The Lebesgue decomposition theorem for arbitrary contents

  • Heinz KönigEmail author


The decomposition theorem named after Lebesgue asserts that certain set functions have canonical representations as sums of particular set functions called the absolutely continuous and the singular ones with respect to some fixed set function. The traditional versions are for the bounded measures with respect to some fixed measure on a σ algebra, in final form due to Hahn 1921, and for the bounded contents with respect to some fixed content on an algebra, due to Bochner-Phillips 1941 and Darst 1962. Then came the version for arbitrary measures, due to R.A.Johnson 1967 and N.Y.Luther 1968. The unpleasant fact with these versions is that each one requires its particular notions of absolutely continuous and singular constituents. It seems mysterious how a common roof for all of them could look, and therefore how a universal version for arbitrary contents could be achieved - and all that while several abstract extensions of particular versions appeared in the subsequent decades, for example due to de Lucia-Morales 2003. After these decades now the present article claims to arrive at the final aim in the original context of arbitrary contents. The article will be based on the author’s new difference formation for arbitrary contents 1999. This difference formation even furnishes simple explicit formulas for the two constituents.


Lebesgue decomposition theorem for contents and measures absolutely continuous and singular in different versions difference formation for arbitrary contents 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    S. Bochner, R.S. Phillips, Additive set functions and vector lattices, Ann.Math. 42 (1941), 316–324.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Bourbaki, Integration, translated by Sterling K. Berberian. Springer 2004.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R.B. Darst, A decomposition of finitely additive set functions, J. Reine Angew. Math. 210 (1962), 31–37.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. de Lucia, P. Morales, Measures on effect algebras. Atti Sem. Mat. Fis. Univ. Modena 51 (2003), 273–293.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J.L. Doob, Measure Theory, Springer 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Guillerme, Remarques sur l’ensemble ordonné des mesures abstraites, Séminaire d’Initiation à l’Analyse, Univ. Paris 6, 20ème Année 1980/81, no.1, 8pp.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Hahn, Theorie der reellen Funktionen I, Springer 1921.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.A. Johnson, On the Lebesgue decomposition theorem, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 18 (1967), 628–632.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. König, Measure and Integration: An Advanced Course in Basic Procedures and Applications, Springer 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. König, What are signed contents and measures?, Math. Nachr. 204 (1999), 101– 124.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. König, Upper envelopes of inner premeasures, Ann. Inst. Fourier Grenoble 50 (2000), 401–422.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. König, Measure and Integration: An attempt at unified systematization, Rend. Istit. Mat. Univ. Trieste 34 (2002), 155–214. Preprint under "".
  13. 13.
    H. König, New versions of the Radon-Nikodým theorem, Arch. Math. Preprint under "".
  14. 14.
    N.Y. Luther, Lebesgue decomposition and weakly Borel measures, Duke Math. J. 35 (1968), 601–615.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Basel 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fakultät für Mathematik und InformatikUniversität des SaarlandesSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations