1960
DOI: 10.1512/iumj.1960.9.59016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two Embedding Theorems with Applications to Weak Convergence and Compactness in Spaces of Additive Type Functions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1962
1962
1978
1978

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Let X denote this limit. By using the unconditional convergence property of ^-bounded measures [8, 2.3], the Orlicz-Pettis theorem, and a result of Procelli [7], we can show that the sequence A,-converges weakly to X in ba(Su Soi). By a result of Leader [5] this implies that the X; are uniformly absolutely continuous with respect to a positive finitely additive bounded set function <p defined on S 0 i.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Let X denote this limit. By using the unconditional convergence property of ^-bounded measures [8, 2.3], the Orlicz-Pettis theorem, and a result of Procelli [7], we can show that the sequence A,-converges weakly to X in ba(Su Soi). By a result of Leader [5] this implies that the X; are uniformly absolutely continuous with respect to a positive finitely additive bounded set function <p defined on S 0 i.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[6]) on weak convergence and sequential weak compactness in H(X, T) to obtain results such as the following (X,S,g) and ||L|| = ||fe||, where the limit is taken (cf. [5]) in the Moore-Smith sense over the directed set of partitions π of X in T. But, and this is the crux of the matter, if fe^* then F(r) = F(l)-r for each re &.…”
Section: R B Darst That C*(x T) Is Isomorphic and Isometric To H(xmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Porcelli's original proof [15] was extremely long and gruelling, while the direct proof due to Darst [5] still contains many technical arguments. The present proof is less elementary, but is devoid of technicalities and directly relates the finitely additive result to its analogue for countably additive measures.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%