While the exact definition is not immediately straightforward, intuitively the essential supremum of a function is the smallest value that is greater than or equal to the function values everywhere while ignoring what the function does at a set of points of measure zero. For example, if one takes the function that is equal to zero everywhere except at where then the supremum of the function equals one. However, its essential supremum is zero since (under theLebesgue measure) one can ignore what the function does at the single point where is peculiar. The essential infimum is defined in a similar way.
As is often the case in measure-theoretic questions, the definition of essential supremum and infimum does not start by asking what a function does at points (that is, theimage of), but rather by asking for the set of points where equals a specific value (that is, thepreimage of under).
Let be areal valuedfunction defined on a set Thesupremum of a function is characterized by the following property: forall and if for some we have forall then More concretely, a real number is called anupper bound for if for all that is, if the setisempty. Letbe the set of upper bounds of and define theinfimum of the empty set by Then the supremum of isBy definition, if the set of upper bounds is empty, we have.
Now assume in addition that is ameasure space and, for simplicity, assume that the function ismeasurable. Similar to the supremum, the essential supremum of a function is characterised by the following property: for-almost all and if for some we have for-almost all then More concretely, a number is called anessential upper bound of if the measurable set is a set of-measure zero,[a] That is, if for-almost all in Letbe the set of essential upper bounds. Then theessential supremum is defined similarly asif and otherwise.
Exactly in the same way one defines theessential infimum as the supremum of theessential lower bounds, that is,if the set of essential lower bounds is nonempty, and as otherwise; again there is an alternative expression as (with this being if the set is empty).
On the real line consider theLebesgue measure and its corresponding𝜎-algebra Define a function by the formula
The supremum of this function (largest value) is 5, and the infimum (smallest value) is −4. However, the function takes these values only on the sets and respectively, which are of measure zero. Everywhere else, the function takes the value 2. Thus, the essential supremum and the essential infimum of this function are both 2.
As another example, consider the functionwhere denotes therational numbers. This function is unbounded both from above and from below, so its supremum and infimum are and respectively. However, from the point of view of the Lebesgue measure, the set of rational numbers is of measure zero; thus, what really matters is what happens in the complement of this set, where the function is given as It follows that the essential supremum is while the essential infimum is
On the other hand, consider the function defined for all real Its essential supremum is and its essential infimum is
Lastly, consider the functionThen for any and so and
If then and otherwise, if has measure zero then[1]
If and are measurable, then
and
If and are measurable and if almost everywhere, then
and
If the essential supremums of two functions and are both nonnegative, then
The essential supremum of a function is not just the infimum of the essential lower bounds, but also their minimum. A similar result holds for the essential infimum.
Given ameasure space thespace consisting of all of measurable functions that are bounded almost everywhere is aseminormed space whoseseminormis the essential supremum of a function's absolute value when[b]
^For nonmeasurable functions the definition has to be modified by assuming that is contained in a set of measure zero. Alternatively, one can assume that the measure iscomplete.