi  (n),$ $\varphi  (n)\to 0,$

3083: that satisfies certain conditions,

3084: $$

3085: E_n(f)_{L_p(w_{\alpha  ,\beta

3086: })}\approx \varphi  (n)\Longleftrightarrow \wt \omega  ^r(f,1/n)_X

3087: \approx \varphi  (n).

3088: $$

3089: Relations with appropriate $K$-functionals

3090: were given but not in the form of the usual equivalence (see

3091: \cite[Theorem 3]{Po01I}).

3092: 

3093: Clearly, moduli that are defined by

3094: integrals or multipliers cannot be defined for $L_p(w_{\alpha

3095: ,\beta  })$ when $0<p<1.$

3096: Also, computation of the behaviour of

3097: these moduli is essentially impossible if one does not use relations

3098: with $E_n(f)_{L_p(w_{\alpha  ,\beta  })}$ and learn about

3099: $E_n(f)_{L_p(w_{\alpha  ,\beta  })}$ by using other moduli.

3100: 

3101: I refer the reader who is interested in the approach of Potapov and

3102: his coauthors to some of his more recent articles, such as

3103: \cite{Po-Ka}, \cite{Po01I}, \cite{Po01II} and \cite{Po05}.

3104: 

3105: 

3106: \section{Lipschitz-type and Besov-type spaces}\label{Sec19}

3107: The Besov-type space that is induced by $\omega  ^r_\varphi

3108: (f,t)_p$ is given by the norm or quasinorm

3109: \begin{equation}\label{Eq19.1}

3110: \Vert  f\Vert  _{B^s_{p,q}(\varphi  ,r)} =

3111: \Big(\int^1_0 u^{-sq}\omega  ^r_\varphi

3112: (f,u)^q_p\,\frac{du}{u}\Big)^{1/q} + \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}

3113: \end{equation}

3114: for $0<s,$ $0<p\le \infty  $ and $q<\infty  ,$ and by

3115: \begin{equation}\label{Eq19.2}

3116: \Vert  f\Vert  _{B^s_{p,\infty  }(\varphi  ,r)} =\us

3117: u\sup\;\frac{\omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,u)_p}{u^s} + \Vert  f\Vert

3118: _{L_p[-1,1]}

3119: \end{equation}

3120: for $0<p\le \infty  $ and $q=\infty  .$  The norm or quasi-norm

3121: $\Vert  f\Vert  _{B^s_{p,\infty  }(\varphi  ,r)}$ represents a

3122: Lipschitz-type space.

3123: 

3124: It was shown in \cite[Corollary 7.2.5]{Di-To87} for $1\le p\le

3125: \infty  $ and in \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Di-Ji-Le} for $0<p<1$ that for

3126: $0<s<r$

3127: \begin{equation}\label{Eq19.3}

3128: \omega  ^r_\varphi  (f,u)_p = O(u^s)\Longleftrightarrow E_n(f)_p =

3129: O(n^{-s}).

3130: \end{equation}

3131: Therefore, for $s<r$

3132: \begin{equation}\label{Eq19.4}

3133: \Vert  f\Vert  _{B^s_{p,\infty }(\varphi  ,r)} \approx \us

3134: n\sup\;n^{-s} E_n(f)_p + \Vert  f\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}.

3135: \end{equation}

3136: 

3137: It was proved for $s< r$ and $1\le p\le\infty  $ (see

3138: \cite[Theorem 2.1]{Di-To88} that

3139: \begin{equation}\label{Eq19.5}

3140: \Vert  f\Vert  _{B^s_{p,q}(\varphi  ,r)} \approx \Big\{\sum^\infty

3141: _{n=1} \, n^{sq-1}E_n(f)^q_p\Big\}^{1/q} + \Vert  f\Vert

3142: _{L_p[-1,1]}.

3143: \end{equation}

3144: This equivalence is valid for $0<p<1$ as well, which now follows

3145: easily the proof in \cite{Di-To88} and the realization results (see

3146: Section \ref{Sec5}).  Similar results are valid for the moduli using Freud

3147: weights $\omega  ^r(f,W,t)_p$ given in (\ref{Eq11.5}) and for moduli

3148: $\wt\omega  ^r_S(f,t)_p$ given by (\ref{Eq12.6}).  For $1\le p\le

3149: \infty  $ one can obtain analogues for the $K$-functionals

3150: $K_{2\alpha  }\big(f,(-\,\frac{d}{dx}\,

3151: (1-x^2)\,\frac{d}{dx})^\alpha  ,t^{2\alpha } \big)_p$ (see

3152: (\ref{Eq4.10})), in which case the result is for $s<2\alpha  .$

3153: 

3154: We observe that the measure of smoothness that is indicated by

3155: belonging to a given Besov space is not as sharp as the measures

3156: discussed in earlier sections, and that the results described in

3157: this section are mere corollaries of  results described in earlier

3158: sections.

3159: We also note

3160: that while for $1\le p\le \infty  $ one has to avoid

3161: in (\ref{Eq19.1}) $s=r$

3162: (justifiably), for $0<p<1$ we have to avoid $r\le s\le r-1+\frac

3163: 1p\,.$

3164: 

3165: 

3166: 

3167: \section{Other methods}\label{Sec20}

3168: To investigate $K$-functionals with step weights such as $\varphi

3169: =\sqrt{1-x^2}$ for example, one can use appropriate transformation

3170: of the variable and study $K$-functionals without step weight or

3171: weights, which is simpler.  Recently, Draganov and Ivanov discussed

3172: this method extensively in a long article (see \cite{Dr-Iv}), and it

3173: seems that this direction of investigation will continue in their

3174: forthcoming papers.  The parts relevant to best algebraic polynomial

3175: approximation are Corollary 5.3 (p.~139) and 8.1 (p.~145) of

3176: \cite{Dr-Iv}.  In \cite[p.~146]{Dr-Iv} transformations related to

3177: Bernstein and Szasz-Mirakian operators on $C[0,1]$ and $C[0,\infty

3178: )$ respectively are discussed.  For $L_p[0,1]$ the Kantorovich and

3179: Durrmeyer operators are discussed in \cite[p.~147]{Dr-Iv}.  Of

3180: course, the $K$-functional of the transformed function is simpler,

3181: but often the difficulty is hidden in the fact that we no longer

3182: deal with the original function but with its transformation.

3183: Nevertheless, there are cases in which this method yields a real

3184: advantage.

3185: 

3186: In a long paper on the subject the talented M.~Dubiner (see

3187: \cite{Dub}) described smoothness by the rate of local polynomial

3188: approximation.  Using local polynomial approximation to obtain

3189: global polynomial approximation is not new and was used extensively

3190: by many authors.  Dubiner's innovation, however, is that he used the

3191: local polynomial approximation as the basis for his investigation

3192: rather than an intermediate step.

3193: 

3194: The advantage of the method is that it allegedly yields treatment

3195: for multivariate domains that is not accessible by other methods.

3196: The disadvantages are that for cases which were not investigated

3197: earlier by other methods one cannot estimate the behaviour of such

3198: measures of smoothness.  Another important deficiency is the lack of

3199: converse results.

3200: 

3201: Moreover, I have difficulty in closing what I

3202: perceive to be many gaps in the proofs and in understanding some of

3203: the concepts.  (While some friends assured me that everything is

3204: okay in the article by Dubiner, those that tried to explain were

3205: stuck like myself.)

3206: 

3207: Apart from the above and the lack of inverse

3208: theorems, it would be nice if direct and weak converse inequalities

3209: for polynomial approximation on a compact subdomain of $\IR^d$ could

3210: be given.  Without weak converse, this type of result is classical

3211: see (\ref{Eq12.13}).  With weak converse, it is not known for

3212: domains as simple as the unit ball in $\IR^d$ when $d>1.$

3213: 

3214: Operstein (see \cite{Op}) studied the analogue of the classical

3215: theorems on the rate of pointwise polynomial approximation to

3216: $L_p[-1,1].$  Operstein proved for $f\in L_p[-1,1],$ $\rho_n =

3217: 2^{-n}(1-x^2)^{1/2} + 2^{-2n}$ and $\omega  (t)$ satisfying $\omega

3218: (t_1+t_2)\le \omega  (t_1) + \omega  (t_2)$ that there exists a sequence

3219: of polynomials

3220: $P_n~\in~\Pi_{2^n+r-1}$ satisfying

3221: \begin{equation}\label{Eq20.1}

3222: \Big\Vert  \Big\{\,\frac{\Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}}{\omega

3223: (\rho_n)} \,\Big\}^\infty  _{n=1}\Big\Vert  _{\ell_p} \le C\Big\Vert

3224:  \,\Big\{\,\frac{\omega  ^r(f,2^{-n})_p}{\omega

3225: (2^{-n})}\,\Big\}^\infty  _{n=1}\Big\Vert  _{\ell_p}

3226: \end{equation}

3227: where

3228: \begin{equation}\label{Eq20.4}

3229: \Vert  \{a_n\}\Vert  _{\ell_p} = \Big\{\sum^\infty  _{n=1} \vert

3230: a_n\vert  ^p\Big\}^{1/p}.

3231: \end{equation}

3232: 

3233: Furthermore, Operstein showed that if for some sequence $\{P_n\},$

3234: $P_n\in \Pi_{2^n}$ one has

3235: \begin{equation}\label{Eq20.2}

3236: \Big\Vert  \,\Big\{\,\frac{\Vert  f-P_n\Vert  _{L_p[-1,1]}}{\omega

3237: (\rho_n)} \,\Big\}^\infty  _{n=1}\Big\Vert  _{\ell_p} \le 1, \q

3238: 1<p<\infty ,

3239: \end{equation}

3240: then

3241: \begin{equation}\label{Eq20.3}

3242: \omega  ^r(f,t)_p \le Ct^r\Big\{\int^1_t\,\Big(\,\frac{\omega

3243: (u)}{u^r}\Big)^q\,\frac{du}{u}\Big\}^{1/q}, \q \frac 1p +\frac 1q =

3244: 1.

3245: \end{equation}

3246: One can view (\ref{Eq20.1}) and (\ref{Eq20.3}) as the analogues of

3247: the pointwise direct and converse result.

3248: 

3249: 

3250: 

3251: \section{Epilogue}\label{Sec21}

3252: I have endeavored to mention all directions and progress made

3253: regarding the rate of polynomial approximation in the last twenty

3254: years. Even though my list of references is quite long, there are

3255: over a hundred possible references that might also have been

3256: included.

3257: 

3258: The issue of best constants was not considered.  Still, I hope that

3259: this survey will be helpful to students and researchers interested

3260: in quantitative estimates of polynomial approximation.

3261: 

3262: I would like to thank

3263: F. Dai, A.~Prymak and S.~Tikhonov for reading a draft of this

3264: manuscript and eliminating many misprints.

3265: 

3266: \section{Appendix}

3267: 

3268: The Jackson-type inequality

3269: $$

3270: E^*_n(f)_B = \inf (\Vert  f-T_n\Vert  _B:\,T_n\in \pmb{\cal T}  _n) \le

3271: C\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_B \eqno{(2.1)^\pr}

3272: $$

3273: for a Banach space $B$ on $T$ satisfying (\ref{Eq2.4}) and

3274: (\ref{Eq2.5}) is essentially known, but as I could not locate a

3275: reference for the exact form $(2.1)^\pr, $ I am adding a proof here.

3276:  One first observes that

3277: $$

3278: \Vert  \sigma  _nf\Vert  _B\le \Vert

3279: f\Vert  _B\q \text{\rm where} \q\sigma  _nf = \frac{1}{2\pi n}\,\int^\pi_{-\pi}\,

3280: \Big(\frac{\sin\,\frac{n(t-x)}{2}}{\sin\,\frac{t-x}{2}}\Big)^2

3281: f(t)dt.

3282: $$

3283: 

3284: Therefore, $E_{2n}(f)_B \le \Vert  f-2\sigma  _{2n}f +\sigma

3285: _nf\Vert  _B\le 4E_n(f)_B.$  We define $F= f*g =\int^\pi_{-\pi}

3286: f(x+t)g(t)dt$ with $g$ of norm $1$ in $B^*,$ the dual of $B.$  For

3287: appropriately chosen $g$ (and still $\Vert  g\Vert  _{B^*} =1)$

3288: $$

3289: \Vert  f- 2\sigma  _{2n}f+\sigma  _nf\Vert  _B-\varepsilon  \le

3290: \vert  F(0) - 2\sigma  _{2n}F(0) + \sigma  _n F(0)\vert  .

3291: $$

3292: We now have

3293: $$

3294: \begin{aligned}

3295: E_{2n}(f)_B-\varepsilon  &\le \Vert  f-2\sigma  _{2n}f +\sigma  _n

3296: f\Vert  _B-\varepsilon  \\

3297: &\le \vert  F(0) - 2\sigma  _{2n}F(0) + \sigma  _n F(0)\vert  \\

3298: &\le \Vert  F-2\sigma  _{2n} F +\sigma  _n F\Vert  _{C(T)}

3299: \le 4E_n(F)_{C(T)} \\

3300: &\le 4C\omega  ^r(F,1/n)_{C(T)} \le 4C\omega  ^r(f,1/n)_B,

3301: \end{aligned}

3302: $$

3303: and as $\varepsilon  $ is arbitrary (independent of $n)$ and

3304: $2^r \omega  ^r(f,1/2n)_B \ge \omega  ^r(f,1/n)_B,$ $(2.1)^\pr$

3305: is proved.  \qed

3306: 

3307: 

3308: 

3309: 

3310: \begin{thebibliography}{99999999}

3311: \baselineskip12pt

3312: %\parskip10pt

3313: \parskip1pt

3314: 

3315: \bibitem[Be-Sc-Xu]{Be-Sc-Xu}  Berens, H., Schmid, H., and  Xu, Y. [1992]

3316: Bernstein-Durrmeyer polynomials on a simplex, {\it J. Approx.

3317: Theory} {\bf 68}, 247--261.

3318: 

3319: \bibitem[Bo]{Bo} Bondarenko, A.V. [2002] Jackson-type inequality in

3320: 3-convex approximation, {\it East J. Approx.} {\bf 8}, 291--302.

3321: 

3322: \bibitem[Bo-Pr]{Bo-Pr} Bondarenko, A., and Prymak, A. [2004] Negative

3323: results in form preserving approximation of higher order, {\it Mat.

3324: %Zametki} {\bf 76}(6), (2004), 812-826. English translation in {\it

3325: Zametki} {\bf 76}(6), 812-826. English translation in {\it

3326: Math. Notes} {\bf 76}(6) (2004), 758--769.

3327: 

3328: \bibitem[Bu-Ja-St]{Bu-Ja-St} Butzer, P.L., Jansche, S., and Stens,

3329: R.L. [1992] Functional analytic methods in the solution of the

3330: fundamental theorems on best weighted algebraic approximation, in

3331: %{\it Approximation Theory}, (Memphis, TN, 1991), G. Anastasion, ed., Lecture Note in Pure

3332: {\it Approximation Theory}, (Memphis, TN, 1991), G. Anastassiou, ed., Lecture Note in Pure

3333: and Applied Mathematics, Marcel Dekker, 151--205.

3334: 

3335: \bibitem[Ch-Di,93]{Ch-Di93} Chen, W., and Ditzian, Z. [1993] A note

3336: %on Bernstein-Durrmeyer operator in $L_2(S),$  {\it J. Approx.

3337: on Bernstein-Durrmeyer operators in $L_2(S),$  {\it J. Approx.

3338: Theory} {\bf 72}, 234--236.

3339: 

3340: \bibitem[Ch-Di,94]{Ch-Di94} Chen, W., and Ditzian, Z. [1994] Strong

3341: converse inequality for Kantarovich polynomials, {\it Constr.

3342: Approx.} {\bf 10}, 95--106.

3343: 

3344: \bibitem[Ch-Di,97]{Ch-Di97}  Chen, W., and Ditzian, Z. [1997] { Best

3345: approximation and $K$-functionals}, {\it Acta Math. Hungar.} {\bf

3346: 75}(3), 165--208.

3347: 

3348: \bibitem[Ch-Di-Iv]{Ch-Di-Iv}  Chen, W., Ditzian, Z., and  Ivanov, K.

3349: [1993] {Strong converse inequality for the Bernstein-Durrmeyer operator},

3350: {\it J. Approx. Theory}  {\bf 75}, 25--43.

3351: 

3352: \bibitem[Da,03]{Da}  Dai, F. [2003] { Some equivalence theorems with

3353: $K$-functionals}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 121}, 143--157.

3354: 

3355: \bibitem[Da,06]{Da06}  Dai, F. [2006] { Multivariate polynomial

3356: inequalities with respect to doubling weights and $A_\infty  $

3357: weights}, {\it J. Funct. Anal.} {\bf 235}(1), 137--170.

3358: 

3359: \bibitem[Da-Di,05]{Da-Di05}  Dai, F., and  Ditzian, Z. [2005] {  Littlewood-Paley

3360: %theory and sharp Marchaud inequality}, {\it Acta Sci. Math.

3361: theory and a sharp Marchaud inequality}, {\it Acta Sci. Math.

3362:  (Szeged)}

3363: {\bf 71}, 65--90.

3364: 

3365: \bibitem[Da-Di,07]{Da-Di07}  Dai, F., and  Ditzian, Z. [2007] { Ces\`aro

3366: summability and Marchaud inequality}, {\it  Constr. Approx.} {\bf

3367: 25}(1), 73--88.

3368: 

3369: \bibitem[Da-Di-Ti]{Da-Di-Ti} Dai, F., Ditzian, Z., and  Tikhonov, S.

3370: [2008]

3371: {Sharp Jackson inequalities,} {\it J. Approx. Theory}, (to

3372: appear).

3373: 

3374: \bibitem[De,81]{De81}  Derriennic, M.M. [1981] { Sur l'approximation de

3375: functions int\'egrable sur $[0,1]$ par le polyn\^omes de Bernstein

3376: modifies}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 31}, 325--343.

3377: 

3378: \bibitem[De,85]{De85}  Derriennic, M.M. [1985] { On multivariate

3379: approximation by Bernstein-type polynomials}, {\it J. Approx.

3380: Theory}  {\bf 45} , 155--166.

3381: 

3382: \bibitem[De-Hu-Le]{De-Hu-Le}  DeVore, R.A.,  Hu, Y.K., and

3383: Leviatan, D. [1996]

3384: { Convex polynomial and spline approximation in} $L_p,$

3385:  $0<p<\infty$,

3386: {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 12}, 409--422.

3387: 

3388: \bibitem[De-Le-Yu]{De-Le-Yu}  DeVore, R.A.,  Leviatan, D., and  Yu,

3389: X.M. [1992]

3390: { Polynomial

3391: approximation in} $L_p,$

3392:  $(0<p<1),$ {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 8},  187--201.

3393: 

3394: \bibitem[De-Lo]{De-Lo} DeVore, R.A., and  Lorentz, G.G. [1993] {

3395: \it Constructive Approximation},  Springer Verlag, Berlin.

3396: 

3397: \bibitem[De-Sh]{De-Sh}  DeVore, R., and  Sharpley, R. [1993] { Besov spaces

3398: on domains in} $R^d,$ {\it Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.} {\bf 335},

3399: 843--864.

3400: 

3401: \bibitem[Di,88]{Di88} Ditzian, Z. [1988] { On the Marchaud-type

3402: inequality}, {\it Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.} {\bf 103},  198--202.

3403: 

3404: \bibitem[Di,92]{Di92}  Ditzian, Z. [1992] { Multivariate Bernstein and

3405: Markov inequalities}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 70}(3),

3406: 273--283.

3407: 

3408: \bibitem[Di,95]{Di95}  Ditzian, Z. [1995] { Multidimensional Jacobi-type

3409: Bernstein-Durrmeyer operators}, {\it Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged)} {\bf

3410: 60},  225--243.

3411: 

3412: \bibitem[Di,95,I]{Di95I} Ditzian, Z. [1995] { On best polynomial

3413: approximation in} $L^2_W(S),$ {\it J. Math. Anal. Appl.} {\bf

3414: 194}, 548--559.

3415: 

3416: 

3417: \bibitem[Di,96]{Di96} Ditzian, Z. [1996] { Polynomial approximation in

3418: $L_p(S)$ for $p>0,$} {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 12},  241--269.

3419: 

3420: \bibitem[Di,98]{Di98}  Ditzian, Z. [1998] { Fractional derivatives and best

3421: approximation}, {\it Acta Math. Hungar.} {\bf 81},  323--348.

3422: 

3423: \bibitem[Di-Hr-Iv]{Di-Hr-Iv} Ditzian, Z., Hristov, V.H., and

3424: Ivanov, K.G. [1995] { Moduli of smoothness and $K$-functionals

3425: in $L_p,$ $ 0<p<1,$}  {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 11},   67--83.

3426: 

3427: 

3428: \bibitem[Di-Iv]{Di-Iv}  Ditzian, Z., and  Ivanov, K. [1993] { Strong converse

3429: inequalities}, {\it J. Anal. Math.} {\bf 61},  61--111.

3430: 

3431: \bibitem[Di-Ji]{Di-Ji} Ditzian, Z., and  Jiang, D. [1992] { Approximation of

3432: %functions  polynomials in} $C[-1,1],$  {\it Canad. J. Math.} {\bf 44},

3433: functions by polynomials in} $C[-1,1],$  {\it Canad. J. Math.} {\bf 44},

3434: 924--940.

3435: 

3436: \bibitem[Di-Ji-Le]{Di-Ji-Le}  Ditzian, Z., Jiang, D., and Leviatan, D.

3437: [1994] { Inverse theorems for best polynomial approximation in} $L_p,$

3438: $0<p<1,$ {\it Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.} {\bf 120},  151--155.

3439: 

3440: \bibitem[Di-Lu]{Di-Lu}   Ditzian, Z., and  Lubinsky, D.S. [1997] { Jackson and

3441: smoothness theorems for Freud weights in} $L_p,$ $(0<p\le\infty  ),$

3442:  {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 13}, 99--152.

3443: 

3444: \bibitem[Di-Ti,05]{Di-Ti05}   Ditzian, Z., and  Tikhonov, S. [2005] { Ul'yanov and

3445: Nikol'skii-type inequalities}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 133},

3446:   100--133.

3447: 

3448: \bibitem[Di-Ti,07]{Di-Ti}  Ditzian, Z., and  Tikhonov, S. [2007] { Moduli of

3449: smoothness of functions and their derivatives}, {\it Studia Math.}

3450: {\bf 180}(2), 143--160.

3451: 

3452: 

3453: \bibitem[Di-To,87]{Di-To87}  Ditzian, Z., and  Totik, V. [1987] {\it Moduli of

3454: Smoothness}, Springer Verlag.

3455: 

3456: \bibitem[Di-To,88]{Di-To88}  Ditzian, Z., and  Totik, V. [1988] { Remarks on Besov

3457: spaces and best polynomial approximations}, {\it Proc. Amer. Math.

3458: Soc.} {\bf 104},  1059--1066.

3459: 

3460: \bibitem[Di-To,90]{Di-To90}  Ditzian, Z., and  Totik, V. [1990] { $K$-functionals

3461: and weighted moduli of smoothness}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 63},

3462: 3--29.

3463: 

3464: \bibitem[Di-Zh]{Di-Zh}  Ditzian, Z., and  Zhou, X.L. [1993] { Optimal

3465: approximation class for multivariate Bernstein operators},

3466: {\it Pacific J. Math.} {\bf 158},  93--120.

3467: 

3468: \bibitem[Dr-Iv]{Dr-Iv}  Draganov, B.R., and  Ivanov, K.G. [2005] { A new

3469: characterization of weighted Peetre $K$-functionals}, {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf

3470: 21},  113--148.

3471: 

3472: \bibitem[Dub]{Dub}  Dubiner, M. [1995] { The theory of multidimensional

3473: polynomial approximation}, {\it J. Anal. Math.} {\bf 67}, 39--116.

3474: 

3475: \bibitem[Du]{Du}  Durrmeyer, J.L. [1967] { Une formule d'inversion de la

3476: transform\'ee de Laplace}, Applications a la theorie des moments,

3477:  Th\`ese de 3e cycle Facult\'e des Sciences de l'Universit\'e de Paris.

3478: 

3479: \bibitem[Du-Xu]{Du-Xu}  Dunkl, C.F., and  Xu, Y. [2001] {\it Orthogonal

3480: Polynomials of Several Variables}, Cambridge University Press.

3481: 

3482: \bibitem[Er]{Er}  Erdelyi, T. [1999] { Notes on inequalities with

3483: doubling weights}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 100}, 60--72.

3484: 

3485: \bibitem[Fe,97,I]{Fe97I}  Felten, M. [1997] { Characterization of best

3486: %algebraic approximation  algebraic modulus of smoothness},

3487: algebraic approximation by an algebraic modulus of smoothness},

3488: {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 89},  1--25.

3489: 

3490: \bibitem[Fe,97,II]{Fe97II}  Felten, M. [1997] { A modulus of smoothness based on

3491: algebraic addition}, {\it Aequationes Math.} {\bf 54},  56--73.

3492: 

3493: \bibitem[Fr]{Fr}  Freud, G. [1971] {\it Orthogonal Polynomials}, Pergamon

3494: Press.

3495: 

3496: \bibitem[Go-Zh]{Go-Zh} Gonska, H.H., and  Zhou, X.L. [1995] {The strong

3497: converse inequality for Bernstein-Kantorovich operators, concrete

3498: analysis}, {\it Comput.

3499: Math. Appl.} {\bf 30},  103--128.

3500: 

3501: \bibitem[Hr-Iv]{Hr-Iv}  Hristov, V.H., and  Ivanov, K. [1990] { Realization

3502: of $K$-functionals on subsets and constrained approximation},

3503: {\it Math. Balkanica (N.S.)} {\bf 4}, 236--257.

3504: 

3505: \bibitem[Iv]{Iv}   Ivanov, K.G. [1989] { A characterization of weighted

3506: Peetre $K$-functionals}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 56},

3507:  185--211.

3508: 

3509: \bibitem[Kn-Zh,94]{Kn-Zh94}   Knoop, H.B., and  Zhou, X.L. [1994] { The lower estimate for

3510: %linear positive operator II}, {\it Results Math.} {\bf 25},  315--330.

3511: linear positive operators, II}, {\it Results Math.} {\bf 25},  315--330.

3512: 

3513: \bibitem[Kn-Zh,95]{Kn-Zh95}   Knoop, H.B., and  Zhou, X.L. [1995] {The lower estimate for

3514: %linear positive operator I}, {Constr. Approx.} {\bf 11},  53--66.

3515: linear positive operators, I}, {Constr. Approx.} {\bf 11},  53--66.

3516: 

3517: 

3518: \bibitem[Ko,94]{Ko94}  Kopotun, K. [1994] { Pointwise and uniform estimates

3519: for convex approximation of functions by algebraic polynomials},

3520: {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 10},  153--174.

3521: 

3522: \bibitem[Ko,98]{Ko98}  Kopotun, K. [1998] {Approximation of $k$-monotone

3523: functions}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 94},

3524: 481--493.

3525: 

3526: \bibitem[Ko-Le-Sh,05]{Ko-Le-Sh05}  Kopotun, K.,   Leviatan, D., and

3527: Shevchuk, I.A, [2005] { Convex polynomial approximation in the uniform norm:

3528: conclusion}, {\it Canad.  J. Math.} {\bf 57}(6), 1224--1248.

3529: 

3530: \bibitem[Ko-Le-Sh,06]{Ko-Le-Sh06}  Kopotun, K.,  Leviatan, D., and

3531: Shevchuk, I.A. [2006] {  Coconvex approximation in the uniform norm: the final

3532: frontier}, {\it Acta Math. Hungar.} {\bf 110}(1-2), 117--151.

3533: 

3534: \bibitem[Le]{Le}  Leviatan, D. [2000] { Shape preserving approximation by

3535: polynomials}, {\it J. Comp. Applied Math.} {\bf 121}, 73--94.

3536: 

3537: \bibitem[Le-Lu]{Le-Lu}  Levin, E., and  Lubinsky, D.S. [2001] {\it Orthogonal

3538: polynomials for exponential weights}, in {\it CMS Books in

3539: Mathematics},

3540: Springer Verlag.

3541: 

3542: \bibitem[Lo-Pe]{Lo-Pe} L\"ofstrom, E.J., and Peetre, J. [1969]

3543: Approximation theorems connected with generalized translations, {\it

3544: Math. Ann.} {\bf 181}, 255--268.

3545: 

3546: \bibitem[Lu]{Lu}  Lubinsky, D.S. [2007] { A survey of weighted polynomial

3547: approximation with exponential weights},  {\it Surv.

3548: %Approximation Theory}, 31--105.

3549: Approximation Theory} {\bf3}, 1--105.

3550: 

3551: \bibitem[Lu-To]{Lu-To}  Lubinsky, D., and  Totik, V. [1994] { Best weighted

3552: polynomial approximation via Jacobi expansions}, {\it SIAM J.

3553: Math. Anal.} {\bf 25},  555--570.

3554: 

3555: % \newpage

3556: \bibitem[Ma-To,98]{Ma-To98}  Mastroianni, G., and Totik, V. [1998] { Jackson type

3557: inequalities for doubling and $A_P$ weights}, in {\it Proceedings of the Third

3558: International Conference on Functional Analysis and Approximation

3559: Theory}, Vol~I (Aequafredda di Maratea 1996) Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo

3560: (2), suppl. 52 Vol {\bf 1},  83--99.

3561: 

3562: \bibitem[Ma-To,99]{Ma-To99}  Mastroianni, G., and  Totik, V. [1999] { Jackson type

3563: inequalities for doubling weights II}, {\it East J. Approx.} {\bf 5},

3564: 101--116.

3565: 

3566: \bibitem[Ma-To,00]{Ma-To00}  Mastroianni, G., and  Totik, V. [2000] { Weighted

3567: polynomial inequalities with doubling and $A_\infty  $ weights},

3568: {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 16},  37--71.

3569: 

3570: \bibitem[Ma-To,01]{Ma-To01}  Mastroianni, G., and  Totik, V. [2001] { Best

3571: approximation and moduli of smoothness for doubling weights},

3572: {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 110},  180--199.

3573: 

3574: \bibitem[Mh]{Mh}  Mhaskar, H.N. [1996] {\it Introduction to the theory of

3575: weighted polynomial approximation}, World Scientific.

3576: 

3577: \bibitem[Ni]{Ni}  Nikol'skii, S.M. [1946] { On the best approximation by

3578: polynomials of functions which satisfy Lipschitz condition},

3579:  {\it Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR} {\bf 10}, 295--318 (Russian).

3580: 

3581: \bibitem[Op]{Op}  Operstein, V.A. [1995] { A characterization of

3582: smoothness in terms of approximation by algebraic polynomials in}

3583: $L_p,$ {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 81},  13--22.

3584: 

3585: \bibitem[Po,01,I]{Po01I} Potapov, M.K. [2001] On the properties and

3586: applications in approximation theory of a family of generalized

3587: shift operators (Russian), {\it Mat. Zametki} {\bf 69} 412--426,

3588: English translation in {\it Math. Notes} {\bf 69} (2001), 373--386.

3589: 

3590: \bibitem[Po,01,II]{Po01II} Potapov, M.K. [2001] Direct and inverse

3591: theorems in approximation theory for the $m$-th generalized modulus

3592: of smoothness, {\it Trudi Mat. Inst. Steklova} {\bf 232}, 289--297,

3593: translation in {\it Proc. Steklov Inst. Math.} {\bf 232}, 281-289.

3594: 

3595: \bibitem[Po,05]{Po05} Potapov, M.K. [2005] On the interrelations

3596: between generalized moduli of smoothness of differentiable functions

3597: and their best approximation by algebraic polynomials (Russian),

3598: {\it Vestnik Moskov Univ. Ser. 1 Math. Mekh.} {\bf 64} 6, 10--17,

3599: translation in {\it Moscow Univ. Math. Bull.} {\bf 60} (2005), 6,

3600: 9--16 (2006).

3601: 

3602: \bibitem[Po-Ka]{Po-Ka} Potapov, M.K., and Kazimirov, G.N. [1998]

3603: On the approximation of functions that have a given order of the

3604: $k^{\rm th}$

3605: generalized modulus of smoothness (Russian), {\it Math. Zametki}

3606: {\bf 63}, 425--436, translation in {\it Math. Notes} {\bf 63},

3607: 374--383.

3608: 

3609: \bibitem[Sa]{Sa}  Sanguesa, C. [2002] { Lower estimates for centered

3610: Bernstein-type operators}, {\it Constr. Approx.} {\bf 18},  145--159.

3611: 

3612: \bibitem[Se-Po]{Se-Po} Sendov, B., and  Popov, V. [1988] {\it The Averaged Moduli

3613: of Smoothness}, Wiley-Interscience, John~Wiley \& Sons.

3614: 

3615: \bibitem[Sh]{Sh}  Shvedov, A.S. [1981]  Orders of coapproximation of functions

3616: by algebraic polynomials, {\it Mat. Zanetki} {\bf 29},

3617: 117--130, English translation in {\it Math. Notes} {\bf 29} (1981),

3618: 63--70.

3619: 

3620: \bibitem[Ta,90]{Ta90}   Tachev, G.T. [1990] {A direct theorem for the best

3621: algebraic approximation in} $L_p[-1,1],$

3622:  $(0<p<1),$ {\it Math. Balkanica} {\bf 4},  381--390.

3623: 

3624: \bibitem[Ta,91]{Ta91}   Tachev, G.T. [1991] {A converse theorem for the best

3625: algebraic approximation in} $L_p[-1,1],$ $(0<p<1),$ {\it Serdica} {\bf

3626: 17},  161--166.

3627: 

3628: \bibitem[Ta,95]{Ta}   Tachev, G.T. [1995] { A note on two moduli of

3629: smoothness}, {\it J. Approx. Theory} {\bf 81}, 136--140.

3630: 

3631: \bibitem[Ti,A]{TiA}  Timan, A.F. [1963] {\it Theory of Approximation of

3632: Functions of Real Variable}, Pergamon Press.

3633: 

3634: \bibitem[Ti,M,58]{TiM58}  Timan, M.F. [1958] { Inverse theorems of the

3635: %constructive theory of functions in the space} $L_p,$ {\it Mat. Sborn}

3636: constructive theory of functions in the space} $L_p,$ {\it Mat. Sb. N.S.}

3637: {\bf 46}(88), 125--132 (Russian).

3638: 

3639: \bibitem[Ti,M,66]{TiM66}  Timan, M.F. [1966] {On Jackson's theorem in $L_p$

3640: spaces},  {\it Ukr. Mat. Zh.} {\bf 18}, 134--137 (Russian).

3641: 

3642: 

3643: \bibitem[To,88] {To88}   Totik, V. [1988] { Sharp converse theorem of $L_p$

3644: polynomial approximation}, {\it  Constr. Approx.} {\bf 4},  419--433.

3645: 

3646: \bibitem[To,94]{To94}  Totik, V. [1994] { Approximation by Bernstein

3647: polynomials}, {\it  Amer. J. Math.} {\bf 116},

3648: 995--1018.

3649: 

3650: \bibitem[Tr-Be]{Tr-Be}  Trigub, R.M., and  Belinsky, E.S. [2004] {\it Fourier

3651: Analysis and Approximation of Functions}, Kluwer Academic

3652: Publishers.

3653: 

3654: \bibitem[Wa]{Wa}  Wang, H. [1993] {\it Approximation by polynomials in

3655: Orlicz spaces}, Master dissertation (Chinese), Beijing Normal

3656: University, Beijing.

3657: 

3658: %\bibitem[Zh]{Zh}  Zhou, X.L. [1994] { Approximation by multivariant

3659: \bibitem[Zh]{Zh}  Zhou, X.L. [1994] { Approximation by multivariate

3660: Bernstein operators}, {\it Results Math.} {\bf 25},  166--191.

3661: 

3662: \bibitem[Zh-Ca-Xu]{Zh-Ca-Xu}  Zhang, P.,  Cao, F., and  Xu, Z. [2003] {

3663: Multivariate modulus of smoothness in Orlicz spaces and its

3664: application}, {\it Adv. Math.} {\bf 32}, No.~6, 695--705.

3665: 

3666: \bibitem[Zy]{Zy}  Zygmund, A. [1950] { A remark on the integral modulus

3667: of continuity}, {\it Univ. Nac. Tucuman Rev. Ser.} {\bf A7},

3668: 259--269.

3669: 

3670: \end{thebibliography}

3671: 

3672: 

3673: \vskip.5in\noi

3674: {Department of Mathematical}

3675: \newline

3676: {and Statistical Sciences}

3677: \newline

3678: {University of Alberta}

3679: \newline

3680: {Edmonton, Alberta}

3681: \newline

3682: {Canada \q T6G 2G1}

3683: \newline

3684: {\tt zditzian@math.ualberta.ca}

3685: 

3686: \endddoc

3687: 

3688: 

3689: 

3690: \vs

3691: \begin{description}

3692: \item  {2.} Jackson-type estimates

3693: \item  {3.} $K\text{\rm -functionals}$

3694: \item  {4.} $K\text{\rm -functionals} $ (second approach)

3695: \item  {5.} Realization

3696: \item  {6.} Sharp Marchaud and sharp converse inequalities

3697: \item  {7.} Moduli of functions and their derivatives

3698: \item  {8.} Relation with Bernstein polynomial approximation and

3699: other linear operators

3700: \item  {9.} Weighted moduli of smoothness, doubling weights

3701: \item  {10.} Weighted moduli of smoothness, Jacobi weights

3702: \item  {11.} Weighted moduli of smoothness, Freud weights

3703: \item  {12.} Multivariate analogues

3704: \item  {13.} Ul'yanov-type result

3705: \item  {14} $\omega  ^r_{\varphi  ^\lambda  }(f,t)_\infty  ,$ $0\le

3706: \lambda  \le 1,$ filling the gap

3707: \item  {15.} Shape-preserving approximation

3708: \item  {16.} Average moduli of smoothness (Ivanov's moduli)

3709: \item  {17.} Algebraic addition (Felten's moduli)

3710: \item  {18.} Generalized translations

3711: \item  {19.} Other methods

3712: \item  {20.} Conclusions and additional remarks

3713: \end{description}

3714: