\section{Introduction}

The reconstruction of a function from its integrals along certain submanifolds is a key task in various mathematical fields, including the modeling of imaging modalities, cf.\ \cite{NaWue00}.
One of the first works was in 1911 by Funk \cite{Fun11}.
He considered what later became known by the names Funk--Radon transform, Minkowski--Funk transform or spherical Radon transform.
Here, the function is defined on the unit sphere and we know its mean values along all great circles.
Another famous example is the Radon transform \cite{radon17}, where a function on the plane is assigned to its mean values along all lines.
Over the last more than 100 years, the Funk--Radon transform has been generalized to other families of circles as well as to higher dimensions.

In this article, we draw our attention to integrals along certain subspheres of the $(d-1)$-dimensional unit sphere $\S^{d-1} = \{\zb\xi\in\R^{d}\mid \norm{\zb\xi}=1 \}$.
Any subsphere of $\S^{d-1}$ is the intersection of the sphere with a hyperplane.
In particular, we consider the subspheres of $\S^{d-1}$ whose hyperplanes have the common point
$
(0,\dots,0,z)^\top
$
strictly inside the sphere for $z\in[0,1)$.
We define the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z f$ of a function $f\in C(\S^{d-1})$ by
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal U_z f (\zb{\xi})
= \frac{1}{V(\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi})}
\int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
,\qquad \zb{\xi} \in\S^{d-1},
\end{equation*}
which computes the mean values of $f$ along the subspheres
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
= \{\zb\eta\in\S^{d-1}\mid \langle\zb\eta,\zb\xi\rangle=z\xi_{d} \}
,\qquad z\in [0,1),
\end{equation*}
where
$V(\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}) $
denotes the $(d-2)$-dimensional volume of $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$.

The spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ on the two-dimensional sphere $\S^2$ was first investigated  by Salman \cite{Sal15} in 2016.
He showed the injectivity of this transform $\mathcal U_z$ for smooth functions $f\in C^\infty(\S^2)$ that are supported inside the spherical cap $\{\zb\xi\in\S^2 \mid \xi_3 < z \}$ as well as an inversion formula.
This result was extended to the $d$-dimensional sphere in \cite{Sal16}, where also the smoothness requirement was lowered to $f\in C^1(\S^d)$.
A different approach was taken in \cite{Qu17}, where a relation with the classical Funk--Radon transform~$\mathcal U_0$ was established and also used for a characterization of the nullspace and range of $\mathcal U_z$ for $z<1$.

In the present paper, we extend the approach of \cite{Qu17} to the $d$-dimensional case.
We use a similar change of variables to connect the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ with the Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F = \mathcal U_0$ in order to characterize its nullspace.
However, the description of the range requires some more effort, because the operator $\mathcal U_z$ is smoothing of degree ${({d-2})/{2}}$.

In the case $z=0$, we have sections of the sphere with hyperplanes through the origin, which are also called maximal subspheres of $\S^{d-1}$ or great circles on $\S^2$.
We obtain the classical Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F = \mathcal U_0$.
The case $z=1$ corresponds to the subspheres containing the north pole $(0,\dots,0,1)^\top$.
This case is known as the spherical slice transform $\mathcal U_1$ and has been investigated since the early 1990s in \cite{AbDa93,Dah01,Hel11}.
However, unlike $\mathcal U_z$ for $z<1$, the spherical slice transform $\mathcal U_1$ is injective for $f\in L^\infty(\S^{d-1})$, see \cite{Rub15II}.
The main tool to derive this injectivity result of $\mathcal U_1$ is the stereographic projection, which turns the subspheres of $\S^{d-1}$ through the north pole into hyperplanes in $\R^{d-1}$ and thus connecting the spherical slice transform $\mathcal U_1$ to the Radon transform on $\R^{d-1}$.
For $z\to\infty$, we obtain vertical slices of the sphere, i.e., sections of the sphere with hyperplanes that are parallel to the north--south axis.
This case is well-known for $\S^2$, see \cite{GiReSh94,ZaSc10,HiQu15circav,Rub18}.
In 2016, Palamodov \cite[Section~5.2]{Pal16} published an inversion formula for a certain nongeodesic Funk transform, which considers sections of the sphere with hyperplanes that have a fixed distance to the point $(0,\dots,0,z)^\top$.
This contains both the transform $\mathcal U_z$ as well as for $z=0$ the sections with subspheres having constant radius previously considered by Schneider \cite{Sch69} in 1969.

A key tool for analyzing the stability of inverse problems are Sobolev spaces, cf.\ \cite{JoLo01} for the Radon transform and \cite{HiQu15} for the Funk--Radon transform.
The Sobolev space $H^{s}(\S^{d-1})$ can be imagined as the space of functions $f\colon \S^{d-1}\to\C$ whose derivatives up to order $s$ are square-integrable, and we denote by $H^{s}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})$ its restriction to even functions $f(\zb\xi)=f(-\zb\xi)$.
A thorough definition of $H^s(\S^{d-1})$ is given in \prettyref{sec:Sobolev-spaces}.
The behavior of the Funk--Radon transform was investigated by Strichartz \cite{Str81}, who found that the Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F\colon H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+({d-2})/{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})$ is continuous and bijective.
In \prettyref{thm:Uz-Sobolev}, we show that basically the same holds for the generalized transform $\mathcal U_z$, i.e., the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z\colon H^s_{z}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+({d-2})/{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})$ is bounded and bijective and its inverse is also bounded, where $H^s_{z}(\S^{d-1})$ contains functions that are symmetric with respect to the point reflection in $(0,\dots,0,z)^\top$.

This paper is structured as follows.
In \prettyref{sec:def}, we give a short introduction to smooth manifolds and review the required notation on the sphere.
In \prettyref{sec:factorization}, we show the relation of $\mathcal U_z$ with the classical Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F = \mathcal U_0$.
With the help of that factorization, we characterize the nullspace of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ in \prettyref{sec:nullspace}.
In \prettyref{sec:function-spaces}, we consider Sobolev spaces on the sphere and show the continuity of certain multiplication and composition operators.
Then, in \prettyref{sec:range}, we prove the continuity of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ in Sobolev spaces.
Finally, we include a geometric interpetation of our factorization result in \prettyref{sec:geometric-interpratation}.

\section{Preliminaries and definitions}
\label{sec:def}

\subsection{Manifolds}

We give a brief introduction to smooth manifolds, more can be found in \cite{AgFr02}.
We denote by $\R$ and $\C$ the real and complex numbers, respectively.
We define the $d$-dimensional Euclidean space $\R^{d}$
equipped with the scalar product $\left<\zb \xi,\zb \eta\right> = \sum_{i=1}^{d}\xi_i\eta_i$ and the norm $\norm{\zb\xi}=\left<\zb \xi,\zb \xi\right>^{1/2}$.
We denote the unit vectors in $\R^{d}$ with $\zb \epsilon^i$, i.e.\ $\epsilon^{i}_j = \delta_{i,j}$, where $\delta$ is the Kronecker delta.
Every vector $\zb \xi\in\R^{d}$ can be written as $\zb \xi=\sum_{i=1}^{d}\xi_i \zb \epsilon^i$.

A diffeomorphism is a bijective, smooth mapping $\R^n\to \R^n$ whose inverse is also smooth.
We say a function is smooth if it has derivatives of arbitrary order.
An $n$-dimensional smooth manifold $ M$ without boundary is a subset of $\R^{d}$ such that for every $\zb \xi\in M$ there exists an open neighborhood $N(\zb \xi)\subset \R^{d}$ containing $\zb \xi$, an open set $U\subset\R^{d}$, and a diffeomorphism $m\colon U \to N(\zb \xi)$ such that
\[
m(U\cap (\R^n\times \{0\}^{d-n})) = M \cap N(\zb \xi).
\]
We call $m\colon V\to M$ a map of the manifold $M$, where $V=U\cap (\R^n\times \{0\}^{d-n})$.
An atlas of $M$ is a finite family of maps $m_i\colon V_i\to M$, $i=1,\dots,l$, such that the sets $m_i (V_i)$  cover $M$.
We define the tangent space $T_{\zb\xi} M$ of $M$ at $\zb\xi\in M$ as the set of vectors $\zb x\in\R^{d}$ for which there exists a smooth path $\gamma\colon [0,1]\to M$ satisfying $\gamma(0) = \zb \xi$ and $\gamma'(0)=\zb x$.

A $k$-form $\omega$ on $M$ is a family $(\omega_{\zb\xi})_{\zb\xi \in M}$ of antisymmetric $k$-linear functionals
$$\omega_{\zb\xi}\colon (T_{\zb\xi} M)^k \to \R,$$
where $(T_{\zb\xi} M)^k = T_{\zb\xi} M \times \dots \times T_{\zb\xi} M$.
Let $f\colon M \to N$ be a smooth mapping between the manifolds $M$ and $N$
and let $\omega$ be a $k$-form on $N$.
The pullback of $\omega$ is the $k$-form $f^*(\omega)$ on $M$ that is defined for any $\zb v^1,\dots,\zb v^k \in T_{\zb\xi} M$ by
\begin{equation*}
f^*(\omega) ([\zb v^i]_{i=1}^k)
= \omega \left(\left[\left.\frac{\dx}{\dx t}f\circ \gamma_i(t)\right|_{t=0}\right]_{i=1}^k\right),
\end{equation*}
where $\gamma_i\colon [0,1]\to M$ are smooth paths satisfying $\gamma_i(0) = \zb \xi$ and $\gamma_i'(0)=\zb v^i$.
If the smooth function $f\colon \R^{d}\to\R^{d}$ extends to the surrounding space, the pullback can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
f^*(\omega) ([\zb v^i]_{i=1}^k)
= \omega ([J_f\, \zb v^i]_{i=1}^k),
\label{eq:pullback-def}
\end{equation}
where $J_f$ denotes the Jacobian matrix of $f$.

An atlas $\{m_i\colon V_i \to M\}_{i=1}^l$ is called orientation of $M$ if for each $i,j$ the determinant of the Jacobian of $m_i^{-1} \circ m_j$ is positive wherever it exists.
A basis $\zb e^1,\dots,\zb e^n$ of the tangent space $T_{\zb\xi} M$ is oriented positively if for some $i$ with $\zb\xi \in m_i(V_i)$ the determinant of the matrix $[J_{m_i^{-1}}\, \zb e^1,\dots,J_{m_i^{-1}}\, \zb e^n]$ is positive.
Up to the multiplication of a constant real number depending only on ${\zb\xi}$, there exists only one $n$-form on an $n$-dimensional manifold.
Let $\zb e^1,\dots,\zb e^n$ be a positively oriented, orthonormal basis of the tangent space $T_{\zb\xi} M$.
Then the volume form $\dx M$ is the unique $n$-form on $M$ satisfying $\dx M(\zb e^1,\dots,\zb e^n) = 1$.

A set $\{\varphi_i\}_{i=1}^l$ of functions $\varphi_i\in C^\infty(M)$ is a partition of unity of the manifold $M$ with respect to an atlas $\{m_i\colon V_i \to M\}_{i=1}^l$ if
$\operatorname{supp}(\varphi_i)\subset m_i(V_i)$ for all $i$ and $\sum_{i=1}^{l} \varphi_i \equiv 1$ on $M$.
Then the integral of a $k$-form $\omega$ on $M$ is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\int_M \omega
= \sum_{i=1}^{l} \int_{V_i} m_i^*(\varphi_i\cdot \omega)
= \sum_{i=1}^{l} \int_{V_i} c_i \d \R^n,
\end{equation*}
where the latter is the standard volume integral $\dx \R^n$ on $V_i\subset \R^n$ and the functions $c_i\colon V_i\to\R$ are uniquely determined by the condition $m_i^*(\varphi_i\cdot \omega) = c_i \d \R^n$.

Let $f\colon M\to N=f(M)$ be a diffeomorphism between the $n$-dimensional manifolds $M$ and $f(M)$, and let $\omega$ be an $n$-form on $N$. Then the
substitution rule \cite[p.~94]{Jan01} holds,
	\begin{equation}
	\int_{f(M)} \omega
	= \int_M f^*(\omega).
	\label{eq:substitution-rule}
	\end{equation}

\subsection{The sphere}
Let $d\ge3$.
The $(d-1)$-dimensional unit sphere
\[\S^{d-1}=\{\zb\xi\in\R^{d}\mid\norm{\zb\xi}=1\}\]
is a $(d-1)$-dimensional manifold in $\R^{d}$ with tangent space
\begin{equation*}
T_{\zb\xi} \S^{d-1} = \{\zb x\in\R^{d}\mid \left<\zb\xi,\zb x\right>=0\}
\end{equation*}
for $\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}$.
We define an orientation on $\S^{d-1}$ by saying that a basis $[\zb x^i]_{i=1}^{d-1}$ of $T_{\zb\xi} \S^{d-1}$ is oriented positively if the determinant $\det [\zb \xi, \zb x^1, \dots, \zb x^{d-1}]>0$.
We denote the volume of the $(d-1)$-dimensional unit sphere $\S^{d-1}$ with
\begin{equation*}
\abs{\S^{d-1}}
= \int_{\S^{d-1}} \d\S^{d-1}
= \frac{2\pi^{d/2}}{\Gamma(d/2)}.
\end{equation*}

\subsubsection{The spherical transform}

Every $(d-2)$-dimensional subsphere of the sphere $\S^{d-1}$ is the intersection of $\S^{d-1}$ with a hyperplane, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
S(\zb{\xi},t) = \left\{
\boldsymbol{\eta}\in\S^{d-1} \mid \left\langle
\boldsymbol{\xi},\boldsymbol{\eta}\right\rangle =t\right\},
\end{equation*}
where
$\zb{\xi}\in\S^{d-1}$ is the normal vector of the hyperplane
and $t\in[-1,1]$ is the signed distance of the hyperplane to the origin.
We define an orientation on the subsphere $S(\zb{\xi},t)$ by saying that a basis $[\zb e^i]_{i=1}^{d-2}$ of the tangent space $T_{\zb \eta} S(\zb{\xi},t)$  is oriented positively if
\[
\det \left(\zb\eta, \zb\xi, \zb e^1,\dots,\zb e^{d-2} \right) >0.
\]

In the following, we consider subspheres of $\S^{d-1}$ whose hyperplanes have a common point
located in the interior of the unit ball.
Because of the rotational symmetry, we can assume that this point lies on the positive $\xi_{d}$ axis.
For $z\in[0,1)$, we consider the point
\[
z\zb\epsilon^{d} = (0,\dots,0,z)^\top.
\]
The $(d-2)$-dimensional subsphere that is located in one hyperplane together with $z\zb\epsilon^{d}$ can be described by $S(\zb \xi,t)$ with $\zb \xi\in\S^{d-1}$ and $t = \left<\zb \xi, z\zb\epsilon^{d}\right> = z\xi_{d}$.
We define the subsphere
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
= S (\zb \xi, z\xi_{d}).
\end{equation*}
The $(d-2)$-dimensional sphere $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ has radius $\sqrt{1-z^2\xi_{d}^2}$ and volume
\begin{equation*}
V(\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}) =
\abs{\S^{d-2}} \left({1-z^2 \xi_{d}^2}\right)^{(d-2)/2}.
\end{equation*}
For a continuous function $f\colon\S^{d-1}\to\C$, we define its {spherical transform} $\mathcal U_z f$ by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal U_z f (\zb{\xi})
= \frac{1}{V(\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi})}
\int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
,\qquad \zb{\xi} \in\S^{d-1},
\label{eq:spherical-transform-def}
\end{equation}
which computes the mean values of $f$ along the subspheres $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$.

\begin{Remark}
	The subspheres $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$, along which we integrate, can also be imagined in the following way.
	The centers of the subspheres $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ are located on a sphere
    that contains the origin and $z\zb\epsilon^{d}$ and is rotationally symmetric about the North--South axis.
	This can be seen as follows.
	The center of the sphere $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ is given by $z\xi_{d}\zb\xi$.
	Then the distance of $z\xi_{d}\zb\xi$ to the point $\frac{z}{2}\,\zb\epsilon^{d}$ reads
	\begin{align*}
	\left\lVert{z\xi_{d}\zb\xi - \frac{z}{2}\,\zb\epsilon^{d}}\right\rVert^2
	&= \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \xi_i^2 z^2 \xi_{d}^2 + \left(z\xi_{d}^2-\frac{z}{2}\right)^2
	\\
	&= (1-\xi_{d}^2) z^2 \xi_{d}^2 + \left(z\xi_{d}^2-\frac{z}{2}\right)^2
	\\&=\left(\frac{z}{2}\right)^2,
	\end{align*}
	which is independent of $\zb\xi$.
	So, the centers of $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ are located on a sphere with center $\frac{z}{2}\zb\epsilon^{d}$ and radius $\frac{z}{2}$.
\end{Remark}

\subsubsection{The Funk--Radon transform}
\label{sec:FRT}

Setting the parameter $z=0$,
the point $0\zb\epsilon^d=(0,\dots,0)^\top$ is the center of the sphere $\S^{d-1}$.
Hence, the spherical transform $\mathcal U_0$ integrates along all maximal subspheres of the sphere $\S^{d-1}$.
This special case is called the {Funk--Radon transform}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal Ff (\zb \xi)
= \mathcal U_0 f (\zb \xi)
= \frac{1}{\abs{\S^{d-2}}} \int_{\mathscr C_0^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_0^{\zb\xi}, \qquad
\zb{\xi}\in\S^{d-1},
\label{eq:FRT}
\end{equation}
which is also known by the terms {Funk transform}, {Minkowski--Funk transform} or {spherical Radon transform}, where the latter term occasionally also refers to means over $({d-1})$-dimensional spheres in $\R^{d}$, cf.\ \cite{Qui82}.

\section{Relation with the Funk--Radon transform}
\label{sec:factorization}

In this section, we
show a connection between the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ and the Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F$.

\subsection{Two mappings on the sphere}
\label{sec:hg}

Let $z\in(-1,1)$.
We define the transformations $\zb h_z, \zb g_z\colon \S^{d-1}\to \S^{d-1}$ by
\begin{equation}
\zb h_z (\zb \eta)
= \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}} \eta_i \zb \epsilon^i + \frac{z+\eta_{d}}{1+z\eta_{d}} \zb \epsilon^{d}
\label{eq:h_z}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\zb g_z (\zb \xi)
= \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-z^2\xi_{d}^2}}
\left(\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \xi_i \zb \epsilon^i + \sqrt{1-z^2} \xi_{d} \zb \epsilon^{d}\right).
\label{eq:g_z}
\end{equation}

\begin{Remark}
\label{rem:gh-injective}
The definitions of both $\zb h_z$ and $\zb g_z$ rely only on the $d$-th coordinate.
The values in the other coordinates are just multiplied with the same factor in order to make the vectors stay on the sphere.
Furthermore, the transformations $\zb h_z$ and $\zb g_z$ are bijective with their respective inverses given by
\begin{equation}
\zb h_z^{-1}({\zb\omega})
= \zb h_{-z} (\zb\omega)
=\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1-z\omega_{d}}\omega_i \zb\epsilon^i +
\frac{\omega_{d}-z}{1-z\omega_{d}}\zb\epsilon^{d}
\label{eq:h^-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\zb g_z^{-1}(\zb\omega)
=\zb g_{\frac{\mathrm iz}{\sqrt{1-z^2}}}(\zb\omega)
=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-z^2+z^2\omega_{d}^2}} \left(\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \sqrt{1-z^2}\,\omega_i \zb\epsilon^i
+\omega_{d}\zb\epsilon^{d}\right).
\label{eq:g^-1}
\end{equation}
The computation of the inverses is straightforward and therefore omitted here.
\end{Remark}

The following lemma shows that the inverse of $\zb h_z$ applied to the subsphere $\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ yields a maximal subsphere of $\S^{d-1}$ with normal vector $\zb g_z(\zb\xi)$.

\begin{Lemma}
	Let $z\in (-1,1)$ and $\zb\xi\in \S^{d-1}$.
	Then
	\begin{equation}
	\zb h_z^{-1} (\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}) = \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}.
	\label{eq:CD}
	\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
	Let $\zb\eta\in\S^{d-1}$.
	Then $\zb \eta$ lies in $\zb h_z^{-1} (\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi})$ if and only if $\zb h_z(\zb \eta) \in \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$, i.e.,
	\begin{equation*}
	\left\langle\zb h_z(\zb{\eta}), \zb{\xi}\right\rangle =z\xi_{d}.
	\end{equation*}
	By the definition of $\zb h_z$ in \eqref{eq:h_z}, we have
	\begin{equation*}
	\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}} \eta_i \xi_i + \frac{z+\eta_{d}}{1+z\eta_{d}} \xi_{d}
	= z\xi_{d}.
	\end{equation*}
	After subtracting the right-hand side from the last equation, we have
	\begin{equation*}
	\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}} \eta_i \xi_i + \frac{1-z^2}{1+z\eta_{d}} \eta_{d}\xi_{d}
	= 0.
	\end{equation*}
	Multiplication with $(1+z\eta_{d})(1-z^2)^{-1/2}(1-z^2\xi_{d}^2)^{-1/2}$ yields
	\begin{equation*}
	\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-z^2\xi_{d}^2}} \eta_i \xi_i + \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{\sqrt{1-z^2\xi_{d}^2}} \eta_{d}\xi_{d}
	= 0,
	\end{equation*}
	which is equivalent to $\langle \zb \eta, \zb g_z(\zb \xi)\rangle =0$,
	so we obtain that $\zb \eta \in \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{Lemma}
	\label{lem:pullback}
    Let $z\in (-1,1)$ and $\zb\xi\in \S^{d-1}$.
	Denote by $\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ and $\dx \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$ the volume forms on the manifolds $ \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ and $\mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$, respectively.
	Then the following relation between the pullback of the volume form $\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ over $\zb h_z$ and $\dx \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$ holds.
	For $\zb \eta \in \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$, we have
	\begin{equation}
	\zb h_z^*(\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi})
	= \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2} \d \mathscr C_0^{g(\zb\xi)}.
	\label{eq:pullback}
	\end{equation}
	Furthermore, we have for the volume form $\d \S^{d-1}$ on the sphere
	\begin{equation}
	\zb h_z^*(\dx \S^{d-1})
	= \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-1} \d \S^{d-1}.
	\label{eq:pullback-sd}
	\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
	We compute the Jacobian $J_{\zb h_z}$ of $\zb h_z$, which comprises the partial derivatives of $\zb h_z$.
	For all $l,m \in \{1,\dots,d-1\}$, we have
	\begin{equation}
	\begin{aligned}
	\frac{\partial [\zb h_z]_l}{\partial \eta_m}
	&= \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\delta_{l,m},\qquad\qquad\qquad
	&
	\frac{\partial [\zb h_z]_l}{\partial \eta_{d}}
	&= -\eta_l\frac{z\sqrt{1-z^2}}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2},
	\\
	\frac{\partial [\zb h_z]_{d}}{\partial \eta_m}
	&= 0,
	&
	\frac{\partial [\zb h_z]_{d}}{\partial \eta_{d}}
	&= \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2}.
	\end{aligned}
	\label{eq:Jacobian-h}
	\end{equation}
	Let $[\zb e^i]_{i=1}^{d-2}$ be an orthonormal basis of the tangent space $T_{\zb\eta} \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$.
	Then $J_{\zb h_z} \zb e^i\in T_{\zb h_z(\zb \eta)} \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ for $i=1,\dots,d-1$ is given by
	\begin{align*}
	J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^i
	&= \sum_{l=1}^{d-1} \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}} e^i_l -\eta_l\frac{z\sqrt{1-z^2}}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} e^i_{d} \right) \zb\epsilon^{l}
	+ \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} e^i_{d} \zb\epsilon^{d} .
	\end{align*}
	Hence, we have for all $i,j \in \{1,\dots,d-2\}$
	\begin{align*}
	\left< J_{h_z}\zb e^i,J_{h_z}\zb e^j\right>
	={}& \sum_{l=1}^{d-1} \left(\frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} e^i_le^j_l -\frac{z(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^3} \eta_l \left(e^i_le^j_{d}+e^j_le^i_{d}\right)\right.
	\\&\hspace{3em}
	\left. + \frac{z^2(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} \eta_l^2 e^i_{d}e^j_{d} \right)
	+ \frac{(1-z^2)^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d} e^j_{d}.
	\end{align*}
	Expanding the sum, we obtain
	\begin{align*}
	\left< J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^i,J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^j\right>
	={}& \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} \sum_{l=1}^{d-1}e^i_le^j_l
	-\frac{z(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^3}
	\left(e^j_{d} \sum_{l=1}^{d-1}\eta_l e^i_l + e^i_{d}\sum_{l=1}^{d-1} \eta_l e^j_l\right)
	\\&
	+ \frac{z^2(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d}e^j_{d} \sum_{l=1}^{d-1} \eta_l^2
	+ \frac{(1-z^2)^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d} e^j_{d}.
	\end{align*}
	Since the vectors $\zb e^i$ and $\zb e^j$ are elements of an orthonormal basis, we have $\left<\zb e^i,\zb e^j\right> = \sum_{l=1}^{d} e^i_l e^j_l = \delta_{i,j}$.
	Furthermore, we know that $\left<\zb e^i,\zb\eta\right>=\left<\zb e^j,\zb\eta\right> = 0$ because $\zb e^i$ and $\zb e^j$ are in the tangent space $T_{\zb\eta} \mathscr C_0^{g(\zb\xi)} \subset T_{\zb\eta} \S^{d-1}$,
	and also $\norm{\zb \eta}^2=1$.
	Hence, we have
	\begin{align*}
	&\left< J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^i,J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^j\right>
	\\
	={}& \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} (\delta_{i,j} - e^i_{d}e^j_{d})
	+2\frac{z(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^3} \eta_{d}e^i_{d}e^j_{d}
	\\&
	+ \frac{z^2(1-z^2)}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d}e^j_{d} (1-\eta_{d}^2)
	+ \frac{(1-z^2)^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d} e^j_{d}
	\\
	={}& \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^4} e^i_{d}e^j_{d}
	\left(-(1+z\eta_{d})^2 +2z\eta_{d}(1+z\eta_{d})
	+ z^2 (1-\eta_{d}^2) +1-z^2
	\right)
	\\&
	+ \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} \delta_{i,j}
	\\
	={}& \frac{1-z^2}{(1+z\eta_{d})^2} \delta_{i,j}.
	\end{align*}
	The above computation shows that the vectors $\{J_{\zb h_z} \zb e^i\}_{i=1}^{d}$ are orthogonal with length $\norm{J_{\zb h_z} \zb e^i} = {\sqrt{1-z^2}}/({1+z\eta_{d}})$.
	By the definition of the pullback in \eqref{eq:pullback-def} and the fact that the volume form $\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}$ is a multilinear $(d-2)$-form, we obtain
	\begin{equation}
	\zb h_z^*(\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}) ([\zb e^i]_{i=1}^{d-2})
	= \dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi} ([J_{\zb h_z} \zb e^i]_{i=1}^{d-2})
	= \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2}.
    \label{eq:pullback-1}
	\end{equation}
	If we set $[\zb e^i]_{i=1}^{d-1}$ as a basis of the tangent space $T_{\zb\eta}(\S^{d-1})$ in order to obtain \eqref{eq:pullback-sd}, the previous calculations still hold except that the exponent $d-2$ is replaced by $d-1$ in equation \eqref{eq:pullback-1}.

	Finally, we prove that the basis $\left[J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^1,\dots, J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^{d} \right]$ of $T_{\zb h_z(\zb\eta)}\mathscr C^{\zb\xi}_z$ is oriented positively, i.e., that
	\[
	d(z):=\det\left(\zb h_z(\zb\eta), \zb\xi, J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^1,\dots, J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^{d} \right)>0.
	\]
	By the formula \eqref{eq:Jacobian-h} of $J_{\zb h_z}$, the function $d\colon [0,1)\to\R$
	is continuous,
	and it satisfies
	\[
	d(0)
	=\det\left( \zb h_0(\zb\eta), \zb\xi, J_{\zb h_0}\zb e^1,\dots, J_{\zb h_0}\zb e^{d-2} \right)
	=\det\left( \zb\eta, \zb g_0(\zb\xi), \zb e^1,\dots, \zb e^{d-2} \right) >0
	\]
	since both $\zb h_0$ and $\zb g_0$ are equal to the identity map and we assumed the orthonormal basis $\left[\zb e^1,\dots, \zb e^{d-2} \right]$ be oriented positively.
	By the orthogonality of the vectors $\zb\xi$, $\zb h_z(\zb\eta)$ and $J_{\zb h_z}\zb e^i$,
	we see that $d(z)$ vanishes nowhere and,
	hence, we obtain that $d(z)>0$ for all $z\in[0,1)$.
	The assertion follows by the uniqueness of the volume form $\dx \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Factorization}

Let $z\in(-1,1)$ and $f\in C(\S^{d-1})$. We define the two transformations $\mathcal M_z,\, \mathcal N_z\colon C(\S^{d-1})\to C(\S^{d-1})$ by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal M_zf (\zb{\xi}) =
\left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\xi_{d}}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (\zb\xi)
,\qquad \zb{\xi}\in\S^{d-1}
\label{eq:M}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\mathcal N_zf (\zb{\xi}) =
(1-z^2\xi_{d}^2)^{-\frac{d-2}{2}}\,
f \circ \zb g_z ( \zb \xi)
,\qquad \zb{\xi}\in\S^{d-1}.
\label{eq:N}
\end{equation}

\begin{Remark}
	The transformations $\mathcal M_z$ and $\mathcal N_z$ are inverted by
	\begin{equation}
	f(\zb\eta)
	= \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1-z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2} \mathcal M_z f(\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\eta))
	= \mathcal M_{-z} \mathcal M_z f(\zb\eta),
	\label{eq:M-1}
	\end{equation}
	and
	\begin{equation}
	f(\zb\eta)
	= \left(\frac{1-z^2}{1-(1-z^2)\eta_{d}^2}\right)^{\frac{d-2}{2}} \mathcal N_z (\zb g_z^{-1}(\zb\eta)),
	\qquad \zb\eta\in\S^{d-1},
	\label{eq:N-1}
	\end{equation}
	respectively.
\end{Remark}

Now we are able to prove our main theorem about the factorization of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$.

\begin{Theorem}
	Let $z\in[0,1)$.
	Then the factorization of the spherical transform
	\begin{equation}
	\mathcal U_z
	= \mathcal N_z \mathcal F \mathcal M_z
	\label{eq:spherical-transform-decomposition}
	\end{equation}
	holds, where $\mathcal F$ is the Funk--Radon transform \eqref{eq:FRT}.
	\label{thm:spherical-transform}
\end{Theorem}

\begin{proof}
	Let $f\in C(\S^2)$ and $\zb \xi\in\S^{d-1}$.
	By the definition of $\mathcal U_z$ in \prettyref{eq:spherical-transform-def}, we have
	\begin{equation}
	\abs{\S^{d-2}} (1-z^2\xi_{d}^2)^{\frac{d-2}{2}}\, \mathcal U_z f(\zb{\xi})
	=\int_{ \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}.
	\label{eq:spherical-transform-1}
	\end{equation}
	Then we have by the substitution rule \eqref{eq:substitution-rule}
	\begin{equation*}
	\int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
	= \int_{\zb h_z^{-1}(\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi})} (f\circ\zb h_z) \, \zb h_z^*(\dx \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}).
	\end{equation*}
	By \eqref{eq:pullback} and \eqref{eq:CD}, we obtain
	\begin{equation*}
	\int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
	= \int_{\mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}} f(\zb h_z(\zb \eta)) \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2} \d \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)} (\zb\eta).
    \end{equation*}
    By the definition of $\mathcal M_z$ in \eqref{eq:M}, we see that
    \begin{equation*}
    \int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
	= \int_{\mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}} \mathcal M_z f \d \mathscr C_0^{\zb g_z(\zb\xi)}.
	\end{equation*}
	The definition of the Funk--Radon transform \eqref{eq:FRT} shows that
	\begin{equation*}
	\int_{\mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}} f \d \mathscr C_z^{\zb\xi}
	= \mathcal F \mathcal M_z f(\zb g_z(\zb \xi)),
	\end{equation*}
	which implies \eqref{eq:spherical-transform-decomposition}.
\end{proof}

The factorization theorem \ref{thm:spherical-transform} enables us to investigate the properties of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$.
Because the operators $\mathcal M_z$ and $\mathcal N_z$ are relatively simple, we can transfer many properties from the Funk--Radon transform, which has been studied by many authors already, to the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$.

\section{Nullspace}

\label{sec:nullspace}

With the help of the factorization \eqref{eq:spherical-transform-decomposition} obtained in the previous section, we obtain the following characterization of the nullspace of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$.

\begin{Theorem}
	\label{thm:nullspace}
	Let $z\in[0,1)$ and $f\in C(\S^{d-1})$.
	Then $\mathcal U_zf=0$ if and only if
	\begin{equation}
	f(\zb{\omega})
	=-\left(\frac{1-z^2}{1-2z\omega_{d}+z^2}\right)^{d-2} f \circ\zb r_z(\zb\omega)
	,\qquad \zb\omega\in\S^{d-1},
	\end{equation}
	where $\zb r_z\colon \S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1}$ is given by
	\begin{equation}
	\label{eq:point-reflection}
	\zb r_z(\zb\omega)= \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{z^2-1}{1+z^2-2z\omega_{d}}\omega_i\zb\epsilon^i
	+ \frac{2z-z^2\omega_{d}-\omega_{d}}{1+z^2-2z\omega_{d}}\zb\epsilon^{d}.
	\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}

\begin{proof}
	Let $f\in C(\S^{d-1})$. Since the operator $\mathcal N_z$ is bijecive by \prettyref{rem:gh-injective}, we see that $\mathcal U_zf = \mathcal N_z \mathcal F \mathcal M_z f = 0$ if and only if $\mathcal F \mathcal M_z f=0$.
	The nullspace of the Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F$ consists of the odd functions, cf.\ \cite[Proposition 3.4.12]{Gro96}, so we obtain
$$\mathcal M_z f(\zb \eta) = -\mathcal M_z f(-\zb \eta),\qquad \zb\eta\in\S^{d-1}.$$
By the definition of $\mathcal M_z$ in \eqref{eq:M}, we have
$$ \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (\zb\eta)
= -\left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1-z\eta_{d}}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (-\zb\eta). $$
We substitute $\zb\omega=\zb h_z(\zb\eta)$ and obtain
\begin{align*}
f (\zb\omega)
&=- \left(\frac{1+z\frac{\omega_{d}-z}{1-z\omega_{d}}}{1-z\frac{\omega_{d}-z}{1-z\omega_{d}}}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (-\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\omega))
\\&
=- \left(\frac{1-z\omega_{d}+z(\omega_{d}-z)}{1-z\omega_{d}-z{(\omega_{d}-z})}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (-\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\omega))
\\&
=- \left(\frac{1-z^2}{1-2z\omega_{d}+z^2}\right)^{d-2} f \circ \zb h_z (-\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\omega)).
\end{align*}
In order to show that $\zb r_z = \zb h_z(-\zb h_z^{-1})$,
we compute the $d$-th component
\begin{align*}
[\zb h_z(-\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\omega))]_{d}
= \frac{z+\frac{z-\omega_{d}}{1-z\omega_{d}}}
{1+z\frac{z-\omega_{d}}{1-z\omega_{d}}}
= \frac{z-z^2\omega_{d}+{z-\omega_{d}}}
{1-z\omega_{d}+z^2-z\omega_{d}}
= \frac{2z-z^2\omega_{d}-\omega_{d}}
{1-2z\omega_{d}+z^2}.
\end{align*}
For $i\in\{1,\dots,d-1\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
[\zb h_z(-\zb h_z^{-1}(\zb\omega))]_{i}
= \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1-z\frac{\omega_{d}-z}{1-z\omega_{d}}} \frac{-\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1-z\omega_{d}} \omega_i
= \frac{z^2-1}{1-2z\omega_{d}+z^2}\, \omega_i.\qedhere
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}

\begin{Remark}
	The map $\zb r_z$ from \eqref{eq:point-reflection}
	is the point reflection of the sphere $\S^{d-1}$ about the point $z\zb\epsilon^{d}$.
	This can be seen as follows.
    Let $\zb\omega\in\S^{d-1}$.
	The vectors $\zb\omega-z\zb\epsilon^{d}$ and $\zb r_z(\zb\omega)-z\zb\epsilon^{d}$ are parallel if for all $i\in\{1,\dots,d\}$
	\begin{equation*}
	\frac{[\zb r_z(\zb\omega)]_i}{\omega_i}
	=\frac{[\zb r_z(\zb\omega)]_{d}-z}{\omega_{d}-z}.
	\end{equation*}
	We have
	\begin{align*}
	\frac{\omega_i}{[\zb r_z(\zb\omega)]_i}
	\frac{[\zb r_z(\zb\omega)]_{d}-z}{\omega_{d}-z}
	&=\frac{2z-z^2\omega_{d}-\omega_{d} -z(1+z^2-2z\omega_{d})}{(z^2-1)(\omega_{d}-z)}
	\\&=\frac{z+z^2\omega_{d}-\omega_{d} -z^3}{(z^2-1)(\omega_{d}-z)}
	=1,
	\end{align*}
	provided all denominators are nonzero.
\end{Remark}

\section{Function spaces on the sphere}
\label{sec:function-spaces}

Before we can state the range of the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$, we have to introduce some function spaces on the sphere $\S^{d-1}$.
The Hilbert space $L^2(\S^{d-1})$ comprises all square-integrable functions with the inner product of two functions $f,g\colon\S^{d-1}\to\C$
$$
\left< f,g \right>_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}
= \int_{\S^{d-1}} f(\zb\xi)\ \overline{g(\zb\xi)} \d \S^{d-1}(\zb\xi)
$$
and the norm $\norm{f}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}={\left<f,f\right>_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^{1/2}}$.

\subsection{The space $C^s(\S^{d-1})$ and differential operators on the sphere}

For brevity, we denote by $\partial_i = \frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}$ the partial derivative with respect to the $i$-th variable.
We extend a function $f\colon\S^{d-1}\to\C$ to the surrounding space $\R^{d} \setminus\{\zb 0\}$ by setting
\begin{equation*}
f^\bullet(\zb x) = f\left(\frac{\zb x}{\norm{\zb x}}\right)
,\qquad \zb x\in\R^{d} \setminus\{\zb 0\}.
\end{equation*}
The surface gradient $\zb\nabla^\bullet$ on the sphere is the orthogonal projection of the gradient $\zb\nabla=(\partial_1,\dots,\partial_{d})^\top$ onto the tangent space of the sphere.
For a differentiable function $f\colon\S^{d-1}\to\C$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\zb\nabla^\bullet f (\zb\xi) = \zb\nabla f^\bullet(\zb\xi)
,\qquad \zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}.
\end{equation*}
In a similar manner, the restriction of the Laplacian
\begin{equation*}
\Delta = \partial_1^2 + \dots + \partial_{d}^2
\end{equation*}
to the sphere is known as the Laplace--Beltrami operator \cite[(§14.20)]{Mue98}
\begin{equation*}
\Delta^\bullet f (\zb\xi) = \Delta f^\bullet(\zb\xi)
,\qquad \zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}.
\end{equation*}
For a multi-index $\zb\alpha=(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_{d}) \in\N^{d}$, we define its norm $\norm{\zb\alpha}_1 = \sum_{i=1}^{d}\abs{\alpha_i}$ and the differential operator $D^{\zb\alpha} = \partial_1^{\alpha_1} \cdots \partial_{d}^{\alpha_{d}}$.
Let $s\in\N$.
We denote by $C^s(\S^{d-1})$ the space of functions $f\colon \S^{d-1}\to\C$ whose extension $f^\bullet$ has continuous derivatives up to the order $s$ with the norm
\begin{equation*}
\norm{f}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}
= \max_{\norm{\zb\alpha}_1 \leq s}\, \sup_{\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}} \abs{D^{\zb\alpha} f^\bullet(\zb\xi)}.
\end{equation*}
The space $C^0(\S^{d-1}) = C(\S^{d-1})$ is the space of continuous functions with the uniform norm.
The definition implies for $f\in C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})$
\begin{equation}
\norm{f}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})} \leq \norm{f}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}.
\label{eq:infty-norm-1}
\end{equation}
We define the space $C^s(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})$ of vector fields $\zb f\colon\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d}$ with the norm as the Euclidean norm over its component functions, i.e., for $\zb f(\zb\xi) =  [f_i(\zb\xi)]_{i=1}^{d}$ we set
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\zb f}_{C^s(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}
= \sqrt{\sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{f_i}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})}^2}.
\label{eq:infty-norm-vector}
\end{equation*}
We see that  for $f\in C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})$
\begin{equation}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2
= \sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{\partial_i f^\bullet}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\leq \sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{ f}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
= d\, \norm{f}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\label{eq:infty-norm-gradient}
\end{equation}

\subsection{Sobolev spaces}

\label{sec:Sobolev-spaces}

We give a short introduction to Sobolev spaces on the sphere based on \cite{AtHa12} (see also \cite{DaXu2013,Mic13}).
We define the Legendre polynomial $P_{n,d}$ of degree $n\in\N$ and in dimension $d$ by \cite[(2.70)]{AtHa12}
\begin{equation*}
P_{n,d}(t)
= (-1)^n\, \frac{(d-3)!!}{(2n+d-3)!!}\, (1-t^2)^{\frac{3-d}{2}} \left(\frac{\dx}{\dx t}\right)^n (1-t^2)^{n+\frac{d-3}{2}}
,\qquad t\in[-1,1].
\end{equation*}
For $f\in L^2(\S^{d-1})$ and $n\in\N$, we define the projection operator
$$
\mathcal P_{n,d}f(\zb\xi) = \frac{N_{n,d}}{\abs{\S^{d-1}}}
\int_{\S^{d-1}} f(\zb \eta)\,  P_{n,d}(\left<\zb\xi,\zb \eta\right>) \d \S^d(\zb \eta)
,\qquad\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1},
$$
where
$$
N_{n,d} = \dim(\mathcal P_{n,d} (L^2(\S^{d-1}))) = \frac{(2n+d-2)(n+d-3)!}{n!(d-2)!}.
$$
Note that $\mathcal P_{n,d}$ is the $L^2(\S^{d-1})$-orthogonal projection onto the pairwise orthogonal spaces $
\mathcal P_{n,d} (L^2(\S^{d-1}))$ of harmonic polynomials that are homogeneous of degree $n$ restricted to the sphere $\S^{d-1}$.
Every function $f\in L^2(\S^{d-1})$ can be written as the Laplace series
$$
f = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \mathcal P_{n,d} f.
$$
We define the Sobolev space
$H^s(\S^{d-1})$
of smoothness $s\ge0$
as the space of all functions $f\in L^2(\S^{d-1})$ with finite Sobolev norm \cite[(3.98)]{AtHa12}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sobolev-norm}
\norm{f}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}
&= \sqrt{\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \left(n+\frac{d-2}2\right)^{2s} \norm{\mathcal P_{n,d} f}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2}
\\
&= \norm{\left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}{4}\right)^{s/2} f}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}.
\label{eq:sobolev-norm-Laplacian}
\end{align}
Similarly to \eqref{eq:infty-norm-vector}, we define the Sobolev norm of a vector field $\zb f\colon\S^{d-1} \to \R^{d}$ as the Euclidean norm over its component functions $\zb f(\zb\xi) = (f_1(\zb\xi),\dots,f_{d}(\zb\xi))$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\norm{\zb f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to \R^{d})}^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{ f_i}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\label{eq:sobolev-vector-valued}
\end{equation}
Since the negative Laplace--Beltrami operator $-\Delta^\bullet$ is self-adjoint, we can write the Sobolev norm \eqref{eq:sobolev-norm-Laplacian} as
\begin{equation*}
\norm{f}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}^2
= \left<\left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}{4}\right)^{s} f,f \right>_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}.
\end{equation*}
We have for $s\in\N$
\begin{align*}
\norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
={}& \int_{\S^{d-1}} \left(\left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}4\right)^{s+1} f(\zb\xi)\right)  f(\zb\xi) \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi)
\\
={}& \int_{\S^{d-1}} \left(\left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}4\right) \left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}4\right)^s f(\zb\xi)\right) f(\zb\xi) \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi).
\end{align*}
Then the Green--Beltrami identity \cite[§14, Lemma 1]{Mue98}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
-\int_{\S^{d-1}} f(\zb\xi)\, \Delta^\bullet g(\zb\xi) \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi)
= \int_{\S^{d-1}} \langle\zb\nabla^\bullet f(\zb\xi),\, \zb\nabla^\bullet g(\zb\xi)\rangle \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi)
,\\ f\in C^{2}(\S^{d-1}),\;g\in C^{1}(\S^{d-1})
\end{split}
\label{eq:Green-Beltrami}
\end{equation}
implies that
\begin{align*}
\norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
={}& \int_{\S^{d-1}} \left< \zb\nabla^\bullet f(\zb\xi),\, \zb\nabla^\bullet \left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-1)^2}4\right)^s f(\zb\xi)\right> \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi)
\\&+ \frac{(d-2)^2}{4} \int_{\S^{d-1}} \left(\left(-\Delta^\bullet+\tfrac{(d-2)^2}4\right)^s f(\zb\xi)\right) f(\zb\xi) \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi).
\end{align*}
Since the gradient $\zb\nabla^\bullet$ and the Laplacian $\Delta^\bullet$ commute by Schwarz's theorem, we obtain the recursion
\begin{equation}
\norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
= \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 + \tfrac{(d-2)^2}4\norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\label{eq:sobolev-norm-gradient}
\end{equation}

\subsection{Sobolev spaces as interpolation spaces}

The norm of a bounded linear operator $\mathcal A\colon X\to Y$ between two Banach spaces $X$ and $Y$ with norms $\norm{\cdot}_X$ and $\norm{\cdot}_Y$, respectively, is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\mathcal A}_{X\to Y} = \sup_{x\in X\setminus\{0\}} \frac{\norm{\mathcal Ax}_Y}{\norm{x}_X}.
\end{equation*}

The following proposition shows that the boundedness of linear operators in Sobolev spaces $H^s(\S^2)$ can be interpolated with respect to the smoothness parameter $s$.
This result is derived from a more general interpolation theorem in \cite{Tri95}.

\begin{Proposition}
	\label{prop:sobolev-interpolation}
	Let $0\leq s_0\leq s_1$, and
	let $\mathcal A\colon H^{s_1}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s_1}(\S^{d-1})$ be a bounded linear operator such that its restriction to $H^{s_0}(\S^{d-1})$ is also bounded.
	For $\theta\in[0,1]$, we set $s_\theta = (1-\theta)s_0 + \theta s_1$.
	Then the restriction of $\mathcal A$ to $H^{s_\theta}(\S^{d-1})$ is bounded with
	\begin{equation*}
	\norm{\mathcal A}_{H^{s_\theta}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s_\theta}(\S^{d-1})}
		\leq \norm{\mathcal A}_{H^{s_0}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s_0}(\S^{d-1})}^{1-\theta} \norm{\mathcal A}_{H^{s_1}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s_1}(\S^{d-1})}^{\theta}.
	\end{equation*}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{proof}
For $n\in\N$, let $\{Y_{n,d}^k \mid k=1,\,\dots,\,N_{n,d}\}$ be an orthonormal basis of $\mathcal P_{n,d} (L^2(\S^{d-1}))$,
and let $f\in L^2(\S^{d-1})$.
We write $f$ as the Fourier series
$$
f = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \sum_{k=1}^{N_{n,d}} \left<f, Y_{n,d}^k\right>_{L^2(\S^{d-1})} Y_{n,d}^k.
$$
On the index set
$$
I=\{(n,k)\mid n\in\N,\; k=1,\dots, N_{n,d} \},
$$
we define for $s\ge0$ the weight function
$$w_s(n,k) = (n+\tfrac{d-2}{2})^{2s}.$$
Then the Sobolev space $H^s(\S^{d-1})$ is isometrically isomorphic to the weighted $L^2$-space
\begin{equation*}
L^2 (I;w_s)
= \left\{ \hat f \colon I\to\C \middle| \norm{\smash{\hat f}}_{L^2 (I;w_s)}^2 =\sum_{(n,k)\in I} \abs{\hat f(n,k)}^2 w_s(n,k) < \infty \right\}
\end{equation*}
that consists of the Fourier coefficients
$$\hat f(n,k)=\left<f, Y_{n,d}^k\right>_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}$$
on the set $I$ with the counting measure.
By \cite[Theorem 1.18.5]{Tri95}, the complex interpolation space between $L^2(I;w_{s_0}) \cong H^{s_0}(\S^{d-1})$ and $L^2(I;w_{s_1}) \cong H^{s_1}(\S^{d-1})$ is
\[
\left[ L^2(I;w_{s_0}), L^2(I;w_{s_1})\right]_\theta = L^2(I;w),
\]
where
\begin{equation*}
w(n,k)
= \left(w_{s_0}(n,k)\right)^{1-\theta} \left(w_{s_1}(n,k)\right)^\theta
= \left(n+\tfrac{d-2}2\right)^{2((1-\theta)s+\theta t)}
= w_{s_{\theta}}(n,k).
\end{equation*}
Hence, $L^2(I;w) \cong H^{s_\theta}(\S^{d-1})$.
The assertion is a property of the interpolation space.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Multiplication and composition operators}
The following two theorems show that multiplication and composition with a smooth function are continuous operators in spherical Sobolev spaces $H^s(\S^{d-1})$.

\begin{Theorem}
	\label{thm:sobolev-product}
	Let $s\in\N$.
	The multiplication operator
	$$ H^s(\S^{d-1})\times C^s(\S^{d-1}) \to H^s(\S^{d-1}),\quad(f,v)\mapsto fv$$
	is continuous.
	In particular, for all $f\in H^s(\S^{d-1})$ and $v\in C^{s}(\S^{d-1})$, we have
	\begin{equation}
    \label{eq:sobolev-product}
	\norm{fv}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}
	\leq c_d^s \norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})} \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})},
	\end{equation}
	where
	$$c_d = \sqrt{2d+2}.$$
\end{Theorem}

\begin{proof}
	We use induction over $s\in\N$.
	For $s=0$, we have
	$$
	\norm{f v}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2
	= \int_{\S^{d-1}} \abs{f(\zb\xi)\, v(\zb\xi)}^2 \d\zb\xi
	\leq \norm{f}_{L^2(\S^d)}^2 \norm{v}_{C(\S^{d-1})}^2.
	$$
	Let the claimed equation \eqref{eq:sobolev-product} hold for $s\in\N$,
	and let $f\in H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})$ and $v\in C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})$.
	Then the decomposition \eqref{eq:sobolev-norm-gradient} of the Sobolev norm yields
	\begin{align*}
	\norm{fv}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	&=\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet (fv)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2 + \tfrac{(d-2)^2}4 \norm{fv}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	\\&=\norm{f\zb\nabla^\bullet v + v\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2 + \tfrac{(d-2)^2}4 \norm{fv}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
	\intertext{By the triangle inequality and since $(a+b)^2\leq2(a^2+b^2)$ for all $a,b\in\R$, we obtain}
	\norm{fv}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	&\leq2\norm{f\zb\nabla^\bullet v}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2 + 2\norm{v\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})\to\R^d}^2
	+ \tfrac{(d-2)^2}4 \norm{fv}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
	\end{align*}
	By the induction hypothesis, we have
	\begin{align*}
	c_d^{-2s} \norm{f v}_{H^{d+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	\leq{}& 2\norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)} ^2
	+ 2\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	\\&
	+ \tfrac{(d-2)^2}4 \norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
	\\
	={}& 2\norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)} ^2
	+ \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^d)}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
    \\&
	+ \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 ,
	\intertext{where we made use of the decomposition  \eqref{eq:sobolev-norm-gradient} of the Sobolev norm.
    Furthermore, we apply \eqref{eq:infty-norm-gradient} and obtain}
    c_d^{-2s} \norm{f v}_{H^{d+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
    \leq{}&  2d\norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
	+ \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
    \\&
	+ \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \norm{v}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 .
	\end{align*}
	Because the involved norms are non-decreasing with respect to $s$, we see that
	\begin{equation*}
	\norm{f v}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}
	\leq c_d^s\, \sqrt{2d+2}\, \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})} \norm{v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})},
	\end{equation*}
    which shows \eqref{eq:sobolev-product}.
\end{proof}

\begin{Theorem}
	\label{thm:sobolev-composition}
	Let $s\in\N$, and let $\zb v\colon \S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1}$ be bijective with $\zb v\in C^s(\S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1})$ and $\zb v^{-1}\in C^1(\S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1})$.
	Then there exists a constant $b_{d,s}(\zb v)$ such that for all $f\in H^s(\S^{d-1})$, we have
	\begin{equation*}
	\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}
	\leq b_{d,s}(\zb v) \norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}.
	\end{equation*}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
We have for $s=0$
\begin{align*}
\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2
= \int_{\S^{d-1}} \abs{f(\zb v(\zb\xi))}^2 \d\S^{d-1}(\zb\xi).
\end{align*}
The substitution $\zb\eta=\zb v(\zb\xi)$ yields with the substitution rule \eqref{eq:substitution-rule}
\begin{align*}
\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2
= \int_{\S^{d-1}} \abs{f(\zb\eta)}^2  \left[(\zb v^{-1})^*(\mathrm d\S^{d-1})\right] (\zb\eta).
\end{align*}
Since $\zb v^{-1}\in C^1(\S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1})$, there exists a continuous function $\nu\colon\S^{d-1}\to\R$ such that the pullback satisfies $(\zb v^{-1})^*(\mathrm d\S^{d-1}) = \nu \d\S^{d-1}$.
Hence, we have
\begin{equation*}
\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2
\leq \norm{f}_{L^2(\S^{d-1})}^2\, \norm{\nu}_{C(\S^{d-1})},
\end{equation*}
which shows the claim for $s=0$.

We use induction on $s\in\N$.
By the decomposition \eqref{eq:sobolev-norm-gradient} of the Sobolev norm, we have
\begin{equation}
\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
= \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 +\tfrac{(d-2)^2}{4} \norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\label{eq:sobolev-composition-sum}
\end{equation}
By the induction hypothesis, the second summand of \eqref{eq:sobolev-composition-sum} is bounded by
\begin{equation}
\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s}(\S^d)}
\leq b_{d,s}(\zb v) \norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^d)}.
\label{eq:sobolev-composition-proof1}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, by \eqref{eq:sobolev-vector-valued} and the chain rule, we have for the first summand of \eqref{eq:sobolev-composition-sum}
\begin{align*}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
&= \norm{\zb\nabla(f\circ v)^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
\\
&= \sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{\partial_i(f\circ\zb v)^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\\&= \sum_{i=1}^{d} \norm{\sum_{j=1}^{d} ((\partial_j f^\bullet)\circ\zb v^\bullet)\, \partial_i v_j^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\intertext{Applying the triangle inequality for the sum over $j$ and Jensen's inequality $(\sum_{j=1}^{d} x_j)^2 \leq d\,\sum_{j=1}^{d} x_j^2$, we obtain}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
&\leq \sum_{i=1}^{d} d \sum_{j=1}^{d} \norm{((\partial_j f^\bullet)\circ\zb v^\bullet)\, \partial_i v^\bullet_j}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\intertext{By Theorem \ref{thm:sobolev-product}, we have}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
&\leq
d\, c_d^{2s} \sum_{j=1}^{d} \norm{(\partial_j f^\bullet)\circ\zb v^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\,\sum_{i=1}^{d}\norm{\partial_i v^\bullet_j}_{C^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\\
&\leq d^2\, c_d^{2s} \sum_{j=1}^{d} \norm{(\partial_j f^\bullet)\circ\zb v^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\, \norm{v_j}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2,
\end{align*}
where the last line follows from \eqref{eq:infty-norm-gradient}.
By the induction hypothesis, we see that
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
\leq d^2\, c_d^{2s}\, b_{d,s}(\zb v)^2\, \sum_{j=1}^{d} \norm{\partial_j f^\bullet}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \,\norm{v_j}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2.
\end{equation*}
By \eqref{eq:sobolev-vector-valued} and the fact that $\norm{v_j}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2 \le \norm{\zb v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2$ for all $j=1,\dots,d$, we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
\le d^2\, c_d^{2s}\, b_{d,s}(\zb v)^2 \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 \norm{\zb v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2.
\end{equation*}
Inserting the last equation and \eqref{eq:sobolev-composition-proof1} into \eqref{eq:sobolev-composition-sum}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\\={}& \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet(f\circ\zb v)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 +\tfrac{(d-2)^2}{4} \norm{f\circ\zb v}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}^2
\\
\leq{}&  b_{d,s}(\zb v)^2 \left(d^2\, c_d^{2s}\, \norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 \norm{\zb v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
+ \tfrac{(d-2)^2}{4} \norm{f}_{H^s(\S^d)}^2\right)
\\
={}&  b_{d,s}(\zb v)^2 \left(\left(d^2\, c_d^{2s}  \norm{\zb v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2-1\right)\norm{\zb\nabla^\bullet f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2
+ \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2\right)
\\
\leq{}&  b_{d,s}(\zb v)^2 d^2\, c_d^{2s}  \norm{\zb v}_{C^{s+1}(\S^{d-1}\to\R^{d})}^2 \norm{f}_{H^{s+1}(\S^{d-1})}^2,
\end{align*}
where we have made use of \eqref{eq:sobolev-norm-gradient}.
\end{proof}

\begin{Remark}
	The last theorem resembles a similar result found in \cite[Theorem~1.2]{InKaTo13}:
	Let $M$ be a smooth, closed and oriented $d$-dimensional manifold and, for $s>\frac{d}{2}+1$, let $\varphi\in H^s(M\to M)$ be an orientation-preserving $C^1$-diffeomorphism.
	Then the composition map
	\[
	H^s(M) \to H^s(M),\;
	f \mapsto f\circ\varphi
	\]
	is continuous.
	However, \prettyref{thm:sobolev-composition} is not a special case of this result because \prettyref{thm:sobolev-composition} requires only $s\ge0$ but imposes stronger assumptions on $\varphi$.
\end{Remark}

\section{Range}

\label{sec:range}

In this section, we show that for $s\ge0$ the spherical transform
$$\mathcal U_z\colon H^s(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+(d-2)/2}(\S^{d-1})$$
is continuous.
To this end, we seperately investigate the parts of the decomposition obtained in \prettyref{thm:spherical-transform},
$$
\mathcal U_z = \mathcal N_z \mathcal F \mathcal M_z.
$$

\subsection{Continuity of $\mathcal F$}

The following property of the Funk--Radon transform in Sobolev spaces was shown by Strichartz \cite[Lemma 4.3]{Str81} using an asymptotic analysis of its eigenvalues.

\begin{Proposition}
	\label{prop:funk-radon}
	Denote by $H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})$ the restriction of the Sobolev space $H^s(\S^{d-1})$ to even functions $f(\zb\xi)=f(-\zb\xi)$.
	The Funk--Radon transform
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal F\colon H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})\to H_{\textrm{even}}^{s+\frac{d-2}{2}}(\S^{d-1})
	\end{equation*}
	is continuous and bijective.
\end{Proposition}

\subsection{Continuity of $\mathcal M_z$ and $\mathcal N_z$}

\begin{Theorem}
	\label{thm:mn}
	Let $z\in[0,1)$ and $s \in\R$ with $s\ge0$.
	The operators
	$$\mathcal M_z\colon H^s(\S^{d-1})\to H^s(\S^{d-1})$$
	and
	$$\mathcal N_z\colon H^s(\S^{d-1})\to H^s(\S^{d-1}),$$
	as defined in \eqref{eq:M} and \eqref{eq:N}, are continuous and open.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
	We first perform the proof for $\mathcal M_z$.
	Initially, we consider only the situation $s\in\N$.
	Let $f\in H^s(\S^{d-1})$ and $z\in(-1,1)$.
	We write
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal M_z f (\zb{\xi}) =
	w_z(\zb\xi)\,
	[f \circ \zb h_z] ( \zb \xi),
	\qquad\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1},
	\end{equation*}
	where
	\begin{equation*}
	w_z\colon \S^{d-1}\to\R,\quad
	w_z(\zb\xi)
	= \left(\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{1+z\xi_{d}}\right)^{d-2}
	\end{equation*}
	and $\zb h_z$ is given in \eqref{eq:h_z}.
	We see that the extension
	\begin{equation*}
	w_z^\bullet(\zb x)
	= w_z \left(\frac{\zb x}{\norm{\zb x}}\right)
	= \left(\sqrt{1-z^2}\,\frac{\norm{\zb x}}{\norm{\zb x}+zx_{d}}\right)^{d-2}
    ,\qquad\zb x\in\R^d\setminus\{\zb0\},
	\end{equation*}
	is smooth except in the origin,
	i.e., $w_z^\bullet \in C^\infty(\R^{d}\setminus\{\zb0\})$.
	Hence, $w_z\in C^\infty(\S^{d-1})$.
	Then Theorem \ref{thm:sobolev-product} implies that
	\begin{equation}
	\norm{w_z\,(f\circ \zb h_z)}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}
	\le c_{d}^s\, \norm{w_z}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})} \norm{f\circ \zb h_z}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}.
    \label{eq:norm-w-fh}
	\end{equation}
	Moreover, the extension of $\zb h_z$,
	\begin{equation*}
	\zb h_z^\bullet \colon \R^{d}\setminus\{\zb0\}\to\R^{d},\quad
	\zb h_z^\bullet (\zb x)
	= \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}}{\norm{\zb x}+zx_{d}} x_i \zb \epsilon^i + \frac{z\norm{\zb x}+x_{d}}{\norm{\zb x}+zx_{d}} \zb \epsilon^{d},
	\end{equation*}
	is also smooth, so $\zb h_z\in C^\infty(\S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1})$.
	This implies that also the inverse
	$\zb h_z^{-1} = \zb h_{-z}$, see \eqref{eq:h^-1}, is smooth.
	So $\zb h_z$ is a diffeomorphism and Theorem \ref{thm:sobolev-composition} together with \eqref{eq:norm-w-fh} implies that
	\begin{align*}
	\norm{\mathcal M_zf}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}
    &\le c_{d}^s\, \norm{w_z}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})} \norm{f\circ \zb h_z}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}
    \\
    &\le c_{d}^s\, \norm{w_z}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})} b_{d,s}(\zb h_z) \norm{f}_{H^s(\S^{d-1})}.
	\end{align*}
	Thus, the operator $\mathcal M_z\colon H^s(\S^{d-1})\to H^s(\S^{d-1})$ is continuous.

	Now let $s\in\R$ with $s\ge0$.
	The above proof shows that both the restrictions of $\mathcal M_z$ to $H^{\lfloor s\rfloor}$ and to $H^{\lfloor s\rfloor +1}$ are continuous, where $\lfloor s\rfloor$ denotes the largest integer that is smaller than or equal to $s$.
	The continuity of $\mathcal M_z$ on $H^s(\S^{d-1})$ follows by the interpolation result \prettyref{prop:sobolev-interpolation}.

	In order to prove the openness of $\mathcal M_z$, we show that the inverse $\mathcal M_z^{-1}$ restricted to $H^s(\S^{d-1})$ is continuous.
    However, we have already done this because $\mathcal M_z^{-1} = \mathcal M_{-z}$ by \eqref{eq:M-1}.

	The same argumentation as above also works for the operator $\mathcal N_z$ as follows.
    Let $z\in[0,1)$ and $s\in\N$.
	We write
	$$\mathcal N_zf (\zb{\xi}) =
	v_z(\zb\xi)\,
	[f \circ \zb g_z] ( \zb \xi)
    ,\qquad\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1},
	$$
	where
    $$v_z(\zb\xi) =  (1-z^2\xi_{d}^2)^{-\frac{d-2}{2}}
    ,\qquad\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}.$$
	We see that the extension
	$$
	v_z^\bullet(\zb x) =  \left(\frac{\norm{\zb x}^2}{\norm{\zb x}^2-z^2x_{d}^2}\right)^{\frac{d-2}{2}},
	\qquad\zb x\in\R^{d}\setminus\{\zb0\},
	$$
	is smooth and hence $v_z\in C^s(\S^d)$.
	\prettyref{thm:sobolev-product} yields
	\begin{equation*}
	\norm{v_z\, (f\circ \zb g_z)}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}
	\leq c_d^s \norm{v_z}_{C^s(\S^{d-1})}  \norm{f\circ \zb g_z}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}.
	\end{equation*}
	Since the extensions of both
	\begin{equation*}
	\zb g_z^\bullet(\zb x)
	=\zb g_z \left(\frac{\zb x}{\norm{\zb x}}\right)
	= \frac{1}{\sqrt{\norm{\zb x}^2-z^2{x_{d}^2}}}
	\left(\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} {x_i} \zb \epsilon^i + \sqrt{1-z^2}\, {x_{d}} \zb \epsilon^{d}\right)
    , \qquad \zb x\in\R^d\setminus\{\zb0\},
	\end{equation*}
	and its inverse \eqref{eq:g^-1}
	\[
	[(\zb g_z^{-1})^\bullet](\zb x)
	=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\norm{\zb x}^2-z^2+z^2x_{d}^2}} \left(\sqrt{1-z^2}\,\sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \omega_i \zb\epsilon^i
	+x_{d} \zb\epsilon^{d}\right)
    , \qquad \zb x\in\R^d\setminus\{\zb0\},
	\]
	are smooth functions on $\R^{d}\setminus\{\zb 0\}$, we see that $\zb g_z$ is a smooth diffeomorphism in $C^s(\S^{d-1})$.
	By \prettyref{thm:sobolev-composition}, there exists a constant $b_{d,s} (\zb g_z)$ independent of $f$ such that
	$$\norm{f\circ \zb g_z}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})} \leq b_{d,s} (\zb g_z) \norm{f}_{H^{s}(\S^{d-1})}.$$
	Hence, $\mathcal N_z$ is a bounded operator on $H^s(\S^{d-1})$.
	An analogue computation shows that the inverse operator \eqref{eq:N-1}
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal N_z^{-1} f (\zb\eta)
	= \frac{f(\zb g_z^{-1}(\zb\eta))}{v_z(\zb g_z^{-1}(\zb\eta))}
	= \left(\frac{1-z^2}{1-z^2+z^2\eta_{d}^2}\right)^{\frac{d-2}{2}}\,(f\circ \zb g_z^{-1})(\zb\eta)
    ,\qquad\zb\eta\in\S^{d-1}
	\end{equation*}
	is also bounded on $H^s(\S^{d-1})$.
    The assertion for general $s$ follows by the same interpolation argument as for $\mathcal M_z$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{Continuity of $\mathcal U_z$}

\begin{Theorem}
	\label{thm:Uz-Sobolev}
	Let $z\in(0,1)$ and $s\in\R$ with $s\ge0$.
	We set $H^s_z(\S^{d-1})$ as the subspace of all functions $f\in H^s(\S^{d-1})$ that satisfy
	\begin{equation}
    f(\zb{\omega})
	=\left(\frac{1-z^2}{1-2z\omega_{d}+z^2}\right)^{d-2} f \circ\zb r_z(\zb\omega),
	\qquad\zb\omega\in\S^{d-1},
    \label{eq:symmetric-z}
    \end{equation}
    almost everywhere,
	where the point reflection $\zb r_z$ about the point $z\:\!\zb\epsilon^d$ is given in \eqref{eq:point-reflection}.
	Then the spherical transform
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal U_z\colon H^s_z(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+\frac{d-2}{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})
	\end{equation*}
	is continuous and bijective and its inverse operator is also continuous.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof} In \prettyref{thm:spherical-transform}, we obtained the decomposition
	$$
	\mathcal U_z = \mathcal N_z \mathcal F \mathcal M_z.
	$$
	We are going to look at the parts of this decomposition separately.
	By Theorem \ref{thm:mn}, we obtain that
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal M_z \colon H^s(\S^{d-1})\to H^s(\S^{d-1})
	\end{equation*}
	is continuous and bijective.
	The same holds for the restriction
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal M_z \colon H^s_{z} (\S^{d-1})\to H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1}),
	\end{equation*}
	which follows from the characterization of the nullspace in Theorem \ref{thm:nullspace}.
	By Proposition \ref{prop:funk-radon}, the Funk--Radon transform
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal F \colon H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+\frac{d-2}{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})
	\end{equation*}
	is continuous and bijective.
	Finally, Theorem \ref{thm:mn} and the observation that any function $f\colon\S^{d-1}\to\C$ is even if and only if $\mathcal N_zf$ is even show that
	\begin{equation*}
	\mathcal N_z\colon H^{s+\frac{d-2}{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})\to H^{s+\frac{d-2}{2}}_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})
	\end{equation*}
	is continuous and bijective.
	The continuity of the inverse operator of $\mathcal U_z$ follows from the open mapping theorem.
\end{proof}

Theorem \ref{thm:Uz-Sobolev} is a generalization of \prettyref{prop:funk-radon} for the Funk--Radon transform $\mathcal F$; the main difference is that the space $H^s_{\textrm{even}}(\S^{d-1})$ is replaced by $H^s_z(\S^{d-1})$, which contains functions that satisfy the symmetry condition \eqref{eq:symmetric-z} with respect to the point reflection in $z\,\zb\epsilon^d$.
Furthermore, the spherical transform $\mathcal U_z$ is smoothing of degree $\frac{d-2}{2}$, which comes from the fact that $\mathcal U_z$ takes the integrals along $(d-2)$-dimensional submanifolds.

\section{Geometric interpretation}
\label{sec:geometric-interpratation}

We give geometric interpretations of the mappings $\zb g_z$ and $\zb h_z\colon \S^{d-1}\to\S^{d-1}$ that were defined in \prettyref{sec:hg}.
The mapping $\zb g_z$ consists of a scaling with the factor $\sqrt{1-z^2}$ along the $\xi_{d}$ axis, which maps the sphere to an ellipsoid, which is symmetric with respect to rotations about the $\xi_{d}$ axis.
Then a central projection maps this ellipsoid onto the sphere again.

In order give a description of the mapping $\zb h_z$, we define the stereographic projection
$$
\zb\pi\colon \S^{d-1}\setminus\{\zb\epsilon^{d}\}\to\R^{d-1},\quad
\zb\xi \mapsto \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\xi_i}{1-\xi_{d}} \zb\epsilon^i
$$
and its inverse
$$
\zb\pi^{-1}\colon \R^{d-1}\to \S^{d-1}\setminus\{\zb\epsilon^{d}\},\quad
\zb x \mapsto \frac{2\zb x + (\norm{\zb x}^2-1)\, \zb\epsilon^{d}}{1+\norm{\zb x}^2}.
$$
The following corollary states that, via stereographic projection, the map $\zb h_z$ on the sphere $\S^{d-1}$ corresponds to a uniform scaling in the equatorial hyperplane $\R^{d-1}$ with the scaling factor $\sqrt{\frac{1+z}{1-z}}$.

\begin{Corollary}
	Let $\zb\xi\in\S^{d-1}$ and $z\in(0,1)$. Then we have
	\begin{equation*}
	\zb h_z(\zb\xi) =
	\zb\pi^{-1}\left(\sqrt{\frac{1+z}{1-z}} \,\zb\pi(\zb\xi) \right).
	\end{equation*}
\end{Corollary}
\begin{proof}
    We are going to show that
    \begin{equation*}
    \zb\pi(\zb h_z(\zb\xi))
    = \sqrt{\frac{1+z}{1-z}}\,\zb\pi(\zb\xi)
    \end{equation*}
    holds.
	We have on the one hand
	$$
	\sqrt{\frac{1+z}{1-z}}\,\zb\pi(\zb\xi)
	= \sqrt{\frac{1+z}{1-z}}\, \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\xi_i}{1-\xi_{d}} \zb\epsilon^i
	$$
    and the other hand
    \begin{align*}
    \zb\pi(\zb h_z(\zb\xi))
    &= \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}\,\xi_i}{1+z\xi_d}}{1-\frac{z+\xi_d}{1+z\xi_d}}\,\zb\epsilon^i
    = \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}\,\xi_i}{1+z\xi_d-(z+\xi_d)}\,\zb\epsilon^i
    \\&
    = \sum_{i=1}^{d-1} \frac{\sqrt{1-z^2}\,\xi_i}{(1-z)\,(1-\xi_d)}\,\zb\epsilon^i.
    \end{align*}
    The assertion follows by canceling $\sqrt{1-z}$.
\end{proof}

\input{sphericalTransformD.bbl}

\end{document}


\section{Introduction}

Ramsey theory is the branch of combinatorics which studies the forced appearance of certain substructures in sufficiently large structures.
One of the classical results in the field is Ramsey's theorem \cite{R}, which states that for any graph $G$, every sufficiently large two-edge-colored complete graph must contain a monochromatic copy of $G$.
It is natural to ask for the minimum order of a complete graph with this property, which we refer to as the \emph{Ramsey number} of $G$, denoted $r(G)$.

The study of Ramsey numbers has branched out in many different directions.
For example, Erd\H{o}s, Faudree, Rousseau, and Schelp \cite{EFRS} introduced the idea of the size Ramsey number in 1972. The \emph{size Ramsey number} of a graph $G$, denoted $\hat{r}(G)$, is the minimum integer $m$ for which there is a graph $H$ with $m$ edges such that every two-coloring of $E(H)$ contains a monochromatic copy of $G$.

Let $P_n$ denote the path on $n$ vertices.
It is well-known that $r(P_n)=\Theta(n)$.
Since the complete graph on $r(G)$ vertices has $\binom{r(G)}{2}$ edges, this implies $\hat{r}(P_n)=O(n^2)$. Erd\H{o}s~\cite{E} offered a \$100 reward for determining the asymptotic behavior of $\hat{r}(P_n)$; the question was settled in 1983 by Beck~\cite{B}, who showed that that $\hat{r}(P_n)$ is also linear in $n$.
The constant in this upper bound has been improved several times (as in \cite{Bo}, \cite{DP}, \cite{L}),  and the current best upper bound, given by Dudek and Pra\l at \cite{DP2}, is $\hat{r}(P_n)\leq 74n$.

Beck \cite{B2} also gave the first nontrivial lower bound on $\hat{r}(P_n)$.
This result was later improved by Bollob\'as \cite{Bo2}, who showed that $\hat{r}(P_n)\geq (1+\sqrt{2})n-O(1)$, and then by Dudek and Pra\l at~\cite{DP2}, who gave the current best lower bound of $\hat{r}(P_n)\geq 5n/2-O(1)$.

More generally, Krivelevich \cite{K} showed that  $\hat{r}(P_n,k)$, the size Ramsey number of the path with respect to edge-coloring with $k$ colors, satisfies $\hat{r}(P_n,k)=O((\log k)k^2n)$.
Dudek and Pra\l at \cite{DP3} have also provided an alternative proof of this upper bound, which is nearly optimal since $\hat{r}(P_n,k)=\Omega(k^2n)$.

The question of determining the size Ramsey number of the path is also of interest in the setting of oriented graphs.
An \emph{oriented graph} is a directed graph in which at most one of $xy$ and $yx$ appears as an edge for each pair of vertices $x$ and $y$.
The \emph{oriented size Ramsey number} of an oriented graph $G$, denoted $\vec{r}(G)$, is the minimum number $m$ for which every two-coloring of the edges of some oriented graph $H$ with $m$ edges contains a monochromatic copy of $G$.
One significant difference arises between the undirected and oriented cases: the same undirected graph admits many different orientations, and these orientations may have very different oriented size Ramsey numbers.
We restrict our attention to the monotone increasing path, which we refer to as the \emph{ordered path}.
Throughout the rest of the paper, we denote the ordered path on $n+1$ vertices and $n$ edges simply by $P_n$.

While the size Ramsey number of an undirected path is linear, the oriented size Ramsey number of the ordered path, $\vec{r}(P_n)$, is very different.
Following initial results by Ben-Eliezer, Krivelevich, and Sudakov \cite{BKS} bounding $\vec{r}(P_n)$, Buci\'c, Letzter, and Sudakov \cite{BLS} recently gave a nice proof showing that $\vec{r}(P_n)= O(n^2\log n)$ by giving a lower bound on the longest monochromatic path in two-coloured random tournaments.
Letzter and Sudakov \cite{LS} also gave a matching lower bound which shows that $\vec{r}(P_n)=\Theta(n^2\log n)$.

In this paper, we consider ordered graphs.
An \emph{ordered graph} on $n$ vertices is a simple graph whose vertices have been labeled with $\{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$.
Since ordered graphs can be viewed as acylic oriented graphs, any lower bound on the oriented size Ramsey number of $P_n$ also applies when we restrict our attention to ordered graphs.
However, one significant difference between the study of ordered and oriented graphs is the lack of symmetry in the ordered case.
For example, the edge 12 in an $n$-vertex ordered graph $G$ plays a very different role in ordered subgraphs of $G$ than the edge $1n$.

The Erd\H{o}s--Szekeres Theorem \cite{ESz} states that every sequence of $n^2+1$ distinct real numbers must contain an increasing or decreasing subsequence of $n+1$ numbers.
This result can be interpreted as giving the least number of vertices in an ordered graph such that any two-coloring of the edges contains a monochromatic ordered path with $n+1$ vertices.
Here, we consider the \emph{ordered size Ramsey number}, minimizing the number of edges in ordered graphs with this property rather than the number of vertices.
Formally, let $\tilde r(P_r, P_s)$ denote the minimum number of edges in an ordered graph for which any red-blue coloring of the edges contains either a red ordered $P_r$ or a blue ordered $P_s$.

Our main result is the following theorem:

\begin{theorem}
	\label{thm:size-ramsey}
	For some absolute constant $C>0$ and for all $2 \le r \le s$,
	\[
		\frac18 r^2s\le \tilde r(P_r, P_s) \le C r^2 s (\log s)^3.
	\]
\end{theorem}

It would be interesting to determine the true asymptotic behavior of $\hat{r}(P_r,P_s)$, although we do not have a conjecture.

In Section 2, we prove the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}.
While random and pseudorandom graphs have been used to prove upper bounds on several variants of size Ramsey numbers (for example, see Beck~\cite{B} and Alon--Chung~\cite{AC}), our proof is the first which uses inhomogeneous random graphs to obtain a result of this type.

In Section 3, we prove the lower bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}.
Our strategy is to adapt an edge-coloring algorithm used by Reimer~\cite{Re} to show that the directed size Ramsey number of $P_n$ is $\Omega(n^2)$.

In Section 4, we describe an alternative approach used to obtain an upper bound on $\tilde r(P_r, P_s)$ which transforms the question of edge-coloring into a problem about vertex-coloring.
In order to give an upper bound on the $b$-color ordered Ramsey number of the ordered path $P_s$, we iteratively define a sequence of graphs, the last of which proves the following theorem:

\begin{theorem}
	\label{thm:vertex-coloring}
	There exists an ordered graph with $se^{O(\log b \sqrt{\log s})}$ edges for which every $b$-coloring of the vertices contains a monochromatic ordered path of length~$s$.
\end{theorem}

As mentioned at the end of Section~\ref{section:vertex-coloring}, a bound of this form can be used to obtain an upper bound on $\tilde r(P_r,P_s)$.
Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring} is not sufficiently strong to improve on the bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey} in this way, but a stronger bound of this type would allow us to deduce a better upper bound on the ordered size Ramsey number of ordered paths.

Finally, in Section 5, we consider $ \tilde r(P_n;q)$, the minimum number of edges in an ordered graph for which any $q$-coloring of the edges contains a monochromatic ordered $P_n$. Using proofs similar to those in Sections 2 and 3, we obtain upper and lower bounds on $r(P_n;q)$ which agree up to a polylogarithmic factor.

\begin{theorem}
	\label{thm:multicolor}
	There exists an absolute constant $C > 0$ such that for all $n \ge 2$ and $q \ge 2$,
	\[
		\frac{n^{2q-1}}{2^{2q-1}(q-1)!} \le \tilde r(P_n;q) \le C n^{2q-1} (\log n)^3.
	\]
\end{theorem}

Throughout this paper, all logarithms are assumed to be natural, and we omit floor and ceiling signs in our proofs for convenience.
For a graph $G$ and $S\subseteq V(G)$, we write $G[S]$ for the subgraph of $G$ induced by $S$ and $G-S$ for the subgraph of $G$ induced by the complement of $S$.
For vertices $u,v$ in an ordered graph $G$, let $d(u,v)$ denote the distance between $u$ and $v$ in the ordering of the vertices of $G$.

\section{Proof of the Upper Bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}}

To prove the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}, we show the existence of an ordered graph on $n = 4rs$ vertices and $O(r^2 s (\log s)^3)$ edges for which any red-blue coloring of the edges contains either a red ordered $P_r$ or a blue ordered $P_s$.

We assume throughout the proof that $s=2^t$ for some $t\in\naturals$; this does not change the asymptotic form of the upper bound. Additionally, we may assume that $s$ is sufficiently large, by choosing the constant $C$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey} so that the upper bound holds for small~$s$.

For $i \ge 0$, define the parameters
\[
	p_i = 2^{-i},\quad \ell_i = 2^{i+3}t,\quad \text{and}\quad m_i = 2^{i+7}r t^2.
\]
Let $k$ be the integer satisfying $\frac n2 < m_k \le n$. Since $m_{t} = 2^7rs t^2 > n$, we have $k < t$. However, for $s$ sufficiently large, we have $k \ge 0$, since $m_0 = 2^7 rt^2 < 4rs$ for large $s$.

\begin{lemma}
	\label{lemma:random-graph}
	Assume $s$ is sufficiently large. For all $0 \le i \le k$, there exists an ordered graph $G_i$ on $n$ vertices with at most $2n m_i p_i$ edges such that between any two disjoint sets $S_1, S_2 \subseteq V(G_i)$ with $|S_1| = |S_2| = \ell_i$ and $\max\{d(u,v) : u \in S_1, v \in S_2\} \le m_i$, there is at least one edge.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
When $i=0$, then $p_0 = 1$ and we may take $G_0$ to be the graph which contains an edge $uv$ whenever $d(u,v) \le m_0$.

When $1 \le i \le k$, we take $G_i$ to be the random ordered graph on $n$ vertices which contains an edge $uv$ with probability $p_i$ when $d(u,v) \le m_i$ and with probability $0$ otherwise. We show that with positive probability, such a graph satisfies both of the desired properties.

The expected number of edges in $G_i$ is less than $n m_i p_i$, so with probability at least $\frac12$, $G_i$ contains no more than $2nm_ip_i$ edges.

The expected number of ``bad" pairs of sets $(S_1,S_2)$ violating the conclusion of the lemma is bounded by
\begin{align*}
\binom{n}{\ell_i}^2 (1-p_i)^{\ell_i^2}
	&\le \exp\left(2\ell_i \log (4rs) - p_i \ell_i^2\right) \le \exp\left(2^{i+4}t \log (4s^2) - 2^{i+6} t^2\right)\\
	&\le \exp\left(2^{i+4}t (2\log s + \log 4 - 4t)\right) \le \exp(-2^{i+4}t) \le s^{-16}
\end{align*}
for $s \ge 9$, where we have $2\log s + \log 4 - 4t < -1$.

Therefore, a randomly chosen $G_i$ contains a bad pair with probability at most $s^{-16}$. With probability at least $\frac12 - s^{-16} > 0$, $G_i$ satisfies both properties: it has fewer than $2nm_ip_i$ edges and no bad pairs $(S_1,S_2)$. In particular, some such ordered graph $G_i$ must exist.
\end{proof}

Let $G$ be the union of the ordered graphs $G_0, G_1, \dots, G_k$ constructed in Lemma~\ref{lemma:random-graph}. This graph has at most
\[
	\sum_{i=0}^k 2nm_i p_i = \sum_{i=0}^k 2(4rs)(2^{i+7}rt^2)(2^{-i}) = 2^{10}(k+1)r^2st^2 \le C r^2 s (\log s)^3
\]
edges, for some constant $C$. We will show that every red-blue coloring of the edges of $G$ contains a red $P_r$ or a blue $P_s$, proving the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}.

Fix an arbitrary red-blue coloring of the edges of $G$. For every $v \in V(G)$, denote by $R(v)$ the length of the longest red path ending on $v$. If there is a vertex $v$ with $R(v) \ge r$, then we are done, so we assume that $R(v)$ has values in $\{0, 1, \dots, r-1\}$.

By the pigeonhole principle, there must be some set $A \subseteq V(G)$ of size at least $\frac{n}{r} = 4s$ such that $R(u) = R(v)$ for all $u,v \in A$. From now on, we work only in the graph $G[A]$. Every edge of $G[A]$ must be blue, since a red edge $uv$ in $G[A]$ would imply $R(v) \ge R(u) + 1$. Therefore, it is sufficient to find a $P_s$ in $G[A]$ to prove the theorem.

We say that two paths are \emph{non-overlapping} if every vertex of one precedes every vertex of the other.

\begin{lemma}
	\label{lemma:induction}
	For $0 \le j \le k$, we can find a collection $\mathcal P_j$ of pairwise non-overlapping paths in $G[A]$ satisfying the following conditions:
	\begin{enumerate}[label=(\alph*)]
	\item \label{c:num-vertices} Together, the paths in $\mathcal P_j$ include at least $(4 - \frac jk)\cdot s$ vertices of $A$.
	\item \label{c:num-paths} The number of paths in $\mathcal P_j$ is at most $\frac{n}{m_j} + 1$.
	\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We induct on $j$.

To construct $\mathcal P_0$, we choose the paths greedily, using only edges in $G_0[A]$. Start a path from the vertex $a_1$ and add vertices $a_2, a_3, \dots$, until we reach a vertex $a_i$ whose distance to $a_{i+1}$ exceeds $m_0$. When this happens, start another path from the vertex $a_{i+1}$ and proceed in the same way.

After each path except possibly the last, there is a gap of at least $m_0$ vertices not present in $A$. Thus, there are at most $\frac{n}{m_0} + 1$ paths, and condition~\ref{c:num-paths} is satisfied.
Since every vertex in $A$ is included in a path in $\mathcal P_0$, and $|A| \ge 4s$, condition~\ref{c:num-vertices} holds as well.

Next, for $1 \le j \le k$, we will use $\mathcal P_{j-1}$ to construct $\mathcal P_j$.

First, we remove all short paths from $\mathcal P_{j-1}$: paths that have at most $2\ell_j$ vertices. To simplify analysis for large $j$, if all paths have at most $2\ell_j$ vertices, we keep an arbitrary path.

Second, we combine paths that are close together into a single path. More precisely, define the \emph{gap} between paths $P$ and $Q$, with $P$ preceding $Q$, to be the distance between the $\ell_j$\textsuperscript{th}-to-last vertex of $P$ and the $\ell_j$\textsuperscript{th} vertex of $Q$. Whenever two consecutive paths $P$ and $Q$ have a gap between them which is shorter than $m_j$, we combine them into one path.

This is always possible by applying Lemma~\ref{lemma:random-graph}, which guarantees that there is an edge in $G_j$ between the last $\ell_j$ vertices of $P$ and the first $\ell_j$ vertices of $Q$. The resulting path using this edge might skip some of the last vertices of $P$ and some of the first vertices of $Q$, but we lose fewer than $\ell_j$ vertices from each: fewer than $2\ell_j$ vertices total. Together, $P$ and $Q$ have more than $4\ell_j$ vertices, so the combined path still has more than $2\ell_j$ vertices, which means we can continue combining paths until no more paths have a gap shorter than $m_j$.

After we are done, we verify that the resulting collection of paths $\mathcal P_j$ satisfies the conditions of the lemma. First, since we start with at most $\frac{n}{m_{j-1}} + 1$ paths and are left with at least one path, we perform at most $\frac{n}{m_{j-1}}$ steps of either deleting a short path or combining two paths. Each step discards at most $2\ell_j$ vertices, so we discard at most
\[
	2\ell_j \cdot \frac{n}{m_{j-1}} = 2^{j+4} t \cdot \frac{4rs}{2^{j+6}rt^2} = \frac{s}{t} < \frac{s}{k}
\] vertices in total. Therefore the paths in $\mathcal P_j$ still include at least $(4 - \frac{j-1}{k}) \cdot s  - \frac sk = (4 - \frac jk) \cdot s$ vertices of $A$, and condition~\ref{c:num-vertices} holds.

Second, we know that all remaining gaps between paths are at least $m_j$ in length. Also, the gap before a path $P$ ends at its $\ell_j$\textsuperscript{th} vertex, and the gap after $P$ starts at its $\ell_j$\textsuperscript{th}-to-last vertex. Since $P$ has at least $2\ell_j$ vertices, each gap ends before the next gap starts, and hence the gaps represent disjoint intervals of at least $m_j$ vertices. Therefore, the number of gaps can be at most $\frac{n}{m_j}$, which means there are at most $\frac{n}{m_j}+1$ paths, verifying condition~\ref{c:num-paths}. This completes the induction step.
\end{proof}

After $k$ steps, we have at most $\frac{n}{m_k} + 1 < 3$ paths which together include at least $3s$ vertices of $A$. As a result, one of the paths has length at least $s$, completing the proof of the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}.

\section{Proof of the Lower Bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}}

We prove the lower bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey} by extending an argument of Reimer \cite{Re}.
Our innovation is to use an Erd\H{o}s--Szekeres coloring on a dense subgraph of the given ordered graph $G$.

\begin{proof}[Proof of the Lower Bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}]
Let $d < r$ be a parameter to be chosen later, and let $G$ be an arbitrary ordered graph with at most $d(r-d)(s-d)$ edges.

Define $U_0$ to be the set of vertices with at least $d$ neighbors preceding them in the order on $G$. Then $|U_0|\leq\frac1d|E(G)| = (r-d)(s-d)$. Apply an Erd\H{o}s--Szekeres coloring to $G[U_0]$: partition $U_0$ into $s-d$ consecutive blocks of size $r-d$, color edges within each block red, and color edges between different blocks blue. Then $G[U_0]$ does not contain a red path on more than $r-d$ vertices or a blue path on more than $s-d$ vertices.

The remaining graph $G - U_0$ has chromatic number at most $d$, by a greedy coloring that considers the vertices as they are ordered in $G$. Let $U_1, U_2, \dots, U_d$ be the color classes of a proper $d$-coloring of $G - U_0$.

To color the remaining edges of $G$, let $uv$ be an edge with $u \in U_i$, $v \in U_j$, and $u$ preceding $v$ in the order on $V(G)$. Color the edge $uv$ blue if $i<j$, otherwise red.

A red path may visit a single vertex in $U_d$, then a single vertex in $U_{d-1}, U_{d-2}$, and so on; finally, it may visit up to $r-d$ vertices in $U_0$. Therefore, the red path can have at most $r$ vertices. Similarly, a blue path can have at most $s$ vertices.

Recall that we assume $r \le s$. If we set $d = \frac12r$, then this argument gives an algorithm for coloring  the edges of any ordered graph on at most $\frac r2 \cdot \frac r2 \cdot (s - \frac r2) \ge \frac18 r^2s$ edges without creating a red $P_r$ or blue $P_s$.
\end{proof}

Note that the optimal choice of $d$ ranges from $\frac13r$ when $r=s$ to $\frac12r$ when $r \ll s$, but this only affects the constant.

\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring}}
\label{section:vertex-coloring}

We prove Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring} by iteratively constructing a sequence of ordered graphs $G_1, \ldots, G_t$ where $t=\sqrt{\log s}$ in which the last graph $G_t$ has the desired property that every $b$-coloring of the vertices of $G_t$ contains a monochromatic ordered path of length $s$.

In order to describe this sequence, we must first define a bipartite graph which will appear in our construction.
The existence of this bipartite graph is a standard fact in random graph theory following from the first moment method.

{\lemma Let $n,m\in\naturals$ and $m\leq \frac{n}{2}$. There exists a bipartite graph with classes of size $n$, at most $O(\frac{n^2}{m}\log\frac{n}{m})$ edges, and the property that there is some edge between any pair of $m$-sets of the partite classes.}

For each $n$ and $m$, fix such a graph and denote it by $H(n,m)$.
Now we are ready to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring}.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring}]

Let $A=2be^{\sqrt{\log s}}$ and $k_\ell=\left(\frac{A}{10b}\right)^{\ell}$ for $1\leq \ell\leq t$.
Define a sequence of ordered graphs as follows:
let $G_1$ be the ordered complete graph $K_{A}$.
For $\ell\geq 2$, let $G_{\ell}$  be the ordered graph formed by placing $A$ copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ consecutively and including a copy of $H(A^{\ell-1},k_{\ell-1})$ between any two copies of $G_{\ell-1}$.

We show in the following two claims that every $b$-coloring of the vertices of $G_{\ell}$ contains a relatively long monochromatic ordered path compared to the size of the graph.
Applying this argument to $G_t$ with $t=\sqrt{\log s}$ will give our result.

\begin{claim}
	\label{claim:long-path}
	Any $b$-coloring of the vertices of $G_{\ell}$ contains a monochromatic ordered path of length at least $A^{\ell}\left(\frac{1}{2b}\right)^{\ell}$.
	\end{claim}

\begin{proof}
We prove this claim by induction on $\ell$.

First, note that any $b$-coloring of the vertices of $G_1=K_A$ must contain a monochromatic ordered path of length at least $\frac{A}{b}$.
Assume the claim holds for $G_{\ell-1}$ and consider an arbitrary $b$-coloring of $V(G_{\ell})$.

For an ordered graph $G$, let $L(G)$ denote the maximum length of a monochromatic ordered path which is guaranteed in any $b$-coloring of the vertices of $G$.
We say that a path in $G_{\ell-1}$ is \emph{long} if it has length at least $A^{\ell-1}\left(\frac{1}{2b}\right)^{\ell-1}$.

By the inductive hypothesis, each copy of $G_{\ell-1}$ contains a monochromatic long path in one of the $b$ colors.
Therefore, without loss of generality, at least $\frac{A}{b}$ of the $A$ copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ contain a long path of color 1.
Denote these copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ by $H_1, H_2, \ldots, H_j$, noting that $j\geq\frac{A}{b}$.

Since each pair of copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ is connected by the bipartite graph $H(A^{\ell-1},k_{\ell-1})$ in our construction of $G_{\ell}$, there must be an edge between one of the last $k_{\ell-1}$ vertices of the long color-1-path in $H_i$ and the first $k_{\ell-1}$ vertices of the long color-1-path in $H_{i+1}$ for each $1\leq i\leq j-1$.
Therefore, by connecting the long color-1-paths in consecutive ``color 1" copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ with edges from the bipartite graphs in this way, we can find an ordered color-1-path in $G_{\ell}$ of length at least $\frac{A}{b}\left(L(G_{\ell-1})-2k_{\ell-1}\right)$.
Applying our inductive hypothesis, this yields a monochromatic path in $G_{\ell}$ of length at least
\begin{align*}
L(G_{\ell}) \geq \frac{A}{b}\left(A^{\ell-1}\left(\frac{1}{2b}\right)^{\ell-1}-2\left( \frac{A}{10b}\right)^{\ell-1}\right) = \frac{A^\ell}{b^{\ell}}\left(\frac{1}{2^{\ell-1}}-\frac{1}{10^{\ell-1}}\right) \geq A^{\ell}\left(\frac{1}{2b}\right)^{\ell}.\qquad\qquad \qedhere
\end{align*}

\end{proof}

\begin{claim}
	\label{claim:few-edges}
	There are at most $A^{\ell+1}(20b)^{\ell-1}C'\ell \log b$ edges in $G_{\ell}$  for $1\leq \ell\leq t$ where $C'$ is a constant.
	\end{claim}

\begin{proof}
We again proceed by induction on $\ell$.
Note that $|E(G_1)|=\binom{A}{2}$ and
\begin{align*}
     |E(G_{\ell})| \leq A |E(G_{\ell-1})| + \binom{A}{2} |E(H(A^{\ell-1}, k_{\ell-1}  ))| \leq A |E(G_{\ell-1})|+ C' A^{\ell+1} (10b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log b,
\end{align*}
since $G_{\ell}$ consists of $A$ copies of $G_{\ell-1}$ connected by $\binom{A}{2}$ copies of $H(A^{\ell-1},k_{\ell-1})$, each of which contains at most $C A^{\ell-1} (10b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log 10b \leq C' A^{\ell-1} (10b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log b$ edges.
Our inductive hypothesis yields the following bound on the number of edges in $G_{\ell}$:
\begin{align*}
   |E(G_{\ell})| &\leq  A |E(G_{\ell-1})|+ C' A^{\ell+1} (10b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log b \\ &\leq  A^{\ell+1}(20b)^{\ell-2}C'\ell \log b + C' A^{\ell+1} (10b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log b\leq C' A^{\ell+1} (20b)^{\ell-1}\ell \log b. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}

Applying these two claims to $G_t$ implies that any $b$-coloring of $V(G_t)$ contains a monochromatic ordered path of length at least $$(2be^{t})^{t}\left(\frac{1}{2b}\right)^t= e^{t^2}=s,$$
while the number of edges in $G_t$ is at most
 $$A^{t+1}(20b)^{t-1}C't \log b \leq sA (40b^2)^t C' t \log b = se^{O(\log b \sqrt{\log s})} .$$
Since $G_t$ has the desired properties, this concludes the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}

A result of this type can be used to obtain an upper bound on $\tilde{r}(P_r,P_s)$.
To do so, let $G$ be an ordered graph such that any $r$-coloring of the vertices contains a monochromatic path of length $s$.
Consider an arbitrary red-blue coloring of the edges of $G$.
If $G$ does not contain an ordered red copy of $P_r$, then we may define an $r$-coloring of the vertices of $G$ by assigning to each vertex $v$ the color $i$ which is the length of the longest ordered red path ending in $v$.
By assumption, this vertex coloring of $G$ contains a monochromatic ordered copy of $P_s$.
Since all edges in this path must be blue by definition of our vertex coloring, we have found a monochromatic ordered copy of $P_s$ in our original edge-coloring of $G$, which implies $\tilde{r}(P_r,P_s)\leq |E(G)|$.

In particular,  applying this argument with the ordered  graph $G_t$ defined in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:vertex-coloring} yields the upper bound $\tilde{r}(P_r,P_s)\leq se^{O( \log r \sqrt{\log s})}$.
While this is weaker than the result of Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey},  this approach might be helpful to improve the upper bound on $\tilde{r}(P_r,P_s)$.

\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:multicolor}}

The proof of the upper bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey} extends quite easily to the $q$-color case, giving an ordered graph with $O(n^{2q-1} (\log n)^3)$ edges for which any $q$-coloring of the edges contains a monochromatic $P_n$. We start by increasing the number of vertices to $N=4n^q$ and creating a sequence of ordered graphs $G_0, G_1,\ldots,G_k$ as in Lemma~\ref{lemma:random-graph} with parameters $p_i=2^{-i}$, $\ell_i=2^{i+3}t$, and $m_i=2^{i+7}n^{q-1}t$. Then, we consider an arbitrary $q$-coloring of the edges of $G=\bigcup G_i$.

For each vertex $v$, we assign a vector $(c_1(v),\ldots, c_q(v))$ where $c_i(v)$ is the length of a longest ordered path in color $i$ ending at $v$.  Since each $c_i(v)\leq n-1$, there is a set $A\subseteq V(G)$ of size at least $\frac{N}{n^{q-1}}=4n$ such that $c_1(v),\ldots, c_{q-1}(v)$ are the same for all $v\in A$. All edges within $A$ have color $q$, so it suffices to find a long path in $G[A]$. (Note that the new value of $m_i$ is chosen to reflect the increased distance between points in $A$.) Finally, the inductive proof that we can find a copy of $P_n$ in color $q$ proceeds as in the proof of the upper bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}.

The proof of the lower bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:multicolor} follows the same general structure as the proof of the lower bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:size-ramsey}: we start by identifying a subset of vertices of high degree, apply an Erd\H{o}s-Szekeres coloring to the edges in this set, and use a greedy vertex-coloring to define the edge-coloring on the rest of the graph.

In particular, set $d=\binom{\frac{n}{2}+q-1}{q-1}$ and fix some ordered graph $G$ with $d(n/2)^{q}$ edges. Let  $U_0$ be the set of vertices with at least $d$ neighbors preceding them in them in the ordering of $V(G)$. Then $U_0$ contains at most $(n/2)^q$ vertices,  so we can apply an Erd\H{o}s-Szekeres $q$-coloring on $E(G[U_0])$ to obtain an edge-coloring with no monochromatic $P_{n/2}$. Next, we greedily color the vertices in $V(G)\backslash U_0$ with $d$ colors and view each of these vertex colors $c$ as a $q$-tuple $(c_1,\ldots, c_q)$ with non-negative entries which sum to $n/2$. We color the edge between two vertices of colors $c$ and $c'$ with the smallest index $i$ such that $c_i<c'_i$. Since any coordinate can take on values ranging from 0 to $n/2$, we obtain a coloring of the edges outside of $G[U_0]$ in which the longest monochromatic ordered path is $P_{n/2}$. Therefore, this strategy yields an edge-coloring of $G$ which contains no monochromatic ordered $P_n$, as desired.