Conic inverses and the full localization theorem

An elliptic test can be inverted near its noncharacteristic directions. The inverse need not be an actual inverse on all distributions: a smooth error is enough. We construct that inverse with every symbol remainder, then prove that finitely many directional tests recover the full local Besov estimate. This supplies the converse in the intrinsic localization theorem, including finite-rank matrix tests.

This is a bounded modified selection of AN03-U010, Section 2, and AN03-U012, Section 6, with the conic and intrinsic arguments completed below. Original principal author and publisher: AN-03 course-writing task / AN-03 local course project, 2026. Earlier modification: AN-03 course-writing task and OpenAI Codex. This selection and its connecting proofs: GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI), Ultra, 4 October 2026; publisher: AN-04 local course project.

Original text: CC0.

K0. Exact inputs and conic conventions

We use ordinary symbols Sd=S1,0dS^d=S^d_{1,0}, real orders, left quantization, D=−i∂D=-i\partial, and the Fourier inverse factor (2π)−n(2\pi)^{-n}. No homogeneous expansion is assumed. The complete earlier proofs are:

Write ess⁡(A)\operatorname{ess}(A) for the complementary closed conic set of points where a full symbol is smoothing on a neighborhood. In particular T2 proves

ess⁡(AB)⊂ess⁡(A)∩ess⁡(B).(R1) \operatorname{ess}(AB) \subset\operatorname{ess}(A)\cap\operatorname{ess}(B). \tag{R1}

Every operator below is proper when it acts on an arbitrary distribution. A kernel with compact support in both variables is proper. An error that is smoothing on a cone means one fixed open cone on which all negative-order estimates, with all derivatives, hold.

All constructions can be made in a compact part of one coordinate chart. They extend by zero as proper operators on the manifold. The statements about local spaces then apply in every chart and frame by T3. Thus no finite global atlas or uniform geometry is assumed.

K1. Summation with every derivative and with support retained

For global ordinary symbols with compact base support, put

pd,L(a)=max⁡∣α∣+∣β∣≤Lsup⁡x,ξ⟨ξ⟩−d+∣α∣∥∂ξα∂xβa(x,ξ)∥.(R2) p_{d,L}(a)=\max_{|\alpha|+|\beta|\le L} \sup_{x,\xi}\langle\xi\rangle^{-d+|\alpha|} \|\partial_\xi^\alpha\partial_x^\beta a(x,\xi)\|. \tag{R2}

The same proof below works for uniformly bounded global base estimates. Matrix norms may be used throughout.

Let aj∈Sdja_j\in S^{d_j}, dj→−∞d_j\to-\infty. Monotonicity is not required. Set Dk=max⁡j≥kdjD_k=\max_{j\ge k}d_j; the maximum exists since only finitely many terms can exceed the first term of that tail. There is a smooth aa such that

a∈SD0,a−∑j<kaj∈SDk(k≥0),supp⁡a⊂⋃jsupp⁡aj.(R3) \begin{gathered} a\in S^{D_0},\qquad a-\sum_{j<k}a_j\in S^{D_k}\quad(k\ge0),\\ \operatorname{supp}a\subset\bigcup_j\operatorname{supp}a_j. \end{gathered} \tag{R3}

Its class modulo S−∞S^{-\infty} is unique and is unchanged by rearranging the sequence, with the corresponding tail orders.

Proof. Choose a fixed smooth χ\chi, equal to one for ∣ξ∣≤1|\xi|\le1 and zero for ∣ξ∣≥2|\xi|\ge2. Choose strictly increasing Rj→∞R_j\to\infty so large that

Aj=(1−χ(ξ/Rj))aj,pdj+1,L(Aj)≤2−j(0≤L≤j).(R4) A_j=(1-\chi(\xi/R_j))a_j,\qquad p_{d_j+1,L}(A_j)\le2^{-j}\quad(0\le L\le j). \tag{R4}

Here is the estimate ensuring that choice. When no derivative hits the cutoff, its support has ∣ξ∣≥Rj|\xi|\ge R_j, and the one-order loss contributes at most C/RjC/R_j. When r≥1r\ge1 frequency derivatives hit it, their factor is at most CrRj−rC_rR_j^{-r}, supported where Rj≤∣ξ∣≤2RjR_j\le|\xi|\le2R_j. The remaining derivatives of aja_j have order dj−∣α∣+rd_j-|\alpha|+r; the weight in (R2) therefore gives at most C⟨ξ⟩−1+rRj−rC\langle\xi\rangle^{-1+r}R_j^{-r}, again at most C′/RjC'/R_j. Base derivatives do not differentiate this cutoff. For each finite list L≤jL\le j, take RjR_j larger than all these finitely many constants times 2j2^j, and larger than Rj−1+1R_{j-1}+1. This proves (R4).

Define a=∑jAja=\sum_j A_j. On each bounded frequency set only finitely many terms occur, so aa is smooth and can be differentiated term by term there. Fix k,Lk,L. Choose J≥max⁡(k,L)J\ge\max(k,L) with dj+1≤Dkd_j+1\le D_k for every j≥Jj\ge J. Since pDk,L≤pdj+1,Lp_{D_k,L}\le p_{d_j+1,L}, the tail is bounded by ∑j≥J2−j\sum_{j\ge J}2^{-j} in this seminorm. This bound follows pointwise from finite sums before taking the supremum; no unproved interchange of an infinite differentiated series is used. The remaining terms in a−∑j<kaja-\sum_{j<k}a_j are finitely many symbols of order at most DkD_k and the finitely many terms −χ(ξ/Rj)aj-\chi(\xi/R_j)a_j, j<kj<k. Each of the latter has bounded frequency support and hence is smoothing. This proves every seminorm assertion in (R3), including k=0k=0.

At a point outside the displayed union of supports, a neighborhood meets only finitely many possible AjA_j; shrink it so that each of their original aja_j vanishes there. Then aa vanishes there. This proves support containment, even when the union is not closed. Two sums differ by SDkS^{D_k} for every kk, so their difference is smoothing. For a finite initial segment of a rearrangement, let DD be the largest order omitted from it. An original initial segment containing those chosen terms and every term of order greater than DD shows that the new remainder is in SDS^D. This proves the rearranged assertion. □\square

K1a. The properly supported operator sum actually needed here

Suppose Cj∈Ψd−jC_j\in\Psi^{d-j} have kernels supported in one fixed compact chart product. There exists a compact-kernel C∈ΨdC\in\Psi^d with

C−∑j<NCj∈Ψd−N(N≥0).(R5) C-\sum_{j<N}C_j\in\Psi^{d-N}\qquad(N\ge0). \tag{R5}

Indeed P2 O4–O5 and Fourier inversion of the compact kernel in the difference variable give a full symbol cj∈Sd−jc_j\in S^{d-j} with base support in one fixed compact set. Sum those symbols by K1. Quantize the result using a fixed compact kernel cutoff equal to one near that compact diagonal. The same cutoff changes each original CjC_j only by a smooth compact kernel: the changed part is separated from the diagonal. Quantizing each remainder in (R3), and adding these finitely many smooth differences, proves (R5). This is an asymptotic sum; there is no claim that ∑jCj\sum_j C_j converges in operator norm.

K2. Ordinary matrix inverses on an elliptic cone

Let a(x,ξ)∈Sda(x,\xi)\in S^d be a square matrix symbol. It is elliptic on a compactly based conic neighborhood VV, above a radius RR, if there is c>0c>0 such that

∥a(x,ξ)v∥≥c⟨ξ⟩d∥v∥((x,ξ)∈V, ∣ξ∣≥R).(R6) \|a(x,\xi)v\|\ge c\langle\xi\rangle^d\|v\| \quad ((x,\xi)\in V,\ |\xi|\ge R). \tag{R6}

The matrix is injective, hence bijective by the proved finite-dimensional dimension theorem applied to the underlying real space of dimension 2q2q, for matrix size qq. Its unique real inverse is complex linear: a(iv)=i a(v)a(iv)=i\,a(v) and uniqueness give a−1(iw)=i a−1wa^{-1}(iw)=i\,a^{-1}w. The bound is ∥a−1∥≤c−1⟨ξ⟩−d\|a^{-1}\|\le c^{-1}\langle\xi\rangle^{-d}. The real cofactor formula gives smoothness where it is invertible, and hence smoothness of its complex matrix entries. Differentiating a−1a=Ia^{-1}a=I gives

∂a−1=−a−1(∂a)a−1.(R7) \partial a^{-1}=-a^{-1}(\partial a)a^{-1}. \tag{R7}

For a combined base/frequency multiindex ν≠0\nu\ne0, repeated Leibniz differentiation gives more explicitly

(∂νa−1)a=−∑0<μ≤ν(νμ)(∂ν−μa−1)(∂μa).(R8) (\partial^\nu a^{-1})a =-\sum_{0<\mu\le\nu}\binom\nu\mu (\partial^{\nu-\mu}a^{-1})(\partial^\mu a). \tag{R8}

Multiply on the right by a−1a^{-1} and use induction on ∣ν∣|\nu|. If α\alpha counts its frequency derivatives, each term has order −d−∣α∣-d-|\alpha|: the two inverse orders and the order of aa add in precisely that way. Thus a−1∈S−da^{-1}\in S^{-d} on each smaller elliptic cone, with all base derivatives of order zero cost.

Multiplication by a smooth degree-zero angular/base cutoff supported strictly within VV, and by a high-frequency cutoff zero below RR, extends this inverse smoothly by zero to a compact-base global S−dS^{-d} symbol. All cutoff derivatives have the ordinary budgets; near the support boundary the cutoff already vanishes on a neighborhood.

The condition is stable under Sd−1S^{d-1} errors: their action on a vector has norm at most C⟨ξ⟩d−1∥v∥C\langle\xi\rangle^{d-1}\|v\|, so (R6) retains c/2c/2 after increasing the radius. Chart and frame changes preserve it by T1–T3 and compact bounds for the invertible coordinate and frame matrices. This defines the intrinsic open elliptic set of an ordinary operator, without classical symbols.

K3. A two-sided conic parametrix with one fixed error cone

Let A∈ΨdA\in\Psi^d be proper and elliptic at a nonzero covector ρ\rho. There is a proper B∈Ψ−dB\in\Psi^{-d} such that

I−BAandI−ABare smoothing near ρ.(R9) I-BA\quad\hbox{and}\quad I-AB \quad\hbox{are smoothing near }\rho. \tag{R9}

The operator BB may have compact kernel in the chosen chart.

Proof. Work with a full local symbol aa of AA, after compact localization as in P2 O5. Choose nested conic neighborhoods V0⋐V1⋐V2V_0\Subset V_1\Subset V_2 of ρ\rho, where compact containment means containment of their closed base/unit-direction sections. Take V2V_2 inside the elliptic region. K2 constructs a compact-base b0∈S−db_0\in S^{-d}, equal to a−1a^{-1} on V1V_1 at high frequency. Proper compact quantization gives B0B_0 with that full symbol modulo smoothing. Hence

EL=I−B0A∈Ψ−1 on V1,EL∈Ψ0 locally everywhere.(R10) E_L=I-B_0A\in\Psi^{-1}\ \hbox{on }V_1, \qquad E_L\in\Psi^0\ \hbox{locally everywhere}. \tag{R10}

The first claim is exactly the first remainder of P2's full product formula, since b0a=Ib_0a=I there. There is no assertion that this error has negative order outside V1V_1.

Take a further scalar conic cutoff equal to one near the closure of V0V_0, supported in V1V_1, with the same harmless low-frequency truncation. Multiply a full local symbol of ELE_L by it and extend by zero. The result is a global compact-base S−1S^{-1} symbol, because the error has order −1-1 throughout its support. Its proper compact quantization RL∈Ψ−1R_L\in\Psi^{-1} satisfies

RL−EL is smoothing on V0.(R11) R_L-E_L\ \hbox{is smoothing on }V_0. \tag{R11}

All kernels RLjB0R_L^jB_0 are supported in one fixed compact chart product: both factors were chosen inside that product, and its intermediate integrations do not enlarge it. Their orders are −d−j-d-j. K1a therefore gives BL∈Ψ−dB_L\in\Psi^{-d} with

BL−SN∈Ψ−d−N,SN=∑j=0N−1RLjB0.(R12) B_L-S_N\in\Psi^{-d-N},\qquad S_N=\sum_{j=0}^{N-1}R_L^jB_0. \tag{R12}

For every finite N≥1N\ge1, associativity gives the exact identity

SNA=I−RLN+∑j=0N−1RLj(RL−EL).(R13) S_NA=I-R_L^N+ \sum_{j=0}^{N-1}R_L^j(R_L-E_L). \tag{R13}

The last sum is smoothing on V0V_0 by (R1) and (R11). The other two errors in BLA−IB_LA-I are RLN∈Ψ−NR_L^N\in\Psi^{-N} and (BL−SN)A∈Ψ−N(B_L-S_N)A\in\Psi^{-N}. Therefore BLA−IB_LA-I has every negative order on the same V0V_0, with every differentiated estimate. It is smoothing there.

For the right side put ER=I−AB0E_R=I-AB_0, cut its order-−1-1 symbol down in the same way to obtain RRR_R, and asymptotically sum B0RRjB_0R_R^j. With TN=∑j<NB0RRjT_N=\sum_{j<N}B_0R_R^j, the finite identity is

ATN=I−RRN+∑j=0N−1(RR−ER)RRj.(R14) AT_N=I-R_R^N+ \sum_{j=0}^{N-1}(R_R-E_R)R_R^j. \tag{R14}

It proves ABR−IAB_R-I smoothing on V0V_0. Matrix factors have not been commuted in either construction. Finally

BL−BR=BL(I−ABR)+(BLA−I)BR(R15) B_L-B_R=B_L(I-AB_R)+(B_LA-I)B_R \tag{R15}

is smoothing there by (R1). Thus ABL−IAB_L-I is also smoothing there, and B=BLB=B_L proves (R9). □\square

This also proves microlocal uniqueness modulo smoothing. If a given B~∈Ψ−d\widetilde B\in\Psi^{-d} has a left inverse property on a cone, compare it with BB using (R15); the difference is smoothing on a smaller common cone, so it has the right inverse property as well. The same argument starts from a right inverse. Conversely, a left inverse property implies, in full symbols, ba=I+rba=I+r with r∈S−1r\in S^{-1}. At high frequency ∥bav∥≥∥v∥/2\|ba v\|\ge\|v\|/2, while ∥b∥≤C⟨ξ⟩−d\|b\|\le C\langle\xi\rangle^{-d}. Thus (R6) holds. For a right inverse, write ab=I+rab=I+r. The bound ∥(I+r)v∥≥∥v∥/2\|(I+r)v\|\ge\|v\|/2 gives bijectivity and ∥(I+r)−1∥≤2\|(I+r)^{-1}\|\le2 by finite-dimensionality. Hence b(I+r)−1b(I+r)^{-1} is a right inverse for aa. A square matrix with a right inverse is surjective, therefore bijective, so a−1=b(I+r)−1a^{-1}=b(I+r)^{-1} has the required norm bound.

As one consequence, AuAu smooth microlocally at an elliptic point implies uu smooth there. Indeed u=BAu+(I−BA)uu=BAu+(I-BA)u: W4 makes the first term regular in that direction, and makes the second regular by its smoothing symbol. Together with pseudolocality this gives equality of the two wavefront sets on the elliptic set.

K4. A finite conic partition reconstructs a compact localization

Fix φ∈Cc∞\varphi\in C_c^\infty, with support KK in one chart. Suppose open cones VρV_\rho cover K×Sn−1K\times S^{n-1}. There are finitely many proper compact-kernel Qj∈Ψ0Q_j\in\Psi^0 and a smooth proper kernel RR such that

φI=∑j=1JQj+R,ess⁡(Qj)⊂Vρj.(R16) \varphi I=\sum_{j=1}^JQ_j+R,\qquad \operatorname{ess}(Q_j)\subset V_{\rho_j}. \tag{R16}

Proof. The compactness of K×Sn−1K\times S^{n-1}, proved by the earlier finite-dimensional compactness results, gives a finite subcover after shrinking each chosen neighborhood. Use the U001 finite smooth cutoff construction in the ambient base/frequency coordinates, restrict to the unit sphere, and obtain nonnegative hj(x,ω)h_j(x,\omega) supported strictly inside those conic sections. Their sum HH is positive on K×Sn−1K\times S^{n-1}. Its minimum there is positive; choose ϵ>0\epsilon>0 with H≥2ϵH\ge2\epsilon on that compact set. Let F(t)F(t) be smooth, zero for t≤ϵ/2t\le\epsilon/2, and equal to 1/t1/t for t≥ϵt\ge\epsilon. It is constructed by multiplying the reciprocal by a smooth cutoff away from zero and extending by zero. Set

qj(x,ω)=φ(x)hj(x,ω)F(H(x,ω)).(R17) q_j(x,\omega)=\varphi(x)h_j(x,\omega)F(H(x,\omega)). \tag{R17}

These are smooth and satisfy ∑jqj=φ\sum_jq_j=\varphi everywhere: on K×Sn−1K\times S^{n-1} the reciprocal applies, and outside KK both sides vanish. Each support stays inside its assigned section.

Extend them by qj(x,ξ/∣ξ∣)θ(∣ξ∣)q_j(x,\xi/|\xi|)\theta(|\xi|), where θ=0\theta=0 near zero and θ=1\theta=1 above a fixed radius. Frequency derivatives of ξ/∣ξ∣\xi/|\xi| have their degree-−1-1 budget; the iterated chain rule proves that these are compact-base S0S^0 symbols. Quantize with a common proper compact kernel cutoff equal to one near the relevant diagonal. The full symbols change only by smoothing, by P2 O4. Consequently their sum is φ(x)θ(∣ξ∣)I\varphi(x)\theta(|\xi|)I modulo smoothing. Its difference from φ(x)I\varphi(x)I has compact frequency support, hence is smoothing. T2's finite compact cosphere argument now gives a smooth proper kernel RR, proving (R16). □\square

K5. Directional Besov tests give the actual local space

Let s∈Rs\in\mathbb R and v∈D′v\in\mathcal D'. Suppose that at each nonzero covector ρ\rho there is a proper Aρ∈Ψ0A_\rho\in\Psi^0, elliptic there, such that Aρv∈B2,∞,locsA_\rho v\in B^s_{2,\infty,\mathrm{loc}}. Then

v∈B2,∞,locs.(R18) v\in B^s_{2,\infty,\mathrm{loc}}. \tag{R18}

Proof. K3 supplies a proper Bρ∈Ψ0B_\rho\in\Psi^0 and a cone VρV_\rho on which Eρ=I−BρAρE_\rho=I-B_\rho A_\rho is smoothing. For any fixed compact output cutoff, use K4 to choose finitely many QjQ_j whose essential supports lie in these cones. Then exactly

Qjv=QjBρj(Aρjv)+QjEρjv.(R19) Q_jv=Q_jB_{\rho_j}(A_{\rho_j}v)+Q_jE_{\rho_j}v. \tag{R19}

The first term belongs to the local Besov space by P1 B6. The second is smooth: (R1) makes its essential support empty, and the compact output support and properness confine its kernel to a compact product, so T2 gives a smooth kernel. Equation (R16) reconstructs φv\varphi v from finitely many such pieces and one more smooth output. These pieces have compact support. For a compactly supported distribution, local Besov membership is global membership in the chart: multiply by one larger compact cutoff equal to one near its support. Smooth compact functions belong to every such space by Fourier decay. The triangle inequality for the dyadic supremum norm therefore proves (R18). No uniform constant over an infinite family of tests is needed. □\square

K6. The full intrinsic localization theorem

Let Λ⊂T∗X∖0\Lambda\subset T^*X\setminus0 be a smooth closed conic Lagrangian, and E→XE\to X a smooth finite-rank complex bundle. Put s=−m−n/4s=-m-n/4. The intrinsic class consists of distributions for which every finite word in proper order-one operators with symbol of order zero on Λ\Lambda has output in B2,∞,locsB^s_{2,\infty,\mathrm{loc}}; the empty word is included. Then:

  1. WF⁡(u)⊂Λ\operatorname{WF}(u)\subset\Lambda for u∈Imu\in I^m.
  2. Every proper A∈Ψ0(X;E,E)A\in\Psi^0(X;E,E) maps ImI^m to itself.
  3. If for each nonzero ρ\rho there is a proper order-zero AρA_\rho, elliptic at ρ\rho, with Aρu∈ImA_\rho u\in I^m, then u∈Imu\in I^m.

Proof. Assertion 1 is precisely the proved W5, transported by T3. For assertion 2 let LL be an admissible order-one matrix operator. The full product formula gives principal commutator symbol la−alla-al modulo S0S^0. On Λ\Lambda both products are of order zero, since l∣Λ∈S0l|_\Lambda\in S^0. Thus [L,A][L,A] is again admissible; its order need only be one. For every finite word the exact telescoping identity is

L1⋯LNA=AL1⋯LN+∑j=1NL1⋯Lj−1[Lj,A]Lj+1⋯LN.(R20) \begin{aligned} L_1\cdots L_N A &=A L_1\cdots L_N\\ &\quad+\sum_{j=1}^N L_1\cdots L_{j-1}[L_j,A]L_{j+1}\cdots L_N. \end{aligned} \tag{R20}

For N=1N=1 this is the definition of the commutator. Multiplying the identity for the suffix by L1L_1, and replacing L1AL_1A by AL1+[L1,A]AL_1+[L_1,A], proves it inductively, without exchanging any matrix factors. The first output in (R20) is in BlocsB^s_{\mathrm{loc}} by P1's order-zero bound. Each summand is an admissible word applied to uu. The empty-word case uses the same order-zero bound. This proves assertion 2.

For assertion 3 choose the conic parametrix BρB_\rho of K3. By assertion 2, vρ=BρAρu∈Imv_\rho=B_\rho A_\rho u\in I^m. The error u−vρ=Eρuu-v_\rho=E_\rho u has an operator EρE_\rho whose symbol is smoothing on some cone VρV_\rho. Fix an arbitrary admissible word WW. Choose a proper compact conic cutoff QρQ_\rho, elliptic at ρ\rho, with essential support inside VρV_\rho, as in W4. Then

QρWu=QρWvρ+QρWEρu.(R21) Q_\rho Wu=Q_\rho Wv_\rho+Q_\rho WE_\rho u. \tag{R21}

The first term lies in BlocsB^s_{\mathrm{loc}}; the second is smooth by (R1) and the compact-kernel argument of K5. Thus every nonzero direction has an elliptic Besov test for WuWu. K5 gives Wu∈BlocsWu\in B^s_{\mathrm{loc}}. This holds for every finite word, including W=IW=I, and proves assertion 3. All constants may depend on that word. The chart and bundle formulations agree by T3. □\square

K7. Independence of sufficiently small cutoff and Lagrangian extension

Suppose Au∈Im(X,Λ1)Au\in I^m(X,\Lambda_1), with A∈Ψ0A\in\Psi^0 proper and elliptic at ρ\rho. There is a fixed cone VV about ρ\rho such that, for every proper compact-kernel P∈Ψ0P\in\Psi^0 with ess⁡(P)⊂V\operatorname{ess}(P)\subset V,

Pu∈Im(X,Λ1).(R22) Pu\in I^m(X,\Lambda_1). \tag{R22}

Indeed use BB from K3, shrink VV inside the smoothing region of E=I−BAE=I-BA, and write Pu=PBAu+PEuPu=PBAu+PEu. K6(2) treats the first term. The second is smooth by (R1). A smooth section satisfies every word estimate, by P2 O5 and the compact smooth Fourier bounds. This proves (R22). In particular any sufficiently small elliptic test at ρ\rho can replace the original one. A larger cutoff containing other, untested directions is not covered by this assertion.

Now let two closed conic Lagrangians Λ1,Λ2\Lambda_1,\Lambda_2 agree on an open cone VV. For w∈Im(X,Λ1)w\in I^m(X,\Lambda_1), take a compact proper P∈Ψ0P\in\Psi^0 whose essential support is compactly contained in VV in base/unit-direction variables. Then

Pw∈Im(X,Λ2).(R23) Pw\in I^m(X,\Lambda_2). \tag{R23}

To prove this, choose a compact proper scalar C∈Ψ0C\in\Psi^0 with full symbol one modulo smoothing on a neighborhood of ess⁡(P)\operatorname{ess}(P), and essential support inside VV. To construct it, cover that compact base/unit-direction set by finitely many smooth bumps supported in VV, as in K4, and let HH be their positive sum. Compose HH with a smooth function zero below a small positive threshold and one above a larger threshold below its minimum on the compact set. The resulting conic symbol is one near the compact set and supported in VV. Truncate near zero frequency and quantize with a compact kernel cutoff. P2 O4 gives the required full symbol modulo smoothing.

For any admissible Λ2\Lambda_2-word L1⋯LNL_1\cdots L_N, put Mj=CLjCM_j=CL_jC. Its principal symbol is c2ljc^2l_j modulo S0S^0, so it has order zero on Λ1\Lambda_1: on the support of cc the two Lagrangians agree, and outside it the symbol is smoothing. Thus every MjM_j is admissible for Λ1\Lambda_1. Also Lj−MjL_j-M_j is smoothing on a fixed neighborhood of ess⁡(P)\operatorname{ess}(P), by the full product expansion. The finite difference identity

(L1⋯LN−M1⋯MN)P=∑j=1NL1⋯Lj−1(Lj−Mj)Mj+1⋯MNP(R24) \begin{aligned} &(L_1\cdots L_N-M_1\cdots M_N)P\\ &\quad=\sum_{j=1}^N L_1\cdots L_{j-1} (L_j-M_j)M_{j+1}\cdots M_NP \end{aligned} \tag{R24}

has smoothing summands by (R1). Properness and compact output localization make them smooth on distributions. Meanwhile K6(2) gives Pw∈Im(X,Λ1)Pw\in I^m(X,\Lambda_1), so M1⋯MNPwM_1\cdots M_NPw has the required Besov order. This proves (R23). Interchanging the two extensions proves the reverse assertion. Together with (R22), this proves that the microlocal intrinsic class depends only on the germ of the Lagrangian and on sufficiently small elliptic cutoffs, when a closed conic extension is used.

Two exercises with complete solutions

Exercise K1. Let

A=(2101),B0=(1011).(R25) A=\begin{pmatrix}2&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix},\qquad B_0=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\1&1\end{pmatrix}. \tag{R25}

Check the finite inverse-correction algebra and explain why it does not imply convergence of an infinite matrix series.

Solution. Direct multiplication gives R=I−AB0=(−2−1−10)R=I-AB_0=\begin{pmatrix}-2&-1\\-1&0\end{pmatrix} and L=I−B0A=(−1−1−2−1)L=I-B_0A=\begin{pmatrix}-1&-1\\-2&-1\end{pmatrix}. Here B0R=LB0=(−2−1−3−1)B_0R=LB_0=\begin{pmatrix}-2&-1\\-3&-1\end{pmatrix}, whereas RB0=(−3−1−10)RB_0=\begin{pmatrix}-3&-1\\-1&0\end{pmatrix}. For every finite NN, telescoping gives A∑j<NB0Rj=I−RNA\sum_{j<N}B_0R^j=I-R^N and (∑j<NLjB0)A=I−LN(\sum_{j<N}L^jB_0)A=I-L^N. For N=2N=2 the first side is (−4−2−20)=I−R2\begin{pmatrix}-4&-2\\-2&0\end{pmatrix}=I-R^2. But λ=−1−2\lambda=-1-\sqrt2 and v=(−λ,1)Tv=(-\lambda,1)^T satisfy Rv=λvRv=\lambda v, since λ2+2λ−1=0\lambda^2+2\lambda-1=0. Thus B0Rjv=λjB0vB_0R^jv=\lambda^jB_0v does not tend to zero. The infinite matrix series cannot converge. K3 uses decreasing symbol orders and (R5), not convergence of this algebraic series. □\square

Exercise K2. On the line choose smooth γ+\gamma_+, zero for ξ≤1\xi\le1 and one for ξ≥2\xi\ge2, and set γ−(ξ)=γ+(−ξ)\gamma_-(\xi)=\gamma_+(-\xi). Let φ,ψ\varphi,\psi be compact smooth cutoffs with ψ=1\psi=1 near supp⁡φ\operatorname{supp}\varphi. Show explicitly how the two directional pieces recover φv\varphi v modulo a smooth term.

Solution. Put Q±=φγ±(D)ψQ_\pm=\varphi\gamma_\pm(D)\psi. The function r=1−γ+−γ−r=1-\gamma_+-\gamma_- is smooth and supported in [−2,2][-2,2]. Since φψ=φ\varphi\psi=\varphi,

φv=Q+v+Q−v+Rv,KR(x,y)=φ(x)ψ(y)2π∫−22ei(x−y)ξr(ξ) dξ.(R26) \begin{gathered} \varphi v=Q_+v+Q_-v+Rv,\\ K_R(x,y)=\frac{\varphi(x)\psi(y)}{2\pi} \int_{-2}^{2}e^{i(x-y)\xi}r(\xi)\,d\xi. \end{gathered} \tag{R26}

Every derivative of this compact-frequency integral is absolutely convergent, so RR has a smooth compact kernel. If both directional pieces belong to BlocsB^s_{\mathrm{loc}}, their compact support makes them global BsB^s functions in this chart; the same is true of the smooth compact RvRv. The triangle inequality then gives the exact endpoint bound for φv\varphi v. This is K4–K5 with the two points of the one-dimensional unit sphere. □\square

Free human sources and the remaining course scope

Gerd Grubb's author-hosted Chapter 7, Lemma 7.3 and Theorem 7.18(1), with Corollary 7.19(1), supplies the cutoff construction and finite inverse-correction method. Its summation lemma is a sketch; K1 supplies every missing derivative estimate and the support argument. K2–K3 give the full ordinary-symbol conic construction rather than assuming a homogeneous expansion.

Lars Hörmander, Fourier integral operators. I, Propositions 1.1.9 and 2.5.1, records the asymptotic convention and the parametrix mechanism. Its external proof references are not programme dependencies. The complete proofs used here are the ones written above and the exact earlier programme proofs in K0.

The intrinsic localization theorem is now supplied in full. The representation using every prescribed nondegenerate or clean phase, refined symbol orders, global Maslov data and the remaining AN-04 course are still separate proof obligations.