## REGULARITY OF POLYNOMIALS IN FREE VARIABLES

## IAN CHARLESWORTH AND DIMITRI SHLYAKHTENKO

Abstract. We show that the spectral measure of any non-commutative polynomial of a non-commutative n -tuple cannot have atoms if the free entropy dimension of that n -tuple is n (see also work of Mai, Speicher, and Weber). Under stronger assumptions on the n -tuple, we prove that the spectral measure is not singular, and measures of intervals surrounding any point may not decay slower than polynomially as a function of the interval's length.

## 1. Introduction.

It was shown in [SS13] that if y , . . . , y 1 n are free self-adjoint non-commutative random variables and P is any self-adjoint non-commutative polynomial in n indeterminates, then the spectral measure of y = P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) cannot have atoms, unless P is constant. This in particular implies that a polynomial of n semicircular elements cannot have atoms. When applied to random matrix theory, this shows that if Y , . . . , Y 1 n are independent Gaussian Random Matrices, then the eigenvalues of P Y , . . . , Y ( 1 N ) exhibit a very weak form of repulsion: the expected proportion of the number of eigenvalues in any interval [ a, b ] goes to zero with N as the size of the interval shrinks.

Statements of this kind can be considered to be part of the study of consequences of regularity assumptions on non-commutative transformations, which is of significant interest due to, for example, the results of [GS12]. Since [SS13], there have been important advances in this direction. Very recently, Figalli and Guionnet [GF14] have used transport maps to give a full picture of the behavior of eigenvalues of P Y , . . . , Y ( 1 n ) under the assumption that P is close to the identity transformation. Finally, Mai, Speicher and Weber [MSW15] have been able able to obtain a regularity result for p y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) in absence of freeness assumption and beyond the perturbative regime. While initially requiring a stronger assumption, they were also able to give a proof of the following theorem using their methods after seeing an early version of our note; our proof appears in the next section.

Theorem. Assume that Voiculescu's free entropy dimension [Voi94, Voi98] δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n . Then for any self-adjoint non-constant non-commutative polynomial P , the spectral measure of y = P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) has no atoms. In particular, δ ∗ ( y ) = 1 .

The assumption of the theorem is satisfied in each of the following cases:

- (1) If y j are freely independent and each has non-atomic distribution (compare [SS13]). Indeed, in this case δ ∗ ( y j ) = 1 and so by free independence δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = ∑ δ ∗ ( y j ) = n . In particular, this holds if y , . . . , y 1 n are a free semicircular family.
- (2) If Φ ( ∗ y , . . . , y 1 n ) &lt; + ∞ .
- (3) If Voiculescu's microstates free entropy [Voi94] χ y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) or non-microstates free entropy [Voi98] χ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) are finite, or if the microstates free entropy dimension δ y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) = n . Indeed, in all of these cases δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n (making use of the inequality between microstates and nonmicrostates free entropy proved in [BCG03]).

It is not hard to see that the hypothesis of this theorem is optimal. Indeed, for a free n -tuple y , . . . , y 1 n in which the law of y 1 has a single atom of weight λ and the laws of y , . . . , y 2 n are non-atomic, one has δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n -λ 2 .

We also prove that if δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n , then there can be no algebraic relations between convergent power series in y , . . . , y 1 n . This was proved under stronger assumptions by Dabrowski (see Lemma 37 in [Dab10]); a version for polynomials appears in [MSW15].

Research supported by NSF grants DMS-1161411 and DMS-1500035, and NSERC award PGS-6799-438440-2013.

Our proof uses ideas from L 2 -homology going back to the second author's joint work with Connes [CS05] to give an alternate proof of the key lemma in [MSW15]. The remainder of the proof is essentially the same as in [MSW15].

In Section 3, we demonstrate that if y ∈ M has no atoms and is algebraic (i.e., has spectral measure with algebraic Cauchy transform), then χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ . The argument hinges on work of Anderson and Zeitouni in [AZ06], and in particular Theorem 2.9 of that paper, which controls the density of the spectral measure of such a variable y . This leads us to the following result:

Corollary. Assume that y , . . . , y 1 n are free, algebraic, and χ y ( j ) &gt; -∞ for 1 ≤ j ≤ n . Then if y = P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) with P a non-constant self-adjoint polynomial, χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ .

In the final section of this paper, we show that under some stronger assumptions, such as the existence of a dual system, the spectral measure of y = P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) cannot be purely singular with respect to Lebesgue measure, and in certain cases such as when y is a monomial, must be absolutely continuous. Additionally, we demonstrate that under the same assumption of a dual system, the spectral measure of y must not decay at a rate slower than polynomially in the neighbourhood of any fixed point.

## 2. Absence of Atoms and Zero Divisors.

2.1. Non-commutative polynomials, power series and difference quotients. If M is an algebra, u, v ∈ M and T is an element of an M,M -bimodule, then we use the notation ( u ⊗ v )# T = uTv . We view M ⊗ M as an M,M -bimodule as follows: for a ⊗ b ∈ M ⊗ M u,v , ∈ M , set

$$( u \otimes v ) \# ( a \otimes b ) = u a \otimes b v.$$

We denote by C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] the algebra of non-commuting polynomials in n indeterminates X ,. . . , X 1 n . We denote by ∂ j Voiculescu's difference quotient derivations [Voi98] with values in C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] ⊗ C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] , determined by ∂ X j i = δ i = j 1 ⊗ 1 .

We denote by C 〈 X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R 〉 the completion of C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] in the norm

We will also write

$$\left \| \sum _ { N } \sum _ { j _ { 1 }, \dots, j _ { N } = 1 } ^ { n } \alpha _ { N ; j _ { 1 }, \dots, j _ { N } } X _ { j _ { 1 } } \cdots X _ { j _ { N } } \right \| _ { R } = \sum _ { N } \sum _ { j _ { 1 }, \dots, j _ { N } = 1 } ^ { n } | \alpha _ { N ; j _ { 1 }, \dots, j _ { N } } | \, R ^ { N }.$$

$$\mathcal { A } [ X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ; R ] = \bigcup _ { R ^ { \prime } > R } \mathbb { C } \langle X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ; R \rangle$$

for the algebra of power series with norm strictly bigger than R . Of course, if y , . . . , y 1 n are elements of any Banach algebra M and max j ‖ y j ‖ &lt; R , then there is a unique homomorphism from A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] which sends X j to y j , j = 1 , . . . , n . For P ∈ A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] , we write P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) for the image of P under this homomorphism.

It is not hard to see that ∂ j extends to an (unbounded) derivation

$$\partial _ { j } \colon \mathcal { A } [ X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ; R ] \to \mathcal { A } [ X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ; R ] \hat { \otimes } \mathcal { A } [ X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ; R ],$$

↦

where ˆ ⊗ denotes the projective tensor product. Likewise, if B is any Banach bimodule over C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] for which the right and left actions of X j are bounded operators of norm at most R , then # extends to an action of A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] ˆ ⊗A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] on B . In particular, if Q is any element of the space L 1 ( L 2 ( M )) of trace-class operators on M , then P → ∂ j ( P )# Q extends to a map defined on A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] .

Let N : A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] → A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] be given by N P = ∑ n j =1 ∂ P j # X j . Thus N is a kind of number operator, multiplying a monomial by its degree.

We note that the formula

$$\phi _ { t } ( P ) = \sum _ { k \geq 0 } \mathcal { N } ^ { k } ( 2 \pi i \ t ) ^ { k } / k!$$

gives rise to an automorphism of A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] which multiplies a monomial of degree d by exp(2 πi t d ) .

2.2. Algebraic relations and Hochschild cycles. The following lemma shows that algebraic relations in the algebra generated by y , . . . , y 1 n produce Hochschild cycles:

Lemma 1. Suppose that P ∈ A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] and suppose that for some self-adjoint elements y , . . . , y 1 n ∈ ( M,τ ) with max ‖ y j ‖ &lt; R and u, v ∈ M , ( u ⊗ v )#( P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) ⊗ 1 -1 ⊗ P y , . . . , y ( 1 n )) = 0 . Let T i = ( ∂ P i )( y , . . . , y 1 n ) ∈ M ⊗ M . Then

$$\sum ( u \otimes v ) \# T _ { i } \# ( y _ { i } \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes y _ { i } ) = 0.$$

Thus if we put for y, y ′ ∈ M Jy J a , ∗ ( ⊗ b J ) ( y ′ ) ∗ J = ay ⊗ y b ′ , the identity

$$\sum [ u T _ { i } v, J y _ { i } ^ { * } J ] = 0$$

holds.

Proof. Note that

$$( u \otimes v ) \# \sum T _ { i } ( y _ { i } \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes y _ { i } ) = ( u \otimes v ) \# ( P ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes P ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) ) = 0,$$

which gives the first equation. The second equation follows from the definition of the action of Jy J ∗ i and commutation of the variables u, v with the variables Jy J ∗ j , j = 1 , . . . , n . /square

Let δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) be Voiculescu's non-microstates free entropy dimension. Denote by FR = FR L ( 2 ( M )) the space of finite-rank operators on L 2 ( M ) . Let ∆( y , . . . , y 1 n ) be the quantity introduced in [CS05]:

$$\Delta ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = n - \dim _ { M \otimes M } \overline { \{ ( T _ { 1 }, \dots, T _ { n } ) \in F R ( L ^ { 2 } ( M ) ) \, \colon \sum [ T _ { j }, J y _ { j } ^ { * } J ] = 0 \} },$$

where the closure is taken in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm.

Let us denote by L 1 = L 1 ( L 2 ( M )) the space of trace-class operators on L 2 ( M ) . Let

$$\Delta _ { 1 } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = n - \dim _ { M \diamondsuit M } \overline { \{ ( T _ { 1 }, \dots, T _ { n } ) \in \mathcal { L } ^ { 1 } ( L ^ { 2 } ( M ) ) \colon \sum [ T _ { j }, J y _ { j } ^ { * } J ] = 0 \} },$$

where once again the closure is taken in the Hilbert-Schmidt norm. Clearly, ∆ 1 ≤ ∆ . By [CS05, Lemma 4.1 and Theorem 4.4] we have inequalities

$$\delta ^ { * } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq \Delta ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq n.$$

The same theorem (with exactly the same proof) shows that also δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) ≤ ∆ ( 1 y , . . . , y 1 n ) (indeed, the only change is in the Lemma 4.2, which obviously works if we replace FR by L 1 ). Thus

$$\delta ^ { * } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq \Delta _ { 1 } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq \Delta ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq n.$$

In particular, if δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n , then ∆( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n , which implies that

$$\overline { \{ ( T _ { 1 }, \dots, T _ { n } ) \in \mathcal { L } ^ { 1 } ( L ^ { 2 } ( M ) ) \colon \sum [ T _ { j }, J y _ { j } ^ { * } J ] = 0 \} } = \{ 0 \}.$$

We record this as:

Corollary 2. [CS05] Let M = W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) . Assume that δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n . Then the only trace-class operators R j ∈ L 1 ( L 2 ( M,τ )) , j = 1 , . . . , n , that satisfy

$$\sum [ R _ { i }, J y _ { i } ^ { * } J ] = 0$$

$$\ a r e \ R _ { 1 } = R _ { 2 } = \dots = R _ { n } = 0.$$

## 2.3. Absence of zero divisors and algebraic relations.

/negationslash

Theorem 3. Let y , . . . , y 1 n ∈ M be self-adjoint elements for which δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n . Assume that for some P ∈ C [ X,.. . , X n ] and some projection 0 = p ∈ W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) , P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) · p = 0 . Then P = 0 .

/negationslash

Proof. Assume for contradiction that P = 0 ; obviously, P is not constant. We may further assume that P is the smallest degree non-constant polynomial with the property that P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) · p = 0 .

Because M is a tracial von Neumann algebra, the left and right support projections of P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) are equal; thus for some projection q 1 with the same trace as p , q 1 P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) = 0 .

We apply Lemma 1 with u = q 1 , v = p to conclude that if we set R j = ( u ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ v )#( ∂ P j )( y , . . . , y 1 n ) , then ∑ [ q R p, Jy 1 j ∗ j J ] = 0 . Then Corollary 2 implies that R j = 0 for all j ; in other words,

$$( 2. 2 ) & & ( q _ { 1 } \otimes 1 + 1 \otimes p ) \partial _ { j } ( P ) ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = 0.$$

Let

$$\Delta _ { j, q _ { 1 } } ( P ) = ( \tau \otimes 1 ) \left ( ( q _ { 1 } \otimes 1 ) \# \partial _ { j } ( P ) \right ) \in \mathbb { C } [ X _ { 1 }, \dots, X _ { n } ].$$

Then ∆ j,q 1 ( P )( y , . . . , y 1 n ) p = 0 , but the degree of ∆ j,q 1 ( P ) is smaller than that of P . It follows that ∆ j,q 1 P = 0 or that P is linear. In the former case, let X i 1 · · · X i s be a highest-degree term in P with a nonzero coefficient, α . Then applying our proof recursively, we obtain projections q , q 1 2 , . . . , q s of trace equal to p , so that (∆ i s ,q s ◦ · · · ◦ ∆ i 1 ,q 1 )( P ) = α ∏ τ ( q j ) = ατ p ( ) s , contradicting ∆ i 1 ,q 1 ( P ) = 0 . If P is linear, then ∆ j,q 1 ( P ) does not depend on X ,. . . , X 1 n and so ∆ j,q 1 ( P )( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = 0 implies that P is constant. /square

Theorem 4. Let y , . . . , y 1 n ∈ M be self-adjoint elements satisfying max j ‖ y j ‖ &lt; R and δ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n . Assume that for some P ∈ A [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ; R ] , P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) = 0 . Then P = 0 .

Proof. Assume for contradiction that P = 0 . Obviously, P is not constant.

/negationslash

We apply Lemma 1 with u = v = 1 : if R j = ( ∂ P j )( y , . . . , y 1 n ) , then ∑ [ R , Jy j ∗ j J ] = 0 . Thus Corollary 2 implies that R j = 0 for all j ; in other words,

$$\partial _ { j } ( P ) ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = 0$$

It follows that also N P = ∑ j ∂ P j # X j satisfies

$$\mathcal { N } P ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = 0.$$

Hence if φ t is given by (2.1), then

$$\phi _ { t } ( P ) ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = 0.$$

Thus

$$\int _ { 0 } ^ { 1 } \exp ( - 2 \pi i \ m \ t ) \phi _ { t } ( P ) ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) = 0, \quad \forall m > 0. \quad \begin{array} { c } \forall m > 0. \end{array} \end{array} \quad \forall m > 0. \quad \begin{array} { c } \forall m > 0. \end{array} \end{array} \quad \begin{array} { c } \forall m > 0. \end{array} \end{array}$$

Thus if we write P ( m ) for the sum of degree m terms of P , then P ( m ) ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = 0 , for each m &gt; 0 . But then we may use Theorem 3 with p = 1 to conclude that P ( m ) = 0 for all m&gt; 0 and that P = 0 . /square

2.4. Further questions. Assume now that z , . . . , z 1 m ∈ M are self-adjoint, but make no assumptions on whether they generate M or not. Put

$$\Delta _ { M } ( z _ { 1 }, \dots, z _ { m } ) = m - \dim _ { M \otimes M ^ { o } } \overline { \left \{ ( T _ { 1 }, \dots, T _ { m } ) \in F R ( L ^ { 2 } ( M ) ) ^ { m } \, \colon \sum [ T _ { j }, J z _ { j } ^ { * } J ] = 0 \right \} } ^ { H S }.$$

Conjecture 5. Let y , . . . , y 1 n ∈ M be self-adjoint elements so that M = W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) . (a) Let P , . . . , P 1 m ∈ C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] be polynomials. Let z j = P j ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) , j = 1 , . . . , m . Assume finally that M = W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) . Assume that ∆ M ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = n . Then exactly one of the following statements holds:

- (i) ∆ M ( z , . . . , z 1 m ) ≤ m -1 ; or
- (ii) ∆ M ( z , . . . , z 1 m ) = m .

Moreover, if (b) holds and χ ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) &gt; -∞ then also χ ∗ ( z , . . . , z 1 m ) &gt; -∞ .

(b) Let N ≥ 1 be fixed, and let P ij ∈ C [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ] , 1 ≤ i, j, ≤ N . Let y = ( P ij ( y , . . . , y 1 n )) ij ∈ M N × N ( M ) , and assume that y = y ∗ . Then any atom of the spectral measure of y must have normalized trace in the set { 0 1 , /N,. . . , N/N } .

Part (b) above is known to hold in the special case that y , . . . , y 1 n are a free semi-circular family; see [SS13].

## 3. Algebraicity and Free Entropy.

Lemma 6. Suppose that y = y ∗ ∈ ( M,τ ) is an element of a von Neumann probability space. Further assume that the spectral distribution of y is Lebesgue absolutely continuous, with density f . Lastly, suppose that f ∈ L p ( R ) for some p &gt; 1 . Then χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ .

Proof. Using interpolation and the fact that ‖ f ‖ 1 = 1 , we may assume that p &lt; 2 . For a single variable, we know by [Voi93] that the free entropy satisfies

$$\chi ( x ) = \iint \log | s - t | \ d \mu ( s ) \, d \mu ( t ) + C,$$

for C constant, so it suffices to bound the integral. Let L t ( ) := χ ( -4 M, M 4 ) log | t | , where M is large enough that the support of µ is contained in ( -M,M ) . Then we have for s ∈ R ,

$$f ( s ) \int f ( t ) \log | s - t | \, d t = f ( s ) \int f ( t ) L ( s - t ) \, d t = f ( s ) ( f * L ) ( s ).$$

We compute:

$$\left | \iint \log | t - s | \, d \mu ( t ) \, d \mu ( s ) \right | & = \left | \int f ( s ) \int f ( t ) \log | s - t | \, d t \, d s \right | \\ & = \left | \int f ( s ) ( f * L ) ( s ) \, d s \right | \\ & \leq \| f \cdot ( f * L ) \| _ { 1 } \\ & \leq \| f \| _ { p } \, \| f * L \| _ { q } \,, \\. + \frac { 1 } { 2 }. \ h v \, \text{Holder} ^ { s \text{ inequality} \colon note that } a \ > \, 2 \, \sin \, n \ < \, 2. \ \text{It suffices. now.}$$

where 1 = 1 p + 1 q , by Hölder's inequality; note that q &gt; 2 since p &lt; 2 . It suffices, now, to show that f /star L ∈ L q ( R ) ; for this, we appeal to Young's inequality. Indeed, if s = q 2 &gt; 1 , then 1 + 1 q = 1 p + 1 s and so we have

$$\left \| f \ast L \right \| _ { q } \leq \left \| f \right \| _ { p } \left \| L \right \| _ { s }.$$

Yet ‖ L ‖ s &lt; ∞ for any 1 ≤ s &lt; ∞ , so we conclude | χ x ( ) | &lt; ∞ .

/square

Suppose that y = y ∗ ∈ M is algebraic, in the sense that its spectral measure µ has algebraic Cauchy transform. Assume further that µ has no atoms. It was shown in [AZ06, Theorem 2.9] that such a measure µ has density f which fails to exist at at most finitely many points, and for some d &gt; 0 and every a ∈ R satisfies

$$\lim _ { x \to a } ( x - a ) ^ { 1 - d } f ( x ) < \infty.$$

In particular, if 1 &lt; p &lt; (1 -d ) -1 , we have f ∈ L p ( R ) and so Lemma 6 leads us to conclude χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ .

Corollary 7. Assume that y , . . . , y 1 n are free, algebraic, and χ y ( j ) &gt; -∞ for 1 ≤ j ≤ n . Then if y = P y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) with P a non-constant polynomial, χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ .

Proof. It was shown by Anderson in [A14] that the freeness and algebraicity of y , . . . , y 1 n is enough to guarantee that y is algebraic. Freeness and the fact that χ y ( j ) &gt; -∞ together with Theorem 3 allow us to conclude that the spectral measure of y has no atoms. Following the above discussion, we conclude χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ . /square

It is tempting to conjecture that if y , . . . , y 1 n satisfy χ y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) &gt; -∞ (where we use Voiculescu's microstates free entropy, [Voi94]) and y = p y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) is a non-constant polynomial, then also χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ . We point out that this is true assuming that p is sufficiently close to a polynomial of degree 1 . For a non-commutative polynomial p let us write a i 1 ,...,i n for the coefficient of the monomial y i 1 · · · y i n in p :

Proposition 8. Assume that χ y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) &gt; -∞ . Fix d and n . Then there exists an /epsilon1 &gt; 0 so that if p y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) is a self-adjoint polynomial of degree d for which

$$\lambda _ { \quad \sum _ { k \geq 2 } \sum _ { i _ { 1 }, \dots, i _ { k } = 1 } ^ { n } | a _ { i _ { 1 }, \dots, i _ { k } } | ^ { 2 } } < \epsilon \sum _ { j } | a _ { j } | ^ { 2 }$$

and y = p y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) , then

$$\chi ( y ) > - \infty.$$

Proof. We note first that we can assume that p has no constant term, since this has no effect on the free entropy of y . Let δ = ∑ j | a j | 2 . We note that by Voiculescu's change of variable formula, χ y , . . . , y ( 1 n ) is unchanged if we replace y j by ∑ i T ij y i , where ( T ij ) is any orthogonal matrix. We may thus assume that a j = 0 unless j = 1 and that | a 1 | 2 = δ . By multiplying p by δ -1 (which changes the free entropy of y by an finite additive constant) we may assume that a 1 = 1 and ∑ n i 1 ,...,i k =1 | a i 1 ,...,i k | 2 &lt; /epsilon1 .

Next, we set q 1 ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = p and let q j ( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = y j for j = 2 , . . . , n . Then by the implicit function theorem for non-commutative power series (see e.g. [GS12]) we know that as long as /epsilon1 is sufficiently small, there exist non-commutative power series f , . . . , f 1 n so that

$$t _ { j } = q _ { j } ( f _ { 1 } ( t _ { 1 }, \dots, t _ { n } ), \dots, f _ { n } ( t _ { 1 }, \dots, t _ { n } ) )$$

$$s _ { j } = f _ { j } ( q _ { 1 } ( s _ { 1 }, \dots, s _ { n } ), \dots, q _ { n } ( s _ { 1 }, \dots, s _ { n } ) )$$

$$\begin{smallmatrix} \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \\ \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \\ \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \cdot \end{smallmatrix}$$

for all j and any operators t 1 , . . . , t n and s , . . . , s 1 n of norm at most 1 1 max . j ‖ y j ‖ . Voiculescu's change of variables formula for free entropy [Voi94] implies that

$$\chi ( q _ { 1 } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ), \dots, q _ { n } ( y _ { 1 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) ) > - \infty.$$

But then

$$- \infty < \chi ( y, y _ { 2 }, \dots, y _ { n } ) \leq \chi ( y ) + \chi ( y _ { 2 } ) + \dots + \chi ( y _ { n } )$$

which implies that χ y ( ) &gt; -∞ .

/square

## 4. Properties of Spectral Measures.

4.1. Non-singularity. For A an algebra, we denote the flip operation on A as follows: given a, b ∈ A , set ( a ⊗ b ) σ = b ⊗ a , and extend this linearly to A ⊗ A . We also maintain the notation ( a ⊗ b )# z = azb for a, b, z ∈ A .

Lemma 9. Let x ∈ B H ( ) be a self-adjoint operator, and assume that the spectral measure of x is not Lebesgue absolutely continuous. Then there exists a sequence T n of finite-rank operators satisfying the following properties: (i) 0 ≤ T n ≤ 1 ; (ii) for a nonzero spectral projection p of x , T n → p weakly; (iii) ‖ [ T , x n ] ‖ 1 → 0 . Moreover, if the absolutely continuous component of the spectral measure of x is zero, then p can be chosen to be 1 .

Proof. Let p be a nonzero spectral projection of x corresponding to a subset of R having Lebesgue measure zero. By replacing x with pxp , we may assume that x has singular spectral measure. In this case, by a result of Voiculescu (see Theorem 4.5 in [Voi79]; note that as remarked at the bottom of page 5 of that article, C -1 = C 1 and so k -1 = k 1 ; in this particular case the result essentially goes back to Kato [Kat66]), there exist 0 ≤ T n ≤ 1 pH with the property that T n → 1 pH weakly in B pH ( ) and ‖ [ x, T n ] ‖ 1 → 0 . /square

Lemma 10. Let Alg( y , . . . , y 1 n ) = A be a ∗ -algebra with y i = y ∗ i , y ∈ A a polynomial, and τ a faithful trace on A . Suppose that y , . . . , y 1 n are algebraically free, and for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n let ∂ i : A → A ⊗ A be the derivation given by ∂ i ( y j ) = δ j = i 1 ⊗ 1 . Then y ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 ˆ i , . . . , y n ) if and only if

$$( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# y ^ { * } = 0.$$

Moreover, if ( ∂ y i ) σ # y ∗ = 0 for every 1 ≤ i ≤ n , then y ∈ C .

Proof. One direction is immediate as Alg( y , . . . , y 1 ˆ i , . . . , y n ) ⊆ ker ∂ i .

Let N i : A → A be the number operator associated to y i , the linear map which multiplies each monomial by its y i -degree. Observe that

$$( \partial _ { i } y ) \# y _ { i } = \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( y ),$$

as each monomial m in y contributes ∑ m ay b = i ( a ⊗ b )# y i = N i ( m ) .

/negationslash

Suppose, then, that ( ∂ y i ) σ # y ∗ = 0 , so y i ( ∂ y i ) σ # y ∗ = 0 as well. Let ϕ λ : A → A be the algebra homomorphism given by ϕ λ ( y i ) = λy i , ϕ λ ( y j ) = y j for j = i , which exists as y , . . . , y 1 n are algebraically free. We compute the following:

$$0 = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } ( 0 ) = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } \left ( y _ { i } ( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# y ^ { * } \right ) = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } \left ( y ^ { * } ( \partial _ { i } y ) \# y _ { i } \right ) = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } \left ( y ^ { * } \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( y ) \right ).$$

Now, suppose deg y i ( y ) = d , and take x, z ∈ A so that x is y i -homogeneous of degree d , deg y i ( z ) &lt; d , and y = x + z . Then:

$$0 = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } \left ( y ^ { * } \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( y ) \right ) = \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } ( d x ^ { * } x ) + \tau \circ \varphi _ { \lambda } ( z ^ { * } \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( y ) + x ^ { * } \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( z ) ) = d \lambda ^ { 2 d } \tau ( x ^ { * } x ) + O ( \lambda ^ { 2 d - 1 } ).$$

Thus dλ 2 d τ ( x x ∗ ) = 0 , and as τ is faithful, either x = 0 (in which case y = 0 ) or d = 0 (in which case deg y i ( y ) = 0 ). Either way, y ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 ˆ i , . . . , y n ) .

$$\stackrel { \dots } { \text{Repeated application of the above yields the final claim.} } & & \square$$

Theorem 11. Let y = y ∗ ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 n ) ⊂ W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 m ) = M be a non-constant polynomial in a W ∗ -probability space and assume that there exists a dual system to y , . . . , y 1 m , i.e., operators R j ∈ B L ( 2 ( M )) , 1 ≤ j ≤ m so that [ R , y j k ] = δ j = k P 1 , where P 1 is the orthogonal projection onto 1 ∈ L 2 ( M ) . Then the spectral measure of y is not singular with respect to Lebesgue measure.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that the spectral measure of y is singular with respect to Lebesgue measure. By Lemma 9, we may choose 0 ≤ T n ≤ 1 finite rank operators with T n → 1 weakly and ‖ [ T , y n ] ‖ 1 → 0 .

Fix x ∈ M . We compute as follows:

$$\upsilon \geq 1 _ { n } \geq 1 \text{ mine rank operators win } 1 _ { n } \rightarrow 1 \text{ w} \\ s follows: \\ 0 & = \lim _ { n \rightarrow \infty } \| J x ^ { * } J R _ { i } y \| _ { \infty } \| [ T _ { n }, y ] \| _ { 1 } \\ \geq \lim _ { n \rightarrow \infty } \left | \text{ Tr} ( J x ^ { * } J R _ { i } y [ T _ { n }, y ] ) \right | \\ \quad & = \lim _ { n \rightarrow \infty } \left | \text{ Tr} ( J x ^ { * } J [ y, R _ { i } ] y T _ { n } ) \right | \\ \quad & = \lim _ { n \rightarrow \infty } \left | \text{ Tr} ( J x ^ { * } J [ ( \partial _ { i } y ) \# P _ { 1 } ) y T _ { n } ) \right | \\ \quad & = \left | \text{ Tr} ( J x ^ { * } J P _ { 1 } ( ( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# y ) ) \right | \\ \quad & = \left | \tau ( ( ( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# y ) x ) \right | \\ \text{e limit of } T _ { n } \text{ as } P _ { 1 } \text{ is finite rank.} \\ \gamma = 0 \text{ as } \tau \text{ is faithful and as } x \text{ was arbitrary. Fro!}$$

We conclude that ( ∂ y i ) σ # = 0 y as τ is faithful and as x was arbitrary. From Lemma 10, we see that y is constant. /square

Here we are able to pass to the limit of T n as P 1 is finite rank.

For certain polynomials, we can make a stronger statement: that the spectral measure is in fact Lebesgue absolutely continuous. To do so, we will need the following modification of Lemma 10.

Lemma 12. Let y = y ∗ ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 n ) ⊂ W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 m ) = M be a polynomial in a tracial von Neumann probability space, suppose y , . . . , y 1 m are algebraically free and have full free entropy dimension, and take ∂ i : A → A ⊗ A as before. Fix 1 ≤ i ≤ n , and assume that for some p ∈ P ( W ∗ ( y )) a non-zero spectral projection of y , we have

$$( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# ( p y ) = 0.$$

Finally, suppose that y is an eigenvector of the number operator N i , i.e., N i ( y ) = ∂ y i # y i = λy . Then λ = 0 and y ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 ˆ i , . . . , y n ) .

Moreover, if ( ∂ y i ) σ #( py ) = 0 for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n and y is an eigenvector of each N 1 , . . . , N n , then y ∈ C .

Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 10, we compute:

$$0 = \tau \left ( y _ { i } ( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \# ( p y ) \right ) = \tau \left ( p y ( \partial _ { i } y ) \# y _ { i } \right ) = \tau \left ( p y \mathcal { N } _ { i } ( y ) \right ) = \lambda \tau \left ( p y y p \right ).$$

/negationslash

If λ = 0 , it follows that pyyp = 0 , hence py = 0 . But then by Theorem 3 we have that y is constant. Thus in either case, y ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 ˆ i , . . . , y n ) . /square

Theorem 13. Let y = y ∗ ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 n ) ⊂ W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 m ) = M be a non-constant polynomial in a W ∗ -probability space and assume that there exists a dual system to y , . . . , y 1 m , i.e., operators R j ∈ B L ( 2 ( M )) , 1 ≤ j ≤ m so that [ R , y j k ] = δ j = k P 1 , where P 1 is the orthogonal projection onto 1 ∈ L 2 ( M ) . Suppose further that for each j , with N j the number operator corresponding to y j , we have N j ( y ) = λ y j . Then the spectral measure of y is Lebesgue absolutely continuous.

Note that the hypothesis that y is an eigenvector of each N j is satisfied when y is homogeneous in each y j , and in particular, whenever y is a monomial.

Proof. We proceed much as in the proof of Proposition 11. Assume to the contrary that the spectral measure of y is not Lebesgue absolutely continuous. As before, we apply Lemma 9 to find 0 ≤ T n ≤ 1 finite rank operators with T n → p weakly for p a spectral projection of y , and ‖ [ T , y n ] ‖ 1 → 0 .

Fix x ∈ M . We compute as follows:

$$\Psi \, \L o p { \, a \, \rho \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \L } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi\, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu}\, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \,\text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} }({ \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } \\ \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{\,pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \quad \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text {pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \, \Psi \, \text{pccu} } { \left ( ( ( \partial _ { i } y ) ^ { \sigma } \, \theta \, y ) ^ { \sigma } \theta \, y ) \right ) \right | \\ \right | \\ \right | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \left | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right | \right |$$

We conclude that ( ∂ y i ) σ #( yp ) = 0 as τ is faithful and x was arbitrary. Our stronger assumptions on y now allow us to apply Lemma 12, and we see y is constant. /square

Here we are able to pass to the limit of T n as P 1 is finite rank.

A related statement is the following. Denote by /vector T an m -tuple of operators /vector T = ( T , . . . , T 1 m ) . Write /vector T ≥ /vector T ′ if T j ≥ T ′ j for all j = 1 , . . . , m . Write R m + for the set of all m -tuples /vector T satisfying 0 ≤ T j ≤ 1 .

Proposition 14. Assume that y , . . . , y 1 m ∈ M admits a dual system R , . . . , R 1 m . Then

$$\liminf _ { \vec { T } \in \mathcal { R } _ { + } ^ { m } } \left \| \sum _ { \begin{matrix} T _ { j }, y _ { j } \end{matrix} } [ T _ { j }, y _ { j } ] \right \| _ { 1 } > 0. \\ \rightarrow$$

Proof. Assume for contradiction that we can find /vector T n ∈ R m + satisfying T j → 1 and ‖ ∑ [ T , y j j ] ‖ 1 → 0 . Then

$$0 \ & = \ \lim _ { n \to \infty } T r ( \sum _ { j } R _ { i } [ T _ { j } ^ { n }, y _ { j } ] ) \\ & = \ \lim _ { n \to \infty } T r ( [ y _ { j }, R _ { i } ] T _ { j } ^ { n } ) \\ & = \ \lim _ { n \to \infty } T r ( P _ { 1 } T _ { i } ^ { n } ) \\ & = \ T r ( P _ { 1 } ) = 1$$

- = Tr P ( 1 ) = 1

which is a contradiction.

/square

## 4.2. Decay of measure.

Lemma 15. Suppose that y , . . . , y 1 m ∈ W ∗ ( y , . . . , y 1 m ) = M have a dual system of operators R , . . . , R 1 m ∈ B L ( 2 ( M )) . Assume that for some P n ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 m ) , there exists a sequence of projections f n ∈ M so that ‖ f n ‖ ∞ = 1 , ‖ f n ‖ 2 → 0 , ‖ P f n n ‖ 2 / ‖ f n ‖ k 2 → 0 for all k ≥ 0 ; moreover, assume that p = sup n deg P n &lt; + ∞ , and for each monomial y i 1 · · · y i p , its coefficient a ( n ) i 1 ··· i p in P n is uniformly bounded in n . Then all coefficients of monomials of degree p in P n must converge to zero.

Proof. Let P n = u b n n be the polar decomposition of P n , with u n a unitary and b n = ( P P ∗ n n ) 1 / 2 . Then, letting g n = u f n n u ∗ n , we obtain another projection g n with ‖ g n ‖ ∞ = 1 , ‖ g n ‖ 2 = ‖ f n ‖ 2 and

$$\| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \| u _ { n } b _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \| f _ { n } b _ { n } u _ { n } ^ { * } \| _ { 2 } = \| f _ { n } b _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \| f _ { n } u _ { n } ^ { * } u _ { n } b _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \| u _ { n } f _ { n } u _ { n } ^ { * } u _ { n } b _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \| g _ { n } P _ { n } \| _ { 2 }.$$

Thus, in particular, ‖ g n P n ‖ 2 / ‖ g n ‖ k 2 → 0 , for any k ≥ 0 .

Then we have:

$$( g _ { n } \otimes f _ { n } ) \# ( P _ { n } \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes P _ { n } ) = ( g _ { n } \otimes f _ { n } ) \# ( \sum _ { i } \partial _ { i } P _ { n } ) \# ( y _ { i } \otimes 1 - 1 \otimes y _ { i } ),$$

so that if we set T n i = ( g n ⊗ f n )# ∂ P i n , then

$$\| \sum [ T _ { i } ^ { n }, y _ { i } ] \| _ { 1 } = \| g _ { n } P _ { n } \otimes f _ { n } - g _ { n } \otimes P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 1 } \leq \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| g _ { n } \| _ { 2 } + \| g _ { n } P _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = 2 \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 }.$$

Thus for any D ∈ B H ( ) ,

$$| \sum T r ( T _ { i } ^ { n } [ y _ { i }, D ] ) | = | T r ( \sum [ T _ { i } ^ { n }, y _ { i } ] D ) | \leq \| \sum [ T _ { i } ^ { n }, y _ { i } ] \| _ { 1 } \| D \| _ { \infty } \leq 2 \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| D \| _ { \infty }.$$

Note that

$$\| T _ { i } ^ { n \dagger } \| _ { \pi } \leq \| f _ { n } \otimes g _ { n } \| _ { \pi } \| ( \partial _ { i } P _ { n } ) ^ { \dagger } \| _ { \pi } \leq C$$

where C = sup n max i ‖ ( ∂ P i n ) † ‖ π &lt; ∞ by our assumptions of the uniform boundedness of both the degree of P n and the coefficients of all monomials in P n . Let D ( n ) = T n σ † j # R j . Then ‖ D ( n ) ‖ ≤ ‖ T n † j ‖ π ‖ R j ‖ ∞ = C R ‖ j ‖ ∞ . Moreover, [ y , D i ( n ) ] = δ i = j T n † i . From this one gets that

$$\| T _ { j } ^ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 2 } = | \langle T _ { j } ^ { n }, T _ { j } ^ { n } \rangle | = | \sum _ { i } T r ( T _ { i } ^ { n } [ y _ { i }, D ] ) | \leq 2 C \| R _ { j } \| _ { \infty } \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 }.$$

Thus

Let now

Then

$$\deg \Delta _ { j } P _ { n } < \deg P _ { n }$$

and coefficients of all monomials in ∆ j P n are uniformly bounded. Moreover,

$$\Pi \text{ monomas in } \Delta _ { j } r _ { n } & \text{ are uniformly boundaries. However,} \\ \| \Delta _ { j } P _ { n } f \| _ { 2 } \ & = \ \tau ( g _ { n } ) ^ { - 1 } \| \tau \otimes 1 ( ( g _ { n } \otimes f _ { n } ) \# \partial _ { j } P _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \\ & \leq \ \tau ( g _ { n } ) ^ { - 1 } \| ( g _ { n } \otimes f _ { n } ) \# \partial _ { j } P _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \\ & \leq \ \tau ( g _ { n } ) ^ { - 1 } \| T _ { j } ^ { n } \| _ { 2 } \\ & \leq \ \sqrt { 2 \| R _ { j } \| _ { \infty } C } \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 1 / 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 1 / 2 }.$$

It follows that

$$\| \Delta _ { j } P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } / \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { k } \leq \sqrt { 2 \| R _ { j } \| _ { \infty } C } \cdot \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 1 / 2 } \cdot \sqrt { \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } / \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 2 k } } \to 0 \quad \text{as } n \to \infty.$$

Thus ∆ i P n once again satisfies the conditions of the Lemma. Iterating, so does ∆ ∆ i 1 i 2 · · · ∆ i p P n , for any sequence i 1 , . . . , i p .

Let p = max n deg P n , and let a ( n ) i 1 ··· i p be the coefficient of the monomial y i 1 · · · y i p in P n . Then

$$a _ { i _ { 1 } \cdots i _ { p } } ^ { ( n ) } = \Delta _ { i _ { 1 } } \cdots \Delta _ { i _ { p } } P _ { n },$$

which means that

$$| a _ { i _ { 1 } \dots i _ { p } } ^ { ( n ) } | = \| a _ { i _ { 1 } \dots i _ { p } } ^ { ( n ) } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } / \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } \to 0,$$

as claimed.

/square

Lemma 16. Let P ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 m ) where again y , . . . , y 1 m admit a dual system. Suppose that there exists a sequence of projections f n ∈ M and t ∈ C so that ‖ f n ‖ ∞ = 1 , ‖ f n ‖ 2 → 0 , ‖ Pf n -tf n ‖ 2 / ‖ f n ‖ k 2 → 0 for all k ≥ 0 . Then P is constant.

$$\| T _ { j } ^ { n } \| _ { 2 } \leq \sqrt { 2 \| R _ { j } \| _ { \infty } C } \| P _ { n } f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 1 / 2 } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { 1 / 2 }.$$

$$\Delta _ { j } P _ { n } = \tau ( g _ { n } ) ^ { - 1 } ( \tau \otimes 1 ) ( ( g _ { n } \otimes 1 ) \# \partial _ { j } P _ { n } ) ).$$

Proof. By replacing P with P -t 1 we may assume that t = 0 . Let P n = P be the constant sequence. Then the coefficient of any monomial of maximal degree must be zero by Lemma 15. This means that P = 0 . /square

Theorem 17. Let y = y ∗ ∈ Alg( y , . . . , y 1 n ) be non-constant, where y , . . . , y 1 n admit a dual system, and let µ be the spectral measure of y . Then for every t ∈ R there is some α &gt; 0 so that µ ([ t, t + ]) /epsilon1 ≤ /epsilon1 α for all /epsilon1 &gt; 0 small enough.

Proof. We will say that µ satisfies condition P t, α ( ) , α &gt; 0 if the inequality

$$\mu [ t, t + \epsilon ] \leq \epsilon ^ { \alpha }$$

holds for sufficiently small /epsilon1 . Equivalently, we require that

$$\log \mu [ t, t + \epsilon ] \leq \alpha \log \epsilon$$

for sufficiently small /epsilon1 .

Fix t ∈ R , and assume to the contrary P t, α ( ) does not hold for any α &gt; 0 . Then there exists a sequence /epsilon1 n → 0 with the property that

$$\frac { \log \mu [ t, t + \epsilon _ { n } ] } { \log \epsilon _ { n } } \to 0.$$

$$\text{Put } \lambda _ { n } = \mu [ t, t + \epsilon _ { n } ] ^ { 1 / 2 }. \text{ Then } \frac { \log \lambda _ { n } } { \log \epsilon _ { n } } \rightarrow 0. \text{ Thus }$$

$$\frac { ( 1 - k ) \log \lambda _ { n } + \log \epsilon _ { n } } { \log \epsilon _ { n } } \to 1.$$

Thus

$$( 1 - k ) \log \lambda _ { n } + \log \epsilon _ { n } \to - \infty.$$

Exponentiating, we get

$$\lambda ^ { 1 - k }$$

It follows that

$$\text{expanding, we ge} \\ \epsilon _ { n } \lambda ^ { 1 - k } & \to 0 \\ \text{Let } f _ { n } = \chi _ { [ t, t + \epsilon ] } ( y ). \text{ Then } \| f _ { n } \| _ { \infty } = 1 \text{ and } \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } = \lambda _ { n }. \text{ It follows that} \\ \| y f _ { n } - t f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } & \lesssim \epsilon _ { n } \lambda _ { n } \\ \cdot$$

and so

$$\| y f _ { n } - t f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } / \| f _ { n } \| _ { 2 } ^ { k } \lesssim \epsilon _ { n } \lambda _ { n } ^ { 1 - k } \to 0.$$

Lemma 16 now implies that y is constant, a contradiction.

## References

[A14] G. W. Anderson, Preservation of algebraicity in free probability , Preprint, 2014, arXiv:1406.6664.

[AZ06] G. W. Anderson and O. Zeitouni, A law of large numbers for finite-range dependent random matrices , Comm. Pure App. Math, Vol. 61 (2008), 1118Ð1154.

[BCG03] P. Biane, M. Capitaine and A. Guionnet, Large deviation bounds for matrix Brownian motion , Invent. Math., 152 (2003), 433-459.

[CS05] A. Connes and D. Shlyakhtenko, L 2 -homology for von Neumann algebras , J. Reine Angew. Math., 586 (2005) 125-168. [Dab10] Y. Dabrowski, A free stochastic partial differential equation, Annal. IHP 50 , 2014, 1404-1455.

[GF14] A. Figalli and A. Guionnet, Universality in several-matrix models via approximate transport maps , Preprint, 2014, arXiv:1407.2759

[GS12] A. Guionnet and D. Shlyakhtenko, Free monotone transport , Invent. Math. 197 (2014), 613-661.

[Kat66] T. Kato, Perturbation theory of linear operators, Springer, 1966.

[MSW15] , T. Mai, R. Speicher and M. Weber, Absence of algebraic relations and of zero divisors under the assumption of full non-microstates free entropy dimension , Preprint, 2015.

[SS13]

D. Shlyakhtenko and P. Skoufranis,

Freely independent random variables with non-atomic distributions

,

Trans. AMS

367

(2015), 6267-6291.

[Voi79] D. Voiculescu, Some results on norm-ideal perturbations of Hilbert space operators , J. Operator Theory 2 (1979), 3-37.

[Voi93] D. Voiculescu, The analogues of entropy and of Fisher's information measure in free probability theory, I , Comm. Math. Phys. 155 (1993) 71-92.

[Voi94] D. Voiculescu, The analogues of entropy and of Fisher's information measure in free probability theory, II , Invent. Math. 118 (1994) 411-440.

[Voi98] D. Voiculescu, The analogues of entropy and of Fisher's information measure in free probability, V , Invent. Math., 132 (1998) 189-227.

/square
I. Charlesworth D. Shlyakhtenko
Regularity of Polynomials in Free Variables
We show that the spectral measure of any non-commutative polynomial of a
non-commutative $n$-tuple cannot have atoms if the free entropy dimension of
that $n$-tuple is $n$ (see also work of Mai, Speicher, and Weber). Under
stronger assumptions on the $n$-tuple, we prove that the spectral measure is
not singular, and measures of intervals surrounding any point may not decay
slower than polynomially as a function of the interval's length.