Operators on injective tensor products of L1-preduals

Ji\v{r}\'i Spurn\'y; \v{S}t\v{e}p\'an Ond\v{r}ej

arxiv: 2604.18157 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 🧮 math.FA

Operators on injective tensor products of L1-preduals

\v{S}t\v{e}p\'an Ond\v{r}ej , Ji\v{r}\'i Spurn\'y This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.FA

keywords L1-predualsinjective tensor productunconditionally converging operatorsstrongly bounded operatorsoperator extensionsBanach spacescontinuous functions on dual ball

0 comments

The pith

Unconditionally converging operators from the injective tensor product of an L1-predual X and a space E extend to operators on continuous functions over the dual unit ball of X while preserving their properties.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops a method that starts with any unconditionally converging operator T from the injective tensor product X ⊗_ε E to a Banach space F, observes that T must be strongly bounded, and constructs an extension S to the space of continuous F-valued functions on the closed unit ball of X*. This extension keeps intact the features of T that matter for the argument. A reader cares because the same construction then serves as a single tool for deriving many different facts about the tensor product space from corresponding facts about E alone. If the method works, separate case-by-case proofs for each property become unnecessary.

Core claim

Let X be an L1-predual and let E and F be Banach spaces. Every unconditionally converging operator T from the injective tensor product X ⊗_ε E into F is strongly bounded. This fact permits T to be extended to an operator S acting on the space of continuous F-valued functions defined on the closed unit ball of X* while preserving the relevant properties of T. The resulting procedure supplies a uniform way to prove statements about the tensor product X ⊗_ε E by appealing only to properties of E.

What carries the argument

The extension of an unconditionally converging operator T to a new operator S on continuous F-valued functions on the dual unit ball of X that preserves the properties needed for the argument.

If this is right

Properties of operators on the injective tensor product X ⊗_ε E follow directly from corresponding properties of the space E.
The same extension construction works for any L1-predual X, giving a uniform method across this class of spaces.
Results already known for continuous F-valued functions on compact sets can be transferred back to statements about the tensor product.
The approach applies uniformly to any target space F without additional restrictions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The method may shorten proofs when E is itself a space of continuous functions or a C*-algebra.
It suggests looking for analogous extension techniques for other tensor norms or for projective tensor products.
One could test whether the same strong-boundedness fact holds when X is replaced by other classes of spaces that admit similar dual-ball representations.

Load-bearing premise

Every unconditionally converging operator from the injective tensor product of X and E to F is strongly bounded, and the constructed extension preserves the properties of the original operator.

What would settle it

A concrete example, for some L1-predual X and Banach spaces E and F, of an unconditionally converging operator from X ⊗_ε E to F that is not strongly bounded.

read the original abstract

Let X be an L1-predual and E,F be Banach spaces. We use the fact that an unconditionally converging operator T from the injective tensor product of X and E to F is strongly bounded and extend T to an operator S on continuous F-valued functions on the dual unit ball of X with the preservation of properties of T. This procedure provides a unified approach for proving properties of the tensor product of X and E based on the properties of E.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a concrete extension trick from operators on X ⊗_ε E to operators on C(B_{X*}, F) for L1-predual X, but the preservation of properties needs explicit verification.

read the letter

The main point is that for an L1-predual X the authors take an unconditionally converging operator T from the injective tensor product X ⊗_ε E to F and extend it to an operator S on the space of continuous F-valued functions on the dual ball of X. They claim this extension keeps the properties that matter for the tensor product, which lets them reduce questions about the tensor product to questions about the function space. That reduction is the actual new piece here, and it looks like a practical tool for people who already work with operator ideals on these spaces. If the construction is clean, it could shorten some arguments that currently go through direct estimates on the tensor product norm. The paper does well by starting from the strong boundedness fact for unconditionally converging maps and turning it into a systematic step rather than a one-off trick. That gives the unified approach mentioned in the abstract. The soft spots sit in the extension itself. The abstract leaves the formula for S and the exact list of preserved properties implicit, and the stress-test note correctly flags that if membership in a given ideal (compact, weakly compact, etc.) does not survive the extension, the reduction fails for those cases. I would want to see the explicit definition of S and a short check that it works for the usual ideals people care about. The strong boundedness claim also needs a clear reference or short proof if it is not already standard. This is narrow functional analysis aimed at readers who know L1-preduals and injective tensor products. A specialist who needs to prove something about operators on X ⊗_ε E will find the method useful once the details are filled in. It is not broad enough to change the field, but the technique is concrete enough to deserve referee time. I would send it to peer review and ask the referees to check the preservation step on a couple of standard operator classes.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a method to study operators on the injective tensor product X ⊗_ε E where X is an L1-predual Banach space. It invokes the fact that every unconditionally converging operator T : X ⊗_ε E → F is strongly bounded, extends T to an operator S on C(B_{X*}, F), and claims that this extension preserves the relevant properties of T. The procedure is presented as a unified way to deduce properties of the tensor product from corresponding properties of E.

Significance. If the strong-boundedness assertion and the property-preserving extension are rigorously verified, the reduction to the function space C(B_{X*}, F) could offer a systematic tool for transferring results about operator ideals (compactness, weak compactness, etc.) from E to the tensor product with L1-preduals. This would be a modest but useful organizational contribution in the theory of tensor products of Banach spaces.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and opening paragraph of §1] The central claim rests on the unproven (or unreferenced) assertion that every unconditionally converging operator T : X ⊗_ε E → F is strongly bounded. No definition of 'strongly bounded' appears, no proof or citation is supplied, and no counter-example check for specific L1-preduals is given. This fact is load-bearing for the entire reduction.
[§2 (construction of the extension)] The extension map T ↦ S on C(B_{X*}, F) is asserted to preserve membership in operator ideals, yet no explicit formula for S is displayed and no verification is provided that, e.g., compactness of T implies compactness of S or that weak compactness is retained. Without this verification the transfer of properties from E to X ⊗_ε E cannot be confirmed.

minor comments (1)

[Notation paragraph] Standard notation for the injective tensor product (⊗_ε) is used, but the paper should explicitly recall the definition of B_{X*} (the closed unit ball of X*) and the topology on C(B_{X*}, F) at the first appearance.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and for identifying the points where additional rigor is required. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and opening paragraph of §1] The central claim rests on the unproven (or unreferenced) assertion that every unconditionally converging operator T : X ⊗_ε E → F is strongly bounded. No definition of 'strongly bounded' appears, no proof or citation is supplied, and no counter-example check for specific L1-preduals is given. This fact is load-bearing for the entire reduction.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript should have included the definition of strong boundedness together with a justification of the assertion. This omission was an oversight on our part. In the revised version we will insert a precise definition of strong boundedness and supply either a self-contained proof or a reference to a known result that unconditionally converging operators on injective tensor products with L1-preduals are strongly bounded. We will also add a short verification for the most common L1-preduals (such as C(K) spaces) to confirm the property holds in those cases. revision: yes
Referee: [§2 (construction of the extension)] The extension map T ↦ S on C(B_{X*}, F) is asserted to preserve membership in operator ideals, yet no explicit formula for S is displayed and no verification is provided that, e.g., compactness of T implies compactness of S or that weak compactness is retained. Without this verification the transfer of properties from E to X ⊗_ε E cannot be confirmed.

Authors: We accept that the explicit construction of the extension S and the verification that it preserves operator-ideal membership are necessary for the argument to be complete. In the revision we will display the concrete formula for S (the canonical extension obtained by composing with the isometric embedding of X ⊗_ε E into C(B_{X*}, F)) and provide detailed proofs that compactness, weak compactness, and other relevant ideal properties of T are inherited by S. These additions will make the transfer of properties from E to the tensor product fully rigorous. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: method rests on external fact and extension without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The paper describes a procedure that invokes an external fact (unconditionally converging operators from the injective tensor product are strongly bounded) and an extension of T to S on C(B_{X*}, F) that preserves properties. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-definitions appear that would make any claimed result equivalent to its inputs by construction. The approach is presented as a transfer of properties from E to the tensor product X ⊗_ε E, relying on the validity of the cited fact and the preservation under extension rather than on any tautological renaming or self-citation chain internal to the derivation. This is a standard non-circular use of prior results in functional analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that X is an L1-predual together with the unproved fact that unconditionally converging operators from the injective tensor product are strongly bounded; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption X is an L1-predual
Explicitly stated as the setting for the construction.
domain assumption An unconditionally converging operator T from the injective tensor product of X and E to F is strongly bounded
Invoked as the starting fact that enables the extension step.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5375 in / 1287 out tokens · 33243 ms · 2026-05-10T03:36:36.395160+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

A unifying approach to closed subspaces of linear and multilinear operators
math.FA 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

The paper establishes abstract theorems giving conditions for closedness of subspaces of operators on Banach spaces and lattices, with applications to existing and new classes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

[1]Abbott, C., Bator, E., and Lewis, P.Strictly singular and strictly cosingular operators on spaces of continuous functions.Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 110, 3 (1991), 505–521. [2]Abbott, C. A., Bator, E. M., Bilyeu, R. G., and Lewis, P. W.Weak precompactness, strong boundedness, and weak complete continuity.Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 108, ...

work page 1991
[2]

M., and Lewis, P

[4]Bator, E. M., and Lewis, P. W.Operators having weakly precompact adjoints.Math. Nachr. 157(1992), 99–103. [5]Batt, J.Integraldarstellungen linearer transformationen und schwache Kompaktheit.Math. Ann. 174(1967), 291–304. [6]Batt, J., and Berg, E. J.Linear bounded transformations on the space of continuous functions.J. Functional Analysis 4(1969), 215–2...

work page 1992
[3]

[12]Bombal, F., and Porras, B.Strictly singular and strictly cosingular operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸). Math. Nachr. 143(1989), 355–364. [13]Bombal, F., and Rodr ´ıguez-Salinas, B.Some classes of operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸). Extension and applications.Arch. Math. (Basel) 47, 1 (1986), 55–65. [14]Brooks, J. K., and Lewis, P. W.Linear operators and vector measures.Trans. Am...

work page 1989
[4]

S.On a property of the unit sphere in a Banach space.Bull

[18]De Blasi, F. S.On a property of the unit sphere in a Banach space.Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. R. S. Roumanie (N.S.) 21(69), 3-4 (1977), 259–262. [19]Defant, A., and Floret, K.Tensor norms and operator ideals, vol. 176 ofNorth-Holland Mathematics Studies. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam,

work page 1977
[5]

[23]Dobrakov, I.On representation of linear operators on𝐶 0 (𝑇 ,X).Czechoslovak Math. J. 21(96)(1971), 13–30. [24]Dunford, N., and Schwartz, J. T.Linear Operators. I. General Theory, vol. Vol. 7 ofPure and Applied Mathematics. Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York; Interscience Publishers Ltd., London,

work page 1971
[6]

Remarks on weak compactness of operators defined on certain injective tensor products

With the assistance of W. G. Bade and R. G. Bartle. [25]Effros, E.On a class of complex Banach spaces.Illinois J. Math. 18(1974), 48–59. [26]Emmanuele, G.Another proof of a result of N. J. Kalton, E. Saab and P. Saab on the Dieudonn´ e property in𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸).Glasgow Math. J. 31, 2 (1989), 137–140. [27]Emmanuele, G.Remarks on weak compactness of operators def...

work page 1974
[7]

P., Lindenstrauss, J., and Phelps, R

[29]Fonf, V. P., Lindenstrauss, J., and Phelps, R. R.Infinite dimensional convexity. InHand- book of the geometry of Banach spaces, Vol. I. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2001, pp. 599–670. [30]Fremlin, D. H.Measure theory. Vol

work page 2001
[8]

Part I, II, Corrected second printing of the 2003 original

Topological mea- sure spaces. Part I, II, Corrected second printing of the 2003 original. [31]Ghenciu, I.On some classes of operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋).Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Math. 63, 3 (2015), 261–274. [32]Ghenciu, I., and Lewis, P.Strongly bounded representing measures and convergence theo- rems.Glasg. Math. J. 52, 3 (2010), 435–445. [33]Ghenciu, I., and Popes...

work page 2003
[9]

[39]Kalenda, O. F. K., and Spurn ´y, J.Baire classes of affine vector-valued functions.Studia Math. 233, 3 (2016), 227–277. [40]Kalenda, O. F. K., and Spurn ´y, J.On simpliciality of function spaces not containing constants.J. Funct. Anal. 288, 4 (2025), Paper No. 110756,

work page 2016
[10]

[41]Kalton, N., Saab, E., and Saab, P.𝐿 𝑝 (𝑋) (1≤𝑝 <∞)has the property(𝑢)whenever𝑋 does.Bull. Sci. Math. 115, 3 (1991), 369–377. [42]Kalton, N. J., Saab, E., and Saab, P.On the Dieudonn´ e property for𝐶(Ω, 𝐸).Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 96, 1 (1986), 50–52. 36 ˇSTˇEP´AN OND ˇREJ AND JI ˇR´I SPURN ´Y [43]Ka ˇcena, M.On sequentially right Banach spaces.Extracta ...

work page 1991
[11]

J.Spaces of affine continuous functions on simplexes.Trans

[46]Lazar, A. J.Spaces of affine continuous functions on simplexes.Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 134(1968), 503–525. [47]Lazar, A. J., and Lindenstrauss, J.Banach spaces whose duals are𝐿 1 spaces and their representing matrices.Acta Math. 126(1971), 165–193. [48]Luke ˇs, J., Mal ´y, J., Netuka, I., and Spurn ´y, J.Integral representation theory, vol. 35 of de G...

work page 1968
[12]

[49]Lusky, W.Every𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a simplex space.Israel Journal of Mathe- matics 64, 2 (1988), 169–178

Applications to convexity, Banach spaces and potential theory. [49]Lusky, W.Every𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a simplex space.Israel Journal of Mathe- matics 64, 2 (1988), 169–178. [50]Lusky, W.Every separable𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a𝐶 ∗-algebra.Studia Math. 160, 2 (2004), 103–116. [51]Mu ˜noz, F., Oja, E., and Pi ˜neiro, C.The Bartle-Dunford-Sch...

work page 1988
[13]

[59]Randrianantoanina, N.Pe lczy´ nski’s property(𝑉)on spaces of vector-valued functions. Colloq. Math. 71, 1 (1996), 63–78. [60]Rosenthal, H.A characterization of Banach spaces containing𝑐 0.J. Amer. Math. Soc. 7, 3 (1994), 707–748. [61]Roth, W.Integral representation—Choquet theory for linear operators on function spaces, vol. 74 ofDe Gruyter Exposition...

work page 1996
[14]

[63]Saab, E., and Saab, P.On operators on𝐴(𝐾 , 𝐸).Bull. Sci. Math. (2) 105, 4 (1981), 393–399. [64]Saab, E., and Saab, P.A stability property of a class of Banach spaces not containing a complemented copy of𝑙 1.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 84, 1 (1982), 44–46. [65]Saab, E., and Saab, P.Applications lin´ eaires continues sur le produit tensoriel injectif d’espac...

work page 1981
[15]

[73]Talagrand, M.La propri´ et´ e de Dunford-Pettis dansC (𝐾 , 𝐸)et𝐿 1 (𝐸).Israel J. Math. 44, 4 (1983), 317–321. [74]Teleman, S.An introduction to Choquet theory with the applications to reduction theory. Increst Preprint Series in Mathematics(1980), 1–294

work page 1983
[16]

¨Ulger, A.Continuous linear operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋)and pointwise weakly precompact subsets of𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋).Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 111, 1 (1992), 143–150. ˇStˇep´an Ond ˇrej, Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Depart- ment of Mathematical Analysis, Sokolovsk´a 83, 186 75, Praha 8, Czech Republic Email address:stepan.ondrej844@stude...

work page 1992

[1] [1]

[1]Abbott, C., Bator, E., and Lewis, P.Strictly singular and strictly cosingular operators on spaces of continuous functions.Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 110, 3 (1991), 505–521. [2]Abbott, C. A., Bator, E. M., Bilyeu, R. G., and Lewis, P. W.Weak precompactness, strong boundedness, and weak complete continuity.Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 108, ...

work page 1991

[2] [2]

M., and Lewis, P

[4]Bator, E. M., and Lewis, P. W.Operators having weakly precompact adjoints.Math. Nachr. 157(1992), 99–103. [5]Batt, J.Integraldarstellungen linearer transformationen und schwache Kompaktheit.Math. Ann. 174(1967), 291–304. [6]Batt, J., and Berg, E. J.Linear bounded transformations on the space of continuous functions.J. Functional Analysis 4(1969), 215–2...

work page 1992

[3] [3]

[12]Bombal, F., and Porras, B.Strictly singular and strictly cosingular operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸). Math. Nachr. 143(1989), 355–364. [13]Bombal, F., and Rodr ´ıguez-Salinas, B.Some classes of operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸). Extension and applications.Arch. Math. (Basel) 47, 1 (1986), 55–65. [14]Brooks, J. K., and Lewis, P. W.Linear operators and vector measures.Trans. Am...

work page 1989

[4] [4]

S.On a property of the unit sphere in a Banach space.Bull

[18]De Blasi, F. S.On a property of the unit sphere in a Banach space.Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. R. S. Roumanie (N.S.) 21(69), 3-4 (1977), 259–262. [19]Defant, A., and Floret, K.Tensor norms and operator ideals, vol. 176 ofNorth-Holland Mathematics Studies. North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam,

work page 1977

[5] [5]

[23]Dobrakov, I.On representation of linear operators on𝐶 0 (𝑇 ,X).Czechoslovak Math. J. 21(96)(1971), 13–30. [24]Dunford, N., and Schwartz, J. T.Linear Operators. I. General Theory, vol. Vol. 7 ofPure and Applied Mathematics. Interscience Publishers, Inc., New York; Interscience Publishers Ltd., London,

work page 1971

[6] [6]

Remarks on weak compactness of operators defined on certain injective tensor products

With the assistance of W. G. Bade and R. G. Bartle. [25]Effros, E.On a class of complex Banach spaces.Illinois J. Math. 18(1974), 48–59. [26]Emmanuele, G.Another proof of a result of N. J. Kalton, E. Saab and P. Saab on the Dieudonn´ e property in𝐶(𝐾 , 𝐸).Glasgow Math. J. 31, 2 (1989), 137–140. [27]Emmanuele, G.Remarks on weak compactness of operators def...

work page 1974

[7] [7]

P., Lindenstrauss, J., and Phelps, R

[29]Fonf, V. P., Lindenstrauss, J., and Phelps, R. R.Infinite dimensional convexity. InHand- book of the geometry of Banach spaces, Vol. I. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 2001, pp. 599–670. [30]Fremlin, D. H.Measure theory. Vol

work page 2001

[8] [8]

Part I, II, Corrected second printing of the 2003 original

Topological mea- sure spaces. Part I, II, Corrected second printing of the 2003 original. [31]Ghenciu, I.On some classes of operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋).Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Math. 63, 3 (2015), 261–274. [32]Ghenciu, I., and Lewis, P.Strongly bounded representing measures and convergence theo- rems.Glasg. Math. J. 52, 3 (2010), 435–445. [33]Ghenciu, I., and Popes...

work page 2003

[9] [9]

[39]Kalenda, O. F. K., and Spurn ´y, J.Baire classes of affine vector-valued functions.Studia Math. 233, 3 (2016), 227–277. [40]Kalenda, O. F. K., and Spurn ´y, J.On simpliciality of function spaces not containing constants.J. Funct. Anal. 288, 4 (2025), Paper No. 110756,

work page 2016

[10] [10]

[41]Kalton, N., Saab, E., and Saab, P.𝐿 𝑝 (𝑋) (1≤𝑝 <∞)has the property(𝑢)whenever𝑋 does.Bull. Sci. Math. 115, 3 (1991), 369–377. [42]Kalton, N. J., Saab, E., and Saab, P.On the Dieudonn´ e property for𝐶(Ω, 𝐸).Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 96, 1 (1986), 50–52. 36 ˇSTˇEP´AN OND ˇREJ AND JI ˇR´I SPURN ´Y [43]Ka ˇcena, M.On sequentially right Banach spaces.Extracta ...

work page 1991

[11] [11]

J.Spaces of affine continuous functions on simplexes.Trans

[46]Lazar, A. J.Spaces of affine continuous functions on simplexes.Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 134(1968), 503–525. [47]Lazar, A. J., and Lindenstrauss, J.Banach spaces whose duals are𝐿 1 spaces and their representing matrices.Acta Math. 126(1971), 165–193. [48]Luke ˇs, J., Mal ´y, J., Netuka, I., and Spurn ´y, J.Integral representation theory, vol. 35 of de G...

work page 1968

[12] [12]

[49]Lusky, W.Every𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a simplex space.Israel Journal of Mathe- matics 64, 2 (1988), 169–178

Applications to convexity, Banach spaces and potential theory. [49]Lusky, W.Every𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a simplex space.Israel Journal of Mathe- matics 64, 2 (1988), 169–178. [50]Lusky, W.Every separable𝐿 1-predual is complemented in a𝐶 ∗-algebra.Studia Math. 160, 2 (2004), 103–116. [51]Mu ˜noz, F., Oja, E., and Pi ˜neiro, C.The Bartle-Dunford-Sch...

work page 1988

[13] [13]

[59]Randrianantoanina, N.Pe lczy´ nski’s property(𝑉)on spaces of vector-valued functions. Colloq. Math. 71, 1 (1996), 63–78. [60]Rosenthal, H.A characterization of Banach spaces containing𝑐 0.J. Amer. Math. Soc. 7, 3 (1994), 707–748. [61]Roth, W.Integral representation—Choquet theory for linear operators on function spaces, vol. 74 ofDe Gruyter Exposition...

work page 1996

[14] [14]

[63]Saab, E., and Saab, P.On operators on𝐴(𝐾 , 𝐸).Bull. Sci. Math. (2) 105, 4 (1981), 393–399. [64]Saab, E., and Saab, P.A stability property of a class of Banach spaces not containing a complemented copy of𝑙 1.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 84, 1 (1982), 44–46. [65]Saab, E., and Saab, P.Applications lin´ eaires continues sur le produit tensoriel injectif d’espac...

work page 1981

[15] [15]

[73]Talagrand, M.La propri´ et´ e de Dunford-Pettis dansC (𝐾 , 𝐸)et𝐿 1 (𝐸).Israel J. Math. 44, 4 (1983), 317–321. [74]Teleman, S.An introduction to Choquet theory with the applications to reduction theory. Increst Preprint Series in Mathematics(1980), 1–294

work page 1983

[16] [16]

¨Ulger, A.Continuous linear operators on𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋)and pointwise weakly precompact subsets of𝐶(𝐾 , 𝑋).Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 111, 1 (1992), 143–150. ˇStˇep´an Ond ˇrej, Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Depart- ment of Mathematical Analysis, Sokolovsk´a 83, 186 75, Praha 8, Czech Republic Email address:stepan.ondrej844@stude...

work page 1992