Operator space theory from the maximal viewpoint

This follows from Haagerup’s definition of the dec-norm once one recalls Proposition 1.2.

For the first part see [P4, p. 266] (and also in [154, § 6.3]). Since M is a dual we can use the weak* topology to show that the infimum is attained. Let u\in MP(E,M). We will use Remark 3.2. Let E be an operator system. Assume u(1)=1 and hence \widetilde u(1)=1 and \|u\|_{mb}=1. If we choose \widetilde u such that \| \widetilde u \|_{mb}= 1 and a fortiori \| \widetilde u \|_{cb}= 1 then \widetilde u : A \to M is c.p. and hence m.p. by the preceding corollary. This settles the unital case. For the non-unital case on E unital, we will use a well known perturbation argument. We fix \varepsilon>0 and we choose any state f restricted to E. Let u_\varepsilon(.)=u(.)+\varepsilon f(.) 1. We define v_\varepsilon\in MP( E , M) by v_\varepsilon(.)= u_\varepsilon(1)^{-1/2} u_\varepsilon(.)u_\varepsilon(1)^{-1/2}. Since v_\varepsilon is unital, by the unital case, it admits an extension \widetilde v_\varepsilon\in MP(A , M). Then, let \widetilde {u_\varepsilon}: MP(A,M) be defined by \widetilde {u_\varepsilon}(.)= u_\varepsilon(1)^{1/2} \widetilde v_\varepsilon(.)u_\varepsilon(1)^{1/2}. We have \| { {\widetilde {u_\varepsilon} } } _{|E} -u\| \le \varepsilon. Let \widetilde u: A \to M be a pointwise weak* limit of a suitable ultrafilter refining the net ({\widetilde {u_\varepsilon} }). The map \widetilde u\in MP( A , M) is the desired extension of u.

For the “only if" part, we simply apply the preceding statement to i_F u: E \to B^{**}. For the “if part" recall that i_B: B \to B^{**} is a max-isometric *-homomorphism, and hence \|i_F u\|_{mb} =\| u\|_{mb}. Similarly, since D \otimes_{max} B \subset D \otimes_{max} B^{**} for any C^*-algebra D, we have obviously (D \otimes_{max} B^{**})_+ \cap (D \otimes_{max} B ) =(D \otimes_{max} B )_+ and hence using the notation (?) (D \otimes_{alg} B^{**})^+_{\max} \cap (D \otimes_{alg} B) =(D \otimes_{alg} B)^+_{\max} and therefore (D \otimes_{alg} B^{**})^+_{\max} \cap (D \otimes_{alg} F) =(D \otimes_{alg} F)^+_{\max}.
Thus if \widetilde u : A \to B^{**} is c.p. it is m.p. by Corollary 3.6 and its restriction to E is m.p.

See [157, Th.3.5].

See [157, Remark 4.2]. The proof is the same as that of (iv) \Rightarrow (i) in [157, Th. 2.6] applied to the class {\mathcal{F}} equal to the class of maps with mb-norm \le 1.

Since the inclusion of A in its unitization is max-isometric we may assume A unital. Since the proof is similar to that in [157] we only give a sketch.
(i) \Rightarrow (ii) : we use A=C^*(G)/ \mathcal{I} for some large enough free group G. Then we lift the restriction to E of the map u: X \to C^*(G)/ \mathcal{I}. This gives us \hat u : E \to \hat E\subset C^*(G) with \|\hat u\|_{mb} =1 lifting u_E. Reducing the range of \hat u we may assume that \hat u is bijective, and then passing to a suitable countable free subgroup of G we obtain \hat E\subset \mathscr{C} and the restriction of the quotient map C^*(G) \to C^*(G)/ \mathcal{I} gives us (\hat u)^{-1} with \|(\hat u)^{-1} \|_{mb} \le 1, whence (ii)’ and a fortiori (ii).
(ii) \Rightarrow (iii) : By [157] the algebra \mathscr{C} satisfies (iii). Using (ii) it is easy to check that any f.d. E\subset X also satisfies (iii). Equivalently X satisfies (iii).
(iii) \Rightarrow (iv) is obvious and (iv) \Rightarrow (iii) follows from an elementary reduction to the separable case, together with the fact that any separable D is a quotient of \mathscr{C}.
(iii) \Rightarrow (v) is proved using the description of the unit ball of the dual of MB(E,D) from [157].
(v) \Rightarrow (i) : Let u: X \to C/\mathcal{I} as in Definition 5.2. Theorem 4.2 tells us that u_{|E}: E \to C/\mathcal{I} admits a lifting v: E \to C with \|v\|_{mb}=\|u_{|E}\|_{mb} \le \|u\|_{mb}, then Theorem 4.1 tells us that v admits an extension \widetilde v: X \to C with \|\widetilde v\|_{mb}\le (1+\varepsilon)\|v\|_{mb}. Recall q: C \to C/\mathcal{I} denotes the quotient map. Let w^{E,\varepsilon}= (1+\varepsilon)^{-1} q \widetilde v : X \to C/\mathcal{I} (which is obviously liftable by (1+\varepsilon)^{-1} \widetilde v). Note that w^{E,\varepsilon} is equal to (1+\varepsilon)^{-1} u on the subspace E. From this follows that u is the pointwise limit of a net of maps indexed by (E,\varepsilon) (namely the maps w^{E,\varepsilon}) that are all liftable by maps with mb-norms \le \|u\|_{mb}. By Arveson’s principle (see Remark 5.3), it follows that u itself is liftable by a map with mb-norm \le \|u\|_{mb}, and we obtain (i).
This gives us the equivalence of the five first assertions. From the equivalence of (i) and (ii) (or (v)) it is clear that (i) and (vi) are equivalent.
Lastly, if X=A (separable) it is proved in [157, Th.0.13] that (iii) is equivalent to the LP of A.

Since any X\subset \mathscr{C} has the MLP, cb-maps from X to quotients have cb-liftings as required by the OLP.

By (i) \Rightarrow (v) in Theorem 5.4, Theorem 6.3 is a reformulation of Theorem 4.1.

For unital maps this is Corollary 3.9. in [157]. The case when u(1)\in C follows by a well known trick. Let \varepsilon>0 and let f be a state on E. Let u_\varepsilon(.)= u(.)+ \varepsilon f(.) 1. Note u_\varepsilon(1)\in C and is invertible. Let v_\varepsilon(.)= u_\varepsilon(1)^{-1/2} u_\varepsilon(.) u_\varepsilon(1)^{-1/2} so that v_\varepsilon(1)=1. Applying the unital case, we have a net v_i of C-valued unital m.p. maps tending pointwise weak* to v_\varepsilon. Then u_i(.)=u_\varepsilon(1)^{1/2} v_i(.) u_\varepsilon(1)^{1/2} tends weak* to u_\varepsilon. Since \lim_{\varepsilon\to 0}\|u-u_\varepsilon\|=0 the announced result follows.

Assume (i). By Theorem 3.8 (note E_1 has the MLP) there is v: E_1 \to C^{**} extending i_C u such that \|v\|_{dec}\le \|v\|_{mb}\le 1. Whence C^{**}-valued unital c.p. maps S_1,S_2 such that V: x\mapsto \left(\begin{matrix} S_1 (x) & v(x)\\ v(x^* )^* & S_2 (x) \end{matrix}\right) is in CP(E_1, C^{**}) (see Remark 3.1). Note v(1)\in C since v_{|E}=u and hence V(1)\in M_2(C). By Lemma 6.5 there is a net of m.p. maps V_i: E_1\to M_2(C) with \|V_i\|\le 1 tending pointwise weak* to V. In particular (V_i)_{12} restricted to E tends pointwise weak* to u. Passing to suitable convex hulls and using Mazur’s theorem we can find (possibly different) c.p. maps V_i with \|V_i\|\le 1 for which (V_i)_{12} restricted to E tends pointwise in norm to u. Choose then i so that \| u - {(V_i)_{12}}_{|E} \| <\varepsilon. Let then v'= (V_i)_{12} :E_1 \to C. We have \|v'_{|E}-u\|< \varepsilon and \|v'\|_{dec} \le 1 (since \|V_i\|\le 1). By the elementary perturbation argument described in [157, Rem. 3.4] there is a map v'': E_1\to C such that v''_{|E}=u with \|v''\|_{dec} \le 1+f(\varepsilon) where f(\varepsilon)\to 0 when \varepsilon\to 0. Thus we obtain (ii).
Assume (ii). By a simple ultraproduct argument involving the net of maps u_1: E_1 \to C (indexed by f.d. subspaces E_1 with E\subset E_1 \subset X and \varepsilon>0) we obtain a map \widetilde u: A \to C^{**} with \|\widetilde u\|_{dec} \le 1 extending i_C u: E \to C^{**}. Equivalently \|\widetilde u\|_{mb} \le 1 (see Theorem 3.7) and a fortiori \| i_C u \|_{mb}= \|\widetilde u_{|E}\|_{mb} \le 1. By (3.12) \| u \|_{mb}\le 1.

We first give the simple proof that (i) \Leftrightarrow (ii), then outline the proof of the other equivalences.
(i) \Rightarrow (ii) is obvious as we just observed. Conversely, if (ii) holds, we have \|u\|_{mb}=\|u\|_{cb} for any u: E \to C. Assuming C\subset B(H) we may apply this with E=C, A=B(H), and u(x)=x for x\in E. Then \|u\|_{mb}=\|u\|_{cb}=1 tells us that the max-norm on \mathscr{C} \otimes C is \le the norm induced on it by the max-norm on \mathscr{C} \otimes B(H), which is equal to the min-norm by Kirchberg’s theorem. So the latter induced norm on \mathscr{C} \otimes C is also the min-norm. It follows that the max-norm and the min-norm are identical on \mathscr{C}\otimes C. Equivalently C has the WEP, proving (ii) \Rightarrow (i).
Assume (ii). By Theorem 6.2 any u\in CB(E,C)=MB(E,C) admits an “extension" \widetilde u\in MB(F,C^{**}) with \|\widetilde u\|_{mb} \le (1+\varepsilon) \| u\|_{cb}, whence (iii). Assume (iii). By Theorem 5.4, there is a net (\widetilde u_i) in the ball of radius 1+\varepsilon in MB(F,C ) tending pointwise weak* to \widetilde u. A fortiori \|\widetilde u_i\|_{cb} \le 1+\varepsilon. Passing to convex combinations using Mazur’s theorem one gets a net (u_i) in the same cb-ball such that the restrictions ({u_i}_{|E}) converge pointwise in norm to u. Then a perturbation argument (as in the proof of Theorem 6.6) leads to (iv). Assume (iv). Fix a f.d. E\subset \mathscr{C} and u\in CB(E,C). Let E=E_0 \subset \cdots E_n\subset E_{n+1}\subset \cdots \subset \mathscr{C} be a sequence of f.d. subspaces with dense union V=\cup E_n. Let \varepsilon_n>0 be such that \prod (1+\varepsilon_n) <1+\varepsilon. By applying (iv) to each E_n we find a map \widetilde u: V \to C with \|\widetilde u\|_{cb} \le 1+\varepsilon extending u. We may then extend \widetilde u to the whole of \mathscr{C} by density of V, whence (v). Clearly (v) implies (iv) which implies (vi). By [157, Th. 21.3] (vi) and (i) are equivalent.

Let I denote the unit ball of \mathscr{C} \otimes_{\max} X. Any t\in I defines a linear map v_t: X^* \to \mathscr{C}. Let j: X^* \to \ell_\infty(I,\mathscr{C}) be the map taking \xi \in X^* to (v_t(\xi))_{t\in I}. Since \|v_t\|_{cb} =\|t\|_{\min} \le \|t\|_{\max} \le 1 we have \|j\|_{cb}\le 1. Moreover since M_n has the MLP (and is a quotient of \mathscr{C}), there is a max-isometric imbedding M_n\subset \mathscr{C} for any n, so we may use the v_t’s with range in such copies of M_n to show that the map j is completely isometric on the dual X^* (in the o.s. sense) of X.
Let s\in \mathscr{C} \otimes_{alg} X^*. Then since \mathscr{C} has the LP we know that \mathscr{C} \otimes_{\max} \ell_\infty(I,\mathscr{C}) \subset \ell_\infty(I, \mathscr{C} \otimes_{\max} \mathscr{C}) isometrically (see (iii) in Th. 4.1) and hence

where for the last equality we used the fact that [Id \otimes v_t](s) and [Id \otimes u_s](t) coincide after flipping the factors. Whence \|s\|_{\max}=\|u_s\|_{mb}. Since (by definition) Y \otimes_{\max} X^* \subset \mathscr{C} \otimes_{\max} X^* the rest is clear.

The inequality \| M_\varphi: C_\lambda^* (G) \to C_\lambda^* (G) \|_{mb} \le \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} can be proved using the Fell absorption principle by which for any \pi the map \lambda(t) \mapsto [\lambda \otimes \pi ] (t) extends to a (faithful) *-homomorphism on C_\lambda^* (G). Then using the functional f(T)=\langle \xi, T \eta\rangle and reasoning as above we obtain the inequality in question.
The converse follows from Theorem 8.2 and (2.2) since the natural morphism \pi_1: C^* (G) \to C_\lambda^* (G) has m.b. norm =1, and [M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C_\lambda^* (G)]= [M_\varphi: C_\lambda^* (G) \to C_\lambda^* (G)]\pi_1, we have \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} =\| M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C_\lambda^* (G) \|_{mb} \le \| M_\varphi: C_\lambda^* (G) \to C_\lambda^* (G) \|_{mb}.

Note that the natural map C^*(G) \to L(G) (resp. C^*(G) \to C^*_\lambda(G)) is a *-homomorphism and hence has m.b. norm =1. Thus by (2.2) \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to L(G)\|_{mb}\le \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C^*(G)\|_{mb}, and similarly with C^*_\lambda in place of L. We claim \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C^*(G)\|_{mb} \le \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} from which follows \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to L(G)\|_{mb}\le \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} (and similarly with C^*_\lambda in place of L). To prove the claim, assume \varphi(.)=\langle \xi, \pi(.) \eta\rangle. Note that t\mapsto \pi(t) \otimes \pi_u(t) defines a *-homomorphism \nu: C^*(G) \to C_\pi^*(G)\otimes_{\max} C^*(G) and the linear form f(T)=\langle \xi, T \eta\rangle has norm (or m.b. norm) \le \|\xi\|\|\eta\| from C_\pi^*(G) to \mathbb{C}. We have [M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C^*(G)]= (f\otimes Id) \nu and hence (see (2.2)) \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to C^*(G)\|_{mb} \le \|\xi\|\|\eta\|. Taking the inf over all \xi,\eta the claim follows.

Conversely let x\in \mathbb{C}[G]. Assume \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to L(G)\|_{mb} \le 1. We have by universality

and hence

and since \langle \delta_e, \lambda(t) \rho(t) \delta_e\rangle=1 for all t this is \ge |\sum x(t) \varphi(t)|, which means

This shows \|\varphi\|_{C^*(G)^*} \le1, and since B(G)=C^*(G)^* isometrically \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} \le1. By homogeneity we obtain \|\varphi\|_{B(G)} \le \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to L(G)\|_{mb}. By (2.2), \|M_\varphi: C^*(G) \to L(G)\|_{mb} is less or equal to the other norms in (i) and (iii). The proof is then completed easily.

By (?) with D={N}' and E=C and by (9.2) there is S\in N with \|S\|\| S^{-1} \|\le \|u\|_{mb} such that u_S(.)=S u(.) S^{-1} is a *-homomorphism into N. Conversely, since a *-homomorphism has unit mb-norm, and left or right multiplication by an element x\in N has mb-norm at most \|x\|, the fact that u(.)=S^{-1}u_S(.)S with S\in N gives us \|u\|_{mb} \le \|S\|\| S^{-1}\|.

Assume w c.b. Clearly w is still a unital homomorphism, and hence if it is c.b. it must be similar to a *-homomorphism whence the existence of an invertible S on H (with \|S\|\| S^{-1} \| =\|w\|_{cb}) such that x\mapsto S w(x) S^{-1} is a *-homomorphism. But restricting this to N' \otimes 1 we find that N' \ni y \mapsto S y S^{-1} is a *-homomorphism. A fortiori it is self-adjoint, which implies by a simple calculation (S y S^{-1} = (S y^* S^{-1})^* and hence S^*S y=yS^*S) that |S| \in N''=N. Now S=U|S| with U unitary and the map C\ni x \mapsto U (|S| u(x) |S|^{-1}) U^{-1} is a *-homomorphism. Since U is unitary C\ni x \mapsto (|S| u(x) |S|^{-1}) is a *-homomorphism, proving the strong similarity of u.

Conversely, if S\in N is such that C\ni x \mapsto (S u(x) S^{-1}) is a *-homomorphism denoted by u_S: C \to N, then obviously v.u_S is a (completely contractive) *-homomorphism from N'\otimes_{\max} C to B(H). Then a\otimes b \mapsto S^{-1} v.u_S (a\otimes b) S has cb-norm at most \|S\| \| S^{-1} \| on N'\otimes_{\max} C and since S commutes with v(b), we have S^{-1} v.u_S (a\otimes b) S = v.u(a\otimes b). Thus we conclude that

The converse inequality was proved in the first part. There we also proved that the inf is actually a minimum.
The last assertion follows from [smith] (see the next remark, already stated in [154, Cor. 6.23]).

Let w: N'\otimes_{\max} C \to B(H) be as in the preceding proof, so that by (?) \|w\|_{cb} \le \|w\|_{mb} \le \|u\|_{mb}. By Paulsen’s result there is S\in GL(H) such that \|w_S\|_{cb} =1 with \|S\| \|S^{-1}\| \le \|w\|_{cb}. Restricting to N'\otimes 1 as above, we see that we may assume |S|\in N and of course w_{|S|} is still unital and completely contractive (c.c.). We claim that \|u_{|S|}\|_{mb} =1. Indeed, w_{|S|} extends to a c.c. unital and hence u.c.p. map \varphi : N'\otimes_{\max} A \to B(H) (by the injectivity of B(H)). This c.p. map \varphi must be N'-bimodular since N'\otimes 1 is in its multiplicative domain (see e.g. [154, p. 107]). Let f: A \to B(H) be the map such that \varphi(x\otimes a)= x f(a) (i.e. f(a)=\varphi(1\otimes a)). The bimodularity of \varphi implies that f(a)\in (N')'=N. Since f: A \to N is a u.c.p. map between C^*-algebras, we have \|f\|_{mb}=1 (see Proposition 3.5) and since f_{|C}=u_{|S|} we find \|u_{|S|}\|_{mb} =1, proving the claim.
Conversely, if S\in N is invertible such that \|u_S\|_{mb}= 1 then as above \|u\|_{mb} \le \|S\|\| S^{-1} \| \|u_S\|_{mb}=\|S\|\| S^{-1} \|. This completes the proof.

Assume \|\delta\|_{mb} <\infty. Then by (?) we have \|Id \otimes \delta : M' \otimes_{\max} A \to M' \otimes_{\max} M\|_{cb} \le \|\delta\|_{mb} and hence \|D\|_{cb} \le \|\delta\|_{mb}. Let \Pi: M' \otimes_{\max} A \to B(H) be the continuous *-homomorphism defined by \Pi(x\otimes a)=x\pi(a). It is easy to check that D is a \Pi-derivation. By Christensen’s theorem there is T\in B(H) with \|T\|= (1/2)\|D\|_{cb} such that D(z)=[\Pi(z), T] for any z\in M' \otimes_{\max} A. Using z\in M' \otimes 1 (for which D(z)=0) we find T\in M''=M and using z\in 1 \otimes A we find \delta(a)=[\pi(a),T], i.e. \delta=\delta^T. This proves 2\inf\{\|\theta\| \mid \theta\in M, \delta=\delta^\theta\} \le 2\|T\|= \|D\|_{cb} \le \|\delta\|_{mb}. Conversely, if \theta\in M and \delta=\delta^\theta we clearly have \|\delta\|_{mb} \le 2 \|\theta\|, and hence \|\delta\|_{mb} \le 2 \inf\{\|\theta\| \mid \theta\in M, \delta=\delta^\theta\}. This proves \|D\|_{cb} = \|\delta\|_{mb} and the first equality in (9.7), the second one follows since \delta^T=\delta^\theta \Leftrightarrow T\in \theta +\pi(A)'. It also proves in passing that \inf\{\|\theta\| \mid \theta\in M, \delta=\delta^\theta\} is attained on T. The cyclic case follows by Remark 9.3.

We just set \widetilde \delta(x)=[x,T] with T attaining the infimum in (9.7).

Let t=\sum b_j \otimes x_j\in B \otimes M. We have \|t\|^2_{\min}=\| t^* t\|_{\min}= \| \sum b_i^* b_j \otimes x_i^* x_j\|_{\min}, and since the linear form x\mapsto \tau(x) is completely contractive from M to \mathbb{C}, the latter is

This settles the case of M \to L_2(\tau)_c. The case of r is similar. The case of oh follows by complex interpolation. Indeed, by [P4, p.137] when B=M_n we have (B\otimes_{\min } H_c, B\otimes_{\min } H_r)_{1/2}= B\otimes_{\min } H_{oh}. This implies that denoting by j: M \to L_2(\tau) the inclusion, the map Id_B \otimes j : B\otimes_{\min } M \to B\otimes_{\min } L_2(\tau)_{oh} has norm \le 1, since it does so for both cases c and r.

By classical interpolation theory (see e.g. [BeL]) for any interpolation pair (A_0 , A_1) we have \|A_0 \cap A_1\to (A_0 , A_1)_{1/2} \|\le 1, and hence for any B

Since (B\otimes_{\min } H_r, B\otimes_{\min } H_c)_{1/2}= B\otimes_{\min } H_{oh} when B=M_n, the result follows by (?).

To start with we claim that it suffices to prove the theorem in the finite case.
Indeed, if N\subset M is a von Neumann subalgebra admitting a c.c. projection P: M \to N we have obviously

Therefore the assumption on M is inherited by N, and in particular by N=pM for any central projection p in M. This shows that the three terms in the decomposition M=M_I\oplus M_{II}\oplus M_{III} in types I, II (semifinite) and III all inherit the assumption. The type I case is easy since it is always injective. Using the subalgebras pM with p finite, which have a weak*-dense directed union, the semifinite case is easily reduced to the finite one. Then using crossed products and Takesaki’s duality theorem as in [Ha1132, p. 198] one can treat the type III case. This proves our claim that we may assume M finite.

Assume M finite and C (F_n, M) \ge c \sqrt n for all n.
We will use the traditional notation OH_n=(\ell_2^n)_{oh}. We have a natural c.c. inclusion j_n : F_n \to OH_n (see Lemma 10.3). Let e_j (resp. t_j) be an orthonormal basis in F_n (resp. OH_n) with (say) j_n(e_j)= t_j. Let y_j\in M. Consider the map \gamma_n : OH_n \to M taking t_j to y_j. Let \alpha_n= \gamma_nj_n : F_n \to M so that a_n(e_j)= y_j. We have

Then (11.3) yields the following: for any (y_j) in M the map \gamma_n: OH_n \to M taking (t_j) to (y_j) satisfies

where c'=1/c. In other words the map w_n : \ell_2^n \to L_2(\tau) taking e_j to y_j satisfies

Since w_n is of rank at most n we have for all n>1

Therefore for any n-tuple of unitaries (y_j) in M

We then use a well known trick. Let T= \sum \bar{y_j} \otimes y_j. Note \|T\|^{2m}=\|(T^*T)^m\| and (T^*T)^m when developed is a sum of n^{2m} terms of the form \bar U\otimes U with U unitary in M.

Therefore

and hence

and letting m\to \infty we obtain

This shows that \|\sum \bar{y_j} \otimes y_j \|_{\min} =n for any n-tuple of unitaries in M and any n. This settles the case of factors, but since pM satisfies the same assumption for any central projection p\in M, the same conclusion holds holds for pM. By Haagerup’s criterion in [Ha1132, Lemma 2.3] (due to Connes [Co] for factors), M is injective. This proves the “if part". The converse holds by [HP2, Th. 4.1].

Recall \|T\|=a_1(T) \ge \cdots\ge a_n(T) and a_n(T)=\lambda_n(|T|). The polar factorization shows (as is classical) that there is a subspace F\subset H_{rc} of dimension n such that \|T(x)\| \ge a_n(T) \|x\| for any x\in F. We may assume a_n(T)>0. It follows that \|{T^{-1}}_{|T(F)} \|\le a_n(T)^{-1}. Let P: L_2(M)_{r c} \to T(F) be the orthogonal projection. Note \|P\|_{cb} \le 1 and \|{T^{-1}}_{|T(F)} \|_{cb}=\|{T^{-1}}_{|T(F)} \| by homogeneity (see Remark 10.5). We have Id_F= {T^{-1}}_{|T(F)} P k \alpha_{|F} and \|k\|_{cb}\le 1 by Lemma 10.1. Therefore

By homogeneity again, F\simeq F_n completely isometrically, so that C(F,M)=C(F_n,M) and the announced result follows.

We first claim that there is a derivation D: A \otimes 1 \to B(H)\bar\otimes M_\lambda (here for simplicity 1 denotes the unit in M_\lambda) with \|D\|_{cb}\le 4 and such that D(\lambda(g_j) ) = P_e \otimes \lambda(g_j) where P_e\in B(H) is a element of unit norm (namely P_e is the orthogonal projection onto \mathbb{C}\delta_e) and g_j are the free generators of G.

We set for any x\in A

with

By a well known operator version of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality (see e.g. [Ha1132, Lemma 2.4]) we have \|\sum b_j \otimes \alpha_j\|\le \|(b_j)\|_R \|(\alpha_j)\|_C\le 1 and \|\sum a_j \otimes \beta_j\|\le \|(a_j)\|_C\|(\beta_j)\|_R \le 1 and hence \|\Sigma\|\le 2. Therefore \|D\|_{cb} \le 4. Since \rho and \lambda commute, \rho(g_j)=a_j+b_j commutes with x\in M_\lambda which means [x,b_j]=-[x,a_j] and hence

where

In particular it is important to observe that for all x\in A

Let a_g=\rho(g) P_{H(g)}. It is easy to check that [x, a_g]=0 when x=\lambda(g') with g'\not=g and =P_e when x=\lambda(g) so that

This proves the claim.
Consider a factorization of Id_{E_n} through M of the form E_n {\buildrel {w}\over \rightarrow} M {\buildrel {v}\over \rightarrow} E_n.

Let \delta: A\otimes 1_M \to B(H)\bar\otimes M be the derivation defined by

By our assumption \|\delta\|_{mb} \le c\|\delta\|_{cb}\le c\|w\|_{cb} \|D\|_{cb}\le 4c\|w\|_{cb}.

By Corollary 9.8 our derivation \delta admits an extension \hat \delta: B(H) \otimes 1_M \to B(H)\bar \otimes M with

Then \hat\delta(\lambda(g_j) \otimes 1_M)=\delta(\lambda(g_j) \otimes 1_M)=P_e \otimes w( \lambda(g_j)), and hence \hat\delta(x \otimes 1_M) =P_e \otimes w( x) for all x\in E_n. Let f\in B(H)^* be of unit norm such that f(P_e)=1. We may view the map f\otimes v as one from {B(H) \bar\otimes M } to {E_n } with c.b. norm \le \|v\|_{cb} since obviously \|f: B(H) \to \mathbb{C}\|_{cb}=1. Let w': E_n \to B(H) and v': B(H) \to E_n be defined by w'(x)= x\otimes 1_M and let v'(b) = [f \otimes v ]\hat \delta(b\otimes 1). Then v'w'(x) =vw(x) for all x\in E_n. Thus v'w' =Id_{E_n} is a factorization through B(H) and hence if c=\| \delta\|_{mb} \|\delta\|^{-1}_{cb}

Taking the infimum over v,w we obtain

and we conclude by (12.2).

Lastly, assume now that G=\mathbb{F}_\infty. Let (g_j) denote the free generators of \mathbb{F}_\infty. Then (?), (?) and (?) can still be used to define the desired derivation, using for (g_1,\cdots,g_n) the first free generators of \mathbb{F}_\infty.

By the closed graph theorem, if the (closed) subspaces of derivations in MB(A,B(H)\bar \otimes M) and CB(A,B(H)\bar \otimes M) coincide, they must have equivalent norms, and then the corollary follows from (12.3) by the last assertion of Theorem 12.3.

Since W is WEP we have \|\hat u\|_{mb} =\|\hat u\|_{cb} for any \hat u\in CB( \mathscr{C} , W). Let q: W \to N be a quotient map so that u=q\hat u. Then \|u\|_{mb} \le \|q\|_{mb} \|\hat u\|_{mb} \le \|\hat u\|_{cb}. When u is associated to a derivation \delta: \mathscr{C} \to B(H)\bar \otimes M as in (?), we have clearly \|\delta\|_{mb} \le \|u\|_{mb}, so this gives us \|\delta\|_{mb} \le \|\hat u\|_{cb}. Taking Remark 2.4 into account, we can select a u associated to a c.b. \delta with \|\delta\|_{mb}=\infty and the corollary follows.

Since injective von Neumann algebras have the WEP, the equality \|u\|_{mb}=\|u\|_{cb} follows from (i) \Rightarrow (ii) in Theorem 6.7. Strong similarity follows by Theorem 9.1.
Assume M\subset B(H). Consider a c.b. derivation \delta:A \to M relative to \pi. Viewing it as B(H)-valued we find \|\delta\|_{cb}=2\min\{\|T\| \mid T\in B(H) \ \delta=\delta^T\}. Let P: B(H) \to M be a conditional expectation projecting B(H) onto M. Note \delta=\delta^T implies \delta=\delta^{P(T)}, with P(T)\in M and \|P(T)\|\le \|T\|. Therefore by (9.7) \|\delta\|_{mb} \le \|\delta\|_{cb} and the rest is clear.

Let H=\ell_2. Assume all c.b. homomorphisms with range B(H) \bar\otimes {\cal M} are m.b. This assumption on B(H) \bar\otimes {\cal M} obviously passes to M_2(B(H) \bar\otimes {\cal M}). It follows (see (?)) that all c.b. derivations with range in B(H) \bar\otimes {\cal M} are m.b. which implies by an elementary argument that the c.b. and m.b. norms must be equivalent on the space of derivations considered in Theorem 13.3. Then {\cal M} is injective by Corollary 12.4 and Theorem 11.2.
Conversely, if {\cal M} is injective so is N=B(H) \bar\otimes {\cal M} so the converse holds by Proposition 13.1.

The first two assertions are equivalent by Theorem 9.1. Assume (i). By the structure theory of von Neumann algebras (see e.g. [bla, III.1.4.1] and [bla, III.1.5.6]), we have a decomposition of the form M=M_1\oplus M_2 with M_2 finite and M_1 properly infinite, which implies M_1=B(\ell_2)\bar\otimes M_1. Clearly each of M_1, M_2 inherits the property (i). By Theorem 13.3 M_1 is injective, which gives us (iii). Assume (iii). Then M_1 satisfies (i) by Proposition 13.1 and M_2 does by Vasilescu and Zsidó’s result in [VZ]. Then (i) follows. Thus (i), (ii) and (iii) are equivalent.
We already know (iv) \Leftrightarrow (v) by Theorem 9.7. Clearly M satisfies (iii) \Leftrightarrow M_2(M) satisfies (iii) \Leftrightarrow M_2(M) satisfies (ii) and the latter implies that M satisfies (iv) (see (?)). This shows (iii) \Rightarrow (iv). Assume (iv). Note that for any decomposition M=M_1\oplus M_2 the inclusion M_1\subset M is max-isometric, so that M_1 inherits (iv) from M. Let M_1=B(\ell_2)\bar\otimes N be the properly infinite part of M. By Corollary 12.4 and Theorem 11.2 N and hence M must be injective, which means that (iii) holds. Thus (iv) \Leftrightarrow (iii).