A threshold for full packing dimension of Hölder images of sets and measures

We first prove (1). The upper bound \dim_P^s\mu\leq s is immediate from the definition of the classical packing dimension profile.

For the lower bound, we begin with the comparison inequality

valid for all x\in\mathbb{R}^n, r\in(0,1) and t\in(0,s].

Next, observe that for every t\in(0,s],

which follows by direct comparison of the kernels branch by branch. Combining this with (Proof),

Fix \theta\in(0,1] and let 0<t<\min\{s,\dim_{P,\theta}\mu\}. By the definition of \dim_{P,\theta}\mu=\dim_{P,\theta}^n\mu, for every \epsilon>0 and \mu-a.e. x, there exists a sequence r_k\to 0 such that

Substituting into (?) and using r_k<1 together with t(1-\theta)\leq t,

so that

Now observe that F_s^\mu does not depend on t; therefore, for any t'<t(1-\theta),

as r_k\to 0. Hence t'\leq \dim_P^s\mu. Letting t'\to t(1-\theta) and then t\to\min\{s,\dim_{P,\theta}\mu\}, we conclude

completing the proof of (1).

To prove part (2), note that the case s\leq D(\mu) is absorbed by part (1) of the theorem. Indeed, letting \theta\to 0 in part (1) and using s\leq D(\mu) gives \dim_P^s\mu=s. If s=n the conclusion is immediate, since \dim_{P,\theta}^n\mu=\dim_{P,\theta}\mu; hence assume s<n and let X:\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n be an index-\alpha fractional Brownian motion with \alpha=s/n\in(0,1). By Theorem 2.2, \dim_P\mu_X=\dim_P^s\mu/\alpha=n almost surely. Arguing as in the proof of Lemma 4.1 (via Lemma 2.7), this yields \dim_{P,\theta}\mu_X=n, and combining with Corollary 3.10,

for every \theta\in(0,1], which implies s=\lim_{\theta\to 0}\dim_{P,\theta}^s\mu=\min\{s,D(\mu)\}.

Hence, suppose D(\mu)<s and let t<D(\mu). By examining the kernel separately on the intervals [0,r^\theta] and (r^\theta,\infty), it is not hard to see that

Now, by our choice of t, for every \theta\in(0,1], for \mu-a.e. x and for every \epsilon\in(0,1), there exists a sequence \{r_k\} with r_k\to 0 such that

Combining this with inequality (?) we obtain

Therefore

for every \theta\in(0,1] and \mu-a.e. x.

We now upgrade (?) to the exponent t. Fix \theta\in(0,1] and let 0<u<t. By examining the kernel we have

as can be checked directly on each of the three branches of the kernel, and that \phi_{r,\theta}^{t,s} is nonincreasing in \theta, so that

Choose \theta'\in(0,\theta] with \theta'<\theta(t-u)/t, and let \{r_j\} be a sequence realizing (?) for the parameter \theta', so that F_{t,s,\theta'}^\mu(x,r_j)\leq 3\,r_j^{t(1-\theta')} for all j large enough. Combining (?) and (?),

By the choice of \theta', this exponent is strictly positive, and hence

Since 0<u<t was arbitrary, we conclude \dim_{P,\theta}^s\mu\geq t for every \theta\in(0,1]. As t<D(\mu) was arbitrary, this gives

For the reverse inequality, monotonicity of the profile in its upper index gives \dim_{P,\theta}^s\mu\leq \dim_{P,\theta}^n\mu=\dim_{P,\theta}\mu for s\leq n, whence \lim_{\theta\to 0}\dim_{P,\theta}^s\mu\leq D(\mu). Therefore

since D(\mu)<s in this case, completing the proof.

Follows directly from Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2

By definition and inequality (3.6), for all x,y\in E,

for some constant C>0.

Let s be such that s\alpha>\dim_{P,\theta}^{m\alpha}\mu. Then there exists a set A\subset E with \mu(A)>0 such that, for every x\in A, there exist \epsilon(x)>0 and r_0(x)>0 with

for all 0<r<r_0(x), by the kernel comparison above and the definition of the image measure. Hence \liminf_{r\to0}r^{-s}F_{s,m,\theta}^{\mu_f}(f(x),r)>0 for every x\in A, and since A\subseteq f^{-1}\bigl(\{y:\liminf_{r\to0}r^{-s}F_{s,m,\theta}^{\mu_f}(y,r)>0\}\bigr), this set has positive \mu_f-measure. Thus the defining condition of \dim_{P,\theta}^{m}\mu_f fails at the exponent s, and since the set of admissible exponents is downward closed (see [Angelini_Packing, Remark 4.4]), \dim_{P,\theta}^{m}\mu_f\leq s. As \mu_f is a measure on \mathbb{R}^m, \dim_{P,\theta}\mu_f=\dim_{P,\theta}^{m}\mu_f\leq s, and since s with s\alpha>\dim_{P,\theta}^{m\alpha}\mu was arbitrary, the conclusion follows.

Let 0<s/\gamma<\dim_{P,\theta}^{m/\gamma}\mu, with s<m. By definition of \dim_{P,\theta}^{m/\gamma}\mu, for \mu-a.e. x and every \epsilon>0 there exists a sequence \{\rho_k\} with \rho_k\to 0 such that

Setting r_k:=\rho_k^{1/\gamma}, this becomes

Fix x in the full-measure set above. Integrating the inequality of Lemma 3.8 against \mu and using Fubini’s theorem, for every r\in(0,1),

Along the sequence \{r_k\} the right-hand side is at most C_{s,m}\,\epsilon; hence, by Fatou’s lemma,

Note that the left-hand side no longer involves the sequence \{r_k\}, which depended on x. Since \epsilon>0 was arbitrary, by using Fubini’s theorem we have, for \mathbb{P}-a.e. \omega\in\Omega,

Fix such an \omega, let x be a point where (Proof) holds, and choose a sequence r_k\to0 realizing the \liminf. From the middle branch of \widetilde{\phi}_{r_k,\theta}^{s}, for every \delta\in[r_k,r_k^{\theta}],

whence

Hence, for every \epsilon'>0 there are arbitrarily small windows [r_k,r_k^{\theta}] on which \delta^{-s}\mu_{f_\omega}(B(f_\omega(x),\delta))<\epsilon' for all \delta\in[r_k,r_k^\theta]. Therefore s\leq\dim_{P,\theta}\mu_{f_\omega}, and letting s\to\gamma\,\dim_{P,\theta}^{m/\gamma}\mu along a countable sequence (intersecting the corresponding almost sure events) completes the proof.

Let 0<\epsilon<\alpha. As recalled in section 2, there exists M>0 such that

Moreover, by [Burrell, Theorem 3.4], we have

for all x,y\in\operatorname{supp}(\mu), where \gamma=1/\alpha.

Applying Lemma 3.6 to the Hölder condition with exponent \alpha-\epsilon, we obtain

Now, by using Remark  3.2 and letting \epsilon\to 0 yields

On the other hand, applying Lemma 3.9 with \gamma=1/\alpha gives the reverse inequality

Combining both, the result follows.

Since \operatorname{supp}(\mu_f)\subset\mathbb{R}^m, we have \dim_P\mu_f\leq \dim_A(\operatorname{supp}\mu_f)\leq m. Hence, the assumption \dim_P\mu_f=m forces \dim_A(\operatorname{supp}\mu_f)=m as well. Applying Lemma 2.7,

we obtain \dim_{P,\theta}\mu_f=m for every \theta\in(0,1].

Combining this with Lemma 3.6 and the monotonicity of \dim_{P,\theta}^t\mu in t, we obtain

for every \theta\in(0,1]. Therefore

Fix a sequence \theta_j\to 0. For each j, Lemma 3.9 applied with \gamma=1/\alpha yields

Intersecting the corresponding almost-sure events over j (a countable intersection, hence still of full probability), we obtain a set \Omega_0\subset\Omega with \mathbb{P}(\Omega_0)=1 such that the above holds for every j and every \omega\in\Omega_0.

Fix \omega\in\Omega_0. Since \dim_{P,\theta}\mu_{f_\omega}\leq \dim_P\mu_{f_\omega} for every \theta\in(0,1], we have

Letting j\to\infty and applying Lemma 3.4 together with the assumption m\alpha\leq D(\mu),

Combined with the trivial bound \dim_P\mu_{f_\omega}\leq m, this gives \dim_P\mu_{f_\omega}=m for every \omega\in\Omega_0, completing the proof.

Applying part (2) of Theorem 3.4, we have

By Theorem 2.2, \dim_P\mu_X=\dim_P^{m\alpha}\mu/\alpha almost surely, and the result follows by applying Corollary 4.3.

Fix \alpha\in (0,1), m\in\mathbb{N} such that s=\alpha m and let X:\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^m be an index-\alpha fractional Brownian motion.

Suppose first that \dim_P^s E=s, this is \dim_P X(E)=m almost surely. Fix \omega in the almost-sure event where \dim_P X_\omega(E)=m and where X_\omega is (\alpha-\epsilon')-Hölder continuous on compact sets for every \epsilon'>0. Fix \theta\in(0,1] and \epsilon>0. By Lemma 5.1, there exists \mu\in\mathcal{M}_c^+(E), which we may normalize to be a probability measure, such that \dim_P\mu_{X_\omega}>m-\epsilon. Since

Lemma 2.7 yields

On the other hand, by Lemma 3.6 applied to X_\omega with Hölder exponent \alpha-\epsilon', together with Remark  3.2 and letting \epsilon'\to 0,

Letting \epsilon\to 0 with \theta fixed, and using the trivial bound \dim_{P,\theta}^{m\alpha}\mu\leq m\alpha, we obtain

Moreover, since \dim_{P,\theta}^{m\alpha}\mu\leq\dim_{P,\theta}\mu for every \mu, letting \theta\to 0 gives

Conversely, suppose s\leq D(E). Fix \theta\in(0,1] and \delta>0. Since \theta'\mapsto\sup_\mu\dim_{P,\theta'}\mu is nondecreasing and its limit as \theta'\to 0 is D(E), we have \sup_\mu\dim_{P,\theta}\mu\geq D(E)\geq s, so there exists \mu=\mu_{\theta,\delta}\in\mathcal{M}_c^+(E), normalized to be a probability measure, with

By part (1) of Theorem 3.4 applied to \mu,

Taking the supremum over \mu\in\mathcal{M}_c^+(E) and recalling the definition of the profile of a set,

Since \theta\in(0,1] and \delta>0 were arbitrary, letting \theta\to 0 and \delta\to 0 yields \dim_P^{s}E\geq s, and the reverse inequality being trivial, completing the proof.

Since f_\omega(E)\subseteq\mathbb{R}^m, we always have \dim_P f_\omega(E)\leq m; moreover f_\omega(E) is analytic, being a continuous image of an analytic set.

Assume m\alpha\leq D(E). By Theorem 5.4, \dim_P^{m\alpha}E=m\alpha, so there exist \mu_j\in\mathcal{M}_c^+(E) with \dim_P^{m\alpha}\mu_j>m\alpha-1/j. Applying Lemma 3.9 with \theta=1 and \gamma=1/\alpha to each \mu_j, together with Remark 3.3,

almost surely.

Since \mu_{j,f_\omega} is supported on f_\omega(E), we have \dim_P f_\omega(E)\geq\dim_P\mu_{j,f_\omega}, and intersecting the countably many almost sure events yields

almost surely.

Conversely, assume \dim_P f_\omega(E)=m almost surely and fix any \omega in the corresponding event. By (?) and Lemma 3.6 applied to the \alpha-Hölder map f_\omega with \theta=1, together with Remark 3.3,

so m\alpha\leq\dim_P^{m\alpha}E\leq m\alpha; then Theorem 5.4 gives m\alpha\leq D(E).