The explicit subaction conjecture associated with the period-two maximizing orbit

At least 7 years old · documented by

Let AA and T(x)=2x(mod1)T(x)=2x\pmod 1 be as in the preceding construction, with inverse branches τ1(x)=x/2\tau_1(x)=x/2 and τ2(x)=(x+1)/2\tau_2(x)=(x+1)/2. Define η=τ2∘τ1\eta=\tau_2\circ\tau_1 and

H(x)=∑i=1+∞(A(τ1(ηi(x)))+A(τ2(τ1(ηi(x))))).H(x)=\sum_{i=1}^{+\infty}\left(A\left(\tau_1(\eta^i(x))\right)+A\left(\tau_2(\tau_1(\eta^i(x)))\right)\right).

A subaction is a function satisfying the corresponding ergodic-optimization inequality. The explicit period-two subaction conjecture. The function

W(x)=H(x)I[0,1/2)(x)+H(1−x)I[1/2,1](x)W(x)=H(x)I_{[0,1/2)}(x)+H(1-x)I_{[1/2,1]}(x)

is a subaction for AA. This candidate is associated with the maximizing probability supported on {1/3,2/3}\{1/3,2/3\}. The source says that the relevant series is absolutely convergent and seeks to prove the subaction identity, but supplies no proof of the conjecture.

References

Primary source

Hermes H. Ferreira, Artur O. Lopes and Elismar R. Oliveira, “Explicit examples in Ergodic Optimization”, arXiv:1809.03900 (2020).

Progress summary

Never refreshed

Nothing recorded yet. Refresh searches the literature and the public web for attempts on this problem, and writes the first summary here.

Solutions 0

No solutions have been posted yet.