the perron - frobenius theorem @xcite asserts that a real square matrix with strictly positive entries has a ` spectral gap ' , i.e. the matrix has a positive simple eigenvalue and all other eigenvalues are strictly smaller in modulus .
more generally , let @xmath4 be a bounded linear operator acting upon a real or complex banach space and of spectral radius @xmath5 .
we say that @xmath4 has a spectral gap if ( 1 ) it has a simple isolated eigenvalue @xmath6 the modulus of which equals @xmath5 and ( 2 ) the remaining part of the spectrum is contained in a disk centered at zero and of radius strictly smaller than @xmath5 .
jentzsch generalized in @xcite the perron - frobenius theorem to integral operators with a strictly positive continuous kernel .
the proof uses the schauder - tychonoff theorem to produce a dual eigenvector and then a contraction on the kernel of this eigenvector to get a spectral gap .
kren - rutman ( * ? ? ?
* theorem 6.3 ) ( see also @xcite and @xcite ) gave an abstract setting of this result by considering a punctured real closed cone mapped to its interior by a compact operator .
compactness of the operator essentially reduces the problem to finite dimensions .
birkhoff , in a seminal paper @xcite , developed a more elementary and intuitive ( at least in our opinion ) perron - frobenius ` theory ' by considering the projective contraction of a cone equipped with its associated hilbert metric .
birkhoff noted that this projective metric satisfies a _ contraction principle _ , i.e.  any linear map preserving the cone is a contraction for the metric and the contraction is strict and uniform if the image of the cone has finite projective diameter .
all these results , or rather their proofs , make use of the ` lattice'-structure induced by a real cone on a real banach space ( see @xcite and also @xcite ) . on the other hand , from complex analysis we know that the poincar metric on the unit disk , @xmath7 , and the induced metric on a hyperbolic riemann surface enjoy properties similar to the hilbert metric , in particular a _ contraction principle _ with respect to conformal maps .
more precisely , if @xmath8 is a conformal map between hyperbolic riemann surfaces then its conformal derivative never exceeds one .
the map is a strict contraction unless it is a bijection ( see e.g.   ( * ? ? ?
* chapter i.4 : theorems 4.1 and 4.2 ) ) . by considering analytic images of complex discs kobayashi @xcite
( see also @xcite ) constructed a hyperbolic metric on complex ( hyperbolic ) manifolds , a tool with many applications also in infinite dimensions ( see e.g.  ( * ? ? ?
* appendix d ) ) .
given a real cone contraction , perturbation theory allows on abstract grounds to consider ` small ' complex perturbations but uniform estimates are usually hard to obtain .
uniform complex estimates are needed e.g.  when proving local limit theorems and refined large deviation theorems for markov additive processes ( see @xcite and references therein ) and also for studying the regularity of characteristic exponents for time - dependent and/or random dynamical systems ( see e.g.  @xcite ) .
it is desirable to obtain a description of a projective contraction and , in particular , a spectral gap condition for complex operators without the above - mentioned restrictions .
we describe in the following one way to accomplish this goal . + in section
[ sec c cones ] we introduce families of @xmath9-invariant cones in complex banach spaces and a theory for the projective contraction of such cones .
the central idea is simple , namely to use the poincar metric as a ` gauge ' on 2-dimensional affine sections of a complex cone . at first sight
, this looks like the kobayashi construction
. a crucial difference , however , is that we only consider disk images in 2-dimensional subspaces
. also we do not take infimum over chains ( so as to obtain a triangular inequality , see appendix [ a proj metric ] ) .
this adapts well to the study of linear operators and makes computations much easier than for the general kobayashi metric .
lemma [ projective gauge ] shows that this gauge is indeed projective .
the contraction principle for the poincar metric translates into a contraction principle for the gauge and , under additional regularity assumptions , developed in section [ sec complex ] , into a projective contraction , and finally a spectral gap , with respect to the banach space norm .    in sections [
section real case ] and [ sec canonical complexification ] we consider real cones and define their _
canonical complexification_. for example , @xmath10 is the canonical complexification of the standard real cone , @xmath11 .
we show that our complex cone contraction yields a genuine extension of the birkhoff cone contraction  : a real birkhoff cone is _ isometrically _ embedded into its canonical complexification .
it enjoys here the same contraction properties with respect to linear operators .
we obtain in section [ c dominated ] then one of our main results : when a complex operator is _ dominated _ by a sufficiently regular real cone - contraction ( assumption [ main assumption ] ) then ( theorem [ c domin sp gap ] ) the complex operator has a spectral gap .
it is of interest to note that the conditions on the complex operator are expressed in terms of a real cone and sometimes easy to verify .
sections [ sec applications]-[sec rpf ] thus presents a selection of complex analogues of well - known real cone contraction theorems  : a perron - frobenius theorem for complex matrices ( as stated at the end of the abstract ) , jentzsch s theorem for complex integral operators , a kren - rutman theorem for compact and quasi - compact complex operators and a ruelle - perron - frobenius theorem for complex transfer operators .
acknowledgements : i am grateful to a douady for a suggestion in the proof of lemma [ lemma contraction ] and to the anonymous referee for several valuable suggestions and corrections .
let @xmath12 denote the riemann sphere . when @xmath13 is an open connected subset avoiding at least three points
one says that the set is _
hyperbolic_. we write @xmath14 for the corresponding hyperbolic metric .
we refer to ( * ? ? ?
* chapter i.4 ) or ( * ? ? ?
* chapter 2 ) for the properties of the hyperbolic metric which we use in the present paper . as normalization
we use @xmath15 on the unit disk @xmath16 and the metric @xmath14 on @xmath17 induced by a riemann mapping @xmath18 .
one then has  : @xmath19    let @xmath20 be a complex topological vector space .
we denote by @xmath21 the complex subspace generated by two vectors @xmath22 and @xmath23 in @xmath20 .    1 .
we say that a subset @xmath24 is a * closed complex cone * if it is closed in @xmath20 , @xmath9-invariant ( i.e.   @xmath25 ) and contains at least one complex line
we say that the closed complex cone @xmath26 is * proper * if it contains no complex planes , i.e.  if @xmath22 and @xmath23 are independent vectors then @xmath27 .
throughout this paper we will simply refer to a proper closed complex cone as a * @xmath28-cone*.    let @xmath26 be a @xmath9-cone . given a pair of non - zero vectors , @xmath29
, we consider the subcone  : @xmath30 .
we wish to construct a ` projective distance ' between the complex lines @xmath31 and @xmath32 within this subcone .
we do this by considering the affine plane through @xmath33 and @xmath34 , choosing coordinates ( the choice to some extend being arbitrary ) as follows  : @xmath35 with the convention that @xmath36 iff @xmath37 .
the interior of this `` slice '' is denoted @xmath38 ( for the spherical topology on @xmath39 ) .
we note that when @xmath22 and @xmath23 are linearly independent , continuity of the canonical mapping @xmath40 implies that @xmath41 is a closed subset of @xmath39 .
as the cone is proper , @xmath42 is a strict subset so that @xmath43 is open and non - empty , whence contains ( more than ) 3 points .
if , in addition , @xmath44 is connected it is a hyperbolic riemann surface ( ( * ? ? ?
* theorem i.3.1 ) ) .    given a @xmath9-cone
, we define the * gauge * , @xmath45 $ ] , between two points @xmath46 as follows  : when two vectors are co - linear we set @xmath47 .
if they are linearly independent and @xmath48 and @xmath49 belongs to the same connected component @xmath17 of @xmath38 we set  : @xmath50 in all remaining cases , we set @xmath51 .    when @xmath52 is a ( sub-)cone of the @xmath9-cone @xmath26 we write @xmath53 $ ] for the projective * ` diameter ' * of @xmath54 in @xmath26 .
we call it a diameter even though the gauge need not verify the triangular inequality , whence need not be a metric ( see appendix [ a proj metric ] for more on this issue ) .
let @xmath26 be a @xmath9-cone .
the gauge on the cone is symmetric and projective , i.e.  for @xmath46 and @xmath55  : @xmath56    proof : for @xmath57 we write @xmath58 with @xmath59 then @xmath60 extends to a conformal bijection @xmath61 ( a mbius transformation of @xmath39 ) preserving @xmath48 and @xmath49 .
the hyperbolic metric is invariant under such transformations so indeed @xmath62 ( but both could be infinite ) .
similarly , the map @xmath63 yields a conformal bijection between the domains @xmath64 and @xmath65 , interchanging @xmath48 and @xmath49 and the symmetry follows .
+    let @xmath66 be a complex linear map between topological vector spaces and let @xmath67 and @xmath68 be @xmath9-cones for which @xmath69 .
then the map , @xmath70 is a contraction . if the image has finite diameter , i.e.   @xmath71 , then the contraction is strict and uniform .
more precisely , there is @xmath72 ( depending on @xmath73 only ) for which @xmath74    proof : let @xmath75 and set @xmath76 and @xmath77 for which we have @xmath78 suppose that @xmath79 are linearly independent and that @xmath80 and @xmath81 are hyperbolic ( if not , @xmath82 vanishes and we are through ) . since shrinking a domain increases hyperbolic distances
, it follows that @xmath83 ( although both could be infinite ) .
suppose now that @xmath84 .
then @xmath48 and @xmath49 belong to the same connected component , @xmath54 , of @xmath85 .
we may suppose that @xmath48 and @xmath49 also belong to the same connected component , @xmath17 , of @xmath38 ( or else @xmath86 and we are through ) .
our assumptions imply that @xmath87 is a strict inclusion and that @xmath88 .
choose @xmath89 and @xcite pick @xmath90 for which @xmath91 ( this is possible as the inclusion @xmath87 is strict and the diameter of @xmath17 did not exceed @xmath73 ) .
the inclusion @xmath92 is non - expanding and the inclusion @xmath93 is a contraction which has conformal derivative uniformly smaller than some @xmath72 on the punctured @xmath73-neighborhood , @xmath94 , of p ( see remark [ remark punctured disk ] ) . in particular , the composed map
( see figure [ fig inclus ] ) @xmath95 has conformal derivative smaller than @xmath96 at @xmath97 . as @xmath89 was arbitrary
this is true at any point along a geodesic joining @xmath48 and @xmath49 in @xmath17 so that @xmath98    [ remark punctured disk ] an explicit bound may be given using the expression @xmath99 for the metric on the punctured disk at @xmath100 ( see e.g.  ( * ? ? ?
* example 2.8 ) ) . denoting , @xmath101
, we obtain the bound , @xmath102 . often , however , it is possible to improve this bound .
for example , suppose that @xmath17 is contractible in @xmath54 ( e.g.  if @xmath103 is simply connected ) and that @xmath17 is contained in a hyperbolic ball of radius @xmath104 .
lifting to the universal cover we may assume that @xmath105 and that @xmath106 with @xmath107 .
the inclusion @xmath108 has conformal derivative @xmath109 for @xmath110 .
we may thus use @xmath111 for the contraction constant . recall that for a real birkhoff cone
@xcite one may take @xmath112 ( an open interval in @xmath113 of diameter @xmath73 is a ball of radius @xmath114 in @xmath113 ) .
let @xmath115 be a complex banach space and let @xmath116 be a @xmath9-cone ( definition [ def complex cone ] ) .
we denote by @xmath117 the dual of @xmath115 and we write @xmath118 for the canonical duality @xmath119 .
we will consider a bounded linear operator @xmath120 which preserves @xmath121 and is a strict and uniform contraction with respect to our gauge on @xmath26 .
we seek conditions that assure  : ( 1 ) the presence of an invariant complex line ( existence of an eigenvector of non - zero eigenvalue ) and ( 2 ) a spectral gap . in short ,
an invariant line appears when the cone is not too ` wide ' and the spectral gap when , in addition , the cone is not too ` thin ' .
let @xmath116 be a @xmath9-cone in a complex banach space ( in section [ section real case ] we will use the very same definition for a real cone in a real banach space ) .
when @xmath122 is a non - zero functional , bounded on the vector space generated by @xmath26 , we define the aperture of @xmath26 relative to @xmath123  : @xmath124.\ ] ] we define the aperture of @xmath26 to be  : @xmath125 $ ] .    1 .   we call @xmath26 _ inner regular _ if it has non - empty interior in @xmath115 .
+ we say that @xmath26 is _ @xmath126-inner regular _ ( with @xmath127 ) if there are @xmath128 and @xmath129 so that @xmath130 ( when @xmath131 the cone is inner regular ) .
we say that @xmath26 is _ outer regular _ if @xmath132 .
+ we say that @xmath26 has _
@xmath133-bounded sectional aperture _
( with @xmath134 ) iff for every pair @xmath135 , the sub - cone @xmath136 is of @xmath133-bounded aperture , i.e.there is a non - zero linear functional , @xmath137 , such that @xmath138 3 .
we say that @xmath26 is _ regular _ iff the cone is inner and outer regular .
+    when a cone is of bounded aperture then the cone has a bounded global transverse section not containing the origin .
this is often a too strong requirement .
for example , in @xmath139-spaces this is usually ok but not in @xmath140 with @xmath141 unless we are in finite dimensions .
being inner regular means containing an open ball and this typically fails in @xmath140 for @xmath142 , again with the exemption of the finite dimensional case .
the notions of bounded sectional aperture and @xmath126-inner regularity , respectively , are more flexible and may circumvent the two above - mentioned restrictions . we illustrate this in example [ ex real jentzsch ] and theorem [ complex jentzsch ] .
it is necessary to create a passage between the cone - gauge and the banach space norm .
the regularity properties defined above will enable us to do so through the following two lemmas  :    let @xmath26 be a @xmath9-cone and let @xmath143 , @xmath144 .
suppose that there is @xmath128 such that @xmath145 for all @xmath146 for which @xmath147
. then    1 .
@xmath148 2 .   if @xmath123 is a linear functional on @xmath149 , which never vanishes on the punctured subcone , @xmath150 , then also  : @xmath151 .
3 .   if @xmath26 is of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture then  : @xmath152 .    proof : let @xmath147 . using ( [ slice ] ) and the scale - invariance of the cone
we see that + @xmath153 .
our hypothesis then implies that @xmath154 contains a disc of radius @xmath155 , centered at 1 .
shrinking a domain increases hyperbolic distances , whence @xmath156 if @xmath123 is non - zero on the punctured subcone , then @xmath157 for all @xmath147 and this implies the second claim .
for the last assertion let @xmath123 be as in ( [ m functional ] ) with @xmath158 .
possibly after multiplying @xmath22 and @xmath159 with complex phases we may assume that @xmath160 . then @xmath161 .
let @xmath26 be a closed complex cone of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture .
then @xmath26 is proper , whence a @xmath9-cone ( definition [ def complex cone ] ) . if @xmath162 and @xmath163 is a functional associated to the subcone @xmath30 as in ( [ m functional ] ) then  : @xmath164    proof : we normalize the functional so that @xmath158
. then @xmath165 for all @xmath166 .
denote @xmath167 and @xmath168 and consider , as a function of @xmath169 , the point @xmath170 . when @xmath171 the properties of @xmath123 show that @xmath172 and therefore , @xmath173 setting @xmath174 $ ] we see that @xmath175 .
the radius @xmath176 is bounded iff @xmath22 and @xmath23 are independent so the cone is proper . enlarging a domain decreases hyperbolic distances so @xmath177 therefore , @xmath178 , and the stated bound follows .
+    let @xmath26 be a @xmath9-cone of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture .
let @xmath120 be a strict cone - contraction , i.e.@xmath179 with @xmath180 .
then @xmath26 contains a unique @xmath181-invariant complex line , @xmath182 .
proof : let @xmath183 and set @xmath184 .
we will construct a cauchy - sequence @xmath185 recursively .
given @xmath186 , @xmath187 choose , as in definition [ def regular cone ] ( 2 ) , a functional @xmath188 normalized so that @xmath189 , associated to the subcone @xmath190 .
set @xmath191 ( for which we have the bound @xmath192 ) and define the next element in our recursion  : @xmath193 using lemma [ bounded sectional aperture ] and then lemma [ lemma contraction ] ( with a contraction constant @xmath194 ) we obtain for @xmath187  : @xmath195 as @xmath196 and @xmath197 we get  : @xmath198 noting that @xmath199 , the first inequality implies  : @xmath200 the sequence , @xmath201 , is therefore cauchy , whence has a limit , @xmath202 , @xmath203 .
the limit belongs to @xmath26 because the cone was assumed closed .
writing @xmath204 and using the second inequality in ( [ en bounds ] ) as well as ( [ e bounds ] ) and @xmath205 we obtain @xmath206 so also the limit @xmath207 exists .
but @xmath208 shows that @xmath209 which implies that @xmath210 , whence that @xmath211 is a @xmath181-invariant complex line .
suppose that also @xmath212 ( with @xmath213 ) is @xmath181-invariant .
then @xmath214 and this implies @xmath215 so the two vectors must be linearly dependent .
thus , @xmath182 is unique .
+    let @xmath120 and let @xmath26 be a @xmath9-cone of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture which is  _ @xmath126-inner regular _ for some @xmath127 .
suppose that @xmath181 is a strict cone - contraction , i.e. @xmath179 with @xmath180 .
then @xmath181 has a spectral gap .
proof : by the previous theorem @xmath181 has a unique eigenvector in the cone , @xmath216 , with a non - zero complex eigenvalue , @xmath6 . in order to simplify the notation we replace @xmath181 by @xmath217 and assume thus that there is @xmath218 , @xmath203 for which @xmath219 .
a slight complication is that @xmath220 need not be in the interior of @xmath26 , or even worse , the interior of @xmath26 may be empty .
@xmath126-inner regularity ( definition [ def regular cone ] ( 1 ) ) allows us to proceed as follows : let @xmath221 , @xmath222 , @xmath127 and @xmath128 be such that @xmath130 .
we write @xmath223 , @xmath224 for the iterates of @xmath225 . by taking limits in equations ( [ e bounds ] ) and
( [ l bounds ] ) we see that the sequences , @xmath226 and @xmath227 , constructed in the preceding theorem verify  : @xmath228    then @xmath229 , so for all @xmath187  : @xmath230 we also get that @xmath231 now let @xmath144 . by our choice of @xmath225 when @xmath232 then @xmath233 . by lemma [ lemma inner regular ] ,
@xmath234 applying the contraction in lemma [ lemma contraction ] , we get @xmath235 in order to get a norm - estimate out of this we pick a sequence , @xmath236 , @xmath189 ( as in equation ( [ m functional ] ) ) , this time associated to the subcones , @xmath237 . by lemma
[ bounded sectional aperture ] , @xmath238 develop the left hand side in @xmath239 , multiply by @xmath240 ( which is bounded by @xmath241 and retain the linear term to obtain @xmath242 valid for any @xmath144 .
let us write @xmath243 for the coefficient to @xmath244 .
since @xmath245 whenever @xmath246 and @xmath247 we also have @xmath248 for such @xmath239-values .
the second half of lemma [ lemma inner regular ] then shows that @xmath249 uniformly in @xmath0 . using the identity @xmath250 . and the three bounds ( [ x ineq ]  -  [ alpha ineq ] ) we obtain for @xmath187  : @xmath251 therefore , @xmath252 exists .
the limit is necessarily proportional to @xmath220 ( since @xmath253 and @xmath254 ) and because of ( [ alpha ineq ] ) and ( [ x - bound ] ) we also have @xmath255 .
then , @xmath256 so that @xmath257 linearity of @xmath181 implies that the mapping @xmath258 must be linear , and as a linear functional it is bounded in norm by @xmath259 .
finally , this time returning to the unnormalized operator , we have shown that @xmath260 with @xmath261 .
it follows that @xmath6 is a simple eigenvalue of @xmath181 corresponding to the eigenprojection , @xmath262 and that the remainder has spectral radius not exceeding @xmath263 .
+    let @xmath115 be a complex banach space and consider @xmath264 , @xmath265 with @xmath266 .
we write @xmath267 for the associated one dimensional projection .
for @xmath268 we set @xmath269 then @xmath270 and @xmath271 so that @xmath272 is a regular @xmath9-cone .
furthermore , if @xmath273 a calculation shows that @xmath274 .
we have the following characterization of the spectral gap property  : a bounded linear operator , @xmath120 , has a spectral gap iff it is a strict contraction of a regular @xmath9-cone .
proof : one direction is the content of theorem [ spectral gap ] ( since a regular cone in particular is of uniformly bounded sectional aperture ) . for the other direction one uses the spectral gap projection @xmath275 to construct an adapted norm ( equivalent to @xmath276 )  : @xmath277 for some fixed choice of @xmath278 . using this norm to define the cone family in ( [ c standard ] ) , it is not difficult to see that @xmath181 is a strict and uniform contraction of @xmath272 , @xmath279 .
let @xmath280 denote a real banach space . recall that a subset @xmath281 is called a ( real ) proper closed convex cone if it is closed and convex and if    @xmath282    we note that convexity is a useful property that _ a fortiori _ is lost when dealing with complex cones . in the following
, we will refer to a real proper closed convex cone as an _ @xmath113-cone_. we assume throughout that such a cone is non - trivial , i.e.  not reduced to a point .
given an @xmath113-cone one associates a projective ( hilbert ) metric for which we here give two equivalent definitions ( for details we refer to @xcite ) .
the first , originally given by hilbert , uses cross - ratios and is very similar to our complex cone gauge  : let @xmath283 denote the extended real line ( topologically a circle ) . for @xmath284 , we write @xmath285 with the convention that @xmath286 iff @xmath287 .
properness of the cone implies that @xmath288 iff @xmath22 and @xmath23 are co - linear . in that case
we set their distance to zero . otherwise , @xmath289 is a closed ( generalized ) segment @xmath290\subset \hatrr$ ] containing the segment @xmath291 $ ] , see figure [ fig cone embed ] in section [ sec canonical complexification ] .
the logarithm of the cross - ratio of @xmath292 , @xmath293 then yields the hilbert projective distance between @xmath22 and @xmath23 .
birkhoff @xcite found an equivalent definition of this distance  : for @xmath284 , one defines @xmath294     \mylabel{birkhoff beta}\ ] ] in terms of which  : @xmath295 .
\mylabel{birkhoff def}\ ] ] a simple geometric argument shows that indeed the two definitions are equivalent .
given a linear functional , @xmath296 , the image of the cone , @xmath297 , equals either @xmath298 , @xmath299 , @xmath300 or @xmath113 .
one defines the dual cone as @xmath301 and using mazur s theorem , cf .
e.g.  @xcite , one sees that the @xmath113-cone itself may be recovered from  : @xmath302    given an @xmath113-cone @xmath303 we use definition [ def aper one ] ( replacing @xmath9 by @xmath113 , complex by real ) to define the aperture of @xmath303 .
it is given as the infimum of @xmath133-values for which there exists a linear functional @xmath123 satisfying ( see figure [ real cone figure ] ) @xmath304    the aperture , @xmath305 $ ] , of an @xmath113-cone , @xmath281 , is determined by @xmath306    proof : let @xmath307 and note that @xmath308 belongs to @xmath309 , the convex hull of cone - elements of norm one .
the reciprocal of the right hand side in ( [ real aper ] ) therefore equals @xmath310 $ ] .
suppose that @xmath128 .
then @xmath311 and @xmath312 are disjoint convex subsets .
the vector difference , @xmath313 , is open , convex and does not contain the origin , whence ( * ? ? ?
* lemma 2.2 , p.89 ) there is @xmath314 whose kernel does not intersect @xmath315 .
we may normalize @xmath316 so that @xmath317 then @xmath318 and therefore @xmath319 . to get the converse inequality let @xmath123 be positive and verify ( [ r aper ] ) . then
@xmath320 +    let @xmath281 be a @xmath321-dimensional @xmath113-cone of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture .
then @xmath303 itself is of @xmath322-bounded aperture .
proof : let @xmath323 . by a theorem of caratheodory ,
a point in the convex hull , @xmath324 , is _ a fortiori _ in the convex hull of @xmath325 points in @xmath326 ( see e.g.  @xcite ) . if @xmath327 , we may even write it as a limit of convex combinations of @xmath321 points in @xmath326
now , apply this to the set @xmath4 in the proof of the previous lemma . in the formula , ( [ real aper ] ) it thus suffices to consider @xmath321 cone - elements which we may order decreasingly according to their norm , @xmath328 .
using lemma [ l real aper ] with @xmath329 , the k - bounded sectional aperture implies that @xmath330 thus @xmath331 and in view of lemma [ l real aper ] , we see that @xmath303 is of @xmath322 bounded aperture .
+    let @xmath332 be an @xmath113-cone .
then @xmath303 is outer regular .
proof  : as in the previous lemma it suffices to look at the supremum in ( [ real aper ] ) over @xmath321-tuples .
the set @xmath333 is compact and @xmath334 is continuous and non - vanishing on @xmath4 , whence has a minimum , @xmath128 .
it follows that @xmath335 .
+    in the literature an @xmath113-cone @xmath303 is said to be norm - directed ( with a constant @xmath336 ) if @xmath337 , @xmath338 . for an
@xmath113-cone our notion of uniformly bounded sectional aperture is equivalent ( up to a small unavoidable loss in constants ) to that of being norm - directed . to see this note that if @xmath303 is of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture and @xmath316 verifies ( [ l - inequality ] ) then @xmath339  : @xmath340 which shows that @xmath303 is @xmath133-norm - directed .
conversely , if @xmath303 is @xmath133-norm - directed then @xmath341 and lemma [ l real aper ] shows that @xmath303 is of @xmath342-bounded sectional aperture .
for example , @xmath343 is 1-norm directed and of 1-bounded aperture , whereas @xmath344 is 1-norm directed , of 2-bounded sectional aperture but only of @xmath321 bounded aperture .
lemma [ lemma inner regular ] ( 3 ) is a complex cone - analogue of being norm - directed .
let @xmath345 and let @xmath281 be an @xmath113-cone which is @xmath346-inner regular ( for some @xmath127 ) and @xmath133-norm - directed .
suppose that @xmath4 is a strict cone - contraction , i.e.@xmath347 with @xmath348 .
then @xmath4 has a spectral gap .
more precisely , there is @xmath349 and a one dimensional projection @xmath275 for which @xmath350 has spectral radius not greater than @xmath351 .
proof : see @xcite in the case of @xmath303 being inner regular and @xmath133-norm directed .
when @xmath303 is assumed only @xmath346-inner regular with @xmath352 one may either adapt the proof of birkhoff ( easy ) or use remark [ c contains r ] below .
let @xmath303 be an @xmath113-cone in @xmath353 , @xmath354 and suppose that @xmath345 verifies @xmath355 .
then @xmath4 has a spectral gap .
proof : implicitly it is assumed that @xmath303 has non - empty interior .
lemma [ r outer reg ] shows that @xmath303 is outer regular , in particular , norm - directed .
local compactness of @xmath353 implies that @xmath356 so the corollary follows from birkhoff s theorem .
+ let @xmath281 be an @xmath113-cone .
it is standard to write @xmath357 for the induced partial ordering of @xmath358 . for @xmath359 , we also write @xmath360 .    the following dominated cone contraction theorem is trivial in the context of an @xmath113-cone contraction . in section
[ c dominated ] we show that a similar ( non - trivial ) result holds in the complex case .
let @xmath361 be contractions of the @xmath113-cone @xmath303 .
suppose that there are constants @xmath362 for which @xmath363 . then @xmath364    proof : given @xmath365 , suppose that @xmath366 are such that @xmath367 , @xmath368
. then also @xmath369 and @xmath370 so that @xmath371 and the claim follows by birkhoff s characterization ( [ birkhoff def ] ) .
+     +    1 .
let @xmath372 and suppose that @xmath373 for all indices .
setting @xmath374 we see that @xmath375 which is of zero projective diameter in @xmath11 . by theorem [ real domin gap ]
we recover the standard result  : @xmath376 in particular , if @xmath377 and @xmath378 denote the leading eigenvalue and the second largest eigenvalue ( in absolute value ) , respectively , then @xmath379 .
the standard perron - frobenius theorem generalizes easily to integral operators , cf .
jentzsch s theorem @xcite and the generalization given by birkhoff in @xcite ) .
we present a somewhat different generalization  : let @xmath380 be a measure space and let @xmath381 , @xmath382
. let @xmath383 ( @xmath384 , a.e . ) and @xmath385 ( @xmath386 , a.e . ) with @xmath387 $ ] being the conjugated exponent so that @xmath388 .
let @xmath389 be a @xmath390-measurable map .
we suppose there are constants @xmath391 so that for @xmath392-almost all @xmath393  : @xmath394 let @xmath345 be the integral operator defined by @xmath395
. then @xmath4 has a spectral gap ( again with a contraction rate given by @xmath396 ) .
+   proof : we write @xmath397 for the cone of positive @xmath140-functions ( @xmath398 , a.e . ) and compare the operator @xmath4 with the one - dimensional projection @xmath399 .
our assumption , @xmath400 shows that @xmath401 and that @xmath402 .
thus ,  @xmath403 .
+ in general , @xmath303 need not be inner regular ( unless @xmath404 ) .
it is , however , @xmath346-inner regular ( with @xmath405 ) for any value of @xmath406 .
one has  : @xmath407 so @xmath408 when @xmath409 . to see that @xmath303 is of uniformly bounded sectional aperture let @xmath410 be of unit norm in @xmath411 , @xmath412 and pick @xmath413 with @xmath414 ( the case @xmath404 , @xmath415 should be treated separately ; we leave this to the reader ) and @xmath416 .
the functional @xmath417 then verifies @xmath418 for all @xmath419 .
thus @xmath303 is of 2-bounded sectional aperture .
a complex cone yields a genuine extension / generalization of the cone contraction described by birkhoff @xcite .
more precisely , we will show that any birkhoff cone may be isometrically embedded in a complex cone , enjoying qualitatively the same contraction properties .
let @xmath280 be a banach space over the reals .
a complexification @xmath420 of @xmath280 is a complex banach space , equipped with a bounded anti - linear complex involution , @xmath421 , @xmath422 , @xmath423 , @xmath424 , @xmath425 , @xmath426 , for which @xmath427 is the real part .
then @xmath428 is a direct sum .
[ note that this is not the same as regarding @xmath420 as a real banach space .
for example , @xmath429 is a complexification of @xmath430 for any @xmath431-norm , @xmath406 , while the real dimension of @xmath429 is @xmath432 .
usually @xmath433 will be an isometry on @xmath420 in which case the canonical projections , @xmath434 and @xmath435 , have norm one .
we note that any real banach space , @xmath436 , admits a complexification , @xmath428 as follows  : we adopt the obvious rules for multiplying by complex numbers , set @xmath437 and introduce a norm e.g.  using real functionals , @xmath438 the latter norm is equivalent ( within a factor of 2 ) to any other norm on @xmath420 having as real part the given space @xmath436 . for the rest of this section @xmath280 will denote the real part of a complex banach space @xmath420 .
a real linear functional , @xmath439 , extends to a complex linear functional by setting @xmath440 for @xmath441 .    given an @xmath113-cone @xmath281 we define its _ canonical complexification _  : @xmath442    we have the following * polarization * identity  : @xmath443    proof : let @xmath444 .
our defining condition ( [ complexification ] ) means that @xmath445 ( assume here it is non - zero ) must have an argument that vary within a @xmath446 angle as @xmath447 varies . normalizing appropriately , we may write @xmath448 with @xmath449 and @xmath450
. if we set @xmath451 with @xmath358 then @xmath452 for all @xmath447 .
hence , @xmath453 for all such functionals and by ( [ dual cone char ] ) this is equivalent to @xmath454 . if @xmath455 ( or @xmath456 ) then we may write @xmath457 ( or @xmath458 ) so we may always assume @xmath459 .
+    let @xmath303 be an @xmath113-cone of @xmath133-bounded aperture .
then its canonical complexification , @xmath460 , is of @xmath461-bounded aperture .
proof : let @xmath314 satisfy @xmath462 and extend @xmath316 to a complex linear functional . when @xmath463 we use polarization , lemma [ c cone char ] , to write @xmath464 with @xmath465
. then @xmath466 , from which @xmath467 and @xmath468 so that @xmath469
. as @xmath470 we also have @xmath471 . therefore , @xmath472    let @xmath303 be an @xmath113-cone .
if @xmath303 is ( 1 ) inner regular/ ( 2 ) outer regular/ ( 3 ) of bounded sectional aperture then so is its canonical complexification .
proof : ( 1 ) when @xmath303 contains a ball @xmath473 one verifies that @xmath460 contains the ball @xmath474 .
+ ( 2 ) as shown in lemma [ c aperture ] , if @xmath475 is of @xmath133-bounded aperture then @xmath476 is of @xmath461-bounded aperture .
+ ( 3 ) let @xmath477 and write @xmath478 for the sub - cone generated by these two elements .
we also write @xmath479 and @xmath480 which is an at most 4 and at least 1-dimensional @xmath113-subcone of @xmath303 . now , if @xmath481 then @xmath482 with @xmath483 and clearly also @xmath484 .
but then @xmath485 so that also @xmath486 , with @xmath476 being the complexification of @xmath487 . by lemma [ cr bd aperture ] , @xmath476 is of @xmath488 bounded aperture so by lemma [ c aperture ] , @xmath476 and therefore also @xmath489 are of @xmath490 bounded ( complex ) aperture .
+    let @xmath303 be an @xmath113-cone and let @xmath460 denote its canonical complexification ( [ complexification ] ) .
then @xmath460 is a @xmath9-cone ( definition [ def complex cone ] ) .
writing @xmath491 for our projective gauge on the complex cone , the natural inclusion , @xmath492 is an isometric embedding .
proof : the set @xmath460 is clearly @xmath9-invariant . consider independent vectors , @xmath365 . by lemma [ r outer reg ]
any finite dimensional subcone of @xmath303 is outer regular , so in particular of uniformly bounded sectional aperture .
our previous lemma shows that the corresponding complex cone is of bounded sectional ( complex ) aperture .
but then @xmath460 must be proper by lemma [ lemma inner regular](3 ) .    regarding the embedding we may normalize the points so that @xmath493 $ ] is a bounded segment in @xmath113 .
define the ` boundary ' points , @xmath494 and @xmath495 . for any @xmath496 the point
@xmath497 is outside the closed convex cone @xmath303 . by mazur
s theorem , @xcite , we may separate this point from @xmath303 by a functional @xmath498 . for any @xmath496
we may then find @xmath499 for which @xmath500 then @xmath501 only if @xmath502 for any @xmath503 whence only if @xmath504 conversely , when @xmath505 and @xmath506 then @xmath507 so this condition is also sufficient . we thus have  : @xmath508 .
therefore @xmath509 is a generalized disc , symmetric under complex conjugation for which @xmath510 ( see figure [ fig cone embed ] ) . in this situation we know explicit formulae for both ( [ hilbert metric ] ) the real and ( [ c metric ] ) the complex hyperbolic metrics in terms of cross - ratios so we get @xmath511 .
+    for @xmath187 the set @xmath512 is a regular @xmath9-cone .
the inclusion , @xmath513 is an isometric embedding .
proof : let @xmath514 , @xmath515 denote the canonical coordinate projections then @xmath516 and @xmath517 .
thus , @xmath518 is the canonical complexification of the standard real cone @xmath11 .
see figure [ fig can complex ] for an illustration of @xmath519 .
+    below we shall need the following complex polarization    let @xmath520 be at a distance @xmath521 .
we may then find @xmath522 so that the vector @xmath523 , or equivalently  : @xmath524 verifies : @xmath525 in particular , @xmath526 and @xmath527    proof : possibly after replacing @xmath528 by @xmath529 for a suitable @xmath530 we may assume that @xmath531 and @xmath532 .
then @xmath533 is a real segment @xmath534 $ ] for which @xmath535t_1,t_2 [ \supset [ -1,1]$ ] ( see figure [ fig geom ] ) .
now write @xmath536 , @xmath537-\pi/2,\pi/2[$ ] . since @xmath538
we get in the @xmath539-coordinate  ; @xmath540 & = & \ { \theta \in
i :   x - \tan \theta \ ; y \in \ccr\ } \nonumber \\ & = & \ { \theta \in i : \cos \theta \ ; x - \sin \theta \ ; y \in \ccr\ } \nonumber \\ & = & \ { \theta \in i : { { \rm re}}\ ; e^{i\theta } ( x+iy ) \in \ccr\ } \label{thetaxy}\end{aligned}\ ] ] in @xmath539-coordinates the projective distance between @xmath541 and @xmath542 is then given by @xmath543    if we do a complex rotation , @xmath544 with @xmath545-\frac{\pi}2     + \theta_1 , \frac{\pi}{2 } - \theta_2[$ ] then the last expression in ( [ thetaxy ] ) shows that @xmath546 $ ] .
now , the derivative of @xmath547 equals @xmath548 so the minimal distance between @xmath549 and @xmath550 is obtained for @xmath551 .
this corresponds to a symmetric configuration in which @xmath552 $ ] with @xmath553 and @xmath554 or equivalently , @xmath555 since @xmath556 whenever @xmath557 we obtain the first claim .
the second is a consequence of @xmath558 for all @xmath559 .
let @xmath560 be at a distance @xmath561 .
through a positive real rescaling , e.g.  replacing  @xmath562 by @xmath563 for a suitable @xmath564 , we may assure that @xmath565    proof : from the birkhoff characterization ( [ birkhoff def ] ) of the projective distance we may rescale , say @xmath562 , to obtain @xmath566 and @xmath567 . then @xmath568 and @xmath569 . from this
we get  : @xmath570 and similarly with @xmath562 and @xmath571 interchanged . rearranging terms
the claim follows .
+    let @xmath572 be an inclusion of @xmath113-cones and denote by @xmath573 the inclusion of the corresponding complexified cones .
let @xmath574 $ ] and @xmath575 $ ] be the projective diameters of the respective inclusions .
then @xmath576 is finite iff @xmath577 is finite .
proof : from the embedding in theorem [ thm embedding ] we see that @xmath578 which implies one direction .    to see the converse , suppose that @xmath579 and let @xmath580 .
possibly after rotating the polarization of @xmath581 and @xmath582 , we may by lemma [ complex polarization ] assume that @xmath583 and @xmath584 with @xmath585 . eventually applying a real rescaling of e.g.  @xmath581 ( which does not change its polarization ) , we may by lemma [ real rescaling ]
assure that in addition  : @xmath586    let us write @xmath587 , @xmath425 and similarly for @xmath588 and @xmath589 . in order to prove our claim
it suffices to find a fixed open neighborhood @xmath590 of the segment @xmath291\subset \cc$ ] , depending on @xmath591 but not upon @xmath581 and @xmath582 , such that @xmath592 for every @xmath593 .
let @xmath594 .
then @xmath595 and we get ( with @xmath596 ) ( a )  : @xmath597 as well as ( b )  : @xmath598 . we also obtain the estimates ( c )  : @xmath599 and ( d )  : @xmath600 .
let us write @xmath601 with @xmath594 and @xmath602 . using the expansion @xmath603 and inserting the estimates ( a)-(d ) we obtain @xmath604      & \geq &          ( 1-\eta^2 )   \la \ell_1 , x_t\ra            \la \ell_2,x_t \ra -\\         & & |z| \eta \sqrt{2 } \sqrt{1+\eta^2 }            \left (           \la \ell_1,x_t \ra \la \ell_2,x_1+x_2\ra +           \la \ell_1,x_1+x_2 \ra \la \ell_2,x_t\ra\right ) \\           & & -|z|^2 2\eta^2            \la \ell_1,x_1+x_2 \ra \la \ell_2,x_1+x_2\ra\\[2 mm ]          & \geq &             \la \ell_1 ,
x_t\ra \la \ell_2,x_t \ra        \left(2 - \left(\sqrt{1+\eta^2 } + |z|               \frac{\eta \sqrt{2 } } { 1-\eta |t| } \right)^2 \right).\end{aligned}\ ] ] this remains positive when @xmath605 is sufficiently small ( recall that @xmath606 ) .
the set of such @xmath601-values thus defines an open connected neighborhood , @xmath607 of the segment @xmath291\subset \cc$ ] . since enlarging a domain decreases hyperbolic distances , we conclude that @xmath608 .
+    suppose that @xmath181 is a real bounded linear operator , that @xmath303 is a @xmath126-inner regular ( some @xmath127 ) , norm - directed cone and that the real operator @xmath181 maps @xmath303 into a subcone of finite projective diameter in @xmath303 .
by birkhoff s theorem , @xcite , the operator has a spectral gap . in view of remark [ remark
norm - directed ] and the properties of the canonical complexification shown above , the same conclusion follows when considering the complexified operator acting on the canonically complexified cone .
our complex cone contraction thus contains the real contraction as a special case ( but , of course , with a more complicated proof ) .
a real operator @xmath275 which contracts a real cone @xmath303 contracts _ a fortiori _ the corresponding complexified cone @xmath460 ( easy ) .
it is then natural to ask if this complex contraction may be preserved when adding an imaginary part to the operator .
many of our applications below are cast over this idea and has lead us to state an abstract assumption for the action upon @xmath303 and a corresponding complex contraction theorem for complexified cones  :    let @xmath609 be a contraction of an @xmath113-cone @xmath303 .
let @xmath610 be an operator acting upon the corresponding complex banach space .
we say that @xmath611 is dominated by @xmath275 with constants @xmath612 provided that for all @xmath613 and @xmath614  : @xmath615     { { \rm re}}\la \ell , mx\ra   \la \ell,\barm x \ra & \leq &                    \beta \la \ell , px\ra   \la \ell , p x \ra            \mylabel{domin b}\\[2 mm ]      | { { \rm im}}\la \ell_1,mx_1\ra   \la \ell_2,\barm x_2 \ra | & \leq &                    \gamma \la \ell_1,px_1\ra   \la \ell_2,p x_2\ra            \mylabel{domin c }     \end{aligned}\ ] ] + we say that @xmath303 is @xmath616-inner regular ( @xmath127 ) if there are @xmath617 and @xmath618 so that @xmath619    the above conditions are @xmath299-invariant and also stable when taking convex combinations .
it thus suffices to verify that these conditions hold for subsets , @xmath620 and @xmath621 which are generating for the cone and the dual cone , respectively , i.e.  for which  : @xmath622 note also that when @xmath303 is inner regular the last condition ( [ aux condition ] ) is automatically satisfied ( choose for @xmath225 an interior point in @xmath303 ) .
when @xmath623 an operator @xmath611 verifying the above assumption is essentially real . possibly after multiplication with a complex phase the operator maps @xmath303 into @xmath303 itself .
the above condition then reduces to the real cone - dominated condition of theorem [ real domin gap ] .
our goal is here to show that the conclusion of that theorem also applies when @xmath611 is allowed to have a non - trivial imaginary part .
it turns out that the allowed ` amount ' of imaginary part depends on the rate of contraction of @xmath275 .
let @xmath281 be a proper convex cone and let @xmath624 be a strict cone - contraction , i.e.   @xmath625 .
write @xmath460 for the canonical complexification of @xmath303 .
suppose that @xmath610 is @xmath275-dominated ( assumption [ main assumption ] ) with constants that satisfy  : @xmath626 then @xmath627 and @xmath628 . if , in addition , @xmath303 is @xmath616-inner regular ( @xmath127 ) and of uniformly bounded sectional aperture then @xmath611 has a spectral gap .
proof : let @xmath444 and @xmath629 .
we write @xmath630 .
the first step is to establish the following inequality ( which , in particular , implies that @xmath631 )  : @xmath632 we will use polarization twice to achieve this .
first , write @xmath633 with @xmath634 and @xmath459 . then @xmath635          + i \left[\la \ell_1,m y\ra    \la \ell_2,\barm x\ra              - \la \ell_1,m x\ra    \la \ell_2,\barm y\ra \right]\\         & = &      \frac12 \left [ \la \ell_1 , m(x\!+\!y)\ra \la \ell_2 , \barm(x\!+\!y)\ra       \!+\ ! \la \ell_1 , m(x\!-\!y)\ra \la \ell_2,\barm ( x\!-\!y)\ra \right ] + \\    & &   \frac{i}{2}\left [ \la \ell_1,m(x\!+\!y)\ra \la \ell_2,\barm(x\!-\!y)\ra       \!-\ !
\la \ell_1 , m(x\!-\!y)\ra    \la \ell_2,\barm(x\!+\!y)\ra \right ] \\       & \equiv & \frac12 [ a ] + \frac{i}2 [ b ] .
\end{aligned}\ ] ] since @xmath636 we may use inequality ( [ domin a ] ) of our assumption to deduce  : @xmath637 for the second term we have by ( [ domin c ] ) @xmath638 where for the last inequality we used schwarz inequality . from these two estimates
we get  : @xmath639    we note that ( [ mu mu ] ) is here independent of the choice of polarization . since @xmath640 we see that the elements @xmath641 and @xmath642 are at a projective distance not exceeding @xmath643 .
we may then use lemma [ complex polarization ] to rotate the polarization again and write @xmath644 where @xmath645 for all @xmath498 .
but then @xmath646 we also obtain @xmath647 so that @xmath648 together with ( [ mu mu ] ) this establishes ( [ eq ell u ] ) .    in order to obtain an estimate for @xmath649 we also need the following inequality  : @xmath650 this follows by setting @xmath651 in the expression for @xmath4 and @xmath652 above and using the upper bounds ( [ domin b ] ) and ( [ domin c ] ) of our assumption  : @xmath653 and the bound @xmath654 as before .
+ consider @xmath655 . using the polarization identity , proposition [ equiv c ]
, we may assume that @xmath656 with @xmath657 so that @xmath658
. then also @xmath659 and with the same bounds for @xmath660 . through a real rescaling , lemma [ real rescaling ]
, we may also assume that @xmath661 .
we also write @xmath662 with @xmath601 , @xmath663 ( and similarly for @xmath588 and @xmath589 ) . by the choice of polarization
@xmath664 so that @xmath665 , i.e.  belongs to the complex cone for all @xmath663 .
we want to show that when @xmath605 is small enough the same is true for @xmath666 .
first note that @xmath667 .
applying the inequality ( [ gamma ineq ] ) we deduce that @xmath668 and @xmath669 . using ( [ eq ell u ] ) on @xmath670 and the expansion @xmath671
, we obtain the inequality @xmath672          & \geq   & { { \rm re}}\ ,    \la \ell_1 , mu_t\ra\ ,     \la \ell_2 , \overline { mu_t}\ra\   \nonumber \\    &   & - |z| \
\left(\ \strut    |\la \ell_1,m u_t\ra | \
|\la \ell_2,m ( u_1-u_2)\ra | \ ; + \ ;    |\la \ell_2,m u_t\ra | \ |\la \ell_1,m ( u_1-u_2)\ra |   \
\right )     \nonumber \\    &   & - |z|^2 \     |\la \ell_1,m ( u_1-u_2)\ra | \     |\la \ell_1,m ( u_1-u_2)\ra |    \nonumber \\[2 mm ]     & \geq & \la \ell_1 , p x_t\ra \ , \la \ell_2 p x_t \ra \ \times      \left(\frac{\alpha}{\cosh({\delta_p}/{2})}-\gamma       + 2 ( \beta+\gamma )   - 2(\beta+\gamma )   \left (      1 + \frac{|z|}{1-\eta|t| } \right)^2          \right ) .
\nonumber \mylabel{c diam}\end{aligned}\ ] ] the set of @xmath673 values , @xmath594 for which the latter quantity is non - negative contains an open neighborhood , @xmath674 of the segment @xmath291\subset \cc$ ] .
it follows that @xmath675    for the last assertion note that the condition ( [ aux condition ] ) implies that @xmath676 which remains non - negative when @xmath677 . thus @xmath460 is @xmath616-inner regular . by proposition [ c regular cone ] , @xmath460 is also of uniformly bounded sectional aperture so the conclusion follows from our spectral gap theorem , theorem [ spectral gap ] .
the most striking application is also the simplest . a complex perron - frobenius theorem  :    let @xmath1 and suppose there is @xmath2 for which @xmath678 for all indices . then @xmath4 has a spectral gap .
proof  : the cone @xmath679 is regular in @xmath430 . by corollary [ corollary cplus ]
, @xmath680 is regular in @xmath430
. we will compare @xmath611 with the constant matrix @xmath374 with respect to the real cone @xmath11 .
as in example [ ex real pf](1 ) , @xmath402 . the canonical basis and its dual generates the cone and its dual , respectively , cf .
remark [ remark generating ] .
the constants from assumption [ main assumption ] then become ( sups and infs over all indices ) ( a ) @xmath681 , ( b ) @xmath682 and ( c ) @xmath683 .
our spectral gap condition of theorem [ c domin sp gap ] simply reads @xmath684 and by finiteness of @xmath0 this is equivalent to the stated assumptions on @xmath4 .
+ in the following , denote by @xmath685 the essential oscillation of a real valued function @xmath220 on a measured space .
theorem [ thm pf complex ] may ( almost ) be viewed as a special case of the following complex version of a result of jentzsch @xcite  :    let @xmath380 be a measure space and let @xmath686 , with @xmath687 .
let @xmath688 , @xmath384 a.e .  and
@xmath689 , @xmath386 a.e .  with @xmath690 so that @xmath691 , cf .
example [ ex real jentzsch](2 )
. given @xmath692 we define the integral operator , @xmath693  : @xmath694 set @xmath695 and @xmath696 .
suppose that @xmath697 and that @xmath698 .
then @xmath699 has a spectral gap .
proof : as in example [ ex real jentzsch](2 ) we consider the @xmath113-cone @xmath700 and we compare with @xmath701 .
we have that @xmath702 and @xmath402 .
we obtain the following estimate for the constants @xmath703 since @xmath704 , @xmath705 and @xmath706 , the cone @xmath303 is @xmath699-inner regular . as shown in example [ ex real jentzsch ] ( 2 ) the real cone has bounded sectional aperture so by proposition [ c regular cone ] ( 3 ) , the same is true for the complexified cone .
the spectral gap condition of theorem [ c domin sp gap ] then translates into the stated condition on @xmath539 and @xmath707 .
let @xmath115 be a complex banach space .
we denote by @xmath708 denote the set of complex planes in @xmath115 , i.e.  subsets of the form @xmath709 with @xmath22 and @xmath23 independent vectors in @xmath115 .
if we write @xmath710 for the unit sphere in @xmath115 then @xmath711 defines a metric on @xmath708 . in the following
let us fix a norm on @xmath429 .
the choice may affect the constants below but is otherwise immaterial .
the space @xmath712 is then a sequentially compact metric space .
let @xmath713 be a @xmath9-cone and let @xmath714 .
suppose there is @xmath715 , @xmath128 such that @xmath716 .
then @xmath717 has at most @xmath718 bounded aperture .
proof : let @xmath719 be a linear functional with @xmath720 and @xmath721 .
choose @xmath722 for which @xmath723 .
if @xmath724 then @xmath725 so that @xmath726 and therefore , @xmath727 the 2-dimensional space @xmath326 is spanned by @xmath159 and @xmath22 so @xmath728 . +    let @xmath729 be a @xmath9-cone .
then there is @xmath730 so that @xmath54 is of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture .
proof : suppose that this is not the case .
then we may find a sequence @xmath731 of planes for which the aperture @xmath732 diverges . taking a subsequence
we may assume that @xmath731 converges in @xmath708 to a plane @xmath326 .
as @xmath54 is proper , @xmath733 is a strict subset of @xmath326 .
thus there is @xmath734 . but
@xmath54 is closed in @xmath429 so there is @xmath128 so that @xmath735 is disjoint from @xmath54 as well .
given another complex plane , @xmath736 , we may find @xmath737 for which @xmath738 .
when @xmath326 and @xmath736 are close enough , @xmath739 and @xmath740 is also disjoint from @xmath54 . by our previous lemma
, @xmath741 is of aperture not exceeding @xmath742 . but this contradicts the divergence of @xmath743 as @xmath744 .
+    let @xmath729 be a @xmath9-cone and let @xmath745 be a closed complex sub - cone with @xmath746 .
then there is @xmath747 such that for @xmath748  : @xmath749    proof : we denote by @xmath750 the canonical projection to complex projective space .
we consider @xmath751 as a metric space with the metric @xmath752 as in ( [ proj metric ] ) .
the projected image , @xmath753 , is compact in the open set @xmath754 so there is @xmath755 for which the @xmath756-neighborhood of @xmath753 is contained in @xmath757 .
let @xmath748 be linearly independent and suppose that @xmath758 .
let @xmath759 be the complex plane containing @xmath22 and @xmath23 .
denote by @xmath760 the connected set in @xmath761 containing @xmath22 and @xmath23 .
let @xmath762 , @xmath763 be an @xmath764-maximally separated set in @xmath760 .
thus , the balls @xmath765 , @xmath763 are all disjoint and @xmath766 .
the cardinality of @xmath433 is bounded by a constant depending on @xmath756 only .
then @xmath767 , @xmath763 so by lemma [ xp lower bound](2 ) each @xmath768 , @xmath763 is of radius not greater than @xmath769 for the @xmath770-metric .
also @xmath771 contains @xmath760 which is connected .
it follows that @xmath772 does not exceed @xmath773 . which is bounded by a constant depending on @xmath756 only .
+    let @xmath729 be a closed subset which is @xmath9-invariant and contains no complex planes ( in terms of definition [ def complex cone ] , @xmath54 is a @xmath9-cone ) .
suppose that @xmath774 is a linear map for which @xmath775
. then @xmath4 has a spectral gap .
proof  : we write @xmath776 for the image of @xmath54 and use the notation and constants from the two previous lemmas
. first note that for @xmath777 , @xmath778 to see this note that when @xmath779 then @xmath780 so by lemma [ wv cone ] , @xmath781 .
if @xmath782 denotes the connected component of @xmath783 containing @xmath22 and @xmath23 then also @xmath784 . by lemma [ lemma contraction ] , @xmath785 .
iterating this argument we see that @xmath786 , @xmath187 . by lemma [ unif k aperture ]
, @xmath54 is of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture , so lemma [ xp lower bound](1 ) assures that @xmath787 .
so that @xmath789 .    now let @xmath790 , @xmath763 be an @xmath764-maximally separated set in @xmath489 .
setting @xmath791 with @xmath763 we see that @xmath792 , @xmath793 .
it follows that there is a map , @xmath794 so that @xmath795 , @xmath793 . since @xmath433 is of finite cardinality , @xmath796 must have a cycle .
thus , there are @xmath797 and @xmath788 for which @xmath798 .
the cone @xmath799 is regular ( easy ) and of bounded diameter in @xmath800 so @xmath801 has a spectral gap and therefore also @xmath4 .
+ when the operator is sufficiently regular one may weaken the assumptions on the contraction and the outer regularity of the cone .
this is illustrated by the following complex version of a theorem of kren and rutman ( * ? ? ?
* theorem 6.3 )  :    let @xmath802 be a @xmath9-cone in the banach space @xmath420 .
let @xmath803 be a quasi - compact operator or a compact operator of strictly positive spectral radius and suppose that @xmath4 verifies @xmath804 then @xmath4 has a spectral gap .    proof  : let @xmath275 be the spectral projection associated with eigenvalues on the spectral radius circle , @xmath805 . by hypothesis @xmath806 is finite dimensional and we may find @xmath634 such that @xmath807 we claim that @xmath808 is non - empty  : let @xmath809 and define @xmath810 .
suppose first that @xmath811 . then @xmath812 so that the distance between @xmath186 and @xmath806 tends to zero . since @xmath813 is locally compact and @xmath186
is bounded we may extract a convergent sub - sequence @xmath814 .
suppose instead that @xmath815 then @xmath816 so there is @xmath128 for which @xmath817 .
we may then replace @xmath22 by @xmath818 where @xmath819 , @xmath820 and we are back in the first case .
thus @xmath821 .
now , @xmath822 the latter for the topology in @xmath806 . in particular
, @xmath823 is non - empty so @xmath824 is an inner regular @xmath9-cone in a finite dimensional space and @xmath825 .
we may then apply the finite dimensional contraction theorem , theorem [ thm finite dim ] , to @xmath826 .
it follows that @xmath827 , whence also our original operator @xmath4 has a spectral gap .
+    in the real cone version ( replacing @xmath9 by @xmath113 ) of theorem [ complex krein rutman ] it is not necessary to assume that the spectral radius of @xmath4 is strictly positive .
this forms part of the conclusion . to see this
pick @xmath809 of norm one .
then @xmath816 so there is @xmath349 for which @xmath828 .
therefore , @xmath829 and then also @xmath830 by the properties of an @xmath113-cone . more generally , @xmath831 .
as @xmath832 it follows that @xmath833{|a^nx| } \geq \lambda > 0 .\ ] ] the fact that this conclusion is non - trivial is illustrated e.g.  by the operator , @xmath834 , @xmath835 , which is compact when acting upon @xmath836)$ ] .
it contracts ( though not strictly ) the cone of positive elements but has spectral radius zero .    in the complex setup ,
if one assumes that @xmath26 is of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture then strict positivity of @xmath5 also comes for free  : suppose that @xmath837 , @xmath838 and @xmath839 , @xmath128 .
then @xmath840 , @xmath841 and also @xmath842 for such @xmath6-values . by lemma [ lemma inner regular ]
we see that @xmath843 from which @xmath844 .
the ruelle - perron - frobenius theorem , @xcite ( see also @xcite ) , ensures a spectral gap for certain classes of real , positive operators with applications in statistical mechanics and dynamical systems .
ferrero and schmitt @xcite used birkhoff s theorem on cone contraction to give a conceptually new proof of the ruelle - perron - frobenius theorem . see also @xcite and @xcite for further applications in dynamical systems .
we present here a generalization to a complex setup .
let @xmath845 be a metric space of finite diameter , @xmath846 . when @xmath847 ( or @xmath9 ) we denote by @xmath848 $ ] the associated lipschitz constant and by @xmath849 the supremum . then @xmath850 ( and similarly for @xmath420 ) is a banach algebra .
let @xmath851 and let @xmath852 be an unramified covering map of @xmath853 which is uniformly expanding . for simplicity , we will take it to be of finite degree ( it is an instructive exercise to extend theorem [ thm rpf ] below to maps of countable degree ) .
more precisely , we assume that there is @xmath854 and a finite index set @xmath433 so that for every couple @xmath855 we have a pairing @xmath856 of the pre - images , @xmath857 and @xmath858 , for which @xmath859 , @xmath860 .
+ fix an element @xmath861 and define for @xmath862 ( or @xmath705 )  : @xmath863 the norm of @xmath699 when acting upon @xmath864 ( in the uniform norm ) is given by @xmath865 and a straight - forward calculation shows that @xmath866 with @xmath867 .
+    [ thm rpf ] denote @xmath868 , @xmath869 and @xmath870 .
suppose that @xmath871 then @xmath872 has a spectral gap .
proof  : we will compare @xmath699 with the real operator @xmath873 . for @xmath279 the set , @xmath874 defines a proper convex cone in @xmath280 which in addition is regular .
inner regularity  : let @xmath875 , @xmath876 and @xmath877 .
then @xmath878 provided @xmath879 .
whence @xmath880 .
outer regularity  : pick @xmath881 and set @xmath882 .
for @xmath883 we have @xmath884 so that @xmath885 , and this shows outer regularity .
let @xmath886 and @xmath887 .
as in ( [ birkhoff beta ] ) let @xmath888 .
a calculation using the defining properties of the cone - family yields  : @xmath889 and we get the following bound for the diameter @xmath890 , cf .
( [ birkhoff def ] )  : @xmath891 the injection @xmath892 is thus a uniform contraction for the respective projective metrics . given @xmath883 and using the pairing @xmath893 we get for the operator @xmath894  : @xmath895 this implies that @xmath896 with @xmath897 .
if we choose @xmath898 then @xmath275 becomes a strict cone contraction of the regular cone @xmath899 .
we also get the estimate ( to obtain an a priori estimate for the contraction one may here try to optimize for the value of @xmath900 )  : @xmath901    by theorem [ thm birkhoff ] , @xmath609 has a spectral gap ( see @xcite and also @xcite ) .
+ returning to the complex operator , @xmath699 , let us fix @xmath855 and the corresponding pairing of pre - images @xmath893 as described above .
let @xmath902 and write @xmath903 with @xmath904 in order to compare with the real operator , we define complex numbers @xmath905 , @xmath906 , through the relation @xmath907 equivalently ( when the denominator is non - zero )  : @xmath908 we may apply lemma [ exp estimate ] below with the bounds @xmath909 and @xmath910 to deduce that @xmath911    given @xmath912 we have  : @xmath913 the two last factors are real and non - negative ( because @xmath914 ) and the complex pre - factor belongs to the set @xmath915 summing over all indices we therefore obtain @xmath916 in which @xmath315 is an average of numbers in @xmath4 whence belongs to @xmath917 , the convex hull of @xmath4 .    when @xmath918 we conclude that the bounds in assumption [ main assumption ] are verified for the constants @xmath919 , @xmath920 and @xmath921 .
the spectral gap condition in theorem [ c domin sp gap ] then reads as follows  : @xmath922    now , in order to get a more tractable and explicit formula we make the following ( not optimal ) choice for @xmath900  :    @xmath923    then @xmath924 so that @xmath925 . using ( [ delta p estimate ] ) we obtain @xmath926    one also checks that   @xmath927   implies   that @xmath928 so we may replace ( [ sp gap cond ] ) by the stronger condition    @xmath929 finally inserting @xmath930 we obtain the claimed condition which is thus sufficient for a spectral gap .
+    in the literature , one often includes a statement on gibbs measures as well .
if we let @xmath931 denote the leading spectral projection of @xmath873 , then positivity of @xmath275 implies that the ` state ' @xmath932 is uniformly bounded with respect to @xmath849 . by continuity , @xmath933 extends to a linear functional on @xmath934 .
if , in addition , we assume @xmath853 compact , then by riesz , this functional defines a borel probability measure @xmath935 on @xmath853 .
the measure is invariant and strongly mixing for @xmath936 .
it is known as a gibbs measure for @xmath936 and the weight @xmath937 .
this part of the theorem , however , needs the partial ordering induced by the cone of positive continuous functions and does not extend to a complex setup ( in general , it is even false there ) .    in the proof we made use of the following complex estimate  :
let @xmath938 be such that @xmath939 and define @xmath940 through @xmath941 then @xmath942    proof : writing @xmath943 and @xmath944 we have  : @xmath945 taking real and imaginary parts , @xmath946 and @xmath947 , we get @xmath948 . also @xmath949 so that @xmath950 .
let @xmath115 be a complex banach space .
given non - zero elements @xmath951 we write @xmath952 iff   @xmath953 .
let @xmath954 denote the quotient map and write @xmath955=\cc^*x$ ] for the equivalence class of @xmath956 .
we equip the quotient space @xmath957 with the following metric @xmath958,[y ] )      = \dist_h ( \cc x \cap s , \cc y \cap s )        = \inf \left\ { \left\|           \frac{\mu x}{\|\mu x\|}\!-\ !          \frac{\nu
y}{\|\nu y\| } \right\| : \mu,\nu\in \cc^*\right\ } ,      \ \ x , y\in x^ *    \label{proj metric}\ ] ] in which @xmath959 is the hausdorff distance between non - empty sets and @xmath960 is the unit - sphere .    1 .
let @xmath116 be a @xmath9-cone of @xmath133-bounded sectional aperture .
then for all @xmath162  : @xmath958,[y])\leq 2 k d_{\calc}(x , y).\ ] ] 2 .   let @xmath956 , @xmath128 and set @xmath961,r)$ ] .
then for all @xmath962 @xmath963,[y])}{r - d_{\pi(x^*)}([x],[y])}.\ ] ]    proof : using the inequality @xmath964 we obtain from lemma [ bounded sectional aperture ]  : @xmath965 and the first conclusion follows . for the second claim , normalize
so that @xmath966,[y])=\|x - y\|<r$ ] and @xmath967 .
let @xmath968 . by ( [ xy inequality ] ) ,
@xmath969 which remains smaller than @xmath970 when @xmath971 $ ] .
then @xmath972 + given any two points @xmath46 we may follow kobayashi @xcite and define a projective pseudo - distance between @xmath22 and @xmath23 through  : @xmath973 since @xmath974 is a ( projective ) metric , the previous lemma implies that      in other words , this new distance does not degenerate when taking the inf over finite chains , so distinct complex lines in @xmath26 have a non - zero @xmath977-distance .
this is conceptually very nice , but , in our context , not particularly useful .
the reason is that even if @xmath120 maps @xmath782 into a subset of finite diameter in @xmath782 for the metric @xmath978 this does not seem to imply a uniform contraction of @xmath181 , i.e.  no spectral gap .
we leave a further study of this metric to the interested reader .
+                  i am indepted to a.  douady for the elegant argument in the proof of lemma [ lemma contraction ] .
p. ferrero and b. schmitt , ruelle s perron - frobenius theorem and projective metrics , _ coll .
soc , j bollyai _ * 27 * ( 1979 ) .