)  =\mathcal{L}\left(  \ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ which is not surprising at all, in view of Grothendieck’s Theorem. So, in some sense, we feel that the estimate $g_{n}\leq\frac{2}{n}$ for $n\geq2$ is probably not optimal. The optimistic reader will probably hope for an estimate for $g_{n}$ so that in the case $n=1$ we recover Grothendieck’s Theorem. Fortunately, in the last section we will precisely obtain such an estimate.

The problem of estimating $g_{n}$ is related to the generalization of certain results involving cotype and absolutely summing multilinear operators. The following result is a combination of [@junek Theorem $3$ and Remark $2$], [@pop Corollary $4.6$] and [@michels Theorem $3.8$ (ii)]:

\[Inclusion Theorem\]\[tt\] Let $X_{1},...,X_{n}$ be Banach spaces with cotype $s$ and $n\geq2$ be a positive integer:

\(i) If $s=$ $2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left(  q;q,...,q\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \label{uu}$$ holds true for $1\leq p\leq q\leq2$ and every $Y$.

\(ii) If $s>2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left(  q;q,...,q\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \label{vv}$$ holds true for $1\leq p\leq q<s^{\ast}$ and every $Y$.

The results above are clearly not always optimal since, for example,$$\Pi_{\left(  2;2,2,2\right)  }^{3}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})\neq\mathcal{L}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})=\Pi_{\left
)   = \mathcal{L}\left (  \ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ which is not surprising at all, in view of Grothendieck ’s Theorem. So, in some sense, we find that the appraisal $ g_{n}\leq\frac{2}{n}$ for $ n\geq2 $ is probably not optimal. The affirmative reader will credibly hope for an estimate for $ g_{n}$ so that in the case $ n=1 $ we reclaim Grothendieck ’s Theorem. Fortunately, in the final section we will precisely obtain such an estimate. 

 The problem of calculate $ g_{n}$ is related to the generalization of sealed results involving cotype and absolutely summing multilinear operators. The following result is a combination of [ @junek Theorem $ 3 $ and Remark $ 2 $ ], [ @pop Corollary $ 4.6 $ ] and [ @michels Theorem $ 3.8 $ (ii) ]: 

 \[Inclusion Theorem\]\[tt\ ] permit $ X_{1},... ,X_{n}$ be Banach spaces with cotype $ s$ and $ n\geq2 $ be a positive integer: 

 \(i) If $ s=$ $ 2,$ then $ $ \Pi_{\left (  q;q,... ,q\right)   } ^{n}(X_{1},... ,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left (
 p;p,... ,p\right)   } ^{n}(X_{1},... ,X_{n};Y) \label{uu}$$ holds on-key for $ 1\leq p\leq q\leq2 $ and every $ Y$. 

 \(ii) If $ s>2,$ then $ $ \Pi_{\left (  q;q,... ,q\right)   } ^{n}(X_{1},... ,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left (
 p;p,... ,p\right)   } ^{n}(X_{1},... ,X_{n};Y) \label{vv}$$ holds true for $ 1\leq p\leq q < s^{\ast}$ and every $ Y$. 

 The results above are clearly not constantly optimal since, for example,$$\Pi_{\left (  2;2,2,2\right)   } ^{3}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})\neq\mathcal{L}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})=\Pi_{\left
)  =\mwthcal{L}\left(  \ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ which is not sorprisinj at alm, in vied of Grothendieck’s Theorem. Sl, un sone sense, we feel that ghe estimwte $g_{n}\lew\frar{2}{n}$ for $n\geq2$ is pckbably kjt olbimal. Vhe optimistic teader will [robably hope xof cn estimate for $g_{n}$ so that in the cafe $n=1$ we rfcover Grothenqiecl’f Thsorem. Fortunately, in the last sectjon we xill precisely pbtain such an estimate.

The prohlem of estimating $g_{n}$ is relajsd ei the generauization of certain reaults involving cotype and absouutelv summing molfiphnear operavors. Tre following result hs a cokbination of [@jmnek Vheoeem $3$ and Remark $2$], [@pop Rorollary $4.6$] and [@michejs Theorek $3.8$ (ii)]:

\[Inclusion Theoeen\]\[tt\] Lgt $X_{1},...,X_{t}$ be Vanxch s'acss witj cktype $s$ ans $n\geq2$ be a positive integer:

\(i) Of $w=$ $2,$ then $$\Pi_{\leff(  q;q,...,q\widht)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};J) \lagel{uu}$$ holds true for $1\lew p\leq q\leq2$ and every $Y$.

\(ii) If $s>2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left(  q;q,...,q\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\richt)  }^{i}(X_{1},...,B_{n};Y) \lwcwl{gv}$$ holds true for $1\leq p\leq q<s^{\ast}$ and every $Y$.

Trs texults above arc clearly not alwaus oljimal since, fot example,$$\Pj_{\left(  2;2,2,2\right)  }^{3}(\ell_{2},\epl_{2},\ell_{2};\majhbb{K})\nwq\mathcal{J}(\ell_{2},\rll_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})=\Pi_{\left
) =\mathcal{L}\left( \ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ which is not surprising in of Grothendieck’s So, in some estimate for $n\geq2$ is not optimal. The reader will probably hope for an for $g_{n}$ so that in the case $n=1$ we recover Grothendieck’s Theorem. Fortunately, the last section we will precisely obtain such an estimate. The problem of $g_{n}$ related the of certain results involving cotype and absolutely summing multilinear operators. The following result is a combination [@junek Theorem $3$ and Remark $2$], [@pop Corollary and [@michels Theorem $3.8$ \[Inclusion Theorem\]\[tt\] Let $X_{1},...,X_{n}$ be spaces cotype $s$ $n\geq2$ a integer: \(i) If $2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left( q;q,...,q\right) }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left( p;p,...,p\right) }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \label{uu}$$ holds true for $1\leq p\leq q\leq2$ and every $Y$. If $s>2,$ q;q,...,q\right) }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left( }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) holds for $1\leq p\leq every $Y$. The results above are optimal since, for example,$$\Pi_{\left( 2;2,2,2\right) }^{3}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})\neq\mathcal{L}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})=\Pi_{\left
)  =\mathcal{L}\left(  \ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ whIch is not suRprisIng At aLl, In viEw of grothendieck’s THEoreM. So, in some sense, we feel thAt the EsTImatE $G_{n}\Leq\frAc{2}{n}$ for $n\GEq2$ IS ProBaBlY noT oPTiMal. ThE opTimistiC reader wilL prObAbly hope for aN EsTimate for $g_{N}$ so That in the casE $n=1$ wE recovEr groTHendiEck’S TheoRem. ForTUnatelY, in the lasT sECtion wE Will preCISeLy obTain such an estimatE.

thE Problem of estimAting $g_{N}$ iS ReLATed To tHe generaliZaTion oF Certain REsULTS inVOlving cotype aNd absolutelY SumMing muLtIliNEar opeRatorS. THE foLlowing resuLt is A combinatIon of [@jUNek TheoREm $3$ and ReMark $2$], [@poP CoRolLary $4.6$] ANd [@MiCheLs tHeoREm $3.8$ (Ii)]:

\[INCluSion TheoReM\]\[tT\] Let $X_{1},...,x_{n}$ be bANACh spAceS witH cotyPe $s$ and $n\geq2$ be a PosItivE IntEger:

\(i) if $s=$ $2,$ thEn $$\Pi_{\LeFt(  q;q,...,q\Right)  }^{n}(x_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\sUbSeteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\RighT)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \labEl{uU}$$ hOldS tRue foR $1\Leq p\leQ q\lEq2$ aNd every $y$.

\(ii) If $s>2,$ tHEn $$\PI_{\lEFT(  Q;q,...,Q\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteQq\pI_{\LeFt(
p;p,...,p\rigHt)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};y) \LaBeL{Vv}$$ holds tRuE foR $1\leq P\LEq q<s^{\aSt}$ anD EvEry $Y$.

The rEsults ABoVe Are cleaRlY not alWaYs oPtiMal siNCe, foR exampLe,$$\Pi_{\left(  2;2,2,2\Right)  }^{3}(\ELl_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{k})\Neq\mathcal{L}(\elL_{2},\ElL_{2},\ELl_{2};\MAthbB{K})=\PI_{\left
)  =\mathcal{L}\left(  \el l_{1};\ell _{2}\ rig ht) $$  whi ch i s not surprisi n g at  all, in view of Groth endie ck ’ s Th e or em. S o, in s o me s ens e,  w e f ee l  t hat t heestimat e $g_{n}\l eq\ fr ac{2}{n}$ fo r  $ n\geq2$ is  pr obably not o pti mal. T he  op t imist icreade r will probab ly hope f or an est i mate fo r $g _{n} $ so that in thec as e  $n=1$ we reco ver Gr ot h en d i eck ’sTheorem. F or tunat e ly, int he l a sts ection we wil l precisely obt ain su ch  an estima te.
Th e  pr oblem of es tima ting $g_{ n}$ is related to thegenera liz ati on o f  c er tai nr esu l ts  in v olv ing coty pe  a nd ab solu t e l y  sum min g mu ltili near operator s.Thef oll owing  resu lt i sa com binati on of  [ @junek Theorem$3$and Remar k $ 2$ ],[@ pop C o rollar y $ 4.6 $] and[@miche l s T he o r e m$3.8$ (ii)]:

\[In cl u s io n Theore m\]\[t t \]  L e t $X_{1} ,. .., X_{n } $  be B anac h  s paces wi th cot y pe  $ s$ and$n \geq2$  b e a  po sitiv e  int eger:
\(i) If  $s=$ $2,$ then $$\P i _{\left(  q;q , .. . , q\ r ight ) }^{n}(X_{1} ,... , X_{n };Y) \ su bse t eqq\P i_{\l ef t (p ;p,...,p\right)  }^ {n }(X_{1 },... ,X_{n};Y) \la bel{uu}$$h o l ds truefor$ 1\ l eq p\leq q\leq 2$ an d every $Y $ .

\(ii)  If $ s>2,$ th en $$\Pi_ { \ left(  q ;q, ... ,q\ rig h t ) }^{n}(X_{1}, . . .,X_ {n };Y)\su bse teqq\Pi _{\ lef t(p;p ,. ..,p\righ t)  }^{n }( X_ {1 }, ... ,X_{n } ;Y) \lab el {vv }$ $ h oldst rue fo r $1\ leqp\ le q  q< s^{\ast } $a n d ev er y$Y$. 

T he  resu ltsa bov e are c learly no t a l ways  o pt imal si nce, for exam pl e,$$\Pi_{\ le ft(   2;2, 2 , 2\right)   }^{3}(\ell_{2},\ell_{ 2 },\ell_ {2} ;\mat hbb{ K})\neq\m ath cal{L} (\e l l_{2}, \ell_{ 2},\e ll _{2 } ; \math b b {K })= \P i_{\left
) _=\mathcal{L}\left( _\ell_{1};\ell_{2}\right)$$ which is not_surprising at_all,_in view_of_Grothendieck’s Theorem. So,_in some sense,_we feel that the_estimate $g_{n}\leq\frac{2}{n}$ for_$n\geq2$_is probably not optimal. The optimistic reader will probably hope for an estimate for_$g_{n}$_so that_in_the_case $n=1$ we recover Grothendieck’s_Theorem. Fortunately, in the last_section we_will precisely obtain such an estimate.

The problem of_estimating_$g_{n}$ is related_to the generalization of certain results involving cotype and_absolutely summing multilinear operators. The following_result is a_combination_of_[@junek Theorem $3$ and_Remark $2$], [@pop Corollary $4.6$] and_[@michels Theorem $3.8$ (ii)]:

\[Inclusion Theorem\]\[tt\] Let_$X_{1},...,X_{n}$ be Banach spaces with cotype $s$_and $n\geq2$ be a positive integer:

\(i)_If $s=$ $2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left(_ q;q,...,q\right)_ }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \label{uu}$$_holds true for_$1\leq p\leq_q\leq2$ and every_$Y$.

\(ii) If $s>2,$ then $$\Pi_{\left( _q;q,...,q\right)  }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y)\subseteqq\Pi_{\left(
p;p,...,p\right)_ }^{n}(X_{1},...,X_{n};Y) \label{vv}$$ holds true for_$1\leq_p\leq q<s^{\ast}$ and_every_$Y$.

The_results above_are clearly not_always_optimal since,_for_example,$$\Pi_{\left(  2;2,2,2\right)  }^{3}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})\neq\mathcal{L}(\ell_{2},\ell_{2},\ell_{2};\mathbb{K})=\Pi_{\left