Journal of Function Spaces
Volume 2018 (2018), Article ID 6037615, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6037615

Research Article

The Characterization of Generalized Jordan Centralizers on Triangular Algebras

Quanyuan Chen,¹ Xiaochun Fang,² and Changjing Li³

¹College of Infor., Jingdezhen Ceramic Institute, Jingdezhen, Jiangxi 333403, China
²Department of Mathematics, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
³Department of Mathematics, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, Shandong 250014, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Quanyuan Chen; cqy0798@163.com

Received 6 May 2018; Revised 27 August 2018; Accepted 30 August 2018; Published 16 September 2018

Academic Editor: Ismat Beg

Copyright © 2018 Quanyuan Chen et al. 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.

Abstract.

In this paper, it is shown that if is a triangular algebra and is an additive operator on such that for any , then is a centralizer. It follows that an Jordan centralizer on a triangular algebra is a centralizer.

1. Introduction and Preliminaries

The triangular algebras are firstly introduced in [1]. Let and be two unital algebras over a commutative ring , where is a unital commutative ring, and let be a unital bimodule. Suppose that is a faithful bimodule; that is, is an bimodule satisfying : and implies that , and : implies that . Consider the set

The usual matrix addition and matrix multiplication on are defined as follows: for any ,

It is easy to see that is an algebra under the usual matrix addition and matrix multiplication and is called a triangular algebra. We denote by for simplicity.

Let be a ring or an algebra and be an additive mapping on . If (resp., ) for any , then is called a left centralizer (resp., a right centralizer). A centralizer of is an additive mapping which is both a left centralizer and a right centralizer. An additive mapping is called a left (resp., right) Jordan centralizer, if (resp., ) for any . A Jordan centralizer of is an additive mapping which is both a left Jordan and a right Jordan centralizer. An Jordan centralizer is defined in ([2]) as follows: let be a ring or an algebra and be an additive mapping on . If there are such that for any , then is called an Jordan centralizer.

The characterization of centralizers on algebras or rings is a subject in various areas. Bresar and Zalar ([3]) proved that if is a prime ring and is an additive mapping on such that (resp., ) for any , then is a left (resp., a right) centralizer. Zalar ([4]) generalized the result to 2-torsion free semiprime rings as follows: if is a 2-torsion free semiprime ring and is an additive mapping on such that (resp., ) for any , then is a left (resp., a right) centralizer. Vukman ([5]) proved that if is a 2-torsion free semiprime ring and is an additive mapping on such that for any , then is a centralizer. Benkovic and Eremita ([6]) proved that if is a prime ring with or , where is a fixed positive integer such that , and is an additive mapping on such that for any , then is a centralizer. Vukman and Kosi-Ulbl ([7]) proved that if is a Banach space over the field , and is a standard subalgebra of and is an additive mapping such that for any , where , then is a centralizer. Qi et al. ([8]) proved that if is a standard subalgebra of with the identity and is an additive mapping such that for any , where is a Banach space over the field and , then is a centralizer. Yang and Zhang ([9]) proved that, if is an additive mapping on a nest algebra , such that or for any , where is a nontrivial nest on , is the corresponding nest algebra, and , then is a centralizer. J. Vukman ([2]) proved that an Jordan centralizer on a prime ring with is a centralizer. Li et al. ([10]) proved that a Jordan centralizer on a CSL subalgebra of a von Neumann algebra is a centralizer. Chen et al. ([11]) proved that an additive mapping on a CSL subalgebra of a von Neumann algebra such that for any is a centralizer. Lately several authors investigated Jordan centralizers or their related mappings on rings and algebras. Some of the results can be found in ([5, 12–20]).

Motivated by these results, we are concerned with an additive mapping such that for any . It is shown that if is a triangular algebra and is an additive operator on such that for any , then is a centralizer. And it follows that an Jordan centralizer on a triangular algebra is a centralizer. As applications, Jordan centralizers on (block) upper triangular matrix algebras and nest algebras are centralizers.

2. Generalized Jordan Centralizers on Triangular Algebras

If is a unital commutative ring, and are unital algebras over with units and , respectively, and is a unital, faithful bimodule, then

is a triangular algebra.

Let be a triangular algebra. And let , , where and are the identity elements of algebras and , respectively. And let (). Then and .

The main result is as follows.

Theorem 1. Let be a triangular algebra and be an additive mapping. If there exist numbers such that

for any , then is a centralizer; that is, and for any , where .

The proof of Theorem 1 can be divided into several lemmas.

Lemma 2. Suppose that is a unital algebra, and is an additive mapping on such that

That is, for any , there is (depending on ) such that

where . Then

(1)

(2)

for any .

Proof. For any ,

On the other hand,

Comparing the above two equalities, we obtain that

Putting in (11) , it follows from that

Lemma 3. Let be a unital algebra and be an additive mapping on satisfying (4). If with such that , then and .

Proof. Since , . By (12), we have that

and

Hence

On the other hand,

Comparing the two equalities, we have that . Since and , and .

Lemma 4. Let be a unital algebra and be an additive mapping on satisfying (4). If with , then .

Proof. If or , the result is trivial.
Let be a nontrivial idempotent; that is, and . By (4),

By (12),

Multiplying (17) by from the left and the right sides gives

Multiplying (18) by from the left and the right sides, we have that

By comparing the above two equalities,

Multiplying (17) by from the left side gives that

That is,

It follows from (20) that

Thus

Multiplying (18) by from the left side yields that

and comparing and (25), we obtain that

It follows from (21) that and

It follows from (24) that

Similarly,

and

Equations (27) and (29) yield that . And

by (28) and (30). By Lemma 3 and , it follows that and . And by (21), and . Identity (17) yields that

Lemma 5. Let be a unital algebra and be an additive mapping on satisfying (4). If with , then

(1),(2), where .

Proof. By (12),

Similarly, .

Lemma 6. Let be a unital algebra and be an additive mapping on satisfying (4). If with , then .

Proof. If or , the result is trivial.
Let be a nontrivial idempotent; that is, and . It follows from Lemma 5 that

Comparing the above two equalities, we have that

It follows from Lemma 2(2) that

By Lemma 4, we have that , , and . Putting for and for in (11), we have that

By (36) with (37),

It follows from (36) that

Comparing (38) and (39), we have that

Multiplying (36) by from the left and the right sides gives that

Multiplying (37) by from both sides yields that

It follows that

Comparing (41) and (43), we have that

It follows from the above equality and (40) that Since , and

By (37) and (45),

By (36) and (45),

Comparing it with (46), we have that and

Lemma 7. Let be a triangular algebra. Suppose that .

(1)If , then ;(2)If , then .

Proof. (1) If and , then for any . So for any . It follows from the definition of a triangular algebra that . And
(2) It is similar to the proof of (1).

Lemma 8. Let be a triangular algebra, and be an additive mapping satisfying (4). Then .

Proof. It follows that and from Lemma 6.
For any , by Lemma 5, we have that

and

It follows that

and

By (12), we have that

Multiplying the above equality by from the right side gives that

It follows that

and

Similarly, we have that

It follows that

and

Lemma 9. Let be a triangular algebra, and be an additive mapping satisfying (4). Let . Then

(1);(2);(3);(4).

Proof. (1) By (11),

Since , , and , it follows that

Multiplying (60) by from the right side, using the fact that , yields that and . Since , it follows from Lemma 7(2) that

Since ,

Combining it with (60), we have that . Since ,

(2) By (11),

Using the fact that yields that

Multiplying (65) by from the right side, we have that and . It follows from Lemma 7(2) that and

Combining it with (65), we have that . Since ,

(3) By (1), for any ,

and

by Lemma 7(1).
(4) By (2), for any ,

and

by Lemma 7(2).

Proof of Theorem 1. Let . Then and . By Lemmas 8 and 9, we have that

So that is a centralizer.

Corollary 10. Let be a triangular algebra, and be an additive mapping. If there are positive numbers , such that for any , then is a centralizer.

Theorem 11. Let be a triangular algebra, and be an additive mapping. If there are positive numbers and a positive integer , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Proof. Putting for in (73), where is any rational number, we get that for any , so that is a centralizer by Corollary 10.

Theorem 12. Let be a triangular algebra and be an additive mapping. If there are positive integers , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Proof. Putting for in (74), where is any rational number, we can also get that for any , so that is a centralizer by Corollary 10.

3. Applications

Upper triangular matrix algebras, block upper triangular matrix algebras, and nest algebras over a Hilbert space are important examples of triangular algebras.

Upper triangular matrix algebras. Let be the set of all matrices and be the algebra of all upper triangular matrices over a ring . For and each , the algebra can be represented as a triangular algebra of the form .

Block upper triangular matrix algebras. Let be the set of all positive integers and let . For every positive integer , , we denote by an ordered vector of positive integers such that . The block upper triangular matrix algebra with corresponding vector is a subalgebra of which contains all block upper triangular matrices, where diagonal blocks have sizes , respectively. Note that and are two special cases of block upper triangular matrix algebras. If we have that and , then is a triangular algebra and can be represented as , where and and are block upper triangular algebras with suitable vectors ,.

Corollary 13. Every Jordan centralizer of a block upper triangular matrix algebra ) is a centralizer, where is the complex field.

Corollary 14. Let be a block upper triangular matrix algebra and be an additive mapping on ). If there are positive numbers and a positive integer , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Corollary 15. Let be a block upper triangular matrix algebra and be an additive mapping on ). If there are positive numbers and a positive integer , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Nest algebras. A nest is a chain of closed subspaces of a real or complex Hilbert space containing and , which is closed under arbitrary intersections and closed liner span. The nest algebra associated with is the algebra

A nest is called trivial if . A nontrivial nest algebra over a Hilbert space is a triangular algebra.

In fact, by Peirce decomposition, a nontrivial nest algebra is a triangular algebra. Suppose that is a nontrivial nest algebra, and is the corresponding nest. Choose any such that , . Set , , , and . Then ; that is,

Since is a faithful bimodule, the nest algebra is a triangular algebra.

Corollary 16. Let be a nontrivial nest algebra over a Hilbert space. Then every Jordan centralizer on the nest algebra is a centralizer.

Corollary 17 (see [9]). Let be a nontrivial nest algebra over a Hilbert space and let be an additive mapping on . If there are positive numbers and a positive integer , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Corollary 18 (see [9]). Let be a nontrivial nest algebra over a Hilbert space and let be an additive mapping on . If there are positive numbers and a positive integer , such that

for any , then is a centralizer.

Data Availability

No data were used to support this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors are supported by the National Science Foundation of China (No. 11401273, No. 11871375) and the Natural Science Research Foundation of Jiangxi Provincial Education Department (No. GJJ170759).

References

W.-S. Cheung, Mappings on triangular algebras, University of Victoria, 2000.

J. Vukman, “On (m,n)-Jordan centralizers in rings and algebras,” Glasnik Mateematicki, vol. 45(65), no. 1, pp. 43–53, 2010.

M. Bresar and B. Zalar, “On the structure of Jordan *-derivations,” Colloquium Mathematicum, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 163–171, 1992.

B. Zalar, “On centralizers of semiprime rings,” Commentationes Mathematicae, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 609–614, 1991.

J. Vukman, “An identity related to centralizers in semiprime rings,” Commentationes Mathematicae, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 447–456, 1999.

D. Benkovic and D. Eremita, “Characterizing left centralizers by their action on a polynomial,” Publicationes Mathematicae, vol. 64, no. 3-4, pp. 343–351, 2004.

J. Vukman and I. Kosi-Ulbl, “Centralisers on rings and algebras,” Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 225–234, 2005.

X. F. Qi, S. P. Du, and J. C. Hou, “Characterization of centralizers,” Acta Mathematica Sinica, vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 509–516, 2008.

C. Yang and J. H. Zhang, “Generalized Jordan centralizers on nest algebras,” Acta Mathematica Sinica, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 975–980, 2010.

P. Li, D. Han, and W.-S. Tang, “Centralizers and Jordan derivations for CSL subalgebras of von Neumann algebras,” The Journal of Operator Theory, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 117–133, 2013.

Q. Chen, X. Fang, and C. Li, “The characterization of generalized Jordan centralizers on algebras,” Sociedade Paranaense de Matemática, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 225–240, 2017.

S. H. Ali, A. Fosner, M. Fosner, and M. S. Khan, “On Generalized Jordan Triple (a, ß)*-Derivations and Related Mappings,” Mediterranean Journal of Mathematics, vol. 10, pp. 1657–1668, 2013.

W.-S. Cheung, “Commuting maps of triangular algebras,” Journal Of The London Mathematical Society-Second Series, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 117–127, 2001.

A. Fosner, “A note on generalized (m,n)-Jordan centralizers,” Demonstratio Mathematica, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 257–262, 2013.

M. E. Gordji and H. Khodaei, “A fixed point technique for investigating the stability of (α,β,γ)-derivations on Lie C*-algebras,” Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 76, pp. 52–57, 2013.

H. Khodaei, “On the hyperstability of (m,n)-derivations,” Fixed Point Theory. An International Journal on Fixed Point Theory, Computation and Applications, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 641–650, 2017.

F. Lu, “The Jordan structure of CSL algebras,” Studia Mathematica, vol. 190, no. 3, pp. 283–299, 2009.

Q. Shen, J. Li, and J. Guo, “On (m,n)-derivations of some algebra,” Demonstratio Mathematica, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 672–694, 2014.

J. Vukman, “Centralizers on semiprime rings,” Commentationes Mathematicae, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 237–245, 2001.

J. Vukman, I. Kosi-Ulbl, and D. Eremita, “On certain equations in rings,” Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, vol. 71, no. 1, pp. 53–60, 2005.