Skip to main content


We're creating a new version of this page. See preview

  • Research Article
  • Open Access

Decomposition of Polyharmonic Functions with Respect to the Complex Dunkl Laplacian

Journal of Inequalities and Applications20102010:947518

  • Received: 28 December 2009
  • Accepted: 26 March 2010
  • Published:


Let be a -invariant convex domain in including , where is a complex Coxeter group associated with reduced root system . We consider holomorphic functions defined in which are Dunkl polyharmonic, that is, for some integer . Here is the complex Dunkl Laplacian, and is the complex Dunkl operator attached to the Coxeter group , where is a multiplicity function on and is the reflection with respect to the root . We prove that any complex Dunkl polyharmonic function has a decomposition of the form , for all , where are complex Dunkl harmonic functions, that is, .


  • Homogeneous Polynomial
  • Coxeter Group
  • Reflection Group
  • Taylor Formula
  • Multiplicity Function

1. Introduction

A fundamental result in the theory of polyharmonic functions is the celebrated Almansi theorem [13], which shows that for any polyharmonic function of degree in a starlike domain in with center , that is,
there exist uniquely harmonic functions such that
The Almansi formula is a genuine analogy to the Taylor formula:
Compared with the Taylor formula, the Almansi formula is obtained by the scheme

and since the constants are solutions of , they are replaced by the solutions of the Laplace equation .

In [1], Aronszajn et al. indicated some applications of the Almansi formula in several complex variables. Its most eminent application is in spherical harmonic function theory [4, 5]. The polyharmonic functions have also applications in the theory of elasticity [6], in radar imaging [7], and in multivariate approximation [8, 9].

The purpose of this article is to extend Almansi's theorem to the theory of complex Dunkl harmonics. The theory of Dunkl harmonics developed by Dunkl [1013] is an extension of the theory of ordinary harmonics. In 1989, Dunkl [10] constructed for each Coxeter group a family of commutative differential-difference operators , called Dunkl operators, which can be considered as perturbations of the usual partial derivatives by reflection parts. These operators step from the analysis of quantum many body system of Calogero-Moser-Sutherland type [14] in mathematical physics. They also have roots in the theory of special functions of several variables. With Dunkl operators in place of the usual partial derivatives, one can define the Laplacian in the Dunkl setting, which is a parametrized operator and invariant under reflection groups. These parametrized Laplacian suggests the theory of Dunkl harmonics. In [15], we obtained the Almansi decomposition for the real Dunkl operator. Now we continue to consider the Almansi decomposition for the complex Dunkl operator.

As a direct consequence, we will show that the Almansi Theorem implies the Gauss decomposition of the homogeneous polynomials into complex Dunkl harmonics.

We need some notations before stating our main result. Let be a root system in and the associated Coxeter group. Let be a fixed multiplicity function on . Fix a positive subsystem of , and denote . We will always assume that
Let be the Dunkl operator attached to the Coxeter group and the multiplicity function , defined by (see [16])

where denotes the reflection in the hyperplane orthogonal to .

The Dunkl operators enjoy the regularity property: if , the space of holomorphic functions in , then . This follows immediately from the formula

for any and .

The Dunkl Laplacian is defined as
more precisely,
Here and are the complex Laplacian and gradient operator:

Throughout this paper we let be a -invariant convex domain in including , that is, , , and for all and . This class of domain turns out to be natural for the Almansi decomposition. It is known that is a regular operator in such a domain. Namely, if , then .

Definition 1.1.

A holomorphic function is Dunkl polyharmonic of degree if . If , it is called Dunkl harmonic function.

Let be the identity operator. For any with we define the operator by
If is Dunkl harmonic in , then so is . For any , by assumption (1.5) we can introduce the operator:
For any and , we denote

Our main result is the following theorem.

Theorem 1.2.

Assume that is a root system in and its associated complex Coxter group. Let be a -invariant convex domain in including . If is a Dunkl polyharmonic function in of degree , then there exist uniquely Dunkl harmonic functions such that
Moreover the Dunkl harmonic functions are given by the following formulae:

Conversely, the sum in (1.14), with Dunkl harmonic in , defines a Dunkl polyharmonic function in of degree .

Remark 1.3.

By the Scheme in (1.4), we know that the formulae of above play the role of Taylor coefficient formulae. These formulae are new even in the classical case .

2. Preliminaries

Let us recall some notation in the theory of Dunkl harmonics; see [16, 17]. Concerning root system and reflection groups, see [18].

A root system is a finite set of nonzero vectors in such that and for all .

The positive subsystem is a subset of such that , where and are separated by a hyperplane through the origin.

For a nonzero vector , the reflection in the hyperplane orthogonal to is defined by

where the symbol and .

The Coxeter group (or the finite reflection group) generated by the root system is the subgroup of the unitary group generated by .

A multiplicity function is a -invariant complex valued function defined on , that is, for all .

Notice that Dunkl operators were studied in literature for .

The Dunkl operator , associated with the Coxeter group and the multiplicity function , is the first-order differential-difference operator. The remarkable property of Dunkl operators is that they are commutative:
The Dunkl Laplacian can be split into three parts

When , the Dunkl Laplacian is just the ordinary complex Laplacian .

Consider the natural action of on functions , given by . The Dunkl Laplacian is -invariant, that is,

Example 2.1.

Let be an integer and . Since we need to consider the sum and runs from 1 to , this forces Take the Coxeter group , which is the symmetric group in elements, acting on by permuting the standard basis (see [17, page 289]). We regard the transposition in as a reflection such that
Therefore, is a finite reflection generated by with a root system
As all transpositions are conjugate in , the vector space of multiplicity function is one dimensional. The complex Dunkl operators associated with the multiplicity parameters are given by

where acts on by interchanging and ; more precisely, with , , and for any .

In this case, the condition (1.5) of the main theorem reduces to

Example 2.2.

In the one-dimensional case , the root system is of type , the reflection group , and the multiplicity function is given by a single parameter . The Dunkl operator and the Dunkl Laplacian are given, respectively, by

If is an even function, then the third term in the formula of vanishes, while the sum of the first two items provides a singular Sturm-Liouville operator.

3. Proof of the Main Theorem

Before proving Theorem 1.2, we need some lemmas.


We write instead of when .

Lemma 3.1.

If , , and , then


For any , and ,
By direct calculation
where . Therefore

From the above two identities and the definitions of and , we have and

Lemma 3.2.

If , then for any , , and


By definition, we have for a.e.
It is also easy to see

Since , it follows that for a.e. . From the regularity property of Dunkl operators, maps into . By the continuity, Lemma 3.2 follows.

Lemma 3.3.

Let . If and as in (1.12), then


Note that (3.6) implies

Indeed, from Lemma 3.1, . As direct consequence of (3.6) and (3.11), we find that and are Dunkl harmonic, whenever is Dunkl harmonic. From the definition of , we thus obtain .

Lemma 3.4.

Let , , Then for any


For any
Take and apply identities and to yield
By our assumption . Therefore
As a result,
for any and . Indeed
By definition, we have

Since , summing up the above identity leads to identity (3.12) for .

Lemma 3.5.

For any complex Dunkl harmonic function in ,


From (1.12) and Lemma 3.1, we know that
Denote . Then is Dunkl harmonic in due to (3.10), and
We need to show

for any Dunkl harmonic function in and .

Let be Dunkl harmonic in and . Then Lemma 3.4 shows
We use induction on to prove (3.23). It is easy to prove when . For the general case, from (3.24) we have

Equation (3.23) follows directly from the assumption of induction.

Now we come to the proof of our main theorem.

Proof of Theorem 1.2.

Denote . It is sufficient to show that
where . Notice that Lemma 3.5 states that

We split the proof into two parts.

(i) . Since , we need only to show . For any , by (3.27) and (3.10) we have
(ii) . For any , we have the decomposition
We will show that the first summand above is in and the item in the braces of the second summand is in . This can be verified directly. First,

Next, since and , we have , as desired.This proves that . By induction, we can easily deduce that .

Next we prove that for any the decomposition
is unique. In fact, for such a decomposition, applying on both sides we obtain
so that

Thus the uniqueness follows by induction.

To prove the converse, we see from (3.23) that, for any Replacing by , we have

for any .

4. Gauss Decomposition

As a direct consequence of Theorem 1.2, we can get the extended Fischer decomposition theorem. Let denote the space of homogeneous polynomials of degree in . Notice that maps into , so that . If , then
and so that
where and . Denote

Corollary 4.1.

Let be a homogeneous polynomial of degree in . Then there exist uniquely Dunkl harmonic homogeneous polynomials of degree such that
Moreover the Dunkl harmonic functions are given by the following formulae:


Let , then is Dunkl harmonic of degree , so that Theorem 1.2 gives the decomposition of as in (4.4). It remains to check the formulae of . We only consider the formula of , since the others are similar. That is, we need to show
Notice that for any , , so that (4.2) implies
and also

The remaining proof follows by induction.



The research is partially supported by the Unidade de Investigação "Matemática e Aplicações" of University of Aveiro and by the NNSF of China (no. 10771201).

Authors’ Affiliations

Department of Mathematics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, Anhui, 230026, China
Departamento de Matemática, Universidade de Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal


  1. Aronszajn N, Creese TM, Lipkin LJ: Polyharmonic Functions. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, USA; 1983:x+265.MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Hayman WK, Korenblum B: Representation and uniqueness theorems for polyharmonic functions. Journal d'Analyse Mathématique 1993, 60: 113–133.MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Malonek HR, Ren G: Almansi-type theorems in Clifford analysis. Mathematical Methods in the Applied Sciences 2002, 25(16–18):1541–1552.MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Stein EM, Weiss G: Introduction to Fourier Analysis on Euclidean Spaces, Princeton Mathematical Series, no. 32. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA; 1971:x+297.Google Scholar
  5. Vilenkin NJa, Klimyk AU: Representation of Lie Groups and Special Functions. Recent Advances, Mathematics and Its Applications. Volume 316. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands; 1995:xvi+497.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Lurie SA, Vasiliev VV: The Biharmonic Problem in the Theory of Elasticity. Gordon and Breach, Luxembourg, UK; 1995:viii+265.Google Scholar
  7. Andersson L-E, Elfving T, Golub GH: Solution of biharmonic equations with application to radar imaging. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 1998, 94(2):153–180. 10.1016/S0377-0427(98)00079-XMATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Armitage DH, Gardiner SJ, Haussmann W, Rogge L: Characterization of best harmonic and superharmonic -approximants. Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 1996, 478: 1–15.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Kounchev O: Multivariate Polysplines: Applications to Numerical and Wavelet Analysis. Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA; 2001:xiv+498.Google Scholar
  10. Dunkl CF: Differential-difference operators associated to reflection groups. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 1989, 311(1):167–183. 10.1090/S0002-9947-1989-0951883-8MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Dunkl CF: Reflection groups and orthogonal polynomials on the sphere. Mathematische Zeitschrift 1988, 197(1):33–60. 10.1007/BF01161629MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Dunkl CF: Integral kernels with reflection group invariance. Canadian Journal of Mathematics 1991, 43(6):1213–1227. 10.4153/CJM-1991-069-8MATHMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunkl CF: Intertwining operators associated to the group . Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 1995, 347(9):3347–3374. 10.2307/2155014MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. van Diejen JF, Vinet L: Calogero-Sutherland-Morser Models. Springer, New York, NY, USA; 2000.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Ren G: Almansi decomposition for Dunkl operators. Science in China Series A 2005, 48(supplement 1):333–342.MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Ren GB, Malonek HR: Complex Dunkl operators.
  17. Dunkl CF, Xu Y: Orthogonal Polynomials of Several Variables. Volume 81. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; 2001:xvi+390.MATHView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Humphreys JE: Reflection Groups and Coxeter Groups, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Volume 29. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK; 1990:xii+204.View ArticleGoogle Scholar


© G. Ren and H. R. Malonek. 2010

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.