Positive maps and finite-dimensional approximation Prerequisite proofs · Sources and terms

Slow reindexing and semi-lift compatibility

Written by GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI), Ultra, September 2026. Self-checked by the writing AI. New original text: public domain (CC0).

Fast reindexing makes a centralizing input commute with a prescribed separable algebra. Slow reindexing reverses which sequences are held fixed during the selection: its entire image commutes with the centralizing part of that prescribed algebra. It also makes a semi-lift agree on the image with its constant limit lift. That compatibility survives the counterexample to unrestricted fast equivariance.

Let M≠0M\ne0 have separable predual and a faithful normal state φ\varphi. Use Mω=Nω/IωM^\omega=N_\omega/I_\omega, the normal subalgebra Mω=Cω/IωM_\omega=C_\omega/I_\omega, and Eω:Mω→ME_\omega:M^\omega\to M from the multiplier and expectation lessons. Write ∥⋅∥#=∥⋅∥φ,#\|\cdot\|_\#=\|\cdot\|_{\varphi,\#}.

1. The action condition and the theorem

A semi-lift γ\gamma is an actual automorphism of MωM^\omega, represented by a family γk→βγ\gamma_k\to\beta_\gamma in the uu-topology:

γ(π(xk))=π(γk(xk)).(1)\gamma(\pi(x_k))=\pi(\gamma_k(x_k)). \tag{1}

Although βγ\beta_\gamma does not determine γ\gamma, the given γ\gamma determines βγ\beta_\gamma: it is the restriction of γ\gamma to the constant copy of MM. Thus γ↦βγ\gamma\mapsto\beta_\gamma respects composition. Write bγ=βγωb_\gamma=\beta_\gamma^\omega for the constant lift.

Theorem 1.1. Let P,Q⊂MωP,Q\subset M^\omega have separable predual. Let HH be a countable group of semi-lifts preserving PP. Assume that bγ∈Hb_\gamma\in H for every γ∈H\gamma\in H. There is a normal unital injective *-homomorphism Φ:P→Mω\Phi:P\to M^\omega with

Φ(x)=x(x∈P∩M),Φ(P∩Mω)⊂Mω,Φ(P)⊂(Q∩Mω)′∩Mω,Eω(aΦ(x))=Eω(a)Eω(x)(x∈P, a∈Q),γΦ(x)=bγΦ(x)=Φ(bγ(x))(x∈P, γ∈H).(2)\begin{aligned} \Phi(x)&=x&&(x\in P\cap M),\\ \Phi(P\cap M_\omega)&\subset M_\omega,\\ \Phi(P)&\subset (Q\cap M_\omega)'\cap M^\omega,\\ E_\omega(a\Phi(x))&=E_\omega(a)E_\omega(x) &&(x\in P,\ a\in Q),\\ \gamma\Phi(x)&=b_\gamma\Phi(x)=\Phi(b_\gamma(x)) &&(x\in P,\ \gamma\in H). \end{aligned} \tag{2}

No factor or trace hypothesis on MM is needed.

The final line concerns bγ(x)b_\gamma(x) in the domain. It does not require Φ(γ(x))=γ(Φ(x))\Phi(\gamma(x))=\gamma(\Phi(x)). The associated constant lifts belong to HH, so bγ(P)=Pb_\gamma(P)=P, making the stated expression meaningful.

2. Countable data and the first selection

Adjoin MM to P,QP,Q, as in fast reindexing. The joins have separable predual, and the enlarged PP is HH-invariant because every semi-lift preserves the constant MM.

Choose countable unital Q(i)\mathbb Q(i)-*-algebras A⊂P,B⊂Q\mathcal A\subset P,\mathcal B\subset Q, ultraweakly dense, with dense intersections with MM and MωM_\omega. Make A\mathcal A invariant under HH by including all translates before forming the algebra. Use increasing finite exhausting sets An,Bn,Hn\mathcal A_n,\mathcal B_n,H_n, with 11 included, and a norm-dense sequence ψj\psi_j in M∗M_*.

Choose contractive multiplier representatives ux(k)u_x(k) of x∈Ax\in\mathcal A, bounded by ∥x∥\|x\|, and va(k)v_a(k) of a∈Ba\in\mathcal B. Use constants for elements of MM, and centralizing representatives for elements of MωM_\omega. Choose one family in (1) for each γ\gamma; use a constant family when the actual automorphism is a constant lift. The limit restriction is independent of that representative choice.

For each x∈Ax\in\mathcal A choose decreasing positive moduli δl(x)\delta_l(x) and sets Wl(x)∈ωW_l(x)\in\omega so that

k∈Wl(x),∥z∥≤1,∥z∥#<δl(x) ⟹ ∥ux(k)z∥#+∥zux(k)∥#<1/l.(3)k\in W_l(x),\quad \|z\|\le1,\quad\|z\|_\#<\delta_l(x) \ \Longrightarrow\ \|u_x(k)z\|_\#+\|zu_x(k)\|_\#<1/l. \tag{3}

These are the previously proved multiplier moduli.

Choose an inner index p(n)≥np(n)\ge n satisfying this finite list:

  1. p(n)∈Wl(x)p(n)\in W_l(x) for x∈An, l≤nx\in\mathcal A_n,\ l\le n.
  2. All addition, adjoint and multiplication discrepancies for operands in An\mathcal A_n, and scalar discrepancies for the first nn rational complex scalars, have symmetric seminorm below 1/n1/n at p(n)p(n).
  3. ∥[ux(p(n)),ψj]∥<1/n\|[u_x(p(n)),\psi_j]\|<1/n for x∈An∩Mω, j≤nx\in\mathcal A_n\cap M_\omega,\ j\le n. Also require ∥[ux(p(n)),a]∥#<1/n\|[u_x(p(n)),a]\|_\#<1/n for these xx and a∈Bn∩Ma\in\mathcal B_n\cap M.
  4. For x∈An, a∈Bn, j≤nx\in\mathcal A_n,\ a\in\mathcal B_n,\ j\le n,
∣ψj(Eω(a)(ux(p(n))−Eω(x)))∣<1/n.(4)|\psi_j(E_\omega(a)(u_x(p(n))-E_\omega(x)))|<1/n. \tag{4}
  1. For every constant lift b=βωb=\beta^\omega among the finitely many associated lifts being tested, and x∈Anx\in\mathcal A_n,
∥β(ux(p(n)))−ub(x)(p(n))∥#<1/n.(5)\|\beta(u_x(p(n)))-u_{b(x)}(p(n))\|_\#<1/n. \tag{5}

Lemma 2.1. This finite selection is possible.

Proof. The first condition uses (3). Every algebraic discrepancy in the second represents zero, hence is in IωI_\omega. The third uses the centralizing representative and the fact that centralizing sequences commute strong* with fixed operators. For the fourth, ux(k)→ωEω(x)u_x(k)\to_\omega E_\omega(x) ultraweakly and the coefficient Eω(a)E_\omega(a) is fixed in MM. The fifth discrepancy represents zero by the definition of a constant lift. Each condition therefore holds on an ω\omega-large set; their finite intersection with {k≥n}\{k\ge n\} is nonempty. □\square

This selection fixes the operators ux(p(n))u_x(p(n)) in MM. The second selection will then let the outer coordinate grow while these operators stay fixed.

3. The second selection and the slow index

Choose decreasing Vn∈ωV_n\in\omega, with Vn⊂{k≥n}V_n\subset\{k\ge n\}, such that for k∈Vnk\in V_n:

∥[ux(p(n)),va(k)]∥#<1/n(x∈An, a∈Bn∩Mω),∣ψj((va(k)−Eω(a))ux(p(n)))∣<1/n(x∈An, a∈Bn, j≤n),∥γk(ux(p(n)))−βγ(ux(p(n)))∥#<1/n(x∈An, γ∈Hn).(6)\begin{aligned} \|[u_x(p(n)),v_a(k)]\|_\#&<1/n &&(x\in\mathcal A_n,\ a\in\mathcal B_n\cap M_\omega),\\ |\psi_j((v_a(k)-E_\omega(a))u_x(p(n)))|&<1/n &&(x\in\mathcal A_n,\ a\in\mathcal B_n,\ j\le n),\\ \|\gamma_k(u_x(p(n)))-\beta_\gamma(u_x(p(n)))\|_\#&<1/n &&(x\in\mathcal A_n,\ \gamma\in H_n). \end{aligned} \tag{6}

Include the associated constant lifts in the finite action tests as needed.

Lemma 3.1. Such sets exist, and they can be chosen with empty total intersection.

Proof. In the first line, va(k)v_a(k) is centralizing, so it commutes strong* with the fixed element ux(p(n))u_x(p(n)). In the second line, its ultraweak limit is Eω(a)E_\omega(a), and the right factor and functional are fixed. In the last line, uu-convergence of the automorphism family implies strong* convergence on every fixed element. All finitely many conditions hold on ω\omega-large sets. Intersect with the preceding Vn−1V_{n-1} and {k≥n}\{k\ge n\}. The latter restriction makes ⋂nVn=∅\bigcap_n V_n=\varnothing. □\square

Put V0=NV_0=\mathbb N, define

r(k)=max⁡{n≥1:k∈Vn},q(k)=p(r(k)),(7)r(k)=\max\{n\ge1:k\in V_n\}, \qquad q(k)=p(r(k)), \tag{7}

and use r(k)=0,p(0)=1r(k)=0,p(0)=1 if the set is empty. The maximum is finite because r(k)≤kr(k)\le k. For each fixed nn, the set VnV_n makes r(k)≥nr(k)\ge n, so r(k)→ω∞r(k)\to_\omega\infty. Equivalently, on the band Vn∖Vn+1V_n\setminus V_{n+1} the chosen operator is ux(p(n))u_x(p(n)). This includes the initial band V0∖V1V_0\setminus V_1, which has no effect on any ultralimit.

4. Multiplier membership and the map

Set

wx(k)=ux(q(k)),Φ0(x)=π(wx),x∈A.(8)w_x(k)=u_x(q(k)),\qquad \Phi_0(x)=\pi(w_x), \quad x\in\mathcal A. \tag{8}

Lemma 4.1. Every wxw_x is a multiplier. If x∈A∩Mωx\in\mathcal A\cap M_\omega, it is centralizing along ω\omega.

Proof. Fix x,lx,l, and choose n0n_0 so x∈Anx\in\mathcal A_n and n≥ln\ge l whenever n≥n0n\ge n_0. On the ω\omega-large set where r(k)≥n0r(k)\ge n_0, the selected p(r(k))p(r(k)) belongs to Wl(x)W_l(x). The fixed modulus δl(x)\delta_l(x) in (3) therefore controls multiplication at every such outer coordinate. If zk∈Iωz_k\in I_\omega is a contraction sequence, its seminorm is below that modulus on another ω\omega-large set. Both product seminorms have ultralimit at most 1/l1/l. Let l→∞l\to\infty and rescale general bounded null sequences. This proves wx∈Nωw_x\in N_\omega.

For centralizing xx, the third first-selection test gives ∥[wx(k),ψj]∥<1/r(k)\|[w_x(k),\psi_j]\|<1/r(k) on the large set where that datum is included. Norm density and the bound 2∥x∥∥ψ∥2\|x\|\|\psi\| extend this to every normal functional. □\square

The algebraic tests make Φ0\Phi_0 a unital rational *-homomorphism, with ∥Φ0(x)∥≤∥x∥\|\Phi_0(x)\|\le\|x\|. Combining (4) and the second line of (6) gives, for fixed x,a,jx,a,j and sufficiently high levels,

∣ψj(va(k)wx(k)−Eω(a)Eω(x))∣<2/r(k).(9)|\psi_j(v_a(k)w_x(k)-E_\omega(a)E_\omega(x))| <2/r(k). \tag{9}

Thus

Eω(aΦ0(x))=Eω(a)Eω(x).(10)E_\omega(a\Phi_0(x))=E_\omega(a)E_\omega(x). \tag{10}

Taking a=1a=1 shows state preservation and, by applying it to x∗xx^*x and xx∗xx^*, preservation of the symmetric state seminorm.

The first line of (6) makes the full image commute with B∩Mω\mathcal B\cap M_\omega. Lemma 4.1 places centralizing inputs in MωM_\omega. Constants in A∩M\mathcal A\cap M are fixed by their chosen representatives.

For actions, the last line of (6) gives

γΦ0(x)=bγΦ0(x).(11)\gamma\Phi_0(x)=b_\gamma\Phi_0(x). \tag{11}

Equation (5), sampled at the same selected inner index on both sides, gives

bγΦ0(x)=Φ0(bγ(x)).(12)b_\gamma\Phi_0(x)=\Phi_0(b_\gamma(x)). \tag{12}

The first comparison uses γk\gamma_k at the actual outer coordinate kk; it does not replace it by γq(k)\gamma_{q(k)}.

5. Normal extension and an explicit example

The faithful-state extension lemma applies: norm closure first, then bounded Kaplansky approximation and the exact symmetric state isometry give a unique normal injective *-homomorphism on PP. Constants are fixed by normal density. The image of P∩MωP\cap M_\omega stays in the normal subalgebra MωM_\omega. The commutation conclusion extends from the dense centralizing intersections because relative commutants are strongly closed. Equation (10) extends separately in xx and aa by normality. Equations (11)–(12) extend by normality of all automorphisms. This proves Theorem 1.1, including restriction back from the enlarged P,QP,Q.

The Pauli example shows why the action condition matters. In R=⨂k≥1(M2,tr⁡2)R=\bigotimes_{k\ge1}(M_2,\operatorname{tr}_2), let X,Z∈RωX,Z\in R_\omega come from Pauli operators in leg kk, and let γ=Ad⁡(Z)\gamma=\operatorname{Ad}(Z). Then βγ=id\beta_\gamma=\mathrm{id}. For P=Q=M2(X,Z)P=Q=M_2(X,Z), replace leg kk by leg ⌊k⌋\lfloor\sqrt k\rfloor in the representatives of its matrix generators. Their matrix relations remain exact, giving an injective map of PP. The new leg tends to infinity, so the images remain centralizing. For all sufficiently large kk, it differs from leg kk, so the image commutes with QQ and is fixed by γ\gamma. Thus

γΦ(X)=Φ(X)=Φ(bγ(X)),Φ(γ(X))=−Φ(X).(13)\gamma\Phi(X)=\Phi(X)=\Phi(b_\gamma(X)), \qquad \Phi(\gamma(X))=-\Phi(X). \tag{13}

This supplies the slow compatibility and exhibits the failure of the stronger equivariance condition in the same example.

6. Exercises with complete solutions

Exercise 1. Why is βγ\beta_\gamma unique even though a convergent limit does not determine its semi-lift?

Solution. The chosen family acts as its limit on every constant a∈Ma\in M. Hence βγ(a)=γ(a)\beta_\gamma(a)=\gamma(a). An actual γ\gamma fixes that restriction, so every family representing it has the same limit. The reverse implication fails: different semi-lifts can have that same restriction.

Exercise 2. What purpose does the hypothesis bγ∈Hb_\gamma\in H serve?

Solution. It ensures bγ(P)=Pb_\gamma(P)=P, so Φ(bγ(x))\Phi(b_\gamma(x)) is defined. It also allows a countable algebra invariant under all those constant lifts and their finite equivariance tests. Invariance under γ\gamma alone would not imply invariance under its different constant lift.

Exercise 3. Explain why the first weak-limit test uses Eω(a)E_\omega(a) rather than va(k)v_a(k).

Solution. The first selection varies the inner index while fixing nn. The coefficient Eω(a)E_\omega(a) is an operator of MM independent of that index, so ultraweak convergence of uxu_x gives (4). After p(n)p(n) is fixed, the second selection varies the outer coordinate and replaces va(k)v_a(k) by that expectation, yielding the second error in (9).

Exercise 4. Why does the second commutator test apply to every xx, rather than only centralizing xx?

Solution. Its varying sequence is va(k)v_a(k), with a∈Q∩Mωa\in Q\cap M_\omega. That sequence is centralizing and therefore commutes strong* with each fixed ux(p(n))u_x(p(n)), regardless of whether xx is centralizing. This gives commutation of the full image with the centralizing part of QQ.

Exercise 5. Verify that every coordinate has a finite level in (7).

Solution. Membership in VnV_n implies k≥nk\ge n, so only the finitely many levels n≤kn\le k are possible. Nestedness makes those levels an initial segment. If it is empty use level zero; otherwise its last member is the required maximum.

Exercise 6. Why is r(k)→ω∞r(k)\to_\omega\infty sufficient for the quotient conclusions?

Solution. For each threshold nn, the ω\omega-large set VnV_n has r(k)≥nr(k)\ge n. Thus every fixed datum is tested on an ω\omega-large set with arbitrarily small error. Ordinary convergence of r(k)r(k) is unnecessary for an ultrafilter quotient.

Exercise 7. Derive multiplier membership from the fixed moduli.

Solution. Fix x,lx,l. On a large set the chosen inner index lies in Wl(x)W_l(x); then every small contraction input is controlled by the same δl(x)\delta_l(x). A null sequence of inputs satisfies that modulus on another large set. Both product seminorms have ultralimit at most 1/l1/l. Letting ll increase proves both ideal-preservation conditions.

Exercise 8. Why is it wrong to evaluate the semi-lift at the selected index q(k)q(k) when acting on the final representative?

Solution. Formula (1) applies γk\gamma_k to the coordinate actually indexed by kk. Its input happens to be ux(q(k))u_x(q(k)), but that does not change the automorphism index. The slow selection first fixes this input, then makes γk\gamma_k close to its limit on it. Replacing kk by q(k)q(k) would describe a different family action.

Exercise 9. Prove injectivity without requiring the automorphisms of HH to preserve φω\varphi^\omega.

Solution. Equation (10) with a=1a=1 makes Φ\Phi preserve φω\varphi^\omega, independently of any action. If Φ(x)=0\Phi(x)=0, multiplicativity gives φω(x∗x)=φω(Φ(x)∗Φ(x))=0\varphi^\omega(x^*x)=\varphi^\omega(\Phi(x)^*\Phi(x))=0. Faithfulness makes x=0x=0. No state invariance of the automorphisms enters.

Exercise 10. Explain the normal extension of the commutation conclusion.

Solution. Each dense input image commutes with the dense *-algebra in Q∩MωQ\cap M_\omega, hence with its von Neumann closure by separate ultraweak continuity. The relative commutant of that closure is strongly closed. Bounded strong* approximation of a general input and the normal extension therefore keep its image in that commutant.

Exercise 11. Check the Pauli slow-index example.

Solution. The indices kk and ⌊k⌋\lfloor\sqrt k\rfloor are distinct for k≥3k\ge3. Operators in distinct tensor legs commute. The reindexed Pauli pair still anticommutes within its single new leg, so its unital M2M_2 relations persist. Since the new leg tends to infinity, all finite-head commutators eventually vanish; trace approximation gives centralizing sequences. These facts prove every assertion in (13).

Exercise 12. Recover scalar independence for a factor when the input xx is centralizing.

Solution. Then Eω(x)=τω(x)1E_\omega(x)=\tau_\omega(x)1. Applying φ\varphi to (2) gives φω(aΦ(x))=φω(a)τω(x)\varphi^\omega(a\Phi(x))=\varphi^\omega(a)\tau_\omega(x). If aa is centralizing too, this is the trace identity on MωM_\omega. The full expectation identity retains the ordered product for general xx.

References

The free construction source is Adrian Ocneanu, Actions of discrete amenable groups on factors, thesis, Chapter 5, Section 5.4, Slow Reindexation Trick, printed pp.55–56 (PDF pp.69–70). Its action condition includes each semi-lift's constant limit lift. The proof first chooses fixed inner operators, then chooses outer neighborhoods for central commutation, ultraweak product tests and convergence of the chosen automorphism families. Its final extension steps are referred to the fast lemma.

Here all multiplier, algebraic, normal-extension and action estimates are written out. The equality compares the actual semi-lift on the new image with its constant limit lift, and with the image of that limit lift's action on the domain. It does not impose equivariance with the original semi-lift on the domain. The full nonfactor and nontracial setting is retained; the tensor-tail example checks the distinction directly.