And to do this, as in many other papers of ours, we will create a (new) special localization of
${T}^{p}.$
The new localization of
${T}^{p}$
may be written in the simple form:
Local Analyticity for complex vector fields
$$({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}}{)}_{\phi}={\sum}_{\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{a\le {p}_{1}}{b\le {p}_{2}}}\frac{{L}^{a}{z}^{a}{T}^{{p}_{1}a}{\phi}^{(a+b)}{T}^{{p}_{2}b}{\overline{z}}^{b}{\overline{L}}^{b}}{a!b!},$$
Here by
${\phi}^{\left(r\right)}$
we mean
$(i\partial /\partial t{)}^{r}\phi (t)$
since near
$z=0$
we may take the localizing function independent of
$z.$
We have the commutation relations:
$$[L,({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}}{)}_{\phi}]\equiv L\circ ({T}^{{p}_{1}1,{p}_{2}}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}},[\overline{L},({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}}{)}_{\phi}]\equiv ({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}1}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}\circ \overline{L},$$
$$\left[\right({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}}{)}_{\phi},z]=({T}^{{p}_{1}1,{p}_{2}}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}\circ z,and\left[\right({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}}{)}_{\phi},\overline{z}]=\overline{z}\circ ({T}^{{p}_{1},{p}_{2}1}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}},$$
where the
$\equiv $
denotes modulo
${C}^{{p}_{1}{p}_{1}^{\prime}+{p}_{2}{p}_{2}^{\prime}}$
terms of the form
$$\frac{{L}^{{p}_{1}{p}_{1}^{\prime}}\circ {z}^{{p}_{1}{p}_{1}^{\prime}}\circ {T}^{{p}_{1}^{\prime}}\circ {\phi}^{({p}_{1}^{\prime}+{p}_{2}^{\prime}+1)}\circ {T}^{{p}_{2}^{\prime}}\circ {\overline{z}}^{{p}_{2}{p}_{2}^{\prime}}\circ {\overline{L}}^{{p}_{2}{p}_{2}^{\prime}}}{({p}_{1}{p}_{1}^{\prime}+{p}_{2}{p}_{2}^{\prime})!}$$
with either
${p}_{1}^{\prime}=0$
or
${p}_{2}^{\prime}=0.$
Note that if we start with
${p}_{1}={p}_{2}=p/2,$
and iteratively apply these commutation relations, the number of
$T$
derivatives not necessarily applied to
$\phi $
is eventually at most
$p/2;$
in our previous works the number dropped to zero (i.e., only
$L$
and
$\overline{L}$
derivatives remained and at most
$p$
of them, half the number of
$L$
and
$\overline{L}$
derivatives we started with, but any fraction of the original number would do as well.
So we insert first
$v=({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u$
in the a priori inequality, then bring
$({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}$
to the left of
$P=\overline{L}LL\overline{z}z\overline{L}$
since
$Pu$
is known and analytic. By the above bracket relations,
$$\left(\right[\overline{L}L+L\overline{z}z\overline{L},\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}\right]u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)\equiv $$
M. Derridj and D.S.Tartakoff
$$\equiv \left(\right({T}^{p/2,p/21}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}\overline{L}Lu,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)+\left(\overline{L}L\right({T}^{p/21,p/2}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)$$
$$+\left(L\right({T}^{p/21,p/2}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}\overline{z}z\overline{L}u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)+\left(L\overline{z}\right({T}^{p/2,p/21}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}z\overline{L}u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)$$
$$+\left(L\overline{z}\right({T}^{p/21,p/2}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}z\overline{L}u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right)+\left(L\overline{z}z\right({T}^{p/2,p/21}{)}_{{\phi}^{\prime}}\overline{L}u,\left({T}^{p/2,p/2}{)}_{\phi}u\right).$$
In every case, the brackets reduce the order of the sum of the two indices
${p}_{1}$
and
${p}_{2}$
by one (here we started with
${p}_{1}={p}_{2}=p/2$
), pick up one derivative on
$\phi ,$
and leave the vector fields over which we have maximal control in the estimate intact and in the correct order. Thus we may bring either
$L\overline{z}$
to the right as
$z\overline{L},$
(possibly after additional iterations of the brackets to obtain an
$\overline{z}$
to the left of
$({T}^{{q}_{1},{q}_{2}}{)}_{\psi}$
), and use a weighted Schwarz inequality on the result to take maximal advantage of the a priori inequality. Iterations of all of this continue until there remain at most
$p/2$
free
$T$
derivatives (i.e., the
$T$
derivatives on at least one side of
$\phi $
are all `corrected' by good vector fields) and perhaps as many as
$p/2L$
or
$z\overline{L}$
derivatives, and we may continue further until, at worst, the remaining
$L$
and
$\overline{L}$
derivatives bracket two at a time to produce more
$T$
's, one at a time. After all of this, there will be at most
${T}^{3p/4},$
and at this point we introduce a new localizing function of Ehrenpreis type with slightly larger support, geared to
$3p/4$
instead of to
$p.$
In our previous work, the order dropped by half and we used
${log}_{2}N$
nested open sets, but here we employ
${log}_{4/3}N$
nested open sets of prescribed size growth may be constructed to prove that for derivatives of order no greater than
$N,$
$$\left{D}^{\left\alpha \right}u\right\le C{C}^{N}{N}^{N}\sim {C}^{\prime}{{C}^{\prime}}^{N}N!$$
locally with
$C$
independent of
$N,$
which proves the analyticity of the solution. Local Analyticity for complex vector fields The situation is not different with larger values of
$k,$
and we do not write this out.
References

J.J. Kohn, Hypoellipticity and loss of derivatives, Annals of Mathematics, to appear.

D.S. Tartakoff, Local Analytic Hypoellipticity for
${\square}_{b}$
on NonDegenerate Cauchy Riemann Manifolds, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 75 (1978), pp. 30273028.

D.S. Tartakoff, On the Local Real Analyticity of Solutions to
${\square}_{b}$
and the
$\overline{\partial}$
Neumann Problem, Acta Math. 145 (1980), pp. 117204.

F. Treves, Analytic Hypoellipticity of a Class of PseudoDifferential Operators with Double Characteristics and Application to the
$\overline{\partial}$
Neumann Problem, Comm. in P.D.E. 3 (67) (1978), pp. 475642.
5 rue de la Juviniere, 78350 Les Loges en Josas, FRANCE Email address : Makhlouf.Derridj@univrouen.fr Department of Mathematics, University of Illinois at Chicago, m/c 249, 851 S. Morgan St., Chicago IL 60607, USA Email address : dst@uic.edu